Horn Speakers - Is it me or.......

[Bjorn]

@Bjorn Let's just say my post is a reasonable summary of the best available audio research, and yours is saying the research is not right because you did AB comparisons and also you offer a professional service that benefits from the research being wrong or inadequate.

I actually find it highly questionable that commercial operators should post here casting doubt on research in areas that the research doesn't suit their commercial operation. Is that even allowed?

You completely avoided my points which clearly states the researchers you hold onto are not very scientific! Come on, use your mind here.

And we can't cherry pick reaearchers that fits our bill. Are you aware of the researchers that went into the delveopment of the LEDE and RFZ design? I know the answers to that

 

[Bjorn]

With mainly ´dry´ material, monaural recordings or popular recordings not containing natural reverb, being used, I could imagine the result flipping in favor of more side-wall reflections under certain conditions easily.

There were only indications of a preference of side wall reflections arriving after 7 ms with classical music. No diffusion being used as a comparison and not many listeners.

Being quite experienced in the field of evaluating loudspeaker sound quality, I would not dare to pretend anything based on such models, either. In the end of the day, you have to give it a listen and ask several people experienced with judging loudspeaker sound quality what their impression is.

Most listens in much smaller rooms and that are highly assymmetrical with windows, fire place etc. A completely different acoustic environment.
I have yet to hear anyone prefer side wall reflections when they had the opportunity to compate to various treatment. Absorption isn't the only way option.

Commercially it would be great to sell speakers for multichannels to most. A lot more to earn! But I prefer sharing honest information.

 

[Arindal]

There were only indications of a preference of side wall reflections arriving after 7 ms with classical music.

Would be very interesting to know the source and the setup, as my experience, and several controlled listening tests, showed quite the opposite.

Absorption isn't the only way option.

I fully agree, particularly given the fact that most of accessible absorbers are not showing an even absorption grade over different frequency bands, so in many cases contributing to even more colourated reverb.

 

[dasdoing]

Stereo failings. Controlled listening tests reveal that for stereo playback, preference increases with side wall reflections included. True for all listener positions, including the 'sweet spot'. Wider dispersion stereo speakers tend to be better at providing the preferred 'apparent source width' than narrow dispersion speakers.

These tests weren't truly controlled; participants simply chose the soundscapes they were already accustomed to. Conversely, most listeners experienced with treated (reflection-controlled) environments would likely prefer them, as they've had exposure to both types. For a genuinely controlled experiment, the test group would need adequate time to grow accustomed to a controlled listening setup. I'm noticing a trend among the latest generation of audiophiles: they're increasingly prioritizing clear sonic images and the recorded ambience, moving away from creating a chaotic, superimposed ambience within their listening rooms.

 

[Arindal]

they're increasingly prioritizing clear sonic images and the recorded ambience, moving away from creating a chaotic, superimposed ambience within their listening rooms.

Although it is difficult to identify a general trend, I also see indications that seemingly more people are moving into that direction which I would take as encouraging. Kind of speculative, but maybe it has to do with modern, reverberant rooms being simply unbearably harsh and shrill if reflections get dominant. It is much more than just a bit of superimposed ambience and additional diffusion and gets particularly annoying when people are playing more ´non-audiophile´ stuff, which I would see as another trend since Spotify radio and other forms of automated playlists are the way to get your music selection.

 

[Newman]

You completely avoided my points which clearly states the researchers you hold onto are not very scientific! Come on, use your mind here.

And we can't cherry pick reaearchers that fits our bill. Are you aware of the researchers that went into the delveopment of the LEDE and RFZ design? I know the answers to that

You are the one completely avoiding my points about the way you are casting doubt on research (and now, as bolded above, throwing mud at esteemed researchers! - a low act) in areas where the research doesn't suit your commercial operation.

Which is an ethical issue, and very important.

 

[kyuu]

Multichannel introduces a lot of acoustic issues which I never have liked. It's highly incorrect with polar lobing, superposition and comb filtering.

