Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Benjamin Gingerich]

This is hypothetical as I'm bidding a project. I am thinking about using 2 Danley SM80f for mains 2 SM80s for sides and a BC 415 in the center, I'm considering instead of a direct crossover, having some overlap in the crossover region, maybe crossing over the 80f at 55 or 60hz and the BC415 at 80hz, my thought processes is to allow for a more full range LR sound and still have the 415 do the bulk of the low-end work. Is there value in this? I am way over complicating this.
The coverage area is basically 110 wide by 75 ft deep, the ceiling at the speaker location will be about 24 feet tall.
Attached is a JPG of the Direct file image.

[John L Nobile]

This is hypothetical as I'm bidding a project. I am thinking about using 2 Danley SM80f for mains 2 SM80s for sides and a BC 415 in the center, I'm considering instead of a direct crossover, having some overlap in the crossover region, maybe crossing over the 80f at 55 or 60hz and the BC415 at 80hz, my thought processes is to allow for a more full range LR sound and still have the 415 do the bulk of the low-end work. Is there value in this? I am way over complicating this.
The coverage area is basically 110 wide by 75 ft deep, the ceiling at the speaker location will be about 24 feet tall.
Attached is a JPG of the Direct file image.

Have you considered using SH96HO's instead of the SM80f's? They get a lot louder and sound much better. I have a pair of them flying in a 105' x 106' with 35-40' ceilings. I use SM80's for filling in sides. The 96's will go down to 80 hz comfortably and lower.

[Art Welter]

... Is there value in this?

The wider the acoustical overlap in the crossover region frequencies is, the wider the frequency range of potential off-axis cancellation between the L/R and sub.

[Benjamin Gingerich]

Have you considered using SH96HO's instead of the SM80f's? They get a lot louder and sound much better. I have a pair of them flying in a 105' x 106' with 35-40' ceilings. I use SM80's for filling in sides. The 96's will go down to 80 hz comfortably and lower.

Yes I have, and that is the 1a option, It does require a down-fill where the sm80 system does not, and I really don't need the extended output of the 96HO's. However, the lower freq pattern control would be beneficial.

[Ivan Beaver]

How is the system going to be run?

Are the subs on an aux?  or just left/right with subs?

If subs on an aux, the the SM80F is a good choice.  I prefer to have my system full range by itself.

If basically a playback system, then there are other choices, Sm80s alone or SH96 etc.

So it really depends on the specific intended usage

Depending on the location of the full range cabinets and subs will determine how much or how little the interference might me

[Benjamin Gingerich]

How is the system going to be run?

Are the subs on an aux?  or just left/right with subs?

If subs on an aux, the the SM80F is a good choice.  I prefer to have my system full range by itself.

If basically a playback system, then there are other choices, Sm80s alone or SH96 etc.

So it really depends on the specific intended usage

Depending on the location of the full range cabinets and subs will determine how much or how little the interference might me

Sub will be aux fed. There will be approximately 36 feet between the main boxes and the BC415 will be centered between them.

If you run the 80f's full range, what would be your starting point to lowpass your sub? should i bring them up to the 80hz range where I would typically like to have my crossover at, or something different?

[Benjamin Gingerich]

The wider the acoustical overlap in the crossover region frequencies is, the wider the frequency range of potential off-axis cancellation between the L/R and sub.

Just playing with the idea if this were a LR+sub system (not aux fed) could another approch be to go with a less steep slope? That would potentially provide lower extention of the top boxes to give more full range, while minimizing the off-axis cancellation? I know there would still be some because of multiple boxes operating in the same frequency range however there would be a decreased amplitude which i would think would reduce the cancellations. Is that the right thought process?

[Ivan Beaver]

Just playing with the idea if this were a LR+sub system (not aux fed) could another approch be to go with a less steep slope? That would potentially provide lower extention of the top boxes to give more full range, while minimizing the off-axis cancellation? I know there would still be some because of multiple boxes operating in the same frequency range however there would be a decreased amplitude which i would think would reduce the cancellations. Is that the right thought process?

Would it be possible to use other subs in place of the BC415 (ie 2 Th118s per side) and put them closer to the SM80Fs?

When you have spaced devices, you WILL have interference, there is no way around it.

It is all a matter of compromise, and trying to minimize the issues, and determining what locations are of primary importance.

The best solution is a single speaker covering the entire full freq spectrum.

As soon as you start to use more than one, your problems start to rise.

[Caleb Dueck]

In every Direct model I have done, there has (so far) always been another cabinet that provided better coverage.  It's good to look at 4kHz, 2kHz, and 250Hz at least.

Regarding overlap - try a few options, with the crossovers adjusted in Direct, with phase on, at 60Hz and similar frequiencies.

I typically do 2dB variation per color to see how bad or good coverage really is.  And always create the stage, at 6' higher than stage surface, for spill and potential feedback. 

Depending on physical distance, I'm starting to like the mains more full range, and the aux subs more for effect (haystack).  A TH118XL with each -96HO, for example, plus the pile of DBH or BC subs. 

I had a project not long ago where I literally tried nearly every model speaker Danley makes in the Direct coverage model.  What I found was that speakers that were taller (better vertical pattern control) with narrower vertical pattern, with a smaller under-hung speaker, tended to give the best front to rear coverage, no surprise.  For that project I think the mains ended up as SH64's with SH95HO's underneath. 

Don't be afraid to try different speaker models in Direct! 

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

[Art Welter]

Just playing with the idea if this were a LR+sub system (not aux fed) could another approch be to go with a less steep slope? That would potentially provide lower extention of the top boxes to give more full range, while minimizing the off-axis cancellation? I know there would still be some because of multiple boxes operating in the same frequency range however there would be a decreased amplitude which i would think would reduce the cancellations. Is that the right thought process?

No, it's exactly the wrong thought process, lesser slopes for separated sources, like overlap, increases potential cancellation over a wider frequency range.

[ProSoundWeb Community]