| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Horn-Loaded Speakers» Deep End DIY - Australian take one Macondo. (98 posts, 5 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 5 of 5 (98 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2 3 4 5
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Macondo Frame modification...  Parquet...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     46  509390  12-22-2006
  »  New  Macondo's Axioms: Horn-loaded acoustic systems..  A link to another thread....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     120  783659  07-29-2007
  »  New  Designing and building a 5 channel horn loaded (looking..  The "old" servo......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     73  404413  06-20-2015
  »  New  Another time aligned 5-way horn project..  Thread moved...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     189  1033000  08-12-2015
  »  New  5-ways from Speedysteve7..  Hehe - no invite for you...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     23  231659  05-20-2011
  »  New  Jessie Dazzle Project..  Will this better to be auditable?...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     172  1712563  08-03-2007
04-05-2021 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,793
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 81
Post ID: 26093
Reply to: 26092
"Bass"
"Best bass" is of course a matter of opinion based on experience and expectations. The (original) Hartsfield LF driver is certainly "designed for horn loading", like the Vitavox AK-151, whereas the AK-150 and the JBL D-130 are designed to be direct radiators. I am thinking that where bass crosses over to midrange, the most natural bass for acoustic music that I have heard comes from direct radiators that by design and by default do not "plumb the depths". The original Hartsfields could play most of what was on an LP when they debuted, and IMO the originals are still better than most modern speakers. Later, JBL added a tweeter, and Classic Audio added an 18" driver to that to play more contemporary LPs. IMO, time alignment at XO is worth considering in terms of the sound (and resultant musical capabilities). Any given speaker might "gain LF" by near wall or corner placement. Typically, lots of peaks and valleys. Give it a shot.

Best regards,
Paul S



04-05-2021 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Jorge
Austin TX
Posts 141
Joined on 10-17-2010

Post #: 82
Post ID: 26094
Reply to: 26093
Bass subdivision
I think we have to subdivide bass into upper bass from 100hz to whatever your midrange does and bass under 100hz and then maybe infrabass. Front loaded upper bass horns are fantastic and I would say if you never heard one, you really never heard a real horn system.   Under 100 hz there might be several options which may vary from back loaded horns, tapped horns and direct radiators and their importance is also vital.  The dynamics of this range can kill or make the whole system. A system that tries to play upper bass and bass at the same time won´t be able to bring out the delicate resolution on any of these combined systems, I have tried them all. The Hartsfield Top Loader, I guess you call them the "original" ones were useless, the labrynth was so complicated no sound came out of there , plus a down firing driver is never a good idea,I had them for 2 years expecting to get good sound out of them and never worked out.  The later model "coffin back" are much better but still no competition to a real front loaded horn in terms of transparency and dynamics, being able to time align it perfectly and tune it to the right frequencies make a big difference. Altec 416 direct radiators are dark sounding by comparison.
04-07-2021 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 367
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 83
Post ID: 26096
Reply to: 26094
Had a moment today...


Anthony Upperbass.JPG


First upperbass horn is up and running.  Second one is now on the lathe with hopefully a quick turnaround.  Now I have to figure out how best to tune it...
04-07-2021 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
rowuk


Germany
Posts 461
Joined on 07-05-2012

Post #: 84
Post ID: 26097
Reply to: 26096
That is simply beautiful
I am far too impatient to keep a project of this magnitude going for this long.

As far as tuning it, buy Romy a ticket...


Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
04-08-2021 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,395
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 85
Post ID: 26098
Reply to: 26096
Create an integrity cheat-list.
Anthony, it feels like more of less comprehensive solution. I like that you make the mid-bass horns to have the same externals profile as lower midrange horn, this is making is visually very complete. If it was mine, then I would use less gloss on fine and would stay more with textured paint, but it just my personal preference. You might here sometimes I advocate textured paint applied to mouth of the horns, but I do not have any methodological clear empirical evidence that it makes any difference and I rather take this side as “burning bush” believe system.  I am a bit surprised that you feel it might be difficulty to tune them. Started with the setting I have as a default.


http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PageIndex=13&postID=24520#24520
 
The measurements are done at the middle of mouth setting of each horn. This is good configuration in my view that doe does not take in account room or any other variable and a perfect test of amps gain and performances of the filters. Drive 1K tone (or whatever my Sansui- TUX1 outputs with own test generator) set the volume at first 4 light on your Placette. You will have a proper balance between the channels for 6-10 feet of listening distance.  Spend some time with this setting and then you can move to any other configuration you feel better works for you. I have a lot of knowledge what will happens if we move one of the channels crossovers up or down, more volume or less volume, there was a lot of time spent experimenting with all of it. If you would like to ask in a context and I will be happy to explain, whatever I still remember. Do not feel however that I feel that to change the balance that I found is some kind of deviation of normality. In fact, if I was in your shoe, I would serially experiment with it. The proposed channels arrangement is a very good starting point hewer. I do it a few times a year to assure the constancy of the whole system configuration. You will see it will run away with time and the cheat-list that I created is very useful for me. I have seen some tubes run away, the kids might touch something, drivers can get damaged or become weaker, the cleaning ladies might disconnect some cables, some mistakes might be made by myself during operation… With 14 channels we have, there is a LOT that might go wrong. To have a system integrity cheat-list I found to be a very effective tool to have.  


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-08-2021 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,395
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 86
Post ID: 26099
Reply to: 26090
Do not even remember what year was it....
 jeff1225 wrote:
Romy,When you say that the Vitavox 15" was the best midbass you heard, was it in a Vitavox corner horn? I'm think about acquiring or building a pair of Vitavox corner horns as I have a perfect room for them. 

Sorry, Jeff, I did not see your post. Yes, the midbass I was talking about came from default Vitavox corner horn. The owner has a few of the identical Vitavox corner horn and he claimed that they all sone different and the one that I hear was the best. I do not know if I subscribe that believe. If they sound all different ten it should be other reason for it. Anyhow, this very same “the best sounding” Vitavox corner heard a number of times in different settings, and I always was very not only not good but rathe very bad sound overall and the midbass in particularly was laughable. However, in one specific location it was beyond believe wonderful.
 
BTW, the irony was that it was completely accidental location, it was not a music room and there were efforts spent to set it up. It was in in hotel, some kind of large room that was used for storage and the speakers were connected purely for fun and thrown in the corners. It was one of the “whole shit” events! We are the idiots who always try to do something “better” but it was so good that we very much realized that we should not touch ANYTHING as the evets like this happens once a life time. I do feel that the speakers accidently hit DPoLS and we had the very same sound across the whole room but that is a different story all together.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-09-2021 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 367
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 87
Post ID: 26100
Reply to: 26098
Tuning the horn
Romy, it is the UB horn that I need to first tune.  Have found an earlier post of yours where you describe your process and will roughly follow it.  First thing though is to measure an impedance sweep of the horn sitting in place to get the base line then play with filling the back-chamber to get the horn resonance frequency equal to the mouth frequency, or thereabouts (reactance annulling).  99cm or 38.5" diameter = 110Hz horn, so I will make sure I start somewhere there.

The paint used for the horns is actually textured/hammered black.  There is a slight metallic hint to the colour which is very black, much blacker than other textured paints that I found, which gives a slight tendency to reflect light.  Certainly not a gloss finish nor even satin but probably somewhere between matte and satin.  The bass cannons and amplifiers (and all my diy equipment) is matte black powdercoating which provides a subtle contrast even though the same colour.

The cheat sheet is a great idea.  Will definitely do one up once it is all set up. 
04-09-2021 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,395
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 88
Post ID: 26102
Reply to: 26100
It is simple, but...
Ah, you were asking about the tunning of the uperbass horn? That is very simple. You need to make the primary resonance to hit exactly at the horn’s mouth rate. So, it is it 110Hz horn then make the primary impedance to peak at 110Hz, there are many ways to measure it by manipulating the size of the back chamber.
 
Ok, should I let it go or to be me? Ok, let to be me. With all simplicity of above there is an ugly question in it there that is VERY complex. Let say that one of your 110Hz in your specific position hit a G-spot and pick up some room gain, effectively acting like 140Hz horn. Should you set the primary resonance at 110Hz or at 140Hz? The different will be very auditable and what is “better”? This is not so simple, and I do not have a definitive answer. You can make one horn to feel “better” but then your uperbass image might be shift unpleasantly. If you have both 110Hz horns siting in acoustic G-spot and become 140Hz horns then stop building hoe and begin to buy lottery... :-)


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 367
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 89
Post ID: 29409
Reply to: 26102
Aus Macondo/Melquiades update
So, this year I've been steadily finalising the installation of Macondo and Melquiades into my room. It seems as though there is always more to do for perfection, but the end is very close now.  There have been plenty of building and measuring and even purchasing...here is the summary:

Melq Bass Channel - Bass Cannons 8 x Scanspeak woofers per side in time aligned position adjacent to horn stack.
Melq Midbass Channel - 3 x Vitavox K15/40 per side set behind listening position not quite in time aligned position (45cm/18" delayed)
Melq Upperbass Channel - 110Hz horn with Fane Studio 8M
Melq Fundamentals Channel - 250Hz tractrix horn with Vitavox S2
Melq Midrange Channel - 400Hz tractrix horn with Vitavox S2 using YO186 DHT
Melq HF Channel - RAAL Lazy Ribbon

Infrabass channel driven from preamplifier - SS buffer with gain to 4 x 18" Dayton Ultimax II woofers in sealed boxes each with a 400w Class AB amplifier...not time aligned...third order low pass at 15Hz...set behind listening position.

Horn stack and Bass Cannons are meticulously time aligned using acoustic measurements, namely alignment of excess phase in the passbands of each channel.

No digital signal processing.

Room acoustic treatment is complete with even reverb times down to bass frequencies.

Room SPL response is good from 10Hz+ with subs engaged, 30Hz+ without subs.

Immersive speakers (7) installed and Trinnov Altitude 16 processor in place with aim to experiment with Auro3D and other immersive audio.  Two channel system must first be completed with all i's dotted and t's crossed.

Have recently upgraded my dac and preamplifier...will talk about the preamplifier later, but it has been a revelation for more than one reason.

I am so pleased with the sound right now, but have had glimpses of other improvements and wish to explore them.  My next post in this thread will be about recent steps/improvements, current compromises and next steps.
10-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 367
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 90
Post ID: 29410
Reply to: 29409
Today


Anthony Macondo (Large).jpg
10-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,793
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 91
Post ID: 29411
Reply to: 29410
Hats Off! Congratulations!
Good job, Anthony! First Class installation! How low do you run your lowest S2s, again?

Best regards,
Paul S
10-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 367
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 92
Post ID: 29412
Reply to: 29410
Before preamplifier change
Like the time periods B.C. and A.C., I now think of my installation in terms of Before Preamplifier (B.P.) and After Preamplifier (A.P.).

As discussed on these pages, I built a hybrid 10Y DHT preamplifier that had more more gain than the Placette Linestage and also sounded a bit better than the Placette...and a lot better than just about any other preamplifier I had trialled or built.  Good sound came fast with the 10Y preamp and thanks to its mosfet based mu-follower it had heaps of gain for my low output sources into Melquiades/Macondo and a very low output impedance, which is what I thought I needed.  Macondo was tuned using the 10Y preamp and I was happy.

Then I went from a dac with 1VRMS output to one with 4VRMS output and then one with 10VRMS output.  This forced me to shift the autoformer volume control from the output of the 10Y preamp to the input so that it was not overdriven to distortion...no big problem and as far as I could tell the sound was the same in either position.  This forced a re-tune of the Melquiades filters as the preamplifier output impedance lifted a little to 12ohm.  All good, easy to do.

Now, my only two sources with low output were the phonostage and the Anthem AV processor, so I still needed the high gain offered by the 10Y preamplifier.

There were some problems though.  The upper channels in Melquiades had to be tuned quite low (attenuated) because of the low output from the bass channels, particularly the Bass Cannons, thanks to their second order filters and relative inefficiency.  The Upperbass horn in this tuning had a 2k shunt resistor dropping its output by many, many decibel.  The RAAL ribbon for the HF channel driven by a single stage SET just was just loud enough to match the Bass Cannons, but I really appreciated its contribution to the overall sound.

Sound was excellent in this configuration.  Both the Bass Cannons and the RAAL Lazy Ribbon were running unattenuated with all other channels (apart from infrabass) attenuated to suit.  The Fundamentals Channel never really satisfied me and it was usually run attenuated much more that I suspect Romy used it...but that is another issue yet to be resolved.

Then I upgraded my dac again...and trialled a very expensive preamplifier...
10-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 367
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 93
Post ID: 29413
Reply to: 29412
After Preamplifier Change
An opportunity came along to trial a couple of dacs higher up the ladder of the dac which I already owned.  The opportunity also extended to trial a newly released preamplifier from the same stable.  I trialled the dacs in my room over several weeks and made my choice.  Then I decided to listen to the preamplifier and the sound in comparison to my 10Y was.....

....horrible!! 

Obviously there was a problem with how it was driving Melquiades...bass was so H.U.G.E. and totally out of proportion...an impedance issue.  Got on a Whatsapp call to the designer in Cyprus and confirmed that the output impedance of the trial preamplifier was 78ohm whereas the 10Y pre is 12ohm...yep, the preamplifier output was more closely following the input impedance of the Melquiades which starts higher in the bass and finishes lower in the highs.  It immediately clicked in my head that this higher output impedance may provide opportunity for higher bass output for Macondo and an overall less attenuated tuning so the next day I measured and re-jigged the Melquiades filters until they give the same frequency response with the trial preamp as with the 10Y preamp.  Using alligator clips I could change filters and swap preamplifiers without turning off the amplifiers in about 2 minutes flat so I was listening apples-to-apples.

Not only was the output of the Bass Cannons much louder with this arrangement, but there was more adjustment available to go louder if I wanted it.  Only foreseable problem would be that I would need more gain from the RAAL HF channel if I lessened attenuation on all the other channels.  Did my listening comparisons over the weekend and it was not even close even though the measured frequency response of the two preamplifiers were much closer to identical than I would have thought possible with the filter changes.

So I want this thing, how to make it fit?

The major problem are my remaining low output sources: the 10Y has 18dB of gain and the trial pre only 3dB.  That is a huge difference in potential output.  The AV processor had recently been swapped to the Trinnov which has plenty of output, which meant the only low output source remaining is my phonostage.  I re-measured the Melquiades inputs and 10VRMS from the preamp is about 4VRMS after the filters which is just below the onset of rising distortion in the first of the Melq channels approaching clipping...but it is also ridiculously loud.  The trial pre can put out a maximum of 5VRMS which is only a bit less than 'ridiculously loud' so it's output is fine, just the gain is too low...time to see how much more bass output I can get with the higher output impedance preamp.

So I set to measuring and re-tuning the filters in Melquiades to suit the trial preamp (and no longer suit the 10Y preamp).  Turns out that the Bass Cannons can be tuned 14dB louder than their original output with the 10Y preamp...and so can all the other channels apart from the RAAL HF channel which is limited to its original output SPL.

This means that with the trial pre and the new filter tuning my low output phonostage is 14dB louder through Macondo before adding any preamp gain, which means things are going to be perfectly fine.  I've just skinned the cat a different way!  

So much has been learnt by measuring and re-tuning Melquiades/Macondo this year that it is now obvious that the low output impedance preamplifier was in this situation a hindrance.   It has not eased all of my concerns with Meql/Mac...some of those are unchanged...and I will talk about them next.


10-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 367
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 94
Post ID: 29414
Reply to: 29413
Melq Concerns
Whenever you have a large project such as this you always look back and wish there were some things you did a little bit differently.  I have a few minor issues with the physical layout of my versions of the actual Melquiades DSET amplifiers, but also a couple regarding topology, which I will introduce here.

Two channels of Melquiades are single stage SET using 6e6P-DR:  one is for the Fundamentals Channel which is a Vitavox S2 in 250Hz tractrix horn; the other for the RAAL Lazy Ribbon HF channel.  They are the first amplifier channels in which measured distortion rises, especially the Fundamentals Channel which is less attenuated than the HF channel.

I've never really appreciated the Fundamentals Channel.  Before meticulous time alignment of the horn stack I appreciated the channel more, but nowadays it is turned right down and is not really heard.  It is not needed for a flat frequency response as the MF and UB horns mesh nicely at about 1kHz, and when turned up I find it brings a harshness to the sound, which is probably that single stage SET under duress.  Would it be better to run Fundamentals via a second stage?  I am not sure, but I would like to talk to Romy about his thoughts and intentions and results when developing the channel.

The HF Channel and the RAAL ribbon have been very successful, but it's always been the quietest channel, and now with the new preamp and louder Melq tuning it is no longer loud enough for the other channels.  For me there has always been a case for a second stage for this amplifier channel and/or a change of tweeter to something a little louder.  Under consideration is a DHT second stage just like the MF channel, but probably restrict myself to 2.5V tubes as the filament wiring and transformers are already in place in DSET.  Tweeter options are perhaps Fostex T500MK?, the new Vitavox TR32 or even the Tannoy Red, however the latter would possibly require a 6c33c second stage which is a lot more difficult to implement.

I can hear the question now...why change preamplifier if you have to alter your amplifiers to suit?  Other than the obvious order of magnitude better sound with the new pre, which is enough of a reason on its own, I already had reservations about the single stage channels and would eventually have experimented with making them dual stage.  But there is another huge reason not yet mentioned...     
10-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,395
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 95
Post ID: 29415
Reply to: 29409
Please consider it.
 anthony wrote:
So, this year I've been steadily finalising the installation of Macondo and Melquiades into my room. It seems as though there is always more to do for perfection, but the end is very close now.  There have been plenty of building and measuring and even purchasing...here is the summary:

Melq Bass Channel - Bass Cannons 8 x Scanspeak woofers per side in time aligned position adjacent to horn stack.
Melq Midbass Channel - 3 x Vitavox K15/40 per side set behind listening position not quite in time aligned position (45cm/18" delayed)
Melq Upperbass Channel - 110Hz horn with Fane Studio 8M
Melq Fundamentals Channel - 250Hz tractrix horn with Vitavox S2
Melq Midrange Channel - 400Hz tractrix horn with Vitavox S2 using YO186 DHT
Melq HF Channel - RAAL Lazy Ribbon

Infrabass channel driven from preamplifier - SS buffer with gain to 4 x 18" Dayton Ultimax II woofers in sealed boxes each with a 400w Class AB amplifier...not time aligned...third order low pass at 15Hz...set behind listening position.

Horn stack and Bass Cannons are meticulously time aligned using acoustic measurements, namely alignment of excess phase in the passbands of each channel.

No digital signal processing.

Room acoustic treatment is complete with even reverb times down to bass frequencies.

Room SPL response is good from 10Hz+ with subs engaged, 30Hz+ without subs.

Immersive speakers (7) installed and Trinnov Altitude 16 processor in place with aim to experiment with Auro3D and other immersive audio.  Two channel system must first be completed with all i's dotted and t's crossed.

Have recently upgraded my dac and preamplifier...will talk about the preamplifier later, but it has been a revelation for more than one reason.

I am so pleased with the sound right now, but have had glimpses of other improvements and wish to explore them.  My next post in this thread will be about recent steps/improvements, current compromises and next steps.

Anthony,

I have much to share about my impressions and feelings regarding your project, but I’ll save that conversation for another time. For now, I’d like to address one specific technical point. I wrote about it quite some time ago, but given the volume of my earlier posts, it’s entirely possible that message was lost in translation.

You see, the topology employed in the Melquiades/Macondo system—its internal filtration approach—is both beautiful and problematic. It uses line-level filtration, where the filters also serve as bias-voltage providers. The elegance of this design lies in the fact that there are very few components directly in the signal path, and the filtration works against a constant, steady impedance. This allows for the implementation of an exceptionally precise, phase-consistent response curve. Everything seems ideal—at least in theory.

However, there is a subtle complication. The input side of these filters does not experience a truly stable impedance from the source. Of course, preamps generally maintain a consistent output impedance, but that consistency differs from one design to another. For example, if my preamp has an output impedance of 5 Ω, yours has 100 Ω, and someone else’s has 1 kΩ, then the Melquiades filters will behave very differently with each of them. In practice, this means the filter’s performance effectively needs to be recalculated each time the source impedance changes significantly—from, say, 5 Ω to 500 Ω.

I learned this lesson the hard way. At one point, I owned several preamps, though the Placette remained my favorite—and it still is. The original version I used (not the newer one from the last decade, which I don’t particularly care for) had a default output impedance of about 20 Ω, if memory serves. When I decided to commit to that preamp, I sent it back to Guy for modification, asking him to reduce the output impedance as much as possible.

He built a more substantial power supply, placed the output stages on larger radiators, and biased them to run significantly hotter. We debated whether to target 3 Ω or 7 Ω, and ultimately he settled on something in between—around 5 Ω to 7 Ω—assuring me that the current assembly could reliably drive as low as 3 Ω. When the preamp returned, I didn’t find the sound objectively better or worse, but it had changed. The difference wasn’t bothersome, yet it was clearly audible and worth acknowledging.

So my point is this: when you experiment with multiple preamps in front of your main system, the changes you hear are not solely attributable to the preamp’s own character. You are also—perhaps without realizing it—hearing how the Melquiades input stage reacts to varying source impedances. Please keep this interaction in mind when evaluating or comparing components.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
10-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 367
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 96
Post ID: 29416
Reply to: 29414
All about the bass
The higher SPL tuning of the Melquiades filters give me tremendous bass flexibility on which I am yet to capitalise.  

Currently, my installation has four bass channels, only the lowest is not driven by Melquiades:
re">Upperbass 100Hz - 1kHz - time aligned
re">Midbassre">50Hz - 100Hz - delayed 45cm/18"
re">Bass Cannons <60Hz - time aligned
re">Infrabass <30Hz - close to time aligned


That extra 14dB SPL from the Bass Cannons and Midbass channels thanks to the new higher output impedance preamplifier really open up possibilities to drive bass from different positions in the room.  For instance, I am completely sold on driving midbass frequencies from behind the listening chair and with the preamp change now have 5dB in reserve in that frequency range so can experiment with new filters and/or with a high nickel content output transformer given what the channel adds to the sound.  

The Bass Cannons, positioned where they are in the room have a frequency response of 10Hz-100Hz +/- 1.5dB unsmoothed, which is super-extraordinary, but they need more horsepower for those low frequencies and if driven by the 400w Class AB amps I built could be revelatory, or rubbish, in conjunction with or replacing the current Infrabass Channel.  That would free up a two stage Melquiades Channel for HF duties perhaps even with Tannoy Red tweeter. 

Then there is the Upperbass Channel...it and the MF really are the heart of the entire system, and I would like to experiment with a high nickel content OPT as there is still plenty scope to lessen attenuation on that channel.

There are probably further scenarios of how bass could be produced in the room that I am yet to consider, but they are made possible by the change in preamplifier.
10-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 367
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 97
Post ID: 29417
Reply to: 29411
S2
 Paul S wrote:
Good job, Anthony! First Class installation! How low do you run your lowest S2s, again?

Best regards,
Paul S


Thanks Paul.  Lowest S2's in the 250Hz horn are a narrow first order bandpass centred at about 800Hz from memory.  They are run quite attenuated.
10-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 367
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 98
Post ID: 29418
Reply to: 29415
Yep
 Romy the Cat wrote:


Anthony,

I have much to share about my impressions and feelings regarding your project, but I’ll save that conversation for another time. For now, I’d like to address one specific technical point. I wrote about it quite some time ago, but given the volume of my earlier posts, it’s entirely possible that message was lost in translation.

Apologies for the mind dump this morning...there is a lot to take in at once.  You will notice in later posts that I adjusted the filters to suit each preamplifier.

I was astonished at how different the sound was when switching from 12 ohm to 78 ohm output impedance preamplifiers.  The trial preamplifier is a brand new release in pre-production (hence no published specs) based on an earlier model in the same stable which has 12ohm output impedance...exactly the same as my 10Y preamp.  Had I realised how much work it was going to create I may not have trialled it, but I am very glad I did.
Page 5 of 5 (98 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2 3 4 5
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Macondo Frame modification...  Parquet...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     46  509390  12-22-2006
  »  New  Macondo's Axioms: Horn-loaded acoustic systems..  A link to another thread....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     120  783659  07-29-2007
  »  New  Designing and building a 5 channel horn loaded (looking..  The "old" servo......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     73  404413  06-20-2015
  »  New  Another time aligned 5-way horn project..  Thread moved...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     189  1033000  08-12-2015
  »  New  5-ways from Speedysteve7..  Hehe - no invite for you...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     23  231659  05-20-2011
  »  New  Jessie Dazzle Project..  Will this better to be auditable?...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     172  1712563  08-03-2007
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