ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Modeling Software / Point Source vs. Line Array  (Read 2669 times)

Ted Christensen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 426
Modeling Software / Point Source vs. Line Array
« on: October 20, 2014, 02:22:00 AM »

So i decided to play around in some modeling software. Primarily Ease vs Danley Direct

I put 2 SH46's per side in Danleys software and in Ease i used 4 dB tech t12's

My findings were the SH46's were A LOT louder. Almost 20dB compared to the T12's and somewhat even front to back between 50 ft. Maybe a 10db Change.

The T12 looked A LOT more steady from front to back in frequency response but not as loud but it did stay more even between 50ft at about 5dB. it looked like it peaked at 108-110dB in the low mids around 400-500hz versus 50 ft back with the danleys it was 122 dB


from left to right if you were to walk around the frequency response of the t12 did stay pretty even as compared to the SH46 in some points there was a sweet spot and others there were dips, nulls, and peaks.


What would you rather have?

I was wondering if it was safe to assume that Point sources can get louder versus line arrays withing the same tier or close to but line arrays don't get as loud but have a much more even frequency response through out the room just softer levels as you back away from the source?

This whole thing seems like a big trade off. (volume versus fidelity)

Logged
Danley SH46 / Th115 / EV ZX5 / EV QRX212H / QSC HPR / Lab Gruppen / Chauvet / Blizzard / Allen and heath ilive

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23729
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: Modeling Software / Point Source vs. Line Array
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2014, 03:28:51 AM »

I think Danley has EASE data, you should model the speakers with the same software.

I do not doubt there is a difference in SPL and tonality throughout the coverage area.  One of the things we've discussed in the Classic LAB is the trade off in designing a full line array (8+ boxes of "big dog" modules) - you can design for the least change in broadband SPL from front to back, or you can design for more uniform tonality from front to back (and accept less SPL at the back of the arena).  The art is sussing out some compromises that gives more tonal consistency while sacrificing as little SPL as possible.  Sometimes you get the trim height you want, sometimes you don't...

The primary advantage of using fewer loudspeakers is less self-interference.  Reflections from walls, ceilings and floors will affect coverage tonality, as will coverage by more than 1 loudspeaker.  This is what Danley does well - the coverage is typically very uniform, tonally.  As you progress to outside the coverage area you'll notice that pretty much the top 6 or 7 octaves drop off together.  I heard one Danley install where they put the "seam" between 2 speakers right down an aisle, the one place nobody sits.  Very nice, and there aren't a lot of products that can let you do that accurately.
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

Ted Christensen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 426
Re: Modeling Software / Point Source vs. Line Array
« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2014, 05:02:37 AM »

I think Danley has EASE data, you should model the speakers with the same software.

I do not doubt there is a difference in SPL and tonality throughout the coverage area.  One of the things we've discussed in the Classic LAB is the trade off in designing a full line array (8+ boxes of "big dog" modules) - you can design for the least change in broadband SPL from front to back, or you can design for more uniform tonality from front to back (and accept less SPL at the back of the arena).  The art is sussing out some compromises that gives more tonal consistency while sacrificing as little SPL as possible.  Sometimes you get the trim height you want, sometimes you don't...

The primary advantage of using fewer loudspeakers is less self-interference.  Reflections from walls, ceilings and floors will affect coverage tonality, as will coverage by more than 1 loudspeaker.  This is what Danley does well - the coverage is typically very uniform, tonally.  As you progress to outside the coverage area you'll notice that pretty much the top 6 or 7 octaves drop off together.  I heard one Danley install where they put the "seam" between 2 speakers right down an aisle, the one place nobody sits.  Very nice, and there aren't a lot of products that can let you do that accurately.

unfortunetly i cannot get the Danley .gll files to open in Ease Focus 2. an error keeps popping up
Logged
Danley SH46 / Th115 / EV ZX5 / EV QRX212H / QSC HPR / Lab Gruppen / Chauvet / Blizzard / Allen and heath ilive

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9533
  • Atlanta GA
Re: Modeling Software / Point Source vs. Line Array
« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2014, 07:23:47 AM »

I think Danley has EASE data, you should model the speakers with the same software.


And even using the same software modeler-there are often "issues".

I know of cases where the data going into the model (from the manufacturer) is highly modified , so it does not represent what actually happens in the real world.

But it does look "pretty" in EASE.

Yes it would be nice if all the data was gathered the same way-with the same amount of smoothing etc, but it is not even close to that.

So what you really have to do with any modeling software is to use personal experience with a product and how well it really behaves (vs the software) and combine that with the software predictions to get some real usable answers.

Just because it shows up on a computer screen does not mean it is right or accurate.
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

Peter Morris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1467
Re: Modeling Software / Point Source vs. Line Array
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2014, 08:00:04 AM »

unfortunetly i cannot get the Danley .gll files to open in Ease Focus 2. an error keeps popping up

As I understand, a standard GLL file will work with Ease, but unless it’s enabled, not with Ease Focus II.
 
If you do a plot with the Ease Focus I, Ease Focus II and dB DVA Composer you will find they all give different SPL results for the same configuration.  The difference is as much as 20dB. I have asked about the difference; the best I could get was they are different but all correct. :-\ (Ease Focus II gives by far the lowest SPL)

FWIW I think you are correct to compare 2 x SH46 with 4 x T12s.
Logged

Rob Spence

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3531
  • Boston Metro North/West
    • Lynx Audio Services
Re: Modeling Software / Point Source vs. Line Array
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2014, 06:42:54 PM »



FWIW I think you are correct to compare 2 x SH46 with 4 x T12s.

But, is 4 boxes a line?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Logged
rob at lynxaudioservices dot com

Dealer for: AKG, Allen & Heath, Ashley, Astatic, Audix, Blue Microphones, CAD, Chauvet, Community, Countryman, Crown, DBX, Electro-Voice, FBT, Furman, Heil, Horizon, Intellistage, JBL, Lab Gruppen, Mid Atlantic, On Stage Stands, Pelican, Peterson Tuners, Presonus, ProCo, QSC, Radial, RCF, Sennheiser, Shure, SKB, Soundcraft, TC Electronics, Telex, Whirlwind and others

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Modeling Software / Point Source vs. Line Array
« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2014, 06:42:54 PM »


Pages: [1]   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.042 seconds with 23 queries.