Herman,
The complexities of music reproduction always seems to favor power. We could discuss this at length, macro/micro dynamics, resistive load power vs reactive load yady yada, but my typing is poor and I'm lazy !
So i will take the easy way out and say after 40 yrs of fighting this demon , without reservation, big un's sound more like live music than likkle un's ...
( academic about the quality )
Nothing against the 2 or 3 watt crowd , it just does not work for me ..
Mapman:
I will reserve comment for now on the class-d stuff , as I'm still in training on there particular sound , which I'm not in favor of currently, and admit i have not heard what you have recommended regarding such, so my verdict (condemnation or approval) is not yet out ....
In your home environment , i would not be surprised that a conventional speaker would have better results vs a horn speaker.
I have personally participated at 2-3 hi-fi shows and dependent on room location , traffic , floor noise a horn speaker can have an advantage during demonstration vs conventional speakers... It's projection of sound is a big advantage here, not so in quite home settings were it's high coloration, and time domain deficiencies say " hello " here I'am !
From my perspective, the coloration is just too high, size and power of instruments out of proportion irrespective of the venue or recording and a 2 much and unnatural in your face presentation.
Those are my observations and of those from my corner, it apparently works for others and since there is no absolute lock on "it " by any of the current topology of today we should just group hug and recognize it's just another cup of tea ..... No thank's ! .... |
The fact that there is a horn connected has nothing to do with the power requirement of the driver. My seismic horn subs go down to ~25Hz and use 18", 400watt pro drivers. They need a certain amount of power just to move that much air, let alone do justice to a good bass note.
I tried the SET route on my horns for a while. They can certainly play, but the SET doesn't have the damping control to make a kick drum snap your chest like it should. This is why I'm running my 110+ dB horns with 50 w/ch, PP amps.
But I don't like spam! Or SET. :-) |
Weseixas, bold but interesting assertion!
The custom horns I heard (110db efficiency) at the audio show were powered by a very expensive ($50000+) Audio Note tube amp, perhaps 20 some watts per channel or so yet quite substantial physically. the size would not indicate the power level to most.
My OHM 5 omnis at home (87 or so db efficiency) are powered by two 500w/ch Icepower Class D monoblocks. Their size do no not indicate the power delviered either, but they go for about 1/10th the cost of the AN tube amp and are highly regarded in their category by many.
Now I know power levels and sound quality are not always bed partners yet the Class D amp delivers 20 times the power for 1/10th the cost, based on known specs.
Now how do the two compare? That was the question I started working on answering last night listening at home.
My assessment so far is that my setup though totally on the opposite end of the design spectrum, can probably almost match the dynamics of the horn system at any listening volume I would care to ever experience and is quite competitive and possibly superior in most every other regard. Fatigue factor is also quite low.
Go figure!
BTW, as most know I am a big fan of teh Walsh driver approach and OHM speakers in general. The Walsh driver is a big part of the sound equation on my system. I don't think most conventional box designs can match these or the dynamic strengths of the horns. Planars have their own set of constraints that are not insurmountable but significant in the dynamics department.
I would have to hear the two systems side by side with the same source material playing in order to make a more detailed comparison of the two. In lieu of that, so far I;d assert that my setup can at least compete in the same league as the megabuck setup I heard basedon comparitive listening. Same true with other more conventional setups I heard running some big time players like Magico V3, mbl, and YB Acoustics among others.
Bottom line, I think that horns can sound like live music and at least convey certain kinds of recordings accurately, but it seems like one must practically be a millionaire rocket scientist to accomplish it. When you do though, the results can be quite rewarding. Nothing really good ever comes cheap or too easily I suppose.... |
Wes, you are correct, it will never be settled here, but why would one need more power if what one has will cleanly go to rock concert levels?
The all things being equal is the problem. If one believes that an SET is the best route then you can only get a limited amount of power. Everything is a compromise and I'm happy with the compromises I chose. |
As we are discussing audio! I must say there are no winners, no good, better best, one man's euphoria is another anathema !
That said and IMO ,
*8 Watts is not enuff from micro /Macro dynamic reproduction of a recording . I have never heard a system that never benefited from more power. ( all things equal )
using a 250 watt amp is not a demerit in my books..
*High efficiency speakers never ever sound like live music, instruments or convey recordings accurately and have a poor sense of balance.
* Horns are great when used in the environment they were/are intended for PA and sound reinforcement where high db levels and not accuracy is important.
