Today's Messages (ON)
| Unanswered Messages (OFF)
| Forum: LAB Lounge |
|---|
| Topic: Small spot monitor |
|---|
| Re: Small spot monitor [message #323342 is a reply to message #319810 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 08:11 |
 |
 Travis Valois
Messages: 63
Registered: April 2004
Location: Sault, Ontario, Canada |
Should Get Out More |
|
|
|
For lower powered gigs where high SPL isn't a requirement, we have four compact wedges we built, each loaded with a JBL 2118 and an MG bullet tweeter. Anyone we've used them with have loved them.
|
|
| | Topic: Aviom Snake with M7CL |
|---|
| Re: Aviom Snake with M7CL [message #323352 is a reply to message #323292 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 08:54 |
Jeff Babcock
Messages: 853
Registered: September 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada |
Has No Life |
|
|
Josh,
Sure it's not CHEAP, but take a look at other digital snake pricing and it starts to look very reasonable. It's also something that is expandable later. If budget really is that tight then move down to the LS9-32 so long as it works for your application. That'll save more than enough to pay for this upgrade and then some.
|
|
|
| Re: Aviom Snake with M7CL [message #323379 is a reply to message #323352 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 10:16 |
Josh Oswald
Messages: 418
Registered: March 2006
Location: Montgomery, Alabama |
Has No Life |
|
|
Yeah, when comparing Aviom solutions to other digi snake company's, there price rocks. Comparing Aviom solutions to copper...not so much. Albeit, copper having far less flexibility and expandability. That's my goal; flexibility, but i can't break the install over it. I've got 80k (ish) for the audio portion of the install and the 20k mark on the digi snake is tough to swallow. Dropping down to the LS9 could save it, but i really like the single layer of the M7. Small issue, i know. 
Thanks,
Josh
|
|
| | Topic: qsc GX3... |
|---|
| qsc GX3... [message #323380] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 10:20 |
Jess Bruffett
Messages: 290
Registered: July 2006
Location: Claremore, Oklahoma |
Has No Life |
|
|
its a class b amp??? i thought they stoped using class b amps because they recombining to the upper and lower waves causes major distortion. so why are they using it now? or is it a miss print?
Awaken the Dead Productions
http://www.myspace.com/awakenthedeadproductions
|
|
|
| Re: qsc GX3... [message #323393 is a reply to message #323380 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 10:47 |
Mike {AB} Butler
Messages: 1686
Registered: April 2004
Location: Lynchburg, VA |
Has No Life |
|
|
Did you read Pat Quilter's comment on the GX3? It looks like they were able to make a class B that "just works".. (how and whatever they did)
http://www.qscaudio.com/products/amps/gx/gx_faq.htm#q8
(Reprinted from QSC Website)
"The GX3 is a class B amplifier, how does this differ from the more common class AB?
The GX3 is a Class B design, as distinct from Class AB. True Class B requires that the positive output stage turn off exactly when the negative stage turns on, and vice versa. If the positive and negative stages overlap, you have Class AB operation, which ensures against any discontinuities, but results in an idle current which creates losses and needs careful bias tracking circuitry. If you have a gap between positive and negative actuation, you actually have "Class C" operation, which is indeed unsuitable for audio due to crossover distortion. Many actual attempts at Class B design end up with Class C results, due to poor understanding of on-off delays, feedback stabilization, and lack of loop gain.
In effect, Class B is the exact dividing line between Class C (no idle current, but distorted), and Class AB (idle current assures continuity, at the expense of extra heat). To optimize efficiency and power in a compact chassis, and eliminate problems of bias tracking, the GX series is set up for zero idle current. Careful design techniques and high closed-loop feedback ensure that there is no appreciable crossover gap, qualifying us to claim "true Class B" as an indicator that we combine maximum efficiency with no perceptible distortion. To put this in practical terms, the GX Class B design achieves less crossover distortion than many imitators of our Class AB designs.
Bottom line - the GX is "Class B done right".
- Pat Quilter "
Looks interesting. I know in my limited experience in doing a few class A and and AB designs from scratch, and even in seting up many a kit amplifier, it's sometimes tricky to get the bias right, and disastrous when done wrong - if thermal runaway occurs. Class B gets rid of that quiescent current issue.. but you have to do that crossover point perfectly.
That's my limit of expertise, anyway..
