ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12   Go Down

Author Topic: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"  (Read 22471 times)

Yoel Farkas

  • Classic LAB
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • eXpert Sound inc.
"Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« on: July 21, 2016, 09:52:20 am »

What are the ups and downs between the "Multi cellular array" technology. like EAW Annya-Anna, Martin Audio MLA, d&b Audio J, Y series. Versos "Single source" systems like Danley sound Labs? 

I currently own and use the Danlay Sound labs J1's, and they are fantastic. I would like to understand the scientific matter between the 2 approaches.   

 
Logged
Yoel Farkas
Expert Sound inc.
Monroe, NY, USA

John Chiara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1148
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2016, 10:36:17 am »

What are the ups and downs between the "Multi cellular array" technology. like EAW Annya-Anna, Martin Audio MLA, d&b Audio J, Y series. Versos "Single source" systems like Danley sound Labs? 

I currently own and use the Danlay Sound labs J1's, and they are fantastic. I would like to understand the scientific matter between the 2 approaches.

Since you are one of a few J1 owners, maybe we can set up a comparison demo somehow. I bet a LOT of us would be interested!
Logged

Helge A Bentsen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 731
  • Oslo, Norway.
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2016, 11:12:17 am »

like EAW Annya-Anna, Martin Audio MLA, d&b Audio J, Y series.

While it would be fun to attend a J1 demo, those systems you have listed here wary greatly in technological finesse and isn't exactly an apple to apple-comparison.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged

thirtha chengappa

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 35
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2016, 11:45:26 am »

And while we are at it just to make things interesting, let's keep the KV2 - VHD 2.0 in context, Not to forget the up coming VHD 5.0.

Heard the VHD 2.0 (2 boxes per side). They managed to give a stiff competition in terms of SPL with several line array brands. The clarity stood out and had a solid lead over the rest.
Logged

Doug Fowler

  • Member since May 1995, 2nd poster on original LAB, moderator on and off since 1997, now running TurboMOD v1.826
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1695
  • Saint Louis, MO USA
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2016, 11:46:09 am »

What are the ups and downs between the "Multi cellular array" technology. like EAW Annya-Anna, Martin Audio MLA, d&b Audio J, Y series. Versos "Single source" systems like Danley sound Labs? 

I currently own and use the Danlay Sound labs J1's, and they are fantastic. I would like to understand the scientific matter between the 2 approaches.

I'll let this continue as a discussion about steering and beam forming, but let's leave the Danley products out of it.

I too have a fair amount of experience with J1, but enough of the "whatever" vs point source debate.
Logged
"It's got electrolytes.  It's got what plants crave."

Yoel Farkas

  • Classic LAB
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • eXpert Sound inc.
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2016, 11:58:51 am »

I'll let this continue as a discussion about steering and beam forming, but let's leave the Danley products out of it.

I too have a fair amount of experience with J1, but enough of the "whatever" vs point source debate.

You are right.
my point is not to review the danley products or to compare it to others. my point is as the subject title  "Multi Cellular Array" vs "Single Source" (the word array does not really come in here since it is a single source and it is usually not arrayed)

the reason i mentioned Danley is because they are the only one i'm aware of that makes large scale single source systems. KV2 could also be considered. but i don't want to discuss brands . all i want  is understand the different technologies.

"Single source" is more simple as it forms a single beam from a single horn. (not to say it is simple to make it a "single source") but "Multi Cellular arrays" have a lot of components with different time offsets so does they overcome the combfiltering interference issue that Line array has?   
Logged
Yoel Farkas
Expert Sound inc.
Monroe, NY, USA

Yoel Farkas

  • Classic LAB
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • eXpert Sound inc.
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #6 on: July 21, 2016, 12:23:17 pm »

Since you are one of a few J1 owners, maybe we can set up a comparison demo somehow. I bet a LOT of us would be interested!
I would wish to. our J1's are sitting in storage for the next few months. i would wish to take it out on a Sunday to a location that have hoist and compere it.

but it is only one site of the engagement, we need some one with a "Multi Cellular array" system to compare it to.
Logged
Yoel Farkas
Expert Sound inc.
Monroe, NY, USA

Yoel Farkas

  • Classic LAB
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 141
  • eXpert Sound inc.
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #7 on: July 21, 2016, 12:36:39 pm »

I'll let this continue as a discussion about steering and beam forming, but let's leave the Danley products out of it.

I too have a fair amount of experience with J1, but enough of the "whatever" vs point source debate.
Well i know there was a lot of discussions about Danley vs "Whatever". the discussions was about "Line Array" vs "single source". my point here is about a (fairly new) technology of "multi Cellular Array" or "steerable array"

i doesn't want to repeat an old discussion  if it was discussed before let me know. 
Logged
Yoel Farkas
Expert Sound inc.
Monroe, NY, USA

Tom Danley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #8 on: July 21, 2016, 01:01:24 pm »

I'll let this continue as a discussion about steering and beam forming, but let's leave the Danley products out of it.

I too have a fair amount of experience with J1, but enough of the "whatever" vs point source debate.

Hi Doug,
You didn’t leave much wiggle room to answer Yoel’s question or discuss two completely different approaches to beam forming, or the theory behind each.   

While I have made loudspeakers since the 70’s, my interest in how sources behave began working with acoustic levitation for space flight hardware in the 80’s, up until then, I never gave much thought to how sound radiates and tended to think of a pa system as something like a bank of lights.   That changed working on levitation systems which required a “beam” of very intense sound and where side lobes were very harmful to levitation stability.

One can form a beam two simple ways, one is a horn, with a CD horn producing a near constant beam width over a range of frequencies and the other is with an array of sources as describe in Huygens theory and originally applied to light.

In the latter, the assumption is that there is both constructive and destructive interference “in front” of the sources as the individual radiations combine and cancel depending on their phase in what’s called Vector addition.   
While each source is often too large compared to the wavelength to coherently combine or add everywhere, there is a region in front where they do add constructively.  This can be used to produce the desired beam and by altering the phase angle between sources, that beam can be steered. This was applied extensively with sound in the early sonar arrays my old boss and acoustician developed back at Mullard labs in WW2.   

The unspoken part of that is that there is more than one beam produced and with loudspeaker which cover a vast span of wavelengths, what you get “out front” is also strongly dependant on both the wavelength and size of the array of sources.   The other part is while you get a beam, you also have sources more than ¼ wavelength apart and this dictates that they produce an interference pattern, a pattern of lobes and nulls spatially distributed around the array and visible when a high resolution polar plot is made. This spatially dependent interference pattern and not loudness is what limits the usable “throw” of the array approach.

The big sonic difference between this and a CD horn is seen IF one examines the Time aspect and not the steady state view which is normally the only way arrays are examined.    With an array of sources, each one has a “vertical beam width” and this beam width is strongly dependant on frequency and below that point, the sources radiate independently and increasingly broadly and follow the Huygens theorem forming the new radiation.

The CD horn on the other hand confines the radiation from a single driver to the angle defined by the horn wall and dimensions, following Don Keele’s “pattern loss frequency” rule of thumb which in inches is 1X10^6 /  horn wall angle / horn mouth dimension.    That dictates that a 12 inch tall horn with a 10 degree horn wall angle losses pattern control around 8300Hz for example and the angle doubles each octave you go below that frequency, also the pattern loss frequency halves each time the horn wall angle or horn mouth dimension is doubled.

The differences primarily are that above pattern loss F, the horn not producing an interference pattern, generally radiates much less energy above, below and behind the horn than an array for the same beam width.
In large rooms like stadiums etc, this is a good thing and needed to maximize intelligibility and musical articulation and can be seen in the Hopkins Stryker equation where N is the number of sources and Q being the directivity of the source (the difference between the energy radiated in the desired pattern vs the rest radiated outside the pattern)

http://www.acousticworx.com/sound%20system%20design%20hopkins%20stryker%20formula.html

Secondly, out front in the time domain, the full range horn is a single source and produces one arrival in time, a single finger snap arrives as a single sonic event while the array of separately radiating sources delivers one arrival for each source, each separated in time and at a level depending on frequency, beam width at that frequency and distance to each individual source. 

In this regard, for a given identical beam width, the single source is much more like the input signal than the array which is inherently dispersive in the time domain due to the extended size of the radiation area.  An Energy vs Time measurement shows this very clearly.

Since we hear not only amplitude but also much of music and voice especially IS TIME VARIANT this part is a key but often forgotten element in this kind of discussion.
Hopefully this was helpful and more scientific than marketing.
Best,
Tom Danley
Logged

Lee Buckalew

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1311
  • St. Louis, MO area
    • Pro Sound Advice, Inc.
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #9 on: July 21, 2016, 04:18:18 pm »

What are the ups and downs between the "Multi cellular array" technology. like EAW Annya-Anna, Martin Audio MLA, d&b Audio J, Y series. Versos "Single source" systems like Danley sound Labs? 

I currently own and use the Danlay Sound labs J1's, and they are fantastic. I would like to understand the scientific matter between the 2 approaches.

These are each utilizing very different technologies, more than just 2 different approaches here.  This is not something that lends itself to an internet discussion.  There are some very good technological white papers published with the AES regarding at least some of these.  If you are a member of the AES you should be able to access the archives.  For MLA technology look up papers by Ambrose Thompson. 
I am not sure who has published papers on EAW ANNYA and ANNA.  D&B is doing very little in the technology department compared to either EAW or Martin and are really still just a line array with some FIR applied (up to 6 max per cabinet if my information is correct) across the full range cabinet as I am understanding it. 
EAW and Martin have very different approaches to each as well. 


Lee
Logged
Lee Buckalew
Pro Sound Advice, Inc.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.038 seconds with 21 queries.