Really. So I guess you promote mono setups then to avoid all this?

 

[Mr. Widget]

Very late to this love/hate thread...have you(anyone who dislikes horns) heard Klipsch Jubilees? I love mine. And yes you have to like horns.View attachment 443652

I love horns!
Unfortunately I don't love listening to most of them.

 

[Ellisr63]

I had my k402 MEHs, and I loved them, but I wanted to try something a little different as I was looking for a more spacious mid. I decided to try them without cabinets and I really liked them, but I was driving them to hard trying to get them to dig down to 20hz, so I added a pair of LilMikes F20 horn subs, and tuned the setup as a 3 way. They sounded much better, but the 15" Celestion ftr15-3070c woofers could not quite keep up with the Celestion axi2050 comp drivers. I then decided to add a 2nd k402 MEH horn to each channel (with Celestion 15ftr3070c woofers only, no comp driver). I split the output from my Xilica xp4080 (I have problem with it, and can only use it as a xp3060 until I can find the problem), and I continued to tune as a 3 way, but with 4 Fosi V3 monoblock amps per channel and a Dayton Audio 300w plate amp (for the f20s), and they now sound the best I have ever heard them sound. I love the detail, soundstage width, and height (lacking the depth as I have the front of the k402s 4' from the wall behind them, and when we move I will go for a room that I can run the setup on the short wall and space at least 3' from the side walls too), effortless sounding, and no honky or hardiness.
My 2 channel setup is: Jays Audio cd2 mk3, Roon Nucleus One (with a Teradak linear power supply), Pontus 2 dac, and a Denafrips Athena preamp.

 

[theREALdotnet]

These tests weren't truly controlled

Nor were they adequately described, which is probably one of the reasons they were never replicated.

 

[Newman]

These tests weren't truly controlled;

Well, they were.

participants simply chose the soundscapes they were already accustomed to.

Which is exactly the point. The test is to find what people generally prefer...whatever their history.

Conversely, most listeners experienced with treated (reflection-controlled) environments would likely prefer them, as they've had exposure to both types. For a genuinely controlled experiment, the test group would need adequate time to grow accustomed to a controlled listening setup.

Oh? The research indicates that adaptation doesn't change one's preference, it just lowers one's standards.

I'm noticing a trend among the latest generation of audiophiles: they're increasingly prioritizing clear sonic images and the recorded ambience, moving away from creating a chaotic, superimposed ambience within their listening rooms.

So your (debatable) problem with the research I noted is that it wasn't 'truly controlled'....but you're 'noticing a trend'? Spot the hypocrisy.

 

[Da cynics]

This is also interesting


Danley Receives Provisional Patent For New Cohearix Lens Technology

Danley Receives Provisional Patent For New Cohearix Lens Technology

Danley Sound Labs announces the receipt of a provisional patent on a new acoustic lens technology. | Danley Sound Labs announces the receipt of a provisional patent on a new acoustic lens technology. Dubbed Cohearix Lens Technology, the technology will be used in development of new Danley...

www.livedesignonline.com

 

[multichannel_guy]

TAD in general is among the world-leading speaker manufacturers when it comes to directivity, maybe a bit heavy on the lower mids and upper bass (which can be EQed). Unfortunately their loudspeakers are expensive and the man behind the genius concept has left the company some years ago. I guess he is with MoFi currently.



Yes, fully agree. Surprisingly they do not sound like old fashioned horns. Bass and impulse response is maybe the best I have ever heard.

Andrew Jones was educated, interned on the finer aspects of speaker engineering by the Japanese engineering crew and resources of Pioneer & TAD, not the other way other around.

Additionally, Andrew does concentric drivers, not a horn guy. Pioneer knows their horns!

 

[Purité Audio]

Initially with KEF I think you will find.
Keith

 

[dasdoing]

Well, they were.

Which is exactly the point. The test is to find what people generally prefer...whatever their history.

