Horn based loudspeakers why the controversy?

I have nothing against horns these days and in fact like many good ones I hear (especially run off tube amps which is another story) but my first exposure to a horn speaker was working at Radio Shack for several years.  Remember the big Mach Ones  in the front of most stores?   They did not sound good at all with most of the SS receivers of the day.    I preferred most any Radio Shack speaker over those.  Radio Shack use to be everywhere and I'd bet many heard those and got a sour taste.   

I have no problem everyone likes something different i have never seen hate for horns from a seasoned Audiophile.Enjoy!!

I had a friend buy a new pair of the old Machs he still is using. But now is running off a cheap tube amp and I helped with network and woofer surrounds and they sound pretty darn good. But do agree that many might have heard cheap horns and just lump that all in and form a opinion. I also feel that many audiophiles have been sold on small profitable speaker systems and since most all have these that means that is the best way that they have somehow achieved a consensus.            Also that a misunderstanding exists that many assume horns do not image because some horns radiation patterns are designed for even response off and on axis while audiophile systems mostly aim at even response on axis thus the solo audiophile sitting centered. Horns can be optimized for both uses and have been for decades much music audiophiles cherish was mastered on Altec RCA TAD etc. 

I like horns. There are some individuals that don’t care for the sound of horns.

Altec had a few versions of a7 one for PA one for theater the theater model is a good bit better sounding and the one most Altec a7 user have today. Consider that a PA sound is highly variable many different things contribute greatly to its overall sound so maybe the band the amps the room the mic singer or the one who set it all up was what you recall as terrible sounding and not the A7

I had a pair of home version Altec A-7's (846B Valencia) back in the early 70's. They were dynamic, had gobs of mid-bass. Problem was, their response curves were very ragged, and the high frequencies fell off quite rapidly above 12k. They also had a very upfront forward soundstage. I moved on to higher quality audiophile speakers after that. Yes, I know, I could have used better amps with them as I used all SS back then, but the overall colorations of those speakers were too hard to endure for the long run. I do agree the latest horn based systems have probably come a long ways vs. those old designs. I just haven't taken the time to listen to them. Much of what I said above could be said for the old JBL and Klipsch designs too......

https://www.stereophile.com/content/listening-125   2013 stereophile article about Altec Valencia

It rings in my ears for next few hours after listening horns. The biggest and the quickest listening fatigue. As outdoor speakers horns are OK.

Obviously horn loaded speakers are used commonly in larger public venues.    Many of those sound really bad as well compared to a good home system, but in many cases it is due to poor or echo-prone acoustics commonly found in those places.  Still tends to give horns a bad rap.

My gym is a good example.    High efficiency horn loaded pro speakers are used in the various exercise rooms that are all basically big echo boxes.   Pretty hopeless to want better sound quality there.  

Horns sound more like real musicians than conventional speakers, to me at least.

 You cannot get the same dynamic range with inefficient speakers. You can apply as much power as you want but you will not get as great a range between the quiet and the loud as you will with a more efficient speaker. 
That is why typically efficient speakers will sound more realistic at lower volumes.

I'm a fan of horns, though I currently don't run a pair.

I have some close friends who REALLY dislike horns, and instead of trying to convince or talk over them, I prefer to listen and understand their complaints.  Beyond the typical complaints about shout, some centers on the integration or lack thereof of such disparate drivers.  Even as a fan, I acknowledge and understand, though I've listened to more than a few "regular" designs that do as badly or worse.

One more thing...horns come in both front-loaded and back-loaded configurations.  Almost always in these discussions, we mean the former when we use the terms generically, but some excellent back-loaded horn products have come down the pike

 Everybody has horror stories about hearing horn's. I remember the first time I went to addition a pair of model nineteens. The owner had them hooked up to a solid-state Mac and proceeded to turn them up so they were playing at about 120 DB steady. He looked at me with a big smile  and said see how clear they are? He didn't even have them set up properly, had  them facing one another across the room. I couldn't get out of there fast enough. Thankfully down the line I had some reasonable experiences  and grew to appreciate horns greatly. 

