Scottmoose said:
Have you ever looked at the TP1 I'd mentioned a couple pages back?
http://www.eckhoerner.de/Downloads/TP 1.pdf
Claimed Frequency Range 30Hz-22,000 Hz always got my attention, as well as the
14' 10" long sound path; looked like a horn/TL combination.
Then Ron C came out with his designs…
Austin gets a 6” FE166 clear down to 4 Hz, then a gradual roll off.
Hello,
i´ve heard them years ago,
very disapointed, so coloured caused by the fronthorn,
thats no Oris 150, and the bass didn´t come because the front horn makes it from 200 Hz to loud, you can´t balance a
bass horn with the same driver, not this way.
If you sit 6 m away it is okay for householt level.
Make something different and better.
i´ve heard them years ago,
very disapointed, so coloured caused by the fronthorn,
thats no Oris 150, and the bass didn´t come because the front horn makes it from 200 Hz to loud, you can´t balance a
bass horn with the same driver, not this way.
If you sit 6 m away it is okay for householt level.
Make something different and better.
Attachments
as there won't be any more cabinets for a LONG time after the next pair!....
I have managed to make it for over 3 years with my old original Dallas horns. Originally i had the 206e driver installed and later went with the 208 sigma with a ribbon tweet. Its been one of the few speakers that i actually put trim on and finished. With the batt P/S GC i have little desire to trade up or build a new system.
I believe ,sometimes, that instead of asking whats the best/newest/ boldest/most advanced, you should ask , what will work for my desires.
If i was going to replace my system , probably the A166 with FHL and a side firing mouth with the deflector placed horz. Either keep the GC or go with a more powerful SET than the SEX amp that i have.A better TT/cart than my old AR /grado blackwould help also.
ron
Or another thought, just keep the 208 sigma/tweet and design another cab (Austin principal), incorporate a FLH, time align the tweet and there ya go.
I have managed to make it for over 3 years with my old original Dallas horns. Originally i had the 206e driver installed and later went with the 208 sigma with a ribbon tweet. Its been one of the few speakers that i actually put trim on and finished. With the batt P/S GC i have little desire to trade up or build a new system.
I believe ,sometimes, that instead of asking whats the best/newest/ boldest/most advanced, you should ask , what will work for my desires.
If i was going to replace my system , probably the A166 with FHL and a side firing mouth with the deflector placed horz. Either keep the GC or go with a more powerful SET than the SEX amp that i have.A better TT/cart than my old AR /grado blackwould help also.
ron
Or another thought, just keep the 208 sigma/tweet and design another cab (Austin principal), incorporate a FLH, time align the tweet and there ya go.
The horn act as a pressure/movement converter, this meen with proper sealing it act as a compression driver. Is it the case with a tl ?
not directly as loading in a TL is minimul. Its the combined loading of the CC and horn expansion that makes it closer to a compression driver system The TL action is a primary function, but the actions as a whole has to be calculated for. Its the blending (XO) between the TL/horn action thats important.. Thats why ,with loading, it takes a powerful/efficent motor to move the mass required. All you are doing ,with loading, is radically changing the Qms of the driver over a given LF range, this loading is a curve and not a slope, its all related to pressure/volume/mass and hydrodynamics. I have learned to lean towards a great deal of loading in FR BLH systems as without the loading the Xmax is exceeded and as there is , just about always, a different higher frequency signal being superimposed at the same time that distortion of the second higher frequency signal occurs due to the cone being in another later(further away from the field) phase point. I try to keep the loading to a point that the Xmax at the lowest frequency is = to the stated overall SPL of that driver. However i have never designed for corner loading as that is a room requirement.
We ask a lot from a single driver and in my current system i consider it to be a 3 way , not a SD FR.
ron
To put it another way, the TL action has minimul loading in a horn, the horn action has a much greater loading, its finding a balance between the two thats tricky.
not directly as loading in a TL is minimul. Its the combined loading of the CC and horn expansion that makes it closer to a compression driver system The TL action is a primary function, but the actions as a whole has to be calculated for. Its the blending (XO) between the TL/horn action thats important.. Thats why ,with loading, it takes a powerful/efficent motor to move the mass required. All you are doing ,with loading, is radically changing the Qms of the driver over a given LF range, this loading is a curve and not a slope, its all related to pressure/volume/mass and hydrodynamics. I have learned to lean towards a great deal of loading in FR BLH systems as without the loading the Xmax is exceeded and as there is , just about always, a different higher frequency signal being superimposed at the same time that distortion of the second higher frequency signal occurs due to the cone being in another later(further away from the field) phase point. I try to keep the loading to a point that the Xmax at the lowest frequency is = to the stated overall SPL of that driver. However i have never designed for corner loading as that is a room requirement.
We ask a lot from a single driver and in my current system i consider it to be a 3 way , not a SD FR.
ron
To put it another way, the TL action has minimul loading in a horn, the horn action has a much greater loading, its finding a balance between the two thats tricky.
ronc...a good point...several good points...
...that I don't actually NEED to replace the speakers. I could replace other elements in the chain. Absolutely right.
However, I really want to use the super-T amp that is gathering dust in the living room and the chinese 192/24 DAC that I have gathering dust next to it. If I upgrade the main system with a new pair of speakers while using the EX-3 drivers that are sitting in a box in the bedroom, then I could pass the MLTLs on to the PC and take the reflex boxes and sub to work with the cheap chinese DAC and super-T.
As these cabinets will be my main speakers I would like them to be as good as I can make them (not the world's greatest as I am not a stupendous woodworker) with respect to what is possible today.
Cheers
Peter
...that I don't actually NEED to replace the speakers. I could replace other elements in the chain. Absolutely right.
However, I really want to use the super-T amp that is gathering dust in the living room and the chinese 192/24 DAC that I have gathering dust next to it. If I upgrade the main system with a new pair of speakers while using the EX-3 drivers that are sitting in a box in the bedroom, then I could pass the MLTLs on to the PC and take the reflex boxes and sub to work with the cheap chinese DAC and super-T.
As these cabinets will be my main speakers I would like them to be as good as I can make them (not the world's greatest as I am not a stupendous woodworker) with respect to what is possible today.
Cheers
Peter
Now I'm confused.ronc said:
When I ask this question before building a pair of A166s you said:
"Actually i designed the A166 to be corner loaded and will achieve a vary flat FR curve for a BLH. Approx 40 Hz FC corner loaded (depends on room dimensions, listerner positions ect ect)."
"Yep, the first pass on the reflector was a square and the horn was corner loaded."
http://fullrangedriver.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=1145
Or are we talking about different speakers or something?
Anyway, they work great in corners, down to ~ 40 Hz, then gradual roll off.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.