ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Church speakers proposal  (Read 6591 times)

DonSneed

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Re: Church speakers proposal
« Reply #10 on: February 17, 2011, 06:57:56 pm »

I never had a problem with the OAP C series, I aimed the long throw HF for the center to rear seating with pink noise & a Ivie IE35 RTA/SPL meter using the tilt of the cabinet. After I get the long throw aimed & where I need it, I cut off the long throw horn & turn on the second horn & aimed for the front pew to the middle, I can tell the leading edge of the HF beam from the trailing edge of the long throw HF beam...Overlap, maybe 1-pew, can't tell it, my DB in most rooms is .8-1.5dbc from front to back, side to side... I use 2-3 or 4 C-1.5 cabinets. I get great coverage & tone quality from these speakers, I really like the second horn, this what make this speaker system work. I install JBL, OAP, EAW, I like them all....
Logged

chuck clark

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 348
Re: Church speakers proposal
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2011, 02:23:13 pm »

Hi Russ, My initial thoughts are:
I see lots of plaster and hardwood. The midrange bounce is gonna be significant in there. Resonant nodes will build up pretty quickly on you at anything much beyond mid-level volumes.
The complex shape and angles of the ceiling will help break things up nicely.
Hope you have nice plush carpet. That will help.
No shields in front of drums? Good luck.
No sonex behind drums? Good luck.
Aim speakers at ears in seats, not on side or back walls to minimize reflected energy levels.
Hang looks tall enough that previously mentioned 250hz region buildup on stage shouldn't be too bad.
Can probly be fixed w/ a dab of EQ.
Nice charts. What software is that? Wonder if it allows for reflected field resonances? (Rarely the case)
Happy sailing
Chuck
Logged

Brad Weber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2209
  • Marietta, GA
Re: Church speakers proposal
« Reply #12 on: February 25, 2011, 03:50:00 pm »

No sonex behind drums? Good luck.
If you mean acoustic absorption in a generic sense, then I agree that would help.  If you mean Sonex as a brand then I disagree as there are numerous, including many less expensive, other options.  :)

Hang looks tall enough that previously mentioned 250hz region buildup on stage shouldn't be too bad.
Can probly be fixed w/ a dab of EQ.
I have to disgree on this.  As far as using equaliztion to fix it, the summation is acoustic and you can't equalize it out, all you can do with EQ is to reduce the level of the source at that frequency.  However, any change you make to the source response will effect everywhere the speaker covers and not just where the levels are higher.  You could put a big notch at 250Hz to reduce the levels mid stage relative to other frequencies, but you'd also be reducing the 250Hz levels everywhere else, which may not be desired.  So you could vary the array height or the equalization but all you'd likely do is vary the levels everywhere without making much difference in the levels on stage relative to the levels in the audience.  And that is what is a concern in terms of gain before feedback.

Nice charts. What software is that? Wonder if it allows for reflected field resonances? (Rarely the case)
I'm not sure what you mean by "reflected field resonances" but those look very much like screen captures from EASE and EASE can include the effects of device and/or room interaction.  What is shown is identified as being the Direct Sound, so it is displaying only the direct sound component and not the effect of the room.  It is not possible to tell for sure from the information shown if interference sum is on or not.
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Church speakers proposal
« Reply #12 on: February 25, 2011, 03:50:00 pm »


Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.115 seconds with 22 queries.