More COVID speakerplanning - Trapezoidal 3-way top

Looks really interesting :D. Curious to see how this will evolve.

Flat top surface seems preffered for stacking and transport purposes, the extra space can be used to fit an longer horn and te internal hatch is directly behind the mid horn. 

For anyone that may be thinking about building this speaker, I have come up with some ideas on how to improve the kick section - less group delay, more power handling, easier to load the driver. I am also not sure if the mb15n351 will actually survive horn loading due to its light cone. 

A mk2 version will be coming soon™

Lil update:

I think I have finally come up with something that makes sense. 

It is 810x650x450, 237L, an xtro is 308L for reference, 30% larger. 

citizensc wrote: I do see the merit to it but it doesn't meet my design goals...

Just thinking out loud, and considering what others have done as solutions.

Unless you are amazing, finding genuinely new solutions is unlikely, but putting a 15" in a horn, with your choice of compromises will yield a new version of kick solution, so carry on. Iterative evolution of the subject is as valid as massive steps.

I see how the Merc/Racing Point brake ducts as an interesting case. At first glance, especially if you are as cynical as me, looks like straight plagiarism, or shared technology. Money is probably involved somewhere, it usually is.

However.

If you are trained to use a wind tunnel, and you are tasked with developing a duct, and you are constrained by strict rules about the location and size and every other variable on the duct, it is likely that a competent engineer will design something quite similar to another competent engineer?

Same with a 15" in a horn, simmed in HR? You have less FIA rules to adhere to, but you are adding your own constraints and rules. If you're competent, which it sounds like you are, for the set of variables you start with, should generate an almost predetermined output!

Effectively your speaker is already designed, so crack out the wood!!

I have been thinking about 4pi vs 2pi, I have come to the conclusion that its probably somewhere between. You are correct to say that it wont be with in 1/4 wavelength of the ground and therefore it isnt true 2pi. It isnt a horn mouth floating in free space either, there are the panels surrounding the horn, the cabs it is likely stacked on top of and if its an indoor venue, there are walls and the ceiling to take in to account. I have decided to stick with 2pi because the xtro models badly in 4pi and I know from real world experience it works well. 

Hornresp is a rather simple modelling software, this is great because you can whip up a model much quicker than you can build a cabinet. More complicated software like COMSOL can be used to generate a closer to real world model but for the time it takes to build a model, a lot of people would rather just build a speaker and measure it. 

The simplicity of hornresp does limit the control you have over the model and as a result it may be less representative of the real world.