Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jeff harrell]

i am going to buy new horns ( not drivers) and have ben looking at the 2" throat DDS CFD 2-65 Pro 65x50 deg coverage and the DDS CFD 2-60A Pro 60x40 deg coverage. has anyone used either of these horns ? i was think of the 65x50 for a little better verticle coverage. i use the Beyma CP750/ti driver i like crossing at 1K. are these DDS brand horns woth the $250+ dollar cost ?

[Ivan Beaver]

jeff harrell wrote on Thu, 20 January 2011 18:47

there will be 3 cabnets side by side without any toeing as i call it. they will be flat across > ___ thanks , jeff

Then you will have a classic case of comb filtering.

It would sound better if you only used a single horn.  

[Tim Weaver]

SSSHHWWEEERRREEESSSHHHEEEWWWRRRR




Cuz, thats pretty much what it'll sound like....

[Jay Barracato]

Prediction at 1800 hz

[Jay Barracato]

Prediction at 1000 hz

[Doug Fowler]

A friend has an SR4732A rig, 2 per side.  He needs to use the 2 per side config quite a bit, so I set him up with some DDS CFD 2-60A.

About a 'fist and a half' of splay gets the interference down to a reasonable level.  You can hear noise 'change' when you get on axis between the two boxes within 25 feet or so, wider than a 'blip' but still not too bad considering.

Off axis, no significant problems IIRC.  For sure, it's a far better solution than the 90 degree horns that came with the boxes.

But don't flat front them, please... :-)

He paid about $140 each for them, six or so years ago.

edit: correct model #

[jeff harrell]

thanks for the info. if i stack one horn on top of another and angle them outward a little does the interference go away ? i have heard a many a system over the years with the funking sounding highs due to sound overlap with horns side by side and heard quite a few Clair S4 cabnets. i dont recall having heard a system with say 3 cone cabnets side by side and lets say 2 or 3 horns set on top of the middle cabnet one on top of the other with one straight ahead and the others rotated off center a little. i would immagine most people in the audience (execpt myself and maybe a few others) wouldnt pay much attention to the interference of side by side horns but if it can be done so it sounds like one horn that would be ideal. i was looking at some of the fotos of the old sytems from long ago and the CalJam74 system had cabnets stacked on top of each other with the horns lined in a vertical line and several feet of seperation from each horn line. i am guessing this arrangement cut down on interference.  

[Art Welter]

jeff harrell wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 12:47

thanks for the info. if i stack one horn on top of another and angle them outward a little does the interference go away ?

Yes, the "barber pole" arrangement is best to reduce horizontal interference patterns.

The wide vertical dispersion of stacked DDS horns will result in less on axis gain due to destructive interference in the HF (where it is most needed) than in the midrange.

A vertical horn array is best done with horns that cover the desired horizontal pattern (90 degrees is usually good) and have a vertical HF pattern that matches the splay.



With the usual HF crossover point of around 1000-1800 Hz, the side by side cone placement (even if forming an arc of a circle) will still have terrible comb filtering for around an octave around the crossover point.

[jeff harrell]

Art Welter wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 14:52

jeff harrell wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 12:47 thanks for the info. if i stack one horn on top of another and angle them outward a little does the interference go away ?   Yes, the "barber pole" arrangement is best to reduce horizontal interference patterns. The wide vertical dispersion of stacked DDS horns will result in less on axis gain due to destructive interference in the HF (where it is most needed) than in the midrange. A vertical horn array is best done with horns that cover the desired horizontal pattern (90 degrees is usually good) and have a vertical HF pattern that matches the splay. With the usual HF crossover point of around 1000-1800 Hz, the side by side cone placement (even if forming an arc of a circle) will still have terrible comb filtering for around an octave around the crossover point.

then i'm guessing the DDS CFD 90A Pro would be the horn to go with. it has 90x40 coverage, thanks

[Art Welter]

jeff harrell wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 14:04

Art Welter wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 14:52 jeff harrell wrote on Fri, 21 January 2011 12:47 thanks for the info. if i stack one horn on top of another and angle them outward a little does the interference go away ?   Yes, the "barber pole" arrangement is best to reduce horizontal interference patterns. The wide vertical dispersion of stacked DDS horns will result in less on axis gain due to destructive interference in the HF (where it is most needed) than in the midrange. A vertical horn array is best done with horns that cover the desired horizontal pattern (90 degrees is usually good) and have a vertical HF pattern that matches the splay. With the usual HF crossover point of around 1000-1800 Hz, the side by side cone placement (even if forming an arc of a circle) will still have terrible comb filtering for around an octave around the crossover point. then i'm guessing the DDS CFD 90A Pro would be the horn to go with. it has 90x40 coverage, thanks

Yes, if you want 60 to 120 degrees of vertical coverage   .

I have not looked at the polars, if it narrows in HF coverage down to 10-15 degrees, it would work OK.

If you want a specific HF pattern, I can custom make HF horns for you at competitive pricing.

PM me if you are interested.

Art Welter