uams

I owned a pair of Simon Mears Audio Uccello speakers until about 3-4 years ago, and they're an homage to the Klipsch Belle's. The Uccello's were built from ground up with the same bass horn design (w/Crites CW1526C woofers), but with different, stacked ply mids and tweeter horns, B&C compression drivers (DCM 50 and DE10) and top-of-line ALK crossovers. Lovely speakers, wonderful craftsmanship, and that particular bass horn coloration in the 125Hz vicinity. I heard that coloration immediately when first auditioning them in Brighton, UK, but nonetheless fell in love with their sound; so wonderfully alive, vibrant, present, dynamic and organic. Over time though the mid bass coloration got to me, and I tried out digital correction in both the amplitude and time domain, which took care of the mid bass bump. It also corrected other things, though the FIR-filters gave off a peculiar "ghosting" effect that preceded more dynamic outbursts. At the time I also went on to have the Uccello's subs augmented, initially with an SVS SB16-Ultra (marred by overhang and lack of integration with the U's), and eventually with a pair of MicroWrecker tapped horn subs that I still own, and that complemented the Uccello's wonderfully. Through it all though I began to feel that what I wanted was something else than what the Uccello's were intrinsically, on their own; they were high-passed around 80Hz to the subs, and had DRC run over them as well - as such everything was very, very good, apart from the ghosting effect and the fact that I found them to lack height of presentation. Eventually it gave me the feeling of simply letting the Uccello's be what they originally were - full-range, sans DRC and subs, and preferably with a low wattage, high quality SET - but it felt incompatible with my ultimate goals and desires. It comes down to the bass horn of the Uccello's/Belle's/La Scala's simply being to small; it stops acting as a horn just over 100Hz (close to the resonance peak here), and throat restrictions (i.e.: from higher compression ratio to aid upper end extension, which is originally hampered by the horn being too small) seems to provoke air velocity problems here, with horn wall resonances only making matters worse. You want a better mid bass horn you need to accommodate bigger size and have the horn act as a horn in its entire range, with an overall smoother as well as cleaner upper end response to follow. But we all know size is a problem when seeking approval in domestic environments, and thus problems arise with horns. A truncated front loaded horn in the subs region is less of a problem than over the mid bass and lower mids, where the sonic penalties are more obvious, but still I prefer tapped horn subs over truncated FLH subs. I would say to quite a few here: love your Klipsch speakers if that's your natural inclination, but there's no reason to be married to the company and get defensive when flaws in design are pointed out or otherwise implied through listening impressions. It's just the physics of things, nothing personal. For horns to be their best size needs to follow accordingly - that's just the way it is.

Hi, gnarly Interesting sub approach. Have you compared such a principle to horn sub iterations? Thanks, yes the MW's are use from 83Hz and down with a high-pass at 20Hz, and the EV bass section is then low-passed at 83Hz. All slopes are 36dB/octave L-R, expect the HP slope style on the MW's is Butterworth. Indeed, if the older EV HP9040 horns + DH1A CD's are anything to go by I'd be surprised if the B&C DCX 464/ME 464 combo doesn't perform very well indeed, but both you and poster @Dave A would seem, at least to some extent, to counter that assumption. Speaking of which, could you share some more insights on the sound of named B&C combo? What do you mean by them sounding like "traditional PA," and how are they differentiated sonically to your Synergy horns? I'm contemplating building the B&C 215-DCX MTM system at some time in the future, but would like to get some bearing on the sonic nature of the B&C horn and driver before considering more seriously. https://fohonline.com/articles/tech-feature/dyi-loudspeaker-design-the-bc-215-dcx/?fbclid=IwAR1qlR_5ipsPiBRjQnPpLDHRQ5DFNyc7ajX0pB5qEXOwAWT31F_VBEhiOIY

Cool Synergy setup. What're the subs situated below the left and right Syn. horns?

Diffraction slot horns seems to catch on with quite the negative buzz, not just around here. How has this tendency latched on so predominantly? Surely not through hands-on experience only. Indeed, as a universal observation at least and at any SPL, I don't see how that is warranted. I use a pair of Electro-Voice TS9040D LX with the Don Keele designed Constant Directivity HP9040 horns + DH1A 8 ohm (and so an older design, as you all know), and from what I've read (though never experienced) the "frying bacon" effect shouldn't set in unless +120dB's are reached. More to the point: used in my own domestic environment they sound great, actually. I've had people over using the likes of Quad electrostatic speakers and other typical "high-end" offerings in their own setups, and they're impressed by the EV's - even envious at some of their traits. I wouldn't worry about the B&C ME464 horn using a diffraction slot - certainly not viewed as an isolated design parameter.

