I'm thinking about build my own line array speakers for live sound.
This is the driver I am considering for the column line array.
The GRS 8FR-8 full-range 8" speaker features a paper cone with poly foam surround. A whizzer cone extends high frequency response and dispersion. Engineered to withstand rigorous commercial use, this driver will also deliver great results when used in point-source hi-fi applications. Affordable pricing makes it perfect for DIY applications. Ideal replacement for the Pioneer B20FU20-51FW (also known in DIY communities as the BOFU)
Product Specifications
Nominal Diameter8"Power Handling (RMS)60 Watts
Power Handling (max)85 WattsImpedance8 ohms
Frequency Response39 to 16,000 HzSensitivity91 dB 1W/1m
Voice Coil Diameter1.5"
I was thinking about putting 4 speaker in each enclosure and wiring the first two and second two in series and connect the the pairs in parallel to a achieve an 8 ohm load.
My questions: The 60 watt RMS rating per speaker concerns me. Will wiring them in series each pair in series and then connecting them in parallel increase their power handling capacity?
The drivers are rated at 91db @ 1watt/1meter. What will the approximate SPL be when all 4 are combined?
I'm thinking this. Four speakers will be moving more than one speaker and they will be sharing the work. Am I correct?
I am also thinking that the power handling should increase but I have no idea by how much.
I plan on powering them with a powered mixer so I'm looking at minimum 300 watts going into a 4 ohm load as there pair of the "Hound Sound" "Whizzers"
One speaker able to go from 39hz to 16,000 is impressive to me. 16,000 is about the limit of most dynamic mics. I'm thinking this would remove the need for subs. I am also thinking of making a column with 8 of these speakers.
Your thoughts?
This is the driver I am considering for the column line array.
The GRS 8FR-8 full-range 8" speaker features a paper cone with poly foam surround. A whizzer cone extends high frequency response and dispersion. Engineered to withstand rigorous commercial use, this driver will also deliver great results when used in point-source hi-fi applications. Affordable pricing makes it perfect for DIY applications. Ideal replacement for the Pioneer B20FU20-51FW (also known in DIY communities as the BOFU)
Product Specifications
Nominal Diameter8"Power Handling (RMS)60 Watts
Power Handling (max)85 WattsImpedance8 ohms
Frequency Response39 to 16,000 HzSensitivity91 dB 1W/1m
Voice Coil Diameter1.5"
I was thinking about putting 4 speaker in each enclosure and wiring the first two and second two in series and connect the the pairs in parallel to a achieve an 8 ohm load.
My questions: The 60 watt RMS rating per speaker concerns me. Will wiring them in series each pair in series and then connecting them in parallel increase their power handling capacity?
The drivers are rated at 91db @ 1watt/1meter. What will the approximate SPL be when all 4 are combined?
I'm thinking this. Four speakers will be moving more than one speaker and they will be sharing the work. Am I correct?
I am also thinking that the power handling should increase but I have no idea by how much.
I plan on powering them with a powered mixer so I'm looking at minimum 300 watts going into a 4 ohm load as there pair of the "Hound Sound" "Whizzers"
One speaker able to go from 39hz to 16,000 is impressive to me. 16,000 is about the limit of most dynamic mics. I'm thinking this would remove the need for subs. I am also thinking of making a column with 8 of these speakers.
Your thoughts?
You are correct that the each driver will have a shared load. However, I don't see this as a great choice for PA. Although I like and use some of the GRS woofers, the fullrange are disappointing and I put them back on the shelf after one test. 39Hz? No way. 80 if you're lucky. Just not worth it - they don't sound very good. I'm not sure they could handle to abuse of PA use.
Of course the price is low, so it won't cost you much to try.
Of course the price is low, so it won't cost you much to try.
i rebuilt some old Yorkville columns with four each of these Pyramid Studio Pro WH8 8" Woofer Accordian Surround
and after two years of steady weekend gig's(pre pandemic) with a dance/rock band they are all still working and sound reasonable. the columns are atop a single fifteen sub and x-over at 120 hz nothing spectacular but gives good results for small 150 seat venues.
and after two years of steady weekend gig's(pre pandemic) with a dance/rock band they are all still working and sound reasonable. the columns are atop a single fifteen sub and x-over at 120 hz nothing spectacular but gives good results for small 150 seat venues.
Last edited:
They are advertising that they go down to 39hz but there is no graph showing the frequency curve. I could always ad subs an use an active crossover at 0 to 100Hz.
Many years ago I played for a band that used Sunn columns.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
They has 4 12"s and the top 2 had whizzers cones. We only ran vocal through them. Eventually, the band leader bought a very high end system with an active 3-way crossover. We were running 4 power amps. It was drawing so much current that we had to tap and split 220 for the lights and PA. Everything went through the PA. I still liked the sound of vocal through those Sunn columns better. They were much smoother.
