ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Turbosound Milan M12/M10 vs RCF ART 712/710-A MKII vs RCF ART 422/310-A MKII/III  (Read 11989 times)

Keith Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3333
  • Toronto

Quote
we mix monitors through FOH so a matching set would keep the system more stable
Hmmmmm...not really. ???

Anyway, I have used the M10s as mains for corporate and for monitors and they sound just fine and are cost effective.
I would think the 12s are no different.
When you hit them hard, the limiters do cut in to protect the drivers and you can hear that. Not really a problem.
Logged
I don't care enough to be apathetic

Chris Shaw

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19

Hmmmmm...not really. ???

Anyway, I have used the M10s as mains for corporate andonitfor monitors and they sound just fine and are cost effective.
I would think the 12s are no different.
When you hit them hard, the limiters do cut in to protect the drivers and you can hear that. Not really a problem.

Thanks Keith.

By 'more stable' I mean that what the band hear will sound more similar in tone to what is coming out of the mains than if, say, the mains were naturally bright and the monitors were  naturally warm, so the band can send better signals which means less processing.
Logged
Chris Shaw
Tech Team Lead
King's Community Church, Hatfield, England

Stephen Kirby

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3006

Actually there is enough difference between nearfield and farfield that performers won't really be able to tell what the audience is getting by having the same speaker in front of them that is FOH.  Now if each system is badly colored, then that's a different story.  While you could compensate with a slightly warmer monitor system, the primary purpose of most monitors is to cut though the stage level, not to timbrally match the FOH.
Logged

Keith Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3333
  • Toronto

Thanks Keith.

By 'more stable' I mean that what the band hear will sound more similar in tone to what is coming out of the mains than if, say, the mains were naturally bright and the monitors were  naturally warm, so the band can send better signals which means less processing.
Still...Hmmmmmm...not really.
A well sorted mains sound and a well sorted monitor sound can be had with different speaker systems.
You should select the speaker system that best suits the job and work out the EQ accordingly.
Now within the monitor system, I would say that having the same speakers is handy. :)
Logged
I don't care enough to be apathetic

Chris Shaw

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19

Actually there is enough difference between nearfield and farfield that performers won't really be able to tell what the audience is getting by having the same speaker in front of them that is FOH.  Now if each system is badly colored, then that's a different story.  While you could compensate with a slightly warmer monitor system, the primary purpose of most monitors is to cut though the stage level, not to timbrally match the FOH.

Thanks Stephen. I hadn't considered the near/far field differences. We are however looking for a better timbral match to FOH than normal, because our band is actually more of a squad with enough of them that every week is a different combination of personal and instruments. Rehearsal on stage is typically no more than 15mins and after the first couple of songs they could be playing any one of hundreds of songs in their folders. So most of what they play is on the fly (and they do it really well), hence accurate monitoring is particularly helpful. Thankfully our stage SPL is not that high so less need to cut through.
Logged
Chris Shaw
Tech Team Lead
King's Community Church, Hatfield, England

Darren Scaresbrook

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Adelaide, South Australia
    • Concert Systems Australia

I'd love a pair of TT's, but I can't make the numbers add up to get from T12's to TT22a's. Tannoy VX12 (presumably the current equivalent to the T12???) are RRP ~800. Add ~200 for half an amp (the Tapco Juice is by no means a high quality amp) and that gets to 1000, for a 15+ year old system. TT22a's are well over 2000.
Wow! 800GBP for VX12's sounds good. Just for comparison, my T12's were $2700AUD each here in Australia! That's 70% more. I'm sure the freight doesn't cost THAT much!!!
Darren

Mike Pyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1007
  • Santa Rosa, CA

Wow! 800GBP for VX12's sounds good. Just for comparison, my T12's were $2700AUD each here in Australia! That's 70% more. I'm sure the freight doesn't cost THAT much!!!
Darren

The VX12 is quite reasonably priced in the USA also, given the build and sound quality. If I were starting from scratch or replacing my inventory of passive cabs they would be high on the list for consideration. They are MUCH lighter in weight than the number the OP cited for the T12 in another thread, under 40 lbs.
Logged
Mike Pyle  Audiopyle Sound  707-315-6204
Dealer For: JBL, Soundcraft, Crown, dbx, AKG, Yorkville, EV, QSC, RCF, FBT, Danley Sound Labs, Fulcrum Acoustic, Tannoy, Lab Gruppen, Powersoft, Linea Research, VTC, EAW, Allen & Heath, Ashly, APB, Audix, One Systems, OnPoint Audio, Presonus, K&M, Ultimate, Global Truss, Road Ready, SKB, Gator, Radial Engineering, Turbosound, Midas, dB Technologies, American DJ, Odyssey, ProCo, Rapco, CBI, Elation, Mipro, Chauvet, Blizzard, Shure, Whirlwind, Bassboss, Yamaha, Line 6, Behringer, Whirlwind, On-Stage, more...

ProSoundWeb Community


Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.037 seconds with 22 queries.