Regards,
Mike Butler
|
|
| | Topic: single or dual 15 tops? |
|---|
| Re: single or dual 15 tops? [message #323307 is a reply to message #322360 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 01:56 |
Jess Bruffett
Messages: 290
Registered: July 2006
Location: Claremore, Oklahoma |
Has No Life |
|
|
|
sub renting from the other guys isnt an option. they charge the same price whether they are doing a gig themselves, or renting to another sound company. i thought of that a bit ago. they also arent interested in hiring anyone to work with them at least in a tehcnical capacity. they pay thier buddies beer tab, or kick them alittle cash if then need help, and if they dont, they just bust it out to be in the scene, and look important. anywho, back to the main question, about single or dual 15 tops. how is the single 15 a step back?? i see it more as a step sideays. i was pretty much wondering what everyone else would use in my situation. and for the fellow club v users how much power do they put to s115v's to get them sounding good. will a 2450 in stereo cut it with those tops? my reasoning tells me i should be fine, but i like to get opinions and hear from other people just in case i am wrong.
[Updated on: Fri, 16 May 2008 01:57]
Awaken the Dead Productions
http://www.myspace.com/awakenthedeadproductions
|
|
|
| Re: single or dual 15 tops? [message #323331 is a reply to message #323307 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 07:13 |
Mike {AB} Butler
Messages: 1686
Registered: April 2004
Location: Lynchburg, VA |
Has No Life |
|
|
| Jess Bruffett wrote on Fri, 16 May 2008 02:56 |
sub renting from the other guys isnt an option. they charge the same price whether they are doing a gig themselves, or renting to another sound company. i thought of that a bit ago. they also arent interested in hiring anyone to work with them at least in a tehcnical capacity. they pay thier buddies beer tab, or kick them alittle cash if then need help, and if they dont, they just bust it out to be in the scene, and look important. anywho, back to the main question, about single or dual 15 tops. how is the single 15 a step back?? i see it more as a step sideays. i was pretty much wondering what everyone else would use in my situation. and for the fellow club v users how much power do they put to s115v's to get them sounding good. will a 2450 in stereo cut it with those tops? my reasoning tells me i should be fine, but i like to get opinions and hear from other people just in case i am wrong.
|
Jess,
Kinda figured that was the case, as far as subrenting.. doesn't surprise me in the least.
As far as the mains, you said yourself the single has about 1 dB less. In the grand scheme of things, sure, -1dB SEEMS like not much to lose on.. but.. here is the thing I considered, and you might do well to as well: IF you are going to make a paradigm shift, WHY make it an equivalent.. why aren't you considering an upgrade? IF you aren't going to consider an upgrade, save your money.. until you can, or buy some units that will do justice to your business.. and maybe (dare I say it?) ace your competition?
Jess, it's obvious you came and asked the question because you had some reservations about doing this.. otherwise you would have just gone ahead and done it.
You can't generate a little extra income somewhere on the side to foot the bill towards a new set of cabinets that will climb you up to the next level? My advice.. start looking at some really improved, state-of-the-art gear.. instead of always having to "settle" for a lesser solution..
Regards,
Mike Butler
|
|
|
| Re: single or dual 15 tops? [message #323336 is a reply to message #323307 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 07:35 |
Mike McNany
Messages: 1195
Registered: April 2004
Location: Franklin PA, USA |
Has No Life |
|
|
IMHO an RMX2450 would provide plenty of solid power to the S115V.
While I understand and agree with the others' opinions of going for an upgrade, I DO understand your desire for smaller lighter tops. Saving space and weight is an upgrade (of a sort) to me.
IF you cannot swing a real upgrade on the tops and still want to shrink down your load, get the SM15V or better yet, the SM12Vs. The monitor shape has the same internal components and can be thrown to monitor duty WHEN you DO upgrade your tops. Since you are using subs, the 12s will save you even more space & weight. And honestly, the 12s sound pretty nice on their own for a vocals support PA system. While SM12Vs would work with an RMX2450, I'd feel safer with an 1850 or a 1450. Better yet a PLX to save weight (or maybe the new GSX series to save $$$ too).
