Print

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

[Yoel Klein]

Yoel, whether you agree or not, the Danley SM80 uses a horn-loaded configuration.  Have you read the patent on the Synergy Horn technology?  If so, what part do you think the SM80 doesn't meet?

Rated patterns are one thing, actual performance is another.  Below is a snapshot taken from the Polar Explorer program comparing the horizontal and vertical directivity of a Yamaha DSR112 (12"/2" 2-way box with separate drivers, well respected in these forums, rated for 90x60 pattern) on the left and the DSL SM80 on the right (horn-loaded sealed-box with 2-way coaxial arrangement, rated for 80x80 pattern). 

I've highlighted the measured response at approximately 500hz on each, and as you can see, even though the DSR112 has a narrower vertical rating, the SM80 actually has a tighter vertical pattern in this frequency (108 degrees versus 187).  The horizontal black lines represent the rated angles from each manufacturer.  As you can see in the vertical patterns, the SM80 will put less mid-range energy into the reverberant space.  If that's not the effects of a full-face horn then I don't know what else will convince you.

I would recommend that you model the space you intend to deploy this system in, using Danley's free Direct software and play around with the different cabinets you are mentioning and see what sort of improvements they make. 

Regarding getting several hundred pounds of speaker cabinet above peoples heads, versus a speaker on a tripod stand, the differences in required equipment to safely execute that strategy and storage/labour to facilitate that type of system should be weighed against any differences in performance to determine where your money would be best spent. 


I think last time I checked, the cost of the Trabes towers that Frank uses or any other similar solution cost nearly the same as the SM80 cabinets do, plus the fact that the larger Danley products you've mentioned cost more than the SM80's do, so the jump in cost for one complete system (lifts, dolleys, cabling, amplifiers, any required changes to your insurance) versus the other is not small.

Jeremy,
Thank you for the information.
My emphasis was not about the SM 80 being patented or not. what I meant to express was the fact that the SH46 Horn is 100% a horn vs the SM80 which is only a 6" horn and lacks the capability to get the energy far enough, compared to the 46.

I know the SH46 is way more expensive and will be a challenge to deploy.  But, while the community are going for line arrays or sprinkle around more fill boxes, I am convinced that using 2 of the Danley boxes (let's say an SH46) will do a much better job.  And I'm convinced there is a way to get a 118 pound SH46 up safely without the need a rigging crew.
 

[Mark Wilkinson]

Yoel, whether you agree or not, the Danley SM80 uses a horn-loaded configuration.  Have you read the patent on the Synergy Horn technology?  If so, what part do you think the SM80 doesn't meet?

Hi Jeremy, I think I see it the way Yoel seems to....I wouldn't call the SM-80 a Synergy at all.

To me, a synergy means locating different drivers and their port entrances on a common horn, not just adding a little bit of horn to a coaxial driver.
Heck, I've been toying with my own version of an SM-80, adding a horn to a 15" B&C coax...it's not anywhere near a true synergy...

[Yoel Klein]

That's an SH-46 "on its side". -F

Is there any video of the event? I gotta hear them!

[Rob Spence]

Just to clarify...

I think the OP is thinking one SM80 per side plus a single TH118 placed somewhere.

With the sub located so far from a top, aligning them to provide the “punch” he requires might be an issue.

Personally, I would do an SM80 & TH118 per side.

.....

About throw... for non-line arrays, the throw is pretty much just a factor of how loud it is at the source. The pattern helps.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Noah D Mitchell]

Yoel, as a current SM80 user with both TH and DBH subs (As well as SH50's in two installed venues) - I would be very nervous about having two SM80's and only one TH118. I think two SM80 could easily outrun a single TH118.


A single SM80 per side is capable of some pretty incredible output (in it's range). One SM80 plus two TH118 per side is a pretty formidable system.


If you're talking weddings and dancing, I would say: Save money by using the SM80 rather than the SH46, put that towards double the sub count.


YMMV

[John L Nobile]

What size of a room are you looking to perform in? I've had an SM80/DBH218 a side in a room that's 105' x 106' with 40' ceilings and had volume complaints afterwards. Probably sitting in front of the guitar amp.

I was very happy with the sound quality and volume.

[Yoel Klein]

What size of a room are you looking to perform in? I've had an SM80/DBH218 a side in a room that's 105' x 106' with 40' ceilings and had volume complaints afterwards. Probably sitting in front of the guitar amp.

I was very happy with the sound quality and volume.

A wedding hall is 125 x 85 give or take, and yeah the ceilings are high.
I tested 2 SM80 and one T118 and I was not satisfied! halfway down the hall, the dancers asked for more volume and more punch.
the TH118 was LOUD the bass notes came through the back bathrooms walls, my body was shaken up by the beast TH118, and some here are suggesting placing 2 TH118?!  Noooo..... That 118 made people have bowel movements - no joke!

So perhaps using 2 Th115's with the Sm80 and another th115-SM80 combo as a fill?
Brrrrr.... that will create more phase issues. you see? I cannot use the SM80 alone as fill because it's not a Full range box!  feel free to correct me.

I listened to each and every video on youtube that had the word "Danley" on it...

There was one video showing the SM80F, Oh my god! does that box use the same driver the SM80 is using? I wonder where the crossover points are for the bottom half tapped horn on the SM80F.

[Jeremy Young]

Jeremy,
Thank you for the information.
My emphasis was not about the SM 80 being patented or not. what I meant to express was the fact that the SH46 Horn is 100% a horn vs the SM80 which is only a 6" horn and lacks the capability to get the energy far enough, compared to the 46.

I know the SH46 is way more expensive and will be a challenge to deploy.  But, while the community are going for line arrays or sprinkle around more fill boxes, I am convinced that using 2 of the Danley boxes (let's say an SH46) will do a much better job.  And I'm convinced there is a way to get a 118 pound SH46 up safely without the need a rigging crew.
 

I'll ask this then.  How deep does a horn need to be, to be considered a horn?  I do not disagree on the differences in the designs of the SH46 versus the SM80.  I am merely pointing out that the horn (it's a horn by every definition of the word, I'm sticking to it) is still a horn and it is doing what it is designed to do.  If the SH46 is 100% a horn, is the SM80 only 60% a horn??

I can assure you that the SM80 has "the capability to get the energy far enough" any time I've deployed them, but what is "far enough" at one gig may not be "far enough" on another.  The SM80 is using two drivers to radiate sound pressure over an 80x80 (nominal) dispersion and has a long-term power handling of 400w.  The SH46 is using seven drivers to radiate sound pressure over a 40x60 (nominal) dispersion, which is significantly less area, leading to a higher sensitivity even if they were using the same drivers.  Add the higher long-term power handling (1,400w continuous) and you get a louder result if you put that much power behind it, but you would still require two SH46's to cover a similar area at a similar distance and angle due to the tighter pattern.  Now you've got 250+lbs to get into the air and power appropriately.  The SH46 also has a lower cutoff to its frequency response which may help your needs, or may not.

Whether one is a better fit to your business is not my place to say, I'm simply trying to clarify some definitions.

[Jeremy Young]

There was one video showing the SM80F, Oh my god! does that box use the same driver the SM80 is using? I wonder where the crossover points are for the bottom half tapped horn on the SM80F.

The mid/high portion of the SM80F is identical to the SM80, they've just added a 2x15" tapped horn into the cabinet to give you a one-box solution for full-range from a single cabinet.  The crossovers are all handled in the Danley DNA amps and processors.  You can download their software and presets from their website if you're interested.

[Jeremy Young]

Hi Jeremy, I think I see it the way Yoel seems to....I wouldn't call the SM-80 a Synergy at all.

To me, a synergy means locating different drivers and their port entrances on a common horn, not just adding a little bit of horn to a coaxial driver.
Heck, I've been toying with my own version of an SM-80, adding a horn to a 15" B&C coax...it's not anywhere near a true synergy...

Very cool looking cabinet Mark, I'm sure it sounds good too. 

My understanding of the Synergy Horn design is that it's all about the placement of the drivers within the horn, with the lower frequency drivers placed closer to the mouth where the horn provides better loading within the frequency region where these drivers are used. 

With a little imagination I can picture a coaxially-mounted 2-way driver with a 6" horn (or whatever the actual measurement is, I've never taken a measurement of it) satisfying those criteria.

The other major success of the Synergy concept is in the crossover design, taking the driver's individual magnitude and phase response into account, along with the close proximity of the drivers, such that the response is flat in phase.  These principles are also in the SM80, so again, I'm failing to see how the SM80 is not a horn-loaded design, or not a Synergy Horn. 

Does it have less pattern control down low than something like an SM96?  Sure does.  It's also louder and lighter. Every loudspeaker design has their trade-offs, and I'm happy with the ones traded in the SM80, they suit my needs very well and my subwoofers can handle the content below their cutoff.

I will quietly step down from my soap-box though, since I don't have anything to win in this argument.  I feel I've made my point, and if not someone who designed the speaker or sells them for a living can step in.  In my opinion, the SM80 is more a "horn" than a 3-box "line array" is really a "line".

[ProSoundWeb Community]