Paul McGowan on Horn Loudspeakers

Ron Resnick

Site Co-Owner, Administrator
Jan 24, 2015
16,017
13,346
2,665
Beverly Hills, CA
In his blog today Paul McGowan, of PS Audio, posted a a piece on horn loudspeakers:

Horns Are Good Because…

August 22, 2022

by Paul McGowan

In one of my YouTube videos, I railed against the sound of horns and how they are difficult for me to adjust to. They simply sound unnatural until my brain adjusts.

Of course, that spurred a raft of opposition from horn lovers defending their turf (as it should).

One of the long time beliefs about the superiority of horns involves their efficiency. Most horns are super efficient and require only a few watts of amplifier power to play loudly. Years ago in the era of small amplifiers that was a big deal. Today, not so much.

Yes, amplifier headroom is essential. When big amps like the BHK600 or the Stellar M1200 monoblocks power an 87dB sensitive pair of dynamic loudspeakers, they sound superior to other, smaller wattage amplifiers.

Rarely do these big amps output even 1/10th of their power capability and, into a 97dB horn, considerably less. That fact does not obviate the need for oversized amps that work within their ultra-linear range (typically about 10% of the total amp capabilities).

But, that said, the idea of a horn’s superiority because of less strain and distortion presented to its connected power amplifier is a thing of the past when a big amplifier maybe cranked out 20 watts.

Old notions from the past stay with us into the present day.



I responded:

For many of the commenters here, I am afraid this is a classic case of “you don’t know what you don’t know.”

1) Horn loudspeakers are just as varied in sonic attributes as are any other topology of loudspeaker, including dynamic drivers in boxes.

Only a Boomer-type mentality would conclude having heard one loudspeaker with a horn-type driver that he knows everything there is to know about horn loudspeakers.

2) The first 18 watts of the PS Audio BHK600 or the Stellar M1200 monoblocks do not sound on very sensitive loudspeakers like the first 18 watts of a Lamm ML2 SET amplifier or of an Absolare SET amplifier.

3) The attraction of many audiophiles to horn loudspeakers is not merely the efficiency specifications. It is, among other attributes, the life-like dynamics and energy which certain horn loudspeakers can reproduce.

PS: I do not own horn loudspeakers. But I have enough actual listening experience with them to understand fully why many audiophiles love them.
 
Last edited:

Ron Resnick

Site Co-Owner, Administrator
Jan 24, 2015
16,017
13,346
2,665
Beverly Hills, CA
Is Paul’s history lesson that horn loudspeakers were developed as the solution to the problem of early amplifiers being able to produce only a few watts correct?
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,437
13,467
2,710
London
Back in those data amps had very low watts. That’s why woofers like Altecs work well with low watts and high output impedance. They don’t need much grip, otherwise they get choked. With tannoys, the first drivers were black, then silver, then red, gold, HPD. The sensitivity decreased from left to right as did impedance. Later HPDs were developed for rock music to be run very loud with the solid state amps that were being developed then.

However it was an advantage to have the speaker run full range at lower watts. Not sure what Paul is implying except that his powerful SS amps are the right amps and speakers made for them are the right speakers
 
Last edited:

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,040
995
Utah
Is Paul’s history lesson that horn loudspeakers were developed as the solution to the problem of early amplifiers being able to produce only a few watts correct?
This comment should tell you that A doesn't know what he's talking about or B he sells high powered ss amps and he's messing with the truth. to prove a point :) .
In his blog today Paul McGowan, of PS Audio, posted a a piece on horn loudspeakers:

Horns Are Good Because…

August 22, 2022

by Paul McGowan
One of the long time beliefs about the superiority of horns involves their efficiency. Most horns are super efficient and require only a few watts of amplifier power to play loudly. Years ago in the era of small amplifiers that was a big deal. Today, not so much.
david

Disclaimer- I don't watch his videos nor frequent his site so I have no opinion one way or another of him.
 

Skanda

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2020
244
292
133
In his blog today Paul McGowan, of PS Audio, posted a a piece on horn loudspeakers:

Horns Are Good Because…

August 22, 2022

by Paul McGowan

In one of my YouTube videos, I railed against the sound of horns and how they are difficult for me to adjust to. They simply sound unnatural until my brain adjusts.

Of course, that spurred a raft of opposition from horn lovers defending their turf (as it should).

One of the long time beliefs about the superiority of horns involves their efficiency. Most horns are super efficient and require only a few watts of amplifier power to play loudly. Years ago in the era of small amplifiers that was a big deal. Today, not so much.

Yes, amplifier headroom is essential. When big amps like the BHK600 or the Stellar M1200 monoblocks power an 87dB sensitive pair of dynamic loudspeakers, they sound superior to other, smaller wattage amplifiers.

Rarely do these big amps output even 1/10th of their power capability and, into a 97dB horn, considerably less. That fact does not obviate the need for oversized amps that work within their ultra-linear range (typically about 10% of the total amp capabilities).

But, that said, the idea of a horn’s superiority because of less strain and distortion presented to its connected power amplifier is a thing of the past when a big amplifier maybe cranked out 20 watts.

Old notions from the past stay with us into the present day.



I responded:

For many of the commenters here, I am afraid this is a classic case of “you don’t know what you don’t know.”

1) Horn loudspeakers are just as varied in sonic attributes as are any other topology of loudspeaker, including dynamic drivers in boxes.

Only a Boomer-type mentality would conclude having heard one loudspeaker with a horn-type driver that he knows everything there is to know about horn loudspeakers.

2) The first 18 watts of the PS Audio BHK600 or the Stellar M1200 monoblocks do not sound on very sensitive loudspeakers like the first 18 watts of a Lamm ML2 SET amplifier or of an Absolare SET amplifier.

3) The attraction of many audiophiles to horn loudspeakers is not merely the efficiency specifications. It is, among other attributes, the life-like dynamics and energy which certain horn loudspeakers can reproduce.

PS: I do not own horn loudspeakers. But I have enough actual listening experience with them to understand fully why many audiophiles love them.
+1 for calling out the "boomer" 'tude. too much of that in hifi lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithR

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,601
5,411
1,278
E. England
+1 for calling out the "boomer" 'tude. too much of that in hifi lol
Love to see this forum without the Boomers.
It would probably go...<BOOM!>
Just leaving the headphone crowd and those who remember WE horns first time around.
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,521
10,687
3,515
USA
My wife recently gave me a wooden iPhone cradle shaped like a horn. I can now watch music videos on my phone just like my kids and their friends do.

It’s on my dresser next to black and white photographs, a cigar humidor, and some real alligator book ends, all in front of an actual map of St. Croix.


1661187927994.jpeg
 

Alrainbow

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2013
3,189
1,387
450
ribbons and horns mostly
horns if done well is very good
less mid and tweet amp power needed but I don’t get the flea watt crowd on them
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,437
13,467
2,710
London
I don’t get the flea watt crowd on them

did you hear Leif’s videos with 7 watts of 300b playing Beethoven 9th and black sabbath? Or Altec with 3.5 watts playing black sabbath?
 

rando

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2019
1,701
1,234
245
Online
I responded:

For many of the commenters here, I am afraid this is a classic case of “you don’t know what you don’t know.”

1) Horn loudspeakers are just as varied in sonic attributes as are any other topology of loudspeaker, including dynamic drivers in boxes.

Only a Boomer-type mentality would conclude having heard one loudspeaker with a horn-type driver that he knows everything there is to know about horn loudspeakers.

2) The first 18 watts of the PS Audio BHK600 or the Stellar M1200 monoblocks do not sound on very sensitive loudspeakers like the first 18 watts of a Lamm ML2 SET amplifier or of an Absolare SET amplifier.

3) The attraction of many audiophiles to horn loudspeakers is not merely the efficiency specifications. It is, among other attributes, the life-like dynamics and energy which certain horn loudspeakers can reproduce.

PS: I do not own horn loudspeakers. But I have enough actual listening experience with them to understand fully why many audiophiles love them.

I duly wonder what your response would've been if instead Paul had ventured onto your side project and started ripping holes in the dialogue you uphold with those entering the hobby on their own terms? ;) :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: lordcloud and tima

Ron Resnick

Site Co-Owner, Administrator
Jan 24, 2015
16,017
13,346
2,665
Beverly Hills, CA
I have no idea what you’re talking about. Please feel free to ask your question in a private message to me, rather than posting something off-topic on this thread.
 

Jägerst.

Well-Known Member
May 5, 2020
48
51
85
52
Denmark
Is Paul’s history lesson that horn loudspeakers were developed as the solution to the problem of early amplifiers being able to produce only a few watts correct?

Thanks for initiating this thread, Ron, and for your counter reply to Mr. McGowan.

Paul is correct that with only low wattage tube amps available back in the day, speakers had to be very efficient to convert those meager watts into high acoustic output, and hence they needed to be horn-loaded and very large. Bear in mind that those speakers had to fill out very large listening spaces like cinemas etc., and in that light it's quite impressive what they were able to do with only so much amp power at hand.

Today however prodigious amp power can be had in almost unlimited quantity - actually it's an inverted scenario compared to the development in speaker sensitivity over the years, certainly for domestic use: modern amps, not least Class-D variants are now much more efficient producing watts - i.e.: with less heat, lighter in weight and using less power to make more power. This again goes hand-in-hand with the considerably smaller and low efficiency speakers of today that are in need of more power, though not necessarily calling for the most efficient amp topology around today.

One thing though is the better efficiency of modern amps to produce more power, but at the receiving end at the speakers watts are still watts; only so much heat can be dissipated before thermal issues arise, not least and likely more relevantly as an audible effect in the transient domain. I think of it as a 1-10W light bulb compared to a 100-1kW ditto - this is how it's handled in the voice coil and passive cross-over components of the speakers as it applies to their very efficient vs. low efficiency iteration for a given SPL.

That is to say: one doesn't just freely compensate low efficiency in speakers with more amp power, as it comes with a price: heat build-up and eventually thermal compression, or (and I believe this term was "coined" by Mr. @Duke LeJeune): thermal modulation, which relates to the dulling of transient behavior due to "peak heat-up" as the perhaps more prevalent and audible side effect vs. compression that ends up frying the VC's and XO components due to excessive heat.

As a statement against the need for high efficiency many an audiophile appears to point at the rarity of the latter scenario (thermal compression) in the paragraph above, while failing to realize the former (thermal modulation) - a sentiment I believe applies to Mr. McGowan. The less restricted transient behavior in high eff. speakers typically comes off as an "aliveness" or sense of ignition in their sound, which may also be described with a better micro dynamic ability, also audible at lower SPL's.

Acoustic transformers, which horns essentially are, doesn't always across without imposing their own sonic imprinting, be that for reasons of the horn profile itself, material resonances (and their nature/frequency) or other. That 'other' may also have to do with their dispersive nature and the degree of reflected vs. direct sound, as well as the way their cone/diaphragm couples to the air and excites it compared to a direct radiator. The latter aspects are differences in presentation, but even so may be misconstrued as colorations or other unwanted horn artefacts that are really just about what differs from the habitual exposition to low eff. direct speakers where reflected sound is more prominent.

Do we need high sensitivity in speakers in domestic milieus today with the plentiful of amp power at hand? Yes, I most certainly believe we do, as hopefully some of the above explains. While I wouldn't necessarily pair them exclusively with low wattage amps (but also with higher powered solid state variants, actively), it seems to me this segment of speakers, usually horn-loaded, potentially offer qualities more inherently linked to a live-like, physically immersive presentation that smaller, low eff. direct radiating speakers simple can't replicate.
 
