Ricci's Skhorn Subwoofer & Files

[radulescu_paul_mircea]

A K10 is more powerful and efficient than an FFA10k. On a pair of SKhorns 16A will be enough on the long. But you will see a voltage drop for sure and also you will see lots of amps drawn on the short term. On the K10 and K20 I have I've seen 47 amps at 225 V on display for large peaks. That's on the power supply, not the output stage. There I've seen 100 Amps and 220 V peaks on the K20 meaning 11KVA reactive power. 

[m_ms]

Reading up on this thread one gets the feeling that a "low corner" below some 25-30Hz for subs used for music augmentation - TH's, FLH's and 6th order BP perhaps in particular - may even be inadvisable if the most "musical" and best-integrated sound (with the mains) is sought. Is there any truth to this?

Tapped horns are said to be particularly bandwidth limited, so that the likes of Ghorn, LOWAR horn and lilWrecker TH's (all tuned at or below 20Hz) have a hard time reaching 100Hz without being EQ'd here. However, for as long as they're used within their "safety zone" in the upper region of their frequency span (say, up to 60-80Hz), not least high-passed accordingly, does that necessarily place any hindrance for them being excellent as music subs? Or is there an inherent flaw - typically, at least - with subs that are tuned below 20Hz, or maybe even higher, that makes them less than ideal for music?

Of course, if music is the primary source why bother with <20Hz reproduction, save perhaps organ freaks and their desire to reach into infrasonics? Cinema subs for the home environment are often preferred when having strong 10-20Hz output, which rules out a lot of horn varieties or other high(er) sensitivity pro-style options (like the SKhorn). Although, I may have to reassess the need for ULF-capabilities for Home Theater use when taking into account that most commercial cinemas use steep high-pass filters below 35-40Hz (except IMAX), and then suddenly strong bass reproduction down to 25Hz, as seen with the OThorn and SKhorn, isn't so bad after all.   

As is I'm going with a pair of MicroWrecker's of lilmike, hopefully finished by the end of next week, because they seem to give me both one and the other; strong reproduction to 20Hz (tuned to 22Hz) and up to some 100-120Hz (perhaps with slight EQ needed), to serve both music and films well. Still I'm wondering if I'm pushing a bit too far towards 20Hz to maybe compromise music reproduction. Maybe the lesson learned is to avoid both/and here, and instead seek either/or - with all that entails. The SKhorn is a close runners-up as a music-mostly sub, split up in two, but maybe that's the next build to embark on some years ahead..

Oh, perhaps I need to reveal that my priorities in regards to music and films (Blu-ray/UHD) is some 60/40. So, I do prefer having the subs dialed in for music first and foremost, but the added weight, physical presence and palpability of having reproduction capabilities down to 20Hz (or even lower) with films is quite addictive.

/Mikael

[Ricci]

18 hours ago, radulescu_paul_mircea said:

A K10 is more powerful and efficient than an FFA10k. On a pair of SKhorns 16A will be enough on the long. But you will see a voltage drop for sure and also you will see lots of amps drawn on the short term. On the K10 and K20 I have I've seen 47 amps at 225 V on display for large peaks. That's on the power supply, not the output stage. There I've seen 100 Amps and 220 V peaks on the K20 meaning 11KVA reactive power. 

To add to this...The K series is set for a maximum draw of 32A slow average from the AC line to avoid tripping breakers. However with music signals this is quite a bit more than this seems. It is easy to pull more current for short durations but averaging even 20A with dynamic content is a LOT of power. I run into this with very long sine wave sweeps but this is not normal use. This is why amplifier current pull is rated at 1/8th or 1/4 duty cycle rather than 100%. The K20 at 1/4 duty cycle into 4 ohm bridged pulls 25A (230v AC).

[Ricci]

5 hours ago, m_ms said:

Reading up on this thread one gets the feeling that a "low corner" below some 25-30Hz for subs used for music augmentation - TH's, FLH's and 6th order BP perhaps in particular - may even be inadvisable if the most "musical" and best-integrated sound (with the mains) is sought. Is there any truth to this?

/Mikael

TH's have a harmonic spike in what is commonly considered their bandwidth which can end up causing issues. If the TH is tuned low it moves the placement of this spike down in frequency until it can end up in the critical bandwidth you want to use the sub in. Bass guitar and kick drum range...As the TH becomes more and more undersized it exaggerates the spike in response even more. The more the tuning is lowered the greater the TH will be undersized effectively. There are tricks that can be done with the design to minimize this harmonic spike and a very well damped driver helps somewhat. You can also attempt to address it with EQ. However if it is bad enough it will always be audible. In my opinion TH's work the best when only extending to 25-30Hz at the lowest due to this. This allows you to keep that harmonic above 100Hz and above the usual low pass for the sub. This is why I quit pursuing big TH's that extend deeply.

Other designs can be made to sound excellent over a wider range much easier. Sealed, IB, ported, FLH, or BP variants. In my opinion for HT powerful headroom down to the 15-16Hz range gets most of the content. It's greatly diminishing returns below that point. For music I consider 25-30Hz the minimum for good reproduction without missing out on the "heavy" notes.

[m_ms]

6 hours ago, Ricci said:

TH's have a harmonic spike in what is commonly considered their bandwidth which can end up causing issues. If the TH is tuned low it moves the placement of this spike down in frequency until it can end up in the critical bandwidth you want to use the sub in. Bass guitar and kick drum range...As the TH becomes more and more undersized it exaggerates the spike in response even more. The more the tuning is lowered the greater the TH will be undersized effectively. There are tricks that can be done with the design to minimize this harmonic spike and a very well damped driver helps somewhat. You can also attempt to address it with EQ. However if it is bad enough it will always be audible. In my opinion TH's work the best when only extending to 25-30Hz at the lowest due to this. This allows you to keep that harmonic above 100Hz and above the usual low pass for the sub. This is why I quit pursuing big TH's that extend deeply.

Other designs can be made to sound excellent over a wider range much easier. Sealed, IB, ported, FLH, or BP variants. In my opinion for HT powerful headroom down to the 15-16Hz range gets most of the content. It's greatly diminishing returns below that point. For music I consider 25-30Hz the minimum for good reproduction without missing out on the "heavy" notes.

Thanks for this run-down - indeed interesting info. It seems to confirm I'm hitting a compromise with the MicroWrecker, tuned some 5Hz below the OThorn(and SKhorn?) and 5Hz above the lilWrecker and similar TH "company."

Attached is a simulation of the B&C 15TBX100 in the MW at 200 watts, 1pi measurement. Sensitivity sits at approx. 97dB's with this unit. There's a clear 80Hz spike, but I'm not sure how that'll translate to the actual real-world performance. I'd like to experiment with a 100Hz low-pass to relieve my all-horn mains from some bass duties, but maybe that's a bit optimistic. 

Being that the SKhorn is not really a horn (not even a variant of sorts?), does that mean the fitted driver is not "force multiplied" as would otherwise be the case via a typical horn loading? How for example would one section (with one 21" driver) of a spilt-in-two SKhorn fare against a single 21"-fitted OThorn (let's just say using the same driver, B&C 21SW152, to make comparisons easier)? Since pressure from both sides of the cone is also used in the SKhorn (though without being horn loaded in a similar fashion at one side as in a TH like the OThorn), I imagine they're not that far apart. Also, looking at the innards of the SKhorn it does seem there's a short loading at the front side of the cone. 

 

[SME]

On 1/2/2019 at 4:04 PM, m_ms said:

Being that the SKhorn is not really a horn (not even a variant of sorts?), does that mean the fitted driver is not "force multiplied" as would otherwise be the case via a typical horn loading? How for example would one section (with one 21" driver) of a spilt-in-two SKhorn fare against a single 21"-fitted OThorn (let's just say using the same driver, B&C 21SW152, to make comparisons easier)? Since pressure from both sides of the cone is also used in the SKhorn (though without being horn loaded in a similar fashion at one side as in a TH like the OThorn), I imagine they're not that far apart. Also, looking at the innards of the SKhorn it does seem there's a short loading at the front side of the cone.

I would call the SKhorn a horn hybrid as it does behave like a horn in the upper end of its bandwidth and like a vented cabinet in the lower end.  But really, I think obsessing about terminology misses out on the important nuances.

When you use the term "force multiplication", I think you are describing the increase in efficiency that occurs as a result of an increase in acoustic impedance of the air adjacent to the driver.  Put another way, the air near the driver is under more pressure than it normally would be without the "horn loading".  Truth be told, there are many ways to accomplish this acoustic loading.  One simple example that arises with subs in small rooms is placement of subs in or near a corner.  The corner placement actually increases the acoustic impedance of the air, loading the driver like a horn would.  Another way to increase acoustic loading is by placing multiple drivers next to one another.  These strategies can be combined.  For example, subs may be stacked in a corner in a floor to ceiling array, leading to an effective infinite line source and excellent acoustic loading.  These do exactly the same things that horns do, and if one is flexible in one's thinking, one can see how such arrangements *are horns* for all practical purposes.

This makes me think of "waveguide theory", which basically provides a new set of mathematical tools to analyze and understand horns.  But at the time, horn speakers had a bad rep in audiophile circles for having screechy treble, so the people promoting the theory and speakers based around them insisted on calling their horns "waveguides", probably because the term was both less likely to sound offensive and more likely to sound sexy and innovative.  BTW, I hold waveguide theory in high regard and believe it has contributed to far superior horn designs, but I think it's still silly to call a "horn" a "waveguide" just because it was optimized using the better theory.

[Ricci]

14 hours ago, SME said:

I would call the SKhorn a horn hybrid as it does behave like a horn in the upper end of its bandwidth and like a vented cabinet in the lower end.  But really, I think obsessing about terminology misses out on the important nuances.

Agreed...There have always been a lot of hang ups with terminology in audio circles and fixation on defining things by a strict set of rules. In order to be an IB the back volume must equal at least 10X VAS...Waveguide vs horn etc...

I consider the Skhorn a hybrid 6th order design.

Fun fact...Skhorn is pronounced like the word scorn and I gave it that name because after exploring all the options I could think of attempting to do a horn of some type, I ended up not doing a horn at all. No matter how much I wanted to, and I really wanted to make a horn at first, I simply could not make a horn this size that would perform like this cab. After giving up and scrapping all the horn ideas for a hybrid 6th order BP I called it Skhorn as a middle finger to bass horns in general. Most people think it's called that because it's some kind of horn LOL.

[m_ms]

17 hours ago, SME said:

I would call the SKhorn a horn hybrid as it does behave like a horn in the upper end of its bandwidth and like a vented cabinet in the lower end.  But really, I think obsessing about terminology misses out on the important nuances.

Are you implying I'm "obsessing" about terminology? My point was simply to call for a comparison between the OThorn and SKhorn while having some tech background to possibly support the discrepancies found here, but apparently that's a touchy subject (or, granted, irrelevant). Oh, Mr. Ricci just confirmed the SKhorn isn't a horn at all, so there you have it..

Quote

When you use the term "force multiplication", I think you are describing the increase in efficiency that occurs as a result of an increase in acoustic impedance of the air adjacent to the driver.  Put another way, the air near the driver is under more pressure than it normally would be without the "horn loading".  Truth be told, there are many ways to accomplish this acoustic loading.  One simple example that arises with subs in small rooms is placement of subs in or near a corner.  The corner placement actually increases the acoustic impedance of the air, loading the driver like a horn would.  Another way to increase acoustic loading is by placing multiple drivers next to one another.  These strategies can be combined.  For example, subs may be stacked in a corner in a floor to ceiling array, leading to an effective infinite line source and excellent acoustic loading.  These do exactly the same things that horns do, and if one is flexible in one's thinking, one can see how such arrangements *are horns* for all practical purposes.

Force multiplication, as it applies as a descriptor of the horn effect, to my mind is equally about effective air radiation area and how it couples to the air (what you mean by "acoustic loading"?). I've read of a number of cases where multiple direct radiating woofers, large ones at that (typically 18" or bigger), have been deemed to not better or even loose steam against horn-loaded bass augmentation - that is, where the latter used smaller diameter units in (much) fewer numbers. Following the need for nuance, as you pointed out earlier, I can't see how this's simply about efficiency dialed up via the horn. The horn being a megaphone as such also makes a given driver diameter appear much bigger at the horn mouth (and beyond it), but there's directivity at play as well and how this further affects how the sound is loaded or "carried" through the air, and ultimately perceived by the listener. Listening to direct radiators often feels like the sound looses energy and impact on its way to the ear/body vs. horn sound that somehow "latches on" to the air for a more visceral feel. More efficient direct radiating drivers alone wouldn't help to accomplish this effect.

So, in a sense the force multiplier is comprised in a threefold way: efficiency + air radiation area + acoustic loading (for a horn) and how this couples the sound to the air (the gradual impedance matching from throat to mouth). If there's a more or less precise numeric value for how to assess the increase of air radiation area from driver cone to the accumulated horn response in front of it, I take it the acoustic impedance matching, and what this means for sound "carriance"/directivity, adds yet another "amplification layer" of how the sound is actually perceived. Of course, all of this may as well be a giant pile of B.S.

Quote

This makes me think of "waveguide theory", which basically provides a new set of mathematical tools to analyze and understand horns.  But at the time, horn speakers had a bad rep in audiophile circles for having screechy treble, so the people promoting the theory and speakers based around them insisted on calling their horns "waveguides", probably because the term was both less likely to sound offensive and more likely to sound sexy and innovative.  BTW, I hold waveguide theory in high regard and believe it has contributed to far superior horn designs, but I think it's still silly to call a "horn" a "waveguide" just because it was optimized using the better theory.

Every waveguide is a horn, but not necessarily vice versa - or something along those lines. I've owned 3 terminology-coined "waveguide" speakers prior to my current all-horn mains - from Amphion, S.P. Technology and hORNS (Polish) - and I was especially fond of the latter two. Going by terminology obsession and the supposed traits of waveguides, which I'm aware of, I should've gone from horns (that aren't waveguides) to waveguides, but the opposite is the case. Hmm.. That's not for lack of acknowledging the virtues of waveguides, but because the overall Tractrix + folded horn design with my current speakers sounded better to my ears.

Needless to say: if a pair of split-up SKhorns sounded better to my ears compared to some horn iteration (TH, FLH, whatever), of course I'd be going with the former. Going with the MicroWreckers, being tapped horns, instead of the SKhorn option comes down to two things: the MW's extending a bit deeper to cater to Blu-ray/UHD movie-playback, and being overall cheaper (cheaper drivers). Not least lilmike, just like Ricci, appears to be a very capable tapped horn, BP or other developer. Admittedly, being that I've had no opportunity to listen to either beforehand, I've been more intrigued with tapped horns than anything else (ports compress, sealed is boring (and inefficient), and all that jazz). 

[SME]

13 hours ago, m_ms said:

Are you implying I'm "obsessing" about terminology? My point was simply to call for a comparison between the OThorn and SKhorn while having some tech background to possibly support the discrepancies found here, but apparently that's a touchy subject (or, granted, irrelevant). Oh, Mr. Ricci just confirmed the SKhorn isn't a horn at all, so there you have it..

My point is that the Skhorn offers most of the same benefits as other sub horns, regardless of whether the Skhorn is technically a horn or not:  The driver is relatively concealed, which helps filter unwanted driver distortion and noise.  The expanding slot for the front provides acoustic loading at the upper end of its bandwidth.  The vent/box resonance provides acoustic loading at the lower end.  By "larger effective area" I think you are referring to directivity/dispersion control.  The Skhorn doesn't provide much dispersion/directivity control, but most sub bass horns don't either because the waves are so long.

What's probably relevant to you about the Skhorn is not that it isn't a true horn but that it that doesn't extend as low as you'd like for home theater content without plugging vents, which makes compression more likely.  The Skhorn does look cleaner in the mid bass than the tapped horns do, so for music integration, I'd expect the Skhorn to typically give better results, but a lot depends on room, placement, setup, etc.  I think you chose the MWs because you wanted as much extension as you could get while sticking with a horn, which may be more difficult (but certainly not impossible) to integrate with the mains.

If money and floor space were not an issue, I'd suggest you maybe go with a Skhorn together with some sealed or vented subs dedicated to the bottom end.  You could just leave them turned off when listening to music if you wanted an "all horn" system.  Or maybe keep things simple and build a M.A.U.L. 

[m_ms]

14 hours ago, SME said:

My point is that the Skhorn offers most of the same benefits as other sub horns, regardless of whether the Skhorn is technically a horn or not:  The driver is relatively concealed, which helps filter unwanted driver distortion and noise.  The expanding slot for the front provides acoustic loading at the upper end of its bandwidth.  The vent/box resonance provides acoustic loading at the lower end. By "larger effective area" I think you are referring to directivity/dispersion control.  The Skhorn doesn't provide much dispersion/directivity control, but most sub bass horns don't either because the waves are so long.

Got it - re: whether the SKhorn is a horn or not. It's impressive what it does with a relatively limited size, and split up in two has a form factor that would suite my environment quite well. The measurements look excellent too. I'd use it with the B&C 21DS115's to shave off some expense (instead of the siblings 21WS152 or IPAL), perhaps also to deliver a slightly smoother measured response (?), but only because I'm under the impression this unit wouldn't compromise overall performance too severely (certainly not for my use); otherwise there wouldn't be any point in building them. But as it is I won't be building them - at least, not anytime soon Right now my focus is getting to implement the two MicroWreckers, which are planned to finally be finished by next weekend (I know it's not a build by Ricci, but might still deliver a build-threat here when they're finished). 

 

Quote

What's probably relevant to you about the Skhorn is not that it isn't a true horn but that it that doesn't extend as low as you'd like for home theater content without plugging vents, which makes compression more likely.  The Skhorn does look cleaner in the mid bass than the tapped horns do, so for music integration, I'd expect the Skhorn to typically give better results, but a lot depends on room, placement, setup, etc.  I think you chose the MWs because you wanted as much extension as you could get while sticking with a horn, which may be more difficult (but certainly not impossible) to integrate with the mains.

Exactly; while not completely sure - because really, how deep does 25Hz feel? - my gut feeling tells me the SKhorn would be slightly lacking with movie-playback, at least some of them, while being potentially better in the opposite end of its operating range compared to the MW. That being said I won't deny horns intrigue me the most (as I'm sure is quite obvious by now), and one of the technical reasons for my preference for TH's over FLH is excursion minima at the tuning frequency, while offering better extension for a given horn size (my listening space is limited, after all). 

I'm sure the SKhorn is an awesome sub - even without being a horn What fascinates me about horn bass though, and where I feel it differs to the sealed and ported designs I've heard (haven't heard 6th order BP iterations), is a distinctive smoothness or buttery liquidity even. I'm thinking it has to do with very little smear/good transient ability, high-ish sensitivity and ease. With the bass heads lurking around here and an experience far exceeding mine I suppose I should eat up my preconceptions and accept that other principles than horns can provide great bass, but is it the same as horn bass? That I'm not convinced of. For now I'm hoping the MW's will integrate well with my all-horn mains with an 80-100Hz low pass. 

Quote

If money and floor space were not an issue, I'd suggest you maybe go with a Skhorn together with some sealed or vented subs dedicated to the bottom end.  You could just leave them turned off when listening to music if you wanted an "all horn" system.  Or maybe keep things simple and build a M.A.U.L. 

That's an interesting solution that I'll keep in mind, mixing the SKhorn with a more depth-capable solution for movies, but it would hardly be manageable in my current listening room. Maybe at some point I'll realize giving up extension below 25Hz is the most acceptable compromise with the SKhorns only - we'll see.

The M.A.U.L however - good Lord. LOL! Or was that Darth M.A.U.L.? That's one mean beast I'd never dare getting my hands dirty with 😲 I mean, 250 kg's?! But, down to 15Hz - job done in that department.  

[SME]

10 hours ago, m_ms said:

Right now my focus is getting to implement the two MicroWreckers, which are planned to finally be finished by next weekend (I know it's not a build by Ricci, but might still deliver a build-threat here when they're finished).  😲

At least get a friend to take a picture of your face when you push those things for the first time.  

10 hours ago, m_ms said:

Exactly; while not completely sure - because really, how deep does 25Hz feel? - my gut feeling tells me the SKhorn would be slightly lacking with movie-playback, at least some of them, while being potentially better in the opposite end of its operating range compared to the MW. That being said I won't deny horns intrigue me the most (as I'm sure is quite obvious by now), and one of the technical reasons for my preference for TH's over FLH is excursion minima at the tuning frequency, while offering better extension for a given horn size (my listening space is limited, after all).

At 25 Hz, you're doing better than the vast majority of cinemas and almost all pro sound systems in existence.  Going lower will definitely make a big difference with *some* movies (maybe 1 in 3 action/scifi) and a subtle difference with many of the others.  Because of room gain, you don't necessarily need a lot of output at the "tuning frequency" of a horn if it's below ~30 Hz.  A lot depends on what the room is doing.  Mine ramps up like crazy to 20 Hz.  IIRC, I theoretically can do near 130 dB sine waves with my subs and without using a huge amount of power)  A pair of MicroWreckers at 20 Hz full tilt probably could destroy my home.  I guess you'll find out what you get with them in your room. 

 

[m_ms]

On ‎1‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 11:19 AM, SME said:

At least get a friend to take a picture of your face when you push those things for the first time.  

Looking forward to that indeed 😎 Truth be told I'm absolutely clueless as to what awaits me with the MW's. My last sub was a single SVS SB16-Ultra - no slouch by any means relative to its size, and quite musical - so I take it I'm in for a change, safe to say, with a pair of horn subs each fitted with a driver the same size as the one used in the SVS. Overall impact comes to mind here.. 😬 I did contemplate adding a second SB16, which I'm sure would've made for a very good result, by why not try something altogether different (and more powerful) while you're at it (I'm rather drawn to pro-style sub bass), for what will amount to the same-ish sum of investment?  

Further off topic (sorry, Mr. Ricci): have you ever heard Danley's TH-50, and if so how did you like it? I know the MW's are inspired by it (as is the Ghorn, I guess), so maybe some impressions of the TH-50 would give me a slight bearing - if indeed this model is anything to go by in relation to the MW's. 

Quote

At 25 Hz, you're doing better than the vast majority of cinemas and almost all pro sound systems in existence.  Going lower will definitely make a big difference with *some* movies (maybe 1 in 3 action/scifi) and a subtle difference with many of the others.  Because of room gain, you don't necessarily need a lot of output at the "tuning frequency" of a horn if it's below ~30 Hz.  A lot depends on what the room is doing.  Mine ramps up like crazy to 20 Hz.  IIRC, I theoretically can do near 130 dB sine waves with my subs and without using a huge amount of power)  A pair of MicroWreckers at 20 Hz full tilt probably could destroy my home.  I guess you'll find out what you get with them in your room. 

Yeah, 25Hz Ricci-measured response from the SKhorn could well turn out to be quite sufficient with movies when all has been said and done with the contribution of room gain. I do have concrete walls in my listening room, but hardwood floor and a ceiling material I'm not aware of (my guess is some kind of plaster), so what that does for room gain I couldn't say. 

If memory serves me correct you're using a total of four 21" units (sealed?) for your subs, right? Using only little imagination I take it those could potentially level your home at "full tilt" or war volume as well? I believe a pair of MW's with the B&C 15TBX100 (which per lilmike is mechanically limited in the MW at about 600 watts) could hit 130dB's with 400 watts, so perhaps in the same ballpark compared to your setup  

[Ricci]

I have heard the TH-50 way back what must've been a decade ago now...It was quite powerful in the basement of the home that we demo'd it in. Ivan also brought a Danley CS-30 and a THspud from what I recall. The TH-50 uses a beastly 15" driver (MTX 9515-44) and it's a huge cab but it does deliver the goods. 

Since the thread is about the Skhorn perhaps we should move discussion to a build thread on the Microwrecker. LilMike is someone I've talked to for years and met before. He's a good guy and he lurks around here, so if you have questions don't hesitate to ask him. 

[m_ms]

1 hour ago, Ricci said:

Since the thread is about the Skhorn perhaps we should move discussion to a build thread on the Microwrecker. LilMike is someone I've talked to for years and met before. He's a good guy and he lurks around here, so if you have questions don't hesitate to ask him.  

Of course. 

[chrapladm]

5 hours ago, Ricci said:

I have heard the TH-50 way back what must've been a decade ago now...It was quite powerful in the basement of the home that we demo'd it in. Ivan also brought a Danley CS-30 and a THspud from what I recall. The TH-50 uses a beastly 15" driver (MTX 9515-44) and it's a huge cab but it does deliver the goods. 

Since the thread is about the Skhorn perhaps we should move discussion to a build thread on the Microwrecker. LilMike is someone I've talked to for years and met before. He's a good guy and he lurks around here, so if you have questions don't hesitate to ask him. 

I have a TH50 build that I was looking at doing for fun using a different driver. But for now I was looking at finally building this Skhorn in a single driver version. Moving houses so lots of things will be changing for myself but projects will finally be started and completed.

[mathiasb]

Reading through this thread has been really inspiring. I discovered new drivers that I would consider reference (IPAL and its brothers), and learned more about horn enclosures.

It makes me want to attempt building a small horn loaded subwoofer for use with desktop speakers and the such, just for its high efficiency.

[radulescu_paul_mircea]

Going back to my issue with the drivers in electrical series, I can say there is absolutely no difference between them linked like that or parallel. All my tests and measurements showed me nothing changes, a small voltage difference is present, but only 1-2 V at 60 V sines. 

[Ricci]

7 hours ago, radulescu_paul_mircea said:

Going back to my issue with the drivers in electrical series, I can say there is absolutely no difference between them linked like that or parallel. All my tests and measurements showed me nothing changes, a small voltage difference is present, but only 1-2 V at 60 V sines. 

That is good news. I'm glad you verified it. 

[Ricci]

Paul did you get the 21NTLW5000's? There aren't any over here in the US yet. I'm keeping an eye out for it because it's on my short list.

[radulescu_paul_mircea]

4 hours ago, Ricci said:

Paul did you get the 21NTLW5000's? There aren't any over here in the US yet. I'm keeping an eye out for it because it's on my short list.

Today was the delivery term, but because of the holidays, it will be a small delay. I'll post some pics and my opinion when I get them.

[Ricci]

10 minutes ago, radulescu_paul_mircea said:

Today was the delivery term, but because of the holidays, it will be a small delay. I'll post some pics and my opinion when I get them.

Great... You will be the first person I know that has gotten their hands on these. 

[radulescu_paul_mircea]

I might not be the first because after all, it will be at least one month from now until I'll get them.. but when I'll have them, I'll test them in every way I can.

[Ricci]

I'm keeping an eye out for availability here in the US but no one has them yet.

[radulescu_paul_mircea]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2368478136529650&amp;id=100001024606404

They are all getting a place in those SKHorns XL

[Ricci]

Nice collection of woofers there!