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: jesseweiss on June 03, 2019, 10:46:54 am

Title: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: jesseweiss on June 03, 2019, 10:46:54 am
We are a weekend warrior cover band of 50 year olds, been together for over 30 years. We do small bar gigs and community events and we've been running a Mackie SRM system (2 550's and 1 1850 sub) for about 4 years.  It fit our needs as a way of upgrading from Behringer stuff on a budget, as I got them used.

With the addition of getting an XR18 and all the processing it provides, upgraded monitors (DBR10's), and all I've learned from this forum we sound good for the gigs we do, from our perspective and that of audiences.

What I've noticed lately is I'm able to get a lot more GBF with the system than I used to since I know a lot more about running sound than I used to, and I'm actually finding that we don't really push the system at all to get the volume and sound quality we need (typical band in the park stuff). Any place we play that needs more has a PA we use.

So..... I'm considering upgrading by downsizing (and possibly improving sound quality) and was looking for feedback, particularly moving to 10" mains from 12's.

One option would be to go with k10.2's over their new KS112. The k10.2's are lighter than our SRM's, the KS112 smaller than our sub and with casters.  This isn't a cheap option but would provide some size/weight relief and better sound quality.

Another option, would be the new EV ELX200 line as their 10" full range are lighter than the k10.2's and the 12" sub is very light and small, small enough we could use 2 if needed.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Taylor Hall on June 03, 2019, 10:59:40 am
You'll find a lot of love for the DSR110 here, while not incredibly light, it is incredibly compact and VERY capable in numerous scenarios. I'm not a huge fan of QSC's SOS offerings, especially at their price point.

As for subs, you may find yourself wishing you had that 18" driver, especially compared to the KS112. Every event I've seen with those deployed have been underwhelming in terms of output. Its a super neat design and would work pretty well in a smaller confined space, but your application of bar gigs and outdoor events would probably highlight these shortcomings where you really need a fair bit of grunt to punch through bodies and open air.

The equipment you're talking about is fairly common, so you could probably find a place to rent from and try for yourself, especially the QSC stuff. It might be a good place to start to test out on a gig, or at least demo it in person to A/B against your current rig.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Patrick Cognitore on June 03, 2019, 11:37:03 am
The models you mention as a potential upgrade path seem like more of a lateral move to me. What is your highest priority with changing speakers - lighter weight, smaller size, improved sound quality? And what is your budget?

I will say that my perception of 'band in the park' type gigs seems to be pretty different than what you've described. So I can't really comment on whether a smaller system will continue to meet your needs.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Helge A Bentsen on June 03, 2019, 12:30:33 pm
Bear in mind that if you wish to upgrade it requires a lot of $$$ or it could end up as a lateral move.

Personally I would look for a small used system from one of the major manufacturers.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: jesseweiss on June 03, 2019, 12:36:29 pm
The models you mention as a potential upgrade path seem like more of a lateral move to me. What is your highest priority with changing speakers - lighter weight, smaller size, improved sound quality? And what is your budget?

I will say that my perception of 'band in the park' type gigs seems to be pretty different than what you've described. So I can't really comment on whether a smaller system will continue to meet your needs.

I should say "small local band in a small park" gigs LOL.  So 50-100 people watching while eating at a community fair.

I know they are mostly a lateral move, other than possibly improved sound quality with a new/better speaker and potentially size/weight savings.

It's not a necessary move, but rather something I'm considering to save our backs :).
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: jesseweiss on June 03, 2019, 12:47:06 pm
Bear in mind that if you wish to upgrade it requires a lot of $$$ or it could end up as a lateral move.

Personally I would look for a small used system from one of the major manufacturers.

My budget is around $3,000, after selling the SRM stuff I'm hoping to get it closer to $2k.  Used is a possibility.

Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Steve Litscher on June 03, 2019, 01:05:39 pm
I'm not aware of a DSR110 offering - only the DSR112 (amazing) and DSR115. There's a DZR10 now, but it's quite a bit more expensive.

Speaking of expense... This might be just slightly above your budget, but if you shop around and ask about discounts from your local retailer (or contact Mike Pyle!!), I'd do something like:

2x DXR10 (very capable and light weight) on tripods
1x JTR Captivator 212 Pro (active)

Very compact system, but very potent. Put the C212Pro in the center of the stage and you'll be duly impressed.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Mike Santarelli on June 03, 2019, 01:16:05 pm
Id consider the RCF evox 12. 
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Sean Anderson on June 03, 2019, 01:28:49 pm

2x DXR10 (very capable and light weight) on tripods
1x JTR Captivator 212 Pro (active)

Very compact system, but very potent. Put the C212Pro in the center of the stage and you'll be duly impressed.

I second the captivator 212 suggestion. I routinely do inside shows the size you mentioned with 1 of them.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Mark Scrivener on June 03, 2019, 01:59:17 pm
... I'd do something like:

2x DXR10 (very capable and light weight) on tripods
1x JTR Captivator 212 Pro (active)

Very compact system, but very potent. Put the C212Pro in the center of the stage and you'll be duly impressed.

I have what could be considered a similar system -
2x DSR112
2x PRX815XLFW

and it sounds fantastic! The PRX 15" subs are only 51lbs and are surprisingly easy to manage due to excellent handle placement. And of course the DSR112's are well known around here. Total cost new with speaker covers, stands, etc, was around $3k. DXR10's or even better DZR10's would weigh a little less (and the DZR10's prob sound better than the DSR112's). The captivator weights a bit more than a single PRX815 sub, but would be a breeze with two people and I'm sure it sounds amazing...

Frankly a system like the above should get you about as good a sound as practical for any event up to 100-200 people.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Andrea Litti on June 03, 2019, 02:26:16 pm
A couple of RCF Art710 mk4 and a RCF 8003-II would be a very good and lightweight portable system that fits your needs and costs about 2500 euros in Italy. I don't know the pricing of this setup in the US but I guess it's close to 2500 USD
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Patrick Cognitore on June 03, 2019, 02:37:05 pm
I just check out the Mackie models that you have, at 37lbs and 64lbs they are not terribly heavy for speakers of their size and construction. I'm not knocking your want and need for lighter weight speakers, I've got a bulging disc myself so I get it. But a QSC K10.2 is 32lbs, which saves you only 5lbs off of your current tops. There are some models that dip below 30lbs, mostly 8" models. To get lighter than that you'd have to go with something like a Bose S1, which has very limited output capabilities, IME.

And subs are mostly going to be over 50lbs. Ones that are worth dragging to the gig to get some low end, anyway.

But if you're SPL needs are truly modest, you may want to check out something like  the RCF Evox J8. I don't generally like those column type systems and usually think you're better off with standard 2 way tops and subs for the price, but for a situation like yours it may worth checking out. the J8 is around 50lbs for the system (sub and top). The top is very lightweight and easy to lift. And the RCF stuff sounds good. A pair of those would come in ~ $2000.

https://www.rcf.it/en_US/products/product-detail/evox-j8/488963 (https://www.rcf.it/en_US/products/product-detail/evox-j8/488963)



I should say "small local band in a small park" gigs LOL.  So 50-100 people watching while eating at a community fair.

I know they are mostly a lateral move, other than possibly improved sound quality with a new/better speaker and potentially size/weight savings.

It's not a necessary move, but rather something I'm considering to save our backs :).
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: frank kayser on June 03, 2019, 02:59:41 pm
Id consider the RCF evox 12.


As much as I'm a RCF fanboy, I don't think the very capable Evox 12 would be budget friendly for him, nor would the Evox 8, which also would fit the bill.  Pricewise, *maybe* the RCF J8 (Evox 8 in a plastic cabinet, more or less...).
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Brian Adams on June 03, 2019, 03:05:44 pm
Id consider the RCF evox 12.

As a former Evox 12 owner (stolen, unfortunately), I'll say they're nice boxes. Super loud for their size, and they sound great. They get a little uneven off-axis, and I disliked that they couldn't be tilted or arrayed. Not a big deal in most bar-type venues, but it was an issue in theaters and churches. I think the Evox 8 sounds a little better out of the box than the 12, but man the Evox 12 gets loud for its size. The J8 is nice too, although it doesn't seem to sound quite as good as the wooden box version. But for half the price it's hard to complain.

After they were stolen, I replaced my 2 Evox 12's with 4 FBT CS1000's, and I'd replace them with the same if they disappeared. The ability to tilt and array them is perfect for my use, and I love that they pack up so small with everything together. The off-axis pattern is much more even than the Evox 12, and while a single FBT CS1000 isn't quite as loud, a pair of them is louder than the Evox. In a theater, I can have the bottom box cover the main floor and the top box covers the balcony. They might look a little funny from the side, but they work really well.

Disclaimer, I'm an RCF and FBT dealer.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Alec Spence on June 03, 2019, 04:05:17 pm
I just check out the Mackie models that you have, at 37lbs and 64lbs they are not terribly heavy for speakers of their size and construction. I'm not knocking your want and need for lighter weight speakers, I've got a bulging disc myself so I get it. But a QSC K10.2 is 32lbs, which saves you only 5lbs off of your current tops. There are some models that dip below 30lbs, mostly 8" models. To get lighter than that you'd have to go with something like a Bose S1, which has very limited output capabilities, IME.
There are loads of us older musos where every bit of size/weight saved has a value, but there's no value in hating the load-in/out, and definitely no manliness in it.

You can get greater weight savings - my RCF ART 710s are 11 kg (24 of your quaint pounds) which is definitely a weight saving worth having.  That said, the latest version are 2-3kg heavier - I think they dropped the neo bass drivers, sadly.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Sean Zurbrick on June 03, 2019, 04:31:20 pm
Id consider the RCF evox 12.

This was going to be my reply as well.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: jesseweiss on June 03, 2019, 05:44:30 pm
I'm not aware of a DSR110 offering - only the DSR112 (amazing) and DSR115. There's a DZR10 now, but it's quite a bit more expensive.

Speaking of expense... This might be just slightly above your budget, but if you shop around and ask about discounts from your local retailer (or contact Mike Pyle!!), I'd do something like:

2x DXR10 (very capable and light weight) on tripods
1x JTR Captivator 212 Pro (active)

Very compact system, but very potent. Put the C212Pro in the center of the stage and you'll be duly impressed.

Yeah the JTR is probably outside my price range.

The PRX815XLF is definitely something I've looked at.

I have to agree with the post that a few pounds makes a difference. Keep in mind that I am frequently moving a lot of the stuff myself, then playing fairly fast drums for 2-3 hours (frequently 35+ songs) and any weight savings is meaningful.

Size of the sub is another issue. None of us have big cars. I can fit the sub in my wife's small SUV but it's tight with my drum kit, stands, and some other stuff.

DXR10 is another option I was looking at. Have to look at their subs to compare, as I think they are fairly heavy.

We did a charity gig we run with a hired sound guy and he used 2 ELX200-12SP subs with I believe RCF tops (10/12, don't remember), and they provided plenty of low end for our needs. This was in a full 400 person theater.

I understand it's mostly a lateral move, but I'm comfortable spending some money to help my back (3 bulging discs, some muscle atrophy in left leg, nerve pain, etc...) so it isn't just a matter of convenience. It may be important to extend my ability to continue to play.

Even two smaller 12" subs that are easier to fit in cars and move around are an option.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: John P. Farrell on June 03, 2019, 06:47:34 pm
So..... I'm considering upgrading by downsizing (and possibly improving sound quality) and was looking for feedback, particularly moving to 10" mains from 12's.

One option would be to go with k10.2's over their new KS112. The k10.2's are lighter than our SRM's, the KS112 smaller than our sub and with casters.  This isn't a cheap option but would provide some size/weight relief and better sound quality.

To me the K10 (and any other boxes in that category) ARE the cheap option.  There are plenty of pro grade 10" boxes with decent output and fidelity but you'll easily be spending your whole budget per box, and most boxes that sound that good aren't especially lightweight.   

I guess we have different ideas of what a rig in the park is expected to do and it seems you're valuing portability far more than upgrading audio quality after reading deeper into the thread.  So if a smaller footprint in the car and a few pounds less to lift is what you're after there have been a few good suggestions for around the $3000 mark. 

Since you're already in a Behringer/Music Group ecosystem with your mixer perhaps check out the Turbosound iQ series....I've had decent luck with them where budget is a concern and they seem to sound a little better than the plastic boxes to me.  MAP on those is $674 and you can definitely get a better price through any dealer.  There are quite a few sub options and you can run ultranet. 

Hope you find something that works for you.

JF
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on June 03, 2019, 07:01:29 pm
For a light weight top I'd take a good look at the Db Ingenia IG2T. I've been running the IG4T with great results. A pair of IG2T's and a DB 18H sub would be a great sounding and light rig. The tops are right around 28lbs and everyone I've talked to says they will beat a 12 inch and horn box hands down. I know my IG4T's crossed over at 100hz to a sub will out perform the 3 different 15 and horn boxes I currently have.

Give Mike Pyle a shout as he is a regular here and has competitive pricing.

http://www.dbtechnologies.com/en/products/ingenia/ingenia-ig2t/

http://www.dbtechnologies.com/en/products/sub-series/sub-18h/

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=db+ig2t&view=detail&mid=8A11582848494C524AFE8A11582848494C524AFE&FORM=VIRE


Douglas R. Allen
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Rob Spence on June 03, 2019, 07:38:16 pm
I upgraded from original QSC K12s to DXR10s.
Sound great. Get plenty loud (for me) and my back is much happier. Oh, and they pack in a smaller space.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Steve Garris on June 03, 2019, 08:38:07 pm
I upgraded from original QSC K12s to DXR10s.
Sound great. Get plenty loud (for me) and my back is much happier. Oh, and they pack in a smaller space.

I've used those SRM boxes and can confirm the DXR would be substantially better sonically than the Mackies. I do not recommend the qsc boxes for mains. I also use a PRX system that I love. YMMV
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Chris Grimshaw on June 04, 2019, 04:14:40 am
If a pair of 12" subs will do the job, I'd expect 8" mains to keep up.

Chris
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Mark Norgren on June 04, 2019, 08:33:54 am
I'm not sure why people are not real high on the QSC stuff.  I have been using various combinations of K12's, KW153's, and KW181's for a few years and found them to be very capable for our cover band.  I upgraded our Presonus board to the Midas M32R and noticed a big improvement.  If needed, I have four subs and with the 153's, I can do stuff for around 300-400 people outdoors.  For larger crowds, we usually let the promoters contract the production out.  Smaller bars, 2 subs and the K12's will do the job nicely!  MHO  Good luck with your search!
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Bob Stone on June 04, 2019, 08:43:20 am
I'm not sure why people are not real high on the QSC stuff.  I have been using various combinations of K12's, KW153's, and KW181's for a few years and found them to be very capable for our cover band.  I upgraded our Presonus board to the Midas M32R and noticed a big improvement.  If needed, I have four subs and with the 153's, I can do stuff for around 300-400 people outdoors.  For larger crowds, we usually let the promoters contract the production out.  Smaller bars, 2 subs and the K12's will do the job nicely!  MHO  Good luck with your search!

Mark - it's just the typical flavour of the month thing that everyone jumps on. Seems right now everyone is on a Yamaha kick with a little JBL SRX sprinkled in. Yesterday was Danley/JTR. The week before that it was QSC...the QSC's are still great boxes for the price.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Tim McCulloch on June 04, 2019, 10:27:48 am
Mark - it's just the typical flavour of the month thing that everyone jumps on. Seems right now everyone is on a Yamaha kick with a little JBL SRX sprinkled in. Yesterday was Danley/JTR. The week before that it was QSC...the QSC's are still great boxes for the price.

Not quite a flavor of the month thing, Bob.  The Yamaha supporters have been pretty steadfast in their use of the products, as have the JBL users (and a few, like Debbie D, use both and make comparisons they publish on the LAB).  The QSC users are happy with their purchases, too, but if you read what Scott H and others have to say about them I suspect the commercial aspects outweigh the sound quality or other *perceived* differences.  I've used almost all the brands and models mentioned in this thread and they're all fairly capable products; the differences are shown when individual owners have a use where THAT product seems superior to them in the use they give those products.

Danley and JTR are worthy of the praise given but mostly are in a class above those mentioned here.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Bob Stone on June 04, 2019, 11:15:31 am
Not quite a flavor of the month thing, Bob.  The Yamaha supporters have been pretty steadfast in their use of the products, as have the JBL users (and a few, like Debbie D, use both and make comparisons they publish on the LAB).  The QSC users are happy with their purchases, too, but if you read what Scott H and others have to say about them I suspect the commercial aspects outweigh the sound quality or other *perceived* differences.  I've used almost all the brands and models mentioned in this thread and they're all fairly capable products; the differences are shown when individual owners have a use where THAT product seems superior to them in the use they give those products.

