Lime Twig

Interestingly, in my digging around the Wave Music forum archives, I found this later post from Shorty: "the EAW 882 horns never kicked or delivered what the real berthas / levans did, i remebered hearing the system at Palladium which EAW made everything in that system for Richard, Richard designed that system with Kenneth Forsyth of EAW and EAW manufactured all the cabinets. All the other rooms with these EAW 882s he used it didnt really do anything compared to his earlier systems or kicked like other berthas ive heard before that werent 882s. Nice find online, (referring to the same 882 drawings posted earlier) thou alot isnt on those plans" (from 2006)

I wouldn't disagree with the physics: you're quite right to point out that a low frequency wave simply will not be audible right in front of a large horn, (and it's quite obvious that you know much more about this that I do!) what I'm reacting to is the idea that for this reason, conventional horns are inappropriate for dancefloors! That just seems to fly in the face of so many world-class club systems! Richard Long's venerated Berthas at the Paradise Garage, 54 and all are the stuff of legend. And even if Ministry of Sound has recently upgraded their Berthas to ported ASXs doesn't mean that the originals didn't sound great throughout the entire '90s! Interesting, I didn't know RLAs cabs were built by EAW. I have some doubts that the RLA Berthas were only a product of the late 80s however. In stories about the Garage system they are the constant fixture and the Garage closed in '87. Here's a sales brochure (no date, sadly) showing the stack with the Berthas and Levan extention.

Tonnes of info here for me to mull over, thanks. Since I will be using my La Scalas for mid-bass, that's already a known quantity for me. I already know I like the sound of these horns for midbass. I take your point that a Bertha style sub is not the way to go since my room is too small. (btw, it's 35' long x 20' across with 16' ceilings). Here's a shot from close to the wall looking across the dancefloor: You can see the hybrid LS tops I built in the pic above. Here's a shot looking the other direction, showing the normal LS: The thing I don't understand is what you mean when you say conventional horns sound like they have no bass up close. I mean, I know the basics, I understand why a large format horn like a Bertha would not have much bass up close, but there is so much variety in folded horns. The person I've been getting the most advice from has two sets of enormous J-scoops for example. One pair has plenty of bass up close, the others do not, owing to differences in horn length and throat size. Some side notes: the RLA bins I was referring to were his Bertha designs from the Paradise Garage. I don't know anything about his use of the Olsons.

This is the best news I've gotten in a while, Fritz,. I'm always happy to take the time to re-learn a bit of math, a bit of horn theory, but eventually I hit a wall and would rather make sawdust. Thanks for the encouragement to just jump in!

Thanks for all your help, greg!

Ok, I think I'm getting this. I've been reading a DIY thread on understanding Hornresp. How do you decide where the area begins and ends that constitutes a given "S"? The first area is especially confusing to me: I kind of understand the two areas around the 90 degree bend and the final area from the beginning of the flare to the horn mouth, but I can't figure out how S1 is measured. Is it just the opening in the motor board? Does it include the area of the first, small reflector?

Thank, Greg. That helps. I really need to learn Hornresp. Being on a Mac makes it hard though. The "pieces" are represented by the S1-S4 values, yes?

I'm confused. That's what I thought initially but if that's the case I can't understand why there would be any divergence from the actual measurements. I can understand why there would be an line on the graph for "ideal exponential" and another for "actual measurements", but what does the piecewise linear model mean in relation to these?

Fantastic. Thanks! Obvious question, but one I wasn't able to figure out from the thread: what type of flare is the LS? Exponential? Conical? Also, what does "piecewise" mean in those graphs?

Hi all, I'm not sure what these are called – I wish I knew the correct term for them – but I'm hoping someone will recognize what I'm describing and can help me out. It's basically a drawing showing the flare of a horn "unfolded" from a folded-horn design. I assume speaker-builders make them as part of the design process to make sure the dimensions of the horn are correct at every fold. I'm wondering how these drawings are made. Would you simply measure the horn at each fold and plot the measurements on a graph? I need one for a La Scala. Since there are two air paths, would I measure both? Of course it would be wonderful if someone had already done this [] Any help is appreciated!

Before I go cutting ply I would love to know how to calculate the flare rate. I've seen drawings of other horns where they "unfolded" the horn and showed its overall shape. Has anyone seen one of these for a LaSca? Or are there any other ways folks can think of to calculate how to get the final folds right?

The LS I inherited came with an extra pair of industrial woofer sections. They were called "LF extensions" if I remember correctly. When we got them they were connected directly from the (parallel) inputs of the regular LS. With no crossover in the woofer sections they did their best to reproduce everything that was thrown at them and sounded - predictably - awful. We later had a low pass xover built for them using the same xover point as the normal LS and ran the system as you suggest: a La Scala with dula bass bins. The result was underwhelming. You could stand in front of them, listening to the normal LS, plug in the second woofer and hear only the slightest increase in low end. We eventually turned it into a 4 channel system by building another set of top-boxes. That has been a far more enjoyable use of the extra LS.

I run 4 La Scalas: 2 original industrials and 2 hybrids made up of Industrial LS woofers plus a top-box I built. It's loaded with a K-400 horn with a Selenium D250X mid and a Selenium ST324 slot tweeter. The crossovers on the second ones were built up by some local folks. When we first turned them all on my impression was they were remarkably similar. After a bit more listening, I realized the new ones were a bit quiter. Our crossover builder informed me that he had lowered the output of the mids by 6db because the D250X was louder than the K55. He had initially planned to only lower it by 3db but had decided on 6 at the last minute. Turns out 3db is right and he offered to change it for free. There may well be differences between the sound of the two drivers but in my experience so far, it's very subtle. And man, those Selenium drivers are CHEAP![] There's a more noticable difference between the tweeters for sure. The Seleniums sound like they go higher. I wouldn't say I like either one better, I'd say the K77 "sizzles", whereas the ST324 "rings". Both are very pleasant to my ear. Happy experiementing!

Very cool project, kg4guy! I've been asking people for advice on another thread about how to design a sub to match my La Scalas. Looking at your design has got me thinking. What would happen if you took a LS bass bin and faced in into the corner of a room, then built a triangular top and bottom to create a large horn for it to sit in? Would it be possible to find the right position for it to create a corner horn out of it? A quick Sketchup pic:

Thanks for the explanations of increased horn length and how it fucntions as a TH. I'm curious about your dislike of conventional horns though. I mean, there are obviously very different schools of thought in audio circles, but disliking folded horns tout court seems to fly in the face of all the most renowned club systems. Richard Long's original systems, Funktion One and Martin Audio's contemporary flagships, as well as the smaller "boutique" NY installers like Gary Stewart Audio and Systems By Shorty. They all use horns exclusively and are all renowned for their bass. Are you not a fan of these systems, or do they achieve something that you feel horns usually don't? Alternatively, perhaps you feel they aren't good examples of what you're describing here?

I thought so. I'm wondering, you said earlier that you thought the MWM would be a bad choice for dance music. This design looks very similar yet peforms incredibly well according to the graph you posted. Where's the difference coming from? I'm missing something obviously, since I don't understand how it could be like a TH or scoop. Is the driver not in a compression chamber in this design?

I've been reading over the thread. It's interesting. I'm always a bit suspicious when I encounter a new (to me) design which seems to promise all the answers! Thanks for filling me in on the (inevitable) trade-offs. What I really want to know more about is their sonic character. I need something that will mate well with my La Scalas. To me, that means I want a sub with real snap, so I can hear the strike of the bass drum that gives dance music it's character. That's one feature that all the good club systems have in common. The more reading I do, the more I realize I don't need (or even want!) a sub that goes to subterranean depths, what I need is one that will match the La Scalas fast, snappy horn sound. Can anyone tell me their impressions of a tapped horn's sound compared to a conventional folded horn?

Interesting. So what's the trade-off? If TH are highly efficient, go lower, are smaller, and easier to build, what do they give up? and thanks for the corner horn sketch! I was wondering if one could modify the MWM design to increase the flare to 90 degrees and make full use of the corner. Have you built this one before?

I've heard that tapped horns go very, very low, but that they trade this depth for a loss in efficiency. Is this right? Having the snap and kick of a high efficiency horn is what I'm looking for. Love the chart for that dual 15" corner horn! Do you have drawings or pics of it? Is the K44E still availble? How is it different from the standard 33?

djk, so you'd recommend a Khorn with a K44E driver as a sub? Could you tell me a bit about the 44? I'd also be happy to hear any other suggestions you have for horn-loaded subs that would complement a La Scala nicely for dance music. What club? Did I miss a post discussing a club?

Thanks for all the pics of Khorn competitors from back in the day, John.

EDIT:after searching some more threads I've got my head around the MCM's parts: MWM, MSSM, MSM, etc. I'd still love to know how well they would mate with La Scalas though! And how efficient they are... they look huge but the horn path looks very simple.

William, THANK YOU for directing me to the MCM. I discovered colterphoto thread on rebuilding his MWMs and they look excellent, all the more because they look like a reasonable thing to build. Can someone fill me in on some details? MCM is the name of the overall line and MWM, MWM-s are part of this line? What are the major differences, configurations within the line? (I read that MWM-s was the single driver version). Most importantly, would they mate well with La Scalas?

I first heard about tapped horns just this week - not something I've ever been familiar with. From what I can make out they look like folded horns where the driver isn't in a compression chamber. I'm assuming that means you get the wave coming off the back of the cone too, but in phase with the wave coming from the horn? Almost like a scoop bin with a much longer horn and the driver firing the opposite direction. Am I right? More importantly: what do they sound like compared to folded horns?