Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ivan Beaver]

3 wide,
2 high.

I would go the other way, 3 high and 2 wide.

When you stack the subs, you get a "free boundary" , or basically an invisible stack going down-so to speak.

By only going 2 wide you don't have any narrowing of the pattern, as you do when you go wide.

[Tim McCulloch]

I would go the other way, 3 high and 2 wide.

When you stack the subs, you get a "free boundary" , or basically an invisible stack going down-so to speak.

By only going 2 wide you don't have any narrowing of the pattern, as you do when you go wide.

That was my take, too.  I was hoping the OP would apply a little brain power and come back with a couple more questions and in the end, develop a better understanding instead of seeking a spoon-fed answer.

[Stephen Kirby]

I would go the other way, 3 high and 2 wide.

When you stack the subs, you get a "free boundary" , or basically an invisible stack going down-so to speak.

By only going 2 wide you don't have any narrowing of the pattern, as you do when you go wide.

From an efficiency standpoint, agreed.  Just concerned about the OP's ability to stack 3 high and not have a problem.  I've known some folks who would stack Sb1000s 3 high, and then weigh them down with some KF850s    Not sure how much KW181s would try to work themselves apart.

[Scott Holtzman]

From an efficiency standpoint, agreed.  Just concerned about the OP's ability to stack 3 high and not have a problem.  I've known some folks who would stack Sb1000s 3 high, and then weigh them down with some KF850s    Not sure how much KW181s would try to work themselves apart.

If you stack them 3 high you need to strap them.  I can easily stack two.  I need someone to help me with the third. 

We have 4 years or so experience running ours now and I have to say the difference between 4 and 6 is not really significant, you have to go to 8.  8 is the most I have ever run.  If you are trying to increase the area covered and not the total output in a large room you can scatter them about.  I have never tried this for a concert/club event but it works really well at weddings and corporate events where you want it to sound solid but not overwhelming.  In theory there should be some truly awful areas where you have many arrivals but I have found 35' spacing works well.

I am not sure where you are but we have 12 in inventory in Cleveland if you ever need more.

[Trevor Jalla]

By only going 2 wide you don't have any narrowing of the pattern, as you do when you go wide.

Would I be right to say any narrowing would be in the vertical instead?

ie only a problem for really, really, really tall people.

[Tim McCulloch]

Would I be right to say any narrowing would be in the vertical instead?

ie only a problem for really, really, really tall people.

Pretty much.

As a rule of thumb, the pattern tends to narrow along the longest axis.  A stack much taller than it is wide will exhibit narrower *vertical* coverage than a wider, shorter deployment.  Dimensions of the array determine at what frequencies these things happen.

[Trevor Jalla]

EDIT: Tim, you removed your question! Am I right to say that as the distance between subs in the horizontal approaches 1/2 wavelength, then:

You'd get cancellation at the 1/2 wavelength frequency for anyone standing off the side? in a wide short cluster.

Or cancellation at that frequency, for a person standing on top of tall narrow cluster. Perceived lobing across different frequencies if the person is really tall, and starts jumping up and down on the cluster.

But what's the chance of that happening in real life

[Ivan Beaver]

Would I be right to say any narrowing would be in the vertical instead?

ie only a problem for really, really, really tall people.

The simple answer is yes, BUT, it depends on the freq of interest.

For lower freq 3 boxes high is not long enough.  But as you higher and higher, the pattern gets narrower and narrower, because the length is now large as compared to the wavelength.

[Roland Clarke]

you could, conceivably, place two subs on top of each other facing forwards and then place two subs stacked two high facing each other side of the centre stack, that would be within the defined quarter wavelength, though I’m not sure that this is the original posters problem.

[dave moldover]

2 stacks, 3 high were placed about 20' apart on the ground tight against the upstage wall. They were stacked on top a truss base plate to serve as additional ballast too. It was more than enough low end for 1300 people in this 14,000' room. Easily more low end than was needed. Now to figure out how to stop all the rattles in the other hardware created by PA vibrations.

[ProSoundWeb Community]