ProSoundWeb Community
Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => LAB: The Classic Live Audio Board => Topic started by: Geri O'Neil on February 24, 2020, 11:11:40 AM
-
I'm always hesitant to come in here with questions like this because of, shall we say, less-than-helpful comments and remarks. I would kindly request that only those participants with some experience in the subject comment (which won't be very many, I'm pretty sure). Here goes...
The former and now part-time boss still owns and uses an old EAW KF760 rig for a lot of events. It's 20 years old, but still sounds pretty decent for outdoor things like rodeos, races, etc. It still makes money, which is why he's using it.
Lately, the EAW UX8800 processors have begun to get shaky and unreliable. Things like dropping output legs, routing assignments, and other oddities. I've done the service bulletin thing of tightening screws and cleaning internal connections and the like and it still happens. It happened lately and the unit wouldn't allow me to go in and assign the proper output leg. I haven't been able to dig in further, we have several of the units and this one is awaiting my further attention on the bench. And EAW will no longer service these processors. No big surprise there.
If, nay, since he's gonna keep running this rig, I think those processors need to go away. I've been looking at the Lake processor line. The LM24 looks promising, but the question is, would anyone know if there are specific settings available for the 760/761 processing requirements? That rig finally sounded pretty decent when the FIR filters were used for the UX8800 processor settings. I doubt it's a simple matter if copying settings, which can't be down anyway because of the gray box nature of the processor settings. And I was never a roll-yer-own processor settings kinda guy, anyway.
Trust me, I've been through the drill of pointing out the cons of investing in new processors for a 20-year-old speaker rig, but he wants to keep the rig running. And at least the Lakes have some resale value if he decided to decommission the 760 rig.
Thanx for any insight.
-
I'm always hesitant to come in here with questions like this because of, shall we say, less-than-helpful comments and remarks. I would kindly request that only those participants with some experience in the subject comment (which won't be very many, I'm pretty sure). Here goes...
The former and now part-time boss still owns and uses an old EAW KF760 rig for a lot of events. It's 20 years old, but still sounds pretty decent for outdoor things like rodeos, races, etc. It still makes money, which is why he's using it.
Lately, the EAW UX8800 processors have begun to get shaky and unreliable. Things like dropping output legs, routing assignments, and other oddities. I've done the service bulletin thing of tightening screws and cleaning internal connections and the like and it still happens. It happened lately and the unit wouldn't allow me to go in and assign the proper output leg. I haven't been able to dig in further, we have several of the units and this one is awaiting my further attention on the bench. And EAW will no longer service these processors. No big surprise there.
If, nay, since he's gonna keep running this rig, I think those processors need to go away. I've been looking at the Lake processor line. The LM24 looks promising, but the question is, would anyone know if there are specific settings available for the 760/761 processing requirements? That rig finally sounded pretty decent when the FIR filters were used for the UX8800 processor settings. I doubt it's a simple matter if copying settings, which can't be down anyway because of the gray box nature of the processor settings. And I was never a roll-yer-own processor settings kinda guy, anyway.
Trust me, I've been through the drill of pointing out the cons of investing in new processors for a 20-year-old speaker rig, but he wants to keep the rig running. And at least the Lakes have some resale value if he decided to decommission the 760 rig.
Thanx for any insight.
We've had the exact same issues with our UX processors. Those things are temperamental and sometimes impossible. We have been using PLM amplifiers on our kf730 rig and the one variable that is missing compared to the UX is a delta high-pass. You get whatever the stock processor setting is, which is not visible. Probably not an issue with the 760, but the 730 can sometimes benefit from raising that frequency. To date we have been doing it with a steep LF shelf. It works, but is not quite as elegant. Other than that, if you are familiar with lake it is a superior platform to the UX from a UI perspective, and I think it sounds better, too.
-
Here you go
http://eaw.com/docs/2_Legacy_Products/Loudspeakers/KF/KF760/KF760_KF761_PROCS_rev2.pdf
-
I have no hands on experience with the gear you are talking about, but there is a UX8800 for sale in the marketplace right now.
https://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,173160.0.html
-
Since DSPs do not always "agree" on the "simple numbers", it is not always possible to simply enter in numbers and get the same results.
Here is what I would do.
Since you have the old processors, take some transfer measurements of the passbands of interest.
Then use a new processor (your choice) and "hopefully" simply get the traces to lay on top of each other.
Here may be the problem. You need to look at both amplitude AND phase traces, and pay attention to the delay settings etc.
There may be some "magic sauce" used in the EAW that makes it hard to get the traces to lay on top, I don't know.
You may have to use some different xover alignments as well.
But I would MEASURE, DO NOT trust the "simple numbers" to be right
-
Here you go
http://eaw.com/docs/2_Legacy_Products/Loudspeakers/KF/KF760/KF760_KF761_PROCS_rev2.pdf
Those numbers do not say what processor they are used in.
Different DSPs can have VERY different numbers to have the same result.
I have seen xover filters being close to an octave off and the bandwidth/Q of filters be off by a factor of 2:1.
Yes, the "basic numbers", will give you "something", but often it could be very different than being correct.
-
Here you go
http://eaw.com/docs/2_Legacy_Products/Loudspeakers/KF/KF760/KF760_KF761_PROCS_rev2.pdf
Those numbers would be for Ashly processors - Ashly was/is the OEM for EAW processors... Note the date on the PDF document - it was pre-UX processors as well...
-
I'm always hesitant to come in here with questions like this because of, shall we say, less-than-helpful comments and remarks. I would kindly request that only those participants with some experience in the subject comment (which won't be very many, I'm pretty sure). Here goes...
The former and now part-time boss still owns and uses an old EAW KF760 rig for a lot of events. It's 20 years old, but still sounds pretty decent for outdoor things like rodeos, races, etc. It still makes money, which is why he's using it.
Lately, the EAW UX8800 processors have begun to get shaky and unreliable. Things like dropping output legs, routing assignments, and other oddities. I've done the service bulletin thing of tightening screws and cleaning internal connections and the like and it still happens. It happened lately and the unit wouldn't allow me to go in and assign the proper output leg. I haven't been able to dig in further, we have several of the units and this one is awaiting my further attention on the bench. And EAW will no longer service these processors. No big surprise there.
If, nay, since he's gonna keep running this rig, I think those processors need to go away. I've been looking at the Lake processor line. The LM24 looks promising, but the question is, would anyone know if there are specific settings available for the 760/761 processing requirements? That rig finally sounded pretty decent when the FIR filters were used for the UX8800 processor settings. I doubt it's a simple matter if copying settings, which can't be down anyway because of the gray box nature of the processor settings. And I was never a roll-yer-own processor settings kinda guy, anyway.
Trust me, I've been through the drill of pointing out the cons of investing in new processors for a 20-year-old speaker rig, but he wants to keep the rig running. And at least the Lakes have some resale value if he decided to decommission the 760 rig.
Thanx for any insight.
If you decide on Lake LM, I will gladly send you our 'old' DLP files for a 760/761/KF940/SB1000 rig we had out with Maiden many years ago.
It would get you a starting point.
If interested, we also have 12x 761's for sale + many parts (recone kits/drivers/diaphragms) for 76x series. Let me know.
-
Those numbers do not say what processor they are used in.
Different DSPs can have VERY different numbers to have the same result.
I have seen xover filters being close to an octave off and the bandwidth/Q of filters be off by a factor of 2:1.
Yes, the "basic numbers", will give you "something", but often it could be very different than being correct.
Very true, but good odds considering the era, are that the processor was EAW's MX8750.
I ran into this EQ conversion task trying to use the SC-48 / ASC-48 with similar EAW legacy settings for kf695z http://forums.prosoundweb.com/index.php?topic=164535.0
In that thread, Rich Frembes formerly with EAW, kindly pointed out, if EQ's were set using BW (instead of Q), that settings would match nicely to the MX8750.
-
Here you go
http://eaw.com/docs/2_Legacy_Products/Loudspeakers/KF/KF760/KF760_KF761_PROCS_rev2.pdf
Thanx for the response, but as Tim said, those settings were for the Ashly-based MX8750 processor where all the settings could be entered manually, as opposed to the locked greybox files used in the UX8800s. I should have clarified the question more specifically in that direction.
I liked what the UX8800s did for the sound of the 760s, but I hated using the cotton-picking' things!
-
I'n my experience with EAW, if you want the rig to sound like it's UX-processed you need a DSP capable of loading Greybox files. That is where the "secret sauce" is.
Powersoft is pretty close with their implementation, but sadly they don't have a stand-alone DSP. My KF750-rig measures identically if I use UX processing or the internal DSP in Powersoft with the same Greybox file.
I'm guessing that if you want to have a DSP solution for this you'll need to come up with your own settings or look to Powersoft.
FWIW: I ran into a KF760/761 rig last year with BH760 subs. Sounded pretty good and had impressive amounts of headroom. Would gladly mix on a system like that again.
-
I'n my experience with EAW, if you want the rig to sound like it's UX-processed you need a DSP capable of loading Greybox files. That is where the "secret sauce" is.
Powersoft is pretty close with their implementation, but sadly they don't have a stand-alone DSP. My KF750-rig measures identically if I use UX processing or the internal DSP in Powersoft with the same Greybox file.
I'm guessing that if you want to have a DSP solution for this you'll need to come up with your own settings or look to Powersoft.
FWIW: I ran into a KF760/761 rig last year with BH760 subs. Sounded pretty good and had impressive amounts of headroom. Would gladly mix on a system like that again.
It Looks like EAW is now posting Graybox settings for Qsys. I don't see any in the download for the 760 though. KF Series it looks like they have KF364, 394, 730, 737, 740. It may be worth a call you see if they can port the 760s over for you.
-
Thanx for all the comments...
I can't believe that I just now thought to look and see if EAW is offering a "second-generation" processor that uses their Greyboxes settings, and lo and behold, they certainly do!
The UX48 is a current product from EAW that will solve our processor problems right off the bat.
Also, I see a line of amplifiers that have the UX processing built-in. We are looking at amplifiers as our (also) 20-year-old LG FP6400s are dying off. Four of them this year have been diagnosed with power supply problems that can't be repaired due to lack of parts availability. No surprise there. But again, we've spent so little money on repairs for those things compared to the money they have made for us. The EAW UXA-4410 would be a good candidate for those needs. And still be useful later if deployed for another rig.
I should keep up with this stuff more often. That's what reverting back to being a musician will do... ;D
-
Thanx for all the comments...
I can't believe that I just now thought to look and see if EAW is offering a "second-generation" processor that uses their Greyboxes settings, and lo and behold, they certainly do!
The UX48 is a current product from EAW that will solve our processor problems right off the bat.
Also, I see a line of amplifiers that have the UX processing built-in. We are looking at amplifiers as our (also) 20-year-old LG FP6400s are dying off. Four of them this year have been diagnosed with power supply problems that can't be repaired due to lack of parts availability. No surprise there. But awe've spent so little money on repairs for those things compared to the money they have made for us. The EAW UXA-4410 would be a good candidate for those needs. And still be useful later if deploy
EAW UXA/UX sure looks like Linea Research DSP/amplifiers
-
EAW UXA/UX sure looks like Linea Research DSP/amplifiers
Oh, my, don’t they, though! Interesting.
-
EAW UXA/UX sure looks like Linea Research DSP/amplifiers
See
https://www.linea-research.co.uk/oem-solutions/
Linea does EAW, among several others, notably Martin and Danley, as well..
Ed Walters
-
I'n my experience with EAW, if you want the rig to sound like it's UX-processed you need a DSP capable of loading Greybox files. That is where the "secret sauce" is.
Powersoft is pretty close with their implementation, but sadly they don't have a stand-alone DSP. My KF750-rig measures identically if I use UX processing or the internal DSP in Powersoft with the same Greybox file.
I'm guessing that if you want to have a DSP solution for this you'll need to come up with your own settings or look to Powersoft.
FWIW: I ran into a KF760/761 rig last year with BH760 subs. Sounded pretty good and had impressive amounts of headroom. Would gladly mix on a system like that again.
FWIW, Lake processors and Lab.Gruppen PLM series will also load greybox files.
-
I'n my experience with EAW, if you want the rig to sound like it's UX-processed you need a DSP capable of loading Greybox files. That is where the "secret sauce" is.
Powersoft is pretty close with their implementation, but sadly they don't have a stand-alone DSP. My KF750-rig measures identically if I use UX processing or the internal DSP in Powersoft with the same Greybox file.
I'm guessing that if you want to have a DSP solution for this you'll need to come up with your own settings or look to Powersoft.
FWIW: I ran into a KF760/761 rig last year with BH760 subs. Sounded pretty good and had impressive amounts of headroom. Would gladly mix on a system like that again.
Our desire to have the rig sounding as intended by EAW is what prompted this topic.
I haven’t perused the EAW site, so I was unaware of the second-generation UX processors and DSP amplifiers that are now available from EAW.
That will solve our issues.
-
FWIW, Lake processors and Lab.Gruppen PLM series will also load greybox files.
Lake processors will not load Greyboxes, only the PLM amps.
-
Lake processors will not load Greyboxes, only the PLM amps.
Is that true even with the latest Lake Controller release?
#NEW Lake Controller version 6.8.4 is now released and available for download! This release makes it possible to also recall FIR based speaker presets to LM Series devices.
-
I'm always hesitant to come in here with questions like this because of, shall we say, less-than-helpful comments and remarks. I would kindly request that only those participants with some experience in the subject comment (which won't be very many, I'm pretty sure). Here goes....
Try posting that you are going to install slotted/drilled or grooved/dimpled disc brake rotors on a build in any import car forum and watch the firestorm erupt - it's really sad the engineer/designer/builders like Enzo Ferrari never got the word - I guess he was set in his ways long before there were internet forums...
It tends to inhibit what many are willing to discuss. :)
-
Is that true even with the latest Lake Controller release?
#NEW Lake Controller version 6.8.4 is now released and available for download! This release makes it possible to also recall FIR based speaker presets to LM Series devices.
I was told by EAW that this was a hardware limitation in the LM series processors that wasn't present in the PLM amps when I researched this a few years ago.
I'm not aware that there is a workaround in place, but I could be mistaken.
-
I was told by EAW that this was a hardware limitation in the LM series processors that wasn't present in the PLM amps when I researched this a few years ago.
AFAIK LM processors don't have the DSP horsepower required to directly import EAW Greyboxes.
Lab.gruppen will soon be releasing a brand-spanking-new Lake Controller and firmware that adds a ton of new features, part of which is direct FIR coefficient import and IIR bi-quad import. It will allow Fulcrum to finally support our DSP settings in the Lake platform (finally!). From what I've seen of signal flow there is a possible work-around to the fixed HPF filter Geri noted earlier. I'm awaiting the next alpha software/firmware release to verify.
Note that the new software/firmware/feature set will only work in D Series and PLM+ Series amplifiers. Original PLM and and LM procesors do not have enough DSP horsepower.
I can confirm that the KF settings published on the EAW Legacy page are intended for MX8750 processors, which were OEMd by Ashly.
The new EAW amp/processor are indeed OEMd by Linea Research. The amps are marvelous; the Linea software not so much (but there is a big upgrade coming on that front soon). I have not played with the processor as of yet.
-
AFAIK LM processors don't have the DSP horsepower required to directly import EAW Greyboxes.
Lab.gruppen will soon be releasing a brand-spanking-new Lake Controller and firmware that adds a ton of new features, part of which is direct FIR coefficient import and IIR bi-quad import. It will allow Fulcrum to finally support our DSP settings in the Lake platform (finally!). From what I've seen of signal flow there is a possible work-around to the fixed HPF filter Geri noted earlier. I'm awaiting the next alpha software/firmware release to verify.
Note that the new software/firmware/feature set will only work in D Series and PLM+ Series amplifiers. Original PLM and and LM procesors do not have enough DSP horsepower.
I can confirm that the KF settings published on the EAW Legacy page are intended for MX8750 processors, which were OEMd by Ashly.
The new EAW amp/processor are indeed OEMd by Linea Research. The amps are marvelous; the Linea software not so much (but there is a big upgrade coming on that front soon). I have not played with the processor as of yet.
Ok, now I’m hoping for a new Lake LM816 or similar.
-
Ok, now I’m hoping for a new Lake LM816 or similar.
I can neither confirm nor deny that I've seen an artist's rendition of something akin. ;-)
-
I can neither confirm nor deny that I've seen an artist's rendition of something akin. ;-)
Hence the code name "Glomar". ;)
-
Lake processors will not load Greyboxes, only the PLM amps.
I did not know this, my apologies for the false info. I thought the LM processors were the same as the PLM processors, just without the "P".
-
I did not know this, my apologies for the false info. I thought the LM processors were the same as the PLM processors, just without the "P".
I think you are more or less correct, but Grey Box setting's have only been enabled on the PLM's. I suspect (and I could be wrong) it would however be technically possible to enable Grey Box settings on the LM's if they wanted to do that.
-
Hey Geri, when I was running 760/761 out in the southwest many moons ago I ran XTA DP226 processors. Very happy with their performance and very easy to control. Still a big XTA fan.
I'm always hesitant to come in here with questions like this because of, shall we say, less-than-helpful comments and remarks. I would kindly request that only those participants with some experience in the subject comment (which won't be very many, I'm pretty sure). Here goes...
The former and now part-time boss still owns and uses an old EAW KF760 rig for a lot of events. It's 20 years old, but still sounds pretty decent for outdoor things like rodeos, races, etc. It still makes money, which is why he's using it.
Lately, the EAW UX8800 processors have begun to get shaky and unreliable. Things like dropping output legs, routing assignments, and other oddities. I've done the service bulletin thing of tightening screws and cleaning internal connections and the like and it still happens. It happened lately and the unit wouldn't allow me to go in and assign the proper output leg. I haven't been able to dig in further, we have several of the units and this one is awaiting my further attention on the bench. And EAW will no longer service these processors. No big surprise there.
If, nay, since he's gonna keep running this rig, I think those processors need to go away. I've been looking at the Lake processor line. The LM24 looks promising, but the question is, would anyone know if there are specific settings available for the 760/761 processing requirements? That rig finally sounded pretty decent when the FIR filters were used for the UX8800 processor settings. I doubt it's a simple matter if copying settings, which can't be down anyway because of the gray box nature of the processor settings. And I was never a roll-yer-own processor settings kinda guy, anyway.
Trust me, I've been through the drill of pointing out the cons of investing in new processors for a 20-year-old speaker rig, but he wants to keep the rig running. And at least the Lakes have some resale value if he decided to decommission the 760 rig.
Thanx for any insight.
-
I was told by EAW that this was a hardware limitation in the LM series processors that wasn't present in the PLM amps when I researched this a few years ago.
I'm not aware that there is a workaround in place, but I could be mistaken.
Bringing this back from the dead to correct myself with something I discovered today.
With the current Lake Controller (7.1.2) you can load EAW Greyboxes into LM44/LM26 DSPs.
But, you can only load one Greybox in each DSP because it uses up both modules.
Haven’t measured the actual response yet against a UX8800, it’s on the «to do» list….
-
FWIW, When I was looking at replacing my UX8800, in searching, I found this post on the EAW website. It says it is for internal use only but, it is posted in their public Knowledge Base. https://design.eaw.com/knowledge/replicate-gf-greybox-processing (https://design.eaw.com/knowledge/replicate-gf-greybox-processing)
-
FWIW, When I was looking at replacing my UX8800, in searching, I found this post on the EAW website. It says it is for internal use only but, it is posted in their public Knowledge Base. https://design.eaw.com/knowledge/replicate-gf-greybox-processing (https://design.eaw.com/knowledge/replicate-gf-greybox-processing)
Ironically this method was exactly how I replicated EAW processing back in the day except the tool was a TEF20 and the processor was a Yamaha D2040.
Oh, and I wasn't replicating anything as sexy as the grey box settings. Just standard analog processing for KF300s and KF850/853s....
-
FWIW, When I was looking at replacing my UX8800, in searching, I found this post on the EAW website. It says it is for internal use only but, it is posted in their public Knowledge Base. https://design.eaw.com/knowledge/replicate-gf-greybox-processing (https://design.eaw.com/knowledge/replicate-gf-greybox-processing)
Is the link dead for just me?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
-
Is the link dead for just me?
Works for me...
Mac 10.12.6
Firefox 113.0.1
Cheers,
Tim
-
Ironically this method was exactly how I replicated EAW processing back in the day except the tool was a TEF20 and the processor was a Yamaha D2040.
What about dynamic EQ? The article linked doesn't address how to port that; it just says do a transfer function at low level to avoid any dynamic EQ.
-
What about dynamic EQ? The article linked doesn't address how to port that; it just says do a transfer function at low level to avoid any dynamic EQ.
I've been thinking about the same thing, do the dynamic eq follow through on other platforms?
Let's use Powersoft as an example. I've processed and deployed a lot of EAW using Powersoft's internal DSP and Greyboxes. Sounds good, works reliable.
But, do Powersoft's DSP support dynamic eq?
-
I've been thinking about the same thing, do the dynamic eq follow through on other platforms?
Let's use Powersoft as an example. I've processed and deployed a lot of EAW using Powersoft's internal DSP and Greyboxes. Sounds good, works reliable.
But, do Powersoft's DSP support dynamic eq?
I don't really see how it could since even if you sampled the processors at different gain levels there's also compression attack and release and all sorts of other response stuff that I can't imagine you could compensate for.
This does seem to get into the art of "modeling" that they do now for electric guitar amplifiers. makes me wonder if this sort of tech could be adapted for this type of purpose or if it's just too niche to make any sense to try
-
Add to that the variability of DSP capabilities, the presence or absence of all pass filters chief among them.
I don't really see how it could since even if you sampled the processors at different gain levels there's also compression attack and release and all sorts of other response stuff that I can't imagine you could compensate for.
This does seem to get into the art of "modeling" that they do now for electric guitar amplifiers. makes me wonder if this sort of tech could be adapted for this type of purpose or if it's just too niche to make any sense to try
-
Add to that the variability of DSP capabilities, the presence or absence of all pass filters chief among them.
^^^^ This ^^^
This will become very apparent when trying to match the phase response when using a DSP without any all pass filters. (As outlined in the linked EAW doc)
Cheers
Martin