Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

How to Make a New Wave Biradial Horn
How to Make a New Wave Biradial Horn
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 5th February 2018, 07:54 AM   #101
Patrick Bateman is offline Patrick Bateman  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Patrick Bateman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Diego
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ro808 View Post
I am not so sure about HOMs being a major issue with the XT1086. 18Sound (now owned by B&C) use very sophisticated tools (both hard- and software) in their labs.
Their horns are have all been developed based on extensive simulation and optimization in Comsol, similar to what Harman has done in developing their PT and Image Control waveguides. Kef and Celestion (also) use Siemens PLM to develop their waveguides, annular diaphragms and phase plugs, which is more or less comparable.

Take a look at this:
Click the image to open in full size.

More than a few sudden discontinuities, but I haven't read any comments about the M2 suffering from HOMs so far.
Even with older drivers that were not (at all) developed for specific use with the M2 waveguide, people praise the "smoothness" it adds to the sound.
On the Audioheritage forum there are plenty of threads on the M2 waveguide.
IMHO the aggressive breaks of the M2 are mostly for cosmetic reasons. The successive models are much more similar to the JBL progressive transition waveguide.

The M2 waveguide is a diffraction horn, and so is the XT1086. The clever thing about the M2 is that there are actually TWO diffraction slots layered on top of each other. One is at a 45 degree angle, and the other is angled at -45.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 08:19 AM   #102
silverprout is offline silverprout  France
diyAudio Member
 
silverprout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ro808 View Post
$34.000

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ro808 View Post
For near field listening, I would recommend a smaller horn with an 6-8" woofer (+ subs). This are 2 favorites and both around 80 in the horizontal.
Too many forums where these have been measured and used in projects, but you might start with googling "Econowave 18Sound".
I'm using two 12 because they are peaking at more than 100dB at the crossover point and stay above 95dB at 100Hz, a 6' would sound anemic in comparison.

PS : the Gedlee designs are not able to maintain a good efficiency at 100Hz, i still don't understand

Quote:
Originally Posted by hollowboy View Post
I'm not sure what is meant by 'angled' here. The coverage angle?
EDIT: I just realised the answer - that multiple horns were being discussed in one post, not just the XT-1464 (18 sound) clone.
As for HOMs, when he was asked about a similar horn (XT1086), Dr Geddes said:
Something like this looks like a pretty good alternative, short and looks like a simple shape (no sharp angles / low HOM?). I like the flat front, which means one could possibly rear mount it + chamfer the baffle to get a smoother mouth edge, (and have less black plastic on view).
Seven dollars.
Not enough loading with this one, is the diffraction an issue in small reverberant rooms ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post
IMHO the aggressive breaks of the M2 are mostly for cosmetic reasons
Aggressive breaks are not problematic when they are made by Harman ?
__________________
Things I Should Have Learned In School (But Probably Didn't)
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 03:39 PM   #103
Ro808 is offline Ro808  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by hollowboy View Post
I'm not sure what is meant by 'angled' here. The coverage angle?
EDIT: I just realised the answer - that multiple horns were being discussed in one post, not just the XT-1464 (18 sound) clone.

As for HOMs, when he was asked about a similar horn (XT1086), Dr Geddes said:



Something like this looks like a pretty good alternative, short and looks like a simple shape (no sharp angles / low HOM?). I like the flat front, which means one could possibly rear mount it + chamfer the baffle to get a smoother mouth edge, (and have less black plastic on view).

Seven dollars.
This small elliptical horn should work with an 8" woofer, crossed around 2KHz. The flat front may cause some edge diffraction, but probably not enough to worry about. The XT120 will most likely outperfom it though.
It's the same with the XT-1464 vs. the similar sized Faital-Pro LTH-142. They are comparable, but the XT-1464 both measures and sounds better.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 04:21 PM   #104
Ro808 is offline Ro808  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverprout View Post



I'm using two 12 because they are peaking at more than 100dB at the crossover point and stay above 95dB at 100Hz, a 6' would sound anemic in comparison.

PS : the Gedlee designs are not able to maintain a good efficiency at 100Hz, i still don't understand
How to Make a New Wave Biradial Horn


The 15TBX100 used in the Summa is about 95dB, if you add some losses due to BSC you'll end up in the low 90's sensitivity.
It's an otherwise well behaved driver, but personally I wouldn't choose a 15" with an Mms of 163 g for a big 2 way, especially if it's tuned for midbass and intended to be used with seperate subs. To me it makes more sense to choose a lighter cone with a stiffer suspension, but sufficient motor force.
Qts just below 0.40 / BL > 17 / Mms < 80 g / Fs of ca. 40 Hz.
You'll need a big cab, but end up with higher sensitivity and most importantly: a very snappy midrange (where most of the music is). As an added bonus: crossover will most likely be easier to get right, because such a woofer is usually less strained at higher freqs, both acoustically (soundwise) and mechanically.
If you put such a driver in a large cab (WAF should be a non-issue) you could tune it close to .0707 and enjoy a very clean mid bass and some sub bass without "overhang" (aka "slow", bottom heavy bass due to a lack of mid bass and too much sub bass) and.... without using subs.

