Loudspeakers have we really made that much progress since the 1930s?


Since I have a slight grasp on the history or loudspeaker design. And what is possible with modern. I do wonder if we have really made that much progress. I have access to some of the most modern transducers and design equipment. I also have  large collection of vintage.  I tend to spend the most time listening to my 1930 Shearer horns. For they do most things a good bit better than even the most advanced loudspeakers available. And I am not the only one to think so I have had a good num of designers retailers etc give them a listen. Sure weak points of the past are audible. These designs were meant to cover frequency ranges at the time. So adding a tweeter moves them up to modern performance. To me the tweeter has shown the most advancement in transducers but not so much the rest. Sure things are smaller but they really do not sound close to the Shearer.  http://www.audioheritage.org/html/profiles/lmco/shearer.htm
johnk

Showing 8 responses by shadorne

@greg22lz    

Multiple driver designs are actually old school designs that have been tried and were not successful. Even Macintosh built a speaker just like Eric's. Bose tried this too.
@salectric


No wish from me to rain on anyone’s parade. Horns can and do sound fantastic - it is all about the quality of drivers and the design - 2nd harmonic changes the timbre (more euphonic) but it is not bad sounding like odd harmonics. Magico’s most expensive design is a horn. It is just that this thread says claims "not much progress" since 1930’s. So I was just trying to show how there has been progress.


@johnk


I agree that nothing is perfect but in the context of this thread - horns have long been surpassed by the modern era of conventional drivers (starting in the 70’s) which have performance up to -70dB of THD - a massive 30dB less distortion than horns.

30dB less distortion - now that is incredible progress!
@johnk

What about non linear affects from compression in the throat of the horn? This usually results in high 2nd harmonic distortion. Since it is caused by air compression, my understanding is that it is an inherent design limitation of horn transducers.

Here are some measurements of various high end horns. They ALL without exception suffer from high 2nd harmonic distortion.

http://www.pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/14_Books_Tech_Papers/LeCleach_Jean-Michel/Horn_Shootout_ETF...

I am surprised nobody is aware of this. It is not a secret.
I thought we got past the limitations of horns about 35 years ago  - once transistor amplifiers became of good quality and allowed more power to be widely available.

Horns are simply not the best in terms of accuracy but they do deliver exceptional SPL for little power - great for live music sound reinforcement.
Agreed. Transducer design has not changed for decades. Mostly tweaks. Some older designs are extremely good even against the best available today. 

From my perspective, the biggest step change was when transistor based power amplifiers allowed greater flexibility in speaker transducer design and realistic LF bass frequencies. Greater power in power amplifiers has allowed wider directivity and less efficient transducers to be employed and active designs allow for better integration. 

So the 70's was when a step change occurred. Arena rock and the golden era of the recording studio helped drive the technology.
Modern tweeters are excellent but almost all share an Achilles heal - ferrofluid! The stuff dries up over several years or sooner if you drive the speakers hard. It is insidious in that the change often occurs slowly so you get used to the sound as it changes. With the loss of ferrofluid damping, tweeters designed to function best with ferrofluid will sound harsh and dull or honky.
You have answered your own question. I think you are indeed biased. Speaker Designs since the mid 70's and early 80's have been significantly better than earlier eras. I agree that things have not much improved since then (diminishing returns maybe?)