Horn based loudspeakers why the controversy?

The real irony to me is that the same people who vehemently argue for the dynamics of horns are the same who think vinyl is king. You don't get more dynamically compressed than vinyl.

@kosst_amojan

I really feel like I need to set the record straight here. Regarding vinyl (and I realize this is off-topic so I won't linger), I run an LP mastering operation and we do CDs too. As far as dynamic range goes, these days typically the LP is less compressed than the CD. This is because there is no expectation it will be played in a car, while there is every expectation that a CD might so they get some compression. But this simple fact is you can take any digital recording and master it to LP without any processing, so long as you don't run into an out-of-phase bass problem (which can usually be solved without processing if you spend enough engineering time with the project). Due to the generalized nature of your comment, I'm saying that its false. LP has dynamic range (ideally) that is nearly that of Redbook.

Now regarding 'dynamics of horns' there is an entirely different issue at play. First, much of the 'dynamics' that audiophile discuss is really distortion due to higher ordered harmonics; I find that usually you can substitute the word 'distortion' for 'dynamics' without changing the meaning of the conversation.

But distortion usually relates to amps, and many horn lovers use SETs, which make quite a lot of distortion. They have good 'dynamics' even when not used on horns :)

As far as the horns go, the distortion they make is related to the diaphragm and the curve of the horn itself. Modern materials are available to prevent the diaphragm from having any breakups in the audio passband; these materials were not available until the early 2000s. So if your impression of horn dates to prior that time, it may simply be out of date. The curve of the horn can be optimized by the use of CAD; again if you were listening to older designs you may not realize the progress that's been made!

Horns are still important because tubes are still very much around decades on after being declared obsolete. You really don't have to know anything technical about their benefits; understanding the economics is enough- tubes do something people like. But the thing is, tube power is expensive and so horns can be quite practical and as fast and transparent as the best ESLs if field coil powered. 

It's true that they have higher distortion when they are run at anywhere near the rated power but they also have vanishing low distortion if they are run at about 10% of full power. So when you hear them coupled with  horns usually you're not hearing the amps distort.   Solid-state is the opposite at about 10% of its full power it will have quite a bit higher distortion  then the SET amp at 10%.

+1  I think most people don't understand this simple fact about SETs and thus don't get to hear what they really do!

Try Everest DD66000, K2 S7500, S3100, K2 S9900, M2.. etc.

I have a customer with K2s- powered by our largest amp, the MA-3. They are amazing and does not hurt to have that kind of power behind them (our amps haver very low distortion at low power levels unlike most push-pull amps; I think that is why he gets away with this).

I get the impression from the glowing adoration of horns by some here that their significant shortcomings are being ignored

I can speak for myself in that such is certainly not the case. Horns can sound as good or as bad as anything else.

Like I said, if somebody has a great pair of horns for me to hear, let me know. I'll listen. I like a tight, physical kind of sound. That's why I like my Focals. It's what I've liked about horns. I don't like that in-your-face way so many project sound. I've never heard a horn not sound like that to some degree. Either that's just what horns sound like, or they're exceptionally difficult to design correctly. I'm leaning towards the latter. I don't blame people if they like that kind of sound. Some people value tone beyond imaging or any other consideration. We all have our quirks. I value exceptional imaging, smooth response, and decent but not ear-popping dynamics. Horns aren't for me.

OK- Classic Audio Loudspeakers. They image extremely well and dance circles around any Focal I've heard. They have gotten 'Best Sound at Show' a number of times (THE Show, RMAF, Axpona, CAF).

The bottom line is that until I hear a horn that sounds like a point-source I'm not going to like them.

The Classic Audio does that; the speakers vanish and do not call attention to themselves. Slight nuances in any recording are instantly audible as they are very fast and revealing (the first breakup occurs at 35KHz); IOW if you want "exceptional imaging, smooth response, and decent but not ear-popping dynamics" then horns may well be for you.

Dynamic speakers absolutely smash horns into the ground in terms of volume of media attention, sales, and conversation. Why do dynamic loudspeakers practically own the speaker market at every price point? You can't understand the controversy if you can't answer that question.

Sure- and to be fair, 90% of those speakers are sold at Best Buy and similar; and really aren't 'high end'. My speakers at home are a lot more expensive that anything sold in a box shop.

Horns were pretty well the only game in town in the old days. Tubes were the only game in town too. Tube power is expensive- so doing the most with it pays off on the speaker end. Horns are still around because if you can build them right, they are as low distortion as anything out there, just as three dimensional and revealing, and a plus is they can play a lot louder- still a good thing, as tube power is still more expensive than solid state and tubes are still very much around!

it’s also how this ability (not least as a product of much higher sensitivity) translates into a sense of effortlessness not only at elevated SPL’s, but at more "sane" playback levels as well.

+1 When we first got our Classic Audio Loudspeakers, this was one of the properties we noticed almost right away.

Siegfried Linkwitz is the guy out there making foolishness out of all the "narrow dispersion is good" silliness. Maybe it's good in a PA, but not a living room. This crowd here deliberately avoids and ignores anything that disagrees with their OPINIONS. That's the source of this controversy.

I'd be careful about making the association between 'narrow dispersion' and 'all horns'. I've had various box and planar speakers; my current setup uses horns and images as well as anything I've heard. My living room is about 15' wide.