ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Down

Author Topic: Long vs short throw boxes  (Read 25244 times)

luis Markson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 295
  • Just keep going....
Long vs short throw boxes
« on: March 25, 2011, 01:29:59 AM »

What facet of speaker design contributes to the long/short throw charateristics of a loudspeaker?

I've always hated using powered boxes like eons and srm450 for monitors and had put that down to their "throw". I'm always amazed at how good the drum fill sounds from monitor op position, but then just falls apart on the riser.

Logged

Jeff Bankston

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2568
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #1 on: March 25, 2011, 02:05:56 AM »

not trying to put down anyone here but i never heard of drums in the monitors except for 1 other post. the others guys never had a problem hearing me. my drums have never ben in the monitors. just wondering.
Logged

luis Markson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 295
  • Just keep going....
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #2 on: March 25, 2011, 03:59:54 AM »

not trying to put down anyone here but i never heard of drums in the monitors except for 1 other post. the others guys never had a problem hearing me. my drums have never ben in the monitors. just wondering.

Drums in the monitor is quite common. What I was actually referring to was the drum fill heard from the monitor desk.
Logged

Brian Elstro

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
  • Richmond, IN
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #3 on: March 25, 2011, 04:21:10 AM »

What facet of speaker design contributes to the long/short throw charateristics of a loudspeaker?

I've always hated using powered boxes like eons and srm450 for monitors and had put that down to their "throw". I'm always amazed at how good the drum fill sounds from monitor op position, but then just falls apart on the riser.

Unfortunately 'long throw' is a marketing term that has been extremely overused. The only thing that makes a speaker 'long throw' is pattern control. A more narrow pattern allows you to 'focus' the sound on your intended audience rather than having to deal with comb filtering and room reflections. A good example would be a 90x40 HF horn vs. a 60x20 HF horn (the numbers are in degrees and state the horizontal by vertical pattern control down to the crossover frequency).

Monitors are just another good example of why you need pattern control onstage. Many powered speakers like the ones you listed require to be chocked up just to get the most sensitive area focused to the muso. They are also taylored for frequency response to the most sensitive region of human hearing (although it doesnt mean that the monitor has to sound bad either). Keep in mind that for a drum monitor, you would need something that is very high sensitivity..... something like a SRM450 with a sensitivity rating of 124db (a guess) would lose 6db every doubling of distance, at 6' that would mean that the drummer is only hearing about 118db. Snare hits can easily hit 105-110db, and thats not paying attention to the guitar rigs and everything else on a noisy stage. The speakers you listed are really designed for SOS or sub augmented setups, but can be made to work in a pinch.

By my understanding this is the best explanation I can give, I am no expert, and I would hope someone would correct me if Im wrong (or maybe even explain a bit on how the LF section of controlled dispersion loudspeakers works.... it still befuddles me how they get an omni-directional driver to maintain a focused sound), hope this helps!
Logged
"can you make them sing better?"

Jeff Bankston

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2568
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #4 on: March 25, 2011, 04:45:13 AM »

Drums in the monitor is quite common. What I was actually referring to was the drum fill heard from the monitor desk.
i understand now.
Logged

Brad Weber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2208
  • Marietta, GA
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #5 on: March 25, 2011, 07:10:32 AM »

By my understanding this is the best explanation I can give, I am no expert, and I would hope someone would correct me if Im wrong (or maybe even explain a bit on how the LF section of controlled dispersion loudspeakers works.... it still befuddles me how they get an omni-directional driver to maintain a focused sound), hope this helps!
Ignoring multiple driver arrays where phase relationships are used for directivity control, there are probably a couple of significant points.  One is that the drivers are not really omnidirectional, or at least not over their full operating range.  Put a woofer in an enclosure and run it at higher frequencies relative to the piston (cone) size and it will start to have directionality, specifically the pattern will tend to focus or 'beam' at higher frequencies.
 
The other is that '90x40', '75x75', 'YxZ', etc. are simply nominal patterns, the speaker has somewhere around that pattern at some point in its operating range, usually at higher frequencies.  It does not mean that the speaker has that specific pattern at all frequencies.  Physically larger horns generally do better at maintaining a pattern and at maintaining it to lower frequencies, so compact boxes with compact horns often actually have rather limited pattern control.   A larger horn may provide pattern control down to 800Hz or even 500Hz, a small horn may not have decent pattern control until 1,500Hz or higher and may have more variance above that.  You can even experience pattern flip at some frequencies where something like a nominal 90x40 box actually has a pattern that is greater vertically than horizontally over some portion of the operating range, usually somewhere through crossover.
Logged

luis Markson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 295
  • Just keep going....
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #6 on: March 25, 2011, 05:27:16 PM »

Thanks for that guys. So from what I understand throw is a product of directivity. A narrower dispersion focuses the energy into a smaller area and results in a greater distance travelled before the energy is dissipated?

If that is the case, then is there an ideal distance to have a listener from a loudspeaker? For a singer woofer and a horn, is there a point where you can be too close? I'm thinking that the directivity at certain frequencies may result in an imbalance in the frequency spectrum up close?

What explains my observations about intelligibility and stability in the drum fill? I've also noticed this when listening to program material when sitting in the drummers stool compared with listening from a couple of meters back. While the level is lower further away, the balance is dramatically better.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2011, 06:24:08 PM by luis Markson »
Logged

Brian Elstro

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
  • Richmond, IN
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #7 on: March 26, 2011, 03:41:56 AM »

Thanks for that guys. So from what I understand throw is a product of directivity. A narrower dispersion focuses the energy into a smaller area and results in a greater distance travelled before the energy is dissipated?

If that is the case, then is there an ideal distance to have a listener from a loudspeaker? For a singer woofer and a horn, is there a point where you can be too close? I'm thinking that the directivity at certain frequencies may result in an imbalance in the frequency spectrum up close?

What explains my observations about intelligibility and stability in the drum fill? I've also noticed this when listening to program material when sitting in the drummers stool compared with listening from a couple of meters back. While the level is lower further away, the balance is dramatically better.

Yes (although the inverse square law still applies, just more 'honestly' so since there are less room interactions and negative phase effects)! There is really only an ideal distance if it is either too loud or they (the audience) are outside the coverage pattern (and if its too loud, youre too old...lol.... jk.. keep levels safe at the audiences closest points). Usually too loud comes way before you can hear the separation in coverage pattern (although it is discernable extremely close up). One explanation for a better balance is wavefront propagation. It is a difficult subject that Im not too comfortable talking about since I dont know much about speaker design, but in a nutshell its how the lower frequency wavelengths take a longer distance to form fully.  Learning the small amount that I have about loudspeaker design has helped my efforts in quality sound tremendously and you may want to look into it as well (not trying to sound condescending but its a never ending learning experience IMO). Have a good one!
Logged
"can you make them sing better?"

luis Markson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 295
  • Just keep going....
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #8 on: March 26, 2011, 03:47:59 AM »

Yes (although the inverse square law still applies, just more 'honestly' so since there are less room interactions and negative phase effects)! There is really only an ideal distance if it is either too loud or they (the audience) are outside the coverage pattern (and if its too loud, youre too old...lol.... jk.. keep levels safe at the audiences closest points). Usually too loud comes way before you can hear the separation in coverage pattern (although it is discernable extremely close up). One explanation for a better balance is wavefront propagation. It is a difficult subject that Im not too comfortable talking about since I dont know much about speaker design, but in a nutshell its how the lower frequency wavelengths take a longer distance to form fully.  Learning the small amount that I have about loudspeaker design has helped my efforts in quality sound tremendously and you may want to look into it as well (not trying to sound condescending but its a never ending learning experience IMO). Have a good one!

You don't sound condescending, this exactly the information and advice I'm looking for..
Logged

Bob Leonard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6807
  • Boston, MA USA
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #9 on: March 26, 2011, 09:22:00 AM »

What facet of speaker design contributes to the long/short throw charateristics of a loudspeaker?

