Great job Mark. I see a lighter dual 15 version in future maybe..
I know you spoken briefly about it before but i think its worth mentioning your FIR hardware setup for those that may want to dabble in the future..
I know you spoken briefly about it before but i think its worth mentioning your FIR hardware setup for those that may want to dabble in the future..
Thank you Jason!
I'd happily go lighter !!!
Seriously, the only reason this syn11 has 18"s in it, is because I already had the drivers, and could free them for this experiment.
And most importantly, I knew the 18n862 can reach to 30Hz sealed, without excessive boost.
I wouldn't bother adding large drivers given the size and weight penalty, unless doing so eliminated the mandatory need for a sub.
What I'm working on now, is comparing the 18"s output from the syn11 horn, to a 18n862 in a regular sealed box.
I'll post about that after i mention the FIR hardware setup as requested.
So yep, for anybody wanting the easiest way to dabble with FIR and speaker processing in general, it has been using Q-SYS.
Which is open-architecture processing, that runs designs you make in design software, to be compiled on a hardware box QSC calls Cores.
The Q-sys Designer software is continually being updated with new features and capabilities. So Core's are not processors that go obsolete, other than time marching on and letting them do more and more, that may be needed for new features, particularly as Cores handle video too.
Qsys allows 16k taps of FIR per channel. The actual number of channels and tap counts that don't overload the processor is Core dependent.
I'm using 15 channels 16k taps per channel, for the three 5-way LCR setup, pictured in #23.
Which after loading FIR files made in whatever favorite FIR generator, gives tuning results as shown in #2.
I don't mean to sound like a saleman for Q-Sys, but I trulu do love the ability it offers an experimenter to try such a wide array of filters and techniques.
And to easily a/b all kinds of compariosn, even one full speaker setup vs another, of comparing IIR xover to FIR, or changing FIR files on the fly with audible hitch or glitch.. Presets can be virtually any parameter/element in a design schematic. And put onto any PC laptop or IOS device as a remote control.
And gosh knows, there can be alot of parameters is so desired... here's the schematic running right now....
Now that I've said all that praise for q-sys, pls let me link some caveats about the current state of the market for Qsys Cores...
particularly used Cores on ebay (the only ones i can afford !) https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/dsp-filter-electronics-options.392315/page-2#post-7176750
I'd happily go lighter !!!
Seriously, the only reason this syn11 has 18"s in it, is because I already had the drivers, and could free them for this experiment.
And most importantly, I knew the 18n862 can reach to 30Hz sealed, without excessive boost.
I wouldn't bother adding large drivers given the size and weight penalty, unless doing so eliminated the mandatory need for a sub.
What I'm working on now, is comparing the 18"s output from the syn11 horn, to a 18n862 in a regular sealed box.
I'll post about that after i mention the FIR hardware setup as requested.
So yep, for anybody wanting the easiest way to dabble with FIR and speaker processing in general, it has been using Q-SYS.
Which is open-architecture processing, that runs designs you make in design software, to be compiled on a hardware box QSC calls Cores.
The Q-sys Designer software is continually being updated with new features and capabilities. So Core's are not processors that go obsolete, other than time marching on and letting them do more and more, that may be needed for new features, particularly as Cores handle video too.
Qsys allows 16k taps of FIR per channel. The actual number of channels and tap counts that don't overload the processor is Core dependent.
I'm using 15 channels 16k taps per channel, for the three 5-way LCR setup, pictured in #23.
Which after loading FIR files made in whatever favorite FIR generator, gives tuning results as shown in #2.
I don't mean to sound like a saleman for Q-Sys, but I trulu do love the ability it offers an experimenter to try such a wide array of filters and techniques.
And to easily a/b all kinds of compariosn, even one full speaker setup vs another, of comparing IIR xover to FIR, or changing FIR files on the fly with audible hitch or glitch.. Presets can be virtually any parameter/element in a design schematic. And put onto any PC laptop or IOS device as a remote control.
And gosh knows, there can be alot of parameters is so desired... here's the schematic running right now....
Now that I've said all that praise for q-sys, pls let me link some caveats about the current state of the market for Qsys Cores...
particularly used Cores on ebay (the only ones i can afford !) https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/dsp-filter-electronics-options.392315/page-2#post-7176750
Hi Steffen, thx for asking.
Syn11 is probably the best sounding yet. I won't know for sure until i can set it up outdoors next to syn10.
It's 75x60 pattern has noticeably more HF/VHF energy than syn10's 90x60 pattern, with a flat on-axis tuning. Which of course makes sense.
