Infocomm???

[Glenn Adams]

Re: Infocomm???

NO, the notches in the combfilter are THERE when sitting still.

You hear DIFFERENCES in DIFFERENT comb filters when moving around.

I have had cases where "textbook" combfilters existed and fooled seasoned audio pros.

They did not pick it up as combfiltering-but rather lack of clarity etc. Some were saying it was the difference in mic preamps and such.

Combfiltering is not this "big ugly monster" that people think it is (and THINK they can pick out). It is a subtle "dulling" of the sound, that takes away the detail, clarity,finesse etc etc. It "sounds" like it could be fixed with eq, but it cannot. Simply boosting eq makes it sound "shrill" and does NOTHING to fix the problem.

You can't fix a TIME problem with eq.

You really don't realize it is there-until it is gone. THEN it gets better.

And that is the best explanation for it I ever heard. So true that you can't fix it by EQ or delays. Even in the Mina demo if the camera man stopped ay any one spot he may hear a reasonable good reproduction of music that night. The guy in front of him would hear a good show as well, just a bit different. Nether of them are aware that they are not hearing the same exact same thing. The brain can work out quite a bit of audio imperfections. At the time I was not aware of a comb, on my head or in my ears. But detail was what I was listening for and noted the designs that had a hifi sound.

Also that EV Manifold system was loud, but did not sound musical, just loud.

OH BTW, I've been seeing the word thrown around again in Danley XD ad's. " THROW"

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

OH BTW, I've been seeing the word thrown around again in Danley XD ad's. " THROW"

There is a difference between "ads" (there are none that I am aware of) and what writers write for a magazine.

Yes you cannot "throw" sound. I wanted to call them farfield and nearfield coverage products.

But technically that is wrong-since the "far field" starts to occur in what would be the "near field" device.

I wish there were other terms. Distant and close? But what if you just need a narrow coverage for people that are up close?

As usual-once you start trying to get "picky" it only gets more confusing.

 

[Brandon Wright]

Re: Infocomm???

Ivan,

Any particular reason for the switch to less but larger mids in the XD96 (2 x 6.5) as opposed to the 4 and 5 inch mids in the other synergy horns? I'm assuming it is just to share components with the xd62 that needs the horsepower of the 6x 6.5 mids, but might it also be due to some sort of advancement or realization of some design advantage?

 

[Glenn Adams]

Re: Infocomm???

There is a difference between "ads" (there are none that I am aware of) and what writers write for a magazine.

Yes you cannot "throw" sound. I wanted to call them farfield and nearfield coverage products.

But technically that is wrong-since the "far field" starts to occur in what would be the "near field" device.

I wish there were other terms. Distant and close? But what if you just need a narrow coverage for people that are up close?

As usual-once you start trying to get "picky" it only gets more confusing.

You are correct - It was on the infocomm page where I saw it. Not from Danley's references, sorry. But I like coverage and distance.

So what would be a great compact sub to stick under a SHB20 for small clubs?

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

Ivan,

Any particular reason for the switch to less but larger mids in the XD96 (2 x 6.5) as opposed to the 4 and 5 inch mids in the other synergy horns? I'm assuming it is just to share components with the xd62 that needs the horsepower of the 6x 6.5 mids, but might it also be due to some sort of advancement or realization of some design advantage?

The XX96 started out as a need for a high output full range cabinet that could be mounted on a flag pole for the upper decks at a 100K+ stadium.

The smaller mids would not fit-because overall they take up more room. The 6.5" mids in the XD cabinets are the same ones we use in the Jericho full range products-they work very well-ESPECIALLY when loaded on a large horn.

We will still continue to use the 4 and 5" mids-they work well-but they were not the right choice in this particular case.

I had the idea to simple "expand" the offerings of the 96 and make a "product line" out of it. So the other products were born.

We will probably expand the lineup as well with some higher output full range cabinets and different sub options. But all in due time.

Actually the XD62 could get by with just 4 mids. But the spacing of the holes in the horn (with the paraline lens) presented a little issue, which was resolved by dividing the horn in half and just adding 2 more mids.

This has a couple of advantages-the mids are even stronger (but they don't need to be) and the lower impedance of 6 vs 4 makes it easier to develop a passive crossover for those that need to drive the cabinets with a single amp channel.

The XD62 has room for the smaller mids, but we decided to stick with the same components (lows-mids-highs) used in the 96, to make it easier for a user to have a few extra parts on hand and be able to use them in all of the cabinets-without having to stock different parts for different model numbers.

But failures would be very rare-except in cases of extreme stupidity. The mids (all of them 4-5 and 6.5") have almost zero failure rate. I think it is well less than 1 cabinet per year that has a mid problem. I am only aware of 1 mid "failure" in all of the cabinets Danley has made.

And with the Sentinel protection on the HF, those few issues should pretty much go away.

 

[Jack Arnott]

Re: Infocomm???

But I like coverage and distance.

Dispersion?

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

You are correct - It was on the infocomm page where I saw it. Not from Danley's references, sorry. But I like coverage and distance.

So what would be a great compact sub to stick under a SHB20 for small clubs?

What is "distant"? 100', 500' 1000'? What is far to one person is close to another-depending on the particular situation.

The sub choice depends on what the user is doing with the system. The size of the club has very little to do with it.

I use to do 50 seat clubs in which I would run 130dB.

A jazz club is very different than an EDM or punk club.

As with everything else-the real need needs to be determined-BEFORE gear is looked at.

In this case-how loud and how low does it need to go? Loud is easy- low is easy. Loud and low-not so easy.

Is 50hz fine? or does it need to be 30Hz. Or maybe 12Hz would be a better choice. It depends.

 

[Glenn Adams]

Re: Infocomm???

What is "distant"? 100', 500' 1000'? What is far to one person is close to another-depending on the particular situation.

The sub choice depends on what the user is doing with the system. The size of the club has very little to do with it.

I use to do 50 seat clubs in which I would run 130dB.

A jazz club is very different than an EDM or punk club.

As with everything else-the real need needs to be determined-BEFORE gear is looked at.

In this case-how loud and how low does it need to go? Loud is easy- low is easy. Loud and low-not so easy.

Is 50hz fine? or does it need to be 30Hz. Or maybe 12Hz would be a better choice. It depends.

200ft, jazz, rock, and fusion, 3db down at 32hz.

so what is the XD designed to do? What distance, genre of music, how low, what is the max SPL?

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

200ft, jazz, rock, and fusion, 3db down at 32hz.

so what is the XD designed to do? What distance, genre of music, how low, what is the max SPL?

I have never seen a "small club" that is 200' deep--------------

But the SBH20 can work well at that distance. Here is a video of the "big brother" (SBH10) at 240'. NO processing except HP filter. And recorded on a hand camera.

USE HEADPHONES to get the best sound!!!!!!!!!! Your speakers will add their own coloration to the recording. not good

We do tilt it back from time to time to show the extreme pattern control-and no lobing like "stacked arrays"

The SBH20 has less output and twice the vertical coverage-but the performance is basically the same.

https://www.facebook.com/DanleySoundLabs/videos/vb.126113687424773/10201597659497403/?type=2&theater

https://www.facebook.com/DanleySoundLabs/videos/vb.126113687424773/10201592108278626/?type=2&theater

The XD (like all Danley products) was not designed for a specific genre of music, but RATHER to accurately reproduce what comes into it.

We will be getting full specs out shortly-so do not have all the details yet. But the XD118 bass cabinets are not intended to be used down real low-more as a general bass cabinet that is good to 40Hz and then rolls off.

Regarding distance-because it is a Synergy horn, (like the other Danley products), "usage" out to 500' or more should be no problem.

Here is a larger version of the Synergy horn at 900'. The band is just a local bar band mixing on stage-so give them a break

https://www.facebook.com/DanleySoundLabs/videos/vb.126113687424773/1907028809515/?type=2&theater

There are videos all over the internet of people recording at 300 and 400' a single Sh96HO per side (very comparable the XD96).

The XD62 has twice the HF drivers (that actually combine well-I was measuring a 5.5dB gain with the second driver) and 3 times the mids of the XS96-AND a narrower pattern-so the sensitivity will be much higher-producing greater SPLs at further distances.

Are you talking about a REAL -3dB, or the -3dB that a good number of (even respected and popular larger manufacturers) use that gives them +/-3dB as a 6dB window-so they consider -6dB to be "flat" and then they go down ANOTHER 3dB to get the published -3dB number?

You know-a little "marketing fudge the numbers" game.

Or in some extreme cases -3dB from WHAT? I have seen cases that the -3dB number is actually 15dB down from the rated sensitivity?

You can SAY anything you want on a spec sheet-but nobody holds the manufacturers accountable for things like this

Hence the reason for a MEASURED RESPONSE-NOT some simple numbers

 

[Peter Morris]

Re: Infocomm???

In response to Glens question Ivan said ... "usage out to 500' or more should be no problem" Hmmm

Glen wanted to do rock music - 500 ft plus ... that's a lot of people at a rock concert. :roll:

 

[kristianjohnsen]

Re: Infocomm???

To Ivan

Looooooong time ago I asked you a simple question, to which you never answered - perhaps you never received it or you did and your answer got lost in "bit space"
That question was about a CELLO on stage in a "good room" - now a cello does not have even polar-pattern ( no instrument does ) - and so the sum of reflections and direct sound must be different to observers in different location in that fine room - correct ???
That time the question was about "long tall speakers" and polar patterns and directivity - yes , we know they are fine in some aspects, and then not so fine in others - and you never answered it - I thought then - and right now seeing you having time to debate - that you simply did not have any interest to answer to my question. Because my question "did not fit"...

Correct if I am wrong.

Please do not misunderstand me - I have a pair of Danley-designed Servodrive subs - love them - have a friend with Danley Tapped horn subs - liked them very much last time working with them -
BUT - are you so eager now, because of something "does not fit" ?
Pardon for not so precice expressions of my writing, but my mother tongue is finnish and I studied english only three years in school ...
Intention is to be good and supporting - not offending !


Just relax

Timo.

I'm not Ivan, but I have some opinions on the subject.

When listening to an instrument or voice directly ("acoustically"), you are listening to the art itself.

The sound may be different in various parts of the listening area. All part of the weird and wonderful world of art. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, etc.

When listening to a sound system used to reinforce music, you are listening to a sort of representation of the art. It's the second-best thing to the real thing, but is the only way to acheive it with a larger audience than just a small one.

There will be all sorts of compromises made by the mixing technician (really, the producer, if you think about it).

Some of these compromises will be (just a few random examples):

In what part of the asymetrical dispersion of the instrument is the microphone(s) placed?
Are instruments portrayed as stereo or mono?
Are sources panned out to represent how things pan out for the player or for a listener?
Will the instrument be reproduced as accurately as possible?
Or will it purposefully be changed for effect?
Are the natural dynamics of the source changed?
Reduced or enhanced?
Etc.

Considering that someone, a producer, or fellow artist to the musician(s), if you will, is making all these decisions to make his or her "representation of the original art", it only seems fair that the systems providers make an effort to make sure that most people in the audience are hearing the same results of those changes and decisions.

In other words: Someone has to change what we are hearing to make everyone hear, anyway, why not make sure everyone gets a similar experience?

In most cases, this is really hard to obtain, but I think it's a nice goal.

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

In response to Glens question Ivan said ... "usage out to 500' or more should be no problem" Hmmm

Glen wanted to do rock music - 500 ft plus ... that's a lot of people at a rock concert. :roll:

He also said Jazz.

Of course there are many different types of Jazz.

Hence the reason I always ask for TARGET SPL, NOT the number of people or style of music.

Some people would say "rock" is 100dBA, others 110dBA. BIG difference in both level and the amount of gear needed.

You MUST define the parameters if you want real useful answers.

And no-a single SBH20 will not "rock" levels at 500'. At least I would not want to. But Jazz-depending on style-very possibly.

 

[Glenn Adams]

Re: Infocomm???

No matter what the level if the sub was relatively flat from 100 down to 40, I want one that is only down -3 db at 32 Hz. This shouldn't be to hard to understand. Otherwise called roll off. The SPL should be close or a bit higher than the SBH20 can muster.

I've seen and heard all Danley stuff. I use very good ear buds so as not to wake my wife. Phone, tablet, and notebook speakers are a crime. Yes I know they are doing all the can with the space they have. Maybe Danley is missing a market that has been grossly overlooked. Cause that Beats audio is worse than the standard stuff.

"The XD (like all Danley products) was not designed for a specific genre of music, but RATHER to accurately reproduce what comes into it."

Bingo, I expected the SBH20 to have been designed this way as well. Come on Ivan, what would be a good marriage for the SBH20? One that can compliment it and not blow up or fart if leaned on for a show or two.

To some other comments, I said 200 ft. And yes I've been in a club that big but you are correct, most are much less. I used this as a worst case scenario. If it played it here, it will play it anywhere. I know what a crowd looks like at 100, 200, 500, and even 1000ft.

Music - I am talking indoors, " Keith Medley to Flim and the BB's to Chuck Mead" not Metallica.

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

No matter what the level if the sub was relatively flat from 100 down to 40, I want one that is only down -3 db at 32 Hz. This shouldn't be to hard to understand. Otherwise called roll off. The SPL should be close or a bit higher than the SBH20 can muster.

"The XD (like all Danley products) was not designed for a specific genre of music, but RATHER to accurately reproduce what comes into it."

Bingo, I expected the SBH20 to have been designed this way as well. Come on Ivan, what would be a good marriage for the SBH20? One that can compliment it and not blow up or fart if leaned on for a show or two.

To some other comments, I said 200 ft. And yes I've been in a club that big but you are correct, most are much less. I used this as a worst case scenario. If it played it here, it will play it anywhere. I know what a crowd looks like at 100, 200, 500, and even 1000ft.

Music - I am talking indoors, " Keith Medley to Flim and the BB's to Chuck Mead" not Metallica.

The first problem is finding a sub that is only 3dB down at 32 vs 100Hz.

If you look at the UNPROCESSED response, you will find that that is NOT easy to find a sub that does that. You HAVE to look at the measured response-DO NOT rely on the simple numbers. They can be VERY misleading-so much as to be outright lies.

You can't use the "processed response" because whatever boost is added down low HAS TO BE SUBTRACTED from the max output. This is a little FACT that people showing processed responses WISH you just ignore-but it IS REAL. If a 6dB boost is added, then the max output at that freq HAS to be 6dB lower. No way around that.

The -3dB has to be from "something". Sometimes this is an imaginary "who knows what". But what it SHOULD be is -3dB from the RATED SENSITIVITY. Danley rates the sensitivity as an "average" in the intended operating band of the loudspeaker.

In the case of subs-we also include the "special numbers" which are the peaks in the response. We tell you specifically what freq and SHOW YOU the measured response. Without the graph-who know where the numbers come from.


I will present another argument. For any sort of "pop" music, the sub needs to be able to "outrun" the tops by at least 10dB-not just a little bit. 15dB is preferred. For some types of music (EDM etc) 25dB is a better target number.

So in the Danley lineup. the 2 products that come to mind that most closely match your "requirements" are the TH112 and the TH118. The TH118 goes a good bit louder, but the TH112 goes lower-in relation to the rest of the response.

Personally, the TH118 would be the better "overall" choice. You could always add a little boost down low if needed.

Remember that these are measured OUTSIDE, without reflections. So inside a room-the room gain will give you a little bit low freq extension.

The SBH20 is designed like all Danley products. The idea being as "neutral" as possible-so that it will as accurately as possible reproduce the incoming signal.

 

[Rob Timmerman]

Re: Infocomm???

Remember that these are measured OUTSIDE, without reflections. So inside a room-the room gain will give you a little bit low freq extension.

Measured in an anechoic environment (without relections, difficult to do outdoors), or measured outside on the ground (half-space) with the associated reflection off the ground that happens to be within a 1/2 wavelength and so constructively interferes at all frequencies of interest? The environment matters, expecially since the latter measurement case is a somewhat better representation of real-world use than an anechoic envrionment, and also generally yields better marketing numbers than the former.

Mods - any chance of splitting the Danley thread from the Infocomm thread?

 

[Mark DeArman]

Re: Infocomm???

The first problem is finding a sub that is only 3dB down at 32 vs 100Hz.

I built a new 18" long excursion Dual-VC speaker for McCauley last year, 1.6" Winding, 0.3" top-plate.
These were the unprocessed results from a good ole' front loaded double 18" cabinet 2.0V @ 1m.



I was actually really surprised how easy it was to build a speaker which could hit 32Hz. Although I don't have the time or a customer for it right now, I'm pretty interested in carrying it further with a longer under-hung motor design.

I've done up a few FEM models of what I'd like to build to get the linear region up to ~2.0" without significantly reducing the power handling or sensitivity. Of course, if you want to move that cutoff frequency down significantly the sensitivity will have to go down. Moving to the under-hung design you don't need Dual-VC anymore for symmetry; TC sound has a few motors like this on the market, but they aren't really targeting Pro-Audio.

The main issue with me just throwing one together and measuring it, is that I need to machine some specialty parts for magnetization.

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

Measured in an anechoic environment (without relections, difficult to do outdoors), or measured outside on the ground (half-space) with the associated reflection off the ground that happens to be within a 1/2 wavelength and so constructively interferes at all frequencies of interest? The environment matters, expecially since the latter measurement case is a somewhat better representation of real-world use than an anechoic envrionment, and also generally yields better marketing numbers than the former.

Mods - any chance of splitting the Danley thread from the Infocomm thread?

We measure subs with the mic and the speaker on the ground-so there is no reflection.

Whole space measurements of subs are pretty worthless-in mine (and others) opinion.

At the subs freq there is likely to never be a situation in which BOTH the sub and the listen are in whole space.

Since at least the listener will always be in half space-then that makes half space measurements totally valid-because that is what will be experienced by the listener.

True anechoic measurements down to 20Hz would require a HUGE chamber. And the results would not represent real world listening.

My opinion is that loudspeaker measurements should be done in a way that represents information that can be translated into useful numbers that somebody can use to estimate actual product performance at a specific distance.

Hence the reason we also do not measure at 1M (which would result in a higher measured number), but rather at 10M-so that can be back calculated to 1M, so THAT number can then be used to figure out SPL at specific distances.

If we used the 1M measurement, then the numbers that would be realized at further distances would be low.

The whole idea is REALISTIC numbers that can be used-NOT what looks good on a spec sheet to fool people and increase sales based on falsehood.

 

[Marjan Milosevic]

Re: Infocomm???

32Hz is not a problem at all. Here is one of my boxes. SPL lever is relative. LPF at 150hz, no HPF. Average SPL with 2.83V is 103 db.

 

[Timo Ulkuniemi]

Re: Infocomm???

Timo.

I'm not Ivan, but I have some opinions on the subject.

When listening to an instrument or voice directly ("acoustically"), you are listening to the art itself.

The sound may be different in various parts of the listening area. All part of the weird and wonderful world of art. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, etc.

When listening to a sound system used to reinforce music, you are listening to a sort of representation of the art. It's the second-best thing to the real thing, but is the only way to acheive it with a larger audience than just a small one.

There will be all sorts of compromises made by the mixing technician (really, the producer, if you think about it).

Some of these compromises will be (just a few random examples):

In what part of the asymetrical dispersion of the instrument is the microphone(s) placed?
Are instruments portrayed as stereo or mono?
Are sources panned out to represent how things pan out for the player or for a listener?
Will the instrument be reproduced as accurately as possible?
Or will it purposefully be changed for effect?
Are the natural dynamics of the source changed?
Reduced or enhanced?
Etc.

Considering that someone, a producer, or fellow artist to the musician(s), if you will, is making all these decisions to make his or her "representation of the original art", it only seems fair that the systems providers make an effort to make sure that most people in the audience are hearing the same results of those changes and decisions.

In other words: Someone has to change what we are hearing to make everyone hear, anyway, why not make sure everyone gets a similar experience?

In most cases, this is really hard to obtain, but I think it's a nice goal.

Hello

So very true - perhaps I have been thinking about this more as live sound mixing point, than reproducing pre-recorded material.
In live situation the soundman can be considered as one member of the performing group - adding his part into the cocktail - and the whole thing might be observed as "cello in concert hall" - even if it is a 16-piece orchestra with massive quadrafonic sound system outdoors or indoors - that absolutely sounds VERY different depending of listeners location.

The pain of getting old - when we were young we had quite easy perception of what was right and correct - now we´ve gotten more and more doubtful and insecure ....

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

Hello



The pain of getting old - when we were young we had quite easy perception of what was right and correct - now we´ve gotten more and more doubtful and insecure ....

The more you learn-the more you realize how LITTLE you actually know/understand.

The best we can do is to try and pass on REAL information to the younger generation, so they do not have to make the same mistakes we did and can learn faster/easier.

IF they will listen to sense.