P.S. forgot to mention....... (yet again)
On the chart, a VK-1000 is just a monobloc version of the VK-500.
On the chart, a VK-1000 is just a monobloc version of the VK-500.
Why not horns?
I've owned a lot of speakers over the years but I have never experienced anything like the midrange reproduction from my horns. With a frequency response of 300 Hz. up to 14 Khz. from a single distortionless driver, it seems like a no-brainer that everyone would want this performance. Why don't you use horns?
992 responses Add your response
Are properly implemented horns that rare? Perhaps, but I would argue that properly implemented high end systems are rare. I've seen a lot of systems in peoples homes that despite their best efforts just don't sound all that good. Most people don't understand the interaction of the different components and selecting input and output impedances that work well together, picking the right amp for a particular speaker, how to integrate it all into the room, and the list goes on. It's not easy. I think it would be very easy to audition a number of horn systems and come away blaming poor performance on a particular aspect of the system when it was actually something else. Like I've said before, it is a shame everybody can't get a chance to audition everybody else's system. These threads are fun but they settle nothing until you can hear what the person is talking about. |
Unsound, Herman and I agree on something :) Herman, The reason the Trios and probably Duos have such an impedance curve has to do with the way the crossover works. Let's use the Duo as an example, but this is only an example, my experience with the Duo (even though a lot more of our customers use them than Trios) is limited. So we have the main horn and let's assume that it is 8 ohms. Then there is the tweeter horn and it is 8 ohms too. Now if there is a cap to keep lows out of the tweeter, what happens is that at low frequencies the amp sees the 8 ohms of the main horn. Since there is no choke to keep highs out of the horn, the main horn will be in parallel with the tweeter at tweeter frequencies. So the impedance drops to four ohms because the amp has to drive the main horn and the tweeter too. The Trio uses an expanded 3-way version of this scenario. If there is a crossover offered that has more than caps in it I think it will be a big step forward for that speaker! |
With a frequency response of 300 Hz. up to 14 Khz. from a single distortionless driver, it seems like a no-brainer that everyone would want this performance. Why don't you use horns? Because I get this and more (useful 60hz - 14,000hz) from my single driver speakers with no horn reflections/ colorations in a much smaller package to boot. |
Thanks Ralph, that makes sense but I wonder how it affects the sound? I have the high impedance drivers so the mid and tweet in parallel won't go below about 8-9 ohms at the high end assuming a resistive load. So it seems to me all my amp has to be able to do is maintain the output voltage into 8 ohms. That seems easy enough. Getting ready to spin my copy of the Dukes of Dixieland "Barn Burner" since I now know it is the only thing that sounds good on my system. Glad I don't have planar speakers. I guess the only thing that sounds good on them are flat instruments like the washboard and the gong. . |
Hey everyone, MrD again. This thread intrigues me so much, because I really love my set up. Yes, I own horns. I have spent many years buying and selling, trying this and trying that, listening to this and listening to that. From these experiences, I have determined what I want a system to do for me. My system is not for background music. My system is to transport me to an illusion of "what I think" is the real thing. Be it rock, classical or jazz. A piano must sound like a piano,sax like a sax,violin like a violin,drums like drums, voices clear and articulate. Can I follow the artistry of each and every musician, starting and stopping on a dime. Does Berry Oakley, Butch Trucks and JJ Johanson carry the tempo and rhythm to make my feet tap. To make my head nod up and down. When Duane and Dicky are strutting their stuff and Gregg is pulling it all together, I am in the audience. They are playing for me. My system has disappeared and has created a lifelike representation of being there. Sound stage has height, width and depth. From an incredibly black, noiseless background, to amazing shadings of micro and macro dynamics, this is what recorded music should sound like. My speakers were designed by a brilliant designer and engineer, for "live sound" reinforcement. I feel blessed that I was able to afford them, to have a room that can accommodate them and to have a wife that puts up with all of it. Thanks again for listening to my rant.... |
Herman, just to be clear here: I don't know the actual impedance of the drivers in the Duo, but in a case where the minimum impedance is 8 ohms, I would expect most amplifiers will have the voltage response to handle that. Its when you go from 19 or so down to 4 ohms that many smaller tube amps are challenged. So- I think we agree on this one :) |
Herman... Sound radiates as a spherical wavefront (except as interrupted by walls). At the distance of the listener or microphone the spherical wavefront is nearly a flat plane. The microphone samples this wavefront at a point, and a planar speaker sends it on to the listener as a plane, almost the same as the original wavefront. How better to reproduce a planar wavefront than by a planar transducer? The diaphram of a planar speaker (like a Maggie) uses stratigically placed mass to damp resonances, but these low frequency anomalies are easier to correct than the high frequency resonances of horns. |
Eldartford. What resonances are you speaking of ? I ask you all. Does your system have qualities of a live ,unamplified venue ? Live music does not "damp" anything. I am not clear of what you speak..... I truly believe many of you horn haters have not heard a "proper" horn set up. A shame, really.... |
Eldartford, cheesy horns do have resonances, the way many other speaker technologies do. A good horn has less resonance than the your speakers do though. Don't misunderstand me here, I totally empathize with people that have trouble understanding this last point! As you point out, sound radiates as a spherical wavefront, no doubt why Quad made the ESL63 a semi-spherical device. A horn often uses a diaphragm that has a similar semi-spherical shape, only it is much larger when it emerges from the mouth of the horn. This may explain why so many people, on hearing good horns, comment that they sound like the best planars, only with greater dynamic impact. IOW my experience of horns is that planars are really the only thing that compete with horns for naturalness of timbre, coherence and detail- cones don't seem to keep up. So I rate horns first if they work right (last if they don't), planars second in the firmament and cone systems last. |
Mrdecibel, Every hi-fi system will have that one track where it shines, it's when confronted with differing music types, is where most fails. I love my non-horns .......... ------------------------------------------- 06-18-10: Mrdecibel A cd recording from 1984 on the Denon/Nippon Columbia Japan label : Eddie Gomez : 38C38-7189 - 9 tracks - A recording , inho, where many systems fail.....it is jazz and has it all.....I love my horns ! |
06-18-10: Mrdecibel said " I truly believe many of you horn haters have not heard a "proper" horn set up" ... This might be true Mr decibel , heard my first on in 1973 my last one last week , so in 37 yrs nothing , not one good horn setup .. from the home made ones , to others costing tens of thousand ... nothing Hmmm and it's not hate mr D, it's just not my cup of tea objectively or subjectively... I do believe you non-horn haters have never heard a "proper" speaker setup ... a shame ! LOL.. |
Atmashere , You leave out one critical part of your thesis, planers radiate sound from both sides , this ability helps to create the required space and time of a recording far more accurately than any monopole transducer. Horns will always sound like hi-fi, never real , they project sound in a manner where all instruments and voices have the same projection and size. The best you can say is that they sound just like an amplified concert 40 ft away. Unfortunately we listen to recordings of live music and not live music itself , as such Horns do not convey this as accurately IMO. A good planer setup will do everything for power as a good horn setup will and sound more like real instruments to boot. Anyone who says a good planer sounds like a horn or vis a vie has never heard a good planer setup ... Regards, |
World's greatest catch-all argument for your favorite thing.....whatever it may be. "You just haven't heard one properly set up!" Ah!! But of course!! How unlucky for the rest of the world that there are so FEW amazing systems out there. Please tell me, where do I go to buy one this instant and who can I get to "properly" set it up?! Indeed, for this particular thread, Weseixas makes THE most compelling argument. Though you could almost miss it. If your live reference (assuming you have "live" as a reference) is amplified music then it's no wonder horns are so appealing. And, sadly, these day's that's pretty much everything. Kinda hard to find live amplified music that doesn't have multiple horns in it. |