 Regarding Altec A7's I had a pair for a while and after quite a few mods they can sound quite good.  

Well, being an owner of new Klipsch Forte III's, I thought I'd chime in. Had Magnepan .7's for awhile and really liked them. In my listening area I knew I was only getting about 75% of what they could deliver because of space considerations. Took the plunge on the Forte's (my 3rd pair of Klipsch over the years). I can say I am very pleased and frankly, pleasantly surprised. They are the most refined yet dynamic sounding Klipsch I have owned. They aren't for everyone but with my taste in music being primarily electric blues and classic rock (Yes spinning now) they fit the bill. One man's trash, another's treasure. Using a Rogue Sphinx with upgraded tubes with splendid results...

My first my first encounter with horns were Klipsch La Scalas driven by early transistor amplifiers. Not pleasant—but great party speakers. Ditto classic Klipschorns. Never heard these with any kind of tube amp, let alone an SET. Fast forward 30 some years and I heard a pair of Avant-garde Duos driven by an all-BAT tube system. Astounding! The bass (which is delivered by a conventional powered woofer), was not dialed in at all, but that was not the speaker’s fault. Victor Khomenko, BAT’s designer just hadn’t gotten around to that. He was running a prototype of a new phonostage and he wasn’t listening for the bass. Victor is big on what he calls “dynamic tracking” and horns do that very well. At very low levels, many speakers just don’t respond at all. They operate like a noise gate in a recording studio; everything below a certain threshold is just swallowed up, rather than being reproduced. Horns avoid that problem, although they have others including, sometimes, significant coloration and a lack of low bass (unless they are really large, like a K-Horn).

Kosst- Altec -a7 a5, Klipsch- Lascala Belle Khorn all run well off class A SS all are under 5k pair- fully horn loaded systems get large and thus costly. Also since you only know me from a few posts in this forum you are not aware that I design loudspeakers and many that I have sold are non horn loaded designs. You also seem to form wrong conclusions based on having limited experience with horn based loudspeaker systems so I can understand why you find loudspeaker discussions complicated and frustrating. And I do feel I have the right to suggest horn loaded options in any forum at anytime I dont see why that is such a issue for you?  And why do you insist others agree with you?  Sorry but I haven't read much of what you post and what I have I haven't seen anything to agree with. 

Horns were virtually ignored by the "high-end" journals like TAS and the Stereophile back in the day. The transition to solid state probably didn’t help either, given that a lot of early sound state gear could be rough on the ears. Size mattered too- I had an older friend while I was finishing college who ran a pair of old K-horns with then already vintage Marantz tube gear and it sounded pretty good. (At the time I was using the original Quad ESL and Audio Research tube amp and preamp).
The notion of vintage horns like WE, RCA, JBL, etc. seemed pretty removed from the collective wisdom being preached in the era when I started fooling around with "serious" gear--the very early ’70s. I think it wasn’t promoted, manufactured or sold much in the States for consumer audio, and certainly wasn’t given the imprimatur of the authorities of the day (back when reading Harry Pearson and J.G. Holt was meaningful-i think people are far more skeptical of reviews and reviewers today, which is a different subject).
I know there were hardcore horn enthusiasts in the Far East. And perhaps a few on the fringes here in the States.
What products revived the horn? Avantgarde was certainly one; there are probably some others, of recent manufacture within the last ten years, along with greater awareness of vintage equipment, like idler turntables and SET amps. (My Avantgardes didn’t really sing until I got a pair of Lamm ML2s).
A hybrid horn system is still a challenge--matching woofer characteristics to the mid and high frequency horns. A full horn system including bass horns is not only large but unless you are DIY, costly. (Even DIY is costly if you are using vintage or more modern high end compression drivers).
I know some people that visited me over the years were surprised that there was no "shouty" ear bleeding aspect to the system--part of it was set up, and a lot had to do with associated components. I’m not sure how effectively horns have been demonstrated at hi-fi shows after their modern resurgence (I don’t go to audio shows much any more).
I also don’t listen at crazy high dbs. In fact, I can get a lot of information at low volume levels, but the bass (I supplement with 15 inch servo woofers, not ideal, but cost-effective) doesn’t really come alive until the system is played at "normal" listening levels. I think the dynamic capabilities aren’t just about "peak loudness" but the so-called ’jump factor’- the ability of the system to make those dynamic swings effortlessly. As a decades long Quad listener (still have ’em, just got ’em restored), I’ve always been about the midrange first- open, non-grainy, not "reproduced" sounding. Horns give me that. The Quads are easier to set up but have even greater limitations. I love both.
I’ve heard very convincing conventional coned speakers- such as the Rockports, driven by very substantial amplification and a good analog front end. Such systems do some things better (at least in the bass region, unless you have horn woofers).
It’s all trade-offs somewhere. Pick your preference. I’ve been extremely happy with my horn system for the past 11 years, and know that I could do better if I threw more money at it.
For the last few years, my priority has been obtaining records. The system is sufficiently "good" that I’d rather have more, different, and interesting music to listen to than constantly upgrade gear.

