Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums > LAB Lounge

Looking for experienced opinions on KS118 and SRX818

<< < (3/13) > >>

Bob Stone:

--- Quote from: Nils Erickson on May 04, 2021, 03:21:01 AM ---I agree with Luke, the SRX boxes are a big step up from all of the QSC options.  If you only have one sub, my .02 is this: don't worry about starting over (it is easy to sell off one sub, or save it for your drum monitor).  Get something scalable that can fit into what you plan to drive.  Single 18's are fine, and you may soon want more.  But you have to double what you have to make a difference, so don't rule out SRX828 if you can find a good way out transporting them; they are a really good value, especially right now.

As far as the tops, keep in mind how you will get them up.  An 835 is 95 lbs... you need two people to lift it, and there is no really good stand option (even though there is a pole cup, I mean that is just silly).  If you plan to do top/pole/sub, go with a smaller option. I would look at the 835 only if I intended to ground stack on a pair of 828 (or single on its side), on sound wings.  Otherwise you will be too low.

If I was buying SRX818, I would pair it with SRX812.  It is powerful and sounds great, and is compact.  You can add subs for bigger shows.  If you grow down the line, SRX812 can be a good monitor or front/side fill.  And, it is a sizable monetary gap to the next step up.

However, I think the real winner is 4xSRX828 and 4xSRX835, if you're looking at JBL.  Then you have a scalable system: one over one, or two over two.  If that fits in the van and you can move it without getting hurt, pull the trigger. If you are a single owner/operator without help for load in/out, get the small stuff.

Of course, if you providing for your band, maybe you already own enough stuff.  What you own already can handle a wedding, small event, or a small club.  Bigger than that and there will often be other sound providers anyway.  Taking the "next step" is bigger than a new set of speakers.  I do believe it is Tim M who has said repeatedly that the next step involves spending 2x what you have invested already, no matter the level you are at.  I have found this to be true, many times over.

Side note: I still have four SRX725, which I have had for many years.  They have been bullet proof, sound good, they get loud.  They have had a good return on investment, and been fun to mix on.  And, they still do the trick for some shows.  The most difficult thing with large speakers is how you deploy them.  Beyond that size, things get a lot more difficult.

Hope that helps you.

Cheers,
Nils

--- End quote ---

I disagree about the size of step. We're not talking double the performance, we're talking a db or two more useful output and marginally better sound.

If the guy was buying net new, then the SRX would be a good direction to go. Given his inventory already though, making the move to JBL over QSC is going to cost a lot more (total price spent before and now). Given the market for live sound is tough right now and the fact that the SRX setup isn't going to increase his ability to get shows (honestly almost any show the SRX speakers could do, the QSC's could do too), it's not worth the investment.

Now if he starts talking about moving actually up to say Danley's or even the SRX dual 18's or something that's substantially more output/capability, then that's a move worth making as it opens up the possible shows he could do.

Nils Erickson:

--- Quote from: Bob Stone on May 07, 2021, 04:23:00 PM ---I disagree about the size of step. We're not talking double the performance, we're talking a db or two more useful output and marginally better sound.

If the guy was buying net new, then the SRX would be a good direction to go. Given his inventory already though, making the move to JBL over QSC is going to cost a lot more (total price spent before and now). Given the market for live sound is tough right now and the fact that the SRX setup isn't going to increase his ability to get shows (honestly almost any show the SRX speakers could do, the QSC's could do too), it's not worth the investment.

Now if he starts talking about moving actually up to say Danley's or even the SRX dual 18's or something that's substantially more output/capability, then that's a move worth making as it opens up the possible shows he could do.

--- End quote ---
Fair enough, it is pretty subjective stuff we are talking about here...

As far as getting more shows, there is much more to it than the name of the system I think.   My experience is that some clients have cared what brand of speakers I had; many others just care about how the job gets done.  So, my advice would be to mix on what makes you happy and brings you business.  Maybe no "upgrade" is needed at all.  Sometimes getting more shows means being about to cross rent with another business in town to do bigger stuff or keep your gear working, so I suppose that is something to consider as well.

Over the years, I have owned JBL SRX, EAW, Danley, d&b, Meyer, QSC, Apogee.  All of them have been fun to mix on, some of them have met riders, some are good for rentals, all of them have been right for some gig, none of them have been right for every gig. 

Cheers,
Nils

Luke Geis:
I'm sort of bummed. I had a good post written up about why the SRX is actually a huge leap forward, but then the i-net crashed on me, again..... the long and short was this:

SRX = Wooden Box / QSC K series = Plastic
SRX = 3" compression driver / QSC 1/4"
SRX = Fully programable DSP / QSC K.2 = limited DSP parameters
SRX = 136db peak output ( in a wet dream ) / QSC = 132db ( also in a wet dream )
SRX = fairly linear output ( considering the price point ) / QSC = not very linear output ( despite it price point )
SRX = Compatible with JBL's flagship VTX line / QSC = not directly compatible with anything
SRX = networkable and remote controllable / QSC = not networkable or controllable remotely
SRX = F.I.R filters / QSC = no F.I.R filters

As you can see, even if you were to make a list of the things that the QSC K series was good at vs. the SRX, it wouldn't really help their case much. I believe and feel the SRX sounds and performs much better than the QSC K series in every way. The K series stuff is pretty expensive considering what it is competing against. There is only about a $300 difference in price between the SRX and the QSC lines, and the SRX is punching far above the QSC in terms of features and performance.

I think the SRX falls into what I call the Pro-sumer market. It is entry-level professional-grade stuff. The QSC K series to me is just consumer or MI grade. It is what 9 out of 10 bands will own happily because it was the best they could afford. That is not to say that it is worthless, unusable, or crap. The QSC K series is good and performs rather well actually. It provides excellent ROI, is accepted by just about any local band, is simple to use, and has good reliability. Having used both the QSC and the SRX MANY times to mix on, the SRX is just easier and more rewarding to work with.

Scott Holtzman:

--- Quote from: Luke Geis on May 09, 2021, 03:28:28 PM ---I'm sort of bummed. I had a good post written up about why the SRX is actually a huge leap forward, but then the i-net crashed on me, again..... the long and short was this:

SRX = Wooden Box / QSC K series = Plastic
SRX = 3" compression driver / QSC 1/4"
SRX = Fully programable DSP / QSC K.2 = limited DSP parameters
SRX = 136db peak output ( in a wet dream ) / QSC = 132db ( also in a wet dream )
SRX = fairly linear output ( considering the price point ) / QSC = not very linear output ( despite it price point )
SRX = Compatible with JBL's flagship VTX line / QSC = not directly compatible with anything
SRX = networkable and remote controllable / QSC = not networkable or controllable remotely
SRX = F.I.R filters / QSC = no F.I.R filters

As you can see, even if you were to make a list of the things that the QSC K series was good at vs. the SRX, it wouldn't really help their case much. I believe and feel the SRX sounds and performs much better than the QSC K series in every way. The K series stuff is pretty expensive considering what it is competing against. There is only about a $300 difference in price between the SRX and the QSC lines, and the SRX is punching far above the QSC in terms of features and performance.

I think the SRX falls into what I call the Pro-sumer market. It is entry-level professional-grade stuff. The QSC K series to me is just consumer or MI grade. It is what 9 out of 10 bands will own happily because it was the best they could afford. That is not to say that it is worthless, unusable, or crap. The QSC K series is good and performs rather well actually. It provides excellent ROI, is accepted by just about any local band, is simple to use, and has good reliability. Having used both the QSC and the SRX MANY times to mix on, the SRX is just easier and more rewarding to work with.

--- End quote ---


Sorry you lost your quote.  THe KS118 and KW181 are all wood sub.

Bob Stone:

--- Quote from: Luke Geis on May 09, 2021, 03:28:28 PM ---I'm sort of bummed. I had a good post written up about why the SRX is actually a huge leap forward, but then the i-net crashed on me, again..... the long and short was this:

SRX = Wooden Box / QSC K series = Plastic
SRX = 3" compression driver / QSC 1/4"
SRX = Fully programable DSP / QSC K.2 = limited DSP parameters
SRX = 136db peak output ( in a wet dream ) / QSC = 132db ( also in a wet dream )
SRX = fairly linear output ( considering the price point ) / QSC = not very linear output ( despite it price point )
SRX = Compatible with JBL's flagship VTX line / QSC = not directly compatible with anything
SRX = networkable and remote controllable / QSC = not networkable or controllable remotely
SRX = F.I.R filters / QSC = no F.I.R filters

As you can see, even if you were to make a list of the things that the QSC K series was good at vs. the SRX, it wouldn't really help their case much. I believe and feel the SRX sounds and performs much better than the QSC K series in every way. The K series stuff is pretty expensive considering what it is competing against. There is only about a $300 difference in price between the SRX and the QSC lines, and the SRX is punching far above the QSC in terms of features and performance.

I think the SRX falls into what I call the Pro-sumer market. It is entry-level professional-grade stuff. The QSC K series to me is just consumer or MI grade. It is what 9 out of 10 bands will own happily because it was the best they could afford. That is not to say that it is worthless, unusable, or crap. The QSC K series is good and performs rather well actually. It provides excellent ROI, is accepted by just about any local band, is simple to use, and has good reliability. Having used both the QSC and the SRX MANY times to mix on, the SRX is just easier and more rewarding to work with.

--- End quote ---

You're missing the point, will the OP get thousands of dollars more business by having the SRX boxes? Unlikely. As a business owner there should be a clear ROI before investing thousands more dollars into gear. If the new rig would let him get bigger shows or something then sure, but going from a couple single 18's to some other couple single 18's, he isn't gaining enough to open him up to new possibilities.

Nobody is arguing that the SRX boxes aren't better, just they aren't worth the money when the OP already has a similar rig.

Also, your math is wrong, a K12.2 is $800, a SRX812p is $1300...that's a $500 difference.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version