Last edited:

cjfrbw

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,323
1,313
1,730
Pleasanton, CA
PM's editorial set me laughing.

Selling the 'monster truck' mentality to audiophiles seems to work with too much money sloshing around and all the promotional talk of the necessity of 'high power' and toe stubbing monoblocks, and massive ingots of wall sucking electronic vampirism. I would call it "noveau Julian Hirsch".

How many guys around here still promote the notion that you can actually hear their amps out to the 300th watt with 'grip' and 'control'?
If you can't sell them on the sound, sell them on the size. If you can't sell them on the size, sell them on the 'power'.

This is a near divine hobby, but there is so much BS and sales simony that you have to have a sense of humor.

And, yes, I enjoy the exquisite devotion and artistry of our manufacturers as much as anybody.

I think if they haven't already, most audiophiles would benefit from hearing a well implemented 45 tube (2 watts or so) amplifier set up with speakers who can project them. Antiquarian? Maybe, but I doubt you could listen and not reset your concepts about what amplification is and isn't. Would probably have a lot of guys going home and kicking their radioactive ingots for not being able to do what a 45 amp can do in the right setup.
 

adrianywu

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2021
564
670
108
57
In addition to what Jägerst mentioned above, namely the thermal effects of high current delivery to the drivers, there is also the issue of diaphragm excursion and moving mass. Horn drivers typically have a moving mass and a diaphragm excursion an order of magnitude lower than that of dynamic drivers, and therefore the distortion is also an order of magnitude lower, and the speed an order of magnitude higher. These are parameters that dynamic drivers will never be able to approach. Try using a compression driver with beryllium diaphragm such as the TAD, and add a field coil such as those from Classic Audio, and you have drivers with distortion figures and dynamic response that no dynamic driver will ever come close to. With sophisticated computer aided design, 3D printing and other advanced manufacturing technologies, most if not all the problems associated with horn coloration can be overcome. Moreover, being able to control the dispersion is always an asset, not a liability. To say that having high efficiency is only necessary when amplifiers have limited power misses the point completely. Low efficiency is a design flaw in and of itself, since there is no sonic advantage and many disadvantages.
 

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,040
995
Utah
In addition to what Jägerst mentioned above, namely the thermal effects of high current delivery to the drivers, there is also the issue of diaphragm excursion and moving mass. Horn drivers typically have a moving mass and a diaphragm excursion an order of magnitude lower than that of dynamic drivers, and therefore the distortion is also an order of magnitude lower, and the speed an order of magnitude higher. These are parameters that dynamic drivers will never be able to approach. Try using a compression driver with beryllium diaphragm such as the TAD, and add a field coil such as those from Classic Audio, and you have drivers with distortion figures and dynamic response that no dynamic driver will ever come close to. With sophisticated computer aided design, 3D printing and other advanced manufacturing technologies, most if not all the problems associated with horn coloration can be overcome. Moreover, being able to control the dispersion is always an asset, not a liability. To say that having high efficiency is only necessary when amplifiers have limited power misses the point completely. Low efficiency is a design flaw in and of itself, since there is no sonic advantage and many disadvantages.
I agree with most of your comments Adrian except the bolded part, if it was that easy we’d have some good modern horns. I’m a big horn guy and have tried many many many of current ones at all price points still haven’t found a single speakeer I‘d want to live with or sell as a dealer. I’d lump them in same category as low efficiency difficult to drive speakers that require horrid sounding power stations to drive them.

david
 
  • Like
Reactions: cjfrbw

Blue58

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2013
890
675
1,155
London, UK