Hence most hi-fi people will not like the sound of horns in their environment.
regards, |
for the same reason people did not want to buy a Honda car,
when they first came out.
Because they were different, they did what ALL other cars
could do, in addition, for a whole lot less gas.
Hyundai, is "Today's" Honda.
Ignorance, is All I am left to assume is the same reason here.
No disrespect intended, I only mean, not having heard,
how can someone appreciate something?
"Done Right" Horns can't be beat. Period.IMHO.
All the lame excuses, trying to prove otherwise, are
without any merit.In the situations ideal for Horn
playback
I think some people just see a Horn speaker, and their
brain says " I HATE HORNS!" ? Why? You tell me...
Oh, and yes, some can use a 3watt tube power amp. and
be happy as ever,while, some designs enjoy HUGE POWER &
HEADROOM,YOU! After all, control the volume, unless your
wife,has control.(Sorry)
Horns are NOT for ALL, But, do NOT! TRY to say that they
are not fully capable of Fantastic Audio Reproduction!
Because, that is just "IGNORANT".
And for the record: I have gotten a head-ache listening to
my fill of regular speakers, so don't act as they are
exempt. They are just as capable, of sounding like "crap".
It's like riding in a Lexus and saying, "too much road
noise! I can't take it." Now, any Lexus owner, will attest
to the fact,that they have tried to start the car, often
when it is running, because they did NOT even HEAR the
engine running! Like an "airlock" on a airliner! QUIET!
Prdprez: Amen Brother. Dan_ed: Not ALL Horns are alike.
Mapman:Again 1 Horn system,does not reflect the sound, of
ALL of the many other designs. Thanks for sharing.
Bottom Line: "Different strokes for different folks"
Enjoy Your Music, YOUR way.
I Love Music! |
I'm confident my own 20+ years of professional experience is enough to say that he has those horns as "optimized" as they will ever be. I think you missed my point. It is impossible to ascertain whether or not they are optimized especially just by listening to them occasionally. You can describe the sound, you can say they sound good or bad, you can say they are too bright or too whatever or not enough of whatever..........but you can't say they are optimized unless you have tried every possible combination of every variable. Yes, kind of ridiculous in a way but that's what it would take. I think my setup sounds pretty good but is it optimal? No, just like everybody else I got to a point and quit trying for now. I'm sure when I revisit it I can somehow improve it. The overall sensitivity pretty much matches the other three horns, which is the point anyway. (right?) No. Very different. If it takes 250W per driver to match the output of 1 or 2 watts per driver then the sensitivity is not even close. One of the beauties of what I would call a true horn is the fact that you can get a lot of sound with very little power. In fact, needing that much power is a dead giveaway that it is not a horn. Going to 20 Hz has nothing to do with it. It's how you get there. Mine only go into the 30's but they do it with a few watts. A very different beast than doing it with twelve drivers and 3,000 watts. (I got that from 3 pair = 6 with 2 drivers per. If my math is wrong then please adjust but I think you get the idea.) how did you time align, physically or electronically? . |
+10 Agree with your assessment ...
High fatigue factor , poor instrument sizing (everything stay's powerful and big) mucho coloration!
regards,
--------------------------------------------------------
06-14-10: Prdprez
an admitted naive observation from a bachelor........
Why is it that we need to figure out ways to get the wifes "out of town" whenever we want to have a little audiophile fun? It seems to me that they don't plan on ways to get the men out of town whenever they have their little parties. To the contrary, they plan the party and we pretty much go running! LOL! (Hmmmmm. wait a minute!.........)
Back to the thread.... Why not horns? Well, because they sound like horns. My friend has meticulously set up his Trios with 3 pairs of bass horns in a dedicated and purpose built room with every little trick and room correction you could think of.
Mighty mighty impressive dynamics. Sometimes feels like I can hear the nose hairs moving in the recording. But ultimately only fun for a little while. I always come away feeling as though I have listened to a well constructed parlor trick rather than a live musical event. |
@ Herman, I should have looked up your system before trying to answer your posts. my apologies.
But if I may be so bold, apparently size and overwhelming a room is not such an issue for you! haha.
But I stand by my statement on the triple avantgarde basshorns. The cumulative length isnt quite like yours but the end result is probably the same. The overall sensitivity pretty much matches the other three horns, which is the point anyway. (right?)
Oh, and we tried the time alignment a LONG time ago. Big improvement, Yes, but still not my cup of tea in the end. |
Okay, then let me put it this way.....
Between himself, myself, and at least one other professional there is 60+ years of collective experience in the overall set-up of that room and system.
I'm confident my own 20+ years of professional experience is enough to say that he has those horns as "optimized" as they will ever be.
And, yes, in this case three pairs of basshorns does come close. And I have the data to prove it.
Like I said, they are not full horns but they are horns non-the-less. Between the triple stack and the very high sensitivity of the 6 individual woofers per channel, well, I'd like anyone to show me a "horn" that goes all the way down to 20Hz thats better! (And fits inside even a generous listening room.) |
Also, I complimented the designer of the horns on how well they were setup. The room was only about 14X18 feet or so with high ceilings. The event was in a quite exquisite 19th century mansion with lots of hard surfaces, ie wood, marble brass,etc. This particular room was in the rear of teh first floor and seemed to be a very elegantly appointed den, study or similar room. The horns were perfectly balanced and set up for this room I would say, delivering a lot of sound but never seeming to overpower the room in any way, which I thought was quite an accomplishment. I do not think it possible to squeeze any more good lifelike sound into a room that size without driving people from it, yet most of the listeners who popped in stayed for a long time and did not want to leave, which is always the best sign. |
Oh, I meant to speak to the meticulous set up in a purpose built room. I once went to audition an amp and the guy had a purpose built room to the point of having non parallel walls and reinforced floors. He had a $75,000 Ongonku amp and their silver step up connected to his reference turntable, whatever Fremmer was using at the time. Room tweaked to nth degree and no expense spared.
He was surprised when I pointed out his speakers were out of phase. My point being if a supposed audiophile can miss something so glaringly obvious it is extremely easy to miss some fine point in the set up that takes it from sounding very good to making it sound right.
. |
"Pinning the cause down to a single room at the show seems a bit of a stretch to me."
No, it was definitely the room with the loud + dynamic horns. I was in there for over an hour just before leaving and no other rooms (including those with other horns) were anywhere near that intense.
Intense in a good way, but intense nonetheless, ie loud and dynamic albeit very clean with no noticeable distortion or breakup and most pleasant to listen to.
So if your goal is to reproduce the close up dynamics of a live orchestral event, I would say that system did it as well as any system I have heard. But I would have concerns about listening to anything that intense for too long or too often because it can definitely accelerate hearing loss.
BTW, my system at home and most very good suitable powered systems I have heard would have much the same result if listened to similarly. That is what music can sound like, but its effects on ones hearing if exposed too much to it should be an area of caution. |
El. he had a headache after the show. Pinning the cause down to a single room at the show seems a bit of a stretch to me.
Prez, that still doesn't mean he had it optimized, and it isn't anywhere near the same place as a horn no matter how many you stack up.
. |
Having heard many horn systems in all sorts of varying set-ups I would say that my friend has managed to optimize his to a far greater degree than any other. So I would say, yes, he has done what was "right".
The size of the amp on the basshorns has nothing to do with what they require. Incidentally, it's 2x 250watts. One for each 12in. driver.
And while it's not a true full horn it is neither a flared opening. But by the time you triple them up you've arrived at pretty much the same place, I would assume.
I know he loves them and has managed to produce the best sound I've ever heard in a horn. And I know many others who love horns. But it's just not for me I guess. |
I hope you horn enthusiasts are enjoying the world cup. Gives you a headache! |
Sarcastic, not at all, why would you need a 250W amp with a high efficiency speaker like a horn? I use an 8W amp with mine but it is a bit of overkill.
. |
"A horn does not require a 250W amp." I hope that was meant to be sarcastic. ;-) |
My friend has meticulously set up his Trios with 3 pairs of bass horns in a dedicated and purpose built room with every little trick and room correction you could think of. That doesn't mean he did it all correctly, only that he spent a lot of time and money doing it. Maybe he has, maybe he hasn't? Are those the huge Avantgarde basshorns? I haven't heard them but they really aren't horns. A horn does not require a 250W amp. Those are woofers with a flared opening. . |
|
I got to attend the Capital Audiofest event in Rockville, MD this past weekend. This was a small but very nicely done event.
THere was a range of pricepoints in equipment there, all the way up to several systems demonstrating the best face of some of the most highly touted gear around, like mbl, Magico, yg acoustics, and various others. There were at least 4 systems I can recall that used horn loaded speakers, a very high % of the systems overall I thought, with results ranging from just OK to most impressive.
I spent the most time (a good hour or so) in the Luminous Audio room, which featured a large 4 way custom horn speaker system that somewhat resembled Avantgarde in design, complete with moderate size, corner loaded, dual bass horn boxes on both sides.
These were being demoed with what I would describe as a no holds barred, cost is no limit system, which was exceptionally well done in all regards, particularly in regards to phono source however.
I think I pretty much heard what I was expecting from such a system, and it was most impressive and hard to fault, though the range of music demonstrated was limited to mostly vintage classical and jazz material. I would have liked to have heard a wider variety of music, but that is not where this demo of this system was geared towards.
Unsound, having heard this system and based on teh sound, I suspect you might reconsider if you had the chance to have this particular system including the horns in your home somehow!
Of course, the main aspect of this system that caught my ear compared to everything else at the show was the dynamics, transient response and overall clarity of the presentation. Soundstage and imaging was well up to snuff as well.
There were two things that I still wondered about afterwards. One was who can afford this stuff, and two was I must admit my head hurt a bit afterwards while driving home. I attribute that to just the overall volume and natural dynamics of the system rather than any faults of the system itself. Were I at the symphony sitting that close to the orchestra in full swing, I'm certain I would feel the same way afterwards.
Regarding the otehr systems featuring horn loaded speakers there, they were mostly all quite nice, somewhat impressive and well behaved (not honky or anything like that), but no others left much of a unique impression on me. The Cathedral speakers room was the other horn based speaker setup that I found myself not wanting to stop listening to, although the material and performance volume there was much more reserved. |
Hey guys just give the wife a credit card with a reasonable set limit and a gps with all the malls programmed in the points of interest;that might work;this has been a pretty good thread for someone who never knew anything about horns such as myself. |
an admitted naive observation from a bachelor........
Why is it that we need to figure out ways to get the wifes "out of town" whenever we want to have a little audiophile fun? It seems to me that they don't plan on ways to get the men out of town whenever they have their little parties. To the contrary, they plan the party and we pretty much go running! LOL! (Hmmmmm. wait a minute!.........)
Back to the thread.... Why not horns? Well, because they sound like horns. My friend has meticulously set up his Trios with 3 pairs of bass horns in a dedicated and purpose built room with every little trick and room correction you could think of.
Mighty mighty impressive dynamics. Sometimes feels like I can hear the nose hairs moving in the recording. But ultimately only fun for a little while. I always come away feeling as though I have listened to a well constructed parlor trick rather than a live musical event.
*shrug* |
Hi Terry, you are a known to be harmless wacko so welcome at any time :>) I had lunch with Nathan last month and he seems to be doing well. It would be nice to get the old gang together. I can accommodate a small crowd but need to get my wife out of town for a few days.
. |
A hoosier!! Definitely beyond my radius. I haven't been that far east in almost 10 years. |
Macrojack,
Let me give you a hint. The former Bronco quarterback now working in Chicago grew up close to Herman's current residence. |
Herman -
If you are in the U.S. would it be too risky to provide the first 3 digits of your zip code? That way those of us who pose an acceptable risk could have an idea whether to consider further pursuit of the topic. I live in 81521 and I feel pretty certain you are too far away for me to visit as I seldom travel more than 50 miles from home. |
Herman,
Although I am a audio wacko, I am sure you did not mean me. By the way, I do need to get up to you new home to hear the upgrades. I hope the invitation is still valid.
T |
M'Jack, you know I post things like "stop by" and then get to thinking about all of the wackos on the internet (not you) and get nervous about having strangers stop by. Call me paranoid but you never know. John Wayne Gacy seemed like such a nice guy.
RME is a company that makes pro-audio interfaces. There are a lot of options..Lynx, Aurora, Weiss, etc.
Pure Vinyl is pretty easy to use but any software that is flexible is going to have some sort of learning curve. Once set up you just boot it up. It runs on Macs so you are halfway home. |
Big world, Herman. Where would one "stop by" for a demo?
I'm pretty interested in Pure Vinyl. Have been thinking about springing for the upcoming Parasound JC-3 phono section but I just sold my Technics SP-10 because we don't play records much these days. I have another Technics table and I intend to continue the option but I'm not sure I want to tie up that much money. I don't have your time delay issue - mine is only about 16 - 18 inches and could be dealt with physically by just shifting the horns forward. I guess I'll see if my prosound guy keeps our appointment this time. He's had to postpone twice.