Danley and JTR are worthy of the praise given but mostly are in a class above those mentioned here.

Understandably those talking up a product they own and like is great...but I've read quite a few threads as of late (in the last month or so) that have had negative comments on the QSC's. Now the QSC's are not the be all, end all of boxes out there but they are good speakers for their price, are quite competitive, and have proven to be workhorses. I wouldn't sway anyone away from purchasing them if they would be suitable for the job and I don't think others should either.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Tim McCulloch on June 04, 2019, 12:11:02 pm
Understandably those talking up a product they own and like is great...but I've read quite a few threads as of late (in the last month or so) that have had negative comments on the QSC's. Now the QSC's are not the be all, end all of boxes out there but they are good speakers for their price, are quite competitive, and have proven to be workhorses. I wouldn't sway anyone away from purchasing them if they would be suitable for the job and I don't think others should either.

We don't own any K series but we've got clients that have them and other than too many user options on the back panel I don't find anything objectionable for the corporate gigs I've done with them, and a couple of entertainment events where the big K boxes were used as side fills (loud 80's tribute act, the speakers survived and the band had no complaints).

For the majority of uses I see the speakers under discussion as largely interchangeable - the differences are the processing/routing options, price, and weight.  Personal preferences and any existing inventory compatibility are probably the biggest decision factors...

Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Steve Garris on June 04, 2019, 04:31:46 pm
Understandably those talking up a product they own and like is great...but I've read quite a few threads as of late (in the last month or so) that have had negative comments on the QSC's. Now the QSC's are not the be all, end all of boxes out there but they are good speakers for their price, are quite competitive, and have proven to be workhorses. I wouldn't sway anyone away from purchasing them if they would be suitable for the job and I don't think others should either.

I work at a club every Sunday night that has 2 K12's flown. The boxes have a weird resonating low mid off the back, requiring a lot of filtering to prevent the vocal mic's from feeding back (250 Hz). Additionally, when the place fills up, they run out of steam and start to sound harsh and crappy, as compared to my SRX or DSR's. They are not worth the $100 savings IMO. I do think they make good floor wedges. YMMV.

A friend has a KW122/KW181 system that I've run a few times. To me they sound off, but I can't quite put my finger on why. They have a noticeably narrow horn pattern that doesn't cover well in wide places.

Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Bob Stone on June 04, 2019, 04:45:20 pm
I work at a club every Sunday night that has 2 K12's flown. The boxes have a weird resonating low mid off the back, requiring a lot of filtering to prevent the vocal mic's from feeding back (250 Hz). Additionally, when the place fills up, they run out of steam and start to sound harsh and crappy, as compared to my SRX or DSR's. They are not worth the $100 savings IMO. I do think they make good floor wedges. YMMV.

A friend has a KW122/KW181 system that I've run a few times. To me they sound off, but I can't quite put my finger on why. They have a noticeably narrow horn pattern that doesn't cover well in wide places.

Where are you buying your stuff? There's a $500 difference between the K12.2 ($800 at sweetwater) vs the SRX812p ($1300 at sweetwater).

And go figure, a narrow pattern doesn't cover well in a wide place, who would have thought? That's not a fault of the speaker whatsoever. In fact, both of those appear to be poor application of the equipment. A pair of K12's in all but the smallest acoustic clubs would be insufficient.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Steve Garris on June 04, 2019, 05:27:24 pm
Where are you buying your stuff? There's a $500 difference between the K12.2 ($800 at sweetwater) vs the SRX812p ($1300 at sweetwater).

And go figure, a narrow pattern doesn't cover well in a wide place, who would have thought? That's not a fault of the speaker whatsoever. In fact, both of those appear to be poor application of the equipment. A pair of K12's in all but the smallest acoustic clubs would be insufficient.


The DSR is $100 more.
Yes, the 75 degree horn is insufficient for a wider space. I wonder why most manufacturers of these similarly-priced boxes use 90 deg horns? Could it be that they work better in your typical small club?
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Mark Scrivener on June 04, 2019, 05:29:57 pm
I work at a club every Sunday night that has 2 K12's flown. The boxes have a weird resonating low mid off the back, requiring a lot of filtering to prevent the vocal mic's from feeding back (250 Hz). Additionally, when the place fills up, they run out of steam and start to sound harsh and crappy, as compared to my SRX or DSR's. They are not worth the $100 savings IMO. I do think they make good floor wedges. YMMV.

A friend has a KW122/KW181 system that I've run a few times. To me they sound off, but I can't quite put my finger on why. They have a noticeably narrow horn pattern that doesn't cover well in wide places.

Recently played a gig where the club had 2 K8's mounted on brackets and we were required to use them. Had the same feedback problem around 250 Hz. And yes, they easily get harsh and run out of steam....but these were 8's. Despite the issues we did manage to get a sound everyone was pleased with....but it could have been so much better.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Mark Norgren on June 05, 2019, 07:20:13 am
It's my hobbyist experience that all rooms need to be eq'd a bit.  Some rooms have hard surfaces that inherently cause issues.  In regards to the horns, we have played a ballroom that is particularly wide.  Not sure any enclosure would provide the necessary coverage.  I'll typically throw a set of K12's to cover the sides and be done with it.

My point about changing from the Presonus to Midas was huge for us.  It is amazing what good preamps do for your sound package.  Clarity, sensitivity, balance, and some other factors we apparent to me right away from the change.  To the OP, don't forget about a quality board.

I'm sure the the Yamaha and JBL are fine speakers and people are happy with them.  My guess is that a good sound engineer could make most of the gear sing given proper time.  I come to this board trying to learn from the pros (I am not), but I do have a pretty good set of ears.  I just got a sense of QSC bashing that I didn't understand.  Again, MHO.  Peace out!
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Tim McCulloch on June 05, 2019, 10:14:43 am
It's my hobbyist experience that all rooms need to be eq'd a bit.  Some rooms have hard surfaces that inherently cause issues.  In regards to the horns, we have played a ballroom that is particularly wide.  Not sure any enclosure would provide the necessary coverage.  I'll typically throw a set of K12's to cover the sides and be done with it.

My point about changing from the Presonus to Midas was huge for us.  It is amazing what good preamps do for your sound package.  Clarity, sensitivity, balance, and some other factors we apparent to me right away from the change.  To the OP, don't forget about a quality board.

I'm sure the the Yamaha and JBL are fine speakers and people are happy with them.  My guess is that a good sound engineer could make most of the gear sing given proper time.  I come to this board trying to learn from the pros (I am not), but I do have a pretty good set of ears.  I just got a sense of QSC bashing that I didn't understand.  Again, MHO.  Peace out!

How did you physically and electrically separate the preamps from the rest of the circuitry and digital signal processing inside the console?  You know, stuff that affects what we hear, like the summing algorithms, or the AD/DA converters?

The answer is that you and so many others attribute all "perceived improvements" of a console's output as being the result of the manufacturer's choice of $0.79 preamp chip.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Dennis Wiggins on June 05, 2019, 10:49:15 am
...boxes have a weird resonating low mid off the back, requiring a lot of filtering to prevent the vocal mic's from feeding back (250 Hz)...

Here is an excerpt from a review I wrote about DXR10.

"My only gripe is that, directly behind the cabinet for about 2-3 feet, it has an annoying mid-range "honk". This is probably due to the fact that is it is so light, which I am willing to trade off. If you work just behind, but very close to the cabinet (as I do to save my hearing), this can be an issue. At more than 3 feet behind , this is a non-issue."

The far more capable DXR12 does not have this issue, and the side handles make easier to put up in the air than the 10. They both get used regularly, depending on the need. I expect that I'll be living with them for a long time.

-Dennis

Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Jeff Lelko on June 06, 2019, 04:37:53 pm
...but I've read quite a few threads as of late (in the last month or so) that have had negative comments on the QSC's.

I just got a sense of QSC bashing that I didn't understand.

From the threads I've read or posted in I never got this impression.  There's nothing wrong with the various offerings from QSC so long as they're used within the scope of their intended application, as is the case with most equipment.  I've mentioned in many threads that I'm still a happy owner/user of the HPR series, as has Scott who owns a substantial amount of KW rig. 

What I've also said is this - QSC tends to give their products a very long production life compared to other companies, especially at the lounge level of gear.  The original K Series and KWs have been on the market for about a decade now if my memory serves correctly.  They're a very known commodity, and I view that as a good thing when needing to grow or rent a system.  Others such as JBL and Yamaha seem to introduce updates and new models on a somewhat yearly or bi-yearly basis, which gives added attention to the brand along with incorporation of the latest industry trends.  QSC shook up the powered speaker market in the mid-2000s with their introduction of the HPR Series which (in my opinion) set the new standard for top-level prosumer or entry-level professional powered boxes.  While the newer KW Series was built around a lighter amp, many will say that it wasn't a sonic improvement especially when pushed - and I tend to agree.  I don't want to say that QSC rested on their laurels after the massive success of the HPR Series, but they certainly haven't released another product that shakes up the industry in the past decade...which opened the door for others like Yamaha to come in with the DSR Series.  This isn't brand bashing - it's just noting industry trends and how quickly various manufacturers are willing to adapt to the current market's offerings.     
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Robert Lunceford on June 06, 2019, 11:34:04 pm
Others such as JBL and Yamaha seem to introduce updates and new models on a somewhat yearly or bi-yearly basis, which gives added attention to the brand along with incorporation of the latest industry trends.

And sometimes manufacturers get it right the first time and the product enjoys longevity. Cases in point , the Sennheiser MD441 that was first introduced in 1966 and is still in production. It is considered to be the most accurate dynamic microphone  ever made.  The Bose 802 only had a couple on minor changes during it's +35 years of production. It has found it's way to the Sydney Summer Olympics and FOH speaker system for Michael Jackson and Bruce Springsteen. It appears that Danley got it right the first time on their entire line.
Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: Scott Holtzman on June 07, 2019, 01:05:47 pm
From the threads I've read or posted in I never got this impression.  There's nothing wrong with the various offerings from QSC so long as they're used within the scope of their intended application, as is the case with most equipment.  I've mentioned in many threads that I'm still a happy owner/user of the HPR series, as has Scott who owns a substantial amount of KW rig. 

What I've also said is this - QSC tends to give their products a very long production life compared to other companies, especially at the lounge level of gear.  The original K Series and KWs have been on the market for about a decade now if my memory serves correctly.  They're a very known commodity, and I view that as a good thing when needing to grow or rent a system.  Others such as JBL and Yamaha seem to introduce updates and new models on a somewhat yearly or bi-yearly basis, which gives added attention to the brand along with incorporation of the latest industry trends.  QSC shook up the powered speaker market in the mid-2000s with their introduction of the HPR Series which (in my opinion) set the new standard for top-level prosumer or entry-level professional powered boxes.  While the newer KW Series was built around a lighter amp, many will say that it wasn't a sonic improvement especially when pushed - and I tend to agree.  I don't want to say that QSC rested on their laurels after the massive success of the HPR Series, but they certainly haven't released another product that shakes up the industry in the past decade...which opened the door for others like Yamaha to come in with the DSR Series.  This isn't brand bashing - it's just noting industry trends and how quickly various manufacturers are willing to adapt to the current market's offerings.     

I have 5 HPR122i's that I just looked have never been services in 5 years (I got them used).  I am always looking for one more 122 and a two 152's then I could make two monitor rigs out of it.

The odd thing to me is QSC seems to go backwards.  I think HPR's sound better and are more rugged than KW's.  The K's have always been weak.  I don't own any, but the DXR10's run circles around them.  The k2's went with the industry trend of putting a mixer and a computer on the back of the speaker so I got turned off right away.  A pro speaker should have a power plug, an input and a link control and level pot.  That's it.  (some means to select DSP presets may be ok but it better be major idiot proof). 

The only downside to HPR is having to move them.  Those suckers are heavy!

Title: Re: More rig for the gig than we need? Upgrading to smaller size and better quality
Post by: jesseweiss on June 09, 2019, 12:24:51 pm
After all the feedback and Yamaha's announcement of updated dr's coming I'm going to wait on those and see how they compare to the lower priced EV ELX stuff.

With the new dxr I can see running 10s over the 12 inch sub. The sub is  heavier than ours but smaller with higher spl. The new dxr10 is 7 lbs lighter than our 12s with the same output. Having heard current dxr they do sound better than ours, so I assume new ones will be even better.

As i said in my OP hoping for size/weight savings and quality upgrade and I dont mind spending even if a mostly lateral move.