I understand! Modern Prosound/proaudio compression drivers are seen in some ways 'ultimate' for sound reproduction, so was just wondering if there if there is a matching modern prosound/proaudio horn design as well
Speaking of Strauss... This is a topclass prosound horn:
Some Brief Notes
An os horn is not the geometry of a complete finite acoustic horn that follows this geometry only in the throat and body. As the mouth is approached the profile radius needs to return to a decline in respect to horn axial length; and while doing so, avoids discontinuities in the bounding curve's 2nd. derivative; i.e., at the point of departure for mouth lips, the radii of curvature should match. If this tack is followed, reflectance will be minimized within the horns pass-band, the lower boundary of which, is roughly defined by the relation wavelength/(mouth circumference) = 1.
References to horns designed using shape optimization techniques may be found at the reference provided and elsewhere. These are relatively recent studies compared to those mentioned here so far.
Google Scholar
The acoustic load presented to a compression driver by a horn only becomes important if there is a concerted effort to extend the response/output of its lower frequency bound necessitated by some venue force majeure.
The dual direct radiator issues can be mitigated by a crossover that progressively engages the second driver to meet increasing VD requirements concomitant with lower frequency reproduction. Here, because wave length is so much larger the driver dimensions, the two drivers behave as a single source. Above this domain only the top driver is engaged in the overlap region shared by the tweeter.
WHG
An os horn is not the geometry of a complete finite acoustic horn that follows this geometry only in the throat and body. As the mouth is approached the profile radius needs to return to a decline in respect to horn axial length; and while doing so, avoids discontinuities in the bounding curve's 2nd. derivative; i.e., at the point of departure for mouth lips, the radii of curvature should match. If this tack is followed, reflectance will be minimized within the horns pass-band, the lower boundary of which, is roughly defined by the relation wavelength/(mouth circumference) = 1.
References to horns designed using shape optimization techniques may be found at the reference provided and elsewhere. These are relatively recent studies compared to those mentioned here so far.
Google Scholar
The acoustic load presented to a compression driver by a horn only becomes important if there is a concerted effort to extend the response/output of its lower frequency bound necessitated by some venue force majeure.
The dual direct radiator issues can be mitigated by a crossover that progressively engages the second driver to meet increasing VD requirements concomitant with lower frequency reproduction. Here, because wave length is so much larger the driver dimensions, the two drivers behave as a single source. Above this domain only the top driver is engaged in the overlap region shared by the tweeter.
WHG
Last edited:
A diy project built around one of Marcel's (mabat) STH (now ATH4) waveguides.
Drivers: B&C DE250 + SICA 12SR3PL.
Drivers: B&C DE250 + SICA 12SR3PL.
Attachments
Last edited:
Wait one, you mean to tell me this ode to two ways has always been about a single seat?! If this had been in the first post, it was a one n' done 'no brainer' layout.
MTM with horn axis focused wherever you want it [recommend level with ears] with woofers canted up/down same angle to overlay it and DSP'd proper time/phase delay. Your choice as to where you toe in [or not] each channel, though if you use conical/OS WG [1 WL long to load to the XO point] it shouldn't be critical once the room is properly dealt with.
Polars/whatever don't matter, much ado about nothing, just the speakers/LP in the right spot and getting the room right.
GM
Could you give some examples of such horns?
A spherical horn with a full 360° roll back, perhaps?
Or smaller:
Last edited:
Of course, that's why we prefer to use horns/WGs on this thread
, but not the polar nulls he was agonizing over for a single seat with the canted MTMs he needs, the rest is just getting the speakers/seat triangle properly oriented in room and dealing with any early reflections, which there really shouldn't be any major ones. Also, even if this wasn't the case, we tend not to hear nulls down low unless broadband, so still much ado about nothing for the vast majority of folks.
GM
It's not the cheapest horn at €300,- euro/piece. Here is some more info: https://en.toutlehautparleur.com/media/catalog/product/datasheet/supravox/PAV_1P.pdf Vertical is also very narrow with 25 deg.
I just ordered a pair of P.Audio PH-3520. We'll see how they do with the Altec's
Last edited:
Already canceled.. I'd have to wait for 3 months to get them.. That a bit to much.
Yes, that's a very nice project by a guy who is an acquaintance of mine. Crossover is just above 1 kHz as can be seen from the pictures shown. What's even more attractive is the price - for the parts cost it's only about 1300 EUR (~ $1500?) for a pair including the baffles with waveguides milled in. Really nice and still not so big speakers.
Last edited:
Greetings to all!
I would like to ask an opinion regarding the woofer of this two-way project. I found the BEYMA 15p80FeN or 15p80Nd and I saw that theoretically they should be valid candidates, someone describes them with a precise and powerful sound ... unfortunately I have no experience on them, I would ask if someone used them to report their experience , in particular15p80feN. Thank you in advance, renewing greetings.
Mleod
I would like to ask an opinion regarding the woofer of this two-way project. I found the BEYMA 15p80FeN or 15p80Nd and I saw that theoretically they should be valid candidates, someone describes them with a precise and powerful sound ... unfortunately I have no experience on them, I would ask if someone used them to report their experience , in particular15p80feN. Thank you in advance, renewing greetings.
Mleod
I'm not looking for praise of my work, I just don't understand the fascination for obsolete technology that we know can be improved upon.
There may not be an "ultimate", but for any desired situation and given constraints, there is always an optimum. Give me these criteria and I can design a device that is optimum. Now, of course, the more restrictive the criteria, the more compromises must be accepted in the optimum. It almost always comes down to size. People just don;t want to accept the size of device that can be required to go lower in frequency and the tradeoff with size is always a substantial one.There's no such thing as 'ultimate' or 'one size fits all' in audio
It depends on your objectives/preferences, room, cabinet, compression driver etc. and budget vs ability to DIY.
Sure horns can be modeled, but it takes considerable skill (and computer tools) to do so.
I've done some angling of devices in studies before and it is surprisingly ineffective.
It can mean a lot since you hear all of the sound from all the room reflections. You don't just hear the axial direct sound. The timbre of a signal is highly influenced by the room and its reflections and these depend on the loudspeaker systems polar response.
What we want is that the directivity be constant and lobing does not do that since the directivity is ever changing. As you say all direct radiating drivers have ever increasing directivity, even a pair of them does as well. What we want is that the directivity of the woofer and the waveguide match at the crossover such that there is not large change in the overall directivity through the crossover.
It takes a BIG device to go down to 600 Hz. This looks like a good attempt.
You have this correct Bill. If only everyone had your level of understanding.
In its hay-day it took 6 months to get delivery of an Abbey. Everyone who was patient was rewarded. It takes time to do things right.