Infocomm???

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

Going to have to call BS on this one. If you are not in the middle you do not have a stereo image. everything falls apart and it's not scalable. That couple of feet of center line is the only place whether it's your living room or an arena.

I guess it depends on what you call "stereo image".

Yes it is a term that is thrown around a lot, and different people have different definitions.

For me, it is being able to get a sense of space and location out of each speaker.

The phantom center will be gone, but the location of instruments in the "soundfield" is still there. Of course until you get way off center and the level of one of the speakers is soo much louder than the other.

As usual "it depends".

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

If for the sake of the discussion if I cut an SH10 in to 4 pieces so it will fit the boot of my car and then assemble the pieces together at the gig ... I think it will still work just as I did before I cut it up.

Individually the pieces will be much more omni at low frequencies as you described just like the pieces of a fixed curvature array. To me each of the piece is just like one box from a fix curvature array ... and BTW fix curvature array can also be horizontal (e.g. L-Acoustc ARC's).

The design goal for a fixed curvature array is for it to behave like one box, a point source.

That's more or less the same goal for a variable curvature (line) array but when you add flexibility into the equations it comes with compromises. The angel is not fixed, you often have different numbers of boxes and there is not one single focal point etc. but as a compromise it works OK ... and as I said before some work better than others.

.

The "problem" with cutting the box into smaller pieces is that each piece will be different. If you look at the SBH products you will see that each of the different lens are a physical different size-but mirrored about the center.

So they HAVE to be assembled back together in the correct order for it to work. And you can't flip one upside down when assembling it, or the whole concept falls apart.

The typical line array (constant curvature or not) is THE SAME box-just more of them. Each with the same pattern.

If you look at the radiation pattern of a typical cabinet, you will see that it does radiate into the coverage pattern of the other boxes.

THIS is the interference that we are talking about. And since the signals are arriving at different times, there will be combfiltering.

This is the "lowering of sound quality" that Tom and I are talking about. Multiple arrivals at the same spot at different times causing notches in the response and a smearing of the sound.

We have discussed with various "tour guys" about having boxes that when put together would form a larger box. But the "pushback" is that they don't want different boxes. They want to use the same model number so they can put them together anyway they want and don't have to worry about having the right boxes in the truck.

And the end result is NOT the same.

 

[Peter Morris]

Re: Infocomm???

The "problem" with cutting the box into smaller pieces is that each piece will be different. If you look at the SBH products you will see that each of the different lens are a physical different size-but mirrored about the center.

So they HAVE to be assembled back together in the correct order for it to work. And you can't flip one upside down when assembling it, or the whole concept falls apart.

That has to happen because your array is straight and each (mirrored pair) lens has to be different ... but you could just as easily make it curved 8)~~

 

[Peter Morris]

Re: Infocomm???

We have discussed with various "tour guys" about having boxes that when put together would form a larger box. But the "pushback" is that they don't want different boxes. They want to use the same model number so they can put them together anyway they want and don't have to worry about having the right boxes in the truck.

I think part of the solution is having a long throw with very narrow vertical pattern, a medium and a short throw box all the same/compatible size and phase response ... still a compromise but much better. That way you can construct an array with all the boxes operating near their optimum design angle etc.

But for some crew that will be too complex~:-(~:sad:

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

I think part of the solution is having a long throw with very narrow vertical pattern, a medium and a short throw box all the same/compatible size and phase response ... still a compromise but much better. That way you can construct an array with all the boxes operating near their optimum design angle etc.

But for some crew that will be too complex~:-(~:sad:

EXACTLY.

Except a narrow vertical box would have to be larger to have the same freq/pattern control.

Most people think that "looks weird"-even though it is technically correct

That would actually require somebody to THINK at a gig.

Who wants to think when just adding more boxes gets more likes on facebook--------------------------

Who gets excited about just 1 or two boxes a side-even though it is better.

But pile up a bunch of boxes and people wet themselves wishing they could have it

 

[Tom Danley]

Re: Infocomm???

