Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Angelo,

I care less about the “commercially available” objectives, honestly it is too boring.

However, whatever you do not be distracted that what you are making will be reminding Avantgardes. The Avantgarde Trio Classic (in vertical configuration) approach was very good and I learned a lot from it. There was nothing wrong in what Avantgarde did and if you go for any 4ways horn installation with horns then the Avantgarde Trio scenario is only one reasonable way to go: my older Macondo, Edgar’s Titans implement the very same scenario as Avantgarde Trio. The geometry of the horns set the rules and there is no other way to set the horns. Of course the implementation of the Avantgarde Trio was very poor: cheap and colorless driver with ceramic magnets, stupid front chambers on loading, absent of back chamber, dumping of the MF diaphragms with ferrofluid, wrong positioning and time misalignment of a tweeter… and many other things that they do wrong. However it means nothing and in the very same configuration it possible to get very good results if to do everything properly and do not cheat.

I do not believe in commercial fortune of properly made 4-ways horns and good luck if you do. Also the Avantgarde Trio were phenomenal success for a few years (amount of the sold) but it had nothing to do actual sound of those horns in the room but was purely the efforts of the Avantgarde’s US distributor + some favorable industry conditions.

Also, one more tip if you willing to think in this direction. The CGN 18 looks like OK driver (although the Fs too high for this motor) but I personally feel that line array are way better solution for LF section (not to mention the sampler foot print). What you make horn, particularly the 3 horn in virtual line sores configuration, and will experiment with integration of the horns with LF section then you might observe that LF line array “work different” then many other solutions.

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site