Horns: JBL Everest DD67000 vs. Avantgarde Duo Mezzo

[beancounter]

I have heard the Everests and AGs (various models) in a show environment; JBL, no contest. Even in a bad room I could tell the JBL was great, in a decent room they were fantastic. I always have had high expectations of AG but they have never delivered.

Had a chance to hear the M2 but missed it.

 

[Lament]

I've heard tons of horn loudspeakers, including about half of the Avantgarde line.

They're not even in the same ballpark as the Danley SH-50s.

While the Danley SH-50 isn't the best loudspeaker I've ever heard, it's probably the best horn, and it sounds light years better than the Avantgarde speakers.

To me, the Avantgarde speakers are VERY dynamic, and that's an attention getter. But it gets fatiguing in a hurry. The SH-50s basically sound like a conventional three-way speaker, but they image like nothing else out there. (My current speakers are Vandersteen, and the SH-50s actually sound quite similar, but they image better and they're more dynamic.)

If I had to fault anything in the SH-50, it would probably be the treble, if you look at the spec sheet the treble is a little rough. The high frequency performance of Bill Waslo's Synergy Horns is superior in IMHO.

So there you have it. $60,000 for AvantGarde, $10,000 for SH-50s, or build a set of Bill's Synergy Horns for less than $500.

Hi Patrick,

interesting to read your experience with the Danley SH-50. I have a pair myself, and I agree with you about the treble being the biggest weakness of this speaker.
I am considering either upgrading the passive crossover with better components or going active with tri-amping. The crossover is very complicated, so I would just replace critical components with higher quality ones with the exact same value. I don't know if this would yield any benefits to the sound quality, but I think it would be an interesting exercise anyway.
I know the treble circuit incorporates a lowpass filter to protect it from high energy HF-content, maybe this would be beneficial to remove as it is probably not necessary in a domestic setting.
Also have been playing with the thought of replacing the BMS unit with a TAD 2001 or similar if going the active route.

Do you have any experience with modifications to the SH-50's? Crossovers etc..

 

[1audiohack]

HI rubjel;

I also have a pair of SH50's, bought them new just last month. When I brought them home I put them next to my JBL 4365's. The immediate observation is the Danley's are softer on top and after several days I added a low Q HF boost and settled at +4.5dB at 18kHz.

Other than that I have left them alone.

I haven't taken one apart yet but wondered about JBL D2430K comp driver as used in the M2 as a possible substitute but in reality, mine will likely be left as is. I sure enjoy them. Maybe someday I will DIY a pair.

If you work on your crossovers I will certainly be interested in hearing about it

Back on topic, kinda, I have heard the DD6700's and love them. I now have a pair but not yet in operation.

I have only heard the AG's at shows and they didn't blow me away.

Also, I think Patrick rented the SH50's, I don't think he owns them.

All the best,
Barry.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Hi Patrick,

interesting to read your experience with the Danley SH-50. I have a pair myself, and I agree with you about the treble being the biggest weakness of this speaker.
I am considering either upgrading the passive crossover with better components or going active with tri-amping. The crossover is very complicated, so I would just replace critical components with higher quality ones with the exact same value. I don't know if this would yield any benefits to the sound quality, but I think it would be an interesting exercise anyway.
I know the treble circuit incorporates a lowpass filter to protect it from high energy HF-content, maybe this would be beneficial to remove as it is probably not necessary in a domestic setting.
Also have been playing with the thought of replacing the BMS unit with a TAD 2001 or similar if going the active route.

Do you have any experience with modifications to the SH-50's? Crossovers etc..

The treble roughness isn't due to the crossover or the compression driver, it's due to the midrange taps.

You can see this effect in my 'Monster Massive' project. Basically when you put holes in the walls of the horn you get dips and peaks that are caused by the midrange taps. You can also see the treble peaks and dips in the published spec sheets from DSL itself.

The Synergy horn suffers less from this than the Unity horn that preceded it, because Tom came up with a new way to make the midrange taps. (It's in the patent.)

Bill Waslo tried various methods to smooth the response, and that's the reason that the treble on his Synergy Horns is superior to the SH-50s, IMHO.

Reducing the size of the midrange taps reduces the maximum output from the horn, that's why Danley Sound Labs can't use smaller taps. It would hurt the maximum output of the horn, and keep in mind these horns are designed for clubs and stadiums.

The SH-50 has a LOT of output potential; I read that the midrange array is actually more efficient than the compression driver!



TLDR: if you want to improve the treble, copy what Bill did. The BMS 4550 is a lovely compression driver and going with a TAD 2001 wouldn't be worth the expense IMHO

 

[Lament]

Barry, Patrick

thank you very much for your input, much appreciated!
I don't think I will try to modify the midrange taps, but this information is very useful. I don't have to waste money trying different CD's since this doesn't seem to be the source of the problem.
I am off topic, so I will start my own thread if I have any further questions or updates regarding the SH-50's 🙂

Best Regards