What's an RME and how easy is it to choose settings and set EQ? If Pure Vinyl works so well in your system where there is no room for error, I have to think it could make me very happy if it is convenient enough for me to operate. I'm really looking for a "set and forget" circumstance. I've had enough hobby - now I just want carefree use.
The rest of my hesitation comes from a feeling of ineptitude when it comes to computers. They drive me crazy. I finally bought an Imac last summer and that has helped a lot. Windows drove me to the point of wanting to shoot my Dell. |
I know, the analog purists in the group dismiss this immediately. They've never heard it but are convinced it won't work well so they wouldn't even consider it. That's fine. After many years of chasing the dream I have a system that makes ME very happy. Herman, your system makes you happy and that is all that matters. Congrats to you for reaching this state with your system. Ok, I'll admit to perhaps being the analog purist at least on this thread. :-) Let me be clear. I do not dismiss digital processing off hand. I am a software engineer also, with degrees in EE and CS, so I understand most of what is going on with DSPs and other digital equipment. It is a very legitimate approach. Personally, I have ruled it out digital process in my system after trying it. Admittedly, I have not tried all of the best gear out there, but I have never heard any non-analog source in my system come close to what my vinyl front end produces. I know this sound very well so it does stick out to me when things aren't there. This is where my listening sensitivities have developed and it is something I cannot ignore. I'm afraid that if I were forced to chose between using digital processing to get my horns to sound good, I would move the horns out in a NY minute. However, Duke's and Atmosphere's points are well taken and I also know and admit that my approach is also compromised. I can address some of the shortcomings with placement of the drivers relative to the others and to the listening position. There are compromises with everything and choices have to be made. As Nick Doshi often states, "Enjoy music, tolerate equipment." |
Ralph, yes, if you look at my system you see I have a big problem with time alignment. The woofers are 16 feet long and I decided that a digital delay was worth a try. First I tried a Behringer DCX2496 which was heavily modified to bypass the crappy opamp outputs and poor power supply and digital clock. The results were very good but that left me with another problem...how to deal with the analog input from my phono stage. The DCX does ADC but the mic preamp wasn't very good and bypassing lowered the input impedance too much.
That's when I discovered Pure Vinyl software. It does what the DCX does but using a much higher quality RME or any interface you choose. The cartridge feeds direct to the mic inputs on the RME. I was very skeptical at first, people who I really trust told me there was no way it would work...there wasn't enough resolution at the high end and you would just end up with square waves at higher frequencies...but I tried it and lo and behold it does work. I digitize the vinyl at 24/192, the PV does the RIAA EQ with a wide variety of curves, and I feed it back out at 24/192 to biamp. I haven't played with the plugins very much but you can fiddle with EQ curves and slopes and cutoff freqs and whatever else to your heart's content. PV has a built in 2 way with a variety of slopes and time alignment but with plugins not only can you tweak the crossovers in an almost endless number of ways but you can do it in a few seconds to see what you prefer.
AND, I have a 107 dB or so horns with SET amps and with the vinyl input turned up I have almost zero noise.
I know, the analog purists in the group dismiss this immediately. They've never heard it but are convinced it won't work well so they wouldn't even consider it. That's fine. After many years of chasing the dream I have a system that makes ME very happy. I used to sit and wonder what I could do to improve it, Now I just sit and enjoy the music.
Stop by anytime for a demo. |
It would be like a buddy who has a 89 Honda Civic, and he says that he would never own a 2010 Audi A-4, because it simply is not as fun to drive as his Honda?
Those who enjoy Horn driven speakers, that are set-up,
and dialed in properly, know how well Music can be
Presented, with a proper Horn set-up.; Just as ANY Audi A-4
owner, will attest to the fact that their Audi, is in
another League, as far as "fun to drive".
Unless you get to try out, in Your home, what folks
are talking about, how can you speak negatively about them.
Speculation, is FAR! from Reality.
And one Horn speaker, does NOT reflect the sound of ALL of
the MANY different varieties available today.
IMHO nothing gets the mid-range, or the highs correct,
like Horns do.
With the awesome variety of "low frequency" drivers, one
can easily, put together, a deadly Audio combination.
The creativity of many of your set-ups, shows this fact.
I Love Music! |
Like many other things in audio, its all in the execution. But there is also an 'ignorance is bliss' thing that seems to play out. I've not heard Herman's system so it may well be me who is ignorant.
