Jump to content

Wood 300Hz horn


3dzapper

Recommended Posts

----------------

On 3/14/2004 8:06:15 PM 3dzapper wrote:

Q-Man,

No, I know nothing about them. I saw them on ebay too and wondered about them. They do look nice though don't they? My wife wouldn't go along with the Altec horns so I'm still looking.

Rick
----------------

Rick,

Try telling your wife to stop bit*hing, close her eyes .....and listen

Works for me.......

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

----------------

On 3/16/2004 6:19:53 PM IB Slammin wrote:

----------------

On 3/14/2004 8:06:15 PM 3dzapper wrote:

Q-Man,

No, I know nothing about them. I saw them on ebay too and wondered about them. They do look nice though don't they? My wife wouldn't go along with the Altec horns so I'm still looking.

Rick----------------

Rick,

Try telling your wife to stop bit*hing, close her eyes .....and listen

Works for me.......

Terry

----------------

Sorry....couldnt get the attachment to send.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Revisiting the calcs.

PWK said the Fc wavelength is 18.1 times the L (should be the Hebrew lahmed symbol) to double area. I confimed that some years ago using the classical exponental equation for horn expansion and Fc. Sorry, can't do that right now, but maybe over the weekend if anyone is interested.

From memory of the article the L of the K-5 is 2.25 inches

The speed of sound is 13500 inches per second. This is part of the conversion from wavelength to frequency.

Fc = 13500 / (2.25*18.1) = 331 Hertz

The L of the K-400 is 2.75 inches.

Fc = 13500 / (2.75*18.1) = 271 Hertz

I don't quite know why PWK was using L in his publications. There was good reason in that it allows some rough mental math. On the other hand it keeps the Fc out of the hands of uneductated pundits.

Please note that in horns of infinite lenght, good loading takes place down to about 140% of Fc.

Looking at some other data from Harry Olsen, a somewhat long, finite horn with a properly sized mouth does better. This is based on the very complicated impedance transfer equation discussed by PWK in one of his papers. There PWK goes into the transfer ratio but does not tell us about the mouth load he used.

Now you know what I know.

Gil

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...