Damn, it's a sorta of Kef 104/2 on steroids ! Cooool !
Is the hyperion horn flare a Danley's or a shelf one drilled for the proto ?
The cabinet looks like (there is some logic when it comes to cabinets in home areas) what the great Baslow made as well years ago !
If I can finally finish one of my projects, I intend to sell those speakers. They started out in Portland, where Bill built them, and I used to live near there.
Then they were sold to a forum member in the Bay Area. I flew up there from San Diego and drove them back.
I bought a new home in Vegas and that's where they're now, but I'm hoping to build something smaller/comparable.
Last edited:
I liked a lot what Bill made after. The Seos horn is NLA, sad ! While he provided the beginning of the horn flare for a 3D print . It goes low enough and the square cabinet is pretty. At max needs distributed subs.
But standalone cabinet is what the market needs indeed. I didn't remember they were made at the back for wall angles like the Klipschorn !
If Tom Danley is making something for home entertainment, I hope he will think to the european market
But standalone cabinet is what the market needs indeed. I didn't remember they were made at the back for wall angles like the Klipschorn !
If Tom Danley is making something for home entertainment, I hope he will think to the european market
What's the compromise in using two direct radiator 15" subs for the hyperion instead of a tapped horn? The direct radiators are smaller and can be EQ'd into submission. But doesn't the EQ cause alot of group delay? Does a direct radiator take a few more cycles to reach
the full spl of the signal then a tapped or front loaded horn?
Less ringing from the direct radiators than a horn I would guess too.
the full spl of the signal then a tapped or front loaded horn?
Less ringing from the direct radiators than a horn I would guess too.
Last edited:
A tapped horn with two fifteens would require about 8x as much volume as a direct radiator.
In the world of car audio, I built a lot of horns and tapped horns, and eventually came to realize that they're probably not great options for a car.
Basically you can get a lot of output out of a horn or a tapped horn, but the box size gets ridiculous.
An example of this, is that if you go over to data-bass.com you'll see that the Stereo Integrity 24" woofer in a sealed box can keep up with horns and tapped horns.
Yes, a sealed box is very low-tech, but if the drivers that put in the box have a lot of displacement and power handling, and you have a big amp, they can keep up with the more exotic sub designs, like horns and tapped horns.
I think horns and tapped horns make sense if you're doing sound reinforcement or a permanent install in a theater or nightclub, where maximum SPL is Job One and cabinet size isn't a huge concern.
Thanks for your input Patrick. I think comparing CEA-2010 results has some value but IMD distortion testing is closer to what music is. In my experience my bfm david (basically an autotuba front loaded horn) towers can do some things that a direct radiator can't do like for example the dynamics of a taiko drum. My RTA spikes at 60hz at 105hz during the drum hit so the direct radiator should still be in it's linear range. But I've tried many 12s in 85 liters including the Acoustic Elegance SBP12a. The sealed 12s can't do it, to mushy. Maybe a pair of dual 15s or SI 24" could do it, I'm not sure. With big cones the suspension resistance seems too high for dynamics.
On the other hand there are resonances in the horn and music like jazz with an upright bass sounds more natural through a audio technology flexunit 12" direct radiator than the horn. I think eventually driver technology will surpass the advantages of a bass horn. Maybe Danley thinks we are there.
On the other hand there are resonances in the horn and music like jazz with an upright bass sounds more natural through a audio technology flexunit 12" direct radiator than the horn. I think eventually driver technology will surpass the advantages of a bass horn. Maybe Danley thinks we are there.
Last edited:
Maybe with active and EQ in the low end. But for passive filters guys, a good sealed with a Qtc around 0.5 is certainly a good if not better if having no electronic filters.
The 12 db curve might be easier for the room with PA drivers to acheive a good enough low end.
Group delay also better than vented with passive filters ! Phase is better where it is important, i.e. in the low end... we surely care less beyond 3K hz !
Now with the plate amps more and more democratic in their price... But the one with FIR filter cost an arm yet !
So why Mr Tom Danley will choose the same driver or their modern catalog reference than the SH60 while he claims it certainly needs less power for home use and closer listening distance ? The coax will make the horn width & size more home friendly -I love what Mark100 is doing but 50" width synergy is not for every home but divorced men ! -
What Bawslow made with its sealed synergy with distributed subs should work great as well ! I would have construct it before if it was not made for the US market where 3D printing is easier and less expensive than most countries, as the drivers : Denovo and NLA Eminence for the woofers (not at the days of the design launch of course).
Asking myself what a Danley could add more ?
Greater Spl ? Really needed for home ?
Ok : no DIY, so great idea and world premiere to use his concept for entertainement audiophile markett that surely deserves it.
Better drivers -Faitals drivers certainly are better than Emminence as well as BMS coax over make for cheap Denovo line BC clones-
The question is, is the studios not he core market instead of home hifi ? (there foot print and look are always a problem to solve)
That's interresting to see what could be go out at the end between a D&D 8C and the SH60
A high-end today should have a low end setup to deal with the owner room...
The 12 db curve might be easier for the room with PA drivers to acheive a good enough low end.
Group delay also better than vented with passive filters ! Phase is better where it is important, i.e. in the low end... we surely care less beyond 3K hz !
Now with the plate amps more and more democratic in their price... But the one with FIR filter cost an arm yet !
So why Mr Tom Danley will choose the same driver or their modern catalog reference than the SH60 while he claims it certainly needs less power for home use and closer listening distance ? The coax will make the horn width & size more home friendly -I love what Mark100 is doing but 50" width synergy is not for every home but divorced men ! -
What Bawslow made with its sealed synergy with distributed subs should work great as well ! I would have construct it before if it was not made for the US market where 3D printing is easier and less expensive than most countries, as the drivers : Denovo and NLA Eminence for the woofers (not at the days of the design launch of course).
Asking myself what a Danley could add more ?
Greater Spl ? Really needed for home ?
Ok : no DIY, so great idea and world premiere to use his concept for entertainement audiophile markett that surely deserves it.
Better drivers -Faitals drivers certainly are better than Emminence as well as BMS coax over make for cheap Denovo line BC clones-
The question is, is the studios not he core market instead of home hifi ? (there foot print and look are always a problem to solve)
That's interresting to see what could be go out at the end between a D&D 8C and the SH60
A high-end today should have a low end setup to deal with the owner room...
Poor man's Hyperion? SM60M + sub(s)
Let's pretend you wanted "real" Synergy speakers (a pair) for an ordinary living room system. You must choose a genuine DSL model for the mids and highs, but you may choose any (sub) woofers to be determined, probably DIY but not required.
I would pick the SM60M; it is good well < 300 Hz. Other models might be substituted. Clearly, you will need a bass solution. How loud do you want it? A pair of 15" woofers? A wall of eight such, with an SM60M in the center? You can get as silly as you like.
Are there any production "subs" that will play up to 300 Hz?
Let's pretend you wanted "real" Synergy speakers (a pair) for an ordinary living room system. You must choose a genuine DSL model for the mids and highs, but you may choose any (sub) woofers to be determined, probably DIY but not required.
I would pick the SM60M; it is good well < 300 Hz. Other models might be substituted. Clearly, you will need a bass solution. How loud do you want it? A pair of 15" woofers? A wall of eight such, with an SM60M in the center? You can get as silly as you like.
Are there any production "subs" that will play up to 300 Hz?
Last edited:
"You must choose a genuine DSL model for the mids and highs, but you may choose any (sub) woofers to be determined, probably DIY but not required."
In the right setting, mounting IB subs into your listening room seems like a good return on $ and effort.
This is a good example:
William Cowan's Homepage
I've done a very cheap version of this in an industrial space --> a quad of 15" woofers mounted in a baffle in a brick corner. The front of the drivers fired into the "listening room" and the rear of the drivers fired into a roughly 4000 litre brick enclosure in a smaller room I'd built.
Using multiple drivers + boundary loading = lots of boost, relative to a normal sub.
Using high(ish) Qts driver in a huge sealed box or OB = very slow roll off.
In the right setting, mounting IB subs into your listening room seems like a good return on $ and effort.
This is a good example:
William Cowan's Homepage
I've done a very cheap version of this in an industrial space --> a quad of 15" woofers mounted in a baffle in a brick corner. The front of the drivers fired into the "listening room" and the rear of the drivers fired into a roughly 4000 litre brick enclosure in a smaller room I'd built.
Using multiple drivers + boundary loading = lots of boost, relative to a normal sub.
Using high(ish) Qts driver in a huge sealed box or OB = very slow roll off.
Soldermizer,
I listened to the SH-50 years ago in a well optimized and measured setup, here are my (and others) impressions:
Danley SH-50
Here is a picture of the setup and comments by the owner:
Danley SH-50
Best,
Anand.
I listened to the SH-50 years ago in a well optimized and measured setup, here are my (and others) impressions:
Danley SH-50
Here is a picture of the setup and comments by the owner:
Danley SH-50
Best,
Anand.
The HF "boost" is typical to achieve "flat" response using a passive crossover with a constant directivity horn/HF driver. A series capacitor is used to bypass the attenuation resistors used at the low end of the HF driver. The overall cabinet sensitivity is reduced to that of the raw sensitivity of the HF driver above around 10kHz.
Stating the obvious...
I find it amusing that so many opinions are formed by listening to speakers that are anything but equal, or equalized. How could anyone possibly fairly compare two speakers if their frequency responses are not closely matched? Never mind the other sonic factors, phase and so on, that may also matter.
Consider this simple case: pick your own favorite speaker. At the outset, they have identical crossovers and measure identically. Now make slight changes to one speaker's crossover. Presented to a new listener who compared the two speakers, they would likely sound very different. In a similar way, the best speaker in the world will probably sound like crap if you boost the highs by ten dB,or cut the bass by the same amount.
The above comments are typical. Yes a speaker will be "voiced" for a given target market. But no way can one make a fair comparison if you (say) haven't equalized the speakers to a common standard prior to listening.
Apples to apples, gentlemen
I find it amusing that so many opinions are formed by listening to speakers that are anything but equal, or equalized. How could anyone possibly fairly compare two speakers if their frequency responses are not closely matched? Never mind the other sonic factors, phase and so on, that may also matter.
Consider this simple case: pick your own favorite speaker. At the outset, they have identical crossovers and measure identically. Now make slight changes to one speaker's crossover. Presented to a new listener who compared the two speakers, they would likely sound very different. In a similar way, the best speaker in the world will probably sound like crap if you boost the highs by ten dB,or cut the bass by the same amount.
The above comments are typical. Yes a speaker will be "voiced" for a given target market. But no way can one make a fair comparison if you (say) haven't equalized the speakers to a common standard prior to listening.
Apples to apples, gentlemen
Last edited:
EQing for 'Apples to apples' only applies if the directivity of the speakers you are comparing happen to be the same. I don't think there is a way of EQing the polar responses of different speakers to be the same ? (If you EQ 2 speakers to be the same at listening position and their polar responses are different then you will get different blends of direct sound / room reflection in the measurement)
Rob.
Rob.
Does that mean we can never compare different systems in an apple to apple way? (Unless they also have the same directivity, probably making them almost identical to be able to achieve that)
I'd say comparing things like differing directivity while keeping the same frequency response (or even better: tonal balance) would be a good start to find one's preference.
I'd say comparing things like differing directivity while keeping the same frequency response (or even better: tonal balance) would be a good start to find one's preference.
I really don't know the answer.... I've built a lot of different type of speakers and have noticed that the more directional they become the harder it is to get them 'dialled in' in room. If I EQ my MEH's flat at listening they sound very different to a 3 way cone and dome EQ'd the same. (harsh, nasal, thin etc)
For me a horn system measures different to a conventional system while sounding tonally the same if that makes sense ? (Once I get my stuff setup on REW I get my headphones on and set it up so the headphones are at the same volume. I play a song and put headphones on, headphones off and tweak until the tonality is equal between them.)
A bit of a confusing post but I hope you can see where I'm coming from.
Rob.
For me a horn system measures different to a conventional system while sounding tonally the same if that makes sense ? (Once I get my stuff setup on REW I get my headphones on and set it up so the headphones are at the same volume. I play a song and put headphones on, headphones off and tweak until the tonality is equal between them.)
A bit of a confusing post but I hope you can see where I'm coming from.
Rob.