Hi all,
I see the Yorkville SA-102 is has just 1x10-inches LF Woofer, 1xHF Compression Driver.
I am interested in a Synergy horn of this type, that uses 2 transducers.
How are the drivers loaded in this type of synergy?
What are the characteristics of this type of synergy?
What are the merits and downfalls?
Please point me to a DIY synergy post of this type,
Thank you,
I see the Yorkville SA-102 is has just 1x10-inches LF Woofer, 1xHF Compression Driver.
I am interested in a Synergy horn of this type, that uses 2 transducers.
How are the drivers loaded in this type of synergy?
What are the characteristics of this type of synergy?
What are the merits and downfalls?
Please point me to a DIY synergy post of this type,
Thank you,
It might also use a coaxial driver. Try to look through Patrick Bateman's threads, he experimented with this coaxial arrangement. While looking at the specs, I think there is actually a 10" woofer from the bottom of the horn, since the horn is asymmetrical vertically and there seems to be some space below it.
1) both drivers radiate in a horn (synergy) ;BR for the 10".
2) link says : Dispersion (°H x °V): 30x45 ; i.e. not so good for a home, certainly made for stacking in venues or outside events.
3) for home, none imho for this model but they made a good 3 Way with a 15" and the mid drivers + CD in a synergy horn which is better for hifi (your post being not in the PA section)
4) look at for instance Bawslo threads for a diy Synergy, but there are many others.
2) link says : Dispersion (°H x °V): 30x45 ; i.e. not so good for a home, certainly made for stacking in venues or outside events.
3) for home, none imho for this model but they made a good 3 Way with a 15" and the mid drivers + CD in a synergy horn which is better for hifi (your post being not in the PA section)
4) look at for instance Bawslo threads for a diy Synergy, but there are many others.
I was not ware the post is not in the PA section, i am actully interested in the PA deployment.
Mrscy,
The Yorkville SA-102 multiple entry horn (MEH) uses a 3” voice coil 10” woofer offset horn loaded through two small ports with two additional bass reflex ports, and a 4” diaphragm HF driver on a Paraline device both loaded to a single conical expansion horn.
Driver loading is shown in their video:
Synergy Array Series - SA102 & SA115S - YouTube
The Paraline throat adaptor helps create a very defined 30 degree HF horizontal coverage pattern, and improves the low frequency response of the HF driver on the vertically asymmetrical conical horn (7 degree up, 38 degree down), allowing a lower HF crossover than a conical horn of the same dimensions would support.
The Paraline does also create more ragged narrow peaks and dips in frequency response than a standard conical horn would have.
As the dispersion pattern requires three units to cover the typical 90 degrees pattern most venues require, and Paraline devices are rather difficult to build and have rough response, you probably won’t find similar MEH DIY projects, though my lower output 90x40 two-way SynTripP
SynTripP: 2-way 2-part Virtual Single Point Source Horn
does use 10” drivers and a 3” diaphragm.
Art
Attachments
Last edited:
Hi Mrscy
Art has done a good job of describing the SA102, the video images he posted are actually of the 3-way SA153 cabinet but they are close enough to describe the arrangement of the components. Marketing just used the same animation in both videos. The one comment I will add that was made by Art, and I have seen mentioned by several other people, is the "rough" response of a Para-line lens. These devices are very tricky to design and manufacture. One is dealing with very high tolerances due to the very small wavelengths involved. I have seen a lot of DIY lens hacked out of plywood with a jigsaw and slapped together and then comments made of how badly they measure. These devices demand accuracy and attention to detail. And just like anything there are tricks to getting them to measure/perform better that are not going to be openly discussed on public forums for everyone to see. I've been designing these devices for more years than I can remember ever since Tom drew me a rough sketch of his idea on a napkin one night while we were having wings and beer. It's has been a constantly improving process of the design and manufacturing process and the results can be just as "smooth" as a standard conical horn. Attached is the RAW SPL response of the lens in the new SA102. It has a couple new features that the lens in the SA153 doesn't have. As you can see it's very smooth for a high output device. There are PDF's on line of our VTC products which use paraline lens as well that show similar results. I'm by no means trying to discourage you from trying to make your own I'm just saying you've picked a tough one that demands a lot to get right. All the best and good luck.
