Gee Emm Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 I'm curious to see how the Synergy sounds with valve amps. Anything has enough power - I haven't run the mids on more than half a watt. At some point when I really have them refined I'll have a GTG and maybe someone will bring toobz. I can bring my Weston 12W T-bird if'n ya like. Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Spencer Posted October 17, 2011 Author Share Posted October 17, 2011 Graham, When I get around to doing a GTG and this thing is show worthy, I'd welcome that. Maybe even a bit of a comparo and people can see if they hear a difference. This thing is about as valve friendly as it gets. More progress pics: http://redspade-audio.blogspot.com/2011/10/synergy-prototype-2-construction-3.html David, This is my second Synergy and parts of it are still a brain bender! The ports are tricky in this one, along with the mounting of the drivers. I couldn't get my head around it completely before physically getting to that stage and holding up the drivers to the horn walls. Dad came in again to help with that part, we tried at first to work it out with trig but the tricky part is being able to resolve trig in 3 dimensions. It's easier to work some parts of it out as you go when it's right there in front of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Spencer Posted October 21, 2011 Author Share Posted October 21, 2011 Update: Oh the joys of fitting 6 drivers onto a 4 sided horn! The port profiles are "frustoconical" but I can't take the credit for doing those (thanks dad!) They were done with a hand saw, chisel and sand paper. Hoping to get one of them fired up and measured this weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gee Emm Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 You have a clever dad Paul And patient Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Spencer Posted October 22, 2011 Author Share Posted October 22, 2011 Very true Graham. I've been building things with dad for over 25 years and I'm still catching up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DQ828 Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 My mind can't get around that photo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Spencer Posted October 22, 2011 Author Share Posted October 22, 2011 You mean you can't make sense of it? There are other photos on the blog that might help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCone Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I don't want to get into an IP flame war, but you are ENTIRELY free to post your specifications to a patented product, as long as you do not manufacture it for commercial sale, or entice someone to manufacture for commercial sale. Especially in Australia! Nonetheless, if it would make you sleep easy, I'm glad to ask Tom Danley if he cares. If Tom agrees would you post the details? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCone Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Doesn't that make you a naughty boy By the way, I'm more than happy with the info supplied, working it out's half the fun & achievement. Since I work with IP everyday of my life, I am certain neither Paul nor I has violated Tom's IP, nor would we be if Paul published his details and I built them. I'm at ease with the circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Spencer Posted October 23, 2011 Author Share Posted October 23, 2011 NYC, PM sent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Spencer Posted October 28, 2011 Author Share Posted October 28, 2011 First version 2 horn is up and running, and performing well ... Full details here: http://redspade-audio.blogspot.com/2011/10/synergy-prototype-2-complete.html Even more badass than v1 Knocked up a quick active xo for it: Yes, it is one metre wide, giving wider coverage - so a wide seating area can work. Comes in handy for movies sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drizt Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 WOW... what more can one say. Looking good mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Excellent work Paul 3 cool banana's . Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaspert Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Impressive build Paul. How far away is the Synergy Horn GTG? I can bring some tube amps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Spencer Posted October 29, 2011 Author Share Posted October 29, 2011 Not too far away as I have a limited time window. Both pairs (S1 and S2) have a buyer and will soon be gone. Yep, gone before finished and before I even had a chance to list them. Currently working out a bit of tweaking, then I was thinking of a couple of GTGs. First an informal GTG to measure them and have a bit of a listen. That won't interest most people. They go up on my elevated polar measurement rig and it's a bit tedious. There will be about 4 speakers measured. But thinking I might put on another GTG and give people a chance to have a listen. Or maybe just one GTG, we'll see. There is also the progressive GTG thing which I need to sort out. Bringing tube amps, that would be cool. I've been wanting to hear tubes running these. I had a mini concert last night - John Mayer music DVD ... ohhhh these are fun! Still need to build the other one ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Spencer Posted November 9, 2011 Author Share Posted November 9, 2011 Measurements on the blog: http://redspade-audio.blogspot.com/2011/11/synergy-horn-measurements.html Measurement GTG: http://www.stereo.net.au/forums/showthread.php/40695-Synergy-measurement-GTG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drizt Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Very cool. Great work Paul. Have you gotten used to the controlled directivity (minimised room reflections from the side walls, etc.) sound yet Paul? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Spencer Posted November 9, 2011 Author Share Posted November 9, 2011 Thanks Yes, it didn't take long. I love the dynamics and effortlessness of these things. It would be interesting to hear them in a really big room, I think there they would do their best work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drizt Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Good to hear. Joz's room comes to mind So you are a fan of 'less' side wall interaction / reflections ? Do you think absorbers at the side / first reflection points would have a similar effect (in regards to the question above)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Spencer Posted November 9, 2011 Author Share Posted November 9, 2011 So you are a fan of 'less' side wall interaction / reflections ? Not necessarily. I tend to agree with Toole to a certain degree. I think the ideal is a big room with constant directivity speakers, a mix of diffusion and absorption and overall a room that has its own sound, a pleasant one where side wall reflections add some body. It's something you can control both with the speakers and treatment, as you suggest. It's all about choice, having the tools to do it. If you buy speakers rather than DIY them, then you can still play with treatment. All else being equal, I think it's better to control directivty of the speakers, rather than have broader dispersion then absorb it. All else isn't equal though. Not even close. Do you think absorbers at the side / first reflection points would have a similar effect (in regards to the question above)? Yes and no. It's hard to compare because the speakers with controlled directivity and no side wall treatment are different in other ways to speakers with wide dispersion. The two approaches with the same goal in mind will not sound the same. The idea might be similar, but the sound is probably quite different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drizt Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Thanks for the reply mate. Kind of what I expected, a 'it depends' type answer. Every choice has it's pro's and con's. I guess it is a matter of if the pro's outweigh the con's or how we deal with or accept the con's that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gainphile Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Imagine that the walls are the "listener", if flat-on-axis speakers are used: - speakers with uncontrolled directivity: it will see non-flat response, generally a peak at tweeter xo. - controlled directivity woofer+horn : it will see sloping down response - dipole: it will see a flat response - omni: it will see a flat response. The 'problem' is the walls does not only listen, it talks back itu the room (reflections). So we want the best reflection possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drizt Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 A good summary. Would the controlled directivity speakers grouping also include all speakers (even regular box speakers) that have been designed with smooth directivity in mind (design goal)? Absorption at the walls would help minimise issues by attenuating what is reflected back. A speaker with controlled directivity can achieve the same thing by minimising the sound that hits the walls in the first place. Imagine that the walls are the "listener", if flat-on-axis speakers are used: - speakers with uncontrolled directivity: it will see non-flat response, generally a peak at tweeter xo. - controlled directivity woofer+horn : it will see sloping down response - dipole: it will see a flat response - omni: it will see a flat response. The 'problem' is the walls does not only listen, it talks back itu the room (reflections). So we want the best reflection possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter the Greek Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 A speaker with controlled directivity can achieve the same thing by minimising the sound that hits the walls in the first place. I am in the other camp - have as wide as you can get, flattest off axis response as you can get - adds to ambiance, which I like. In a 2 channel system, if you have only direct sound you miss out on a lot of good stuff. Ever listened to a good movie in stereo on a good system? in a good room you'll hear the surround effects as if you have rear speakers and the front stage is massive. For this you need good reflections - preferably diffused (this is why BAD's are so cool for first reflection points with high quality speakers with good off axis response) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gainphile Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 A good summary.Would the controlled directivity speakers grouping also include all speakers (even regular box speakers) that have been designed with smooth directivity in mind (design goal)? Absorption at the walls would help minimise issues by attenuating what is reflected back. A speaker with controlled directivity can achieve the same thing by minimising the sound that hits the walls in the first place. If what you mean by 'normal' is a woofer + dome tweeter, then no. The woofer would beam at 1.2-2khz which is the typical xo frequency, then widens again because at that frequency the tweeter radiates as omni . If the speaker was flat on-axis, then at 30deg it would have a dip (or peak). To correct this at the wall using absorbers would be incredibly difficult. Woofer + dome tweeter polar The next question is then... what is the ideal dispersion? ... tha'ts debatable. I personally found 120deg is a sweet spot (dipole). Omni is too wide and 90deg like econowaves are too narrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts