Aren't the mid drivers and bass drivers for the Bwaslo design out of production since he used buyout drivers? Bwaslo has an impressive XO design which is shot if you swap the mids and bass units for something else. We can always use miniDSP but I like the passive phase linear design. It's not easy to do.
Speaker Addict on Ebay has the mids
Parts Express has the compression driver
The trickiest part of the xover, by far, is the midrange and high frequency part
You mean it's better than your Gedlee ? Both for the tonal color and soundstage ?
Which one?
To my ears, the SH50s image like crazy but the treble is borderline low-fi. You can see this in the published graphs, it's rough:
Geddes gets beat up a lot around here, but he's absolutely correct that reducing diffraction in waveguides makes an audible improvement. Here's a measurement that yours truly did of the QSC waveguide that's sold over at Parts Express for $35. (It's a OS curve, no doubt.)
When you compare the QSC to the SH50, you'll see that the frequency response fluctuations in the SH50 are about +/- 3dB, while the QSC is only 1-2dB. This is definitely due to the midrange taps; when I drill holes in the QSC waveguide it's no longer that smooth. If you look at the QSC measurement, you can see that if you listened 45 degrees off axis, as Geddes recommends, and you applied constant directivity EQ to offset the high frequency droop, you could get the QSC to fit into a window that's +/- one decibel. That's remarkable performance, as good as any dome tweeter, and that's using a waveguide and compression driver combination that costs less than $150. That is truly a remarkable value.
J. Gordon Holt did a great essay in Stereophile called "Why Hi-Fi Experts Disagree." It's required listening for this debate, because the question of which speaker is better will largely boil down to your personal preferences. The Gedlee speaker doesn't sound remotely like a horn, it's treble is as good as some silk domes.
The SH50 doesn't have that silky smooth treble, but it images like crazy. Probably the only speaker I've ever heard that images better than a Vandersteen.
But Waslo's Synergy improved on the treble of the SH50.
Without a doubt, the big takeaway from having Synergy horns in my room was that I realized that most of our imaging cues are in the midrange and the midbass.
Last edited:
The enhanced imaging has to be experienced to be believed. I have also experienced this on my Trynergy (full range tractrix synergy) and on 2-way synergy and think it has to do with reduced spray off of nearby walls since the energy is controlled and directed. You have much less reflection noise to deal with and as a result, the SNR for phase-sensitive imaging is much higher. This is what makes them sound jaw dropping, captivating, or stunning - all appropriate adjectives that I would use to describe the sound.
I meaned the Waslo you prefer in the list and the Gedlee you have (as you know them to have it)....
It is possible just to add foam in a Synergy just only in front of the tweeter mouth ? a sort of little foam dome and not a massive one like the Gedlee, because here the particular design of a Synergie horn design (no to close the other mids holes with the foam used for the treble mouth !).
Or Worth to try a notch at 4.5 Khz to 5Khtz on the SH50 ?
It is possible just to add foam in a Synergy just only in front of the tweeter mouth ? a sort of little foam dome and not a massive one like the Gedlee, because here the particular design of a Synergie horn design (no to close the other mids holes with the foam used for the treble mouth !).
Or Worth to try a notch at 4.5 Khz to 5Khtz on the SH50 ?
Last edited:
Ah, thanks ! And thanks also John for the testimonials about all the synergys heard !
If I have to try one, it could be the one of Xrk971 designed because the good targett price ! In fact I lurk at it from one year but for many reasons can't beginn it yet !
Basloo one seems far more complicated to do : need a lot of skill for the enclosure !
So if I rewrite John's thoughts :
SH50 is the best for imaging but have a bad hifi sound in the highs, certainly due to be used with huger space than our rooms and a farer listening distance (my simple understanding).
Gedllee speakers are very close for the Soundstage (better than Vandersteen?) but with better tones
Basloo design offers best of two world in a domestic environment ?
What happen when the same CD than Gedllee uses is keeped in a synergy design ? (small 1" mouth ?)
Reading all of you, it seems a good synergydesign could solve lack of mid-bass dynamic & soundstage imaging in a smaller footprint ! But what about te highs as said above : do the better horn and CD can beat the more conventional treble units (domes, planar, etc !) when it comes to judge about tonal color ? (by the way I believe the hardiest job is the mid for tonal color : a tradeoff has to be find between micro and macro dynamic, details and energy !)
The CD is just choosed because of the needs of high efficienty (design origin is from PA world for live events !) ?
Maybe also the Basloo design is a very good integration of the bass unit with the synergy horn above ?
If I have to try one, it could be the one of Xrk971 designed because the good targett price ! In fact I lurk at it from one year but for many reasons can't beginn it yet !