I am responding to a few of you. My system sounds wonderful on all music. I compare what I hear to live unamplified music, as stated previously. I particularly mentioned this recording because many systems I have listened to (I bring this with me) fall apart in one or more ways. I will tell you I have heard horns and horn based systems I did not like. I have heard planar and box type speakers I have liked. I have owned many of these types. I have not said I love horns. I have said I love "my" horns. The Klipsch Lascala. The fact that they found their way very quickly into peoples homes for music listening is what got me interested in them many years ago. My 1st Klipsch Heritage speaker experience(a long long time ago) was Khorns with Marantz 9s/7C in a room properly dimensioned. Sources at the time were vinyl and 15ips master tapes. Loved the musicality and the voicing. The full range bass horn was more melodic than anything I had heard before( in a 20x26 ) room. It is an experience I will not forget. My box speakers(B&WDM6,AR3A as examples) sounded constricted and ill defined. My DQ10s imaged better than the Khorns, but everything else seemed lifeless. These Khorns were owned by a college professor of mine, and we spent a lot of time swapping equipment around at his place. I never had good corners for Khorns. As an audiophile, I have to say I did not like any speaker in or near a corner. Then Paul Klipsch designed, at least for me, his best design. So I am saying again, I love MY horns. I will be happy to continue any further discussion or debate but I must go... cheers. |
Mr Decibel , Fair enuff and thanks for responding, it works for you, that's a fact no one can dispute and the lascala has been around long enuff for most to hear, my self included and are relativity easy to acquire... http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/trends/ta10_3.html From 6 moons: The La Scalas have their own way of conjuring up the magic of music. They are so un-hifi that you won't bother to look for the pin-point imaging or high resolution layering - and yet nothing is missing from the total sonic tableau. You are listening with your heart rather than with your ears. Ahhh, I do have 2 friends with the same Klipsh speakers and while i do not mind the sound , i have no heart, pure ears! . -) PS: The Klipsch are from a by gone era , i do like the nostalgic value of it , along with old altecs and JBL's , i did have an Altec in the 70's , before discovering panel speakers... |
Weseixas, I find problems with the stock Lascala, mostly box resonance of the doghouse(a Klipsch forum term for woofer housing). I have completely eliminated this problem, which I can tell you is present in your friends units. The new Lascala II uses a beefier cabinet to get rid of this coloration. I talk about it in an earlier post. Tubes are from a by gone era, but look at the popularity and, resurgence, of the topology. The Heritage series was ahead of its time, and many designs have not caught up. Let me also say I have owned MLogans and have much experience with ESL63s. Nice sound. But they are congested in their dynamics, "at least to me ". Now what will they do at 100db and above? Once again, this is all based on my ears, then my heart...Thanks.... |
I can see and do agree that the Mods you listed would make a huge difference on that speaker. Also agree with your assessments of ML and the quads 63. Never heard an ML that i could take home , OK , But !!! I did have a 63 with custom subs and upgraded power supply and they were not bad , actually pretty good dynamically but not a super speaker in the dynamic world. I would wager the 63's with the custom subs would walk all over the lascala, ear busting SPl's not withstanding.. Without the Subs and the a for mentioned Mods.. errr worthless IMO ... Really good panel speakers or Dynamic speakers will give nothing up to horns in the SPL dept, in a conventional home environment IMO. I do believe if you heard one done and setup correctly you would not go back to Horns! Of course if i ever hear a mega zolt Macumba horn system that blew my mind, I would be the first one here singing there songs of praises. I do not speak of this lightly, I'm not biased to any topology , only to good sound. Just Last week i had the privilege to listen to a custom horn setup , fully active 3 way (BMS driver, no tubes) and i was very surprised of the clarity in the upper ranges (the top end was actually excellent) the overall sound and presentation was good on soft rock type music, but still found the presentation fatiguing and with poor perspective and tonal quality. Another was the Acapella Acoustics, La campanella , better than the custom BMS setup IMO and I would have liked to play with them a bit, as these were not bad , but still no cigar.. I'm still waiting , listening and all ears ..... |
The only horn speaker that I honestly would change to, given my room dimensions, would be the Jadis Eurythmie. I was the chosen fellow, for 3 days doing the demos at the '96 Stereophile show in NY at the Waldorf. I also got to hear them for an extended time period in a home environment, properly set up. As far as the Quad /sub system you feel would walk all over the Lascalas, let me remind you I listen at over 100 db and peaks above regularly. I do not think the panels would handle it for long. I am enjoying our differences and respect your opinions. As you said earlier, this is a very personal topic. Let us all enjoy ! |
Hello Mr DB, I'm very familiar with the Jadis Eurythmie and also attended the 96 show ! I also heard the Jadis setup at Lyric. I found that speaker to have a huge tonal balance issue and not to my liking and yes there were those that loved it , i guess if it is your thing , i thought the Audio Note setup was better, But this is Audio , enjoy the journey -) When any system lacks energy and content(different from pushing high SPL) most tend to increase the volume , kinda drive the music home , in this manner they feel it is "live" not so ... Music, especially recordings of live music has a lot of energy, micro and macro dynamics, this energy and dynamics is what drive the volume as it swells, the closer any system get's to correctly reproducing this is the more you will understand of what i speak, it is different from playing music " loud" it's the difference of it sounding real! |
Weseixas, I am not sure if you are saying to me your ears are "better" than mine, that I play loud to compensate other areas of deficiency. Let me just say...to each his own. I understand dynamics very well, and live music, both amplified and unamplified. I do wish you the best and just hope your system can make your feet tap the way mine does for me. Listening to a high end speaker in a room with other speakers present,you tend to hear those other speakers as well(Lyric). Time to move on.........Thank you |
Agree with gawdbless on this making bold all encompassing statements. Sad part of it all is the huge disservice these types due to audio by keeping people with limited experience from trying something new. Since they read the all this is that or that is only for hi-fi not music or all this does that. Just BS anyone with experience can see but those new will just take this as fact. And its not just horns TT CD SET PP SS amps Ribbons Planar STATs cones domes all have detractors. I see this daily in forums all [insert name here] users are deluding themselves only the [insert name here] is capable of accurate music reproduction. Have a open mind for once remember no absolutes, nothings perfect and if you do not like something does this now means that its crap for all? Or maybe you just do not enjoy it ever think of this? Maybe you never owned a recently constructed horn so your listening bias is from casual listens not real hands on experience. I for one know its possible to design very good sounding accurate loudspeakers of most any design and transducer type so why not with horns? |
You leave out one critical part of your thesis, planers radiate sound from both sides , this ability helps to create the required space and time of a recording far more accurately than any monopole transducer. If you cannot get the speaker far enough from the rear wall, the first comment is moot. Duke has built systems that are rear-firing and they seem to work fine... The second comment is simply absurd! Horns image and present soundstage images as well or as badly as any other speaker technology. |
Atma, I understand why you reject the pejorative comment re: horns and imaging, but I will take issue with your specific rebuttal. Planars and omnis (properly set up) image differently than horns (or any other monpoles). Some may prefer that presentation. Some may feel exactly the other way. I won't attach a value judgement, but either way, IMHO, imaging is one area where people can draw sharp distinctions between monopoles (including horns) and dipoles/bipoles/omnis. Marty |
Plainly there is no consensus on the desirability of horns in this discussion. However, it is equally plain that most of us see horns as a viable alternative. A few have no taste for them at all and a couple are hell bent on discouraging others from exploration. I would posit however, that those who are encouraging newcomers to try horns out and see if they like them hold a higher position than those who claim to be protecting newbies from such exploitation. After all, they are the same individuals who retreat to arguments about the primacy of personal taste every time their other gambits appear at all shaky. Clearly horns are not everyone's answer but to some of us they hold a position that known alternatives fail to challenge. How is that a problem? |
