Print

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

[Mikey Brown]

Hi Harry!

I was referencing my tuning comments to the way say an LCR or AB/C system is done. The center cluster that is used primarily for vox reinforcement is sometimes HPF and cut differently than the L&R. Likewise the A&B vox systems may be tuned differently than the C (band) system in a broadway ABC system. Now knowing Dave matrixes Vox with drums makes this moot, but if you were doing a total separation would this make sense in a line array? As I recall the Dead system did this type of tuning with actual components. Sounds like some MAPP predictions with this could be fun!

[RYAN LOUDMUSIC JENKINS]

I think many of you have misunderstood my thinking in this post.  I am wondering if anyone thinks that we may see manufactures making each single element of line arrays that will be the equivelant of two boxes in one.  Making for a single hang point with and only using maybe four amp channels to do two separate mid/high section all in one box.  Could be run with a single NL8 cable, etc.  Since most of us are using DSP capable of doing the processing for six to eight band passes with two to four inputs it wouldn't put much more strain on our processing.
The most difficult part of this would be with regards to the mixing console but in the mid level I think every console is capable of doing this type of application whether it be by using groups instead of stereo out of matrices.

I just wonder if we may see this and all of a sudden it would become available to the mid level market instead of just Dave Rat and the very high end market.

[Vince Byrne]

Ivan Beaver wrote on Wed, 16 July 2008 20:59

Isn't the main reason for running dual rigs in order to keep the vocal mics cabinets from being "overloaded" by the instruments?

Ivan, I just had a vision of a single Synergy horn loaded with two sets of differently driven low/mid transducers, one set with vocals and one with the rest. Single source, no 2x system cost and logistics ...

[Matt Vivlamore]

Just a thought... never working with a line array system or looked into the details about it...

What about taking the single hang point and splitting the boxes in half and in theory you have the dual PA set-up at a single point

I am thinking something like this...
Hang Point
Guitars
Vox/Drums
Guitars
Vox/Drums
Guitars
Vox/Drums
Guitars
Vox/Drums
Guitars
Vox/Drums
Guitars
Vox/Drums

[Charlie Zureki]

[quote title=RYAN LOUDMUSIC JENKINS wrote on Thu, 17 July 2008 09:06]I think many of you have misunderstood my thinking in this post.  I am wondering if anyone thinks that we may see manufactures making each single element of line arrays that will be the equivelant of two boxes in one.  Making for a single hang point with and only using maybe four amp channels to do two separate mid/high section all in one box. [/quote



 There would be No excuse for not hearing the Vox in the Mix.
     

 
Not the same thing, but....

Some experiments were done in the past with multitudes of drivers and each driver handling smaller bands of frequencies. I believe there were promising results, but there were many obstacles. Each driver would need it's own Amp, Active x overs were non existent, so they used passive, timing was also an issue. It could get crazy for a Big System.

 Didn't John M. and Bob Carver do a lot of this type of research?

With the electronics today it would be much easier to design the system. I would be curious to see the benefits, and would they outweigh the cost?  I think that in critical listening environments it would be a clear improvement (fixed installations), but for Concert Sound it may be another whole ball of wax.(Gaff tape..hehe)

Cheers,

Hammer
Cheers

[Mike Babcock]

RYAN LOUDMUSIC JENKINS wrote on Thu, 17 July 2008 10:06

I think many of you have misunderstood my thinking in this post.  I am wondering if anyone thinks that we may see manufactures making each single element of line arrays that will be the equivelant of two boxes in one.  Making for a single hang point with and only using maybe four amp channels to do two separate mid/high section all in one box.  Could be run with a single NL8 cable, etc.  Since most of us are using DSP capable of doing the processing for six to eight band passes with two to four inputs it wouldn't put much more strain on our processing. The most difficult part of this would be with regards to the mixing console but in the mid level I think every console is capable of doing this type of application whether it be by using groups instead of stereo out of matrices. I just wonder if we may see this and all of a sudden it would become available to the mid level market instead of just Dave Rat and the very high end market.

I seriously doubt you'll see a manufacturer sign on to this for many reasons.Some of which are:

1. Band Engineers won't understand the concept well enough
2. If you think it's hard enough to sell Danley to visiting engineer who have never heard of it, try this...
3. Hey, I know you have your own consoles, but how about if you reconfigure everything for this PA?
4. Manufactures would sell half the boxes it would normally take

[SteveKirby]

Ivan Beaver wrote on Wed, 16 July 2008 20:59

Isn't the main reason for running dual rigs in order to keep the vocal mics cabinets from being "overloaded" by the instruments

I think what we are really talking about here is intermodulation distortion.  Those of us who remember trying to sing through the bass amp in the sixties are very aware of IM.  It's been a pet peeve of mine for years.  Running midrange and intelligibility frequencies though the same driver as the bass or lower frequencies.

However, my benchmark for audiophile music presentation is still the Sound Lab A1, which is a floor to ceiling full range electrostatic single bandpass speaker.  All frequencies reproduced by the same radiator.  Most amazing clarity and transparency I've ever heard.  All the virtues of the Quad electrostatic but full range.

Now there is probably an upper limit to how loudly these things can play, but given their size, they are loud enough to listen to music in the rooms I've seen them fit into.

What this tells me is that it is possible to get all the separation of instruments and clarity from a single source.

So the problem when we hear a lack of clarity is that we are, as Ivan says, "overloading" the source (meaning the speaker system in this discussion, the source into the air).  The old "not enough rig for the gig".  So at some point, people are trying to get more SPL out of whatever they are using and it is alleviated by breaking up input sources into multiple playback sources.  Reducing the IM.

So, is there another way to reduce the IM?

Ryan mentioned more and narrower bandpasses.  Folks have been down this road.  I remember 5 way systems back in the 70's that were a tremendous leap forward in warmth and clarity over the 2 and 3 way systems of the time.  But coverage and arrayability of such things wasn't so great.  And they were much more involved to tune and align.

So in the interest of uniform coverage, minimal lobing, and so on, the fashion swung to less bandpasses, better integrated in physical space.

Now with better analysis tools and onboard amplification, maybe the time is ripe for a 5 way box again.  But with the various bandpasses aligned within waveguides or steered by DSP so that a coherent wavefront (similar to that SoundLab) comes out the front.

[David Sumrall]

Hey Dan,

A lot of $ for that one input, but in many ways that is their money channel i guess.

I think their pastor will only use a hardwired lav. So a headset would be out as a much cheaper possible option.

I guess they figured the channel eq on the PM1d and maybe a bus parametric would not do the trick as well.

I totally agree on the expense part, the design makes a lot more financial sense if all the vocals were in the little rig.

In the grand scheme of that venue's overall construction budget the little line array was probably a small percentage.

I would think they have tried it several ways there by now to figure out what works best for them.

But yeah that is a chunk of change.

We currently have a LCR cluster rig with all three clusters covering all of the main floor.

So the dual line array option is of interest to me as a way to get some of the same benefits  using a separate rig for the vocals. Not sure if we will go that route for sure.

David

[Derek Worden]

Mike Babcock wrote on Thu, 17 July 2008 10:53

RYAN LOUDMUSIC JENKINS wrote on Thu, 17 July 2008 10:06 I think many of you have misunderstood my thinking in this post.  I am wondering if anyone thinks that we may see manufactures making each single element of line arrays that will be the equivelant of two boxes in one.  Making for a single hang point with and only using maybe four amp channels to do two separate mid/high section all in one box.  Could be run with a single NL8 cable, etc.  Since most of us are using DSP capable of doing the processing for six to eight band passes with two to four inputs it wouldn't put much more strain on our processing. The most difficult part of this would be with regards to the mixing console but in the mid level I think every console is capable of doing this type of application whether it be by using groups instead of stereo out of matrices. I just wonder if we may see this and all of a sudden it would become available to the mid level market instead of just Dave Rat and the very high end market. I seriously doubt you'll see a manufacturer sign on to this for many reasons.Some of which are: Band Engineers won't understand the concept well enough If you think it's hard enough to sell Danley to visiting engineer who have never heard of it, try this... Hey, I know you have your own consoles, but how about if you reconfigure everything for this PA? Manufactures would sell half the boxes it would normally take

I think your fourth point is what really will make most manufactures steer away from this route.

But just WHAT IF... If someone was to make a single box to cover the same spectrum and same space with two channels of audio for better quality, would you have to use two HF drivers or would two MF drivers be enough gain of clarity. Sort of a quasi-duel hang PA.

[Bob Leonard]

(Brian) Frost wrote on Thu, 17 July 2008 02:21

I can only see this working on the very high end.  Budgets are shrinking for a lot of shows and bringing twice the boxes seems like a very expensive upgrade for most gigs. Double labor, truck, and boxes... really double most expenses.  Promoters arent going to double the audio budget any time soon, so me thinks people who want to try this are going to have to do what Dave Rat does and make 2 hangs.

Probably just the opposite Brian. A large system will cost much more to develop than a smaller/mid sized system will. I don't have an unlimited budget, but I've been able to run a dual system in one form or another since the mid 70's. Back then it was because of limited capabilities, limited channels, limited everything. So you usually ended up with more than 1 board, speaker system and amplifiers to cover even a 1000 seat club. Of coarse the backline wasn't as critical then as it is today.

For over 15 years I have purposely run a vocal mix seperate from my backline and the advantages are countless. 722s for vocals, 725s and subs for backline, and monitors on their own mix. As a matter of fact, most people probably already have enough hardware to do this already. All you need is a good board, with vocals through the master mix and the backline through BUS 1/2. Set your EQ's for the vocals, set your EQ's for the backline, no problems with feedback, levels, etc..

Have fun.

[ProSoundWeb Community]