Garland

There are some 120o horns available, but since room corners represent a 90o angle, I always preferred this pattern. It covers the room very well when the speakers are positioned at each side of the coverage area, toed-in 45o with forward axis crossed just in front of the listeners. That arrangement offers the most uniform spectral balance and the best stereo imaging over the widest coverage pattern.

I have thought about this also. In big rooms where you are 12 or more feet away, it is hard to get out of the coverage area, but in a small room it is hard not to. Do you want the coverage so you can have a wider listening area, or do you want to put more upper midrange in the front part of the room for reverb? I could probably glean this from Toms post, but I am too busy and tired to dig through posts right now :) The only reason I ask is some of the wide ones have bad top end dispersion, sometimes worse than standard 90 x 40's. If you are going to be in one spot it won't matter much, but if you want extra-wide and even coverage, be careful choosing.

There are a few wide ones, a Beyma and some P-Audio models. I have possibly found every currently available production horn in the Pi size/frequency class, so I can look through my notes and point out a couple of links later this evening.

later,
Thomas

Garland

Not dispersion related but just a thought. Have you heard your speakers with a Peavey CH-3? I own some CH-3's and I have used some H-290's with the same speakers. While they are amazingly similar despite their appearance, I felt the CH-3 had more body and the H-290 had hotter presence range. I consider the CH-3 to be pretty neutral, while my impression of the H-290 was leaner, dryer and cooler sound. It may be a subjective taste thing and humans are full of opinions, but it was obvious to Jennifer and I. The CH-3 might sound like backing off a few feet from an H-290 to some folks, Maybe you.

You would have to get screw-ons, but I think you would like them. To many these differences might be hair splitting, or trivial. If memory serves me, there have been a few specifics you have dialed in to what some would say is the hair splitting realm, which you noticed and appreciated. This "slightly" different horn may be just the ticket. One look at the throat and you will know you have never seen anything like it, in a good way. Do you know a nearby Pi guy you could trade horns with for a couple of days?

I wouldn't want my armchair evaluation to get you spending money and not liking them, BUT I still feel based on what you said in SET forum that you will like CH-3 better. While I am still using 2370's for the incredible off axis top octave(lots of spread out chairs in here). Other than that 2370 sounds about as good to me as the CH-3 when compensated accordingly, but it's not a better horn IMHO. If they weren't so pricey on the Theater 4 scale I would suggest them as well.
Thomas

You heard my CH3 knockoffs get smoked on axis by Bmar's horn over at Cope's the time that I brought the Karlsons. They do have even coverage though, out to around 90 deg. You're welcome to try them. I also have Altec 511Bs and will soon have JBL 2382 knockoffs you could try, but the JBLs will need 1"-2" adapter. I like Wayne's DIY idea too. That throat/flange section is the hardest part to DIY IME.

John