Why not horns?

Eldartford, or:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MTHX0BsunE

Eldartford, I think it might be more cocrrectly described as a freaking abomination.:-)

Mapman, I'm not sure that Ohm's current non-bending wave non-Walsh drivers qualify.

2 X 15" woofers and +/- 3 db 45 Hz, I'm not impressed. The 4 Ohm load might not be too appealing to many horn enthusiasts either.

Macrojack, are you seriously trying to claim that you've taken the higher road?

I absolutely loathe horns!

Herman, you might be guessing right, but how many hundreds of opportunities does it take for horn enthusiasts to properly implement them?

Midrange purity of horns? Ha! You can't be serious.

Horns were the dominant speaker technology for many years, probably due to the unavailability of reasonably priced high out-put amplification. Once reasonably priced high-out-put amplification became available, horns became less popular. Now that there has been a resurgence in the popularity of low powered amplification, the popularity of horns has increased. IMHO, the recent popularity of horns has more to do with accommodating certain amplification choices, than with any inherent superiority horns might have unto themselves.

Macrojack, I thought I explained what "wavefrom fidelity" was in a previous post. I'm happy horn fans are addressing it, I'm not sure that it has been resolved to my satisfaction. The very concept of a horn suggests to me a distortion creator. I'm not completely satisfied with audio reproduction as it currently exists. I just think other design considerations might hold much more promise, such as the German Physiks carbon fibre DDD.

Mapman, I thought it was obvious that I was questioning the midrange purity of horns. Horns are about as different as omnis as can possibly be. Based upon your love of omnis, (which I do appreciate), I can't help but feel that horns would be an anathema to you. I find horns to be the most colored of all the different speakers. I will say that they do do dynamics and loudness as well or better than just about all other speakers (though the Wilson's can give them a run). If one were to listen to nothing but big band music, I could understand one choosing horns, but despite literaly hundreds of demos, including some high touted and expensive rigs, I find horns to be a bad joke.

Devolution?

Herman, well said, no arguments from me.

Eldartford, I believe that some speakers from Dunlavy, Green Mountain, Quad, Vandersteen and Thiel can do a fairly good job of reproducing a square wave too.

Macrojack, why would "Horns have a greater potential than any other approach."?

O.K. Macrojack, I don't like horns because to my sensibilities the are honky, screechy, shouty, have a cupped coloration, are too big, can be so sensitive that they amplify every minutia of noise and distortion, are ugly, require a ridiculous amount of of space, get in the way of themselves in such a manner that time aligning them is next to impossible without the added expense of digital manipulation, image poorly, and due to the the exra needed labor to manufacture, the huge size, unusual shape and extra weight cost more than competing designs. IMHO, all told, horns offer an ugly sound for a very high price.

I offer my apologies for wandering off topic and mentioning other brands of speakers that don't offer horns. In my defense it was in response to other contributors that brought up the fact that current technology allows horns to now be time and phase coherent, something that was previously next to impossible to do. I applaud the effort. Another poster suggested that only one other very different speaker technology was capable of that. The inference was that horns are no worse than most in that regard. I thought it appropriate to point out that various other speaker designs offer that capability. Some of us find that important.

JohnK, do your really think I would let horns in my home?

I couldn't possibly remember them all, there didn't seem to be any reason to. I've heard just about all the Klipschs, some JBL's, some Altecs, most of the Avante Gardes, the KARS, etc.,etc.. The absolute worst and perhaps funniest were being demonstrated at a show, were horns that used used actual tuba bells. I still shake my head when I think of those.

I like tubas too, but I don't want to hear very other instrument coming through them.

I think pro-audio got the balanced standard thing right. But they sure are ruining popluar music recording.

Macrojack, I think you make a good point. I think electrical amplification is preferable. As I posted earlier, I suspect that the current trend in horn speakers, is due to the current trend in low powered amplifiers, not to any inherent superiority of horns. I will grant you that horns almost always play louder, and are usually superior in dynamic contrasts. To my ears those benefits are far out weighted by their compromises. If mechanical amplification is all that good, why aren't Victrolas used much anymore?

