ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 31   Go Down

Author Topic: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!  (Read 86151 times)

Micky Basiliere

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 413
    • http://www.mbsoundco.com
Re: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!
« Reply #40 on: October 27, 2007, 01:30:58 pm »

Bennett, This "thread" About Powered Speakers Was just a "funny" in response to your "here's Mine" thread(when you posted no picture),being funny because you use powered speakers.
    I think your being alittle defensive here??? I just pointed out a couple of "posssible drawbacks" And this is just my opinion!
Not facts at all,so guess i did nothing wrong here. I'm just trying to get some ideas for my new Amp rig,and it's nice to see other peoples creations... Micky Confused
Logged
Micky Basiliere
www.mbsoundco.com

Scott Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2722
Re: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!
« Reply #41 on: October 27, 2007, 01:41:19 pm »

Not mine... but definately one of my favorites!  The rest of the amps are on the other side of the stage...  Very Happy

index.php/fa/12005/0/
Logged
"Percussive Maintenance" - Bang on it until it works!
Scott Smith, South Florida - MIXING OLD SCHOOL WITH NEW

Jason Dermer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1366
Re: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!
« Reply #42 on: October 27, 2007, 02:01:59 pm »

Wrong answer. Thank you, please play again.

Weather:
http://livesound.ca.newsmemory.com/ee/livesound/default_ezin e.php?token=jXWFXmAcjgCLQ0JflBWHrXBrX2

Cabling:
http://www.linkitaly.com:8080/public/jsp/frameset.jsp

Power:
No more or less power is needed than a properly powered system with racks of amplification.

Expensive:
Right in line with what you would pay for the combination of unpowered boxes, processing, amps, and racks.

Fragile:
Again, no more so than their unpowered counterparts.

Can you please elaborate on where your feelings on powered systems comes from?


There are real pluses and minuses to powered and unpowered boxes, and an hour with the "search" function should bring you to plenty of good debate from both camps. In the end, use whichever suits your client's and your own needs the best, but please do not make uninformed blanket statements about an entire realm of SR equipment that you likely have not had much experience with.
Logged
Jason Dermer
jason@asburyaudio.com
cell: 732-616-3463
office: 732-938-3100

"Rock & Roll and cars are just slightly different versions of the same mental disorder."- Peter Egan

Tony "T" Tissot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3902
    • http://www.4dbsound.com
Re: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!
« Reply #43 on: October 27, 2007, 02:04:08 pm »

Micky Basiliere wrote on Fri, 26 October 2007 22:21

"Self Powered" = HEAVY,EXPENSIVE,CABLE HUNGRY,and FRAGILE!(and don't like moisture outside of road cases!!!Another expensive investment!!! hehehe Twisted Evil


1. Not heavy. Maybe 10% more than passive. Huge weight reduction by virtue of losing speaker amp racks. I also gained lots of footprint in the trailer as well.
2. Not more expensive.  Expensive - sure - Like any pro-audio gear.
3. Cable hungry. Actually less cable weight. An XLR and a 12/3, instead of 14/8.
4. Not at all fragile. Not susceptible to moisture problems. But they do get covered in the rain - same as conventional speakers.

My ISP self-powered rig has proven to be a very useful investment.

Self-powered works very well in my situation, where limited setup time, and suspect power is the norm.
Logged
MNGS
ProSoundWeb - Home of 50,000 audio professionals - and two or three curmudgeonly SOBs.

Bruce Gering

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 988
Re: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!
« Reply #44 on: October 27, 2007, 02:54:16 pm »

I know they're not yours, but why are the AC cords in a coil instead of figure 8?
Logged
Sometimes I wish I had a clone of myself so I could enjoy life while my clone worked for me. Thing is, my clone would just keep the money, or worse yet, I would be working while he enjoyed my life!

Lester Moran

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 658
Re: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!
« Reply #45 on: October 27, 2007, 03:12:29 pm »

Bruce Gering wrote on Sat, 27 October 2007 19:54

...why are the AC cords in a coil instead of figure 8?



...so people on PSW could get all pissy with each other arguing about which is better?

Very Happy


Les


edit:  added smilie-face so the easily offended would know I am not being personally critical, but rather full of good-natured humor...


Logged

Hasse Queisser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 456
    • http://www.technosound.se
Re: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!
« Reply #46 on: October 27, 2007, 04:29:55 pm »

I like the look of that too  Razz . I don't have as many of them (yet), but the three racks like the one in the pics below are more than enough for me right now. 70kW of PowerLights gets you a long way  Very Happy

index.php/fa/12008/0/
Logged
Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups.

Hasse Queisser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 456
    • http://www.technosound.se
Re: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!
« Reply #47 on: October 27, 2007, 04:31:17 pm »

Backside.
index.php/fa/12010/0/
Logged
Never underestimate the power of very stupid people in large groups.

Shane Presley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 699
    • http://www.bssproductions.com
Re: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!
« Reply #48 on: October 27, 2007, 06:08:50 pm »

My amps are always in transition... I have 4 x 3402's on the way, probably to change out the AP6020's.... Take a peek...index.php/fa/12012/0/

Shane Presley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 699
    • http://www.bssproductions.com
Re: LET'S SEE THOSE AMP RACKS!
« Reply #49 on: October 27, 2007, 06:10:03 pm »

Rear view of the BSS Productions racks....index.php/fa/12013/0/
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 31   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.05 seconds with 18 queries.