Are horns and hi-eff designs becoming more popular

My impression is that horns are a bit more popular these days than in the recent past, but then most things tend to cycle in and out of fashion, irrespective of whether they are good, bad or indifferent.

Horns have their strengths, but they also have weaknesses. In other words, they are like any other speaker or piece of equipment. The key to audio happiness is to line up the strengths of a speaker with the those areas where your ear is most sensitive or that you find important in sound reproduction. In my case, while I enjoy the dynamics of a good horn, I've never heard one yet that didn't have a distinct honkiness that knocked it out of consideration for me. It is a sonic trait that I am apparently more sensitive to than others.

Interestingly, I've just finished the book "Musicophilia" by Dr. Oliver Sacks. It talks about about the brain and how we perceive and process music along with the manner in which afflictions can affect our hearing music, or even using music as treatment. While the book says virtually nothing about audio equipment, the entire text reinforces how differently each of us perceives music. Some of this comes how our brain is wired from before we are born, some comes from experiences and training as an infant (which permanently affects how connections in our brain form) and some comes from our training and experiences later on. (A very interesting read if you like that kind of stuff.)

The net result is that each of us is going to be impressed by different things when we listen. Therefore, rather than read about how this or that speaker is the best thing since sliced bread, the key is to get out and listen and find out what [i]you[/i] are sensitive to when listening to music.

Ive been in the hobbie a long time I have seen so many flavors of the month in loudspeakers. I feel horns -hieff designs are becoming more popular. I see many manufacters taking baby steps using horn tweeters or just saying wave guide not calling a horn a horn. I do agree with MLsstl no one speaker for everyone but ML doesnt address the fact that hi-eff isnt just for horn designs one can build a standard dynamic with med-hieff or ribbon OB TL BR AS all can be hi-eff today I was asking more about the trends toward higher eff not just stating that horns are da bomb though I do feel that to be true;) Horns designs have also made much progress. Many when they think horns think vintage nothing wrong at all with vintage but if your only experance with horns is vintage or PA than your in for a pleasent surprise once you hear a proper modern set. And Dcstep many horns availible that dont sound vintage like klipsch I would start to list some but since I manufacter loudspeakers I dont want to add bias so search about ask others. Horns have been with us since day 1. Dont think horns will ever fade away but since hi-eff can be had without the horn. We might get others into the hi-eff club. And that should be a good thing, maybe its the giant power sucking room heating SS or tube amplifier thats days are numbered? Care to discuse? Take care and happy listening

Johnk,

I couldn't agree more. Lots of baby steps toward hi-eff/medium-hi eff. many of which are not horn designs. Some of these designs are so good for the price that people are jumping on the bandwagon as it is an inexpensive starting point into true audiophile territory. For the price of a mass-market big-box store speaker, someone can assemble a simple bass reflex box with a single driver or an open baffle design, using 1 piece of plywood with an OB specific driver mounted in it. So, for as little as about $200-$400 someone can get a taste of high-end sound if they are willing to do a bit of assembly.

Of course, often this will be the starting point for folks to seek out better, less compromised designs like the ones you build or like the ones on the frugal-horn site.

Concerning "power sucking room heating SS and tube amps", the medium to hi-efficiency designs allow folks to get by with lots less power, size, heat, etc. Heck, right now I have 3 amps that work great with all of my recent speakers (all medium-hi effeciency designs). They are a 6 W/channel T-class switching amp, and two different 3.5 w/channel tube amps. The simplicity and cost saving on amplifiers along was one of the primary driving forces for me to seek out efficient designs.

For less than $1000 someone can assemble a very good sounding system (CD, Amp, Speakers) if they stick to hi-efficency, low powered designs. It might not be pretty and typically wouldn't pass the WAF test, but it could sound pretty good. Of course you can spend a lot more and get even better sound, but the cost of entry can be low and can set folks on the path to great sound.

Happy Listening and enjoy the journey!

TIC

I think they are. With tubes making such a great comeback, it just makes sense that Hi-Eff would grow with it.

Taking it a step further: I think the triode is the most perfect amplifying device, especially when done in single ended mode. Now we're really limited in wpc. "Gizmo" thought you hit the wall at 10 watts for SET. I kinda agree. My fav's are the 45, 2a3, and 300b. They are the heart of my system. If I need to go louder than I already can do, I would look to a more eff speaker before a bigger amp.

I think Johnk missed one of my main points. Perhaps I can restate it as follows.

Speaker design, like all engineering projects, is a complex series of decisions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the various choices available. This can emphasize certain sonic traits at the expense of others, or involve cost or size issues, or limit the suitability of the speaker in terms of placement or the associated equipment required.

Ribbon tweeters, for example, typically have poor vertical dispersion, historically can present distortion issues relative to other designs, and can be challenging to coherently integrate into a system.

All of that said, there are some fine systems with ribbon tweeters that many people think are great. What you have in that situation is a design where the advocates enjoy the strengths of such a system without being sensitive to (or at least bothered by) the weaknesses.

Same thing with higher efficiency designs. Once again we are back to engineering compromises. If the strong points of a design line up with a person's listening preferences, then all is good with the world. However, someone else may value characteristics not available in a high efficiency design (say low bass from a small cabinet where loud volume is not an issue) and will find a different speaker design is a better choice for them.

In summary, one often sees a pattern in audio discussions. There is the presumption that the writer's choices and perceptions are the only credible ones. Anyone who hears differently and prefers other equipment it thought to either lack proper training and education or is just wrong. It is more likely that they simply appreciate strong points of their system that are less relevant to the other person.