My aim is to get the sound of the Bose L-1 system but at higher SPL with the same or better fidelity. I want to be able to go from a powered mixer into 2 columns. That 39Hz really caught my eye. I tended believe it because I've played bass through an Ampeg 8 x 10 cab with an SVT head and a SWR Henry the 8 x 8 cab and the bottom end was superb. The Dayton PA200-8 is the recommended replacement driver for the Henry 8 x 8 cab and it specs out at 92.4 SPL with a frequency response of 70hz to 6000hz with 250 watts RMS power rating. On Parts Express the Dayton woofers spec out at incredibly low frequencies. Very hard to believe.😕
The Bose L1 system is setting the bar pretty low. A Yamaha DBR10, for instance, would be an improvement at a fraction of the price.
Chris
Chris
I like what I heard from the Bose but I think they are way over priced considering the real cost of components. I was on Gear Slutz asking why line arrays were so expensive and the answers I got were quite absurd that went along the lines of paying for R&D.
In one band we used Bose 901s. They contain 8 2" 1 ohm speakers. I liked the sound and how that shape dispersed the sound.
In a live situation fidelity is important but so are practicality and reliability. Some rooms can be acoustic nightmares. Line arrays seem to do better in tough rooms than point source systems in my experience. Clubs are a dynamic environment. You can pink the room with a spectrum analyzer and it will sound great at the board but crappy in other parts of the room. Line arrays, even the Bose sound good in most rooms everywhere in the room.
I've never heard the Yamaha Yamaha DBR10 system you mention but I've always liked Yamaha gear for its quality, design and reliability. That said, the Yamaha DBR10 is point source and would have coverage issues in some rooms such as hot spots and dead spots.
I'm sold on line arrays but they are so expensive and the large ones seem best suited for arenas and outdoors. The TOA HX-5b looks good but I think it's designed for a permanent installation.
In one band we used Bose 901s. They contain 8 2" 1 ohm speakers. I liked the sound and how that shape dispersed the sound.
In a live situation fidelity is important but so are practicality and reliability. Some rooms can be acoustic nightmares. Line arrays seem to do better in tough rooms than point source systems in my experience. Clubs are a dynamic environment. You can pink the room with a spectrum analyzer and it will sound great at the board but crappy in other parts of the room. Line arrays, even the Bose sound good in most rooms everywhere in the room.
I've never heard the Yamaha Yamaha DBR10 system you mention but I've always liked Yamaha gear for its quality, design and reliability. That said, the Yamaha DBR10 is point source and would have coverage issues in some rooms such as hot spots and dead spots.
I'm sold on line arrays but they are so expensive and the large ones seem best suited for arenas and outdoors. The TOA HX-5b looks good but I think it's designed for a permanent installation.
Most of what you are talking about falls into a category of column speakers, they look and in some cases perform a bit like a real line array but fall well short in overall performance mainly because of their size.. they're just not big enough. This is what the guys on the other forum were getting at, a ton of R&D goes into the creation of a real PA scale line array, the consumer sized column speakers(something you can pack in the trunk of a car) are marketing ripoffs really, the biggest of them(Bose L1) does behave like a line source at higher frequencies.. the vocal range and up, but has no line source control at lower frequencies and that creates a sound imbalance the further away you get from the system as the lowend decays faster than everything else.
This is all about the physics of sound reproduction, the amount of SPL that can be generated comes down to the total air volume the drivers can displace, and the frequency range that a column acts as a line source is directly tied to the column length, longer = lower.
Larger drivers generally get louder than smaller versions simply because they displace more air, but due to the effects of comb filtering smaller drivers lend themselves better to a column design so a design decision has to be made here. If you go with smaller drivers like those found in the Bose L1 then it's possible to cover a lot of the audio spectrum reasonably well with just one type of driver, but max SPL will be limited. If you use a larger driver like a 6" for example then a separate tweeter array will be necessary to cover the upper octaves as comb filter will muck up the output of those 6's up high... even if an individual driver has good extension up into the khz range. This makes the speaker system larger but not unreasonable, and the payoff is greater SPL capability.
An example of this is the now discontinued SLS Audio LS8695, it used eight 6" drivers and 9 ribbons in a 48" high cabinet designed to stack vertically for more output and greater line source control at lower frequencies. I have seen DIY versions that used dome tweeters instead of ribbons to good effect.
[/url]SLS LS8695 by paul, on Flickr[/IMG]
This is all about the physics of sound reproduction, the amount of SPL that can be generated comes down to the total air volume the drivers can displace, and the frequency range that a column acts as a line source is directly tied to the column length, longer = lower.
Larger drivers generally get louder than smaller versions simply because they displace more air, but due to the effects of comb filtering smaller drivers lend themselves better to a column design so a design decision has to be made here. If you go with smaller drivers like those found in the Bose L1 then it's possible to cover a lot of the audio spectrum reasonably well with just one type of driver, but max SPL will be limited. If you use a larger driver like a 6" for example then a separate tweeter array will be necessary to cover the upper octaves as comb filter will muck up the output of those 6's up high... even if an individual driver has good extension up into the khz range. This makes the speaker system larger but not unreasonable, and the payoff is greater SPL capability.
An example of this is the now discontinued SLS Audio LS8695, it used eight 6" drivers and 9 ribbons in a 48" high cabinet designed to stack vertically for more output and greater line source control at lower frequencies. I have seen DIY versions that used dome tweeters instead of ribbons to good effect.
Last edited:
Caveat: I'm thinking out loud.
I don't recall getting comb filtering from columns but then again were were only using them for vocals.
Can't comb filtering happen from reflected sound as well?
My understanding of what makes line array different from columns is that line arrays have their drivers aimed in slightly different directions which is why the Bose L1 is perceived nearly as loud in the back of a room as in the front. Now my question is. If there were several Bose L1's in a room would comb filtering happen?
As I recall, columns worked best when spread as wide the were pointed slightly downward and aimed at the far corners of the room. I'm guessing when that's done the sound from each driver arrives to any given point at the same time????
In a band situation there are so many variables. Stage sound will get to a location at a different time than the front speakers. A lot of the stage sound will be reflected sound. Empty rooms sound different than a full room. Some room are more reflective than others. Crests and troughs are arriving at a given point are many different times and at different SPLs.
Let's way you have two columns with 4 8" drivers in each one. The room is rectangular. The columns are angled downward slightly and pointed at the the same angle at the far corners of the room. The sound from the right column will reach the room corners at which they are aimed at the same time. Right? If the columns are elevated and correctly angled downward, won't the sound from the bottom speaker reach the same point at the same time thus eliminating comb filtering?
Do you know if there are any figures on driver size and spacing and the difference number of milliseconds to a given point? The speed of sound is a constant.
Part of my plan is to put full range 8" speakers into a vertical enclosure and put a slight convex curve the board on which they are mounted. My thinking is that the because of the curve and a downward aiming, that once elevated the distance of each driver from a given point in the room will be the same. BTW, I'm math challenged. 😱
I don't recall getting comb filtering from columns but then again were were only using them for vocals.
Can't comb filtering happen from reflected sound as well?
My understanding of what makes line array different from columns is that line arrays have their drivers aimed in slightly different directions which is why the Bose L1 is perceived nearly as loud in the back of a room as in the front. Now my question is. If there were several Bose L1's in a room would comb filtering happen?
As I recall, columns worked best when spread as wide the were pointed slightly downward and aimed at the far corners of the room. I'm guessing when that's done the sound from each driver arrives to any given point at the same time????
In a band situation there are so many variables. Stage sound will get to a location at a different time than the front speakers. A lot of the stage sound will be reflected sound. Empty rooms sound different than a full room. Some room are more reflective than others. Crests and troughs are arriving at a given point are many different times and at different SPLs.
Let's way you have two columns with 4 8" drivers in each one. The room is rectangular. The columns are angled downward slightly and pointed at the the same angle at the far corners of the room. The sound from the right column will reach the room corners at which they are aimed at the same time. Right? If the columns are elevated and correctly angled downward, won't the sound from the bottom speaker reach the same point at the same time thus eliminating comb filtering?
Do you know if there are any figures on driver size and spacing and the difference number of milliseconds to a given point? The speed of sound is a constant.
Part of my plan is to put full range 8" speakers into a vertical enclosure and put a slight convex curve the board on which they are mounted. My thinking is that the because of the curve and a downward aiming, that once elevated the distance of each driver from a given point in the room will be the same. BTW, I'm math challenged. 😱
Comb filtering is when the output of 2 or more sound sources producing the exact same signal arrive at the listener at slightly different times, this produces an interference pattern that if visually displayed would resemble a comb in appearance. A speaker like the L1 most definitely produces a LOT of comb filtering as there is no way to time align the output of all those drivers to every listening position. To hear comb filtering simply move horizontally while listening for changes in the spectral balance of the speaker output, since every frequency has a different wavelength comb filtering occurs at different distances for every frequency and this results in what sounds like a whishy washy variation in the spectral balance as you move. In comparison a singe point source type speaker has a relatively smooth unchanging spectral balance across it's effective coverage pattern.
Room reflections also add to this interference pattern but have more effect on lower frequencies, high frequencies are more directional and are absorbed by bodies and materials quicker and dissipate faster over distances.
The super wide coverage that is attributed to line arrays is a direct result of the physics governing the interaction of a large number of drivers arranged in a column, in this case the vertical pattern narrows while the horizontal widens but only at frequencies where the drivers output is omnidirectional. At higher frequencies all drivers become more directional reverting to point source behavour again so this only applies to frequencies whose wavelength is significantly less than the diameter of the driver, for the 2.5" drivers in an L1 for example that means they only act as a line source below about 5khz. That is enough to be convincing to the untrained ear but it falls well short of the ideal. The alternating angled drivers in the later L1 model is more marketing BS, it really doesn't do much if anything to increase horizontal coverage.
It's become convention to use a pair of speakers either side of the stage for PA applications even though stereo sound is rarely used and most listeners aren't in the stereo sound field, but norms are difficult to change so we roll with it. Best practice is to aim the speaker at the listeners to keep as much energy off the walls and ceiling to minimize reflections, you want to take the room out of the equation as much as possible. And where possible elevate the speakers so they are more equidistant from all listeners, this produces more consistent sound levels at all listening positions... you don't have to blast those in front to get appropriate SPLs to the back.
