ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: Today at 04:26:08 pm 
Started by Brad Harris - Last post by Eric Eskam
I have a QNAP RAID 6 file server with 8 6TB drives in it, and another at a lower RAID with 8 4TB drives in an out building as a backup. The near one is live 24/7. The remote boots up, runs drive tests, and shuts down every night.

I just set a new QNAP TS-h973AX for a friend to consolidate a server onto (as a VM) and serve as file storage too for them.  Very impressive.  Their new QTS Hero version of their software is based on ZFS - and one thing that ZFS is awesome at is bitrot.  As long as you are mirroring or RAIDing disks, you get automatic and *continuous* bitrot detection.  If issues are detected, the parity information from your mirror or raid config is used to fix it on the fly.

Biggest reason to use ZFS, IMNSHO.

The downside to ZFS is it can be pretty resource intensive.  Keeping that in mind, to obtain max performance I bought a slightly bigger box so I could put in a pair of SSDs for cache and a second pair of SSDs for the System storage pool (system pool is automatically assigned to the first storage pool that gets created when you first set your box up).  If all you are doing is file sharing - and especially if you are just archiving files, then this level is not required.  Having said that, just having a pair of inexpensive 250GB SSDs dedicated to cache can make a substantial perf difference even if you put the system stuff on regular hard drives.  If you aren't interested in running virtual machines, but just doing file sharing/backups then they have ARM based units that are not quite half the cost of the one I referenced.  I use those at remote locations all the time.  And most of their units can take external expansion boxes so you can keep growing over time fairly economically without having to start over.

It’s a steeper hardware cost for the QTS Hero edition, but the data protection ZFS brings is second to none - and with bigger hard drives they are packing more data into the same space; always makes me nervous. 

A final tip for your own cloud equivalent backup - if you have a willing friend/relative on the other side of the country, dropping a box at their house gives you great geographic diversity.  Letting them back their stuff up to it too can sweeten the pot :)  The built in Qnap stuff for networking two boxes across the Internet had some security issues earlier this year - I connect mine over my own VPNs (piVPN - great solution).  If they can be trusted, the built in Qnap cloud assisted utilities really are slick and plug ’n play able for mere mortals.  If they fixed the issues from earlier this year :p

 2 
 on: Today at 04:24:39 pm 
Started by Heath Eldridge - Last post by Chris Grimshaw
One characteristic that I have found when working with boxes that more and more resemble a point source, is that when they comb....they comb deep.  Even just one per side, feeding the same content to each box, and being ever so slightly off the centerline, or worse...in the wind, you get really bad nulls.   Honestly, you would expect this as its textbook physics.

If you've amp channels to spare, 2x SM80/side could be used without combing: send different instruments to the different speakers. Vocals & GTR to one pair, keys, bass and drums to the other, for example.

It needs a bit of setting up at the desk with post-fade Aux sends etc, but it can be done.

Chris

 3 
 on: Today at 04:22:29 pm 
Started by Keith Billik - Last post by Tim Weaver
Digging up this old thread.

A friend of mine started this podcast: https://www.beatsinabottle.com/letstalkaudio

It focuses on women and minorities in audio.


I'm slated to be a guest in the near future. Even though I'm a basic white guy. If you know some women/minorities in the field maybe point them to her. She clearly needs more guests if I'm going to be on it! lol

 4 
 on: Today at 03:40:28 pm 
Started by Richard Penrose - Last post by Tim Weaver
Having dofferent subs vs tops isn't as much of a concern in your market really. Lots of people mix and match tops and subs exactly for the reason you state. That and the Yamaha's are the kings of the MI powered top and the JBL SRX 818/828 are the same for powered subs right now.

It's more about having enough of the same brand/style of speaker for two mains and 4-6 monitors is a bigger deal when trying to sell the system to a client. Could be 2 DXS mains and 6 DBR monitors. At least they look the same and are all from Yamaha.



Also havong just bought 4 DXR Mk1's I can tell you there is nothing lacking in the HF department. They are great. I wouldn't worry about buying the Mk2 version thinking you are getting something "More".

 5 
 on: Today at 03:20:55 pm 
Started by Justice C. Bigler - Last post by Michael Lawrence
Leave it to the crew at Rational to actually have fun with their jobs.

When the technical writers get let off the leash once a year  :D
Here's this year's:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/37441592220/permalink/10158900572397221/

Quote
Rational Acoustics is proud to introduce a revolutionary leap forward in the field of sound system test and measurement. Smaart™VR brings the measurement platform you know and love into the future with full Virtual Reality support. Supporting the latest generation of VR headset systems including the Octopus Crest 2 and the NAI EVE, Smaart™VR brings you inside the measurement, creating total immersion in the data you’re generating.

According to Smaart™VR product manager Christ Sanjoures, “Our goal with Smaart™VR was to create a measurement platform that comes to you, and I have to say, I think we really pulled it off – once you experience your measurement in an immersive way – breeze blowing in your hair, soaring high above the phase trace, feet dangling into the Live IR – you’ll never go back. It’s like using an IMAX theater as your computer screen.”

Smaart™VR also speeds up measurement and tuning work in the field due to its “distraction free” workflow – the headset allows the user to focus solely on the measurement data itself, without getting distracted by looking around the venue at the actual system being worked on. Plus, the headset offers 20 dB of isolation in both ears, allowing the user to work in comfortable silence, without having to actually listen to the sound being produced by the system. In other words, Smaart™VR is perfect for users who just want to focus on the squiggly lines, devoid of any meaningful context.

Smaart™VR harnesses the full power of a modern desktop gaming PC to render the stunning graphical presentation of the measurement data. Laptop computers are not supported at this time, making Smaart™VR a perfect work-from-home solution to system alignment.

 6 
 on: Today at 03:16:51 pm 
Started by John Hiemburg - Last post by Rick Earl
Afternoon,


I've spent some time searching, and either this information is hard to find or I'm failing in my search.


We're building a metal building (16,000sf) to house a new sanctuary on the current church campus. Metal pre-fab. It will be exposed ceilings. The metal building mfgr recommends spray-in expanding foam insulation for its insulating properties, but I can't find any information on sound absorption for any of the available products.


I *can* find info regarding spray-in foam and sound *transmission*. In other words, there is a healthy amount of discussion about whether it is useful to stop sound from getting between rooms. This is not my concern. I just need to find some kind of data regarding absorption - I can pass that along to the acoustical consultant to design the proper amount of absorption for our room.


Am I missing a magical search term? Does anyone have any experience with this? Any other concerns or 'gotchas' with this kind of insulation that you've experienced?


Thank you!

Usually I am looking for Coefficient of Absorption when looking at acoustical properties of materials.  It should give you data across different frequencies.   On issue I have had dealing with polyurethane foams is they are different, so there is no one source. I know one manufacturer had some data a few years ago, but I cannot find it.  Even from the same manufacturer, we had choices of closed or open cell, slow or fast cure.  We went with an unknown product (no my choice) we knew it was going to be covered so we decided not to worry about it for the rest of the design.  It did reduce outside noise quite a bit, I had only wished I had thought of doing before and after RT-60 measurements. 

EDIT:  Here is the article I started with - still had it bookmarked, but could not find the other related information: https://www.constructionspecifier.com/sound-deadening-with-sprayfoam-adding-unexpected-value-with-spf/

 7 
 on: Today at 03:09:14 pm 
Started by Justice C. Bigler - Last post by Brian Bolly
Justice - if you're running the v8.5 public beta, you will find an interesting new option in the Transfer Function "Import ASCII" dialogue  ;)

I feel like I should go download v8.5 public beta now...

 8 
 on: Today at 02:59:57 pm 
Started by Richard Penrose - Last post by Corey Scogin
Did you notice if the larger compression driver helped the sound stay cleaner when driven at high spl’s?

I have not compared the mk1 and the mk2 when driven hard, only at moderate levels. Sorry.

 9 
 on: Today at 02:30:42 pm 
Started by Richard Penrose - Last post by Richard Penrose
That's funny. The new compression driver is on the smaller side too relative to some slightly more expensive competitors. That doesn't mean it doesn't sound good. It's about system performance, not the details of a particular component. Though sometimes larger compression drivers can have an advantage, it doesn't mean larger is always better.

If you're interested in larger compression drivers and corresponding lower crossover points, putting more on the horn, RCF is one of the few that design boxes geared that direction. But they'll be more expensive and may not have the features you're looking for (high-pass, other adjustable DSP).

I agree with Tim. Yamaha gear typically has a very good price/performance ratio. If you're at the DXR line or better, you're in a pretty good spot.

Thanks yes I’ve heard the RCF 735a mk4 and it is definitely a good speakers but I’m not sure I could call it better than the DXR15? They both have strengths and weaknesses.

Did you notice if the larger compression driver helped the sound stay cleaner when driven at high spl’s?

 10 
 on: Today at 02:27:58 pm 
Started by Richard Penrose - Last post by Richard Penrose
The reason why I’m keen to change is because of the weight! I injured my back and shoulder a few years ago and would like to cut the weight down. Also, at quite a few of the venues I work at, it is not possible to wheel equipment due to the terrain and steps. One of the venues has 120 steps down a cliff so not one for big subs!!!

Ideally I would love a system that can at least match the audio quality, output and depth of bass of my system where the subs weigh the same or less than the DXR15’s and very lightweight at under 15kg! I have heard the KV2 EX6 / EX1.2 system and this sounds wonderful. However, this still doesn’t solve the issue as the sub is still fairly heavy at 32kg and doesn’t have castors. It also costs around £7000 which way out of my budget!
I’ve also heard a pair of Nexo PS10’s over a single LS500 sub and this put out a huge sound for such a small system and was possibly matching or even exceeding my system. This makes me very interested in a secondhand PS10 / LS400 system! However, as I mentioned I’m not keen on a passive system because of having to carry an extra amp and system controller. Some gigs I use just a pair of DXR15’s which is way less to carry than a pair of PS10’s, pair of LS400’s, amp and controller!
The closest I’ve come across that I can actually afford is the FBT VN2000 but I’m not sure if this could even get close to my current system? I’ve spoken to a few people who use them for running full bands through them and say they perform great and completely exceeded their expectations for such a small system. I may see if I can arrange to hear this system next to mine at some point.

I have considered consolidating to one brand but the Yamaha 18” subs weigh almost 10kg more before adding castors! Also, I prefer the sound of Yamaha tops compared to QSC’s (apart from the KW153 which weighs almost 40kg!)

I’m not planning on growing but going more compact and lightweight without downgrading performance.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10


Page created in 0.017 seconds with 15 queries.