Print

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

[Phil Lewandowski]

Thank you Jeff and Nathan for the recommendations!

Jeff - you know, that was exactly where my mind started to go; first getting the SH69's up there and aimed. And then evaluating with the ears, exactly where and how much extra support is needed along the back half and the sides.

Nathan - great to hear that even a pair of those SM100B's had no problem with a similar sort of gym. Gives me confidence the SM69's will be a great fit, and the extra pattern control might help.

[Phil Lewandowski]

On a different gear topic, any suggestions on bang-to-buck DSP's with Dante?
I had the Symetrix Prism 8x8 suggested so far.

The DSP will simply be "set it and forget it" for doing basic box correction with PEQ, HF/LF filters, room tuning and delays.
Shouldn't need more than 4 inputs and 8 outputs.

Thanks!

[Nathan Riddle]

On a different gear topic, any suggestions on bang-to-buck DSP's with Dante?
I had the Symetrix Prism 8x8 suggested so far.

The DSP will simply be "set it and forget it" for doing basic box PEQ correction, HF/LF filters, room tuning and delays.
Shouldn't need more than 4 inputs and 8 outputs.

Thanks!

Xilica FR1 or QR1

Nothing else in price/performance range.

[Phil Lewandowski]

Does anyone have direct experience of the 100hz+ performance of the Danley SH69 vs. the SM96?

Since we don't need tons of low end support, after seeing the space in person, it was suggested
that the SH69 might be overkill especially on the low end. (And we could always add a sub to support the SM96.)

But still curious on how different these 2 boxes are from 100hz+.

Thanks!

[Dave Garoutte]

Does anyone have direct experience of the 100hz+ performance of the Danley SH69 vs. the SM96?

Since we don't need tons of low end support, after seeing the space in person, it was suggested
that the SH69 might be overkill especially on the low end. (And we could always add a sub to support the SM96.)

But still curious on how different these 2 boxes are from 100hz+.

Thanks!

Check out the DSLUG facebook. 
I have the SM96 and love them.  Never heard the SH69.
Stand alone they're great for acoustic and spoken word, but I add a small sub when needed.  They keep up with two TH118 for full bands. 

[Ivan Beaver]

Does anyone have direct experience of the 100hz+ performance of the Danley SH69 vs. the SM96?

Since we don't need tons of low end support, after seeing the space in person, it was suggested
that the SH69 might be overkill especially on the low end. (And we could always add a sub to support the SM96.)

But still curious on how different these 2 boxes are from 100hz+.

Thanks!

The SH69 will have pattern control down a little lower, and the Sh69 will also get a good bit louder.

Whether or not you need the extra SPL is for you to answer.

[Eric Deweese]

Thank you all for the great insight! It has been very helpful.

Right now I am looking into a pair of Danley SH69 for the L-R main stage speakers. And then 9 Danley OS12CX's spread out through the gym for the distributed system. Hoping it will fit into our budget as from modeling it seems like that will be able to meet our SPL and coverage needs.

But any other suggestions on specific boxes to look into, I'm game!

I have an install in a similar sized space with 2 SM96... plenty of spl and great pattern control! If you don't need the extra 2dB of the SH69 I think the SM96 would save you lots of budget money for some fills if required.

[Phil Lewandowski]

Well--it is appropriate based upon Eric's input above--I've been playing around with different designs and
actually was able to get a little more even coverage using a pair of SM96's as delays. SH69's still as stage mains.

I've attached the Danley Direct simulation image of the vocal intelligibility range. Let me know what you think!


Due to architecture and aesthetics requests by the power that be, the main speakers will by mounted "in" the proscenium with acoustically transparent fabric. This means I can't get the mains quite as wide from each other as I wish, but isn't bad. Coverage on the side still begins right in the area where the bleachers begin (about 20ft out on the sides).

Anyways, just an update and let me know of any thoughts or things to be aware of.
Thanks!

[Ivan Beaver]

Due to architecture and aesthetics requests by the power that be, the main speakers will by mounted "in" the proscenium with acoustically transparent fabric.

BE SURE and don't let anybody paint the "transparent" fabric.

I have seen this happen a couple of times.

The fabric will get painted and it really screws with not only the loss of high end, but also the dispersion pattern.

The same thing goes for fiberglass panels on walls.  I have seen them painted and they turn into a solid surface, destroying any effect they might have had previously.

And the same thing goes for bare cinderblocks.  They are actually fairly absorbent, until they are painted.  Of course in every gym they "must" be painted, and then the gym get livelier.   

[Mike Caldwell]

Due to architecture and aesthetics requests by the power that be, the main speakers will by mounted "in" the proscenium with acoustically transparent fabric. This means I can't get the mains quite as wide from each other as I wish, but isn't bad. Coverage on the side still begins right in the area where the bleachers begin (about 20ft out on the sides).

Anyways, just an update and let me know of any thoughts or things to be aware of.
Thanks!

Be sure the speakers are at the very front edge of the proscenium.

A few years ago at a new school's auditorium with the speakers in the proscenium ( got to hide the ugly speakers!) they put speakers back from the front edge at least six feet. It sounded like speakers in a box!
To make it even more fun they did not leave any way to get into the proscenium short of taking off the front panels and trim.

[ProSoundWeb Community]