ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Down

Author Topic: subwoofer vs no subwoofer  (Read 3650 times)

Andrew Hirschman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« on: October 19, 2015, 01:48:59 pm »

In a very small church 100 seats, 40x 60 room, I'd like to know opinions of with or not it is an advantage to have a separate subwoofer or not. Were never going to reach a very high spl. Were talking a mono system one speaker flown center off a lam beam.

My thought is the advantage of one speaker is like a danley sh96HO is can go low, but then you have to dial the bottom of lav mics out, vs the idea of having a SM80 with a Th118 you can run the sub off and aux/matrix and then just not include the bottom of the lav in the sub.

If you want to direct towards other posts, I would welcome that.

regards,
Andy

Logged

Scott Carneval

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 997
    • Cenero Audio Visual
Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #1 on: October 19, 2015, 02:09:27 pm »

While the SH96HO is an amazing speaker, it wouldn't be my go-to for a 100 seat church. The SM80 is probably overkill as well. The SM100 is probably more suitable to the spl and pattern requirements of your room, and it's a good bit cheaper than the SM80. The SM100B and SM100F also have lower extension if needed.

But first things first, what style of music will you be playing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged

Luke Geis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2134
    • Owner of Endever Music Production's
Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #2 on: October 19, 2015, 03:06:43 pm »

less is more........... If it's spoken word only and perhaps background music, I would find as small as I can that gets the response and SPL needed. I would go as far as only using one speaker if it's spoken word only.
Logged
I don't understand how you can't hear yourself

Keith Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3425
  • Toronto
Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #3 on: October 19, 2015, 04:17:31 pm »

In a very small church 100 seats, 40x 60 room, I'd like to know opinions of with or not it is an advantage to have a separate subwoofer or not. Were never going to reach a very high spl. Were talking a mono system one speaker flown center off a lam beam.

My thought is the advantage of one speaker is like a danley sh96HO is can go low, but then you have to dial the bottom of lav mics out, vs the idea of having a SM80 with a Th118 you can run the sub off and aux/matrix and then just not include the bottom of the lav in the sub.

If you want to direct towards other posts, I would welcome that.

regards,
Andy
An SM100 would be a fine top speaker.
You can add a sub but a TH118 would be overkill!
Something smaller and less expensive would do fine to add a little energy to music playback.
High pass filters are your friend with vocals :)
Logged
I don't care enough to be apathetic

Andrew Hirschman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #4 on: October 19, 2015, 06:26:49 pm »

While the SH96HO is an amazing speaker, it wouldn't be my go-to for a 100 seat church. The SM80 is probably overkill as well. The SM100 is probably more suitable to the spl and pattern requirements of your room, and it's a good bit cheaper than the SM80. The SM100B and SM100F also have lower extension if needed.

But first things first, what style of music will you be playing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Spoken word, worship music- full band(drums, bass, piano, guitar, vocals)
Logged

Andrew Hirschman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #5 on: October 19, 2015, 06:30:48 pm »

An SM100 would be a fine top speaker.
You can add a sub but a TH118 would be overkill!
Something smaller and less expensive would do fine to add a little energy to music playback.
High pass filters are your friend with vocals :)

I want full range, so some low frequency, we have a full band to reinforce.
Logged

Caleb Dueck

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1339
Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #6 on: October 19, 2015, 07:32:51 pm »

This is more a question of style and low frequency expectation than room size.

If you want the sound full without a subbass haystack, the SM100F is worth a close look.  We recently did a church install with a pair of those, no sub. 

If you want deeper bass, something like the SM96 for main speaker and TH112 sub works great.  You get the depth without the extra cost of a TH118. 

A TH118 isn't necessarily a bad choice though.  It is quite efficient, so you may be able to use an existing or smaller amp.

Logged
Experience is something you get right after you need it.

Andrew Hirschman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #7 on: October 19, 2015, 08:08:17 pm »

This is more a question of style and low frequency expectation than room size.

If you want the sound full without a subbass haystack, the SM100F is worth a close look.  We recently did a church install with a pair of those, no sub. 

If you want deeper bass, something like the SM96 for main speaker and TH112 sub works great.  You get the depth without the extra cost of a TH118. 

A TH118 isn't necessarily a bad choice though.  It is quite efficient, so you may be able to use an existing or smaller amp.

So the existing speaker is an EV zx1 hanging center and zx1 sub sitting on the floor of the stage. It's alright, honestly it sounds decent, its going to leave soon as the church that shares space with us is leaving and it is theirs. So we have about 2 months or so till that happens.

I think mono is great in this room, its small enough that the coverage works fine. I might be worried that given the size of room that the conical wave deal sends as much into the ceiling as the audience, our trim is prob about 10-12 feet depending on the size of the box. With the Sm100/* Im worried that it might be spray the stage to much. the lam beam that it hangs off is about 4' back from the lip of the stage.

a few more details...I already have a QSC PL340 just sitting waiting to be used :)
Logged

George Dougherty

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 724
Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #8 on: October 19, 2015, 10:57:59 pm »

So the existing speaker is an EV zx1 hanging center and zx1 sub sitting on the floor of the stage. It's alright, honestly it sounds decent, its going to leave soon as the church that shares space with us is leaving and it is theirs. So we have about 2 months or so till that happens.

I think mono is great in this room, its small enough that the coverage works fine. I might be worried that given the size of room that the conical wave deal sends as much into the ceiling as the audience, our trim is prob about 10-12 feet depending on the size of the box. With the Sm100/* Im worried that it might be spray the stage to much. the lam beam that it hangs off is about 4' back from the lip of the stage.

a few more details...I already have a QSC PL340 just sitting waiting to be used :)

A PL340 will be massive overkill, likely even if you do want to add subs.  We went for excessive headroom in a 35x65 sanctuary that barely seats around 200.  30ft peaked ceiling.  A single SH69 and a TH115 cover the room and I can lay down about 110-115db front to back with only a 6db variation front to back.  I'm powering each off a side of a single PLX1804.  I can't quite do the 115db with that amp, but even when I push it to the limits of what's beyond tolerable to me with nobody else to annoy I'm just tickling the clip lights on the amp.

Spec-wise it would be a good mate for something like our setup.  In practice, it's beyond necessary for speaker setups like what's being discussed here.
Logged

David Allred

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1854
Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #9 on: October 20, 2015, 07:41:23 am »

Unless you have the itch to buy something bigger and better.  Since the existing system is "decent" and functional, why not offer to buy it from the other group?  You'll save a lot of money and all that install expense and/or time.  Put the saved money toward something truly needed.
Logged

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9091
  • Atlanta GA
Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #10 on: October 20, 2015, 08:07:31 am »

While the SH96HO is an amazing speaker, it wouldn't be my go-to for a 100 seat church. The SM80 is probably overkill as well. The SM100 is probably more suitable to the spl and pattern requirements of your room, and it's a good bit cheaper than the SM80. The SM100B and SM100F also have lower extension if needed.

But first things first, what style of music will you be playing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Agreed.

THe SM100 series get quite a bit louder than people would normally think-due to the horn loading.

If speech only the SM100 would work great.

The basic differences between the SM100F and Sm100B are the 100B goes lower, while the 100F goes louder.

They are both the same physical size-so that is a wash.

The SM100F is also less expensive.

All are a single amp channel.

I would not go with a separate sub-unless the Church is a real rock type Church.
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: subwoofer vs no subwoofer
« Reply #10 on: October 20, 2015, 08:07:31 am »


Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.071 seconds with 23 queries.