Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

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.

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site