LOL.. John the Irony !!! ----------------------------------------------------------- 06-19-10: Johnk Agree with gawdbless on this making bold all encompassing statements. Sad part of it all is the huge disservice these types due to audio by keeping people with limited experience from trying something new. Since they read the all this is that or that is only for hi-fi not music or all this does that. Just BS anyone with experience can see but those new will just take this as fact. And its not just horns TT CD SET PP SS amps Ribbons Planar STATs cones domes all have detractors. I see this daily in forums all [insert name here] users are deluding themselves only the [insert name here] is capable of accurate music reproduction. Have a open mind for once remember no absolutes, nothings perfect and if you do not like something does this now means that its crap for all? Or maybe you just do not enjoy it ever think of this? Maybe you never owned a recently constructed horn so your listening bias is from casual listens not real hands on experience. I for one know its possible to design very good sounding accurate loudspeakers of most any design and transducer type so why not with horns? |
Atmasphere , Suprise comment coming from one of your back ground... You are comparing a monopole to a dipole , they cannot sound alike or have the same presentation and never will, it is technically impossible. talk about absurd ! If you cannot get the speaker far enough from the rear wall, the first comment is moot. Duke has built systems that are rear-firing and they seem to work fine... The second comment is simply absurd! Horns image and present soundstage images as well or as badly as any other speaker technology. |
Atmasphere My comments on Horns and how they image, poor tonal balance, and poor sizing still stands, I'm not sure why you would mention Duke building speakers which are rear firing, as this has nothing to do with my opinion and suggestions, as many have done so before Duke and many will after . Look i can understand those that have migrated to the sound of horns, they do it for the power ! less be frank the hi end is froth with really , really bad products , i would easily say 90% of the speakers available to the public is just plain crapola. For years dealers et al have marketed and pushed junk in exchange for big bucks and when the bidniz went A/V , it was easy for most to jump as they were never really happy with their 100K garbage systems. Horns have allowed many to just enjoy the music from a power perspective , gone were the days when the had to listen to that wimpy sound from their 40K speakers ,playing the same 10 songs that worked over and over. You know those guys , you know the ones with 10 cd's ! There is a lot here to say , but my typing is bad and i'm lazy. I was involved in the audio field for 30 yrs, and with all respect for the parties involved , spare me the condescension of telling me about Duke's speakers, been there done that and a ball of wax... I can prove all that has been stated, funny how when the weak ones are challenged they resort to personal fire ! I will say again ..... The Horn guys have Challenged before , my good associates at Audio note and Jadis did so 15 yrs ago when i was involved, Less just say i proved my point... Can you ? |
Weseixas - I can't see much value in your opinions. Sorry. Audio Asylum seems more like an appropriate format for your debating technique. That 30 years in the audio biz has taught you to view the majority of high end audio with an informed cynicism but your "shout louder" approach to discussion keeps me from taking you very seriously. |
Ralph wrote: "If you cannot get the [dipole] speaker far enough from the rear wall, the first comment [that dipoles create the required space and time of a recording more accurately than monopoles] is moot. Duke has built systems that are rear-firing and they seem to work fine..." Weseixas replied: "Atmasphere... You are comparing a monopole to a dipole, they cannot sound alike or have the same presentation and never will... Spare me the condescension of telling me about Duke's speakers, been there done that and a ball of wax..." Duke chimes in: I think Ralph was saying that if your dipoles are not far enough out into the room, the advantage of dipole radiation is lost. And I agree; in fact, I usually advise people who can't place speakers at least 3.5 feet out into the room to get monopoles instead. Without sufficient time-lag in between the first arrival sound and the arrival of the backwave energy, that strong early reflection is more likely to be a