Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
fatfreddiescat
Young Croc
Joined: 15 October 2010
Location: N.E.Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 1081
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2018 at 10:00am |
Elliot Thompson wrote:
fatfreddiescat wrote:
Elliot Thompson wrote:
You would have to scale the internal chamber of the horn in WinISD to determine what the 12 inch is seeing in terms of frequency response. It may be best to just create a new smaller box for the horn instead since you pulled the horn out of the old box. This will allow you to compare the old design to the new design (Hear the difference) which, will tell you how much low frequency loss will come into play by using a smaller box. The above would be the safe method instead of butchering an old box based on opinions of others who have no on hands experience owning such a design. When it comes to such modifications you are really on your own to determine if downsizing a cabinet will meet up to your requirements from a sound quality standpoint. Best Regards, |
WINISD won't model the low end cutoff of a horn as your dealing with reactance annulling, hornresponse and akabak will, hornresponse being much more user friendly for this purpose.
|
Possibly, you are mistaking internal chamber of the horn to canal of the horn. I am talking about the internal chamber of the horn. Under those circumstances the method I suggested does work in WinISd for I did it nearly 20 years ago with
some large 180 Hertz Straight Horns. Straight horns with vents are a hybrid in which,
follows the same principal as a reflex cabinet in terms of the rear chamber and
port interaction.
Best Regards,
|
I was referring to the enclosure at the rear of the driver which as far as I'm aware from the previous posts is a sealed chamber, in which case WINISD does not have the capability to model the effects of the low frequency response of the horn system, due to the effect of the reactance imparted by the horn. If it is a ported rear chamber then WINISD will be applicable to an extent, but still hornresponse would be a better choice for a horn system.
|
|
Elliot Thompson
Old Croc
Joined: 02 April 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5172
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2018 at 12:13pm |
fatfreddiescat wrote:
Elliot Thompson wrote:
fatfreddiescat wrote:
Elliot Thompson wrote:
You would have to scale the internal chamber of the horn in WinISD to determine what the 12 inch is seeing in terms of frequency response. It may be best to just create a new smaller box for the horn instead since you pulled the horn out of the old box. This will allow you to compare the old design to the new design (Hear the difference) which, will tell you how much low frequency loss will come into play by using a smaller box. The above would be the safe method instead of butchering an old box based on opinions of others who have no on hands experience owning such a design. When it comes to such modifications you are really on your own to determine if downsizing a cabinet will meet up to your requirements from a sound quality standpoint. Best Regards, |
WINISD won't model the low end cutoff of a horn as your dealing with reactance annulling, hornresponse and akabak will, hornresponse being much more user friendly for this purpose.
|
Possibly, you are mistaking internal chamber of the horn to canal of the horn. I am talking about the internal chamber of the horn. Under those circumstances the method I suggested does work in WinISd for I did it nearly 20 years ago with
some large 180 Hertz Straight Horns. Straight horns with vents are a hybrid in which,
follows the same principal as a reflex cabinet in terms of the rear chamber and
port interaction.
Best Regards,
|
I was referring to the enclosure at the rear of the driver which as far as I'm aware from the previous posts is a sealed chamber, in which case WINISD does not have the capability to model the effects of the low frequency response of the horn system, due to the effect of the reactance imparted by the horn. If it is a ported rear chamber then WINISD will be applicable to an extent, but still hornresponse would be a better choice for a horn system. |
It would be more of a personal preference based on the
experience level of the user of the actual program at hand. If a person have
years of experience building horns, he/she would gravitate to wards Horn
Response. At the same token if a person has years of experience building reflex
cabinets, he/she would gravitate to wards winISD or any other program designed
for reflex cabinets.
Best Regards,
|
Elliot Thompson
|
|
fatfreddiescat
Young Croc
Joined: 15 October 2010
Location: N.E.Wales
Status: Offline
Points: 1081
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 September 2018 at 6:03pm |
Elliot Thompson wrote:
fatfreddiescat wrote:
Elliot Thompson wrote:
fatfreddiescat wrote:
Elliot Thompson wrote:
You would have to scale the internal chamber of the horn in WinISD to determine what the 12 inch is seeing in terms of frequency response. It may be best to just create a new smaller box for the horn instead since you pulled the horn out of the old box. This will allow you to compare the old design to the new design (Hear the difference) which, will tell you how much low frequency loss will come into play by using a smaller box. The above would be the safe method instead of butchering an old box based on opinions of others who have no on hands experience owning such a design. When it comes to such modifications you are really on your own to determine if downsizing a cabinet will meet up to your requirements from a sound quality standpoint. Best Regards, |
WINISD won't model the low end cutoff of a horn as your dealing with reactance annulling, hornresponse and akabak will, hornresponse being much more user friendly for this purpose.
|
Possibly, you are mistaking internal chamber of the horn to canal of the horn. I am talking about the internal chamber of the horn. Under those circumstances the method I suggested does work in WinISd for I did it nearly 20 years ago with
some large 180 Hertz Straight Horns. Straight horns with vents are a hybrid in which,
follows the same principal as a reflex cabinet in terms of the rear chamber and
port interaction.
Best Regards,
|
I was referring to the enclosure at the rear of the driver which as far as I'm aware from the previous posts is a sealed chamber, in which case WINISD does not have the capability to model the effects of the low frequency response of the horn system, due to the effect of the reactance imparted by the horn. If it is a ported rear chamber then WINISD will be applicable to an extent, but still hornresponse would be a better choice for a horn system. |
It would be more of a personal preference based on the
experience level of the user of the actual program at hand. If a person have
years of experience building horns, he/she would gravitate to wards Horn
Response. At the same token if a person has years of experience building reflex
cabinets, he/she would gravitate to wards winISD or any other program designed
for reflex cabinets.
Best Regards,
|
|
|
gen0me
Young Croc
Joined: 20 February 2016
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 999
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 19 September 2018 at 3:34pm |
Here is the same horn with bigger rear chamber and two strongest standing waves.
|
I appreciate every like :)) https//www.facebook.com/genomesoundsystems Mixes: https://www.mixcloud.com/gen-ome/
|
|
sgarfa
Registered User
Joined: 10 December 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 101
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 September 2018 at 8:19am |
very nice use of abec3....I tried with poor results :( ...
|
|
|