diyAudio (
-   Multi-Way (
-   -   Synergy Horns. No drawbacks, no issues? (

peteleoni 5th September 2013 05:13 AM

Synergy Horns. No drawbacks, no issues?
Other than actually owning one and living with it, and after much much study, I'll be damned if I can find any reason to think that this is not an end all product, in effect having the inherent possibility of making other horn designs obsolete. Please set me straight because I can't find one hole is this design, couls someone give me a good reason to choose anything else as far as high fidelity is concerned?????

stewin 5th September 2013 06:55 AM

have you ever heard a paralline loaded technology? :)

peteleoni 5th September 2013 08:06 AM

Well yes his as well but more applicable to HF I was thinking.

Tom Danley 5th September 2013 04:35 PM

I suppose the big problem for hifi is that we don’t make any that look the part, we don’t make any that are made in the way the market has come to expect.
All of them are made according to the acoustics of the elements involved, it is entirely how things work acoustically that drove the design or like they say “form follows function". I used to have / make electrostatic speakers but I could never go back now.

The result is a horn loaded system which acts like, sounds like and measures like a single wide band driver with no crossover in a larger than average Constant Directivity horn. Even with the largest Synergy horns, you can walk up and even put your head in the horn mouth and never hear there is more than one source of sound floating in front of you. There are NO lobes and nulls at crossover or anywhere else, most can reproduce a square wave over a broad band even using a passive crossover.

Personally I would love to sell a hifi version (hifi has been my hobby most of my life and is the target I aim at) but the company is focused on large scale sound right now where all the acoustic problems are much greater and compared to live sound products, the sound difference is immediately obvious..
The problem with hifi is similar to live sound, it is marketing driven, on the other hand, the large scale sound we are in is sound quality driven and concert sound systems used their sound terrible by comparison so on site side by side demos nearly always produce a large sale, hence that is our focus.
What I would change for the home is to tilt the response down a little bit like most hifi speakers instead of flat which tends to sound a little bright playing CD’s. I have SH-50’s for my listening system and had started a revised sm-60 I hoped would be more compatible with the size more in line for home use.

We don't do much marketing, are not a household word but if you have Facebook, you can see some of the stadiums where the larger versions have recently been installed

One of the things we did in the early days to track our progress was to do “generation loss recordings” and now as a result, they tend to sound good even when picked up by a microphone.
If you have ever heard sound in a stadium before and have headphones on your computer, try a couple of these video’s taken at LSU Tiger stadium a couple weeks ago;

or Michigan state earlier this year;
Tom Danley
Danley Loudspeakers | Danley Sounds Labs | Danley Sound Labs, Inc.

ra7 5th September 2013 04:48 PM

Tom, there is no doubt that the Synergy design is superior to most anything out there in a number of ways. But I've always wondered about it's performance when it comes to the all important factor of on axis frequency response. From the graphs I have seen on your website, it is not as smooth as the best direct radiator designs. Of course, this is easily fixed with some EQ using a DSP. Given it's constant directivity nature, EQ should be usable throughout the range of the horn.

What are your thoughts on this?

Tom Danley 5th September 2013 05:21 PM

Well that is true, the commercial sound Synergy horns are generally not as flat as some hifi direct radiators but unless one also listens at one meter, the response there doesnít tell you much about what you will hear at the listening position, usually several meters away.

In a room, at the listing position, a large CD horn will measure much more like itís one meter response than the direct radiator because there is much less room corruption and reflected sound.
The SH-50ís in my listening room measure + - 4dB at the LP while a pair of small point source direct radiators at the same locations measured +- 12dB because of reflected sounds etc.

Part B is that with a passive crossover, it takes 2 or 3 parts to fix every bump in the response and in commercial sound, there is a need to keep the price under control so part of the game is keeping an eye on what the market expects from others.
The sm-60s I was working on do have more network parts and are flatter about + - 1 dB@1mtr with the tilt I mentioned. Yes, eq can fix problems and if you radiate like a single source, it does so in the entire pattern and any correction to magnitude also corrects itís corresponding phase.

peteleoni 5th September 2013 09:19 PM

Thanks for responding Tom. If I were still writing regularly for Mix or EQ I would be all over this. If Craig Anderton is not hip to this yet , I will make sure he is aware. It seems to me you may have something that is a paradigm shifter here floating just under the radar. I would imagine holding the patent on such a thing is a bit like having a tiger by the toenail with other tigers watching.

ScottG 5th September 2013 10:09 PM

I personally think there are many negative issues (..but then what speaker doesn't have that?)..

However, do you really want me to list them? :o

Instead I'll go with a positive. ;)

The basic design because of it's narrow directivity, is very well suited to ambiophonics. :)

..and suggest an area of improvement:

For the larger designs that use bass drivers (Synergy as opposed to Unity), it would be even better if the woofers had a pressure release section on the sides for better in-room (higher directivity at lower freq.s) performance. (Note: this is mostly about maintaining directivity in the lower midrange.) The down-side here is that low freq. reproduction would be missing - but done well, that would be an acceptable compromise IMO (and would obviously need to be supplemented with sub.s).

peteleoni 5th September 2013 10:43 PM

Yes Scott I would like you to list them. I will point out that subs are needed in all cases anyway. If we can get a point source down to midbass its a done deal. You always have to deal with low bass in a room for room basis, not a point worth belaboring. I would very muck like to hear about all else .

Pano 6th September 2013 12:46 AM


Originally Posted by peteleoni (
I will point out that subs are needed in all cases anyway.

You might be surprised by the SH50. Tom might say a sub is needed, but when I've heard it without, I did not find it lacking. Yes, a sub helps, but isn't as necessary as one might think. The SH50 already has more grunt than most Hi-Fi speakers.

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:03 AM.

Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 18.75%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2018 diyAudio