Print

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

[Mike Santarelli]

Sat through a DZR demo today at AES Show.
They sounded pretty good by themselves, but I'd want a shoot-out to decide if the 12's are that much better than my DSR112's.
They do have a side-handle, which is a nice addition.
But cloth grilles? No thanks.

I also did this as well.  I thought they 10, 12, and 15 were all good. In a two way form the 15 stood out the most but they are large. I have to say to say I was little underwhelmed by them.

Now the 315 on the other hand was amazing. So much clarity and punch. I’d like to grab a pair and replace my srx835. If the specs are as advertised, this will well outperform the 835. From what I heard, I’d think it will no problem.


The bad news is I also sat through the nexo demo. Now I want those.

[Nate Zifra]

I also did this as well.  I thought they 10, 12, and 15 were all good. In a two way form the 15 stood out the most but they are large. I have to say to say I was little underwhelmed by them.

Now the 315 on the other hand was amazing. So much clarity and punch. I’d like to grab a pair and replace my srx835. If the specs are as advertised, this will well outperform the 835. From what I heard, I’d think it will no problem.


The bad news is I also sat through the nexo demo. Now I want those.

Also sat through the demo at AES.  I agree with Mike S above, the 315 could very well have the SRX835's beat in terms of clarity and spl.

[Luke Geis]

The 315 is a bit scary in its specs. The mid/high is a passive crossover with a FIR Filter only between the woofer and the mid/highs, as does the JBL. The JBL uses 3" drivers for the highs while the Yamaha 2". The Yamaha has a 1" throat CD, while the JBL a 1.5" throat CD. The Yamaha weighs roughly 92lbs whereas the JBL is 85lbs. The JBL uses a 6" MF driver and the Yamaha an 8" MF driver which could be why it has better output. The Yamaha states 2000 watts peak with 1,300 watts continuous while the JBL touts 2000 watts peak and 1,500 watts continuous. The 1/8th power rating for the Yamaha is 1.25 amps ( 150 watts ) while the JBL is 2.2 amps ( 265 watts ) which means the Yamaha has almost 2x the efficiency. I don't see where an extra 6db in output is coming from with the Yamaha unit?

[Peter Kowalczyk]

I received a couple DZR12s yesterday (thanks Mike!) and had a little bit of time to play with them in my living room before passing them to their new owner.  I figured I'd snap a few measurements comparing the different 'D-Contour' settings.  The 'FOH' mode was un-surprising -  a bit of dynamic bass boost.  What was very interesting to me was the 'Monitor' setting.  In addition to a much higher High Pass, monitor mode has about 1.5ms less latency than FOH mode.

In the image attached, blue is No D-Contour, Green is D-Contour in FOH mode, and Orange is D-Contour in Monitor Mode. 

I didn't get a chance to A/B with my DSR112s, but I'm generally impressed with the LF extension and clarity.  Oh, and I have to say, the covers are pretty trick... they open up to function as a rain cover.  Cool!

[Eric Snodgrass]

I figured I'd snap a few measurements comparing the different 'D-Contour' settings. 
and Orange is D-Contour in Monitor Mode. 

Peter, when you measured the cabinet in Monitor Mode did you have the cabinet on the ground configured as a wedge? 

[Kevin Conlon]

I received a couple DZR12s yesterday (thanks Mike!) and had a little bit of time to play with them in my living room before passing them to their new owner.  I figured I'd snap a few measurements comparing the different 'D-Contour' settings.  The 'FOH' mode was un-surprising -  a bit of dynamic bass boost.  What was very interesting to me was the 'Monitor' setting.  In addition to a much higher High Pass, monitor mode has about 1.5ms less latency than FOH mode.

In the image attached, blue is No D-Contour, Green is D-Contour in FOH mode, and Orange is D-Contour in Monitor Mode. 

I didn't get a chance to A/B with my DSR112s, but I'm generally impressed with the LF extension and clarity.  Oh, and I have to say, the covers are pretty trick... they open up to function as a rain cover.  Cool!

   As someone who was going to buy a pair of DSR112 in march, would i be better off with the DZR? I do not really need the extras it has but would like the minor increase in spl. 

[Rob Spence]

   As someone who was going to buy a pair of DSR112 in march, would i be better off with the DZR? I do not really need the extras it has but would like the minor increase in spl.

If the usable SPL isn’t more than 3dB, you and your customers will not notice. If that little bit matters to you, then you have too small a rig for what you need.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Kevin Conlon]

If the usable SPL isn’t more than 3dB, you and your customers will not notice. If that little bit matters to you, then you have too small a rig for what you need.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

I get the 3db. I want these for an annual show because of the sound quality, spl not that high. Trying to NOT justify the extra cash.

[Chris Grimshaw]

I get the 3db. I want these for an annual show because of the sound quality, spl not that high. Trying to NOT justify the extra cash.

If you've got subs and would always use them, I'd go with the DSRs. If there's a reasonable number of gigs where a pair of speakers on sticks would do the job, the DZRs dig deeper.

Chris

[kel mcguire]

3 dB per cabinet is pretty significant in a lot of instances, especially for transients. Perhaps a more reasonable quantification might be that; if you're always hitting clip limiters on your DSR 112 then the DZR12 probably won't be the headroom you've needed. On SPL alone, it comes down to about $200 for 3 dB each speaker.

[ProSoundWeb Community]