Walter66

Active Member
Aug 22, 2022
190
203
43
The "horn" speaker speeds up membranes. I've done that with some woofer chassis, they became fast. Much faster compared to a ventilated box without any front horn. It works like a transformer. A small dome can move a bigger mass of air. A way to increase sensitivity. And I think, thats what we want to increase.
Btw, its much easier to design a low watt tube amp compare to a high watt. And even with SS amps, the low watt, class A amp sounds purer than its counterpart with some hundred watt. OK, now you don't need huge output trannies for that design, but the PSU isn't that simple. Big caps in a row today in most models. But that stores energy, why not use big chokes? To be honest, today they are much more expensive than big caps.
So we learn, the industry is after cheap audio solutions. High powered SS amps with low efficiency ceramic magnet speakers (cheap) dominate audio.
All expensive solutions were the target for "better" means cheaper solutions. They killed the audio- transformers, they killed the choke supplies, they killed field coil speakers, they killed alnico high efficiency speakers, but they loved to used the cheapest technology and told us thats the best, the most modern and advanced technology.

There is no other field of hobby, where the real quality of enjoyment has declined and degraded over the decades like the audio hobby is. The people who think that their iphone is the new golden standard for audio sound quality are heartbroken when it comes to light that the sound of the 1960's was so superb compared to todays high end audio
 

Duke LeJeune

[Industry Expert]/Member Sponsor
Jul 22, 2013
747
1,200
435
Princeton, Texas
That is to say: one doesn't just freely compensate low efficiency in speakers with more amp power, as it comes with a price: heat build-up and eventually thermal compression, or (and I believe this term was "coined" by Mr. @Duke LeJeune): thermal modulation, which relates to the dulling of transient behavior due to "peak heat-up" as the perhaps more prevalent and audible side effect vs. compression that ends up frying the VC's and XO components due to excessive heat.

I borrowed the term "thermal modulation" from somebody else, and more than likely it was Earl Geddes.

In addition to what Jägerst mentioned above, namely the thermal effects of high current delivery to the drivers, there is also the issue of diaphragm excursion and moving mass.

I'd like to propose a third, though perhaps less significant, dynamic advantage of horns, and that is, improved in-room signal-to-noise ratio. Recall that the higher the signal-to-noise ratio, the greater the dynamic contrast.

To a certain extent the in-room reflections are "noise" which can compete with the direct-sound "signal". The relatively narrow directivity of horns results in higher direct-to-reverberant sound ratios, and therefore correspondingly higher in-room "signal-to-noise" ratios. But there's even more to it than that:

As long as the overtones (higher frequencies) in the decaying in-room reflections are loud enough, the ear recognizes them as reflections and treats them as "signal", at least to some extent. But once the overtones in a reflection are no longer loud enough for the ear to deduce that it's a reflection, it becomes "noise", and therefore detrimental. Within the relatively narrow-angle pattern that a horn covers, the high frequency energy typically holds up better than within the wider patterns conventional speakers cover, such that the decaying reflections of the horn's output have sufficient overtone energy to maintain their identity as "signal" for significantly longer as they fade into inaudibility.

(Obviously the room's absorptive characteristics play a role in this regardless of speaker type. Somewhat counter-intuitively, over-use of absorption [which is virtually always more effective at short wavelengths than at longer ones] can actually RAISE the in-room noise floor and LOWER the effective in-room signal-to-noise ratio! This is because the overtones are selectively attenuated too early in the lifetime of the reflections, such that they transition from recognizable "signal" into detrimental "noise" while they are louder than would otherwise have been the case. If you've ever noticed that listening fatigue sets in earlier than expected in a "heavily treated" room, your ear/brain system struggling against a higher effective in-room signal-to-noise ratio may have been the cause. Regardless of your speaker "religion", imo it makes sense to start out with speakers whose off-axis energy doesn't need to be "fixed" by acoustic treatment, such that whatever treatments you DO choose can be dedicated to impoving the room acoustics rather than trying to counteract a fundamental characteristic of the speaker.)
 
Last edited:

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing