I wouldn't attempt it, IMO you are far ahead to sell them and upgrade or DIY your own from scratch.
NO - Just the mention that they were similar definitely put a damper on this thread.
I am...
I am very proud of the engineering work done by members of this site. I am proud of the desire to know, and the desire to be better. I am the last person who ever wanted to see the internals of Tom's designs...
The SS15, and variations of it that I have done are by far some of the best sounding cabinets I've put together. Many different "wrongs" that I have encountered in the past are "righted" in those designs.
To find out that it is the mirror image of another persons work... is well... sad...
I would like to think that I did something new....
But as the saying in audio goes... There really isn't anything new, except marketing....
Yeah man as we've seen by all the patent images that pop up, all this stuff has been done before, many many years ago. They just didn't have the technology to spread the knowledge and help each other through quick communication like we do now with DIY audio, CAD programs, Hornresp/akbak etc
NO - Just the mention that they were similar definitely put a damper on this thread.
Just to clarify that was a no - as in you are not the only one, and yes I am disappointed.
Xoc1's TH-18 exactly copied the external dimensions of the DSL TH-118, and was quite close to the internal fold pattern (other than one detail) which follows when one attempts to duplicate an existing design.
Just to clarify that was a no - as in you are not the only one, and yes I am disappointed.
I don't understand why you would be disappointed finding out that the copy was also quite close internally.
Like Tom Danley, I have always enjoyed opening up stuff and seeing "what makes it tick".
I have made dozens of "new designs", all based on modifications of old designs resulting in an incremental improvement.
Nothing wrong with finding out that you can follow the bread crumbs left by other designers, don't be sad, "be happy, don't worry".
We all stand on the shoulders of Giants.
Same is true for Mr. Danley. He took a forgotten method of enclosure design and made it his own by means of intelligence and determination and well thought out marketing. Nothing wrong with that.
What is in this thread and a few others is an open dissemination of the same type. You guys run with what you have put together and be proud of what you have accomplished.
And don't stop and sit back thinking you have created the perfect enclosure. Tweak it! Fix it, make it better. That is the real difference you can effect as a DIY designer
dan:
actually that doesn't do justice to how high quality the images are on danleys site.
Right click on image, and do a 'save image URL' then paste that into your browser, and click the "plus" to see full size....
An amazing amount of detail can be seen in the wireframes... In one of the synergy wireframes you can even easily see/measure the ports for the mids, including the entry/exit sizes of the ports. There's enough detail that if a person wanted to, you could exactly copy the cabinet.
actually that doesn't do justice to how high quality the images are on danleys site.
Right click on image, and do a 'save image URL' then paste that into your browser, and click the "plus" to see full size....
An amazing amount of detail can be seen in the wireframes... In one of the synergy wireframes you can even easily see/measure the ports for the mids, including the entry/exit sizes of the ports. There's enough detail that if a person wanted to, you could exactly copy the cabinet.
Last edited:
I had an SH50 that I purchased for about $2200 and I have seen used ones go for as low as $1500. Yes, you could make a copy, but there is a somewhat elaborate crossover network in the thing (try reverse engineering that from the drawing!), and the woodwork isn't as easy as making, say, a tapped horn. It's a nice piece of woodwork, and put together with Torx screws with inserts for the removable panels, etc. I think the cost effective method would be to find a good one.
I know that Tom has been following this thread as I noticed his name in the viewing list a while back, but he has kept quiet (at least in public)!
I would like to thank him for the new website - there is a lot of truly inspirational information on there for anyone who takes the time to look.
I like the comment on the Danley University page.....
Regards Martin (Xoc1)
I would like to thank him for the new website - there is a lot of truly inspirational information on there for anyone who takes the time to look.
I like the comment on the Danley University page.....
Regards Martin (Xoc1)
comes and gets me !Mwmkravchenko you greatly missed the mark on this.
For one, I wasn’t aware of the any other designs that were similar. Having been a speaker builder for 40+ years and in commercial and live sound for much of my life, I was surprised to see something that looks similar.
The Tapped horn idea came from thinking about the reflected signal that causes a notch in any side mounted drivers on the synergy horn.
I wondered ‘what if” is substituted an active source of the opposite sine for the reflected signal.
After a week of fiddling in Akabak I had something to try and then found some rules to go along with it. We sold the first Tapped horns 7 years ago when we started the company and right off the bat, they were a hit because they really do work.
Further, I assume your speaking of the Transflex enclosure which if you had read the patent you would have noticed a couple things. For one, they call out that the “system” has the same efficiency as the direct radiating mounting of the driver AND that the driver can be mounted outside of the enclosure, both NOT like the tapped horn.
In the Tapped horn, it is possible to get a gain of 10dB or more over the direct radiating case for the driver and that comes about from acoustic loading the Tapped horn provides.
Speaking of that, the Transflex makes no claim to or exhibits this and if one examines the areas where the front and back of the drivers are, you would notice it is also not a horn or sized to produce this effect.
Lastly, I do not copy designs and don’t even get trade magazines and to accuse us of growing because of clever marketing is insulting, we are surrounded by companies that ARE just that, our success so far is based on side by side comparisons and little else. The only way you can start from scratch and succeed against the giants is by having a better mouse trap.
Also if you do a “google patent” search on my name, you will find a good number of things which are to the patent office’s view “original”.
The patent office may or may not issue a patent on the Tapped horn, sometimes applications go through, sometimes they don’t, I have been in R&D and inventing most of my life also but still can’t tell what will go and what won’t with them.
Lastly, I can’t complain about DIY’rs figuring out how my inventions work, that is my background too and while you may never have seen any, I have dropped some important clues along the way in this and other forums.
On the other hand, an attitude like yours kind of makes me kind of wish I had never said a word about how anything works like most of the other designers i know.
Tom Danley
Standing on shoulders of giants is different from intellectual theft! The one is what we all do when learning things in school, the other is at least dishonest, or outright criminal. One does not simply accuse people of doing that without having substantial evidence. Doing so is ignorant and entitled. Especially in this case, since you are obviously wrong.