Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Horn-Loaded Speakers
Topic: No. You are actually empty of it.

Page 1 of 1 (19 items)


Posted by Romy the Cat on 09-07-2024

f you could go uploaded couple video clips when I I I was reminiscing compose a time when I was building my playback and I have some nostalgia about it. I really like the time when I was navigated a project from point a to point b reflecting in my actions some of my personal views and visions. The fact that it was materialized in some kind of creative machinery was very gratifying to me. 

Nowadays I am not exactly bored with my life brought to my huge surprise some accidental events couple days ago inspire me to contemplate another project. I will record video about it when I have time. I did a number of my audio projects in the past, where some of them were very successful and some of them were clearly failures. I have a good feeling about it. Irony that I absolutely do not need it but something tempt me to do with it.

Posted by Romy the Cat on 09-29-2024
DipolCornerLoaded.jpg



Posted by Amir on 10-01-2024
Thanks for sharing new video , this picture from Mike reminds the David Karmely setup in show 2005 :
https://audiofederation.com/hifiing/2005/HE2005NYC/day1/track5/index.htm
David Karmeli (Damoka) now is active in Utah . those days we were younger ... enjoy beautiful autumn


IMG_1162.jpeg

Posted by Romy the Cat on 10-05-2024
Last night I have a long listening session of my New corner loaded speakers, I don't have a name for them yet. I kind of feel sense of amazement what they do with the lower register. Some of very very complex thingd they do amazingly interesting.  I was listening to my favorite recording of La Mer by Berlin philharmonic and was really pleased of not impressiveness of this lower and upper base. It is very different from my main system does. Macondo in its current configuration has unquestionably much more Superior bass. But when I am talking about performance of specific register I always think in terms how I would like to change it in order the result comply with my belief how I would like it to be.  With all quality of the base that I am getting from my Macondo I always feel that I would like to have slightly softer very bottom range. I understand that it is not exactly possible because I have my lowest channel in Macondo driven by a solid state amplifier. I am a strong believer that any solid state amplification topologically cannot produce proper base. I certainly have its flowing over a tube crossover which specifically optimized to increase second harmonic, it helps a lot but it is still not a single ended bass. However, when I listening my corner horns which even remotely do not go as deep as my main system I do not have this feeling that I want to have slightly softer bottom end. Do not forget that I am driving my corner horns not even solid States amplifier, but exceptionally horrible amplifier, from a single integrated chip of total cost probably a few dollars. I think what happening because I have a dipole corner horn there are some very intricate phase randomization that overall make bass very interesting. I am still thinking about it...

Posted by a.anagnost on 10-16-2024

Having lived with back loaded horns for a few years (a few decades ago I was infected with Yellow SingleDriveritis), this topology brings up a lot of memories.

Rommy, if my eyes don't deceive me, I am detecting a blurry 15’’ firing behind the grill cloth located near the bottom of the front baffle. By any chance, is this horn related to: Jensen Technical Bulletin 3 ( https://aafradio.org/audio/Jensen_TB-3.html )?

BR,

Antonis Anagnostopoulos


Posted by Romy the Cat on 10-17-2024

Antonis, the type of the hormone is your link it is exactly that type of the horn that I do not like. It has multiple bends, it means it has a fixed resonance chamber inside itself. My corner horns has none of it, it is just a mouse a radiating into corner. 


Saying all of it, I am sound like some kind of corner horn expert, and I am not. I heard plenty of corner horns that I very much do not like and I had only two horns that I do like. I did not have any personal investigation why I like it. There are many variables why those two corner horns sounded okay and my presumption that it is a topology is just my guess. It does not based upon any of my experience to actually to make corner horn to sound right. So, if I were you I would not use me for any kind of point of reference as corner horn is an apology about which I have near no personal experience to deal with.


