|
High Efficiency Speaker Asylum Need speakers that can rock with just one watt? You found da place. |
|
|
|
High Efficiency Speaker Asylum Need speakers that can rock with just one watt? You found da place. |
|
In Reply to: Re: Putland posted by tomservo on June 10, 2003 at 17:18:43:
A couple of different horn design approaches have been discussed on this thread. That, in itself, makes for a very interesting discussion. Specifically, we've spoken about Leach's and Keele's mathematical models, and you've expressed an opinion - perhaps an observation - that Leech's methods were superior. But others have expressed the opposite view.I particularly like Leach's Spice models for horns and for electrodynamic and piezoelectric drivers. As you might guess, that's right up my alley and I've enjoyed making Spice models for analysis of my circuit designs, even going so far as to build analog computers to implement similar models in the analog realm, and reading their results with A/D converters.
I tell you this to let you know I'm with you on that part. I'm not discounting your appreciation of Leach's horn models. I don't take issue with your choice of high-mass diaphragms either. What I'm focused on is the issue of "spin" and your choice of the phrase "folk lore math." When people have recommended horns with highly damped motors and light cones, you often reply with the thing about "folk lore math." But there are very good reasons a person might want to design a horn with exactly that kind of motor.
So I don't find your approach of using a heavy diaphragm to be particularly unappealing, but I do think it means that the horn will be mass dominated. Having a lighter mass would obviously result in a design that is less so, and there's merit in making that choice. But the point is that this discussion isn't really just about Keele vs. Leach. For you, it's as much about defending your choice to use heavy cones vs light ones, and it's about using motors with higher Q - Stuff that really needs "engine breaking" from the current sinking ability of the amp.
Then again, you and I both know all too well how difficult it is to sit and watch the "other guys" doing their share of stretching the facts. I've sat and watched bogus demonstrations of the wavefront inside various horns, completely misrepresenting the shape of the pressure wave as it travelled down the flare. I've spoken with men who claimed not to find a resonant peak in their measurements of a series circuit containing a single coil and a single capacitor. And I've heard 'em claim that what amounts to an undersized basshorn will be flat down to 25Hz without the benefit of corner boundary conditions. Of course, the "fine print" shows the requirement for a powerful amplifier and a ton of EQ to bring up the bottom end. So that's spin too.
But putting all that aside, I'm not sure it is appropriate to talk of absolutes in this industry. After all, it is really an illusion that we are trying to achieve here - To reproduce sound as convincingly as possible. And there's room for plenty of different implementations - As you've said yourself, there are a continuum of solutions.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- "Folk lore math" - Wayne Parham 00:47:09 06/11/03 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
