As a relative noob in hifi audio, I've been playing with Hornresp to design the ideal enclosures for my pair of 2.5" Dayton Audio ND65-8 drivers. (Mainly just as an exercise in practical application to learn something about acoustics and quarter wave enclosure design)
I've tried several classic/standard/conventional models in Hornresp but the one below seems to provide the flattest response near the target tuning frequency.
What would you even call this? Mass Loaded Reverse Taper Quarter Wave Transmission Line? MLRTQWTL 😀
AFAICT it would sound good according to the model. Unless of course I'm overlooking some critical piece obvious to everyone but me.
Thoughts? What enclosure would you put these drivers in for maximum SQ when paired with a small subwoofer?
I've tried several classic/standard/conventional models in Hornresp but the one below seems to provide the flattest response near the target tuning frequency.
What would you even call this? Mass Loaded Reverse Taper Quarter Wave Transmission Line? MLRTQWTL 😀
AFAICT it would sound good according to the model. Unless of course I'm overlooking some critical piece obvious to everyone but me.
Thoughts? What enclosure would you put these drivers in for maximum SQ when paired with a small subwoofer?
Maximum sound quality? Perhaps you can keep tweaking in hornresp and get the rolloff shape and the smoothness in the passband appropriate for your needs. By the way, often a gentle rolloff can be easier to blend with a sub. How low you try to go depends on your room.. if you can reach low enough for a sub without having to squeeze it that would be preferrable.
Though technically called a vented cone, per MJK's only defining a vented taper as ML-TQWT, some of us prefer a bit more description, so ML-TQWT for inverse tapered and a mass loaded (vented) positive tapered TL (horn) = ML-horn 😉
Thanks Allen. It appears the curve is less ideal than my novice eyes see. Speaking of ideals, what exactly would the ideal curve look like? Something like this?
'Quickie' HR sims of the Pioneer's Classic BR (Vas/1.44, Fb = Fs) converted to a TQWT, TL for 'better' SQ, blend.
Last edited:
That's a pretty nice curve but it isn't practical on its own and will have to be taken lower by some method, and you've indicated crossing to a subwoofer. You don't want to be trying for something that makes a good rolloff, you want something that lends itself to blend with another curve. The sub is the one which is going to set the rolloff. I'd not be trying to get the absolute maximum bass out of this one, and relax the knee a little. I'd model some closed boxes first and look beyond closed only if it was not enough on its own.. E.g. If you don't feel confident making a clean blend to your sub(s) then you might want to push this to cover the vocal range.
Pretty much
Is what it is.
80 dB 2.5 inch driver
far as sound quality I wouldn't expect anything below 200 Hz
I would look at cone excursion with 5 or 7 watts and what SPL your at.
Small sub / Woofer should take care of anything below 200 Hz
Model might look flat, and likely a fun exercise and learning process.
would assume 4Pi/ full space response below 300 or 200Hz
will drop quickly
In real life it wont be flat.
Midrange driver, let the sub do its job.
sound quality would be letting a woofer do the work.
Not trying to be negative, because having fun with software is something I enjoy too.
Is what it is.
80 dB 2.5 inch driver
far as sound quality I wouldn't expect anything below 200 Hz
I would look at cone excursion with 5 or 7 watts and what SPL your at.
Small sub / Woofer should take care of anything below 200 Hz
Model might look flat, and likely a fun exercise and learning process.
would assume 4Pi/ full space response below 300 or 200Hz
will drop quickly
In real life it wont be flat.
Midrange driver, let the sub do its job.
sound quality would be letting a woofer do the work.
Not trying to be negative, because having fun with software is something I enjoy too.