Figure 8 plots the
weighted principal components identified for the
angle-dependent component of the horn radiativity. Each component is
weighted by its corresponding singular value, thus visually indicating
its importance. Also plotted using the same line type are the
zero-lines for each principal component. Note in particular that the
first (largest) principal component is entirely positive.
![]() |
Figure 9 shows the complete horn impulse-response model
(
![]()
![]()
diag
), overlaid with the
original raw data
. We see that both the fixed base-leakage
and the angle-dependent horn-output response are closely followed by
the fitted model.
![]() |
Figure 10 shows the estimated impulse response of the base-leakage
component
, and Fig. 11 shows the modeled angle-dependent
horn-output components
delayed out to their natural arrival
times.
Figure 12 shows the average power response of the horn outputs.
Also overlaid in that figure is the average response smoothed
according to Bark frequency resolution [16]. This
equalizer then becomes
in Fig.
. The filters
and
in Fig.
are obtained by dividing
the Bark-smoothed frequency-response at each angle by
and
designing a low-order recursive filter to provide that equalization
dynamically as a function of horn angle. The impulse-response arrival
times
determine where in the delay lines the filter-outputs
are to be summed in Fig.
.
![]() |
Figure 13 shows a spectrogram view of the angle-dependent
amplitude responses of the horn with
(Bark-smoothed curve in
Fig. 12) divided out. This angle-dependent, differential
equalization is used to design the filters
and
in Fig.
. Note that below 12 Barks or so, the angle-dependence
is primarily to decrease amplitude as the horn points away from the
listener, with high frequencies decreasing somewhat faster with angle than low
frequencies.
![]() |