ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Ideal point source coverage pattern  (Read 1449 times)

Brian O'Shaughnessy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
    • Vitamin C Entertainment
Ideal point source coverage pattern
« on: February 17, 2014, 09:17:54 am »

So we've been looking to get some new speakers. We do a lot of bands but mostly DJs. Been looking at these speakers. http://www.pksound.ca/loudspeakers/cx215-60/
Along with these subs
http://www.pksound.ca/loudspeakers/cx800/

This is all tenative, as of right now, we're thinking of getting 2x CX800 (dual 18 subs) and 2x cx-215 (main speakers point source). Though it is likely in a year or two (or whenever the money happens) we will want to double up, I feel as though 4x of each would put us at a really good spot for ability to handle larger shows.

Now to my question, the main speaker comes in two version for coverage pattern, a 60 degree and a 90 degree for the horizontal (both at 40 degree vertical) I know having just one per side 90 would be ideal. But if we were to get 2 per side, would having 90 be too wide? Would it be easier to go with 60 and suffer slight "power lane" issues for the ability to more easily add extra boxes down the line? This is a purchase we've been considering for a good while now and really want to make the best decision possible.

Also looking for recommendations for any other speaker manufacture. I know bassboss has some subs with good low extension. Thanks for any input on either of these questions!
Logged
Vitamin C Entertainment
http://vcentertain.com

John Halliburton

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 431
  • White pointy beard, knows zip...about chicken.
Re: Ideal point source coverage pattern
« Reply #1 on: February 17, 2014, 09:39:14 am »

So we've been looking to get some new speakers. We do a lot of bands but mostly DJs. Been looking at these speakers. http://www.pksound.ca/loudspeakers/cx215-60/
Along with these subs
http://www.pksound.ca/loudspeakers/cx800/

This is all tenative, as of right now, we're thinking of getting 2x CX800 (dual 18 subs) and 2x cx-215 (main speakers point source). Though it is likely in a year or two (or whenever the money happens) we will want to double up, I feel as though 4x of each would put us at a really good spot for ability to handle larger shows.

Now to my question, the main speaker comes in two version for coverage pattern, a 60 degree and a 90 degree for the horizontal (both at 40 degree vertical) I know having just one per side 90 would be ideal. But if we were to get 2 per side, would having 90 be too wide? Would it be easier to go with 60 and suffer slight "power lane" issues for the ability to more easily add extra boxes down the line? This is a purchase we've been considering for a good while now and really want to make the best decision possible.

Also looking for recommendations for any other speaker manufacture. I know bassboss has some subs with good low extension. Thanks for any input on either of these questions!

You realize that these are nothing special, just powered two way traps.  They may have quality components in them, but who knows, they don't publish enough hard data.  Also, no graphs of anything.

Coverage pattern spreads out to pretty much omnidirectional in the 15" as you go down in frequency-as it does with any similar loudspeaker design.  At the typical range for the crossover, a 15" driver will have an approximately 60 degree dispersion pattern naturally, so mating to a 60 degree high frequency section is usually the way to go to try and keep the coverage as consistent as possible.

I'd think you'd be more interested in how clean these speakers sound at rated power, and if this is loud enough for your DJ events.  Few things tick me off more than a distorted, overloaded DJ system, and I don't even do these kinds of events.

You don't say what you use currently, and if it's working for you.  What about cross rental?  Do other sound companies in the area use the PK gear so you could just rent extras for larger gigs?  Something to consider.

There are a lot of options out there, let's find out some more info on what you've got, business plan, and other options.

Best regards,

John

PS.  An "ideal" point source, or at least as close as anyone has come so far, are these:

http://www.danleysoundlabs.com/products/loud-speakers/
« Last Edit: February 17, 2014, 09:42:23 am by John Halliburton »
Logged

Brian O'Shaughnessy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
    • Vitamin C Entertainment
Re: Ideal point source coverage pattern
« Reply #2 on: February 17, 2014, 09:47:02 am »

Thanks for the reply. Right now we have a Yamaha Club speakers. 4x 15" main cabinets and 4x dual 18" cabinets and 4x 12" wedges. We really like the sound quality, but we've had a few outdoors gigs that just didn't quite have the power to handle the event as well as I would have liked. Also the subs don't quite have the depth and punch that I've heard from other higher end subs. I know several popular DJ's have toured with these speakers and have lauded them, that's what turned me onto them in the first place. Also they have similar dimensions to our current speakers so we wouldn't have to worry about a change in transportation for the time being.

As far as cross renting, I don't believe there are any other PK speakers in my area, at least that I know of.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2014, 09:56:07 am by Brian O'Shaughnessy »
Logged
Vitamin C Entertainment
http://vcentertain.com

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3851
  • Atlanta GA
Re: Ideal point source coverage pattern
« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2014, 11:52:53 am »

Without more information-such as polar plots-even photos without the grill-there is no way of knowing how large the horn is or over what freq range the rated pattern is actually what it says it is.

If this is like many 3 way boxes of its size-then the pattern is only the rated pattern on the top couple of octaves-NOT across the entire bandwidth or even below 1-2Khz.

So what you "think" is happening is nothing at all like what is really happening.

And if you rotate the horn-you are only changing the top couple of octaves not down into the midrange area.

Just something to consider
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

Brad Weber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2215
  • Marietta, GA
Re: Ideal point source coverage pattern
« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2014, 01:06:12 pm »

To expand on the previous comments, the specified "Coverage Pattern" is simply a nominal number, the actual pattern may be close to the specified nominal pattern at some frequencies but it likely varies with frequency and may not even match the nominal pattern at any frequency.  There is no way of knowing the actual pattern or how it varies without the manufacturer providing relevant data.  Without such data there is no way of knowing the actual patterns of the nominal 90x40 and 60x40 versions of the PK boxes or the differences between them.
 
Rotating a horn with an asymmetrical pattern (e.g. 90x40, 70x50, etc.) will change the interactions between the woofer and horn through crossover and thus potentially result in a different pattern at some frequencies than simply swapping the horizontal and vertical patterns above crossover.
 
In general, most applications do not require the 170-180 degrees of coverage that would typically be provided by two properly splayed 90 degree horizontal boxes.  At the same time, many applications may work better with more than a single nominal 60 degree horizontal box.  So the choice for pattern may come down to your most common applications and how often a single box or two boxes per side would likely be used.
Logged

John Halliburton

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 431
  • White pointy beard, knows zip...about chicken.
Re: Ideal point source coverage pattern
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2014, 02:25:13 pm »

Thanks for the reply. Right now we have a Yamaha Club speakers. 4x 15" main cabinets and 4x dual 18" cabinets and 4x 12" wedges. We really like the sound quality, but we've had a few outdoors gigs that just didn't quite have the power to handle the event as well as I would have liked. Also the subs don't quite have the depth and punch that I've heard from other higher end subs. I know several popular DJ's have toured with these speakers and have lauded them, that's what turned me onto them in the first place. Also they have similar dimensions to our current speakers so we wouldn't have to worry about a change in transportation for the time being.

As far as cross renting, I don't believe there are any other PK speakers in my area, at least that I know of.

Honestly, there may not be much of a difference between the PK product and your Yamaha Club cabinets.
However, two points/questions-first, how are you powering up your speaker system?  Not that it may make a noticeable difference, but knowing will help.
Second, we really don't know what drivers are in the PK gear-"Neo 15" woofer and 1.4" exit horn could be a lot of different drivers.  Don't get me wrong, they could be using good stuff, we just don't know.
I did find a different spec sheet on the model you're looking at, and they published polars-horizontal and vertical...but only for 2khz, 4khz, and 8khz.
Might just as well left them off.
Have you auditioned these speakers, comparing them to your current rig?
I will also mention that what you found when you did an outdoor gig was the need for more subwoofers.  It is the single biggest change when moving outside, given all other system specs stay the same.  Double the subs and sub amps for outdoor gigs, at a minimum.

Best regards,

John
Logged

Brad Weber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2215
  • Marietta, GA
Re: Ideal point source coverage pattern
« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2014, 08:59:12 am »

I did find a different spec sheet on the model you're looking at, and they published polars-horizontal and vertical...but only for 2khz, 4khz, and 8khz.
Might just as well left them off.
If you're talking about http://test.pksound.ca/cx215-60/, the polar charts have no description of the units per division but would seem to have to be 6dB per division for it to be somewhere near being a 60x40 box at 8kHz which then appears to make the pattern around 90x90 at 2kHz.
Logged

dick rees

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5702
  • St Paul MN
Re: Ideal point source coverage pattern
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2014, 11:28:39 am »

The "ideal" point source would be one which has whatever degree of dispersal cited over the entire frequency spectrum.  If such speakers were to exist, they would be very large and very expensive.

Well, you said "ideal"...
Logged
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

Brian O'Shaughnessy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
    • Vitamin C Entertainment
Re: Ideal point source coverage pattern
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2014, 11:33:53 am »

Thanks to everyone for all the input. Interesting you guys were able to find a test. version of the site with different polar charts, I find that helpful. I think this quote from Brad perfectly sums up my problem.


In general, most applications do not require the 170-180 degrees of coverage that would typically be provided by two properly splayed 90 degree horizontal boxes.  At the same time, many applications may work better with more than a single nominal 60 degree horizontal box.  So the choice for pattern may come down to your most common applications and how often a single box or two boxes per side would likely be used.

... yep ... definitely a dilemma...

I was talking to another speaker manufacture (Bassboss), they have switchable lenses for their high frequency driver. He said it could be either 30 degrees or 90 degrees with a simple swap. Is it really that easy?? I want to talk to PK and see if they have a similar option. Which actually brings up another question but I'll wait a bit on that...

John, I have not had a chance to listen to these speakers in person. I just have heard good things and the specs seem to add up. They do seem as though they would be at least a noticable bit louder then the yamahas. Though you bring up a good point, will they be that much better??? I am not totally sure, I know they will be louder but how much more is uncertain. I know the subs will have better low extension and will give a punch I didn't have before. But since I will be halving my number of boxes it will maybe nullify the change? It seems as though each cabinet is approx ~7-8 db louder per box. That doesn't seem like a whole lot in my mind. I know loudness =/= quality but at least I wont be distorting them as easily.

Also you're right Dick, I did say ideal! I guess I mean within the realms of our reality at this point in time :)

Once again thanks for all the input!
« Last Edit: February 18, 2014, 11:44:26 am by Brian O'Shaughnessy »
Logged
Vitamin C Entertainment
http://vcentertain.com

dick rees

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5702
  • St Paul MN
Re: Ideal point source coverage pattern
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2014, 11:54:20 am »

Thanks to everyone for all the input. Interesting you guys were able to find a test. version of the site with different polar charts, I find that helpful. I think this quote from Brad perfectly sums up my problem.

... yep ... definitely a dilemma...

I was talking to another speaker manufacture (Bassboss), they have switchable lenses for their high frequency driver. He said it could be either 30 degrees or 90 degrees with a simple swap. Is it really that easy?? I want to talk to PK and see if they have a similar option. Which actually brings up another question but I'll wait a bit on that...

John, I have not had a chance to listen to these speakers in person. I just have heard good things and the specs seem to add up. They do seem as though they would be at least a noticable bit louder then the yamahas. Though you bring up a good point, will they be that much better??? I am not totally sure, I know they will be louder but how much more is uncertain. I know the subs will have better low extension and will give a punch I didn't have before. But since I will be halving my number of boxes it will maybe nullify the change? It seems as though each cabinet is approx ~7-8 db louder per box. That doesn't seem like a whole lot in my mind. I know loudness =/= quality but at least I wont be distorting them as easily.

Also you're right Dick, I did say ideal! I guess I mean within the realms of our reality at this point in time :)

Once again thanks for all the input!

Unless all the drivers in the cabinet have horns for directional "control", most boxes you can afford will suffer the same problems.

The real world solution is to get them mounted at the proper height, angle/aim them at the desired coverage area and fire away...keeping as much of the sonic energy as possible pointed at the listeners and as little as possible bleeding onto reflective surfaces such as walls, ceilings and support structures.

Improvement in your expressed area of concern follows an ever steepening curve as far as the efficacy of $ : quality.  IMnshO, it really doesn't make much difference if the program is DJ.  Live sound is another story...
Logged
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.115 seconds with 23 queries.