Flattest response between 2000hz - 20 000hz [Archive]

Robh3606

10-07-2005, 10:40 AM

Well all compression drivers fall off above their mass break point at 6db per octave so they all need compensation for flat response. You can do it with the horn a crossover or a combination of both. They are only flat over a limited range. There are a couple of roads depending on the horn type used for flatest response. From playing around with the 2307, 2344, 2373 I can get them all flat from say 2K-12K maybe a bit more but the 1" drivers won't get you out to 20K. If the 1" won't the 2" won't either. You are not going to get that flat curve out to 20K without adding a 2405 as an example but then you have ripples in the response above and below the crossover point. Another issue is besides the flat on axis response they all have different DI characteristics you can easilly hear in a normal room as these sum with the on axis response. I would be more concerned about the horn type used than flat response. You can get them all to measure real close but they simply sound different. I would go for the horn/sound charateristics you like best and work to get them as flat as I could. Don't go by flat as the most important characteristic. Tractrix sounds very nice from what I have heard listenning to the Titans. They use a tractrix mid with a Fane tweeter up top to get out above 10K.

4344 on axis 2 meters 1/3 octave 1 second gate averaged with 2416 2307/H94 Second is 2344 with 2416 same conditions. Between 1K and 10K very similar but sound noticeably different. You can see the roll off in the 1" drivers with the 2344 combo.

Rob:)

Zilch

10-07-2005, 11:35 AM

Mr. Widget has published an incredibly flat horn/driver combination here; I recall it was a TAD driver.

BUT, as Robh points out, the desired sound distribution characteristic is by far the more important starting criterion for selection. On-axis response is only a portion of it....

Mr. Widget

10-07-2005, 01:30 PM

I don't think you will find a horn driver combo that exhibits a flatter on axis response than this. The red plot is the TAD TD4003 driver mounted to TAD TH4003 horn. The blue plot is the same driver mounted to a cast resin clone of the horn that I have made. They are both about +/- 1.25dB between 600Hz and 12KHzwithout any EQ. They do roll off above 12KHz. I have recently received some newer examples of the TD4003 drivers and they seem to have a slightly more extended top end.

As for the importance of constant directivity, I believe it is a subject that is up for debate. These horns have tightly controlled directivity with a pattern of 30° by 80°. In my room with floor to ceiling drapes on the side walls I find the imaging to be exceptional. Additionally the sound only changes slightly as you move about the room.

Widget

Niklas Nord

10-08-2005, 10:27 AM

Hello Friends !!
ok then, but is there no JBL -driver as flat as the TAD then?
The TAD 4003 seems to be great.

It´s only one problem, I would like to have this in a small enclosure.
Would it work with a little tractrix -like horn?

Si there anybody using any TAD´s with tractrix?

Mr. Widget

10-08-2005, 10:34 AM

It is the horn and driver together that gives you the response curve. I have a friend that uses the TAD TD4003 on a Tractrix but the response is not the same. He still likes it a lot, but you may find that you prefer a different driver on a tractrix.

There is another catch. The TD4003 is difficult to get, I had to wait months, and they are extremely costly.

Widget

Niklas Nord

10-08-2005, 10:38 AM

Hello
Aha, so the 4003 dont work so well on the tractrix then..
And if it´s not easy to get.. hmm..

I would like to squeese a horn in a small box, it´s only 26cm wide..

Zilch

10-08-2005, 11:56 AM

10"?

For $38, try the JBL OASR horn:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=1915&p=16719

Mr. Widget

10-08-2005, 12:13 PM

Aha, so the 4003 dont work so well on the tractrix then..
I didn't say that... I said that you won't get the response I posted. Here is a photo of the TD4003 mounted to a small tractrix. It is the small horn near the tweeter. This is an amazing system, but due to the design of tractrix horns, you will need a tweeter.

..or you can take Zilch's recommendation and use the OASR... just be aware that you will need some form of EQ, with all of the gains and losses associated with them.

Widget

yggdrasil

10-08-2005, 01:42 PM

I tried these data on a tractrix calculator. Guess what? No usable echo. Horn length < 1 cm. When using Fc = 1000Hz -> Horn length 2-3 cm.

The Tractrix formula gives short horns, especially when the driver size increases. Using a 1" driver gives more sense on a tractrix horn from 2k.

http://melhuish.org/audio/tractrixcalc.html

whgeiger

10-08-2005, 06:25 PM

I need a horn driver and horn that can provide the flattest response possible between 2000hz and 20 000hz.

Where do I look, JBL or TAD or something else?

Maybe the horn could be tractrix -shaped?

NN,

Some notes follow:

1) For this spectrum, the TAD 2001 or TAD 2002 would be better choices. At 1000 Hz (octave below high pass filter [f6]) and above, use of a 4" diaphragm (TD-4001,2,3) driver is contraindicated unless a PA venue is anticipated.

2) For any tweeter/horn combination, while flat (approximately) on axis response is possible, power response is not. As frequency increases, power response will decline while the energy that remains becomes more focused into a beam. For best results, power and on axis response should both decline equally. Then when the required equalization is applied, signal beaming will not be emphasized.

3) If a circular section horn is to be used, then an exponential neck with slope angle matching that of the driver throat opening is preferred. Finish this off with a tractrix bell. This may be accomplished by equating formula derivatives. If you match the tractrix flare tangent directly to that at the driver opening then only one tractrix horn is possible.

Regards,

WHG

Mr. Widget

10-08-2005, 07:05 PM

For this spectrum, the TAD 2001 or TAD 2002 would be better choices.I would agree. If you do not need or want a lower crossover point, then the 2001 or 2002 will most likely be the drivers of choice if cost is no object. They are bargains compared to the 4003, but are still on the pricey end. Actually, TAD suggests that the 2002 is good above 400Hz, but I kind of wonder about that.

For best results, power and on axis response should both decline equally. Then when the required equalization is applied, signal beaming will not be emphasized.This is currently JBL's approach with horns. In theory it certainly makes sense, but in my practical exploration the offense of equalization is far worse than a less than ideal power response. There are many successful speakers on the market that also go against this theoretical ideal. (Most all dome based designs have a narrowing of power response with increase in frequency, and there are many that are quite successful.) As I mentioned above in post #7, I do believe this is and area open for debate.

Widget

Robh3606

10-08-2005, 08:02 PM

"This is currently JBL's approach with horns. In theory it certainly makes sense, but in my practical exploration the offense of equalization is far worse than a less than ideal power response."

Yes but the one of the benefits of this approach is that it makes any EQ used less offensive. With your on axis and power response are closely matched the use of EQ doesn't destroy the on axis response and also has the added benefit requiring less EQ for flat in room response. You can't EQ in flat power response. If your are trying to take a speaker measure flat that has curves that are markedly different, and try to fix it with EQ you are going to have problems. My thing with EQ is I don't understand how it is offensive if it's done right unless of course it is improperly used to compensate for issues with the design such as poor in room response due to design issues of the loudspeaker.

It is also there philosophy with the evolution of the smaller broadcast monitors. Take a look at the improvements in the DI curves over time. They have been headed this way since the begining of the 44xx series. Take a look at the driver baffle placement and crossover points. You can see the effects in the curves. Same with the 6300 series and LSR.

On another topic which sounds better. Using the Q of the horn to EQ the compression driver or using the crossover to do it electrically???

Rob:)

Mr. Widget

10-08-2005, 08:13 PM

On another topic which sounds better. Using the Q of the horn to EQ the compression driver or using the crossover to do it electrically???I guess that is my point exactly. To my ears, having listened to and personally experimented with both, I prefer to let the horn do it... well to be honest, I have heard precious few horns do it well. The only JBL horn that does it well (to my ears) is the 2397. Beyond that, some of the tractrix designs do it well, and I really like the TH4003. 99% of the horns out there don't work for me. I suppose if you are going to compare a 23XX to a 23XX', then I may agree that the use of an equalized bi-radial is the way to go.

Widget

Mr. Widget

10-08-2005, 08:55 PM

"My thing with EQ is I don't understand how it is offensive if it's done right unless of course it is improperly used to compensate for issues with the design such as poor in room response due to design issues of the loudspeaker."

I agree with you in principle 100%. That said, in my practical experience listening to bookshelf systems, to $100K+ systems, in rooms ranging from spare bedrooms to purpose built mastering rooms, I have enjoyed more systems that exhibit less than ideal DI characteristics than those that excel in this area. The systems that I am referring to are not beam machines, but they are not those with textbook perfect DI characteristics either.

This is not a scientific survey and is purely anecdotal, but that has been the conclusion that I have come to for my own personal choices. There are many factors that cloud the issues, but I simply want to point out that there is the possibility that someone who is interested in critical two channel playback may not find the constant directivity horns and their associated networks the desirable choice despite the measured and theoretical advantages of the design.

A side note. (From my already off topic adventure.)

I recently had the pleasure to listen to two systems at another forum member's home. We listened to a pair of LSR6332s and a pair of 4333As. They were in different rooms, with different electronics. Despite the fact that the 4333As were far less spatially accurate, less tonally accurate, have horrible time and phase alignment, and were designed before the use of directivity index considerations in JBL's monitor design, I really preferred listening to them. I was shocked. I am not a huge fan of that era JBL monitor, and have criticized aspects of that monitor many times before, but the hell with all of that, the hell with theory... it was simply more fun to listen to music through. I wish I could have stayed longer and listened to more.

Widget

edgewound

10-08-2005, 09:13 PM

My thing with EQ is I don't understand how it is offensive if it's done right unless of course it is improperly used to compensate for issues with the design such as poor in room response due to design issues of the loudspeaker.

Rob:)

I believe that using EQ to fix the response of a speaker system just adds more gunk to the playback....especially if it's used to boost the HF response. The gain structure of the system becomes compromised and more distortion and noise is introduced into the program being played back. My favorite way to listen to speakers in 2-channel to unveil the sound quality is to go CD direct into the power amp....no pre-amp no tone controls...CD to amp to speakers....no added flavoring. Of course I'm referring to listening for enjoyment...not live sound where an EQ might be necessary to tailor the system to the venue.

Robh3606

10-08-2005, 09:17 PM

Hey Widget

"There are many factors that cloud the issues, but I simply want to point out that there is the possibility that someone who is interested in critical two channel playback may not find the constant directivity horns and their associated networks the desirable choice despite the measured and theoretical advantages of the design."

Sure I can see that. We all hear things a bit different. If certainly enjoy my XPL's and many very good sounding speakers are not designed along these lines. I can see where these would be advantages such as sound reinforcement, monitoring and Movie house systems. I can see advatages at home as well but as you say there is more than a smooth power curve.

"Despite the fact that the 4333As were far less spatially accurate, less tonally accurate, have horrible time and phase alignment, and were designed before the use of directivity index considerations in JBL's monitor design, I really preferred listening to them. I was shocked."

Fun is where it's at and they certainly are just that.

Rob:)

Robh3606

10-08-2005, 09:20 PM

"My favorite way to listen to speakers in 2-channel to unveil the sound quality is to go CD direct into the power amp....no pre-amp no tone controls...CD to amp to speakers....no added flavoring."

Hello Edgewound

You know I have a small system at work where I go from a Sony ES carosel directly into the amps. The amps are Urie 6211 running L20T3 and I amazed at how good this simple system sounds.

Rob:)

edgewound

10-08-2005, 09:24 PM

scott fitlin

10-08-2005, 09:34 PM

Hi Rob...

I really think it becomes a scenario where "less is more"...ya know? More music and detail seem to come through from the simpler signal path.Always!

Zilch

10-08-2005, 11:32 PM

I'll hide the EQ in the passive crossovers.

You'll never know the difference.... :p

edgewound

10-08-2005, 11:56 PM

I'll hide the EQ in the passive crossovers.

You'll never know the difference.... :p

That'll work...no mucked up gain chain;)

Mr. Widget

10-09-2005, 12:25 AM

I'll hide the EQ in the passive crossovers.

You'll never know the difference.... :p

Packing your ears with cotton, putting the speakers in another room, or just leaving them disconnected also works...:blah:

Widget

Earl K

10-09-2005, 07:06 AM

Hi Niklas

- Here is a driver that does very well between 2K & 18K . Don't let this low price put you off. This is a very high quality driver . If these are for surrounds in a HT system / then these would be my first choice .

- Note : It has a Mylar™ diaphragm which has a more "damped" sound quality to it than most metals can obtain ( excluding the use of ferrofluid in the gap ). I happen to like its' texture. It sits somewhere between phenolic and titanium ( yes that's a wide range of textures :p ) . This diaphragm is reminiscent of a well damped aluminum diaphragm ( like the Altec 288 or 902 ).

- These are Italian drivers / so I doubt if it would make much sense to buy from Parts Express & move them back across the Atlantic ocean ( These are Parts Express Prices ) .

- You can see that these represent a very modest outlay of cash / for the hobbiest .

<> EarlK

whgeiger

10-09-2005, 07:07 AM

I would agree. If you do not need or want a lower crossover point, then the 2001 or 2002 will most likely be the drivers of choice if cost is no object. They are bargains compared to the 4003, but are still on the pricey end. Actually, TAD suggests that the 2002 is good above 400Hz, but I kind of wonder about that.

This is currently JBL's approach with horns. In theory it certainly makes sense, but in my practical exploration the offense of equalization is far worse than a less than ideal power response. There are many successful speakers on the market that also go against this theoretical ideal. (Most all dome based designs have a narrowing of power response with increase in frequency, and there are many that are quite successful.) As I mentioned above in post #7, I do believe this is and area open for debate.

Widget

WW,

Most of my posts here are usually 'pooh-poohed’ on the basis of the specious ‘theory vs. practice’ argument. This is utter nonsense as the latter is nothing more than implementation of the former when a rational design path is taken. If the recommendations made are followed intelligently, coupled with some modicum of craftsmanship, superior results can be obtained. Bent nails are not the fault of a misused ball-peen hammer. Loudspeaker components designed to cover an audience at a rock concert are usually unsuitable for use in a confined, at-home venue. Typically, when modest equalization makes the music 'sound bad', what is being revealed are imperfections in the source or other system component(s). The degree of signal mangling that takes place to get to the recording stage makes what happens afterward some what a trivial matter so long as the reproducing system is of decent quality and not in need of repair.

Regards,

WHG

Niklas Nord

10-09-2005, 09:49 AM

Earl K, interesting. I will look into that !! B&C -drivers ! :)

Robh3606

10-09-2005, 10:55 AM

Hello whgeiger

"Most of my posts here are usually 'pooh-poohed’ on the basis of the specious ‘theory vs. practice’ argument. This is utter nonsense as the latter is nothing more than implementation of the former when a rational design path is taken."

To be honest I find some of your posts difficult to understand. You have a very diverse membership in this forum with all different levels of expertise and understanding. It would not be a bad idea if you took a minute to type in an example in practical use so all can understand what you mean. This is not a slight and hope it is taken in the spirit I have written it.

"Loudspeaker components designed to cover an audience at a rock concert are usually unsuitable for use in a confined, at-home venue."

I was about to say no way and then I thought about it. If you look at the classic statement speakers like the Paragon, Heartsfield and Everest they all use the TOTL sound reinforcement drivers. After that point the basic drivers have their roots in the R+D from the SR drivers but there are modification such as aguaplased diaphrams and charge coupled networks. Looking at the newest 9800 there are no drivers used that are not modified. That said I think that these type of driver is certainly suitable if used correctly in their original state. All of the Statement speakers are the best they can do at their time. I think we would all agree that even in their unmodified forms the drivers are certainly capable of providing an enjoyable listening experience providing they are set up correctly.

