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

[Flaesh]

those acoustic panels

I wouldn't call them "acoustic." Although they are globally popular as an affordable, off-the-shelf solution. I wonder if they’ll ever make slats of varying widths, use an MLS sequence, or something similar. Even standard ones can be bent to create a abfuser\difsorber that acts as both a geometric diffuser and an absorber. Diagnose the room's acoustics and control the effect(s), as always. ps: Yes, this will eliminate the acoustically useless merits of these sticks—their negligible thickness and absolute simplicity of use.

 

[Audio Science Pal]

By the way, I like those acoustic panels.
View attachment 562240
I'm thinking of putting some up myself—mainly because I think they look good.
They might still have some effect, even though they're thin. Probably not for absorption (though you could place mattresses between them and the wall), but rather as diffusers.

I recently visited a house in which one wall of a room had felt backer (10mm thick felt) slat panels added. I think they are a good addition, acoustically and visually.

 

[Sal1950]

Yes, this will eliminate the acoustically useless merits of these sticks—their negligible thickness and absolute simplicity of use.

I recently visited a house in which one wall of a room had felt backer (10mm thick felt) slat panels added. I think they are a good addition, acoustically and visually.

My fix for massive slap echo off all the left and right-rear wall windows. No WAF to deal with here.

 

[Audio Science Pal]

My fix for massive slap echo off all the left and right-rear wall windows. No WAF to deal with here.

Are those Roxul batts press fit into the window openings? I like it.

 

[Snickers-is]

Hi-Fi Klubben, which sells across the Nordic countries, is a commercial retailer; they wouldn't stock Vestlyd (wide) speakers unless they actually sold well:
View attachment 562238View attachment 562239

I believe it is their own brand, and the products are a result of what they wanted.

The pricing is really aggressive, and they are quite fun to listen to.

 

[Sal1950]

Are those Roxul batts press fit into the window openings? I like it.

Yes the 2" thick batts. I just cut them a slight bit over the width size with a box cutter, or large bread slicing knife and slid them in sitting on the window sill, that's it.
They've been just sitting there for over 4 years now, no problems.

 

[Proud Audiophile]

OK, it happened again. I recently listened to some large horn speakers. I have periodically done this over many years at various hifi shows. I came away again with the same thoughts. I just don't get them.

Firstly they were clearly highly directional. Unless I was right bang in the firing line on axis they had no high frequencies.

Secondly, mid range seemed over emphasised with a "cuppy" effect. Exactly like the sound you get if you cup your hands around your mouth.

Lastly they were no more dynamic than any other large speaker.

All the same characteristics I have heard previously.

Is it me? Am I biased? Heard the wrong horns? Some rave about horns but it's lost on me.

What are others experiences?

In my opinion, for home audio, horns are an outdated technology from a time when 5 or10 watts was good power and you got it from a simple flea watt class A tube design . Today we don't need to accept bad frequency response for efficiency. I agree with everything you said except one thing. Horns do seem to be generally more dynamic but not necessarily in a good way. I really dislike the sound they deliver. Very rough ride to my ears. A smoother response is much more enjoyable to me. Can you imagine the spin? Have a nice day.

 

[Snickers-is]

In my opinion, for home audio, horns are an outdated technology from a time when 5 or10 watts was good power and you got it from a simple flea watt class A tube design . Today we don't need to accept bad frequency response for efficiency. I agree with everything you said except one thing. Horns do seem to be generally more dynamic but not necessarily in a good way. I really dislike the sound they deliver. Very rough ride to my ears. A smoother response is much more enjoyable to me. Can you imagine the spin? Have a nice day.

I think your accusations towards horns are a bit unfair. As far as I can see, there are four claims here connected to horns:

1: Horns are outdated.
There are different types of horns made for different purposes. They have all sorts of different properties depending on the task they are made to fit. For hifi, you need a few properties that are kind of interconnected. One is very low HOM. Another one is freedom of resonances. Controlled dispersion is a third factor. It is easy to find a horn that is developed for an entirely different purpose, only to perform very poorly on one or more of these parameters.

