Dylanl Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Here is the area I am describing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Like I said before, the Khorn is not likely to have alot of problems with reflections due to the shape of the back chamber, it tends to break reflections up. However, a 16x16 "sheet" of 2 to 3" thick fiberglass mounted around the back of the driver should be sufficient. Enclose the back of the driver and staple in place. You will notice a difference in "clean-ness". That's it. Try it and find out. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylanl Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 So it should look like this correct: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 That's it exactly. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylanl Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herc Posted December 9, 2006 Author Share Posted December 9, 2006 oops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herc Posted December 9, 2006 Author Share Posted December 9, 2006 have they been getting through to you? I have sent you a couple now..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Warren Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 Drew-The actual horn response of the K33 in the Klipschorn is shown below. The response is provided by Klipsch and was taken with the bass unit in the anechoic chamber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coytee Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 [Only Klipsch doesn't use any absorptive material in the horn's back chamber, even when there are parallel walls like the LS, Belle and Jub. I'm not trying to argue anything nor prove anything nor take sides. That said, I interpret you saying above that the Jubilee does NOT have ANY absorptive material in the back chamber (where the drivers are?)??? If I understand you correctly and if what is in the picture is what I THINK it is, then I beg to differ [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 That's news to me, and I would guess for everybody else here.... since NONE of the HERITAGE HORNS come from the factory complete with stuffing! However, that looks like open-cell foam to me. Foam doesn't have as much absoption capability as fibrous material(s), I presume that is for suppressing reflections rather than gaining any viable increase in available Vb. Personally, I wouldn't use foam, but that's just me. I've seen people use all sorts of things, and all tend to have somewhat of an effect, however, loose long stands of wool fiber is considered to have the greatest apsorption ability. It's the strands that slow down the waveforms, and cause them to stretch out and cancel due to phase differences and losses due to viscocity (the tendency of air to "stick" to a surface). There is an AES paper that tests various fibrous absorptive materials, worth a look. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrewBolce Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 Just to be clear the model I made was with the chamber stuffed with poly or the like. In my own khorns I have a similar configuration to Fig. 4-30. Mine have plastic window screening stapled to the back of the speaker with a thin layer of poly (wally world pillow stuffing) over it. I stuffed it at first, then kept removing material until I liked the sound again. What remained was just a thin layer . I confirmed my listening with the model. Heavy stuffing alters the response. I do not think the model is mathmatically sophisticated enough to show any refections or the like, if they exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 How can you possibly call them Khorn clones with that complement of drivers? A Klone is the enclosure, not the drivers! The so-called "Klipsch" drivers are Atlas, EV, Eminence (and/or whatever is the cheapest for Klipsch to buy)... who cares about cheap drivers?! Michael, you've got to quit "worshipping" the wrong things... DM and you need to get your facts straight. the drivers are manufactured to a spec; specs developed by klipsch and manufactured for klipsch. we don't just "choose" a driver and stick it in there. and for the record, if you replace anything in the speaker that is not endorsed by klipsch, it is not a klipsch. i am not saying that it is bad; it is just not klipsch. roy delgado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 Dylani, Waves, what waves? If a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound? You do not hear the back chamber. The stuffing changes the characteristics of the backchamber thereby changing the operating characteristics of the woofer, thereby changing what you hear from the horn. Stuffing will change different woofers/speakers differently. My AR speakers need it, my khorns do not. Oh, yes you do! I beg to differ! The reflections come back through the cone out of phase. have you EVER measured this? This creates what I can only call "muddiness". Only Klipsch doesn't use any absorptive material in the horn's back chamber, even when there are parallel walls like the LS, Belle and Jub. caused it doesn't needed and we measured it.....if it needs, we put it in. I would agree, however, that due to the Khorn having no parallel surfaces in the back chamber, that it suffers from less reflectivity problems than the others, but I also think that it can have less "muddiness" if reflections are suppressed, but that is my opinion only. Not really a good thing IMO. This does not mean that you need to add so much material that it alters the response of the driver, only to supress the interference from internal back chamber reflections and standing waves. DM roy delgado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 [ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 oops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 That's news to me, and I would guess for everybody else here.... since NONE of the HERITAGE HORNS come from the factory complete with stuffing! However, that looks like open-cell foam to me. Foam doesn't have as much absoption capability as fibrous material(s), I presume that is for suppressing reflections rather than gaining any viable increase in available Vb. Personally, I wouldn't use foam, but that's just me. I've seen people use all sorts of things, and all tend to have somewhat of an effect, however, loose long stands of wool fiber is considered to have the greatest apsorption ability. It's the strands that slow down the waveforms, and cause them to stretch out and cancel due to phase differences and losses due to viscocity (the tendency of air to "stick" to a surface). There is an AES paper that tests various fibrous absorptive materials, worth a look. DM this foam works really well and i should know because we measured it...... roy delgado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djk Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 John, you notice how the published response of the K33 in the Klipschorn looks remarkably similar to the predicted response of the JBL driver? This is despite the McBean plot being for a different JBL woofer than what is actually being used (2226 vs 2225). I would like to see the screen shots of the McBean showing all input parameters he used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Warren Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 You mean to tell me that ANY 15" driver will load the Klipschorn? Man, that PWK really was a genius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrewBolce Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 John, you notice how the published response of the K33 in the Klipschorn looks remarkably similar to the predicted response of the JBL driver? This is despite the McBean plot being for a different JBL woofer than what is actually being used (2226 vs 2225). I would like to see the screen shots of the McBean showing all input parameters he used. You are quite right. I got Googled. I didn't catch that it gave me a link to a similar number. Here is the correct plot. It is a much better match to the khorn enclosure. I use the model to do "what ifs". It is not intended to match the anachoic chamber measurements. I used it as we did here to see if a particular woofer works in the enclosure before buying it. Here are the parameters I used: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.