Print

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

[Nathan Riddle]

Here is the rub, Danley has presets available for their processor and amps with DSP but they don't list recommended EQ settings in their op manual or other documentation (at least that I could find).
It appears that neither you nor Nathan were too keen on the Danley preset and you both created your own. I too created my own EQ preset for the SM80 although is was very minimal.
When I do speaker comparisons I like to hear the speakers "out of the box" flat. If the manufacturer supplied a recommended EQ curve or other processing, I would then include that as the starting point for the speaker.

The recommended speaker processing is a DNA amp everything else is bandaid and not recommended.

I'll ship you an amp. Do the test again.
I doubt the results will be different.
But it would squelch questioning the validity of your test.

[Robert Lunceford]

The recommended speaker processing is a DNA amp everything else is bandaid and not recommended.

I'll ship you an amp. Do the test again.
I doubt the results will be different.
But it would squelch questioning the validity of your test.

Hey Nathan, thanks for the offer but I sold the Danleys within days of getting the X-40s.
As well as the clarity, the Meyer speakers sounded as if they didn't have to work as hard as the Danleys did at higher volumes.

[Jeremy Young]

Here is the rub, Danley has presets available for their processor and amps with DSP but they don't list recommended EQ settings in their op manual or other documentation (at least that I could find).
It appears that neither you nor Nathan were too keen on the Danley preset and you both created your own. I too created my own EQ preset for the SM80 although is was very minimal.
When I do speaker comparisons I like to hear the speakers "out of the box" flat. If the manufacturer supplied a recommended EQ curve or other processing, I would then include that as the starting point for the speaker.

I never meant to call your test methods into question, and again I'm super happy you found something that suits your needs.  I have never heard a Meyer rig that wasn't a joy to listen to, although I've heard bad mixes on them but that's another story.  When I start talking technical, I've been told I can be a bit condescending although that's never my intent. If my post comes across that way, my apologies. 

The joy of a product like the X40 is the fact that it's completely plug and play. I'll never know what it sounds like "unprocessed" because that's not possible in a design like this and therefore doesn't really matter.  That said, there isn't even a published frequency response graph in any of the current documents on the Meyer website, so my presumption is that this information is found through their MAPP software or EASE files or similar. None the less, I'll make an educated guess that the response would be pencil flat. I could play devil's advocate and say they're "hiding" it as well as Danley is "hiding" their presets, but I'm drifting into defensive mode since I make good money with my Danley inventory so naturally I'm biased.  However, when I look at the published frequency response of the SM80, it's not flat.  In fact it's one of the more "rough" performing boxes, "out of the box" in their lineup.  Tradeoffs to making it both loud and small. 

If I were performing a test like this, I would be validating the published data against measured data to see if I could recreate it.  If the SM80 measured response matched what's on the data sheet, that's a win.  Whether or not I'd use it that way, is another question. 

Anecdotally, I've never, ever, just plugged in a speaker and mixed a show. I am always making voicing adjustments for the content, space, etc, either in my mixer bus processing or speaker processor.  Testing it the way I'd use it, would be to adjust EQ to my taste to make it sound the best to my ear as possible, and then evaluating it's various attributes or comparing it.  I've used speakers that needed some pretty significant "work" to make them pleasant sounding, and I lost a lot of headroom doing so, for example. 

Comparing the SM80 to other Danley boxes I own like the Go2-8CX or FLX12, I can attest to the difference in "out of the box" performance, but both of those speakers have much smoother published frequency responses (and much lower output).  My new SH96's sound pretty darn good without processing, but again that matches the published data.  I still use the Danley presets for those though, because I find them to sound better even with those subtle changes than raw with a HPF.  It wasn't hard to get that file, I just e-mailed my Danley dealer.

The reason Danley doesn't list the EQ preset values is because you simply upload the file into the DSP or DSP amplifier.  In the time I've been watching, they've gone from OEM amps through Crest, to Linea Research, and now have options for Dynacord and MC2, in other words there are a lot of price points available.  The exercise I mentioned where I used Smaart to match my non-Danely processor to match the published data that Danley provides, involved entering numbers into the fields that did not match the numbers in the Danley DSP.  In other words, different processors have different "versions" of filter math, and simply copying numbers doesn't necessarily give you the same results.  Ivan's been pretty vocal about this on these very forums numerous times.  Without that Smaart trace, I would have simply entered those numbers and wouldn't have been happy with the results.

The limiter settings are another story.  I set/measured the limiters in my EV DC-One to match the published data from Danley for the SM80.  When I switched to the DNA processor, the speaker spent less time in the limiters and sounded better at the same time.  I could make my own limiter settings, but it would cost a lot of drivers.  This is one particular area where I'll always prefer a manufacturer's preset/DSP than rolling my own.

I spent a lot of my youth sandwiched between a drummer who hit his cymbals too loud, and a fender twin on 11.  Hearing tests tell me I'm less sensitive at 4k than surrounding frequencies, and I keep that in mind when mixing and use tools like Smaart to verify with less bias.  Presets are not always meant to suit every application, otherwise brands like EAW with multiple "colours" of grey box settings wouldn't exist, nor would the two "monitor" and "main" presets for the FLX12's I own.  I saw all of this to make a point that hearing and taste are unique to each individual. 

My question for you is, did you use the Danley preset that you developed for the SM80 during these tests?  How does your preset vary from the information myself and Nathan provided?  I'm asking only out of curiousity, I know you don't have the cabinets anymore and don't feel obligated to answer.  I'll go back to my cave, enjoy the new gear and thanks for sharing your experience. 

[Robert Lunceford]

I never meant to call your test methods into question, and again I'm super happy you found something that suits your needs.  I have never heard a Meyer rig that wasn't a joy to listen to, although I've heard bad mixes on them but that's another story.  When I start talking technical, I've been told I can be a bit condescending although that's never my intent. If my post comes across that way, my apologies. 

The joy of a product like the X40 is the fact that it's completely plug and play. I'll never know what it sounds like "unprocessed" because that's not possible in a design like this and therefore doesn't really matter.  That said, there isn't even a published frequency response graph in any of the current documents on the Meyer website, so my presumption is that this information is found through their MAPP software or EASE files or similar. None the less, I'll make an educated guess that the response would be pencil flat. I could play devil's advocate and say they're "hiding" it as well as Danley is "hiding" their presets, but I'm drifting into defensive mode since I make good money with my Danley inventory so naturally I'm biased.  However, when I look at the published frequency response of the SM80, it's not flat.  In fact it's one of the more "rough" performing boxes, "out of the box" in their lineup.  Tradeoffs to making it both loud and small. 

If I were performing a test like this, I would be validating the published data against measured data to see if I could recreate it.  If the SM80 measured response matched what's on the data sheet, that's a win.  Whether or not I'd use it that way, is another question. 

Anecdotally, I've never, ever, just plugged in a speaker and mixed a show. I am always making voicing adjustments for the content, space, etc, either in my mixer bus processing or speaker processor.  Testing it the way I'd use it, would be to adjust EQ to my taste to make it sound the best to my ear as possible, and then evaluating it's various attributes or comparing it.  I've used speakers that needed some pretty significant "work" to make them pleasant sounding, and I lost a lot of headroom doing so, for example. 

Comparing the SM80 to other Danley boxes I own like the Go2-8CX or FLX12, I can attest to the difference in "out of the box" performance, but both of those speakers have much smoother published frequency responses (and much lower output).  My new SH96's sound pretty darn good without processing, but again that matches the published data.  I still use the Danley presets for those though, because I find them to sound better even with those subtle changes than raw with a HPF.  It wasn't hard to get that file, I just e-mailed my Danley dealer.

The reason Danley doesn't list the EQ preset values is because you simply upload the file into the DSP or DSP amplifier.  In the time I've been watching, they've gone from OEM amps through Crest, to Linea Research, and now have options for Dynacord and MC2, in other words there are a lot of price points available.  The exercise I mentioned where I used Smaart to match my non-Danely processor to match the published data that Danley provides, involved entering numbers into the fields that did not match the numbers in the Danley DSP.  In other words, different processors have different "versions" of filter math, and simply copying numbers doesn't necessarily give you the same results.  Ivan's been pretty vocal about this on these very forums numerous times.  Without that Smaart trace, I would have simply entered those numbers and wouldn't have been happy with the results.

The limiter settings are another story.  I set/measured the limiters in my EV DC-One to match the published data from Danley for the SM80.  When I switched to the DNA processor, the speaker spent less time in the limiters and sounded better at the same time.  I could make my own limiter settings, but it would cost a lot of drivers.  This is one particular area where I'll always prefer a manufacturer's preset/DSP than rolling my own.

I spent a lot of my youth sandwiched between a drummer who hit his cymbals too loud, and a fender twin on 11.  Hearing tests tell me I'm less sensitive at 4k than surrounding frequencies, and I keep that in mind when mixing and use tools like Smaart to verify with less bias.  Presets are not always meant to suit every application, otherwise brands like EAW with multiple "colours" of grey box settings wouldn't exist, nor would the two "monitor" and "main" presets for the FLX12's I own.  I saw all of this to make a point that hearing and taste are unique to each individual. 

My question for you is, did you use the Danley preset that you developed for the SM80 during these tests?  How does your preset vary from the information myself and Nathan provided?  I'm asking only out of curiousity, I know you don't have the cabinets anymore and don't feel obligated to answer.  I'll go back to my cave, enjoy the new gear and thanks for sharing your experience.

Hi Jeremy,
No worries, I didn't find your post condescending at all. I've learned some things (perhaps to late) from your posts on this thread. And thank you for posting your DSP settings, it may prove beneficial to other SM80 owners in the future.
I absolutely loved my SM80s and always wished there was a self powered version. I have nothing but praise for Danley. I think they make some of the best and most innovative speakers available. I truly enjoyed having used them for eight years. I would have loved to owned some of the more sophisticated Synergy© cabinets, such as your SH96, but they are too large and heavy for me to consider as I need to be able to deploy the system by myself.
To answer your questions.
1. No, I did not use the EQ preset that I created for the test.
2. My preset was stored in my QU mixer which I loaded into the LR Out Parametric EQ. 4k was boosted 3.5db with a 2/3 octave width. 300Hz was cut 4.5db with a 2/3 octave width.

[ProSoundWeb Community]