Print

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

[Matteo Lanzi]

Hi everyone,
new to the forum although I've been reading for quite some time. I'm doing a major upgrade to my personal rig, from QSC K8.2/RCF Art 705AS (first series) and old RCF Art300A as monitors to 2 Meyer Sound CQ1 tops over 2 USW-1P subs. I think I'll keep the K8.2 and move them to vocal monitor duty/ultraportable system for when it's needed.

I had considered JBL SRX 835P/828SP, but with the price of used gear dropping I will actually pay less for the Meyer rig and I believe it will sound, if not louder (TBD) at least better.

Use will be 80% for my band rehearsal room (I am a drummer), 10% for school events I volunteer at as DJ/sound service, 10% as our own PA for gigs that don't provide their own system.

My questions:
1. choice of used Meyer vs. new JBL SRX800, good idea, bad idea, meh? Thoughts?

2. my choice of subs is mainly weight related, I think ideally a 2x18/side would be better, but the 650P at 100Kg/221lb is hard to manage even for 2 people, and the 700HP is right up there, also maybe too much for those tops. Will the USW-1P be too underpowered vs. the CQ1, on a 1:1 ratio?

3. would you run the system a) full range top and bottom and deal with the overlapping in frequencies between 40 and 180H with eq, or b) use a dedicated line driver such as the Meyer LD-1a or LD-2 for crossover, or c) use the outputs of the X32 for crossover (subs into mono center output with LPF, tops into main LR with HPF)?

Would love to hear back from people who've used the CQ1/USW-1P combination.
Thanks in advance,
Matteo

PS I live in Italy, I had also thought of Danley (SM80+TH118) but no used Danley gear in Europe as far as I can tell and I can't afford new shipped from US.

[Mac Kerr]

My questions:
1. choice of used Meyer vs. new JBL SRX800, good idea, bad idea, meh? Thoughts?

2. my choice of subs is mainly weight related, I think ideally a 2x18/side would be better, but the 650P at 100Kg/221lb is hard to manage even for 2 people, and the 700HP is right up there, also maybe too much for those tops. Will the USW-1P be too underpowered vs. the CQ1, on a 1:1 ratio?

3. would you run the system a) full range top and bottom and deal with the overlapping in frequencies between 40 and 180H with eq, or b) use a dedicated line driver such as the Meyer LD-1a or LD-2 for crossover, or c) use the outputs of the X32 for crossover (subs into mono center output with LPF, tops into main LR with HPF)?

Would love to hear back from people who've used the CQ1/USW-1P combination.
Thanks in advance,
Matteo

PS I live in Italy, I had also thought of Danley (SM80+TH118) but no used Danley gear in Europe as far as I can tell and I can't afford new shipped from US.

The CQ-1 is one of Meyer's best ever speakers. The USW-1P is a good sounding sub. Whether in your use it will be enough sub you will have to judge yourself. I would use that combination in pretty much any situation, but I'm not a big sub build up guy. It will be a great sounding rig.

Mac

[Matteo Lanzi]

The CQ-1 is one of Meyer's best ever speakers. The USW-1P is a good sounding sub. Whether in your use it will be enough sub you will have to judge yourself. I would use that combination in pretty much any situation, but I'm not a big sub build up guy. It will be a great sounding rig.

Mac

Thanks Mac, we play mostly rock originals with a punk-ish flavor, so I agree I don't need to go ultra-low even with the kick. I'm also acutely aware this is overkill, heck even just the CQ1 probably is, but I play mostly for my own pleasure and now that I can afford it (by the way, as I'm selling a lot of equipment as well, the upgrade in PA will cost me less than €3.000 difference!) I can't wait to hear the sound! Any suggestions on my third question (crossover)? Cheers, M.

[Peter Kowalczyk]

Love me some CQ-1s!  They're great sounding boxes.

While the USW-1P is a great sub too, in my opinion it is an under-gunned match for the CQ-1.  It was designed more as a match to the UPA.  The combo will surely sound great until you run out of headroom.  And with modern music, my guess is the USWs will limit first.  I'd think the 700-HP would be a better match.  I purchased this setup (700 + CQ1) for a client a few years ago and everyone's been very pleased with it.

I find that the CQ-1's LF section tends to limit before the HF section.  By high-passing the CQ-1s, you can mitigate this and gain a bit more headroom.  As to the specific freq / filter shape, use MAPP and SMAART and your ears to Decide.

Since you mention an X32, I would recommend using the Matrix section of the console as a system processor to implement High-passed Main L/R, and Low-passed mono Sub outputs.  That said, I've found that the X32 does not have enough output drive voltage to push SOME Meyer speakers to full output (based on work with UPQ-1Ps primarily) - the console clips before the speakers.  So you may find it advantageous to get a separate system processor like a Galileo.  But it's probably a non-issue unless you're trying to squeeze every bit of SPL from the rig.

[Matteo Lanzi]

Love me some CQ-1s!  They're great sounding boxes.

While the USW-1P is a great sub too, in my opinion it is an under-gunned match for the CQ-1.  It was designed more as a match to the UPA.  The combo will surely sound great until you run out of headroom.  And with modern music, my guess is the USWs will limit first.  I'd think the 700-HP would be a better match.  I purchased this setup (700 + CQ1) for a client a few years ago and everyone's been very pleased with it.

I find that the CQ-1's LF section tends to limit before the HF section.  By high-passing the CQ-1s, you can mitigate this and gain a bit more headroom.  As to the specific freq / filter shape, use MAPP and SMAART and your ears to Decide.

Since you mention an X32, I would recommend using the Matrix section of the console as a system processor to implement High-passed Main L/R, and Low-passed mono Sub outputs.  That said, I've found that the X32 does not have enough output drive voltage to push SOME Meyer speakers to full output (based on work with UPQ-1Ps primarily) - the console clips before the speakers.  So you may find it advantageous to get a separate system processor like a Galileo.  But it's probably a non-issue unless you're trying to squeeze every bit of SPL from the rig.

Peter thanks for your feedback, I know the 700HP would be a better match but it's really heavy (although the movements are rare, my practice room is in a basement - so stairs up and down every time) and about twice as expensive than the USW. Do you think a single 700HP (as a start) would do a better job than 2 USW?
Cheers,
M.

[Phillip Ivan Pietruschka]

Should be a great sounding rehearsal room!

Even if you don’t run a x-over between sub and CQ, if you eq back the build up in the over lapped region, you’ll have more headroom from the CQ. I did this at least a few times with CQs &or UPQs quite successfully (though not for hard rock or edm). Meyer stuff is all made to play pretty well together, so simple solutions to combining mids/highs and subs can be made to work quite successfully in appropriate applications.

700HPs are quite a bit more impressive than the two other options; but may well be quite unnecessary for a rehearsal space.

[MikeHarris]

as a drummer you will appreciate the speed and tightness of the dual 15. the 700HP too big to drag up stairs...once down there it will never leave

[Helge A Bentsen]

I prefer 600HP with CQ-1. They are a lot smaller and lighter than 700HP.

That would be my first choice if I was in your situation and wanted a USW replacement.

[Matteo Lanzi]

as a drummer you will appreciate the speed and tightness of the dual 15. the 700HP too big to drag up stairs...once down there it will never leave

As a drummer I had thought about the 2x15 aspect and fully agree with you. Same goes for the 700s, best product but not in this context. If anything I might later upgrade to 4x USW, more boxes but each a lot easier to carry. The 600HP is still over 45lbs/20Kg heavier than the USW, and according to the specs is louder but doesn't go as low (FWIW).
With 4 USW I think I'd have an amazing sounding PA with no particular bottom end issue, while also being very flexible as I could go just 2xCQ1 or add 1-2-3 (cardioid)- 4 (standard or cardiod) subs.
No one has mentioned the comparison with the JBL Srx 835P/828SP, so I guess it's a non-stater.
Thanks to everyone for your input, it's a big decision and I'm happy to rely on collective wisdom.
Have a great weekend, M.

[Jon Fu]

With 4 USW I think I'd have an amazing sounding PA with no particular bottom end issue, while also being very flexible as I could go just 2xCQ1 or add 1-2-3 (cardioid)- 4 (standard or cardiod) subs.

USW-1Ps are great sounding subwoofers but they don't get very loud relative to modern offerings. They'd be fine in a rehearsal room but I'd be concerned about using them in low numbers in any DJ situation requiring substantial volume with modern music. The 600-HP was part of a newer generation and they do get significantly louder than what the specification sheets would suggest at the expense of some low frequency extension.

Meyer's documentation lists two UPQ-1Ps with one 600-HP as a generally flat system. Since the CQs have greater low frequency extension, you can probably get away with four USWs. But then again, you're lugging four subwoofers that could be replaced with two 600-HPs (with some headroom to spare). USW-1Ps and 650-Ps are great sounding speakers but SPL leaders they are not. I don't know that they could compete with the SRX828SP if you just need SPL. The HP series were a vast improvement on that front and the LFC series even more so. Just my two cents.

[ProSoundWeb Community]