Room reflections also add to this interference pattern but have more effect on lower frequencies, high frequencies are more directional and are absorbed by bodies and materials quicker and dissipate faster over distances.
The super wide coverage that is attributed to line arrays is a direct result of the physics governing the interaction of a large number of drivers arranged in a column, in this case the vertical pattern narrows while the horizontal widens but only at frequencies where the drivers output is omnidirectional. At higher frequencies all drivers become more directional reverting to point source behavour again so this only applies to frequencies whose wavelength is significantly less than the diameter of the driver, for the 2.5" drivers in an L1 for example that means they only act as a line source below about 5khz. That is enough to be convincing to the untrained ear but it falls well short of the ideal. The alternating angled drivers in the later L1 model is more marketing BS, it really doesn't do much if anything to increase horizontal coverage.
It's become convention to use a pair of speakers either side of the stage for PA applications even though stereo sound is rarely used and most listeners aren't in the stereo sound field, but norms are difficult to change so we roll with it. Best practice is to aim the speaker at the listeners to keep as much energy off the walls and ceiling to minimize reflections, you want to take the room out of the equation as much as possible. And where possible elevate the speakers so they are more equidistant from all listeners, this produces more consistent sound levels at all listening positions... you don't have to blast those in front to get appropriate SPLs to the back.
Last edited:
The classic rule of thumb for modern line arrays comes from Dr Christian Heil, the brains behind L'Acoustics who were the first to successfully market modern, large format vertically arrayable speakers in the 1990's, and is basically that for optimum coupling you keep the centre to centre spacing of the drivers to within 1/2 of a wavelength at the highest frequency of interest.
As Conanski points out, even for small drivers, that means the "proper" line array behaviour can only be maintained up to a few kHz at best, after which slightly different approaches are needed. The classic approach for this is using waveguides to create HF pattern control that is very very narrow in the vertical plane then using many of these to allow the projection of concentrated HF levels over longer distances.
The manual for the V-DOSC system from L'Acoustics contains a lot of info - the summary around pp11-14 is pretty accessible without getting into much maths, the appendices give a lot more theory, albeit with more maths too.
https://www.l-acoustics.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/en_vdosc_manual.pdf
Thank you for this information.
Am I correct in assuming that if a column is angled downward slightly the sound from each driver will the same point at the same time? I ask this because in the studio, overhead drum mics are placed at angles and measurements are made to reduce comb filtering. I know that one of the advantages of PZM/Boundary mics is that they reduce or eliminate comb filtering. I saw one video where the engineer placed room mics about a credit card's width from a wall and from the floor.
As to people's untrained ears, that's most people. If something sounds good to them whether it it achieved from Bose psycho acoustics or by some other means it doesn't matter to me. I've played in a lot of rooms and some were nightmares for sound while some were quite good. For me, a system that sounds decent in every environment makes the most sense.
The talk back then was often about long throw bass cabinets, folded horns, ported, bins and bandpass boxes and various combinations of all four. Miccing kick drum can be a nightmare. Compression, EQ, limiters and gates can help but a bad room is a challenge for any system.
My beef with Bose is the price and their less than reputable marketing and customer service. I say this because I was thinking about making a clone of their's. I searched for replacement speakers for the L-1 and Bose won't say what they are but I did find that the drivers that go in the 901's are one ohm and I believe 2". I found it a bit sleazy that Bose won't say what drivers are in their skinny columns.
I'm starting to understand the reason for small drivers.
Ideally, I'd like solid and clear mids and high from a system capable of handling medium indoor venues that can be expanded to handle the occasional outdoor shows.
One of the problems I experienced in some rooms probably had to do with resonating frequencies. Some bass notes would be a lot louder than others and some would nearly disappear. Bass frequencies can be troublesome.
Thinking out loud: Maybe a good system would be efficient smaller speakers that can handle lots of power, coupled with 2 band pass boxes crossed over at 100 Hz and powered with a whopping power amp.
The plan is to power the tops with a powered mixer and pull out the low lows (0 - 120) with the EQ on the mixer and then use another EQ coming out of the active crossover for make up gain for the lows if needed.
No angling a column speaker down doesn't change the physics problem, it's still not possible to time align all the drivers to every listening position.
Mics placed right next to a boundary eliminates the possibility they will pick up reflected sound, this can be helpful but it's got nothing to do with comb filtering.
If you want to make a jump up in performance you will have to upgrade from the powered mixer and get a DSP speaker processor, the tools included in these things make it possible to accomplish so much more.
Mics placed right next to a boundary eliminates the possibility they will pick up reflected sound, this can be helpful but it's got nothing to do with comb filtering.
If you want to make a jump up in performance you will have to upgrade from the powered mixer and get a DSP speaker processor, the tools included in these things make it possible to accomplish so much more.
I see vertical line arrays that are curved and I see line arrays at outdoor venues that are horizontal hunt high and aimed downward.
