ProSoundWeb Community

Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => LAB Lounge => Topic started by: bren collins on June 25, 2018, 01:56:06 pm

Title: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: bren collins on June 25, 2018, 01:56:06 pm
Hey guys Iím looking to upgrade from my sm80ís currently powering them with a powersoft k3 with proper limiters, passive or powered is fine with me if passive Iíll be using a powersoft amp...... my goal is pretty much higher spl they do the job fine as far as coverage most the times but Iím getting requests for very high spl numbers it seems more and more and the sm80ís just canít reach that, I love them they sound great keep tonal quality at a distance but I need more.... I looked at a pair of sh46ís and just not sure want other options. I also  Thought about 4 perside rcf hdl20 but thatís a little more money than Iíd want to spend.... anyways just wanting to see what u guys suggest!
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: TJ (Tom) Cornish on June 25, 2018, 02:36:36 pm
Hey guys Iím looking to upgrade from my sm80ís currently powering them with a powersoft k3 with proper limiters, passive or powered is fine with me if passive Iíll be using a powersoft amp...... my goal is pretty much higher spl they do the job fine as far as coverage most the times but Iím getting requests for very high spl numbers it seems more and more and the sm80ís just canít reach that, I love them they sound great keep tonal quality at a distance but I need more.... I looked at a pair of sh46ís and just not sure want other options. I also  Thought about 4 perside rcf hdl20 but thatís a little more money than Iíd want to spend.... anyways just wanting to see what u guys suggest!
If you can manage the logistics, the Danley SH96HO is pretty killer.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: John L Nobile on June 25, 2018, 03:25:53 pm
If you can manage the logistics, the Danley SH96HO is pretty killer.

Very nice speakers. I'm still amazed at how loud they get yet still sound clean. I'd have to question their rider acceptance though.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Steve Litscher on June 25, 2018, 03:56:37 pm
How much more SPL are you being asked for, and what type of space/venue are you trying to cover?

The SM80 is rated for 128dB continuous (65-lbs)
The SH96HO is rated for 133dB continuous (220-lbs)

We use the JTR Speakers Noesis 3TX speakers, which are rated for 133dB continuous but only weigh 50 pounds or so. They have interchangeable horns, so if you need more throw, you can order them with a 60x40 (instead of 90x60).

We've had great results with the 3TX; just did a show at a soccer stadium over the weekend with them... bacon and beer festival with about 3500 people in attendance. We had benefit of some gain compliments of the grandstands, but we were hitting 96-98dB at FOH (75 feet out) with the master fader riding at about 50%.

The event and venue had noise limits, so we couldn't push them any farther... but they had a ton of headroom left.

There are a bunch of variables, of course, but the 3TX are pretty effective at delivering clear, powerful sound. They don't need much processing, which is also nice.

And as mentioned, if rider acceptance is a requirement, then you may have to look elsewhere.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Mike Pyle on June 25, 2018, 04:02:06 pm
Aside from the SH46 and SH96HO mentioned, you might also consider something like the TW T24N:

https://www.twaudio.de/en/product/t-series/t24n-neoclassic

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on June 25, 2018, 04:03:47 pm
The Peter Morris DIY's (PM90 and PM60) on Soundforums fill the bill, other than you gotta build em lol

I really want to audition the TW Audio T24N.  73lbs of kick ass, it appears.  Maybe worth a trip to Knoxville, TN.

Seeburg K24 looks good too, at 77lbs, but where to find in the US?

I'm sure there are other high-output lightweight champs, but these are all I know in this type and weight category.
I figure these all have at least an easy 6dB jump on the SM80.
 
Having built Peter's design, I personally can't see going to anything heavier, unless of course it's a major jump in coverage area....

Haha...I see Mike just beat me to the TN24N

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Ivan Beaver on June 25, 2018, 06:30:43 pm
It is important to look and consider more than the "simple max SPL" numbers.

You must know where they come from, and more importantly, what does it sound like at those SPLs?

If you simply want loud, then run a piece of metal through a table saw.

Just because a loudspeaker can produce a particular SPL, does not mean you want to listen to it at that SPL.

This is where side by side testing is important, but is often hard to do.

The "simple numbers" can get you in trouble if you are not careful.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Caleb Dueck on June 25, 2018, 07:00:25 pm
Aside from the SH46 and SH96HO mentioned, you might also consider something like the TW T24N:

https://www.twaudio.de/en/product/t-series/t24n-neoclassic
Another echo for SH96HO, SH46's, or T24N. 

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on June 25, 2018, 07:35:06 pm
It is important to look and consider more than the "simple max SPL" numbers.

You must know where they come from, and more importantly, what does it sound like at those SPLs?

If you simply want loud, then run a piece of metal through a table saw.

Just because a loudspeaker can produce a particular SPL, does not mean you want to listen to it at that SPL.

This is where side by side testing is important, but is often hard to do.

The "simple numbers" can get you in trouble if you are not careful.

Agree wholeheartedly !

But can't say I understand your caveat about simple numbers, at least in the context of the boxes proposed as upgrades to the SM80.

I do think every box mentioned is probably a sonic upgrade to the SM80, and throughout the SM80's bandwidth at least.

Whether or not the other commercial boxes suggested can pull the numbers they claim, I dunno....I haven't heard the two I suggested....
but looking at the T24N's engineering/drivers used, and Production Partner review, it's a long way from 'metal through a table saw'  ;)  https://www.twaudio.de/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/TW_AUDiO_T24N_Tests_Production_Partner_Reprint_T24N_EN.pdf
Ditto to the Seeburg engineeering/drivers used ....

I have the JTR 3TX and the PM 90 & 60.
I don't have an SM-80, but have experience with it and the SH-69.

I can look at the 3TX continuous SPL spec of 133dB, and know from the drivers used it simply can't match a SH96HO, numbers be damned.
So I have to move it closer to an SM-80 than to a SH96HO, in terms of SPL.
My guess, again from an engineering/driver's used perspective, is the 3TX is very likely noticeably cleaner sounding than the SM80, and probably a little louder..at least through the SM80's higher than is usual low-cutoff.

I also know for certain the PM90 & 60 are a lot stronger and a bit cleaner than the 3TX, from many hours of direct comparison.
The TW Audio and Seeburg boxes look to share the same pedigree as Peter's design..

 
In my mind the 3 boxes I submitted aren't about simple SPL numbers...but hopefully real world, quality throughout intended bandwidth, SPL gain..
I added comments about the 3TX, since I have direct experience there, and as good and clean it is, I can't see it in the SPL league of the other mentioned boxes.



Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeremy Young on June 25, 2018, 07:36:28 pm
Random question: do you need more SPL at the back, or at the front? 

If the answer is the back, would a second pair of SM80's as delays suit your needs?  It would certainly simplify the logistics in the upgrade (still a S.O.S.O.S. AKA speaker-on-stick-on-steroids) with the same voicing as your mains.  Won't do anything to make things louder at the front through, and not suited to all venue shapes and sizes.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: bren collins on June 25, 2018, 07:54:45 pm
It is important to look and consider more than the "simple max SPL" numbers.

You must know where they come from, and more importantly, what does it sound like at those SPLs?

If you simply want loud, then run a piece of metal through a table saw.

Just because a loudspeaker can produce a particular SPL, does not mean you want to listen to it at that SPL.

This is where side by side testing is important, but is often hard to do.

The "simple numbers" can get you in trouble if you are not careful.

Iím not looking for simply a number but instead boxes that have similar or better tonal quality than the sm80 while providing more output...... and yes Iím needing the output up front not really the back I have delay stacks for when I do need more output in the back up front is where my demand needs to be met..... I wouldnít mind a speaker that could be pole mountable as I donít think one has been mentioned yet except the t24 maybe but Iím not even sure if it has one, sh96 I simply just to heavy love the box but way to heavy for me I need under 120 pounds for sure
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Rick Powell on June 25, 2018, 09:40:20 pm
The PM 60/PM 90 is the loudest pole mountable speaker I know of, in the 80 lb range. There are heavier speakers that have had a pole mount, but really...would you want to?
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Mike Santarelli on June 26, 2018, 09:30:01 am
The PM 60/PM 90 is the loudest pole mountable speaker I know of, in the 80 lb range. There are heavier speakers that have had a pole mount, but really...would you want to?


Where is the best place to find info about these?  found a few references online but not much.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on June 26, 2018, 10:39:12 am

Where is the best place to find info about these?  found a few references online but not much.

PM90 degree  https://soundforums.net/community/threads/new-diy-mid-high.11601/

PM60 degree  https://soundforums.net/community/threads/60-degree-diy-mid-hi.12390/
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Lance Hallmark on June 26, 2018, 12:17:13 pm
How much more SPL are you being asked for, and what type of space/venue are you trying to cover?

The SM80 is rated for 128dB continuous (65-lbs)
The SH96HO is rated for 133dB continuous (220-lbs)

We use the JTR Speakers Noesis 3TX speakers, which are rated for 133dB continuous but only weigh 50 pounds or so. They have interchangeable horns, so if you need more throw, you can order them with a 60x40 (instead of 90x60).

We've had great results with the 3TX; just did a show at a soccer stadium over the weekend with them... bacon and beer festival with about 3500 people in attendance. We had benefit of some gain compliments of the grandstands, but we were hitting 96-98dB at FOH (75 feet out) with the master fader riding at about 50%.

The event and venue had noise limits, so we couldn't push them any farther... but they had a ton of headroom left.

There are a bunch of variables, of course, but the 3TX are pretty effective at delivering clear, powerful sound. They don't need much processing, which is also nice.

And as mentioned, if rider acceptance is a requirement, then you may have to look elsewhere.

I second the Noesis 3TX. Very clear, very loud, great sound quality & construction. Cross over at 80 hz so a true 4 way setup with subs. I have not run mine over about 60% and have done rave type events for over 500 people.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Ivan Beaver on June 26, 2018, 12:34:42 pm
I have not run mine over about 60%
I am always curious about when people quote %.

What does that REALLY mean?

If talking about power, then 50% is 3dB. So 60% would mean you had 2.5dB left?

Or are you talking about perceived loudness?  How is that determined?

If twice as loud is approx 10dB, then if you are running at 60%, that would mean you have about 8dB left?

Or does it mean something else?

Just curious.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: John L Nobile on June 26, 2018, 12:40:10 pm
How much extra SPL do you need? The SM80 can get quite loud for it's size but if that's not close to your needs, you may have to bite the bullet and get something that is too heavy for a "pole". Visuals are important as well. I've had BE's look at my SH96HO's and say "that's not enough PA". I can't imagine what they'd say if they saw an SOS.

BTW, they were fine after hearing them.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Frederik Rosenkjśr on June 26, 2018, 02:46:41 pm
You say you are using Powersoft amps. So was I until a year ago. What are your limiter settings? With the limiter settings I was using on my Powersoft amps (K6/10 and X) I was limiting them way too soon, as I found out when I switched to Linea Research/Danley amps with official presets. Iíve gained probably at least 6 dB on the SM80!
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Lance Hallmark on June 26, 2018, 04:01:33 pm
I am always curious about when people quote %.

What does that REALLY mean?

If talking about power, then 50% is 3dB. So 60% would mean you had 2.5dB left?

Or are you talking about perceived loudness?  How is that determined?

If twice as loud is approx 10dB, then if you are running at 60%, that would mean you have about 8dB left?

Or does it mean something else?

Just curious.

Sometimes I forget which Forum I'm on when replying, lol.
In this case, I currently run these 4 ohm configured speakers on a Crown XTI6002. Most shows I've done with them are been showing intermittent flashing of the -20db indicator. The loudest I've run them up to was an intermittent flashing of the -10 db indicator. No accurate sound measurements taken, just a seat of the pants guess that there is a reasonable amount of usable volume left over where I have run them to date.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Chris Grimshaw on June 26, 2018, 04:29:40 pm
-10dB on an XTI6002 is around 120w into 8ohm.

You're barely tickling them. So long as the program material is fairly dynamic, I'd expect decent sound until the red lights come on.

Push the fader. They'll get louder.

Chris
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Ivan Beaver on June 26, 2018, 04:47:26 pm
You say you are using Powersoft amps. So was I until a year ago. What are your limiter settings? With the limiter settings I was using on my Powersoft amps (K6/10 and X) I was limiting them way too soon, as I found out when I switched to Linea Research/Danley amps with official presets. Iíve gained probably at least 6 dB on the SM80!
We do have Armonia presets for most of the Danley products if needed.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeff Lelko on June 26, 2018, 10:47:37 pm
Iíve been following this thread with interest, and while I donít have any first hand suggestions to share besides whatís already been mentioned you could add the RCF TTL6-A to the list.  Iíve never heard the box in person so I canít say how itíd hold up to the SM80 or others but itís technically pole mountable.

As an aside, why do the TW Audio products not come up more often here?  Are they simply not what most people need, or are they just not as common in the United States?
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Tim McCulloch on June 27, 2018, 10:00:45 am

As an aside, why do the TW Audio products not come up more often here?  Are they simply not what most people need, or are they just not as common in the United States?

Very little market visibility in the USA coupled with premium prices?
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Scott Olewiler on June 27, 2018, 12:39:53 pm
Very little market visibility in the USA coupled with premium prices?

I spent 10 mins on Google yesterday trying to find a US dealer yesterday and came up empty.  If I can't find  dealer I'd be very concerned about trying to geta warranty repair later.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Caleb Dueck on June 27, 2018, 01:16:14 pm
I spent 10 mins on Google yesterday trying to find a US dealer yesterday and came up empty.  If I can't find  dealer I'd be very concerned about trying to geta warranty repair later.
There are dealers, like us, just not advertised.  The T24N is great, think d&b level pricing though rather than JBL/JTR/SM80 level prices.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Steve Crump on June 27, 2018, 01:39:48 pm
So, does anyone know what the street price of the T24N is?
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Mike Pyle on June 27, 2018, 04:12:43 pm
So, does anyone know what the street price of the T24N is?

I will PM you. If anyone else is interested in TW, feel free to contact me.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com on June 27, 2018, 04:26:15 pm
Iíve been following this thread with interest, and while I donít have any first hand suggestions to share besides whatís already been mentioned you could add the RCF TTL6-A to the list.  Iíve never heard the box in person so I canít say how itíd hold up to the SM80 or others but itís technically pole mountable.

The RCF TTL6-A is definitely a great option! I haven't heard it yet in person myself (planning to next Friday, 7/16).  I have a VERY happy customer using them though.  He has purchased a second pair for a total of four.

Jeff
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Mike Santarelli on June 27, 2018, 05:58:25 pm
The RCF TTL6-A is definitely a great option! I haven't heard it yet in person myself (planning to next Friday, 7/16).  I have a VERY happy customer using them though.  He has purchased a second pair for a total of four.

Jeff

Just heard the ttl6a last week. Very impressive speaker.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on June 28, 2018, 03:40:23 pm
We do have Armonia presets for most of the Danley products if needed.

Hi Ivan, two quick questions....

Do you have Armonia specific, or other DSP specific,  presets  .... 
that differ from the platform/DSP-independent presets, that have been on your website?

And are all those platform-independent presets the same as what are in the SC-48?
(I ask because for all your speakers that I've checked they seem to be the same, and I don't want to assume they are the same, if not so)

thx,  mark
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Ivan Beaver on June 28, 2018, 04:34:08 pm
Hi Ivan, two quick questions....

Do you have Armonia specific, or other DSP specific,  presets  .... 
that differ from the platform/DSP-independent presets, that have been on your website?

And are all those platform-independent presets the same as what are in the SC-48?
(I ask because for all your speakers that I've checked they seem to be the same, and I don't want to assume they are the same, if not so)

thx,  mark
I took a transfer function of our DNA presets.

Then matched that transfer function with an X8 using the Armonia software.

There were some HUGE differences.  In most cases the Q was about twice what is should be, and in some xovers (specifically Bessell), the freq was about an octave off.

So yes, they were adjusted as needed to match the amplitude/phase response of the DNA presets
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: bren collins on June 30, 2018, 09:40:05 pm
We do have Armonia presets for most of the Danley products if needed.

Where can I find those Armonia presets at? Limiters I believe are set pretty straight forward honestly probably lenient.... but canít help to double check
There seeing peaks of 1200 watts though and sustaining 7-800 Watts. Iím running them into the limiters with most shows. Iíve really been looking into the t24n it seems to be the speaker I need but price is killing me. The goal was to spend 6500 or so for the pair! But so far they are the only ones I think for the bill I really like the 3tx but I see not much of a headroom gain to justify a change in speaker knowing Iíll find a way to push them to there limits as well. Looks and brand of my system doesnít really matter anymore Iím a big fish Iím a little pond all my competitors use jbl rigs typically 2 stx828 per side with matching tops good system but my 4 th118 on a k10 eats those subs alive musically and even spl I would say and the sm80ís are a much longer throw with a better sound. Lately Iíve been stepping up though doing bigger events, the company is known around the area and its name typically gets the job, anytime I get the no S.O.S, I either fly the sm80ís on trussing if it will do the job or I rent 6 per side rcf hdl20ís. Iím typically trusted to bring the proper equipment if I donít have it I rent it the reason for the upgrade is for me to have to do less renting haha.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: bren collins on June 30, 2018, 09:46:52 pm
The PM 60/PM 90 is the loudest pole mountable speaker I know of, in the 80 lb range. There are heavier speakers that have had a pole mount, but really...would you want to?

What all goes into building these speakers ?
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: David Sturzenbecher on June 30, 2018, 10:29:22 pm
What all goes into building these speakers ?

Didn't quite make it to reply 14 huh...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Ivan Beaver on June 30, 2018, 10:45:15 pm
Where can I find those Armonia presets at?
Send me an email at ivan@danleysoundlabs.com
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Rick Powell on July 01, 2018, 12:50:38 am
What all goes into building these speakers ?

For the 90 degree version you need:
BMS 4594 ND HE coaxial horn driver about $700 each
RCF HF950 horn about $150 each
(Two) RCF MB12N351 12" speakers about $300 each
Some Baltic birch plywood, mostly 5/8" or 15mm thickness
Exterior paint or bed liner, steel grille material, and cabinet hardware like pole cup, speakons, etc.

That's most of it to do the speaker itself. Probably $1600 in parts and materials, plus the labor and equipment to put it together. You would want to do this in a well-equipped wood shop or have a cabinet maker do the work for you. Not an extremely hard build for an experienced woodworker, but it might be a bit much for someone's first speaker building project.

You also need an amp with a built-in or separate processor to power the speaker; it's too tight to fit in an amp module to make it a powered speaker.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on July 01, 2018, 07:04:52 am
Hey guys Iím looking to upgrade from my sm80ís currently powering them with a powersoft k3 with proper limiters, passive or powered is fine with me if passive Iíll be using a powersoft amp...... my goal is pretty much higher spl they do the job fine as far as coverage most the times but Iím getting requests for very high spl numbers it seems more and more and the sm80ís just canít reach that, I love them they sound great keep tonal quality at a distance but I need more.... I looked at a pair of sh46ís and just not sure want other options. I also  Thought about 4 perside rcf hdl20 but thatís a little more money than Iíd want to spend.... anyways just wanting to see what u guys suggest!

I just started to play around with some new DB IG4T's. They can be stacked in pairs for more output ,138db's for the pair. Light and great side to side coverage.  I actually purchased them for smaller shows but they can put the spl out for sure.  May end up using them as my main speaker.
I'll post a review when I have some gigs on them and try them stacked in testing. 

https://www.facebook.com/371069353615/videos/10154842280948616/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhCYYAsTUd0

Douglas R. Allen

You may also want to take a look at the RCF line.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vG6bB1AVTxc&t=171s
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 02, 2018, 07:21:44 am
For the 90 degree version you need:
BMS 4594 ND HE coaxial horn driver about $700 each
RCF HF950 horn about $150 each
(Two) RCF MB12N351 12" speakers about $300 each
Some Baltic birch plywood, mostly 5/8" or 15mm thickness
Exterior paint or bed liner, steel grille material, and cabinet hardware like pole cup, speakons, etc.

That's most of it to do the speaker itself. Probably $1600 in parts and materials, plus the labor and equipment to put it together. You would want to do this in a well-equipped wood shop or have a cabinet maker do the work for you. Not an extremely hard build for an experienced woodworker, but it might be a bit much for someone's first speaker building project.

You also need an amp with a built-in or separate processor to power the speaker; it's too tight to fit in an amp module to make it a powered speaker.

To put some perspective on the PM90ís performance.  Its design for maximum output and sound quality from 100Hz up, and to be light enough (35-37 Kgs) to be pole mounted.  The low mid-section has an average efficiency of about 105dB per watt per metre with a peak efficiency around 110dB. The HF is about 112dB as is the VHF. The highs are rated 150 watts continuous and 1000 watts peak, the VHF 80 watts 320 watts peak. The 12Ē Mids will take 1300w (650W ea) continuous.

Soooo Ö to match everybody elses exaggerated SPL claims you could say that maximum SPL is 110 + (1300 watts) 31 dB + 6 dB for the peak = 147 dB!  In practice like so many of the quoted max SPL figures, this is nothing like what you can realistically expect in the field.

The PM 90 is however one of the loudest speakers that can be pole mounted.  I think TW Audioís T24N will have similar performance. According to my SIM the T24N will have slightly less low frequency output because it uses a shorter horn when compared to the PM90/60. The T24N is rated at 143 dB peak and has a 3Ē diaphragm compression driver crossed at 1K6 compared to the more powerful 2-way BMS driver in the PM90 which crossed at 700Hz and 6K3 for the VHF.  In practice I expect these two boxes to be similar in terms of SPL.

One of the unique things with thePM90 design is all the drivers are operating their piston range to ensure maximum sound quality. The design is symmetrical and when processed with a Lake LM26 it has a very flat phase response, produces an almost perfect impulse response and can reproduce an acoustic  square wave both on and off both axes.

The SM80 mentioned here also has excellent performance Ė for comparison the mids are about 102 dB and take 400 watts Ė thatís 128dB continuous and 134 peak, as per Danleyís spec, but the efficiency starts to drop off below about 150Hz. Its only about 91 dB at 100Hz, which is about 12-15 dB less the PM90 at this frequency.  Having said that for a small rig where the sub is physically close to the top it probably does not matter and Iím sure its performance in terms of SPL, sound quality and price will be hard to beat 😊

Peter

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jonathan Betts on July 02, 2018, 06:54:26 pm
Thank you Peter for sharing all the info regarding the PM 90. I would love to hear these cabinets some day.

Just wondering what you would consider to be the maximum distance  you would want between subs and tops in a small system like the SM 80/TH 118.  Would this distance have the same effect on the system in both the vertical and horizontal planes?

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jon Dees on July 02, 2018, 08:56:36 pm
Bren:

Download EASE Focus and start to download speaker files from Danley and TW Audio and create a typical outdoor venue for yourself. If you are a geographic nerd like myself you can even screenshot a Google Maps view of your outdoor venue and import it to get a reality check on your sound pressure gradients.

Then also find a typical 12"+horn file (QSC K12, for instance is available) to compare to. You can also download RCF boxes like the TTL6A to check it out. Or a silly short line array on a stick can also be modeled.

I have gone thru 10-15 boxes and found the best output/mass ratio to be the IG4T Douglas mentions. There may not be enough, especially in the mid-bass, for your program material, but you can check this with octave modeling in EASE focus.

EASE Focus also assists in visualizing the help that going from the 80* nominal pattern to a 60x40 like the T24N could provide for HF directivity. You should also consider that some of your mids may be currently absorbed in the first couple of rows and additional elevation like scaffolding might help.

HTH,
Jon

I just started to play around with some new DB IG4T's. They can be stacked in pairs for more output ,138db's for the pair. Light and great side to side coverage.  I actually purchased them for smaller shows but they can put the spl out for sure.  May end up using them as my main speaker.
I'll post a review when I have some gigs on them and try them stacked in testing. 

https://www.facebook.com/371069353615/videos/10154842280948616/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhCYYAsTUd0

Douglas R. Allen

You may also want to take a look at the RCF line.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vG6bB1AVTxc&t=171s
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Corey Scogin on July 03, 2018, 12:42:54 am
Download EASE Focus and start to download speaker files from Danley and TW Audio and create a typical outdoor venue for yourself. If you are a geographic nerd like myself you can even screenshot a Google Maps view of your outdoor venue and import it to get a reality check on your sound pressure gradients.

Then also find a typical 12"+horn file (QSC K12, for instance is available) to compare to. You can also download RCF boxes like the TTL6A to check it out. Or a silly short line array on a stick can also be modeled.

I didn't realize EASE had a free visualizer product. That's a neat utility.

The Danley and QSC GLL files are not licensed for the latest version of EASE Focus.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Scott Holtzman on July 03, 2018, 01:34:06 am
I didn't realize EASE had a free visualizer product. That's a neat utility.

The Danley and QSC GLL files are not licensed for the latest version of EASE Focus.

FBT is in the same boat, hasn't licensed V3.  You can still download V2 though. 
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on July 03, 2018, 07:09:46 am
Bren:

Download EASE Focus and start to download speaker files from Danley and TW Audio and create a typical outdoor venue for yourself. If you are a geographic nerd like myself you can even screenshot a Google Maps view of your outdoor venue and import it to get a reality check on your sound pressure gradients.

Then also find a typical 12"+horn file (QSC K12, for instance is available) to compare to. You can also download RCF boxes like the TTL6A to check it out. Or a silly short line array on a stick can also be modeled.

I have gone thru 10-15 boxes and found the best output/mass ratio to be the IG4T Douglas mentions. There may not be enough, especially in the mid-bass, for your program material, but you can check this with octave modeling in EASE focus.

EASE Focus also assists in visualizing the help that going from the 80* nominal pattern to a 60x40 like the T24N could provide for HF directivity. You should also consider that some of your mids may be currently absorbed in the first couple of rows and additional elevation like scaffolding might help.

HTH,
Jon

I've started to write an informal review on the IG4T's.  I thought they were rather thick in the 90 to 300hz range. I set the crossover on the IG4T's to 110hz when listening and used the 100hz crossover on the Yorkville EF500p when I compared them. Not sure if excursion would be a limiting factor with the crossover set to 110hz for loud play back in the 90/300hz range.  I have not looked at them with my smaart setup as of yet or gone out with them.  They are certainly better than the EF500p which is a 15 woofer and 3 inch horn voice coil in overall coverage by a lot. Possible more output as well.  I think 2 IG4T's a side , with the large coverage they give , would with proper subs would be more than impressive for 2 40lb boxes a side.   Again this is just a draft I had started.

""" Did a quick listen at work. I have been using Yorkville's EF500p's with LS801pb subs. The tops and subs have been my staple for many years. I did a direct comparison today. The 4-6.5 inch drivers I really didn't expect to keep up with the subs nor did I really expect them to sound "full" if you will.
With a EF500p on the left and IG4T on the right this is what I found. IG4T has a listed 1 db less max output. I used recorded music and Live band tracks returned to my desk for testing

The horn on the 4T's are different and need to be heard. The up front level seems smoother and not as "pointed" as the EF500p's. Left to Right coverage up front is miles above the yorkie's. I pointed both speakers to the left about 45 degrees off center. The 4T's still sounded even where the horns on the 500's were down and the very high's missing. Great L/R coverage on the T's.

75 feet back the Yorkvilles sounded as expected straight on within the tight pattern but lacked again side to side. The odd thing was the IG4T's seemed louder than the 500's in the back and the coverage was great.

Over all sound. The EF500's sounded average with no eq and had some 250 to 450hz gack stuff that I always take out. The IG4T's didn't need any eq to sound good. The fullness they gave was not expected. If anything they sounded very thick but clean at 100 to 300hz range with authority. I found I used the 110hz crossover frequency built into the DSP in the IG4T's compared to the 100hz cut on the yorkvilles.

To sum it up. Pretty much the same volume as my EF500p's which I really like up close but much better coverage. Farther back they manage to be louder in relation to the 500's and still have better coverage. All in all I can retire my EF500p's to high level drum / bass monitoring on stage and replace them with these.
Same to better volume. Better coverage and "Sound" plus a 50 percent reduction in weight. These are better than my EF500p's.

Side note. The IG4T's take a little more input to reach full output at the same time as the EF500p's. I adjusted for that during testing. They do have a handy VU meter on the back that shows input and gives you a quick reference as to the headroom left on the speaker. Also they had no problems keeping up to my subs. I may have had about 3-4db's to go in my tops when the subs limit lights came on with average tracks. '''''

Again an informal listening/testing at this point.  I was amazed that a 40lb box gave such good coverage/output and to me bested my 15/3 inch tops that weigh in twice as much. I ordered some LP-IG Ingenia link brackets and they should be here in a day or so. I really like to take a look at a stack with Smaart.  I'm really hoping to not like what I see because I'd hate to have to order another pair...  ;-)

Douglas R. Allen
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 03, 2018, 08:04:24 am
Bren:

Download EASE Focus and start to download speaker files from Danley and TW Audio and create a typical outdoor venue for yourself. If you are a geographic nerd like myself you can even screenshot a Google Maps view of your outdoor venue and import it to get a reality check on your sound pressure gradients.

Then also find a typical 12"+horn file (QSC K12, for instance is available) to compare to. You can also download RCF boxes like the TTL6A to check it out. Or a silly short line array on a stick can also be modeled.

I have gone thru 10-15 boxes and found the best output/mass ratio to be the IG4T Douglas mentions. There may not be enough, especially in the mid-bass, for your program material, but you can check this with octave modeling in EASE focus.

EASE Focus also assists in visualizing the help that going from the 80* nominal pattern to a 60x40 like the T24N could provide for HF directivity. You should also consider that some of your mids may be currently absorbed in the first couple of rows and additional elevation like scaffolding might help.

HTH,
Jon

Thatís a much better way of getting some idea of what the speakers are capable of; it however assumes the manufacturer has put the correct data representative of the speakers true SPL capabilities, which may or may not be the case.

Many manufactures max SPL figures often just represent the max SPL capability of the HF driver, but in practice the typically lower output capability of the low / mid driver is a better representation of what we can expect in the real world.  Using an EASE sim solves this.

So FWIW these are some results of EASE Focus 3 -  Boxes @ 4m height, SPL at 50M

I have used mostly RCF and dB Technologies boxes assuming they may use the same measurement methods as they are part of the same company ??

4 x DB Technologies VIO 210 Ė 97.6dB
4 x DB Technologies T12 FIR Ė 97.6dB
4 x DB Technologies T8 FIR Ė 93.7dB
2 x RCF TTL6 Ė 92.7dB
1 x TW Audio T24N Ė 87dB
1 x RCF TTL6 Ė 86.3dB
1 x RCF TT25MK2 Ė 82.3
2 x DB Technologies IG4T Ė 80.9dB
1 x DB Technologies IG4T Ė 76.3dB
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Ivan Beaver on July 03, 2018, 08:15:41 am
Thatís a much better way of getting some idea of what the speakers are capable of; it however assumes the manufacturer has put the correct data representative of the speakers true SPL capabilities, which may or may not be the case.

Many manufactures max SPL figures are often just represent the max SPL capability of the HF driver, but in practice the typically lower output capability of the low / mid driver is a better representation of what we can expect in the real world.  Using an EASE sim solves this.


That is a VERY important point.

There are some products that have a large hump around 1-2KHz (where the Hf driver is being really loud), without eq applied.

So that point can be 10dB louder than the rest of the response of the cabinet.

So is that "hump" really what you want to know (It will have to be eqed down anyway), or rather how loud the OTHER freq can get?

This is a prime example of where a "single simple number" can get you in all sorts of trouble in terms of expected output/outcome.

You MUST look a bit further in order to get the real/usable answers.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 03, 2018, 09:20:08 am
Thank you Peter for sharing all the info regarding the PM 90. I would love to hear these cabinets some day.

Just wondering what you would consider to be the maximum distance  you would want between subs and tops in a small system like the SM 80/TH 118.  Would this distance have the same effect on the system in both the vertical and horizontal planes?

I have heard the SM80 pole mounted on top of a TH118 and it worked perfectly. I suspect if you flew the SM80 20 plus feet in the air and ground stacked the sub I would expect you to notice a few issues. In these case you really want solid performance down quite low and a crossover around 80Hz or less.

The PM90 is also a bit of a compromise with a nominal crossover of 100Hz. It can be crossed as low as 80Hz but at the expense of LF output/SPL.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on July 03, 2018, 09:20:53 am
Thatís a much better way of getting some idea of what the speakers are capable of; it however assumes the manufacturer has put the correct data representative of the speakers true SPL capabilities, which may or may not be the case.

Many manufactures max SPL figures are often just represent the max SPL capability of the HF driver, but in practice the typically lower output capability of the low / mid driver is a better representation of what we can expect in the real world.  Using an EASE sim solves this.

So FWIW these are some results of EASE Focus 3 -  Boxes @ 4m height, SPL at 50M

I have used mostly RCF and dB Technologies boxes assuming they may use the same measurement methods as they are part of the same company ??

4 x DB Technologies VIO 210 Ė 97.6dB
4 x DB Technologies T12 FIR Ė 97.6dB
4 x DB Technologies T8 FIR Ė 93.7dB
2 x RCF TTL6 Ė 92.7dB
1 x TW Audio T24N Ė 87dB
1 x RCF TTL6 Ė 86.3dB
1 x RCF TT25MK2 Ė 82.3
2 x DB Technologies IG4T Ė 80.9dB
1 x DB Technologies IG4T Ė 76.3dB

Just for clarity. These are at 50 meters. 164 feet out in the USA. 80.9 dbs I find respectable at 164 feet. Working backwards that would be around 116db's at 2.5 feet? *roughly*  Close to 5db's of coupling for the two boxes as well.  Not too bad. Especially in that price range. Is this full bandwidth within the designed frequency range of the box? I know the SM80 has somewhat limited range below 140hz or so but I believe some eq can be added without thermal or excursion limits in spl?  How does a person go about using EASE when some eq is or low cut filters may be needed? Also within the 90hz to 120 Low Cut Filter range used in the IG4T's how does these numbers correlate? I see the IG4T as a mid/high box and not as a full range box.   I'm guessing proper eq is done by manufactures in self powered boxes so a big hump in output around the horn's cut off and above is already corrected?  I as well believe looking at Peak spl is silly at best. You get what you pay for is as always true within reason.  I certainly didn't hear any large hump around 1-2 k.  My fathers health at 86 has dominated my time at current but I'll try to give the 4T's a look with smaart at some point as I could be wrong.

Douglas R. Allen
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 03, 2018, 09:40:54 am
Just for clarity. These are at 50 meters. 164 feet out in the USA. 80.9 dbs I find respectable at 164 feet. Working backwards that would be around 116db's at 2.5 feet? *roughly*  Close to 5db's of coupling for the two boxes as well.  Not too bad. Especially in that price range. Is this full bandwidth within the designed frequency range of the box? I know the SM80 has somewhat limited range below 140hz or so but I believe some eq can be added without thermal or excursion limits in spl?  How does a person go about using EASE when some eq is or low cut filters may be needed? Also within the 90hz to 120 Low Cut Filter range used in the IG4T's how does these numbers correlate? I see the IG4T as a mid/high box and not as a full range box.   I'm guessing proper eq is done by manufactures in self powered boxes so a big hump in output around the horn's cut off and above is already corrected?  I as well believe looking at Peak spl is silly at best. You get what you pay for is as always true within reason.  I certainly didn't hear any large hump around 1-2 k.  My fathers health at 86 has dominated my time at current but I'll try to give the 4T's a look with smaart at some point as I could be wrong.

Douglas R. Allen

In the case of the IG4T the peak which is usually around 2K for a 3" diaphragm compression driver has been equalised flat by the on board DSP: but that does not change its underlying efficiency and ability to produce SPL.

FWIW I have some of the IG4Ts ... very nice smooth sounding speaker. Its tall slim profile almost disappears from view in many applications - great for those corporate functions where that is important.

With respect to EASE Focus3 you can model EQ and crossovers 
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on July 03, 2018, 12:29:48 pm
In the case of the IG4T the peak which is usually around 2K for a 3" diaphragm compression driver has been equalised flat by the on board DSP: but that does not change its underlying efficiency and ability to produce SPL.

FWIW I have some of the IG4Ts ... very nice smooth sounding speaker. Its tall slim profile almost disappears from view in many applications - great for those corporate functions where that is important.

With respect to EASE Focus3 you can model EQ and crossovers

Peter;

        Thanks for the information.  One of the reasons I picked them up was the small footprint and weight.  I was thinking about a standard 12 and horn but in some rooms I do these these are even better for line of sight.  That and I have 2 rooms that a single stack of 2 with a pair of subs under will most likely be how I will go out with them.
        How they matched and in some ways out did the ef500p's was an unexpected bonus.  Have you stacked them in pairs and any problems I should look out for?

        Thanks again;
        Douglas R Allen

Sorry for topic swerve.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Ivan Beaver on July 03, 2018, 12:46:36 pm
I have heard the SM80 pole mounted on top of a TH118 and it worked perfectly. I suspect if you flew the SM80 20 plus feet in the air and ground stacked the sub I would expect you to notice a few issues. In these case you really want solid performance down quite low and a crossover around 80Hz or less.


Agreed.  It is all a matter of "it depends".  When the full range cabinets are not truly full range, and located a distance from the subs, you get the impression that you are hearing highs and lows from different places, which you are.

Some people like to have different parts coming from different places, and consider that "good"-I am not one of them.

Agreed that if the tops and subs are separated by a decent distance, the tops need to be full range.

Hence the reason for the SM80F (F is for full range) for installs.  But not exactly pole mountable for portable setups.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 04, 2018, 07:45:24 pm
Peter;

 Have you stacked them in pairs and any problems I should look out for?

        Thanks again;
        Douglas R Allen

Sorry for topic swerve.

Yes, no problems operating in pairs - one on top of the other with the horns together, just dial in the setting for 2 boxes and away you go. You do notice a significant, almost 6 dB increase in output, much more that you get sticking 2 x 12"+ horn speakers side by side.

The only issue in this configuration is being able to get the boxes high enough (safely) to take advantage of their performance.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on July 04, 2018, 09:01:42 pm
Yes, no problems operating in pairs - one on top of the other with the horns together, just dial in the setting for 2 boxes and away you go. You do notice a significant, almost 6 dB increase in output, much more that you get sticking 2 x 12"+ horn speakers side by side.

The only issue in this configuration is being able to get the boxes high enough (safely) to take advantage of their performance.

Thank you.

     I have a very high rt room in August that will be the first time I can try the stack.  A single stack should yeild the best sound in there.

Kindest regards;
        Douglas R. Allen
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Ivan Beaver on July 04, 2018, 09:22:51 pm
Thank you.

     I have a very high rt room in August that will be the first time I can try the stack.  A single stack should yeild the best sound in there.

Kindest regards;
        Douglas R. Allen
With ANY loudspeaker, a SINGLE unit will sound better than multiples.

Yes multiples may be louder, but due to 2 arrivals, will not sound better or clearer.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Renard Hurtado on July 05, 2018, 12:09:15 am
 Hi All,

I have 4 IG4T and really like these boxes.  I bought them about two months ago, since then my EV ETX-35P and my beloved SRX-725, have been vacationing.

Two stacked on top of each other, really shines, getting vocals out of a` mix is very very easy with these boxes.

The small footprint is fantastic, first time I used them was a show by a choir and with various solo artists, open air in front of a national museum, around 600 people.after the show lots of folks came up to me and ask me, if i had some other speakers hiddeen somewhere in the trees.

I am using them with a pair os DbTechn sub18H a side,

This is one of the best investments I have made, next to some QSC HPR-122 I cannot break or destroy.

In a ball room they had two big screens left and right, when i walked in the organizer told me, sorry but there is almost no place fo put your speakers. he left the room, he came back during soundcheck, furious expecting to find my boxes blocking the screens, when he opened the door, he just stood and shook his head......he could believe these slim towers next to the screens, was producing this much clean and clear sound !
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 05, 2018, 01:49:04 am
With ANY loudspeaker, a SINGLE unit will sound better than multiples.

Yes multiples may be louder, but due to 2 arrivals, will not sound better or clearer.

In this case you only really get 1 arrival, its not perfect but in practice it works quite well - The horn is at the top of the box and its horizontal pattern is +20 - 50 degrees, below that there are 4 x 6.5" drivers.  The design of the horn allows two horns to be place on top of each other with the top horn (and box) inverted.

The concept is a bit like cutting an SBH20 in half with each section covering 0 to -10 degrees and using half for a small show and stacking the two halves together for a larger show.

Its not perfect but its MUCH better than you get when you stack two normal boxes together.  It also allows a little beam steering. 

By doing this dB Tech have added a little bit of scale-ability into the system. 
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: David Allred on July 05, 2018, 07:10:07 am


In a ball room they had two big screens left and right, when i walked in the organizer told me, sorry but there is almost no place fo put your speakers. he left the room, he came back during soundcheck, furious expecting to find my boxes blocking the screens, when he opened the door, he just stood and shook his head......he could believe these slim towers next to the screens, was producing this much clean and clear sound !

The organizer was mad that you succeeded?
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Ivan Beaver on July 05, 2018, 07:25:51 am
In this case you only really get 1 arrival, its not perfect but in practice it works quite well - The horn is at the top of the box and its horizontal pattern is +20 - 50 degrees, below that there are 4 x 6.5" drivers.  The design of the horn allows two horns to be place on top of each other with the top horn (and box) inverted.

The concept is a bit like cutting an SBH20 in half with each section covering 0 to -10 degrees and using half for a small show and stacking the two halves together for a larger show.

Its not perfect but its MUCH better than you get when you stack two normal boxes together.  It also allows a little beam steering. 

By doing this dB Tech have added a little bit of scale-ability into the system.
I would argue differently.

"It depends" on what freq you are talking about. and at what distance.

At the lower to middle freq, sure you will have one apparent arrival.  But at the higher freq, where the wavelengths get small, the arrivals MUST be closer and closer to gather in order to have a "single arrival".  This is generally considered to be less than 1/4 wavelength.

10KHz is 1.4", this would be a difference of 0.35".

The SBH products are NOT radiating into the same area.

Each of the lenses covers a different part of the total radiation pattern.

That is exactly why line arrays have issues, different drivers cover the same area, arriving at different times, resulting in comb filtering-or smearing.

This results is a loss of detail and clarity.

Here is a little video of what is going on inside the SBH products and how it is achieved.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8cX5Xs_vZg

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 05, 2018, 09:33:18 am

The SBH products are NOT radiating into the same area.

Each of the lenses covers a different part of the total radiation pattern.


Yes I understand that, and that's what dB are trying to do to some extent with the asymmetrical horn design.

They can be stacked with the two horn together, the top horn covering 0 to about +40 degree and the bottom horn 0 to - 40 degree (best guess for two boxes) ... its a compromise but it works.

I'm sure it does not as well as dedicated single box but as a compromise its much better than sticking two standard boxes together. In this case two boxes give you almost 6 dB more output, with standard boxes its more like 3 dB and a loss of articulation.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Renard Hurtado on July 06, 2018, 01:37:10 am
The organizer was mad that you succeeded?

yes, when he was outside he heared the loud sound coming from the exhibition hall, I guess he thought that the  big boxes were placed in his absence in front of the screens..........but when he walked into the room, his madness faded away !
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: David Allred on July 06, 2018, 09:14:29 am
yes, when he was outside he heared the loud sound coming from the exhibition hall, I guess he thought that the  big boxes were placed in his absence in front of the screens..........but when he walked into the room, his madness faded away !
That makes more sense that he jumped to a conclusion.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: John Schalk on July 09, 2018, 04:19:04 pm
4 x DB Technologies VIO 210 Ė 97.6dB
4 x DB Technologies T12 FIR Ė 97.6dB
4 x DB Technologies T8 FIR Ė 93.7dB
2 x RCF TTL6 Ė 92.7dB
1 x TW Audio T24N Ė 87dB
1 x RCF TTL6 Ė 86.3dB
1 x RCF TT25MK2 Ė 82.3
2 x DB Technologies IG4T Ė 80.9dB
1 x DB Technologies IG4T Ė 76.3dB

Very interesting data Peter, thanks for posting it.  I have a few questions.  Did you model the 60 degree or 90 degree T24N and would the different horn pattern matter for an SPL reading in EASE?  Also, for the 2 x TTL6, did you model them as one over one in the vertical orientation or side by side?  None of the RCF system images for the TTL6 show it being used in a horizontal array; perhaps because of the design of the mid-high horn?  Regarding the IG4T, it seems very similar to the NXL 24A.  For both of those designs, do you know if the mids are sent to all four 6" drivers, or are they restricted to the top driver only. 
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on July 09, 2018, 08:56:58 pm
Very interesting data Peter, thanks for posting it.  I have a few questions.  Did you model the 60 degree or 90 degree T24N and would the different horn pattern matter for an SPL reading in EASE?  Also, for the 2 x TTL6, did you model them as one over one in the vertical orientation or side by side?  None of the RCF system images for the TTL6 show it being used in a horizontal array; perhaps because of the design of the mid-high horn?  Regarding the IG4T, it seems very similar to the NXL 24A.  For both of those designs, do you know if the mids are sent to all four 6" drivers, or are they restricted to the top driver only.

John;.

In the case of Ig4t's it is a 2 way box with a crossover of 1.1k.  The 4 - 6.5 inch drivers are 16 ohm and the 4 are all wired in parrell for a 4 ohm load.  I did consider this total spacing of course to be to a little great for all the drivers to be closer than 1/4 wavelength and yet with music there doesn't seem to be a phase problem when listening from the top speaker going down to the bottom one.  I measured 20 inches from the top speakers center cone to the bottoms speakers center cone. So around 620hz and below should couple. When stacked as a pair this would change as well.  I have as yet not listened to them coupled.  I wondered why they weren't manufacturered as a "quasi" 3 way but maybe there is more to it than overall spacing.  Each driver in relation to the next one down is close enough to be closer than 1/4 wavelength at the crossover frequency so do they all couple as one? 

The 4 drivers in a line sound like one driver.  How they measure I haven't had a chance to check yet.

Douglas R. Allen

EDIT Adding a video with the IG4T being disassembled.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZ_y9iCDypQ
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 10, 2018, 04:03:38 am
Very interesting data Peter, thanks for posting it.  I have a few questions.  Did you model the 60 degree or 90 degree T24N and would the different horn pattern matter for an SPL reading in EASE?  Also, for the 2 x TTL6, did you model them as one over one in the vertical orientation or side by side?  None of the RCF system images for the TTL6 show it being used in a horizontal array; perhaps because of the design of the mid-high horn?  Regarding the IG4T, it seems very similar to the NXL 24A.  For both of those designs, do you know if the mids are sent to all four 6" drivers, or are they restricted to the top driver only.

The Sim was for the 90 degree T24N and the 2 x TTL6's were one over one with the horns together.

The IG4T's are configured as Douglas said.  When you look at the GLL plots for one box they are very nice with some vertical issues around the crossover that you get with all 2 way boxes with the horn at the top.  When you look a the GLL plot for two boxes there is some comb filtering happening which produces some "fingers"  in the vertical coverage pattern - BUT the intended coverage area for how the boxes are designed to be set up is excellent with more or less no issues.

I have used the IG4T as a single and one over one ... and for what they are designed to do, they're great - we always get positive comments from the audience and engineers.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on July 10, 2018, 11:28:50 am
Hi Peter,   +1, on thanks for posting the Ease simulations.

Are you able to input the necessary information into Ease, to make comparable simulations for the PM 90/60s ? (and maybe even SM-80)
I'm thinking that could add a boatload of perspective to the thread....

I've yet to wade into learning modeling programs, but I do  realize manufacturers typically provide Ease data.
So please pardon me for even asking this ......if manually inputting or guesstimating data,  isn't doable or is simply a lot of work  :)
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Geert Friedhof on July 10, 2018, 06:17:33 pm
Ease focus is free to download and use for you. The manufacturer pays the fees. You just need GLL files.

Start playing!
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Caleb Dueck on July 10, 2018, 07:55:27 pm
Ease focus is free to download and use for you. The manufacturer pays the fees. You just need GLL files.

Start playing!
But - since it costs the manufacturer quite a bit, many manufacturers don't pay to play.  This is why many manufacturers also create their own software, along with additional functionality they can program in their own that Ease Focus can't do. 

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Geert Friedhof on July 11, 2018, 07:17:04 am
But - since it costs the manufacturer quite a bit, many manufacturers don't pay to play.  This is why many manufacturers also create their own software, along with additional functionality they can program in their own that Ease Focus can't do. 

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

yeah, i know, but it might give the OP some direction and understanding modelling some stuff on his own.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 11, 2018, 08:17:05 am
Hi Peter,   +1, on thanks for posting the Ease simulations.

Are you able to input the necessary information into Ease, to make comparable simulations for the PM 90/60s ? (and maybe even SM-80)
I'm thinking that could add a boatload of perspective to the thread....

I've yet to wade into learning modeling programs, but I do  realize manufacturers typically provide Ease data.
So please pardon me for even asking this ......if manually inputting or guesstimating data,  isn't doable or is simply a lot of work  :)

No I don't have a GLL file for the PM90/60. To do this its output has to be measured at every frequency over thousands of points over the surface of a sphere.  I have access to the equipment to do that but for it to be useful  I would need to buy a licence for Ease Focus ...$$$$$

Danley has GLL files but no licence for Ease Focus that I could use for comparison.  You can of course look at them using Ease GLL viewer - the SM80's plots are extremely good, there are only a few points where you see some lumps and bumps. The IG4T is also extremely good but you can see the issues at the crossover frequency between the HF and Low (1100Hz)
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on July 11, 2018, 10:28:10 am
No I don't have a GLL file for the PM90/60. To do this its output has to be measured at every frequency over thousands of points over the surface of a sphere.  I have access to the equipment to do that but for it to be useful  I would need to buy a licence for Ease Focus ...$$$$$

Danley has GLL files but no licence for Ease Focus that I could use for comparison.  You can of course look at them using Ease GLL viewer - the SM80's plots are extremely good, there are only a few points where you see some lumps and bumps. The IG4T is also extremely good but you can see the issues at the crossover frequency between the HF and Low (1100Hz)

Thanks Peter, I had no idea GLL files encompassed so many measurements.
Interesting stuff.


And thx Geert,  yeah, I'd like to wade into modeling commercial boxes, especially wading in for free !....

it's just so far, I've been focused on DIY efforts, trying to get a good grip on making basic on and off axis measurements, and then listening to the coverage.
And i also have to admit I kinda hate using models when i feel I don't understand all the factors they rest on....

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Geert Friedhof on July 11, 2018, 11:40:22 am
While you are at it, you might wanna have a look at the RCF TT 25 CXA. You too Peter. You might be in for a nice surprise...

I have 4 of those, and all i can say is: WOW! I suspect they will have a SM80 for breakfast. Not flyable though, but only 40 lbs or so.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeremy Young on July 11, 2018, 01:17:04 pm
Geert, the RCF spec sheet for the TT-25 CXA lists a max SPL of 133 dB. 
The DSL SM80 spec sheet lists max SPL as 134dB. 

What information do you have that supports your claim?  Have you A/B compared the two cabinets?  Do you own or have you worked with DSL SM80's? 

How is the 60x60 pattern on the RCF box when used on a pole versus the DSL 80x80 pattern?  Have you arrayed them for wider coverage and did you notice much interference?  I would think a higher max SPL rating and larger area of coverage (DSL) would mean the SM80 would be the top performer but I am comparing spec sheet single numbers from different manufacturers here (dangerous game that is) which is why I'm interested in your first-hand experiences.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Geert Friedhof on July 11, 2018, 02:11:07 pm
Follwing this thread i got the Danley EASE GLL files, and compared them to the CXA.

There is a 3dB rms difference (AES) in favour of the CXA.

Also compare the balloon graph. Same freq as SM80 (4600Hz)
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Geert Friedhof on July 11, 2018, 02:34:10 pm
I have not arrayed them, and i turn them in slighly (10-15 degrees) when the stage is wider than 20 feet.

Overhere in Europe we don't get much Danley.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Rick Powell on July 11, 2018, 05:07:18 pm
Follwing this thread i got the Danley EASE GLL files, and compared them to the CXA.

There is a 3dB rms difference (AES) in favour of the CXA.

Also compare the balloon graph. Same freq as SM80 (4600Hz)

I am having trouble interpreting these graphs. I can believe the CXA is more efficient at frequencies around 100 Hz but with the horn loading, the SM80 plays louder from say 300 to 2000 Hz than most 2-way boxes its size for a given voltage input.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Geert Friedhof on July 11, 2018, 05:51:41 pm
Yes, but the SM80 has 35.6dbV, which converts roughly to 450W at 8 ohm, while the CXA is 1100W rms.

The CXA is 15", the SM80 is 12" According to EASE, the RMS spl is 127dB@35.6dBV for the SM80, while the CXA should do 130.5dB@1100W.

I still think it would be a very interesting shootout.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeremy Young on July 11, 2018, 07:47:27 pm
Thanks for the info Geert.  So in your eyes a +3dB difference in output is enough to eat something for breakfast?  Less than I'd get excited about, but that's really up to the buyer to determine whether +3dB of theoretical output for a box that looks like a monitor-wedge on it's side is worth the upgrade.

Not to sound like a Danley fanboy (I own some SM80's, so I'm sure owner's bias can be applied to my perspective), but I wonder how the impedance of the SM80 (although nominally 8-ohm but is well above 8-ohm for much of the operating range) plays into the RMS wattage for those figures in EASE. 

I admit that if this EASE data is from real-world measurements, then it's as real-world as it gets and I can be ignored.  I've never worked with EASE but I use Danley's direct software often.

However, for me to carry this thought through in the presence of more experienced minds than mine, the SM80 spec sheet shows that the impedance is above 10-ohms from about 600hz to 5khz (a very important range for vocals). 

Danley's rated sensitivity is derived from 2.83v input, and max output SPL is based on the recommended wattage at the nominal impedance (400 watts = 26dBw) added to the sensitivity (102dB).  As I'm sure you know (but others reading this may not), 2.83v into 8-ohms = 1 watt; but 2.83v into 16-ohms (around 1.5khz) is 0.5 watts; meaning one 'could' add another 2-3dB in max output in that range.  If I've done my math wrong please correct me.

Again, this is clear evidence for why single-numbers cannot be applied to these sorts of things and why I was interested whether you'd actually put these boxes against each other before claiming one was vastly superior to the other. I've never seen or used the RCF box.

Yes it is a 12", but it's horn-loaded in a sealed box.  The RCF box in discussion is not (bass-reflex), so it would be inaccurate to compare the two based on midrange-driver diameter alone.

In use, I find the pattern control in the mid-range of the SM80 to be very helpful in keeping the midrange mud out of the microphones when the stage is close to the back of the main loudspeakers.  I own a small production company, but I just used a pair of SM80's in an outdoor field with 100' to the furthest listeners, trim height approx 8' to the bottom of the box with 8-degrees downward tilt.  Range of live entertainment throughout the (windy) day ending with a 4-piece British Invasion cover band.

My peak-hold lights on my loudspeaker processor indicated that my peaks were 6dB away from the RMS limiters (I had 1,600-watt-into-8-ohm amplifiers on each loudspeaker, so peaks could still breeze past the RMS limiters by another 6dB before amp clipping) and it was nice and clear throughout the listening area with very consistent response.  Rock levels it was not, but the client didn't want rock levels for this family event.  The BE was very happy with the system.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 11, 2018, 08:01:53 pm
Here are the Ease SPL plots - there is a double IG4T that is not obvious.

There is also a plot of 4 x dB Tech T8s
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com on July 11, 2018, 08:26:25 pm
I finally had a chance to listen to the RCF TTL6-A speakers in person over the weekend.  A long-time client of mine is using them as his new A-rig. As deployed in the linked photo gallery, the speakers sounded VERY good and provided good GBF used in a live bluegrass situation.  The rig had ample headroom and still sounded crystal clear in the parking area all the way above and behind the main seating area.  I am thoroughly impressed with this rig and would highly recommend it to anyone looking for an upgrade in this class.

My client is based in the MD area so if you'd like to take a listen yourself, please contact me.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/T95P3C3eTgJZrXEy5

Jeff
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: David Sturzenbecher on July 11, 2018, 08:28:43 pm
I finally had a chance to listen to the RCF TTL6-A speakers in person over the weekend.  A long-time client of mine is using them as his new A-rig. As deployed in the linked photo gallery, the speakers sounded VERY good and provided good GBF used in a live bluegrass situation.  The rig had ample headroom and still sounded crystal clear in the parking area all the way above and behind the main seating area.  I am thoroughly impressed with this rig and would highly recommend it to anyone looking for an upgrade in this class.

My client is based in the MD area so if you'd like to take a listen yourself, please contact me.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/T95P3C3eTgJZrXEy5

Jeff

Do you sell roofs?  You should.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on July 11, 2018, 09:13:55 pm
Here are the Ease SPL plots - there is a double IG4T that is not obvious.

There is also a plot of 4 x dB Tech T8s

Thanks for posting these and the other plots in the post before.  I noticed that the single IG4T has a listed 129.7 spl and a smooth response from 100hz or so up to around the crossover point with a downwards tilt after. Basically how I like to set my pa up. I thought in my listening test it sounded very good in the 100 to 300 hz range and the speaker with no EQ sounded fine.  The two stacked has some interaction around the crossover frequency but I'm guessing this is the two horns interacting and it may sound better than it looks.  Any chance there is data on the Yorkville ef500p? Like to see it's listed spl as I thought they were very close but the ef500p coverage/response was different :-/ .
I'm going to download Ease this weekend if I can squeeze the time in.

Kindest regards;
Douglas R. Allen
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Geert Friedhof on July 11, 2018, 09:18:35 pm
@Jeremy:

Yes, the CXA is intended for monitor use, buti it's also conical coaxial, like the sm80. So i was just interested in comparing the two.

That's why i wrote 'suspect'. The ease data suggests so.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeff Lelko on July 11, 2018, 09:24:56 pm
I finally had a chance to listen to the RCF TTL6-A speakers in person over the weekend.  A long-time client of mine is using them as his new A-rig. As deployed in the linked photo gallery, the speakers sounded VERY good and provided good GBF used in a live bluegrass situation.  The rig had ample headroom and still sounded crystal clear in the parking area all the way above and behind the main seating area.  I am thoroughly impressed with this rig and would highly recommend it to anyone looking for an upgrade in this class.

My client is based in the MD area so if you'd like to take a listen yourself, please contact me.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/T95P3C3eTgJZrXEy5

Jeff

Thanks for the report and pictures!  Sound quality aside and putting my corporate hat on I like how clean the deployment looks.  Knowing that youíre also a user of the SH46, how do they compare to the TTL6-A and if you had to buy one or the other, which would you take?  I also know RCF makes the companion TTL6-AS but so far in my research on these systems see very few of the AS variant in use.  Why might that be?  Thanks!
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Steven Eudaly on July 11, 2018, 11:20:31 pm
I like how clean the deployment looks.

While looking at the photos, "clean" was not a word that came to mind for me.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: John Schalk on July 12, 2018, 11:04:14 am
Is that one over one for a total of four TTL 6A boxes, or is it one TTL6A and one bass module per side?  I didn't see any other subs in the photo, although for blue grass, you don't need a lot of thump.

The TT 25-CXA is a very interesting box.  That is a lot of output from a 40lb box that includes the power amp.  What do you feel is the -3dB point?
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com on July 12, 2018, 11:06:54 am
Do you sell roofs?  You should.

Haha, no I don't currently sell roofs.  The roof wasn't my client's either.

Jeff
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com on July 12, 2018, 11:10:00 am
Is that one over one for a total of four TTL 6A boxes, or is it one TTL6A and one bass module per side?  I didn't see any other subs in the photo, although for blue grass, you don't need a lot of thump.

The TT 25-CXA is a very interesting box.  That is a lot of output from a 40lb box that includes the power amp.  What do you feel is the -3dB point?

It's a total of four TTL 6A boxes, one over one per side.  There are two Yorkville LS801P subs per side that aren't in the pictures.  The RCF's have very decent low-frequency response on their own based on feedback from my client.  I wasn't able to hear that for myself first hand though since the gig was already ongoing.

Jeff
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com on July 12, 2018, 11:11:00 am
While looking at the photos, "clean" was not a word that came to mind for me.

The flown RCF rig is very clean in appearance--the staging and roof was not provided by me or my client.

Jeff
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: David Allred on July 12, 2018, 11:18:37 am
The RCF's have very decent low-frequency response.



Decent = meh?  So, very meh?   ;D ;)
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com on July 12, 2018, 11:21:17 am
Thanks for the report and pictures!  Sound quality aside and putting my corporate hat on I like how clean the deployment looks.  Knowing that youíre also a user of the SH46, how do they compare to the TTL6-A and if you had to buy one or the other, which would you take?  I also know RCF makes the companion TTL6-AS but so far in my research on these systems see very few of the AS variant in use.  Why might that be?  Thanks!

Those are tougher questions to answer!  I'll try to break it down a little bit:
Deployment - I really like the appearance of the flown RCF rig.  I have only ever ground stacked SH46's on scaffolding--that's a much wider and seemingly labor intensive endeavor.  Theoretically SH46's could be flown in a similar fashion as the RCF's were in this picture.  That would make it a much more interesting comparison.

Sound quality - Out of the box, the RCF's are self-powered boxes and have a very flat response and hi-fi sound to them.  Similarly, SH46's sound fairly good out of the box but can use some additional processing to really shine to their full potential.  I would have to give an edge to overall pattern control to the Danleys but the horn-loaded RCF's are far better than most.  The RCF's have a flatter low-end response vs. the SH46's.  When the SH46's are used two or more per side that's less of an issue (as their low-end couples).  They still don't extend as low in response as the RCF's do though.  I don't think the RCF AS cabinets would be necessary unless you wanted extreme low bass response/headroom.

Output - I think the SH46's probably have the slight SPL advantage but for most people, it'd be a lot easier/safer to run the RCF's closer to their limits (with their self-powered and internal processing advantage).

My client actually had SH46's in mind for his new rig when he was introduced to the RCFs.  I think he would have been happy with either option but he has been extremely pleased with his purchase thus far.  It would be a tough decision for me to make for you--I highly recommend getting in front of both rigs so that you can make the call for yourself.

Thank you,

Jeff



Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com on July 12, 2018, 11:24:11 am
Decent = meh?  So, very meh?   ;D ;)

Not at all, I wasn't able to hear them without subs, but my client has used them at multiple smaller events without subs and not missed the subs at all.  That's far better low-frequency response than most competing products in this class.

Jeff
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: John Fruits on July 12, 2018, 11:25:35 am
The flown RCF rig is very clean in appearance--the staging and roof was not provided by me or my client.

Jeff
Good of you to clarify that, that side view shot of the stage could be a really good "circle all the wrong things" game.  If I were going to come up with a name for the staging provider I would choose Half-Fast Events or something like that.  They got some things right, others not so much.  I wonder, do they have insurance?
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: David Allred on July 12, 2018, 11:31:28 am
The pictures are "odd".  Even after looking at all of the views of the RCF's, the front-ish and side-ish views make the box look big (2 x 12 + horn big), but in the rear view they look very slim and not even as tall.  Is that the camera / phone playing tricks are do they seem that way in person.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Geert Friedhof on July 12, 2018, 12:07:51 pm
2 TTL6+flybar is almost 8 feet long.

CXA -3dB: somewhere around 80-85Hz. I use preset L2 (Flat with 100Hz HP) with sub 8004 in 90Hz mode.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: John Schalk on July 12, 2018, 12:30:30 pm
@Jeff -- That seems like a pretty wide seating area to cover with a 90 degree box.  Were there any fill speakers that did not make it into the pictures?  What are your thoughts on the coverage of the TTL 6a for these types of outdoor events where the audience area can be nearly 180 degrees?
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Steven Eudaly on July 12, 2018, 12:43:40 pm
I personally feel that this "put-two-boxes-together-with-one-upside-down" sort of deployment isn't too far removed from Ye Olden Daze Of Audio where people just stacked boxes covering different passbands together until it got loud enough.

Sure, RCF made the TTL6 rigging so it "works" but is it really the most efficient, cleanest, cost effective and best sounding way to get the job done?

I feel this box fits a weird niche between "point source" and "line array" that doesn't offer much flexibility.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com on July 12, 2018, 12:56:33 pm
@Jeff -- That seems like a pretty wide seating area to cover with a 90 degree box.  Were there any fill speakers that did not make it into the pictures?  What are your thoughts on the coverage of the TTL 6a for these types of outdoor events where the audience area can be nearly 180 degrees?

There were a pair of front fills on the stage deck and one Yorkville U15 as an extreme side fill speaker on the House Right side.  Horizontal coverage was probably as wide or slightly wider than a pair of SH46's arrayed per side would have provided.  Toying with the speaker splay on each side and leveraging the front fills right in front of the stage can provide pretty good coverage without additional gear (and larger budget requirements).

Jeff

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Rick Powell on July 12, 2018, 04:35:58 pm
Here are the Ease SPL plots - there is a double IG4T that is not obvious.

There is also a plot of 4 x dB Tech T8s

Without benefit of real EASE data, I'd still guess the PM90/PM60 would come in somewhere around the territory of the SH96HO, maybe a little less total output due to the # of woofers, but essentially the same BMS coaxial driver on a somewhat smaller horn, and a similar extended high end (probably flatter to 20k if FIR processed).
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Peter Morris on July 12, 2018, 09:02:20 pm
Without benefit of real EASE data, I'd still guess the PM90/PM60 would come in somewhere around the territory of the SH96HO, maybe a little less total output due to the # of woofers, but essentially the same BMS coaxial driver on a somewhat smaller horn, and a similar extended high end (probably flatter to 20k if FIR processed).

The PM90/60 will be somewhere near the SH96HO.  The SH96HO obviously goes lower but even if you consider everything above 100 Hz it will still make more because its a 4 way box where the PM90/60 is a 3 way box.

In term of spec sheet peak figures the PM90/60 and SH96HO will have about the same peak SPL because they use the same compression driver.  (Note: I believe Danley is now using a B&C driver in the  SH96HO)

In the real world its about energy over the entire operating spectrum not instantaneous peaks that are shown in the spec sheet.   A two way box rate at 130 dB will not be as loud as a 3 way box rated at 130 dB on a broad band  signal.

This is overly simplistic but on broad band signal if you have a woofer making 130dB + the high frequency driver making 130dB the output will be the sum of these two.  In the case of the 3 way box you can have all 3 drivers making 130dB; intuitively this will sum to more. If you think in terms of energy and assume each driver can take 100 watts and has the same efficiency - the 2-way can take 200 watts while the 3-way can take 300 watts.

You also have to remember that in the real world a speakers output is limited by the the output of the least powerful driver (i.e. low,mid or high) ... anyway as a guess the SH960HO should have about 3dB more output than a PM90/60 and a PM90/60 about 7 dB more than an SM80. 
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeff Lelko on July 12, 2018, 09:40:05 pm
Those are tougher questions to answer!  I'll try to break it down a little bit:
Deployment - I really like the appearance of the flown RCF rig.  I have only ever ground stacked SH46's on scaffolding--that's a much wider and seemingly labor intensive endeavor.  Theoretically SH46's could be flown in a similar fashion as the RCF's were in this picture.  That would make it a much more interesting comparison.

Sound quality - Out of the box, the RCF's are self-powered boxes and have a very flat response and hi-fi sound to them.  Similarly, SH46's sound fairly good out of the box but can use some additional processing to really shine to their full potential.  I would have to give an edge to overall pattern control to the Danleys but the horn-loaded RCF's are far better than most.  The RCF's have a flatter low-end response vs. the SH46's.  When the SH46's are used two or more per side that's less of an issue (as their low-end couples).  They still don't extend as low in response as the RCF's do though.  I don't think the RCF AS cabinets would be necessary unless you wanted extreme low bass response/headroom.

Output - I think the SH46's probably have the slight SPL advantage but for most people, it'd be a lot easier/safer to run the RCF's closer to their limits (with their self-powered and internal processing advantage).

My client actually had SH46's in mind for his new rig when he was introduced to the RCFs.  I think he would have been happy with either option but he has been extremely pleased with his purchase thus far.  It would be a tough decision for me to make for you--I highly recommend getting in front of both rigs so that you can make the call for yourself.

Thanks for the detailed response Jeff!  I completely agree that these two options aren't an apples to apples comparison - they're just two products that interest me and given that you've heard or used both I figured I'd ask.  I'd definitely be using (and thus comparing) two per side of either box.  What I like about the TTL6-As is that their rigging is integral to the cabinet so assembling the array on site isn't complicated, whereas (correct me if I'm wrong) the SH46s would be a bit more time consuming to bolt together and fly.  I also like that you can use only 1 TTL per side for smaller events, even on a pole mount if desired and safe to do so. 

I definitely plan on traveling to hear both options when the time comes for me to make a purchase.  Thanks again!

Sure, RCF made the TTL6 rigging so it "works" but is it really the most efficient, cleanest, cost effective and best sounding way to get the job done?

I feel this box fits a weird niche between "point source" and "line array" that doesn't offer much flexibility.

Speaking without seeing or hearing, I'm not sure I'd agree.  I do agree that this solution isn't a line array replacement, but it seems to be a modular and very manageable alternative to either the 4-box arrays or larger point sources such as the SH96.  While you could probably get 10 of the smaller RCF line array elements for the cost of 4 of the TTLs, I would wager these are easier to handle for the smaller operator on smaller jobs that don't really NEED a line array or refrigerator-sized boxes.  At least they seem to push the limit of what can be done with a system that's movable by one person in a single utility van! 
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jon Dees on July 13, 2018, 09:18:27 am
I personally feel that this "put-two-boxes-together-with-one-upside-down" sort of deployment isn't too far removed from Ye Olden Daze Of Audio where people just stacked boxes covering different passbands together until it got loud enough.

Sure, RCF made the TTL6 rigging so it "works" but is it really the most efficient, cleanest, cost effective and best sounding way to get the job done?

I feel this box fits a weird niche between "point source" and "line array" that doesn't offer much flexibility.

It is a weird niche but has been filled for a long time by the SRX835 and its predecessors, KF650 and boxes like the SLS920 and SLS960 (now discontinued). The TTL6 and its little brothers are an improvement on the KF650 concept in that one per side is not too narrow, allowing to cover more events/split up a rig, and these boxes are taller so guys not willing to routinely endure the liability of flying speakers overhead can have a usable product ground stacking.

These don't scale up to 5x/side but then you are into the next level of production with lifts, stages, etc. for any event handled.

The Q for most lounge types is - would you rather by 4 TTL6 + 4 IG4T/NXL-24A plus stage wedges as a basic multiple gig system or would you rather try to buy QSC KLA or JBL VRX or JBL STX835? I would contend that these vertical kits beat the application flexibility of all of those products, without the liability/risk/setup time of vertical lifts or the 60* pattern inflexibility of using something like STX835 1/side. Note the TTL6-A even has a pole mount for crazy folks who think it goes on a pole. Wonder if RCF sells a pole rated for that box...

Also the manufacturer's DSP engineering today means comparisons to component stacking systems is not really valid, IMHO.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Rick Powell on July 13, 2018, 10:08:28 am
It is a weird niche but has been filled for a long time by the SRX835 and its predecessors, KF650 and boxes like the SLS920 and SLS960 (now discontinued). The TTL6 and its little brothers are an improvement on the KF650 concept in that one per side is not too narrow, allowing to cover more events/split up a rig, and these boxes are taller so guys not willing to routinely endure the liability of flying speakers overhead can have a usable product ground stacking.

These don't scale up to 5x/side but then you are into the next level of production with lifts, stages, etc. for any event handled.

The Q for most lounge types is - would you rather by 4 TTL6 + 4 IG4T/NXL-24A plus stage wedges as a basic multiple gig system or would you rather try to buy QSC KLA or JBL VRX or JBL STX835? I would contend that these vertical kits beat the application flexibility of all of those products, without the liability/risk/setup time of vertical lifts or the 60* pattern inflexibility of using something like STX835 1/side. Note the TTL6-A even has a pole mount for crazy folks who think it goes on a pole. Wonder if RCF sells a pole rated for that box...

Also the manufacturer's DSP engineering today means comparisons to component stacking systems is not really valid, IMHO.

These "quasi-line sources" are very creative solutions to the market for an easily deployable system that will handle events from a small bar gig to a small festival or concert setting. The other alternative is a point source that will go wide and loud enough, light enough to mount on a pole, and enough SPL to handle the same range of applications. As demonstrated in the above discussions, the SM80, T24, TT25 CXA and PM 60/90 accomplish the same thing in a different way, with varying degrees of success in hitting similar volume/pattern targets. It is great to have these choices that weren't available 10 years ago.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Steven Eudaly on July 13, 2018, 11:05:31 am
These don't scale up to 5x/side but then you are into the next level of production with lifts, stages, etc. for any event handled.

The Q for most lounge types is - would you rather by 4 TTL6 + 4 IG4T/NXL-24A plus stage wedges as a basic multiple gig system or would you rather try to buy QSC KLA or JBL VRX or JBL STX835? I would contend that these vertical kits beat the application flexibility of all of those products, without the liability/risk/setup time of vertical lifts or the 60* pattern inflexibility of using something like STX835 1/side. Note the TTL6-A even has a pole mount for crazy folks who think it goes on a pole. Wonder if RCF sells a pole rated for that box...

Also the manufacturer's DSP engineering today means comparisons to component stacking systems is not really valid, IMHO.

But here we are, with people using lifts to fly two of these per side.

I'm not an owner nor a big fan of VRX/KLA/etc but IMO they're a much more usable product for this niche as they scale better and take up less space. You can pole mount one or two, you can fly several boxes, etc. If that's what you're going for.

Also you could take the same fancy DSP work and apply it to old skool stacked component systems and likely end up with similar sonic results, but that still doesn't make it the best solution.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Caleb Dueck on July 13, 2018, 11:24:13 am


I'm not an owner nor a big fan of VRX/KLA/etc but IMO they're a much more usable product for this niche as they scale better and take up less space. You can pole mount one or two, you can fly several boxes, etc.

My experience is opposite.  During a KLA demo, I grabbed a TT25A, and for the same price (2 boxes KLA on a tripod) - better sound, similar coverage, better SPL.

Personally I would rather have either high output SOS (SM80, T24N, PM60, etc) or large point source (SH96HO, SH64, J3, etc) with under-hung fill.



Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Steven Eudaly on July 13, 2018, 11:26:37 am
My experience is opposite.  During a KLA demo, I grabbed a TT25A, and for the same price (2 boxes KLA on a tripod) - better sound, similar coverage, better SPL.

Personally I would rather have either high output SOS (SM80, T24N, PM60, etc) or large point source (SH96HO, SH64, J3, etc) with under-hung fill.

Well, that wasn't really my argument. I also would rather have a high output SOS than KLA/VRX, but the TTL6 is not that. 
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com on July 13, 2018, 12:40:47 pm
Well, that wasn't really my argument. I also would rather have a high output SOS than KLA/VRX, but the TTL6 is not that.

The TTL-6A would definitely be a good option to use instead of a KLA or VRX array.  It would most likely have similar/better max SPL, smoother dispersion throughout the listening area, higher-fidelity due to 3-way design, and better pattern control.  The TTL-6A would stomp most SOS rigs--this is for people taking the next step up.

Jeff
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeremy Young on July 13, 2018, 03:01:55 pm
What I like about the TTL6-As is that their rigging is integral to the cabinet so assembling the array on site isn't complicated, whereas (correct me if I'm wrong) the SH46s would be a bit more time consuming to bolt together and fly.  I also like that you can use only 1 TTL per side for smaller events, even on a pole mount if desired and safe to do so. 



Hey Jeff, to play the devil's advocate; from what I've read from SH46 users, the typical approach is to leave them bolted together and transport the pair on a dolly.  Roll the pair under the lift, attach your hoist to the array kit (https://www.danleysoundlabs.com/products/brackets-and-flyware/fs-flyware-kit/) and start lifting. 

The pair of SH46 cabinets would be a shorter hang than two of the TTL-6-A (by about 6') which may improve sight lines in some applications if the trim height is high enough (but the RCF boxes being narrower would have the upper hand for ground-stack applications), and would take less time to lift than the process I watched on the RCF site for hanging one under one TTL-6-A.  Overall weight would be similar, if not slightly less for the pair of SH46's due to less cabling and the bumper "looking" heavier than the FS-flyware kit (I haven't compared those specs) but I doubt it would be enough to change what lift you needed to use.  That of course assumes your van can transport a pair of 250lb dollies and someone can get them under the lift. 

The other option is a single SH96HO per side since it has tilt-back wheels (might be easier to maneuver on grass than a 4-wheel dolly of similar weight,and it's already one cabinet) but I agree that the flying hardware on the RCF is where it really takes the lead over the current Danley offerings.

An argument to the length of two of the TTL-6 A would be that it might "look" like a bigger rig to some clients (very line-array looking to those who don't know the difference).  Some might think that's a good thing, others a bad thing.  Depends who you cater to and what separates your clients from their money the easiest.

As for safety from built-in limiters and processing on the RCF boxes, just buy the Danley DNA amps and load the proper preset and you're protected (and your amp can be somewhere out of the sun).  That's just my take on it anyway.  I ALWAYS prefer separate amps for the sake of redundancy/cabling but an amp rack is one more thing to fit in the van on a small scale. (Edit: I nearly forgot that both the SH46 and SH96HO are available powered).

These options are all very intriguing to me but I personally wouldn't want to be putting a 116lb, nearly-4' tall loudspeaker on a tripod...nice height for a ground stack deployment though especially with the HF near the top of the cabinet.  This RCF option is definitely intriguing and it's great to hear of so much success with it already. 

It's an exciting time for small-to-mid-level operators.
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com on July 13, 2018, 05:30:10 pm

Hey Jeff, to play the devil's advocate; from what I've read from SH46 users, the typical approach is to leave them bolted together and transport the pair on a dolly.  Roll the pair under the lift, attach your hoist to the array kit (https://www.danleysoundlabs.com/products/brackets-and-flyware/fs-flyware-kit/) and start lifting. 

The pair of SH46 cabinets would be a shorter hang than two of the TTL-6-A (by about 6') which may improve sight lines in some applications if the trim height is high enough (but the RCF boxes being narrower would have the upper hand for ground-stack applications), and would take less time to lift than the process I watched on the RCF site for hanging one under one TTL-6-A.  Overall weight would be similar, if not slightly less for the pair of SH46's due to less cabling and the bumper "looking" heavier than the FS-flyware kit (I haven't compared those specs) but I doubt it would be enough to change what lift you needed to use.  That of course assumes your van can transport a pair of 250lb dollies and someone can get them under the lift. 

The other option is a single SH96HO per side since it has tilt-back wheels (might be easier to maneuver on grass than a 4-wheel dolly of similar weight,and it's already one cabinet) but I agree that the flying hardware on the RCF is where it really takes the lead over the current Danley offerings.

An argument to the length of two of the TTL-6 A would be that it might "look" like a bigger rig to some clients (very line-array looking to those who don't know the difference).  Some might think that's a good thing, others a bad thing.  Depends who you cater to and what separates your clients from their money the easiest.

As for safety from built-in limiters and processing on the RCF boxes, just buy the Danley DNA amps and load the proper preset and you're protected (and your amp can be somewhere out of the sun).  That's just my take on it anyway.  I ALWAYS prefer separate amps for the sake of redundancy/cabling but an amp rack is one more thing to fit in the van on a small scale. (Edit: I nearly forgot that both the SH46 and SH96HO are available powered).

These options are all very intriguing to me but I personally wouldn't want to be putting a 116lb, nearly-4' tall loudspeaker on a tripod...nice height for a ground stack deployment though especially with the HF near the top of the cabinet.  This RCF option is definitely intriguing and it's great to hear of so much success with it already. 

It's an exciting time for small-to-mid-level operators.

Hi Jeremy,

You certainly make great points.  I've run the SH96HO's as well--it's definitely another contender in this class.  I would say that all of these rigs are probably above van level.  For our rig and my client's, we're using cargo trailers for transport.

For several iterations of our DSL rig the DNA amps and Sentinel protection circuits weren't available.  That's the preferred way to operate them now.

I fully agree--it's a great time to be alive and have so many good options! :)

Jeff
Title: Re: Upgrade danley sm80
Post by: Jeff Lelko on July 13, 2018, 10:58:40 pm
Hey Jeff, to play the devil's advocate...

Please do!  It's all great discussion and you make good points.  I have read that most SH46 users travel with the pairs bolted together.  While I wouldn't be opposed to doing that, it just makes for a rather awkward and heavy package that won't truck pack well.  Then again, if driving in a van, truck pack doesn't really matter...  I agree that pretty much everything mentioned is above a van rig in full deployment, but I like that I could easily dolly a pair of TTLs around to serve smaller jobs when the flown set of 4 isn't needed.  That was one of the big disappointments to me when hearing the SM80s - there's just no using them without subs.  Not that any large event wouldn't have them, but I like having a full range cabinet to call upon if the circumstance arises.   

The other option is a single SH96HO per side since it has tilt-back wheels (might be easier to maneuver on grass than a 4-wheel dolly of similar weight,and it's already one cabinet) but I agree that the flying hardware on the RCF is where it really takes the lead over the current Danley offerings.

The SH96HO is definitely another strong contender.  Having gotten to see/hear one and move a Danley box similar in size and weight to the SH96HO, it'd be right at the limit of what I'd consider doable by one person.  While an SH96HO would look and sound awesome ground stacked on some TH118XLs, the moving/stacking logistics is no where near as manageable as the TTL.  I also don't personally care for the look of a single flown SH96.  Given that most of my sound work is corporate in nature, looks matter too.  The streamlined rigging was what also interested me so much in the Danley Exodus series.  I was told last month that the series is being reworked and isn't dead, so maybe there's hope still that we'll see these boxes again. 

The way I see it is that at least in my case, I'm mostly a lights/pyro guy - I just happen to also have a loyal (and growing) client base that hires me for sound.  As such, I'd like to extend the upper end of what I can handle but at the same time not leave the smaller jobs behind.  I can always rent for the one or two big jobs a year when I need more rig than I can justify owning.  I'm just trying to find the "sweet spot" for a next-step-up rig that doesn't force me to completely restructure the logistics side of my business too.  The TTL option blurs the lines just enough to really interest me.  So many good options...and given that this purchase is at least 18 months out there's time for a few more products to enter the market too.