Post by: josh cohen on June 01, 2007, 01:48:11 AM
i think i've caught the growler bug. i do a lot of dance (techno) shows and think a pair or two of these little loud guys would be rocking.
Post by: Tim McCulloch on June 01, 2007, 04:24:26 PM
Jeff Permanian probably has more pictures than anyone else since the Growler is a fairly new product.
As for reviews, you've seen what's been said in the Product Review forum, and you might want to find the NY Subwoofer Shootout threads there. Look for posts by Elliot Thompson.
Not in the same league as the BassMax Triples or the Danley TH215, but for the size, weight, and program material they performed impressively.
If I were building a club rig that I had to move myself, I'd probably purchase Growlers.
Tim Mc
Post by: josh cohen on June 01, 2007, 04:27:54 PM
| Tim McCulloch wrote on Fri, 01 June 2007 15:24 |
If I were building a club rig that I had to move myself, I'd probably purchase Growlers. Tim Mc |
exactly!
Post by: Rob Spence on June 02, 2007, 06:34:52 PM
The 2 Growlers stacked gets the QRX up high enough.
I have heard Mike Christy's pair and while I like em a lot, more is better.
I am powering them now one per channel on a pair of PLX3002s but want to go to bigger power for them such as a PL6.0 or Crest Pro 9200.
Post by: Mike Christy on June 06, 2007, 01:11:39 PM
) Just kidding... it was some sub killer track on the shootout CD that did it, but no majic smoke.I dont think it was a fair listening test at my place, the cabs were setup on a screen porch, kind of coupled but not really, facing an open sliding glass door into the house, and 1/2 the side of the house, it was LOUD, but I think even louder inside the house - across the living room and by the kitchen sink - let the wave lengths unfold. I dont think we realized how loud it was until we tried to talk to each other - it was very clean. I do plan on getting another set, with 4 they will cover any size gig I will be willing to do.
None the less, I am VERY pleased with them, they are easy to carry/move, sound good and low, are musical, look great, I cant find a flaw, they are perfect for me. I think if you are doing DJ stuff you will love them. Alot of my gigs are DJ/hip-hop, and those kids are amazed by them, they have never heard such a small system put out such a quality sound, although, I think they get crap systems lots of time, and engineers who dont give a rat's ass. Last gig they said there was to much bass - what the?!
I digress... I have a gig Friday night, Ill post more pics than are on the pisces sound site, and a short review on how they make Vdrums sound, should be interesting...
Mike
Post by: Steve Hurt on June 06, 2007, 08:33:50 PM
http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/21880/747/
(I added rubber feet and pole sockets before taking the pics, but it's pretty easy to imagine them without those parts added)
Post by: Will Lane on June 19, 2007, 06:47:01 PM
Post by: Mike Christy on June 20, 2007, 08:30:59 AM
I think the cabs are going to sound different. Horn loaded typically take less power to generate the same SPL, but are better used in pairs (or more). Ive read the 808s can be violent but dont go as low as others.
Im sure everyone's sick of reading my same Growler spiel, but they are musical, smooth, full, and do go low, especially for their size. They are 100db @1w/m ( @60Hz I think, help someone? ) - that is a real measured spec. Yorkville doesn't publish their specs like that, I wish they did, at least we'd have some kind of starting reference, even if on paper.
<Begin Speculation> Im not sure 2 against 4 would be a fair fight, maybe the edge to the 808s for raw driver count and physical radiated cabinet area, by how many dB? Who knows. And what does it sound like? If your doubling the cabinets and doubling the amps your going to increase the SPL, no matter WHAT cabinet your up against. I'm certain you'll hear a different quality of sound from each set of cabinets, and is that the sound you want?
</End Speculation>
Now 4 against 4? That's a different subject.
Post by: Jeff Permanian on June 20, 2007, 10:57:48 AM
.
Post by: Matt Jordan on June 27, 2007, 10:04:23 PM
Post by: josh cohen on June 27, 2007, 10:13:22 PM
| Matt Jordan wrote on Wed, 27 June 2007 21:04 |
I can demo Growlers in Boise, ID. I just took delivery on 2 units, and will be the Northwestern Growler dealer. Four words. I am VERY impressed. Thanks Jeff |
boise is a loooooong way from new orleans.
Post by: Phil LaDue on June 27, 2007, 11:27:48 PM
| josh sense wrote on Wed, 27 June 2007 22:13 | ||
boise is a loooooong way from new orleans. |
Nahh, it's only 2221.88 miles
Post by: Michael 'Bink' Knowles on June 28, 2007, 03:04:14 PM
| Phil LaDue wrote on Wed, 27 June 2007 20:27 | ||
Nahh, it's only 2221.88 miles |
At Mach 1 it should take about 2 hours and 53 minutes for the sound to get there. Fire them up!
-Bink
Post by: Roy Tamanaha on June 28, 2007, 04:58:48 PM
I started out by purchasing four Growlers from Jeff (great guy, easy to work with, and very knowledgeable), and was so impressed that I ended up purchasing twelve in all.
My reason for acquiring so many was to have the extra head room if needed for a large outdoor event that took place this past Memorial Day with 5000+ in attendance. As it turned out, I believe that we could have gotten by with just eight (four a side). The Growlers are very efficient and capable of high power handling.
We setup the Growlers in L-R clusters, mouths coupled, with eight Martin H3s on top. The system slammed! It required very little EQ and in fact, we ran the low end flat to the cut-off freq….around 35Hz. The output from the Growlers was incredible!
The lineup for the event included everything from jazz, to rap, to a high octane (but great!) rock band which included former members of Oingo Boingo. The Growlers pounded out the low end with extension and output that rivaled or beat any of the best dual 18”s we’ve used in the past and with much better sound quality! At about 500 ft back from the stage, the low end pounding was still very pronounced.
Other than some stage and power problems, the event went very well. Lots of compliments on the sound system from both the audience and performers alike (lots of references to how “fat” and “full” the system sounded) and we were offered the contract for next year’s event.
The Growlers are amazing subs especially when you consider their size, and keep in mind they’re loaded with a single twelve! They produce what I can only describe as a very in-your-face wavefront that for lack of a better term, “growls”. The sound is full, with the kind of impact that you would expect from front loaded subs. I can't get over how much I appreciate the immense sound from such a small package! Not being the youngest guy in the sound business, size and weight have become very important considerations when contemplating purchases and upgrades.
Of course, we’ve used the Growlers on a smaller scale, one or two a side for indoor corporate gigs. The bands are usually bass heavy, seven to nine pieces, for crowds ranging from 300 to 500. We’ve had no problem filling the rooms with plenty of punchy low end that keeps the dancers on the dance floor.
Needless to say, as a satisfied customer I'm very impressed with the JTR Growlers. If you have an opportunity to hear them, I urge you to go check them out. It'd be worth your time, money, and maybe your back! Can't tell you how many times we've seen smiles appear on the faces of drummers and bassists during sound check owing to the fat sound that the Growlers deliver!
Jeff’s other cabinets are due out soon and I hope to check them out as well….. a pair of his tops to start with and possibly expand from there.
I want to second Mike Christy’s “big thank you” to the folks who organized the NY shootout! It was through the shootout that I first became aware of the Growlers. The shootout was very well done and the information, discussions, and observations that followed have been invaluable to all of us who couldn’t attend.
Note to folks on the west coast: if you are attending the upcoming National Guitar Workshop in L.A., the Growlers will be used by McClendon Audio Inc. for all the live performances.
Best regards,
Roy
Post by: Mike Christy on June 28, 2007, 09:28:38 PM
Post by: Dave Rickard on June 28, 2007, 09:50:34 PM
| Michael 'Bink' Knowles wrote on Thu, 28 June 2007 13:04 | ||||
At Mach 1 it should take about 2 hours and 53 minutes for the sound to get there. Fire them up! -Bink |
It depends on if the Growlers have "fast" bass or not
Post by: Matt Jordan on June 29, 2007, 04:59:41 AM
Post by: Peter Etheredge on June 29, 2007, 10:44:28 AM
| Roy Tamanaha wrote on Thu, 28 June 2007 15:58 |
There have already been so many positive things said about the JTR Growlers on PSW so please forgive any redundancy in this post. But for anyone who hasn't had the opportunity to hear and/or use with these subs, I want to share my recent experiences with you. My take is from a slightly different angle?..I purchased twelve of these great little cabs. I started out by purchasing four Growlers from Jeff (great guy, easy to work with, and very knowledgeable), and was so impressed that I ended up purchasing twelve in all. My reason for acquiring so many was to have the extra head room if needed for a large outdoor event that took place this past Memorial Day with 5000+ in attendance. As it turned out, I believe that we could have gotten by with just eight (four a side). The Growlers are very efficient and capable of high power handling. We setup the Growlers in L-R clusters, mouths coupled, with eight Martin H3s on top. The system slammed! It required very little EQ and in fact, we ran the low end flat to the cut-off freq?.around 35Hz. The output from the Growlers was incredible! The lineup for the event included everything from jazz, to rap, to a high octane (but great!) rock band which included former members of Oingo Boingo. The Growlers pounded out the low end with extension and output that rivaled or beat any of the best dual 18?s we?ve used in the past and with much better sound quality! At about 500 ft back from the stage, the low end pounding was still very pronounced. Other than some stage and power problems, the event went very well. Lots of compliments on the sound system from both the audience and performers alike (lots of references to how ?fat? and ?full? the system sounded) and we were offered the contract for next year?s event. The Growlers are amazing subs especially when you consider their size, and keep in mind they?re loaded with a single twelve! They produce what I can only describe as a very in-your-face wavefront that for lack of a better term, ?growls?. The sound is full, with the kind of impact that you would expect from front loaded subs. I can't get over how much I appreciate the immense sound from such a small package! Not being the youngest guy in the sound business, size and weight have become very important considerations when contemplating purchases and upgrades. Of course, we?ve used the Growlers on a smaller scale, one or two a side for indoor corporate gigs. The bands are usually bass heavy, seven to nine pieces, for crowds ranging from 300 to 500. We?ve had no problem filling the rooms with plenty of punchy low end that keeps the dancers on the dance floor. Needless to say, as a satisfied customer I'm very impressed with the JTR Growlers. If you have an opportunity to hear them, I urge you to go check them out. It'd be worth your time, money, and maybe your back! Can't tell you how many times we've seen smiles appear on the faces of drummers and bassists during sound check owing to the fat sound that the Growlers deliver! Jeff?s other cabinets are due out soon and I hope to check them out as well?.. a pair of his tops to start with and possibly expand from there. I want to second Mike Christy?s ?big thank you? to the folks who organized the NY shootout! It was through the shootout that I first became aware of the Growlers. The shootout was very well done and the information, discussions, and observations that followed have been invaluable to all of us who couldn?t attend. Note to folks on the west coast: if you are attending the upcoming National Guitar Workshop in L.A., the Growlers will be used by McClendon Audio Inc. for all the live performances. Best regards, Roy |
Do you per chance have any pictures of this? Becuase I'd love to see how that looked with 12 of these things
Also I'm personally VERY interested in getting a pair of these - hopefully by Christmas - to replace my ES608s, which while I love them I'd like something that can go lower. Plus I like the idea that Jeff is right here in the Chicago area!
How would a pair of Growlers compare with a Peavey QW218?
Post by: josh cohen on June 29, 2007, 06:36:49 PM
| Peter Etheredge wrote on Fri, 29 June 2007 09:44 |
Do you per chance have any pictures of this? Becuase I'd love to see how that looked with 12 of these things Also I'm personally VERY interested in getting a pair of these - hopefully by Christmas - to replace my ES608s, which while I love them I'd like something that can go lower. Plus I like the idea that Jeff is right here in the Chicago area! How would a pair of Growlers compare with a Peavey QW218? |
from the reviews above, it seems apparent that growlers are putting double 18" cabinets to shame, both in levels of output, and ease to transport.. peter, since you and i both have the same size rig and mains, i think growlers would be ideal.
(im at the halfway point as far as saving up for a pair)
Post by: Roy Tamanaha on June 30, 2007, 02:19:22 PM
Here are a couple of pictures from the Memorial Day event....I was hoping to post them sooner but couldn't figure out how to reduce the file size.
Regarding your other question, I'm sorry but don't recall using the QW218s. I'm sure that others here can chime in on that.
As another possibility, since Jeff is in your area, maybe the two of you can arrange a side by side evaluation.
Best Regards,
Roy
Post by: Roy Tamanaha on June 30, 2007, 02:23:13 PM
Roy
Post by: Jeff Permanian on July 10, 2007, 08:13:20 PM
| Peter Etheredge wrote on Fri, 29 June 2007 09:44 |
I'm personally VERY interested in getting a pair of these |
This weekend July 13-15 is the anual Chicago Irish Fest at Irish American Heritage Center. Come on out, Guinness Fifth Province Stage will feature JTR Growlers.
4626 N. Knox Ave. Chicago IL.60630
http://irishfestchicago.com/default.aspx
Post by: John Halliburton on July 11, 2007, 10:00:23 AM
Hope to see some LABster's this weekend.
Best regards,
John
PS. It's rumored that there'll be plenty of Guiness, Smithwick's and other interesting beverages served this weekend.
;>)
Post by: Rob Spence on July 12, 2007, 07:50:42 PM
Jeff, post some pics after...
Have a few pints for me too
Post by: Scott Waldy on August 02, 2007, 01:09:19 AM
| Rob Spence wrote on Thu, 12 July 2007 17:50 |
I sure wish I could be in Chicago for that... Jeff, post some pics after... Have a few pints for me too |
SO, ummmmmmmm..... Jeff, how about those pics?
Post by: Jeff Permanian on August 03, 2007, 02:31:52 PM
http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/228265/16715/?sr ch=growlers#msg_228265
Post by: Steve Hurt on August 04, 2007, 01:44:10 PM
http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/mv/msg/21880/20617 0/
Post by: Rob Spence on September 02, 2007, 12:45:54 AM
And soon I will post a pic of the amp rack
Post by: Ivan Beaver on September 02, 2007, 09:44:58 AM
Post by: Tim McCulloch on September 02, 2007, 01:39:33 PM
| Ivan Beaver wrote on Sun, 02 September 2007 08:44 |
Kinda looks like when I used to do sound for deaf schools. The kids would crawl up into my W bins (Servodrive SDL5's) and LOVE it. |
Ivan-
Ah, memories... a band I mixed years ago had a recurring gig in a little club in Olathe, KS (KS side of Kansas City Metro), about 4 blocks from the state school for the deaf. The club's music roster leaned toward the "hair metal" of the day. Probably a 60/40 ratio of hearing to deaf customers.
The "students" had a blast. They could feel the beat and had a great time dancing. It was also fun to watch them converse with sign language from across the room, and "eaves-drop" on other conversations. It was also kind of ironic that they'd come by the mixer and give me thumbs-up and a smile... my most appreciative audience only knew me from the feel of my mix...
Thanks for the memory lane trip, Ivan.
Tim Mc
Post by: Ivan Beaver on September 02, 2007, 04:32:10 PM
I also lots of thumbs up, right after they pointed at the subs.
They were really happy to be there, something you don't get from normal gigs.
The biggest issues I had was being asked to turn the horn waaaay down, as the loud HF would tend to hurt some of the kids who had a little hearing and it would overload the hearing aids.
They (the people in charge) said they did not care how it sounded quality wise, as long as the bass was really pounding and the lights were flashing alot. If you didn't have pounding bass you would not be hired back!
I always enjoyed doing gigs for them.
Post by: Kent Clasen on September 05, 2007, 12:00:01 PM
This isn't techno, but here is a Growler from a church install. It was recessed into this cement walled cavity. We used 2. They are great sounding, and small- although not light but very solidly built.
Jeff even delivered them himself last week with an 8hr drive to get them to us in time! Great service.
Post by: Jeff Permanian on September 16, 2007, 09:33:54 PM
| Kent Clasen wrote on Wed, 05 September 2007 11:00 |
This isn't techno, but here is a Growler from a church install. It was recessed into this cement walled cavity. We used 2. |
What was the capacity of that church? Any other pics?
Post by: Kent Clasen on September 18, 2007, 11:23:22 AM
| Jeff Permanian wrote on Mon, 17 September 2007 02:33 | ||
What was the capacity of that church? Any other pics? |
Jeff,
The capacity is 600 seats.
Here is a wide shot. I was surprised at how little the kick drum needed to be eq'd, even with a head on the front with no hole.
Post by: Matt Jordan on September 18, 2007, 08:53:23 PM
Post by: David Haulman on September 19, 2007, 02:44:20 PM
Post by: Scott Deeter on September 19, 2007, 03:43:15 PM
| Matt Jordan wrote on Tue, 18 September 2007 20:53 |
I started with just two Growlers. They all raised their eybrows and said "that's not bad for 6 12 inch speakers". Then I reached over and turned on the other four... |
| David Haulman wrote on Wed, 19 September 2007 14:44 |
What happened when you activated the other 4 cabinets?? |
My guess, their eyebrows landed somewhere behind them
Post by: Winston Gamble on September 20, 2007, 01:15:32 AM
Winston
Post by: Matt Jordan on September 20, 2007, 04:37:53 AM
Post by: Matt Jordan on September 20, 2007, 04:38:45 AM
Post by: Cosmas Bain on October 31, 2007, 09:48:48 AM
Cosmas
Post by: Jeff Permanian on November 02, 2007, 05:22:19 PM
| Cosmas Bain wrote on Wed, 31 October 2007 08:48 |
where can I demo the Growlers in The Ny/Nj area? Cosmas |
Check the road test thread, the growlers will be in your area shortly.
Post by: Seedy Smith on November 07, 2007, 01:28:13 PM
Post by: Jeff Babcock on November 07, 2007, 03:52:47 PM
Post by: Ivan Beaver on November 07, 2007, 05:23:26 PM
I don't know if this is an issue for the Growler, but it is with some cabinets.
Post by: Jeff Permanian on November 08, 2007, 09:25:43 AM
| Chaz Myers wrote on Wed, 07 November 2007 12:28 |
Ok, how do we get JTR to make a powered Growler? Maybe a built-in 1000W amp. I would buy two of them! |
| Jeff Babcock wrote on Wed, 07 November 2007 14:52 |
I'll second that.... Jeff, a powered Growler should sell like hotcakes, totally ideal for the market you are serving. How 'bout it? |
Even is it made the sub 2" deeper, gained 15 lbs and added $500 to the price tag?
Post by: Phil LaDue on November 08, 2007, 09:34:49 AM
| Jeff Permanian wrote on Thu, 08 November 2007 09:25 |
Even is it made the sub 2" deeper, gained 15 lbs and added $500 to the price tag? |
Considering I would spend at least $450 on I what would say is a suitable amplifier to power the passive version, yes.
At very least a detailed market study is in order.
Weight wise, it is either a two man lift or a heavy duty handcart for anything over (roughly) 80lbs so the extra weight would not be a huge issue.
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on November 08, 2007, 10:49:05 AM
| Jeff Permanian wrote on Thu, 08 November 2007 08:25 |
Even is it made the sub 2" deeper, gained 15 lbs and added $500 to the price tag? |
The second part of that question is IMO the more significant. It appears the calculus made by humans in purchase decisions, tend to resist the higher price point of powered cabinets despite the often improved value equation.
I am a fan of powered speakers and while subs don't benefit as much from multi-amping and active crossovers as full range boxes, powered subs are attractive since the designer can dial them in and hopefully make them harder to kill.
I expect with powered subs it will be difficult to sell for a premium over stand alone amp solutions which keep getting cheaper.
In the future they'll all be powered with a digital input port, but there will be a lot of traditional boxes sold between now and that future.
Good luck.
JR
Post by: Jeff Babcock on November 08, 2007, 11:14:14 AM
For a similar comparison, Yorkville sells the UCS1p and LS800p for about $1150-1200 in terms of typical selling price (not MSRP). Those are decent powered subs at a good price, they've sold a lot of LS800p's for sure. If you could offer a powered growler in that price range, you would have a much more compact package which would have an edge over those products IMHO. Take the free shipping out of your deals and you could probably get close to Yorkville's price range.
But, don't jump into this without some serious research. See if your market will support it. Also consider warranty implications, you would have more to potentially support. JR is absolutely right about people sometimes having difficulty understanding all of the added value in a powered rig.
Cheers
Jeff
Post by: Phil Lewandowski on November 26, 2007, 08:14:02 PM
I am looking at purchasing some Growlers and I was just curious if you have been able to get that chest thumping low end out of them?
How have you been best able to get this and with how many Growlers?
The reason I bring this up is someone said that they were able to get that some of the time and I am just curious if the Growlers are very capable of moving the amount of air to get the chest thumping low end!
Thank you for your time!
Phil Lewandowski!
Post by: Art Welter on November 27, 2007, 04:59:18 AM
After that chest thumping low end? I'm sure you can get it from the growlers, but chest thumping is a bit subjective, and I would generally peg it at a higher frequency than real sub action, more like 60-160 HZ. I'm not a very big guy though, probably the bigger the barrel, the lower the thump.
Going lower, feeling your pants legs flutter is a sure sign of "moving some air". A couple octaves down from the chest thump, the "eye wiggle" is even more extreme.
You need staccato, "punchy" stuff to get chest thumping, heavily damped kick drum is the usual suspect.
That said, to this day, the most chest thumping action I have ever heard were the guitars for Humble Fu*%ing Pie (thats how they were intruduced)4-13-91 at Sam's (now First Avenue) in Minneapolis. The guitars were panned hard right and left, and at times it felt like someone wrapped a packing blanket over your chest and 8 guys with baseball bats were beating on the brat.
Most of that juice would have been centered around 160HZ, and it was the only time I ever saw anyone thermal one of our low mid amps. Anybody know that sound man? He was the guy on the cover of Humble Pie's "Go For The Throat" record from that same time.
Chest thumping low end will depend on the size of the room and how close you are to the thumpers, two should get you going.
Growl on.
Art
Post by: Phil Lewandowski on December 04, 2007, 10:49:07 AM
I'm looking for amp to power 2 Growlers then eventually 4. I am looking for alternatives for powering it in stereo but I don't have the money for the PL6.0.
Has anyone used the QSC RMX5050 on it? Either at 1 per channel or 2 per channel? It seems like it could work decently!
Thanks!
Phil Lewandowski
Post by: Jeff Babcock on December 04, 2007, 02:07:26 PM
Post by: peter.golde on December 04, 2007, 03:16:26 PM
Post by: Mark Hobbs on December 09, 2007, 07:52:42 PM
| Phil Lewandowski wrote on Tue, 04 December 2007 09:49 |
Has anyone used the QSC RMX5050 on it? Either at 1 per channel or 2 per channel? It seems like it could work decently! Thanks! Phil Lewandowski |
The 5050 would work great for 1 pair of Growlers....that what I have. If you go for 2 pairs, each Growler will then lose some power and headroom, but it will probably work OK though. For maximum results use one 5050 per pair of Growlers.
Post by: Jim Duyck on December 10, 2007, 11:55:53 AM
And don't forget about the other differences like 24 lbs. and 2 rack spaces for the PL380 and 150 lbs. and 6 rack spaces for the 2 5050's!?!?!?!
