Sure. But there are no signs of the speakers being wired out of phase. If they were, there would be much more than a 2dB dip in the 300-800Hz region. Additionally, as I mentioned before, Tom has seen the data and has not refuted it. The speaker was checked when it came back in stock (I saw their process) and put back on the shelf where it was then loaded in to my car. I have no reason and see no evidence to believe a pair of midrange drivers are wired out of phase (or not playing at all). If that were the case, then when they are playing together, the midrange would be about +4dB... and then the results really wouldn't make sense. 
It wouldn't be the first case. Synergy's mid and bass unit have acoustic bandpass type response, and xo changes can easily mess original LP/HP slopes and thus phase match up to half cycle rotation.I think you're letting your imagination get a bit wild there.
So, please show the step response! Obviously it is too difficult to measure each way separately.
Not sure this is the right place to ask as it's probably a very basic synergy question, but I'm wondering whether there are technical (sound quality) reasons for not using coaxial compression drivers or 'just' economical ones. I.e. whether the reasoning behind going for midrange taps is something like "we can get the same sound quality, but much cheaper" or whether it's actually technically better to do so (regardless of cost).
Hi
Just have a look at this thread by member mark100. He has posted some threads on different Synergy-builds he has done with coaxial compression drivers. In this latest thread on his SYN 9 prototype he discusses the addition of midrange-drivers between woofers and coax CD. Better just read it for your self.
SYN 9: a change in direction
Steffen
Just have a look at this thread by member mark100. He has posted some threads on different Synergy-builds he has done with coaxial compression drivers. In this latest thread on his SYN 9 prototype he discusses the addition of midrange-drivers between woofers and coax CD. Better just read it for your self.
SYN 9: a change in direction
Steffen
It's mostly for power handling/SPL capability. There is no replacement for displacement.
That Syn9 thread is interesting! But equally confusing
I should be more precise in my question: does it have advantages to inject different frequencies at different points down the horn or is it more of a "works just as well"? In theory, would a true full range point source at the apex of the horn be preferable or rather various taps at the location ideal for their passband?
I should be more precise in my question: does it have advantages to inject different frequencies at different points down the horn or is it more of a "works just as well"? In theory, would a true full range point source at the apex of the horn be preferable or rather various taps at the location ideal for their passband?
https://www.danleysoundlabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/The-Tapped-Horn.pdf
This white paper has been around for many years (ca. 2006). Look at the above linked article starting midway down page 3--and you can answer your own question.
I shouldn't be surprised by some of the comments here, but I'm still disappointed that so little has apparently changed in people's understanding of what's important in loudspeaker design, and what really is at a lower priority.
I now remember quite clearly why I generally do not post in this forum. I'm still surprised by the feeding frenzy on the measurements--which are, of course, still incomplete. The "reviewer" still hasn't seen fit to post these, even though he has been alerted to their omission last year. There are no phase, group delay, or even step response plots (i.e., a poor third choice in terms of diagnosing time alignment/phase issues). The reviewer has omitted fully 50% of the transfer function response of the loudspeaker, and thinks it isn't important enough to post for all loudspeaker measurements. He's learned very little, it seems.
He's even listened to the result of careful design of the MEHs for linear phase response with full-range controlled directivity (the difference between the Unity and the Synergy patents: US6411718 and US8284976) of the SM-60 top-end of the Hyperion, extolling its subjective listening virtues. But he clearly never listened to what Mr. Danley was telling to him as to why it sounds the way that it does in-room (Tom is a very patient man, it seems--much more patient than I believe I would be):
Chris
Last edited:
Yes but such a driver does not exist for this requirements of this application. A compression driver will never be as comfortable crossing at 400hz as 4 x cone drivers. Think about how much more cone area is in the mids and how much more power handling is available...
I have read that paper before, but thanks for making me read it again. Given my specific question and some of the replies here, it's quite obvious to me now that it's about the loading (or lack thereof for lower frequencies at the apex in a conical horn) and subsequently the power handling (not only can one use more powerful drivers, but also place them in a location where they get loaded ideally by the horn).
I suppose the question is then how loud can these coaxial CD's play without any loading in their lower register. Depending on the use case the answer might be not low/loud enough, but for a domestic speaker - even as powerful as the Hyperion - I would assume (!) it should actually suffice, no? But then I can't see the specs about crossover points and they might simply be too low.
Where did you get that?
Recommend checking Olson or Beranek for straight-sided ("conical") horn loading at longer wavelengths than 1/4 wavelength axially. The loading doesn't go completely to zero like exponential or hyperbolic profiles do. That's still a big advantage, usually 3-5 dB or more over their direct radiating case, which is a lot.
Chris
I remember you... such a pleasant fellow you are. With all your brilliance and intellect, you still choose to spend your time complaining instead of making things happen on your own. Didn't you mention you have a Danley speaker? Have you posted any of the data you ask about? Have you provided full SPIN data for everyone to see? I haven't seen it. If you haven't maybe you should stop telling other people what to do and be more proactive; do it yourself.
While I'm at it let me just be clear:
People like you annoy the **** out of me. Instead of simply saying "hey, thanks for x/y/z, but can you also provide xx/yy/zz" you complain, throw in pedantic quotes of "reviewer" and criticize. It's easy to do that when you are contributing nothing of merit to the conversation. For all future replies: I think I gave you my phone number last year. Call me and complain next time. Don't do this entitled and whiny internet stuff. I don't have time for it.
At any rate:
I haven't posted phase and group delay in the past because those are add-on modules for the Klippel which I could not afford at about $8000 USD (link below; item number 2520-016). Maybe you even forgot... when you asked me to give you this information last year and said you'd give me $50, I gave you what I could at the time when you asked for the Klipsch Heresy IV and you donated $20. Something like that (it's been a while). I believe I said back then that it wasn't true anechoic but it was the best I could do. So, it's not like I didn't tell you why I wasn't providing that data publicly. You knew this then. But you had to go all scorched-earth for no good reason and be a total douchenozzle in the above reply.
However, I can now provide that data going forward after receiving those modules with a recent update. So, hey, I'll add them because it'll round out the data... even if I don't think it really adds much value. But, next time don't be such a dick. Just ask. The world doesn't revolve around you and your desire for this data.
- Erin
Price list:
https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/kl...em/PDF/KLIPPEL_Analyzer_System_Price-List.pdf
Last edited:
Wow...can I have my $20 back?
[If anyone wonders why I don't post a lot here, it's probably because of posts like the above that are never moderated.]
Erin, you seem extremely angry/emotional for this forum. That anger has been apparent elsewhere, too. This is the first time I've seen that you've admitted that you couldn't make time-domain measurements with your Klippel rig. But there are other, far less expensive ways to get usable time domain data with what others use here. Or you can refer to Danley's own full-space measurements, which I find to be extremely accurate. Your memory of my generous offer to ship (round trip) to you my SH-50 at my own expense for your own measurements is somehow affected. That offer was turned down by you--because I believe you had "better things to concentrate on" at the time. I left the offer open. Then I see the Hyperion stuff from you--like it was a completely new and exciting subject. Great--good news. I'm glad you actually got to hear them and now understand why I wanted to ship mine to you for you to hear and measure.
For the others here: I have posted SH-50 data, just not on this forum. The forum that I typically use to post such data is down right now, but should be back up presently. (I believe it's bad form to advertise other forums from this current forum.) If you want to know which forum, please PM me.
My focus is not the SH-50 per se, but on "full range" MEHs in general--of which the K-402-MEH is my design, which I have posted extensive measurements on. Several people in that other forum have built them and are now enjoying them, even though they are large horns by current standards.
But this is not to take away one iota of what Danley provides--and they produce good stuff. My hat's off to Mr. Danley.
Chris
[If anyone wonders why I don't post a lot here, it's probably because of posts like the above that are never moderated.]
Erin, you seem extremely angry/emotional for this forum. That anger has been apparent elsewhere, too. This is the first time I've seen that you've admitted that you couldn't make time-domain measurements with your Klippel rig. But there are other, far less expensive ways to get usable time domain data with what others use here. Or you can refer to Danley's own full-space measurements, which I find to be extremely accurate. Your memory of my generous offer to ship (round trip) to you my SH-50 at my own expense for your own measurements is somehow affected. That offer was turned down by you--because I believe you had "better things to concentrate on" at the time. I left the offer open. Then I see the Hyperion stuff from you--like it was a completely new and exciting subject. Great--good news. I'm glad you actually got to hear them and now understand why I wanted to ship mine to you for you to hear and measure.
For the others here: I have posted SH-50 data, just not on this forum. The forum that I typically use to post such data is down right now, but should be back up presently. (I believe it's bad form to advertise other forums from this current forum.) If you want to know which forum, please PM me.
My focus is not the SH-50 per se, but on "full range" MEHs in general--of which the K-402-MEH is my design, which I have posted extensive measurements on. Several people in that other forum have built them and are now enjoying them, even though they are large horns by current standards.
But this is not to take away one iota of what Danley provides--and they produce good stuff. My hat's off to Mr. Danley.
Chris
Chris A - take a look at what he has tested with his expensive test gear. Look at the website.
Makes one wonder what is the point? Measuring bookshelf speakers is not quite the same as measuring something like an SH50.
Mr. Danley proves yet again what a patient and kind soul he is.
Chris A has published reams of interesting information and measurements AND actual realized speaker plans at the KLIPSCH FORUM.
I followed his lead and built his MEH based on a KLIPSCH K402 horn and have never been happier with any loudspeaker. My previous loudspeakers were horns in the traditional architecture - separate horns for four frequency ranges.
In addition to making measurements with expensive gear in a reverberant garage or on top of a pole it helps if one listens to the loudspeaker with some appreciation of actual music and what it sounds like in a performance space.
This punkin in a bikini (what a visual) should be grateful to be corrected by Chris A who has produced something that works very well. All of the measurements in the world mean nothing if they do not lead to a loudspeaker that makes music. No matter how much money you spend on the gear.
And then to have the audacity to beg for money.
If he can be offended I reserve the right to be offended.
This is from someone Chris A has had many disagreements with so I am not a mindless devotee and in addition I have had more than my share of Chris A's keyboard lashings - he takes this hobby very seriously and does have a point of view that has been refined over decades.
We are not friends and I do not doubt he finds me annoying which is fine. But he has my respect and appreciation for what he has done. Measurements being the least of his accomplishments. Measurements can only show you what is wrong with the big things. Only in conjunction with listening can they have any meaning at all.
Makes one wonder what is the point? Measuring bookshelf speakers is not quite the same as measuring something like an SH50.
Mr. Danley proves yet again what a patient and kind soul he is.
Chris A has published reams of interesting information and measurements AND actual realized speaker plans at the KLIPSCH FORUM.
I followed his lead and built his MEH based on a KLIPSCH K402 horn and have never been happier with any loudspeaker. My previous loudspeakers were horns in the traditional architecture - separate horns for four frequency ranges.
In addition to making measurements with expensive gear in a reverberant garage or on top of a pole it helps if one listens to the loudspeaker with some appreciation of actual music and what it sounds like in a performance space.
This punkin in a bikini (what a visual) should be grateful to be corrected by Chris A who has produced something that works very well. All of the measurements in the world mean nothing if they do not lead to a loudspeaker that makes music. No matter how much money you spend on the gear.
And then to have the audacity to beg for money.
If he can be offended I reserve the right to be offended.
This is from someone Chris A has had many disagreements with so I am not a mindless devotee and in addition I have had more than my share of Chris A's keyboard lashings - he takes this hobby very seriously and does have a point of view that has been refined over decades.
We are not friends and I do not doubt he finds me annoying which is fine. But he has my respect and appreciation for what he has done. Measurements being the least of his accomplishments. Measurements can only show you what is wrong with the big things. Only in conjunction with listening can they have any meaning at all.
What?! When did I beg for money? Chris said he'd give me $50 to give him some extra data. As in a donation for my efforts and trouble. I obliged and he chipped in what he felt my time was worth. This was my exact reply back to him in November when he asked if I thought the request for the data was unreasonable. Since you want to accuse me of begging for money, let's deal in facts, shall we?...
After some back and forth about other things, I sent him the best data I could to which he replied with:
So, nowhere did I beg or request money. He offered in a thread, openly. Then followed up by messaging me directly. The rest is what you see above. Let's not stretch truths into lies, here.
My data is free for everyone to view. If I have the ability then I'll provide the data I can. It's that simple.
So, the two OT posts here comes down to me not having provided some additional data (phase, GD, step response). Right? That's the crux? So we are ready to burn the place down because I "only" provided full spinorama? And I didn't provide the extra data because I didn't have the means at the time? Come on, guys.
If you don't like what I do provide that's fine. If you want extra data then ask and I'll see what I can do. But don't go tromping around like a child saying "it's only 50%" and other nonsense without even giving me a chance as Mr. Askew has done. That's just downright entitled. Out of all the things in the world to be upset at someone about, you would think that "not all the data" would be far down on that list, but alas...
I'll move on from this. You are welcome to message me directly but I won't be replying any further on this ridiculousness here. Got better things to do (like trying to get you bastards some more data) (said with a joking tone, btw).
Chris said:
Erin said:
After some back and forth about other things, I sent him the best data I could to which he replied with:
Chris said:
So, nowhere did I beg or request money. He offered in a thread, openly. Then followed up by messaging me directly. The rest is what you see above. Let's not stretch truths into lies, here.
My data is free for everyone to view. If I have the ability then I'll provide the data I can. It's that simple.
So, the two OT posts here comes down to me not having provided some additional data (phase, GD, step response). Right? That's the crux? So we are ready to burn the place down because I "only" provided full spinorama? And I didn't provide the extra data because I didn't have the means at the time? Come on, guys.
If you don't like what I do provide that's fine. If you want extra data then ask and I'll see what I can do. But don't go tromping around like a child saying "it's only 50%" and other nonsense without even giving me a chance as Mr. Askew has done. That's just downright entitled. Out of all the things in the world to be upset at someone about, you would think that "not all the data" would be far down on that list, but alas...
I'll move on from this. You are welcome to message me directly but I won't be replying any further on this ridiculousness here. Got better things to do (like trying to get you bastards some more data) (said with a joking tone, btw).
Last edited:
I've attacahed 3 images.
First is a groundplane comparison at 2m and 4m to that of the anechoic data. (above the midrange there is expected difference because the speaker wasn't angled toward the mic; I only cared about verifying the LF data of the anechoic response)
Second is an 'overall' shot showing the IR range of anechoic data, GD and phase/mag.
Third is enlarged GD.
Keep in mind this is anechoic data with response resolution of 0.73Hz. I know it will look funny but that's most likely because you've been used to gated measurements. Even the GP measurements you see in my comparison are gated to about 170ms (~6Hz increment/resolution) and you can see how this drives a difference in the lower frequencies. For point of reference, most gated "quasi-anechoic" measurements are 3-5ms which is about 200-300Hz resolution. Most GP data I see is gated no higher than 200ms; if that. Again, just clarifying because I know it won't look "right" if you don't understand this ahead of time.
Okay, that's it. Hope ya'll appreciate it and we can move on...
- Erin
First is a groundplane comparison at 2m and 4m to that of the anechoic data. (above the midrange there is expected difference because the speaker wasn't angled toward the mic; I only cared about verifying the LF data of the anechoic response)
Second is an 'overall' shot showing the IR range of anechoic data, GD and phase/mag.
Third is enlarged GD.
Keep in mind this is anechoic data with response resolution of 0.73Hz. I know it will look funny but that's most likely because you've been used to gated measurements. Even the GP measurements you see in my comparison are gated to about 170ms (~6Hz increment/resolution) and you can see how this drives a difference in the lower frequencies. For point of reference, most gated "quasi-anechoic" measurements are 3-5ms which is about 200-300Hz resolution. Most GP data I see is gated no higher than 200ms; if that. Again, just clarifying because I know it won't look "right" if you don't understand this ahead of time.
Okay, that's it. Hope ya'll appreciate it and we can move on...
- Erin
Attachments
Thanks Rick. That's one of the nicest compliments that I've ever received. And I don't find you annoying--only serious about your music reproduction--just like myself. We both look at the problem space and the solution space differently, but our ears apparently work very similarly.
And I also understand the situation a lot better with Erin's rig. I think I see why he's so focused on the money thing right now. I also believe that I understand why he's investing in Klippel NFS--because people on forums like this won't listen to those that don't have $10K, $20K or even $100K test rigs (and I can think of one person on another forum that apparently started catering to that sort of thing...and that person isn't Erin).
So Erin, sorry that I didn't understand the limitations of your current/prior NFS setup. I have thought (in my dreams) of what I'd do with an NFS rig, but then reality sets in fairly rapidly after that initial thought. I've actually talked about the added resolution of an NFS that could be used to identify more minute issues in loudspeaker implementation (like in-box resonances and driver issues, etc.). I don't want to detract from that effort, but perhaps a bit more transparency on your part would have avoided the events today. Lessons learned.
The biggest single point that I intended to make is that most people are chasing things like flat SPL on-axis, and have not realized or learned on their own that on-axis SPL flatness is about the only loudspeaker performance capability that can easily be remedied. Controlled directivity, extremely low modulation distortion (at full volume) and linear or flat acoustic (not electrical impedance) phase growth are the capabilities that do make a difference.
Tom Danley has actually made it easy with his initial Unity Horn design, and has showed the importance of linear/flat phase growth with the Synergy Horns. With the Hyperion, he has apparently translated that into extremely flat SPL/phase response via FIR filtering (down to a very low frequency), along with the other items I mentioned above. He's given up directivity below ~500 Hz, but I think he realizes that "narrow loudspeakers" are too difficult a subject to overcome in the consumer's expectations, so he's given up on full-range directivity, and instead added the FIR filtering for home duty. I don't give up on full-range directivity, in fact, I've found it to be a transformational capability. Perhaps more on that subject later--and not in this thread (or perhaps this forum, if it continues to drift toward "lowest common denominator" behavior).
With the K-402-MEH, I actually look at that design sort of like a "paint by numbers" loudspeaker. Mr. Danley has made it easy for us to follow the bread crumbs--if you let yourself do so and pay close attention to what he says. So I don't think of the K-402-MEH as anything but a fusion of two men's ideas: Roy Delgado (the K-402 horn profile and PWK's two-way designs) and Tom Danley (the basic MEH design, and phase flatness). I didn't do much else but follow their lead and do a little thinking about how to put the two ideas together.
Chris
And I also understand the situation a lot better with Erin's rig. I think I see why he's so focused on the money thing right now. I also believe that I understand why he's investing in Klippel NFS--because people on forums like this won't listen to those that don't have $10K, $20K or even $100K test rigs (and I can think of one person on another forum that apparently started catering to that sort of thing...and that person isn't Erin).
So Erin, sorry that I didn't understand the limitations of your current/prior NFS setup. I have thought (in my dreams) of what I'd do with an NFS rig, but then reality sets in fairly rapidly after that initial thought. I've actually talked about the added resolution of an NFS that could be used to identify more minute issues in loudspeaker implementation (like in-box resonances and driver issues, etc.). I don't want to detract from that effort, but perhaps a bit more transparency on your part would have avoided the events today. Lessons learned.
The biggest single point that I intended to make is that most people are chasing things like flat SPL on-axis, and have not realized or learned on their own that on-axis SPL flatness is about the only loudspeaker performance capability that can easily be remedied. Controlled directivity, extremely low modulation distortion (at full volume) and linear or flat acoustic (not electrical impedance) phase growth are the capabilities that do make a difference.
Tom Danley has actually made it easy with his initial Unity Horn design, and has showed the importance of linear/flat phase growth with the Synergy Horns. With the Hyperion, he has apparently translated that into extremely flat SPL/phase response via FIR filtering (down to a very low frequency), along with the other items I mentioned above. He's given up directivity below ~500 Hz, but I think he realizes that "narrow loudspeakers" are too difficult a subject to overcome in the consumer's expectations, so he's given up on full-range directivity, and instead added the FIR filtering for home duty. I don't give up on full-range directivity, in fact, I've found it to be a transformational capability. Perhaps more on that subject later--and not in this thread (or perhaps this forum, if it continues to drift toward "lowest common denominator" behavior).
With the K-402-MEH, I actually look at that design sort of like a "paint by numbers" loudspeaker. Mr. Danley has made it easy for us to follow the bread crumbs--if you let yourself do so and pay close attention to what he says. So I don't think of the K-402-MEH as anything but a fusion of two men's ideas: Roy Delgado (the K-402 horn profile and PWK's two-way designs) and Tom Danley (the basic MEH design, and phase flatness). I didn't do much else but follow their lead and do a little thinking about how to put the two ideas together.
Chris