Mike McNany
|
|
|
| Re: single or dual 15 tops? [message #323349 is a reply to message #323336 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 08:42 |
Jess Bruffett
Messages: 290
Registered: July 2006
Location: Claremore, Oklahoma |
Has No Life |
|
|
its not that i dont want to upgrade, i really do, and i actually have a little fund going for it. i want to do it all at once instead of piece by peice. i hate miss matched systems. the goal is in 12 months to move to a vrx/srx rig(6 vrx tops and 4 srx subs), rack and cabs. my efx rack is in great shape, i just spent some cash on a few older mixers to expand my channel capabilities, i bought a spirit-8 40 channel in a flight case with 3 power supplies for 2500 bucks, i also bought a 24 channel spirit 4-2, well its acutally 32 but it has 4 stereo channels 2 power supplies and a case aswell for 1500 bucks. so mixer efx and such wise, im good. i bought the 40 channel console because i figured its 40 good channels for sooo cheap and i know its been taken care of. i can move the 24 channel one on my own easily. so thats why i have focused attention now on my cabs. agian i need to start looking at setting the system up on my own, also the pole mount ability is really nice too. but back on point, thats why im not wanting to upgrade to higher end tops right now. i guess i have some thinking to do to really deside if the single tops are a move i really want to make... if anyone has any thing else to say, i would love to hear it. ohh also i did consider the monitor thing, but i have ocd and plugging the speakon in on the top of the cab, would drive me crazy. and with the single 12 tops, i would loose too much height. i can deal with the single 15 tops on hieght, but nothing smaller.
Awaken the Dead Productions
http://www.myspace.com/awakenthedeadproductions
|
|
|
| Re: single or dual 15 tops? [message #323354 is a reply to message #323349 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 09:04 |
Mike McNany
Messages: 1195
Registered: April 2004
Location: Franklin PA, USA |
Has No Life |
|
|
| Jess Bruffett wrote on Fri, 16 May 2008 09:42 |
Ohh, also I did consider the monitor thing, but I have OCD and plugging the speakon in on the top of the cab, would drive me crazy. and with the single 12 tops, I would loose too much height. I can deal with the single 15 tops on height, but nothing smaller.
|
A little annoying, I agree. But it's easy enough to add a round panel mount NL4 to the backside or bottom of the monitor shaped Yamaha Club. In return, you'd have an extra set of monitors later and be easier to sell, more desirable, if needs be, IMHO.
Mike McNany
|
|
|
| Re: single or dual 15 tops? [message #323412 is a reply to message #322212 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 11:19 |
|
| Lester Moran wrote on Mon, 12 May 2008 23:58 |
| Jess Bruffett wrote on Tue, 13 May 2008 04:18 |
well to try and hit all the points. i dont have the budget to upgrade. tulsa is the worse market to try and do sound in. there are guys in tulsa who have rich parents and deep pockets that have 8 box jbl srx systems with qsc plx/macrotech amps and a&h gl3800 consoles and do gigs for 100-150 bucks(there are 2 guys with almost identical systems) and some beer and thats not an exageration. now these guys arent the best sound guys, but it always comes down to cold hard cash. they have better gear and will even go lower to get a gig, just to be in it. because they dont need the money and they can upgrade when ever they want when new toys come out. vs. me who doesnt have deep pockets even though according to almost every fraking band i have mixed in the past 3 years i am one of the best engineers in the area. thats why i cant afford to upgrade right now. i have been working stead enough but after maintance and paying my stage manager there isnt alot left espcially with gas at 3.60 a gallon. i love my tops in terms of how they sound, and the abuse they can take. i am resonably please with thier output. what i am needing now is easier to set up. the dual 15 tops are stupid heavy and very deep which makes them awkward for 2 people to setup and impossible for 1 when the subs are setup verticaly. the single 15's i can setup on my own. as gas is getting more expensive and i am getitng more gigs and my stage manager is also the bass tech for a major national touring act he is about to be gone for some time. everything i own have casters or caster boards now, but that doesnt help if i cant stack my system. i am still doing rooms between 300-350 max occupancy. not larger rooms, but as im being seen as a better engineer than the comitetion i am having some people willing to pay for me and my rig more than the other guys. and also around here asking form the promoter to provoide loaders/ people to help set up and you get laughed at. so... this is where i am at, and why i am wondering about going to the single 15 tops. also about more power to what i have, i have tried bridgeing 1450's the my current tops, and i dont get 3 db i should from doubling the power at best after 2 minutes i get 1.3db of extra output. so even adding more power to the single 15 tops isnt gonna yeild more output. and 450 watts is just 50 shy of the program power handling mark that everyone yells about so much.
|
Jess,
#1. Learn to use Capitals. Makes it easier to read.
#2. Charge $650 minimum per gig. It gets you out of the muck, and creates the impression that you may be worth it. If you're as good as you say you you are, it will work.
#3. If the market / contractee won't cooperate with a requirement for four laborers, shit, move.
Jeez.
Sorry.
Les
|
Even more important then caps, use LOTS of paragraphs. I get lost going from the end of a sentence to the beginning of the next. Yes, I am old and the eyes don't work like they used to, but I am not the only one and this is not a contest.
I don’t mean this as a flame. It just makes it difficult to help.
Too Tall
Curtis H. List
Bridgeport, Mich.
I.A.T.S.E. Local # 274 (Gold Card)
Lansing, Mich
Independent Live Sound Engineer (and I'm Tall Too!)
|
|
| | Topic: Festival fun |
|---|
| Re: Festival fun [message #323369 is a reply to message #323120 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 09:39 |
Rick Angsten
Messages: 8
Registered: July 2007
Location: Illinois |
Newbie |
|
|
| Quote: |
Probably not the best place to source a genset ground from, but at least they were trying. Most of the time I see small generators ungrounded.
|
Just had a discussion on genny grounding. I'm not sure that a spring clamp is listed as a approved connection device regardless of the electrode you are attached to.
Code specifically allows the generator not to be grounded with conditions. A high impedance ground path is the worst solution.
http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/33892/18841/
|
|
|
| Re: Festival fun [message #323370 is a reply to message #323369 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 09:51 |
Tim McCulloch
Messages: 3617
Registered: April 2004
Location: Wichita KS USA |
Has No Life |
|
|
Code does not permit spring clamps, C-clamps, or other types of easily removed or disconnected grounding equipment.
The "well, at least they tried" attitudes would probably meet with little sympathy with a jury or judge after plaintiff's council put an "expert witness" on the stand who said the genset wasn't grounded properly, but doing so would have prevented the loss that lead up to that lawsuit.
Grounding a genset is relatively simple and it amazes me it isn't done in many situations where the Code exemption clearly does not apply.
Oh, and a reminder to ALWAYS meter power and to never blindly trust someone else's hookups... a former employee of ours was electrocuted when a rental fence blew down and landed on the genset.. He went to move the fence panel and got electrocuted. I'm not clear on the details, but it looks like the genset frame wasn't grounded, and there were other hookup issues. He survived and already has a lawyer suing everyone who was within a 3 block radius... We'll see what becomes of this.
Have fun, good luck, and DONT FOOL WITH ELECTRICITY.
Tim Mc
"It's not your fault if he can't play the part. Let him suck out loud."
|
|
|
| Re: Festival fun [message #323419 is a reply to message #323126 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 11:40 |
Chris Hindle
Messages: 530
Registered: April 2004
Location: Montreal, Canada |
Has No Life |
|
|
| Dan Pockrus wrote on Thu, 15 May 2008 15:01 |
A bit more info:
1) The sign is aluminum.
2) The pole isn't metal - it's one of those poured concrete poles made to look like an antique pole.
That said, at least they tried.
-- Dan --
|
In other words, it's NOT grounded.
Tried my ass.
"Ya, whatever. Just stick a '57 on it, and get off the stage"
Chris.
|
|
| | Topic: Weird XLR insert cable |
|---|
| Re: Weird XLR insert cable [message #323422 is a reply to message #323031 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 11:48 |
Alexander B Larsson
Messages: 63
Registered: April 2007
Location: Sweden |
Should Get Out More |
|
|
I make my own "custom" cables from a thin (but strong) dual, balanced cable from Klotz, designed for installation and 2-to-1 cables. The quality seems really good, and it fits neatly into a Neutrik 1/4" TRS connector.
/Alexander
[Updated on: Fri, 16 May 2008 11:49]
|
|
| | Topic: Microwedge Use for Ensemble |
|---|
| Re: Microwedge Use for Ensemble [message #323357 is a reply to message #323291 ] |
Fri, 16 May 2008 09:09 |
Jeff Babcock
Messages: 853
Registered: September 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada |
Has No Life |
|
|
Josh,
You might also consider the new Radian version of the microwedge, I can't remember what they call it now, but it's just an updated version of the micro since the EAW changeover. I suspect it will cost a fair bit less than the EAW version if price is a concern and should still sound very good.
That said there are quite a few good coax wedges out there, MW's obviously being at the forefront of the attention, but there are some very good options at lower pricepoints. For lower or mid volume applications (whatever that means....) you might even want to try the EAW VRM12 - not a rock box, but has worked well for me in these scenarios where size and cost were both a consideration. They are very small, extremely inexpensive, and have 2 angles which might help with your angle dilemma. They are probably less than 1/4 the price of the microwedge, and certainly are not up to that standard of quality or output. But in contemporary church install situations they can work very well.
Cheers
Jeff
|
|
|
Pages (6): [1 ]
Current Time: Fri May 16 23:25:11 CDT 2008
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03290 seconds |
Forum Home
Login
Forum Search
Register
FAQ