The main speakers are from-ground-up build Simon Mears Audio Uccello's (http://simonmearsaudio.com/uccello-horn-loudspeakers.html), and are inspired by the Klipsch Belle. The folded bass horn section should be identical (with the Crites CW1526C woofer), but the rest is different. The midrange and tweeter horns are Tractrix profile, with the midrange horn being, if I'm not incorrect, a slightly modified Eliptrac 400. Mids and tweeter drivers are B&C DCM50 and DE10.

My current setup with the MicroWrecker tapped horns standing in the background corners

I would leave the La Scala's as they're originally built and add a pair of horn subs; horns for horns, as they say. Crossing them over to the La Scala's in the 80-100Hz range seems like a good choice. Horn subs sound different compared to direct radiator subs. To my ears the former is smoother, more enveloping and refined, and will integrate better with your La Scala's. Low distortion is not the only reason horns sound different, but also the way the cone through the gradual impedance match of the horn interacts with the air, makes a perceived difference. Suitable FLH subs could be the THT's and Cinema F20's, but I find tapped horns variants to be suitable as well. I use a pair of MicroWrecker tapped horns to augment my Belle-inspired Uccello's below 78Hz.

You bring up an interesting subject, namely going about bass performance beyond the mere typical and dare I say trite, insufficient and indeed ill-placed terminology that simply refers to the likes of "tight," "accurate" and "fast" (so, no, I don't believe you're in the wrong with your outset). Bass is much more than that, and authentically reproduced (at least to my ears) I'd even claim it's something other than "tight" and "fast;" natural bass to me is tuneful first and foremost, and has an effortless, smooth and wholly enveloping presence - regardless of playback level. Using the word "musicality" feels rather appropriate as a sibling-term to "tuneful" that describes this very ability as well, as it seeks to sum up an overall presence of music. When I listen to an upright bass in a live performance its fullness/richness, texture and layered sound is what strikes me, and very few speakers/subs I've heard are able to reproduce this remotely faithfully. When bass reproduction feels "tight" to me it often equates into an overdamped and constricted character, and at the same time much hifi-bass can also feel too ponderous and solidified. To my ears bass needs to float, envelope and excite the air, and this way lends itself to a more holistic experience. On the upper boldfaced part: yes, a fitting driver placed in a folded horn of some kind WILL have "different sonic characteristics" compared to a direct radiating iteration, but contrary to you I believe this change more successfully approximates what to my ears sounds right compared to a live acoustic reference. Quality bass/sub horns are rid of audible overhang, and exhibit a beguiling smoothness, omnipresence and ease making bass feel just there and properly integrated in the whole. In my specific setup I find a pair of tapped horns to blend in seamlessly with my all-horn mains, and compared to the FLH's I've heard my TH's have a more pronounced sense of (natural) warmth while feeling perhaps slightly more visceral. However, bass horns take up space, there's no way around that - it's simply dictated physics. There are relatively less space consuming alternatives though (oh well, certainly helped by their shape and not using +15" drivers), like lilmike's PicoWrecker tapped horns. A pair of those (or four) I'm sure would do wonders in most any domestically sized environment. Insofar a sub(s) doesn't physically and acoustically obstruct one's listening space, I don't believe you can overdo subs capacity by any typical, practical measure; headroom is your friend, and implementation is paramount. Indeed I'd stress the need for sheer capacity, and always go at least dual when implementing subs in your setup as this will aid response smoothness (with less need for EQ) and add headroom, all things being equal.