Not constantly, just to Austin Acoustic system.

Took the plunge and had a set of Cornscala "D's" built.
These speakers do everything I want from a speaker.
For the price they are fantastic, ugly as sin yes, but appearance is of no concern to me.  They out perform my mates Tannoy Kingdoms Royal's hands down at a fraction of the price.
They are not horn sounding at all, in fact people cant believe they are horns.
Horns done right just sound so real and lifelike to me, like music should.

Interesting personal observation I have tried various SET amps on these speakers, they are super sensitive and easy to drive, and every one of the SET amps just did not rock my boat.  They realy sing and come alive on my Opera Consonance Cyber 800 6CA7 mono blocks  @ 78 W. Go figure.

That being said:
I have listened to other horn speakers Avantgarde  Uno, Duo and the Zero 1.
Driven by different electronics in different venues and I am afraid to say they tore my ears off.
Also had a pair of Martion Bulfrogs for a week on demo, same story, just to much wrong with them.
Had the opportunity of hearing Unison research Max 2's they sound very good, they use the same horn as the Cornscala "D" very similar, but they are slower than the Cornscalas and lack bass in comparison, and cost one hell of a lot more.

Have been fortunate enough to hear Kinoshita RM-7V Monitors (horns) in a recording studio, these gave me the audio experience of a life time, closest to the real thing I have yet heard.

Have been a dedicated Vandersteen fan for a long time and have had many other makes of speakers and they have all left me wanting.  
Bought a set of Klipsch KG4's and they plus a friends DIY horn build got me interested in horns. They gave my Vandy 2 Signatures a good run for the money only thing they lacked in comparison was the clarity of the Vandies. All that at the cost of a night out.
Horns done right just do it for me, done wrong they are awful I have to admit.
And there seem to be many done wrong out there.

Kosst  it's all a matter of mathematics. Thanks it in these terms. You have a speaker that is 100 db efficient.  The source music goes from 10 DB to 30DB.  You multiply the two numbers together to get your final levels.  You are going from 1000 to 3000. Now take the efficiency of the speaker and substitute in a figure of 80db efficiency.  The source music still goes from 10 to 30. Do your multiplication and you get 80 to 240.  In the second scenario spread is much smaller than the first scenario.  That represents the dynamic range.Obviously this is a huge oversimplification  as the decible scale is logarithmic, but I think it serves to illustrate what I'm talking about. Increasing the power of the amplifier which can bring you to the same peak  levels will not give you nearly the same range. People continue to confuse dynamic range with ability to play loud and they are two different things. 
 So if you call continuing to try to correct misinformation not taking no for an answer, I am guilty as charged. 
Kosst  about 5 to 10 years ago I used to think just like you. I thought all vintage stuff must have been massively superseded by today's offerings.  I believed the magazines with all their reviews and advertising drivel.   Then I met a few friends who were older than me and had been into Audio since they were in their teens. They'd collectively pretty much owned everything at some point or another,  The one guy had made a lot of money flipping gear just prior to the Internet and in the beginning years of the Internet.   At one of their houses I heard Vitavox horns with SET amplification.  That's basically gear who's technology predates  the stereo era.  Granted it was set up with a top-of-the-line clear Audio table and Goldfinger cartridge.  Upon hearing that I realized that the best today's mega dollar offerings can hope for is to approach equalling it. In fact all of today's mega dollar offerings I've ever heard did not even come close, but I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt because I haven't heard all of it.  
The other funny thing is that with all of their collective experience, none of these gentleman ever, ever, ever participate in forums anymore.   In fact the one gentleman was a leading expert in the electronics and telecommunications fields for 30 years.   He holds numerous patents in his name. He has scratch built his whole system and it too is better than any modern commercial offerings I've ever heard. When I asked why, they explained that because when they try to correct the miss information they basically get shouted down and treated like idiots. I totally see what they mean. 

@whart 

Have you used your Quads with the ML2?

I'm really enjoying the Klipsch Cornwall III.  Rated at 102db efficiency.  I've added a Fostex horn super tweeter to extend the upper frequencies.  The super tweeter sits on a Symposium Svelt shelf which also addresses some midrange resonant frequencies on the cabinet.  The speakers sit on top of a pair of Rollerblock 2+ double-stacked which brings everything into focus and cleans up the low end.

http://assets.klipsch.com/product-specsheets/Cornwall-III-Spec-Sheet-v03.pdf

A real sleeper in today's market.

One thing I do not particularly like (not that I hate it, but I find it swaying me not to buy) about most modern horn speakers is that the horns are so often made of some kind of plastic but that there is generally no attempt by the manufacturer whatsoever to damp them on the rear side. If you were to walk up to such a horn (the larger the horn the worse the effect) and flick it firmly with your fingernail then you’d instantly get a very good idea of what the horns are actually doing to the sound. I suspect most people are under the impression that the vowel characteristics that are often associated with horns are somehow coming from the shape of the curve or their dimensions, but I don’t think it’s so. I find it most often due to simply being that the horns typically go undamped in most designs.

The real rub for me here is that the reasoning that this effect can and should be dealt with in other aspects of design (crossover design, EQ, placement, or whatever) Completely misses the point. Properly, the vowel sound should be dialed out of the equation as much as possible from the start. You damp it out physically - no more vowel sound, no more problem, right? We don’t as a rule tolerate vowel sounds in box designs, in fact makers regularly go to great lengths to tout that they’ve removed them with careful attention to the cabinets, don’t they? So why are so many makers of horn speakers so seemingly silent on the subject of audible horn resonances - especially as it relates to horn material?

Just my 2 cents though.

But....I suppose makers of box designs may *claim* that they’ve gotten rid of their cabinet resonances by their sheer prowess in wood construction and so forth....only in fact to rely on a lot of help from their crossover design in the final result. So I guess why can’t a horn speaker manufacturer basically do the same really...I dunno.

I think all that is one reason why I eventually moved out of the speaker market and into DIY - once I went open baffle, I found it all much easier for me to get what I really want...and for far less.

@ivan_nosnibor

... We don’t as a rule tolerate vowel sounds in box designs, in fact makers regularly go to great lengths to tout that they’ve removed them with careful attention to the cabinets, don’t they? So why are so many makers of horn speakers so seemingly silent on the subject of audible horn resonances - especially as it relates to horn material?

