LTH 142
It was reported to me that the 142 can get as low as 500Hz, but only if mounted on a large flat baffle, as opposed to the flange simply being in free space (which is not a good idea for any horn, for that matter, even if it says Altec on the front label.)
It was reported to me that the 142 can get as low as 500Hz, but only if mounted on a large flat baffle, as opposed to the flange simply being in free space (which is not a good idea for any horn, for that matter, even if it says Altec on the front label.)
Have owned it (IMG Stageline branded version), but never used it.
I'll report as soon as I've heard it with the HF1440 (in the near future) and hope to post some measurements as well.
Like 80-90% of the commercially available horns, it's too small to get the most/best out of the HF1440. Besides, it's not a CD horn and beams considerably.
Does anyone have experience with the B&C DE880 and/or DE980-TN?
I was pleasantly surprised by the smoothness of the older DE820, when I heard those mounted in F1 Resolution 3s at high SPL.
The ..880s are supposed to be even better, especially in the top octave.
Danley exchanged FaitalPros for DE880s in the SH96 (non HO).
I'll report as soon as I've heard it with the HF1440 (in the near future) and hope to post some measurements as well.
Like 80-90% of the commercially available horns, it's too small to get the most/best out of the HF1440. Besides, it's not a CD horn and beams considerably.
Does anyone have experience with the B&C DE880 and/or DE980-TN?
I was pleasantly surprised by the smoothness of the older DE820, when I heard those mounted in F1 Resolution 3s at high SPL.
The ..880s are supposed to be even better, especially in the top octave.
Danley exchanged FaitalPros for DE880s in the SH96 (non HO).
Attachments
Last edited:
Ok it is a little bit an apple to oranges comparison due to the different drivers used. But if you look at Vance Dickasons measurements the LTH142 doesn't seem to beam much more than the XT1464 for instance. Both are around 15 dB down @ 30 degrees off axis compared to on-axis in the top octave.
Regards
Charles
Regards
Charles
It's quite remarkable and completely contrary to popular belief; the Funktion One and Void Air Motion V2 / Tri Motion reference 4-point installations that I've heard recently on several occasions, reproduce a smooth sound, devoid of any harshness whatsoever. The Void systems are perhaps even a little too mushy for my taste.
How many of us would expect to endure considerable SPL at about 1-2 meters distance from either bunch of horns without earplugs? (Obviously for a very short time).
How many of us would expect to endure considerable SPL at about 1-2 meters distance from either bunch of horns without earplugs? (Obviously for a very short time).
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
I do not think that this is really true. The horn loading is not the biggest factor, it is the compression ratio. And in either case this loading has more to do with radiation efficiency and not "loading" in the sense of constraining the diaphragm motion. In any of these systems the radiation load is a small fraction of the total mechanical "load" on the diaphragm - being dominantly the result of the Electromagnetic damping. What this means is that horn loading will have only an insignificant effect on the diaphragm motion. It will continue to increase as the frequency falls if the SPL is to be maintained at a constant level regardless of the details of the radiation impedance. So basically the horn load has almost no effect on the diaphragms motion.
Agreed on the mechanical aspects being more important. However, for Salmon type of (deep) horns, loading has a more pronounced impact on the driver, compared to your and other modern (short) horns and waveguides. The latter are mostly used above the driver's mechanical limits. If not, these will sound quite terrible, especially at higher SPLs.
Moreover, the compression ratio of oldskool drivers (with a conical exit section) combined with these classic horns is generally higher, compared to modern pancake driver + waveguide combinations. In essence, these are different 'systems'.
Last edited:
I really love my EV HR9040 horns and hope to test the HF1440 soon on that horn. I also ordered LTH142 to check if this will perform satisfying with the HF146.
Here are actual pics: Faital 15FH500 (16Ohm) 300 liters reflex, and EV HR9040 with Altec 288K.
KR Barossi
If we would construct a very deep JMLC/Tractrix, or exponential horn with a huge mouth (suppose: a 50Hz 'horn'), one could use a 1" TAD 2001 from 200Hz without issues. Obviously it'll beam like hell, but due to the loading provided by the horn it'll sound good within reasonable SPL limits.
Barossi, I'd probably prefer the HR9040 to practically every other commercially available horn. It's the result of Keele's early 'work' and according to many his magnum opus.
Do you also have experience with the HR9040A?
The EV HR series harbor the key to CD from large horns without the (theoretical) drawbacks of sharp edged slots. I think Bjørn Kolbrek drew inspiration from the big white EV horns (as well as Cohen's Reversed Flare theory) in designing the red horns for the Axi2050.
Last edited:
Maybe true to some extent, but not always. But in any case it is still insignificant.
I never talk about "old school" as we have come so far from any of that that it is always a waste of time. Nostalgia for audio should be limited to history and not suggested to refute the current approaches. They are "different" systems, the new being a fast improvement on the old.
So beaming, in your view, is not detrimental to sound quality?
Yea, this is clearly not the mainstream view.
The Big EV Horns (i own the HR9040a) are very good, unfortunately 1.29 inch and not 1,4"
https://www.electrovoice.com/binary/HR9040A EDS.pdf
I also own a beautiful pair EV HR6040 (without A) they are rare and also very nice!
I was around for much of the early days of audio and I had many of the systems that people view with nostalgia today, but I would never go back. Audio quality is so much better today than in the past. I still hear those old systems at events and they still sound exactly the same as they did. To some with fond remembrances of this era, this is good. To me it is simply not acceptable.
As I said in another thread, I would look at ways to measure the wavefront from a CD. It's never done and yet we know that it is less than ideal. The thread
has a discussion of this.
A compact horn is a small horn...
, the largest is your soundwave on your horn surface the smallest are your distorded waves.Look at this design, is there any enlightenment coming in you mind ? It remembers me the the billiard but with recorded laughs on each rebound.
The camera works by combining 64 separate microphones, a traditional optical camera, and an integrated data analysis system. Using data from the mics, the system figures out exactly where in the frame the sounds are originating from and then overlays the high-resolution results in real time on the live view from the optical camera.
“Sound propagates as a wave at a certain speed, which means that sound needs a certain amount of time to propagate from a noise source to each microphone of the array,” the company writes. “Depending on each microphone’s position, the sound wave will need varying travel times. The algorithm running on SOUNDCAM analyzes these time delays and calculates accurate acoustic pictures and videos in real time.”
Probably still not very useful