Todd
Art has done a good job of describing the SA102, the video images he posted are actually of the 3-way SA153 cabinet but they are close enough to describe the arrangement of the components. Marketing just used the same animation in both videos. The one comment I will add that was made by Art, and I have seen mentioned by several other people, is the "rough" response of a Para-line lens. These devices are very tricky to design and manufacture. One is dealing with very high tolerances due to the very small wavelengths involved. I have seen a lot of DIY lens hacked out of plywood with a jigsaw and slapped together and then comments made of how badly they measure. These devices demand accuracy and attention to detail. And just like anything there are tricks to getting them to measure/perform better that are not going to be openly discussed on public forums for everyone to see. I've been designing these devices for more years than I can remember ever since Tom drew me a rough sketch of his idea on a napkin one night while we were having wings and beer. It's has been a constantly improving process of the design and manufacturing process and the results can be just as "smooth" as a standard conical horn. Attached is the RAW SPL response of the lens in the new SA102. It has a couple new features that the lens in the SA153 doesn't have. As you can see it's very smooth for a high output device. There are PDF's on line of our VTC products which use paraline lens as well that show similar results. I'm by no means trying to discourage you from trying to make your own I'm just saying you've picked a tough one that demands a lot to get right. All the best and good luck.
Todd
Attachments
BTW, if it's not obvious, TDM designed the speaker that's the subject of this thread:
Yorkville Sound Podcast #1 - Todd Michael - YouTube
Yorkville Sound Podcast #1 - Todd Michael - YouTube
If you have a horn with a really wide beamwidth, it has to work harder because it's radiating into a wider beamwidth.
For instance, the compression driver in the JBL M2 is just ridiculously large, because the beamwidth of the speaker is something like 120x100 degrees.
If your tweeter is working really hard, you have three solutions:
1) use a bigger tweeter
2) raise the crossover point
3) both
The Danley Synergy Horns have a beamwidth which is fairly typical for pro speakers, about 50x50 or 60x40.
With the Paraline speakers, they're basically trading vertical beamwidth for horizontal beamwidth. For instance, a Danley SH-50 is 50x50 in beamwidth. A VTC EL210 is 90x10 in beamwidth. Add those together and you get "100 degrees", just like the SH50.
The maximum output of the two boxes is comparable, but the EL210 is a much simpler design, is smaller and lighter. EL210 has two tweeter and two woofers, SH50 has two woofers, four mids, and one compression driver.
I'm getting off topic, so let me get to the main point:
If you want to make a two way Unity horn, there's a few ways to go about it:
1) You can reduce the beamwidth. A 40x40 Unity horn won't make the tweeter "work" as hard as a 60x60 Unity horn. A 70x10 Unity horn will work about as hard as a 40x40 Unity horn. How you achieve that narrow vertical beamwidth is up to you. You could use a Paraline or a VDOSC or a ribbon or whatever. All that matters is that you're trading vertical beamwidth for horizontal beamwidth, to make things easier on the tweeter, so you can transition from a three-way design to a two-way design.
2) You can just use a really big and/or expensive tweeter. The JBL D2430K is known to be nice. They're $1198 a pair: JBL D2430K Tweeter JBL 446213-001X for VTX Series - Speaker Exchange
3) You can just lower your expectations, as far as maximum SPL goes. My latest design is a two way and I get away with not using midranges because it's only designed to play to about 107dB: Ribbon Unity Horn
For more info on the Paraline, check out my thread here:
Square Pegs
Todd,
Thanks for the correction. The location and relative size of the ports and the co-ax HF driver should have tipped me off, but "close enough for rock and roll" 😉
After watching VTC videos, built 10 Paralines for back in 2008, understand the importance of attention to the small details in these devices lacking in many DIY attempts.
It does appear your SA102 has smoother response than the DSL Paralines, and an improvement over the VTC lines, good work!
Art
Attachments
Last edited:
One interesting thing about the SA102 versus the VTC boxes and the Danley Genesis horns with the early Paraline lens, is that the SA120 appears to use a BMS coaxial. IIRC, some of the Jericho horns use a BMS coax too.
This begs the question: I wonder if the high frequency output is improved by delaying the mid frequency output?
IE, in the BMS coax, there's two diaphragms and one of them leads the other one by a few centimeters. Would be interesting to see if that yields an improvement.
My hunch is that the answer is "yes", since the Paraline lens is basically just a conical horn that's been squashed. And we've seen with the Unity horn, that putting the mids ahead of the tweeter makes everything easier.
Also, what I describe is in the original Paraline patent, but AFAIK, nothing commercial has every implemented that:
This begs the question: I wonder if the high frequency output is improved by delaying the mid frequency output?
IE, in the BMS coax, there's two diaphragms and one of them leads the other one by a few centimeters. Would be interesting to see if that yields an improvement.
My hunch is that the answer is "yes", since the Paraline lens is basically just a conical horn that's been squashed. And we've seen with the Unity horn, that putting the mids ahead of the tweeter makes everything easier.
Also, what I describe is in the original Paraline patent, but AFAIK, nothing commercial has every implemented that:
Thank you all for your responses, I am convinced that this is too complicated and I'll consider SynTripP/Bill Waslo Synergy.
I would really like to have 2 drivers per cabinet, just LF and HF, whats your take on that seeing that a common configuration is a 2 x LF and 1xHF?
I would really like to have 2 drivers per cabinet, just LF and HF, whats your take on that seeing that a common configuration is a 2 x LF and 1xHF?
I intend to sell Bill Waslo's Synergy Horns, so if you're anywhere near Las Vegas just let me know.
They sound great but the wife says they gotta go.
They sound great but the wife says they gotta go.
I am far in Southern Africa, in a small country called Lesotho, famous for its 3000 meters+ altitude and mountains. 🙂
An older option...
Is the Yorkville Unity U15. This was perhaps, the "poor man's Synergy." Sadly they discontinued these a year or two back. At about $1000 (US) each, they seemed a great deal, half or less the cost of comparable Danley Synergy line. I've had a pair for about six years. In fairness, it was a trashed used pair, so I never experienced the stock unit. I made slight modifications and run them with active EQ. They are by far the best sounding speaker's I've ever had, and I've had quite a few. Other than very brief listens, I've not listened to "real" Synergy speakers.
The original Synergy was literally a Unity with altered ports and EQ. If one could locate a used pair (currently the ask on eBay is more than they cost new!), they offer the hobbyist the potential to approach Synergy quality by custom port or EQ mods.
Is the Yorkville Unity U15. This was perhaps, the "poor man's Synergy." Sadly they discontinued these a year or two back. At about $1000 (US) each, they seemed a great deal, half or less the cost of comparable Danley Synergy line. I've had a pair for about six years. In fairness, it was a trashed used pair, so I never experienced the stock unit. I made slight modifications and run them with active EQ. They are by far the best sounding speaker's I've ever had, and I've had quite a few. Other than very brief listens, I've not listened to "real" Synergy speakers.
The original Synergy was literally a Unity with altered ports and EQ. If one could locate a used pair (currently the ask on eBay is more than they cost new!), they offer the hobbyist the potential to approach Synergy quality by custom port or EQ mods.
The SA102 uses a 4" diaphragm 1.4" exit B&C DE1090TN.
I had thought the SA102 video depicted the SA102, but as Todd Michael pointed out, the video images I posted were actually of the 3-way SA153, which uses a co-ax mid-high driver.
As the SA153 is tri-amped (400Hz, 7kHz crossover frequencies), I would assume time/phase compensation is used in it's processing to align all three components.
Art
Attachments
While researching this thing yesterday, I noticed you can buy many of the parts online.
You'd have to come up with a waveguide and a crossover.
midranges are here: Yorkville 7405 5" Driver For U15 | Full Compass Systems
woofer is here: Yorkville 7531 15" 7531 Woofer For U15 | Full Compass Systems
tweeter is BMS 4550 iirc : Compression driver BMS 4550, 8 ohm, 1 inch exit
Don't quote me on this, but as I recall:
Todd from Yorkville (who's in this thread) designed the Yorkville U15, with no input from Sound Physics Labs. Danley, from SPL, was impressed by Todd's choices, and switched from B&C compression drivers to BMS compression drivers. The SPL Runt was the first SPL speaker using the BMS 4550. Then when SPL went kaput, Danley formed Danley Sound Labs, and the Danley SH-50 uses the same midranges as the SPL-TD1, but a different compression driver: the BMS 4550.
I have a BMS 4552ND here, and a pile of Eminence N151Ms, and the Eminence is *really* similar, for much less money. The Eminence was used in one of the Jericho speakers. I actually started using them because I saw them in the Jericho, when I met up with Danley a couple of years ago.