Brad, I think we're mostly on the same page. And I apologize if I've come across argumentative at all in my posts the past few days (maybe I'm not getting enough fresh air?).
My point was really simply that this seemed to be a product not developed to fix a common problem or provide a solution for a common application but rather a product that does something nobody really seemed to be asking for and that goes against how the product was intended to be used.
Well, I can see how a sound company who has VRX in stock as their "flagship" speaker system might be tempted to buy some of these for those handful of gigs where they need a little more level at the far seats. Instead of renting a better solution for the gig they are inclined to "invest" in something that can let them use the system they already have. I don't know that it's a solution that nobody asked for. Check out TJ's comments earlier in this thread. I'm familiar with looking at gigs that are on the edge of your capabilities and calling in a "bigger rig" might mean no profit or maybe creating other issues. All that to say I can certainly imagine some VRX folks who will see this and go "wow, that might be just what I need!"
Is a straight array of VRX boxes actually a "useful array" and how was that determined? Given that JBL did not intend the VRX932 for such use, do you really get "better far-field audience coverage without over powering the near-field audience members."? Does simply using a 'straightening bracket' truly make a VRX932 array like a Vertec array?
These are the questions that I don't think we can answer without actually measuring the setup. That's really the point I was trying to make. I'm not willing to call it a dud until I've heard it and measured it. And since JBL has not published much in the way of polars or other data for the VRX to gauge the control group, I can see how the guys making the "straightening brackets" might not have an easy way of showing that their invention doesn't disrupt "the delicate balance" of the original design.
As far as allowing you to hang more boxes [safely] than the JBL specs state, I.... no idea... how... why would... can this be.... please don't. The safety issue is the biggest issue here. But perhaps they've had a mechanical engineer sign off on them?
It would be interesting to hear from anyone who has actually tried these.
I agree. But this is not an invitation to ignore the potential safety issues!!!
Compared to what? The VRX is made for a specific application at a specific price point. 4 per side hanging from trusses or lifts can deliver a pretty decent show. Lots of folks - many on PSW - have done it and are doing it every day.
Exactly; compared to what!?!
I don't know that VRX with this array adaptor would be significantly worse than any other comparably priced solution for live music. Tim, how much would it cost to rent a "better" solution from your JBL inventory? Would a nice line of 4886 be loud enough to compete with 5 or 6 boxes of VRX?
btw, I put in the grinning emoticon because I meant that line about VRX sounding bad mostly as a joke. JBL did a few things quite well with the line but I have to say that VRX is not my first choice for live music. It does have it's issues (engineering compromises). For instance, I think it tends to sound bright and a bit brash straight out of the box. Those who use them on a routine basis obviously figure out ways of taming it. (I use 932s at least a dozen times a year moistly for talking head stuff and so I'm not sure I count.)