| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Horn-Loaded Speakers» My Multi-way Horns (9 posts, 1 page)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 1 of 1 (9 items) Select Pages: 
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Jessie Dazzle Project..  Will this better to be auditable?...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     172  1117109  08-03-2007
  »  New  Midbass Horns and Real Estate...  Just a youtube video......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     247  1488413  07-26-2009
  »  New  The tapped horns: cons, pros and Sound..  Sorry, no images any more....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     56  478610  04-23-2009
  »  New  45Hz Bass Horn..  Can We Ever be Saved From Ourselves?...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     23  234093  09-19-2006
  »  New  Big mama 1.5" horns......  Crossover point...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     27  153739  09-08-2006
  »  New  Barn Conversion - James' Project..  The vintage vs. contemporary compression driver....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     28  257285  02-04-2007
  »  New  Many Mani's options: My first horns..  Well, you need to read a whole book....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     27  96007  01-20-2010
11-29-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
skushino
Seattle, WA
Posts 93
Joined on 07-07-2004

Post #: 1
Post ID: 12369
Reply to: 12369
My Multi-way Horns
fiogf49gjkf0d
My current speakers are Edgarhorns with the straight 80hz upper-bass shell.  The bass never sounded correct to me.  The problems with Edgar's mid-bass are well documented at this site and elsewhere.  I tried some simple modifications to the crossovers and amplification and obtained improvements in the right direction, but at this point I want to take a different path with a new multi-way system.  My plan is to implement the new system in 3 phases, so that I can monitor the effects of each change on its own.  Here is the plan:


BandwidthDriverHornRemarks
Phase 3> 10kFostex T900ABullet tweeterReplace Edgar sub with stereo tapped horn subs
> 1200JBL 2441Edgar 350Hz tractrix horn
240 - 1200Faital M5N12-80   5"142 Hz 4" throat tractrix horn
75 - 24012" 'x'-driver70hz 8" throat
< 70Dual B&C 8PE21 8" woofersStereo tapped horns
Phase 2> 10kFostex T900ABullet tweeterAdd 70 Hz midbass horn -> 5 way system
> 1200JBL 2441Edgar 350Hz tractrix hornraise upperbass high pass xover from 135 -> 220
240 - 1200Faital M5N12-80   5"142 Hz 4" throat tractrix hornlower sub xover from 120 -> 60
65 - 22012" 'x'-driver70hz 8" throat
< 60JBL 2240   18"Edgar Seismic Sub
Phase 1> 10kFostex T900ABullet tweeterReplace Edgar 80Hz horn with 142Hz upper bass horn
> 1000JBL 2441Edgar 350Hz tractrix hornraise MF xover from 500 -> 1000
135 - 1000Faital M5N12-80   5"142 Hz tractrix horn 4" throatraise LF xover from  65 -> 120
< 120JBL 2240   18"Edgar Seismic Sub
Edgarhorn> 10kFostex T900ABullet tweeterBase line
(current)> 500JBL 2441Edgar 350Hz tractrix horn
80 - 500Electro Voice EVM-15LEdgar 80Hz 10" throat horn
< 80JBL 2240Edgar Seismic Sub

The system will grow from its current 4-way configuration to 5-ways.  I'm ok with the current mid-range and HF.  Attention is focused on the region below 200hz. 

Phase 1 replaces the Edgar 80hz horn with a Hasquin 142hz round tractrix with a 4" throat driven by a 5" Faital Pro M5N12-80.  I also have a couple of 8" drivers to try in this horn, Fane Studio 8M and B&C 8PE21.  The final selection will be based on results of listening to all.  Naturally the crossover points will need to be adjusted for the new horn.  I plan to get an RTA to help integrate the new horn.  In the beginning this horn will turn on around 135hz, but in the final configuration it will be used an octave higher, turning on around 240hz.