Macrojack, horns have have historically had some of the biggest companies spending the most money trying to develop them. I don't see why you think they are capable of lower distortion. Yes, I think horns are more archaic. There's a reason there are so many more cones and domes, they make more sense. Even panels and omnis make more sense, at least to me. Speaker designers no longer need to compromise their products due to the limited availability of high powered amplifiers. Other speaker designs are capable of filling residential sound rooms with enough volume without the need for additional mechanical volume enhancers. Horns have been well understood for decades. Perhaps there might be advancements due to CAD, improved drivers and digital cross-overs, but those types of advancements will be probably bear more and sweeter fruit for other designs. Truth be told, many if not most of the advancements that might be available in horn development for home use, will probably never see the light of day, because they probably aren't worth the investment due to market considerations. What ever future horn development there might be, will probably be geared to commercial venue applications in which high fidelity might not be the highest priority.

Duke, thank you for your thoughtful response. It has been argued here that that though they might appear similar that wave guides and horns are different enough as to require them to be categorized differently. Wouldn't such a controlled radiation pattern reduce the size of the sweet spot and reduce the sound-stage, especially for multiple listeners? I've not heard this to be the case with horns. Wouldn't the amount of reverberant sound be greater in most indoor live venues too? So long as the reverberant sound is not too close in time, shouldn't we be able to hear this as a reverberant sound and not as distortion? Furthermore, couldn't this reverberant energy be controlled via room treatment and/or room correction? If my budget permitted, I'd guess that I'd move from cones & domes 'n boxes to top quality omnis. Perhaps the antithesis of what you've described as an advantage. Aren't there already existing remedies for such thermal compression in many cones & domes and not really much of an issue for alternative drivers? Am I correct in assuming that the cross-overs you describe aren't digital and therefore are probably incapable of preserving correct time and phase? It would appear to me that this ideal matching of non-horn loaded woofers to the rest of the horn loaded drivers must be rare in deed, all the horn loaded systems I've heard are blaringly bright. I have still yet to hear a horn system that's colouration's are below audibility.

FWIW, I find most horns ugly, but the Avant Gardes while not my cup of tea sonically, are very cool looking.

Duke, thanks again! Interesting how much we agree! Despite expectations to the contrary I too am surprised at the sound-stage capabilities of horns. I would consider this a strength of horns. I think it important to remember that room correction can be programmed for different listening positions. IME, those speakers that can preserve waveform integrity are the most enjoyable. As you wisely pointed out, we all have have our own prioritized sensitivities to different aspects of sound reproduction. I suspect that for many this aspect might not be as important. I believe you are correct, due to market considerations, R&D capital, manufacturing, shipping and handling costs, horns will have a difficult time competing in the value oriented market segment.
Unfortunately I won't be attending RMAF, my loss, it would be a pleasure to meet you face to face.

I suppose if one wasn't interested in waveform integrity, then driver integration would be less of an issue.

Duke, as I have said before, it would appear to me that some people seem to be more sensitive to wave form integrity than others. Of course those people who might not be as sensitive to wave form integrity, might be more sensitive to other aspects of sound reproduction. Though I don't have any hard statistical research to support this, the market seems to bear it out. There are many successful speaker manufactures that don't prioritize wave form integrity, and very few that do. The few that do, seem to garner consistent positive reviews, a loyal following, and enough sales to make them most successful in this highly competitive industry.

Atmasphere, time and phase coherence, or as Duke refers to: "waveform fidelity".

Atmasphere, until recently I didn't think that horns could possibly be capable of waveform fidelity. I am very happy to read, that it is now being addressed. Still, there are other concerns that keep me from being too optimistic.

Mrdecibel, Sorry for the confusion. That reference was a joke aimed at the title of that thread. It was not aimed at you, and I hope you can accept my apologies for unintentionally offending you.

