ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
 91 
 on: Yesterday at 05:31:35 pm 
Started by Bob Faulkner - Last post by John Fruits
If you are price checking, Full Compass lists them.  Also worth checking with Mike Pyle for prices.

 92 
 on: Yesterday at 05:30:38 pm 
Started by John Roberts {JR} - Last post by Frank DeWitt
Not to Code.   The outlet has to be in the same room.

You will note that my signature is "Not to code". 


 93 
 on: Yesterday at 05:19:20 pm 
Started by Yoon Cha - Last post by Luke Geis
Having used just about every major unit out there, the one thing I can say is that when coming at it with a fresh mind, there really is no difference. They all pretty much do the same things. How they do it is a matter of learning it. So which ever unit you get, you will simply just learn. The path from point A to B is a little different in each mixer, but for the most part follows the same basic method. Find the appropriate menu / sub menu and make the needed change.

Many of the basic features are very easy to see and utilize. It is usually the more intricate changes that you make that will be harder to find; like changing an output port, or routing different mix busses around.

I say pick one that exceeds your current needs and meats your budget, don't worry about how easy it is to learn. You will figure it out, naturally.

 94 
 on: Yesterday at 04:49:26 pm 
Started by Mark Cadwallader - Last post by Chris Hindle
Steve, Chris, I'm pointing out that all we have is the manufacturer's *statement*.  That Fluke or Amprobe or Triplette or HP.... have track records of meeting their declarations and specs is a good thing and not one I'm dismissing.

I'm only saying that absent personal experience or anecdotal evidence of failure of a specific product, we *really* don't know, do we?

And no, I don't own cheap knock-off meters... 8)
All I was getting at was when your life can so easily be put in danger, what use is that "pretty good for 30 bucks" meter, when you can pony up some more for a meter that is trusted daily by so many working electricians.
Bunch of years ago, someone gave me a bargain basement DMM. Back at the shop, I put it through the Chop Saw, and tossed it. One of the Shop Lackies said he would have been happy to take it. I told him "I would never trust my life to it. Why would I want to give it to you?" I told him I'd go halvsies when he wanted a Fluke. Couple of months later, he got a REAL meter.
Chris.

 95 
 on: Yesterday at 04:41:34 pm 
Started by Bob Faulkner - Last post by Tim McCulloch
Another Undercover NYC user here, but I'm interested in the Yamaha offering... couldn't find it with a quick 1-minute search on Google. Any links to the Yamaha weatherproof cover?

Video here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md4Zkpjtb6g

 96 
 on: Yesterday at 04:34:59 pm 
Started by Al Rettich - Last post by Lee Buckalew
The problem is that we are so surrounded by bad audio everywhere you go, many many people (including "audio professionals") think THAT is what it is SUPPOSED to sound like."

When they hear clean, uncompressed audio, they think it is weird sounding or something is wrong.

For example, how many people listen to audio clips on their computer speakers?

Those are FAR from accurate, but we do it anyway.

It is an odd world we live in, where certain parts of the system are pushed to the bests quality, yet others are basically garbage.

You are only as good as your weakest link.

Harman has done extensive blind listening tests with different groups of people in multiple nations utilizing measureable accuracy as the standard.  The different speaker systems tested were measured for accuracy to the original source. 
The groups ranged from professionals in the industry to consumers. Every group tested chose the most accurate speaker as being the best sounding.  One of the things that they wanted to discover was if the belief that listening to MP3's is causing people to prefer the artifact laden sound of compressed files over accurate reproduction was actually true.  They found that it was not true.

If I am remembering the study correctly they also found that the higher resolution (up to original master resolution of course since we cannot add resolution) files were also universally preferred.  I am going to have to see if I can find the study.

Lee

 97 
 on: Yesterday at 04:28:38 pm 
Started by Frank Koenig - Last post by Mike Sokol


It's a work of art. I love looking at vintage electrical gear. I have a drafting board what was probably made in the early 1900's and the castings are simply beautiful. Shame that we can't spend that much time and care on modern gear, but it's just not cost effective. But there are still boutique shops for those willing to pay for detail work.

 98 
 on: Yesterday at 04:27:41 pm 
Started by Michael Hogeland - Last post by Michael Hogeland
The number in the crossover setting (eg, LR24, BW18, etc) is the number of decibels per octave that the crossover is attenuating by.

So, once the rolloff is in place, a 6dB per octave slope isn't much - 50Hz is only 6dB down on 100Hz. In fact, you need a 12dB/octave slope just to keep cone movement level as frequency decreases (if there was no crossover, the cone excursion would rapidly increase towards the bass, which is bad for drivers trying to cover the midrange).

I'd recommend 18dB/octave or 24dB/octave slopes for crossover use, and definitely 24dB/octave to protect the sub. Steeper slopes aren't necessary (24dB/oct kills things fast enough IME), but do add more group delay around the bottom end.

Chris

Chris - I set it up at 24 all around as recommended and sounds great.  Guys in the band really enjoyed the upgrade (one of which is a sound recording engineer, so good ears!)

I am thinking you don't have your amp set in the way you think you do.  What mode is the amp in?  For your situation, you should be in Biamp1 or Biamp2 and feeding the amp a single mono full-range signal.

Chrysander - Amp is in Bi-Amp2; L/R from mixer to Amp A/B.  iPod is done into a stereo channel with L/R 1/4" trs to 1/8" headphone jack  ::shrug::  I don't know a lot about the equipment admittedly, but I know what I did, and I know what I hear. 

Hearing someone in this group confused about it concerns me though. 


 99 
 on: Yesterday at 04:23:04 pm 
Started by Mark Cadwallader - Last post by Matt Errend
I do not doubt there are fraudulently labeled products but there is no way of knowing, 100%, that any given product in our hands has been engineered, tested and certified to a particular standard - all we have is the manufacturer's declaration of conformity.

There are import rules designed to keep products that have fraudulent certifications off of the domestic market, but unfortunately customs has a hard time keeping up with all the junk hitting our shores. Consumers can do the legwork themselves and contact the issuing group to see if a particular model/ make of equipment has actually been tested and certified, or if product markings are just lies.

Buying a name brand with a trusted reputation is a good idea, but there are a number of good "value" meters available that shouldn't blow up in your hand if you accidentally put it to 220V while you had it set to measure resistance, but it's always a good idea to do some research before buying a piece of equipment you're going to trust your life to.

IMO if you're doing regular venue tie-ins, or dealing with portable generators in the 50kW+ range, buy yourself a good CAT III 600V or better meter from a trusted brand and keep it and especially the probes in good condition.


 100 
 on: Yesterday at 04:15:35 pm 
Started by Al Rettich - Last post by Ivan Beaver
Back when I used to work for Rupert the Famous Audio Designer (late 1990s), he described to me how he was certain that consumers would naturally demand and prefer higher resolution audio than CD.
I counter-argued that consumers (not pros) were becoming quite happy with MP3 quality.
He didn't agree.
The problem is that we are so surrounded by bad audio everywhere you go, many many people (including "audio professionals") think THAT is what it is SUPPOSED to sound like."

When they hear clean, uncompressed audio, they think it is weird sounding or something is wrong.

For example, how many people listen to audio clips on their computer speakers?

Those are FAR from accurate, but we do it anyway.

It is an odd world we live in, where certain parts of the system are pushed to the bests quality, yet others are basically garbage.

You are only as good as your weakest link.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]

Page created in 0.074 seconds with 15 queries.