I've always hated using powered boxes like eons and srm450 for monitors and had put that down to their "throw". I'm always amazed at how good the drum fill sounds from monitor op position, but then just falls apart on the riser.

Luis,
Being about 100 years old has often led me to not using many of the terms often read in replies or heard bantered about. I try to stay away from words or expressions such as "MI", throw, tweeter, woofer, etc..
 
In the world of speakers I tend to think of the word range, being more accurate than "throw". And, to be more precise I would prefer the term "Effective range". For most practical purposes, and as an example, almost every 15" cabinet on the face of this planet will have approximately the same "effective range". You may say to yourself you wish to put 115db on the dance floor, the back of the dance floor is 40-50 feet away, can I do this. The answer will be yes for almost any box you use.
 
The effective range however will be determined by much more than horn pattern and volume. The effective range will be determined by the speakers ability to provide clear and not distorted  output at the volumes required to obtain a 115db level at 50 feet. Will the speaker hold together at those levels, and does the speaker play well with others when multiple boxes of the same type are combined, extending the system range. Will the entire system be capable of providing the needed output, with clarity, at the distance required. Horn patterns are important but they are only a small part of the equation.
Logged
BOSTON STRONG........
Proud Vietnam Veteran

I did a gig for Otis Elevator once. Like every job, it had it's ups and downs.

Brad Weber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2208
  • Marietta, GA
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #10 on: March 26, 2011, 10:10:31 AM »

Thanks for that guys. So from what I understand throw is a product of directivity. A narrower dispersion focuses the energy into a smaller area and results in a greater distance travelled before the energy is dissipated?
Perhaps it's easiest to think of it this way, if you had to cover a certain number of people where everyone was within a or 'short' distance you'd probably want a wider pattern device in order to provide good coverage of all of the listeners.  If you moved those people further away from the speaker, a 'long' distance away, then you would likely want a narrower pattern device.

If that is the case, then is there an ideal distance to have a listener from a loudspeaker? For a singer woofer and a horn, is there a point where you can be too close? I'm thinking that the directivity at certain frequencies may result in an imbalance in the frequency spectrum up close?
You can get into more tchnical aspects such as near field versus far field, but the primary thing is probably simply whether the speaker provides the desired levels and response over the desired listener area.  "Too close" might be asociated with varying levels at the edges of listener area.
 
What explains my observations about intelligibility and stability in the drum fill? I've also noticed this when listening to program material when sitting in the drummers stool compared with listening from a couple of meters back. While the level is lower further away, the balance is dramatically better.
Think of the angular relationship as well as the distance.  The output of speakers tends to drop off as you move off-axis and often falls off differently for different frequencies.  Some speaker exhibit a nice smooth drop of for most frequencies right up to the pattern cut off, others may have some frequencies that drop off dramatically while other frequencies drop off very little.  As you move closer or further away from a speaker is that movement along the speaker's axis or does the movement result in how far you are off axis also changing?  It could be that moving further awway simply puts you more into the coverage of the speaker at all frequencies and thus provides a better frequency response.
Logged

David Parker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1198
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #11 on: March 27, 2011, 04:58:08 PM »

What facet of speaker design contributes to the long/short throw charateristics of a loudspeaker?

I've always hated using powered boxes like eons and srm450 for monitors and had put that down to their "throw". I'm always amazed at how good the drum fill sounds from monitor op position, but then just falls apart on the riser.

A church I attended years ago  hired a consultant to spec a system. The church was a 208' diameter concrete dome. The consultant spec'd a system that absolutely did not work. There were 20 horns total, all huge with JBL 2445 drivers. 10 of the horns were "long throw", about 4' long, intended to "develop" at 300'-400'. As noted, the back was was less than 200' from the horns. As expected, there were hot spots and cold spots with regards to sound. At the back of the room, the horns had not spread out enough to meet each other's coverage. At the front, where the shorter "throw" horns were aimed, it was equally spotty, since those horns were still too narrow in coverage for the distance they covered.
Logged

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9534
  • Atlanta GA
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #12 on: March 27, 2011, 05:34:50 PM »

A church I attended years ago  hired a consultant to spec a system. The church was a 208' diameter concrete dome. The consultant spec'd a system that absolutely did not work. There were 20 horns total, all huge with JBL 2445 drivers. 10 of the horns were "long throw", about 4' long, intended to "develop" at 300'-400'. As noted, the back was was less than 200' from the horns. As expected, there were hot spots and cold spots with regards to sound. At the back of the room, the horns had not spread out enough to meet each other's coverage. At the front, where the shorter "throw" horns were aimed, it was equally spotty, since those horns were still too narrow in coverage for the distance they covered.
I ran into the same sort of thing a number of years ago when the consultant spec JBL PD horns for a traditional Baptist church.  The reason was that the narrow pattern would not energize the room as much.  OK, But you have to use enough of them to adequately cover the audience or else you end up with hot spots and dead spots-like they did.

Nothing against the product, but it was the wrong tool for the job at hand.
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

Mac Kerr

  • Old enough to know better
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7551
  • Audio Plumber
Re: Long vs short throw boxes???
« Reply #13 on: March 27, 2011, 05:39:23 PM »

A church I attended years ago  hired a consultant to spec a system. The church was a 208' diameter concrete dome. The consultant spec'd a system that absolutely did not work. There were 20 horns total, all huge with JBL 2445 drivers. 10 of the horns were "long throw", about 4' long, intended to "develop" at 300'-400'. As noted, the back was was less than 200' from the horns. As expected, there were hot spots and cold spots with regards to sound. At the back of the room, the horns had not spread out enough to meet each other's coverage. At the front, where the shorter "throw" horns were aimed, it was equally spotty, since those horns were still too narrow in coverage for the distance they covered.

What kind a system fixed the problem? In an acoustic disaster area like a concrete dome I don't think those horns were a bad idea. There is no such thing as a horn intended to "develop" at 300'-400', there are only horns with different coverage angles. AFAIK the narrowest coverage horns JBL made were 40ºHx30ºV. If these were arrayed 5 wide by 2 high, with 5º of overlap, the 10 horns would have a coverage pattern of about 180ºHx55ºV, without significant gaps in coverage, at any reasonable distance. In a concrete dome, it is certainly possible, even probable that reflections off the ceiling and walls were causing those dead spots. Those big horns were used to try to reduce those reflections by keeping sound off the ceiling and walls. Maybe it was not possible to have a good sound in that room at that time, but it wasn't because the horns didn't have enough coverage.

Mac
Logged

Mac Kerr

  • Old enough to know better
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7551
  • Audio Plumber
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #14 on: March 27, 2011, 05:43:32 PM »

I ran into the same sort of thing a number of years ago when the consultant spec JBL PD horns for a traditional Baptist church.  The reason was that the narrow pattern would not energize the room as much.  OK, But you have to use enough of them to adequately cover the audience or else you end up with hot spots and dead spots-like they did.

Ivan, with 10 of the narrowest horns JBL made, and 10 somewhat wider pattern horns there was probably enough to cover the room, even if it was in the round. Ten 40º horns in a circle should cover 360º.

That doesn't make the design a good one, but it seems unlikely the dead spots were completely due to horns being too narrow. It would help to know about the actual design and implementation.

Mac
Logged

Jeff Bankston

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2568
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #15 on: March 27, 2011, 06:43:29 PM »

these cabnets were considered "short throw" but got out to over 200,000 people and could be heard past the 1/2 mile point. when you build a wall off sound it will get out especially when indoors. "IF i remember right" the 15" woofs in these cabnets were rated to handle 150 watts each. this was the CalJam74 pa system. check out the amp racks next to the speakers.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2011, 06:49:52 PM by Jeff Harrell »
Logged

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9534
  • Atlanta GA
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #16 on: March 27, 2011, 06:55:49 PM »

Ivan, with 10 of the narrowest horns JBL made, and 10 somewhat wider pattern horns there was probably enough to cover the room, even if it was in the round. Ten 40º horns in a circle should cover 360º.

That doesn't make the design a good one, but it seems unlikely the dead spots were completely due to horns being too narrow. It would help to know about the actual design and implementation.

Mac
In my particular case there were only 2 horns used for the balcony and 2 for the main floor.

It was just a case of a poor overall system design-not the tools that were used.

But as the contractor, we had no say in the design (I tried to point it out-but the customer would not listen to me), we were hired to put it in as designed.
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

David Parker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1198
Re: Long vs short throw boxes???
« Reply #17 on: March 27, 2011, 08:50:16 PM »

What kind a system fixed the problem? In an acoustic disaster area like a concrete dome I don't think those horns were a bad idea. There is no such thing as a horn intended to "develop" at 300'-400', there are only horns with different coverage angles. AFAIK the narrowest coverage horns JBL made were 40ºHx30ºV. If these were arrayed 5 wide by 2 high, with 5º of overlap, the 10 horns would have a coverage pattern of about 180ºHx55ºV, without significant gaps in coverage, at any reasonable distance. In a concrete dome, it is certainly possible, even probable that reflections off the ceiling and walls were causing those dead spots. Those big horns were used to try to reduce those reflections by keeping sound off the ceiling and walls. Maybe it was not possible to have a good sound in that room at that time, but it wasn't because the horns didn't have enough coverage.

Mac

some of the horns were intentionally aimed at the walls, to counteract whatever.  That didn't work at all. I took four of the shorter horns and aimed them down into the audience and turned the rest of them off. The longer horns were stadium horns, they were huge. 31" square at the end, 54" long. They had no place in that room.  Shortly after that the Astrodome in Houston put in a new sound system. I recognized the horns in that setup distinctly, they were the same as the ones in the church. That system MIGHT have worked had all the horns been pointed into the seats and properly aimed and levels properly set, but that is not the way it was installed. I didn't have the wherewithal to set all of them up that way. This was 20 years ago. I was just learning about live audio. What I did improved it immensely, but had I had some horns with wider dispersion, it would have been even better. Here are the horns in question, JBL2366a.http://www.jblpro.com/pub/obsolete/23606566.pdf
Logged

Mac Kerr

  • Old enough to know better
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7551
  • Audio Plumber
Re: Long vs short throw boxes???
« Reply #18 on: March 27, 2011, 09:14:33 PM »

some of the horns were intentionally aimed at the walls, to counteract whatever.  That didn't work at all. I took four of the shorter horns and aimed them down into the audience and turned the rest of them off. The longer horns were stadium horns, they were huge. 31" square at the end, 54" long. They had no place in that room.  Shortly after that the Astrodome in Houston put in a new sound system. I recognized the horns in that setup distinctly, they were the same as the ones in the church. That system MIGHT have worked had all the horns been pointed into the seats and properly aimed and levels properly set, but that is not the way it was installed. I didn't have the wherewithal to set all of them up that way. This was 20 years ago. I was just learning about live audio. What I did improved it immensely, but had I had some horns with wider dispersion, it would have been even better. Here are the horns in question, JBL2366a.http://www.jblpro.com/pub/obsolete/23606566.pdf

More evidence that the problem wasn't the fact that long throw, narrow coverage pattern, horns were used in what may have been the right room, but that it was a bad design or installation. No sound system in the world will work in the face of bad design and installation.

Mac
Logged

David Parker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1198
Re: Long vs short throw boxes???
« Reply #19 on: March 27, 2011, 10:27:43 PM »

More evidence that the problem wasn't the fact that long throw, narrow coverage pattern, horns were used in what may have been the right room, but that it was a bad design or installation. No sound system in the world will work in the face of bad design and installation.

Mac
My original point for the original poster was that if the pattern was too tight and the targets too close, there would be hot and cold spots. Unless there are adequate tight coverage horns to be aimed to cover the targets. The install in question was a disaster, and a very expensive one. As I recall, the install was $140,000 about 1987. I don't remember the name of the contractor, but they were highly recommended for church installs at the time. This was their first shot at a concrete dome, and it didn't work. They had a couple of the shorter horns in that series aimed down at the stage for monitors. That also did not work at all.
Logged

Mac Kerr

  • Old enough to know better
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7551
  • Audio Plumber
Re: Long vs short throw boxes???
« Reply #20 on: March 27, 2011, 10:35:30 PM »

My original point for the original poster was that if the pattern was too tight and the targets too close, there would be hot and cold spots. Unless there are adequate tight coverage horns to be aimed to cover the targets. The install in question was a disaster, and a very expensive one. As I recall, the install was $140,000 about 1987. I don't remember the name of the contractor, but they were highly recommended for church installs at the time. This was their first shot at a concrete dome, and it didn't work. They had a couple of the shorter horns in that series aimed down at the stage for monitors. That also did not work at all.

And my original point was that the problem was not that the horns were too narrow, they were badly aimed. Those 10 40º horns can cover 360º with no gaps. There is no such thing as a long throw horn that does not work up close within its coverage pattern. Long throw horns do not "develop" at some theoretical distance.

Mac
Logged

duane massey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1727
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #21 on: March 28, 2011, 12:47:28 AM »

Houston has had a number of poorly designed and/or installed systems in churches and schools. It's probably no coincidence that most of the companies that pursued that market are out of business.
Logged
Duane Massey
Technician, musician, stubborn old guy
Houston, Texas

David Parker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1198
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #22 on: March 28, 2011, 06:35:16 AM »

Houston has had a number of poorly designed and/or installed systems in churches and schools. It's probably no coincidence that most of the companies that pursued that market are out of business.

When these horns were in their heyday http://www.jblpro.com/pub/obsolete/23606566.pdf I saw them in MANY churches, and nobody was happy with them. The typical install in a 400 seat auditorium was to have two of them mounted together up in the top of the steep V ceiling (basically up in the rafters), pointed down, one at the front and one aimed more to the rear. There would be a low frequency cab also located up at the top near them.
Logged

Tim Weaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3693
  • College Station, Texas
    • Daniela Weaver Photography
Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #23 on: March 29, 2011, 04:56:20 PM »


Back to the OP's question, the problem you are having is one of "suitable listening distance". It's the same problem faced by designers of studio monitors. There are nearfield monitors and farfield monitors. The largest Nearfields you see are usually 8" woofer two way systems. 2 way systems with larger low freq drivers are extremely difficult to design crossovers for due to the difference in radiation patterns between the LF and the HF.

You will also see that NF monitors use dome tweeters instead of horns in order to have a radiation pattern that matches the woofer better. The idea is to have (as much as possible) spherical radiation from both drive units at the frequencies they are playing. The small woofs will give you a much higher possible crossover point before they begin to narrow their radiation pattern.

How this all pertains to your drum monitor is that the drummer is sitting in the "nearfield" and you at the desk are not. The Eons are not designed with nearfield listening in mind. Therefore the drummer is getting a wildly skewed, lumpy frequecy response. To the credit of the eons, most 15" x 1" horn pro audio cabinets will have this same problem. A 15" woofer is a great compromise between acceptable freq response and high efficiency, but it typically makes a terrible low/mid for a 2 way cabinet.

My suggestion is to either back the monitor up several feet, or run a 3 way drum fill with a sub and a small 2 way cabinet. A 10/1" monitor on top of an 18" sub works pretty well, given that all the components are of decent quality. If you can find a small monitor with a conical wave guide you might be a little better off than one with a rectangular horn, but as always, give it a listen to see if it sounds good up close.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2011, 05:17:38 PM by Tim Weaver »
Logged
Bullwinkle: This is the amplifier, which amplifies the sound. This is the Preamplifier which, of course, amplifies the pree's.

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Long vs short throw boxes
« Reply #23 on: March 29, 2011, 04:56:20 PM »


Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.047 seconds with 24 queries.