This has confounded me as well, and yet, perhaps the obvious answer involves failing to direct proper attention towards and financially invest sufficiently into making great horns (one hopes there’s actual knowledge there to be aware of these implications, but the care needed for this to translate into the product itself appears to be in minor demand). As an example JBL has long touted their "Sonoglass" horn material, but going by my similar-ish impressions of several of their models featuring Sonoglass horns it seems the general sonic imprinting generated here (that of a grey-ish and rather "splashy" character, as some rightly puts it) could stem from the horn material used. Sonoglass is by all accounts cheaper, lighter, and easier to manufacture than a, say, machined (and thick-walled) hardwood horn, all factors that weigh in heavily in cost considerations; let’s not fool ourselves into thinking JBL has, in essence, other incentives to use this material, and that anything from hereon is simply "damage control." As a general rule I believe horns are much more sensitive, so to speak, with regard to their implementation, manufacture and need of care to work really well compared to direct radiating speakers, but these are demands that doesn’t sit well in today’s manufacturing market, for obvious reasons (sad they are). As such I suspect really well-sounding horns (all-horns in particular) may be a relative boutique business, certainly compared to the mass market of speakers in general, but I’ll be among the first to acknowledge their outspoken qualities when done right.

@kosst_amojan

The sensation I've always gotten, even from the best horns I've ever heard, is the same sensation I get standing right in front of a trumpet or sax horn. My dad and brother played trumpet. I played sax and electric bass.

In my world that could as well be a compliment to horn speakers, and your experience in playing the saxophone only makes you the better judge for drawing this comparison. I'm quite sure what you're intentionally referring to here is an aspect that to your ears follows horn speakers regardless of the music being played back - i.e.: one that mimics the "shouty" and present sound of a real sax or trumpet - but my takeaway from this (and which I believe you may be at least subconsciously influenced by as well) is the significance of spontaneously comparing speakers to live instruments, and all that could entail. Think about it, and to reiterate; you're comparing live instruments to speakers, horns not least, and this also calls out shared traits such as tonality/timbre, dynamics, uninhibited presence (a sense of ease, you may say), etc. While your intentional takeaway is for this to be negatively fused and support your stance, I'm conversely seeing you being dismayed by a sound that emulates a live acoustic ditto, for the reason mainly being that any comparison made here will be grounded in more than what you're consciously aware of. Speculative and total B.S.? Quite possibly, but it's a potential "the plot thickens" example of how many audiophiles may be less interested in or even repels live acoustic sound (as reproduced by a stereo) than creating their own (and by a whole community supported) hifi-sound. 

Kosst you said{ It's no mystery to me at all why you NEVER see horn loaded bass guitar rigs}  http://philjonesbass.com/product/16-h-bass-horn-speaker/

' Shouting contest thickens ', no doubt. He is not against live music or its approximation, he is against bad 'live music' shouting at him.
Phusis, I suggest you leave the man alone, let him 'play sax' any way he wants to and just listen without commenting. I would also say that you yourself do not tolerate the same things.

Anyway, who would want these ’big vaginas’ that are almost , if ever, impossible to make sound coherent, more or less uncolored and not spitting out sounds in your face ? Sax and trumpet played live in front of you sound really terrible. Even Miles’s trumpet, I suppose.

@phusis 

Thanks for your comments and I definitely agree: the interest in horn material damping somehow appears MIA, yet too many manufacturers seem to be acting almost as if they are better off letting such sleeping dogs lie, rather than stepping in to educate the consumer on a sales point for which they see no real demand.

"As a general rule I believe horns are much more sensitive, so to speak, with regard to their implementation, manufacture and need of care to work really well compared to direct radiating speakers, but these are demands that doesn’t sit well in today’s manufacturing market, for obvious reasons (sad they are)."

Yes, and I could almost say that it seems like one of those sort of 'pet-peeve' speaker-building traditions of mine in general - that most speaker builders tend to be (relatively) clueless about fully and seriously investigating doing whatever it may happen to take to solve a given "audio" problem (i.e., evaluating how well the problem was fixed based on nothing more than how it actually Sounds) - most particularly the traditionally neglected kind - even if that best sounding solution happens to turn out to be rather more expensive than was anticipated.

In the end, most manufacturers seem much more comfortable building essentially by some sort of *common-sense* based, unconscious formula (the crossovers, or resonance control of a panel, or a horn or cabinets or whatever) should each cost no more than X. Maybe vaguely like when we as newer audiophiles tend to map out our systems planning with a budget first ("I'll spend X amount on speakers, Y on the source, etc), rather than asking the more seasoned question: "How much will it take for me to get the kind of sound I want?" Or for the manufacturers: "How much will it cost to solve the more basic, traditional and neglected audio problems and then work them all into a single, solid design?" 

@inna 

' Shouting contest thickens ', no doubt. He is not against live music or its approximation, he is against bad 'live music' shouting at him.
Phusis, I suggest you leave the man alone, let him 'play sax' any way he wants to and just listen without commenting. I would also say that you yourself do not tolerate the same things.

I was actually being much in earnest with my comment to poster kosst_amojan, but perhaps that's the issue. Apology extended to kosst for crossing the line.  

Anyway, who would want these ’big vaginas’ that are almost , if ever, impossible to make sound coherent, more or less uncolored and not spitting out sounds in your face ? Sax and trumpet played live in front of you sound really terrible. Even Miles’s trumpet, I suppose.

That's where I can't relate to your findings, and am tempted to refer to my earlier post to kosst on at least some of my reasons why.  But, we've been there already, I guess, and will simply have to agree to disagree. 

{ the interest in horn material damping somehow appears MIA}  Maybe a few costly german horns are not addressing it but most all others do. GOTO goes all out in doing so and many other horns do not need much due to material choices. You also see a good num going with massive wood bells to reduce coloration.  Those not addressing are doing so for mostly cosmetic reasons or they feel that it somehow kills the magic.

@james1969 - no, i have not used the ML2s on the Quads (yet). I had my old Quad II amps restored, and installed NOS GEC KT 66s, NIB GEC EF86 and a NOS Mullard rectifier. They are fab sounding- better than when I first started using them in 1973.
I did use super tweets (Deccas; Sequerra Ribbons) and a woofer back in the day; the tweeters were fine, getting the bass seamless was very difficult, perhaps owing to what was available commercially in the late ’70s and early ’80s. I then switched to the Crosby Quad for a long while and shelved the original ESLs until recently restored.
The woofer matching with the horns is very similar to the experience I had with the Quads. Right now, I’m using the Quads without any additional speaker(s).
With the Avantgarde, I found that if you cranked up the woofer gain to make it punch, it sounded obviously discontinuous with the mid-horn; back the woofer off to blend with the mid-horn made the bass reticent; thus, I supplement with those add-on 15" servo subwoofers. I matched the sound of subs to blend into the Avantgarde woofers as seamlessly as possible through adjustments to crossovers, gain and on the subs, phase. I also added a small DSP unit to the subs. You really don’t notice them, except they give a deeper, bigger stage and when there is real deep bass on a record, it is now presented with more authority.
I’d love to do a semi-vintage horn system; just a question of dollars at this point. I’m a retired pensioner living on my investments. :)
Are you using your Lamms with the Klipsch you linked to?

@whart 

Yes, the Cornwall IIIs are driven by the ML2s.  I just love the low end bass.  This is my first near-full-range speaker.  I've had monitors in the past.

@james1969 - I sent you a PM via Audiogon so we don't have to burden this thread with our Quad discussion. 
regards,
bill

The real irony to me is that the same people who vehemently argue for the dynamics of horns are the same who think vinyl is king. You don't get more dynamically compressed than vinyl.

@kosst_amojan

I really feel like I need to set the record straight here. Regarding vinyl (and I realize this is off-topic so I won't linger), I run an LP mastering operation and we do CDs too. As far as dynamic range goes, these days typically the LP is less compressed than the CD. This is because there is no expectation it will be played in a car, while there is every expectation that a CD might so they get some compression. But this simple fact is you can take any digital recording and master it to LP without any processing, so long as you don't run into an out-of-phase bass problem (which can usually be solved without processing if you spend enough engineering time with the project). Due to the generalized nature of your comment, I'm saying that its false. LP has dynamic range (ideally) that is nearly that of Redbook.

Now regarding 'dynamics of horns' there is an entirely different issue at play. First, much of the 'dynamics' that audiophile discuss is really distortion due to higher ordered harmonics; I find that usually you can substitute the word 'distortion' for 'dynamics' without changing the meaning of the conversation.

But distortion usually relates to amps, and many horn lovers use SETs, which make quite a lot of distortion. They have good 'dynamics' even when not used on horns :)

As far as the horns go, the distortion they make is related to the diaphragm and the curve of the horn itself. Modern materials are available to prevent the diaphragm from having any breakups in the audio passband; these materials were not available until the early 2000s. So if your impression of horn dates to prior that time, it may simply be out of date. The curve of the horn can be optimized by the use of CAD; again if you were listening to older designs you may not realize the progress that's been made!

Horns are still important because tubes are still very much around decades on after being declared obsolete. You really don't have to know anything technical about their benefits; understanding the economics is enough- tubes do something people like. But the thing is, tube power is expensive and so horns can be quite practical and as fast and transparent as the best ESLs if field coil powered. 

 Yes many of the horns are not damped well enough including a lot of the vintage stuff. The pair of vitavox that I keep going on about were mounted in a wooden box with Sand poured around them. He said that made a big difference and took away some of the edge. I noticed  that as well with the pair of the voice of the theatres that I had. I poured lead shot over top of the horns and damped the bottom with a sticky butimen pad. Big difference!  Another point to consider is that with a pair of Vitavox or klipschhorns they need to be pushed right back in the corner of the room. So they actually end up being less obtrusive then your run-of-the-mill Monkey coffin that needs to be pulled out 5 feet from each wall. 

atmasphere

I run an LP mastering operation and we do CDs too. As far as dynamic range goes, these days typically the LP is less compressed than the CD. This is because there is no expectation it will be played in a car ...  this simple fact is you can take any digital recording and master it to LP without any processing, so long as you don't run into an out-of-phase bass problem (which can usually be solved without processing if you spend enough engineering time with the project). Due to the generalized nature of your comment, I'm saying that its false. LP has dynamic range (ideally) that is nearly that of Redbook.

I agree ... mostly. CD does have a better potential dynamic range but with actual music, it's very rarely utilized. And the way recordings are mastered, a modern LP almost always beats the comparable CD - because of how the two are mastered. It's really ironic.

 Just regarding the OP's a post I think Horns are really polarizing because they are like a microscope on the entire chain that lies before them. So if there's anything bad in the chain it really really highlights it. But if everything is good and the horns are good it's really good. 

 Also just regarding atmospheres comments about SET amps and distortion. It's true that they have higher distortion when they are run at anywhere near the rated power but they also have vanishing low distortion if they are run at about 10% of full power. So when you hear them coupled with  horns usually you're not hearing the amps distort.   Solid-state is the opposite at about 10% of its full power it will have quite a bit higher distortion  then the SET amp at 10%. And many people have bass their opinion on horns from the 70s and 80s with crappy higher powered solid-state amps. I don't know why anybody would use that combo but unfortunately lots of people did.

The best system I’ve heard Austin Acoustic system they are using Horns....made by Austin Acoustic as well... Dynamic is out of this world? $750k, they were in Chicago Axpona 2017

For the record the quality of the compression driver makes all
The difference in the world . Here us a great example 
Pure Audio Project  open baffle  Horn  model. All these speakers are modular  ,they share 4- 15 inch Emenence drivers, 
There us the Horn , Voxativ full range for mids- highs,Tang Band,
Beyma150,AMT - Heil ,AMT-, you have full control ,as well as the Xover. A interesting take at something different,and you
Put it together.