Posted by Paul S on 10-17-2024
Romy, I am reminded of large olden days enclosures that were "randomly vented", in that the venting was meant to diffuse backwave reinforcement/cancellation rather than trying to use the backwave to augment the front wave. It is very difficult these days to search for Tesla (Tesla a.s., CZ) speakers, since all search engines are trained to show Tesla cars. Anyway, the large Tesla ARO woofers were used in large and heavy double-walled enclosures with "diffusion vents". I experimented with this concept by drilling multiple random sized holes in the backs of empty boxes, and at times I used a rock wool "curtain" behind the driver. These enclosues do not "help" the driver in any way, really, but they come close to IB in terms of allowing one to hear what the driver itself has to offer. I did not try any of these enclosures "corner loaded", and - of course - the room figures largely in that case. Not to say it wouldn't "work", rather any particular "solution" might be fairly room specific.

I think the "big problem" for any large woofer candidate is equalizing output in the passband, and most fancy "solutions" have the real world aim of getting LF from a "reasonably sized" enclosure. I think, regardless, there is no Free Lunch with LF, although I certainly agree there is a lot of room for the improvement of Musical Bass. It always gets my attention when someone goes after Musical Bass.

Paul S

Posted by a.anagnost on 10-18-2024
And you have proved it: I am reading (and studying) GSC for over 15y and, as I have worked in Physics research for some years, I am eligible to say that you are performing experimental Physics using scientific methodology. Even failed experiments are thoroughly documented! The funny thing is that we have worked together in the past (don’t remember how many years ago) re EAR 834 (I provided some Spice simulations and a little help in proving that replacing the tube in the output cathode follower with a BJT transistor is quantitatively ok but unacceptable.)

To be fair, the Jensen TB-3 horn does not have that many bends. It has only one. On the other hand, I don’t think it is a horn. The document states "flare cutoff frequency of 43 cycles": Impossible with about 1m flare length. It is a bass reflex with a horn(y) shaped duct (instead of the traditional cylinder / Helmholtz resonator). 
Admittedly, this topology permits tunning to lower frequency (compared to a BR with the same driver).

Back to the topic:
I am not interested in blindly copying/replicating something I don’t yet understand. The only reason I mentioned the Jensen TB-3 is simply that it is the only thing that I have seen (and studied to some extend) resembling the posted pic.

I am obviously interested in dipole corner horn (why? Maybe the avatar answers that).
Is your experiment a horn?
Or it is simply a box with two openings?
Can you share topology information?  (a hand sketch would be fine)

Antonis

Posted by Romy the Cat on 10-18-2024
Antonis, I disagree with you that Jensen has no unnecessary bends. Take a look at my image below. From point A to point B the horn has a band that acts as a resonant chamber. The paths between those two points always have their harmonics which are ever present and there is no way to eliminate it from the horn sound. Also, I am completely against the concept that this type of horn should have multiple bends. The only benefit of the bends is to have longer horns. It would make sense to have longer only if a month of the horn is larger as a result of the longer horn. In this specific configuration the response of the horn is restricted by the size of the mouse and longevity of the horn doesn't give any benefits besides creating internal permanent resonances.

On the right side, you see the schematic of my new corner horn. As you see it is made extremely simple and the back chamber radiates into the hole which hits a corner.  There is a red plate in parallel to the mouse exit which does not exist in my horn but exists in Vitavox CN191 corner horn which uses the same topology. Initially, I was planning to put these plates in there but frankly speaking, I'm OK with how it is. I just know that to experiment with the size, profile and proximity of this plate behind just behind the mouth will take years and I do not have in me a drive to “improve” anything as it is not my main system. 

I absolutely insist that you take very seriously this paragraph. Although I very much insist that many multiband horns that I heard sounded like crap, I do not insist that they sound like this because of the bends. There are so many variables in corner-loaded horns you know I have so little personal experience playing with them that all my ideas are purely hypotheticals. When I glanced inside my new corner horn I saw that there were no extra bends, only that made me decide to buy it. The rest is purely accidental my reportedly-positive result does not prove anything but just delivers my own comfort with my hypothesis.