"Typically, when modest equalization makes the music 'sound bad', what is being revealed are imperfections in the source or other system component(s)."

That I would have to agree with you. I don't see EQ as the great evil that many do. As with anything else it has to be implemented correctly.

Rob:)

Mr. Widget

10-09-2005, 11:01 AM

WW,

Most of my posts here are usually 'pooh-poohed’ on the basis of the specious ‘theory vs. practice’ argument. This is utter nonsense as the latter is nothing more than implementation of the former when a rational design path is taken. If the recommendations made are followed intelligently, coupled with some modicum of craftsmanship, superior results can be obtained. Bent nails are not the fault of a misused ball-peen hammer. Loudspeaker components designed to cover an audience at a rock concert are usually unsuitable for use in a confined, at-home venue. Typically, when modest equalization makes the music 'sound bad', what is being revealed are imperfections in the source or other system component(s). The degree of signal mangling that takes place to get to the recording stage makes what happens afterward some what a trivial matter so long as the reproducing system is of decent quality and not in need of repair.

Regards,

WHG

I agree with you completely. Except for the part about your posts being 'pooh-poohed'... I certainly don't disregard your posts as being too anything. I think they are thoughtful and on point, though I may not always agree with your conclusions. ( I probably agree with more of what you post than you think.)

In your post above about PA gear and bent nails, we are in 100% agreement. I don't think my posts on this thread are incongruous with your rationale.

Widget

BTW: The TD4003 is not a PA driver. The TD4002 is typically used in that application, but they are very different animals.

PS. Just read Rob's response... I too thought of the venerable 375 driver and it's many uses. I would suggest that the drivers themselves when well designed as are the 375 and others, are fine in any application, it is the implementation that makes the difference. I would never use a PA horn on a driver for use in my listening room. Beyond that there is also personal preference. There are many who enjoy a 2370 horn in their living room... I wouldn't.

Mr. Widget

10-09-2005, 11:06 AM

Along with the B&C drivers I have heard good things about Beyma. The initial question though was what is the flattest response.

I would suggest that while the drivers do matter, since most drivers made today from JBL and others are all quite good, the horn will have at least as much if not more of an effect on your final sound.

Widget

Niklas Nord

10-09-2005, 12:48 PM

How can I calculate the right horn for a horndriver? It must be a small
horn, maximum width is some 18 - 26cm

pangea

10-09-2005, 01:42 PM

How can I calculate the right horn for a horndriver? It must be a small
horn, maximum width is some 18 - 26cm

I'd go for the selenium horn HL14-50, as in 50mm driver.

Totally neutral in sound and doesn't cost a fortune.

BR
Roland

Mr. Widget

10-09-2005, 01:59 PM

It is affordable at under $30ea.... might be a bit too beamy for my taste.

http://www.partsexpress.com/pdf/264-316.pdf

tomp787

10-09-2005, 08:30 PM

Hello,

I recommend the BMS 4540nd and DDS ENG 1-90 Pro horn.

The bms costs a bit less than the B&C mentioned above.
http://www.bmspro.com/downloads/
I think you can also buy the jbl 2407h which appears to be the 4540 as well.

The DDS horn is a bit over your spec at 27cm but works well with the 4540
http://www.ddshorns.com/catalog.php?page=ENG190Pro

Best Regards,
Tom

pangea

10-10-2005, 03:03 AM

It is affordable at under $30ea.... might be a bit too beamy for my taste.

http://www.partsexpress.com/pdf/264-316.pdf

Why do you think that it would be a "problem"? How often do you sit outside the sweet-spot when you listen to music and/or don't you toe in the speakers?

I have never felt any "beaminess" while listening to these horns.
When coupled to the 2441, the listening angle is wider than the graph shows, I'm sure, all the way up.
EDIT: Besides, I do have a 075 on top as well, so I really don't think there are any drawbacks in using this horn.
Only when crossed over too low, there is a slight coloration, but then again, that goes for all horns.
But other than that, the horn is as "clean" as can be IME.

BR
Roland

Niklas Nord

10-10-2005, 04:54 AM

I dont want a sweetspot, it should be no sweetspot.
I´m not alone when I watch a movie or listen to music.

Low distorsion, uncollored, flat response, no sweetspot.

Robh3606

10-10-2005, 09:28 AM

"I dont want a sweetspot, it should be no sweetspot.
I´m not alone when I watch a movie or listen to music.

Low distorsion, uncollored, flat response, no sweetspot."

You are going to have a problem then. I use 2344's and you are not going to find many horns that can throw a larger image across the room with there 100x100 coverage. I use them in my main system which doubles for both HT and music. The sweet spot they have is larger than the 2307/3208 lense combo but is still well defined. The timbre doesn't change as you move off axis but you loose your phantom image just like any other speaker when you go off to far to one side. I would look into the 2600/3100 horns providing you can place them correctly. They were designed for exactly what you seem to be looking for.

Rob:)

Niklas Nord

10-10-2005, 09:32 AM

Is it not the tractrix wich have the best dispersion?

Mr. Widget

10-10-2005, 09:40 AM

Ditto what Rob said.

Tractrix horns have a very tight and confined sweetspot. The only way to successfully play movies for several people is using an actual center channel unless you are willing to accept a major compromise.

Widget

Niklas Nord

10-10-2005, 09:45 AM

I thougt tractrix was the horn wich had the best dispersion.
It´s not only about movies :blink: Also music HAHA ! :D

Well, it´s hard for me to explain in english, but I thing
you all understand what I´m out for.

Mr. Widget

10-10-2005, 09:46 AM

How often do you sit outside the sweet-spot when you listen to music and/or don't you toe in the speakers?

Never. With horn speakers I almost always toe them in.

I have never felt any "beaminess" while listening to these horns.
When coupled to the 2441, the listening angle is wider than the graph shows, I'm sure, all the way up.
EDIT: Besides, I do have a 075 on top as well, so I really don't think there are any drawbacks in using this horn.

I am not sure that there would be a problem... I was speculating. I do find the 075 way too beamy for my taste though. I suppose like everything else in this hobby we all bring different expectations and requirements to it.

Widget

Niklas Nord

10-10-2005, 09:54 AM

What does "beamy" mean? :blink:

Mr. Widget

10-10-2005, 10:11 AM

Like a flashlight...

http://www.maglite.com/index_flash.asp

Widget

Niklas Nord

10-10-2005, 10:16 AM

Beamy, is like a sweetspot? Concentrated or something?:o:

JBLnsince1959

10-10-2005, 10:22 AM

Beamy, is like a sweetspot? Concentrated or something?:o:

yes, the more "beamy" it is the more focused or concentrated it is. compare a laser to a regular light. The laser is more "beamy" because the light takes a more focused path as a regular light will disperse or widen.

Look at the polar response in the previous post, that says it all.

as the freq. increases or goes higher there is more of a chance it will "beam" more and not spread out across the room. That's what horns try to do is to spread out the high freq.'s

Niklas Nord

10-10-2005, 10:25 AM

OK, so if it´s beamy it´s more concentrated in the dispersion and therefore more db in that point on that frequency. Can this make a harsh sound?

Robh3606

10-10-2005, 11:08 AM

I use my 2344's for stereo and have a Urei 811 center. In comparison the Urie horn is perfect for me because it covers my couch and prime listen position for Multichannel music with a tight and controlled radiation pattern. It has a very sharply defined sweet spot. You need to be on axis with this horn and if you are lucky you might get 2 people in it for stereo. I find that horn to be more focused than the mains because there are less reflections and a higher percentage of direct sound from it. It's not harsh just different because of the mix of direct vs. reflected sound.

http://audioheritage.csdco.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=4408

Rob:)

frank23

10-10-2005, 11:10 AM

I dont want a sweetspot, it should be no sweetspot.
I´m not alone when I watch a movie or listen to music.

If you want this, I think there is only one horn and it does this very well: JBL 2344A

Low distorsion, uncollored, flat response

And I haven't got any reason to doubt the qualities of the 2344A in this area. In fact, I love them!

You have to equalize it though and I agree with Rob that passive equalization is the best with these horns. The active EQ in the active M552 and M553 crossovers does not sound good at all.

greetings, Frank

Zilch

10-10-2005, 12:21 PM

If you want this, I think there is only one horn and it does this very well: JBL 2344AWell, there's also the smaller 2342 Biradial, and the Progressive Transition waveguide family, as well, from which you can pick your pattern. JBL makes a 1" throat adapter for them, too.

Here's the data Mr. Widget compiled on the OASR horn. It's got an 85° conical dispersion. Scroll up to post #84 for more info about them:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=42999&highlight=OASR#post42999

For $38, I'd be trying that one. It LOOKS like Tractrix, too.... :p

For comparison, see HF polar plots here:

http://www.jblpro.com/pub/obsolete/Sound_Power/sp212-a.pdf

Zilch

10-10-2005, 12:34 PM

OK, so if it´s beamy it´s more concentrated in the dispersion and therefore more db in that point on that frequency. Can this make a harsh sound?It's the same dB, basically, but, in sum, as you move off axis, you progressively lose the higher frequencies. Study the polar plots and you'll see what's happening there.

That's what constant directivity is mostly all about: maintaining constant response at all frequencies throughout the specified dispersion field.

frank23

10-10-2005, 01:11 PM

Well, there's also the smaller 2342 Biradial, and the Progressive Transition waveguide family, as well, from which you can pick your pattern. JBL makes a 1" throat adapter for them, too.

hmmm, these progressive transition things seem nice, especially the constant beamwidth.

I searched the forum for the 100x100 square rotateable horn, the pt-h1010hf, but all I found was that it was hard to get. I'd love to try it in comparison to the 2344.

Does anyone have any more info?

greetings, Frank

Zilch

10-10-2005, 01:20 PM

It's a myth. :p

Not the waveguides, rather, their being hard to get. I've not had difficulty. PM me if you can't get them in Europe.

You'll need the throat adapter, too, unless you have 1.5" drivers to play them.

Be aware that it requires different compensation than 2344, i.e., different crossover than 4430.

[BUT, we know how to do that, too. It's just extra work to really compare them....]