Not that I'm there or anything - our 4 Growlers are still on a pair of bridged 2450's...
Post by: paris mcbride on April 16, 2008, 04:45:57 AM
Post by: Chris Gruber on April 17, 2008, 11:42:29 PM
)?
Post by: Peter Etheredge on April 24, 2008, 05:55:24 PM
| paris mcbride wrote on Wed, 16 April 2008 03:45 |
i have not played a gig with them yet so i cant review them but heres some pics. btw, will 2 yorkville nx-750s keep up with them? |
Lose the Sonic Maximizer - it's snake oil and you're only hurting your sound with those Growlers and the Yorkies.
-pete
Post by: paris mcbride on April 25, 2008, 02:43:29 AM
| Peter Etheredge wrote on Thu, 24 April 2008 16:55 | ||
Lose the Sonic Maximizer - it's snake oil and you're only hurting your sound with those Growlers and the Yorkies. -pete |
mind explaining......im kind of new here.
Post by: Mike {AB} Butler on April 25, 2008, 11:19:57 AM
Do a search on the forum, but you will see that most people who start with them end up getting rid of them. It is a device that will modifies your systems' output sonically.. in a detrimental fashion. It was meant for users that had cheapo, poor quality speakers. It can cause all sorts of issues.
See the thread below..
http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/306781/360/?srch =BBE+Sonic+Maximizer#msg_306781
Regards,
Post by: John Halliburton on April 25, 2008, 11:51:16 AM
The shot is back at FOH, looking over the GL220 mixer to the stage about 75' away. A pair of Growlers holding up a pair of SPL Trik Traps, and four coax wedges spaced across the front. The balcony overhang is clearly visible.
Best regards,
John
Post by: Dan Magers on April 25, 2008, 01:03:40 PM
Post by: Jeff Permanian on April 25, 2008, 10:50:59 PM
Post by: William Bonsu on May 02, 2008, 04:32:33 PM
| John Halliburton wrote on Fri, 25 April 2008 10:51 |
Here's an on topic shot from the cell phone camera yesterday for a daytime gig in the (actually)630 seat theater I do a bunch of gigs at during the year. The shot is back at FOH, looking over the GL220 mixer to the stage about 75' away. A pair of Growlers holding up a pair of SPL Trik Traps, and four coax wedges spaced across the front. The balcony overhang is clearly visible. Best regards, John |
John,
not sure how your setup sounded but do yourself a favor and CENTER CLUSTER those Growlers!!.....they work BEST in clusters of 4 as i have 4 of them and every gig ppl are amazed at the sound and all i do i smile and keep on rockin!! just my $.02
Post by: Ivan Beaver on May 02, 2008, 05:00:49 PM
There is no one size fits all when it comes to sub placement, it varies from situation to situation.
Post by: John Halliburton on May 02, 2008, 09:03:03 PM
Yes, I agree, they would provide more bass, but as Ivan points out, the folks in the front center would be dying from bass. The first row is only 9' back from the edge of the stage, and I'd have to set the subs on the floor, so they'd be about 7' from them at that point.
What I get from the setup shown in the photo is good coverage, my Trik Traps elevated to a very nice height-they provide coverage to the balcony seats nicely even-and really good sightlines. Only the widest seats in the first few rows will have a bit of sightline issue.
If I need more output in that room I'd stack the speakers on the landing in each corner formed by the proscenium and adjacent wall, gaining some boundary reinforcement. I can also add more subs and tops there too, there's just enough of a footprint. An added bonus is sightlines improve even more then too.
I've had a full house listening to this exact system, 650 reunion crazy local Irish/Folk music fans with their favorite six piece band doing a 20th anniversary show, and everyone could hear the show no problem. Now I know I'd need to double FOH for an electric group of some sort at the least.
Best regards,
John
Post by: Mike {AB} Butler on May 03, 2008, 09:35:13 AM
While I can agree with you.. IF the bass is lethelly loud.. my experience has been that people are less bothered by bass when sitting near the subs than they are by highs at the same volume level from the tops.
Some years back, I did a center floor sub for a church. Was testing it when a member of the congregation who was a Hi-Fi enthusiast showed up. He was REAL impressed with the quality and amplitude of the bass. He asked how in the world can the front rows tolerate something that loud. I said, go sit up in the second row, and see for yourself. His response, "no way, it'll blow my ears out!". Still, he ended up doing so, and was astonished to find the bass wasn't perceptibly greater than it was at the back! Plus, I have seen so many churches that do this.. and the front rows aren't blown away. I know you have, too.
As I said, I will agree.. but only if the subs are waayyy loud!
Regards,
Post by: Ivan Beaver on May 03, 2008, 09:54:56 AM
In the past I have put subs under the front of the stage-mainly because "that is the way many others do it". Once I started looking (and listening) at other options, I have changed my way of thinking. I have not put a center sub(s) under the stage in the last 500 or more installs.
I would agree that the level the bass is run at can make a difference in "perceived" level. At lower levels it is harder to detect variations in level. The upper freq cutoff and musical content can really affect "the effect" also.
In most cases (that I am involved with) center subs in front of (or under) the stage is the LAST thing I think of regarding placement.
But different people have different needs/wants out of a sound system, so they have different approaches.
Post by: Michael Hedden Jr. on May 03, 2008, 10:24:35 AM
The second is physics, front loaded subs due to their inherent lack of sensitivity compared to horn loaded subs, benefit/need boundary coupling just to get close to the desired levels. Three to four times the ground stacked subs need to be placed close to at least one if not two or three stiff boundaries.
As Ivan has said if you ever get a chance to hear properly flown subs the even/consistency of bass response over the entire coverage area will change the way you look at it and I don't think you'll ever go back to them on the floor again as your preferred way of doing it.
Mike Hedden
Danley Sound Labs, Inc.
Post by: Tim Padrick on May 03, 2008, 06:41:41 PM
http://www.peavey.com/support/technotes/soundsystems/boundar ycancellation.cfm
http://www.padrick.net/LiveSound/CancellationMode.htm
http://100db.com/misc/boundary.xls
Post by: Mike {AB} Butler on May 05, 2008, 09:42:27 AM
I would certainly not argue with the experience you and Ivan probably have that a horn loaded sub can be flown with much better results than a front loaded sub.. just that I have only ever seen ONE system with flown subs that worked properly. And I would certainly agree that having a boundary, such as the floor, for a front loaded design box seems to mitigate a lot of the issues that flying creates for that design type box.
Another thing, though, is I know I see riders that say very clearly about NO FLOWN SUBS.. probably because they are thinking about conventional front loaded boxes sounding so poor up in the air.
Anyway, I'm not contesting your experiences.. only relating mine.. which I have not had the privilege of getting to work with as much in fine equipment as you all have.
Regards,
Post by: kevinjames on June 10, 2008, 04:29:21 PM
Also are the growlers avalable with recessed handles on top and bottom and 4 casters on the back?
Post by: Mike Pyle on June 18, 2008, 02:16:29 AM
| kevinjames wrote on Tue, 10 June 2008 13:29 |
Anyone know how the growlers compare to a 3015lf loaded Tuba 36 24" wide? I have 6 of the Tubas but am interested in how the Growlers compare as i am puting together a smaller secondary set up. Oh i should mention, this is for dance music dj use. Also are the growlers avalable with recessed handles on top and bottom and 4 casters on the back? |
Kevin,
I have some Growlers in Napa, including a demo cab that you can try.
One pair in my inventory have the T-nuts installed for 4 caster mounting on the rear. The standard handles are routed into the top and bottom rear edge. You should talk to Jeff about the possibility of adding handles. It should be easy to put them in the horn mouth area, but I don't know how that may affect performance.
Here is a big photo that Phil Lewandowski posted of his Growler:
http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/fa/14900/449/
Post by: Rain Jaudon on June 24, 2008, 12:21:19 AM
(with the tops dropping off around 140/120hz, id think there would be a slight gap in there)
Perhaps 4 RS220 tops?
Alas, not sure I can afford a pair of Growlers and another amp.. but never hurts to dream.. or get 1 now, 1 later.
Post by: Evan Kirkendall on June 24, 2008, 12:24:38 AM
| Rain Jaudon wrote on Tue, 24 June 2008 00:21 |
How would a pair of Growlers do with a set of Community RS220 tops? (with the tops dropping off around 140/120hz, id think there would be a slight gap in there) Perhaps 4 RS220 tops? Alas, not sure I can afford a pair of Growlers and another amp.. but never hurts to dream.. or get 1 now, 1 later. |
Read my road test reviews:
http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/mv/msg/27515/0/20/ 6178/
I wasnt very happy with them... The RS220's out ran them by a long shot...
Evan
Post by: paris mcbride on August 12, 2008, 04:52:13 PM
Post by: Rick Powell on October 09, 2008, 02:52:11 PM
However, I'm not sure if the plate would fit the back of a cabinet without compromising the bracing or the folded horn air path.
Post by: Brian Harden on February 07, 2009, 07:43:01 PM
Maybe Jeff can chime in here whether it's possible?
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 07, 2009, 07:52:37 PM
| Brian Harden wrote on Sat, 07 February 2009 19:43 |
I would be thinking of the QSC amp mentioned by the previous poster or the Digmoda stuff that's out now. Come to think of it, I wonder if the QSC gets their plate amps from KSC/Digmoda? |
I would find it hard to believe that an amplifier manufacturer would be buying amps from another company-but hey-stranger things have happened.
Post by: Brian Harden on February 08, 2009, 11:02:49 AM
When I made that comment, I was only thinking about QSC- the speaker maker. I somehow forgot about their little known amplifier line.
Post by: Rick Powell on February 10, 2009, 02:04:53 AM
Speakerpower will not sell modules in small quantities, last time I checked. They are a little more high powered than the QSC's and the DSP can be adjusted to the speaker, where with QSC's you are stuck with their factory module settings unless you alter the module. The 40 Hz rumble filter and 100 Hz low pass point seem about right for the piece, though. Not familiar with the other modules you mention.
Post by: Jaraad Brown on February 10, 2009, 07:33:52 AM
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 10, 2009, 08:01:44 AM
Post by: Rick Powell on February 10, 2009, 08:37:17 AM
You deal with the modules all the time, and I will defer to your knowledge, but I thought the Speakerpower modules could be set by the end user with a PC interface...however, the process is somewhat cumbersome, and must be done when the module is "out of box" and cannot be programmed on the fly like a Crown I-tech. I believe Simon Coffin, who occasionally posts here and built some self-powered coax monitors with the Speakerpower modules, could chime in on this. Or Brian Oppergaard, who actually builds 'em.
Also, looking at the Digmoda model previously mentioned...it looks like a re-badged Speakerpower module.
Post by: Rick Powell on February 10, 2009, 09:17:38 AM
http://www.speakerpower.net/PDF/DSP-Quickstart-Setup-and-ope ration-Rev-P.pdf
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 10, 2009, 09:20:07 AM
If you hook up your computer to a unit and turn it on, it will erase the stored data-and you will get no sound out of it. You had better have a working program you can load into it.
You cannot "read" any data from the unit.
Brian has a new DSP out now that has ethernet control over a couple of the user functions. But the "real workings" are set by him, and as of now, he is the only person who can program them.
Post by: kevinjames on February 11, 2009, 04:45:48 PM
| J. Brown wrote on Tue, 10 February 2009 03:33 |
I know this if off topic but I was able to meet Jeff in person at his Warehouse and he showed me the "supergrowler." It is a prototype so it isn't for sale yet, he is still working on it. |
That looks great. I'd love to get more info on it.
Post by: Jeff Permanian on February 11, 2009, 05:22:35 PM
Post by: Mark Hobbs on February 11, 2009, 10:37:34 PM
| Jeff Permanian wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 16:22 |
They have simular response as the growler, 103db 1 watt, 18mm 13ply baltic birch, 120 lbs, 36" x 24" x 26" and load with a 15" driver 600watts continous/1200watts program, 17mm xmax. I'm holding for building them because I want a more powerful driver. |
What about a growler with a pair of 10s? I seem to remember you telling me about the possibility of doing this.
The pair of 10s will displace just as much as the 15, they will fit in the enclosure of the standard growler. You get the power handling of the 2 voice coils (2000 watts program?), a weight increase of ~12 pounds and a sensitivity increase of 3db. This seems like a good way to go.
Post by: Evan Kirkendall on February 11, 2009, 11:02:21 PM
| Jeff Permanian wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 17:22 |
They have simular response as the growler, 103db 1 watt, 18mm 13ply baltic birch, 120 lbs, 36" x 24" x 26" and load with a 15" driver 600watts continous/1200watts program, 17mm xmax. I'm holding for building them because I want a more powerful driver. |
Why is every so hung up on "wanting more power?" That seems to be the new trend "my box handles X watts, so it's better then yours!" I'd rather have a 500/1000w driver in a box that'll do 136dB peak vs. a 1000/2000w driver in a box that'll do the same. The less power, the better IMO.
Evan
Post by: Phillip_Graham on February 11, 2009, 11:14:24 PM
| Evan Kirkendall wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 23:02 | ||
Why is every so hung up on "wanting more power?" That seems to be the new trend "my box handles X watts, so it's better then yours!" I'd rather have a 500/1000w driver in a box that'll do 136dB peak vs. a 1000/2000w driver in a box that'll do the same. The less power, the better IMO. Evan |
Evan,
Jeff is almost assuredly not speaking about the drivers' input power capacity.
He is likely speaking of 1 of two things:
1. A driver with a higher BL product for the motor
2. A driver with more usable XMAX.
Given the extremely short horns used in the growler boxes, I am suspecting number 1.
From a speaker designer's perspective, I can tell you that for modern loudspeaker drivers power handling is almost NOT on the list of things to concern yourself with.
Certain more meaningful parameters, such as increasing a driver's BL product, happen to include the side benefit of building a motor structure that can deal with greater input voltages.
Post by: Mark Hobbs on February 11, 2009, 11:21:43 PM
| Evan Kirkendall wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 22:02 |
Why is every so hung up on "wanting more power?" That seems to be the new trend "my box handles X watts, so it's better then yours!" I'd rather have a 500/1000w driver in a box that'll do 136dB peak vs. a 1000/2000w driver in a box that'll do the same. The less power, the better IMO. |
I doubt if he wanted the more powerfull driver for the sake of bragging rights. Yes, I see the value of getting the same amount of output with less amplifier power, but there are many other variables, trade offs etc. involved there.
Post by: Art Welter on February 12, 2009, 02:24:54 PM
| Quote: |
Why is every so hung up on "wanting more power?" That seems to be the new trend "my box handles X watts, so it's better then yours!" I'd rather have a 500/1000w driver in a box that'll do 136dB peak vs. a 1000/2000w driver in a box that'll do the same. The less power, the better IMO. |
Evan,
Not a new trend at all.
Around 1983, the EVM Series II speakers came out, handled twice the power of the original series, and were 3 dB less sensitive.
The speakers were "winning" over the amps.
Amps got bigger again, speakers had to catch up again, lest they get a reputation as frybabies.
The trend merely escalates with each generation. Back then it was a 100 to 200 watt deal.
Now it is 500 to 1000, or 1000 to 2000 or more.
Art Welter
Post by: Jeff Permanian on February 12, 2009, 03:37:21 PM
| Mark Hobbs wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 22:21 |
but there are many other variables, trade offs etc. involved there. |
Isn't that the truth. Size, lowend, efficiency. Pick two.
Post by: Rick Powell on February 12, 2009, 10:33:52 PM
| Jeff Permanian wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 16:22 |
They have simular response as the growler, 103db 1 watt, 18mm 13ply baltic birch, 120 lbs, 36" x 22.5" x 25" and loaded with a 15" driver 600watts continous/1200watts program, 17mm xmax. I'm holding for building them because I want a more powerful driver. |
So what is the advantage or the difference if the efficiency and response curve is similar, but the cabinet is bigger and heavier?
Post by: Winston Gamble on February 12, 2009, 11:16:51 PM
| Rick Powell wrote on Fri, 13 February 2009 03:33 | ||
So what is the advantage or the difference if the efficiency and response curve is similar, but the cabinet is bigger and heavier? |
My thought exactly. There must be something missing in Jeff's summation.... I can't imagine him going after the B-52 type market of bigger is better and badder.
Winston
Post by: Mark Hobbs on February 12, 2009, 11:33:09 PM
| Rick Powell wrote on Thu, 12 February 2009 21:33 | ||
So what is the advantage or the difference if the efficiency and response curve is similar, but the cabinet is bigger and heavier? |
Maybe the lack of a big difference between this and the standard Growler would explain the desire for a more "powerful" driver.
The obvious difference and advantage is the 3db higher sensitivity and the slight increase in power handling.
Post by: kevinjames on February 13, 2009, 09:43:37 AM
| Rick Powell wrote on Thu, 12 February 2009 18:33 | ||
So what is the advantage or the difference if the efficiency and response curve is similar, but the cabinet is bigger and heavier? |
I'm wondering this too. I would have thought with the bigger box that that horn path would be a little longer and the mouth area bigger giving it the ability to extend a little lower, sounds like thats not the case though.
Post by: Jeff Permanian on February 13, 2009, 10:40:26 AM
| Rick Powell wrote on Thu, 12 February 2009 21:33 |
So what is the advantage or the difference if the efficiency and response curve is similar, but the cabinet is bigger and heavier? |
The goal was for one 15" version to equal two Growlers, 3db more efficient and double the power handling. The 15" in these prototypes was just for proof of concept and actually handles less power than the Growler driver. Getting a 15" that meets the design goal is proving to be difficult. The dual 10" was the first plan however the high excursion 10" had very little SD, weighed 27.5lbs each, cost within a couple bucks of the 12" so the dual 10" had less output than a 15", weighed much more and cost much more.
