Lack of high-end speaker reviews

[Timcognito]

I don't get your comment? Are you referring to horns and the present conversation or something earlier in the thread?

Sorry it was about testing only one speaker. Should have linked that comment. If one tests bad so will its companion on the other channel.

 

[Audio Science Pal]

The guy told me they were only demoing Genelec’s integration with Atmos renderer (if you look at the show desc on their website it’s extremely clear).

An acquaintance of mine told me they were ordering a pair for their mastering studio so if that works out I’ll have free reign to play with them. I really want to hear them next to Danley Hyperion as that is their only real competitor.

Look forward to reading your thoughts after you get to visit that studio.

 

[Matt_Holland]

I give you:
KEF Blade 2 Meta review from Erin

 

[cavedriver]

I give you:
KEF Blade 2 Meta review from Erin

I would have been surprised if it wasn't good, but that's the point of this thread, isn't it? As in, which companies' speakers are still hard to predict as to whether they will be good or not. I would admit at this point that KEF's products are relatively predictable going forward. If I could make a request it would be for Amir and Erin to "fill in the gaps" - all the companies that might be good, but for which there is relatively little data on their higher end speakers. I would especially like to hear some of the things that are highly regarded but who's performance I don't have much of a grasp on, such as a vintage JBL 4350/4355 monitor, or a Danley tapped horn.

 

[Matt_Holland]

I would have been surprised if it wasn't good, but that's the point of this thread, isn't it? As in, which companies' speakers are still hard to predict as to whether they will be good or not. I would admit at this point that KEF's products are relatively predictable going forward. If I could make a request it would be for Amir and Erin to "fill in the gaps" - all the companies that might be good, but for which there is relatively little data on their higher end speakers. I would especially like to hear some of the things that are highly regarded but who's performance I don't have much of a grasp on, such as a vintage JBL 4350/4355 monitor, or a Danley tapped horn.

Agree!

I’d like to see B&W exposed.

 

[somebodyelse]

or a Danley tapped horn

https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/danley_sh50/

 

[gnarly]

or a Danley tapped horn.

Hi, the tapped horns in Danley speak are subwoofers.
You mean Synergy horns, like the SH-50, etc.

 

[cavedriver]

https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/danley_sh50/

oh, thanks, I missed that he had reviewed that. A little rougher than I expected but not too surprising considering it was one of the PA models. Too bad he didn't measure the SM-60, or more importantly, the Hyperion. That's the one I'm sure everyone would like to see.

Hi, the tapped horns in Danley speak are subwoofers.
You mean Synergy horns, like the SH-50, etc.

I believe the Synergy horns are also technically tapped horns.

 

[gnarly]

I believe the Synergy horns are also technically tapped horns.

No, they're not really. Synergy horns work on an entirely different set of principles than a tapped horn sub.

 

[cavedriver]

No, they're not really. Synergy horns work on an entirely different set of principles than a tapped horn sub.

please explain why a tapped horn would strictly refer to subwoofers. It seems Danley considers the tapped horn to be a special case of a "multiple entry horn", so strictly speaking you could ding me that I might be referring to multiple entry horns, except that I'm not. Yes, Danley appears to have trademarked the term "Tapped Horn", where it would appear that he considers them a specific case where the positioning of the drivers and use of a ported housing are components of the design, but I don't see where this is strictly for a sub. I also think he's being a little unfair here by marketing a term "Tapped..." when the word for the ports in the cone are "taps" in MEH's so you could say we're talking about "tapped horns" but not "Tapped Horns". Per his Wikipedia page it says this about "Synergy" and "Tapped Horns":

"Danley's Synergy Horn concept was an improvement on the multiple entry design of the SPL-td1. The idea is that multiple drivers in different bandpasses are combined into one horn to make a phase-accurate, constant-directivity single-point-source loudspeaker.

Danley's Tapped Horn concept directs sound from the rear of a horn-loaded driver into ports (taps) that are vented into the horn closer to the mouth of the horn, farther from the driver at the throat of the horn. At frequences such that the wavelength is twice the distance to the taps, the waves routed inside the cabinet to exit through ports in the horn combine positively with direct sound from the front of the driver."

I'm particularly interested in this subject because of Scott Hinson's "MEH" multiple entry horn DIY project and the buzz that exists around that speaker (as well as Danley's Hyperion although those are out of my price range). I will note that from Danley's definition of a TH it seems like Scott's design may be a Synergy Horn but not a TH because the drivers primarily fire into the horn through ports while their back waves that exit through ports in the cabinet are actually on the back of the cabinet and not in the horn. But again, I see nothing about a TH that says it has to be a sub.

 

[gnarly]

please explain why a tapped horn would strictly refer to subwoofers.

The tapped horn sub idea hinges on a 1/4 WL distance between the length of the primary horn receiving direct driver response, and the relative distance of the other side of the driver radiating into free space.

Synergy horns are about the placement of driver on the horn with their ports, such that both acoustic z-axis timings, and horn loading if possible, are optimized.
Other than the lowest freq drivers used in a synergy horn, which can gain reflex ports, all other driver sections are sealed.
That in and of itself negates the "tapped horn" idea.