That is one of the worst things I've seen in some time...
I'm just trying to grasp the thought process behind setting that up. I mean, really… why? You're not gonna get more coverage any direction… just a mumble of mush. *sighs* -Ray "running 2 over 2 VRX per side right now at an event" Aberle
It tickles me to imagine the FOH guy saying to the stagehand as he's hanging those VRXs side-by-side, "Hey hey hey, what are you doing?! The horns need to be right up next to each other!"
I'm sure that's true, Tom. I think Drew's assumption about the VRX having bigger LF drivers than the 4886, which caused him not to consider it, were bad assumptions and not really thought out.
I'm pretty skeptical of the assertion about box for box SPL performance below 250. You talk about excursion, but don't mention any real specs of the actual driver in the VRX vs the vertec. It's not as though driver diameter is a conclusive predictor of output. I'm not qualified to say exactly what the case is here, but I'm very skeptical of your explanation.Not to mention the value of "more output below 250". We're hoping for flat, right? Maybe I'm not following you, please feel to explain.
It's hard to tell what assumptions the calculators make, but here's a composite picture from the various LAC tools. The graph is at 1 meter. The VRX tool says that the graph indicates preset output, and I selected V5 long throw for 4886. Selecting max output for 4886 gives a chunk more SPL.I will say from experience, that 4886 is louder than VRX broadband (3 4886 vs 2 VRX).
Tom, you went with a 4886/4883 combination, right?-Ray
I'll bet it has some SIZZLE directly on axis! That's a lot of comp driver pointed in one direction..
Page created in 0.18 seconds with 26 queries.