Earl K

10-10-2005, 05:04 PM

Niklas ,

- Here's what can be done with these OASR, "Dr. Seuss Horns" ( & once again, thanks to Woody Banks for this great "descriptive" )

- The first 3 pics are from Woody Banks' HT system ( with exclusive use of these OASR horns . The full thread is located here. (http://audioheritage.csdco.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=5516)

- The fourth pic is from an HT project that was executed by sebackman . The full thread is located here. (http://audioheritage.csdco.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=3774)

- These examples are from two projects that feature the OASR horn .

:)

Niklas Nord

10-11-2005, 02:12 AM

Is there any measurements on this horn? What horn drivers can we use for it?
it looks like tractrixshape :o:

Earl K

10-11-2005, 04:39 AM

Is there any measurements on this horn?

- Yes there are .
- Follow the links that Zilch had posted above to see the measurements . ( Up in Post 51 (http://audioheritage.csdco.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72320&postcount=51) ).

:)

Zilch

10-11-2005, 11:04 AM

It looks like tractrix shape :o:
It LOOKS like Tractrix, too.... :pDon't MAKE us cranky, now.... ;)

Niklas Nord

10-12-2005, 12:44 AM

hehe :D :D :D
Looks nice :)

How´s the imaging? Do you think there is better imaging on horn wich have sweetspot than horns that have no sweetspot?

Robh3606

10-12-2005, 03:59 AM

"How´s the imaging? Do you think there is better imaging on horn wich have sweetspot than horns that have no sweetspot?"

It's a preference call. A 2344 images different than a tractrix or the 2307/2308 combo. It's not a simple call as the room is going to effect it as well. A horn that does well in my room may not in yours because of placement issues. Tractrix is a smaller area than say a CD horn with flatter power response. The imaging covers a larger area because there is less beaming with a CD horn. You need a special horn to give you what you are looking for "No sweet spot" or actually the "largest sweet spot" You need a defined coverage horn like Everest or 2600/3100.

http://www.lansingheritage.org/html/jbl/specs/home-speakers/1985-everest.htm

http://www.lansingheritage.org/html/jbl/specs/home-speakers/1998-s3100mkii.htm

Rob:)

Zilch

10-12-2005, 10:33 AM

You need a special horn to give you what you are looking for "No sweet spot" or actually the "largest sweet spot" You need a defined coverage horn like Everest or 2600/3100.Heh:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=3838&page=40&pp=15

[Won't fit in 10", tho.... ;)]

Niklas Nord

10-12-2005, 12:29 PM

Hello I have a hard time here, explaining in english :blink:
If theres a big sweetspot, is the imaging bad compared with a horn that offers a small sweetspot? For the people in the middle..

big sweetspot = many people in the sofa can have a nice time :applaud:
small sweetspot = only the person in the middle of the sofa, are having that great JBL audio -time :biting:

Rolf

10-12-2005, 12:47 PM

Hi Niklas.

Yes you are right. e-mail me if you like to discuss. I live in Norway, so you can write Swedish.

Rolf

Zilch

10-12-2005, 02:34 PM

Rloggie heard the H3100 horns on "Mini-Everests" here a couple of days ago, and posted an apt characterization of them in the "Test Ride" thread:

They have a sweet spot as wide as the spacing of the speakers.

It's like sitting off-center in a cabaret. The sound of the band comes from the middle between the speakers, and you can still tell the locations of the singer and instruments. The image is stationary when properly set up.

Most speakers will produce a similar effect, to a limited extent, if you toe them in appropriately for the listening location. It's simple geometry, actually. You're more on-axis with the speaker farthest away, and more off-axis with the nearer one, thus minimizing the image shift.

Constant directivity horns in general have a somewhat broader "sweet spot," but some perceive the image as smeared off-center if reflections are not controlled. H2600/3100 and the Everest horn are "controlled" directivity, and thus mitigate image smearing.

I'm suggesting that, in theory, toed-in constant directivity OASR horns will have a broader sweet spot than the beamier Tractrix, while retaining good, though not perfect off-center imaging....

Earl K

10-14-2005, 08:44 AM

I'm suggesting that, in theory, toed-in constant directivity OASR horns will have a broader sweet spot than the beamier Tractrix, while retaining good, though not perfect off-center imaging....

- I second your suggestion . The OASR seems like a nice design blend between Constant Directivity & Exponential/Conical .
- Also, the response ( CD - EQed ) of the 2425/6/7 on that horn with its' gentle rolloff after 10K, would fit my criteria for what I desire from a surround speaker ( truncated frequency-extemes ).
- OTOH: I still don't know Niklas' intended application ( but maybe I haven't paid enough attention ;) )

:p

Niklas Nord

10-15-2005, 01:06 PM

Intended application, home audio listening offcourse !! :)

Niklas Nord

10-23-2005, 08:11 AM

What else :D

jlee

03-15-2007, 07:32 AM

Just came across on this article. Sorry to bring this thread back! :)
I found the pro-audio Martin Audio Model H3 / H3T 3-way horn PA speaker has the most flattest frequency response from about 50Hz to 18 KHz.

Pls check the attached.

Also the website: http://www.martin-audio.com/

My question is how does this PA speaker sound in low / normal music level?
Does it have micro details? Compare to JBL or even TAD 4001?
Can I use SET 5Watts or other small amp with its electronic crossover / controller M3 (or DX1) to bi-amp / tri-amp to get good sound?

