The key points I see here are the at the horn area expansion is correct through the combiner, The bends of the combiner are minimised, the outer wall angle joins the main horn smoothly and from a point of simlar width to the throat. The inner wall angle is not straight. I designed the below combiner, it differs on many of these features and it dosen't perform as well:
A key parameter if you design these structures is how close you can pack the compresion drivers (much easier if they are smaller).
I guess bms coaxial and 12" is not possible without having a hole around 600hz, also would not be possible with even 10" because probably paraline almost long as 10" would not work so good.
What do you people think of a 4way synergy.
Dcx464 on a paraline, 2x 5" m5n8-80 (xo 900hz) on sides followed by 2x 12" 12fh520 (500hz).
I think those would be hard to put in 1/4wavelenght but may be possible.
And one question Does speakers driven lets say under 900hz and placed in 1/4 wavelenght couple 6db in all frequency or just some parts?
What do you people think of a 4way synergy.
Dcx464 on a paraline, 2x 5" m5n8-80 (xo 900hz) on sides followed by 2x 12" 12fh520 (500hz).
I think those would be hard to put in 1/4wavelenght but may be possible.
And one question Does speakers driven lets say under 900hz and placed in 1/4 wavelenght couple 6db in all frequency or just some parts?
Tagging on some things that @kipman725 wrote -
Joseph Crowe has an interesting article about using a pair of high quality full ranges loaded on a horn:
https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/dual-audience-a3s-fullrange-drivers-in-sabourin-horn-no-1303
Years and years ago, I built something similar using the Aurasound 2" drivers. It worked shockingly well. I actually shelved it because I thought I might be doing something incorrectly. As @Genuine noted, it was one of those projects where you're scratching your head trying to figure out why more companies don't do it.
Having built a lot of horns and waveguides, my guess is that these aren't common in prosound because their output levels are relatively limited. Also, prosound companies tend to offer "metoo" solutions, where you can get very similar speakers from half a dozen different companies. I think this is "a sales thing", basically the sales folks at these companies can't easily move a lot of speakers if they're really far out in leftfield.
These types of horn loaded full ranges solve a lot of problems, but they'll likely need a super tweeter to get them to play to 20khz. But the ability to generate 93dB from a pair of 75mm drivers is quite amazing.
Joseph Crowe has an interesting article about using a pair of high quality full ranges loaded on a horn:
https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/dual-audience-a3s-fullrange-drivers-in-sabourin-horn-no-1303
Years and years ago, I built something similar using the Aurasound 2" drivers. It worked shockingly well. I actually shelved it because I thought I might be doing something incorrectly. As @Genuine noted, it was one of those projects where you're scratching your head trying to figure out why more companies don't do it.
Having built a lot of horns and waveguides, my guess is that these aren't common in prosound because their output levels are relatively limited. Also, prosound companies tend to offer "metoo" solutions, where you can get very similar speakers from half a dozen different companies. I think this is "a sales thing", basically the sales folks at these companies can't easily move a lot of speakers if they're really far out in leftfield.
These types of horn loaded full ranges solve a lot of problems, but they'll likely need a super tweeter to get them to play to 20khz. But the ability to generate 93dB from a pair of 75mm drivers is quite amazing.
Attachments
Do you actually hear up that high? And secondly have you done an analysis of the music you listen to? My hearing poops just below 15k and I have regularly for 20 years watched a musical spectrum analyzer on Foobar as I listen, almost nothing above 14kiliohertz. The odd time on full orchestral. What you show here is a great idea. Leveraging the best that can be had from the system. Joseph is doing some more and more interesting work.
Hello everybody!
First of all, thanks for all the sharing of the experiences!
I started my Paraline journey a while back and I wanted to share the results of my last version! I use a DCX464 and I used a eq to make it flat. (didn't eq that much)
It's not that easy to reengineer the paraline design! it took a lot of time! But I really like my last design. (3d printed out of PLA)
Does some have experience with "baffle diffraction" off the front of the paraline?
Height lens 26cm layers 6mm opening 20mm
first measurements close to the paraline
second on the floor outside. (not ideal)
First of all, thanks for all the sharing of the experiences!
I started my Paraline journey a while back and I wanted to share the results of my last version! I use a DCX464 and I used a eq to make it flat. (didn't eq that much)
It's not that easy to reengineer the paraline design! it took a lot of time! But I really like my last design. (3d printed out of PLA)
Does some have experience with "baffle diffraction" off the front of the paraline?
Height lens 26cm layers 6mm opening 20mm
first measurements close to the paraline
second on the floor outside. (not ideal)
I hope this is working 🙂
The 10k dropoff of the full range measurement is because of the not so great measuring conditions.
The 10k dropoff of the full range measurement is because of the not so great measuring conditions.
It is indicative of real world conditions. And the happy fact is there is little useable high frequency in music above 13k anyway. Well done in room frequency response.
yes that's true's, and the differences is also in the mics.
I didn't mentioned dat the full range measurement was taken with a dbx mic and the paraline alone with a umik-1. They measure quite different above 4khz.
I ordered a Isemcon emx 7150, so I can measure with the same mic.
I didn't mentioned dat the full range measurement was taken with a dbx mic and the paraline alone with a umik-1. They measure quite different above 4khz.
I ordered a Isemcon emx 7150, so I can measure with the same mic.
Pics please?
Would love to see how you built it.
Would love to see how you built it.
Todd Michael made an offhand comment that there's Paralines in IMAX theatres, and I never noticed the first time he posted it here:
So I found some pics (see attached.)
While it's not as "pretty" as the giant Synergy Horns that William Cowan made for A for Ara (see attached), it's cool that you can probably listen to a HUGE Unity (Synergy?) Horn in nearly any state, if you're near an Imax.
If you look at the way the GIGANTIC ones are set up, it looks like they're designed to be coaxial all the way down to 150Hz or so. (Note the low frequency drivers BEHIND the horn that sits in front of them. That makes it coaxial, similar to the giant "A for Ara" speaker, just not as pretty.)
Some have said that there are Danley Jericho speakers in some Imax theatres, but I think the third pic is actually a Yorkville speaker. Note that the ports are located where Yorkville puts their ports on their prosound Paraline speakers. And the horn appears to be shaded.
So I found some pics (see attached.)
While it's not as "pretty" as the giant Synergy Horns that William Cowan made for A for Ara (see attached), it's cool that you can probably listen to a HUGE Unity (Synergy?) Horn in nearly any state, if you're near an Imax.
If you look at the way the GIGANTIC ones are set up, it looks like they're designed to be coaxial all the way down to 150Hz or so. (Note the low frequency drivers BEHIND the horn that sits in front of them. That makes it coaxial, similar to the giant "A for Ara" speaker, just not as pretty.)
Some have said that there are Danley Jericho speakers in some Imax theatres, but I think the third pic is actually a Yorkville speaker. Note that the ports are located where Yorkville puts their ports on their prosound Paraline speakers. And the horn appears to be shaded.
Attachments
Side note: The Imax subs appear to be Eminence Lab12. Makes sense, since Danley spec'd the design for the original labsub from about 25 years ago, and the driver has been used in numerous Danley speakers (and apparently Yorkville speakers too.)
Check out the cones from the "Yorkville Kanga" pictured above, and compare to this pic.
Also, if you're international, there was some discussion on Reddit that indicates this setup is present in Chinese Imax theatres. If it's there, safe to assume it's in other countries also.
Check out the cones from the "Yorkville Kanga" pictured above, and compare to this pic.
Also, if you're international, there was some discussion on Reddit that indicates this setup is present in Chinese Imax theatres. If it's there, safe to assume it's in other countries also.
Attachments
Although the Danley DSL-12 looks very similar to the LAB12, there are differences.
Note the single small vent on the rear of the LAB12, it's smaller voice coil heats up rapidly compared to the DSL-12 on the right with the additional 8 vents:
The larger diameter and depth of the DSL-12 voice coil and the additional cooling vents provide 2mm more excursion, more power handling and better heat dissipation.
Other differences can be noted in the TS parameters (courtesy of DataBass):
Both drivers are made by Eminence, but the DSL-12 is sold by Danley Sound Labs.
Art