SynTripP: 2-way 2-part Virtual Single Point Source Horn

the wide variance in qts will likely have a severe effect on response. low qts drivers have a narrow peak in port output, higher qts value drivers have a wider peak in port output.

not to mention the otther effects that varied qts will have on the horn response itself.
 
Art.

I got my hands on a pair of DH1A's.

What would you thoughts be on adapting the SyntripP for those CD's
If you remove the 1.4" to 2" adapter the DH1A becomes a DH1AMT, it will fit with no modification of the SynTripP plans. The hex screws holding on the adapter "snout" are coated with Loctite, heating the screws makes it easier to remove them. I broke one of the screws off when removing a DH1A snout before realizing heating loosens Loctite.

Cabinet weight will increase from 34 to about 52 pounds using the DH1 rather than a neo driver.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Legis, I'm just thinking of gutting out a JBL SR4732A and making a syntripp out of it.

Nice system you have there, liking that red synergy and tap horn you have posted. How low does your synergy horn go?

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.


I have a baby unity horn painted red just like it :)

07.08.2015-09.18.png
 
Last edited:
They have been in various positions. I like them best when they are only ambient tweeters without direct radiation to listening spot. This way they do not mess with the point source feeling at all. Thus they (2 per ch) have been sitting on the synergy's compression drivers illuminating the ceiling. :)

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
 
Still on the radar

I still have this build on my radar.

I have been toying with the 3D model, which I propose to turn into cut sheets.

The model helps get the cuts, angles and sizing right, so as to correctly interpret the 2D hand drawings.

I have the B&C mid drivers...two of them at least.
 
ART:

On the top-down drawing, it appears there are TWO different configurations for the BR port walls.

I assume the walls in red that a parallel are to accommodate for the pole insert.

Is this correct?

Is one configuration more optimal that the other?



I am probably going to mount mine horizontally and use two per side, as that works well on our mobile vehicle.

In which case I dont need a stand mount....so I am wondering if the angled port walls should go top and bottom?
 
The drawing in post #41 shows the ports in red as built, the angled port walls would have interfered with the tilt assembly and would not have given the desired Fb (82Hz).

The pictures below may help you understand the port configuration. If you are not using the tilt assembly (you will want it for other applications...) just use four part "H".

Art
 

Attachments

  • Port Cut out.jpg
    Port Cut out.jpg
    117.3 KB · Views: 1,722
  • Port Side "H".jpg
    Port Side "H".jpg
    66 KB · Views: 1,607
  • Ports.png
    Ports.png
    626.4 KB · Views: 1,683
  • Tilter:Port assembly.jpg
    Tilter:Port assembly.jpg
    137 KB · Views: 1,338