Using Direct radiator 15"s for 70hz and up is an effective use.
a Hornsubwith a 15" IS a good use of space-but horns are always large.A smaller woofer wont be able to move as much air ;-)

I too like the idea of using cheaper drivers on a longer horn-But by the time you count up the cost of wood + cutting costs its almost the same-and why not use a good linear driver than a cheap one for peace of mind.

If a 10" or 12" will cure your 40hz Hornsub issue then thats really good- i used an 8" for 50hz on 155litres for awhile!

Cheers!
Mike.e

The other side of the coin is that room gain lifts the lowest frequencies quite a bit. But that's really the point. At the deepest frequencies, the horn begins to act more like the front chamber of a BP box. So that and the woofer, rear chamber and room are what's most important to response. And of course the EQ used to bump up the bass where horn response falls off.

I've seen guys boasting about basshorn performance at frequencies that the flare couldn't possibly support. Models show it shouldn't and measurements show it doesn't. Put it in a room, and boundary conditions help but you still don't have horn gain under horn cutoff, and some response claims fly in the face of that. Down very low, what you really have is room gain from direct radiators in a fancy box.

I love horns, and they've been all I've used for 25 years. I love basshorns too. But when I hear claims of 20Hz - and sometimes claims of output under 10Hz - from a 30Hz horn with an 1/8th size mouth, well, I would hope that people would do a better job of interpreting what's really going on. It all reminds me of guys talking about doing 7 second quarter mile times in their Chevy with a "3/4 cam."

I can appreciate people here making basshorns that are most efficient above 40Hz or 60Hz. Most program material is above 40Hz anyway, and so having improved efficiency from horn gain above 40Hz or 60Hz is a worthy goal. But I've seen bait-and-switch, fancy marketing names given to well-known properties, and product development put on hold to eek the last bit of profits from a cheap woofer used in a popular design. A superior product is on the backburner because the inferior one is still selling to people that love SPL hype more than they love good sound. The public is told it's the state of the art, and they aren't to be made aware of the improved device until the cow's been milked dry. So I guess I've become cynical about that sort of thing.

All I really wanted to say is that hyped performance of portable basshorns in the octave under 30Hz is really just locker room talk, in my opinion. It's fun for the boys to hang out and talk about those 3/4 cams I suppose, and that's cool, it's fun. But there's always something bigger and better, and I'm not sure I ever enjoyed watching brand rivalries when it's all basically the same stuff.

Thesedays there still doesnt seem to be a good speaker system of which you can compare the latest products to-perhaps monitors would do this job-being the rule to compare against.

If people were loving the sound of 2 12"s on a seemingly 30hz cutoff horn playing down to the subsonics- reliant on pyschoacoustics and sealed box operation.....

Im glad i have my 2226 to compare things too :-)

P.T. Barnum introduces something at a show claiming it's the biggest, fastest, loudest, and whatever. He has his shills do the introduction and a few in the crowd to cheer it on. So you might want to peer behind the curtain when the show is over to find out the real story.

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

Our good Mr. Barnum volunteers to promote this thing, just for the thrill. The effort is to be a donation to the public good. But then after the thing catches on, minor changes are made and the "new and improved" model is immediately offered for sale. Was the promotion really for the greater good? Or was it bait and switch?

Now for the best part, Barnum's gadget is based on a relatively cheap main component. It's great as a bang for the buck thing, and it's pretty good and all. But it is certainly not state of the art, and is actually quite common. The really cunning move is to give the impression that it is a top-notch statement product, and that its performance is better than anything else. "Nothing else even comes close."

After cultivating this kind of reputation, why bother to make something that truly rises to the level of performance of a statement product? Better to use a catchy technical sounding name and call it a breakthrough. Why bother to introduce an overhead valve version when Mr. Barnum can convince everyone that his flathead version with the flashy name is great? Secretly, he does everything he can to stop others from introducing overhead valve engines. That might cut into sales, no good in that.

All the while, Mr. Barnum looks for a way to take credit for overhead valve technology so that when it hits the market, he can say he was responsible for that too.

This is nothing new and shouldn't be shocking to anyone. It is a common story. It is the story of Tesla and Edison. It is the story of Marconi. So it shouldn't be surprising to find it in other businesses too.

Be sure to look behind the curtain...