Basloo one seems far more complicated to do : need a lot of skill for the enclosure !
So if I rewrite John's thoughts :
SH50 is the best for imaging but have a bad hifi sound in the highs, certainly due to be used with huger space than our rooms and a farer listening distance (my simple understanding).
Gedllee speakers are very close for the Soundstage (better than Vandersteen?) but with better tones
Basloo design offers best of two world in a domestic environment ?
What happen when the same CD than Gedllee uses is keeped in a synergy design ? (small 1" mouth ?)
Reading all of you, it seems a good synergydesign could solve lack of mid-bass dynamic & soundstage imaging in a smaller footprint ! But what about te highs as said above : do the better horn and CD can beat the more conventional treble units (domes, planar, etc !) when it comes to judge about tonal color ? (by the way I believe the hardiest job is the mid for tonal color : a tradeoff has to be find between micro and macro dynamic, details and energy !)
The CD is just choosed because of the needs of high efficienty (design origin is from PA world for live events !) ?
Maybe also the Basloo design is a very good integration of the bass unit with the synergy horn above ?
Last edited:
Hello All,
Here is what I have so far. I built this horn based on Jmorkins thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/195955-unity-horn-budget-drivers-active-x-over.html
It looks like I get good extension on the mids. It is my understanding that having some overlap between drivers will help when crossing over. Im stil trying to find out if I have the mids ported in the right area to create the "synergy" effect. With crossover in place I should get near perfect phase tracking?
Just an FYI: I know how to press the measure button on my gear but that is about it.
Steve
Here is what I have so far. I built this horn based on Jmorkins thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/195955-unity-horn-budget-drivers-active-x-over.html
It looks like I get good extension on the mids. It is my understanding that having some overlap between drivers will help when crossing over. Im stil trying to find out if I have the mids ported in the right area to create the "synergy" effect. With crossover in place I should get near perfect phase tracking?
Just an FYI: I know how to press the measure button on my gear but that is about it.
Steve
Attachments
Last edited:
Ah, if only it were that easy. The midrange placement HELPS getting phase tracking, but it certainly doesn't do the whole job. It just helps to counter the delay you'd normally get from the midrange's lowpass crossover response.
That said, I think your overlap looks fine. If I were you, I'd get a miniDSP and use that as crossover, much easier to work with delays and response flattening than trying to do it with passive components (which, plainly said, is an absolute b**ch to do). And since you can press the measure button, just keep pressing it and watching while you change crossover points, delays, filter types, and parametric peaks/notches on the MiniDSP, till it all works out (and till you have enough isolation/protection for the tweeter). Trial and error works great when you have the control a DSP gives.
Also, 'That Said' again, getting the response to be 'linear phase' (a.k.a. 'waveform faithful', 'square wave coherent', etc., etc.) hasn't seemed to be a dramatic (if even noticeable) improvement at least in my setup. Getting all the sound to come from the same point and having the uniform directivity is the bulk of the benefit, and you are basically there already. I think that speaker is going to sound GOOD.
Thank you for the input!
I am going to actually add an additional 2x 10inch woofers to go 3way (like a SH-50). I have a mini-DSP to tweak with, however, I have a DBX Driverack PX (2-Way). I would love to go passive between a pair of drivers. The Driverack can do time alignment, EQ, Crossover duties.
I guess the crossover between bass and mid would not require the phase to match as well and there would be much more overlap to pick the crossover point from.
hmmmm
I am going to actually add an additional 2x 10inch woofers to go 3way (like a SH-50). I have a mini-DSP to tweak with, however, I have a DBX Driverack PX (2-Way). I would love to go passive between a pair of drivers. The Driverack can do time alignment, EQ, Crossover duties.
I guess the crossover between bass and mid would not require the phase to match as well and there would be much more overlap to pick the crossover point from.
hmmmm
I got some time with my son on Sunday and made some more sawdust for this project. I would love to have built a fullsize horn the first go around but I didn't expect to want to build a 3 way horn (IE SH-50/SH-96 etc) I had planned to build a more traditional speaker that had WW/MT comprised of a Synergy horn. I will be in need of all my best duct tape and bondo skills to get the horn extensions to match up but I am very excited. FYI the Bass driver will be mounted up snug with the mid not where I am holding it.
Steve
Steve
Attachments
Last edited:
Nice work! If you want phase-coherent, transient-perfect, square wave capable, etc. use BW1 XO between the HF and MID and MID and LF (or use Duelund XO with LR2 between LF and HF and BW1 berween LF and MID and HF and MID - so called "hole-filler XO"). I am studying that here with my 2-way. It makes a difference on some tracks with bass and percussion recorded in natural stereo listener-perspective mics. Heavily produced multi-mic tracks you won't hear benefits as much. I have settled on LR2 for now and happy.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/273524-10f-8424-rs225-8-fast-ref-monitor.html
What mids are you using?
I second Bwaslo that it will sound good with miniDSP. Loud too.
Almost done with both horns. Anybody want to give me some input on hole size for my woofer cutouts? How critical is this hole? I want the woofers to run between 60/80HZ up to 300HZ. My gut says around 2=2.75 inches
Don't bash me guys I know all this can be put into Horn Resp but Im not that type of guy.
Steve
Don't bash me guys I know all this can be put into Horn Resp but Im not that type of guy.
Steve
Last edited:
Woofer holes are not critical to put in sim. They aren't horn loaded anyways and are essentially band pass woofer holes. The size vs volume of chamber formed by cone will affect your HF extension though. You can always make holes bigger but harder to make smaller. You can add volume plug in cone to reduce volume and increase upper HF extension. Should do that anyway for best performance. 2.75in sounds fine.
I have a set of the original Unity's from Nick McKinney. The Unity is paired with a 15" bass driver. I've been planning on building a new set of cabinets.
I've toyed with the idea of adding bass units to the Unity, ala the synergy approach. The idea of extending the Unity output down to around 100Hz seems attractive. It would offer single source output throughout the critical vocal range.
I think I could add a couple of low profile 8" mid bass drivers to the waveguide, and still keep the cabinet size reasonable (might even consider mounting the whole unit in corner soffits). It may require smaller mids, but that's doable.
Right now, directivity between the Unity and bass units matches up pretty well around 3-400Hz. I would guess that the same might apply in matching up the 3 range Unity to the bass at around 100Hz. Though at that frequency, it may not much matter.
If this is not a completely crazy idea, what 8" midbass drivers might fit the bill?
Sheldon
I've toyed with the idea of adding bass units to the Unity, ala the synergy approach. The idea of extending the Unity output down to around 100Hz seems attractive. It would offer single source output throughout the critical vocal range.
I think I could add a couple of low profile 8" mid bass drivers to the waveguide, and still keep the cabinet size reasonable (might even consider mounting the whole unit in corner soffits). It may require smaller mids, but that's doable.
Right now, directivity between the Unity and bass units matches up pretty well around 3-400Hz. I would guess that the same might apply in matching up the 3 range Unity to the bass at around 100Hz. Though at that frequency, it may not much matter.
If this is not a completely crazy idea, what 8" midbass drivers might fit the bill?
Sheldon
I do not know if I should keep posting here. I have come to think of this thread as a catch all DSL/Synergy Horn resource. I don't think I am building anything that needs it's own build thread. If any body thinks my posting is cluttering up this thread or misplaced please advise me.
Here is the result of the last few days work on this project.
I added on to the Synergy horn I built last year that only covered to 300Hz. I will now have 2x10 inch bass drivers. I would like to get down below 100Hz from these speakers. The bass driver measurement is without any real box behind the driver. I mounted the woofer and added gasket foam to the backside and screwed down a cheap plastic bucket about the same size as the drivers frame. I will build a box later as I decide how I want to make the final box.
I calculate the air space as 0.25 - 0.3cft. I know there is room to improve here. I have not put the whole thing back together but the bass sounded pretty good on the test tracks with just one woofer!
I still think I could go passive between the woofers and the mids to basically make this speaker bi-amped with my Rane Driverack unit. For right now it will be tri-amped with the MiniDSP and the Rane Driverack.
Looking at the graphs I wonder if I should open up the width of the mid's entry holes? This would filter out some more of the upper freq information IIRC.
Will update as I go along,
Steve
Here is the result of the last few days work on this project.
I added on to the Synergy horn I built last year that only covered to 300Hz. I will now have 2x10 inch bass drivers. I would like to get down below 100Hz from these speakers. The bass driver measurement is without any real box behind the driver. I mounted the woofer and added gasket foam to the backside and screwed down a cheap plastic bucket about the same size as the drivers frame. I will build a box later as I decide how I want to make the final box.
I calculate the air space as 0.25 - 0.3cft. I know there is room to improve here. I have not put the whole thing back together but the bass sounded pretty good on the test tracks with just one woofer!
I still think I could go passive between the woofers and the mids to basically make this speaker bi-amped with my Rane Driverack unit. For right now it will be tri-amped with the MiniDSP and the Rane Driverack.
Looking at the graphs I wonder if I should open up the width of the mid's entry holes? This would filter out some more of the upper freq information IIRC.
Will update as I go along,
Steve
Attachments
Last edited:
