ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down

Author Topic: what in the world are they thinking ?  (Read 24064 times)

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8866
  • Atlanta GA
Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
« Reply #40 on: May 30, 2011, 09:13:33 pm »

What can we conclude from this ?

That the curved array has very erratic coverage?
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

Mac Kerr

  • Old enough to know better
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6562
  • Audio Plumber
Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
« Reply #41 on: May 30, 2011, 09:21:21 pm »

Here are a couple MAPP images substituting MM4s for K-Array.
One is a plan view of a straight line of 90 MM4s at 2kHz.
The other is a plan view of 90 MM4s separated into six 5' sections, arrayed into an arc and predicted at 2 kHz

It is unclear what point you are trying to make here.

Don't forget that while MAPP Online is a very accurate way to model systems of Meyer speakers, the data in MAPP for each Meyer product is not equivalent to other products. While it is easy to build models of sub arrays, because over their frequency range subs tend to behave more like each other than speakers with mid and high frequency elements, it is not a general purpose modeling engine for other manufacturer's products. Once you get away from a relatively omnidirectional, limited bandwidth, speaker like a sub, you really need the correct speaker data for the model to have any meaning. The data in MAPP Online is derived from very detailed measurements of Meyer's products. It really does not relate to other speakers.

Mac
Logged

Dennis Awrey

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 37
Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
« Reply #42 on: May 30, 2011, 09:36:51 pm »

Here are a couple MAPP images substituting MM4s for K-Array.
One is a plan view of a straight line of 90 MM4s at 2kHz.
The other is a plan view of 90 MM4s separated into six 5' sections, arrayed into an arc and predicted at 2 kHz

It is unclear what point you are trying to make here.

Don't forget that while MAPP Online is a very accurate way to model systems of Meyer speakers, the data in MAPP for each Meyer product is not equivalent to other products. While it is easy to build models of sub arrays, because over their frequency range subs tend to behave more like each other than speakers with mid and high frequency elements, it is not a general purpose modeling engine for other manufacturer's products. Once you get away from a relatively omnidirectional, limited bandwidth, speaker like a sub, you really need the correct speaker data for the model to have any meaning. The data in MAPP Online is derived from very detailed measurements of Meyer's products. It really does not relate to other speakers.

Mac
Then I won't pursue this any further.
Logged

Robert Lunceford

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 419
Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
« Reply #43 on: May 31, 2011, 01:16:44 am »

K-ARRAY KR200S used for stage monitors.

Logged

Peter Morris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1273
Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
« Reply #44 on: May 31, 2011, 03:09:42 am »

Does any one know how this switch works?

Interestingly and probably related is that the impedance is 16 ohm is spot mode (7 deg) and 8 ohm in flood mode (120 deg).

Philip

Bessel array and or variants ? ? ?  - just a thought

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=6012

http://www.extra.research.philips.com/hera/people/aarts/RMA_papers/aar00b.pdf

http://www.angelfire.com/sd/paulkemble/soundf.html

Peter

Logged

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8866
  • Atlanta GA
Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
« Reply #45 on: May 31, 2011, 06:35:50 am »

K-ARRAY KR200S used for stage monitors.
Just because somebody is using a product a particular way-does not mean that it is correct-or that the usage is giving good results-or better results that would be achieved in a different manner.

Maybe the artisit is happy with it, and there may be other "circumstances" that cause a particular usage or setup--"We cannot have those speakers on the front of the stage be seen" for example.

In the example cited-it would not matter if the product was in the "line mode" or the "point mode" (I forgot exactly what they were called).   A curved aray that is focusing will cause all sorts of combfiltering across the stage.

Just because we can do something-doesn't mean we should do it.
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

Brad Weber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2209
  • Marietta, GA
Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
« Reply #46 on: May 31, 2011, 07:59:06 am »

Just to be clear, this topic is about how good a system sounds in a picture?

Has anyone actually listened to this system?

It seems like the guy that is using them on an actual tour with actual people is pretty happy with them. Should we just assume that he does not know what he is doing?

Just saying...
John, I get what you're saying and as Peter noted, there may be something lost in translation and editing but what in the article actually indicates the results are good, that the person doing this know what they're doing or that the people are happy with the results?  People assuming a good result due to the product without that actually being stated seems to reflect more on the marketing than on the product.
 
For example, "Sound professionals present were surprised by the performance of the slimline speakers." means that 'sound professionals' were surprised by the performance in some way.  However, we don't know who those people were and "surprise" is not inherently a good thing and I have been surprised many times by how bad some things sounded.  In fact this reminded me a bit of a comment Dave Gunness made at a trade show regarding how many 'pros' would listen just on axis and apparently never consider off axis response or how the speaker might interact in an array.  Given the comments made in the article and the absence of comments regarding coverage and interaction, one wonders is that perspective is reflected.
 
Although it is likely the impression that was intended, there is nothing in that marketing piece that actually says that qualified live sound pros or the audience were pleased with the overall audio results in that application, it actually seems to focus more on the visual aspect being what defined any success.
 
Logged

Peter Morris

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1273
Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
« Reply #47 on: May 31, 2011, 08:40:19 am »

  ....  it actually seems to focus more on the visual aspect being what defined any success.

If you have ever done anything for TV - thatís all they are interested in, the visual aspect, forget the live audio! I know - it sucks Ö but I keep thinking if these little things work half OK what a great compromise for those occasions. 

Peter
Logged

John Schimpf

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
« Reply #48 on: May 31, 2011, 09:54:00 am »

John, I get what you're saying and as Peter noted, there may be something lost in translation and editing but what in the article actually indicates the results are good, that the person doing this know what they're doing or that the people are happy with the results?  People assuming a good result due to the product without that actually being stated seems to reflect more on the marketing than on the product.
 
For example, "Sound professionals present were surprised by the performance of the slimline speakers." means that 'sound professionals' were surprised by the performance in some way.  However, we don't know who those people were and "surprise" is not inherently a good thing and I have been surprised many times by how bad some things sounded.  In fact this reminded me a bit of a comment Dave Gunness made at a trade show regarding how many 'pros' would listen just on axis and apparently never consider off axis response or how the speaker might interact in an array.  Given the comments made in the article and the absence of comments regarding coverage and interaction, one wonders is that perspective is reflected.
 
Although it is likely the impression that was intended, there is nothing in that marketing piece that actually says that qualified live sound pros or the audience were pleased with the overall audio results in that application, it actually seems to focus more on the visual aspect being what defined any success.

Good points Brian. I appreciate the technical discussion that this topic has created, but I am just confused why the original post suggests that there is no way that this system could possibly work. How exactly do we judge what is right or wrong when it come to something so subjective?

I guess my main point is that we should not be so quick to conclude that our fellow professionals in the field working night after night, successful in what they do with the equipment they choose, are making the wrong choices because a spec sheet says it wont work, or because someone disagrees with the choice.

The question also still remains, has anyone here actually heard this show using these speakers in the venues that they are playing? If an artist likes the sound of these speakers as monitors is he or she wrong for liking them?

John


Logged

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20450
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
« Reply #49 on: May 31, 2011, 10:05:43 am »

John, I get what you're saying and as Peter noted, there may be something lost in translation and editing but what in the article actually indicates the results are good, that the person doing this know what they're doing or that the people are happy with the results?  People assuming a good result due to the product without that actually being stated seems to reflect more on the marketing than on the product.
 
For example, "Sound professionals present were surprised by the performance of the slimline speakers." means that 'sound professionals' were surprised by the performance in some way.  However, we don't know who those people were and "surprise" is not inherently a good thing and I have been surprised many times by how bad some things sounded.  In fact this reminded me a bit of a comment Dave Gunness made at a trade show regarding how many 'pros' would listen just on axis and apparently never consider off axis response or how the speaker might interact in an array.  Given the comments made in the article and the absence of comments regarding coverage and interaction, one wonders is that perspective is reflected.
 
Although it is likely the impression that was intended, there is nothing in that marketing piece that actually says that qualified live sound pros or the audience were pleased with the overall audio results in that application, it actually seems to focus more on the visual aspect being what defined any success.

Good points Brian. I appreciate the technical discussion that this topic has created, but I am just confused why the original post suggests that there is no way that this system could possibly work. How exactly do we judge what is right or wrong when it come to something so subjective?

I guess my main point is that we should not be so quick to conclude that our fellow professionals in the field working night after night, successful in what they do with the equipment they choose, are making the wrong choices because a spec sheet says it wont work, or because someone disagrees with the choice.

The question also still remains, has anyone here actually heard this show using these speakers in the venues that they are playing? If an artist likes the sound of these speakers as monitors is he or she wrong for liking them?

John

When I design a system, the performance is not "subjective."  There are objective criteria to be met, often with a third party proof of performance evaluation.  If things don't work the way I said they would, we don't get paid.

That said, the issue presented by the OP is that, as pictured (and without further details in the article), this is not a "normal" deployment of the product.  There is no data showing measured results, no specific information regarding changes in processing or hidden switches that somehow make the K Array a stellar performer in the pictured application.

As neither the sound designer nor K or Sennheiser has posted to give us that information, I fully understand Mr. Young's skepticism.  He is not one to make public statements without careful consideration and, based on my knowledge of these types of systems I have no trouble accepting his premise.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
Logged
"Practicing an art, no matter how well or badly, is a way to make your soul grow, for heaven's sake. Sing in the shower. Dance to the radio. Tell stories. Write a poem to a friend, even a lousy poem. Do it as well as you possible can. You will get an enormous reward. You will have created something."  - Kurt Vonnegut

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
¬ę Reply #49 on: May 31, 2011, 10:05:43 am ¬Ľ


Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.026 seconds with 25 queries.