Higher SQ Synergy Horn - brainstorm

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#21
My research has all shown that the drivers make very little to no difference in the end result. It's the systems architecture that matters, the basic design. As far as I am concerned, for pure sound quality I would not go the Danley way at all. Its advantages all have to do with higher output bot sound quality.
 
#22
JLH,

If I may ask, what is your opinion on using a Paraline technology with synergy horns, perhaps in a hybrid design where a compression driver and mids are in paraline and woofers tap in further down the conical horn?
 
Last edited:
#23
JLH said:
The key sentence in your post is

How can you even think about upgrades when you haven't even heard them before? 😕

What resonance and tonal issues are you referring to? Where did you get the idea there was resonance and tonal issues?

AMT can't be used in a Synergy because it makes the throat area too large to acoustically load the mid-ranges. Everything you have questioned has already been discussed and put to rest at least 4 or 5 times. Trust me when I tell you if there was a better way, then Danley would be doing it. The reason why he uses the components he uses is because it's the best solution out of all the options.
Click to expand...

Agreed, however, everything can be improved upon...I am positive that Danley would make a few different choices for Hi-Fi implementation. I also agree that with the driver choices available that he has made the best of the compromises for the intended high/est output use. The drivers that are suited for this design are few. I don't think we should be so closed minded in regards to improvement. Are you suggesting that this design is the final word. I understand you have taken it as far as you can, hats off to you sir. Is the Danley box not resonant, it appears not well damped? Perhaps box coloration/tonal issues are inaudible in this design.

I will give them a listen and report back when qualified.
 
#29
thirdman said:
Agreed, however, everything can be improved upon...I am positive that Danley would make a few different choices for Hi-Fi implementation. I also agree that with the driver choices available that he has made the best of the compromises for the intended high/est output use. The drivers that are suited for this design are few. I don't think we should be so closed minded in regards to improvement. Are you suggesting that this design is the final word. I understand you have taken it as far as you can, hats off to you sir. Is the Danley box not resonant, it appears not well damped? Perhaps box coloration/tonal issues are inaudible in this design.

I will give them a listen and report back when qualified.
Click to expand...

At home listening levels you are putting less than 2 to 3 watts into the Synergy horns. Also understand the horn walls receive bracing from the driver baskets and the crossover module. I've listened to Synergy horns several times and there were zero resonance issues. Due to their SPL potential they have extremely low distortion at ear splitting levels in the home setting.
 
#31
another reason why resonances, at least with enough bracing to move them up in frequency, aren't a big deal is that the hf and mid driver diaphrams have little mass and only have to move relatively little for a high output. . They don't impart much vibration into theit mounting structures. So Danley or Geddes horns don't put much mechanical energy into the box to excite resonances. It's different from a direct radiator shaking it's cone mass hard to radiate a high audio level.
 
#36
Beast ended up with those speakers after the seller backed out of our agreement. I guess he came in and offered more $$, I think the seller was then telling beast he was in a biding war, but I wouldn't play cause we had already agreed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom