A Horn Subwoofer

or

Redefinition of the bookshelf loudspeaker

Subhorn2

From when I became a horn enthusiast I have always dreamed of a subhorn. Real horn loading down to 25-30Hz or lower. This would be a crazy project, no matter how it was done. It would be big, really big. But I had made up my mind, one day I would do it. I just had to try...

July 2003: I moved into a new house. The time had come!

Other subhorns

A few people have subhorns. An interesting project is described by Thomas Danley, the LAB sub at Live Audio Board, see http://www.prosoundweb.com/. This sub was developed by specifying a horn, and then making a driver that would work in that horn the best way. This sub requires a special driver, but is smaller than many other horn subs.

Bert Doppenberg of bd-design has two 3.7m long subhorns in his listening room. (Click DIY Products -> Articles -> Bass Horn Design).

 

driver thumb

SR-12A300

Considerations

For many months I did simulations in David McBean's Hornresp horn analysis program. It can be downloaded here: Hornresp. I tried lots of drivers, horn lengths, expansion types and front/rear chamber sizes. It is really hard to make a horn go below 30-35Hz, especially if you want to get it domestically acceptable. For a 2.5-3.5m long exponential horn, the lower limit seemed to be about 30Hz. That is pretty low, as low as my old sub. But if this thing is so big anyway, why not go deeper? I wanted to squeeze as much as possible out of this design.

I considered the LAB sub, but it needs a special driver.

Then at last it seemed like I had found a nice horn, using a 15" driver from Sammi. But then something happened: ELTEK had an "offer of the week" on the most powerful Sammi 12" drivers, the SR-12A300. Two of them in a 4m long horn gave very good results...

 

hornresp2 thumb

fig. 1

 

horn1 thumb

fig. 2

horn2_thumb.gif (6325 bytes)

fig. 3

mouth thumb

fig. 4

The horn

The horn I ended up with is a hyperbolic-exponential horn with the following parameters:

Ath: 350cm2, Am: 6500cm2, length: 400cm, Fc: 15Hz, T: 2, Vrc: 100 liters, Vtc: 7 liters.

The simulated response is very good, look at fig. 1. At 40Hz, efficiency is 107dB/1W/1m. If we use this as the reference, -3dB is 25Hz and 300Hz. However, the horn is huge, about 1200 liters... the only way to make it domestically acceptable was to disguise it as a piece of furniture. Since I was short on shelves, a logical choice was to put shelves on the horn.

 

Building the horn

It wasn't until I started cutting the panels and glueing them together that I realized how huge the horn really was. And it grew bigger and bigger... It is (outside measurements) 208 cm high, 185 cm wide, and 65 cm deep, all in all (I can stand upright inside it!), but not all of it will be used for the horn. It took 3 people to lift it up to an upright position, it is quite heavy... I don't know how much it weighs, but it is most likely more than 100kg.

Fig. 2 shows the first steps. The front panel lies on the floor, and the inner boards are glued to it.

Fig. 3 shows a friend of mine nailing one of the angled boards inside the horn. The picture gives a measure of the size of this thing.

Fig. 4 shows the horn mouth without the bracing. The shelves will be in the space at the right side of the mouth.

Performance

Objective; measurements:

Not much to put here yet, but it measures down to 30Hz with a small peak at the 15Hz flare frequency, and another one at about 70Hz, which I have EQ'ed flat. It seems that much of it is a room mode. I will put up some graphs later I hope. One reason that it doesn't go down to the simulated 25Hz is maybe that it's not in a corner. I hope to do a simulation of the horn as built to compare with the measured results.

Subjective:

This is probably the most interesting part for most of you. How does this monster sound?

Accuracy: A subhorn does not have the slow response of  a vented or bandpass enclosure. The bass is tight, precise and articulated. No matter how loud I play, it never loses control. A kick drum has the right snap, the bass guitar can growl. It feels real, not like something reproduced by speakers...

Impact: "I feel the earth / move / under my feet"  When two heavy duty 12" woofers work into a horn of this size, you really get the air moving! This is the most physical bass I've ever had. I can feel it even at low volume settings. When I turn up the volume, it really shakes the floor.  And when I play really loud, it feels like someone is lightly kicking my chair... It is possible to sense the resonant frequencies of the floor. The bass is enveloping and real. Size does matter!

Distortion: The bass never gets muddy or compressed. No matter how loud or complex, it keeps going. This is perhaps the greatest difference from the old bandpass sub. At last, I can turn up the volume without the bass getting left behind. The feeling that nothing limits the SPL enhances the realism of reproduction, it is the natural, satisfying experience of increased bandwidth with increased volume. Usually, small woofers start to limit the level at 25-80Hz at around 90-95dB, which means that if you turn the volume further up, there will not be more bass, in addition to increased IMD. A separate subwoofer helps, but even a 15" driver has its limits. Of course, this horn also has limits, but they are in the 115dB range at 25Hz, 120dB at 40Hz and 135dB at 60Hz, Xmax limited. That is enough for me...

Was it worth it? Definitely! I would not trade a real subhorn for another sub, this is by far the best performance I've heard. As physical as PA bass, tighter than anything I've heard, controlled and detailed. Big, yes, but good!

4 years later

I have now had this horn for nearly 4 years, and it still provides impressive performance. But I can no longer say it is the best performance I have heard. About a year ago, I designed a horn subwoofer for sound reinforcement, and even if it doesn't go as deep as this horn, the response is smoother, and it just sounds more “right”.

Since I built the big sub-horn, I have learned a lot about how horns work, and as a result, I can now see several flaws in the design of this horn:

  1. Even if it's big, it is acoustically small compared to the wavelengths it is intended to reproduce.

  2. The mouth is too small and the flare rate too low, resulting in a behaviour similar to an organ pipe.

A horn that would out-perform this one with ease, using the same drivers, could be a 4.5m long exponential horn with 2 sq metres mouth and 350cm2 throat areas, and an 80 l rear chamber volume. This would give some 3dB increase in low-frequency efficiency, and a much smoother response, and a -3dB of 28Hz when mounted against the wall/floor boundaries, and 25Hz when corner mounted (where it would also have the required mouth size).

If you want to build a good horn subwoofer, there are a few things to keep in mind:

  1. If you want smooth response down to a low frequency, free of resonances, the horn will be big – very big – and should preferably be built into the house.

  2. The mouth should have a circumference close to one wavelength at the cut-off frequency, and not less than 0.7 wavelengths. Too many bass horn designers shorten the horn too much, and this invariably results in a resonant response. It is still far better than the usual vented or band-pass enclosure, but it doesn't take you anywhere near the performance of a full-sized horn.

  3. Use an exponential or hyperbolic-exponential (hypex, T <= 1) flare. Conical horns of equal performance will be more than 30 times larger. Small conical bass horns will act like tuned pipes, and will not give the full performance of a well-designed exponential or hypex horn. Plane-wave propagation through the horn can be assumed if the horn is placed in a corner or at the wall-floor intersection, this means that the cross-section of the horn can be calculated according to the known formulas for hypex horns without correction.

  4. If you want a horn that is not extremely big, select a higher cut-off instead of shortening the horn too much. Very good performance in a slightly limited frequency range is to be preferred over mediocre performance in a larger frequency range. Smooth power response and good output down to 45Hz will give a greater satisfaction in the long run than a peaky response down to 25Hz.

  5. Use Hornresp to design the horn. Use first the Hypex designer tool with the driver of your choice, then tweak the design to optimize performance. A rear chamber slightly larger than that suggested by the Hypex Designer tool will usually result in a smoother response. If the rear chamber is too large for your liking, select a driver with higher Vas. Check the acoustical impedance chart, and avoid designs with large peaks and troughs in the impedance. This is the load for the driver, and large peaks and troughs here indicate strong resonances in the horn. This may not be so obvious in the SPL response if the driver matches the horn well, but will affect the subjective performance. A hypex horn (T < 1) will have one large peak close to cutoff, but subsequent peaks should quickly diminish in amplitude.

Good luck!

 


Latest blog entry

Horn Loudspeaker Simulation

Horn Loudspeaker Simulation

Many readers may be familiar with the free software Hornresp, which, given driver parameters and some geometrical parameters for the horn and cabinet, can simulate a wide variety of horn, direct radiator and bandpass systems. This may be enough for most people, while others (like me) are curious about the math and algorithms behind it

Simulating horns and horn loudspeakers has interested me for a long time. I found Hornresp back at the time when David McBean first made it available (around 2000 I think). At first you could only get the full functionality by paying a small fee, otherwise the throat area of the first segment was fixed. He later told me that he actually ended up giving the full version for free to those who asked, and if I had known that I'd probably started using it in earnest earlier. But my first midbass horns were designed using Hornresp (with the original limitation), as was my later horn subwoofer and other horns. But around 2005-2006 I got interested in horn theory and other methods of evaluating horn performance, like power factor (the cosine of the phase angle between resistance and reactance of the throat impedance). First I made a program that would read the data exported from Hornresp and plot the power factor. Later I started looking into wave fronts in horns, and combination of horn types (like multiple segment horns with Hypex segments), and for that I needed to write my own horn simulation software. 

I first made contact with David McBean in 2004, and we started corresponding regularly, discussing many aspects of horn simulation. This was extremely helpful when I started writing my own horn simulator, and I can't thank David enough for making Hornresp available, and for guiding me through the rough terrain of horn simulation. Although he never showed me more than a couple of snippets of code, through discussion and references I was able to make things work and learn things from the ground up. 

My horn simulator, HornCAD™, evolved into a complex program that could use the Mode Matching Method (MMM), simulate all types of segments, rectangular horn, and curved horns. It could use measured compression driver data, and export dxf files for CAD use. Thanks to the MMM, directivity simulations were quite accurate, and I used it extensively during my time at Celestion. 

But since HornCAD™ was born as a tool to learn horn simulation and to explore various ways to simulate horns, it is full of unfinished functionality and bugs that are hard to track down due to the size of the code base. Therefore it has never been released to the general public. That may change in the future, though... But enough about my background as a horn simulator writer!

Simulation Basics

The point of this article is to give an introduction to horn loudspeaker simulation. While it may seem like black art for most people, it is more similar to electrical circuit simulation. So in this little series, I plan to explain how to implement a simple "Hornresp-ish" code in Octave/Matlab. It will of course not have all the bells and whistles of Hornresp, but will be able to simulate the power response, electrical impedance and diaphragm displacement of a basic horn loudspeaker. 

Horn loudspeaker simulation typically consists of simulating:

  1. The radiation from the horn, especially radiation impedance, but also directivity.
  2. The horn itself: throat impedance as a function of mouth radiation impedance, and the output volume velocity as a function of the input volume velocity.
  3. The acoustical circuit apart from the horn: front and rear chambers, vents etc.
  4. How the loudspeaker driver behaves when connected to the acoustical load made up by the horn, chambers, vents etc and thereby the power delivered to the horn, the electrical input impedance of the system, diaphragm displacement etc. 

We will cover all of this, but also things like simulating multiple segment horns, horns with special profiles like the tractrix, and maybe even look at tapped horns. 

Glossary

The list above contains many words that may be unfamiliar, but if you want to learn horn simulation, you need to know what they mean. So here is a short glossary:

  • Radiation impedance: When something vibrates with a certain velocity, it pushes the air, and the air pushes back with a certain force. The ratio of this force from the air to the velocity of vibration is the mechanical radiation impedance. In this analogy, force is analoguous to voltage and velocity to current, and just like voltage divided by current gives electrical impedance, force divided by velocity gives mechanical impedance. 
  • Volume velocity: velocity times area, cubic meters per second.
  • Acoustical impedance: A similar analogy can be made in acoustics: with pressure analoguous to voltage and volume velocity analoguous to current, the ratio between them is acoustical impedance. It relates to mechanical impedance through the area of the vibrating surface (which may not be solid, but can be an imaginary surface, for instance the horn mouth). Mechanical impedance is acoustical impedance times area squared.
  • Acoustical circuit: an analoguous circuit of acoustical components like ducts, horns and volumes. It can be drawn like an electrical schematic, and we can calculate its performance based on electrical circuit theory. This is a fundamental method for simulating electroacoustic systems.

Simulation: The Nitty Gritty Details

Here are links to the parts in the series (the links will go live as the parts are added):

  1. Part 1: Radiation and T-Matrix
  2. Part 2: Adding a driver
  3. Part 3: Multiple segments and more T-matrices
  4. Part 4: Other horn profiles and curved wave fronts
  5. Part 5: A simple tapped horn model

The Bass Transmission Index

The Bass Transmission Index

Evaluating the accuracy of low frequency reproduction isn't as straightforward as one may think. There is talk about "fast bass", and PRAT (Pace, Rythm And Timing) is sometimes mentioned as a description. In such a discussion someone will invariably point out that a 20Hz sine wave isn't "fast", and that the issue of fast or slow bass is meaningless. It may seem that way using these simple arguments, until you experience accurate, detailed bass reproduction. But how do we quantify it? Obviously not by measuring the rise time of a 20Hz sine wave! 

This is actually a very real problem. For the mix engineer, perhaps the biggest problem is how a loudspeaker with poor temporal response alters the perceived balance between rhythm section instruments like kick drum and bass guitar. Though not exclusively the case, loudspeakers with ported cabinets (bass reflex loading) are more likely to exhibit this type of problematic behaviour, due to the use of resonant elements to increase bass extension. An incorrect mix made on loudspeakers like this may not transfer well to other sound reproduction systems, and can't be corrected later during mastering, since the two instruments occupy the same part of the audio spectrum.

Lara Harris, Keith Holland and Philip Newell have done extensive work on quantifying bass reproduction accuracy, resulting in Lara's PhD work and the Bass Transmission Index (BTI). The BTI is an objective measure of a loudspeaker's ability to accurately reproduce low-frequency musical content. The metric aims to describe how well a loudspeaker reproduces the temporal envelope of a dynamic and harmonically-complex signal, something that cannot easily be evaluated from the usual frequency response (magnitude plots). 

Like the STI (Speech Transmission Index), as used in speech intelligibility measurements, the BTI is based on a metric called the Modulation Transfer Function (MTF). MTF-based methods such as these pass an amplitude-modulated signal through the system, varying the rate of the temporal fluctuations across a range of values that are likely to feature in the real-world signals that the system will encounter. The preservation of modulation depth between input and output is used as an indicator of how well the system can reproduce these temporal variations. The figure below illustrates the concept, showing modulation depth for input (mi) and output (mo) signal envelopes.

MTF

The BTI evaluates the MTF in 10 frequency bands from 16-160Hz, with 7 modulation frequencies from 0.8-11.7Hz. The algorithm computes a matrix of modulation index scores between 0 and 1 for each combination of frequency band and modulation frequency. This grid of numbers can be used to calculate an overall average score, and is visualised as a grayscale intensity image where white = 1.00 (perfect reproduction). As a rule of thumb for interpreting these BTI intensity images:

  • Inconsistent shading in the horizontal direction (left-right) indicates variation in the frequency response magnitude (this is variation across frequency bands).
  • Inconsistent shading in the vertical direction (up-down) indicates variation in the faithfulness of envelope transmission (this is variation across modulation frequencies).

The figure below shows an example BTI intensity image and mean score for a bass-reflex studio monitor. Frequency bands (centre frequencies) are on the x-axis, and modulation frequencies on the y-axis.

BTIplot

Recently I have worked with Lara to make her BTI research code production ready, and it has now been officially made available on GitHub. It runs in Matlab and Octave (although not all the advanced options are available in Octave, and some requires certain Matlab tooboxes), and demonstrates a reference implementation. Here are the links:

BTI Toolbox on GitHub

Lara's LinkedIn post about BTI

My LinkedIn post about BTI

 

Big Bend Bass Horn: Driver Update

Big BenD Bass Horn: Driver Update

[Previous: InstallationMain

This update is actually long overdue, and related to a project at Celestion I wasn't able to finish: a cone driver specifically designed for bass horns. It follows the ideas I outlined under My Approach to Bass Horn Design, and is a 12" driver designed for a compression ratio of about 1:2. As I wanted it to be easy for Celestion to put it into production, I used as many standard parts as possible, either directly or something that could be easily machined from standard parts. But I also added a feature that aren't easy to find in modern drivers: an underhung edge-wound voice coil. 

Here are a some of the features of this driver:

  • Underhung 3" edge-wound voice coil
  • Copper sleve on pole piece
  • Focused magnetic gap
  • Low moving mass
  • Vented pole piece and back plate
  • 250W power handling
  • Large ferrite magnet
  • Inverted dustcap to allow for phase plugs if desired

And for those who worry about the high power rating being detrimental to other qualities important for horn speakers, rest assured: this power rating was a result of the voice coil size and venting, not of "beefing up" the driver (which typically makes the moving assembly lighter) to take higher temperatures and forces. 

Here's a side view of the driver, without the front segments. It's built on a Celestion FTR chassis. 

New driver

The magnet system:

bigBendDrivers3

The gap flux is slightly above 1Tesla, which is quite good for a gap this size. It takes a substantial amount of magnet to produce that, especially when you lose gap width to a copper cap. 

Comparisons with old DIY driver

Below are a couple of photos comparing the new driver to a DIY project I used to begin with, referred to as 12" DIY driver in the performance measurements. The DIY driver used the motor system from a pair of Celestion NTR08-2009D 8" woofers I found in the bin. They had the cones cut out, but the motor was salvageable (even the voice coil), and I used them to build a pair of 12" drivers using available parts. I used the lightest 12" by 2" cones I could find, and a fairly soft spider. They turned out to be quite good, with the BL^2/Re being a good match for my bass horns. But the new drivers are more robust, and also give a very good performance and produces very clean bass in the Big BenD horns. 

Comparision with old DIY driver

Comparision with old DIY driver (back)

 Parameter  Old DIY driver  New driver
 Re [Ohms]  4.46  5.8
 Le [mH]  0.065  0.086
 BL [N/A]  12.3  17.0
 Mms [g]  39.2  64.5
 Rms  [Ns/m]  3.4  0.63
 Cms [m/N]  4.36e-4

 1.88e-4

     
 

Now I just hope Celestion will finialize this project and put the drivers into production, as I think this would be a good driver for bass and midbass horn use, especially for domestic use.

[Previous: InstallationMain

Big BenD Bass Horn: Installation

Big BenD Bass Horn: Installation

[Previous: Performance MeasurementsMain; Driver Update

Finally, the last article about the Big BendD bass horn! This part will cover the installation and setup of the horn, with some comments on the subjective performance at the end.

Installation

Although the DIY 12" driver showed the most promise during outdoor testing, I still wanted to try the Altec 515-8G when setting up the horn. It was mounted in the rear chamber, the chamber was filled with wool, and the rear wall covered with pieces of an acoustic celing tile. 

RearChamberAltecWoolBackWallDamping

Then came the process of carrying all the parts into the living room, setting it up, adding gaskets, bolting it all together, installing the drivers, wiring it up and put the rest of the system back together. In the process I had help from my good friend Harry. This is really a two-person job, because carrying the big parts into the house isn't easy to do by oneself. The parts were all designed to fit through a standard door, but they are still a bit difficult to move around. 

Setup01Setup02Setup03

Setup01Setup05Setup03

Setup01Setup08Setup03

Setup01Setup11Setup03

With two people working, the setup was done in a couple of hours. There are a lot of bolts, about 70 per horn, so or ratchet spanners got a real workout. 

The complete setup is shown below. The white middle/throat sections blend in with the walls, making the bass horn less dominating in the room. It does work, some people have not recognised it as part of the bass horns.

Axi2050Proto1

The First Test: Where's the Bass?

Just setting up the horn and putting some music on, without any crossover or EQ, left us wondering: Where's the bass? Isn't this supposed to be a bass horn? There's a lot of lower midrange, but the sound was a bit thin. 

Altec95dBInRoomThe measurements made it obvious what the problem was: the output fell below 70Hz, and apart from a peak at 50Hz, the response was more like a midbass horn than a 30Hz bass horn. What was going on? 

We swapped the Altec for the DIY 12", and that helped significantly; the better impedance match between the horn and driver was definitely an issue in the presence of room modes. Which turned out to be the real problem.

Room Modes

 My living room is about 7m long and 3.5-4m wide. This means that the second mode in the length direction and the first mode in the width direction are both at about 50Hz, which is also clear from the measurement above. Between these two modes, energy transfer in the room is quite limited. A wider room would definitely be an improvement, but you have to work with what you've got. 

In the modal region in a room, the response can vary quite a lot from position to position. Some listening positions have a smoother response, while others place the listener at peaks or nulls of modes. To find the best starting point for EQing the response, I measured the response in the room at a 2.5 by 3m grid, every 0.5m. The results for all positions are shown below. 

RoomRespGrid

It turned out that the response was quite smooth about 3m from the horns mouths, somewhat behind the middle of the room. The responses at this line are shown below. Annoyingly, the response drops quite sharply below 45Hz, due to the lack of modes between 25Hz and 50Hz, but apart from rebuilding the room (which I'm sure the landlord wouldn't like), there's not much to be done. 

RoomResp3m

I have applied some EQ to lift the response a bit, but one should be very careful with EQing dips caused by room modes. And I'm not going to spend the rest of my life in this house, so hopefully my nest home will have a more beneficial distribution of modes int eh listening room!

Listening Tests

So, after all this work, how does it sound? The lack of output below 45Hz is only noticable on music where you know there should be something down there. Apart from that, the response in the listening position is quite smooth, and it has the traits of bass horns that I have been missing for so long: proper impact - even at low volumes -, and responsive, detailed and tight bass. Low frequency details in the recordings are quite easy to hear, and there's no overhang or resonance. It sounds effortless even at very high volumes too. The horn integrates well with the fast and detailed midrange of the Axi2050, making it a good combination. I also tried a delay-derived subtractive crossover, as described in the Horn Book, and it made a worthwile improvement to the coherence and naturalness in the lower midrange.

All in all, I'm very satisfied with the performance. 

[Previous: Performance MeasurementsMainDriver Update

Big BenD Bass Horn: Performance Measurements

Big BenD Bass Horn: Performance Measurements

[Previous: Belts and braces pt. 4Main; Next: Installation

 With one horn finished, I took it outside to do some frequency response measurements. First thing to do is to measure the horn under conditions similar conditions to the simulations. This is a very important part of designing speakers, if you want to use simulation tools in the process. You need to verify that your simulation is correct, and if not, in what way. It is especially important if you are writing your own simulation software. I think people are getting better at it, but there have been many cases on DIYaudio of people complaining about their simulations being wrong, when the actual problem is that they have not simulated what they have actually built. 

Corner

The actual condition of a horn built into an "infinite corner" (3 infinite baffles perpendicular to each other) isn't easy to achieve in practice. The best I could do was to use the walls of my house and garage:

Testing1

And then put some extra sheets of plywood between the buildings to try to close the gap.

Testing2

So, finally the first measurements, with and without baffles. The difference isn't huge, This may be because the garage is still close enough in terms of wavelengths to contribute to the baffle effect. (I'm not sure if the levels are actually correct, trying to do the calibration in ARTA gave some confusing results.)

MeasuredCornerTxt

So how well does this fit with the simulations? Actually pretty good, see below. The Response below 200Hz is almost spot on, the  response at higher frequencies deviates, probably because of the simple model used for simulating the curving, and because I used a different driver than in the measurements. 

What I'm quite happy with is that the curving approach worked as intended: there are no sharp dips and peaks or suckouts in the response, and it doesn't roll off until about 500Hz. This creates a nice overlap with the midrange horn. At the lower end, the response starts to fall off rapidly below 30Hz, which was the intended lower limit. The response is a bit uneven, but we'll see that this changes with a different driver.

OutdoorResp

Wall

The second test condition is in front of a wall. Neither of the two are fully representative of the operation conditions in actual use, but it will show the effect of placing the horn in front of, instead of flush with, a wall.

Testing3

The effect of one missing side wall and the increased distance to the back wall is evident: a loss of level at low frequencies that was predicted by both the simulations and scale model measurements. 

MeasuredWallTxt

Driver Tests

The next measurements were done with REW as I found it easier to do a level calibration there than when using ARTA. Four different drivers were tested:

Altec 515-8G, a 15" driver built in a Celestion FTR-3070 chassis, A 12" guitar speaker, and a 12" high efficiency woofer built using various parts available. The results are shown below. 

There is a clear difference between the drivers; the guitar speaker clearly fails and has a very peaky response (not all musical instrument drivers are suitable for bass horn use, even if Dr. Bruce Edgar had good results with EVM-12). The 15" drivers perform about the same. The best results comes from the 12" driver I built. This isn't actually very surprising, since it has the best impedance match with the horn of all the drivers. 

The dips in the response at 483Hz and 870Hz are from standing waves in the empty rear chamber.

FR105dBWall

Distortion

Following is some distortion meausrements of the drivers tested. I measured at 95, 105 and 115dB SPL at a 2m distance. Only the results for 115dB (114dB for the 12" prototype) are shown.
Altec115dB

15inDIY115dB

Guitar115dB

12inDIY115dB

The 15" drivers are quite similar in response, but the Altec clearly has lower distortion. The guitar driver has very high distortion (not surprisingly, since it has a stiff paper surround and only 1mm overhang on the voice coil), and is best left to what it was designed to do: create distortion for electric guitars. 

The 12" DIY driver has the smoothest response, and while the distortion is slightly higher than the Altec, they are both quite at "sane" listening levels.  

Altec95dB

12inDIY95dB

[Previous: Belts and braces pt. 4Main; Next: Installation