Why not horns?

I'm not seeking inclusion. My horns are made of 12 identical cherry wood panels. Dan is right about the need for uniform perfection in the horn. The use of non-conical designs has as much to do with a desire to increase horizontal dispersion as it does any other consideration.
Please - please - please read what Bill has to say about his reasons for choosing the conical approach before offering any more of your uninformed preferences.

Over and over there come these statements of preference without any justification or explanation. Maybe you actually know what you are talking about but aside from Duke or Ralph, I don't recall hearing from anyone who has actually done any of this. Before you ask, I have not either. But if you read what I have had to say, you will notice that I make no pretense at expertise.

Merely saying "I loathe horns" offers nothing useful. Claiming that a conical is not a real horn is just stupid, and having heard a lousy sounding horn 18 years ago at a concert or in a Cerwin Vega frat house system doesn't really serve as the basis for bashing an entire category.

Little is known about horns by the general public and I will stand by my belief that there is a lot more to be discovered as we strive to do so.

DSP does not deprive us of info. I find mine provides exceptional detail in concert with the horns. Micro dynamics are downright amazing. Just hearing the crowd noise in the background at televised sporting events is a thrill.
There may be legitimate reasons for digiphobes to shun DSP but loss of information is not one of them.

There is not way to go from analog, to digital, and back to analog without losing information. That is just a physical fact.

I think Dan_ed is correct as the signal reproduced is a approxmation of the original,close but not exact.
As far as being able to hear a difference is probally based on how well the whole process performs and what the ear can detect.

Reproduced sound is merely an approximation of the original sound. How faithful that reproduction is depends on many facets and parameters. Trading better performance in one area for somehow compromised performance in another is what we mean when we talk about trade-offs. For some, the trade-offs in utilizing digital rather than analog might prove attractive. And it is very possible that the diminishment we see as factually inevitable may be practically absent.

Yes, Microjack. Exactly. It is all about trade-offs. I have heard my system using both digital and analog active line level crossovers. There is no question things change differently with the two approaches. I don't like what I hear with a digital filter in the signal path, others may be perfectly happy with it. All I wish to get across is that there is more than one way, just as there is more than one way to design a horn that performs very well.