One objection I've always had to generic electronic crossovers is that they don't allow any tweaking of the curves to accommodate the sort of nuances that Duke has been mentioning. Almost any serious passive crossover you see has tweaks in it to manage idiosyncrasies of the particular drivers in use.
So Herman, why do you use the DSP? Are you bi-amplifying? |
I agree about the benefits I find in active bi-amping. There's more there there.
And in my system things are pretty simple. All frequencies above 400 hz. are emitted by a single driver with no crossover whatsoever. So where is the digital problem introduced. Is it at the XO point? Or through EQing? Or just by being in the signal path? Is it digital conversion that you find corruptive?
Could it be that with audio ignorance is bliss? Maybe we are better off just trying to be satisfied rather than dissatisfied? That argument sounds good but the other side will say that it is from dissatisfaction that discovery and progress spring. And who can argue with that?
Curiosity drives me a little but vanity might be the real motivator. I want to get as much as I reasonably can. I guess the anguish part of all this comes into play when I start trying to rationalize what is reasonable. And that unspoken disagreement among us may be why we feud. Everybody has a different value system telling him what is reasonable. |
I would not say that digital filtering/processing can't sound good, because it can sound very good. I could probably be happy with that solution if I weren't so involved with analog.
Yes, the pro-audio guys are definitely not concerned with our silly audiophool-ishness. :-)
I can't argue with Atmosphere with regards to actives being a detail filter. There is definitely some loss there when compared to the sound using a passive xover at the speakers. However, there are also some benefits that may out weight this. I find that the increased control of the drivers when doing the active/biamp solution has increased the level of other details. I assume this is due to reduced IMD. This seems to be true for the mid-bass in my system where I do think the active has increased the detail in this range. The sound is much tighter, which sounds faster and better defined. |
Now we're getting into things I really don't understand - computers.
The first question I have to ask is, "Are all DSPs the same soundwise?"
Since we're talking digital, is the cheapo as good as the upper end pro stuff. I chose to believe not when I bought the XTA DP 224. However, I found that it was more difficult to set up than my DBX. So I have arranged for a guy to come by with his computer and his XTA software and set it up for me. Apparently he can just put it on a PC card for me to slip in the front of the unit or he can plug into the back through the RS 232 port, whatever that is. I can see it has 9 pins.
There is also a MIDI connector and an RS 485 in/out set.
Here is a spec sheet:
http://www.fmsystems.net/pdf/cutsheet/dp226.pdf
So I have to ask if the XTA is better than the DBX Drive Rack PA? If so, how so?
Does the quality of the DSP come into play or is the problem universal? Is there a problem at all?
The pros don't seem to think so. Is that just because it makes their job easier?
I don't hear any problem now other than the faint rushing sound in the horn when the system is muted. I bought the XTA to get rid of that noise because it is much more flexible than my Drive Rack. It has been suggested that the noise is due to a problem with gain level matching. Or impedance.
I'm hoping everything will be resolved next Tuesday morning. |
they suck the life right out of the music I sit here tapping my toe, rocking back and forth with a big grin. The life has not been sucked out of the music. I get the same response from seasoned audiophiles as well as complete newbees who sit slacked jawed never having heard a high end system. I think this is one of those situations where we can't discuss it with words. You need to hear what is going on over here. . |
Herman, your machine is doing 64bit calculations but the DSP signal is only 24 bit, if that. DSPs can be harnessed to a lot of tasks; one thing you learn really quick in dealing with them is they suck the life right out of the music.
The master tapes in the studio are as close as you will ever get to the real thing. If they can't do it there, they are not going to do it in the home either.
We used a DSP-style crossover at a recent show (T.H.E Show). We were recording live and comparing the live vs the recording. It did sound pretty good, with 24-bit master files, but I am left wondering, how much better would it have been if we had an analog recorder for the recording task, and a passive crossover that allowed a single amp to do the whole speaker rather than a DSP with two very dis-similar amps to do top and bottom?
My experience with electronic crossovers of any type is that they act just like detail filters. In some ways I think the DSP units really do take the analog electronic crossovers to task, but I have yet to see any kind of bi-amped system beat one that is full range.
IOW I am not dismissing DSPs just out of my studio experience, it just seemed like the easiest quick explanation. |
Ralph, is that a fair comparison? Dismissing DSP in the home because the master tapes sound better in the studio? I've got a ton of 44.1K recordings that DSP can only hope to make better , not worse. My computer is doing 64 bit calculations on my files to produce crossovers with no phase shifts and time align my drivers at the same time. I can use all manner of EQ plugins if I wish to improve what are often marginal recordings. Since I don't have the original analog files I think it is great way to go in the home. |
MACROjack. I apologize for keep using micro-jack! Just realized I was doing that.
There is a huge tap-age of DSP in the home theater circles. It is certainly very good these days. But there is only so much that can be done by hardware and software.
But don't let me spoil the enjoyment. There certainly are many who use digital correction/processing with their horns and are very happy with the results. |
One thing I have always found interesting about Bill's horn is the cast flange. This would seem to give the best control in the critical throat area. Now that I think about it some more, this is also why I have put off trying a proto. I think I could get the cone pretty close but there is no way I could do justice to that throat piece. :-)
Wish I had the price of admission to the field coil drivers. Chris Brady told me that those drivers really impressed him, and that wasn't taking anything away from the Cogents, and Bill's conical. It was his Edgarhorn Titans that got me hooked on horns. I had heard some good ones before that, but his DIY pair really hit home with me. I didn't buy his 'table but I really liked the sound of his horns. :-) |
So Ralph, I take it you aren't seeing the untapped potential of DSP. |
Macrojack, you had me up until the DSP part. I've spent a lot of time with digital (using both DSP and plain vanilla) and analog recording systems. We use both in our recording studio. While digital falls flat on its face using the master files against the same thing on analog, DSP can only hope to make it worse, in the process of whatever its doing: EQ, compression, decompression, whatever.
I'm happy to keep an open mind but the DSP thing is really going to have to work at it to win me over.
Based on what Duke has imparted I would really like to try a conical horn, combined with a proper field-coil driver and crossover. It really **does** seem as if the potential of horns is still untapped. |
Yes, Microjack. Exactly. It is all about trade-offs. I have heard my system using both digital and analog active line level crossovers. There is no question things change differently with the two approaches. I don't like what I hear with a digital filter in the signal path, others may be perfectly happy with it. All I wish to get across is that there is more than one way, just as there is more than one way to design a horn that performs very well. |
Reproduced sound is merely an approximation of the original sound. How faithful that reproduction is depends on many facets and parameters. Trading better performance in one area for somehow compromised performance in another is what we mean when we talk about trade-offs. For some, the trade-offs in utilizing digital rather than analog might prove attractive. And it is very possible that the diminishment we see as factually inevitable may be practically absent. |
I think Dan_ed is correct as the signal reproduced is a approxmation of the original,close but not exact.
As far as being able to hear a difference is probally based on how well the whole process performs and what the ear can detect. |
There is not way to go from analog, to digital, and back to analog without losing information. That is just a physical fact. |
I'm not seeking inclusion. My horns are made of 12 identical cherry wood panels. Dan is right about the need for uniform perfection in the horn. The use of non-conical designs has as much to do with a desire to increase horizontal dispersion as it does any other consideration.
Please - please - please read what Bill has to say about his reasons for choosing the conical approach before offering any more of your uninformed preferences.
Over and over there come these statements of preference without any justification or explanation. Maybe you actually know what you are talking about but aside from Duke or Ralph, I don't recall hearing from anyone who has actually done any of this. Before you ask, I have not either. But if you read what I have had to say, you will notice that I make no pretense at expertise.
Merely saying "I loathe horns" offers nothing useful. Claiming that a conical is not a real horn is just stupid, and having heard a lousy sounding horn 18 years ago at a concert or in a Cerwin Vega frat house system doesn't really serve as the basis for bashing an entire category.
Little is known about horns by the general public and I will stand by my belief that there is a lot more to be discovered as we strive to do so.
DSP does not deprive us of info. I find mine provides exceptional detail in concert with the horns. Micro dynamics are downright amazing. Just hearing the crowd noise in the background at televised sporting events is a thrill.
There may be legitimate reasons for digiphobes to shun DSP but loss of information is not one of them. |
I think the advice I was given by Ralph when I asked him if he prefers a horn system or electrostatic speaker when using his electronics and all else being equal fits 100% into this thread and his response was "it really depends on the speaker rather than the technology. Its the 'all else being equal' part that prevents an answer beyond that. Either one can be awesome or suck really bad." I some day do wish to explore a horn system and this thread has given me some of the understanding needed to do so. |
