Jump to content

m_ms

Members
  • Content Count

    82
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

m_ms last won the day on March 9 2019

m_ms had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

11 Good

About m_ms

  • Rank
    Power Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks for suggesting the Yorkville version as well. "There was .." - are they out of production? The U15 looks interesting, and where I've found them listed are not that expensive. Question is though, and this concerns the current Synergy horns as well, whether they're dialed-in too hot in the HF-region, being that they're likely to be used where the listening distance is more pronounced (like outdoors, or bigger indoor venues)? Indeed that's crucial, because I'd be using them in a domestic environment where the listening distance won't exceed ~10-12 feet. The bass capacity some of the people here have implemented in their homes is substantial, to say the least. Skrams and Skhorn used in conjunction.. - makes my pair of MicroWrecker tapped horns seem almost puny by comparison.. 😲 Thanks for sharing your impressions. While I'd love to try out the SH46's they seem not to be well-suited in a "hifi" set-up due to the early HF roll-off, but other than that I gather they'd be a wonderful addition to one's home system, not least as HT-speakers (with subs)! The SM60F is more like it for what I'm looking at, and that you've tried them out successfully with the Skrams is important info; my intention is to use a pair of Synergy horns all the way down to my tapped horn subs (crossed in the vicinity of or slightly below 80 Hz), although I am wondering whether a dedicated midbass horn would be a better choice so to have a horn-loading here that actually acts like a horn (with dispersion control lower in frequency) and then crossing the SM60F higher? That's why I'm looking at the SM96 with a wider coverage and dispersion control further down. The SH50's would be great, but I'm afraid they're too expensive for my budget as is. Do you feel the SM60F lacks energy in their lower operating range crossed over to the Skrams, compared to the SH46? EDIT: on second thought, the Danley's or Yorkville's being too "hot" in the HF-region for domestic use likely won't be a problem in my case, being that they'll be used through a Xilica XP-3060 DSP unit anyway with DRC Designer corrections.
  2. Off-topic, but I've noticed a poster (or two?) in this thread using Danley Sound Labs Synergy horns in conjunction with the Skrams. I'm contemplating possibly incorporating a pair of SM96's in my own set-up, and would appreciate any insight on their sound - be that pro or domestic use. You're welcome to send me PM's so not to derail this thread. EDIT: Though this paragraph from poster @jay michael is quite illuminating, it appears (from page 11): /Mikael
  3. @N8DOGG -- And just thinking about the woofers in the main speakers are 15" drivers.. That's a rather massive sub set-up, not least in light of more to potentially come!
  4. Not using my set-up at "war volumes" (I like that expression), nor in any pro use settings, and there are different factors at play with my system compared to yours that would have me prefer the particular cross-over choices (slope/type and frequency) I've made between the mains and subs. That being said I wouldn't go with a gentler slope, by rather a steeper one - if you can. In my set-up I find there's a "plateau" or leveling of virtues or qualities if you will with a 36dB/octave Linkwitz-Riley slope between the mains and subs. Lower than that and the sound starts becoming a tad too placid (loss of energy and firmness), and higher than that the sound becomes a bit high-strung or tensely wound-up. 30dB/octave L/R is close, and with some music perhaps preferable, but overall I prefer the "energy coherence" of the 36dB/octave L/R slope. I use a 20Hz 4th order BW HPF on my tapped horns, and they're crossed at 78Hz. Would love to cross higher than that, but though I've yet to try out crossing in the 95-100Hz region more thoroughly (which may be preferable with my mains), I fear it'll challenge the upper range cleanliness of my TH's. Actually a friend of mine may try out building a pair of Othorn subs to augment his all-horn mains (WE 12a replicas made of wood), and should he not be too pleased with the pairing (I somehow doubt that), the Othorns may find a way to my setup - an exciting thought.. I guess in your case I might try out a 105-110Hz cross-over with a 36dB/octave L/R slope and see how that works..
  5. Essentially, isn’t a tapped horn exactly that - a 6th order BP?
  6. Heard a bunch of those KS28's at a Rammstein concert earlier this year, and I must say the sheer wallop and physical presence they delivered was rather astounding. In a some 50,000 ppl stadium we sat about the furthest away from the stage we could, in the upper balcony, and yet the bass pounded in a manner almost beyond belief. It mayn't have been great bass per se, but it sure as hell was physical, dense and loud! Btw, I thought the KS28's housed BMS drivers?
  7. Would a Danley DTS-10 get there? EDIT: Of course, the DTS-10 is likely beyond proposed budget..
  8. Interesting impressions - much appreciated. The Skram appears to be one heck of a sub (and the Othorn as well), and I'd also like to have a closer listen to the Danley's. Regarding named perceived differences between the Skram and Othorn (grunt vs. growl, if you will), I'm wondering whether the more pronounced rowdy character or "growl" of the Othorn is at least partly explained due the driver being more exposed at the mouth? The way you describe it though doesn't make it sound as if the Othorn is sonically akin to a typical direct radiator (i.e.: if we accept there is any such typicality to the sound of a direct radiator), and moreover I've heard other people speak of the tapped horn sound in ways quite similar to yours (something about a combination of presence, smoothness, a certain visceral feel, and even a touch of "warmth") - impressions I can relate to via my own tapped horns, though it may at first glance sound like any capable, well integrated sub regardless of topology.. Interesting also that the Skrams appear to be more impactful (alive?) in the upper end of their range compared to the Othorn and how this is explained (simply caused by a rise in the frequency curve in the upper range?). I've always imagined the Othorns were good to some 125Hz.
  9. Good idea with the systematic study. A friend of mine has implemented a 48dB BW HPF at 20Hz on his six 15"-loaded FLH's (tuned at 25Hz), and that sounded pretty decent to me, but other than not having heard a lower HPF slope on his setup I don't know the variables that would affect the outcome differently compared to my own setup. I've never really understood the meddling with audio content that would impose HPF; leave that to the end user. Lately I've found a tendency among studios/mixing facilities to limit ULF content in Blu-rays/UHD's (certainly from Disney, added to a low reference level), and while the impact of this is less audible in my own setup (with the latest 18dB BW HPF 17-18Hz extension is all I'll ever get), though still easily audible, I presume it's an entirely different matter with your sub setup and extension down to ~5Hz(!). It's a shame also that IMAX theaters are the only commercial cinemas to hit in the vicinity of 23Hz, but I wonder the type of HPF they're using. A bunch of Skrams/Skhorns/Othorns in a commercial cinema would be fun, and high-passed at some 25Hz would offer a significant gain in extension over the typically used dual 18" ported cabs.
  10. If your use of 12-24dB BW HPF (or mostly 18dB) is implemented in the context of the subs having to endure your test-bench trials, then I take it the slopes being mentioned are sufficiently protective. I may try out 12dB BW and see whether it's advantageous in terms of sound quality, but I'm not sure it's a good idea with tapped horns if they unload more severely below tune compared to ported subs or a 6th order BP iteration like the Skrams? As is 18dB BW HPF is preferred here over 48dB BW. The overall presentation just appears to be more cohesive.
  11. Maybe this has been brought up at an earlier juncture, but is the driver in a Skram unloaded below tuning frequency similarly compared to a tapped horn or ported enclosure to necessitate a high-pass filter, and if so what's the proper/sufficient slope and type to use here - Butterworth, 2nd to 4th order? 7th or 8th order slope HPF are oftentimes considered too steep, but why? It should follow they offer better protection of the driver while "eating" less dB's down to the cut-off; to my ears a steeper HPF (like 8th order) makes the low-end appear slightly more extended for this reason, but perhaps also a bit too distinctive. I'm back to a 3rd order BW to see how that fares..
  12. Can you elaborate on the "low growl" aspect of the sound of the Othorn, and how it differentiates the sound of the Othorn compared to other subs you've heard? Is this something that makes the Othorn sound different compared to the Skram, even though you deem them to be "equal" to each other in the low-end performance?
  13. My assessment of the Skrams-sensitivity was with a pair of them in mind (like, emulating a single SKhorn), so that would have them hover in the 100dB territory. Sorry I wasn't clear about that. Really, I'm a blundering novice on these matters, so @Ricci and others would be much better fitted to answer your questions, but I've also had my thoughts on the Othorn vs. Skrams and what to choose here if one were to venture in that direction (I'm very happy with my pair of MicroWrecker tapped horns of @lilmike, but am intrigued nonetheless). Initially I got the crazy idea (but still relevant, I believe) that since my main speakers are all-horns it's better to use a horn variety to augment them below 80 or so Hz instead of using direct radiators (hence my choice of the MW's), but with the Skrams I'd be willing to make an exception (i.e.: hidden driver, a very slight horn-loading(?) of the front side of the driver-cone; ported on the backside, a bad-ass 21" driver w/massive power handling, high-ish sensitivity, relatively wide and clean bandwidth). If I'm not incorrect the Othorn is build around the B&C 21SW152, and therefore it's perhaps the best choice (apart from the IPAL) compared to other, cheaper alternatives. The Skrams however appear to be very well equipped with the cheaper B&C 21DS115 (or other), is a less complex build (from what I've read), perhaps a cleaner upper band performance, a slightly smaller footprint, and optional lower-band extension via port blocking. It would be most illuminating listening to them side-by-side, but Ricci already elaborated on a comparison of the SKhorn vs. Othorn, which should give one an idea in regards to the Skrams vs. Othorn performance. I believe I'd go with the Skrams (a pair), but either choice I'm sure would be awesome. If you only need to go to 70Hz upwards the supposedly cleaner upper band of the Skrams may not be relevant.
  14. So, in the case of your initial and specific request aimed at the Skrams it's not really about movie playback capabilities as such (a different inquiry altogether, it would seem), but simply whether they kick a** from 30-120Hz with a suggested (and, it seems, fitting) driver, the B&C 21DS115-4. From what I'm able to assess the Skrams do exactly that; being 25-120Hz monsters at a relatively modest physical size, not least in light of them being fitted with a 21" driver, close to or more than 100dB sensitivity and hitting 25Hz quite comfortably. For your purpose I'd leave all ports open, or close no more than one per cab. Traits on paper that, if it weren't for my MW's, I'd have a pair build to my own setup in a heartbeat. EDIT: more fittingly you may consider poster @dgage's advice of either not being in the need of the Skrams, or use them solely with, say, 2 ports open. Personally I'd go with the latter option
  15. I suspect the Skrams are as good for movies with the B&C 21DS115-4 as any other fitting driver 21" driver in this cab, the variable here being the number of ports being blocked and how this affects extension. I'm guessing, but for movie playback (and music playback in general) it seems a good compromise is blocking one of the four ports for a reasonable balance between extension and output/response smoothness in the lower octaves.
×
×
  • Create New...