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 Lounge => Topic started by: Debbie Dunkley on November 12, 2013, 02:40:04 pm

Title: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 12, 2013, 02:40:04 pm
I want to get a couple of passive speakers to use as monitors on stage. The music ranges from classic rock to jazz - audience up to 250 -mainly small to medium bar gigs.
1st reason being that I currently use 2xQSC K10's and 2x JBL PRX 612's (which sound great and do a good job for me every time) but sometimes it is a pain getting those extra power outlets to the front of the stage.
2nd reason is that I already own a couple of Crown amps (XLS2000 and XLI3500) and could utilize them with passive speakers AND save some money on the speakers.
And reason # 3 - at that one gig where some idiot decides to pour his beer into my monitor, it will not do as much damage ?????

As I already own and like the PRX612'2 , I was thinking about getting a couple of PRX412's to run from one of my amps. They sell for $499 or less and I could save a bunch of money - keeping my 612's nice for FOH in small venues.
On stage volume is never crazy loud and I normally have plenty of power left over if I need it. I also realize that although my K10's and the 612's are rated at 1000w, only 500 w is dedicated to the driver and the horn wouldn't need the other 500w-so realistically it wouldn't be fair to compare the RMS rating at 600w and 1000w.

However, looking at the SPL of each speaker, it is only 126db for the 412's and 134db for the 612's. I was hoping that the passive version powered with an adequate comparative amp would compare well with the powered version. Would I notice much difference using the 412's as monitors compared to my 612's?
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Jerome Malsack on November 12, 2013, 03:12:49 pm
Most of the problem is the beer or liquids in the 120 power quad boxes at the front of the stage and that you still will have those power cords in the front to support some of those pedal boards and such.  By not having the 120 on the front of the stage it will limit your liability if something stupid happens.  After all it will be the band who used the extension cord and brought the power to the front of the stage.   Be carefull of those foam rubber walls they have for sound dampening on the rear wall they can have toxic smoke if ignited by your electrical. 

Dont forget that the band will have their ten or twenty drinks lined up on the floor to be kicked and pulled around on the cables.  Nocked off the top of the guitar cabinets, along that back line also. 
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: TJ (Tom) Cornish on November 12, 2013, 03:51:28 pm
Most of the problem is the beer or liquids in the 120 power quad boxes at the front of the stage and that you still will have those power cords in the front to support some of those pedal boards and such.  By not having the 120 on the front of the stage it will limit your liability if something stupid happens.  After all it will be the band who used the extension cord and brought the power to the front of the stage.   Be carefull of those foam rubber walls they have for sound dampening on the rear wall they can have toxic smoke if ignited by your electrical. 

Dont forget that the band will have their ten or twenty drinks lined up on the floor to be kicked and pulled around on the cables.  Nocked off the top of the guitar cabinets, along that back line also.
Um, what?  Don't have Edison receptacles on the stage because beer might get spilled in them, but you need to have them anyway for guitar pedals so they can start the walls on fire?

I have never heard such a defense for passive speakers.  If a person is legitimately concerned about the location of the receptacle, getting a longer IEC cable is pretty trivial.  They're available to at least 50', which should remove it plenty far from the beer fountain.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: TJ (Tom) Cornish on November 12, 2013, 03:57:33 pm
I want to get a couple of passive speakers to use as monitors on stage. The music ranges from classic rock to jazz - audience up to 250 -mainly small to medium bar gigs.
1st reason being that I currently use 2xQSC K10's and 2x JBL PRX 612's (which sound great and do a good job for me every time) but sometimes it is a pain getting those extra power outlets to the front of the stage.
2nd reason is that I already own a couple of Crown amps (XLS2000 and XLI3500) and could utilize them with passive speakers AND save some money on the speakers.
And reason # 3 - at that one gig where some idiot decides to pour his beer into my monitor, it will not do as much damage ?????

As I already own and like the PRX612'2 , I was thinking about getting a couple of PRX412's to run from one of my amps. They sell for $499 or less and I could save a bunch of money - keeping my 612's nice for FOH in small venues.
On stage volume is never crazy loud and I normally have plenty of power left over if I need it. I also realize that although my K10's and the 612's are rated at 1000w, only 500 w is dedicated to the driver and the horn wouldn't need the other 500w-so realistically it wouldn't be fair to compare the RMS rating at 600w and 1000w.

However, looking at the SPL of each speaker, it is only 126db for the 412's and 134db for the 612's. I was hoping that the passive version powered with an adequate comparative amp would compare well with the powered version. Would I notice much difference using the 412's as monitors compared to my 612's?
A passive speaker will be more difficult to make sound as good as a quality active speaker, as the work the manufacturer has done to eq, align, and protect the active speaker must be replicated by an external DSP.  These days it's pretty hard to make a case for low-end passive speakers.

There are lots of places to get longer power cords for active speakers.  Middle Atlantic makes them up to 25': http://www.middleatlantic.com/power/iec.htm, and even Monoprice has a nice selection of cords in varying gauges up to 25': http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=102&cp_id=10228&cs_id=1022801&p_id=5295&seq=1&format=2

You can also get combination AC/signal cables like this: http://www.fullcompass.com/product/334932.html

If it were me, I'd stick to active boxes.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Jerome Malsack on November 12, 2013, 08:26:52 pm
Um, what?  Don't have Edison receptacles on the stage because beer might get spilled in them, but you need to have them anyway for guitar pedals so they can start the walls on fire?

I have never heard such a defense for passive speakers.  If a person is legitimately concerned about the location of the receptacle, getting a longer IEC cable is pretty trivial.  They're available to at least 50', which should remove it plenty far from the beer fountain.

Ok yes you win    it was a rubbish answer. 

The actives will have better sounding output compared to the passives. 

 
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 12, 2013, 10:37:42 pm
Thanks guys.... I had a feeling that there wouldn't be too much support for passives. For FOH I have a passive system (SRX) and an active one (PRX and QSC subs) and I use them for what I consider to be the appropriate application on a  gig by gig basis. I understand the argument for both and enjoy them for different reasons. I may be complicating something that doesn't need changing. I would be interested to know though if anyone had ever compared between the PRX 400 series and the PRX 600 series in terms of efficiency.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Tim McCulloch on November 12, 2013, 11:50:42 pm
Thanks guys.... I had a feeling that there wouldn't be too much support for passives. For FOH I have a passive system (SRX) and an active one (PRX and QSC subs) and I use them for what I consider to be the appropriate application on a  gig by gig basis. I understand the argument for both and enjoy them for different reasons. I may be complicating something that doesn't need changing. I would be interested to know though if anyone had ever compared between the PRX 400 series and the PRX 600 series in terms of efficiency.

No experience with PRX comparisons.

I liked this:  "For FOH I have a passive system (SRX) and an active one (PRX and QSC subs) and I use them for what I consider to be the appropriate application on a  gig by gig basis. I understand the argument for both and enjoy them for different reasons."

Well said.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 12, 2013, 11:59:39 pm
No experience with PRX comparisons.

I liked this:  "For FOH I have a passive system (SRX) and an active one (PRX and QSC subs) and I use them for what I consider to be the appropriate application on a  gig by gig basis. I understand the argument for both and enjoy them for different reasons."

Well said.

Thank you Sir.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Don Boomer on November 13, 2013, 12:06:34 am
I would expect a big difference, getting bigger as you turn them both up.  Passive crossovers suffer from insertion losses that will waste 20-30% of the power from your amp and never allow it to get to the speaker.  Active speakers will typically have a lot less distortion and even less if you drive them both hard.  Active speakers will likely protect the drivers much better and cost considerably less.  And if the active speakers utilize DSP you will likely get a bunch more benefits than these (depending on the manufacturer).
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Tim Perry on November 13, 2013, 12:45:18 am
I would expect a big difference, getting bigger as you turn them both up.  Passive crossovers suffer from insertion losses that will waste 20-30% of the power from your amp and never allow it to get to the speaker.  Active speakers will typically have a lot less distortion and even less if you drive them both hard.  Active speakers will likely protect the drivers much better and cost considerably less.  And if the active speakers utilize DSP you will likely get a bunch more benefits than these (depending on the manufacturer).

I'm going to have to challenge pretty much all of these statements. Waste 30 % of powe in a crossover? They would say have to dissipate 300 watts or more if you used a 1,000 W amp or larger and ran it full tilt. Granted the HF section is often padded but still...

Active speaker cost less?  Where do you shop?

Active protect the driver better... well maybe... but I still see a number of blown units come through the doors i the local purveyor of band stuff.

Active speaker use DSP... all of them? really? 

Hey I LIKE my K speakers but the big advantage is: no amp rack, no speaker cables.







Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: chuck clark on November 13, 2013, 06:52:57 am
hi Debbie, you might try going to Guitar center as they are currently stocking both 612's and 412's. Nothing like a good old fashion A-B side by side comparison to slice thru all the smoke of opinion and haze of better sound thru marketing. Then YOU can tell US about it! I agree that 8 db seems like too much difference if indeed both boxes have the same drivers and the only difference is active / passive x-over.  Except for the pain of having to run two cables to each box, Bi-amping is more efficient so it's probably the way of the future.
Back in the day when 400 Watts per side was a big amp, it made more sense to bi-amp. As long as the woofer is getting 500W and the tweet is getting 200 adequate volume should not be an issue.  I too still like the simplicity of running 1 cable to each speaker.  Also lightweight amps have made dragging an amp rack around much less difficult so not as big a negative as it once was either.  Happy sailing on the sound waves!
Chuck
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Cailen Waddell on November 13, 2013, 07:09:12 am
The 412 doesn't use the same drivers as the 612. I looked at this for an install application recently.  As the drivers are different, it is reasonable to believe that they don't sound the same, however by all means go listen.  If you are looking for a speaker that you care less about, check out what mark and Liz have at Audiopile.  I've never heard them, but I trust that they are of reasonable quality and are an ok to good speaker.  For the price and the application they might be the right tool for the job. http://audiopile.net/products/Speakers/DUS_SPEAKER_SELECT.shtml
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Chuck Simon on November 13, 2013, 09:17:43 am
Cailen is correct, the 412 and 612 use different speakers.  This info is available at the JBL sight under Service/Exploded views.  If you are used to JBL performance, I don't think you are going to be happy with the Audiopile speakers.  They might be OK, but they are not in the same league as the JBLs you have or even the 412s.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Cailen Waddell on November 13, 2013, 09:58:40 am
And I'll just clarify that I don't think the audiopile speakers are comparable to JbL. Although maybe the jrx....  Regardless I suggested the audiopile because it will make noise and might be the right tool for the job of a speaker that you have minimum investment in for wet bar band gigs.  Debbie, I don't know your clients, so that's a judgement call you have to make. I haven't heard the 412, but I have read that if you like the 612, you will find the 412 disappointing.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Steve Garris on November 13, 2013, 03:00:22 pm
I would be looking for close-out prices on the PRX 612. GC is letting all 600 series go for very cheap now that the 700 series is out.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Don Boomer on November 13, 2013, 03:28:36 pm
I'm going to have to challenge pretty much all of these statements. Waste 30 % of powe in a crossover? They would say have to dissipate 300 watts or more if you used a 1,000 W amp or larger and ran it full tilt. Granted the HF section is often padded but still...

 Passive crossovers work by impedance mismatches. It doesn't necessarily show up as dissipated power but it does not make it to the driver as it would if the amp were directly connected to the driver.  A simple 1 dB insertion loss in a passive crossover would mean that 26% of the power would  not be developed by the amp.  I'm not talking about padding here.

A pretty famous speaker system manufactured by one of my former employers (with 10's of thousands of them out in the world) had a 500W rating even though the woofer was only rated at 250W by itself.  We could make and stand behind that because we knew the crossover would never actually let the power through.

Quote
Active speaker cost less?  Where do you shop?

Generally speaking, passive speaker systems require an amplifier to work  ;D.  So if you add in the cost of the speaker system and the amp and compare apples to apples, it is almost always the case the a self contained active system is less than the cost of the separate components used in a passive speaker system

Quote
Active protect the driver better... well maybe... but I still see a number of blown units come through the doors i the local purveyor of band stuff.

Nothing is guaranteed ... but if you were to poll manufacturers you would see a lot fewer driver failures in their active systems than in their passive systems.  With an active crossover (and you could use this externally of course) when you square off the power amp by driving the lows too hard none of that passes up into the HF section as it does with a passive system. 

Quote
Active speaker use DSP... all of them? really? 
 

You must have missed the word "if" in my statement


[/quote]
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 13, 2013, 05:02:37 pm
Thanks so much for all the good info and suggestions everyone.

Chuck and Steve, GC is exactly where I got my 612's from and they were a really good price. No regrets at all there! I looked for a 412 last time I was there but didn't see one. I'll check again this weekend when I drop by my local GC !!

At first I had read that they had the same drivers and one was simply the active version of the other but yes Cailen it seems that is not so - shame really - would be a much better AB comparison if the only difference was the installed amp. It would be a great way to check out just how much improvement is made by relying on the engineers to marry the driver, HF driver, amp, crossover, DSP etc...

Don, It makes absolute sense that it works out cheaper overall to purchase actives - no external amp required. However, I have the amps already and thought it better to utilize them with passives rather than sell them.

I'll see what becomes available and I might stick with what I have.

The comment I made regarding drinks and spills was because 3 weeks ago, I provided sound for a band at a local restaurant/bar. Ironically it is a fun place to play but gets very loud and crazy. Early in the evening there were so many drunks dancing with drinks in their hands and leaning over the front of the stage, I couldn't believe I didn't lose a monitor to a full glass of beer. It seemed to spill everywhere but inside my enclosures!!
I told the band I wouldn't do that venue again but the guitar player really wants me to.
As an experiment this past weekend, for the same band, I tried side-fills (or should I say cross stage monitoring). It worked really well and the singer even said she didn't hate it.!! I explained that this is the only way I'll do the crazy bar from now on and they agreed.
This brings me to my original posting. My other thought was to use 'inexpensive' passive monitors but I didn't want to lose too much quality of sound.
As a final thought....I had considered the EV zlx112 (unpowered) only $299 BUT only rated at 250 watts. I have heard the zlx112P and it is certainly good enough for monitors. Again, not sure how the passive 'version' compares !!!!
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Chuck Simon on November 13, 2013, 05:21:51 pm
Debbie, I would suggest a couple of used JBL Mpro 412s or MRX 512's.  They are pretty good speakers.  I used a couple of the Mpro 412s as monitors along with my SRX 712's and they did a good job.  After getting some more 712s I sold the 412s to a band that now uses them as mains.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 13, 2013, 05:49:33 pm
Debbie, I would suggest a couple of used JBL Mpro 412s or MRX 512's.  They are pretty good speakers.  I used a couple of the Mpro 412s as monitors along with my SRX 712's and they did a good job.  After getting some more 712s I sold the 412s to a band that now uses them as mains.

Now wouldn't I LOVE to justify a couple of 712's as monitors !!!  - I use SRX for FOH.
However, back to affordability - good call on the MRX512's. They don't seem to come up very often and they tend to hold their value just like the SRX's.  I love the Neo's and so does my back !
Never heard the Mpro's but heard good things about them for the most part. Sounds like you were pretty happy with them till the extra 712's came along !!! Did the MRX series replace them?
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Chuck Simon on November 13, 2013, 06:44:09 pm
Yes, MRX replaced Mpro.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 13, 2013, 07:47:49 pm
Yes, MRX replaced Mpro.

Thanks...2 MP410's on ebay right now.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Sean Chen on November 13, 2013, 09:19:30 pm
I echo the benefit of running passive monitors for the absence of power cord by the monitor. That's the main reason why I prefer passive monitors for the front line vocalists using wireless mics, as it's less visually distracting and less of a trip hazard for moving vocalists. It's not as much of a factor for back line instrumentalists.

You can get the benefit of active monitors by bi-amping a passive monitor that can be bi-amped. SRX 712m for example can be biamped as simply as using a Crown XTI amp which has preset for bi-amping it. You do need to haul an additional 2 amplifier channels per bi-amped mix. I am fairly happy with running my SRX712m passive, so it cuts down on total amps to haul.

On MRX, you should hear them first. They don't sound in the same league as SRX in terms of clarity.

I have found for monitor purpose, EV ZX1 works nicely, as it is fairly clean, gets loud enough for most type of monitoring need, and is light, compact, and affordable. It even has rotatable horn to change the dispersion direction.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Sean Chen on November 13, 2013, 09:32:07 pm
Thanks so much for all the good info and suggestions everyone.

Chuck and Steve, GC is exactly where I got my 612's from and they were a really good price. No regrets at all there! I looked for a 412 last time I was there but didn't see one. I'll check again this weekend when I drop by my local GC !!

For what it's worth, PRX 412 uses the same woofer as JRX 112, which I have found to have sub par clarity. Many churches I play at use them, and I grew very tired of its sound. I have not heard the PRX 412 yet, so it's not a fair judgement based on woofer alone. You should definitely hear it before committing to it.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Conrad Muzoora on November 14, 2013, 12:31:06 am
Thanks...2 MP410's on ebay right now.

Careful, the Mpro 410's are not in the same league as the Mpro412 and 415's. In my opinion the mpro 410, 212 and 225 are all cousins of the JBL JRX.

Conrad
www.kooleventug.com
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Dustin Campbell on November 14, 2013, 01:19:56 pm
I have 2x srx725 and 2x718 and 2x mp415 & 2x mp410 -

The mp410 is perfect for listening to music in my band room- they sound very nice - I wouldn't quite throw them in with the infamous Jrx series-the cabinet in the mp410is built just like the mp415 but they don't cut through for monitors unfortunately- would love to grab some srx712's though or stx812 and feed them some real power

the pm410 looks like a mini speaker- still a cool box
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 14, 2013, 04:21:47 pm
Thank you for sharing your hands-on experience - priceless. Conrad, I did notice the Mpro 410's going for a lot less than the 412's on Ebay - for good reason it seems. I really don't want to lose clarity.
The bands I work with tell me I get a better monitor sound than they are used to and I don't want that to change. Other than the musicians 'getting down' with the dancers once in a while and hearing FOH, the only sound they hear is through the monitors. That is where the money is in my opinion and why bands like to use me.
If the SRX712's keep going for the money they have been (and I see no change happening there) maybe I need to switch brands and start looking at the EV's.
Sean, I'd like to try the ZX1. Pricing isn't bad either. If the 412's sound anything like the JRX's, I will NOT be investing in them.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Chuck Simon on November 14, 2013, 05:21:54 pm
There's a good reason the 712s cost as much as they do.  You get what you pay for.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 14, 2013, 05:40:00 pm
There's a good reason the 712s cost as much as they do.  You get what you pay for.

I agree...I love my FOH SRX715's and 718's.  Wish I could justify getting the 712's.
The gigs I do are small to medium and I am not PA hire. I run sound for my husband's band and help other musician friends out when I am not working with his band.
I hope this explains my hesitancy regarding investing in the 712's. I really do believe you get what you pay for but in my case SRX monitors at the price they go for might be considered overkill (still would love a couple though) !!
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Chuck Simon on November 14, 2013, 05:55:51 pm
I'm not trying to talk you into anything, Debbie, I could be perfectly happy with my Mpro 412s if I wasn't such an equipment junkie!
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Dustin Campbell on November 14, 2013, 06:12:42 pm
I really like my Mpro 415's and 410's  -  they would be great monitors for regular bands and such- It's that I play in a pretty heavy band and want to get some monitors that will blow my singers head off- hence the need for the srx, stx monitors - but for other than hard rock many people have been very happy with the mpro4's  -- its hard for me to pay $2400 for a pair of stx812's when I paid 2200 for a pair of srx725's(used of course)- although that's what I'll wind up doing- 
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 14, 2013, 09:21:16 pm
I'm not trying to talk you into anything, Debbie, I could be perfectly happy with my Mpro 412s if I wasn't such an equipment junkie!

No...I get it -I really do.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 14, 2013, 09:28:58 pm
I really like my Mpro 415's and 410's  -  they would be great monitors for regular bands and such- It's that I play in a pretty heavy band and want to get some monitors that will blow my singers head off- hence the need for the srx, stx monitors - but for other than hard rock many people have been very happy with the mpro4's  -- its hard for me to pay $2400 for a pair of stx812's when I paid 2200 for a pair of srx725's(used of course)- although that's what I'll wind up doing-

So maybe the 410's or 412's would work for me given the not so extreme volumes I deal with. I'm so confused right now .....
I have a couple of old Eon 1500's that I might use for now in venues where I don't trust my active speakers to liquid till something comes up at the right price. Next to them, most of the speakers we have discussed will probably sound good!!
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Tim McCulloch on November 14, 2013, 10:04:56 pm
If the SRX712's keep going for the money they have been (and I see no change happening there) maybe I need to switch brands and start looking at the EV's.
Sean, I'd like to try the ZX1. Pricing isn't bad either. If the 412's sound anything like the JRX's, I will NOT be investing in them.

The SRX712m was discontinued a year ago.  There is a rumour that JBL is doing another run of them, but I have no factory confirmation of that and was given no indication of how many pieces (if any) will be built.

I can confirm that *new* SRX728 exist, as I unpacked 4 of them last week.  :)  No idea if the majik elves found these hiding in a warehouse or if the elves built them recently...
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Conrad Muzoora on November 15, 2013, 01:37:37 am
Thank you for sharing your hands-on experience - priceless. Conrad, I did notice the Mpro 410's going for a lot less than the 412's on Ebay - for good reason it seems. I really don't want to lose clarity.
The bands I work with tell me I get a better monitor sound than they are used to and I don't want that to change. Other than the musicians 'getting down' with the dancers once in a while and hearing FOH, the only sound they hear is through the monitors. That is where the money is in my opinion and why bands like to use me.
If the SRX712's keep going for the money they have been (and I see no change happening there) maybe I need to switch brands and start looking at the EV's.
Sean, I'd like to try the ZX1. Pricing isn't bad either. If the 412's sound anything like the JRX's, I will NOT be investing in them.

The JBL Mpro 412 and 415 are great speakers, very superior to the 410, 215, 215 and 225 which all have a terrible HF driver utilizing this same diaphragm http://www.ebay.com/itm/JBL-MPro-MP212-MP215-MP225-MP410-Diaphragm-2412-Horn-Driver-Repair-Parts-4-Pack-/130949866840?pt=US_Pro_Audio_Speaker_Drivers_Horns&hash=item1e7d386558 . The Mpros are however discontinued and very rare to find. I recently changed my inventory from mp412 to ev sx300 mainly because i couldnt get original JBL diaphragms for them (A few stores that had them were selling them at close to 200$ a piece). The ev sx300 is very good sounding and universally available and has served be well in place of the mpro 412s.
Conrad
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 15, 2013, 09:42:14 am
The SRX712m was discontinued a year ago.  There is a rumour that JBL is doing another run of them, but I have no factory confirmation of that and was given no indication of how many pieces (if any) will be built.

I can confirm that *new* SRX728 exist, as I unpacked 4 of them last week.  :)  No idea if the majik elves found these hiding in a warehouse or if the elves built them recently...

I hope those elves can convince Santa to drop a couple of 712's down my chimney.......
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 15, 2013, 09:43:12 am
The JBL Mpro 412 and 415 are great speakers, very superior to the 410, 215, 215 and 225 which all have a terrible HF driver utilizing this same diaphragm http://www.ebay.com/itm/JBL-MPro-MP212-MP215-MP225-MP410-Diaphragm-2412-Horn-Driver-Repair-Parts-4-Pack-/130949866840?pt=US_Pro_Audio_Speaker_Drivers_Horns&hash=item1e7d386558 . The Mpros are however discontinued and very rare to find. I recently changed my inventory from mp412 to ev sx300 mainly because i couldnt get original JBL diaphragms for them (A few stores that had them were selling them at close to 200$ a piece). The ev sx300 is very good sounding and universally available and has served be well in place of the mpro 412s.
Conrad

Good to know and more options to choose from.....
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Tommy Peel on November 15, 2013, 10:38:50 am
I hope those elves can convince Santa to drop a couple of 712's down my chimney.......

If you get a chance put a word in for them to drop a pair of 618-XLF's down mine(though I'd take just about anything that JBL makes).  ;D
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: sam saponaro on November 15, 2013, 04:12:36 pm
And reason # 3 - at that one gig where some idiot decides to pour his beer into my monitor, it will not do as much damage ?????
Actually the damage is more pysical to the grill of said monitor,after the monitor gets busted over said idiots head. ;)
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Tim McCulloch on November 16, 2013, 01:17:58 pm
Actually the damage is more pysical to the grill of said monitor,after the monitor gets busted over said idiots head. ;)

Oh were it to be so...

One of the things I don't miss about bar gigs is the utter lack of financial responsibility excused by "a good time" being had.  Bullshit.  The establishment never accepts responsibility for their patrons spilling or deliberately pouring their drink on stage.  If the patrons are behaving that way, I submit they've been over-served and hope they aren't driving later.

Alcohol pays for a lot of stuff; I think it should pay for damages to the band's or provider's equipment.  In bar-land, it almost never does.

That said, butching up the grilles, treating the woofers with Zepel or other water repellant, etc are good things to do for any speakers going into a bar.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 16, 2013, 03:38:42 pm
Oh were it to be so...

One of the things I don't miss about bar gigs is the utter lack of financial responsibility excused by "a good time" being had.  Bullshit.  The establishment never accepts responsibility for their patrons spilling or deliberately pouring their drink on stage.  If the patrons are behaving that way, I submit they've been over-served and hope they aren't driving later.

Alcohol pays for a lot of stuff; I think it should pay for damages to the band's or provider's equipment.  In bar-land, it almost never does.

That said, butching up the grilles, treating the woofers with Zepel or other water repellant, etc are good things to do for any speakers going into a bar.

I concur !!
The bar owner of this particular establishment has basically said "TOUGH" to the bands and continues to rake in the money serving what look to me to be well underage kids till they can no longer function in a socially acceptable manner.
If it were my band I would refuse to work there and if all the bands stopped playing there till this guy takes some responsibility, things would have to change. However, as just the sound 'guy' I cannot make that call.
Well, we are doing sound there again this coming weekend (I'm dreading it). I told the band last time 'never again' but they are desperate as no-one will help them out (I wonder why?).
Last night we used the side fill method again in a different bar (same band) but we got some feedback issues because the guitarist and bass player on either side of the stage didn't understand the concept of avoiding aiming their mics directly at the speakers from 12 inches away!!!.
So I may have to go back to floor monitors and maybe use my old passive Eons. Even though they will be in the thick of it, the loss is far less as they owe me very little at this point.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 16, 2013, 03:39:53 pm
Actually the damage is more pysical to the grill of said monitor,after the monitor gets busted over said idiots head. ;)
Now there's a thought....
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Tim McCulloch on November 16, 2013, 11:08:51 pm
I concur !!
The bar owner of this particular establishment has basically said "TOUGH" to the bands and continues to rake in the money serving what look to me to be well underage kids till they can no longer function in a socially acceptable manner.

Karma has a way of dealing with asshats like him.  I just hope nobody dies for his profits while we wait for his comeuppance.

One thing I suggest is either food service cling wrap or palletizing stretch wrap.  In a pinch a thin trash bag will do.  Not acoustically ideal but you won't have fungal growth or bacterial colonies on your monitors and your HF drivers won't drown.  Explain to the band that you don't play without protection.  Wrap those rascals or let someone put up their credit card for potential repairs.  The food service wrap is wider (about 2') and thinner than the packing wrap.  The stretch wrap is stronger.  Don't cover any ventilation ports or heat sinks.

Tim "cranky old guy" Mc
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Jeff Bankston on November 17, 2013, 01:37:50 am
speaking of damage to monitors, has anyone ever had a drummer loose a stick that landed in a stage monitor horn ? btw , i'm a drummer that looses a stick every now and then.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 17, 2013, 05:32:36 pm
Karma has a way of dealing with asshats like him.  I just hope nobody dies for his profits while we wait for his comeuppance.

One thing I suggest is either food service cling wrap or palletizing stretch wrap.  In a pinch a thin trash bag will do.  Not acoustically ideal but you won't have fungal growth or bacterial colonies on your monitors and your HF drivers won't drown.  Explain to the band that you don't play without protection.  Wrap those rascals or let someone put up their credit card for potential repairs.  The food service wrap is wider (about 2') and thinner than the packing wrap.  The stretch wrap is stronger.  Don't cover any ventilation ports or heat sinks.

Tim "cranky old guy" Mc

Hey Tim...thanks for those suggestions. 
I'll certainly give it a try because I think even though some loss will be noticed in audio quality (highs especially??), it means I will feel better about using the K10's this weekend. My guess is that I will get a better sound with the K10's covered in plastic wrap than the Eon G2's. Would you agree or would it be a close call?
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Tim Perry on November 17, 2013, 09:47:36 pm
Would you agree or would it be a close call?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTI9K8J5o0o

At a gig where you believe beer or liquids will probably be spilled into the monitors, I would tend to use of "B" monitors. 
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 19, 2013, 12:16:32 pm
Quick update...... I just ordered a couple of EV ELX112 passives from my 'go to' guy at GC. I got a really good price of $229 ($244 with tax) each shipped to my door. I figured this way, I can always try them out and if they don't do what I need, easy to take back to the local store but I'm hoping they will suffice.
The price point is crazy good and I know they are not terribly efficient but hey - I'm not using them for FOH -just monitors so all I need is clarity and moderate volume.
I can power them with a Behringer (don't hate!) EPX2800 - 350w per side into 8 ohms or a Crown XLI3500 (1000w into 8 ohms). I'd have to watch the gains on the Crown but the Behringer is better suited power wise. I had good results for many years with the Behringer EP2500 (the only Behringer product I've ever owned) so not too worried about the EPX - especially for monitor duty.
I'll be using them this weekend (if there are no delays in shipping) at the 'dreaded' bar of drunken, under-aged, over privileged idiots and I'll report back.... (no returning them if they get dumped on though - fingers crossed)
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: g'bye, Dick Rees on November 19, 2013, 12:23:05 pm
Quick update...... I just ordered a couple of EV ELX112 passives from my 'go to' guy at GC. I got a really good price of $229 ($244 with tax) each shipped to my door. I figured this way, I can always try them out and if they don't do what I need, easy to take back to the local store but I'm hoping they will suffice.
The price point is crazy good and I know they are not terribly efficient but hey - I'm not using them for FOH -just monitors so all I need is clarity and moderate volume.
I can power them with a Behringer (don't hate!) EPX2800 - 350w per side into 8 ohms or a Crown XLI3500 (1000w into 8 ohms). I'd have to watch the gains on the Crown but the Behringer is better suited power wise. I had good results for many years with the Behringer EP2500 (the only Behringer product I've ever owned) so not too worried about the EPX - especially for monitor duty.
I'll be using them this weekend (if there are no delays in shipping) at the 'dreaded' bar of drunken, under-aged, over privileged idiots and I'll report back.... (no returning them if they get dumped on though - fingers crossed)


I think this has probably been mentioned before, but I know EV makes a full grill with a backing material for some of their speakers (Sx/Sxa) for outdoor deployment.  If that is an option for you, it'll keep liquids from reaching the cones/drivers and let it drain off without damage.

For "idiot-resistant" monitors, I'd go for the plastic cabinets with the outdoor grilles.  No worries...
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 19, 2013, 12:38:20 pm

I think this has probably been mentioned before, but I know EV makes a full grill with a backing material for some of their speakers (Sx/Sxa) for outdoor deployment.  If that is an option for you, it'll keep liquids from reaching the cones/drivers and let it drain off without damage.

For "idiot-resistant" monitors, I'd go for the plastic cabinets with the outdoor grilles.  No worries...

Thanks Dick...did a quick search but cannot find those covers. The QSC ones are readily available it seems.....I'm going to need covers anyway - I protect every piece of equipment I own - so this could be a good option if they are made to fit the ELX112's.
I did consider getting the zlx versions with 'plastic' cabs but thought these would have a slightly warmer sound AND the price was right..another trade-off I suppose.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: g'bye, Dick Rees on November 19, 2013, 12:42:04 pm
Thanks Dick...did a quick search but cannot find those covers. The QSC ones are readily available it seems.....I'm going to need covers anyway - I protect every piece of equipment I own - so this could be a good option if they are made to fit the ELX112's.
I did consider getting the zlx versions with 'plastic' cabs but thought these would have a slightly warmer sound AND the price was right..another trade-off I suppose.

They are not "covers" like the QSC's.  They are actual outdoor grilles which cover the entire front of the cabinet.  I'll look for a link.

Edit:

http://www.electrovoice.com/product.php?id=55

There's a nylon fabric "sandwich" behind the full grille.  You'd have to take a pretty good stream from a hose directly at the grille to get anything to get in.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 19, 2013, 01:03:47 pm
They are not "covers" like the QSC's.  They are actual outdoor grilles which cover the entire front of the cabinet.  I'll look for a link.

Edit:

http://www.electrovoice.com/product.php?id=55

There's a nylon fabric "sandwich" behind the full grille.  You'd have to take a pretty good stream from a hose directly at the grille to get anything to get in.

Great idea and thank you for taking the time to get the info to me - well appreciated.
The link you gave is to a specific model SX300 PI (which would work well for my purpose) but given the fact I have already invested in these and the price I paid, I wonder if I can find grilles to fit the ELX112's?
I'll maybe contact EV first and then go on a hunt to see if I can find the correct material and even undertake making them !! I am quite adventurous when it comes to getting creative!
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: g'bye, Dick Rees on November 19, 2013, 01:12:27 pm
Great idea and thank you for taking the time to get the info to me - well appreciated.
The link you gave is to a specific model SX300 PI (which would work well for my purpose) but given the fact I have already invested in these and the price I paid, I wonder if I can find grilles to fit the ELX112's?
I'll maybe contact EV first and then go on a hunt to see if I can find the correct material and even undertake making them !! I am quite adventurous when it comes to getting creative!

EV parts from the factory (if available) are pricey...enough so that it makes sense to just buy the model in the first place. 

I picked up a used pair of Sxa100's with the outdoor grilles for $500.00.  They have proven to be very usable all around and especially for stage side-washes outdoors.  If we get any precipitation, I don't have to worry about them at all and can tend to other things.  I just turn them around to face the audience area and play back some tracks for background audio while we all scurry to cover up.  That way the MC still has contact with the crowd to give instructions.

I'd look hard at the used market and see if you can pick up anything in the Sx series coming off an outdoor install.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 19, 2013, 02:50:26 pm
EV parts from the factory (if available) are pricey...enough so that it makes sense to just buy the model in the first place. 

I picked up a used pair of Sxa100's with the outdoor grilles for $500.00.  They have proven to be very usable all around and especially for stage side-washes outdoors.  If we get any precipitation, I don't have to worry about them at all and can tend to other things.  I just turn them around to face the audience area and play back some tracks for background audio while we all scurry to cover up.  That way the MC still has contact with the crowd to give instructions.

I'd look hard at the used market and see if you can pick up anything in the Sx series coming off an outdoor install.

Thanks for the good information Dick - appreciated as always.

I'll definitely keep an eye open for something in the Sx series line....sounds like a winner for the conditions we have discussed.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: g'bye, Dick Rees on November 19, 2013, 03:13:46 pm
Thanks for the good information Dick - appreciated as always.

I'll definitely keep an eye open for something in the Sx series line....sounds like a winner for the conditions we have discussed.

I'll take a closer look at the "liners" behind the Sx100 grilles one of these days.  IIRC, they are a nylon like fabric "envelope" lined with some very thin foam.  This is something that you could make or have made.  It serves to pass audio but deflect any liquids that get past the perforated grill.  In fact, you could probably get away with a simple single layer of nylon fabric behind the grill.  With the Sx series, you can just fasten it under the sides of the grille, but with the ELX and the wrap-around grille you would probably have to come up with some other way of keeping it in place. 
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 19, 2013, 03:21:10 pm
I'll take a closer look at the "liners" behind the Sx100 grilles one of these days.  IIRC, they are a nylon like fabric "envelope" lined with some very thin foam.  This is something that you could make or have made.  It serves to pass audio but deflect any liquids that get past the perforated grill.  In fact, you could probably get away with a simple single layer of nylon fabric behind the grill.  With the Sx series, you can just fasten it under the sides of the grille, but with the ELX and the wrap-around grille you would probably have to come up with some other way of keeping it in place.

An entrepreneur mind might jump on this - after market water resistant grille liners made for the most popular speakers on the market.....mmm
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 21, 2013, 09:59:38 pm
So, the ELX112's arrived today. Did a quick AB comparison with my PRX612's. Kinda wish I hadn't. An unfair shoot-out really - not that the PRX's are the best speakers out there of course.  I probably should have compared to the K10's as I usually use them as monitors  but I wanted to compare 12" to 12".
Don't get me wrong - I  am not disappointed with the purchase I made.  I really think they will be fine as monitors and they seemed to get loud enough for the stages I get to cover without clipping or distortion. I know that some people are JBL lovers and others are not so much but it seems that I always get a good warm sound from the PRX's no matter what. The ELX112's needed some eq'ing but didn't sound too bad by the time I had finished. A little too much middle for my liking and a slight lack of vocal clarity. Overall for the money I paid I think they'll do fine and if one of them ends up getting dumped on - not the biggest investment in the world.
I'll use them as is tomorrow and hope for the best. Be an awful shame if I get any damage first time out !!!
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Dustin Campbell on November 21, 2013, 10:09:45 pm
Congrats on the new members of the family- for me it takes a little while to get to know each piece of new equipment and usually I like them better as I get accustomed to them - I'm sure you will deploy them and use them to their fullest
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 21, 2013, 10:41:37 pm
Congrats on the new members of the family- for me it takes a little while to get to know each piece of new equipment and usually I like them better as I get accustomed to them - I'm sure you will deploy them and use them to their fullest

Thanks Dustin...I always enjoy getting new equipment - I've never owned EV before so that's kinda nice. I don't get to hear the monitors much of course - not like the FOH but if the musicians are happy with them on stage then so am I !!!
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Tim McCulloch on November 21, 2013, 10:42:51 pm
Congrats on the new members of the family- for me it takes a little while to get to know each piece of new equipment and usually I like them better as I get accustomed to them - I'm sure you will deploy them and use them to their fullest

I agree.  New speakers and new microphones take some getting used to.  Not that they are necessarily better or worse, but that they are different.  We are steeped in the sonic presentation of whatever we've been using so almost anything else sounds foreign to us.  Some time and experimentation will eventually show what the new toys are capable of.
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Dustin Campbell on November 21, 2013, 10:57:42 pm
As an amateur musician myself I am super happy with any monitors at all - side note story - when I was younger my band played "the Whiskey" and we were so exited and we set up super quick and we're ready to be "rock stars" and there was some nice big monitors in front of us and we did a quick sound  check - I said to the sound guy - can you turn up the monitors up a little and he replied " opening bands don't get monitors"     - So your bands should be happy that you put a lot of thought into their listening experience - once again have fun bringing out there best performances - p.s. Never wanted to play the whiskey again :-)
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 22, 2013, 10:11:42 am
As an amateur musician myself I am super happy with any monitors at all - side note story - when I was younger my band played "the Whiskey" and we were so exited and we set up super quick and we're ready to be "rock stars" and there was some nice big monitors in front of us and we did a quick sound  check - I said to the sound guy - can you turn up the monitors up a little and he replied " opening bands don't get monitors"     - So your bands should be happy that you put a lot of thought into their listening experience - once again have fun bringing out there best performances - p.s. Never wanted to play the whiskey again :-)

ha ha... I know how you felt...
In my day I sang pro for a short time and semi-pro for many years before surgery damaged my voice in 2003. For those first couple of years I didn't use monitors - didn't even know what they were - but I think it helped me in the long run. Anything else was simply 'butta'. In fact I never really expected too much on stage as long as the FOH sounded good. Yes, I spoil the singers I work with but hey - that's my job right?
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Debbie Dunkley on November 24, 2013, 09:15:52 am
Update....gig went well and no casualties YAY !. I got a few splashes on them but nothing to worry about.
In, fact, security stepped in at one point when some dancers started grabbing the mic from the singer. She got a little worried. Finally, the owner did the right thing and kicked out the trouble makers. The rest of the evening went smoothly.
The 3 singers in the band expect quite high levels on stage and I was a bit worried whether the ELX's could keep up but the musicians  were very happy and I got those suckers up high and sounding clear and punchy. I am very happy with them. I used them with a Crown XLS2000 at 375 watts per side into 8 ohms. It was a good fit. 
Title: Re: Comparison passive/active
Post by: Jerome Malsack on November 24, 2013, 02:29:29 pm
Update....gig went well and no casualties YAY !. I got a few splashes on them but nothing to worry about.
In, fact, security stepped in at one point when some dancers started grabbing the mic from the singer. She got a little worried. Finally, the owner did the right thing and kicked out the trouble makers. The rest of the evening went smoothly.
The 3 singers in the band expect quite high levels on stage and I was a bit worried whether the ELX's could keep up but the musicians  were very happy and I got those suckers up high and sounding clear and punchy. I am very happy with them. I used them with a Crown XLS2000 at 375 watts per side into 8 ohms. It was a good fit.

Happy to hear on the positive results.  Glad the owner grew a pair and had security remove the trouble.