polizzio

" The only horn loaded speakers to rival these are the Klipsh Klipschorns. They crush the Klipsch Cornwalls and La Scalas in side by side testing in every category." As PWK himself would say.......Bullshit!

@Chris A Throat is where compression would occur. Mouth is outlet. The wiki on horn loudspeaker has helped me.

Got it, thanks.

ah......we all agree on that. My Peavey SP-1s 40 years ago were of the same design. Folded horn LF cab.

Chris, define "acoustic transformer" in your words for me, please. The paper you linked gave none, i read it. How does an acoustic transformer work? How does it amplify acoustic energy from a transducer? How does it produce a measurable gain? "Woofers have a lot more resistance to push against at the mouth of a horn than if direct radiating." Are you stating there is a form of compression @ the mouth of the horn? More resistance to cone excursion than a sealed cab direct radiating?

Absolutely agree with you on the DSP compensation/boost. Enhanced/boosted very low frequency output.

I agree with directivity gain vs a DR, a focused beam like output. I mentioned that above several posts above. A horn cab precisely focuses the acoustic energy from the transducer. Chris do you believe the actual acoustic output from the transducer is "amplified" in a horn cab? A passive amplifier as Carl stated.

So how does my sealed cab direct radiator SVS SB-3000 sub generate a 25 hz signal? It has no horn.

So based on that theory, generating a 10 hz signal in headphones or earbuds is impossible?

I clearly stated the horns purpose above. To precisely focus the acoustic energy of the transducer. It does not actually increase the transducer's acoustic output. Same transducer @ same power generates the same acoustic energy in a direct radiator cab .....its just diffused or dispersed differently. DR diffused in a wide pattern. No "megaphone" effect. If you google search there is no such thing as a passive amplifier. An amplifier requires an energy source to amplify an input signal.

Put your money where ur mouth is.........oh that's right, I forgot, you just talk s**t. And you don't really believe it

Why? Does it actually increase the acoustic output from the transducer? I don't think so.

So your saying if the bass horn cab was much larger, it would alter the frequency response of the transducer? You need to explain that to me.

Help me understand this as I have been giving bass cabs a lot of thought. Sealed and BR designs. LS LF cab is horn loaded yes, but the horn config does not amplify or alter the frequency response generated by the transducer itself. A horn loaded cab is not an amplifier. What it does is focus or precisely "aim" the acoustic energy versus say a direct radiator cab. It performs like a megaphone. Show me any sealed cabinet home loudspeaker manufactured today which reproduces with authority < 50 hz in test data. Not to mention DSP utilized in many sub amps today. Or active XOs, and bi or tri amping used with some high end home loudspeaker systems. Bass reflex cab is tuned to effectively reproduce sound lower than 50hz in the input signal. This tuning, port size, and cab volume is critical. BR also utilizes acoustic energy from both sides of the transducer radiating surface, where as a sealed cab only uses the front radiating surface transmitted to listener. By design the BR cab offers the listener more acoustic output vs a sealed cab. No doubt this is a prime reason Klipsch has gone to BR cab in the latest Heresy IV. But this also leads me to ponder utilizing both sides of the transducer radiating surface (front and rear surfaces). In essence the rear movement is an echo of the original sound wave generated by the outward movement of the transducer cone. Grant you speed of sound is ~ 1100 feet per second (fast) but its still an echo of the original signal. Also reflected in @Chris A latency test results he posted about a month ago of his former CWs and his Jubes in a graph. I have to add I was surprised the latency of the CW LF was not actually worse compared to his mighty jubes. A testament to PWK's original design and execution. And remember PWK in his early days didn't have computer power, software processing, and modeling/testing/sampling of today's technology. Since I have been a member here at the forum, a couple members have called CW bass "flabby" vs LS. Clearly some members here have extensive experience both hands on and listening experiences vs myself. Multiple systems, annual get togethers, classes @ Klipsch, equipment reviews and demos. Welcome any comments or discussion on this topic as it helps my learning process here. I know @ClaudeJ1 has a tremendous experience and knowledge of BR reflex cabs as shown in his Super Hersey mod and sub discussions. I'm sure many here would learn from this discussion.

That's a lock, given the teams involved Joe Burrow, Coach O and staff will hand out free lessons tonight to Clemson.

I believe you. But the Colt 1911 semi auto trigger mechanism is so easy to improve. So simple really. John Browning was a genius, as was displayed in many of his creations. But yes you would think a Colt Gold Cup would have a decent trigger from the factory. Trigger creep is safe for a manufacturer, the great preventer of ADs.

Well the big day has finally arrived. GO LSU TIGERS.

Colt just announced they are going to manufacture the Python revolver once again. Although I doubt they will equal the Python quality once created by true craftsmen. The early Pythons were assembled and lock work hand fitted by a single craftsman. We shall see. Colt announced in late 2019 they have voluntarily stopped selling AR15s to the civilian market, only LEO going forward. They also lost out as a supplier of rifles to the US military, to FN. Me thinks they are trying to replace lost revenue streams. We may be witnessing the last days of Colt Manufacturing going forward. Checking the SN of my unit above @ the Colt website indicates it was manufactured in 1973.

Read one article which mentioned being very careful with multiple levels of data compression via BT transmission. MP3 file is already compressed, then transmitted via BT (wireless) resulting in a second level of compression. Why the OP is raving about his experience with his Autoengine BT unit. His source signal is lossless (amazon ultra HD streaming).

You are welcome.

That is not worth the expense. That amp is rated @ 140 wpc clean, his avr will do 125 wpc clean into 2 channel stereo only. 25 watts when volume is cranked up is negligible. Not even a 2 db change between the two when approaching really high volume settings. OP needs to move to at least 250 wpc, 300 or 400 wpc even better. Or listen @ lower volume levels where output power is clean and amp not clipped. Read this article on amp output power and sound pressure (volume) increases: https://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/the-decibel-db

Actually if you research BT technologies, the latest BT 5.0 and a couple of the latest codecs will transmit 576 and 990 kbps data transmission rates. Far eclipsing the best mp3 data rate @ 320 kbps. I am a wired guy myself, have yet to try bluetooth technology other than the SVS app for my sub settings. Or my phone while in the car. I don't listen to music from my smartphone, I do it from a high res portable player and wired earbuds. But the BT 5.0 LDAC codec has three times the data transmission rate of the best quality mp3 data rate. Now whether your phone or device supports these codecs is another thing. But the OP's Audioengine B1 Bluetooth Reciever/DAC does do aptX hd and 576 kbps. Pretty impressive. And BT tech and their codecs are improving every day. here is a link to some educational reading on BT 5.0 and the latest codecs: https://www.soundguys.com/understanding-bluetooth-codecs-15352/

Damn, that game will drive a Texan fan to drinkin.

That shot of Watts kneeling and out of breath just before the last KC touchdown pretty much sums it all up.

KC takes the lead!