ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 on: Today at 07:29:52 pm 
Started by Jason Raboin - Last post by Ben Mehlman

Re radios and their prices:

Motorola.. and some others eg Kenwood, Vertex/Standard etc make excellent commercial radios which are FCC "type accepted" for operation on commercial frequencies in the USA.  Radios that are not "type accepted" for Part 90 are technically illegal for business use, regardless of any license you may have.  Of course, these radios cost quite a bit.. but you do get quality and legality.

But if you are on a budget or tend to work in situations where you can lose radios.. most Chinese import radios are not type accepted.. but there are some Part 90 type accepted Chinese import radios that are pretty good radios. 

These, when used on a frequency you are licensed to use, or when used on one of the license-free MURS VHF channels, are totally ok to use and will cost you as little as $30-$80 each.

For example the Puxing PX-777 VHF I believe is a part 90 radio, and MURS capable. 
The Baofeng UV-82C is as well.

Both these radios are known to be pretty good performers.  I have some experience with the PX-777.  The radio itself is solid, good audio, decent RF and AF performance.  My one complaint is that the charger base is a little hard to get to mate with the radio sometimes.  For $65 you'll be quite surprised at the quality you get.

The UV-82C is a dual band (UHF/VHF) radio, so you have flexibility there.  You can operate on your licensed UHF channel and also interoperate with other people on MURS channels (these channels are the old VHF color "dot" channels so there are tons of production radios out there that use them).  Or if you get a GMRS license ($75) you can operate them for personal use on those channels.  These radios also have a dual-listen feature where you can be having a conversation on one channel, while monitoring another.  For example, one channel for sound, another channel for event coordination, etc.  If you need to respond on the other channel, you can push a button and flip your transmitter over to it.

The other option that a dual band radio opens up, if you work very large events, is the possibility of setting up a temporary cross-band repeater, which is really the best way to go if you want to have range measured in miles.

If you are a little bit handy you can program them yourself and save on that cost as well (technically you are not supposed to do that.. but lots of people do).

And if you lose one.. well, for $30-80 it's not such a big deal...

 on: Today at 07:21:49 pm 
Started by Kemper Watson - Last post by Kemper Watson
So I ended up getting the Netgear NightHawk 1900..
I've watched the video on getting the MR18 wifi hidden. How do I go about this for the Netgear?.

Edit.. I can open the wireless settings on the I Pad.. What do I do to hide it?

 on: Today at 07:18:56 pm 
Started by Rusty Stevens - Last post by Mike Sullivan
Thanks for the review Rusty.  I've been demoing the SRX835P's from a friend of mine, and we just picked up 8 of the SRX 828's.. IMHO they outperform our S30's in sound quality, and are pretty close in volume with 8 S30's.. we used the S30's last year, and the SRX828's this year.. My buddy is selling his 4 835's and 2 828s to downgrade to a smaller rig for their band, so I'm working on picking the rig up from him by the end of the year, this way we have something for our LTLA (less than line array) shows and for my small festival work.

 on: Today at 06:57:48 pm 
Started by Scott Gentry - Last post by Scott Gentry
The primary benefit of using a system processor with "packaged" loudspeaker systems is that you can compensate (somewhat) for non-colocated tops/subs with delays, and you have EQ with memory.

If you use the Yamaha speakers you'll find it Very Good Indeed that the crossovers are included in both the tops and subs.  You will not need - and should not use - the 360 to cross over between the tops & subs.  Use it for delay, EQ, etc.

I've not looked into the routing and technical capabilities of the 360, but if you can use it as a 3 in, 6 out DSP with whatever internal routing you want, you can do some good stuff with it but most of that Wholesome Creamy Goodness will not be used until you expand to using delay speakers or need to align the PA to front fill speakers or use nontraditional sub/top placements.

You ain't there yet, Scott

Agreed !!

I've actually been working on getting someone I know and trust to come out to my place, I'm about an hour from Dallas, TX

Always good advice, thank you. And yes, VENUE 360 is three in, six out, user configurable. I like. It's also simple for me to understand and learn on. I expect gaining a better understanding of its functions and capabilities will help me as well.

Main purpose of the thread was really to try and understand what true and factual benefits are achieved using a matched system, does actually having the subs and mains wired together make a difference ( other than crossover points), vs feeding the same two boxes from two outputs (high and low), etc.

And maybe more specifically, what if I like say the EV main and the Yamaha sub, or the other way around. What if each independently sounds better to me, why would it be a negative to not have a matched set??

Once again, this is a knowledge based question, not completely specific to a problem, but more to learn an understanding of what's actually taking place within the drivers/ enclosures/ etc. When I was using a different top, and almost pulled the trigger on a different brand sub, several suggested staying with the same manufacturer to retain the benefits that were built into that system. For discussion purposes, if you're willing, many people said if you want an awesome sub, buy a JTR. Ok, suppose I went that direction, and bought, IDK say a EV 35 main. Taking the output capability of the JTR out of the equation, what specifically does the all EV system, or JBL, or QSC, etc. have over the system with two different brands.

I guess I'm trying to get real world answers to why a matching rig is "supposed" to be better? And in what way? Isn't a really good sub and a really good main still really good regardless of what's above or below it? Obviously they would need to have the crossover sections matched by the user, but are the big companies doing something so special there that the regular guy can't come close?

When I bought my first system I did what I suspect most did, I listened to a few different speakers in the price range I could afford, and I bought what sounded best to me. As it turned out the subs and mains were made by two different companies. I'm trying to understand why many have suggested that's not the best approach. Not trying to be difficult or challenge any facts, but when companies use words like "optimized" in their marketing literature, I'm not so quick to accept without knowing exactly how that's been achieved.

 on: Today at 06:49:46 pm 
Started by Tim Hite - Last post by Don T. Williams
I just came across this which is super inexpensive compared to most everything I have seen.

I am sure it won't compare in quality to most but for light traffic it might just work. 3 in a  pack !
I actually just took advantage of those on an earlier deal that saved another couple of dollars.  I liked them enough that I ordered more.  And yes they did smell a lot at first.  I set them I the sun for a couple of days and most of the smell is gone.  I'm not sure I would want to travel with them in a hot van.  Relegate them to a trailer or box truck and use the outside until they stop the out gassing.

 on: Today at 06:46:24 pm 
Started by Dave Batistig - Last post by Mac Kerr
Assuming that 64 (72) channels will meet your input requirements.

CL5 can mix 88 audio channels, 72 mono plus 8 stereo (16 audio ch). In addition to the 64 channels on the main Dante I/O connector plus the 8 local analog ins you can also have up to 48 more channels connected to the console via Dante cards in the 3 MY slots. You can swap inputs via scenes so you could have 112 inputs patched at the stage and swap inputs for multiple acts via scenes. It gets a little tricky getting the HA control to work via the slot channels, but it can be done.

As others have said, gain sharing is usually more trouble than it's worth. Analog splits are the way to go. The manufacturers can show you how easy and slick it is, but in the heat of battle I'll take a real split any time.


 on: Today at 06:44:27 pm 
Started by Debbie Dunkley - Last post by Rick Powell
On the topic of mixing one's own sound (a side topic of the OT): Musicianship comes into play very much. I'm a professional audio person and a semi-pro musician. There are many things that make for a "good" musician. The basics are intonation, tonal quality & rhythmic sense but let's not forget the all important dynamics. A band with good internal dynamics will always self mix well. From the audio engineers perspective (both monitors and FOH), these are the easiest gigs in that, once you get the room tone & balance right, it's basically set & forget. The same is true if a band is self mixing.

It's always far better if the artists are actually LISTENING to each other and trying to blend. It think it's called "talent". OTOH I have mixed bands that had all of the other ingredients right but still had to be "ridden" all night long. As long as what they do is predictable, you can make it sound good BUT unless you're really familiar with their material, the chances for a mixing mistake go up.

Long story short. If musicians can't afford a sound person then they need to concentrate on their internal dynamics & tone (mic technique, patch normalization, etc.....).
Just my .02

This is so true. There are a handful of bands out there that you could "mix with a 2 x 4" - just push all the faders up equally and let the musicians do their magic. I did a remix of a live recording by a group who was captured on a 4-track reel to reel in the 70s, who later did a few records for MCA, and they were known as a great vocal group. All the vocals were recorded to one track, and I thought what an unbalanced mess it was going to be to try to make it sound coherent. Lo and behold, they were uncannily perfectly blended with each other and in tune without auto-tune, with the background vocals being just the right balance and blend underneath the lead vocal (which there were four lead vocalists and this was true no matter who was singing lead). There were slight imbalances in some of the instruments that had been grouped together on some tracks, but nothing blatant. That's the way to do it.

 on: Today at 06:35:41 pm 
Started by David Pedd - Last post by Don T. Williams
I have a rider for a popular rock band of the mid to late seventies.  The sound and lighting were my responsibility and were no trouble, but the rider ask for " six willing ladies - no pros"!  I really don't know if they got that part of the rider, but it was the only time I saw it in writing.

Some where in a past thread is a link to Iggy Pop's tech rider. I hope someone can provide that link.  His engineer is dead serious on what he and Iggy want, but the way it is written is damn entertaining.  What ever you do, don't give him a digital console!!!!

 on: Today at 06:19:15 pm 
Started by David Pedd - Last post by Lee Buckalew
I don't really think the request was weird but how if was stated was. 
Back in the early to mid 1990's we used to do a benefit show each year that featured the likes of Gregory Hines and Tony Bennett. 
Mr. Bennett's rider always listed the required condition/cleanliness for SM58's as needing to be "lickable". 


 on: Today at 06:14:31 pm 
Started by Scott Gentry - Last post by Scott Gentry

You said high quality :D

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Holy cow !!!! Uh,,, I'm good!!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

Page created in 0.086 seconds with 14 queries.