Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site
In the Forum: Horn-Loaded Speakers
In the Thread: Macondo's Axioms: Horn-loaded acoustic systems
Post Subject: Idiom of AxiomsPosted by be on: 4/3/2008
Romy wrote:
"Do not listen
Romy, make you own very simple experiment and then make your own mind.
Take two horn channels, low-pass and high-pas them at 6K for instance
and drive them with 6K sinewave. When you time alight the driver you
have well measurable gain. Any minute angling of axes of any of two
drivers you will have change of the summarizing gain. Then set the
driver with one having 1-2cm delay and begin to angel them. You will
see that aliment will be changing and you will be able to changing the
delay and angel to find the look-like perfect time alignment. However,
here what the GOTO, Cessaro and the rest of the guys failed to admit:
the angled aliment will work probably ONLY for a VERY specific
listening distance. The parallel horns however do not care about
listening distance. BTW, the effect is audible at HF and for bass horn
that do not go very high the “parallel axis paranoia” might be
neglected."
The time alignment will depend on the geometrics of horn set up and listening position, in the same manner, no matter if the horns are tilted or not.
It is simple: delay=(distance of ear to source)/(speed of sound)
I dont see why non tilting should have any advantage over tilting.
Actually if one is so close to the horns that one or more of the the throats get obscured from vision by the inside of the horn walls, then the necesarry bending of the sound path will increase the changes of delays, when one is moving around.
I think that Romys preference for non tilting lies in, that by not tilting the horns, the directivity, beaming or on axsis frequency iregularities are avoided, simply by pointing them where they dont do so much harm, below or abow the ears.
Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site