Horns - what do you think about them ? Advantages and shortcomings?

[semente]

They're very large and very expensive. Each horn/way cannot cover more than two octaves. This means at least 3-way + sub. Ideally actively driven.

Excellent transient response, low distortion (requires advanced profile Tractrix, Le Cleac'h). Narrow dispersion, controlled directivity.

[semente]

46 minutes ago, DuckToller said:

Thank you @semente , for your response!
Would you file "Narrow dispersion" under advantages as it seems ?
I have read there are at least two camps in that non-conclusive debate about which kind of dispersion is preferable with valid arguments on each side.

Cheers, Tom
 

 

Narrow dispersion reduces room interference/reflections.

 

These reflections impact image focus negatively and also make it more difficult to recreate ambience cues present in recordings of classical music.

But those same reflections are often perceived as enhanced 3D-ness (soundstage effect) which may make multi-track studio produced recordings sound more interesting/enveloping.

 

Ultimately it's a matter of taste and depends on the kind of music you listen to.

 

http://www.gedlee.com/Papers/directivity.pdf

[semente]

On 6/21/2019 at 6:13 AM, Lone Mountain Audio said:

Im not feeling that in practice Fas42.   People who make the music are highly focused on low distortion and very very few of them use horns.   The big horns in the wall at studios have failen quite out of fashion as well in any situation other than high SPL.  Midfield conventional cone speakers are very much in vogue in professional circles, for engineers can hear the details they miss on the horn systems.

 

Brad   

 

Because they're big and very expensive, not because engineers can't hear the details.

[semente]

3 hours ago, STC said:

 

Horns are not suitable for near field monitoring/mastering. 

 

That too.

[semente]

23 minutes ago, Lone Mountain Audio said:

 

No-not true I'm afraid.  I work within the top studios throughout the country and not a single one I can think of relies on horn based monitoring for mixing other than hip hop or R+B.  Horns based systems are used because they can reach very high SPL, not for low distortion.  JBL M2's are in a few rooms, but mostly Dolby ATMOS rooms.  George Ausperger is a very famous studio designer, now in his 80s, that did a lot of studio builds and designs in the 70s and 80s and 90s and these were all horn based.  Rock Roll artists like to hear it played back loud.  These systems can reach 140dB SPL.  Most mixers cannot work that loud anymore.   

 

The top high resolution recordists (DSD) do not use horns (Michael Bishop for example).  It's all lower SPL conventional cone/dome driver speakers, all active.   

 

Library of Congress, editing everything in media (voice, music and video) for archiving uses ATC 150 ASL as well.  No horns.  

 

Brad

 

Yes, I understand that you are an ATC dealer or distributor and it looks like you're pitching a bit...

 

How many of those engineers in top studios have listenned to high performance ≥4-way horns?

I am more inclined to accept @STCs suggestion as most probable cause, followed by price and size:

 

On 6/22/2019 at 2:14 PM, STC said:

 

Horns are not suitable for near field monitoring/mastering. 

 

I'm not sure whether @The Computer Audiophile requires that you register or at least mention your business affiliation.

 

 

[semente]

2 hours ago, STC said:

The choice of the speakers used by recording studios is not always based on SQ. It depends much on the need, pricing, sponsorship, discounts and others.

 

After sales service is probably very important.

 

2 hours ago, STC said:

Speaking of ATC, why are there two versions of the speakers? Are you telling the audiophiles in this forum that they use same Hifi modals in the studio? If not, what’s the difference between ATC’s pro and Hifi version?  

 

Perhaps in a new thread dedicated to ATC loudspeakers?

[semente]

3 hours ago, STC said:

JBL M2 is not a full range horn speaker but looking at some of the reviews they included them as horn speakers so I guess I should let it be so for the benefit of the industry.

 

The M2 isn't horn-loaded as far as I know, it uses a dual diapraghm compression driver and that large thing is a wave guide.

Design goals seem to have been loudness and dispersion.

I would definitely not call them high performance horns.

I've never listened to a pair.

