Print

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

[Hugo Peterson]

Hi all :-)

I'm interested in hearing about audible differences between the Danley SH50 and SH60.

As only the SH50 has frequency graph info on the Danley website I used the amazingly easy to use Direct software to compare the two.

Looks like the SH50 has a mostly flatter response, with a little EQ to even the score, would the two offerings sound audibly different given the different horn shape and mid drivers?

I've seen mentioned in other threads that the SH50 is voiced to be flat with a single box where the SH46 is voiced to be flat with 2 boxes arrayed. Would the SH50 retain that lovely flat response with 2 boxes arrayed?

If one were to consider set up options thus being able to do a single stack per side or double stack. Using outdoors for discernment, no obstructions except ground plane (and hopefully people!) logic would say a single stack per side would be better off at 60˚, would a double stack at 120˚, likely set a bit wider than 2 x SH50, have an adverse/advantageous affect of stereo field. Would one say end up with a thinner sweet spot with 2 x SH60 per side due distance between the stacks to achieve best coverage or perhaps the phase response would minimise differences to negligible.

Is there an optimum distance for phase response and coverage between speakers in an ideal situation that's been measured?

Would the SH50 (and maybe SH60?) still be considered the highest fidelity of the SH range?

Thanks for any input, all greatly appreciated :-)

Hugo

[Art Welter]

Hi all :-
Hugo

Hi Hugo,

Got to use your real name here on PSW, or the thread will be locked.

Cheers,
Art

[Hugo Peterson]

Hi Hugo,

Got to use your real name here on PSW, or the thread will be locked.

Cheers,
Art

Oops and thanks :-)

[Helge A Bentsen]

I've owned SH50, it sounds really good, but doesn't get loud. I'm calling BS on published SPL ratings for that box.
SH46 sounds good, but not as good as SH50. I've only heard it one a side, so can't comment on it's array performance.
EAW QX5 blows them both into next week in terms of sound quality and SPL.

IMHO.

[Hugo Peterson]

I've owned SH50, it sounds really good, but doesn't get loud. I'm calling BS on published SPL ratings for that box.
SH46 sounds good, but not as good as SH50. I've only heard it one a side, so can't comment on it's array performance.
EAW QX5 blows them both into next week in terms of sound quality and SPL.

IMHO.

Thanks for the input Helge :-)

Definitely things I've been considering, enough level from SH50, comparable quality from the SH46. Guess it depends on how many heads one needs to cover with what music as to what loud enough is, I'll mostly be doing quality electronic music which prevents pretty loud and is also expected to feel loud. SH50 I'd hope to get up to 300 people on a dance floor, probably on top of a TH118XL.

The QX5's look interesting, require a lot of processing by the looks, Doesn't look like the support XTA?which doesn't help with my current investments.

Did you get enough coverage with one SH46 per side? or were they flipped 64?

Cheers

Hugo

[Helge A Bentsen]

Thanks for the input Helge :-)

Definitely things I've been considering, enough level from SH50, comparable quality from the SH46. Guess it depends on how many heads one needs to cover with what music as to what loud enough is, I'll mostly be doing quality electronic music which prevents pretty loud and is also expected to feel loud. SH50 I'd hope to get up to 300 people on a dance floor, probably on top of a TH118XL.

The QX5's look interesting, require a lot of processing by the looks, Doesn't look like the support XTA?which doesn't help with my current investments.

Did you get enough coverage with one SH46 per side? or were they flipped 64?

Cheers

Hugo

SH46 was for a demo, so coverage wasn't an issue. 300 people from a pair of SH50 indoors is doable, depends on your SPL requirements.
QX5 requires a EAW processor or a DSP amp capable of loading their presets, just like a lot of boxes from a lot of other manufacturers.
FWIW I used LAB-gruppen amps and Lake processing on my SH50-rig. It wasn't exactly cheap either.
For running a QX5 in an install you could use a Powersoft install amplifier with DSP that's cheaper than the LAB+Lake combo I used for a portable setup...

[Mark Wilkinson]

SH46 was for a demo, so coverage wasn't an issue. 300 people from a pair of SH50 indoors is doable, depends on your SPL requirements.
QX5 requires a EAW processor or a DSP amp capable of loading their presets, just like a lot of boxes from a lot of other manufacturers.
FWIW I used LAB-gruppen amps and Lake processing on my SH50-rig. It wasn't exactly cheap either.
For running a QX5 in an install you could use a Powersoft install amplifier with DSP that's cheaper than the LAB+Lake combo I used for a portable setup...

In addition to Powersoft, I see EAW provides processor settings for BSS and QSYS.
Core110f's can be found on ebay fairly routinely for under $1500.

Kudo's to EAW for some 3rd party processor support !!   

[Caleb Dueck]

Thanks for the input Helge :-)

Definitely things I've been considering, enough level from SH50, comparable quality from the SH46. Guess it depends on how many heads one needs to cover with what music as to what loud enough is, I'll mostly be doing quality electronic music which prevents pretty loud and is also expected to feel loud. SH50 I'd hope to get up to 300 people on a dance floor, probably on top of a TH118XL.

The QX5's look interesting, require a lot of processing by the looks, Doesn't look like the support XTA?which doesn't help with my current investments.

Did you get enough coverage with one SH46 per side? or were they flipped 64?

Cheers

Hugo

Take a listen to the SH96HO and J7, and try them in Direct.  Even the SH50, which is great by itself (but not super loud), isn't so amazing with that seam in the middle.  I don't know about the latest presets, and will defer to those who have listened more recently than I have, but wouldn't put the SH60 in the top tier for sound quality.

The QX5- has odd polar response, but not as bad as the QX3.  Also worse pattern control than the options above.  I have directly AB'ed SH96HO and QX5, and the 96HO was much better (smoother, smoother especially through the mid-range, better mid-bass, better pattern control, higher SPL, more even pattern).

[Jeffrey Knorr - JRKLabs.com]

I've seen mentioned in other threads that the SH50 is voiced to be flat with a single box where the SH46 is voiced to be flat with 2 boxes arrayed. Would the SH50 retain that lovely flat response with 2 boxes arrayed?

If one were to consider set up options thus being able to do a single stack per side or double stack. Using outdoors for discernment, no obstructions except ground plane (and hopefully people!) logic would say a single stack per side would be better off at 60˚, would a double stack at 120˚, likely set a bit wider than 2 x SH50, have an adverse/advantageous affect of stereo field. Would one say end up with a thinner sweet spot with 2 x SH60 per side due distance between the stacks to achieve best coverage or perhaps the phase response would minimise differences to negligible.

Hi Hugo,

I'll speak to the points that I have direct experience with.  The SH50's when arrayed, two per side or more, may need a low-frequency shelf EQ applied to reduce the build up that will occur say 300 Hz and lower (from the speaker pattern overlap).  A pair of SH46's per side would have a flatter low-frequency response out of the box in that configuration--it's just how the speakers were tuned and optimized.

When we first moved to DSL products, we ran two SH50's per side.  The sound quality, "throw", and pattern control were outstanding for a passive box.  The only thing that we were missing was more output.  We eventually upgraded to SH46's, again running two per side.  The SH46's gave us most of what we loved about the SH50's with twice the maximum SPL (albeit with a slight sound quality trade off).  Ultimately for portable use the SH46's were the best way for us to go. 

We've also used the SH96HO and been very happy with its performance as well.  If we were starting over again today, I would probably look at the J7 as someone else already recommended.  If you can make that swing financially, it will open up even larger gigs for you. 

Jeff "You can always turn it down" K.

[Ivan Beaver]

I've owned SH50, it sounds really good, but doesn't get loud. I'm calling BS on published SPL ratings for that box.

The SPL numbers are easily achievable.  But they are PEAK numbers.  Average SPLs (like on a normal SPL meter that doesn't read peak) are generally 15dBish down from the peak numbers.  That is standard for every loudspeaker that I am aware of.

The "average" SPL will depend on the dynamic range of the content, the speed of the meter, the freg range of the music etc

[ProSoundWeb Community]