Post by: Sam Costa on October 27, 2017, 12:17:38 AM
I'm going to be in the market of upgrading my sub amp to something with a little more oomph factor. My current setup is as follows (see pic - Disregard the top amp QSC PLX1202 - it was a backup amp and no longer there)
Amp 1 - QSC PLX1202 = Highs
Amp 2 - QSC PLX3402 = Mods
Amp 3 - QSC PL 4.0 = Lows
Amp 4 - QSC PL 4.0 = Subs
Speakers:
Top mains: EAW KF650 (usually floor stacked on top of the subs 1 to 2 per side depending on the venue)
Subs: Carvin Trx218 (typically floor stacked 2 dual 18" cabs per side)
don't get me wrong, the 4.0 does great, it's never let me down and always a rock star but as time goes on I'm looking for more bottom end for some events (especially outdoor) and wondered about going with a QSC 6.0 or maybe a Lab Gruppen LA 48a? or?....
Or course budget is the first thing that comes to mind and I don't mind paying for quality amps but are there other used amps out there that are in the $1K range that would give me a bit more than the 4.0?
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a136/fullforcesound/Sound%20Pics/Amp%20rack%201_zpszwhq95bd.jpg) (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/fullforcesound/media/Sound%20Pics/Amp%20rack%201_zpszwhq95bd.jpg.html)
Post by: Rob Spence on October 27, 2017, 12:48:19 AM
Hey fellas,
I'm going to be in the market of upgrading my sub amp to something with a little more oomph factor. My current setup is as follows (see pic - Disregard the top amp QSC PLX1202 - it was a backup amp and no longer there)
Amp 1 - QSC PLX1202 = Highs
Amp 2 - QSC PLX3402 = Mods
Amp 3 - QSC PL 4.0 = Lows
Amp 4 - QSC PL 4.0 = Subs
Speakers:
Top mains: EAW KF650 (usually floor stacked on top of the subs 1 to 2 per side depending on the venue)
Subs: Carvin Trx218 (typically floor stacked 2 dual 18" cabs per side)
don't get me wrong, the 4.0 does great, it's never let me down and always a rock star but as time goes on I'm looking for more bottom end for some events (especially outdoor) and wondered about going with a QSC 6.0 or maybe a Lab Gruppen LA 48a? or?....
Or course budget is the first thing that comes to mind and I don't mind paying for quality amps but are there other used amps out there that are in the $1K range that would give me a bit more than the 4.0?
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a136/fullforcesound/Sound%20Pics/Amp%20rack%201_zpszwhq95bd.jpg) (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/fullforcesound/media/Sound%20Pics/Amp%20rack%201_zpszwhq95bd.jpg.html)
I use a PL6.0 for subs. Doesn’t break a sweat.
Should be in your price range.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Post by: Stu McDoniel on October 27, 2017, 04:25:13 AM
Hey fellas,Better subs or more subs seems like the way to go instead of buying a different amplifier.
I'm going to be in the market of upgrading my sub amp to something with a little more oomph factor. My current setup is as follows (see pic - Disregard the top amp QSC PLX1202 - it was a backup amp and no longer there)
Amp 1 - QSC PLX1202 = Highs
Amp 2 - QSC PLX3402 = Mods
Amp 3 - QSC PL 4.0 = Lows
Amp 4 - QSC PL 4.0 = Subs
Speakers:
Top mains: EAW KF650 (usually floor stacked on top of the subs 1 to 2 per side depending on the venue)
Subs: Carvin Trx218 (typically floor stacked 2 dual 18" cabs per side)
don't get me wrong, the 4.0 does great, it's never let me down and always a rock star but as time goes on I'm looking for more bottom end for some events (especially outdoor) and wondered about going with a QSC 6.0 or maybe a Lab Gruppen LA 48a? or?....
Or course budget is the first thing that comes to mind and I don't mind paying for quality amps but are there other used amps out there that are in the $1K range that would give me a bit more than the 4.0?
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a136/fullforcesound/Sound%20Pics/Amp%20rack%201_zpszwhq95bd.jpg) (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/fullforcesound/media/Sound%20Pics/Amp%20rack%201_zpszwhq95bd.jpg.html)
Post by: Ivan Beaver on October 27, 2017, 07:39:42 AM
Better subs or more subs seems like the way to go instead of buying a different amplifier.Agreed. Simply throwing more power or hoping that a different amp "sounds better", is a waste of money, and could possibly tear up the current speakers.
Remember that with ANY loudspeaker, the harder you push it, the more distortion it has. Up to the point it stops making sound.
Post by: Thomas Le on October 27, 2017, 09:13:24 AM
Post by: TJ (Tom) Cornish on October 27, 2017, 09:15:36 AM
Totally off topic but what’s with the BBE on the top?System processor/crossover. http://www.bbesound.com/products/speaker-management/
Post by: Rick Powell on October 27, 2017, 09:30:27 AM
System processor/crossover. http://www.bbesound.com/products/speaker-management/
The biggest improvement to the system might be getting an EAW UX8800 processor to replace the BBE. Before swapping out speakers and amps, why not try to wring out the best sound out of what you have already?
Post by: John Chiara on October 27, 2017, 10:07:09 AM
The biggest improvement to the system might be getting an EAW UX8800 processor to replace the BBE. Before swapping out speakers and amps, why not try to wring out the best sound out of what you have already?Probably not going to make a difference with the subs.
Post by: Mal Brown on October 27, 2017, 10:25:06 AM
Post by: Stephen Kirby on October 27, 2017, 02:10:44 PM
Post by: Sam Costa on October 27, 2017, 05:12:47 PM
Some years ago there was a sub shootout where they also tried a few amps. The PL6 and Crest Pro9200 were they only amps folks could head an audible difference with. I bought the lighter Crest and could definitely tell the difference between it and the PLX3402 I had previously. Beyond that I think you're getting into some fairly expensive 10kW things.
Thank you guys. Some really great info here and always appreciate the feedback.
Unfortunately I'm still working with the 4-way digital BBE crossover. It's been good to me and and I know for a fact that upgrading to a UX3600 would be a game changer and I'm sure I would notice a world of difference. Just need to find one for sale for a fair price. :)
Someone had mentioned that even running 2 DBX Drive racks would make a noticeable difference. Any truth to that? (1 to run the subs and 1 to run the mains)
Post by: Steve Eudaly on October 27, 2017, 05:15:56 PM
The biggest improvement to the system might be getting an EAW UX8800 processor to replace the BBE. Before swapping out speakers and amps, why not try to wring out the best sound out of what you have already?
While this won't help your lack of subbage whatsoever, I do give this suggestion a huge second. You will notice a huge improvement with a UX dsp and will wonder why you didn't do it sooner.
You might hear a difference between the BBE and a Driverack (but probably not), and it still won't be the "right" solution and will greatly compromise the system's sound quality.
But regarding the subs, if you're missing low end at big events and outdoors with what you've got, a new amp isn't going to fix the problem. You either need to get more subs that match what you already have or sell the Carvins and replace with something with more output.
Post by: Scott Holtzman on October 27, 2017, 05:43:37 PM
While this won't help your lack of subbage whatsoever, I do give this suggestion a huge second. You will notice a huge improvement with a UX dsp and will wonder why you didn't do it sooner.
You might hear a difference between the BBE and a Driverack (but probably not), and it still won't be the "right" solution and will greatly compromise the system's sound quality.
But regarding the subs, if you're missing low end at big events and outdoors with what you've got, a new amp isn't going to fix the problem. You either need to get more subs that match what you already have or sell the Carvins and replace with something with more output.
I have to third the processor and add that the subs are really woefully inadequate. Since clearly weight is not an issue there are some great deals on SM1000Z's out there. Nothing beats boxes. Power just doesn't make that big a difference.
Two examples. We are going from 6 to 12 Meyer 650's not a new box by any means but you can't compare them with the MI subs, they are just in a different class than even our STS 828's 12 is going to keep up with 16 dual 10" Italian line array elements.
Second, I have had to run the STX828's at 1200 watts a side and honestly could not tell the difference from 4k with live rock music. I am sure EDM would be different but that's not our world.
Post by: Sam Costa on October 27, 2017, 07:52:48 PM
I have to third the processor and add that the subs are really woefully inadequate. Since clearly weight is not an issue there are some great deals on SM1000Z's out there. Nothing beats boxes. Power just doesn't make that big a difference.
Two examples. We are going from 6 to 12 Meyer 650's not a new box by any means but you can't compare them with the MI subs, they are just in a different class than even our STS 828's 12 is going to keep up with 16 dual 10" Italian line array elements.
Second, I have had to run the STX828's at 1200 watts a side and honestly could not tell the difference from 4k with live rock music. I am sure EDM would be different but that's not our world.
Scott, thanks for the info.
I tried searching " SM1000z" and couldn't find anything on these boxes. Do you have any additional info on them? If however you meant SB1000 (EAW) then yes I would love some of those. I have a pair of SB600 for smaller venues which work GREAT btw.
Post by: Scott Holtzman on October 27, 2017, 08:01:20 PM
Scott, thanks for the info.
I tried searching " SM1000z" and couldn't find anything on these boxes. Do you have any additional info on them? If however you meant SB1000 (EAW) then yes I would love some of those. I have a pair of SB600 for smaller venues which work GREAT btw.
Sorry typ0 SB1000z EAW storied monster subs. They will also work great with the processor. You would be tits deep in sound if you picked these up and the upgraded processor.
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,161558.msg1485336.html#msg1485336
Post by: Sam Costa on October 27, 2017, 08:21:47 PM
Sorry typ0 SB1000z EAW storied monster subs. They will also work great with the processor. You would be tits deep in sound if you picked these up and the upgraded processor.
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,161558.msg1485336.html#msg1485336
Ahhhh... Ok. I'll have to take a look at those. Perhaps pick up a pair of SB1000's nd see how it goes compared to the 4 Carvin cabs I use.
Post by: Kemper Watson on October 27, 2017, 08:42:54 PM
Ahhhh... Ok. I'll have to take a look at those. Perhaps pick up a pair of SB1000's nd see how it goes compared to the 4 Carvin cabs I use.
You would be better off upgrading the subs. The Carvins will not keep up with properly powered and processed 650's. Two SB1000 should be infinitely better than the Carvins. Try your best to get the Ux8800. You'll have a complete system then
Post by: Tim McCulloch on October 27, 2017, 10:38:00 PM
I'm joining the dog pile regarding both the SB1000 subs and the UX processing. Both will do you a world of good. If you're mostly finding your subs lacking when outdoors or in larger rooms and your'e not doing those often, get the processor first and buy the subs as deals appear.
Your customers are much more likely to notice the very audible difference in the KF600s as you'll use the UX on every gig.
Call an EAW dealer and get quotes on the UX8800. A quick 'net search found a used unit for $2400 and new for <$3600.
Yeah, I know that's a big chunk of change. These are the kinds of purchase decisions that tend to hinge on bigger questions like "do I plan on remaining with or expanding my EAW inventory?" If yes, the processing is worth it. Hearing your 600s with "focused" processing will make you smile, really. You might not be able to increase your fee but you'll add another 5 years to the market longevity of your loudspeakers. What else can you do to make them remain appealing to your clients for 5 years? And if you purchase other EAW products you'll have the processor for them :)
If you're not sure how much longer you'll have the KF600s or if you're wanting to jump brands in the next 1-2 years, skip the processing *and* the subs and just start piecing together your new rig. Until then, rent subs and power for the gigs that need extra oomph.