Phase 2 adds a mid-bass horn.  This is the most important and challenging part of the project.  If I make a mistake here, the project would be a total failure.  This horn should cover around 70 - 240hz.  At this point I'm looking at a rectangular 65 - 70hz hyperbolic-expo profile with 8" throat driven by a 12" 'driver x'.  I don't want to reveal the driver yet as there is some controversy around the application and further modeling needs to be done.  This driver has never been used in a similar application that I'm aware of.  There may be a good reason for this, but I'm stubborn and need to try it for myself.  The driver selection is based on one criteria - luscious and colorful tone.  Initial results from hornresp show good potential in a front-loaded horn application.  In case my x-driver proves unsuitable, I will go with a more conventional 12" woofer.

Phase 3 replaces the Edgar Seismic Sub with stereo tapped horns.  These will be dual P-P configuration.  John Hasquin has been very helpful on this part.

For amplification I have ML-2s.

The stand is a major project all by itself.  My current plan is support the 142hz horn on a block like Romy's.  Then need to fabricate a stand for the mid horn above, with the Fostex tweeter in between the 142 horn and mid horn.  I am planning to hang the mid-bass horn from the ceiling vertically aligned with the other horns.  Partly because there is no other place to put them, to obtain coupling with the ceiling, and also to be more off-axis in the hopes of mitigating excess hf coming out of this horn being heard at the listening seat.  It might look something like this:


horns.bmp

Disregard the different color schemes, I was trying to get a visual of different ideas.  Kind of leaning towards the 'Japan horn" color scheme on the left. 

I expect this project will evolve over the next several months, and then take several more months before getting decent results.  The first part is getting John's 200 pound horns shipped to Seattle, paint them, have stands built for the mid and HF, then finally working on implementing them.  I don't even want to think of the nightmare of phase 2 yet - fabricating mid-bass horns and then hanging them from the ceiling...
11-30-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,535
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 2
Post ID: 12371
Reply to: 12369
Something does not click in here.
fiogf49gjkf0d

Scott,

I do not particularly like many of the ideas that you presented in here and, in my view, some of your movements you are planning are faulty. Your dissatisfaction of the Edgarhorns upper-bass is too wide-ranging and not well-interpreted by you properly. You are trying to build a new system with “attention is focused on the region below 200hz” but you forget that sound below 200Hz is 50% of your room. Where are the assurances that your dissatisfaction is from the Edgarhorns midbass but not from the specifics of your room?  You said “I plan to get an RTA to help integrate the new horn.” Good but prevented you to get it 5 years back – I think it is how long you are being frustrated with new Edgarhorns upper-bass.

To replace two 80–500Hz and 500Hz -10k channel with 3 channels of 70 Hz -240Hz, 240Hz -1200Hz and 1200Hz -10K is a very good idea of cause. Do not be too bind to the specific crossover points you identified, there is many reasons why you might not be able to him them.

I do not know Scott – something does not feel to me in this idea as sensible. Too much project management and too little expression of the sonic specific. Anyhow, I wish you good luck…. Post your observations about the sound of your 'driver x', about the sound of the Faital M5N12-80   and about the sound of B&C 8PE21.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
11-30-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
skushino
Seattle, WA
Posts 93
Joined on 07-07-2004

Post #: 3
Post ID: 12374
Reply to: 12371
Reasons behind the moves
fiogf49gjkf0d
Thanks for your comments, Romy.

Edgarhorns weren't an obvious choice.  Many horns never worked for me.  The Avantgardes left me cold.  So did the single-driver crowd (I just don't get it....), Altec VOTs, PA systems, etc.  But there were some systems that made a good impression - one of Josh's Electronluv systems, my old Klipsch's driven with tubes, large vintage Tannoys, John Tucker's horns, and your Macondo.  Looking back, my expectations for the Edgarhorns were too high. 

You are trying to build a new system with “attention is focused on the region below 200hz” but you forget that sound below 200Hz is 50% of your room.

I don't think it's the room.  I moved my other speakers and that damn sub-woofer all over the place before finding the locations that work.  This gave me experience to know the difference between wrong bass from the room and just wrong bass.  The bass I have isn't bad-room bass.  I know exactly how I want my bass, and I have heard it before in some other systems.  My Edgarhorn bass misses the mark on too many critical things.  The tone color is tepid and gray. The energy is sleepy.  Music notes are shapeless rather than round.  It is asleep in the upper bass part.  The bass doesn't match the MF.  It should be more stately and noble.  Slower.  Vibrant.  Engaging.  These aren't problems from bad-room bass.  This is the horn and driver.

I spent time listening to just the upper bass horn.  And the only word to describe the experience is 'disappointing'.

When I get my RTA I bet it shows the bass is 3 - 5dB lower compared to everything else - this is what I hear.  If that was the only thing wrong I could just pad the rest down.  But that only fixes the sound level and leaves all the other problems.  The horn is too short to properly load the lower bass.  There are better drivers than the 15" woofer for playing the lower mids.  I like the idea of using a small 5" or 8" driver properly horn-loaded instead.  Intellectually, the bass can be implemented better than it is now.  And I have high hopes (there I go again) for the x-driver in a proper mid-bass horn.  If it works, it would be phenomenal.

You said “I plan to get an RTA to help integrate the new horn.” Good but prevented you to get it 5 years back – I think it is how long you are being frustrated with new Edgarhorns upper-bass.

You're right.  No excuse.

To replace two 80–500Hz and 500Hz -10k channel with 3 channels of 70 Hz -240Hz, 240Hz -1200Hz and 1200Hz -10K is a very good idea of cause. Do not be too bind to the specific crossover points you identified, there is many reasons why you might not be able to him them.

Nope not hung-up on specific crossover points.  These are just my conceptual idea for integrating the different parts - how they might fit together.  The real project begins with using the RTA and listening to each specific horn / driver combo and learning where they do well and how they play together.

I do not know Scott – something does not feel to me in this idea as sensible. Too much project management and too little expression of the sonic specific.

I'm rarely accused of being sensible.  I'm planning to hang the damn mid-bass horns from my ceiling!  Should have spent more effort describing why I'm doing this rather than how it will be implemented.  If you have more comments on what doesn't feel right about my project, please share.

Again, thanks for your feedback.
11-30-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
jessie.dazzle


Paris, France
Posts 456
Joined on 04-23-2006

Post #: 4
Post ID: 12375
Reply to: 12369
Mid-bass horn observation
fiogf49gjkf0d
Looking at phase 3, one of the first things that pops out is the following:

Skushino wrote:
"...75-240Hz [from a] 12" x-driver [loaded into a] 70Hz [horn with an] 8" throat..."

Because they are a royal PITA to make, you'll want to give yourself every chance of getting your base horns right the first time.

If you're really expecting 75Hz, you'd be better off going with a horn that has a lower cutoff; the sort of standard "rule of thumb" is to dimension the horn such that its cutoff is one octave below the lowest frequency you plan to ask that horn to produce. This, in your case would call for a horn having a cutoff of 37.5Hz (call it 40Hz). Not allowing this margin may result in the dreaded honk, though many do push their bass horns well into this margin, it is, strictly speaking, not kosher... Factor in some reinforcement from walls, ceiling, floor, and you may get away with pushing it (you can apply the same rule to your 142Hz horn, but there you are probably close enough).

If playing by the "book", you are talking about a horn that measures around 10-feet, and that's only back to the driver mounting plane; now add the length of the back chamber and you'll get something like 11 feet total.

Also, the horn will need to have substantial mass; this must be taken into consideration when contemplating ceiling-mounting (not impossible though).

On another subject, looking at your CAD image leads me to recommend that you consider an acoustically transparent screen, allowing you to use a bigger screen, and partially (visually) obscure some of the horns. I'm assuming a pull-down model, which could be retracted when not using a projector.

Best of luck with the project,

jd*


How to short-circuit evolution: Enshrine mediocrity.
11-30-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,535
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 5
Post ID: 12378
Reply to: 12374
Scott, are you going to park your Camel in your new horn?
fiogf49gjkf0d

 skushino wrote:
  Edgarhorns weren't an obvious choice.  Many horns never worked for me.  The Avantgardes left me cold.  So did the single-driver crowd (I just don't get it....), Altec VOTs, PA systems, etc.  But there were some systems that made a good impression - one of Josh's Electronluv systems, my old Klipsch's driven with tubes, large vintage Tannoys, John Tucker's horns, and your Macondo.  Looking back, my expectations for the Edgarhorns were too high. 

Scott, you are looking for a playback with “attention is focused on the region below 200hz” and mane as few playbacks that according to you left you with good impression. Interesting that all of the playback systems you liked use different topologies for the “region below 200Hz”.  The point that I made is very deep-seated. People hear somebody playback, like the result and they attribute the fact that they like it with whatever reason they would like it to attribute. So, I do not take the fact that you  had good impressions from above mentioned playbacks in association with the fact the they had proper “region below 200Hz”. 

 skushino wrote:
  I don't think it's the room.  I moved my other speakers and that damn sub-woofer all over the place before finding the locations that work. 

I had corrected it: “sound below 200Hz is 50% of your room” but not the 5% as I initially typed. I have corrected it. I personally still feel that a lot of problem that you have are room related, not becomes your room is be but because you do not know your room and never invested efforts to get any objective idea about your room. A horn would give you 6dB gain. A room will override it with 10-15dB gain or lost, so what we are talking about?

 skushino wrote:
  This gave me experience to know the difference between wrong bass from the room and just wrong bass.  The bass I have isn't bad-room bass.  I know exactly how I want my bass, and I have heard it before in some other systems.  My Edgarhorn bass misses the mark on too many critical things.  The tone color is tepid and gray. The energy is sleepy.  Music notes are shapeless rather than round.  It is asleep in the upper bass part.  The bass doesn't match the MF.  It should be more stately and noble.  Slower.  Vibrant.  Engaging.  These aren't problems from bad-room bass.  This is the horn and driver.

OK, that was good. But what happen if place a regular sealed monitor in the location of your midbass horn. Did you try to load the amp that drives the midbass channel differently? I do not defend the new version of Edgar midbass. I do not like it and I do not like it just on specks – I do not need to listen nit to know that it shall not be good. However, if you take the same driver that Bruce used in his horn and use it as a direct radiator then what happen? I know that Horn in there is faulty but is it horn, driver or the way how the driver is loaded? Anyhow you set your hart to get rid of it and replace it with two new horns. This is fine. But there are two mains problem with it. First, you did not took advantage of the Edgar midbass and did not made it to sound proper. Second, with your new midbass and upperbass bass horn you will have the absolutely same problem but you did not address them with Edgar midbass and you most likely will not address it with new horns. I ma taking about the situation to make any configuration to sound as it shell sound, of to be able to get best out what is possible.

 skushino wrote:
  When I get my RTA I bet it shows the bass is 3 - 5dB lower compared to everything else - this is what I hear.  If that was the only thing wrong I could just pad the rest down.  But that only fixes the sound level and leaves all the other problems.  The horn is too short to properly load the lower bass.  There are better drivers than the 15" woofer for playing the lower mids.  I like the idea of using a small 5" or 8" driver properly horn-loaded instead.  Intellectually, the bass can be implemented better than it is now.  And I have high hopes (there I go again) for the x-driver in a proper mid-bass horn.  If it works, it would be phenomenal.  

Come on, Scot if you did not use RTA in your room and generally not accustom to interpret result from response perspective  then who care what you would bet?  This exactly why I am so skeptical about your project as you do not use the methods of judgment the I agree to understand.

 skushino wrote:
  Nope not hung-up on specific crossover points.  These are just my conceptual idea for integrating the different parts - how they might fit together.  The real project begins with using the RTA and listening to each specific horn / driver combo and learning where they do well and how they play together. .  

I think the make any conceptual ideas you will be able when you recognize what you room does. It is highly likely that you would need to use a huge overlap from you midbass and upperbass horn. You also need to reverse your trapped horn and make the hole at bottom not atop as your 240Hz crossover point ay will not vertically center the output of midbass and the trapped horn.

 jessie.dazzle wrote:
If you're really expecting 75Hz, you'd be better off going with a horn that has a lower cutoff; the sort of standard "rule of thumb" is to dimension the horn such that its cutoff is one octave below the lowest frequency you plan to ask that horn to produce. This, in your case would call for a horn having a cutoff of 37.5Hz (call it 40Hz). Not allowing this margin may result in the dreaded honk, though many do push their bass horns well into this margin, it is, strictly speaking, not kosher...

Hm, I do not know if I agree with it. To have 40Hz cat off in order to get 75Hz? I think it is very questionable objectives. It shell be opposite, you shall have 75Hz and be able to get out of it let say 60Hz.  Then your horn is properly installed in a room.  The "rule of thumb" to have cutoff is one octave below the lowest frequency you plan to ask that horn to produce is applicable to MF and HF horns not to bass horns. In bass horn you have resonance frequency to play to deal with “dreaded honk” and it is very effective. Well I would agree that it is good to have opportunity to use the “octave below” rule but who can afford to make 37.5Hz horn and to high-pass it at 75Hz? If I have a 37.5Hz horn I would be driver it all the way down to the horn rate and would see how the horn handles it. Then with back chamber I would made it to sound as I would like to. You see at 40Hz the thing that would be getting from room would be way more important than any of my problem coming from the horn itself.  Do not forget that it is not upperbass horn but the midbass horn….

The cAT


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-01-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
skushino
Seattle, WA
Posts 93
Joined on 07-07-2004

Post #: 6
Post ID: 12380
Reply to: 12375
Implementing a Big Horn
fiogf49gjkf0d
Jessie-

Good to hear from you.  I am very motivated following your progress.  Thanks for the inspiration.

My room size is around 15' x 18' x 8'.  At this point, I feel that a proper 60 - 70hz midbass horn is physically the largest I am realistically prepared to accommodate at home.  Could a larger horn be made to fit?  Yes, of course.  Will it annoy me taking up precious space?  I think so.  It's a personal judgment call.  I read the thread about midbass horns and real estate with interest because it's personal.

Because they are a royal PITA to make, you'll want to give yourself every chance of getting your base horns right the first time.

Well yes and no.  My obsessive personality means I'm spending way too much time researching this project.  This site, other horn sites, horn response software, horn profile software, connecting with more experienced horn people like John Hasquin, Jeffrey Jackson, etc.  Having been involved in project management, I'm convinced that no matter the amount of effort I invest up front in planning, after this horn is finished I will eventually discover something about it that I would want to change or do differently or could be better.  Later, after the painful memory of fabricating this horn fades, I can see doing another to include lessons learned.  I see this as my first midbass horn rather than my final / ultimate horn.

If you're really expecting 75Hz, you'd be better off going with a horn that has a lower cutoff; the sort of standard "rule of thumb" is to dimension the horn such that its cutoff is one octave below the lowest frequency you plan to ask that horn to produce.

I did go this way on the other horns.  The 142hz upper-bass horn will turn on around 250, and the 350hz MF horn will turn on around 1000.

Also, the horn will need to have substantial mass; this must be taken into consideration when contemplating ceiling-mounting (not impossible though).

