maybe the 186horn combined with new drivers that can be pushed a little bit more on the low end would be a solution?

i think there has been some decent evolution of drivers since rog created that horn.. maybe we can make some use out of it? got to calculate some stuff.. but i'm still a newb when it comes to horn-calculating so if some of the "gurus" could step in? :)

Surely the invader fits this question? or am i looking at the wrong plots 

to be honest i havent heard the invaders with just 2, always been 4 or more

Mykey's invader modification...

Not sure which driver this is simmed with but it does the job surely?

mykey- wrote: I would like to suggest a more easier build by doing away with all the throat chamber DOINGS make a rectangular LETTER BOX throat same as what I have done on the C4-S. Make the area 450cm, this would give even loading on the driver and will be a far easier build  normal loading, not offset    http://img838.imageshack.us/i/invader.png/" rel="nofollow"> http://img847.imageshack.us/i/invader.png/" rel="nofollow">

can you explain exactly what you mean by this (specifically the -3db part)? i am now confused

i use 4 of the l36's loaded with void, sometimes in venues that are only 300 capacity and there's no issue of it not being bassy enough, many times on soundcheck the lights fall out and we have to use foam and rubber to stop the decks and mixers falling out the dj booth, however in some venues i also encounter some of the issues many have said before where the bass seems more apparent behind the stack or in the corner of the room, but never an issue of not enough bass, id love to see the sim's of the v18 in this cab to compare against some other designs, i'm sure they aren't the best but as the quote suggests i agree its nonsense that this cab is useless, its worked well for me so far anyway

Kevin i would be very interested to see your design and input data as it sound much the same as a recent project i took on, mine is a double 12" ported horn using the 12sb30 as my base driver with certain others seriously out performing but at three times the price, I have managed to make the double cabinate 460L with the external dimensions of 40*120*95cm, only plays to 55Hz but has a wide bandwidth up to 180Hz which is reasonably flat with one box and completely flat from 50-150Hz when its couples in a group of 4 double boxes (my avatar is actually a screen shot of the design). It does shows that with the port as the lower extension you can gain just that little bit more form a design that has a size constraint. I then went on to hornresp a ULF 18" version loaded with the PD1850 (im sure the V18 could hack it), which plays 32-100Hz with the same lay out in mind (with no 3D model as of yet) changing the external dimensions to 60*120*95cm so it comes in at a wopping 680L but does produce the goods (apparently according to hornresp).

Horn length of 277cm to S5 using the floor as a further extension to the horn. 

Suited to the usual suspects but better suited to the lighter coned drivers such as the Fane 18-1000. 

Outer dimensions are to your specification 1200*600*900 

This is one cab @ 2pi 

4 cabs @ 2pi

And then 8 @2pi cabs for a quick LOL

This is a sketch up that isn't 100% finished but the internal horn dimensions are 100% true to the sims just need to sort out a few external things. I see the access pannel invader/psycho style with the possibility of a heat sink to help the driver cool better. 

I have designed the horn path to be as smooth as possible with smoothed curves (it does have one 180* turn involved that cant be helped) I have also developed a throat adaptor that will be a mission to build without the use of fiberglass and a mould which is also not 100% desirable but completely doable. A more basic version could be developed but at the expense of sound quality i imagine (whether this is audible or not is a different question). The throat adaptor is much the same as a letter box but giving a more even cone loading with an octagonal entry that turns 90 degrees in the first 15cm of horn.  

And here is a comical representation of the horn path using cute red arrows.

I would love feed back on this type of thing as in my eyes the throat adaptor (best seen in picture 2) will give better controle over the entire surface area of the cone making it act more like a piston. The smoothed horn path i believe will help make the design sound smoother rather than just hearing air move/chuff.

Squeezing the extra horn length in to the cab in this way was an idea spawned from a plan i have of a tapped horn that i have no further details than this picture :

This is to make the driver work in the same ways as a piston with no squeeze of pressure with the driver facing a flat or offset wall straight infront of the driver as with most conventional horns, with some (in my opinion a lot) of energy bounced straight back through the driver creating strange pressure nulls and peaks within this 'compression' chamber meaning the driver wont be as musically controlled i my opinion. My adaptation should create far less negative reflections and deal with this problem with a minimal loss of acoustical energy. A basic law physics states that the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection and so i have drawn you this :

This is surely taking energy from the cone and making the system more inefficient? 

The adaptor is a perfectly octagonal 90 degree turn creating the first few centimeters of the horn with the begging of the horn measured from the octagonal entry. 

Please some one educated tell me if im going wrong or if more explanation is needed, iv had a few beers so i may be babbling shit.  

http://forum.speakerplans.com/alternative-version-of-wsx-plan_topic35203_page1.html " rel="nofollow - http://forum.speakerplans.com/alternative-version-of-wsx-plan_topic35203_page1.html 

@ Smoore - I havent, I designed it as I had free time and fancied a challenge. My thinking for the throat adaptor was just to illustrate a concept that i had never seen used in a design, to me it makes a lot of logical sense, we all know how important corner 'reflectors' are but at a critical stage in setting the tonality of a bass bin its seen as ok to unevenly 'load' a flimsy paper cone and expect good results. We all know that even the most efficient of drivers are struggling to achieve 4% electrical to acoustical energy transfer, with 96% of the electrical energy wasted when in free space. To use an enclosure and the surroundings to gain 20-30% efficiency. Loosing energy with corners is a well known fact why not treat the entry to the horn the same?

Drivers suitable for this design would be anything from the v1000/PD1850 with a slightly less desirable peaky low end to the Fane 18-1000 which will give you the results above.  Anything with a low FS, Qes and a high BL and Xmax should give you an ok result.

 

 Also just a point i want to make (This is probably incorrect anyway!) , someone mentioned to me that using straight lines to make a curve was alot better than using curves.. As it results in more predictable movement/reflection of sound waves. It would also make it alot easier for me to build! What do you reckon? Or would you keep it as it is?

Ill answer the question about the so called reflectors as best i can to my understanding when i post the rest of the data 

 

 If, come next april, you are still in the design process, and need a prototype, send me a PM!

Here is the plots for one box @ 2pi 1w1m

Then 4 boxes @2pi 1w1m

Finished drawing it up too.

Ill have to draw up some 2D plans when i get time.