ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11   Go Down

Author Topic: Upgrade danley sm80  (Read 6235 times)

John Fruits

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 752
Re: Upgrade danley sm80
« Reply #90 on: July 12, 2018, 11:25:35 am »

The flown RCF rig is very clean in appearance--the staging and roof was not provided by me or my client.

Jeff
Good of you to clarify that, that side view shot of the stage could be a really good "circle all the wrong things" game.  If I were going to come up with a name for the staging provider I would choose Half-Fast Events or something like that.  They got some things right, others not so much.  I wonder, do they have insurance?
Logged
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs.  There's also a negative side."-Hunter S. Thompson

David Allred

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1565
Re: Upgrade danley sm80
« Reply #91 on: July 12, 2018, 11:31:28 am »

The pictures are "odd".  Even after looking at all of the views of the RCF's, the front-ish and side-ish views make the box look big (2 x 12 + horn big), but in the rear view they look very slim and not even as tall.  Is that the camera / phone playing tricks are do they seem that way in person.
Logged

Geert Friedhof

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 419
Re: Upgrade danley sm80
« Reply #92 on: July 12, 2018, 12:07:51 pm »

2 TTL6+flybar is almost 8 feet long.

CXA -3dB: somewhere around 80-85Hz. I use preset L2 (Flat with 100Hz HP) with sub 8004 in 90Hz mode.
Logged

John Schalk

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 113
Re: Upgrade danley sm80
« Reply #93 on: July 12, 2018, 12:30:30 pm »

@Jeff -- That seems like a pretty wide seating area to cover with a 90 degree box.  Were there any fill speakers that did not make it into the pictures?  What are your thoughts on the coverage of the TTL 6a for these types of outdoor events where the audience area can be nearly 180 degrees?
Logged

Steven Eudaly

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 328
  • Living the dream.
    • Headline Productions
Re: Upgrade danley sm80
« Reply #94 on: July 12, 2018, 12:43:40 pm »

I personally feel that this "put-two-boxes-together-with-one-upside-down" sort of deployment isn't too far removed from Ye Olden Daze Of Audio where people just stacked boxes covering different passbands together until it got loud enough.

Sure, RCF made the TTL6 rigging so it "works" but is it really the most efficient, cleanest, cost effective and best sounding way to get the job done?

I feel this box fits a weird niche between "point source" and "line array" that doesn't offer much flexibility.

Jeffrey Knorr - CobraSound.com

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 124
    • CobraSound.com
Re: Upgrade danley sm80
« Reply #95 on: July 12, 2018, 12:56:33 pm »

@Jeff -- That seems like a pretty wide seating area to cover with a 90 degree box.  Were there any fill speakers that did not make it into the pictures?  What are your thoughts on the coverage of the TTL 6a for these types of outdoor events where the audience area can be nearly 180 degrees?

There were a pair of front fills on the stage deck and one Yorkville U15 as an extreme side fill speaker on the House Right side.  Horizontal coverage was probably as wide or slightly wider than a pair of SH46's arrayed per side would have provided.  Toying with the speaker splay on each side and leveraging the front fills right in front of the stage can provide pretty good coverage without additional gear (and larger budget requirements).

Jeff

Logged

Rick Powell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 729
Re: Upgrade danley sm80
« Reply #96 on: July 12, 2018, 04:35:58 pm »

Here are the Ease SPL plots - there is a double IG4T that is not obvious.

There is also a plot of 4 x dB Tech T8s

Without benefit of real EASE data, I'd still guess the PM90/PM60 would come in somewhere around the territory of the SH96HO, maybe a little less total output due to the # of woofers, but essentially the same BMS coaxial driver on a somewhat smaller horn, and a similar extended high end (probably flatter to 20k if FIR processed).
« Last Edit: July 12, 2018, 04:57:55 pm by Rick Powell »
Logged

Peter Morris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1198
Re: Upgrade danley sm80
« Reply #97 on: July 12, 2018, 09:02:20 pm »

Without benefit of real EASE data, I'd still guess the PM90/PM60 would come in somewhere around the territory of the SH96HO, maybe a little less total output due to the # of woofers, but essentially the same BMS coaxial driver on a somewhat smaller horn, and a similar extended high end (probably flatter to 20k if FIR processed).

The PM90/60 will be somewhere near the SH96HO.  The SH96HO obviously goes lower but even if you consider everything above 100 Hz it will still make more because its a 4 way box where the PM90/60 is a 3 way box.

In term of spec sheet peak figures the PM90/60 and SH96HO will have about the same peak SPL because they use the same compression driver.  (Note: I believe Danley is now using a B&C driver in the  SH96HO)

In the real world its about energy over the entire operating spectrum not instantaneous peaks that are shown in the spec sheet.   A two way box rate at 130 dB will not be as loud as a 3 way box rated at 130 dB on a broad band  signal.

This is overly simplistic but on broad band signal if you have a woofer making 130dB + the high frequency driver making 130dB the output will be the sum of these two.  In the case of the 3 way box you can have all 3 drivers making 130dB; intuitively this will sum to more. If you think in terms of energy and assume each driver can take 100 watts and has the same efficiency - the 2-way can take 200 watts while the 3-way can take 300 watts.

