Print

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

[Eddy Roswell]

Hi. Would be interesting how those 2 models compare. There is absolutely no reviews on NuQ122-AN. How is it? Seems it has pretty much same specs like IQ12 however it has wood housing. DSP is almost same except it doesn't have that modelling feature. Why NuQ were not so popular cause price is almost same as IQ? Do they have some serious issues?
How IQ or NuQ compare to Milan series in the means of sound quality? Seems Milans also have DSP. Those days Milans are twice cheaper than IQ. I'm not planning to use Ultranet, so is it worth getting IQs over Milans? Is sound clarity difference big enough between them?

[Luke Geis]

The NuQ is higher up on their model line up, so I would bet that it is a better box overall. The wood enclosure does make a difference. I have used the IQ series a few times and they are quite impressive for their cost and relatively low spec rating. Not having had a chance to measure one, I could not say how accurate the specs are.

The Milan is lower on their lineup and while once one of their mid-range offerings, it is now more entry level. I would pass on the Milan if you can afford better. It has half the wattage and is -3db lower in SPL than the NuQ. The -3db isn't a deal breaker, but if you can afford it, more would be better.

The specs between the NuQ and the IQ are the same essentially. It leads me to believe the only real difference between them is the box. The price difference between them isn't all that much either. I believe there is roughly a $250-$300 difference in price each. The thing to consider is that the IQ series is essentially a slightly improved QSC K12 knock-off. I like the Power-Con and I like the DSP, but it is a K12 enclosure essentially. The NuQ is a little more of an honest box from the Tribe, and it doesn't look to have any obvious cues from another model. It is more of a real speaker if you ask me.

It is all about your budget. The buy once, cry once mantra is very true in this field. The more you afford, the better the performance. If you have $1,600 to play with, spend $2,000 and get the next best thing you can/will afford. If these were your only three choices, the NuQ is the one. For the price of the NuQ though, you could place the Yamaha DSR on the table as well as the JBL PRX. From a feature standpoint, the Nuq is a better option, but its lower cost and lower spec lead me to believe that for the same or a little bit more money, you can get a speaker with a little more gas.

One thing I can say is that I once had a speaker with a 70* X 70* horn in it. It sounded great and worked well, but there was an obvious sweet spot and it wasn't very big. The NuQ utilizes a 70* X 70* horn and I would suspect it to have a similar fate. The 90* X 50* options when working with a pair of speakers on sticks really does help make the sweet spot a little larger and even the coverage out a bit. All depends on usage though. Indoors the 70* X 70* pattern really helps keep some media off the walls. The smaller pattern can work, but you really have to point it where you want it.

[Eddy Roswell]

  Thanks Luke. I appreciate your help. Actually yesterday I had opportunity to listen for IQ15 and NuQ122-AN in different places. Both tried with EQ set to 0 and all the DSP features turned default. NuQ122 highs sounded really great and resolution was fine. However there was some rise in high mids. In one track which I know well I could hardly hear vocals. Also some lows were weird and even scouring on some tracks. What was really strange that IQ15 sounded really good. Even though I was thinking to buy 12", now I'm leaning to 15". I haven't noticed any issues on IQ15.

Actually here in Europe price difference between IQ and NuQ series is only 70 euro, which is only 10% of overall price. However nobody is buying NuQs and all the sales go for IQs. Not sure why it is but I'm tending to think that something in IQ was improved as DSP is little bit different from first look. Maybe it's because IQs were introduced much later than NuQ so they had some new technological improvements while NuQ was only redesigned later. Also it might be the difference I noticed was because of comparison between 12" and 15".

I was 80% sure I would go for NuQ series as the price is pretty same, wood enclosure is great and overall as you say they are line up in the list. However after listening both I'm in big dilemma again Maybe NuQ152-AN would be perfect for me but I have no opportunity to listen for it.

[Robert Lofgren]

Can you elaborate a bit more on this?

There is a 5lbs weight diff, different amp module and the iq’s are fiberglass reinforced

The thing to consider is that the IQ series is essentially a slightly improved QSC K12 knock-off. I like the Power-Con and I like the DSP, but it is a K12 enclosure essentially.

[Luke Geis]

The amp module may be heavier, there may be additional bracing inside, the speaker may be ferrite as opposed to neo; all kinds of different factors can add up to a 5# difference. Looking at it though, you can't help but see that it looks nearly identical to a K series box. Fiberglass reinforced plastic could be heavier than what QSC is using, it may be thicker. My bet is that it even sounds better than a QSC It just doesn't look original in design is more what I meant.

[Tim Hite]

Have you seen the new Turbosound Berlin system?

http://m.musictribe.com/Categories/p/P0B66

. . . It just doesn't look original in design is more what I meant.

[Tim McCulloch]

Have you seen the new Turbosound Berlin system?

http://m.musictribe.com/Categories/p/P0B66

Oh happy day, another VRX wannabe.  /sigh, sarcasm

[Caleb Dueck]

Oh happy day, another VRX wannabe.  /sigh, sarcasm

The original wasn't quite bad enough, others are racing them down.

[Stephen Kirby]

What, pray tell, it a "dendritic waveguide"?  In most forms of electronics dendrites are a bad thing.

[Spenser Hamilton]

What, pray tell, it a "dendritic waveguide"?  In most forms of electronics dendrites are a bad thing.

 Turbosound has been pushing the Dendritic Waveguide for a long time, at least as far back as the Flex Array.

https://www.fullcompass.com/common/files/10948-TurbosoundTFA600HDP.pdf

In the past, they had a nice PDF explaining the Dendritic and the Polyhorn technologies that were used in Flex, Flash and Aspect. I can no longer find that document.

[Luke Geis]

This is what one looks like. It is just a maze of channels that split a single driver up so that when all the path lengths converge, it is over a larger horn width, making it easier to place with another like horn. When multiple drivers are used the horn is designed to converge everything together. Because a single driver is split into many small paths that all have the same volume and path length, it makes for a horn that can be converged in multiples much easier and with a greater level of resolution. In theory, you could stack many of these atop one another and have a very cohesive wavefront ( as opposed to a conventional horn splayed atop another ).

[Steve Garris]

The original wasn't quite bad enough, others are racing them down.

Is there something not so great about those VRX (and others) boxes? They're out of my price range, but I've heard them a couple of times and thought they sounded pretty good. This was a single unit on a pole per side - acoustic music & vocals. Does my cheaper SRX stuff perform better, aside from the different pattern coverage? Just curious...

[Luke Geis]

It's isn't so much that the VRX sounds bad, it's just not a practical tool for most things. The VRX has " a sound " and isn't good nor bad, it just doesn't sound great. They especially don't work well with only 1 box. They really need 2 boxes of more to even out and really start working and sounding decent. The problem is that for what it is, it is a rather pricey speaker.

Fast forward a bit and now you have 5-6 companies making an offering in the Constant Curvature Array category and pretty much all of them are priced a little high simply because they can and none of them are truly what they are touted as. My biggest gripe with the VRX is that it is relatively heavy @ 55lbs. and needing two on a pole makes them a little more than scary. To hang them means a structure that costs a heck of a lot more money than the speakers are worth investing in the structure for. Basically, CC arrays are expensive to implement correctly and only get marginal results. They are scalable, which is great, but it's the doing it right part that kills them.

I think the SRX and other similar priced conventional boxes sound much better than the VRX. I have used the QSC KLA quite a bit too and I hate that box even more than the VRX. I have not used any other options yet such as the D.A.S or the Renkus Heinz CFX101LA, but they are one and the same as a CC array. While the Turbosound Berlin may sound much better than the VRX ( as I have heard it does ), it is still a VRX made by a different company. JBL just happened to be the ones who popularized the CC array format and ever since it has been a race to have " array " in the title of the speaker system to drive sales. To me, if your only going to use 1-2 VRX on a stick, you may as well just use a $5,000 PS speaker that is really F-N awesome instead. If you're actually going to put 4-5 VRX in the sky like they are meant to be, then it is more viable and proper deployment.

[Tim McCulloch]

Is there something not so great about those VRX (and others) boxes? They're out of my price range, but I've heard them a couple of times and thought they sounded pretty good. This was a single unit on a pole per side - acoustic music & vocals. Does my cheaper SRX stuff perform better, aside from the different pattern coverage? Just curious...

Think "Christmas tree" horizontal coverage, turned on it's side.  Pink noise and a little walk around is incredibly revealing.  It's the nature of the design and for the most part, any speaker that looks like this will exhibit similar tendencies.

[Caleb Dueck]

Is there something not so great about those VRX (and others) boxes? They're out of my price range, but I've heard them a couple of times and thought they sounded pretty good. This was a single unit on a pole per side - acoustic music & vocals. Does my cheaper SRX stuff perform better, aside from the different pattern coverage? Just curious...

I've never heard VRX sound good, and KLA was even worse.  Spending more, as Tim alluded to, doesn't help either (think L'Acoustics WiFo).  If you're going to segment near vs far - the far speaker has to have higher SPL and a different (narrower) pattern.  If you're going to segment more than just near/far - get a real line array. 

After living in modeling software for a few years now - generally having a main speaker and an under-hung down fill, or a true line array - covers better than a fake line array (vertical array).  I've yet to see an application where a fake array performs better than the main/down point sources, or true line array. 

The best was a KLA array, vs a single RCF TT speaker.  Played them both side by side then basically asked the QSC rep - "What does KLA do better?".   

The other is basic audio - the higher the quantity of sources, the more interference.  Having one source, higher output, with better pattern control - outperforms multiple 'cheap' sources every time.  Especially if the multiple sources are price point driven and basic trap boxes, and the point source is essentially a point source (Danley, EAW QX5, Fulcrum AH/FH, PM90, etc). 

[Chris Grimshaw]

The best was a KLA array, vs a single RCF TT speaker.  Played them both side by side then basically asked the QSC rep - "What does KLA do better?".   

Ouch.
What was the reply?

Chris

[Caleb Dueck]

Ouch.
What was the reply?

Chris

Silence, then turned to someone else and changed the topic. 

[Patrick Cognitore]

In the past, they had a nice PDF explaining the Dendritic and the Polyhorn technologies that were used in Flex, Flash and Aspect. I can no longer find that document.

Uli probably lost it off his bicycle while riding to work.

[David Morison]

Uli probably lost it off his bicycle while riding to work.

I hope this is it: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gpEntCALRRljXfEUAD2adFRRCjOuTmnI/view?usp=sharing
HTH,
David

[ProSoundWeb Community]