Post by: Stephen Kirby on October 27, 2017, 11:25:24 PM
Post by: Tim McCulloch on October 27, 2017, 11:33:04 PM
I didn't notice that he was using Carvin subs. Likely to have the same EMI drivers as the Yamaha Club boxes. 600W AES each. Stepping up to boxes loaded with RCF or 18-Sound 1100W drivers with higher efficiency would be like doubling the number of subs he has now.
Yeah, and if he's gonna keep the KF600s the incremental spending steps would be different if his current subs weren't doing it for the majority of his gigs, like buying the first SB1000z he can find... and then another, and THEN the UX8800. Then more subs :) You can't have too much sub 8)
Post by: Stephen Kirby on October 28, 2017, 12:37:40 AM
Post by: Kemper Watson on October 28, 2017, 09:26:30 AM
There are a bunch of Sb850s in the Marketplace. Couple dB less output but easier to move and good price. Would still kill the Carvins and work with the UX processor as well.
And these as well:
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,165207.0.html
Post by: Sam Costa on October 28, 2017, 03:58:44 PM
And these as well:
http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,165207.0.html
Again, thanks for all the replies and feedback. The more I realize it the more I should focus my efforts on purchasing a UX processor as I do plan on purchasing more EAW gear (subs primarily) I also have several KF300's so this would only help achieve the sound I'm looking for then look into purchasing some SB1000 and or SB750's.
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on October 28, 2017, 05:01:57 PM
Again, thanks for all the replies and feedback. The more I realize it the more I should focus my efforts on purchasing a UX processor as I do plan on purchasing more EAW gear (subs primarily) I also have several KF300's so this would only help achieve the sound I'm looking for then look into purchasing some SB1000 and or SB750's.
Hi Sam, There were a couple of UX3600's in Marketplace last month, in case you didn't see them.
FWIW, I simply can't see paying up for the 8800...sub integration is relatively easy...processing is nothing special..and heck, sub deployments are always varying to begin with.....
But for mains, the processing is indispensable.
My guess is once you hear how good your various kf mains can sound, it will focus your efforts on getting some really good subs.
Post by: Steve Eudaly on October 28, 2017, 08:38:36 PM
FWIW, I simply can't see paying up for the 8800...sub integration is relatively easy...processing is nothing special..and heck, sub deployments are always varying to begin with.....
Assuming biamped mains with mono subs, an 8800 allows you to do subs and front fills in addition to your mains. It is quite nice being able to monitor and mute/unmute your mains, subs and fills all from one place and not have to fiddle with multiple dsp interfaces to change various parts of the system.
That sort of cohesiveness it what makes it a "system" to me, and not just a bunch of pieces cobbled together.
Post by: Tim McCulloch on October 28, 2017, 09:38:38 PM
Assuming biamped mains with mono subs, an 8800 allows you to do subs and front fills in addition to your mains. It is quite nice being able to monitor and mute/unmute your mains, subs and fills all from one place and not have to fiddle with multiple dsp interfaces to change various parts of the system.
That sort of cohesiveness it what makes it a "system" to me, and not just a bunch of pieces cobbled together.
^^^ Where's the damn "LIKE" button? ^^^
Post by: Mac Kerr on October 28, 2017, 10:27:26 PM
^^^ Where's the damn "LIKE" button? ^^^
On Facebook, but you wouldn't know about that...
Mac
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on October 29, 2017, 09:49:09 AM
Assuming biamped mains with mono subs, an 8800 allows you to do subs and front fills in addition to your mains. It is quite nice being able to monitor and mute/unmute your mains, subs and fills all from one place and not have to fiddle with multiple dsp interfaces to change various parts of the system.
That sort of cohesiveness it what makes it a "system" to me, and not just a bunch of pieces cobbled together.
Great point Steven! I could not agree more
I guess I just see the UX 8800 as overly expensive compared to alternatives, no matter what the objectives.
In my mind, the only reason to get a UX for use with legacy speakers, is for the newer 'focus' tunings.
Otherwise, why not put EAW's posted legacy presets in a more affordable processor....or just find an old mx8750.
Besides, you can get 2 UX3600's for the price of 1 UX8800 (albeit talking new prices)...why not go that way for even more integrated system capability ?
Post by: Steve Eudaly on October 29, 2017, 12:39:18 PM
In my mind, the only reason to get a UX for use with legacy speakers, is for the newer 'focus' tunings.
Otherwise, why not put EAW's posted legacy presets in a more affordable processor....or just find an old mx8750.
Besides, you can get 2 UX3600's for the price of 1 UX8800 (albeit talking new prices)...why not go that way for even more integrated system capability ?
If multiple 3600s could be had for the price of one 8800 and the control network was sufficient, that's certainly an interesting option that could give you some added flexibility.
I will say from experience, the sound quality difference between the UX and MX units is not negligible. And while using EAW's posted presets in another brand dsp will result in a "usable" system, it will be very lackluster compared to what the UX offers.
Post by: Sam Costa on October 29, 2017, 02:54:04 PM
If multiple 3600s could be had for the price of one 8800 and the control network was sufficient, that's certainly an interesting option that could give you some added flexibility.
I will say from experience, the sound quality difference between the UX and MX units is not negligible. And while using EAW's posted presets in another brand dsp will result in a "usable" system, it will be very lackluster compared to what the UX offers.
I'm currently running Tri-amped mains and stereo subs.
Post by: Sam Costa on October 30, 2017, 01:57:05 AM
I'm currently running Tri-amped mains and stereo subs.
Interestingly enough, a guy reached out to me today in regards to the post, said he has a dbx driverack 480 which he says it has EAW tunings build in to the unit. Anyone have any feedback on this processing unit?
Post by: Tim McCulloch on October 30, 2017, 08:03:45 AM
Interestingly enough, a guy reached out to me today in regards to the post, said he has a dbx driverack 480 which he says it has EAW tunings build in to the unit. Anyone have any feedback on this processing unit?
The DR480 is not capable of the processing done by the UX processors, period.
Post by: Helge A Bentsen on October 30, 2017, 08:40:58 AM
I run a KF650e/SB600e rig on a Powersoft X8 DSP+Dante with the latest Greyboxes from EAW.
It sounds fantastic and I can recommend it.
Post by: Rob Spence on October 30, 2017, 10:57:39 AM
Interestingly enough, a guy reached out to me today in regards to the post, said he has a dbx driverack 480 which he says it has EAW tunings build in to the unit. Anyone have any feedback on this processing unit?
The 480 is an old box. 2 generations behind current.
And, as Tim says, isn’t capable of doing what the UX boxes do.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on October 30, 2017, 11:38:03 AM
I'm currently running Tri-amped mains and stereo subs.
My 2c....get a UX3600 to continue triamping your mains...if you're gonna keep the kf650s..... I join the gang that says just do it.
In my 'general shopping experience', I'd suggest to register with Northern Sound & Light to get a price from them, and it more often than not pays to get a price from our forum member Mike Pyle.
Use your existing processor for subs, or even the x-over capability of your mixer if it has 24dB BW / LR.
I figure you're already familiar with EAW recommendations, but in case you're not http://eaw.com/docs/2_Legacy_Products/Processor%20Settings/
Good Luck...and then on to new subs !
Post by: Pat Semeraro on November 07, 2017, 11:00:52 PM
Also with the 8800 you can run an aes signal from your console. The depth of the stereo image when running aes from a GOOD board is noticeable from cutting out a full generation of analog to digital conversion plus no cable distance losses, no ground loops, it makes a difference!
If you're good with a soldering iron, I suggest ordering the PL2 capacitors from QSC. (PLX is same amp but with half of the power supply capacitance) The tone is absolutely more solid and the power draw is more even. You'll get a few hundred extra watts of output each amp as a bonus. Costs very little per amp, and makes a big difference.
Final trick is instead of using one amp for lows, and one amp for mids, use one amp for lows on one channel and mids on the other, then duplicate for the other side. If you only have one 3402 then grab another for a few hundred dollars. Think of a bass drum then snare drum. They dont happen at the exact same time. Wiring this way allows the full power supply on the kick then full power supply on the snare. It will surprise you how much headroom you gain that way just by using the power more efficiently. Big iron amps didn't benefit as much but the PLX amps have massive power supply sag under load (its part of their design) and this allows them to work more effectively.
Hey fellas,
I'm going to be in the market of upgrading my sub amp to something with a little more oomph factor. My current setup is as follows (see pic - Disregard the top amp QSC PLX1202 - it was a backup amp and no longer there)
Amp 1 - QSC PLX1202 = Highs
Amp 2 - QSC PLX3402 = Mods
Amp 3 - QSC PL 4.0 = Lows
Amp 4 - QSC PL 4.0 = Subs
Speakers:
Top mains: EAW KF650 (usually floor stacked on top of the subs 1 to 2 per side depending on the venue)
Subs: Carvin Trx218 (typically floor stacked 2 dual 18" cabs per side)
don't get me wrong, the 4.0 does great, it's never let me down and always a rock star but as time goes on I'm looking for more bottom end for some events (especially outdoor) and wondered about going with a QSC 6.0 or maybe a Lab Gruppen LA 48a? or?....
Or course budget is the first thing that comes to mind and I don't mind paying for quality amps but are there other used amps out there that are in the $1K range that would give me a bit more than the 4.0?
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a136/fullforcesound/Sound%20Pics/Amp%20rack%201_zpszwhq95bd.jpg) (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/fullforcesound/media/Sound%20Pics/Amp%20rack%201_zpszwhq95bd.jpg.html)
Post by: Ray Aberle on November 08, 2017, 10:34:07 AM
Final trick is instead of using one amp for lows, and one amp for mids, use one amp for lows on one channel and mids on the other, then duplicate for the other side. If you only have one 3402 then grab another for a few hundred dollars. Think of a bass drum then snare drum. They dont happen at the exact same time. Wiring this way allows the full power supply on the kick then full power supply on the snare. It will surprise you how much headroom you gain that way just by using the power more efficiently. Big iron amps didn't benefit as much but the PLX amps have massive power supply sag under load (its part of their design) and this allows them to work more effectively.The other advantage here is reliability/redundancy at a show. As it is now, should one of those amps fails, your entire MF or HF range is gone. Using Pat's suggestion, if one amp fails, you lose just the MF/HF on one side (or if you eventually have double stacks on a side, then potentially just losing half of one side or the other) -- this is slightly less disastrous than losing all of one bandpass across the system...
-Ray
Post by: Franklin Benjamin on November 09, 2017, 04:13:51 PM
Hey fellas,
I'm going to be in the market of upgrading my sub amp to something with a little more oomph factor. My current setup is as follows (see pic - Disregard the top amp QSC PLX1202 - it was a backup amp and no longer there)
Amp 1 - QSC PLX1202 = Highs
Amp 2 - QSC PLX3402 = Mods
Amp 3 - QSC PL 4.0 = Lows
Amp 4 - QSC PL 4.0 = Subs
Speakers:
Top mains: EAW KF650 (usually floor stacked on top of the subs 1 to 2 per side depending on the venue)
Subs: Carvin Trx218 (typically floor stacked 2 dual 18" cabs per side)
don't get me wrong, the 4.0 does great, it's never let me down and always a rock star but as time goes on I'm looking for more bottom end for some events (especially outdoor) and wondered about going with a QSC 6.0 or maybe a Lab Gruppen LA 48a? or?....
Or course budget is the first thing that comes to mind and I don't mind paying for quality amps but are there other used amps out there that are in the $1K range that would give me a bit more than the 4.0?
Hi Sam, I'm going to go against everyone and recommend that you borrow a larger amp and test.
I'm pretty certain that you will hear the difference.
I was in your predicament about 12 years ago with different speakers.
I was using two bridged 4.0 amps on subs.
I switched to a 9.0 moved the 4.0s up to mids (double 15 top) and experienced a real difference in low end.
Exact same processing and I wound up with more defined (tighter) and controlled bass.
While Carvin isn't the best manufacturer in the world, last I checked they were using some decent B&C drivers prior to that, I think they were using Eminence Kilomax which is a great driver. (at least for me). I have six of them in horn loaded subs and have no issues with them.
I have never been pleased with a 4.0 on subs.
This how ever involves a large purchase.
My recommendation would be a used PL380 if you could find it.
I think I've seen them in the wild for around $1200 - $1300.
I have no issues with upgrading to a UX processor but based on what you currently own, I think that a larger better amp will make a bigger difference now.
Post by: Pat Semeraro on November 11, 2017, 12:18:36 AM
Cheers
The other advantage here is reliability/redundancy at a show. As it is now, should one of those amps fails, your entire MF or HF range is gone. Using Pat's suggestion, if one amp fails, you lose just the MF/HF on one side (or if you eventually have double stacks on a side, then potentially just losing half of one side or the other) -- this is slightly less disastrous than losing all of one bandpass across the system...
-Ray
Post by: Helge A Bentsen on November 12, 2017, 07:07:35 AM
Powersoft K20. Performance beyond anything else on the market right now.
Post by: Tim McCulloch on November 12, 2017, 04:03:34 PM
The obvious answer for any subwoofer:
Powersoft K20. Performance beyond anything else on the market right now.
With matching price tag.
Post by: Scott Holtzman on November 12, 2017, 04:11:41 PM
With matching price tag.Yeah, the form factor is nice too.
I have commented on this thread and is just amazing that it still goes on.
You will never get an ROI on those PL380's. Whatever difference you perceive is it translated to the customer or talent as a value proposition.
If you are using that last 4.5 db you need more cabinets or better cabinets , not more power. Most clients pay by the box.
Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk
Post by: Sam Costa on November 13, 2017, 05:43:44 PM
Final trick is instead of using one amp for lows, and one amp for mids, use one amp for lows on one channel and mids on the other, then duplicate for the other side. If you only have one 3402 then grab another for a few hundred dollars. Think of a bass drum then snare drum. They dont happen at the exact same time. Wiring this way allows the full power supply on the kick then full power supply on the snare. It will surprise you how much headroom you gain that way just by using the power more efficiently. Big iron amps didn't benefit as much but the PLX amps have massive power supply sag under load (its part of their design) and this allows them to work more effectively.
Pat, Interesting. I've never thought of wiring it that way, and it makes perfect sense.
FYI, just got a UX3600 and my final bumper is coming in a few weeks. When I get everything fitted/flown, and dialed in properly, I'll work on wiring it how you suggested and dialing everything in for the mains.
Ultimately I am looking at going with additional subs for my current amps. Looking at going with 4 - SB1000 sub cabs, but that will have to wait a few months (just don't tell my wife!) ;)
Post by: Tim McCulloch on November 13, 2017, 07:08:04 PM
Pat, Interesting. I've never thought of wiring it that way, and it makes perfect sense.
FYI, just got a UX3600 and my final bumper is coming in a few weeks. When I get everything fitted/flown, and dialed in properly, I'll work on wiring it how you suggested and dialing everything in for the mains.
Ultimately I am looking at going with additional subs for my current amps. Looking at going with 4 - SB1000 sub cabs, but that will have to wait a few months (just don't tell my wife!) ;)
It'll be our little secret, Sam. Just don't put in on FaceSpace/MyBook...
If you liked your rig before, you're really gonna like it now. Unlike some of EAW's processing choices in the Deep Dark Past the graybox settings in the UX sound pretty good right out of the box. You'll probably find yourself rethinking top box splay angles.
You've done a significant upgrade and the audible improvement should be apparent. I hope your customers like the "new & improved" and that the rig gets you more work.
Post by: Luke Geis on November 13, 2017, 10:50:23 PM
Let's assume he doubles his amp wattage, he will gain 3db. Never going to make or break a show. Now lets also then assume he gets a processor. Still not going to fix the desire for more low end.
At 135db continuous according to spec with the 4 he has, he should be able to get between 130-136db real world output at 1 meter from these depending on deployment. This is simply by going with +12db in coupling gain and subtracting 16db for amp power and crest factor. He is powering the subs with an amp that is essentially rated for its RMS rating.
While 133db ( averaging the potential here ) isn't shattering anything, it certainly respectable. The tops have essentially the same output performance though. So this may be why he is wanting of more low end. In order to get a +6db ratio of subs to tops without turning the tops down, you would need another set of 4 subs!!!!! This, or you will have to find more efficient subs. These subs are already pretty efficient though with a 141db peak output and a whooping 8000 watts of peak power capability. Hard to find something much better for a reasonable price. If you double up on wattage you can eek another 3db of peak output and perhaps with some tricks you can squeeze it up a few db more to get a safely usable 141db real world output, but you would be at the end of the rope by then and still only just be +6db over the potential of the tops. If you get another set of 4 subs and double up on the power ( 4000 watts each !!!!!! ) you can cruise the subs in with a likely +9db potential over the tops. But that is A LOT of MOOOOOOOLLLLLLAAAAA.
Post by: Scott Holtzman on November 14, 2017, 01:53:16 AM
I think it has pretty much been stated, but a bigger amp will not fix the problem. I would venture a guess that another processor won't either.
The processor was to improve the sound of his tops, not to address the low end extension.
He did mention he is looking to upgrade his subs. I was going to wait a few to let him know that 4 isn't enough.
Post by: Callan Browne on November 14, 2017, 07:30:50 AM
I was going to wait a few to let him know that 4 isn't enough.
Wait what..? I just today ordered 2 18's to take me to 4 total, you mean I still need more? the wife isn't going to be happy...
</Sarcasm>
*edited for clarity
Post by: Scott Holtzman on November 14, 2017, 10:02:50 AM
That comment was for Sam and the SB1000's he needs to keep up with his tops.
Wait what..? I just today ordered 2 18's to take me to 4 total, you mean I still need more? the wife isn't going to be happy...
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk
Post by: Sam Costa on November 14, 2017, 06:59:42 PM
That comment was for Sam and the SB1000's he needs to keep up with his tops.
Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk
GASP... I'll need more than 4 - SB1000? Holy smokes, I see a divorce in the future. ;)
I thought going with 4 (2 per side) SB1000's was going to sound great or at least a bigger improvement over my current TRX sub cabs. Please do keep in mind that 70-80% of the shows I provide sound for, I ground stack my current subs then stack 1 to 2 mains per side.
Would you recommend 3 SB1000's per side to keep up with the mains then?
Post by: Sam Costa on November 14, 2017, 07:33:04 PM
It'll be our little secret, Sam. Just don't put in on FaceSpace/MyBook...
If you liked your rig before, you're really gonna like it now. Unlike some of EAW's processing choices in the Deep Dark Past the graybox settings in the UX sound pretty good right out of the box. You'll probably find yourself rethinking top box splay angles.
You've done a significant upgrade and the audible improvement should be apparent. I hope your customers like the "new & improved" and that the rig gets you more work.
Thanks Tim. I don't need the latest and greatest and all of my sound & lighting jobs are word of mouth which is what I prefer. Aside from my regular Mon-Fri job this is a side business along with performing with our band which also uses my sound and lighting gear.
You guys would probably laugh at some of our crowds and type of music we play in our band, but one thing is certain, Portuguese people love hearing that low end, as do i!
Here's a pic from one of our events in Northern California recently where I ran the 2 EAW KF650's and 2 TRX sub per side.
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a136/fullforcesound/Sound%20Pics/FDFE701B-8C60-47FB-8AF8-865F73364EA8_zpsuuyyv7ff.jpg) (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/fullforcesound/media/Sound%20Pics/FDFE701B-8C60-47FB-8AF8-865F73364EA8_zpsuuyyv7ff.jpg.html)
Post by: Luke Geis on November 14, 2017, 09:10:22 PM
The hard truth is that the subs you currently have are ( on paper at least ) more efficient and louder than the SB1000's would be. At this point if you must have more, you would probably be better off at investing in power amps. With an amp that is pushing 2x the wattage you would still be in a safe place and you would get +3db.
I was saying before that you can get tricky and eek a little more out of the subs if you really want to. Sounds like you may be running subs on an aux and doing so is one such trick. The next thing would be crossing the subs over at a slightly lower frequency to save some headroom, but that is dependent upon where you are currently at. The last thing is compression / limiting. You can squash the signal going to the subs a little to reduce the crest factor which will give a higher perceived output and allow a little more output before clipping.
I have a saying though as a caveat. " Too much of a good thing is still too much ". If you go trying to eek every last drop out of the subs to get as close to that supposed 141db per box, you stand that much more of a chance of damaging them. I think that you can realistically get the continuous 135db per box out of them. This would give you a theoretical real world peak SPL of around 144db - 147db!!!!! Now this would be cooking with gas.
My prescription for this would be to run subs on an aux and run a crossover somewhere between 60hz and 80hz ( probably closer to 80hz since the tops are only good down to 65hz ). Next would be to get a set of amps that can push 4000 watts per channel at 4 ohm's!!!! The amp will be a tough one since not many can do that affordably. Then using a bit of compression / limiting on the aux subs signal, you can get the crest factor down enough to gain another 3db of perceived SPL. Between all that you should be able to get close to 135db per sub in real world output at 1 meter! While I won't guarantee that YOU will, I know it should be at least possible with a competent user.
These numbers DO NOT factor distance losses, so keep that in mind. Also be aware that separating the subs as you have in the picture above will reduce potential output at least in some of the listening area. There are several deployment methods and all have a trade off. If you need more than what 4 2X 18" subs can provide for a hobbyist type job, I would say you may as well quit your day job and just go head on into sound support. By the time you invest the money and the typical setup energy, you will never get paid enough to do it as a hobby.
Post by: Rob Spence on November 14, 2017, 10:56:52 PM
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Post by: Scott Holtzman on November 14, 2017, 11:35:10 PM
GASP... I'll need more than 4 - SB1000? Holy smokes, I see a divorce in the future. ;)
I thought going with 4 (2 per side) SB1000's was going to sound great or at least a bigger improvement over my current TRX sub cabs. Please do keep in mind that 70-80% of the shows I provide sound for, I ground stack my current subs then stack 1 to 2 mains per side.
Would you recommend 3 SB1000's per side to keep up with the mains then?
They are meant to couple in groups of 4. I think 4 aside will get you close to where you want to be.
They stack well in storage <g> You get four guys, get a corner up and then push to stack (this is defacto with any big sub).
You have to double to get your next jump up. Going fro 2 to 3 won't be noticeable. Going from 2 to 4 is. Especially with these subs that the mouth opening is designed to couple in groups of four.
Post by: Mac Kerr on November 15, 2017, 12:13:52 AM
They are meant to couple in groups of 4.
