VTC subs compare to Danleys?
- Thread starter John Chiara
- Start date
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
What they do with the idea is up to them.
I will say that there are some "unaccounted for" aspects of the tapped horn that have taken awhile to develop (just look at how much better Toms current creations are-than his first attempts were before starting Danley). Somethings take awhile to "get a handle on".
And NO-we are not telling what those "unaccounted for" things are. I see all kinds of DIY attempts that miss it.
Recently in Germany an interesting thing happened to a rental house. A guy rented a pair of TH118s. When he brought them back a week later he told what he did with them.
He shipped them 500 miles to a gathering of Tapped horn DIY guys. The idea was to simply measure them. They had all built their versions of a TH118 (a single 18" driver in a cabinet about the same cubic volume) and wanted to do a side by side.
Their measurement of the TH118 was 0.5dB higher than the Danley specs (I tend to take the conservative approach and go down in SPL specs-rather than up).
And it was 5-6dB higher than the best of the other cabinets.
They guys were pleased and disappointed at the same time.
I have no experience with the VTC tapped horns-but would like to clarify that Tom Danley did not design those cabinets. The technology (ideas etc) are licensed from Danley-but designed by VTC Engineers.
What they do with the idea is up to them.
I will say that there are some "unaccounted for" aspects of the tapped horn that have taken awhile to develop (just look at how much better Toms current creations are-than his first attempts were before starting Danley). Somethings take awhile to "get a handle on".
And NO-we are not telling what those "unaccounted for" things are. I see all kinds of DIY attempts that miss it.
Recently in Germany an interesting thing happened to a rental house. A guy rented a pair of TH118s. When he brought them back a week later he told what he did with them.
He shipped them 500 miles to a gathering of Tapped horn DIY guys. The idea was to simply measure them. They had all built their versions of a TH118 (a single 18" driver in a cabinet about the same cubic volume) and wanted to do a side by side.
Their measurement of the TH118 was 0.5dB higher than the Danley specs (I tend to take the conservative approach and go down in SPL specs-rather than up).
And it was 5-6dB higher than the best of the other cabinets.
They guys were pleased and disappointed at the same time.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
John -
A couple of local guys here are using the VTC 18, extremely impressive. It goes low, gets very loud, well worth a demo. (I haven't heard the TH118.) The VTC guys are very high on this box, I can see why.
-Tim T
John -
A couple of local guys here are using the VTC 18, extremely impressive. It goes low, gets very loud, well worth a demo. (I haven't heard the TH118.) The VTC guys are very high on this box, I can see why.
-Tim T
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Hopefully the VTC licensed technology performs better than the DIY guesses at how to make one.
I get a rather lukewarm reading from Ivan's comments.
I hope TD is being fairly compensated for all commercial executions of his IP....
JR
Hopefully the VTC licensed technology performs better than the DIY guesses at how to make one.
I get a rather lukewarm reading from Ivan's comments.
I hope TD is being fairly compensated for all commercial executions of his IP....
JR
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
JR -
The VTC (Yorkville) ELS118 is NOT a TH118 knock off, nothing like it. It's one of those basically cube-shaped boxes with a rearward facing driver and some internal woodwork making it a tapped horn of some ilk. IMO it's worth a listen, or better, a bit of hands-on to get an idea of what it can do for the OP. Whether or not it is more worthwhile than the TH118, I have no clue. I own neither of these boxes, I posted as I have heard the VTC and was impressed.
.:: VTC Pro Audio - ELS118 ::.
-Tim T
JR -
The VTC (Yorkville) ELS118 is NOT a TH118 knock off, nothing like it. It's one of those basically cube-shaped boxes with a rearward facing driver and some internal woodwork making it a tapped horn of some ilk. IMO it's worth a listen, or better, a bit of hands-on to get an idea of what it can do for the OP. Whether or not it is more worthwhile than the TH118, I have no clue. I own neither of these boxes, I posted as I have heard the VTC and was impressed.
.:: VTC Pro Audio - ELS118 ::.
-Tim T
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
No way to know for sure.
The one question I would have with the specs is the statement on the freq response chart. It says 1w 2.8V and it is a 4 ohm cabinet. So either is it 2 watts or the drive voltage was 2 volts.
No way to know for sure.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Another detail just to note is that the frequency response and probably thus also the sensitivity and max SPL are ground plane or half space measurements. That is noted on the frequency response chart but not for the other numbers. Many people will assume additional output from boundary loading without knowing if the data for the speaker already reflects half space conditions.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Of course the whole half or whole space measurement in relation to subs is kinda silly if you ask me.
If EITHER the sub or the mic is in a "ground plane" condition-then the measurement is ground plane-and the additions apply. But you do not get "both". You get the one time "6dB add" and that is it. not 6dB for each.
Most people listen to a sound system while either standing or seated near a floor or the ground. Therefore the "ground" condition applies (at least at sub freq-not for higher freq). Most people are not listening to a sub while both the sub and themselves are floating in the air and far away from boundaries. True free field.
One thing that I think is so often "missed" is the whole PURPOSE of specs and measurements. What they SHOULD be telling you or giving you-is an idea of the REAL WORLD performance of the cabinet. This will also allow designers to use those specs and extrapolate SPL at distance and so forth.
But there are a number (of popular manufacturers) who give very misleading information-and the buying public just "eats it up" and recites it as fact.
Good examples are when a loudspeaker has a large peak at some freq. This is often cited as the "peak" output. While they are not lying-they are FAR from telling the truth or giving USEFUL information about how loud the loudspeaker can get using normal material that the average person would expect to use/listen to.
While this peak may actually be there-the REST of the loudspeakers response cannot get that loud. So the output ACROSS THE INTENDED FREQ BAND (the USABLE output) is much lower than the stated "peak" output. I have seen it as high as 15dB less. And there are a number of products that are 10dB lower-that is quite a bit!
So when you actually USE the loudspeaker and eq this peak down-the loudspeaker is easily outperformed by another loudspeaker whos "peak" rating is actually lower.
Hence the need to provide MEASURED data that is reproduceable by anybody out in the field. If you can't reproduce the specs-then what good are they?
If you have to have a "special test tone" or "special conditions"-then that spec is not of much use in the REAL world.
I like to use the analogy of a cars gas milege. What if the rating was done while coasting down a mountain. You would get a really high number. And while the number is not "wrong" it is FAR from giving a customer an idea of what he can get while driving on a NORMAL highway or around town.
Sorry to rant.
This has no bearing on the subject or products at hand-but rather the "spec game" in general.
I think some manufacturers sit in closed rooms and place bets "Let's see what we can get away with telling the lemings this time". HEY Watch this! I bet they will eat it up.
Of course the whole half or whole space measurement in relation to subs is kinda silly if you ask me.
If EITHER the sub or the mic is in a "ground plane" condition-then the measurement is ground plane-and the additions apply. But you do not get "both". You get the one time "6dB add" and that is it. not 6dB for each.
Most people listen to a sound system while either standing or seated near a floor or the ground. Therefore the "ground" condition applies (at least at sub freq-not for higher freq). Most people are not listening to a sub while both the sub and themselves are floating in the air and far away from boundaries. True free field.
One thing that I think is so often "missed" is the whole PURPOSE of specs and measurements. What they SHOULD be telling you or giving you-is an idea of the REAL WORLD performance of the cabinet. This will also allow designers to use those specs and extrapolate SPL at distance and so forth.
But there are a number (of popular manufacturers) who give very misleading information-and the buying public just "eats it up" and recites it as fact.
Good examples are when a loudspeaker has a large peak at some freq. This is often cited as the "peak" output. While they are not lying-they are FAR from telling the truth or giving USEFUL information about how loud the loudspeaker can get using normal material that the average person would expect to use/listen to.
While this peak may actually be there-the REST of the loudspeakers response cannot get that loud. So the output ACROSS THE INTENDED FREQ BAND (the USABLE output) is much lower than the stated "peak" output. I have seen it as high as 15dB less. And there are a number of products that are 10dB lower-that is quite a bit!
So when you actually USE the loudspeaker and eq this peak down-the loudspeaker is easily outperformed by another loudspeaker whos "peak" rating is actually lower.
Hence the need to provide MEASURED data that is reproduceable by anybody out in the field. If you can't reproduce the specs-then what good are they?
If you have to have a "special test tone" or "special conditions"-then that spec is not of much use in the REAL world.
I like to use the analogy of a cars gas milege. What if the rating was done while coasting down a mountain. You would get a really high number. And while the number is not "wrong" it is FAR from giving a customer an idea of what he can get while driving on a NORMAL highway or around town.
Sorry to rant.
This has no bearing on the subject or products at hand-but rather the "spec game" in general.
I think some manufacturers sit in closed rooms and place bets "Let's see what we can get away with telling the lemings this time". HEY Watch this! I bet they will eat it up.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Pretty unlikely, while there are many less technical "sales types" in the middle trying to sell product by making their product look as good as possible.
I have suggested that maybe you should write an article or AES paper, without actually naming names, but giving real world examples (with mfr concealed) of the excesses you describe. If you arm the consumer with how to recognize actual spec inflation, the sun light should help disinfect it. Consumers do not embrace being fooled. The white paper about "specifications" on your website seems pretty thin (barely longer than this post). Maybe expand upon this discussion there with some hard real, but un-named, examples.
I am not sure it is as widespread as you suggest, while no doubt mistakes and examples pop up from time to time. Peavey has been widely criticized as playing fast and loose with all kinds of specs. That was not my personal experience in my 15 years there. I did see (or hear about) multiple examples of competitors using specification metrics that overstated performance. If Peavey was the odd man out using a more conservative specification, the customers would just ASSume the other value competitors were a few dB louder, than they really were. This is not an excuse, but a practical reality in some market segments. Being right is little consolation when you lose significant sales because of it.
Surely not all of your competitors are cheating with distorted specifications.
JR
Probably for a small sub-set of all customers. The vast majority look at specs for "more is better" or "louder is better" purchase comparisons.
We've been around this tree before... Every loudspeaker engineer I ever knew and worked with, complains about the "other guys" distorting specifications.
Pretty unlikely, while there are many less technical "sales types" in the middle trying to sell product by making their product look as good as possible.
I have suggested that maybe you should write an article or AES paper, without actually naming names, but giving real world examples (with mfr concealed) of the excesses you describe. If you arm the consumer with how to recognize actual spec inflation, the sun light should help disinfect it. Consumers do not embrace being fooled. The white paper about "specifications" on your website seems pretty thin (barely longer than this post). Maybe expand upon this discussion there with some hard real, but un-named, examples.
I am not sure it is as widespread as you suggest, while no doubt mistakes and examples pop up from time to time. Peavey has been widely criticized as playing fast and loose with all kinds of specs. That was not my personal experience in my 15 years there. I did see (or hear about) multiple examples of competitors using specification metrics that overstated performance. If Peavey was the odd man out using a more conservative specification, the customers would just ASSume the other value competitors were a few dB louder, than they really were. This is not an excuse, but a practical reality in some market segments. Being right is little consolation when you lose significant sales because of it.
Surely not all of your competitors are cheating with distorted specifications.
JR
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Agreed it is not real widespread. However most of my examples come from some of the biggest-most respected-names in the business. Somehow they seem to "get a free pass" and people just look the other way. They don't get questioned-that is my biggest gripe.
When I ask the "kool aid" drinkers they often say something along the lines of "yeah-but it does the job". But the manufacturer is LYING to you (or greatly deceiving at best)-and that is OK with you?
There are a lot of specs that are fine-depending on what side of the sheet you look at. VERY often one side does not agree with the other (meaning the published response does not match the marketing numbers on the front).
It seems like the guys with the least amount of data are the biggest offenders. I guess they do have something to hide.
It has been my experience (although limited in depth) that the Peavey products I have measured have all meet spec.
I have a different opinion of Peavey than most. Yes they get "blamed" for poor quality products-while in reality in most cases it is a case of operator error that is causing the lack of performance.
Just like cars. The people who spend more for a "better quality" car tend to take better care of them. In many cases the typical buyer of a cheap car does not take car of it-and blames the car.
As a bench tech for many years-I had very few complaints about Peavey design or construction. Most was easy to work on and simple to repair. Therefore keeping the value to the customer.
I have gotten a good start on exactly a paper like you describe-no names-but actual data from the products. I just need to find the time to finish it.
Agreed it is not real widespread. However most of my examples come from some of the biggest-most respected-names in the business. Somehow they seem to "get a free pass" and people just look the other way. They don't get questioned-that is my biggest gripe.
When I ask the "kool aid" drinkers they often say something along the lines of "yeah-but it does the job". But the manufacturer is LYING to you (or greatly deceiving at best)-and that is OK with you?
There are a lot of specs that are fine-depending on what side of the sheet you look at. VERY often one side does not agree with the other (meaning the published response does not match the marketing numbers on the front).
It seems like the guys with the least amount of data are the biggest offenders. I guess they do have something to hide.
It has been my experience (although limited in depth) that the Peavey products I have measured have all meet spec.
I have a different opinion of Peavey than most. Yes they get "blamed" for poor quality products-while in reality in most cases it is a case of operator error that is causing the lack of performance.
Just like cars. The people who spend more for a "better quality" car tend to take better care of them. In many cases the typical buyer of a cheap car does not take car of it-and blames the car.
As a bench tech for many years-I had very few complaints about Peavey design or construction. Most was easy to work on and simple to repair. Therefore keeping the value to the customer.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
I don't have the time to search, but I thought I'd read somewhere that VTC's ELS118 was a discarded Danley design, after Danley instead developed the Th118. I must have misunderstood whatever it was that I read, but it's stuck in my head as great Danley folklore. Can you help straighten me out Ivan? What sub is it that you put out for Halloween? The "Frankenstein" or something like that? No relation to the ELS118?
I had the ELS118 on demo a while back. If I recall, it was roughly equal in output to 2 Growlers, with lower extension. A great sounding sub, but quite unwieldy to handle.
I don't have the time to search, but I thought I'd read somewhere that VTC's ELS118 was a discarded Danley design, after Danley instead developed the Th118. I must have misunderstood whatever it was that I read, but it's stuck in my head as great Danley folklore. Can you help straighten me out Ivan? What sub is it that you put out for Halloween? The "Frankenstein" or something like that? No relation to the ELS118?
I had the ELS118 on demo a while back. If I recall, it was roughly equal in output to 2 Growlers, with lower extension. A great sounding sub, but quite unwieldy to handle.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
So the ELS118 may be using the same concept (I don't know without getting a closer look inside)-which is kinda unique-a multi layer approach that twists and turns-think like a corkscrew-kinda.
I use a design for Halloween that "kinda" resembles the ElS118-except it has a single 15". The performance is pretty good-and a good bit deeper response than a TH115. I only built the 1 prototype. I quickly hated it-moving it around. So it never went any further. We were calling it the "twister" because of the air path.
So the ELS118 may be using the same concept (I don't know without getting a closer look inside)-which is kinda unique-a multi layer approach that twists and turns-think like a corkscrew-kinda.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Hi Guys,
There is some incorrect information in this thread (even from Ivan.....) about the ELS118 so perhaps I should clear things up.
First off Ivan is correct that Yorkville/VTC normally licenses Tom's technology and pretty much take the design work into our own hands (by me) with some of Tom's input when necessary, Tom and I have worked together a long time and we have a very good working relationship helping each other and bouncing ideas back and forth pretty regularly.
So let's clear things up...
First this was one rare situation where Tom DID design the ELS118 (and the ELS212 in fact). I was short on time working on the rest of the VTC product line and Tom did the simulations and rough prototype drawings himself and then passed it on to me. We (Yorkville) built and tested the prototypes and Tom was actually here at Yorkville on business when he and I did the final tweaking and listening tests together.
The TH118 was designed much after the ELS118. I have never heard the TH118 or seen the inner details of that cabinet so I don't know how they compare. But I can say that the ELS118 was not a "Discarded Danley design".
And lastly the rated cabinet sensitivity of 105 is correct...the stated drive voltage should read 2V. I will ask the guys to correct this on the spec sheet.
Hope this clears things up.
Cheers,
Todd Michael
Yorkville Sound/VTC Pro Audio
Hi Guys,
There is some incorrect information in this thread (even from Ivan.....) about the ELS118 so perhaps I should clear things up.
First off Ivan is correct that Yorkville/VTC normally licenses Tom's technology and pretty much take the design work into our own hands (by me) with some of Tom's input when necessary, Tom and I have worked together a long time and we have a very good working relationship helping each other and bouncing ideas back and forth pretty regularly.
So let's clear things up...
First this was one rare situation where Tom DID design the ELS118 (and the ELS212 in fact). I was short on time working on the rest of the VTC product line and Tom did the simulations and rough prototype drawings himself and then passed it on to me. We (Yorkville) built and tested the prototypes and Tom was actually here at Yorkville on business when he and I did the final tweaking and listening tests together.
The TH118 was designed much after the ELS118. I have never heard the TH118 or seen the inner details of that cabinet so I don't know how they compare. But I can say that the ELS118 was not a "Discarded Danley design".
And lastly the rated cabinet sensitivity of 105 is correct...the stated drive voltage should read 2V. I will ask the guys to correct this on the spec sheet.
Hope this clears things up.
Cheers,
Todd Michael
Yorkville Sound/VTC Pro Audio
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Mr. Michael,
Since the VTC gear being aimed at the Pro Market... I have a question about why was the IEC plug chosen on the NS21P and S4P? Why did you not use the PowerCon found on other pro-level boxes?
Also…
What’s the difference between the LS2100PB and NS21P? What makes the NS21P $500 more than the Yorkville counterpart?
And the same questions between the S4P and U15PB.
Mr. Michael,
Since the VTC gear being aimed at the Pro Market... I have a question about why was the IEC plug chosen on the NS21P and S4P? Why did you not use the PowerCon found on other pro-level boxes?
Also…
What’s the difference between the LS2100PB and NS21P? What makes the NS21P $500 more than the Yorkville counterpart?
And the same questions between the S4P and U15PB.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Hi Matt,
Marketing and Sales is far from my responsibility here but I will try and answer your questions the best I can.
I asked around about the IEC plug, since I did not design the electronics, and was told the PowerCon was considered at the time but the price increase was a lot. So some end users where asked if this feature was warranted and the general consensus was no. I guess there were pros and cons to both sides of the coin. These amps were designed a while ago but since then we are now using a locking IEC plug on all our higher end cabinets. It is not a PowerCon but rather a simple locking chord and the input on the panel will also accept a standard non-locking chord as well. I guess when there is time the VTC cabinets will be updated as well.
As for the LS2100PB and NS21P the cabinets and amps are similar the only difference is the NS21P has a custom punched grill which is much more expensive to manufacture than the stock perf grill on the LS2100PB. I can't comment on your noted $500 difference but the MSRP US prices only differ by $200.
The same pretty much goes for the S4P and U15PB but when the S4P was created we took the opportunity to rework the DSP setting using a more updated Synergy alignment.
Todd
Hi Matt,
Marketing and Sales is far from my responsibility here but I will try and answer your questions the best I can.
I asked around about the IEC plug, since I did not design the electronics, and was told the PowerCon was considered at the time but the price increase was a lot. So some end users where asked if this feature was warranted and the general consensus was no. I guess there were pros and cons to both sides of the coin. These amps were designed a while ago but since then we are now using a locking IEC plug on all our higher end cabinets. It is not a PowerCon but rather a simple locking chord and the input on the panel will also accept a standard non-locking chord as well. I guess when there is time the VTC cabinets will be updated as well.
As for the LS2100PB and NS21P the cabinets and amps are similar the only difference is the NS21P has a custom punched grill which is much more expensive to manufacture than the stock perf grill on the LS2100PB. I can't comment on your noted $500 difference but the MSRP US prices only differ by $200.
The same pretty much goes for the S4P and U15PB but when the S4P was created we took the opportunity to rework the DSP setting using a more updated Synergy alignment.
Todd
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Is it possible for the consumer to modify the IEC outlet into a PowerCon.
I only ask, because I have plenty of PowerCon cable in stock and it is much cheaper to build PowerCon than IEC.
Is it possible for the consumer to modify the IEC outlet into a PowerCon.
I only ask, because I have plenty of PowerCon cable in stock and it is much cheaper to build PowerCon than IEC.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Matt,
I'm not sure.....I suggest you call our Service Department and inquire about it. I'm sure it can be done...it's just how much "MacGyvering" it will take to do it...
T.
Matt,
I'm not sure.....I suggest you call our Service Department and inquire about it. I'm sure it can be done...it's just how much "MacGyvering" it will take to do it...
T.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
The TH118 (while it was developed much later) is essentially a TH115 (very early Danley product) with a 18" driver mounted in it. The construction around the driver mounting is different.
I had wanted to have an 18" version of the TH115 for a number of years-but nobody made a driver that was suitable for it. When some came available we built a prototype and it worked very well-so it came to life.
So if I had to make a guess-the ELS118 is very much like the "twister" or "vortex" that did early on-the one I use for Halloween. At least in the horn layout. Nothing wrong with that-I liked the way it performed-just moving it around was an issue-hence the reason it never went any further than the prototype I built.
Thanks for clearing that up-that is news to me.
The TH118 (while it was developed much later) is essentially a TH115 (very early Danley product) with a 18" driver mounted in it. The construction around the driver mounting is different.
I had wanted to have an 18" version of the TH115 for a number of years-but nobody made a driver that was suitable for it. When some came available we built a prototype and it worked very well-so it came to life.
So if I had to make a guess-the ELS118 is very much like the "twister" or "vortex" that did early on-the one I use for Halloween. At least in the horn layout. Nothing wrong with that-I liked the way it performed-just moving it around was an issue-hence the reason it never went any further than the prototype I built.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
Ivan,
I don't think the horn folding in the ELS118 is like what you are referring to as a "twister" or "vortex"...I have built several other prototype tapped subs with that layout before and am very familiar with.
The ELS118 has a very complex horn folding going from the front to the back of the cabinet (4 times) in a sort of "W" formation first "splitting" in the vertical direction and then transforming to the horizontal direction. In fact this horn has one of the most complex folding patterns I have ever seen and is a real "treat" for the guys in the woodshop to build. But it's performance is excellent by ANY standard. It was designed for pro touring applications and with it's 2 cabinet dolly most users roll them off the truck into position and never lift them.
T.
T.
Ivan,
I don't think the horn folding in the ELS118 is like what you are referring to as a "twister" or "vortex"...I have built several other prototype tapped subs with that layout before and am very familiar with.
The ELS118 has a very complex horn folding going from the front to the back of the cabinet (4 times) in a sort of "W" formation first "splitting" in the vertical direction and then transforming to the horizontal direction. In fact this horn has one of the most complex folding patterns I have ever seen and is a real "treat" for the guys in the woodshop to build. But it's performance is excellent by ANY standard. It was designed for pro touring applications and with it's 2 cabinet dolly most users roll them off the truck into position and never lift them.
T.
T.
Re: VTC subs compare to Danleys?
The one I built does go from front to back and changes directions and comes back forward and changes direction again and then comes out. Sounds like the same concept anyway.