There is another interesting aspect that I always have in the back of my mind. A corner-loaded horn has theoretically unlimited mouse size and as a result, this horn is perfectly topologically suitable to work with tone control. Not equalization, which is horrible because you are closing your slope, but pure tone control, which does not introduce facial distortions. You choose some kind of arbitrary frequency, let's say 150 Hertz and you with a capacitor and two resistors introduce anything under it let's say +2 decibels. Since the mouth of the horn is “unlimited”, or effectively the size of your corner, then increment of your horn output as a specific frequency perfectly makes sense, particularly with a horn that is made with a driver of resonance 20-25 Hertz.

 I would love to learn what constitutes the quality of my current sound that is coming from direct radiator versus corner loading. Of course, I did an experiment plugging direct radiation and listening just corner loading results, exactly what Vitavox CN191 does. I hated what I heard. The Vitavox uses a driver with 45Hz resonance, and I use a driver with 25Hz resonance. I feel that Vitavox  15” driver is an order of magnitude more interesting then this crappy Altec but when I put it into my corner corn I get better sound from a driver but less interesting sound from my room. I was thinking about it a lot trying to identify why and then failed to catch it and decided to keep Altecs. The whole idea of my corner horn installation is that I would like to drop it in the corner and not worry about anything else. I got much more interesting results than I hoped for. I would like more people to hear my corner horn and tell me why it is so peaceful. It is very interesting as if I introduce better amplification or front end it does not sound interesting. It sounds the best when I drive it from an objectively crappy sound front end with five dollars integrated amplifier. It is kind of ridiculous but it is what it is.

CornerHorsnsAIdeas.png


Posted by Edgar= on 10-19-2024
Howdy Romy and all. It's a pleasure to visiting the site again, AND again I found myself flabergasted by the words coming out of your mouth Romy! Now dipole bass! What would the cat of 15 years ago say to the cat now?!?
I make fun but I too have had good moments with simple dipole bass. In its limitations...
I'm still formulating my theories but I'm interested on your thoughts regarding any correlation in your experience between how reverb injection changes your subjective experience of the sound, and how the 'incorrect' dipole bass also make you perceive sound in room?
Also, if any correlation in your subjective experience with Dannoy?
Would you say Dannoy and the dipole corner cabinets have a similar lower rolloff? Subjectively? Dannoy is also kind of dipole around 25hz. Others might disagree with that statement.
I still listen to Dannoy regularly. 
But back to the dipoles. If I had to take a stab in the dark about the source of the phenomena showing up that you are enjoying Romy, I would guess it has to do with your loudspeaker as a microphone. I think this also applies to Dannoy phenomena. Specifically the way they build harmonics in the room.
I believe reverb injection is also doing something similar, restructuring the pressure in the room at lower registers, allowing the harmonics to build properly, in natural order.
To explain, everytime our loudspeakers pressurise the room, as in each cycle, the room also depressurises. that depressurisation then drives the loudspeaker and generates a signal out of the driver into the amplifier's output stage, as we know. But how much do we think about how this phenomena effects our playbacks?
This is from an AI - 

The principle of reciprocity in electroacoustics is a fundamental concept that applies to transducers, including loudspeakers and microphones. Here are the key points:

  1. Bidirectional conversion:
    • A transducer can convert energy in both directions.
    • For a loudspeaker, this means it can convert: a) Electrical energy into acoustic energy (its primary function) b) Acoustic energy into electrical energy (the reverse process)
  2. Loudspeaker as a microphone:
    • Due to this principle, a loudspeaker can actually function as a microphone.
    • When sound waves hit the speaker cone, they cause it to vibrate.
    • These vibrations move the voice coil within the magnetic field of the speaker.
    • This movement induces a small electrical current in the voice coil, effectively generating an audio signal.
  3. Implications for audio systems:
    • In a high-powered audio system, this effect can contribute to feedback.
    • The speaker-generated voltage can be fed back into the amplifier, potentially causing distortion or oscillation.
The difference in dampening factor between solid state amps and valve amps has a dramatic effect  on how this room/driver/output-stage feedback loop behaves/sounds. if the loudspeaker topology is complex, the distortion generated in this feedback loop will be complex. If the loudspeaker topology is simple, the distortion will have more simple, naturally ordered harmonics. And you know how the old adage goes, "if we have to have distortion in our output stage, let's make sure its structured properly"
That's not an adage, I just made it up. but if it was an adage, it would be one I'd be happy to say.
With all due respect Romy, the 5 channels of your main playback = 5 isolated feedback loops. The harmonics of the distortion in the output-stage feedback loops can only restructure themselves within the limited bandwidth of the DSET xformers before they are reintroduced into the room, not across the entire bandwidth of the playback. So whilst your main playback will generate very linear pressure on the first cycle, once the room feeds back into the isolated xformers, the order of the harmonics is de-structured. 
Also, the most charge back into the output stage is generated at resonate freq of the drivers, which may be why the two different resonance frequencies create such different subjective experience in your corner cabs. I don't really know. Just guessing.
Interested in your thoughts.
Lastly, I remember I started following your adventures back when you were adding two more drivers to the top of you line arrays in your Boston Apartment. I have enjoyed following along and have benefited from the discoveries of each of your adventures since then. The pilot system experiments, the mid bass horns of course, the multiple house moves and the family and the many others. I look forward to the developments of this humble project.
Ed

Posted by a.anagnost on 10-19-2024
Romy, light a cigar, make yourself comfortable and try to follow my thoughts.

Both contraptions are topologically equal: If you consider that in Jensen, A is a triangular box equivalent to the triangular box (rear chamber) of your contraption. (Jensen is just talking to the 2 ducts/horns through the 2 (point B) slits).

Imagine unfolding everything and putting all components in a straight line: We derive to the same basic schematic (which is a dipole):
A driver, attached to a box (defined by some volume Vb) attached to a (conical) horn shaped duct (defined by some throat surface St, some mouth surface Sm and some flare length Lf). 

Obviously:
If St=Sm, the schematic becomes a typical Bass Reflex (BR) schematic.
If St<Sm then we have a BR with horn duct. And now we have a problem: We have to tune that horn in very special way as we don’t want to introduce peaks due to horn gain and due to BR miss-alignment (keep in mind that this horn acts also as port/Helmholtz resonator in order to tune the BR response).

Based on the above, the BR theory may/can explain the observed differences using random (Altec and Vitavox) drivers: 
We need specific Vb for each driver and specific tunning of the horn duct.

In your case (since all dimensions are fixed), If I wanted to use the Vitavox, I would reduce Vb.

Dipole
One important factor is the distance between the driver and the (very large compared to traditional BR boxes) side openings. This can cause severe cancellations especially in the 150-300 Hz range. I suppose that placing the driver near the bottom (or near the top) of the baffle would be beneficial.

Corner placing
This is uncharted territory for me too. My biggest concern is that practically, we are using a fraction of the side walls as an excuse. If those boxes were ceiling high…but still we are talking about a very fast opening horn…


In fact, I feel more comfortable thinking that I have a BR build for corner location: Efficiency is increased, reflections from those 2 walls are eliminated and that’s it.

Antonis

Posted by Romy the Cat on 10-19-2024
 a.anagnost wrote:
Based on the above, the BR theory may/can explain the observed differences using random (Altec and Vitavox) drivers: 
We need specific Vb for each driver and specific tunning of the horn duct.

In your case (since all dimensions are fixed), If I wanted to use the Vitavox, I would reduce Vb.
This is the whole point of changing the driver's,  absorbs the result, but very explicitly do not try to interpret the results. It is obviously that each driver would require own volume of compression chamber before mouth. Since my current horn was built by an armature who just caught design I didn't know what he's doing I presume that the volume of compression chamber currently is absolutely random. However if it was built even by a smart person who very much know what he is doing then it is superbly difficult to tune the compression chamber properly to a given driver. If it was not a dipole then there are thousand parameters which might impact the size of compression chamber, like  type of corner you have, the accuracy of positioning Horn in the corner, presents of large pieces of furniture which produce contra pressure to the horn mouth and many other factors. And then we suddenly remember that this is a dipole and the only god knows how much direct versus reflected sound I am hearing. Yes it's my be measured through the time domain but in reality this knowledge would not have any practical benefits, as any minute abstraction of direct radiation sound will force to the change the volume of compression chamber. I feel in this situation a perfection is enemy of good enough. I very explicitly stated to myself that all that I do just randomly change driver and do not look anything further into it. Sometimes when I retired and Have nothing to do I would like to play this size and shape of  the bouncing plate depicted red on my schematic. The whole idea of this project was to get a random result as is. I had very little hope that it would be interesting and frankly speaking, subconsciously I was hoping that it would be not good  as I have too many speakers in my house and I do not need another playback system. The result that I got in my view Is so ridiculously interesting was accomplished by so little means I decided to keep this corner horns And nowadays my older son playing his Taylor Swift on it more that I play my music.

Posted by Romy the Cat on 10-19-2024
 Edger, I have fixed the link you reported with my kids playing. I also refuse to comment anything about the Dunnoy. It was such a monumental fiasco on my part that I still cannot interpret what it was. You do not understand what amount of physical and psychological efforts is necessary in order 1 day to listen Dannoy and then completely demolish my setup that I built for 20 years and incorporated everything that I know and believe in audio. I am not kidding it was so good and 2 people who visited me and that time To whom I expose the results that I was getting from Dannoy did not consider that I am crazy. It was one of the best sounds I heard and I still remember it, never was able to replicate it however. My living hypothesis is that the Dannoy during those 2 weeks was accidentally positioned at DPOLS and this is only explanations that I have. In this case I was not listening the Dannoy themself but the sound of the speakers in DPOLS
Regarding of dipole bass. I am still in fundamental opposition to dipole base. I wrote a lot about it and it is remaining to be my position that unavoidable acoustic shorting With dipole configuration has implication to sound. I feel that I able to pick up this undesirable me Implication  within any single dipole bass installation I ever heard. It is very catchy, very non abusive and very welcoming bass. It is kind of easy to swallow but my problem is that if I absolutely blindly can detect this bass within an installation's sound then the bass is result of playback efforts only. I would not disagree a statement that live acoustic bass is dipole by nature and I might even agree Z. listening live acoustic concert I recognize the same welcoming characteristics of the bass  that I call as dipole bass. So, an observant reader would ask if  acoustic bass has all characteristics that I hate in dipole bass during Sound reproduction then what is my problem? I do not have an answer and I still feel that something is fundamentally wrong with reproduce Dipole base. The fact that I have my new corner horns and I am pleased with dipole base result does not change my standing.

Posted by a.anagnost on 10-19-2024

Ahh Romy…, we are on same page: If I had something (who cares if it’s a horn, a BR, di-pole, bi-pole, di-abolic, or whatever) producing some decent/acceptable Sound I would not touch it (even if I was retired and had nothing to do the whole month) if that damn thing plays Taylor Swift nearly (30%) as good as it plays J.S.Bach (He is my Achilles heel: I confess that it is impossible for me to hear Bach as a background music… of course I am governed by many other flaws)>>


Posted by Edgar= on 10-19-2024
 Romy the Cat wrote:
You do not understand what amount of physical and psychological efforts is necessary in order 1 day to listen Dannoy and then completely demolish my setup that I built for 20 years and incorporated everything that I know and believe in audio.

Of course not but I have some idea. I have been following your efforts.
What's the idea calling your experience with Dannoy a fiasco!? Not at all! I think there is more to it than DPOLS. I still feel it has to do with the output-stage/driver/room feedback loop. You hadn't experienced a feedback loop that simple in a while in your own set up. As you say, years of 3/4/5 channel approach.There is much more I could say but I'm off topic. I won't push the point.

I know your position on dipole bass. I share the same position. I was poking fun.
The scenario is very different live acoustic bass and reproduced acoustic bass. With live, as the frequency of the note move up and down the instrument, the ratio of front wave to back wave change, creating sweeps of beats or undertones as I understand it. Fine for an instrument, not for playback. The musician can play the beats but the playback is stuck with the rigidity of the dominating tones. Not desirable! Very complex to tune. 



Posted by Romy the Cat on 10-20-2024

It is very interesting to see how the perception of those things changes with age. 25 years ago I was discovering all of those things, recognized patterns go to work and what does not work and was very pleased when I experience different playback installation and those time after time confirming that's my theories were accurate. Nowadays I am 56 and I do not particularly care to find confirmations or challenges to my theories. What actually make me happy, amused and to a great degree entertain is to see how people which violate my theories somehow made the things work and get positive results. 


I do not do a lot of audio traveling nowadays: messed up former wife, three small kids, lack off economical flamboyance and many other factors. Then I do experience other people installation I mostly do not pay attention what have been done but rather vote capacity exist in a given installation and how faithfully as I play back work in the respect to a chosen topology. This is completely different approach which focus not the way how it sounds but rather analyzing what topology use, knowing what the result should be and paying attention if that alleged positive and negative aspects of a given topology manifest itself through the sound that system produces. 


In context what I said above I recognizes in myself and interesting tendency. When a musician listening at base peach reproduce by the playback efforts then he or she not necessarily listen how play bad place but rather his or her awareness reconstruct a pitch in on brain and the musician not necessary listen the sound of playback but rather use a playback as a generator of different Sonic simulations. This is well research and known fact in this why many musicians do not use fancy playback installations. What I detected in me that when I listening and playback my awareness unveilingly does not listen yhe sounds the system produces but is chasing acknowledgment on giving audio topology.  Sometimes sitting in the live concert at another city listening spot in the concert Hall I in my mind transposite imperfect live sound into playback sound coming from a set of specific audio apologists.  All of it lets me super fast, literally visiting listening just a few bars to make a very accurate judgment about the efforts of a given playback. 


I am grateful then back of beginning 2000s when I did audio literally full time, I developed great listening techniques which permit me at will completely the couple myself from something's if I always called "Target listening" and to listen music as is. I remember when I developed it it was almost like yoga practicing. I was trying to teach my kids this concept but they not getting it yet...


Posted by rowuk on 10-20-2024
Conventional string instruments are a special form of Helmholz resonators not dipoles! The strings that are supported at two ends in free air are mostly "audible" as articulation. The resonating top of the instrument, the bridge and the specific enclosed volume and shape, all add to create the complex resonances that make the tone. These forces are additive.

Dipoles only work if we can limit the subtraction of out of phase elements - mostly by giving them a lot of room to breathe. The room resonances are minimized as is the LF extension and LF linearity.

In the case of your corner horn speakers, we have a resonant chamber feeding the corner and that is very much the antithesis of a dipole. There are a couple of companies in Germany that have designed Horn Resonators. Hans Deutsch had speakers commercially available according to this principle. http://www.hans-deutsch.com/aap.html Chapter 2.1 talks about this.

There are also some DIY documented efforts also of interest. http://www.hornlautsprecher.de/ You will have to use Google Translate or similar as this is only in German. They also discuss how to match the resonant volume to the room.

Posted by Romy the Cat on 10-20-2024

I think you took slightly wrong in my comments that life acoustic bass is dipole. It is absolutely not dipole. In context of listening space it is what we call an objects single point source, where geometrical dimension of radiating surface infinitely negligible to focusing distance. Maybe in a context of a large organ or 120 piece orchestra it is not a single point source but each individual instruments for certainly is. However, and it is huge and very important however from my point of view. The quality of the base that life acoustic instrument produces is rather similar to what in audio produced by the dipole bass.


Well to be perfectly honest dipole in my view not in the top of the packing order but rather infinite buffle. However infinite buckle is virtually not known in audio and successful implementation of infinite buffle is rather accidentally successes then I predictable result. Is very large room, very large open bottle, we are talking 20-40 is an option but in the bottom knee it's act as dipole. When we talking about dipoles it is important differentiate a dipole as a topology and dipole as specific implementation. I have seen some obscene dipole 20 Hertz electrostatic panels driven by 5,000 volt directly couple transmitter tubes. Is that implementation and the sounds very ridiculous but it has on topological dipole non-abusiness that's very much present during life acoustic listening. 


Saying all of this I would like to clearly highlight that I'm advocating the subject this in opposition of my personal preference. I am advocating that dipole bass in order has significantly more similarity to acoustic basd from from live performance. However, I still insist that properly implemented non dipole bass it's more to listening benefits. In my view dipole bass it's kind of easy come easy go type of bass.  I fully admit that non-dipole base has more audio impressiveness which has nothing to do with music itself. However as an audio practitioner, to me that bass actaves are just another expressive tool and I know how to use it. It is virtual impossible to look, or to manage, or to analyze dipole bass for one or half octave. I have very little understanding of recognizing measurable and auditable in dipole bass as sometime different things means different things.  It is like some people who used conical horns for their installations. Sometimes they work fine and sometimes they do not, I do not think anybody was able to figure out why yet. With non-dipole base I feel that I have control and I feel I have an established pattern between navigating sound to a direction and getting a specific auditable result. So, in my view, non-dipole bass is a badly playing musician but at least if I am a conductor he take right notes in the right time. With the dipole basd it would be a spectacular musician who can play different score from the rest musicians of my orchestra. 


If somebody feels as they harvest the secrets of dipole bass and are willing to demonstrate please invite me I would be the first I would like to learn the accomplished result.


Posted by Romy the Cat on 10-21-2024

I spent today couple hours to listening my new corner horns. I think I need to give a name to it as I do not know how to refer to it. I will work on it later on.  I need to tell you that since I brought my corner horns I did not listen my main  play back. Not because it is worse or anything like this but it is damn interesting to listen to the corner horn  and try to figure out what in me so much accepts it. This thing is driven by Denon udm30, 50 bucks worth objectively piece of shit. One of my S2 drivers is semi magnetize and because of this driven 4db harder. The S2 drivers have not correct diaphragms and diaphragms are not aligned. I use original vital box rectangular horns that I kind of do not like and I have a pair of beautiful wooden 1808 multi-cells that out of just sitting on the floor, next to corner horns I have no idea what response of my corner form installation. Subjectively it has a big wide range bump between 80 HZ and 250 HZ.  That upper bass, that unfiltered 15-in Altec driver has very distinct excessiveness and sometimes very obviously mask out music with lower midrange noise. If I go to somewhere else and heard the sound I will give very specific instructions how to make it better. 


Still, I am listening it and I have zero motivations to change anything. My interest now is not how to make my current sound better but why this seemingly not perfect sound appeals to me too much. I do not put any reverberation channels in place, power regenerations and the whole system is wired with cheapest cables from home Depot. It is not the most accurate system in musical terms. My main playback provokes significantly more intellectual, emotional and aesthetical impact. There are certain rounding off that impact from corner hordes. Still, for whatever reason it is very  pleasurable to hear it. It is not the pleasure that derived from curiosity of how the corner horn system will render this or that complex part. It feels like my corner horn installation kind of don't give a shit how it's present music and forever reasons the way it does do challenge me as an audio person but completely relax me as music listener.


What is very funny is that there is some music which is absolutely impossible to play on my corner horns. For instance today I was trying to play WTC number 2 by Stanislav Richter and the music was hardly even recognizable. It was absolutely remarkable. The very same effect I observed with large Dinlavis, some things they do okay but some music playing by them just not make any mental or aesthetical relation with my brain. I have no idea what it is. However, when music is right, and particularly during complex crescenders my corner horns act like an escadrón of well trained cavalry charges an open field. And it is not just audio expressionism, I have no idea what it is but it's absolutely not expected by me.


Page 1 of 1 (19 items)