Why not horns?

One thing I have always found interesting about Bill's horn is the cast flange. This would seem to give the best control in the critical throat area. Now that I think about it some more, this is also why I have put off trying a proto. I think I could get the cone pretty close but there is no way I could do justice to that throat piece. :-)

Wish I had the price of admission to the field coil drivers. Chris Brady told me that those drivers really impressed him, and that wasn't taking anything away from the Cogents, and Bill's conical. It was his Edgarhorn Titans that got me hooked on horns. I had heard some good ones before that, but his DIY pair really hit home with me. I didn't buy his 'table but I really liked the sound of his horns. :-)

MACROjack. I apologize for keep using micro-jack! Just realized I was doing that.

There is a huge tap-age of DSP in the home theater circles. It is certainly very good these days. But there is only so much that can be done by hardware and software.

But don't let me spoil the enjoyment. There certainly are many who use digital correction/processing with their horns and are very happy with the results.

Ralph, is that a fair comparison? Dismissing DSP in the home because the master tapes sound better in the studio? I've got a ton of 44.1K recordings that DSP can only hope to make better , not worse. My computer is doing 64 bit calculations on my files to produce crossovers with no phase shifts and time align my drivers at the same time. I can use all manner of EQ plugins if I wish to improve what are often marginal recordings. Since I don't have the original analog files I think it is great way to go in the home.

Herman, your machine is doing 64bit calculations but the DSP signal is only 24 bit, if that. DSPs can be harnessed to a lot of tasks; one thing you learn really quick in dealing with them is they suck the life right out of the music.

The master tapes in the studio are as close as you will ever get to the real thing. If they can't do it there, they are not going to do it in the home either.

We used a DSP-style crossover at a recent show (T.H.E Show). We were recording live and comparing the live vs the recording. It did sound pretty good, with 24-bit master files, but I am left wondering, how much better would it have been if we had an analog recorder for the recording task, and a passive crossover that allowed a single amp to do the whole speaker rather than a DSP with two very dis-similar amps to do top and bottom?

My experience with electronic crossovers of any type is that they act just like detail filters. In some ways I think the DSP units really do take the analog electronic crossovers to task, but I have yet to see any kind of bi-amped system beat one that is full range.

IOW I am not dismissing DSPs just out of my studio experience, it just seemed like the easiest quick explanation.

they suck the life right out of the music

I sit here tapping my toe, rocking back and forth with a big grin. The life has not been sucked out of the music. I get the same response from seasoned audiophiles as well as complete newbees who sit slacked jawed never having heard a high end system.

I think this is one of those situations where we can't discuss it with words. You need to hear what is going on over here.

.