This is a tough call.  If it were going on the floor, I would follow the path of high mass.  Since it will be suspended (and there is a heavy piano on the floor directly above!), I would like to find an alternate to high mass.  Your experience isn't encouraging here.  Seems like you have some practical experience with materials.  If there were a lower mass alternative, I have a hunch you would have already pursued it.  Wondering if a sandwich construction of plywood outside with stiffeners and foam in the middle might work well enough.  Jeffrey Jackson fabricates midbass horns with layers of plywood up to around 1.75" thick. This might be another path.  This is an example of why I feel this might be only my first of two or three iterations.

On another subject, looking at your CAD image...    

That's funny - I wish I was using CAD.  The image was a simple mock-up on MS Powerpoint!  Need to learn how to drive Google 3d.

Thanks for your input, Jessie.  Keep it coming.
12-01-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
skushino
Seattle, WA
Posts 93
Joined on 07-07-2004

Post #: 7
Post ID: 12384
Reply to: 12378
The Room Effects
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy, I re-read your comments a few times to better understand your feedback.  I think you are saying the effects of my room may be dominating any problems with the Edgarhorn bass, or at least I can't know since I don't have any objective data.  Is this correct?

Maybe you're right.  But here is why I'm not convinced.  My room is kind of funny.  The floor is suspended wood over a crawlspace around 4' deep.  The right side wall is only one sheet of drywall backed by insulation.  Behind that wall is another void the size of a small room.  The physical dimensions of the room are around 15' x 18' x 8', but the acoustic dimensions at low frequencies are much larger, probably almost twice as large.  I'm surprised at the sound in my room.  When I set-up my system, I expected a sonic disaster due to room dimensions and LF nodes.  I do notice nodes at sub bass frequencies.  But I do not hear them at mid and upper bass.  This is with three different speakers through the years.  Yes, this is all based on listening rather than measuring.  Naturally when I get the RTA I'll learn to use it and take measurements.  I may need to eat my words later, but not yet...

The point that I made is very deep-seated. People hear somebody playback, like the result and they attribute the fact that they like it with whatever reason they would like it to attribute. So, I do not take the fact that you  had good impressions from above mentioned playbacks in association with the fact the they had proper “region below 200Hz”. 

I should have written clearer.  I listed horn speakers I liked as reasons for my interest in horns in general, and getting Edgarhorns in particular.  I thought my old Klipsh, the vintage Tannoys, and John Tucker's horns were not ideal bass, but they were good enough overall.

But there are two mains problem with it. First, you did not took advantage of the Edgar midbass and did not made it to sound proper. Second, with your new midbass and upperbass bass horn you will have the absolutely same problem but you did not address them with Edgar midbass and you most likely will not address it with new horns. I ma taking about the situation to make any configuration to sound as it shell sound, of to be able to get best out what is possible.

Yes, I didn't do all that could be done with the Edgarhorn bass if that means using objective tools.  I agree and that's why I'm buying the RTA.  But I have decided to move on.  The Edgarhorn bass annoys me from a conceptual perspective.  It isn't a bass horn and driver done as well as it could be.  Not close.  The new mid-bass and upper bass horns are a step in the right direction with less compromise.  If the room is an issue, I'll work on it when I get the RTA.

It is highly likely that you would need to use a huge overlap from you midbass and upperbass horn.

Yes, it will have that flexibility.  The upper bass horn is purposely almost like a fundamentals channel.  There is plenty of overlap between it and the midbass and MF.  I modeled these horns.  But I still have no idea how close the model results will be to the actual results in my room.  The overlap should be useful for fine tuning.  I was interested in how you used your fundamentals channel to tune Macondo.

You also need to reverse your trapped horn and make the hole at bottom not atop as your 240Hz crossover point ay will not vertically center the output of midbass and the trapped horn.

Yes!  I think this is a good idea.
12-01-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,535
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 8
Post ID: 12385
Reply to: 12384
Fuck the horns!
fiogf49gjkf0d

 skushino wrote:
I think you are saying the effects of my room may be dominating any problems with the Edgarhorn bass, or at least I can't know since I don't have any objective data.  Is this correct?

