Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver
You have to look at what the "design goal" is of the loudspeaker.
Thanks so much for joining in. I had heard of the Danley's but didn't really know anything about them until I went to Beast's GTG and overall I was really impressed with the SH50s but thought they were missing something when compared to the Noesis 212s.
If you go over to the JTR thread, you will see that Goodoc bought a pair of SM60F (formerly owned by Beast) to try in his own room and is still in the middle of testing them but has the same impression I had of Beast's SH50s, they are being let down by the compression driver/midrange. That's not to say that it isn't a great speaker, it just happens to be in my opinion, not as strong in that particular aspect.
Regarding my comments about the midbass, I would need to listen again as we weren't using Beast's subs at the time and so the integration might not have been as good. So I'm not really concerned about the midbass but I did find the upper and midrange to not be as clear and articulate as the Noesis 212. But damn, I absolutely loved the soundstage, it just enveloped you.
I know there are tons of speakers on the market at all levels and it is crazy to think a speaker no matter how good will be liked by everyone. However, it seems many of us on here are very interested in Danley for our home theater. It was awesome reading your Danley Kit thread and learning about the cool stuff you guys do, especially the design goals for Lambeau Field.
If you were able to build a SM60 size speaker with a coaxial compression driver similar to the 212 (maybe voiced not quite as bright) and a strong, articulate midbass that covered the 50/60-20,000 range, I'd think you'd have a hit on your hands. Assuming I haven't dialed in my 212s by then, I would be one of the first to drive down to Georgia to listen to a pair and potentially leave with them in hand. I'm sure you're busy and successful but I really do hope you find some time to make such a speaker for the home theater market.