Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

[John Halliburton]

September 25th, and the Irish American Heritage Center in Chicago. One block east of the Edens and Kennedy expressway junction.

I've been wanting to audition both these loudspeakers in situ, and I'll get to do it next week. Not a shoot out, they are in two different price categories.

If you're in the area that day, drop by, Jeff and I will be playing around in the nice 640 seat theater space there.

Orbit Shifter subs underneath, one per side.

The QU24 will be there too.

Probably ready around lunchtime.

Best regards,

John

 

[Gary Weller]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

What were the conclusions?

 

[Peter Morris]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

What were the conclusions?

Both were excellent, but as I understand (I was not there) the JTR's N3TX won out over the SM80s. They were lighter, sounded better and provided as much SPL as the SM80s.
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,151380.10.html

I’m not surprised; JTR I believe is using the BMS 4594ND compression driver in this box. It’s one of the best drivers out. It’s a dual concentric and allows the horn to be used to quite a low frequency, ensuring that the 2 x 10” drivers operate in their optimum frequency range. I believe Danley use 3 of these in their Jericho J1s.

I’m not sure what driver the SM80 uses, maybe a B&C or Eighteen-Sound 12” coaxial. Both make superb drivers. Danley loads it into a sealed box with very short horn, a bit like the trick Clair Brother did about 15 years ago with the 12” mid in their R4 series 2, I think they called it thick baffle technology or something.

 

[Peter Morris]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

Both were excellent, but as I understand (I was notthere) the JTR's N3TX won out over the SM80s. They were lighter, sounded better and providedas much SPL as the SM80s.
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,151380.10.html
I’m not surprised; JTR I believe is using the BMS 4594NDcompression driver in this box. It’s oneof the best drivers out. It’s a dual concentric and allows the horn to be usedto quite a low frequency, ensuring that the 2 x 10” drivers operate in theiroptimum frequency range. I believe Danleyuse 3 of these in their Jericho J1s.
I’m not sure what driver the SM80 uses, maybe a B&Cor Eighteen-Sound 12” coaxial. Both make superb drivers. Danley loads it into asealed box with very short horn, a bit like the trick Clair Brother did about15 years ago with the 12” mid in their R4 series 2, I think they called itthick baffle technology or something.

sorry some of the words are joined together - there does not seem to be any way to fix it ... the site will not let me modify or correct the post.

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

Both were excellent, but as I understand (I was notthere) the JTR's N3TX won out over the SM80s. They were lighter, sounded better and providedas much SPL as the SM80s.
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,151380.10.html
I’m not surprised; JTR I believe is using the BMS 4594NDcompression driver in this box. It’s oneof the best drivers out. It’s a dual concentric and allows the horn to be usedto quite a low frequency, ensuring that the 2 x 10” drivers operate in theiroptimum frequency range. I believe Danleyuse 3 of these in their Jericho J1s.
I’m not sure what driver the SM80 uses, maybe a B&Cor Eighteen-Sound 12” coaxial. Both make superb drivers. Danley loads it into asealed box with very short horn, a bit like the trick Clair Brother did about15 years ago with the 12” mid in their R4 series 2, I think they called itthick baffle technology or something.

And as usual there are things that don't show up in a "casual listening" situation. Things like pattern control down to a particular freq-how well it holds up over distance and so forth are items that are often missed-but do make a difference in some situations. Other situations-not so much.

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

JTR I believe is using the BMS 4594NDcompression driver in this box.

I remember somewhere that they were using the 4593-which is the lessor of the 2 drivers-but that was awhile back-so not sure how accurate my statement is.

 

[TJ Cornish]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

And as usual there are things that don't show up in a "casual listening" situation. Things like pattern control down to a particular freq-how well it holds up over distance and so forth are items that are often missed-but do make a difference in some situations. Other situations-not so much.

I would like to see Danley do some work in the area of manufacturer-supplied presets. We did a shootout with several Danley boxes vs other manufacturers, and ended up choosing a different manufacturer because with three rounds of tuning from a very qualified operator, we were unable to make the Danley product sound as good (SH60 in this case) as another manufacturer's box. This particular manufacturer has spent a lot of time on processing.

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

I would like to see Danley do some work in the area of manufacturer-supplied presets. We did a shootout with several Danley boxes vs other manufacturers, and ended up choosing a different manufacturer because with three rounds of tuning from a very qualified operator, we were unable to make the Danley product sound as good (SH60 in this case) as another manufacturer's box. This particular manufacturer has spent a lot of time on processing.

"Presets" are an interesting topic.

