AVS Forum Addicted Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Mentioned: 479 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2501 Post(s)
i was the one who made the comment about "impedance all over the map", not noah. i also said that i am new to this impedance matching idea. no ill will intended. i'm familiar with acoustic impedance matching in the way a trumpet works, but i don't know if the principal is the same for mr. d.'s latest creation.
has danley sound labs received a patent on the tapped horn design, is it still pending, or was it rejected? just curious. the patent office is so frustrating to deal with. for those who don't know, they have about a 2 year delay in granting patents. that's really poor customer service, especially for industries where 2 years is an eternity.
i'm still curious how the ground plane measurements translate to in-room measurements for this type of tapped horn design. it would seem that a 'regular' ported sub would benefit more from ground plane to corner placement than a tapped horn because of the directivity of the horn sub.
my last question is about placement. the idea of behind screen and used as a riser are being discussed. is one better than another? traditional subs benefit from corner placement with higher spl, but possibly more peaky modes, is the same true with this tapped horn design.
my apologies for all the questions, but since the tapped horn is so different, i have to at least question all the old assumptions and heuristics that we have come to rely on with respect to design/placement, etc.
thanks in advance for answering any of my questions.