Two way synergy Horn

From another Project which I did not finish I have two 5 inch midrange drivers, PHL 950Nd, here.

As I am still looking for a speaker for my home cinema I came to the idea to build an prototyp of an two-way
synergy-horn based on them combining with the HF10AK which am currently using in my Coax-Speaker.
Two 12 inch woofers in D'appolito configuration around the horn will complete them to an three way speaker.

So the plan is to run the 12 inch woofers to about 300-400Hz and then the horn should take over, where the
two midrange drivers should run to about 1,5khz - 2khz and then HF10AK will complete to 20khz.

At first of all I took ath4 (which is a really great piece of software, thanks to mabat!) to generate a horn contour as startup for the synergy horn.
My plan is to have 90° horizontal coverage and 50° vertical coverage. The horn should be about 12 inch wide to match the woofers width. After trying a lot of different configs I came out with the following ath4-configuration:


Code:
   [FONT=Arial]Throat.Profile = 1[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Throat.Diameter = 25.4             ; [mm][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]; half of HF10AK Exit angel (21 degree)[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Throat.Angle = 10.5                  ; [deg][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Length = 112                                ; [mm][/FONT]
  
  [FONT=Arial]; -------------------------------------------------------[/FONT]
  
  [FONT=Arial]; Horizontal analysis[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Coverage.Angle = 45 - 20*sin(p)^2[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Term.s = 0.7 - 0.2*sin(p)^2[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Term.n = 4.0 - 1.4*sin(p)^2[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Term.q = 0.996 - 0.003*sin(p)^2[/FONT]
  
  [FONT=Arial]; -------------------------------------------------------[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Morph.TargetShape = 1[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Morph.FixedPart = 0.0[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Morph.Rate = 3[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Morph.CornerRadius = 12 ; [mm][/FONT]
  
  [FONT=Arial]; -------------------------------------------------------[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Mesh.AngularSegments = 80[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Mesh.LengthSegments = 30[/FONT]
  
  [FONT=Arial]Mesh.ThroatResolution = 4.0     ; [mm][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Mesh.InterfaceResolution = 8.0  ; [mm][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Mesh.InterfaceOffset = 5.0      ; [mm][/FONT]
  
  [FONT=Arial]; -------------------------------------------------------[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]ABEC.SimType = 1[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]ABEC.f1 = 800 ; [Hz][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]ABEC.f2 = 20000 ; [Hz][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]ABEC.NumFrequencies = 20[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]ABEC.MeshFrequency = 1000 ; [Hz][/FONT]
  
  [FONT=Arial]ABEC.Polars:SPL = {[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]  MapAngleRange = 0,90,19[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]  NormAngle = 0    ; [deg][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]  Distance = 3      ; [m][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]  Offset = 113       ; [mm][/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]}[/FONT]
  
  [FONT=Arial]; -------------------------------------------------------[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Output.STL = 1[/FONT]
  [FONT=Arial]Output.ABECProject = 1[/FONT]
I came out with the following simulated polar pattern:

Horizonal:
horizontal — ImgBB

Vertical:
vertikal — ImgBB

Then I imported the STL into sketchup to build the horn around the contour and together with hornresp I came up with the following result:
File-Upload.net - Synergy-Horn.skp

File-Upload.net - SynergyHorn.stl


To simulate the midrange frequency response in hornresp I will now descripe what I did and If I did something wrong please tell me.

At first I ran through the Input Wizard with the following settings:
Quarter Space --> Horn loaded --> Multiple Entry --> 3 segments --> Conical (S1) --> Conical (S2) --> Conical (S3) --> Entry Point at S2 --> No acoustical lining --> Throat Chamber --> Throad adapter --> Conical (Throad adapter)

On side one in hornresp (attached screenshot) I did the following settings (see my comments in attached screenshot).
On hornresp side two (attached screenshot) I did the following settings (see also my comments in attached screenshot).
Then I openend the Multiple Entry Horn wizard (to find under tools) and honfresp simulated me the following frequency response (see attachment) which looks good to make an crossover at about 1,5-1,8khz to the HF10HAK.

Is the calculation I did correct?
Do you have a recommendations about the horn? What I can do better? What I did wrong? I want to optimize the horn as far as possible before making a 3d-print-prototyp
 

Attachments

  • honresp_side1.jpg
    honresp_side1.jpg
    435.7 KB · Views: 1,239
  • honresp_side2.jpg
    honresp_side2.jpg
    412 KB · Views: 1,221
  • calculated frequency response.png
    calculated frequency response.png
    15.6 KB · Views: 1,193
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Is the calculation I did correct?
Do you have a recommendations about the horn? What I can do better? What I did wrong? I want to optimize the horn as far as possible before making a 3d-print-prototyp


Ok I think you can make this work, but the odds of getting it right the first time is very low. Don't let this discourage you, this just means you will have to design and test a few before you can get it right.

Running with that I would suggest the first print be a test bed.

Design the first horn to have the two mids ports in different positions, and test them separately covering the untested side with duct tape. Have one side close together and closer to the throat, and position the other side ~10cm farther from the throat and taps placed farther apart from one another. With luck one of the two will work, and if not you will have a really good idea what you need them to do on the next version.

In your horn there isn't much play space on the sides of the horn, so I would adjust port size. Pull one side further from the throat and remove the latter half of the ports area on that side.

FWIW, for me ~1500hz ends up with a port opening starting 32-40mm from the throat measured along the center of the horn. Horn coverage, flair type, and CD driver depth all play a part. You can also adjust this somewhat with mid chamber volume.

Do not model the mid plug on the test run. Use a flat base, and make some different volume plugs to stick in and test. You will find that the mid taps length and volume under the cone are not cut and dry, and are affected by each other. You will have to dial them in by changing the volume and shape of the volume under the mid.

You can sorta see this effect in Hornresp by using the wizard and changing the Throat Chamber Volume and the Throat Chamber Port Length. You can get the same FR with different inputs, and you can also get a feel for how to adjust your real chamber volume to get the real world FR you are after.

Hornresp can get you close, but there are so many interconnected small parameters that interact. I will say you may want to really pay attention to the large spike there over 1K in the HR sim. Learn how to dampen it in hornresp, so that if it is in the real FR you will know what you have to alter to get rid of it.

As a fellow SketchUp user remember to go back in and remove all the stray interior faces, and the dreaded surface multi faces. They aren't always an issue, but sometimes they give slicers the hickups.

Have fun!

EDIT: that is yellow play-doh used in volume testing years before I got my 3d printer in the real life pics.
 

Attachments

  • one.PNG
    one.PNG
    134.7 KB · Views: 983
  • two.PNG
    two.PNG
    211.4 KB · Views: 959
  • three.PNG
    three.PNG
    27.7 KB · Views: 194
  • four.PNG
    four.PNG
    7.4 KB · Views: 206
  • 0608191329.jpg
    0608191329.jpg
    401.3 KB · Views: 304
  • 0608191328.jpg
    0608191328.jpg
    370.7 KB · Views: 330
  • 0608191326.jpg
    0608191326.jpg
    408.2 KB · Views: 260
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
It's easier for me to convert the hornresp ME1 to an OD horn in order to play with the loudspeaker wizard and adjust mid volume to tap length and size.

Of course, I use an old version of HR... maybe things are easier now.

I'm not sure quarter space is the way to go. I normally use half space and assume a low corner will be a little bit better, and the upper corner is pretty close.
 

Attachments

  • five.PNG
    five.PNG
    45.8 KB · Views: 225
Hi, from the renderings it looks like you have the mids on the sides of the horn. Are they within 1/4wl at crossover from each other? If not you could get them a little bit closer if they were at the top and bottom.

Because of my horn contour with wide horiztonal coverage I don´t think that I can keep them in this range. For me the question also for the 1/4-Wavelength rule is still unclear. Which postion of the opening is important? The start of the openening, the middle or the end? Attached are my measured distances. If the start of the opening is important I can keep them into this range.

Also the 1/4 wavelength rule regarding the distance along the middle of the horn to the input slots is still unclear. What is the starting point for measurment? The diagraphm inside compression driver or the horn throat? Same for end of measurement. Should I chosse the start, the middle or the end of the input ports?
I tried to make it more clear with the attached sketch.
 

Attachments

  • Distance_To_Each_Other.jpg
    Distance_To_Each_Other.jpg
    328.7 KB · Views: 363
  • 1-4_Wavelength_rule.jpg
    1-4_Wavelength_rule.jpg
    129 KB · Views: 468
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Design the first horn to have the two mids ports in different positions, and test them separately covering the untested side with duct tape. Have one side close together and closer to the throat, and position the other side ~10cm farther from the throat and taps placed farther apart from one another. With luck one of the two will work, and if not you will have a really good idea what you need them to do on the next version.
ok that means you put one driver on the left side and only measure with one driver active. Then you only measure the other side with only other side active?

In your horn there isn't much play space on the sides of the horn, so I would adjust port size. Pull one side further from the throat and remove the latter half of the ports area on that side.
Yes that is a problem. I tried different settings with reducing the input area but then I got an abrubt downfall at about 1,5khz.
So reducing the input area does not model very well in hornresp but is maybe better for the compression driver because it "see's" more horn surface.

I will say you may want to really pay attention to the large spike there over 1K in the HR sim. Learn how to dampen it in hornresp, so that if it is in the real FR you will know what you have to alter to get rid of it.
Tried differnt settings but the spike is always there. Do you have an idea how to get rid of it?
 
Last edited:
Hi, from the renderings it looks like you have the mids on the sides of the horn. Are they within 1/4wl at crossover from each other? If not you could get them a little bit closer if they were at the top and bottom.
putting them on top and buttom is physically not possbible because then I do not have the length to put the 5 inch drivers there. I then need either a bigger horn (what I do not want beacause of match the 12 inch woofer size and keep veritcal coverage low) or use smaller drivers.
Also I want to keep the 12 inch woofers as low as possible together because of D'Appolito configuration. That was the main reason putting them on the side.
What is the effect when not keeping 1/4-Wavelength rule for the input ports to each other?
 
another topic which is unclear to me. Normally the surround is known to only produce "waste" and distortion and is only there to "hold" the cone. In my design (and in a lot of other synergy design I have also seen) I have put the input slots as near as possible to the horn throat (1/4 wavelength rule) which results in, that the input slots is maybe have in the surround and other half over the membran surface. Does this matter in this case? Or is better to trying to put the input slots in front of the cone only?
 

Attachments

  • surround.jpg
    surround.jpg
    189 KB · Views: 187
Hi, I haven't built synergy yet but that seems to be the rule of thumb, distance of the taps from the throat dictates the crossover point. I guess if the distance between the opposing mid drivers is more than distance from throat it could add some anomalies in the frequency response.

Tap location relative to the speaker cone: I've got no other info than I remember mark100 and some other member commented sound or measurements were best when the tap is middle of the cone. I don't know how holes are located in Danley synergies, but I suspect that there is problems getting drivers close enough and the hole position is a natural place to balance different properties of the system. Best chance for success would be to start copying what others are doing and then trying to improve on that with ideas emerging from prototypes.

You will learn a lot from the first print and measurements, have fun! :)
 
Last edited:
First off the Ap1 in my hornresp pic should have been 17.5. It was late... It is useful for trends only as the cd isnt accounted for.

Quarter wavelength along the horn starts inside the cd, and until approximately the port center. Quarter length across the horn is also approximated at the port center. The more oblong the port the more reality will round things off and differ from the sim.

Ports placed greater than 1/4 wl apart will start producing combfiltering as you move around as the distance from you to each port changes, and it can be seen in polar measurement.. 1/2 wl is a real killer here as things cancel out.

Yes, just do one mid at a time. Run a sim for a single mid for both positions as well. Then compare reality to them. Check polars for deal breakers as well.

If you shrink the ports as they are you have to remove more mid chamber volume, or move the port further from the throat.... the cd seeing more horn face is always a good thing to a point.

The spike will always be there as the drivers motor to sprung weight is tight in this horn profile. I just meant that if you see a +6db spike in reality you can lower it by changing things in the horn.

As for ports on the top or bottom if you pulled the mids closer to the horn inside surface while leaving them on the sides you might just be able to place a short port tube on the top and bottom right over your corners. 6-7mm horn thickness is enough with 2.4-3mm thick walls and medium in fill. With all the extra mid support material there as well I wouldn't be afraid of 4mm horn thickness. This would push them closer to the surrounds.

Surrounds. Ports at the center of the driver would be best, but isnt going to happen most of the time. I think the time difference from the port to the other points along the driver is more an issue than the surround itself in the mids. The chambers and plug shapes help with this though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I added the part about where the port starts as most ports end up in the same ballpark size on a 3way. It was just a reference I use to get started.

If I want ~1500 then I start there. Mid chamber volume, port size (diameter and length,) along with horn profile can be used to shift the knee around some to maximize the area up to the reflection point.

You originally posted a desire for a 1.5 to 1.8khz xover point.

This would just be from the horns throat not the cd.
 
I ran the horn simulation through abec for the tweeter (see polar pattern on first post) but this does not include the midrange simulation.
I am not a specialist in this, so I did not include midrange here. Therefor I tried to simulate the frequency response in hornresp.
But after more and more thinking about this project I came more and more to the conclusion not to use the 5 inch midrange and try to give them back.
Instead I am thinking to use 4x 3 inch midwoofers on the horn which gives me the following advantages:

- I can place them on top and bottom and so I can inmprove distance between the input slots (1/4 wavelength rule from slot to each other) because vertical horn contour is about 50° (instead 90 in horizontal).
- I can put them nearer to the compression driver which lets me improve the distance to the throat (1/4 wavelenght rule to compression driver)
- Less sd of all drivers requires less input slot area which let the compression driver "see" more horn surface
- when using smaller drivers which are nearer to the horn throat, helps me to put the slot not directly over the surround and let me move it more into the middle of the cone surface

I have attached a quick and dirty sketch to get a feeling for the dimensions.
I am currently thinking about Faital 3FE22.
An opinions about 4x3 inch vs 2x5 inch?
Which 3 inch woofer you would recommend?
 

Attachments

  • 3 inch woofers.jpg
    3 inch woofers.jpg
    204.7 KB · Views: 356
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Good reasoning and this is what most do, use small woofers. There is another route as well: bigger compression driver (maybe a coaxial comression driver) allows using lower crossover point and larger woofers further down the waveguide. Both have their own set of compromises but these are the two options that I've seen people to gravitate.

For home use, I believe you could go with the 5" woofers and 1" compression driver just use low crossover point and accept the lower power handling capability. Will follow how it turns out for you :)
 
Member
Joined 2007
Paid Member
I used Faital pro 3FE25 (Ferite version) in my build and only got a crossover point of 1.27kHz. Seemed like the HF was limited by the mass corner frequency so perhaps a driver with more motor force would go higher.
BM-D446 on PH-4220

I have been looking at this driver:
4NDF34 LF Drivers - B&C Speakers

I haven't done this in ABEC/AKABAK3(easier) yet but you can just model the geometry of your whole horn including midrange volume plugs and diaphragm shapes, link the T/S params using the lumped element modeler. I'm guessing you have only used the ATH4 script so far so there is quite a lot to learn but there are example in the AKABAK3 install.
 
I used Faital pro 3FE25 (Ferite version) in my build and only got a crossover point of 1.27kHz.
Did you try to model this in hornresp and did the simulation also fall at this frequency? Did you play with the slot length and with a volume filler in the compression chamber?
I quick and dirty modelled my 12 inch horn with 4x 3fe22 and frequency response falls down at about 2khz, says hornresp
 

Attachments

  • 3fe22.jpg
    3fe22.jpg
    66.9 KB · Views: 317
Member
Joined 2007
Paid Member
Its all in the thread I linked above, volume fillers made only a small difference. The Hornresp simulations I did didn't seem very accurate (however its hard to tell as Hornresp doesn't model directivity). I got a totally different response shape to your plot so perhaps this is to do with my horn?

There is the monster midrange for unity horn thread to check but very few drivers turn out to be suitable so I don't know of a 3" driver.
 
Member
Joined 2008
Paid Member
Hi de45dd

I’m glad I came across your thread.

You managed to raise a lot of questions that I have, or just plain didn’t understand how to express, when I tried to pursue a synergy project recently.

I spent countless hours reading all the big synergy related threads.

I had intended to try and acquire the drivers needed to mimic Bill Waslo’s Cosyne project...and managed to get most of them (except that the Aura woofer was the 4 Ohm version).

I thought I would use an active crossover to figure out any issues with the different woofers.

When I ordered the CDs from Parts Express I came across some pretty big 90 X 40 horns on buyout (similar to your design profile) and thought they might be an easier way to experiment than building from scratch.

Well, these synergy projects really are a can of worms.

I ran into the same hornresp modeling issue as you with the large knee at around 1kHz...and couldn’t figure how to get rid of it. I did notice it would shift a bit if I varied the throat volume and port area.

It became obvious after modifying one horn to accept the CDs (it was a screw mount) that trying to get the tiny Gentos in place along with the 6 inch Aura woofers I got was going to be a nightmare.

I tried modeling some other Aura 3.5” buyouts I had bought from Madisound years ago...and still had the same issue with the big knee at 1kHz. They also didn’t have the efficiency I was after.

Finally I thought I would try and make a 2 way synergy like you as I have some excellent condition old Dukane 5A540 (essentially Coral M100) that are supposed to be able to go down to 500Hz.

I got as far as mounting the Dukane and taking gated measurements using my MiniDSP (set with a 4th order high pass at 500Hz) and Umik 1.

Although they didn’t seem to flinch at the low filter point, they also didn’t reach nearly as high as I thought they would (they pretty much crash after 10kHz).

That left me frustrated and thinking I wouldn’t be able to have a synergy that actually covered the range I wanted (approximately 200-20kHz)

Aditionally, I was struggling with an expansion near the throat of the horn that made it difficult to try and create mounting plates and volume plugs for the (4) Aura woofers that would keep them close to the throat.

I think the issue that had me put it aside was that even if I disregarded the high frequency drop off, I couldn’t wrap my head around the allowable trade offs of port distance and size while trying to use the CD that allowed for a lower crossover point.

I thought to myself, if I could get the woofers to cross at or below the knee at 1kHz I might be able to use the filter to deal with it...but would that actually happen if I used the same port size as Bill used in his Cosyne and had to place it out further on the horn (starting at 5” or so) where I had a flat surface?

It’s now sitting in the garage while I try and figure out a new dipole sub system.

I’m wondering if its worth it to buy some higher efficiency B&C 6MDN44 so that I would only need to fit 2 on each horn.

The 6MDN44 are mentioned as a good choice for synergy in a thread devoted to selecting mid woofers for the synergy design.

Until I can understand more of what’s going on, I don’t think I want to spend more money.

Your thread is shedding a little light. I don’t understand how to do things like calculate 1/4 wavelengths and apply that to port distances at all.