or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Danley SH-50/SH-60 for dedicated Home Theater
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Danley SH-50/SH-60 for dedicated Home Theater - Page 11

post #301 of 696
Ivan,

What is the purpose of the sheet of "foam" that covers the speaker behind the grill?

Kutlow,

Where you off center slighlty or dead center during your 2 channel trial run.
post #302 of 696


There ain't nothin' wrong with the Danley logo---it's as nice as most and better than a lot of others!


Tom
post #303 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodhisafa View Post

Ivan,

What is the purpose of the sheet of "foam" that covers the speaker behind the grill?

Kutlow,

Where you off center slighlty or dead center during your 2 channel trial run.

There are a number of "purposes" for the backing on the grill.

It is easily removed by grabbing it and pulling it off it you want to. It comes off cleanly-no "gook" to clean up afterwards.

The main purposes are to "hide and protect".

The protection is to simply keep smaller pieces of junk from getting into the loudspeaker. Not that they would cause any problems, but if a large enough one got into the woofer or midrange exit holes it would settle on the cones and possibly buzz /rattle at times.

The hide part comes in on installs-specifically ones that use white loudspeakers.

If the cabinet is white-and the horn is white-then you will see black "dots" where the exit holes are. It doesn't look very nice. But by having a white grill on a white cabinet-with a black backing, the grill just looks "off white" and has a much cleaner look to it.

Even with everything black (and no backing material) some people don't care to see the horn and said is wasn't "clean".

If you don't have a lot of airborn junk in your home, you can simply remove the grill (metal and cloth backing). To me it looks "cooler" to see the horn.

The sonic benefit is a slight increase in HF response because it is not being blocked slightly by the grill.

The problem with holes in the grill is a choice. If you make the holes smaller-the grill is stronger and stands up to more abuse in touring situations-but you loose more HF response.

If you use a more open grill (larger holes or more open area as compared to the closed area of the metal itself) then you will get better HF response.

But the grill material is more flimsy and it dents easier and makes a noise when vibrated, which can get to be annoying. Some manufacturers use grills that will actually "zing" when you hit them right.

As with all other things, it is simply a matter of tradeoffs.

For home use I would remove them. But that is just my opinion. Unless you have a cat that might get inside it and "play" with the woofer cones.

PS. We do not (we did for a little while and then stopped) add the backing material to the sub cabinets. The reason is that the steel grill holes are right at the limit for starting to block the sound and reduce the performance. With the cloth backing we could measure a couple of dB of reduction. So we stopped using it.

This type of backing is not usually a problem for "normal" subs, but our exits are so small, the ratio of size to air flow reduction was to much.
post #304 of 696
Ivan,

I am very interested in purchasing complete speaker package for my small dedicated HT.

The dimensions are 10.5' x 17'. I have 88" wide screen with only 20" available on each side. The first row of seats is 9.5' from screen. The second row is 15' from screen. The second row is pretty much right against the back wall. The height of the room is 7'. The seats are 3 wide and go pretty much wall to wall.

I am currently not looking for subs as I have 2 18" diy mal-x and 1 Paradigm Seismic 10.

I am looking for the best fit that you would have for this small room. Would want LCR and 2 surrounds. I would not say that price is no object, but willing to spend best possible sound. I am sure the size of the room is limiting factor for size and cost of speakers.

What would you recommend as the "best" Danley fit for this room.

Thanks very much
Darryl
post #305 of 696
Spoke with UPS Freight; my delivery is scheduled for next Wednesday 4/27 @10:00AM CST.

Edit, forgot to include a very important detail; 2 skids totaling 550lbs.
post #306 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltaHomeTheatre View Post

Ivan,

I am very interested in purchasing complete speaker package for my small dedicated HT.

The dimensions are 10.5' x 17'. I have 88" wide screen with only 20" available on each side. The first row of seats is 9.5' from screen. The second row is 15' from screen. The second row is pretty much right against the back wall. The height of the room is 7'. The seats are 3 wide and go pretty much wall to wall.

I am currently not looking for subs as I have 2 18" diy mal-x and 1 Paradigm Seismic 10.

I am looking for the best fit that you would have for this small room. Would want LCR and 2 surrounds. I would not say that price is no object, but willing to spend best possible sound. I am sure the size of the room is limiting factor for size and cost of speakers.

What would you recommend as the "best" Danley fit for this room.

Thanks very much
Darryl

I would look at 2 options-with the determining factor being price.

Lower price- LCR each SM60. Surrounds SH Micro

Higher price-greater output LCR each SH60 Surrounds SH Micro

In either case I would place the L/R with the angled wall (of the cabinet) flat (or very close) against the wall. This will greatly reduce the reflections off of the wall and will make the stereo image appear wider than possible in your room because there will be a "virtual" loudspeaker on the outside of the physical loudspeaker.

In both cases I am assuming the center speaker will not be very far out into the room. 60° will cover the seats fine. If the center is halfway between the rear wall and the seats I would suggest the 90° version of each the SM and SH speakers.

The surrounds would go up all the way up and with the top of the cabinet flat (or close to) against the ceiling. The angle of the cabinet was designed so that the top "wall/edge" of the cone is flush against the ceilng-again pretty much eliminating the "ceiling bounce" caused by conventional loudspeakers.

This also puts the loudest part of the loudspeaker (center) pointing towards the opposite/furthest seats so you have a more even coverage.
post #307 of 696
You would pick the Micro over the SH100 for surrounds ?
post #308 of 696
For a room that small you wouldn't need much.
post #309 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver View Post

I would look at 2 options-with the determining factor being price.

Lower price- LCR each SM60. Surrounds SH Micro

Higher price-greater output LCR each SH60 Surrounds SH Micro

In either case I would place the L/R with the angled wall (of the cabinet) flat (or very close) against the wall. This will greatly reduce the reflections off of the wall and will make the stereo image appear wider than possible in your room because there will be a "virtual" loudspeaker on the outside of the physical loudspeaker.

In both cases I am assuming the center speaker will not be very far out into the room. 60° will cover the seats fine. If the center is halfway between the rear wall and the seats I would suggest the 90° version of each the SM and SH speakers.

The surrounds would go up all the way up and with the top of the cabinet flat (or close to) against the ceiling. The angle of the cabinet was designed so that the top "wall/edge" of the cone is flush against the ceilng-again pretty much eliminating the "ceiling bounce" caused by conventional loudspeakers.

This also puts the loudest part of the loudspeaker (center) pointing towards the opposite/furthest seats so you have a more even coverage.

Thanks Ivan for the recommendations.

I am very happy you think the SH60s would work in my room. I understand they are basically identical to the SH50s but wider sound pattern. I did have a couple concerns with those speakers.

1) There seems to be differing opinions that a larger room is required to get the most out of the SH50/60s. I was concerned that my seating position might be too close.

2) The SH60s are 28" wide. I only have 20" on each side of my screen. Even though I would place tight against the wall and thus have them angled in a bit, would they not be too wide? I would not want to go to a smaller screen?

Thanks
Darryl
post #310 of 696
Darryl,

Have you considered an AT screen? You could make a DIY one out of Seymore material for less than $200 and have a 20" larger screen .

Moto
post #311 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by HFGuy View Post

You would pick the Micro over the SH100 for surrounds ?

As Brandon says, he is in a small room. The micros will be more than enough for surrounds.

In the Huntsville airport 4 are covering an area that would seat over 1000 people and not straining at all.

They will be plenty for the average HT.
post #312 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltaHomeTheatre View Post

Thanks Ivan for the recommendations.

I am very happy you think the SH60s would work in my room. I understand they are basically identical to the SH50s but wider sound pattern. I did have a couple concerns with those speakers.

1) There seems to be differing opinions that a larger room is required to get the most out of the SH50/60s. I was concerned that my seating position might be too close.

2) The SH60s are 28" wide. I only have 20" on each side of my screen. Even though I would place tight against the wall and thus have them angled in a bit, would they not be too wide? I would not want to go to a smaller screen?