Does Anyone have experience on this PA speakers at home?

johnaec

03-15-2007, 08:05 AM

I found the pro-audio Martin Audio Model H3 / H3T 3-way horn PA speaker has the most flattest frequency response from about 50Hz to 18 KHz.Don't let the "flatness" of that curve fool you! The divisions are each 5dB - that system barely falls between +/- 6dB - hardly what I'd call flat!

John

jlee

03-15-2007, 08:12 AM

Don't let the "flatness" of that curve fool you! The divisions are each 5dB - that system barely falls between +/- 6dB - hardly what I'd call flat!

John

Hi John,
Thanks for the quick comments. Pls check the spec carefully since there are many color lines there for off axis response which is the smooth off-axis response I ever see also. It falls between +- 3db. Except for the a little ripple for about 300Hz, it basically is +- 2db.

If you ever check the so called flattest one like TAD 4001 / 4003 around 10K ~ 20K, you'll know what I'm saying.

BTW, do you have any idea on using this PA one at home?

Mr. Widget

03-15-2007, 08:37 AM

Zilch

03-15-2007, 10:04 AM

(despite the fact that some on this forum seem to believe they can "hear the curves":D)Poo.

This from someone who can actually draw the curves from listening?

[I ain't buyin' it.... :p ]

jlee

03-15-2007, 06:01 PM

I have absolutely no experience with this system... however, no PA system that I have heard has ever sounded as good as a proper studio monitor or domestic system in a typical home application.

All loudspeakers are designed around specific compromises. To make a really good PA system you choose a different set of compromises over the ones you would choose for a monitor.

As for the response curves... they are only of a very limited usefulness (despite the fact that some on this forum seem to believe they can "hear the curves":D) and the ones taken by a manufacturer to be used as a sales tool are rarely of much use at all.

Widget

Hi Widget,

Thanks for the comments.
My original thinking was to buy one with my own paint and veneer to replace the PA looking.
However, I then thought buying the H2 module (midrange with tweeter portion) and put that on top of my Klipschorn bass bin.
An then the latest plan was to have the midrange horn let it working from 200 Hz to 2KHz (I remembered some one in this board using Audax on a horn to this range getting very positive results even could compare with TAD 4001). The tweeter then replaced with TAD 2002 to cover from 2KHz up to 25 Khz. So the whole SUPER (I think) system is Khorn bassbin + Martin special midrange + TAD 2002 ........
(Under this revised plan, I won't spend too much if Martin midrange falls....):o:

Mr. Widget

03-15-2007, 11:03 PM

Poo.

This from someone who can actually draw the curves from listening?

[I ain't buyin' it.... :p ]For the most part these curves describe a system's tonal qualities... to me this is not really as important as the more subtle qualities of reproduction. Tonality can be relatively easily tweaked with tone controls or an equalizer. The qualities of transient response, dynamics, detail, imaging, etc. etc.... are far more indicative of how a system actually sounds and these are not really available from a simple frequency response plot.

Widget

Mr. Widget

03-15-2007, 11:07 PM

Hi Widget,

Thanks for the comments.
My original thinking was to buy one with my own paint and veneer to replace the PA looking.
However, I then thought buying the H2 module (midrange with tweeter portion) and put that on top of my Klipschorn bass bin.
An then the latest plan was to have the midrange horn let it working from 200 Hz to 2KHz (I remembered some one in this board using Audax on a horn to this range getting very positive results even could compare with TAD 4001). The tweeter then replaced with TAD 2002 to cover from 2KHz up to 25 Khz. So the whole SUPER (I think) system is Khorn bassbin + Martin special midrange + TAD 2002 ........
(Under this revised plan, I won't spend too much if Martin midrange falls....):o:Personally, I wouldn't mess around with the Martin Audio mids myself, but if you want to, go ahead... they may be exactly what you are looking for.

If you are going to go to the expense of using a pair of TAD 2002s, I'd use them with a horn that supports them down to at least 500Hz and I would cross them over around 1KHz... as for using them as tweeters, I think they may be fine, but certainly not world class above 10KHz.

Widget

jlee

03-16-2007, 05:25 AM

Personally, I wouldn't mess around with the Martin Audio mids myself, but if you want to, go ahead... they may be exactly what you are looking for.

If you are going to go to the expense of using a pair of TAD 2002s, I'd use them with a horn that supports them down to at least 500Hz and I would cross them over around 1KHz... as for using them as tweeters, I think they may be fine, but certainly not world class above 10KHz.

Widget

HI Widget,
Thanks. I've checked the forum and remembered you had made TAD and Westlake horn for 4001 use. Are these still available?
Also is there any wood horn there for TAD 4001 that can let me crossover it at 350Hz (which is the actual KHorn crossover freq even they advertised for 400Hz)?
Can TAD 4001 go such low?
If it is OK, I can use my existing TAD ET-703 the very excellent tweeter (that i used for many years which replaced Khorn's K-77) to crossover at about 14 Khz with TAD 4001.

Mr. Widget

03-16-2007, 08:17 AM

jlee

03-16-2007, 08:47 AM

The Et-703 is a world class tweeter... since you are familiar with it I doubt that using the 2002 or almost any other tweeter would be completely satisfying. (the JBL bat slayer is another example of an outstanding tweeter) I cross my ET-703s over at 8KHz with my TD-4003s. The TD-4001s and TD-4003s both go out to >18KHz, but at the higher frequencies you are listening to the distortion products of the diaphragm's mass break point... I don't like hearing it.

As for the 4001... the TADs are really nice, but not below 550-600Hz. I know some people have used them in their Klipschorns, I'd be afraid of destroying them and would assume the extra distortion from pushing them that low might also be an issue.

Why not try one of the large format JBLs with a phenolic diaphragm? There are several to choose from, I'd look for a pair of 2482s. None of the horns that I have made have ever been usable in the 400Hz region. I have no horn recommendations.

Widget

Hi Widget:
Thank you so much! This forum with your professionalism is wonderful!!
Few more questions:
1. Any recommendation on JBL horn with 2482?
2. In your opinion, is TAD 4003 better than 4001? And which horn you use for 4003?
3. I'm very very very interested in Meyer Sound X-10 and found you have comments on this thread: http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=3424 Could you please check it out and let me know if you still remember the sound of Meyer X-10?
How does X-10 compare with TAD 4003 / ET-703 combination? At normal and small SPL?

Best regards

Mr. Widget

03-16-2007, 09:56 PM

1. Any recommendation on JBL horn with 2482?
Sorry... I really can't think of a horn I have heard that covers this range that is something I'd pursue.

2. In your opinion, is TAD 4003 better than 4001? And which horn you use for 4003?Yes, I do like the TD-4003 better than the TD-4001. The 4003 has just a bit more of the detail and tactile quality that I find so compelling in the 4001.

I use custom cast resin versions of TAD's TH-4003 horn that was designed specifically for the TD-4003 driver. The combination is really quite remarkable in it's neutrality and non-horn like behavior. It is also absolutely crazy expensive.

3. I'm very very very interested in Meyer Sound X-10 and found you have comments on this thread: http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=3424 Could you please check it out and let me know if you still remember the sound of Meyer X-10?
How does X-10 compare with TAD 4003 / ET-703 combination? At normal and small SPL?It has been so long since I heard the X-10, that I really can't comment. It was a remarkable two-way as is the JBL Everest DD66000... I think I'd lean toward the JBL.

Widget

jlee

03-18-2007, 06:53 AM

Sorry... I really can't think of a horn I have heard that covers this range that is something I'd pursue.

Yes, I do like the TD-4003 better than the TD-4001. The 4003 has just a bit more of the detail and tactile quality that I find so compelling in the 4001.

I use custom cast resin versions of TAD's TH-4003 horn that was designed specifically for the TD-4003 driver. The combination is really quite remarkable in it's neutrality and non-horn like behavior. It is also absolutely crazy expensive.

It has been so long since I heard the X-10, that I really can't comment. It was a remarkable two-way as is the JBL Everest DD66000... I think I'd lean toward the JBL.

Widget

Hi Widget,

Thanks. I may end up with Meyer X-10 (cheaper than JBL DD66000) in the long run.
One more question for X-10: It only use one 4 inch driver to go up to 20 khz. Can X-10 high freq compete with ET-703? (I guess not..... However, any distingushable timber or details in music?)

Within these few years, a good choice is to build TAD 4003 (or 4001) with corresponding horn TH-4003 (or TH-4001).
Therefore, can you please send me the horn drawing if convenient? Or can you build the horn for me?:D

One more question: Can TAD 4003 goes down to around 500 Hz? If it can, Do you have horn drawing to go with it? then I can use it with horn loaded bass bin of my Klipsch La Scala and that will be wonderful....

Mr. Widget

03-18-2007, 12:28 PM

One more question for X-10: It only use one 4 inch driver to go up to 20 khz. Can X-10 high freq compete with ET-703? (I guess not..... However, any distingushable timber or details in music?)
The Everest also uses a 4" diaphragmed compression driver all the way up, but it is a newer design and does sound quite good even with the tweeter removed... I checked.

One more question: Can TAD 4003 goes down to around 500 Hz? If it can, Do you have horn drawing to go with it? then I can use it with horn loaded bass bin of my Klipsch La Scala and that will be wonderful....It can be pushed and go down to 500Hz... I would not recommend it in that application though.

Widget

Niklas Nord

03-26-2007, 03:03 PM

Hello !

I´ll take this interesting thread up ! is there any new interesting drivers out there?

:)

Elac310

11-02-2014, 01:25 AM

I have recently received some newer examples of the TD4003 drivers and they seem to have a slightly more extended top end.

Digging out an older post/thread, (I love old posts and threads, there's more in those than what has not yet been written in those to come)

Mr Widget: would you still stand to this impression nowadays, which would mean that something in the construction process of the driver has evolved? I have regulalrly similar impressions (not with TAD though) when I use a new driver or new diaphragms in a used driver.
After a while the sound is not as sparkling as in the first few days of use, maybe a consequence of the inevitable burning in process. If I'm not mistaken, the top end emanates from the periphery of the diaphs which is also a very sollicitated part due to the suspension effort. Especially the larger diaphs.

Mr. Widget

11-02-2014, 06:35 PM

Mr Widget: would you still stand to this impression nowadays...I can't really answer as I haven't compared my 7+ year old drivers to new ones.

My impression at the time was that slight manufacturing changes had been made and that was the reason for the difference, but I suppose it is possible that the drivers "wear in"... though I feel our subjective impression of speakers varies more than any objective change from "break in" justifies.

Widget