@avguytx -- Thanks for your interest Yes, the pair of MicroWreckers were finished by mid January, and since their arrival in my setup here have undergone quite the experimentation with regard to their placement in my listening room, as well as still undergoing the process of being progressively run-in. My initial plan to have them placed front center/rear wall was eventually replaced by them being positioned along each their side wall, symmetrically to the mains, and in stereo. Many if not most may argue the validation of running a pair of subs in true stereo crossed below some 100Hz - with reference both to whether musical material (certainly digital) is really recorded in stereo in the bass below 80-100Hz (some is), and whether we're able to discern stereo information this low in frequency (we are, I'd say) - but I can say for sure that running the MW's symmetrically to the mains has aided their integration, in a way even that now has the MW's integrate seamlessly with my all-horn Uccello's. Inherently though the MW's integrate better, even from the outset, than my previous SVS SB16-Ultra ever came to do - just to be clear. So here I am, having now finally found the placement for the MW's (after some 2 months with various positioning) and also settled on the cross-over frequency at 80Hz, where my mains are high-passed as well. The slope type, both the high- and low-pass here, is Linkwitz-Riley at 42dB/octave as is, with a high-pass on the MW's at 20Hz 24dB/octave Butterworth slope, for driver protection and theoretical distortion minima. Even closing in on 3 months of use it's clear the MW's are not yet fully run-in; every now and then I can hear how they develop in small, but still rather significant audible "notches" that has the bass gain in impact and becoming fuller and more enveloping. Those B&C drivers are stiffly suspended, and they move very little even being given a fairly good workout with Blu-ray movies in particular, so I suspect a lengthy process for them to loosen up. The MicroWreckers are crazy good subs, indeed I haven't heard bass this refined, effortless, smooth and enveloping/present. There's a natural, liquid warmth even to their reproduction (while sporting no overhang) that shakes the air in a way very differently compared to my earlier SVS, which had a more "brutal" along-the-floor and slab-like presentation of bass, but also having a more congested and "massive" feel to it as if it struggled with inertia and slight compression even. The SVS went slightly deeper, I'd say about 5Hz, and this is not insignificant with certain Blu-ray movies where below 20Hz reproduction creates a certain shudder effect - something many cinephiles crave. For my own part, while it felt like a sacrifice to begin with, the more the MW's are run in the less I feel is lacking here, to the point now where I feel the gains in the midbass down to 20Hz and overall bass character more than makes up for any loss of <20Hz extension compared to the SVS. Oh, I may have been rather "visible" in forums here and there in my insatiable appetite to know of horn bass in its different sonic incarnations - sorry if I've "pestered" any discussions here with my presence. I just find it interesting to know what others feel here, and how they come about their impressions of bass from both horns, other hidden-driver 6th order BP iterations, and direct radiator solutions. I've felt it necessary to help me hone in on where to put my efforts sub-wise, but it's an ongoing discussion I'm still invested in Regarding the CNC-machining: it was actually the cabinet maker that I hired (and knew beforehand) that suggested we go the route of CNC, so to make for the most sturdy, rigid (the horn panels are cut into the side walls) and aesthetically pleasing outcome of the cabinets. Though cab-build tolerances are, well, tolerated with bass horns, the final result here has all measurements fit to the mm, and there are absolutely no air leaks. A lesser build and ply quality would surely have been accepted, but I wanted a premium build quality to give these the benefit of the doubt, so to speak, in whichever way it may support the quality of the bass and resilience to high-power use (the pressure build-up inside the horn with high SPL's can be significant), subtle it may be.

@ClaudeJ1 Being the two subs in your setup presently (and for some time now, it seems) are both tapped horns, is that a reflection of an actual preference for tapped horn iterations over "Full Horn subs"? It appears you've also used Mr. Fitz Maurice's THT at an earlier juncture, and if so how would you compare the bass from the THT to both the TH-50 and OThorn? Oh, and do you care to elaborate on your choice of two different tapped horn subs in your setup? If I had to guess the OThorn provides the most "musical" bass of the two, and the TH-50 extends a few Hz deeper to fill in and give some heft for watching movies..

The closing statement of Kevin Fisk's 2014 review of the Uccello's might be worth stressing: http://simonmearsaudio.com/uccello-review.html An homage and development, not a ripoff - if it makes any difference among the diehard Klipsch Heritage fans here

Thanks, they're actually Simon Mears Audio Uccello's, inspired by the Belle

Sorry for the late follow-up. The two MicroWrecker tapped horns of "lilmike" (over at the Avsforum) have now been implemented, though only for about a week and a half. Those B&C 15TBX100 drivers are still very stiff (forgot to run them in before mounting them) leading to a somewhat lean and slightly lack-of-impact bass, and optimization still has a long way to go, but overall I'm impressed by their imprinting. As of now am toying with delay and crossover between the MW's and mains via the Xilica XP-3060 and the XConsole control software, presently sitting at 90Hz x-over with 48dB/octave slope, Linkwitz-Riley. I'm also running a HPF at 20Hz 48dB/octave Butterworth, mostly as a means of theoretical diminishment of distortion. I've yet to start PEQ, but later will try a REW-treatment (maybe also DRC Design) to see how that fares.

Thanks, @Chris A - will get back to you shortly.

Is there a recommended high-pass crossover frequency for the Belle's when integrating them with subs? I've read about the folded bass horn of the Belle and how it supposedly stops acting like a horn below some 100Hz(?) or a bit higher, please correct me if I'm wrong here, and therefore I'm thinking the ideal high-pass frequency would be where this occurs (i.e.: where the folded bass horn stops acting like a horn). Of course this needs for the subs to cleanly reproduce at +100Hz. My main speakers are inspired by the Belle, and the folded bass horn is similar (while the rest is not). I have a pair of tapped horn subs being build as we speak, lilmike's MicroWrecker's, and so am very interested in learning about the above. Initially I planned to run my main speakers full-range with the MW's (crossed about 60-62Hz), but I've got hold of an excellent digital XO, a Xilica XP-3060, that I would like to try inserting over my main speakers (with their passive XO's still in the chain), and experiment with high-passing them. I intend to start with a 100Hz high-pass to the MW's.