DIY Synergy horn - Page 8

Very nice results!!! Were you expecting pattern control that low?

JSS

Pattern control is pretty much dictated by the size of the horn.

The larger the horn-the lower the pattern contol.

Also for a given horn size-the wider the horn the lower the pattern control.

Nobody has been able to cheat physics in that regard.

That is why speakers that use small horns have little to no pattern control (except up high) no matter what the specs may say.

If you want to keep the sound within a certain area-you need to keep as much of it as possible within that area-meaning you need to go as low as possible/practical.

Very nice results. I think you are going to have an exceptional performer. What are the dimensions when it transitions wider and what are the final mouth dimensions?

Paul, am I correct in assuming that you have not made the changes to the port dimensions and spacers to increase the volume in front of the mid cones that you proposed? I am curious to hear what the next step is.

These are some very impressive results. I am curious how much effect the flare has on the end directivity of S1 and S2. It is difficult for me to tell with the normalized vs non normalized plots. I am still learning. Could someone who has more knowledge in this area please shine some light on this?

It seems like it could be interesting to see a test with and without the flares. Perhaps the verticals on the existing S1 and S2 would be revealing. This would be much to ask but there could be something to learn to refine the process of designing these excellent speakers.

couple months down the road i hope erich h will offer a flat pack.. would be absolutely nuts

Paul, why are you considering terminating your experiments with this setup? Do you want to try a different horn or maybe feel you are being limited by the Pyle drivers? I would love to see you fabricate the spacers and test and also play with the port dimensions and configurations some. I also would like to see how a couple of 8 or 10 inch woofers could be integrated on the horn to make it more Synergy like. I know this might be a tall order. I find this thread and your blog to be the most interesting and useful topic of all the DIY sites I frequent at this time. The fact is the weather in this hemisphere is turning cold and so my speaker building is probably done now until spring. I really enjoy watching your progress and hope you'll have more to report during our winter.

The extended flares definitely improve pattern control down low. It has been proven by others and there is at least one AES paper to explain it. So, no need to do an AB comparison. You will notice that all DSL products have this feature. Paul can probably go into the detail further but just thought I would answer this for you.

Only three?

Mark

Oh my friend I am both tough and busy on my own version.

Mine's a tad bit larger as I'm going for loading down to 80 hertz minimum. Below that I have a nasty little dual eight folded horn subwoofer I have been playing with.

Big horn, bigger performance. Much different drivers. 78 square centimeter planar and some very wide-band mid-woofers i have been working on for a few months. The first production run of them should be on North American soil sometime in the end of this year. If all goes well I'll post it in the early part of the year.

I prefer to work as much in simland as I can. When I have a good simulation based on accurate measurements I tend to get what I simulated if I build accordingly.

Building is not so hard. I have spent a little over 25 years as a cabinet maker off and on. And the bulk of my work has not been kitchens and the easy stuff.

Have to get two CBT's out of the shop and a custom two way horn loaded job. Then the Synergyish design will see the light of day. Right when it is a might bit nippy in the shop every time I want to work on something. Winter is coming here and you guys are heading into summer.

I hope you get to do some great listening. Your polars are very nice. And I'm guessing they have a very neutral character to them. TO bad you didn't do some inter-modulation measurements. They tell allot about what is going on in a multiway horn.

Mark

Loading to 80Hz is a bear. It actually sounds like you are trying for something like I was looking at last year.

If things stay stable for the next 5 months I should be able to start on my own.

What kind of raw driver cost are you looking at per speaker?

About $500/side depending on how close to the sources you are.

Mark

Thank You. That Keele paper is an interesting read. My head hurts now! But it is soaking in a bit at a time. So the S1 with wings would hold pattern control lower. I am curious what is causing the axial dip in S1? Why would we not see this in the verticals of S2 also? I am assuming that the overall expansion is the same in both of them.

A bit of play in hornsrep saw opening segment 2 improving the 800 to 1000hz quite a bit. The schematic shows a taper from s2 to s1. Enlarging s2 seems to move things in the right direction. Combined with some juggling of the throat size and chamber volume could fix the mid. Hopefully without ruining the CD. I have not seen that model.

If I am in error here please don't hesitate to say so. I am here to learn and have a lot of it to do. If I can contribute be any help at all it is a privilege.

Derek

By S2 and S1 are you talking about the Mid tap point and the "throat?"

If so, by increasing the S2 in Hornresp you are increasing the coverage area of the horn. You also have to keep the circumference of the horn at S2 in the correct range for the upper xover point needed for proper coherence. It is a juggling act.

That said... an active PEQ could fix issues here well enough for most people.

Yes I was fiddling with the mid tap point with good looking results. This moved the crossover for the mid above 1000hz with no glaring deficiancies. I am not sure how this looks to the CD.

This could be getting close to the crossover challenges TD has spoken of. Be careful Paul, don't spill the secret sauce I get the feeling a few of us are ready to lap it up.

There is no secret sauce really. You can find all your answers in the patent application.

The only thing that isn't really explicitly fleshed out is the passive XO/EQ network, but he tells you enough to run with that as well. Forget traditional strict slope patterns, and treat it more like and analogue EQ ignoring the strict filter implementations... orders, slopes what have you. Just use what works.

It isn't so much how the mid or CD sees things, as how they interact when they are both present and functioning. HR can not show this to you, and if you follow the patent app you don't have to worry about it.

I wanted to add that I am quite sure that Earl Geddes crosses to the DE 250 at 900hz in the Summa speaker. I remember reading that near the beginning of the long thread on OS waveguides at DIY audio. His testing revealed no problem with that even when his speakers were used for sound in clubs in the Orient. It should be fine here. I am just curious to find out if any delay or time compensation had to be applied in the crossover or was the phase correct without it?

OK, the pieces are starting to come together a bit with a lot of help. I have read the patents and am able to understand more all the time. I will get there.

In my room a narrower horizontal patern is desirable to eliminate first order reflections at the listening position. (14x23) Looking at the directivity sonograms the 3500hz null in the s1 seems to be a consideration. Is this normalized out in S2? This seems high for the wings to have much influence. Is it the angle or rate of expansion that influances this? That is why I was curious about the vericals of the s2 wavegude to see how the respective angle works with this null.

It just occured to me at 14 feet we are talking about almost wall to wall waveguides three up. Oh Yeah! This could be fun. I see an AT screen in my future.

Derek

Same. This thread is excellent. I'm managing to follow along with almost everything ok. Thanks.

Hah! Glad it wasn't just me :-)

Thanks Paul. That clears things up very nicely for me. Before you call the experiment with this horn done, could you possibly pair it with a high quality 15 or 18 inch driver with proper CTC spacing and time compensation and post some listening impressions? Could you maybe compare it with the E wave and Yorkville that you have measured? I think that what you have accomplished thus far deserves this and should not be discarded before this is done.

It will be difficult to match the clarity of the horn loaded system to that of a vented or sealed box. Very different type of sound timbre.

Been there done that.

See what you you end up deciding. Should prove to be very interesting.