Maybe you're right.  But here is why I'm not convinced.  My room is kind of funny.  The floor is suspended wood over a crawlspace around 4' deep.  The right side wall is only one sheet of drywall backed by insulation.  Behind that wall is another void the size of a small room.  The physical dimensions of the room are around 15' x 18' x 8', but the acoustic dimensions at low frequencies are much larger, probably almost twice as large.  I'm surprised at the sound in my room.  When I set-up my system, I expected a sonic disaster due to room dimensions and LF nodes.  I do notice nodes at sub bass frequencies.  But I do not hear them at mid and upper bass.  This is with three different speakers through the years.  Yes, this is all based on listening rather than measuring.  Naturally when I get the RTA I'll learn to use it and take measurements.  I may need to eat my words later, but not yet...

...  The new mid-bass and upper bass horns are a step in the right direction with less compromise.  If the room is an issue, I'll work on it when I get the RTA.

Scott,

As you can sense I do have an attitude toward to your project and I think you know the reason.  You fashion an idea to build those horns, there is nothing wrong with it of course. Still, when I write what I write I do it not for sake of amusement but because I believe in it:

http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=863

http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=2553

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=7213

The point that I am trying to make is that we do not build horn, fuck the horn, we built a sound of our objectives in our listening rooms. That Sound does not have a lot of relation to the topology of speakers you have, it is juts Sound. You decided to go with horn and you feel that horn has some advantaged. Perhaps, but the 50% of what you have under 200Hz is not the sound of your transducers but sound of you room, so why do you feel that you old or new horn had/will have any advantages if you by default have removed from sound 50% of what your channels do?

It is perfectly fine to discard rooms or anything but then you set yourself in methodologically experienced state where your results are not interpretable. You have absolutely random result but you are trying to attribute to it a universal ruling. I think it is incorrect. Why doesn’t you put your Edgarhorn underwater and then report that it does not process right sound. I ma sorry but it was exactly what you did – you have a superficial result with Edgarhorn upperbass horn, you did not go to the bottom of it and you very much might have a superficial result with two new channel.

Scott, good sound does not come from shallow-consumed better equipment but from an ability of a system owner to recognize problems and to react upon his recognition. The Edgarhorn setup with two Edgarhorn refrigerator subs is a very good playground to learn a lot about horns. I wish you was able to make the Edgarhorn setup to sound in the way you like and then, from there, go to more complex system. It is a good idea to open a huge bagel shop at 5th Avenue in Manhattan after you succeed with a small bagel shop in suburbs on Oklahoma…

Remember horns do not resolve problems – they crate them. You have to develop a pattern how you deal with those problems.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
08-28-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
KS
Posts 9
Joined on 08-07-2010

Post #: 9
Post ID: 14347
Reply to: 12384
Faital chamber/ratio
fiogf49gjkf0d
Hi Skushino, hope you dont mind me jumping on to your old thread, but I can upon it while looking for ideas re chamber volume and compression ratios for the same Faital driver into a 160hz Azurahorn. Could I ask how you were using yours?

Ta,
K.S
Page 1 of 1 (9 items) Select Pages: 
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Jessie Dazzle Project..  Will this better to be auditable?...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     172  1117109  08-03-2007
  »  New  Midbass Horns and Real Estate...  Just a youtube video......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     247  1488413  07-26-2009
  »  New  The tapped horns: cons, pros and Sound..  Sorry, no images any more....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     56  478610  04-23-2009
  »  New  45Hz Bass Horn..  Can We Ever be Saved From Ourselves?...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     23  234093  09-19-2006
  »  New  Big mama 1.5" horns......  Crossover point...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     27  153739  09-08-2006
  »  New  Barn Conversion - James' Project..  The vintage vs. contemporary compression driver....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     28  257285  02-04-2007
  »  New  Many Mani's options: My first horns..  Well, you need to read a whole book....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     27  96007  01-20-2010
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts