Heh:Originally Posted by Robh3606
http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...&page=40&pp=15
[Won't fit in 10", tho.... ]
Heh:Originally Posted by Robh3606
http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...&page=40&pp=15
[Won't fit in 10", tho.... ]
Hello I have a hard time here, explaining in english
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
small sweetspot = only the person in the middle of the sofa, are having that great JBL audio -time
Hi Niklas.
Yes you are right. e-mail me if you like to discuss. I live in Norway, so you can write Swedish.
Rolf
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....
- I second your suggestion . The OASR seems like a nice design blend between Constant Directivity & Exponential/Conical .Originally Posted by Zilch
- 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 )
Intended application, home audio listening offcourse !!
What else
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?
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?
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") 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....)
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
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
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)