Jump to content

Driver Comparison for the K 402 Horn


Recommended Posts

Mike,

I can always depend on you to toss a rock. You know, the Martinelli is NOT even available any more, SO the ONLY Engineered Horn for the Jubilee Base Bin IS the K 402. Is using a TAD driver in lieu of the K69/1132, blasphemy in your mind also? If that is the case, there are quite a few that are going against the Kliopsch tradition, in your mind. ALL i want to know is if the K 402 will sound better to me as SO many have suggested. To say IT is the best Horn that has ever been put on top of a Jubilee could also be challenged by someone. I am certainly not downplaying Klipsch or as you think "Talking bad" about them. I am only in this for the research and my being a Dealer should NOT have anything to do with it. If every time I make a post on this Forum and you are going to play the Dealer Card, something is terribly wrong. You are one of the very reasons that I have difficulty trying to express anything here, as you want to challenge everything that anybody does. This isn't some type of competition or Pre-School game, it is a fact finding mission. You REALLY need to stop being so negative in your views. I would hope that I will be allowed to post as a regular member with questions and hopefully get help along the way without having to battle someone every time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris,

You make some very good points and believe me, I am listening to everything you guys say. The Martinelli is a unique Horn and just sounds great with the Jubilee, I know going in that the 402 has got to sound great as so many people have attested to that fact. I have just NEVER personally heard one and thought it was about time I did. I am the one spending the money for these test to help ME understand this process, so I consider it a huge learning curve for me, not some sinister ploy to degrade the K 402. It could be the combination with the Beyma driver just clicks, who knows? IF time alignment can make that or any other Horn better, I am all for it.

W. C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

W.C.,

Ordinarily, I wouldn't have responded after your previous response since I don't usually go head-to-head (it creates bad will). But your announcement of being a Klipsch dealer sort of changes things a bit. I would recommend that you perhaps engage Roy D. in emails on this subject and on others closely related to Klipsch Heritage and Professional products - there is a lot to digest, IMHO.

Also note that your relationship to the forum has changed once you are perceived as a representative of the Klipsch product line, especially one that goes online and contributes on its forum. I believe that this puts you in a position of added responsibility in a "honest broker" role, one that SpeakerFritz alluded to above. And I personally hope that readers of these threads intending eventually to invest in the better-performing Klipsch products have a balanced and informed view on what those unique products bring to the marketplace.

Regards,

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richard,

I am looking forward to the results with the DX-38 and what the delays bring to the table. I have used the active features of several Crown XTI's for the MCM stacks and that has worked out great. They have been used in a large open area so I doubt that I personally could hear any nuances, or major differences as I will in a much smaller setting. we also use the M3 and 4 passives with them and it is hard for me to tell any difference between the active and passive crossovers.

Your right, which is better Heinz or Del Monte?

W. C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>

When I asked Bob Moers, former Klipsch President, and PWK himself, about 8 years later, they both said that 2 milliseconds was inaudible on speech and music with loudspeakers, but it would be detected with headphones and clicks.

This is a well documented effect.  If PWK said this, I believe that he wasn't telling the whole truth on the perceived effect of delays. See the top of <a href="http://online.physics.uiuc.edu/courses/phys406/Lecture_Notes/P406POM_Lecture_Notes/P406POM_Lect10_Part2.pdf">page 4 of this article</a>. </p><p>Chris </p>

The dates for the questions were 1977 for Bob and 1985 for PWK. The paper you cite was published in 2002, the year PWK passed on and improved the IM distortion of Heaven's musicians.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richard,

I am looking forward to the results with the DX-38 and what the delays bring to the table. I have used the active features of several Crown XTI's for the MCM stacks and that has worked out great. They have been used in a large open area so I doubt that I personally could hear any nuances, or major differences as I will in a much smaller setting. we also use the M3 and 4 passives with them and it is hard for me to tell any difference between the active and passive crossovers.

Your right, which is better Heinz or Del Monte?

W. C.

Grey Poupon (in honor of direct radiator "audiophiles").

I, for one respect the fact that you are sharing here as an individual and not a dealer. I'm sure if those biases were real instead of pereceived by a few people here, you would say so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Claude,

Thanks for the kind words. I think you, of anyone here, can relate to MY passion for trying to understand and further development, on a few items in the speaker arena. All I want to do is share some findings....I really have NO bias or agenda, just preferences that can change anytime, as it will be a learning experience, until I am Horzontal......[:D]

I certainly want to maintain the individuality as best that I can, as the Dealer part is purely a Service, that I have been asked to perform, and I hope that we can do it justice..

Thanks,

W. C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone tried to build DIY 402 horn, well that sounded close to a manufactured model??

cigarbum

I don't think anyone has seriously attempted this. If anyone understood the geometry, they might also be able to scale it down. However, I do not think it is that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone tried to build DIY 402 horn, well that sounded close to a manufactured model??

cigarbum

I've done a 1" throat horn that has the same application as a K510. [;)]

Btw, when comparing horns that have different polar responses, it's very important to understand the influence of the room. Constant directivity only sounds good when the room has a flat "power response" (for lack of a better way to describe it with few words).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone have any plans or drawings?

This is an interesting proposition, one that I've actually considered over time. I've often thought that a horn mold could be made by hand. However, certain questions come to mind as I think about the ultimate desired result, including:
  1. How close does one need to calculate the expansion profiles in vertical and horizontal? It turns out that the volume expansion profile tolerance may be more critical than what might be assumed at first blush, especially at the throat of the horn. Can we hold those tolerances in our DIY mold? Doing this using wood would be prohibitive in cost since the K-402 horn is quite large - much larger than a Martinelli horn.
  2. What is the design goal? Reproducing the K-402 horn profile itself, or rather its desirable characteristics, i.e., controlled coverage from ~400 Hz - 20 KHz? (Note: making a "chinese copy" of the K-402 horn profile just doesn't feel right to me since this was the result of significant efforts on Klipsch's part over several months of invested work.)
  3. How does one measure the result? Test it outside using a calibrated microphone, signal generator, and test recording software to verify that what we intended to build is indeed what we got? Of course, a good compression driver (2") fitted nicely to the horn's throat is needed to do this test. Room EQ Wizard or related software running on a laptop, connected to a phantom power source and then to the calibrated microphone would do nicely. Off-axis measurements are needed, so some kind of rotating test rig for the microphone or the horn/driver is need to ensure repeatability of measurements.
  4. Be prepared to do iterative prototype builds via trial and error a number of times until the horn profile performs as we desired.

This process seems a bit daunting for the casual hobbyist, IMHO, but certainly is not impossible. Being able to make good, repeatable dimensions in fiberglass molds and prototype horns made from those molds is required to get a good result. All that is needed is time and fiberglass after the initial investment in a test rig is made, which should on the order of $500-1000(US), assuming that the laptop is already available, and that multiple iterations of prototype horns can be controlled to two or three cycles and associated custom molds.

Of course, the alternative is to buy a couple of K-402s from Klipsch. [;)] (That is what I did, and I've been an extremely happy customer ever since.) However, if I had some time on my hands, and had nothing better to do, and had at the resources mentioned, I might try some trials.

Here is some text from Roy Delgado's article on a tractrix horn, written in 1991 for Audio magazine:

"…Thus, the tractrix curve is, in itself, a hybrid of other curves and the tractrix curve ultimately used by Klipsch has been further ‘hybridized’. The pure tractrix equation necessitates a horn which is circular from throat to mouth. We built a pure tractrix horn designed to operate smoothly from 600 Hz upward.

In tests, we noted a very smooth coverage angle of approximately 45° from 1.2 to 8 kHz. At 8 kHz, the coverage pattern began to narrow, becoming 30° at 20 kHz. Because the horn was circular, this coverage pattern was the same horizontally and vertically
Our design goal was horizontal coverage of 60° and vertical coverage of 40°. So we were mildly encouraged by this data and hoped that we could get the tractrix coverage closer to our design goal by converting the horn from a circular configuration to a rectangular one.
Making this conversion required more than math. In a trial-and-error process over many arduous months, various geometric configurations were attempted. Finally, our horn gave us the horizontal and vertical coverage angles we wanted, and those coverage angles were smooth up to 20 kHz. Almost within grasp was more than we had ever hoped- a high-frequency horn for a two-way system!"

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being able to make good, repeatable dimensions in fiberglass molds and prototype horns made from those molds is required to get a good result. All that is needed is time and fiberglass after the initial investment in a test rig is made, which should on the order of $500-1000(US), assuming that the laptop is already available, and that multiple iterations of prototype horns can be controlled to two or three cycles and associated custom molds.

I believe it actually costs quite a bit more than $1k to do your own fiberglass molds - and even then it's hard to hold the tolerances needed for audio. Ideally your throat needs to be accurate to within 0.05" if you wanna satify 1/10 wavelength requirements at 20kHz. But if anyone knows anything different I would love to hear about a cheaper way to prototype...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...