In this case, it really doesn’t takelong for some folks to be revealed as clueless. And the first tip-off
presents itself in form of a comparison of my design to a front-loading
exponential horn and then a high-tune transmission line. Apples and
oranges have more in common. Their attempt at applying quarter-wave math
to a conical rear horn, alone, aught to give you an idea of how skewed
their references are. Granted, a front loading horn (whether conical or
exponential) does achieve it’s coupling / loading effect through a
wave length multiplier along with gradual velocity-to-air mass transfer
along a designated contour. Rear horns, on the other hand use the air
mass inside the horn as a resonant “spring mass” much like a
ported enclosure allowing the horn to be shorter yet still effectively
couple the back-wave to the air mass at the mouth of the port. Take a
semi-conical folded rear horn like the “snail shell”, for
instance; in most of them, the effective horn length averages roughly 65
inches so, according to that forum’s take on horns, most snail
shells are in fact designed to reproduce mid-bass. At any rate, I do hope
you enjoy the sound quality, response, and the output of your design.
Pete
Sales, Team Toxic Bass