Post by: Rick Powell on February 14, 2009, 01:46:47 AM
Post by: Mark Hobbs on February 15, 2009, 05:11:39 PM
| Phillip Graham wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 22:14 |
Jeff is almost assuredly not speaking about the drivers' input power capacity. He is likely speaking of 1 of two things: 1. A driver with a higher BL product for the motor 2. A driver with more usable XMAX. |
Well, by wanting to increase the sensitivity by 3db and double the power handling of the standard growler with the 15 inch version it would appear that he is almost assuredly talking about input power capacity and that you were wrong.
Either that or am I missing something.
Post by: Jeff Permanian on February 16, 2009, 12:39:09 PM
| Mark Hobbs wrote on Sun, 15 February 2009 16:11 | ||
Well, by wanting to increase the sensitivity by 3db and double the power handling of the standard growler with the 15 inch version it would appear that he is almost assuredly talking about input power capacity and that you were wrong. Either that or am I missing something. |
and Xmax.
Post by: Phillip_Graham on February 16, 2009, 01:38:12 PM
| Mark Hobbs wrote on Sun, 15 February 2009 17:11 | ||
Well, by wanting to increase the sensitivity by 3db and double the power handling of the standard growler with the 15 inch version it would appear that he is almost assuredly talking about input power capacity and that you were wrong. Either that or am I missing something. |
Mark, you are indeed missing something.
The vast majority of modern drivers, in almost all speaker alignments, have more power handling capability than they do excursion capability.
Practically, in most loading situations, the way you add power handling is by adding XMAX! A few very good horn-loaded systems, the best of the tapped horns, and some 6th order bandpass systems have enough driver loading to provide excursion control sufficient to render them voice coil heating limited, rather than XMAX limited. A short horn like the growler is almost assuredly going to need as much XMAX help as it can get.
Increasing the sensitivity 3dB would require a driver whose parameters are more compatible with the horns' acoustic impedance, to improve the power transfer. Depending on the nature of the horn that is going to lead a specific BL product target, hence my note 1.
Edit: I figured out the driver used in the Growler, and it only has a moderate BL product, so perhaps a higher BL product will not be needed.
Post by: Mark Hobbs on February 16, 2009, 08:55:52 PM
| Phillip Graham wrote on Mon, 16 February 2009 12:38 |
Mark, you are indeed missing something. The vast majority of modern drivers, in almost all speaker alignments, have more power handling capability than they do excursion capability. Practically, in most loading situations, the way you add power handling is by adding XMAX! A few very good horn-loaded systems, the best of the tapped horns, and some 6th order bandpass systems have enough driver loading to provide excursion control sufficient to render them voice coil heating limited, rather than XMAX limited. A short horn like the growler is almost assuredly going to need as much XMAX help as it can get. Increasing the sensitivity 3dB would require a driver whose parameters are more compatible with the horns' acoustic impedance, to improve the power transfer. Depending on the nature of the horn that is going to lead a specific BL product target, hence my note 1. Edit: I figured out the driver used in the Growler, and it only has a moderate BL product, so perhaps a higher BL product will not be needed. |
That makes sense. Adding to the xmax adds to the power handling (if the xmax is the limiting factor) and Jeff wants to add to the power handling. When Jeff said "3 db more sensitivity an twice the power handling" I wasn't thinking about the possibility of the xmax being the weak link.
Post by: Russ Havrylik on March 11, 2009, 02:52:17 AM
Personally I would be all over a dual 12 growler that took the place of 2 growlers (as long as it was under 135lbs and less $ than 2 growlers)
I bought 6 growlers from you a year or so ago after renting Rob's 4. I put 2 in a club and kept 4 for myself. Mine have been great but the meathead dj's in the club managed to blow both drivers in the club (at different times). I had them running parallel on one side of a rmx 5050, I took that out and loaned them one of my LG fp6400's and they have been fine ever since, only problem is I want my amp back but don't know what to put in there instead.
Anyway I have been wanting to buy at least 4 more growlers so I could do 4 per side arranged like the pic from the beer fest with the 4733's on top. but it would be sweet to be able to get two more subs that have the output of 4 growlers. Although I am not sure what it would do to the sound to mix the subs like that, then again it is probably a waste of time to continue with endless speculation. Whatever design you decide on I am sure it will be amazing.
Oh and if I can ever get my credit card debt paid down I have been dying to get 4 or 6 triple 12's, any chance you could make triple 12m's with pole mounts and feet on one end so that they could be used as monitors or mains?
Post by: Rick Powell on March 11, 2009, 04:21:15 PM
| Russ Havrylik wrote on Wed, 11 March 2009 01:52 |
Hey Jeff, what about putting two 12's in the super growler? |
If you want a Super Growler, I guess you could just epoxy glue 2 of 'em together!
Post by: Russ Havrylik on March 11, 2009, 05:40:29 PM
Post by: Jaraad Brown on July 10, 2009, 03:14:51 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-LXr7gXTCg&feature=chann el_page
Post by: Jeff Permanian on August 29, 2009, 10:17:17 PM
Post by: Rain Jaudon on August 29, 2009, 10:44:28 PM
Post by: Jeff Permanian on August 29, 2009, 10:55:25 PM
Post by: William Bonsu on August 31, 2009, 09:56:08 AM
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on August 31, 2009, 07:58:53 PM
Without a doubt a room full of dancers. Its hard to tell by the pictures but were the subs quite a distance back from the tops? If so was delay used on the tops or with the subs in the center it was not needed?
Douglas R. Allen
Post by: Jeff Permanian on September 02, 2009, 01:30:30 AM
Post by: Jaraad Brown on September 04, 2009, 05:32:31 AM