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 17

post #481 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by jheyau View Post

Forin places his SM60Fs on top of his DTS 10s and he is thinking of getting another pair of SM60Fs AND a pair of DTS 10s for the rear channels!

Ah, thanks! My brain fizzled on who it was.
post #482 of 705
I thought my ears were burning!!! Actually, I was just keeping my AVS addiction in check. Vraxoin, I sit 14 feet away from the speakers and they work just fine on top of the DTS-10. Everything images just fine vertically. I will be moving in a few weeks, if the room is smaller I will test to see if I need to buy stands/poles. Hopefully in 2-3 weeks I will know if I can fit 2 more dts-10s in the new room.

What I want to do- Buy 2 more dts-10s

What I should do- Upgrade what I do not have; purchase a projector

What I need to do- Sell my equipment, ban AVS from my mind/pc and save for school/retirement

Honestly, I need to stop this audio stuff and buy a projector. The kuro is great but I think I am missing out on the video. I will probably buy used, as projectors hold their value as well as pc video cards. Plus I am RBE sensitive, need low lag for classic SHMUPing, and am used to Kuro black levels....sigh.

Forin
post #483 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by forin View Post

I thought my ears were burning!!! Actually, I was just keeping my AVS addiction in check. Vraxoin, I sit 14 feet away from the speakers and they work just fine on top of the DTS-10. Everything images just fine vertically. I will be moving in a few weeks, if the room is smaller I will test to see if I need to buy stands/poles. Hopefully in 2-3 weeks I will know if I can fit 2 more dts-10s in the new room.

What I want to do- Buy 2 more dts-10s

What I should do- Upgrade what I do not have; purchase a projector

What I need to do- Sell my equipment, ban AVS from my mind/pc and save for school/retirement

Honestly, I need to stop this audio stuff and buy a projector. The kuro is great but I think I am missing out on the video. I will probably buy used, as projectors hold their value as well as pc video cards. Plus I am RBE sensitive, need low lag for classic SHMUPing, and am used to Kuro black levels....sigh.

Forin

Cool! Thanks for checking in. This should help Tom Bley with his decision I'd imagine.

Buying a nice projector will make you forget about your "What I need to do" option.
post #484 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ettepet View Post

Yes, I'm wandering too. I liked the depth of his comparison between his Genelecs and the (single) Catalyst he owns

exactly the reason I'm interested. The cats are on my short list.
post #485 of 705
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ettepet View Post

Yes, I'm wandering too. I liked the depth of his comparison between his Genelecs and the (single) Catalyst he owns. Can't wait to hear what he thinks of the SH50's...

Sofar the SM60F's that arrived last week are doing quite well attached to my Onkyo TX-NR5008. The Onkyo is unable to combine "Speaker B" with my subwoofers, so I have to try some other configurations as well. Haven't tested them on my TAG av32dp yet. The coming 2 weeks I also plan to take them with me to a co-worker of mine who owns modified Quads and a high-end DAC.

One thing I like about the SM60's sofar is that they already sound good when they are positioned way on top of my current front speakers (4 feet 9 high). Standing up from a sitting position the sound changes little, which to me is quite impressive.

I need more time!

Let me just say - the SH50 is the most difficult speaker to get to "sound right" I have had. Frequency response is by far not so "smooth", flat as with the Genelecs and even the Seaton Cat's (which are DSP corrected). The SH50 sounds quite "rough" in comparison (just like their measured frequency response suggests...).

The dynamic capabilities are (literally) to die for - as to be expected from this high sensitivity speaker in a medium sized room. They are much more "alive", more "in your face", and more revealing than the Seatons. But the SH50 certainly don't sound so smooth, refined. They are more exciting than relaxed. Danley writes about being part of "a new generation of extreme listeners" - and that's spot on. The Danleys are certainly not for everyone. They are very distinct. Hardly comparable to any other speaker.

For me they show huge potential. I have a lot of variables in my setup. With Audiolense "room correction" I have many parameters, I can freely choose a target curve, decide which amount of correction (=filtering) I want. With the Genelecs (hardly need any correction) and with the Seatons (sound "good" no matter what you do to them..) it is easy. With the SH-50 it is hard work to "design the in-room sound" to my liking.

