Print

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

[Mark Oliver]

First post here!
Looking for insight into what the differences are between these three with respect to: throw
                     coverage
                     sonic qualities
Have worked lots with Peavey Impulse 1015 and the Elite 401 and am interested in whether or not an update is worthwhile.

Thanks

Mark Oliver

[Matt Vivlamore]

The U15s are a set-up from the SP2s... The E15 edge out the SP2 with sound quality.

I have the U15s and I am powering them with a PL236.  I started out powering them with a RMX2450 then a CE4000.

I went with the U15s, becasue its a 3 way cab, sound great.  Its also Bi-Amp able (HF/MF powered together).  U15s and throw I have been able to cover a middle school size gym-torium with no problem.  But with the U15s on stage on speaker stands you do get a small dead zone at front and center so front fills shouls be used.  If you go with Yorkvilles, I suggest getting the processor for that speaker.  I didn't beleive that a $200 crossover would sound that great, well it does.

[Jeff Babcock]

U15's are far superior if their coverage suits you.
E15's are not bad but a bit beamish in the midrange just below the crossover point.  I prefer the E12's over the E15.  Both have some funkiness around 400Hz to watch out for.  SP2's are probably the low man on the totem pole here, but may still be sufficient for your needs depending on what those are and your budget.

You mentioned throw and coverage.  You can really deduce this yourself from the specs provided.  Narrower dispersion speakers tend to be classified as long throw simply because they are more directional...likely to work well in an array which can give you increased output, but short and long throw are fairly generic terms and you have to be careful with this.  It can also be interpreted to signify "shading" where HF is boosted in the top cabs (long throw cabs) of a vertical array to compensate for loss of HF over long distances or excessive heat and humidity, for example in a festival situation with very large coverage areas.

[Mike McNany]

Having used many versions of the SP2 and currently the U15s, I agree there is no comparision. The U15s are way above the SP2s soundwise. I strongly prefer them.

BUT that is also reflected in cost. SP2s are decent speakers and do have some advantages, though. Lower cost, MUCH lower cost on the used market, and the ability to replace drivers and cones yourself readily available at mid to large size Peavey dealers. If you are hard on your system, go with the SP2s (recent used would be best). Also, the newer SP2s have a pretty go weight loss advantage over the U15s.

Mike McNany

[Tim Padrick]

Jeff Babcock wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 01:02

...E12....E15.  Both have some funkiness around 400Hz to watch out for.

A light filling with Dacron/Polyester fiber helps this a lot.  It helps the U15 as well.

[Steve Oldridge]

Stock... I would agree with the others... but...

I recently acquired 2 more used SP2Ti's. I now have 4 of them, all bought used for a grand total of around $700 [for all 4].  I compared the stock SP2Ti's with my other pair prior to ripping out the crossovers and bi-amp'ing them like the others. Oh.. so-o-o much cleaner after the "fix".  

Now, they all have the Black Widow 1505KADT's in 'em and I replaced the stock HF drivers with 1" Selenium D210Ti's for another $100+

When I compare price to value, its hard to beat, but of course, this suits my needs, YMMV.


-Steve