ellisdj said:
Reason I was surprised is because I thought a horn design was a tool for extending bass response from a driver - a way of getting more out of it, and expected the big drivers used in older speakers to naturally have better extension because they are bigger coupled with the horn.
I assumed then in a 2 way design it would have to used differently to cover the mids.
Goes to show I little I know about these speakers - its interesting thanks
A horn for a loudspeaker is best thought of as an impedance matching device, a kind of acoustic transformer.
It's job is to 'transform' the vibrations (energy) in a relatively hard, inelastic material material, the speaker cone, into a much 'softer' elastic material, air. I have forgotten much of what I once knew about this subject but it effectively transfers more of the energy in the cone into the air, hence increasing the efficiency of the transducer as a whole.
Within the passband of the horn, the effective, in enclosure, sensitivity of the driver is increased. This technology was developed for the motion picture industry where the primary chalange was to get room filling spls from the relatively low powered valve amplification of the day. Bandwidth, particularly at the bass end was not that important, even giants such as these had modest bass extension but above the cutoff frequency of the front horn (around 100hz), the sensitivity of the system would be in excess of 100dB/watt/metre.
This is a simple two way system with controlled dispersion from the multicell horn which covered everything above 500hz. To give you an idea of scale, those are 15inch drive units.