Search results

I wonder how many speakers you need to stack to achieve the line source radiation.

If only it were that easy. They stand it up for point source.

Is that the only mention of it in the manual? If so, I don't think it means what you think it means. I don't think there is a substantive implication that any of those dsp techniques will be applied upstream of the output. Maybe they put it there as a hedge, but it really doesn't promise...

Yup, look at those graphs. The HTM-12 has it's faults for sure, but the directivity and dynamics are excellent, and eq will fix a lot. Like some of these other speakers, they are typically used in environments where EQ is standard practice. Amazing what this kit gets you. A wider directivity is...

Play around with the room sim in REW. It's as good a guess as any.

This speaker's high frequency peak is in the top octave. That's far above any baffle step compensation issue, and the crossover looks to be in the 2khz region. The EQ settings suggested are for anechoic speaker correction - to be applied before correction for room issues.

Afaik, horns used for directivity don't smooth on axis response, they control dispersion and provide acoustic loading at the lower ranges, something about the throat geometry. Making the response smooth is all in the crossover. I don't think the horn really affects the top octave.

This is a classic (vintage) constant directivity horn shape.

FWIW, the REW generated 5 band peq I tried first wasn't bad at all.

Active would really nice, but the price of extra amplifier channels really dampens the value. I posed this very subjective question in the V1 review - is it worth it to go active? The consensus in that thread seemed to be the combo of passive+active was a better value. One thing I saw being...

Thanks, @Maiky76, trying your EQAPO settings out in lieu of my own. @johnp98, I imagine the determining factor would be how many bands of EQ you have available. @Rick Sykora, thanks, I'm not technical enough to understand the EPDR, so hadn't really paid attention to the blips in that curve...

Thanks, Erin. Simple 5 band eq has been generated...now if only I could actually listen at a decent volume.

I don't recall the pitch of the howl when I was sanding the boxes, but it was definitely without ports installed.

Isn't it ported around 45hz per the impedance plot, or am I reading that wrong? Doesn't seem out of the ordinary.

Well...yes...

I think a quick Google will turn it up. I think Princeton? used the Nathans for a study of theirs. Geddes used more expensive drivers for sure, but I recall the straight OS shape to have its own minor issues. The polars aren't obviously better to me. The point is that this is heavily inspired...

I hope whatever miscommunication gets sorted out soon. Looking forward to refining my DSP settings on the HTM-12 v2. Both v1 and v2 should be excellent deals in combo with EQ/DSP, if you want a dynamic system that never sounds strained. As HT designs, DSP usage and subwoofers are essentially...

I agree - in this case, as Ryan alluded to, this is probably one of the few high sensitivity center channel options for those who don't use an AT screen. HTM-12 is a better value for most, but pretty hard to implement as a center without an AT screen.

This is for sure present. I recall exciting some strong enclosure resonances while sanding it down.

Going fully active, you would be designing the crossover, or implementing someone else's design at the same stage of signal processing. Point taken about digitally encoded multichannel. I'm still stuck in 2.1 land.