This thread is derivation from the Collin’s post:

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/TreeItem.aspx?postID=1843#1843

It is always annoyed me when people try to make generalizations without having an objective sight, sufficient enough to interpret the issues in its entirety. It is even more annoying when people begin to stretch the conclusion to the subjects that they have no rational to address. In the epicenter of this might be the army of the cretins at Audio Asylum or at the Audiogon where their avenge poster-idiot snatch a piece of the “accidental audio” and then go online and complies hierarchy of BS justifications trying to rationalize why he personal inadvertent action was not just a compulsive not-justifiable deed but a deeply cogent activity. Do you want evidence? Ask to those cretins “Why?” and prohibit them to quote audio media. If it would be not sufficient for you then visit the listening room of those idiots and to listen their playback IN CONTEXT OF THIS EXPLANATIONS. You will not have any further doubts…

Unfortunately, here at my site, we are trying to do the very same with the subject LeCleach vs. tratrix curves. What kind justification we, a community of the horn users, have to make the comprising between the LeCleach and tratrix? I do not think that we have any.

The fact that some of us use tratrix and some use the LeCleach and reportedly all of us got the positive results do not address the LeCleach vs. tratrix question.  We can talk about mathematics and the theories of the horn operation but lets do not be in denial: we all know that the theories of horn are not necessary describe Sound but rather the propagation of the pressures. Even if we have hypothetical person who own two identically built tratrix and LeCleach horns with identical cut off, identical throats and against the identical drivers (I never heard about a person who have done it) then the result of “comparing” would be not methodological objective as well. We see, the octavian space between the horn cut off and the electro-mechanical cut off of the driver is very tricky thing and it might have a different sensitively for LeCleach and tratrix. Therefore in order to equalize the performance of the horns the horn might not be the identical size. Also, the LeCleach and tratrix horns of the same cut off rate have different death - one is slightly deeper and therefore it rolls off the HF slightly more aggressively. As the result, the same driver in the different horn would have different response and the different dispersion patterns. In order to talks about the curve only and cancel out of the frequency deviations due to the horn’s depth the shortest horn should be very slightly high-passed. Well, not any driver would react to the small coil in series to them adequately…  Also, how about the frequency of the horns? The 500Hz horn is very different animals then the 150Hz horn and the demand very different things…. I could continue to bring very many examples why the LeCleach vs. tratrix discussion would be not really the discussion about the curves but about the auditable consequences of misusing one or another curve.  In the end I would not be surprised if it turn out that IDENTICALLY OPTIMUM IMPLEMENTED LeCleach and tratrix would in fact have no difference in performance.

Probably (?)  the only voice that would be interestingly to hear regarding the subject would be the horn makers who presumably made many of them and had a chance to conduct more of less creditable experiments. Still, I have my skepticism as a person who made many horn does not necessary is able to interpret and evaluate the results properly. I know quite a few horn makers who are despicable idiots…

Well, what it leads me to is a feeling that the LeCleach vs. tratrix question is bogus by nature. Like in anything else - the important thing is not the benefits of a specific topology but an ability of a person to recognize the idiosyncrasies of one or another setting, and then, to be able to react to those idiosyncrasies accordingly. A person with real sensitively, understating and creativity would get excellent sound out of anything. In contrary any typical idiot who try to do something with horn (for instance all those Sawyers, Fitzmaurices, Parhams,  Magnetars and the rest near-audio victims of abortions) “do something “,  and their results are a direct representation of their own inadequacy – they all end up with garbage result, no mater what curve or topology they use. As I always said that an attitude of playback system is only an illustration of the system owner’s personal objectives. The playback of an idiot is like a Oscar Wilde's Dorian Gray with his portrait… Anyhow….

I always said that any topology in the hands of barbarian would produce a barbarian result. Oppositely, in the proper hands many of the weak topologies would act beneficially. Both, the LeCleach and tratrix are fundamentally shorter horns then consistently explanation horns and this fact set them both apart form the “long” horns. The “short horn” works for MF and HF channels and I would very doubt that the shorter horns would work for LF horns. Which is “better”? I do not know and I never heard any credible voice that would credibly propose one or another. Does a person who has a good result with LeCleach or with tratrix should care about an alternative profiles? Yes, it might  BUT ONLY AFTER being able to identify what is wrong with his current horn profile:

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/TreeItem.aspx?PostID=432

Otherwise, it becomes not the observation about the LeCleach vs. tratrix but rather the desiccation why sometime a horn profile is not juts a horn profile.

Rgs,
Romy the caT