Thanks
Darryl

I don't know what you mean by "getting the most out of them in a larger room". If you mean you would not be able to run them at full capacity in your room-you are probably correct. They would get VERY loud.

HOWEVER there is no reason to "run them at max output". In fact the lower (level) you can run any loudspeaker the better it will sound. Having excess is a good thing.

If you have only 20" then I would look at the SM60's-as they are smaller than the SH60's. The big difference is that the SH's have a fuller response due to a stronger low freq. But with subs, this should not be an issue.

Sorry- but I missed the 20" clearance in your post.
post #313 of 696
Is there any tonal change from the Micro or SH100 to the SH50/60 ? I ask because my current mid-fi rid has this and when i get a front to rear pan the sound changes drastically and drives me nuts.
post #314 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by HFGuy View Post

Is there any tonal change from the Micro or SH100 to the SH50/60 ? I ask because my current mid-fi rid has this and when i get a front to rear pan the sound changes drastically and drives me nuts.

There is a change in tonality between the different loudspeakers. This is due to several reasons.

1: The sensitivity is different between the different models. This level change alone will make one loudspeaker sound "different". It is amazing how different the same loudspeaker can appear to sound with a 1dB difference in level (or less)

2: The pattern is also different. This will mean different reflections for each of the loudspeakers making each one sound "different". Of course the more dead the rooms is, the less this has an effect.

3: The low freq response is also different. This gives a different "warmth" to each of the different models.

4: There is also a different design approach to each of the different models.

The design goal was to make each loudspeaker as wide a response as possible-with as high a sensitivity as possible-with as flat an amplitude and phase response as possible.

Granted, with proper level matching and eq, most of those differences will be greatly minimized. But the raw cabinets will appear to be quite different-especially inside a room.
post #315 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by HFGuy View Post

Is there any tonal change from the Micro or SH100 to the SH50/60 ? I ask because my current mid-fi rid has this and when i get a front to rear pan the sound changes drastically and drives me nuts.

There is a kind of "Danley Sound", which means all the different Danley boxes will have a very open, transparent, musical and honest sound, almost independently of the construction. If you would compare them side-by-side you can hear the difference, what Ivan described so well, but generally they are extremely similar. You can not go wrong with any of them at home, be your system HT or 2.0 or 2.1 for stereo music.
post #316 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver View Post

I don't know what you mean by "getting the most out of them in a larger room". If you mean you would not be able to run them at full capacity in your room-you are probably correct. They would get VERY loud.

HOWEVER there is no reason to "run them at max output". In fact the lower (level) you can run any loudspeaker the better it will sound. Having excess is a good thing.

If you have only 20" then I would look at the SM60's-as they are smaller than the SH60's. The big difference is that the SH's have a fuller response due to a stronger low freq. But with subs, this should not be an issue.

Sorry- but I missed the 20" clearance in your post.

The SM60s would be perfect choice for this room, they can be used in any small or any big room at home and you can listen them very close, you will not hear a problem. I just had a visitor at home, a mastering engineer, who is planning to buy a pair for a kind of near/midfield monitoring monitor for their smaller mastering room. They have an old M and K sub, but he liked it with no sub a lot.
post #317 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by allanf714 View Post

I love audio just as much as anyone on this forum and I genuinely enjoy the opportunity to listen to such cutting edge speaker designers as Tom explain and rationalize their designs. Would love to own one. But.. I along with many others I cannot quite afford or justify the expense. (and that's a bummer). A kit of some of the more home theater friendly Danley designs (SM60/SM96/SHmini/micro) would be just awesome. It would definitely allow lots of us access to this cutting edge technology and most certainly elevate the industry as a whole.

I genuinely understand that the economics behind the kits may not make a whole lot of sense for Danley. I also understand that synergy horn kits may be a bit too complex for a kit form factor. Lastly the kits would likely cut out the established distribution channels for Danley. But then again... how much of the home theater market are they really capturing anyhow?

One can dream.... and that's what I have to keep doing for now

Allan


There are around good PA speakers with one point source and horn loaded (mid/hi) or DIY plans for them just need to search and you dont need to be bank owner. I have one point source horn loaded speakers and made some modifications and replaced hi driver so got sensitivity 108 dB @ 1w/1m (each)and I have four of them in front to do 114 dB @ 1w/1m so I dont need more than 2 W drive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFdSDhZrsBQ
post #318 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZivkoF View Post


There are around good PA speakers with one point source and horn loaded (mid/hi) or DIY plans for them just need to search and you dont need to be bank owner. I have one point source horn loaded speakers and made some modifications and replaced hi driver so got sensitivity 108 dB @ 1w/1m (each)and I have four of them in front to do 114 dB @ 1w/1m so I dont need more than 2 W drive

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFdSDhZrsBQ

Did you build those? If so do you have a link to your build thread?
post #319 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferenc_k View Post

The SM60s would be perfect choice for this room, they can be used in any small or any big room at home and you can listen them very close, you will not hear a problem. .

That is one good aspect that is overlooked in the Danley designs.

At a recent trade show we had a designer from a competing manufacturer stop by the demo room and he walked around and listened to the SH50 and then walked up and stuck his head as far inside the SH50 as he could-while listening.

His comment was "When does it start to sound like a horn?". He was very impressed.

Because it is a coherant source, it has 1 origion-not several (as is typical with seperated drivers)-so you don't have to get "a distance away" to get it to sound right.
post #320 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver View Post

That is one good aspect that is overlooked in the Danley designs.

At a recent trade show we had a designer from a competing manufacturer stop by the demo room and he walked around and listened to the SH50 and then walked up and stuck his head as far inside the SH50 as he could-while listening.

His comment was "When does it start to sound like a horn?". He was very impressed.

Because it is a coherant source, it has 1 origion-not several (as is typical with seperated drivers)-so you don't have to get "a distance away" to get it to sound right.

When I have hifi buddy visitors, I used to ask them to walk just between the two speakers, some 1m close to their line. They are always very much surprised to learn that all room effects gone, and there is some clean music floating on air, like a giant headphone, music played by kind of real standing musicians.
post #321 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferenc_k View Post

There is a kind of "Danley Sound", which means all the different Danley boxes will have a very open, transparent, musical and honest sound, almost independently of the construction. If you would compare them side-by-side you can hear the difference, what Ivan described so well, but generally they are extremely similar. You can not go wrong with any of them at home, be your system HT or 2.0 or 2.1 for stereo music.

Ferenc, how do you compensate for the somewhat uneven frequency responce of the SM60F's in your stereo setup? Where Ivan tells us how easy it is to detect (sub) 1dB differences between speakers the FR of the SM60F's fluctuates 6-7dB in many frequency ranges. The SH50 seems more controlled in that respect.
post #322 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ettepet View Post
Ferenc, how do you compensate for the somewhat uneven frequency responce of the SM60F's in your stereo setup? Where Ivan tells us how easy it is to detect (sub) 1dB differences between speakers the FR of the SM60F's fluctuates 6-7dB in many frequency ranges. The SH50 seems more controlled in that respect.
It is one thing to easily detect a dB difference in level between 2 like cabinets.

Is is quite another to hear differences in level in freq response.

I do sweeps all the time (as in hundreds/thousands of times when working on a design) and cannot hear the peaks and dips in the response. Unless they are quite large or wide.

Unless there is something really wrong, there is no way I could listen to the sweep-or noise of one of our loudspeaker and even come close to drawing its response curve-excpet maybe the low freq rolloff.

That is not saying that you won't hear a difference between two slightly different freq responses. You will-hear a difference. Unless your ear/brain system is very very good (mine is not in that regard), you will not be able to tell me what the difference is (ie 2Khz is 2dB down about 1/4 oct wide). Only that you hear something different

When the cabinets are the same, you simply don't pick up on that.

Now if you are playing a single tone and changing the level-THAT is when you can tell the difference.

I be you would be quite surprised as the reponse of many "better" quality loudspeakers, if they were measured in the same detail as the Danleys.

If you even get a response curve at all-it is usually heavily averaged and with few data points-making it "look" much smoother than it really is.

We show you the "ugly truth" as it were.

There is also a lot more to the "sound" of a loudspeaker than the amplitude response. Although is usually the most you get from anybody.

My experience is that the ear is much more forgiving of amplitude than it is of phase/time response.

You almost never see phase response graphs (except from us). It is a WHOLE LOT harder to get the phase correct-especially in more than 1 listening position.

It can be relatively easily done for a single spot-jsut don't move even a couple of inches. Then because the drivers now have different path lengths to the ear the sound is different. YEs even small parts of an inch can have huge effects on the sound.

Try this for a fun experiment.

Take 2 single cone loudspeakers ( 3 or 4" in a small cube box works-but they could be out of the box or a sealed back midrange or whatever you have) and play some pink noise or white noise into both of them

Both speakers are hooked to the same amp channel-so they are getting the exact same signal.

Place them either side by side or one on top of the other-with the fronts lined up. You can be pretty much any listening distance away 1M 5M etc

Now have a friend move JUST ONE of the loudspeakers back a little bit (like 2inches)-while the noise is playing. Did you notice a change in the sound? Now move it back a littel bit more-see how the sound changes again.

As you get 2 different sound arrivals to your ears, the response changes.

If you were to move your physical listening position to where you ears were the same distance away from both drivers (as when the expirement started) you would get the same sound as the origional again. But when the loudspeakers are placed back in the origional position, the sound will change.

That is what happens when drivers are spaced on the cabinet front or in space.
post #323 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by MX48 View Post
Darryl,

Have you considered an AT screen? You could make a DIY one out of Seymore material for less than $200 and have a 20" larger screen .

Moto
Moto,

I would love to have an AT 2.35 screen but have the following concerns:
  1. With the size of my room, to put the speakers behind I would have to move the screen 18"-24" inches closer to first row seating. That would put it about 7.5' away. From my understanding that might be too close for AT screen material (ie seeing holes or perferations).
  2. I went to two high end audio places in town and they did not recommend (one would not sell) AT screens due to loss of audio fidelity. I am not sure if this is true as I do not have enough experience.

If item two is not an issue, I have possible option of cutting into my front wall and gaining some extra space. My theater is double wall construction with 1"+ of dywall. I could may get 7" back by doing some significant reconstruction. That still pushes screen at least 1' closer.

Any idea how much space is needed around the Danley speakers? My guess is nothing around sides and back (although speakon connector might be a couple inches). My concern would be how much space between screen and front of speaker.

Darryl
post #324 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver View Post
If you have only 20" then I would look at the SM60's-as they are smaller than the SH60's. The big difference is that the SH's have a fuller response due to a stronger low freq. But with subs, this should not be an issue.
Ivan,

For the all important center channel would you recommend that I stick with a third SM60F or upgrade to SH60/69?

I understand that for output the SM60F will have more than I need. I typically dont listen at reference levels anyway. I am just wondering if the "better" speaker would be a better fit for the center channel where I have more placement options?

Thanks
Darryl
post #325 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ettepet View Post
Ferenc, how do you compensate for the somewhat uneven frequency responce of the SM60F's in your stereo setup? Where Ivan tells us how easy it is to detect (sub) 1dB differences between speakers the FR of the SM60F's fluctuates 6-7dB in many frequency ranges. The SH50 seems more controlled in that respect.
When I am playing with the location of the speakers and sub(s) I use sweeps, to get the minimum of the fluctuation, but to be honest it usually does not take more than few minutes. My room is quite evil anyway, so do not spend too much time with it. Earlier I was using a DEQX high-end room corrector/4-way digital crossover to minimize timing and phase difference between the speakers and correct the nodes, but since I am more familiar with the Danley speakers, I tried only once, do not feel I need it to get the sound for my liking. In an hour or so I could get the response very close to flat, with some mmild using of parametric eq, it was sensational, pure for a while, then it was getting boring a bit and the life was a bit sucked out this way, so I forgot it and switched of the room correction mode and was using only the digital crossover mode.

I learnt to live with the fact that life (and rooms) is never perfect
The Danleys, including the SM60F are so honest, balanced and coherent and I am sitting not too far anyway, I can live with some room problems and potential speaker frequency response unevenness easily.
post #326 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltaHomeTheatre View Post
Ivan,

For the all important center channel would you recommend that I stick with a third SM60F or upgrade to SH60/69?

I understand that for output the SM60F will have more than I need. I typically dont listen at reference levels anyway. I am just wondering if the "better" speaker would be a better fit for the center channel where I have more placement options?

Thanks
Darryl
I drew out your room as your described and the 60° of the SM60 would cover the seats just fine. If you went wider then you would have more energy hitting the walls. That is why I suggested the 60.

You will notice that many times I suggest the 90° for the center. That is because in a lot of those rooms the people are either closer to the screen or wider in the seating-and they need the wider coverage.

The only thing "better" about the SH69 is louder and lower-neither of which you will "appreciate" in your room. The SM 60F should be fine.

But if it makes you feel better-then go for it. Remember you will have to find a way to "prop it up" (due to the trapazoid shape) or else put it on the floor and let the natural angle point it up.
post #327 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferenc_k View Post
When I am playing with the location of the speakers and sub(s) I use sweeps, to get the minimum of the fluctuation, but to be honest it usually does not take more than few minutes. My room is quite evil anyway, so do not spend too much time with it. Earlier I was using a DEQX high-end room corrector/4-way digital crossover to minimize timing and phase difference between the speakers and correct the nodes, but since I am more familiar with the Danley speakers, I tried only once, do not feel I need it to get the sound for my liking. In an hour or so I could get the response very close to flat, with some mmild using of parametric eq, it was sensational, pure for a while, then it was getting boring a bit and the life was a bit sucked out this way, so I forgot it and switched of the room correction mode and was using only the digital crossover mode.

I learnt to live with the fact that life (and rooms) is never perfect
The Danleys, including the SM60F are so honest, balanced and coherent and I am sitting not too far anyway, I can live with some room problems and potential speaker frequency response unevenness easily.
Thanks for this extra bit of info. I will receive my SM60F's (installer version) the coming 2 or 3 weeks and find out myself as well. Did you buy the touring version? (seeing you use pole stands, for which it has a socket) I'll have to find an adapter to attach a pole.

edit: oh, and thanks Ivan for your explanation.
post #328 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver View Post
I drew out your room as your described and the 60° of the SM60 would cover the seats just fine. If you went wider then you would have more energy hitting the walls. That is why I suggested the 60.

You will notice that many times I suggest the 90° for the center. That is because in a lot of those rooms the people are either closer to the screen or wider in the seating-and they need the wider coverage.

The only thing "better" about the SH69 is louder and lower-neither of which you will "appreciate" in your room. The SM 60F should be fine.

But if it makes you feel better-then go for it. Remember you will have to find a way to "prop it up" (due to the trapazoid shape) or else put it on the floor and let the natural angle point it up.
Ivan I just built a stand for my SH69 and Ill post pics of it later. It came out very nice.
post #329 of 696
Mark,

Any more listening impressions you may share?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kutlow View Post
Ivan I just built a stand for my SH69 and Ill post pics of it later. It came out very nice.
post #330 of 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04FLHRCI View Post

Mark,

Any more listening impressions you may share?

I only have one amp right now so Im running my SH50 on the Crest 9200. I have the gains turned to the 12 o clock position so I dont send it too much power. They sound awesome. The mid bass is very nice. In 2 channel listening I can see how people say you dont need a sub. So for now im really happy with them. Monday one more amp ships so Ill be able to run one channel to one dts 10 and the other to the SH69 Center. That should make movies better for now. Crest has a small delay in the 8200 amp as they are waiting for parts. They should ship in a week. So for now yes I like my Danleys.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Danley SH-50/SH-60 for dedicated Home Theater