net detriment. I think Ralph referred to my bipolar horn-type speakers because they are an example of a horn speaker that has radiation characteristics similar to a dipole, and as a result when set up like a dipole, they tend to sound a lot like a dipole. These comments by an Audiogoner who has owned some rather nice dipole and omni speakers (as you will see) backs up this claim. Weseixas again: "Anyone who says a good planer sounds like a horn or vis a vie has never heard a good planer setup." What a good horn system and a good planar system have in common is this: They both generate a reverberant field that is spectrally correct (something few cone-n-dome systems accomplish). The relative level of that reverberant field different: With a correctly-setup planar, the reverberant field is considerably stronger relative to the first-arrival sound than for a monopole horn system. One could liken this to sitting in Row 15 versus Row 3. (A good omni is usually more like Row 25.) Weseixas, your "been there done that" remark about my speakers implies that you've heard them. Which ones, and where, if you don't mind my asking? Thanks, Duke |
Macrojack , Really !,,,, Maybe you should review the personal retorts and shout louder approach by you and your "friends" before labeling me with such i notice none has labeled you absurd when stating this ! With a frequency response of 300 Hz. up to 14 Khz. from a single distortionless driver, Macrojack Ahhh , such is life !!!! |
Hello Duke, With all do respect , for Ralph to insert distance to back wall would be like me inserting some absurd requirement for listening to a horn,speaker... We are discussing things and ideas in absolute terms, Ralph knows better than that! I thought this was an discussion about the merits and demerits of Horn speakers , apparently not , i suppose ? In regards to Dipoles 3.5 is 2 close IMO. My rule of thumb at least the speaker height from the rear wall or 5 feet min and I'm sure you are not comparing your bi-polar speaker polar plot to that of a Di-pole with it's figure 8 pattern ?.... I highly doubt the 2 will sound the same, the sonic characteristics are so completely different... Regards, |
Weseixas wrote: "I'm sure you are not comparing your bi-polar speaker polar plot to that of a Di-pole with it's figure 8 pattern ?.... I highly doubt the 2 will sound the same, the sonic characteristics are so completely different..." Duke replies: Indeed I am making precisely that comparison. My bipolars radiate into a constant 90 degree pattern, both front and back, over most of the spectrum. Few dipoles maintain their initial figure-8 once we get up into the midrange and treble region; their radiation patterns usually change significantly with frequency (SoundLabs being a notable exception). As we go down in frequency my pattern widens somewhat, but this is of less consequence down where the room dominates anyway. In the bass region I even manage to emulate much of the in-room smoothness of a good dipole system, and here's a recent article in a webzine that describes how I do so. A few years ago I had a longtime (decades long) SoundLab owner tell me that one of my bipolars came the closest to sounding like his speakers of anything he had ever heard, including monopoles, other dipoles, other bipoles, omnis, or anything eles. In fact he actually placed an order for a pair of my speakers, but later cancelled it after changing the setup of his SoundLabs to be more like how I set up my bipolars - apparently that made a significant improvement in his room. Since my intention was to emulate the radiation pattern characteristics of the SoundLabs (something I did with Roger West's full knowledge), the outcome there was still encouraging to me. I don't mind coming in a close second to SoundLab. Since you didn't reply to my inquiry about where you heard my speakers, now I'm thinking that maybe you didn't. Is that correct? Duke |
06-20-10: Audiokinesis wrote: My bipolars radiate into a constant 90 degree pattern, both front and back, over most of the spectrum. Few dipoles maintain their initial figure-8 once we get up into the midrange and treble region; their radiation patterns usually change significantly with frequency (SoundLabs being a notable exception). ----------------- Sorry , not sure how you are coming by this, everyone i have ever measured exhibits a classic figure 8 or pretty close 2 it, unless there is an reflection issue. *How were you measuring ? you must have reflections issues. *Also is your bi-polars reverse phase in the rear ? * is yours a compression horn or a wave guide ? I'm not sure about your question Duke, i must have missed it before , anyway i have never insinuated or said that i had listened to your speaker(s) before. |