ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7   Go Down

Author Topic: The high cost of deploying a true line-array  (Read 29809 times)

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9534
  • Atlanta GA
Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #40 on: August 07, 2014, 10:43:09 AM »

That should be easy for Tom to add to his speakers ... I think he has the patent on that   ;D
http://www.google.com.au/patents/US5036944
We should have one of those next year at Infocomm (June) in Orlando.

Many people have heard about it-but not experienced it in person (myself included).

So it should be fun to play with and do some "parlor tricks" with.
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9534
  • Atlanta GA
Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #41 on: August 07, 2014, 10:52:01 AM »

there are a few of us who will have to juggle logistical challenges that require a system that is not an 800lb monolithic block.   This was Peter's point, and reflects many others' reality as well.


Danley only has 2 boxes that are 800lbs or more (not counting the Matterhorn). The J1 and the J5.

Most are waayyyyy less than that-including the ones used at most of the large stadium installs- and are much easier to move around.
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23745
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #42 on: August 07, 2014, 10:53:39 AM »

Danley only has 2 boxes that are 800lbs or more (not counting the Matterhorn). The J1 and the J5.

Most are waayyyyy less than that-including the ones used at most of the large stadium installs- and are much easier to move around.

Flying a Matterhorn would go faster and be easier than rigging Tommy Lee's "drum rollercoaster" on the current "Final Motley Crue Tour".
Logged
"If you're passing on your way, from Palm Springs to L.A., Give a wave to good ol' Dave, Say hello to progress and goodbye to the Moonlight Motor Inn." - Steve Spurgin, Moonlight Motor Inn

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9534
  • Atlanta GA
Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #43 on: August 07, 2014, 11:41:39 AM »

Flying a Matterhorn would go faster and be easier than rigging Tommy Lee's "drum rollercoaster" on the current "Final Motley Crue Tour".
Didn't they do that back in the 80s also?

I know Keith Emerson did the "flying piano" back in the 70s.
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

Josh Millward

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 713
  • Meridian, MS
Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #44 on: August 07, 2014, 11:58:38 AM »

All of this speaks to what I have been thinking for a long time, The Danley J3 is a far more ideal loudspeaker for the live production business than the J1.

First of all, it weighs almost half of what the J1 weighs. It arrays nicely, and with a 60x40 pattern one or two a side would be suitable for an extremely large number of gigs.

If you were to couple a pair on each side of the stage with one of the truss rigs used to hang the line array loudspeakers, you could have a much better sounding and more flexible system.
Logged
Josh Millward
Danley Sound Labs

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23745
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #45 on: August 07, 2014, 12:44:20 PM »

Didn't they do that back in the 80s also?

I know Keith Emerson did the "flying piano" back in the 70s.

This is different, it's actually on tracks, the riser lifts, makes the first drop, comes up a hill and then stops, reversing to get him back on stage.  It takes 9-14 hours to install just this gag, not including all the rest of the usual gig work.

When the show played here they used the "B rig gag" because someone in management didn't look at a map to see that it would take about 6 hours to get from Des Moines to Wichita and that leaving after 2am meant missing the 6am Wichita load in time... they arrived about 10am.

Logged
"If you're passing on your way, from Palm Springs to L.A., Give a wave to good ol' Dave, Say hello to progress and goodbye to the Moonlight Motor Inn." - Steve Spurgin, Moonlight Motor Inn

Peter Morris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1467
Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #46 on: August 07, 2014, 10:13:43 PM »

Danley only has 2 boxes that are 800lbs or more (not counting the Matterhorn). The J1 and the J5.

Most are waayyyyy less than that-including the ones used at most of the large stadium installs- and are much easier to move around.

Hi Ivan,

Firstly - I’m not saying your boxes don’t sound great, I’m just saying that for most sound contracting companies they are not a good logistical choice.  Perhaps if you only do large scale touring work like Clair brothers, then large single special purpose boxes may make sense, but that’s only one small section of the market.

More to the point, I would love you guys to be able to provide a scalable, flexible solution whose size and weight matched most modern line arrays without the sonic comprises.  I would buy some, but until you do I don’t think your criticism of line arrays is valid.  They have just picked a different point on the compromise curve.  I’m sure many of the line array manufactures if they chose to make a single big box solution would be able to match what you guys have done.

Weight has dominated this discussion, so let’s look at it in more detail. Most companies require a box that can be “man” lifted. Practically it needs to be either a 4 person lift or a 2 person lift.  Occupational safety laws around the world in general limit the weight per person to around 30Kgs. That means a big box needs to be around 120kg maximum, a medium box 60 kgs and small box 30 Kgs.

Lets look at some large and medium scale line arrays that you don't seem to like:

Large
•   L- Acoustics K1 – 106 kgs
•   Turbosound Flashline – 102 Kgs
•   Adamson Energia  -  K15 80kgs  K12 – 60kgs
•   JBL VTX25 – 83 Kgs
•   d&b J series  - 60kgs
•   L- Acoustics K2 –  56 kg (can used ad down fill for K1)
•   EAW Anya – 130 kgs
Medium
•   d&b V series – 35kgs
•   JBL VTX20 – 40kgs
•   Turbossound Flex – 41 Kgs (can be used as down fill for Flashline)
•   Adamson Energia K12 – 60kgs

All of these fit my weight criteria and all have appropriate lifting points / handles except Anya which is a little bit on the heavy side. Interestingly Anya's weigh is not specified on her spec sheet, I found it mentioned in an interview with Dave Rat. I suspect EAW think she's a bit fat so they don’t mention it too often.

…and yes people stack them 3 or 4 high on a Dolly, but at some point someone will have to manually lift them.

Your J3 for example weighs 196 kgs and has 4 handles … 50kgs per person. Not acceptable under most safety laws around the world, but given it’s an install box and you can use a forklift no problem.

Soooo ….still waiting to see what you guys have come up with :) :)
« Last Edit: August 08, 2014, 02:57:37 AM by Peter Morris »
Logged

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9534
  • Atlanta GA
Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #47 on: August 08, 2014, 07:43:51 AM »

Hi Ivan,


Soooo ….still waiting to see what you guys have come up with :) :)
Let's just say there are some things "in the works" and "being considered".

I will not say anything else until things get more finished.

Don't expect to purchase them next month however
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

Tom Danley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #48 on: August 08, 2014, 10:23:31 AM »

Hi Ivan,

Firstly - I’m not saying your boxes don’t sound great, I’m just saying that for most sound contracting companies they are not a good logistical choice.  Perhaps if you only do large scale touring work like Clair brothers, then large single special purpose boxes may make sense, but that’s only one small section of the market.

More to the point, I would love you guys to be able to provide a scalable, flexible solution whose size and weight matched most modern line arrays without the sonic comprises.  I would buy some, but until you do I don’t think your criticism of line arrays is valid.  They have just picked a different point on the compromise curve.  I’m sure many of the line array manufactures if they chose to make a single big box solution would be able to match what you guys have done.

Weight has dominated this discussion, so let’s look at it in more detail. Most companies require a box that can be “man” lifted. Practically it needs to be either a 4 person lift or a 2 person lift.  Occupational safety laws around the world in general limit the weight per person to around 30Kgs. That means a big box needs to be around 120kg maximum, a medium box 60 kgs and small box 30 Kgs.

Lets look at some large and medium scale line arrays that you don't seem to like:

Large
•   L- Acoustics K1 – 106 kgs
•   Turbosound Flashline – 102 Kgs
•   Adamson Energia  -  K15 80kgs  K12 – 60kgs
•   JBL VTX25 – 83 Kgs
•   d&b J series  - 60kgs
•   L- Acoustics K2 –  56 kg (can used ad down fill for K1)
•   EAW Anya – 130 kgs
Medium
•   d&b V series – 35kgs
•   JBL VTX20 – 40kgs
•   Turbossound Flex – 41 Kgs (can be used as down fill for Flashline)
•   Adamson Energia K12 – 60kgs

All of these fit my weight criteria and all have appropriate lifting points / handles except Anya which is a little bit on the heavy side. Interestingly Anya's weigh is not specified on her spec sheet, I found it mentioned in an interview with Dave Rat. I suspect EAW think she's a bit fat so they don’t mention it too often.