Sweet, but what did Megadeath think of them??? I really don't care about whomever you want to name drop thinks about some cabinets you demo'ed. I care about what I heard. I wouldn't even be posting if it weren't for the fact that the demo was prefaced with "listen for the awesome phantom center channel" and I have never heard less of a phantom center out of any speakers I have ever heard. Maybe it was just some sort of weird room anomaly, and I was really coached to listen for it...who knows. If the demo was prefaced by, listen to how great these speakers sound, I would be saying "yeah, they sounded pretty good". And I'll be sure to wear a name badge the next time we talk.

Hi David.
It may be that in the demo you went to, Mike didn’t preface that part by saying “if you’re close to the center…” which he was saying as part of the demo.

I was at every demo but don’t recall him forgetting that part but to be honest, the trade show was pretty much a blur and I do know that many people stood at the rear in the center to hear that phantom and some commented on how pronounced it was.
If you are a Synaudcon forum guy, there has been a thread about comb filtering and stereo images which Dr Jones replied to and explained why combing harms / destroys the mono phantom / stereo image as it mimic’s the Head Related Transform Function we use to tell the direction and height of a source.

With speakers that radiate no interference pattern, a mono voice signal when listened to near the center will seem like a person standing in the center and talking with no awareness of a right and left source while a speaker system that has a large interference pattern has an obvious right and left source with some center phantom or with more interference what sounds like a wall of sound and a voice that spans a large width instead of a point in the center.
Well if you’re at a demo, do say hi and if you have any questions that is the place to ask as between Doug, Ivan and myself, we are able to address whatever you might care to ask technically speaking.

 

[Tom Danley]

Re: Infocomm???

If for the sake of the discussion if I cut an SH10 in to 4 pieces so it will fit the boot of my car and then assemble the pieces together at the gig ... I think it will still work just as I did before I cut it up.

Individually the pieces will be much more omni at low frequencies as you described just like the pieces of a fixed curvature array. To me each of the piece is just like one box from a fix curvature array ... and BTW fix curvature array can also be horizontal (e.g. L-Acoustc ARC's).

The design goal for a fixed curvature array is for it to behave like one box, a point source.

That's more or less the same goal for a variable curvature (line) array but when you add flexibility into the equations it comes with compromises. The angel is not fixed, you often have different numbers of boxes and there is not one single focal point etc. but as a compromise it works OK ... and as I said before some work better than others.

To me its easy to stick it all in one box and get it to work, the real problem is producing a small manageable box that can be arrayed and adapted to many different situations. The compromise with Danley speaker is the lack of flexibility, the compromise with your typical line array is multiple arrivals etc.

As I said above, each of those piece shown in the picture below is very similar to one box out of a fixed curvature array. In this case the array is optimized to used 4 boxes and provides 10 degrees of vertical coverage. It would still work with 2 or 3 pieces but there would be issues, less low frequency control and perhaps some lobbing etc., but when I got to the gig the ceiling was too low perhaps I would just leave the top box off ..... and think, what the heck, the gig is still going to be OK ...

Hi Peter
The SBH-10 is an astigmatic point source horn and if one were to cut it into 4 parts, it could still work IF the ends of each segment were “close enough” to sum into one source all the way up high.
Given at 20Khz the WL is about 5/8 of an inch, if one had a spacing of say 5/16 inch between the ends of each segment, one could get good summation up to about 10KHz. In other words, if there were two layers of plywood (a top and bottom for each segment), this is already much too large to operate up high and still be acting as if it were one source located about 25 feet behind the cabinet.

Also, the individual segments would not have the nominal 2.5 degree dispersion angle that the 10 degrees / 4 segments would suggest and changing the angle between them or changing the length puts one into the pattern flip mode. In other words, if one made a horn which was 10 degrees vertical and 90 degrees horizontal, the height of the horn mouth must be 9 times the width of the horn mouth or one has the diffraction / pattern flip problem.
Call it “flexibility” or other term, there is only one acoustically correct geometry given the V and H angles and source width and height, this is why line arrays spray more and more energy to the sides outside the desired pattern when one makes them longer or more curved, as a radiating aperture, the same rule applies to a tight packed row of direct radiating sources as well but unlike a horn’s pattern control, these also radiate a lot more energy up and down as well..
Of more importance is constant directivity as the spectral balance doesn't change appreciably as one moves off axis, only the spl falls. This is how one can have it "sound the same everywhere" in a stadium and still have the spl variation within 2 dB or less in every seat. One uses the constant beam width to advantage by having the right mounting height and angle.
Here is a single J-3 where you can hear that part, the first video was up close where th eguy walked around and except for when he was close to the subwoofer, it sounds th esame under it as it does out in front. The second one is far away from it and still sounds very similar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MOG_sPejGA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiS0-lqSUX4


If one had the ceiling problem you mentioned, one could use the lower half if mounted against the boundary and then the h/w ratio is preserved via the acoustic mirror image.
Further, since most loudspeakers are multi-way systems, it isn’t just the hf source that is a concern, the mid and lf sources also produce an interference pattern when they are too far apart with the upper and lower ranges or if there is more than one source. These need to be within ¼ wl at the highest F of concern as well and in the sbh10, the lf emerges from the same paraline lens as the hf does. This is the same for all the Synergy horns (part of the patent), where the upper and lower ranges combine, they are less than ¼ wl apart, where multiple drivers interact which the horn, they are less than ¼ wl apart. For example, at 1KHz, this means the sources can be no farther than about 3 ¼ inches apart.
This is seen clearly when you do an ETC of a paraline or other synergy horns, there is only one short arrival, as if it were a single driver in a very deep horn.

What did you think of the sound in the video’s?
Even though taken with a cheap camcorder or Iphone, I think one can hear they are very different from line arrays, especially the 3 box demo where Mike walks the field at Penn state.

 

[Peter Morris]

Re: Infocomm???

Hi Peter
The SBH-10 is an astigmatic point source horn and if one were to cut it into 4 parts, it could still work IF the ends of each segment were “close enough” to sum into one source all the way up high.
Given at 20Khz the WL is about 5/8 of an inch, if one had a spacing of say 5/16 inch between the ends of each segment, one could get good summation up to about 10KHz. In other words, if there were two layers of plywood (a top and bottom for each segment), this is already much too large to operate up high and still be acting as if it were one source located about 25 feet behind the cabinet.

Also, the individual segments would not have the nominal 2.5 degree dispersion angle that the 10 degrees / 4 segments would suggest and changing the angle between them or changing the length puts one into the pattern flip mode. In other words, if one made a horn which was 10 degrees vertical and 90 degrees horizontal, the height of the horn mouth must be 9 times the width of the horn mouth or one has the diffraction / pattern flip problem.
Call it “flexibility” or other term, there is only one acoustically correct geometry given the V and H angles and source width and height, this is why line arrays spray more and more energy to the sides outside the desired pattern when one makes them longer or more curved, as a radiating aperture, the same rule applies to a tight packed row of direct radiating sources as well but unlike a horn’s pattern control, these also radiate a lot more energy up and down as well..
Of more importance is constant directivity as the spectral balance doesn't change appreciably as one moves off axis, only the spl falls. This is how one can have it "sound the same everywhere" in a stadium and still have the spl variation within 2 dB or less in every seat. One uses the constant beam width to advantage by having the right mounting height and angle.
Here is a single J-3 where you can hear that part, the first video was up close where th eguy walked around and except for when he was close to the subwoofer, it sounds th esame under it as it does out in front. The second one is far away from it and still sounds very similar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MOG_sPejGA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiS0-lqSUX4


If one had the ceiling problem you mentioned, one could use the lower half if mounted against the boundary and then the h/w ratio is preserved via the acoustic mirror image.
Further, since most loudspeakers are multi-way systems, it isn’t just the hf source that is a concern, the mid and lf sources also produce an interference pattern when they are too far apart with the upper and lower ranges or if there is more than one source. These need to be within ¼ wl at the highest F of concern as well and in the sbh10, the lf emerges from the same paraline lens as the hf does. This is the same for all the Synergy horns (part of the patent), where the upper and lower ranges combine, they are less than ¼ wl apart, where multiple drivers interact which the horn, they are less than ¼ wl apart. For example, at 1KHz, this means the sources can be no farther than about 3 ¼ inches apart.
This is seen clearly when you do an ETC of a paraline or other synergy horns, there is only one short arrival, as if it were a single driver in a very deep horn.

What did you think of the sound in the video’s?
Even though taken with a cheap camcorder or Iphone, I think one can hear they are very different from line arrays, especially the 3 box demo where Mike walks the field at Penn state.

Hi Tom,

I believe I understand what you are doing with the SH10 and other designs, and as I said earlier I think it’s a great solution.

My point in respect to line arrays is that they are a compromise; they designed to meet the practical demands of the customer. They are general not deployed as a line sources but more like a collection of astigmatic point sources as a result of the J curve that is often used.

AFMG’s FIR maker can manipulate magnitude, EQ and phase ofthe components in the array and as I understand is able to resolve / improve some of these issues.
http://firmaker.afmg.eu/

At the same time some designers are trying to address some of physical the issues you mentioned. Some get the HF sources from individual cabinets very close together so that there is more chance of it behaving as one source. Havea look at the pictures below.

The problem at the end of the day for various reasons is the live sound customer wants, and needs to some extent, a bunch of boxes which are all the same size, not too heavy or big and can be stacked together to do an arena one day and a 1000 seat theatre the next. Trying to meet these physical constraints without compromising the acoustic performance is the challenge.

 

[Tom Danley]

Re: Infocomm???

Hi Tom,

I believe I understand what you are doing with the SH10 and other designs, and as I said earlier I think it’s a great solution.

My point in respect to line arrays is that they are a compromise; they designed to meet the practical demands of the customer. They are general not deployed as a line sources but more like a collection of astigmatic point sources as a result of the J curve that is often used.

AFMG’s FIR maker can manipulate magnitude, EQ and phase ofthe components in the array and as I understand is able to resolve / improve some of these issues.
http://firmaker.afmg.eu/

At the same time some designers are trying to address some of physical the issues you mentioned. Some get the HF sources from individual cabinets very close together so that there is more chance of it behaving as one source. Havea look at the pictures below.

The problem at the end of the day for various reasons is the live sound customer wants, and needs to some extent, a bunch of boxes which are all the same size, not too heavy or big and can be stacked together to do an arena one day and a 1000 seat theatre the next. Trying to meet these physical constraints without compromising the acoustic performance is the challenge.

Hi Peter
Line arrays are a compromise both in obvious and un-obvious ways and a strong part of what the customer demands is a result of the carpet bombing of marketing hype done to promote the virtues of line arrays. While one rarely hears the old lie “these line arrays spl falls off at half the rate”, there is still a great deal of misunderstanding out there and also as pointed out on other forums, sound quality is pretty far down on the list of what matters in live sound. This is why we have not tried to market to the live sound area, it is an uphill battle trying to explain the flaws in something so heavily promoted so much so few believe it, especially for a company like us that does not market or advertise much.

On the other hand, 17 years ago when i developed the Unity horn, the precursor to the Synergy horn, none of the line array cabinets looked anything like or tried to address the things the Unity did but now many /most line array designs have a strong resemblance so at least the design engineers increasingly recognize these factors do matter.

The nub is, if one makes an array of line sources, doubling the number of boxes only raises the far field SPL about 3 dB once they are too far apart to add coherently .
The interference pattern they generate makes the off axis SPL highly variable and so one must aim the boxes so that the listeners are within the pattern and even then, the response changes as a function of distance and position and has a limited useful “throw” where the response is acceptable. Further, having multiple sources of radiation also means that any transient information is smeared out in time reducing intelligibility and this is very measurable.
In commercial sound voice intelligibility is often a requirement and measured via STIpa.
An easy to picture transient would be a record tick or pop, a naked transient. Played through an array, there is the first arrival from the closest box all the way to the last arrival from the farthest box and this may well be a number of milliseconds behind the first. Yes one can optimize the arrivals at one spot with dsp but that correction only applies in one spot, everywhere else is different because everywhere else has different path lengths.
Within a Synergy horn, doubling the number of drivers raises the SPL about 6 dB and increasing the horn dimensions further reduces the SPL off axis , up down to the sides and rear (a great thing in a room) and both of these improve intelligibility (as suggested in the Hopkins Stryker equation).

This is why a single J-3 (like the one in the previous link) can produce about the same SPL with much greater and even pristine sound quality than a dozen medium sized line array boxes at 200 feet.

Yes, it is heavier than one line array box but much lighter and cheaper than 12 and because they are much more “constant directivity”, they sound fine even well off axis (as in the video above), they are just quieter but by choosing the mounting height and angle, can produce a near constant SPL with the same frequency response over a considerable distance.
Here scalability is a matter of choosing one powerful enough for the large distance and turning it down in a smaller venue.
Unlike making a larger and larger line array the sound quality does not suffer with increasing size as even the largest one (the Caleb which covers the far end of the Iowa Hawkeye stadium over 800 feet away) still acts like /sounds like / measures like one driver.
In the large room / stadium area though, the customers generally already have line arrays that they are unhappy with and VERY FEW give a rats behind what name they have or who’s on tour with them so doing a demo with a visually tiny system that blows the line array away in sound quality and evenness of coverage has made that area a very good market for us where live sound is a hard nut to crack.
My background and even more so Ivan’s is live sound however and when you hear what can be done live compared to the familiar solutions. , there is no going back to line arrays.
My hope was that at least a few folks would listen to the videos where I think even that way one can tell these large synergy horns are very different sonically than line arrays but no one has commented on them.
Best,
Tom

 

[Andrew Broughton]

Re: Infocomm???

If you have headphones handy, I can at least illustrate what I am talking about, plug them into the computer and try some stadium video’s that demonstrate what I am talking about.
This system is in the scoreboard at the far end (700 feet away)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/tnsw5mb4v5vdlwq/20120726122124.mts?dl=0

A larger scoreboard system that can do 106dBA slow at 800 feet and has a -3dB point at 27Hz.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/oyosfc3adc6j1du/20130723135350.mts?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ykq1y2ugesok2se/20130723141759.mts?dl=0

My daughter at patterns edge in a stiff crosswind at about 400 feet

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dz224imtchuohi4/20130723145400.mts?dl=0

An even larger system at 800 feet

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lyjf0p46163q4es/20140805175937.mts?dl=0

the field coverage speaker (1 j-3) at the 50 yard line

https://www.dropbox.com/s/mxa64hkkhkk07vj/20140805133848.mts?dl=0

The demo that lead to the replacement of a 3 year old well known line array, the speakers are the little black glob under the scoreboard. Clair bros the installer measured + -2 dB over the stadium and “it sounds the same everywhere”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_usTlJi2NA&feature=share

These are probably not what you’re used to and until the patents expire, it’s our technology.

Best,
Tom Danley
Danley Sound Labs

My hope was that at least a few folks would listen to the videos where I think even that way one can tell these large synergy horns are very different sonically than line arrays but no one has commented on them.
Best,
Tom

FWIW, I took a listen to your clips, and I for one am impressed, but I was impressed before the clips also. I still have never heard a Danley rig in person.

 

[Peter Morris]

Re: Infocomm???

Hi Peter
Line arrays are a compromise both in obvious and un-obvious ways and a strong part of what the customer demands is a result of the carpet bombing of marketing hype done to promote the virtues of line arrays. While one rarely hears the old lie “these line arrays spl falls off at half the rate”, there is still a great deal of misunderstanding out there and also as pointed out on other forums, sound quality is pretty far down on the list of what matters in live sound. This is why we have not tried to market to the live sound area, it is an uphill battle trying to explain the flaws in something so heavily promoted so much so few believe it, especially for a company like us that does not market or advertise much.

On the other hand, 17 years ago when i developed the Unity horn, the precursor to the Synergy horn, none of the line array cabinets looked anything like or tried to address the things the Unity did but now many /most line array designs have a strong resemblance so at least the design engineers increasingly recognize these factors do matter.

The nub is, if one makes an array of line sources, doubling the number of boxes only raises the far field SPL about 3 dB once they are too far apart to add coherently .
The interference pattern they generate makes the off axis SPL highly variable and so one must aim the boxes so that the listeners are within the pattern and even then, the response changes as a function of distance and position and has a limited useful “throw” where the response is acceptable. Further, having multiple sources of radiation also means that any transient information is smeared out in time reducing intelligibility and this is very measurable.
In commercial sound voice intelligibility is often a requirement and measured via STIpa.
An easy to picture transient would be a record tick or pop, a naked transient. Played through an array, there is the first arrival from the closest box all the way to the last arrival from the farthest box and this may well be a number of milliseconds behind the first. Yes one can optimize the arrivals at one spot with dsp but that correction only applies in one spot, everywhere else is different because everywhere else has different path lengths.
Within a Synergy horn, doubling the number of drivers raises the SPL about 6 dB and increasing the horn dimensions further reduces the SPL off axis , up down to the sides and rear (a great thing in a room) and both of these improve intelligibility (as suggested in the Hopkins Stryker equation).

This is why a single J-3 (like the one in the previous link) can produce about the same SPL with much greater and even pristine sound quality than a dozen medium sized line array boxes at 200 feet.

Yes, it is heavier than one line array box but much lighter and cheaper than 12 and because they are much more “constant directivity”, they sound fine even well off axis (as in the video above), they are just quieter but by choosing the mounting height and angle, can produce a near constant SPL with the same frequency response over a considerable distance.
Here scalability is a matter of choosing one powerful enough for the large distance and turning it down in a smaller venue.
Unlike making a larger and larger line array the sound quality does not suffer with increasing size as even the largest one (the Caleb which covers the far end of the Iowa Hawkeye stadium over 800 feet away) still acts like /sounds like / measures like one driver.
In the large room / stadium area though, the customers generally already have line arrays that they are unhappy with and VERY FEW give a rats behind what name they have or who’s on tour with them so doing a demo with a visually tiny system that blows the line array away in sound quality and evenness of coverage has made that area a very good market for us where live sound is a hard nut to crack.
My background and even more so Ivan’s is live sound however and when you hear what can be done live compared to the familiar solutions. , there is no going back to line arrays.
My hope was that at least a few folks would listen to the videos where I think even that way one can tell these large synergy horns are very different sonically than line arrays but no one has commented on them.
Best,
Tom

I understand what you are saying - Here is the impulse response from one of my designs I published in the DIY section of this board. If I do say so myself, it probably the best I have ever seen, and needless to say its transient behaviour is excellent.

I also understand why you say once you have heard an excellent point source you do want to go back ... that's until your the person working out the logistics of a tour. Different venues and load-in and setup problems etc. ... then all of a sudden those line-arrays start to look good. A big point source box may be perfect for one venue, quick and easy to deploy but impossible to use in the next. The problem, while keeping those of that care about sound quality happy, is to get the logistics to work over the greatest range of applications possible.

The logistical problems are not just confined to load-in and set up, but some gear is "leap frogged" to the next destination and set up begins on the next show while you are playing in a different city.

 

[Tim McCulloch]

Re: Infocomm???

I understand what you are saying - Here is the impulse response from one of my designs I published in the DIY section of this board. If I do say so myself, it probably the best I have ever seen, and needless to say its transient behaviour is excellent.

I also understand why you say once you have heard an excellent point source you do want to go back ... that's until your the person working out the logistics of a tour. Different venues and load-in and setup problems etc. ... then all of a sudden those line-arrays start to look good. A big point source box may be perfect for one venue, quick and easy to deploy but impossible to use in the next. The problem, while keeping those of that care about sound quality happy, is to get the logistics to work over the greatest range of applications possible.

The logistical problems are not just confined to load-in and set up, but some gear is "leap frogged" to the next destination and set up begins on the next show while you are playing in a different city.

I think it's easy to forget just how "bad" big 3D arrays of trap boxes could sound, too... and that properly designed and deployed arrays of those same boxes could sound pretty darn good. Tom stuffed all of that into a box or 2 and made it play nice with all the pieces and parts.

One of the more popular proprietary rigs was the ShowCo Prism® and (limited production Prism II®). I worked a bunch of it as a stagehand and never developed a liking for the way it sounded. Many folks thought of it as a "rock 'n' roll rig". Yeah, it got way loud and had a penetrating quality that some liked... for the time, put a lot of SPL into a fairly small box and had sophisticated processing to do vertical beam steering (along with some internal inclination/declination of transducers) that was quite the thing. But most of the time what I heard from them was unpleasant.

Another rig that I liked much more was/is the EV X-Array, but it takes a patient and skilled system tech or it's no better than the Prism. I'm not sure how it's processed now or what presets/training/EASE tools come with it. I remember when one of the big Holiday shows carried X-Array and the system tech basically started with a core coverage area that he kept the same for arenas; another for theaters, and built on additional coverage for each individual venue. It seemed time consuming and various adjustments to loudspeaker suspension components gave opportunity to hang stuff wrong and not catch it until the rig was going out... But when well designed it sounded pretty nice, certainly better than anything I'd heard come out of a Prism rig.

In a nutshell: The ability to create interference within an array of portable, commercial loudspeakers pre-dates the line array by at least 20 years.

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

I think it's easy to forget just how "bad" big 3D arrays of trap boxes could sound, too... and that properly designed and deployed arrays of those same boxes could sound pretty darn good. Tom stuffed all of that into a box or 2 and made it play nice with all the pieces and parts.

One of the more popular proprietary rigs was the ShowCo Prism® and (limited production Prism II®). I worked a bunch of it as a stagehand and never developed a liking for the way it sounded. Many folks thought of it as a "rock 'n' roll rig". Yeah, it got way loud and had a penetrating quality that some liked... for the time, put a lot of SPL into a fairly small box and had sophisticated processing to do vertical beam steering (along with some internal inclination/declination of transducers) that was quite the thing. But most of the time what I heard from them was unpleasant.

Another rig that I liked much more was/is the EV X-Array, but it takes a patient and skilled system tech or it's no better than the Prism. I'm not sure how it's processed now or what presets/training/EASE tools come with it. I remember when one of the big Holiday shows carried X-Array and the system tech basically started with a core coverage area that he kept the same for arenas; another for theaters, and built on additional coverage for each individual venue. It seemed time consuming and various adjustments to loudspeaker suspension components gave opportunity to hang stuff wrong and not catch it until the rig was going out... But when well designed it sounded pretty nice, certainly better than anything I'd heard come out of a Prism rig.

In a nutshell: The ability to create interference within an array of portable, commercial loudspeakers pre-dates the line array by at least 20 years.

And I have heard quite a few line arrays that simply were not deployed properly and sounded like crap. If they would just do it the way the manufacturer intended-it would be better. But sadly many people think they know more than the designers.

Heck I have heard our products that were used improperly and the result is not good.

Heck if you put 4 different sized tires on your favorite sports car-don't blame the car maker when it does not handle properly. Or put the wrong fuel in it etc etc.

As with any tool, if it is not used properly, the end results are going to be less than optimum.

But so many people simply want to blame the tool. It is "easier" that way.

 

[Glenn Adams]

Re: Infocomm???

Wow Tom. Impressive clips from the stadiums. But the most impressive is the one with your daughter in it. The wind was just ripping across the top and very little drop in - anything. Even the highs stuck together. So totally amazing.

Let me know if you need a pair of SBH10's on top of a pair of TH112's tested at this years Mt Gretna Art Show.

Ivan, I envy you for being able to play with this stuff as your day job. Dang.

 

[Ivan Beaver]

Re: Infocomm???

Ivan, I envy you for being able to play with this stuff as your day job. Dang.

I have had a pretty wide variety of jobs in my life-all the way from component level 11GHZ microwave communications down to 5 Hz audio-in repair-rental-install and manufacturing.

I consider myself truly blessed to be working with the people I am and the type of company Danley is.

It took a lifetime to get to the "dream job". Thank you Mike, Tom and all the others guys.

 

[John Roberts]

Re: Infocomm???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MOG_sPejGA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiS0-lqSUX4



What did you think of the sound in the video’s?
Even though taken with a cheap camcorder or Iphone, I think one can hear they are very different from line arrays, especially the 3 box demo where Mike walks the field at Penn state.

I am already a fan boy so don't need convincing but that is pretty damn impressive.

Are both of those videos shot with the same recorder? I can hear some deterioration in the second video but being able to recognize the song from over a 1/4 mile away is an achievement. For it to sound that coherent is remarkable.

Since the sound quality was slowly varying I expect it was atmospheric effects over that distance air path and not the recorder. I think I heard some "cheap mic" effect in the second recording too, or perhaps a cheap AGC dealing with lower SPL ( As i listen over cheap computer speakers :-( ) .

Congrats to all involved

JR

PS: Not sure neighbors 1/4 mile away want to hear the music, but at least they can understand the words, and sing along.

 

[Mike Hedden]

Re: Infocomm???

I am already a fan boy so don't need convincing but that is pretty damn impressive.

Are both of those videos shot with the same recorder? I can hear some deterioration in the second video but being able to recognize the song from over a 1/4 mile away is an achievement. For it to sound that coherent is remarkable.

Since the sound quality was slowly varying I expect it was atmospheric effects over that distance air path and not the recorder. I think I heard some "cheap mic" effect in the second recording too, or perhaps a cheap AGC dealing with lower SPL ( As i listen over cheap computer speakers :-( ) .

Congrats to all involved

JR

PS: Not sure neighbors 1/4 mile away want to hear the music, but at least they can understand the words, and sing along.

Hey John,
The second video was shot with a Canon digital SLR stuck out of my sun roof. That demo was coherent well beyond this as confirmed by the police officer that showed up at our demo saying he had received a possible noise ordinance issue. When he left the restaurant going to his car he heard our demo which was a mile away as the crow flies. He was very complimentary of our quality and song choice but we still got a ticket!

Mike Hedden
Danley Sound Labs, Inc.

 

[Glenn Adams]

Re: Infocomm???

Hey John,
The second video was shot with a Canon digital SLR stuck out of my sun roof. That demo was coherent well beyond this as confirmed by the police officer that showed up at our demo saying he had received a possible noise ordinance issue. When he left the restaurant going to his car he heard our demo which was a mile away as the crow flies. He was very complimentary of our quality and song choice but we still got a ticket!

Mike Hedden
Danley Sound Labs, Inc.

Even more impressive. That ticket is like a speeding ticket for a new Ferrari @ 199mph.
I've been a fan boy of them since I first laid eyes on the Lambda kit.

 

[Timo Ulkuniemi]

Re: Infocomm???

My hope was that at least a few folks would listen to the videos where I think even that way one can tell these large synergy horns are very different sonically than line arrays but no one has commented on them.
Best,
Tom

Hello

I was listening at your samples using the built-in speakers of my 2008 iMac ...

Clarity was obvious - but since I could not recognize any of the artists - and therefore had no idea of original sound - I did not think I could write feedback. Now I listened some exerpts again and decided to write - just to let you all know we are aware ...

Only Danley products I ever seen are one Contrabass - two Servodrives in my van and a pair of tapped horn bass bins ... - oh yeah, yhere is one "heart" of bass tech on my shelve - no cabinet..

Nuuska

p.s. thanks for finding me motors for "Contrabass" few years back

 

[Glenn Adams]

Re: Infocomm???

Come on Timo- you can hear lips smack, at 300 feet, in a 15 mph cross wind, and 23 mph gusts, lows, mids, and highs all in phase, thru a camcorder mic yet. And you can't comment because you no not know the original tune?

I sure can and I never heard it before.

One thing that particularly sticks out to me is when 500 feet away, it sounds like it is only 100 feet away.
And I would love to use them for live reinforcement if I ever build a touring rig again I am not buying anything other than the best Synergy horn for the application.