That has made it a little more difficult to use as the center on my LCR setup (which has syn10's for L&R. Didn't expect the smallish pattern difference to matter, but the LCR matrix settings for three syn10s needed me to add a center level control for easy song by song adjustment
.
The 18"s in it work great! It's almost a little funny sounding at first, to hear so much bass and kick coming from right around the CD, but it grew on me quickly. A bit of a different sound than syn10's sitting on top of dual 18" PPSL subs. Reinforces my belief that our brain somehow localizes subs more than commonly thought.... I guess because subs put out more information than steady tones....
.
Only problem with the 18"s though, is that they are being used in sealed configuration, which after the boost needed for 30Hz response, leaves them running out of headroom compared to syn10s and subs.
But I've planned all along for porting syn11. Going to use four 4" pwc drain pipe ports. Should be pretty easy to install and adjust length.
Which is what's going on now. Box is apart and in the shop.
Won't be very soon though, because i plan to assemble it outdoors, and leave it setup there on a stand with large caster wheels for easy movability.
Looking forward to listening tests, and I really want to play with / measure, how the multiple sections can best be used given their ability to overlap pretty widely.
Also have new 4-5mic antenna -type mast setup, to help with vertical polars.
Come-on springtime !!
Syn11 is probably the best sounding yet. I won't know for sure until i can set it up outdoors next to syn10.
It's 75x60 pattern has noticeably more HF/VHF energy than syn10's 90x60 pattern, with a flat on-axis tuning. Which of course makes sense.
That has made it a little more difficult to use as the center on my LCR setup (which has syn10's for L&R. Didn't expect the smallish pattern difference to matter, but the LCR matrix settings for three syn10s needed me to add a center level control for easy song by song adjustment
.
The 18"s in it work great! It's almost a little funny sounding at first, to hear so much bass and kick coming from right around the CD, but it grew on me quickly. A bit of a different sound than syn10's sitting on top of dual 18" PPSL subs. Reinforces my belief that our brain somehow localizes subs more than commonly thought.... I guess because subs put out more information than steady tones....
.
Only problem with the 18"s though, is that they are being used in sealed configuration, which after the boost needed for 30Hz response, leaves them running out of headroom compared to syn10s and subs.
But I've planned all along for porting syn11. Going to use four 4" pwc drain pipe ports. Should be pretty easy to install and adjust length.
Which is what's going on now. Box is apart and in the shop.
Won't be very soon though, because i plan to assemble it outdoors, and leave it setup there on a stand with large caster wheels for easy movability.
Looking forward to listening tests, and I really want to play with / measure, how the multiple sections can best be used given their ability to overlap pretty widely.
Also have new 4-5mic antenna -type mast setup, to help with vertical polars.
Come-on springtime !!
Thx Mark
That is interesting! If you´d ask Earl Geddes he would say you can´t hear the subs location!
But maybe there are some higher frequency by-products in the sound from the subs that give away their position/location in space!? "motor-noise" that is LP filtered away in the SYN by the portholes? Hmm.
Chriss advocates using horns in stead of direct radiators. I think in part, because of the LP filtering of the horn.
Looking forward to spring and your up-comming research.
A shame that the SYN11-construktion (-contraption!! 😀 ) is so heavy.
Steffen
That is interesting! If you´d ask Earl Geddes he would say you can´t hear the subs location!
But maybe there are some higher frequency by-products in the sound from the subs that give away their position/location in space!? "motor-noise" that is LP filtered away in the SYN by the portholes? Hmm.
Chriss advocates using horns in stead of direct radiators. I think in part, because of the LP filtering of the horn.
Looking forward to spring and your up-comming research.
A shame that the SYN11-construktion (-contraption!! 😀 ) is so heavy.
Steffen
Yep. always a possibility.
What I did for a simple comparison test with the PPSL subs, is cut everything off but the subs and the 18"s in syn11.
And then listened to pink noise and a few tracks with dynamic bass.
The 18"s in the syn11 sounded a little lower/cleaner...but not much. I think maybe the air trapped between the cones and ports (1/8th of Sd) adds an additional acoustic low-pass to the already steep electrical low-pass. Dunno.
Both setups had the same 100Hz LR 96 dB/oct low pass, and I can still localize the subs when using pink noise, and that low-pass in place.
Around 80-90 Hz and 96 dB/oct, I can no longer localize them.
But can, at 80Hz and lower order 48 dB/oct low-pass.
