Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site
In the Forum: Horn-Loaded Speakers
In the Thread: Macondo Frame modification.
Post Subject: Different frames for different directions.Posted by Romy the Cat on: 9/17/2011
fiogf49gjkf0d
oxric wrote: |
My mistake. I should not use the term Lecleach on this site. |
|
There is absolutely nothing prohibitive in Lecleach profile, it works very nice for HF but the La profile shall not be used in cases where vertical clearance is critical. Guess what? Anyone who do not stick a single Fostex in a horn and call it an acoustic system but instead go multi-channel, any single person have vertical challenge. Even if you have 50 feet ceiling then you still would want to keep your stuck of horns lower and closer to each other.
oxric wrote: |
In any case, I wanted to say Fundamental Channel and not Injection channel. |
|
OK, if does make more sense. Your mentioning of horn loaded Injection channel that you “desisted” before having the playback up did sound a bit foolish.
oxric wrote: |
And yes I'm perfectly aware of the vertical problems of having Lecleach profiles with a multi-way system and none of the horns I have ordered are LeCleach - they are all tractrix. I did some comparisons with the S2 in a Lecleach horn whilst a friend was here a few months ago. It was not a'kosher' comparison' but I personally preferred the LeCleach even though admittedly the horns from someone in Australia were not how I would have built them. It would be fair to say that my friend who likes the LeCleach felt the 400Hz tractrix combined better with his Fane in a Stereolab 140Hz upperbass horn. But all of this is really not pertinent to the subject of my post really as I doubt I will be able to accomodate Lecleach profiles and would only like to do these comparisons much later on for the sake of my own education. |
|
When you say that your preferred the LeCleach over tractrix then can you elaborate what specifically your preference were based upon?
oxric wrote: |
There are only two points that you make here. Since I don't know what configuration I will end up with, I should not worry and waste my energies designing and building a frame for now. I do not agree. The frame is as you say part and parcel of the final system and given that it is multi-way, one needs to at least be able to set up and position three channels relative to each other in the vertical and horizontal plane. Your method of simply fixing the MF atop the upperbass horn which is what I would have to do would make it close to impossible for me to change the spacing between these two channels other than in a very rough and ready fashion. A flexible frame even if I should eventually replace it with a better fixed one (I do not see any compelling reason why I should do this even if my 'flexible' frame is not the optimum solution) is better than no frame at all. |
|
Ok, I would not disagree and do not insist in anything. I just bring my own example- if I design my frame today then it would be slightly different then what I have done in 2006.
oxric wrote: |
clinches this argument for me is that I need to find the correct location for these horns in a fairly large room (it is 6mx7m albeit with ceiling height of 2.35m and with a beam going across). I can try to locate the horns across four walls. There is no way that I will be able to easily try these different solutions without an easy means of moving these bulky/heavy horns. What better way than having a frame on wheels? |
|
I was under impression that you do know where you will be positioning your horns. Did you have a playback, any playback, in your listening room before? If yeas then you shell know your room sonically.
oxric wrote: |
My question was a fairly generic one regarding the location of especially the Upperbass and MF channels with respect to each other. I mentioned this question here as someone may have had a thought or two based on personal experience which might have been a good starting point for locating the supporting rods in the main mast. I fully intend to work it out for myself so maybe the question was redundant anyway. |
|
There is no definitive answers to it. I use visual clearance from listening position. As long as I can see from my listening position the bottom edge of the MF horn I consider that the clearance is set. How different would it be if it was not “just clearance” but 4.75cm of clearance I do not know.
oxric wrote: |
I do not know Romy. I do not know where I will go after living with the Upperbass/MF/LF solution for a year or longer. Maybe just add a tweeter and enjoy my music collection or go to more concerts with my family as the children grow up. That could just be good enough for me. Whatever it is, and I do not think I know any more than I do, it will not be just 'variable' I hope. |
|
Why do you care? You just said that you do not know. Make it work, observe the result and go with flow from that. You might not feel a need for nether Fundamental or Injection. You might feel a need for another type of MF or Upperbass. You might lose interest I audio and fall in love with archeology. Those all continuations would require different frames….
Rgs, Romy the CatRerurn to Romy the Cat's Site