I'm not looking for something that is listening room quality or something that take a lot of set up time. I can EQ a room fairly well and I can get the best out of most systems. I've heard small and large line array systems and I liked how they sounded. I've also heard bands butchered by bad sound men. who couldn't mix or EQ. The worst sound I heard was a venue with a treated room and the sound man still managed to make the bands sound like crap.
I've run analog boards with several bands and I've done sound from stage while playing. I apply the 80/20 rule. I can spend time and money on the 20% and not make a big difference. I just want to get the 80% right. If on the other hand I was in charge of created a house PA. I'd call in the experts.
There are a lot of compromises when you're playing gigs. Fast set up times are important. The days of roadies or hauling heavy amp racks and huge cabs are over.
A lot has improved gear wise. Amp power is much cheaper and lighter. LEDs have made stage lighting more practical. No more tapping 220 lines. Solid state bass and guitar amp sound good. Powered speakers make sense.
For my purposes an 800 watt powered mixer with built in effects appeals to me. A line out into a powered sub that can thump and push out some tactile frequencies makes me giddy.😀
This one is like the build I have in mind. Do you think this design have comb filtering issues?
Judging by the size I'm thinking have 12" drivers in them.
Here are the specs for this one.
Specifications: That seem misleading.
Product number: LDCURV500PS
Product type: Portable Array System
Type: active
System output (RMS):: 920W
Color: black
Number of array satellites: 8 <--- What so they mean by "array satellites"?
Number of Smartlink adapters: 2
Number of subwoofers: 2
Max. SPL (continuous): 128dB
Max. SPL (peak): 134dB
Frequency response: 47 - 20000Hz
Dispersion (H x V): 110° horizontal, vertical (each satellite) 10°
RMS: Subwoofer: 300 W , Array Satellites: 2 x 160 W, Subwoofer Extension 300W
Peak power: Subwoofer: 1200 W , Array Satellites: 2 x 640, Subwoofer Extension: 1200W
Amplifier: Class D
Protection circuits: DSP-based multiband limiter
Weight: 44kg
Accessories (included): 2 x Power cable, 2 x Distance bar, 2 x Speaker cable (2.2 m)
Subwoofer
Low/mid driver dimensions: 10" 2 10s are hardly enough for a bass and kick
Low/mid driver dimensions (mm): 254mm
Cabinet construction: vented
Cabinet material: plywood
Cabinet surface: PA painting
Dimensions Subwoofer (W x H x D): 325 x 383 x 491mm
Subwoofer weight: 16.5kg
Subwoofer features: 16 DFX Presets, Bluetooth, 4 System DSP Presets, 4 channel mixer, 3 ergonomic handels, Threaded flange M20
Array Satellites
Mid/Hi system: MF: 1 x 4" / HF: 3 x 1" with WaveAhead® Technology / 16 ohms
Array Satellite Features: metal grille, internal crossover, WaveAhead® Technology
Array Satellite Material: die-cast aluminium
Array Satellite Surface:: powder coated
Array Satellite Dimensions (W x H x D): 122 x 122 x 122mm
Array Satellite Weight: 1.7kg
Link
There's a lot of hocus pocus with specs these days. They will call a mixer with 8 channel strips 12 channel for instance.
What I have against point source is the horns. Those configuration IMO have dispersion issues and sometimes have dead spots.
I play bass and I know how loud some drummers can be and you need 300 watts and very efficient speakers in your to compete with a banger. I don't think subs with 10" drivers will do much unless they are EVs, JBLs or Black Widows with a 103 db rating.
I'm not looking for something that is listening room quality or something that take a lot of set up time. I can EQ a room fairly well and I can get the best out of most systems. I've heard small and large line array systems and I liked how they sounded. I've also heard bands butchered by bad sound men. who couldn't mix or EQ. The worst sound I heard was a venue with a treated room and the sound man still managed to make the bands sound like crap.
I've run analog boards with several bands and I've done sound from stage while playing. I apply the 80/20 rule. I can spend time and money on the 20% and not make a big difference. I just want to get the 80% right. If on the other hand I was in charge of created a house PA. I'd call in the experts.
There are a lot of compromises when you're playing gigs. Fast set up times are important. The days of roadies or hauling heavy amp racks and huge cabs are over.
A lot has improved gear wise. Amp power is much cheaper and lighter. LEDs have made stage lighting more practical. No more tapping 220 lines. Solid state bass and guitar amp sound good. Powered speakers make sense.
For my purposes an 800 watt powered mixer with built in effects appeals to me. A line out into a powered sub that can thump and push out some tactile frequencies makes me giddy.😀
This one is like the build I have in mind. Do you think this design have comb filtering issues?
Judging by the size I'm thinking have 12" drivers in them.
Here are the specs for this one.
Specifications: That seem misleading.
Product number: LDCURV500PS
Product type: Portable Array System
Type: active
System output (RMS):: 920W
Color: black
Number of array satellites: 8 <--- What so they mean by "array satellites"?
Number of Smartlink adapters: 2
Number of subwoofers: 2
Max. SPL (continuous): 128dB
Max. SPL (peak): 134dB
Frequency response: 47 - 20000Hz
Dispersion (H x V): 110° horizontal, vertical (each satellite) 10°
RMS: Subwoofer: 300 W , Array Satellites: 2 x 160 W, Subwoofer Extension 300W
Peak power: Subwoofer: 1200 W , Array Satellites: 2 x 640, Subwoofer Extension: 1200W
Amplifier: Class D
Protection circuits: DSP-based multiband limiter
Weight: 44kg
Accessories (included): 2 x Power cable, 2 x Distance bar, 2 x Speaker cable (2.2 m)
Subwoofer
Low/mid driver dimensions: 10" 2 10s are hardly enough for a bass and kick
Low/mid driver dimensions (mm): 254mm
Cabinet construction: vented
Cabinet material: plywood
Cabinet surface: PA painting
Dimensions Subwoofer (W x H x D): 325 x 383 x 491mm
Subwoofer weight: 16.5kg
Subwoofer features: 16 DFX Presets, Bluetooth, 4 System DSP Presets, 4 channel mixer, 3 ergonomic handels, Threaded flange M20
Array Satellites
Mid/Hi system: MF: 1 x 4" / HF: 3 x 1" with WaveAhead® Technology / 16 ohms
Array Satellite Features: metal grille, internal crossover, WaveAhead® Technology
Array Satellite Material: die-cast aluminium
Array Satellite Surface:: powder coated
Array Satellite Dimensions (W x H x D): 122 x 122 x 122mm
Array Satellite Weight: 1.7kg
Link
There's a lot of hocus pocus with specs these days. They will call a mixer with 8 channel strips 12 channel for instance.
What I have against point source is the horns. Those configuration IMO have dispersion issues and sometimes have dead spots.
I play bass and I know how loud some drummers can be and you need 300 watts and very efficient speakers in your to compete with a banger. I don't think subs with 10" drivers will do much unless they are EVs, JBLs or Black Widows with a 103 db rating.
Those are two popular types of arrays.
The J shaped hang you see at many large concerts operates partly as line source and partly point source. The section at the top with all the boxes facing straight ahead is a line source covering the back of the venue, the curved bit at the bottom is used to cover the near stage area and for this purpose the operator sometimes sets the output level of these boxes a bit lower than the upper boxes as they are only covering the audience positions a relatively short distance away. The primary goal of this type of array is consistent SPL at all listening positions and these arrays do a very good job of that.
The horizontal arrays you see at sports arenas are a more traditional deployment, these point source boxes are hung in a splayed pattern to cover adjacent section of the audience area. This works well and typically produces much less comb filtering than the concert line array, but SPLs across the seating area vary a lot more.. closer to the boxes is louder, further away is quieter just like it's always been.
It's good to hear you are not allergic to new technology, it has come a long ways in recent years and yes it makes the job of a working musician or a sound/lighting provider like me much easier.
Powered speakers in general have made hugh strides, powered column systems like that LD Systems Curv500 and conventional 2 and 3-way PA boxes are so much better because of it. There is so much more than a power amp included in these systems now, the DSP processing included replaces a whole rack of gear and the end result is these boxes sound and perform great right out of the box and all the way to full output. There is simply no way the average user will ever come close to the same performance with passive speakers and outboard equipment, this is why I suggested you try and get your head around upgrading from the old school powered mixer, they quickly become an obstruction to upgrades because of limited routing options, and besides... there is so much more you can do with a compact digital mixer or if you don't need that much mix processing, a table top analog mixer will be smaller and easier to carry than your box mixer.
Yes all line arrays produce comb filtering, it's fundamental to how they work and there is no avoiding it so my advice is ignore this fact if you like the sound produced.
The QSC KLA systems you linked are called constant curvature arrays, these technically aren't line arrays as they cannot be deployed in a straight line. These and others like it are modified point source boxes and yes they contain compression drivers but on special horn flares. These powered boxes sound good and get just as loud as their sisters like the QSC K12.2, but they have to be deployed overhead and it's really not practical to use more than 3/hang because of the built-in curve they have when bolted together, so they have limited uses. I have used the Mackie and Yorkville versions of the same type of box a few times with good results. The JBL VRX is the absolute worst example of this type of box I have ever heard, none of the others I mentioned above sounded anything like the JBL, they were all much smoother and more musical with none of the harshness. The compression drivers in the JBL VRX are the same POS used in the JRX cab so no surprise they sound like ***.
The specs on that LD system are misleading, no way 4 four inch drivers a side can generate 128dB and no a pair of 10" sub drivers would be woefully inadequate. I call BS on those specs, this system is little more than a loud home theater speaker, it would not be suitable for a typical rock band in any way... just not enough output. If you like this format that is fine but you will have to scale it up to something with a 15" or 18" sub and a bigger line array.
Last edited:
Sorry I didn't get back sooner. I started to respond and my internet went down.
Of all the bands I've heard if there was comb filtering comb filtering I was not aware of it. Some locations in a room sound better than others. There are so many variables.
Here's a dumb thought: You have a vertical speaker loaded with bunch on smallish high efficiency drivers. Each driver is powered by its own small amplifier. All the drivers will reach distance sooner or later than all the other drivers. Do you think a delay of the fastest drivers that will match the slowest driver would be a way to cancel out comb filtering. I got the idea watching videos on mic placement where the engineer measures the distance for the overhead mics on a drum kit to eliminate cancellation because the sound of one part of the kit will reach the mic at different times.
Part of the reason for a powered mixer is because I have power amps, low end drivers and an active crossover. The idea is to have an A system and a B system with mostly the same gear. For small gigs the stage volume would do most of the work but for larger rooms I'd add more subs crossed over at 120 run by a power 800 or 1200 watt power amp and I'd crank the powered mixer a bit. I like tactile frequencies from a kick drum, synth and bass guitar and listener like them too. THUNDER! I like a bass drum to sound like a bass drum not a typewriter. That takes moving a lot of air and a gate or and electronic kick drum brain and a trigger to enhance the thump. They are less troublesome.
I'm thinking now that the curved arrays you mentioned are a good option. As to JBL gear. I've never been a fan of how their drivers sound. I've played with too many guitar players who replaced their amp's stock speakers with JBLs. Fender amps would come with Eminance speakers but because the JBLs were more efficient they would get rid of the stock speakers. IMO a 100 watt guitar amp doesn't need a more efficient speaker. When it came to monitors, I preferred Yamaha, Peavey, and Carvin to JBLs.
Of all the bands I've heard if there was comb filtering comb filtering I was not aware of it. Some locations in a room sound better than others. There are so many variables.
Here's a dumb thought: You have a vertical speaker loaded with bunch on smallish high efficiency drivers. Each driver is powered by its own small amplifier. All the drivers will reach distance sooner or later than all the other drivers. Do you think a delay of the fastest drivers that will match the slowest driver would be a way to cancel out comb filtering. I got the idea watching videos on mic placement where the engineer measures the distance for the overhead mics on a drum kit to eliminate cancellation because the sound of one part of the kit will reach the mic at different times.
Part of the reason for a powered mixer is because I have power amps, low end drivers and an active crossover. The idea is to have an A system and a B system with mostly the same gear. For small gigs the stage volume would do most of the work but for larger rooms I'd add more subs crossed over at 120 run by a power 800 or 1200 watt power amp and I'd crank the powered mixer a bit. I like tactile frequencies from a kick drum, synth and bass guitar and listener like them too. THUNDER! I like a bass drum to sound like a bass drum not a typewriter. That takes moving a lot of air and a gate or and electronic kick drum brain and a trigger to enhance the thump. They are less troublesome.
I'm thinking now that the curved arrays you mentioned are a good option. As to JBL gear. I've never been a fan of how their drivers sound. I've played with too many guitar players who replaced their amp's stock speakers with JBLs. Fender amps would come with Eminance speakers but because the JBLs were more efficient they would get rid of the stock speakers. IMO a 100 watt guitar amp doesn't need a more efficient speaker. When it came to monitors, I preferred Yamaha, Peavey, and Carvin to JBLs.
It is impossible to get the exact same sound everywhere inside a room, there are just too many factors that you have no control over so you do the best you can with the area of most importance... usually the dance floor area in front of the stage, and the rest gets what it gets. As a member of the audience I would not like a venue that was equally loud everywhere, people like to be able have a conversation when not on the dancefloor. That applies to clubs and bars but not concert venues where the opposite is true, so you want to be careful not to treat both types of venues the same with regard to sound reinforcement.
No it's not possible to time align the output of all drivers to all listening positions at the same time, it is possible to do it for 1 position and that is why it works for mics, but this doesn't translate to speakers. And it's not about faster or slower drivers... that is a myth anyway.
Passive speakers are the easiest to DIY of course and that is what this forum is all about, so you just need to come up with a design you like and go for it.
No it's not possible to time align the output of all drivers to all listening positions at the same time, it is possible to do it for 1 position and that is why it works for mics, but this doesn't translate to speakers. And it's not about faster or slower drivers... that is a myth anyway.
Passive speakers are the easiest to DIY of course and that is what this forum is all about, so you just need to come up with a design you like and go for it.
Last edited:
A bad room can be challenging. EQ and playing at lower volumes can help some in a reflective room. It would be nice if there was gear that could automatically compensate for a room.
I have heard that a delay set properly can cancel room echo. It would be nice if the PA could detect and cancel reflections. Here's a paper about it but I don't really understand it. https://asa.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1121/1.5023326 This is nothing new.
If you think about it, if you are listening to an orchestra in an auditorium there is sound coming at you at from many directions. I would think that comb filtering happens in that scenario.
I've heard talk from classical musicians about rooms and the timing on the echo. A singer in the organ loft in the right church can sound fantastic. It seems that reflections get unpleasant as volume increases.
It's a compromise when it comes to PA systems. A bad sound man and the wrong PA can wreck a good band. I guess the thing is would be to not have the best PA but have the right PA for the band.
I have heard that a delay set properly can cancel room echo. It would be nice if the PA could detect and cancel reflections. Here's a paper about it but I don't really understand it. https://asa.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1121/1.5023326 This is nothing new.
If you think about it, if you are listening to an orchestra in an auditorium there is sound coming at you at from many directions. I would think that comb filtering happens in that scenario.
I've heard talk from classical musicians about rooms and the timing on the echo. A singer in the organ loft in the right church can sound fantastic. It seems that reflections get unpleasant as volume increases.
It's a compromise when it comes to PA systems. A bad sound man and the wrong PA can wreck a good band. I guess the thing is would be to not have the best PA but have the right PA for the band.
Actually it's more important to have to correct PA for the room. Line arrays are the shiny new thing that everybody wants but they are completely wrong for many indoor applications. It's a tool in the toolbox and is nice to have but in my experience they really aren't the best option for the majority of indoor spaces. There are 2 venues in my area where I could use a decent line array system, temporary walls can be opened up for a space big enough for 400-500ppl and the usual stage location is centered on one of the long walls, so the system coverage area is very wide. But that only accounts for maybe 5 or 6 events a year out of 60-75 and point source boxes work better in all the other spaces so it doesn't makes economic sense for my business... given what a proper PA sized line array would cost.
Last edited:
Ideally the thing to do is treat every room acoustically with bass traps etc.. but that is not practical. Right now I don't have a studio but soon I will and I've read a lot about room treatments for a studio and listening rooms. Live situations are dynamic so I'm thinking there will be compromises and challenges. I've played in a lot of rooms and most were OK but some were nightmares. School gyms can be awful given the high ceilings and hard smooth surfaces.
I'm familiar with outdoor concert systems and indoor systems in both point source and line array but it's hard to judge given the room variables but I will say, I've only heard indoor "line arrays" Bose L1 with acoustic single acts and duos and I liked what I heard. That said, I did play at a club with a band that added point source speakers to the L1. It was a long narrow room and the sound was quite good. When others were playing the sound was big without being too loud everywhere in the room. That's what I'm looking for and something that can be flexible and configurable. One of the last bands I played with had a huge PA. It was overkill in all but outdoor venues. It should have been scaled back. Our monitors were more than enough for most venues. We were a 3 piece band with a singer and we were running 3 monitor sends into 6 monitors. It didn't sound horrible. The drummer's kick sounded like a typewriter because he was too much of an a$$hole to tune it. We were running a 3 way cross over and we were running 4 15"s and 4 18"s for lows. I don't know if the 15"s were for low mids or all the lows were going into the woofers. Either way, given all that power and all those speakers it was a waste.
🙁The music scene has been hurt everywhere because of COVID-19 and that makes it worse for bands even when this nightmare is over. I will probably end up doing a solo act or a duo and this is why I think a scale-able system is a good idea in the event a band becomes feasible.
Powered subs make a lot sense for this. I wonder if it would be possible to come out of a powered sub into a passive sub? I would think that the amp in an active sub would be okay with a 4 Ohm load.
I'm familiar with outdoor concert systems and indoor systems in both point source and line array but it's hard to judge given the room variables but I will say, I've only heard indoor "line arrays" Bose L1 with acoustic single acts and duos and I liked what I heard. That said, I did play at a club with a band that added point source speakers to the L1. It was a long narrow room and the sound was quite good. When others were playing the sound was big without being too loud everywhere in the room. That's what I'm looking for and something that can be flexible and configurable. One of the last bands I played with had a huge PA. It was overkill in all but outdoor venues. It should have been scaled back. Our monitors were more than enough for most venues. We were a 3 piece band with a singer and we were running 3 monitor sends into 6 monitors. It didn't sound horrible. The drummer's kick sounded like a typewriter because he was too much of an a$$hole to tune it. We were running a 3 way cross over and we were running 4 15"s and 4 18"s for lows. I don't know if the 15"s were for low mids or all the lows were going into the woofers. Either way, given all that power and all those speakers it was a waste.
🙁The music scene has been hurt everywhere because of COVID-19 and that makes it worse for bands even when this nightmare is over. I will probably end up doing a solo act or a duo and this is why I think a scale-able system is a good idea in the event a band becomes feasible.
Powered subs make a lot sense for this. I wonder if it would be possible to come out of a powered sub into a passive sub? I would think that the amp in an active sub would be okay with a 4 Ohm load.
There are a small number of commercial powered subs that have an output to drive a second passive sub but they are not common. It would be a very bad idea to modify a powered sub that isn't designed for this, in most cases that would just kill the amp.
If you're not opposed to buying something direct from china I have seen plate amps with this type of feature on AliExpress, the same distributor also has a range of 3-ch amps that could be used to drive the whole PA system, and some also have built-in DSP.
GETSHOW 1200+400+400W Professional DSP Amplifier 2.1 Sound System Amplifier Module Plate Amplifier|Stage Audio| - AliExpress
If you're not opposed to buying something direct from china I have seen plate amps with this type of feature on AliExpress, the same distributor also has a range of 3-ch amps that could be used to drive the whole PA system, and some also have built-in DSP.
GETSHOW 1200+400+400W Professional DSP Amplifier 2.1 Sound System Amplifier Module Plate Amplifier|Stage Audio| - AliExpress