BUT I am confident I am getting there. My temporary room setting without much acoustic treatment doesn't help. My dedicated room is in planning stage.

One word about the Parasound JC-1s - the question arised why did I choose these amps (instead of more cost effective pro amps). Well, without JC-1s I would be completely lost with the SH-50. I tried a couple of amps to compare them to the JC-1s with the SH-50. I will tell you one thing - the SH-50 will punish you for any weak link in the signal chain. Be it the content, the source player, the preamp (I tried it briefly with my Onkyo 886 pre-pro instead of the Prism Sound - not a good time...) and the amps.

Why did I choose the JC-1? Because of the consequencies of a high sensitivity speaker. Above all you need clean power - the distortion specs and S/N ratio of the JC-1 are reference. MOSFET output stages (=almost tube like characteristics). Enough power to take advantage of all the dynamics possible. Ultra high bias Class A mode (it basically runs in Class A all the time with a high sensitivity speaker like the SH-50). Passive cooling = no fan! Highly inefficient but - although the differences are minor - I prefer it to class D designs (which eg. result in more HF hiss -> see Seaton Catalyst)

If there is one key aspect of the Sh-50 it is revealing the whole signal (chain) (just like the Genelecs are capable of).
post #486 of 705
Thread Starter 
btw I made it. I am on the Danley homepage ;-):

http://www.danleysoundlabs.com/danleyport.asp?ID=53
post #487 of 705
Thread Starter 
@ Ivan

What do you think about baffle mounting the SH-50 right above my Studiothek screen? My experience is that the SH-50 are very depended on (proper) in room placement. Do you have experience with a baffle wall in context with your Synergy Horns? In theory it is always the best possible placement - I am just not quite sure how it interacts with your particular design.
post #488 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLion View Post

@ Ivan

What do you think about baffle mounting the SH-50 right above my Studiothek screen? My experience is that the SH-50 are very depended on (proper) in room placement. Do you have experience with a baffle wall in context with your Synergy Horns? In theory it is always the best possible placement - I am just not quite sure how it interacts with your particular design.

Mounting it in a baffle should be fine-as long as the baffle edges are flush (or close nayway) to the front of the cabinet.

You do not want them to be in front of the front edge of the cabinet-as this would cause bad reflections back into the throat of the horn.

It would also be a good idea to get them as close as possible to the cabinet so as to not leave a large gap that could set up some resonances.
post #489 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by vraxoin View Post

I feel that's very solid front row coverage. The listener's head is multiple feet within the 50deg pattern boundaries. Obviously there are no horizontal coverage issues for the deeper rows, but vertical may be an issue for ideal coverage. Since this is a temporary situation it doesn't seem worth much worry as you can correct for it later on in the new room. Curious what Ivan's take is.

It looks fine to me. If the edge of the seat was right on the edge of the pattern-then that would be a different issue. But they are well covered.

I do agree that the vertical is the biggest concern. As you move the loudspeakers up-they also have to come in.

But since he is going to be moving-this in only a temporary condition.

I would assume (but have nothing to base it on) that the new space would not have the ceiling issues this one does.
post #490 of 705
Lion I and I am sure others find your unbiased opinion very valuable, I look forward to your full review. I also wonder how your speaker positioning findings would change in a treated room.
post #491 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLion View Post
I need more time!
Thanks for your status update..

Quote:
Let me just say - the SH50 is the most difficult speaker to get to "sound right" I have had. Frequency response is by far not so "smooth", flat as with the Genelecs and even the Seaton Cat's (which are DSP corrected). The SH50 sounds quite "rough" in comparison (just like their measured frequency response suggests...).
The SM60F's are also not flat, with swings more prominent high up in the FR (looking at the graphs).

Sofar I've only connected my Onkyo 5008, which later today I plan to exchange for higher end gear. My sp/dif coaxial cable was fixed today so I can connect the Danleys to a "Arcam DV27a transport + TAG av32dp" combo.

The last couple of days I'm also answering questions and handing over evidence to a US police detective about the RSL II / Schifter scam, which cost me (and several others) $6000+. They're trying to contact others but need leads. I'm looking through all my old stuff which is eating into valuable speaker evaluation time.
post #492 of 705
Lion, Ettepet,

What kind of material is being used to evaluate your respective Danley systems, music or movies?
post #493 of 705
So far music, in my case, but with a big enough collection that covers a lot of ground.
post #494 of 705
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodhisafa View Post

Lion, Ettepet,

What kind of material is being used to evaluate your respective Danley systems, music or movies?

80% movies (100% Blu-Ray), 20% music (up to 7.1 192khz flac streams)
post #495 of 705
what I like about the SH50 is you get the wrap around sound feeling verses a straigh path sound from traditional speakers. In others words when I compared my SH50 verses the JTR it was like the sound path of the JTR being 12 inches wide coming at you and the Danley was so wide you couldnt tell exactly where the speaker was. It was like the sound went around you and circled to your back. Does that make sense? I know what I heard and I waswnt the only one there who described it just as Im saying.
post #496 of 705
Im stopping by Danley to audition the TH221 on Tuesday. I wonder if I could ratchet it down to the roof of a toyota corolla?
post #497 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by kutlow View Post
what I like about the SH50 is you get the wrap around sound feeling verses a straigh path sound from traditional speakers. In others words when I compared my SH50 verses the JTR it was like the sound path of the JTR being 12 inches wide coming at you and the Danley was so wide you couldnt tell exactly where the speaker was. It was like the sound went around you and circled to your back. Does that make sense? I know what I heard and I waswnt the only one there who described it just as Im saying.
Our ears are interesting "devices". They receive lots of "clues" that tell us about things such as distance. Those clues are driver offsets, reflections and so forth.

As a general rule-the harder it is to tell how far a loudspeaker is away from you, you more behaved it is. Ie the better it "holds together" over distance.

I remember sitting at the BYU football stadium some 700+ feet away from the loudspeakers and closing my eyes and listening. It seemed as if the sound was around 30' in front of me. After doing that for a little while and then opening my eyes-it was hard to believe that the loudspeakers so small and so far away.
post #498 of 705
Of course you can!



post #499 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by kutlow View Post
Im stopping by Danley to audition the TH221 on Tuesday. I wonder if I could ratchet it down to the roof of a toyota corolla?
You could use the cart they sell with it and tie it to your tow bar. Or have it shipped.
--

I compared the few months old flagship Onkyo with my previous Arcam+TAG+MPS-1 combo. The latter sounded way way better on the SM60F's. I ended up tieing the Onkyo to the (Emotiva) MPS-1 and now am very happy with the setup. Tomorrow I will calibrate the speakers, compare the Danleys to the Catalysts and listen to multichannel.
post #500 of 705
Everyone describes experiences differently.

Ivan describes clearly what a highly coherent source should emulate. Kutlow, on the other hand, describes what seems more akin to a psychoacoustic room effect. I have no reason to believe the effect the two of them are describing, isn't caused from the same quality of the speaker,...individuals articulate things differently,... interesting, I'm merely thinking out loud

Kutlow, any more details would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
post #501 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOH View Post

Everyone describes experiences differently.

Ivan describes clearly what a highly coherent source should emulate. Kutlow, on the other hand, describes what seems more akin to a psychoacoustic room effect. I have no reason to believe the effect the two of them are describing, isn't caused from the same quality of the speaker,...individuals articulate things differently,... interesting, I'm merely thinking out loud

Kutlow, any more details would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Good post!

And if I may add from my experiences with:

Danley SM60F - SH100 - SM60F (front LCR)
JTR Slanted 8HT - JTR Slanted 8HT (rear L/R)
5.1 in a 14'X17' HT

and

Danley SM60M - Epik Empire - Epik Empire - Danley SM60M (front L/R)
Danley SH100 - Danley SH100 (rear L/R)
4 channel system in a 10' X 13' HT

The coherence of the Danley design, the uniformity of the frequency and phase response across the directivity pattern and throughout the entire band (except the bottom) makes for a sense of envelopment from the surround mix that is remarkably different than when attempted with other transducers.

In the smaller room, I had other speakers (brand left unsaid) in the SAME positions, with the SAME gear driving them. You might think that a small room would enable this envelopment and you would be correct.

However, the sense of being wrapped around with the sound was DRAMATICALLY increased when the Danleys were placed!

And in the larger HT room, with the L/R SM60F's placed with their angled side flush against the left and right side walls, there is the SAME sense of envelopment, as if the surround mixer's intent was fully realized. (Note: The JTR Slanted 8HT design is a coaxial, time-coherent design)

The more I play with the Danley Synergy speaker design, the more I am convinced that time and spatial coherency, from on-axis all the way to the edge of the coverage pattern, in the vertical and the horizontal, that coherency should be the paramount design goal, not a marketing afterthought based upon the latest audio boutique fashion.

At the primary listener position, this sense of envelopment effect can be understood as taking the superb imaging of two Synergy speakers in stereo from their direct, first-arrival wave coherence and pulling that out into the depth of the surround field. Somehow, the time and spatial coherence between the front soundstage and the surround soundstage combine more ideally into a convincingly wrapped-around soundscape.

In addition to the first-order cause for this enveloping effect above, I would like to test the hypothesis that the coherency of the source transducer positively affects the room’s reverberant response, especially in HT sized rooms. In other words, if the originating source transducer is close to an ideal point-source (with directivity added), even after reflection off walls, floor and ceiling, the reflected and delayed waves are more readily re-correlated by the brain’s superb audio processing; translation: a more effortless immersion into the recreated dimensions of the soundscape.

The payoff of approximating a point-source (with directivity) is evident every time I say "Wow!" from a realistic recreation of a soundscape around me!
post #502 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOH View Post

Everyone describes experiences differently.

Ivan describes clearly what a highly coherent source should emulate. Kutlow, on the other hand, describes what seems more akin to a psychoacoustic room effect. I have no reason to believe the effect the two of them are describing, isn't caused from the same quality of the speaker,...individuals articulate things differently,... interesting, I'm merely thinking out loud

Kutlow, any more details would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

I have played several music dvd's and since im stuck in the 80's music my brother and I were amazed to the sound quality out of the Danley Speakers. It was like the band was in my room. I then listened to the Michael Jackson (This is It) Bluray movie and I was floored. All I know is compared to my old set up which was 3 JTR Triple 12's amd 4 JTR Triple 8's this Danley set up is a amazing upgrade. The clarity and the sound quality at all listening levels is amazing. What I was missing with my other speaker set ups was mid bass. The SH50 took care of that. Guys the sound can only be appreciated in person.
post #503 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by robobob View Post

Good post!

And if I may add from my experiences with:

Danley SM60F - SH100 - SM60F (front LCR)
JTR Slanted 8HT - JTR Slanted 8HT (rear L/R)
5.1 in a 14'X17' HT

and

Danley SM60M - Epik Empire - Epik Empire - Danley SM60M (front L/R)
Danley SH100 - Danley SH100 (rear L/R)
4 channel system in a 10' X 13' HT

The coherence of the Danley design, the uniformity of the frequency and phase response across the directivity pattern and throughout the entire band (except the bottom) makes for a sense of envelopment from the surround mix that is remarkably different than when attempted with other transducers.

In the smaller room, I had other speakers (brand left unsaid) in the SAME positions, with the SAME gear driving them. You might think that a small room would enable this envelopment and you would be correct.

However, the sense of being wrapped around with the sound was DRAMATICALLY increased when the Danleys were placed!

And in the larger HT room, with the L/R SM60F's placed with their angled side flush against the left and right side walls, there is the SAME sense of envelopment, as if the surround mixer's intent was fully realized. (Note: The JTR Slanted 8HT design is a coaxial, time-coherent design)

The more I play with the Danley Synergy speaker design, the more I am convinced that time and spatial coherency, from on-axis all the way to the edge of the coverage pattern, in the vertical and the horizontal, that coherency should be the paramount design goal, not a marketing afterthought based upon the latest audio boutique fashion.

At the primary listener position, this sense of envelopment effect can be understood as taking the superb imaging of two Synergy speakers in stereo from their direct, first-arrival wave coherence and pulling that out into the depth of the surround field. Somehow, the time and spatial coherence between the front soundstage and the surround soundstage combine more ideally into a convincingly wrapped-around soundscape.

In addition to the first-order cause for this enveloping effect above, I would like to test the hypothesis that the coherency of the source transducer positively affects the room's reverberant response, especially in HT sized rooms. In other words, if the originating source transducer is close to an ideal point-source (with directivity added), even after reflection off walls, floor and ceiling, the reflected and delayed waves are more readily re-correlated by the brain's superb audio processing; translation: a more effortless immersion into the recreated dimensions of the soundscape.

The payoff of approximating a point-source (with directivity) is evident every time I say "Wow!" from a realistic recreation of a soundscape around me!

Wow, thanks,..all these ideas are swirling through my head as I read your post. I have no reason to believe the coherency of the SH products isn't a strong attribute, but I keep thinking directivity/pattern control is significantly responsible for what you're experiencing. Obviously, top to bottom, it's the sum of all the design aspects that contribute to what a listener gets out of a SH experience. However, I'm just thinking that focusing that energy toward the LP, keeping any destructively smearing early energy off the other surfaces in the room gets way ahead of the room equation from the start.

My concerns are any potential listener fatigue, and the somewhat ragged response in the frequency domain. Are these valid concerns in your opinion? When one views a FR of a normal speaker in a normal small room, the FR @ the LP is highly ragged. Peaks and nulls of 10-20db, and even more are common. This response is an aggregate of the native FR and the room's destructive influences. So, my question is do you feel the SH gets out ahead of this, and it's rough native FR is a non-issue due to it's directivity/pattern control?

Thanks
post #504 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by kutlow View Post

........

All I know is compared to my old set up which was 3 JTR Triple 12's amd 4 JTR Triple 8's this Danley set up is a amazing upgrade....

.....What I was missing with my other speaker set ups was mid bass. The SH50 took care of that.



Damn,.....if three JTR12's,..all across the front was lacking in midbass compared to any product, that's amazing!

I very much enjoy reading these opinions of this SH line. They're on my short list for new mains. I'm a month or two away from getting serious, however I'm very interested in these.
post #505 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOH View Post

When one views a FR of a normal speaker in a normal small room, the FR @ the LP is highly ragged. Peaks and nulls of 10-20db, and even more are common. This response is an aggregate of the native FR and the room's destructive influences.

When you look at the FR curve-you HAVE to take a lot of real information into concern-regarding how "smooth" it is.

For example-in the attached graphs below-which HF driver has the smoother response? The correct answer is NEITHER!

They are EXACTLY the same driver/graph etc. The only difference is the way they are displayed.

You have to look at much more than just the curve to get an idea of what is going on. In so many products a "marketing curve" is applied to make the product appear to look better than it is.

At Danley we prefer to "drop our pants" and who the world what we really have-warts and all. So the published curves may not "appear" as good as some others-but the reality is in the listening.

Also remember that your ear does a good bit of averageing to smooth things out on its own, so the HF is not a jagged as it may appear.
LL
post #506 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver View Post

Our ears are interesting "devices". They receive lots of "clues" that tell us about things such as distance. Those clues are driver offsets, reflections and so forth.

As a general rule-the harder it is to tell how far a loudspeaker is away from you, you more behaved it is. Ie the better it "holds together" over distance.

I remember sitting at the BYU football stadium some 700+ feet away from the loudspeakers and closing my eyes and listening. It seemed as if the sound was around 30' in front of me. After doing that for a little while and then opening my eyes-it was hard to believe that the loudspeakers so small and so far away.

And a very good reason why flat magnitude response is not the holy grail-our brains forgive and process and mask over a lot of sonic info, and this is one of the coolest aspects of Danley's work.

But I'm preaching to the choir. ;>)

Best regards,

John
post #507 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOH View Post



Damn,.....if three JTR12's,..all across the front was lacking in midbass compared to any product, that's amazing!


Mark....in the interest of full disclosure, please tell them what you were using to drive the triple 12s versus what you are using to drive the Danleys' . Be sure to include the wattage.
post #508 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver View Post

Also remember that your ear does a good bit of averageing to smooth things out on its own, so the HF is not a jagged as it may appear.

wrt graphs and marketing, you are spot on correct,..however, that doesn't diminish the fact that a smooth response is preferred. I have certain qualities I prefer in loudspeaker ability, and flat axial or overall power response isn't the be all end all for me. But that is inconsistent with extensive research that Harman, et al, have performed. If I recall correctly, the single most preferable quality by individuals participating was smoothness in the frequency response. Additionally, I've read interviews with senior loudspeaker designers within Harman's fold, that claim phase coherency is of minimal importance regarding which aspects of loudspeaker design matter, and which do not. Obviously Harman's research work is significant, however oftentimes group-think prevails to the detriment of the ultimate outcome. I'm in no way saying their work is flawed, nor am I claiming Danley's work is flawed. I'm not even intellectually capable of determining that.

What I am saying is I'm very much interested in Danley's SH designs, and I'm revamping my entire modest HT rig, in favor of a system without any realistic dynamic constraints. When one experiences another system, generally there are differences, and oftentimes differences are perceived as better. I'm sure if I heard the SH line, I'd be impressed with their capabilities. Long term use fleshes out other aspects that may not be so apparent at the time of the initial audition.

Loudspeakers that dynamically make the cut for me, and are within the realm of afford-ability include Geddes Summas, Seaton's Catalyst, various JBL designs, and others. I've given consideration to some kit work, such as some type of super* EconoWave/Pi type diy design, perhaps a SH kit, I'm open to suggestions.

* by super I mean to explore some measure of added capability in the 50-200hz range, whereby many systems lose that power feel that accompanies a good live rig. I've posted wrt this often, but the sat/sub trend in the late 80's early 90's created a monster. This monster is still prevalent today,..whereby systems have adequate LF support, however the power region (my term) immediately above the subs is oftentimes neglected. Program content contains a great deal of energy in this region, and most systems...even megabuck systems fail in this area. Compression, and general lack of headroom in the area of concern renders too many systems anemic and essentially sucks the life out of the presentation. When these octaves are handled aptly, a sense of system "speed" is imparted, and very high playback levels contain a visceral component that for me, is essential.

I'm done rambling, strong coffee, one of my few vices left will do that.

Back OT
post #509 of 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by FOH View Post

Wow, thanks,..all these ideas are swirling through my head as I read your post. I have no reason to believe the coherency of the SH products isn't a strong attribute, but I keep thinking directivity/pattern control is significantly responsible for what you're experiencing. Obviously, top to bottom, it's the sum of all the design aspects that contribute to what a listener gets out of a SH experience. However, I'm just thinking that focusing that energy toward the LP, keeping any destructively smearing early energy off the other surfaces in the room gets way ahead of the room equation from the start.

My concerns are any potential listener fatigue, and the somewhat ragged response in the frequency domain. Are these valid concerns in your opinion? When one views a FR of a normal speaker in a normal small room, the FR @ the LP is highly ragged. Peaks and nulls of 10-20db, and even more are common. This response is an aggregate of the native FR and the room's destructive influences. So, my question is do you feel the SH gets out ahead of this, and it's rough native FR is a non-issue due to it's directivity/pattern control?

Thanks

Ivan has already made the point about comparing unsmoothed, "hair-and-all" graphs with graphs published from a lying-with-graphs marketing philosophy.

Here is an additional fact: running a TEF sweep through the SM60M's in-room, produced a graph very similar to the graph posted on the Danley site, the differences due to room absorption and less than ideal speaker placement.

To be clear, the peaks and valleys did not always match exactly but the general pattern was very consistent with the ground plane (or hoisted in the air) measurements from the Danley site.

But what was surprising was that the Danley's delivered in-room a very close match to the response posted as its nominal response, that the Danley actually delivered to a real world listener's space a very close approximation of what was advertised!

This is a remarkable achievement, if you have actually swept small rooms with high resolution equipment, not going by the graphs produced from an auto EQ/room correction system. The short duration sweeps that the automated calibration algorithms characteristically use severely limits their accuracy, BTW.

The Synergy design actually shocked me with how close to its nominal response it brought to a severely compromised room. An indication of a superior idea is when it succeeds in the most challenging conditions, not how well it can be propped up by a heroically ideal demo room.

The most notable fact from that live in-room sweep is that it displayed the same characteristic frequency response as the response posted on the Danley site! AND that the in-room peaks and valleys stayed for the most part within +/- 4dB from 200Hz to over 13,000Hz, showed that the speaker's response dominated the room's response, the speaker's directivity and its uniform "illumination" of the space within its coverage pattern providing a more predictable response.

Of course, directivity is an important aspect in a small room. Directivity alone however, cannot explain the coherence by itself. Inevitably, in a small room (HT sized), there WILL be reflections. Unless the room is over-dampened with treatments (try enjoying music in an anechoic space!), there will be late arrivals mixing with the direct waves. In my untreated room, I am delighted that the 4 Danley system's coherence dominates. A room properly treated using diffusers/bass traps would still benefit from this coherence.

I am speculating that the most critical factor that makes or breaks this coherence effect, is the impossible-to-fake, time and spatial alignment of the drivers' output, aiming at reproducing a point-source with directivity.

When the inevitable mixing of direct arrivals with reflections occurs, the hypothesis is that the greater off-axis timbral uniformity AND the original point-source time alignment of the reflected and the direct waves combine to make the convolution by the ear-brain to recreate the original soundscape easier to resolve, by starting with fewer errors from greater coherence at origin.

The last adjective I would use in regard to the SM60M's response would be "ragged"! I can only speak to the SM60F/SM60M and the SH100 models but the words that I would apply would be: smooth, neutral, transparent, musical, efffortless, NON-fatiguing to the max!

My test of a sound system is how you feel after a 6-8 hour immersion session; other than flat-butt syndrome, the 4 channel Danley system has the least listener fatigue of all the systems I have owned.

There is something very important about this true phase coherence in time and space to our audio processing capabilities, that makes what is a self-trained perceptual skill in all of us, the skill of recreating a realistic space from imperfect audio cues, easier to apply, requiring less processing effort on our parts. This extra ease and relaxation translates to extra involvement in our perceptual recreation, the feeling that there is more "there" there!

If frequency response anomalies are considered to "color" the sound, what then does time smear and the disjointed response in time and space of multiple drivers do to the sound?

Slice the sound image into separate chunks like a Benihana chef?

I return to the word coherence as it has a precise denotation in laser engineering and has the clear connotation of every piece of the whole being in sync with every other piece until there is only the whole.

In short (too late! ) it is my conclusion that whatever this coherence is, it is more important to great sound recreation than a "ruler-flat" frequency response. A near flat response UNVARYING from on-axis to all the way to the edge of the pattern is much more audible and of greater impact on imaging and the life of the music than a "flat-on-paper" on-axis response.
post #510 of 705
FOH,

I think Earl has discontinued his Summas because they are too difficult to make due to his one-man operation. I think the SH50 should have better directivity than the Geddes models. Earl uses a home-made diffuser on the ceiling and a thick fulton mattress covered with a carpet on the floor in front of the speakers to absorb the sound from the spherical wave guides. With the SH50 and SM60F the radiation angles are tighter than with any of the Geddes models and one does not need to take those drastic steps. Because of the Danley's angled cabinets, one can simply push them flush against the side walls while with the Geddes one must measure exactly 45 degrees angled inward to have them sound properly. I looked at the Abbeys very carefully but decided on the SM60Fs; in fact I had been following Geddes for some months before I discovered Danley.
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