You also have to remember that in the real world a speakers output is limited by the the output of the least powerful driver (i.e. low,mid or high) ... anyway as a guess the SH960HO should have about 3dB more output than a PM90/60 and a PM90/60 about 7 dB more than an SM80. 
Logged

Jeff Lelko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 990
  • Cape Canaveral, FL
Re: Upgrade danley sm80
« Reply #98 on: July 12, 2018, 09:40:05 pm »

Those are tougher questions to answer!  I'll try to break it down a little bit:
Deployment - I really like the appearance of the flown RCF rig.  I have only ever ground stacked SH46's on scaffolding--that's a much wider and seemingly labor intensive endeavor.  Theoretically SH46's could be flown in a similar fashion as the RCF's were in this picture.  That would make it a much more interesting comparison.

Sound quality - Out of the box, the RCF's are self-powered boxes and have a very flat response and hi-fi sound to them.  Similarly, SH46's sound fairly good out of the box but can use some additional processing to really shine to their full potential.  I would have to give an edge to overall pattern control to the Danleys but the horn-loaded RCF's are far better than most.  The RCF's have a flatter low-end response vs. the SH46's.  When the SH46's are used two or more per side that's less of an issue (as their low-end couples).  They still don't extend as low in response as the RCF's do though.  I don't think the RCF AS cabinets would be necessary unless you wanted extreme low bass response/headroom.

Output - I think the SH46's probably have the slight SPL advantage but for most people, it'd be a lot easier/safer to run the RCF's closer to their limits (with their self-powered and internal processing advantage).

My client actually had SH46's in mind for his new rig when he was introduced to the RCFs.  I think he would have been happy with either option but he has been extremely pleased with his purchase thus far.  It would be a tough decision for me to make for you--I highly recommend getting in front of both rigs so that you can make the call for yourself.

Thanks for the detailed response Jeff!  I completely agree that these two options aren't an apples to apples comparison - they're just two products that interest me and given that you've heard or used both I figured I'd ask.  I'd definitely be using (and thus comparing) two per side of either box.  What I like about the TTL6-As is that their rigging is integral to the cabinet so assembling the array on site isn't complicated, whereas (correct me if I'm wrong) the SH46s would be a bit more time consuming to bolt together and fly.  I also like that you can use only 1 TTL per side for smaller events, even on a pole mount if desired and safe to do so. 

I definitely plan on traveling to hear both options when the time comes for me to make a purchase.  Thanks again!

Sure, RCF made the TTL6 rigging so it "works" but is it really the most efficient, cleanest, cost effective and best sounding way to get the job done?

I feel this box fits a weird niche between "point source" and "line array" that doesn't offer much flexibility.

Speaking without seeing or hearing, I'm not sure I'd agree.  I do agree that this solution isn't a line array replacement, but it seems to be a modular and very manageable alternative to either the 4-box arrays or larger point sources such as the SH96.  While you could probably get 10 of the smaller RCF line array elements for the cost of 4 of the TTLs, I would wager these are easier to handle for the smaller operator on smaller jobs that don't really NEED a line array or refrigerator-sized boxes.  At least they seem to push the limit of what can be done with a system that's movable by one person in a single utility van! 
Logged

Jon Dees

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 84
Re: Upgrade danley sm80
« Reply #99 on: July 13, 2018, 09:18:27 am »

I personally feel that this "put-two-boxes-together-with-one-upside-down" sort of deployment isn't too far removed from Ye Olden Daze Of Audio where people just stacked boxes covering different passbands together until it got loud enough.

Sure, RCF made the TTL6 rigging so it "works" but is it really the most efficient, cleanest, cost effective and best sounding way to get the job done?

I feel this box fits a weird niche between "point source" and "line array" that doesn't offer much flexibility.

It is a weird niche but has been filled for a long time by the SRX835 and its predecessors, KF650 and boxes like the SLS920 and SLS960 (now discontinued). The TTL6 and its little brothers are an improvement on the KF650 concept in that one per side is not too narrow, allowing to cover more events/split up a rig, and these boxes are taller so guys not willing to routinely endure the liability of flying speakers overhead can have a usable product ground stacking.

These don't scale up to 5x/side but then you are into the next level of production with lifts, stages, etc. for any event handled.

The Q for most lounge types is - would you rather by 4 TTL6 + 4 IG4T/NXL-24A plus stage wedges as a basic multiple gig system or would you rather try to buy QSC KLA or JBL VRX or JBL STX835? I would contend that these vertical kits beat the application flexibility of all of those products, without the liability/risk/setup time of vertical lifts or the 60* pattern inflexibility of using something like STX835 1/side. Note the TTL6-A even has a pole mount for crazy folks who think it goes on a pole. Wonder if RCF sells a pole rated for that box...

Also the manufacturer's DSP engineering today means comparisons to component stacking systems is not really valid, IMHO.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.076 seconds with 22 queries.