It depends on what you are looking for in a "preset"

Are you looking for a linear response? Something that will accurately transfer what is coming into the box into what is coming out of the box?

In many cases people will say YES-that is exactly what they are looking for. But how are they judging this? With live material in which case they also have a mixing console to adjust the individual channels tonality as needed? in most cases not.

They are using prerecorded tracks. So often what we 'prefer" to hear in prerecorded tracks is NOT a linear response-but one that is tilted on the top and bottom.

And it also depends on the level you are listening at. What sounds good at low levels does not transfer to high levels. But if you were mixing a band-you would simply pull out the offending freq on the channels that needed it. But you can't do that with tracks-so the eq (around the 3-4Kish "harsh" range) for the whole system will need to be changed as the level goes up.

Also the tracks being listened to will have very different "sounds"-so often adjustments need to be made in that regards.

I have had a number of people tell me that they don't like the sound of the Danley speakers because they want something that "feels like an icepick in the forehead" and makes your eyeballs wince and hurt the top of your nose.

So as you can see different situations and different people like different things. It really depends on what you are trying to "accomplish" with the sound system.

In many cases what people say they want-and what they choose are very different things.

There is no pleasing everybody.

And just to add-many people just listen on axis and make their judgements based on that. But in reality most people are NOT on axis and all over the place. Having even coverage across the intended coverage area is important.

To me it is more important that everybody hear close to the same thing-rather than a couple of people hear really good and most of the people do not.

But again-it depends on what is important to you and the particular situation.

 

[Kevin Maxwell]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

"Presets" are an interesting topic.

>>>SNIP

I have had a number of people tell me that they don't like the sound of the Danley speakers because they want something that "feels like an icepick in the forehead" and makes your eyeballs wince and hurt the top of your nose.

So as you can see different situations and different people like different things. It really depends on what you are trying to "accomplish" with the sound system.

SNIP<<<<<

I find the ice pick statement funny because the one time I heard some DSL boxes that is exactly what it sounded like to me. And I didn’t like it. And it was you doing the demo.

 

[John Halliburton]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

Both were excellent, but as I understand (I was notthere) the JTR's N3TX won out over the SM80s. They were lighter, sounded better and providedas much SPL as the SM80s.
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,151380.10.html
I’m not surprised; JTR I believe is using the BMS 4594NDcompression driver in this box. It’s oneof the best drivers out. It’s a dual concentric and allows the horn to be usedto quite a low frequency, ensuring that the 2 x 10” drivers operate in theiroptimum frequency range. I believe Danleyuse 3 of these in their Jericho J1s.
I’m not sure what driver the SM80 uses, maybe a B&Cor Eighteen-Sound 12” coaxial. Both make superb drivers. Danley loads it into asealed box with very short horn, a bit like the trick Clair Brother did about15 years ago with the 12” mid in their R4 series 2, I think they called itthick baffle technology or something.

"Win" is not the correct term. It was not a shoot out. The voicing on the SM80 is not my preference for the type of work I do most. They could be processed and I could use them, but I would rather have a loudspeaker with voicing to my liking right out of the box, or as close as I can get/afford. That is why I mentioned the other Danley models that I prefer. Plenty of folks using them and loving their performance.

Directivity is a hallmark of the Danley Synergy design, and the SM80 certainly performed better, but that was totally expected-any direct radiating low frequency section is going to be almost omni in it's radiation by 200hz, and the Noesis is no exception.

The Noesis were used Saturday for a small concert in a 24'x50'x12' room, stage at one of the narrow ends. Wound up cutting 215hz on all the speakers, and I'm sure part of this is due to the inherent behavior of the direct radiating low frequency section. Using my SPL Runts(predecessor to the SH95) in there does not require this cut in the house.

That said, the Noesis were very nice sounding and well behaved after that.

Visually, the Noesis were a much better choice in there, the SM80 would have produced some "Speaker Fright" by their appearance in that setting. Not something that I have to worry about often, but it is a nice touch when needed.

Best regards,

John

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

I find the ice pick statement funny because the one time I heard some DSL boxes that is exactly what it sounded like to me. And I didn’t like it. And it was you doing the demo.

I don't recall the situation, but there have been demos that were 'intended" to take place around a certain SPL, but then they simply go louder-and nothing was changed in the processing-so the tonality changed due to the sensitivity of our ears.

Sometimes it is not the loudspeaker that is the issue-but rather our own sensitivity to certain freq at certain levels.

Different people have different sensitivities-even if their hearing is still intact.

I'm not making excuses-but just stating what happens and some of the "variables".

For example-some people like a distorted high end because they think it has more "highs". It is not natural but they like it.

The same things goes for the low end. People are so used to the distorted sound from front loaded woofers driven hard, they sometimes don't care for a the actual clean sound of other woofers.

Often it depends on what your perspective is and what you are used to.

Just like some FOH guys like a system that has just a bit of "fuzz" to it-no matter the actual SPL and they will mix for that "fuzz" and push the system until it gives them the "sound" they are looking for. I have personally experienced this and if you give them the "fuzz" at a lower SPL they are often happy.

So once again "it depends".

 

[TJ Cornish]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

"Presets" are an interesting topic.

It depends on what you are looking for in a "preset"

Are you looking for a linear response? Something that will accurately transfer what is coming into the box into what is coming out of the box?

In many cases people will say YES-that is exactly what they are looking for. But how are they judging this? With live material in which case they also have a mixing console to adjust the individual channels tonality as needed? in most cases not.

They are using prerecorded tracks. So often what we 'prefer" to hear in prerecorded tracks is NOT a linear response-but one that is tilted on the top and bottom.

And it also depends on the level you are listening at. What sounds good at low levels does not transfer to high levels. But if you were mixing a band-you would simply pull out the offending freq on the channels that needed it. But you can't do that with tracks-so the eq (around the 3-4Kish "harsh" range) for the whole system will need to be changed as the level goes up.

Also the tracks being listened to will have very different "sounds"-so often adjustments need to be made in that regards.

I have had a number of people tell me that they don't like the sound of the Danley speakers because they want something that "feels like an icepick in the forehead" and makes your eyeballs wince and hurt the top of your nose.

So as you can see different situations and different people like different things. It really depends on what you are trying to "accomplish" with the sound system.

In many cases what people say they want-and what they choose are very different things.

There is no pleasing everybody.

And just to add-many people just listen on axis and make their judgements based on that. But in reality most people are NOT on axis and all over the place. Having even coverage across the intended coverage area is important.

To me it is more important that everybody hear close to the same thing-rather than a couple of people hear really good and most of the people do not.

But again-it depends on what is important to you and the particular situation.

I've never met a preset that didn't allow customer preference tuning. My experience with the SH60 was that it was not particularly flat phase, and there were "things" going on that several tuning attempts, at least with our level of ability, we couldn't fix. The other manufacturer (another fully horn loaded box with "focusing" technology) did enough work before we got the box that we could voice it to our satisfaction with relative ease.

This isn't about being a speaker on a stick that some DJ will plug a mixer in with no DSP and expect their version of a smiley face; it is leveraging the party with the most product knowledge and experience - the manufacturer - to present their product in such a way that it has the best chance of being used optimally, no matter what particular tuning preference is the outcome.

I am very pro-Danley, and was the person who pushed for the Danley gear to be considered. We invested significant time with the SH60, but whether due to our lack of setup ability, damage of the demo box we had, or product limitations, Danley lost the sale to another vendor because in the end it didn't sound as good.

 

[Peter Morris]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

And as usual there are things that don't show up in a "casual listening" situation. Things like pattern control down to a particular freq-how well it holds up over distance and so forth are items that are often missed-but do make a difference in some situations. Other situations-not so much.

Absolutely, but ultimately we are judged by “casual listening” - the audience. They don’t care about any of that stuff just so long as it sounds good. In general the two are however directly related.

JTRs box was of particular interest to me. About 15 years ago I built a double 10 and horn box very similar to the N3TX for our own use. It was passive / active, pole mountable and had fly points top and bottom. It was slightly smaller than the N3TX. The original version was sealed but to get a bit more LF I changed the design and added some ports.

It turn out to be one of the most useful speakers I have ever owned. It was the right size and weight and had lots of horse power and throw. It is still a great box for so many applications.

FWIW my latest version uses the BMS 4594ND with an RCF-HF950 horn and some Eighteen Sound 10” drivers. It can be run 2 or 3 way active and is generally used with our double 18” subs. For processing it requires one or two Lab Gruppen Lake – LM26’s.

The frequency response is +/- 1.5 db from about 100Hz to 20KHz, the phase response (depending on the processing selected) is flat from about 100Hz to 20KHz and the impulse response is almost perfect. I have included a link to RCF’s spec sheet so you can see some of the polar response plots of the horn.
http://www.rcf.it/en_US/products/precision-transducers/horns/hf950

The catch with my design is, it’s very expensive to build and process. If you want the phase response flat from 100Hz you need to allow 12.5ms of FIR process time and you need to use 2 x LM26s … but they do sound great, better than our line arrays J. FWIW it can also be processed with one lake or a normal DSP ... anyway ...

I don’t know if it’s possible, and I have been hinting elsewhere … but could you build one of your SBH horns using say 3 x 8” drivers that was +10 degrees – 20 degrees in a similar size and weight box with a passive active option. I don’t live in the US, so your requirements may be different but I think it would be a winner

 

[Max Warasila]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

I've never met a preset that didn't allow customer preference tuning. My experience with the SH60 was that it was not particularly flat phase, and there were "things" going on that several tuning attempts, at least with our level of ability, we couldn't fix. The other manufacturer (another fully horn loaded box with "focusing" technology) did enough work before we got the box that we could voice it to our satisfaction with relative ease.

This isn't about being a speaker on a stick that some DJ will plug a mixer in with no DSP and expect their version of a smiley face; it is leveraging the party with the most product knowledge and experience - the manufacturer - to present their product in such a way that it has the best chance of being used optimally, no matter what particular tuning preference is the outcome.

I am very pro-Danley, and was the person who pushed for the Danley gear to be considered. We invested significant time with the SH60, but whether due to our lack of setup ability, damage of the demo box we had, or product limitations, Danley lost the sale to another vendor because in the end it didn't sound as good.

TJ did a much better job phrasing what I was thinking than my previous two attempts did. But quite simply, I don't want to be mucking about in the processing when the manufacturer (who knows anything and everything about the box) could have already started me on my way on getting the box to sound great instead of just good.

 

[Glenn Adams]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

Great can be the enemy of good.

I have not heard either of these systems. What I will say is that the only live pa speaker that I ever heard almost match the Transient response, Freq response and power response of my perfect listening rooms Acoustat model 3's was a pair of Danley SH50's. With the all out max level going to the Danley of course.

PS - I've seen " throw " thrown about in these comments. I thought we put that issue to bed?

 

[Tim McCulloch]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

PS - I've seen " throw " thrown about in these comments. I thought we put that issue to bed?

It depends on how far you can throw the bed...

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

I have included a link to RCF’s spec sheet so you can see some of the polar response plots of the horn.
http://www.rcf.it/en_US/products/precision-transducers/horns/hf950

]

I learned years ago that the same horn with different drivers on it can have different polar patterns.

Sometimes VERY RADICALLY different. Sometimes about the same as not to be worried about.

The first experience was with a 120° rated horn. With one driver is was probably that, yet another driver FROM THE SAME MANUFACTURER as the first driver had about a 30° wide pattern.

Yet on a different horn-both drivers had essentially the same coverage.

You can't just "throw drivers on horns" and expect certain things to happen. There is sometimes a lot of "interaction" between the walls of the driver before it even get out of the driver, and the horn walls, and this can really change things.

Very often what people "think" in happening is very different that what is really happening.

The polars are only good for the driver that was on the horn at the time.

 

[Peter Morris]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

I learned years ago that the same horn with different drivers on it can have different polar patterns.

Sometimes VERY RADICALLY different. Sometimes about the same as not to be worried about.

The first experience was with a 120° rated horn. With one driver is was probably that, yet another driver FROM THE SAME MANUFACTURER as the first driver had about a 30° wide pattern.

Yet on a different horn-both drivers had essentially the same coverage.

You can't just "throw drivers on horns" and expect certain things to happen. There is sometimes a lot of "interaction" between the walls of the driver before it even get out of the driver, and the horn walls, and this can really change things.

Very often what people "think" in happening is very different that what is really happening.

The polars are only good for the driver that was on the horn at the time.

FWIW this one behaved very well and seemed to match what RCF stated with the different drivers I tested it with - 18sound, B&C and the BMS :razz:

The results looked good - sorry I can't show you some polar plots - I don't have the equipment to produce them just take various measurement on and off axis.

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

FWIW this one behaved very well and seemed to match what RCF stated with the different drivers I tested it with - 18sound, B&C and the BMS :razz:

The results looked good - sorry I can't show you some polar plots - I don't have the equipment to produce them just take various measurement on and off axis.

It may very well work with various drivers, but I just wanted to point out that some horns work with some drivers better than others.

 

[Peter Morris]

Re: Casual JTR Noesis and Danley SM80 meet up-also QU24

It may very well work with various drivers, but I just wanted to point out that some horns work with some drivers better than others.

Thanks Ivan, my experience with different drivers on the same horn having different patterns is that it’s associated with the throat design – short horns with large throats (2”) seem to be the worst.

Regards
Peter