Oh? The research indicates that adaptation doesn't change one's preference, it just lowers one's standards.

So your (debatable) problem with the research I noted is that it wasn't 'truly controlled'....but you're 'noticing a trend'? Spot the hypocrisy.

Imagine asking a group of people who’ve only eaten fast food their entire lives to rate different meals. If you gave them a choice between a gourmet, carefully prepared dish with subtle flavors and a greasy fast-food burger packed with salt, sugar, and fat, most of them would probably prefer the burger.


But that doesn’t mean the burger is a more "accurate" or "better" meal from a culinary standpoint. It just means people tend to prefer what they're accustomed to. Their taste buds are conditioned for strong, immediate flavors, not balance and nuance.

 

[Arindal]

I have watched a newly released video on YT about a guy named Joseph Crowe from Canada, who has a very very promising approach of countering the shortcomings of horns regarding (resonance-induced) colorations, localization and treble directivity at the same time:

It is one central horn for the treble (2K+) with a compression driver, slim shape and wide angle, sitting in the center of what appears to be a 4-driver slightly-curved midrange line array with much narrower horizontally angled horns and a broader silhouette. This ´hourglass´ shape is what is supposed to prevent directivity index in the treble region getting too high while keeping the localizable area small and achieving something like a virtual pointsource. In the video, he is discussing the shape and seems skeptical about MEH concepts.

I am not into designing horns and have not listened to this particular model, but from theoretical point of view this is exactly what I would do. Kudos to Joseph Crowe for offering such an elegant and universal solution to this complex equation!

 

[Newman]

I have watched a newly released video on YT about a guy named Joseph Crowe from Canada, who has a very very promising approach of countering the shortcomings of horns regarding (resonance-induced) colorations, localization and treble directivity at the same time:

View attachment 457530

It is one central horn for the treble (2K+) with a compression driver, slim shape and wide angle, sitting in the center of what appears to be a 4-driver slightly-curved midrange line array with much narrower horizontally angled horns and a broader silhouette. This ´hourglass´ shape is what is supposed to prevent directivity index in the treble region getting too high while keeping the localizable area small and achieving something like a virtual pointsource. In the video, he is discussing the shape and seems skeptical about MEH concepts.

I am not into designing horns and have not listened to this particular model, but from theoretical point of view this is exactly what I would do. Kudos to Joseph Crowe for offering such an elegant and universal solution to this complex equation!

Without measurements, it is just hand-waving.

 

[Arindal]

Without measurements, it is just hand-waving.

I do partly agree that some polar plots could be helpful to judge to which extent the goals have been met. On the other hand, this was just about solving a complex equation of horn design from a theoretical point and the solution looks elegant enough. This manufacturer is usually open with measurements, publishing them in his blog, and the speaker in question comes with in-room measurement service and room correction.

So what exactly flaw or imperfection would you expect to identify in measurements to be published?

FYI, some years ago an early prototype with straight horn mouth was (as a DIY concept under the same name Nighthawk) presented by the developer, including measurements. Remember some discussion among horn DIY specialists, and common agreement was that this is genius, with the level of remaining imperfections being already very low at this stage. The developer announced to make a revised concept to tackle the narrow on-axis imperfection around 3.5K which seemingly took 5 years:

 

[HiMu]

Without measurements, it is just hand-waving.

Nighthawk Front Horn --- Full Test with Measurements

Photo posted by @Arindal is the revised version of that

 

[Newman]

Thanks for the measurement data. I think it confirms that some of the claims are exaggerated. His real goal seems to be at all costs to avoid having a crossover in the vocal range of 250-2000 Hz. But the resultant response and beam width control in that range is somewhat ragged and could probably be surpassed with an elegant crossover-based design. Personally I think that this idea, that desperately avoiding a crossover in the main vocal region is bound to improve sound quality, is an audiophile myth and leads to certain designs being overrated.

cheers