…and yes people stack them 3 or 4 high on a Dolly, but at some point someone will have to manually lift them.

Your J3 for example weighs 196 kgs and has 4 handles … 50kgs per person. Not acceptable under most safety laws around the world, but given it’s an install box and you can use a forklift no problem.

Soooo ….still waiting to see what you guys have come up with :) :)

Hi Peter, all
At risk of being accused of marketing, I would point out the thread was about the cost involved.

About 10 years ago a loudspeaker driver engineer said to me “the line array fad has saved our Butt’s” and the reason is that for a given audience SPL, it actually requires more of everything to get the job done and that is great for everyone involved at the sales end of things. 
 
The reason is that to actually get “line source” behavior the way it is done now, requires that some or much of the energy from each source to be expended in self cancelation in the near field.   That same spatial interference pattern is what you hear when the wind blows, why they sound different everywhere, is what takes a single impulse fed to the system and transmogrifies it so it arrives at the listener as an impulse stretched out in time according to the various path lengths involved to each source.  In installed sound or the situations where fidelity matters, that is a big deal all by itself.

Also, the reason we don’t market to the live sound area IS because of mfr's riders and the mountain of marketing that would need to be scaled to overcome the “knowledge” about the line array so it is no surprise that the concept of drivers that add coherently into what appears to be a single driver’s radiation in time and space is a difficult concept.   

Yet, that single crossover less driver behavior is the object of the Synergy horn and why they don’t radiate an interference pattern of lobes and nulls, why they have such a large working distance and when it matters, sounds better as well.

Few live sound people would need the acoustic power of say 6 lab subs in one full range box, but if one did, that would be a J1.    In one of the video’s I linked, there was a single J3 covering the entire football field and 20 rows up the stands and that one box has a far larger working distance than a large line array and sounds the same everywhere and is comparatively immune to wind.   

In the scale of typical live sound use, a pair of sh46’s arrayed or an SH-96HO per side used (with separate subs) here and in Europe for EDM shows is probably the closest thing to the output of a typical array system.
Unfortunately, making a speaker that acts / measures /sounds like a single crossover-less driver does not lend itself to scalability like the line arrays where you simply use more and more.  This isn’t like lighting, it’s more like projecting an image,  there are very specific acoustic requirements that need to be met if one wants to avoid the problems of self interfering sources.  For installed sound in rooms, sound radiated to the sides, up and down and rear this is a real problem.  That greater directivity / less sound outside of the pattern and “sounds the same everywhere” is partly why Synergy horns have caught on there.   One might think of it like adding extra cylinders to an engine, you can design them in from the beginning but you can’t just tack more and more on to the crankshaft if you need more power.
That being said, Ivan had an idea that I think will work for a system which can be scaled but this isn’t a reality yet.
 Best,
Tom
Logged

Peter Morris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1467
Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #49 on: August 10, 2014, 09:26:21 PM »

Unfortunately, making a speaker that acts / measures /sounds like a single crossover-less  driver does not lend itself to scalability like the line arrays where you simply use more and more.
That’s my point, and why we accept all the compromises of a line array, or perhaps more appropriately – a variable curvature array as L- Acoustics describes them.
Quote
That being said, Ivan had an idea that I think will work for a system which can be scaled but this isn’t a reality yet. 
I do actually understand the issues associated with “line-array” behaviour so I will be very interested to see what you guys come up with.
   
Peter
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: The high cost of deploying a true line-array
« Reply #49 on: August 10, 2014, 09:26:21 PM »


Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.034 seconds with 23 queries.