Thanks for your reply and pic!
Pete:
> they sound very different from my stereo speakers
And what are the main differences ?
> Plenty of lows for such small drivers & 5W amp
Roughly, how deep they goes in this karlson-pipe ?
Dont you mind, that the line length is a lilbit short ?
Magnetar:
> The slot when used properly with a tuned front and back
> chamber will give you a 3-6 db gain 50-250 Hz.
I agree with the words "when used properly", cause everything
is just a tool for us, and we must to learn to use it right.
The base of the Karlson speakers is also just an acoustical
phenomenon, what we can apply in speaker-building.
I've read some articles on that Karlson site above, and they blessed
this design all above the other solutions including horn, TL, BR, etc...
> In my experiance my Karlson type Klams will easily outperform Klipschorns in the bass
Well, thats interesting, could you please write more details about your enclosures ?
Otherwise my basic question, what i dont understand in the karlson theory,
is still: what is the major drawback to use it, cause i dont think,
it just makes our FR smooth, and nothing else...
Lets see the basics here: http://home.planet.nl/~ulfman/theory.htm
This exponential theoretically cut helps us to make the FR smoother.
But, wouldnt the overall FR level decreased cause of acoustical
shortcut, related to the uncutted version (simple, straight TL) ?
Our vent is increased a lot after all, isnt ?
Pete:
> they sound very different from my stereo speakers
And what are the main differences ?
> Plenty of lows for such small drivers & 5W amp
Roughly, how deep they goes in this karlson-pipe ?
Dont you mind, that the line length is a lilbit short ?
Magnetar:
> The slot when used properly with a tuned front and back
> chamber will give you a 3-6 db gain 50-250 Hz.
I agree with the words "when used properly", cause everything
is just a tool for us, and we must to learn to use it right.
The base of the Karlson speakers is also just an acoustical
phenomenon, what we can apply in speaker-building.
I've read some articles on that Karlson site above, and they blessed
this design all above the other solutions including horn, TL, BR, etc...
> In my experiance my Karlson type Klams will easily outperform Klipschorns in the bass
Well, thats interesting, could you please write more details about your enclosures ?
Otherwise my basic question, what i dont understand in the karlson theory,
is still: what is the major drawback to use it, cause i dont think,
it just makes our FR smooth, and nothing else...
Lets see the basics here: http://home.planet.nl/~ulfman/theory.htm
This exponential theoretically cut helps us to make the FR smoother.
But, wouldnt the overall FR level decreased cause of acoustical
shortcut, related to the uncutted version (simple, straight TL) ?
Our vent is increased a lot after all, isnt ?
Re: Thanks for your reply and pic!
It has better power response in the mids BUT it does cause dips in the response above the bass. I do not use them above 300 Hz - I have in the past and with a 15" woofer that normally would be beaming badly the Karlson opens them up . In the upper midrange they have great off axis response due to the slot. They are not as omni-directional as a regular box in the bass either - so there is less room interaction - The response in room is much smoother and more articulate (in my experiance) in the bass. They also have a more life-like punch that can rattle your teeth and flap your pant leg beyond conventional enclosures. They are very enjoyable to experiance. With as little as 30 watts and a good high efficiency 15" woofer like the Altec 421 they will send a shockwave through the room - or couple to the room air very well and sound authoritive - just like bass instruments should.
Think of a wide band bandpass enclosure like a BP6, look at the gain in efficiency that is possibble, now add wide bandwith, no baffle step, no floor dip, and better dispersion - That is a Karlson! 🙂
Cortez said:
It has better power response in the mids BUT it does cause dips in the response above the bass. I do not use them above 300 Hz - I have in the past and with a 15" woofer that normally would be beaming badly the Karlson opens them up . In the upper midrange they have great off axis response due to the slot. They are not as omni-directional as a regular box in the bass either - so there is less room interaction - The response in room is much smoother and more articulate (in my experiance) in the bass. They also have a more life-like punch that can rattle your teeth and flap your pant leg beyond conventional enclosures. They are very enjoyable to experiance. With as little as 30 watts and a good high efficiency 15" woofer like the Altec 421 they will send a shockwave through the room - or couple to the room air very well and sound authoritive - just like bass instruments should.
Think of a wide band bandpass enclosure like a BP6, look at the gain in efficiency that is possibble, now add wide bandwith, no baffle step, no floor dip, and better dispersion - That is a Karlson! 🙂
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Currently I use these Karlson type Klams for midbass loaded with EV EVM15B with a another EVM15L in the back (0 to 180 degree phase adjustment) for more directional control of the bass. For 200 Hz up I use a large round wooden 180 tractrix horn loaded with a bi-amped Tannoy dual concentric driver.
peranders said:
Greets!
Correct. If you ignore much of what's published about the 'Ultra Fidelity' Karlson (especially the 'TL' and 'horn' references) you'll see that he took a horn compression driver design (4th order bandpass) and added a series of reflex chambers to create a multi-gainstage 6th order bandpass. These would normally have a very narrow, high gain BW if a typical vent was used so he enlarged/tapered it to widen it somewhat, allowing wide BW 'fullrange' and coax drivers of the day to be used.
From this we see that there's a notch between each reflex 'gainstage' and that if used beyond its -3dB HF BW (Fh) you get acoustic 'hash' for a frequency response until the beamwidth narrows enough to not be modulated/reflect off the inside of the front HF filter chamber. IOW, pretty much all of the BW above a few hundred Hz if considerable tweaking isn't done.
In concept, an innovative design ahead of its time in a way IMO, but so poorly executed/marketed that it quickly became audio's worst bad 'joke'. So much so that most later designers/serious DIYers dismissed it 'out of hand' as not even being worth their time to reverse engineer/improve them, instead continuing the 'bad press' anytime they were mentioned (me included until Freddy sent me measurements and a drawing some years ago).
I still won't recommend them except for cheap midbass PA or DJ/frat 'party' speaker or severely BW limited corner loaded use though, but well constructed with a 30-40 Hz Fs/0.3-0.4 Qts MI driver and large compression driven horn perched on top, they pack a lot of 'get down and boogy' ~live performance in a relatively compact package.
For a more 'HI-FI' ('flatter') performance, drive them with a high output impedance amp like they were originally designed for, or at least some series resistance if an SS amp is used.
GM
GM said:
Do not use a driver with a QTS above .3
A large compression driven horn perched on top is a very bad combination with a Karlson in my experiance. Bad advice.
Karlsons sound best with a BIG SS amp, tube amps tend to be fat and slow. Series resistance? NO WAY
Greets!
All in your opinion only so since we appear to be ~180 deg 'out of phase' 😉 we'll have to agree to disagree. Obviously, if you want high gain over a very narrow BW, then SS driven lower Qt drivers should be used, but IMO this is way too much harmonic distortion to be acceptable. WRT a separate horn, don't know what combos you tried, but obviously you have to choose one that's compatible through the XO BW and either physically or digitally aligned for good performance. Bass IS 'slow' down in the Karlson's BW, it's the mids integration/HF extension that determines how 'fast' it is since the lower the fundamental, the wider its BW.
As always though, YMMV, so it's up to the individual to try the various configurations to find what works best for them in their app.
GM
All in your opinion only so since we appear to be ~180 deg 'out of phase' 😉 we'll have to agree to disagree. Obviously, if you want high gain over a very narrow BW, then SS driven lower Qt drivers should be used, but IMO this is way too much harmonic distortion to be acceptable. WRT a separate horn, don't know what combos you tried, but obviously you have to choose one that's compatible through the XO BW and either physically or digitally aligned for good performance. Bass IS 'slow' down in the Karlson's BW, it's the mids integration/HF extension that determines how 'fast' it is since the lower the fundamental, the wider its BW.
As always though, YMMV, so it's up to the individual to try the various configurations to find what works best for them in their app.
GM
------Greets!
Hello
--------All in your opinion only so since we appear to be ~180 deg 'out of phase' 😉 we'll have to agree to disagree. Obviously, if you want high gain over a very narrow BW, then SS driven lower Qt drivers should be used, but IMO this is way too much harmonic distortion to be acceptable.
It is my experiance and your opinion -
So where are you imaging too much HD is coming from? Low QTS drivers? Limited bandwith? Solid state amps? Surely not from using a front chamber and coupler - If it was used wide band then sure, the reflections inside the front chambers cause harmonically related dips.
------WRT a separate horn, don't know what combos you tried, but obviously you have to choose one that's compatible through the XO
Many diiferent horns with compression drives that would load down to 200 cycles - IE the Emilar EC600 and the EH153 horn - Edgar 550 round horns, 220 cycle 10 cell Dukanes with 2440 JBL. EV940 with EM1012 , TAD 4001 in 180 cycle round tractrix -- many more combos
--------- BW and either physically or digitally aligned for good performance. Bass IS 'slow' down in the Karlson's BW, it's the mids integration/HF extension that determines how 'fast' it is since the lower the fundamental, the wider its BW.
I have aligned the Karlson to the mid many times, open baffle or horn loaded cones that go down to 300 cycles or lower integrates much better then a compression driver.