Or a symphony orchestra with real imaging to capture, and it will probably take much longer than 2 hours to record.

Presently, I have neither the time nor the inclination to get caught up in the technical bantering, but other than that, I find myself in full agreement with Prdprez's position regarding horns on this thread.

Herman, well said.

Macrojack, you've got a lot of nerve. You asked why not horns? We answered because horns have a characteristic sound that we don't care for. You asked for specifics. We provided them. You periodically bring up the same complaints that our responses aren't helpful. Well "thems the answers". You dismiss our responses as being ignorant. Well in as much as we might not have the same exact experiences and responses as you, you don't have the same experiences and responses as us. We are no more ignorant than you. You expect us to research the writings of your one and only guru, unfortunately, as you seem to be attached at the hip with him, unless you turn around, your blocking the light on any chance of an open dialogue. Perhaps you are the one that doesn't get it. Neither of us said, that it was impossible to get good sound from horns. What we said, is that based upon our experience, we see more promise elsewhere. Perhaps you should start a new thread for horn enthusiasts only. More importantly, perhaps you should learn to stay on subject without insulting those that disagree with you, as that is the most disagreeable thing of all.

Popularity is not synommous with quality. Horns have been around a long time, for a number of reasons. Perhaps, because of early amplifier limitations and/or perhaps because much like today, they work well for creating great volume for great spaces. It would appear to me, at least on this thread, that there doesn't seem to be a consensus by horn enthusiasts as to; when exactly a horn is implemented properly. Perhaps when that can be determined, the horn haters will give horns yet another chance. Till then, your ill mannered upper case insulting shouting doesn't improve the quality of your argument, it compromises it.

Herman, While all systems deserve considerations regarding placement, associated gear and room treatment, I don't remember box speaker, or for that matter any other speaker design enthusiasts making such prerequisite qualifications. Are properly implemented horns that rare?

Atmasphere, we may haven taken different paths in the woods, but we're in the same woods.:-)

IME, horns are capable of producing a very good sound stage, but not very good imaging.

JohnK perhaps the horn enthusiasts should temper their excitement as well. Newcomers are just as easily influenced by the hyperbole as well. The opening of this thread practically invited the negative reaction.

Mapman, for example; singers with 10' mouths.

Herman, I'll wager a doughnut with my Thiels.

Herman, not all Thiels produce the same bass either.

Herman, I applaud your efforts, I don't believe I have heard a horn system that makes similar claims. It would appear as though you have a rather unique custom speaker system. A speaker system that would be unique to other horns systems, and perhaps even an anathema to some other horn enthusiasts. A speaker system that would not readily be available to the typical consumer. I have concerns that the horns themselves would get in the way of themselves in providing a waveform that would actually be time and phase coherent at the listening position. Still, it's refreshing to see the effort being made. Bravo.

Again, I'm not the one making the claims.

Mapaman, I'm not the one making the claims. Ohm's web site makes some claims using some audio buzz words, but, they don't seem to be used correctly. Perhaps some evidence to support those claims might be appropriate?

Prdprez, John Dunlavy also thought the step response was the most important measurement.

Mapman, the original Walsh Drivers had 2 such mechanical cross-overs. I suspect that there was some cross-over in the lower than the extreme upper frequencies as well. The DDD doesn't have any such mechanical cross-overs.

JohnK, I might be mistaken, but I thought horns were used more to monitor pop recordings and typical dynamic speakers were preferred for classical recordings.

Mapman, the original Ohms Walsh driver was not a one way speaker, there were different segments. Though it might not have used an electrical cross-over, there were indeed mechanical cross-overs. Still a brilliant idea, that I think might has been improved upon by the German Physiks DDD, which appears to be a single driver. I think we're getting off topic now.

Mapman, those horn loaded German Physiks are at the lower end of the line for German Physiks. Their top tier products don't use horns. As for the reviewer, I have no idea who he is, but he's entitled to his opinion.