Last edited by Ro808; 5th February 2018 at 04:36 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 04:52 PM   #105
phase_accurate is offline phase_accurate
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
It's the same with the XT-1464 vs. the similar sized Faital-Pro LTH-142.They are comparable, but the XT-1464 both measures and sounds better.
If I read the datasheets properly then the Faital is smaller. I always wondered what the differences are sound-wise but I have never got an answer. I use the XT1464 with a Faital HF 146 and I am quite content with it. But the Faital one would look nicer and less bulky.

regards

Charles
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 04:56 PM   #106
Ro808 is offline Ro808  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post
IMHO the aggressive breaks of the M2 are mostly for cosmetic reasons. The successive models are much more similar to the JBL progressive transition waveguide.

The M2 waveguide is a diffraction horn, and so is the XT1086. The clever thing about the M2 is that there are actually TWO diffraction slots layered on top of each other. One is at a 45 degree angle, and the other is angled at -45.
That's what I gathered from the "M2 for the poors" thread. The idea being: by creating enough diffraction it (eventually) becomes a none issue. I am not so sure about this. It makes more sense the M2 waveguide is the result of well behaved pressure distribution, a product of modeling and optimization.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 05:03 PM   #107
silverprout is offline silverprout  France
diyAudio Member
 
silverprout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ro808 View Post
The 15TBX100 used in the Summa is about 95dB, if you add some losses due to BSC you'll end up in the low 90's sensitivity.
It's an otherwise well behaved driver, but personally I wouldn't choose a 15" with an Mms of 163 g for a big 2 way, especially if it's tuned for midbass and intended to be used with seperate subs. To me it makes more sense to choose a lighter cone with a stiffer suspension, but sufficient motor force.
Qts just below 0.40 / BL > 17 / Mms < 80 g / Fs of ca. 40 Hz.
You'll need a big cab, but end up with higher sensitivity and most importantly: a very snappy midrange (where most of the music is). As an added bonus: crossover will most likely be easier to get right, because such a woofer is usually less strained at higher freqs, both acoustically (soundwise) and mechanically.
If you put such a driver in a large cab (WAF should be a non-issue) you could tune it close to .0707 and enjoy a very clean mid bass and some sub bass without "overhang" (aka "slow", bottom heavy bass due to a lack of mid bass and too much sub bass) and.... without using subs.
I still believe that Gedlee has a good technical reason, i don't find it

I've opted for the solution that you've descibed (25L cabs) and intergrated the LF abilities of the front speakers in the multisub setup.
It is better, but i still tinking that i've missed something in my understanding
__________________
Things I Should Have Learned In School (But Probably Didn't)
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 05:14 PM   #108
Ro808 is offline Ro808  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by phase_accurate View Post
If I read the datasheets properly then the Faital is smaller. I always wondered what the differences are sound-wise but I have never got an answer. I use the XT1464 with a Faital HF 146 and I am quite content with it. But the Faital one would look nicer and less bulky.

regards

Charles
I was about to buy a pair of LTH-142's, but after reading some comments of people who compared it to the XT-1464, I decided to cancel. The LTH-142 tends to beam quite a lot due to the tractrix contour and it's subsequent depth/width/height ratio. The XT-1464 is larger and features an optimized mouth (with roundover). It will still beam, but less annoyingly so, aspecially with near- and midfield listening.
It's quite easy to understand if you compare both horns: which one looks more akin to a trumpet?
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 05:33 PM   #109
Ro808 is offline Ro808  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverprout View Post
I still believe that Gedlee has a good technical reason, i don't find it

I've opted for the solution that you've descibed (25L cabs) and intergrated the LF abilities of the front speakers in the multisub setup.
It is better, but i still tinking that i've missed something in my understanding
Dr. Geddes undoubtedly selected his drivers based on fundamental technical objectives. As always: it's a matter of trade-off, pick your poison etc.

I am not a fan of using separate subs for hi-fi (music) use and have hardly any experience in setting up such a system myself. I have listended to many though and, with a few exceptions, don't like it for music. For home cinema: it's a different story.

By the way: Why not include (part of) the sub duties in the main cabs? 30Hz and below.... apart from a few church organ works, there's not much music with sub bass content.

Last edited by Ro808; 5th February 2018 at 05:42 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th February 2018, 05:57 PM   #110
Ro808 is offline Ro808  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Follow up:
Come to think about it: not so long ago I set up subs for an omnidirectional loudspeaker system. These were special OEM Kef coaxials with inversed cones in a small tube shaped case. The subs were 15", 2 separate cabs. Although these might not be called subs in the true sense, because they covered 25-80 (max 120) Hz. This setup, once properly dsp-ed (with Dante) did perform quite well. The omni tubes are quite forgiving in this respect, integration that is.

... Back to Biradials, I guess
  Reply With Quote

Reply


How to Make a New Wave Biradial HornHide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Horn Extender/Wave-guide for TH weltersys Subwoofers 172 8th July 2019 06:57 PM
Ok, I get it. A wave guide is not a horn. peteleoni Multi-Way 17 8th September 2013 07:22 PM
12" full range on a backloaded horn, BIB, tappered quarter wave or other horn boxes? c3conv Full Range 1 27th July 2011 06:37 PM
biradial or exponential holger honda Multi-Way 0 15th June 2005 04:25 PM
how to make a clean square wave? sss Solid State 23 6th September 2004 11:55 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:56 PM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 14.29%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2020 diyAudio
Wiki