-------As always though, YMMV, so it's up to the individual to try the various configurations to find what works best for them in their app.
So how have you used your Karlsons?
Hello
--------All in your opinion only so since we appear to be ~180 deg 'out of phase' 😉 we'll have to agree to disagree. Obviously, if you want high gain over a very narrow BW, then SS driven lower Qt drivers should be used, but IMO this is way too much harmonic distortion to be acceptable.
It is my experiance and your opinion -
So where are you imaging too much HD is coming from? Low QTS drivers? Limited bandwith? Solid state amps? Surely not from using a front chamber and coupler - If it was used wide band then sure, the reflections inside the front chambers cause harmonically related dips.
------WRT a separate horn, don't know what combos you tried, but obviously you have to choose one that's compatible through the XO
Many diiferent horns with compression drives that would load down to 200 cycles - IE the Emilar EC600 and the EH153 horn - Edgar 550 round horns, 220 cycle 10 cell Dukanes with 2440 JBL. EV940 with EM1012 , TAD 4001 in 180 cycle round tractrix -- many more combos
--------- BW and either physically or digitally aligned for good performance. Bass IS 'slow' down in the Karlson's BW, it's the mids integration/HF extension that determines how 'fast' it is since the lower the fundamental, the wider its BW.
I have aligned the Karlson to the mid many times, open baffle or horn loaded cones that go down to 300 cycles or lower integrates much better then a compression driver.
-------As always though, YMMV, so it's up to the individual to try the various configurations to find what works best for them in their app.
So how have you used your Karlsons?
Cortez,
at 1.2M high, the folded pipe has a quarter wavelength of ~2.4M, around 40Hz - and my pipes give useful response lower than that.
The way the traditional Karlsons and Magnetars load onto the floor probably gives them more gain than mine, but I'm happy with the smoothness of the low end response.
As to how they sound, I can't quite put my finger on the difference yet (I don't use them that often), It's sort of like the lower mids/upper bass have a more 'live' feel. That's why I want to set up some sort of measurement system soon, so I've got data to give a reality check.
As to how Karlsons are analysed, I think that everyone comes up with a different take, and they're all partly correct, 'cause it's such a complex design. I stuck with a simple pipe to reduce complexity, I see it basically as a TL, with the slot giving control over the low end - an alternative to the Bass Reflex free bass, with wider and smoother low end response.
GM & Magnetar, I'd be interested to know more about what you think the effect the Q of the driver has???
Cheers,
Pete McK
at 1.2M high, the folded pipe has a quarter wavelength of ~2.4M, around 40Hz - and my pipes give useful response lower than that.
The way the traditional Karlsons and Magnetars load onto the floor probably gives them more gain than mine, but I'm happy with the smoothness of the low end response.
As to how they sound, I can't quite put my finger on the difference yet (I don't use them that often), It's sort of like the lower mids/upper bass have a more 'live' feel. That's why I want to set up some sort of measurement system soon, so I've got data to give a reality check.
As to how Karlsons are analysed, I think that everyone comes up with a different take, and they're all partly correct, 'cause it's such a complex design. I stuck with a simple pipe to reduce complexity, I see it basically as a TL, with the slot giving control over the low end - an alternative to the Bass Reflex free bass, with wider and smoother low end response.
GM & Magnetar, I'd be interested to know more about what you think the effect the Q of the driver has???
Cheers,
Pete McK
Hi All,
I first read about the Karlson speaker in an article in Popular Electronics some time in the 1960s. I came across a journal paper (IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics, december 1966) many years later while studying TL speakers, by Martin C. Poppe that can be found linked on this page:
http://home.planet.nl/~ulfman/artic.htm
I'd say that the Karlson is a tapered TL pipe with a tapered port at low frequencies with an attempt for the slot to also serve to improve the mid and/or high frequency dispersion as is well known with slot loading. I don't think the combination of the two was a good idea, and the front cavity resonances were a design flaw not a positive feature. It was an interesting design to study.
I built a 6 ft straight, untapered line system with a tapered slot similar to that shown in the Poppe paper but shorter when I was a young teen. My intent was to build a TL inspired by the performance of IMF speakers and I simply wanted to try the tapered slot that I saw in the Karlson. I was hacking around but they sure sounded good, I did use fiberglass damping on the walls.
Pete B.
I first read about the Karlson speaker in an article in Popular Electronics some time in the 1960s. I came across a journal paper (IEEE Transactions on Audio and Electroacoustics, december 1966) many years later while studying TL speakers, by Martin C. Poppe that can be found linked on this page:
http://home.planet.nl/~ulfman/artic.htm
I'd say that the Karlson is a tapered TL pipe with a tapered port at low frequencies with an attempt for the slot to also serve to improve the mid and/or high frequency dispersion as is well known with slot loading. I don't think the combination of the two was a good idea, and the front cavity resonances were a design flaw not a positive feature. It was an interesting design to study.
I built a 6 ft straight, untapered line system with a tapered slot similar to that shown in the Poppe paper but shorter when I was a young teen. My intent was to build a TL inspired by the performance of IMF speakers and I simply wanted to try the tapered slot that I saw in the Karlson. I was hacking around but they sure sounded good, I did use fiberglass damping on the walls.
Pete B.
Re: Re: Thanks for your reply and pic!
What happened to the Audaxes in OB's on top of the Klams? This was the last arrangement I recall you posting about back on 'that other site'. What exactly are you using now? I know it's a Tannoy, but which one and which flare?
Cheers
Hi Mike,Magnetar said:
What happened to the Audaxes in OB's on top of the Klams? This was the last arrangement I recall you posting about back on 'that other site'. What exactly are you using now? I know it's a Tannoy, but which one and which flare?
Cheers
I think there is a little mixture here, about to different things:
The either thing is the karlson theory itself, namely that an open air column (a TL)
resonates by default crispy, and when you cut the pipe with this 2/3 long exponential
slot, its FR shoud be smoother (ideally perfectly flat...).
My question about this was: wont be the cutted TL loss from its efficiency in the low
bass region, cause of the slot (due to acoustical shortcut) ?
The other thing, is the widespread, famous hybrid Karlson, that is basically a reflex
(and not a TL) enclosure with his curtains, which likely helps to disperse the sound,
reach better midbass, and maybe achieve a little more efficieny in the (mid!)bass,
due to the exponential shape slot opened to the floor.
I would like to build soon a special Karlson TL, with such an exponential slot.
What do you think, would be the karlson theory also work with a design like this ?
The either thing is the karlson theory itself, namely that an open air column (a TL)
resonates by default crispy, and when you cut the pipe with this 2/3 long exponential
slot, its FR shoud be smoother (ideally perfectly flat...).
My question about this was: wont be the cutted TL loss from its efficiency in the low
bass region, cause of the slot (due to acoustical shortcut) ?
The other thing, is the widespread, famous hybrid Karlson, that is basically a reflex
(and not a TL) enclosure with his curtains, which likely helps to disperse the sound,
reach better midbass, and maybe achieve a little more efficieny in the (mid!)bass,
due to the exponential shape slot opened to the floor.
I would like to build soon a special Karlson TL, with such an exponential slot.
What do you think, would be the karlson theory also work with a design like this ?
Attachments
Re: Re: Re: Thanks for your reply and pic!
Hi Bret,
The Audax/OB's are here in my mad storage lab. I am listening to bi-amped modern 6.5" dual concentric drivers in my 180Hz round wooden tractrix horns perched above the Klams with an added 15" EVM15L firing out the backof the Klam to couple with the room better. Compared to the Audax it's more neutral (low mid/mid is excellent) and soundstages quite a bit better. The big mid horn allows for a lower bass to mid crossover point. I have 4 more of the Tannoys - They will be used for center and rear channels (Circle Surround) when I get the time to build the cabinets for them.
Sorta looks like these but uses Klams instead of the FH1 midbass horns and the Tannoy instead of the TAD 4001 compression driver - The horn of course is shortened with a larger 1:1 throat and 14 liter backchamber. It's around 320 lbs a channel - IOW they are Hawgs.😉
Brett said:
Hi Bret,
The Audax/OB's are here in my mad storage lab. I am listening to bi-amped modern 6.5" dual concentric drivers in my 180Hz round wooden tractrix horns perched above the Klams with an added 15" EVM15L firing out the backof the Klam to couple with the room better. Compared to the Audax it's more neutral (low mid/mid is excellent) and soundstages quite a bit better. The big mid horn allows for a lower bass to mid crossover point. I have 4 more of the Tannoys - They will be used for center and rear channels (Circle Surround) when I get the time to build the cabinets for them.
Sorta looks like these but uses Klams instead of the FH1 midbass horns and the Tannoy instead of the TAD 4001 compression driver - The horn of course is shortened with a larger 1:1 throat and 14 liter backchamber. It's around 320 lbs a channel - IOW they are Hawgs.😉
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Magnetar said:
Greets!
Your 'opinion' is based on experience just as mine is, but apparently you're convinced that yours is the only valid one, so no point in wasting any more time with you.
GM
PeteMcK said:
Greets!
It's not complex if you look at it one segment at a time, though I imagine it would take a heap o' calcs to model one. There's also several different models, each with a different number of segments, so while my description/suggestions were specific to the 'Ultra Fidelity', Magnetar mentioned in another post his were 'Klams', which is a different design altogether and require somewhat different component considerations.
Typically, a 'live' feel is due to a narrow BW well above Fb being boosted, which is what a low Qts, SS driven BP is all about, and all of the Karlson designs are no exception, though their ~aperiodically loaded 'HI-FI' model was designed to reduce this form of harmonic distortion.
Karlsons are no different than any other cab design in that the higher the Qts, the flatter the aneochoic response until Qts = 0.707. Above this point, peaking at both Fl, Fh begins in a BP, so not a good idea to exceed this by much unless damping in both chambers are used.
GM
Cortez said:
Greets!
Yes, there's some efficiency losses due to the tuning point being spread out over a wider BW than normal.
You can use the 'Karlson Coupler' on any vented design. Scroll down to the BLH design with one and the comparison measurements between it and a rectangular terminus: http://gallery.audioasylum.com/cgi/view.mpl?UserImages=21168&session=
GM
GM said:
Hmm. I will not waste any more of my time with you either.
Sorry but I don't see where you have any experiance with Karlsons. I only see an opinion. I asked you about the Karlsons you have and you didn't answer. Do you really expect your above non answer to validate your experiance and wash away my experiance and opinion based on experiance? It didn't. The advice you give is wrong compared to reality I really can't see how it can be based on actually using a coupler - for example mating the Karlson with a compression driver and horn (typical 500-1200 cycle xover) knowing the Karlson design has serious flaws well into the bandwith that it would be forced to be used. That's why I posted what I did.. ugh...
Later
What would happen, if we would use a karlson cut to a reflex-tube ?
Maybe a BR design would also resonate in a wider band ?
Maybe a BR design would also resonate in a wider band ?
TL
Cortez,
I have built a TL like that, using a 5" Sanyo speaker that I thought had good wide rage potential.
The only difference is trhat I sloped the speaker back about 15 degrees.
It is 85Cm high, giving effective length of around 2.4 M >40Hz.
(sorry, can't find a pic at present)
(I'm using them as my computer speakers...)
Yeah, the low end does drop off due to less loading from the pipe, but its a gentle roll off, which allows lower stuff to be heard.
As to the slot length, I've followed the traditional 1/3 - 1/4 of pipe length, but I suspect that a more scientific appraoch, deciding how much of a pass band is desired before calculating & cutting, would be better. Of course, longer slots to give wider bandwidth probably means the unloading effect of the pipe starts higher up the spectrum, (and is steeper?)
Pete McK
Cortez,
I have built a TL like that, using a 5" Sanyo speaker that I thought had good wide rage potential.
The only difference is trhat I sloped the speaker back about 15 degrees.
It is 85Cm high, giving effective length of around 2.4 M >40Hz.
(sorry, can't find a pic at present)
(I'm using them as my computer speakers...)
Yeah, the low end does drop off due to less loading from the pipe, but its a gentle roll off, which allows lower stuff to be heard.
As to the slot length, I've followed the traditional 1/3 - 1/4 of pipe length, but I suspect that a more scientific appraoch, deciding how much of a pass band is desired before calculating & cutting, would be better. Of course, longer slots to give wider bandwidth probably means the unloading effect of the pipe starts higher up the spectrum, (and is steeper?)
Pete McK
And what would happen if we would make a long TL tuned to 20 Hz,
and the cut would be 2/3 long. Ideally the karlson cut should
make a smooth FR up to 20Hz, so when the speaker has an Fr
30Hz, this shouldnt be trouble, cause our TL resonate also on 30Hz.
and the cut would be 2/3 long. Ideally the karlson cut should
make a smooth FR up to 20Hz, so when the speaker has an Fr
30Hz, this shouldnt be trouble, cause our TL resonate also on 30Hz.
cutting a slot probably de-Q's and effectively shortens a line
Karlson have a front chamber so may differ from a slotted TL/Fulmer
slotting a reflex tube might introduce 'wheeze' at higher levels especially with sine but so could distributed/resistive vents
FWIW here's a short slot in final section of a 9 ft line
http://home.earthlink.net/~buddhaboy2/Line.jpg
(don't know how to link in this forum's format yet)
Karlson have a front chamber so may differ from a slotted TL/Fulmer
slotting a reflex tube might introduce 'wheeze' at higher levels especially with sine but so could distributed/resistive vents
FWIW here's a short slot in final section of a 9 ft line
http://home.earthlink.net/~buddhaboy2/Line.jpg
(don't know how to link in this forum's format yet)