Where is this information from? AFAIK the EAW subs that are meant to be used in blocks of 4 are the bass horn series, the now legacy KF940, BH760, and LA400.
Mac
Post by: Stephen Kirby on November 15, 2017, 12:31:45 AM
Post by: Scott Holtzman on November 15, 2017, 04:16:15 AM
Where is this information from? AFAIK the EAW subs that are meant to be used in blocks of 4 are the bass horn series, the now legacy KF940, BH760, and LA400.
Mac
Mac is right, it is the KF940 I had in mind and it doesn't even look the same.
With the 4 dual 18's and the MX processor you will be more than pleased.
Sorry for the confusion.
Post by: Pat Semeraro on December 23, 2017, 11:57:00 PM
With no measuring equipment except your ears, play some pink noise through the 650s at low/comfortable level and walk in front of them back and forth. (Too loud and you'll load up the room which makes this test more difficult.) You should hear no change in sound as you move between the two top boxes. With the 650z cabinets, EAW recommends 12" between them in front with the rears touching - in practice that is a good place to start.
From the picture it looks like you have the two top boxes mostly pointing in the same direction. If that's true, then you will hear significant comb filtering as you walk side to side in front of them. Rotate the fronts away from each other until the pink noise doesn't change as you walk back and forth.
Two 650s over two double 18's is a very useful combination and I've done it many hundreds of times. In practice I've achieved smooth box to box hand-off by pointing the outer box straight ahead and rotating the inner box 25 to 30 degrees to the center, it usually end up being around 10" to 12", just as EAW suggests.
This only takes a few minutes and could improve your house sound more than you might expect. If no front-fills are being used then a more aggressive angle to the center on the inner box and adjust as necessary on the outer box would give more even coverage on the dance floor area. Season to taste...
*caveat* My use of KF650z has always been tri-amped via UX8800, which gives very clean and distinct pattern edges. Non "z" boxes, bi-amping and non UX8800 processing might give different results, including less defined pattern edges which would be more forgiving with cabinet placement.
Cheers,
Pat
Here's a pic from one of our events in Northern California recently where I ran the 2 EAW KF650's and 2 TRX sub per side.
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a136/fullforcesound/Sound%20Pics/FDFE701B-8C60-47FB-8AF8-865F73364EA8_zpsuuyyv7ff.jpg) (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/fullforcesound/media/Sound%20Pics/FDFE701B-8C60-47FB-8AF8-865F73364EA8_zpsuuyyv7ff.jpg.html)
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on March 28, 2018, 08:59:52 PM
If you're good with a soldering iron, I suggest ordering the PL2 capacitors from QSC. (PLX is same amp but with half of the power supply capacitance) The tone is absolutely more solid and the power draw is more even. You'll get a few hundred extra watts of output each amp as a bonus. Costs very little per amp, and makes a big difference.
Hey Pat, great tip.
Which PL2 model should I ask QSC about, to get the the caps? Or do you know the cap values that could be obtained elsewhere?
Thx, Mark
Post by: Pat Semeraro on March 30, 2018, 03:05:53 PM
Hey Pat, great tip.
Which PL2 model should I ask QSC about, to get the the caps? Or do you know the cap values that could be obtained elsewhere?
Thx, Mark
There are three cap values - 200v first stage, then 55v and 90v in the second stage. Single rail models use only the 90v. Lower powered models also skimp out on the 200v caps - I always fill empty parking spaces in the 200v section also. PLX3402 = PL236 but PLX version has strangled power supply. It seemed impossible that mod could make any difference but in practice it was a big deal. I converted many of the cx1102 version to PL236 spec and they would power dual 18" subs at war volume pretty well if the AC was stout. (Don't try that on a 15 amp circuit...)
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on March 31, 2018, 09:53:20 AM
There are three cap values - 200v first stage, then 55v and 90v in the second stage. Single rail models use only the 90v. Lower powered models also skimp out on the 200v caps - I always fill empty parking spaces in the 200v section also. PLX3402 = PL236 but PLX version has strangled power supply. It seemed impossible that mod could make any difference but in practice it was a big deal. I converted many of the cx1102 version to PL236 spec and they would power dual 18" subs at war volume pretty well if the AC was stout. (Don't try that on a 15 amp circuit...)
Gotcha, and thx.
I peered into a PLX3402 and a PL340, and see the 3 banks of caps.
I see the 3402 uses caps of 2200uf for 200v, and 470uf for 90v & 55v.
..and the pl340 uses 3300uf for 200v, and 1000uf for 90v & 55v.
Same number of caps on all banks, both boards....boards look very similar.
Do you think it would be a worthwhile benefit to replace just the 6 big 200v caps?
That seems a lot more doable than also changing the 20 caps for 90v & 50v....
I have no issues with the plx3402 other than it dropping out on intense sub peaks...
Curiosity also peered into a PL380....it has two 6-cap banks of 3300s for 200v, but no other banks....
Post by: Pat Semeraro on April 02, 2018, 02:05:06 PM
Curiosity also peered into a PL380....it has two 6-cap banks of 3300s for 200v, but no other banks....
PL380 is a completely different design. Its the PLX, PL2, CX, and DCA that are the same amps but with different front panels and full or castrated power supply.
Someone long ago measured the difference between beefing up the 200v caps on the high voltage side vs the power amp side and found that rail sag was was much more severe on the low side and that beefing up 90v/55v caps made a much bigger difference than the 200v.
I've always done both so cant say which helped more. What I can tell you is that a cx1102 (i.e. PLX 3402) running 4 ohm subs in shop testing would pop a 10 amp power strip almost instantly but after the cap upgrades ran without issue all the way to blinking its limit lights and with a much more solid tone. You can perform the same test with a PLX3402 and an PL326 side by side. The PL326 will sound noticeably more round and powerful on subs and also draw its AC current differently.
Cheers,
Pat
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on April 02, 2018, 08:16:04 PM
PL380 is a completely different design. Its the PLX, PL2, CX, and DCA that are the same amps but with different front panels and full or castrated power supply.
Someone long ago measured the difference between beefing up the 200v caps on the high voltage side vs the power amp side and found that rail sag was was much more severe on the low side and that beefing up 90v/55v caps made a much bigger difference than the 200v.
I've always done both so cant say which helped more. What I can tell you is that a cx1102 (i.e. PLX 3402) running 4 ohm subs in shop testing would pop a 10 amp power strip almost instantly but after the cap upgrades ran without issue all the way to blinking its limit lights and with a much more solid tone. You can perform the same test with a PLX3402 and an PL326 side by side. The PL326 will sound noticeably more round and powerful on subs and also draw its AC current differently.
Cheers,
Pat
Thx Pat, I believe i found those old tests that confirm what you're saying. Here starts yet another dang $ learning experiment haha
Post by: Don T. Williams on April 02, 2018, 11:55:07 PM
Post by: Sam Costa on April 05, 2018, 11:33:12 PM
Agreed. Simply throwing more power or hoping that a different amp "sounds better", is a waste of money, and could possibly tear up the current speakers.
Remember that with ANY loudspeaker, the harder you push it, the more distortion it has. Up to the point it stops making sound.
Just a quick update, since this posting I now will be going with 2 PL 6.0's and will be purchasing next month 4 EAW SB1000z subs. I actually had a chance to hear these side by side with my current subs (4-Carvin 218 TRX) and noticed a difference. I was very pleased. :) (using all my existing amps and network)
I'll still use my Carvins for smaller venues as they still sound great, but could I (or should) I deploy these with the SB100z for larger venues (outdoors events) to push more air on sub duty?
Post by: Caleb Dueck on April 05, 2018, 11:39:55 PM
I'll still use my Carvins for smaller venues as they still sound great, but could I (or should) I deploy these with the SB100z for larger venues (outdoors events) to push more air on sub duty?
As a general rule - mixing subs isn't a good idea, and fewer higher quality subs is better than many lower grade subs.
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Post by: Don T. Williams on April 06, 2018, 04:19:27 PM
Post by: Sam Costa on April 06, 2018, 05:48:02 PM
As a general rule - mixing subs isn't a good idea, and fewer higher quality subs is better than many lower grade subs.
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Ok, I figured I would be running into variances with the two different models. I appreciate the info gents.
Post by: Mark Wilkinson on April 06, 2018, 07:54:24 PM
I think mixing different subs, if each is using a different crossover is probably the greater problem.
The crossovers usually cause more phase misalignment than the subs do, and phase misalignment is the cause of combining problems.
If any drivers can be combined, it's subs...the wavelengths are huge, compared to combining problems further up in freq.
Heck, just put em together all using the same crossover....see for yourself :)
Post by: Chris Grimshaw on April 07, 2018, 03:29:25 AM
The wavelengths are large, but ported boxes go through a 180 degree phase shift around port tuning, so boxes with different port tuning frequencies will show cancellations towards the bottom end, even if 60-100Hz combines well.
Chris
Post by: Luis_Marquez on May 14, 2018, 10:16:52 PM
Here's a pic from one of our events in Northern California recently where I ran the 2 EAW KF650's and 2 TRX sub per side.
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a136/fullforcesound/Sound%20Pics/FDFE701B-8C60-47FB-8AF8-865F73364EA8_zpsuuyyv7ff.jpg) (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/fullforcesound/media/Sound%20Pics/FDFE701B-8C60-47FB-8AF8-865F73364EA8_zpsuuyyv7ff.jpg.html)
[/quote]
Sam , how well do the subs play together? They look like the trx218n’s over trx218b’s. Shallow cab over deeper cab. Slot porting over outer corner ports. Just curious
Post by: Tim McCulloch on May 14, 2018, 11:27:22 PM
I think mixing subs is much more viable than commonly expressed..
I think mixing different subs, if each is using a different crossover is probably the greater problem.
The crossovers usually cause more phase misalignment than the subs do, and phase misalignment is the cause of combining problems.
If any drivers can be combined, it's subs...the wavelengths are huge, compared to combining problems further up in freq.
Heck, just put em together all using the same crossover....see for yourself :)
Mixing subs from the same manufacturer and from the same model line family is pretty much good these days but it hasn't always been that way.
Mixing subs with different designs (bass reflex; band pass, horns of various types) is a whole 'nuther kettle of fish. Been that way since B. K. (Before Klipsch) and remains so today.
YMMV. Indoors there are enough reflections to do a hap-hazard job of pseudo-averaging the output, but realize that depending on where you are standing, you could be below average no matter what and the more equal the acoustic output of cancelling subwoofers (at some frequency) the deeper the comb until the cancellation is infinite and the peaks are +6dB. You could get lucky and find that you get a little more sub in most of the audience area but you won't be getting 6dB worth, which is what you'd get doubling with identical subs and their own amplification.
I guess my point is: if you going to haul around 2x the subs and power why not be assured that it will result in uniformly greater output? Yeah, I know this is the Lounge and some of you (and me) have interesting collections of things that make noise and we want to extract the maximum return on our dubious investments. I understand that. But when it comes down to having to move it, store it, insure it and maintain it - costs that exist regardless of the acoustic contribution the product makes - it should give a result where the whole is equal to to the sum of its parts, not less than.
Post by: Rick Powell on May 15, 2018, 01:11:42 PM
...But when it comes down to having to move it, store it, insure it and maintain it - costs that exist regardless of the acoustic contribution the product makes - it should give a result where the whole is equal to to the sum of its parts, not less than.
^ 1000+