2: There are good and bad dynamic qualities.
This is a very unreasonable claim. There is no way of improving dynamics. It can only be degraded, meaning you move away from the dynamic linearity of the original track. I believe you may be talking about uneven frequency response that is being mistaken for some kind of dynamic behavior.

3: Horns cause uneven response.
If you have the three parameters above under control, you do not get uneven response. It is that simple.

4: Removing the horn removes these problems.
Removing the horn usually degrades the dispersion control and increases non linear distortion. If you have a very good horn, you will not improve the frequency response or dynamic qualities by removing the horn.

You are off course entitled to having an opinion, but I think your reasoning is confusing and in some ways misleading. I suspect you simply have not yet heard a very good horn that is correctly integrated into the rest of the system.

Here are some raw measurements of a 46cm horn at 15 degree steps horizontally and vertically:

These measurements are gated, but not smoothed. It is easy to achieve a very smooth response with the tonal balance you want with this starting point, and it sounds pretty damn great.

 

[Plcamp]

These measurements are gated, but not smoothed. It is easy to achieve a very smooth response with the tonal balance you want with this starting point, and it sounds pretty damn great.

I agree, this is an sb CD on a 450hz horn…flat smooth freq response from 500 hz to 4 kHz…

 

[fpitas]

Some of us horn guys even EQ them flat. Yes, it can happen.

 

[Flaesh]

"Constant directivity compensation" is absolutely necessary for constant directivity horns\WGs. The same applies to a directivity that is not entirely constant, though somewhat less so.
ps: Archaic exponential and radial horns may not require equalization, at the cost of narrowed directivity.

 

[fpitas]

"Constant directivity compensation" is absolutely necessary for constant directivity horns\WGs.

Even radial horns need some of it, just not as much high frequency boost.

 

[Snickers-is]

Some of us horn guys even EQ them flat. Yes, it can happen.

Sure, but that does not necessarily remove what caused the uneven response to begin with.

 

[fpitas]

Sure, but that does not necessarily remove what caused the uneven response to begin with.

Uh...no. Not sure where you're going with that. You don't EQ any drivers?

 

[Snickers-is]

Uh...no. Not sure where you're going with that. You don't EQ any drivers?

EQ is useful for changing the tonal balance, and altering the response of low order modes. But it normally sounds better if you can avoid them in the first place. My point is that in many cases, EQ-ing away something is very often not the same as completely removing the audible impact of it.

EDIT: I should add that this goes for any driver and driver-enclosure combination as well.

 

[fpitas]

EQ is useful for changing the tonal balance, and altering the response of low order modes. But it normally sounds better if you can avoid them in the first place. My point is that in many cases, EQ-ing away something is very often not the same as completely removing the audible impact of it.

YMMV. I do just fine with it, once I learned what I was doing.

 

[Flaesh]

YMMV.

I would argue. The laws of physics are the same for everyone. Textbooks from the last millennium describe three low-pass filters in the drivers. Including Fhm. However, with different horns, that acoustic power can be distributed differently in space.

 

[fpitas]

I would argue. The laws of physics are the same for everyone. Textbooks from the last millennium describe three low-pass filters in the drivers. Including Fhm. However, with different horns, that acoustic power can be distributed differently in space.

True. Luckily, the 511 isn't all that bad that way. I have honestly never seen anyone do anything with them but maybe toss some cheap driver on one and hope it works. Or use the factory Altec 2nd order crossovers with an old 802 driver.

 

[Duke]

EQ is useful for changing the tonal balance...

You do understand that EQ is vital to correct the inevitable dowward-tilting frequency response of a constant-directivity horn, right? And, that once you've corrected the on-axis response of a constant-directivity horn, you have simultaneously corrected the off-axis response as well?

To put it another way, EQ is an inevitable part of using a constant directivity horn, if sound quality is a consideration.

But it normally sounds better if you can avoid them in the first place.

Well... there is one school of thought that says a top priority should be having a minimalist crossover design, and another that says a top priority should be having the off-axis response track the on-axis response. In practice, those two priorities end up being somewhat at odds with one another.

 

[Flaesh]

I once heard speakers with probably five (but no fewer than four) horn-loaded bands—possibly with just a capacitor in each band (each band operates below Fhm). It was quite fun. But I didn't want to «do\try this at home». Could I be mistaken ?