Here are two variants for camplo. I am not sure if these also fulfill the size restrictions.
The first is a varinat of the Jericho with stretching and projection applied and with a high Lamé exponent.
View attachment drba_SWH160_SF138_SE6P.zip
Second with HVdiff profiles.
View attachment drba_jmlc_150_hvdiff.zip
It would be great if Don will find some time and prepare the ABEC3 models.
As I already stated I would not go so low. X-over >=400 Hz. Even with a step xover the CD has still to produce some frequency amplitudes below the cut-off.
The first is a varinat of the Jericho with stretching and projection applied and with a high Lamé exponent.
View attachment drba_SWH160_SF138_SE6P.zip
Second with HVdiff profiles.
View attachment drba_jmlc_150_hvdiff.zip
It would be great if Don will find some time and prepare the ABEC3 models.
As I already stated I would not go so low. X-over >=400 Hz. Even with a step xover the CD has still to produce some frequency amplitudes below the cut-off.
These are all excellent designs, they all deserve the lip treatment Don is perfecting.
I've been researching materials and ideas on how to construct the horns and baffles. Between sand, epoxy, and polymer concrete, I believe there is a solution. I also think its going to be hard to beat the Jericho Shark, with looks to load low and spread the horizontal polar.... The Jericho Revisited for the benefits of a round horn...These 3 last designs are hard to choose from. The Jericho revisited is already a keeper in my book...but there might be a 200hz contender in the Jericho-Shark or any of its latest revelations
I think Don is putting some special touches on the lip geometry before he uses it on the other horns, can't wait! I think its an honor to have Don and Doc contribute such an important piece to the project, and hope to bring their creations to life, in such a way that it gives life to their future endeavors
I've been researching materials and ideas on how to construct the horns and baffles. Between sand, epoxy, and polymer concrete, I believe there is a solution. I also think its going to be hard to beat the Jericho Shark, with looks to load low and spread the horizontal polar.... The Jericho Revisited for the benefits of a round horn...These 3 last designs are hard to choose from. The Jericho revisited is already a keeper in my book...but there might be a 200hz contender in the Jericho-Shark or any of its latest revelations
I think Don is putting some special touches on the lip geometry before he uses it on the other horns, can't wait! I think its an honor to have Don and Doc contribute such an important piece to the project, and hope to bring their creations to life, in such a way that it gives life to their future endeavors
Maybe it's just me, but as with the SH96s I thought the SH50s sounded a tad lean throughout the (lower) midrange. Perhaps it's because I'm used to direct radiating cones for this part of the spectrum, still I couldn't help but think the midrange lacked some weight/body, despite the SH50's 2 x 12" and 4 x 5" midrange cones.
...Or maybe I am mistaking clean for lean
...Or maybe I am mistaking clean for lean
Last edited:
Could be. The last time I heard the SH50 it anything but lean in the lower mids. Very full and beefy. I'm pretty sure there was some EQ involved.Maybe it's just me, but as with the SH96s I thought the SH50s sounded a tad lean throughout the (lower) midrange.
...Or maybe I am mistaking clean for lean
FWIW, in the same room were Don Keele and his CBT. I like the CBT and it always gets great audience reaction. But next to the Danely horn the CBT sounded small and weak. That's not surprising, given the technology, drivers and cost* of each speaker - but the difference was striking.
*Should be about a 12 to 1 cost ratio, I think. Aren't the SH50s about $6K each?
That is a question best answered by the Master, David McBean.
You're probably right about the EQ.
The dj couple - who turn out to be friends of the girl living next door, didn't use headphones, but relied on the ATC SCM45A Pros for monitoring instead. As mentioned, they played a rather unusual selection of tracks. It's not often you get to hear a Kate Bush track in clubs these days.
List prices of SH50 variants in NL:
SH-50I 50 x 50 degree . Passive Installation version € 4.669,00
SH-50I-AT 50 x 50 degree . Passive Installation version (Weatherized) € 5.848,00
SH-50IP 50 x 50 degree . Powered Installation version € 7.827,00
SH-50T 50 x 50 degree . Passive Touring version € 5.299,00
SH-50TP 50 x 50 degree . Powered Touring version € 8.412,00.
Last edited:
I kinda dismiss anything I hear regarding tonality unless I know the system, and source material, and am in control of EQ/processing/etc.
Just too many variables.
If I hear a hole in the response somewhere, I look to the drivers used, and see if the "needs 4x displacement increase for each octave decrease" rule is met.
If so, I figure the system has the guts and just needs adjustment.
Pano, I echo your experience with my synergy and CBT attempts. Not about to say either of my builds starts to have the refinement of Danley's or Keele's...but can totally say the small and weak comparison holds for mine as well.
Oh, circling back to tonality....
I find source material varies so much, I keep separate volume controls of each driver section, all controlled by a master.
Generally, bass adjustment helps the most, but often a dB or two +/- in upper-bass/lower-midrange (Mid below), does wonders at both tightening bass, and accentuating upper clarity.
Attachments
Mark, your active Synergies are more appealing (at least to me) than passive SH50s, if only because of the considerable cost savings as well as the opportunity to improve the appearance.
We have to bear in mind the SH50s are designed for extremely high SPL, which is plain overkill at home.
I am convinced there's some room for refinement, if we let go of the SPL requirements.
Besides, elimination of these crossover parts isn't a bad thing either.
We have to bear in mind the SH50s are designed for extremely high SPL, which is plain overkill at home.
I am convinced there's some room for refinement, if we let go of the SPL requirements.
Besides, elimination of these crossover parts isn't a bad thing either.
Last edited:
Glad you liked that !
But you know, it's kind of ironic ....the conversation about relaxing SPL to build a better synergy for home use...
...because the synergy so outruns the dual 18" stack, I had to move it back on top of two double 18" push-push subs...and those four 18"s can't keep up with it either
I'm pretty dang certain the syn, which is only pulling duty from 100Hz up, has quite a bit more SPL in it, than the SH-50.
Anyway, I really agree with the sentiment for a more aesthetic home synergy.
@Cowanaudio...I want to see you make a synergy out of that awesome horn you showed your're working on for the dcx464
One day it goes into storage or changes hands and whoever finds it can't get it to work, so tosses it.