Originally Posted by beastaudio
Phase linear? Full on point source? Not quite. The horn loading down to 300hz or wherever it is, not a bad start, but there is still something distinct with the Danleys that I can't really put in writing. Call it different crossover wizardry between the two designs, but it yields something completely different IMO. YMMV.
Agreed, I know it took YEARS
for Danley to get his designs right, and multiple generations going back to the unity design. A DIY venture is certainly a fun idea, but agreed, far from a trivial exercise for sure!
IMO, it's simple. The cool band-pass distortion lowering, the tidy phase response, the point source approach, those are all sought after attributes. But the key ... IMO, is combining these with well executed, wide band controlled directivity
That combination is nice, but for us HT application users, it doesn't really pay off entirely, until it's placed into a room
. That's when the magic happens ... relative to loudspeakers we typically encounter. The huge psycho-acoustic payoff is a proper ITDG, or Initial Time Delay Gap. This gap quantifies the time difference between the arrival of the initial direct wave
, and first strong reflection
... at the LP.
The Danley cabs take some of the room distortions ... out of the picture.
Simply enabling our hearing process to get a good clean exposure to the recorded event, is so important for intelligibility, and for proper resolution of the phantom acoustic image. Unfortunately our rooms are so good at superimposing their characteristics over the top of the recording. The last thing we want is to over-lay another spatial environment atop the environment that's so well captured by the recording's engineering team.
The headphone effect you mentioned once before, this is it. We're so used to being bathed in smeared detail from the lateral, side-wall energy, being exposed to a nice clear presentation can be revelatory. It's attainable with well executed acoustic environment ... but that means not EQ'ing or altering the sidewall energy. Ideally, the sidewall contribution needs to be linear above the transition frequency. The design and user placement of the Synergy, helps facilitate this.
The only downside that I hear pointed at the Synergy designs, is somewhat ragged FR. How much would that impact the HT enthusiast? I don't know, ... I've heard the design and liked them. Can't have everything I guess. What they do right, they do very right. Very low distortion, both from the loudspeaker and the room
As stated, the Cats and the JTRs also have strong attributes. It's all good.
(Cats-bass and mid-bass, none better, DSP w/top to bottom time alignment and coherency ...smooth non fatiguing all the way up SPL)
(JTRs-very high quality compression HF with pattern control, value)
Of course all that's my experience. I hope to experience the big JTR-215HTs next weekend.
dgage, that's funny you mention that about your son, I can relate.
My 14yo son, is really beginning to get into audio ... I love it. He did a science fair project a month or so ago, about the basic importance of the loudspeaker enclosure, relative to low frequencies. He wanted to include several visual aids, etc, so I showed him what to do with measurements etc., he learned a lot,... very cool.
Below is a couple images of his project, essentially the focus was the importance of the enclosure assuring the back-wave wouldn't corrupt the primary output;
Notnyt is right, the JBLs are phenomenal value for HT, and often overlooked. He likes them, that's good enough for me ... he's not much on hype.
jbrown15, I wouldn't worry about diaphragm material. Yeah, there may be subtle differences, especially at the limits, but the acoustic distortions the room imposes should entirely swamp your immediate concern, IMO.
Besides, nobody has designed, built, and sold more pro loudspeakers than JBL. They've steadily poured into R&D, their stuff reflects it. The 4722 seems to be an incredible sweet-spot in pricing/value/performance.