ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Real specs?! (possibly unnecessary rant)  (Read 3726 times)

Gareth James

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 231
Real specs?! (possibly unnecessary rant)
« on: October 24, 2006, 05:37:54 am »

I was searching for info on another sub on the eaw site when i noticed they have a new basshorn in development. They got a preliminary pdf up there so i had a read...

This new sub is almost same dimensions, (and i'm guessing similar internal structure) to their BH822e/KF940 design (which I've heard nothing but bad things about in actual use). Old sub 52x36x32, new sub 42x36x32.

Seems they've started to quote sensitivity figures at frequencies lower than 100+hz these days, they quote 105dB sensitivity for 4x stack at 50hz (as well as 110dB at 160hz).

These will probably be almost twice the weight (guess based on old subs weight) and almost twice the size of Danley TH-115's yet the danleys can produce equal or greater spls almost half an octave lower.

Before I go on I have great respect for most of EAW's stuff but subs is one area I'm not sure they do great anymore. I have heard and liked the SB1000 subs, not so keen on the LA128(?) sound.

I've not heard the LA400 so won't comment but where are the "middle of the road" subs, can we not have reasonable extension without huge sizes anymore?

All the horn loaded stuff is either massive or lacks any real extension. Surely if EAW wants to continue to have customers you use all EAW, especially the bigger touring systems, they will want to have subwoofers that will keep up in coming years in terms of size weight and output?

Maybe I'm jumping the gun a little (lot) here, or picking on EAW especially but isn't the company worried that people might start buying their line arrays etc and then using someone else subs for best performance...
Logged

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9010
Re: Real specs?! (possibly unnecessary rant)
« Reply #1 on: October 24, 2006, 07:05:52 am »

Just a little note about the Danley TH115.  The specs for it are for a SINGLE box.  Those figures goe up when you put them in a blocks.

I have heard that some people take measurements on a block of 4 and then just subtract 6dB, and call it a single box measurement.  I cannot confirm this however.

Danley can provide you with measurements of single-duals-quads etc if you ask.
Logged
For every complicated question-there is a simple- easy to understand WRONG answer.

Can I have some more talent in the monitors--PLEASE?

Ivan Beaver
dB Audio & Video Inc.
Danley Sound Labs

Pascal Pincosy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 978
Re: Real specs?! (possibly unnecessary rant)
« Reply #2 on: October 24, 2006, 05:17:26 pm »

The problem with measurements and specs is also that quoting specs for a single cabinet will always benefit the subwoofer system that is designed to work well as a single cabinet. If one quotes specs for a single LABsub, the reader can be left unaware that LABsubs are best used in a block of 4, and as such, that LABsubs specs are considerably better when used in such a manner.

I think the solution is better documentation of means and methods used to acertain specs. One that would work in Ivans example would be "Ratings per cabinet when used in a four cabinet array." Such documentation would lead to less end-user disgruntled-ness when said end-user finds out that their new subs sound like crap when used with one cabinet per side, especially when the end-user purchased the cabinets for just such a purpose.

For those who haven't noticed, TH-115's are really really loud. Upcoming designs from Bassmaxx, Fitzmaurice, and other horn-loaded subs are also really really loud. Apparently EAW either hasn't noticed, or they are just hoping <praying> that buyers haven't.
Logged
Know:Audio
--------------------------------
US Distributor: Trabes/MG Srl
Speaker Lifts-Truss-Roof Systems

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9010
Re: Real specs?! (possibly unnecessary rant)
« Reply #3 on: October 24, 2006, 05:55:03 pm »

One of the things that Danley does at trade shows is on a poster show the response of a single dual and quad Th115's on the same graph. The equaivelent of 1 watt applied to each cabinet.  100Watts @ a distance of 10M to take away any artificial gains the closeness of the mic to the cabinet would have.

You can take off 6 dB on the quad and 3dB on the dual to get how the cabinets add sensitivity to each other. The total applied to each "array" would be 1Watt for the entire "array".

index.php/fa/6338/0/
Logged
For every complicated question-there is a simple- easy to understand WRONG answer.

Can I have some more talent in the monitors--PLEASE?

Ivan Beaver
dB Audio & Video Inc.
Danley Sound Labs

Michael 'Bink' Knowles

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4279
    • http://www.binkster.net/index.shtml
Re: Real specs?! (possibly unnecessary rant)
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2006, 02:30:50 pm »

Quote:

...The total applied to each "array" would be 1Watt for the entire "array"...


Can you recheck that fact? Small print in the image says 400w was applied.

-Bink
Logged
Michael 'Bink' Knowles
www.binkster.net

Dave Rickard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2903
Re: Real specs?! (possibly unnecessary rant)
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2006, 03:08:32 pm »

Michael 'Bink' Knowles wrote on Wed, 25 October 2006 12:30

Quote:

...The total applied to each "array" would be 1Watt for the entire "array"...


Can you recheck that fact? Small print in the image says 400w was applied.

-Bink


It is also measured at 10 meters, instead of 1 meter, so would that be equal to 4W at one meter?

I'm understand that is to diminish mouth/measurement anomalies.
Logged
Dave
Yorkville dealer

"The wrong piece of gear, at the right price, is still the wrong piece of gear."

"If you don't have good stuff at each end of the signal chain, (mics and speakers) what you use in between is just turd polish."--Dave Dermont

Gareth James

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 231
Re: Real specs?! (possibly unnecessary rant)
« Reply #6 on: October 25, 2006, 03:23:59 pm »

I think when Ivan said 1w into the entire array he was referring to if you took 3dB off the 2xsub measurement and 6dB off the 4xarray. Ie. with a 4x array with 1 w into the entire array you would get a near flat 109-110dB between 40-100hz ish.

I guess my point from the original post was comparing the fact that the EAW array would probably be twice the size and weight and only put out 105 at 50hz...probably being 3-4dB down from that at 40hz.

Considering both subs have effectively equal powerhandling you would need 6 or more of the EAW subs to keep up with the 4x Danley array ABOVE 50hz let alone below, taking up 3x the weight and space not to mention extra amps.

Its just one example but there are other manufacturers out there that have would come close to achieving what is in my mind a significant performance advantage.
Logged

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9010
Re: Real specs?! (possibly unnecessary rant)
« Reply #7 on: October 25, 2006, 09:06:37 pm »

You are correct.  That is why I said the equalivelent of 1Watt.  100 watts is a 20dB rise and 10M is a 20dB decrease, so it all equals out to 1 Watt/1Meter.
Logged
For every complicated question-there is a simple- easy to understand WRONG answer.

Can I have some more talent in the monitors--PLEASE?

Ivan Beaver
dB Audio & Video Inc.
Danley Sound Labs

Michael_Elliston¶

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 261
    • http://www.geocities.com/xobt
Re: Real specs?! (possibly unnecessary rant)
« Reply #8 on: November 11, 2006, 06:26:59 pm »

Gareth James wrote on Tue, 24 October 2006 22:37

I was searching for info on another sub on the eaw site when i noticed they have a new basshorn in development. They got a preliminary pdf up there so i had a read...

This new sub is almost same dimensions, (and i'm guessing similar internal structure) to their BH822e/KF940 design (which I've heard nothing but bad things about in actual use). Old sub 52x36x32, new sub 42x36x32.

Seems they've started to quote sensitivity figures at frequencies lower than 100+hz these days, they quote 105dB sensitivity for 4x stack at 50hz (as well as 110dB at 160hz).

These will probably be almost twice the weight (guess based on old subs weight) and almost twice the size of Danley TH-115's yet the danleys can produce equal or greater spls almost half an octave lower.

Before I go on I have great respect for most of EAW's stuff but subs is one area I'm not sure they do great anymore. I have heard and liked the SB1000 subs, not so keen on the LA128(?) sound.

I've not heard the LA400 so won't comment but where are the "middle of the road" subs, can we not have reasonable extension without huge sizes anymore?

All the horn loaded stuff is either massive or lacks any real extension. Surely if EAW wants to continue to have customers you use all EAW, especially the bigger touring systems, they will want to have subwoofers that will keep up in coming years in terms of size weight and output?

Maybe I'm jumping the gun a little (lot) here, or picking on EAW especially but isn't the company worried that people might start buying their line arrays etc and then using someone else subs for best performance...

Since the danley basshorns operate on other principles,and the EAW horns are classic basshorns,id expect some differences.

People seem to like the la400.
Im not entirely sure what you mean by 'can we not have reasonable extension without huge sizes anymore?

All the horn loaded stuff is either massive or lacks any real extension.'


Question - when did we get extension without huge sizes?
Theyd only make it as large as it needs to be!

Perhaps they have a different set of parameters to aim for.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 22 queries.