Originally Posted by penngray
How can Danley products sound so go but have the worst FR plots?
First and foremost, in the anecdotal impressions
I've read, the take-away is a "wow" factor from experiencing absolute dynamic realism. In my opinion, the white paper is just that,..a white paper. What matters is what's audible at the LP.
In a broad scope, I'd suggest that well controlled throw pattern of some of the Danley products lessens a room's contribution. And when you combine those elements with a level of dynamic capability, and absolute freedom from compression and other distortions, the product is quite impressive for the needs of HT. Any coherency, or lack thereof, is secondary and is more icing on the cake, and would bear fruit long term. Just as ragged frequency response becomes problematic over time, and isn't quite as easy to delineate at first listen. However, once one learns to hear certain elements, like frequency issues and lack of smoothness, resonances etc., it becomes very easy to hear these problems. It's an acquired skill-set, initially fleshed out with an A/B side by side demo. But once developed, easy to use and it become second nature.
In a search for new HT mains, I looked at many of the usual suspects. Geddes, Seaton, Danley, JTR, JBL, and others. I really became curious about TD's work, and began to express my interest in Danley's various SH products in several threads etc. I received many IM's/e-mails explaining that alone, they audition quite strong, however over time, along-side competitors within the same $, their aberrant freq. behavior became intolerable. Three entirely independent exchanges with individuals, were quite consistent with their findings.
To be fair, the Danley SH series is aimed at an entirely different market segment than for example Seaton's Catalyst. However, there exists this crossover appeal within the enthusiast HT segment.
Finally, I'd bet TD and company would prefer the SH stuff had better behavior in the frequency domain. I do too.