Anyway, I've never been a fan of multiple subs. Heck, imo a single sub sounds best. But that's a no go with stereo.
All that said, the one indoor multiple sub setup that looks very very promising to me, is the double array....where the rear wall subs are essentially active bass traps.
Last edited:
Been a while since commenting on this guy. It's proving to be a very interested test bed, along with my improved outdoor measurement setup.
The main impetus behind this DIY, has been to get a sub section into a synergy/unity horn, so that a sub is not needed.
Previous posts about it were with the dual 18"s being used sealed. This post shows four 4" bass-reflex ports that were added.
I added the ports because the EQ needed to raise response down to 30Hz took away too much system headroom.
Unfortunately, the ports didn't add as much gain as hoped. Their tuning frequency matches Hornresp sims, but the output is low.
I'm purely guessing something about the triangular box cavity behind the drivers alters the effective volume.
Anyway, I've ended up plugging the ports, expanding the port area from 1/8th Sd, to 1/5th Sd. This helped raise sensitivity 1-2dB, which is only about 95 dB @ 2.83v.
And making each side sealed off from the other side. This eliminated some internal standing wave issues.
The 18" sub section can easily be used as high 250Hz; 375Hz is even ok.
But the low section (two 12") is good down to 75Hz,
so currently I'm toying with sub-low crossover in the 100-120Hz range.
It's a new experience for me, to hear a sub so co-located with the main speaker.
Percussive punch and slam are greater and cleaner than anything I've heard. Which adds to overall clarity i think.
It's defintely a bit different than a similar 'main' syn set on a sub (like my existing LCR system).
The only rub is that reverting to sealed to get down to 30Hz has taken away the system headroom again.
And neither a Linkwitz-transform or PEQs, sound like they have the ease of cranking out the very low end, like the on-the-floor reflex subs do.
I guess it's a case of low signal measurements that look the same, not telling the whole story.
So I add in the PPSL subs low passed at 60-80Hz... a flippin 6-way now, ugh.
This is good for experiments and a one-off project, but is disappointing given the goal from the outset was to not need a sub.
I wanted to make this a somewhat permanent outdoor, standalone speaker.
Anyway again, the sub section is one-half of the work I've been doing.
Rest has been to carefully try to measure, section by section, the response at varying distances, from mouth to about 4m.
I've measured each section with all ports blocked (horn alone ). Then unblock lower frequency port sections one-by-one to see how response was effected by each section of ports.
And then see how corrections for each section, hold up across polars.
I'll get into all this in another post. As it really varies by measurement distance, up close vs farther out.
A preview conclusion, which is still under development, is that mouth diffractions create more response anomalies that ports interferences.
The main impetus behind this DIY, has been to get a sub section into a synergy/unity horn, so that a sub is not needed.
Previous posts about it were with the dual 18"s being used sealed. This post shows four 4" bass-reflex ports that were added.
I added the ports because the EQ needed to raise response down to 30Hz took away too much system headroom.
Unfortunately, the ports didn't add as much gain as hoped. Their tuning frequency matches Hornresp sims, but the output is low.
I'm purely guessing something about the triangular box cavity behind the drivers alters the effective volume.
Anyway, I've ended up plugging the ports, expanding the port area from 1/8th Sd, to 1/5th Sd. This helped raise sensitivity 1-2dB, which is only about 95 dB @ 2.83v.
And making each side sealed off from the other side. This eliminated some internal standing wave issues.
The 18" sub section can easily be used as high 250Hz; 375Hz is even ok.
But the low section (two 12") is good down to 75Hz,
so currently I'm toying with sub-low crossover in the 100-120Hz range.
It's a new experience for me, to hear a sub so co-located with the main speaker.
Percussive punch and slam are greater and cleaner than anything I've heard. Which adds to overall clarity i think.
It's defintely a bit different than a similar 'main' syn set on a sub (like my existing LCR system).
The only rub is that reverting to sealed to get down to 30Hz has taken away the system headroom again.
And neither a Linkwitz-transform or PEQs, sound like they have the ease of cranking out the very low end, like the on-the-floor reflex subs do.
I guess it's a case of low signal measurements that look the same, not telling the whole story.
So I add in the PPSL subs low passed at 60-80Hz... a flippin 6-way now, ugh.
This is good for experiments and a one-off project, but is disappointing given the goal from the outset was to not need a sub.
I wanted to make this a somewhat permanent outdoor, standalone speaker.
Anyway again, the sub section is one-half of the work I've been doing.
Rest has been to carefully try to measure, section by section, the response at varying distances, from mouth to about 4m.
I've measured each section with all ports blocked (horn alone ). Then unblock lower frequency port sections one-by-one to see how response was effected by each section of ports.
And then see how corrections for each section, hold up across polars.
I'll get into all this in another post. As it really varies by measurement distance, up close vs farther out.
A preview conclusion, which is still under development, is that mouth diffractions create more response anomalies that ports interferences.
it might not have been 100% succesful but the look is fantastic
Thx kipman,
I should count my blessings really. It's probably the best sounding build yet. It's the clearest/cleanest sounding, based on lyric intelligibility, along with vocal and instrument separation. Timbre and harmonies are downright beautiful.
But haven't had any direct outdoor a/b time against syn10s to be completely sure ....been too busy playing with new measurement rig and new measurement ideas etc.
If I wasn't looking for the raw-power bottom end of my PPSL subs, I probably would have thought the syn11's sub section is best ever, because it's so dang clean. But I can't live without an effortless sounding bottom end anymore.
Only real problem is I can't devote four 18" drivers to one speaker.....
I should count my blessings really. It's probably the best sounding build yet. It's the clearest/cleanest sounding, based on lyric intelligibility, along with vocal and instrument separation. Timbre and harmonies are downright beautiful.
But haven't had any direct outdoor a/b time against syn10s to be completely sure ....been too busy playing with new measurement rig and new measurement ideas etc.
If I wasn't looking for the raw-power bottom end of my PPSL subs, I probably would have thought the syn11's sub section is best ever, because it's so dang clean. But I can't live without an effortless sounding bottom end anymore.
Only real problem is I can't devote four 18" drivers to one speaker.....
Hi Mark
I have been contemplating on your "integrated sub" issue, the two 18" drivers, and that they do not produce enough SPL down low!?
When I look at pictures of your SYN11 and your PPSL subs, it seems as if the internal volume of the SYN11 is not as big as the internal volume of the PPSL? I guess the horn-part in the SYN11 takes a lot more volume then the slot in the PPSL?
Is the volume for the 18" drivers and port-dimensions (reflex-ports) in the SYN11 and PPSL the same?
Best, Steffen
I have been contemplating on your "integrated sub" issue, the two 18" drivers, and that they do not produce enough SPL down low!?
When I look at pictures of your SYN11 and your PPSL subs, it seems as if the internal volume of the SYN11 is not as big as the internal volume of the PPSL? I guess the horn-part in the SYN11 takes a lot more volume then the slot in the PPSL?
Is the volume for the 18" drivers and port-dimensions (reflex-ports) in the SYN11 and PPSL the same?
Best, Steffen
Hi,
Maybe the fact your syn11 don't have the 'sub' part coupled to floor play a role too in your feel missing effortless sub reproduction.
Maybe the fact your syn11 don't have the 'sub' part coupled to floor play a role too in your feel missing effortless sub reproduction.
I'm with Steff. You are up against Hoffman's Iron Law. Add volume below the horn, perhaps by coupling into a hollow stand.
Hi Kevmoso, the reason I can't use four 18"s to support the single syn11, is that i have a total of 6 bms18n862.
It takes a pair of them per any syn main I've made. So to keep a stereo rig running indoors, it leaves me only two which are in the syn11.
And there's the plain old cost of getting a couple more, along with that sinking feeling of simply buying too much stuff....
Hi Seffen, you are spot on. It's a matter of not having sufficient internal volume in syn11.
I thought I'd have about 130L internal per driver, which Hornresp showed to be marginal, but OK.
That included space behind the horn and CD, enclosed by the wrapping box. That pathway between the 18" chambers made some nasty internal reflections, and I had to seal off both 18" side chambers. Which took away quite a bit of volume....as did the port tubes.
I've ended up with about a 100L, simply too small. And I get results even lower than Hornresp output for 100L, maybe due to the triangular chamber, dunno.
Anyway, ported is a no-go.
Hi krivium, that's a big part my take too.
I think syn11's sub's section up off the ground, is missing the +6dB ground coupling of my PPSL's ports (which are at the bottom of the sub)
I really wish I could get an effortless 30Hz out of the syn11 horn itself.
It's kinda amazing how much stronger and cleaner slam and punch are, compared to anything I've heard before.
If I could just get that very low end authority too, with out having to build an even bigger wrap-around box. Lol
Hi Jack, yep. No question about it
The best alternative I can come up with, to be able to use syn11 as my outdoor speaker (and not just a super duper muti-way test box),
is to put a big castor board under a couple of old Labhorn subs, and set the syn11 on top of the subs.
I simply have to be able to roll the rig around. It's either that, or somehow turn the cart syn11 currently sits on into a sub.
I just don't want to buy anymore sub drivers...I have too many subs already.
I'm sure slam and punch must be incredible you have enough membrane area for it to be as such.
Maybe it's a side effect of not going 'low enough' too?
I think Nc535 and Steffen are right: too have the Syn at correct height you need a stand, it'll give additional volume and could help coupling to floor too ( i whitnessed it can make a difference in low end between skinny stand and as wide as loudspeaker (plain) with monitors). For the better or worse idk, but at least you'll have enoigh volume for your 18".
Would it be difficult to implement this to your built?
Maybe it's a side effect of not going 'low enough' too?
I think Nc535 and Steffen are right: too have the Syn at correct height you need a stand, it'll give additional volume and could help coupling to floor too ( i whitnessed it can make a difference in low end between skinny stand and as wide as loudspeaker (plain) with monitors). For the better or worse idk, but at least you'll have enoigh volume for your 18".
Would it be difficult to implement this to your built?
Hi krivium, yep, one might suspect that. I did at first.
Until I added a PPSL sub low passed steeply at 80Hz,
And slam and punch remained just as spectacular.
My guess is the slam and punch come from driver "tight-packing", inherent in a synergy/unity
Not an option to increase the size of the syn11 box. It's already huge and weighs 220 lbs.
Plus, I can't buy baltic-birch anymore (due to war)
Hi kipman, yeah, that 18" mid/low bass idea, is what I'm toying with. Although I don't intend to use the BMS for a sub to go with it.
I stole the bms drivers from the the center sub in my LCR syn10 stack. I want them to go back into that sub which is totally dialed in for them.
So I'm shopping for some less expensive 18"s for this syn11 that don't have to reach down so low, since I'll add a sub.
I have 4 old labhorns, and two JTR orbitshifters. Gonna figure out how to use one or two of them to go with the syn11 (and the different 18"s.)
I'm pretty sure syn11 can keep up with at least 3, maybe 4, double 18" reflex.
Outdoor fun on the way !!!
Last edited:
Hey all to any still following along.
Dammit, and YEA, syn11 has turned into the best damn speaker i've ever heard.
The hold up all along, has been how the dual 18"s worked in the build.
I kept thinking the problems i was hearing were acoustic design problems...since I'd never tried any syn with such big low drivers.
Somewhat embarrassingly, the acoustic syn build design was fine.
But the dsp/Q-Sys implementation i was using for a tuning had great low level measurements, but sounded way off when turned up.
Took me forever to figure out why.
I've often preached the need for linear response that includes headroom for bass and it's transients.
I was ignoring my own own advice, thinking i was safe with audio comparisons on a relatively low powered test bed platform.
Stupid me. test platform had low power.
Jeez...you should hear syn11 unconstrained..... wild woman indeed !!! lol.
The biggest change vs previous syns or any speakers I've heard to date, is in the bass and low mids.
Such clarity there, bass notes and riffs are so defined. And mid range /HF clarity and timbre sound the best yet.
Funny how being clear down low, helps up high.
I'm 1000% convinced if we want the greatest sound as we know it today, we have to look for coincident integration as low in freq as possible.
Big arrse syns forever !!!!!!
Dammit, and YEA, syn11 has turned into the best damn speaker i've ever heard.
The hold up all along, has been how the dual 18"s worked in the build.
I kept thinking the problems i was hearing were acoustic design problems...since I'd never tried any syn with such big low drivers.
Somewhat embarrassingly, the acoustic syn build design was fine.
But the dsp/Q-Sys implementation i was using for a tuning had great low level measurements, but sounded way off when turned up.
Took me forever to figure out why.
I've often preached the need for linear response that includes headroom for bass and it's transients.
I was ignoring my own own advice, thinking i was safe with audio comparisons on a relatively low powered test bed platform.
Stupid me. test platform had low power.
Jeez...you should hear syn11 unconstrained..... wild woman indeed !!! lol.
The biggest change vs previous syns or any speakers I've heard to date, is in the bass and low mids.
Such clarity there, bass notes and riffs are so defined. And mid range /HF clarity and timbre sound the best yet.
Funny how being clear down low, helps up high.
I'm 1000% convinced if we want the greatest sound as we know it today, we have to look for coincident integration as low in freq as possible.
Big arrse syns forever !!!!!!
Last edited: