Print

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

[Mike Santarelli]

I personally would love to see some quantitative comparison to show overlap in capabilities between the TTL6A, the J7, and the J3 as the upper end of point-and-shoot boxes.  After hearing the J3 in the wild I’d be very curious to see (hear) how close the J7 and TTL6A can come despite their smaller size and lower cost.

Hi Jeff,

The ttl6a while an impressive box, will come nowhere near the J7.  As a ttl6a and sm80 owner, I can say the output in real world conditions are close between just those boxes 1:1. The ttl6a is touch louder and has a lot more bottom end and lower mids, which should be expected. A better comparison would be the ttl6a vs 96ho with the 96ho having an edge 1:1 which would also hang in there with a double hang of ttl6a.  I did do an casual side by side comparison between these boxes.

As a side note, I do think the IG and NX series are great boxes. I will most likely add some down the road.  As I eluded to in a similar post ,there are expectations vs reality when it comes to deployment.  My original intention was to ground stack two ig4t on top of 9006 subs. The logistics of stacking a second IG4t on top of an already nearly 8ft tall stack (vertical 9006 and single IG4t) quickly realized to be not as easy as it seemed.   I will also add that double stacking the ttl6a is not the most fun of activities.  I would count on flying in that regard.

Lots of great speakers out there and the tt4 series are pretty incredible and much easier to deploy and link than the ttl6a. 

It is good time for gear choices.


Mike

[Caleb Dueck]

I personally would love to see some quantitative comparison to show overlap in capabilities between the TTL6A, the J7, and the J3 as the upper end of point-and-shoot boxes.  After hearing the J3 in the wild I’d be very curious to see (hear) how close the J7 and TTL6A can come despite their smaller size and lower cost.

I haven't compared them other than spec sheets, but both the J7 and J3 are close-ish while the TTL6A is far behind.  Ivan, and likely Scott, have likely compared the J7 and J3.  It's not as simple as max clean SPL; there was a thread a while back where Iain talked about how the different tonality comes into play besides sheer SPL between these two boxes.  It may have been on the FB Danley group, there's a lot of activity there.

[Matt Vivlamore]

I haven't compared them other than spec sheets, but both the J7 and J3 are close-ish while the TTL6A is far behind.  Ivan, and likely Scott, have likely compared the J7 and J3.  It's not as simple as max clean SPL; there was a thread a while back where Iain talked about how the different tonality comes into play besides sheer SPL between these two boxes.  It may have been on the FB Danley group, there's a lot of activity there.

On of the biggest problems with the J3 and J7 is weight the J3 weights 440# and J7 is 265#.  I'm also going to guess that the J3/J7 cost much much more than the TTL6A.

[Caleb Dueck]

On of the biggest problems with the J3 and J7 is weight the J3 weights 440# and J7 is 265#.  I'm also going to guess that the J3/J7 cost much much more than the TTL6A.

Yeah, a J7 with one amp per speaker (for full SPL output) is almost 4x the price of a TTL6A.  You can't even really compare the two, either in terms of performance or cost.  When you're up at the J7 level, you're comparing your system with d&b/L'Acoustics/Meyer arrays.  With the TTL6A, you're comparing with SM80, T24N, and such boxes. 

[Jeff Lelko]

Thanks for the input Caleb and Mike - that definitely answers my question.  I've heard the SM80 in a demo environment and can see how the TTL6A would add some much needed output in the lower end of the spectrum allowing for a lower crossover point on subs.  As someone keeping a casual eye out for a "next system" when the time comes I've always been cautious about the upper limits of the TTL6A with respect to its price versus taking the plunge on a J7 rig or similar - really looking for that sweet spot on "bang to buck" for "next step up" rigs.  Thanks again! 

[Doug Fowler]

Thanks for the input Caleb and Mike - that definitely answers my question.  I've heard the SM80 in a demo environment and can see how the TTL6A would add some much needed output in the lower end of the spectrum allowing for a lower crossover point on subs.  As someone keeping a casual eye out for a "next system" when the time comes I've always been cautious about the upper limits of the TTL6A with respect to its price versus taking the plunge on a J7 rig or similar - really looking for that sweet spot on "bang to buck" for "next step up" rigs.  Thanks again!

IMO SM80 needs a one octave bass box with the same footprint, say 80Hz - 160 Hz.  No one wants to run their subs high enough to account for SM80’s lack of bass response.  It’s also a stacking solution.

[Douglas R. Allen]

Hi Jeff,

The ttl6a while an impressive box, will come nowhere near the J7.  As a ttl6a and sm80 owner, I can say the output in real world conditions are close between just those boxes 1:1. The ttl6a is touch louder and has a lot more bottom end and lower mids, which should be expected. A better comparison would be the ttl6a vs 96ho with the 96ho having an edge 1:1 which would also hang in there with a double hang of ttl6a.  I did do an casual side by side comparison between these boxes.

As a side note, I do think the IG and NX series are great boxes. I will most likely add some down the road.  As I eluded to in a similar post ,there are expectations vs reality when it comes to deployment.  My original intention was to ground stack two ig4t on top of 9006 subs. The logistics of stacking a second IG4t on top of an already nearly 8ft tall stack (vertical 9006 and single IG4t) quickly realized to be not as easy as it seemed.   I will also add that double stacking the ttl6a is not the most fun of activities.  I would count on flying in that regard.

Lots of great speakers out there and the tt4 series are pretty incredible and much easier to deploy and link than the ttl6a. 

It is good time for gear choices.


Mike

   I've only double stacked my IG4T's and IG2T's a few times. When I did, I set the IG4T's beside the sub. Stood on the sub and just reached down and picked them up. At 40lbs. not hard at all. Any sub that is large enough to stand on and is around the height that a chair is enough added height to get you up on makes for a easy stack.  If your subs are taller than that then set the tops on them and get up with a step ladder. Like every setup, you'll know what to bring to make it happen. I'd rather do that than a 3 box line array with poles.

Douglas R. Allen

[Rick Powell]

IMO SM80 needs a one octave bass box with the same footprint, say 80Hz - 160 Hz.  No one wants to run their subs high enough to account for SM80’s lack of bass response.  It’s also a stacking solution.

The SM80F (2-15's in a tapped horn along with the mid/hi section of an SM80) is a solution that some have used with a sub to solve the issue, and has decent low end response as a stand alone. Although at 215 lbs. it is much harder to deploy in a stack than a regular SM80.

There is also the SM80M which is a ported box instead of a sealed box, that is pole mountable and extends the -3dB LF response to 86Hz as opposed to the SM80's 140Hz. And weighs the same 65 lbs as the SM80. There's your missing octave.

[Mike Santarelli]

   I've only double stacked my IG4T's and IG2T's a few times. When I did, I set the IG4T's beside the sub. Stood on the sub and just reached down and picked them up. At 40lbs. not hard at all. Any sub that is large enough to stand on and is around the height that a chair is enough added height to get you up on makes for a easy stack.  If your subs are taller than that then set the tops on them and get up with a step ladder. Like every setup, you'll know what to bring to make it happen. I'd rather do that than a 3 box line array with poles.

Douglas R. Allen

It is definitely doable, it just can get a little squirrelly on top of a taller sub. There are scenarios I’ve encountered where the practicality of double stack would be difficult or not ideal in a setting but the output of two per side would be needed. This is one reason I went a different direction.  I really do like them and not trying knock them. They do sound really good and pricing is attractive. I would definitely take flying into consideration for anyone planning on using a double stack.

Right before COVID hit I did some consulting for a theater I was contracted at which had a balcony.  It is a small and quaint old theater which does live music and movies.  We decided that the IG3T was the best choice for coverage and budget.  Each side has a wall mounted double stack of of IG3T. They work really well in that room and because of the horn design, you have clarity in the balcony which you didn’t have before.

[Mike Pyle]

   I've only double stacked my IG4T's and IG2T's a few times. When I did, I set the IG4T's beside the sub. Stood on the sub and just reached down and picked them up. At 40lbs. not hard at all. Any sub that is large enough to stand on and is around the height that a chair is enough added height to get you up on makes for a easy stack.  If your subs are taller than that then set the tops on them and get up with a step ladder. Like every setup, you'll know what to bring to make it happen. I'd rather do that than a 3 box line array with poles.

Douglas R. Allen

Too bad dB Technologies does not have some kind of a hinge attachment to make stacking easier. My TTL11A system can be stacked easily by one person because of the hinge plates that mount between the cabinets.

While the TTL11A looks similar to current column offerings, it is different in that the bottom cabinet covers only bass frequencies while the top is mids & HF. All the processing is in the top column. While this means you must always run both columns it has the advantage (in my view) of putting the HF horns at the top of the stack. Mounted to the TTS26A sub, the horns are high enough to provide good coverage clear across a 150' deep ballroom and not peel the faces off audiences up close. 3 position beam steering minimizes slap back. When RCF came out with the TTL6A I had hopes that it would be a system like the TTL11A on steroids, but the horns being in the middle of a double stacked column adds the complexity of lifts to achieve the height needed for large area coverage.

IMO SM80 needs a one octave bass box with the same footprint, say 80Hz - 160 Hz.  No one wants to run their subs high enough to account for SM80’s lack of bass response.  It’s also a stacking solution.

I suggested this to the western sales rep during a demo at my warehouse years ago, either using a separate cabinet or using the SM80 horn as the top half of a taller cabinet (thinking dual 12" or 15" size). When they announced the SM80F I got briefly excited, until I saw the size and weight of the design. Not at all the portable, easy setup solution I had hoped for.

[ProSoundWeb Community]