[semente]

3 hours ago, STC said:

 

The ears do not hear linearly at different level.

 

I think that @Lone Mountain Audio is referring to compression/distortion, not frequency response flatness.

 

Soundstage/MRC measure speakers linearity at 90dB/2m and 95dB/2m:.

This is the Monitor Audio PL100:

 

 

Chart 4 - Deviation from Linearity at 90dB and Above

Difference @ 90dB, 50Hz - 20kHz (measured @ 2m)

Curve: difference from 70dB at 90dB

Difference @ 95dB, 50Hz - 20kHz (measured @ 2m)

Curve: difference from 70dB at 90dB

 

An explanation of the measurement:

 

Deviation from Linearity

• Deviation from linearity - Measured with a frequency sweep across the audible spectrum on axis at 2 meters.
  
  Purpose: Shows how a speaker is stressed and if it compresses at certain frequencies as the sound-pressure level is increased.
  
  What it tells you:  As volume increases, all frequencies should rise at the same rate. However, as a speaker is stressed, compression will occur at certain frequencies. The stress may be mechanical, thermal or otherwise. This test shows those frequencies at which deviation occurs as a result of compression. Many speakers show slight deviations at 90dB. Most speakers start to show serious deviations at 95dB. Very few speakers can be tested at 100dB without damage.

[semente]

12 hours ago, Lone Mountain Audio said:

SO much of this for consumer is truly preference and that is totally okay.  I am truly not saying someone should not like them.  BUT there is a lot of information not correctly presented as it relates to cone/dome systems.  This has nothing to do with ATC and everything to do with old tech vs new tech.   

 

A great system with linear response should sound the same at all levels, not have any kind of volume dependent distortion other than clipping.   This is a very important value in the studio and is true well beyond ATC.  Horn loaded systems (something like an original Klipschorn) are not present in any studio I have ever been in LA or Nashville.  To say modern cone/dome systems have more distortion as a class compared to horns is just not the case anymore.  Maybe in 1970, maybe even in 1975?  But with advent of speakers that addressed issues like phase (the Dahlquist DQ 10 and KEF 104) things have advanced a LOT since then.  Odd order harmonic distortion in modern woofers is in the neighborhood of 30dB-45dB lower than it was in the DQ 10 days.  Midrange distortion, especially in the vocal range is drastically lower as well.  Dispersion is much more consistent horizontally and much less energy is wasted spraying HF all over the ceiling and floor.  Electronics have improved also, active systems reduce crossover distortion (passive crossover) by a huge amount, improve on phase control (creating linear phase system), and many other much smaller issues have been engineered out to create incredible realism.

 

Brad

www.lonemountainaudio.com

www.transaudiogroup.com

ATC Importer to the US

 

 

 

Any competent large studio monitor will have controlled dispersion and low distortion, not just ATCs. Some actually produce smoother on- and off-axis response and lower distortion at high levels. Some passive consumer speakers also produce both on- and off-axis response that just as smooth (Dynaudio, Kef, PSB, Revel, etc.).

 

 

As for competent large horns, I suggest that you listen to some Avant Garde or Cessaro setups. I think that your references (vintage Klipsch or JBL models) are way out of date.

 

Horns allow you to use far less powerful amplifiers with simpler circuits and have even better-controlled narrower directivity than waveguides.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/avantgarde-acoustic-uno-nano-loudspeaker-measurements

 

And compression drivers require exceedingly little excursion to achive normal listening levels.

 

But they should be at least 4-way and driven actively.

 

 

[semente]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

At that level it doesn’t matter any longer. Average level in room listening is around 75dB. The peaks can go above 100dB. On continuous high spl level the ear mechanism would work hard to minimize the damage to ears and I doubt you would hear the few dB difference. 

 

As I said, it looks good on brochure.  

 

I agree with that.

[semente]

20 hours ago, fas42 said:

Rey Audio ... some every nice examples out there ...

 

That's not a good example of high-performance horns.

 

Try these 4-way horn-loaded speakers + subs instead for proper horns: