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: Tom Young on May 27, 2011, 09:51:16 am

Title: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 27, 2011, 09:51:16 am
I am hunting down some speakers for an unusual installation project and checked the K-Array website. I have heard their column speakers a few times and think they're contenders for/in that market.

But the leading headline on their website really disturbs me. See:

http://www.k-array.net/

and the top NEWS story: "A Beautiful Front-fill".

In this news item a sound guy has chosen a fairly long column speaker as a *front fill* speaker in larger theaters.

specs: http://www.k-array.net/downloads/karray/datasheet/KR200S_data_B.pdf

So just to be clear: there is a need to cover across the front seats and the sound dude choose a speaker, which when laid on its side, has 7-degrees horizontal coverage directly on axis to the center of the column. How does this cover more than (say) 3-5 seats with HF and upper MF energy ?

OK, OK. Egregious errors by marketing folks are nothing new in the pro audio market/press and elsewhere. We all know that.

But think about what this does to the basic understanding of electroaocustics for the novice who reads this stuff.

And (equally troubling).... how did the sound dude not notice the lack of HF coverage across the front seats ?

This is not the first time I have seen a column speaker deployed in such a flawed manner. But I find it startling, disturbing and disconcerting to see this on the front page of a pro audio speaker manufacturer's website.

end of rant
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Frederik Rosenkjær on May 27, 2011, 10:14:51 am
I don't understand the problem?

As far as I know they consist of a lot of small drivers all reproducing the entire frequency spectrum. Wouldn't that mean that the horizontal coverage (horizontal when lying down) is not 7 degrees measured from the center but out from each end of the stick? (and when laying them end-to-end the "middle field" where it acts as a cylindrical radiator (array length and driver distance permitting) is just extended).
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 27, 2011, 10:21:20 am
I don't understand the problem?

As far as I know they consist of a lot of small drivers all reproducing the entire frequency spectrum. Wouldn't that mean that the horizontal coverage (horizontal when lying down) is not 7 degrees measured from the center but out from each end of the stick? (and when laying them end-to-end the "middle field" where it acts as a cylindrical radiator (array length and driver distance permitting) is just extended).

No.

Look at the polars for this speaker or any other columnar speaker (Bose MA12, for one). Take the vertical polars and rotate them 90-degrees. This is what the column spoeaker does in the horizontal axis when laid on its side (well..... without some side-effects of the stage lip and/or floor).

Take this a step further and sign up for MAP On-line at Meyer Sound. Build a column array with MM-4 drivers. Map the coverage. Rotate the array. Check coverage at the various fractional-octave points.

Another interesting experiment is to mount a column speaker on its side (horizontally) on a stand and rotate it (or walk across the coverage area) and listen to what occurs ..... especially at HF's.

Cylindrical wavefronts are part, or almost, a theoretical myth (as is the "point source") and may only be achieved through mirroring with the floor (and ceiling ? ... I forget).

If it *was* possible to use column speakers for front fill, under-balcony fill, etc. I can assure you that many of us would do so.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Mac Kerr on May 27, 2011, 10:30:54 am
I don't understand the problem?

As far as I know they consist of a lot of small drivers all reproducing the entire frequency spectrum. Wouldn't that mean that the horizontal coverage (horizontal when lying down) is not 7 degrees measured from the center but out from each end of the stick? (and when laying them end-to-end the "middle field" where it acts as a cylindrical radiator (array length and driver distance permitting) is just extended).

This might work if the entire audience width was covered with speakers placed end to end, creating a single line the width of the audience. For single speakers, or even that long line, the HF is focussed toward the center of the speaker. I was amazed by this phenomena while listening to an LDS L-800 column speaker (http://www.lds-co.se/products/lds800.htm) that was used as a proscenium mounted vocal system in a theater. In the front row the end seat was looking right into the bottom driver of the column. When you sat down in that seat you could distinctly hear all the high end go away as you sat down, despite the fact that you were staring right into a working ribbon driver. the high end really came back on when you stood up enough to be staring at the 3rd ribbon up in the column.

Mac
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Matt Errend on May 27, 2011, 07:32:24 pm
I don't understand the problem?

As far as I know they consist of a lot of small drivers all reproducing the entire frequency spectrum. Wouldn't that mean that the horizontal coverage (horizontal when lying down) is not 7 degrees measured from the center but out from each end of the stick? (and when laying them end-to-end the "middle field" where it acts as a cylindrical radiator (array length and driver distance permitting) is just extended).

No.

Look at the polars for this speaker or any other columnar speaker (Bose MA12, for one). Take the vertical polars and rotate them 90-degrees. This is what the column spoeaker does in the horizontal axis when laid on its side (well..... without some side-effects of the stage lip and/or floor).

Take this a step further and sign up for MAP On-line at Meyer Sound. Build a column array with MM-4 drivers. Map the coverage. Rotate the array. Check coverage at the various fractional-octave points.

Another interesting experiment is to mount a column speaker on its side (horizontally) on a stand and rotate it (or walk across the coverage area) and listen to what occurs ..... especially at HF's.

Cylindrical wavefronts are part, or almost, a theoretical myth (as is the "point source") and may only be achieved through mirroring with the floor (and ceiling ? ... I forget).

If it *was* possible to use column speakers for front fill, under-balcony fill, etc. I can assure you that many of us would do so.

Have you considered that they might be changing the way the DSP is functioning when it is placed horizontally?
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 27, 2011, 09:31:56 pm
No.

Look at the polars for this speaker or any other columnar speaker (Bose MA12, for one). Take the vertical polars and rotate them 90-degrees. This is what the column spoeaker does in the horizontal axis when laid on its side (well..... without some side-effects of the stage lip and/or floor).

Take this a step further and sign up for MAP On-line at Meyer Sound. Build a column array with MM-4 drivers. Map the coverage. Rotate the array. Check coverage at the various fractional-octave points.

Another interesting experiment is to mount a column speaker on its side (horizontally) on a stand and rotate it (or walk across the coverage area) and listen to what occurs ..... especially at HF's.

Cylindrical wavefronts are part, or almost, a theoretical myth (as is the "point source") and may only be achieved through mirroring with the floor (and ceiling ? ... I forget).

If it *was* possible to use column speakers for front fill, under-balcony fill, etc. I can assure you that many of us would do so.


Have you considered that they might be changing the way the DSP is functioning when it is placed horizontally?

Have you considered looking at the article and then the specs for this system ?

There is DSP. However there is no indication that it is employed to vary the coverage pattern. The coverage pattern is stated as 7V x 100H. And the published polars support this. Period.

Take a look at any of the digitally steerable column speakers out there and see if you can find any reference to placing them on their sides for any application let alone something like this. Actually, you could make good use of this (narrow horizontal, wide vertical)  in a tall atrium with a narrow horizontal field. But that is not what we're talking about here.

To answer your question:  I did research what this system does prior to posting about this.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Robert Lunceford on May 28, 2011, 02:46:22 am
Down-fill?
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tim McCulloch on May 28, 2011, 03:17:57 am
Wow.  Just wow.  Nothing about this give me warm, fuzzy feelings.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Ales Dravinec on May 28, 2011, 03:19:36 am
Down-fall !

Here, I corrected it for you :)

Once and for all, there is no such thing as cylindrical wave front. (for crying out loud).

w/r
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Keith Broughton on May 28, 2011, 10:10:37 am
Here, I corrected it for you :)

LOL! Made my day :)
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Ivan Beaver on May 28, 2011, 10:17:44 am
And (equally troubling).... how did the sound dude not notice the lack of HF coverage across the front seats ?


I think-therein lies a lot of the problem.  It is my hinest opinion that a large number of people in our industry simply do not listen to what they (or the systems they design) are actually doing.

It makes sound and if it gets loud-that is good enough for them.

I say it all the time when I walk into rooms "At some point-somebody said "this" was acceptable and got paid".  What about all the interference-what about all the large holes in the response-what about the wildly varying levels and so forth.

Years ago we had a little run in with a well known consultant.  We were asked to visit the church and see if we could improve the system.

It was HORRIBLE.  We called the consultant up on the phone and told him that the customer was very unhappy with the system.  He said-and this is a quote "Well I can prove that the system works in EASE".

The customer didn't care about that-the system didn't work in his room.

In this case the consultant spent only about 1-2 hrs in the room doing the "alignment".  This was around a 1500 seat room and he was attempting (not very well) to do beam steering and such in a wrap around room.  It did not work.

So did he actually LISTEN to his work-or just make some noise and rush out to grab his return flight?  The later is the case-because there is no way he could call himself an audio professional and say that the job he just did was even remotely "decent".

We went in and removed his work-rehung the loudspeakers in the proper place-realigned-rewired the amp rack and the customer has been happy.

I have seen jobs from very well known designers that are just plain bad.  But they like to copy/paste and just run the work through the door and get paid-no caring if the system actually works properly for the customer.

It really is sad how low the quality of work often is in our industry-especially with all the different loudspeaker tools we now have available-the measurement tools-the knowledge base/training available and so forth.

I say it all the time-we have a lot of STUPID people doing audio.  Yes- there are a good number who really do care-and who "get it", but there are still a lot of just plain stupid people who have no business attempting to do what they do.

Put down the cable and step away from the loudspeaker and nobody gets hurt.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Brad Walker on May 28, 2011, 08:58:30 pm
Tom said:
There is DSP. However there is no indication that it is employed to vary the coverage pattern. The coverage pattern is stated as 7V x 100H. And the published polars support this. Period.

Brad Walker replies:
And you can't overcome the physics of small line arrays with DSP when you lay it on its side - unless you have an out of whack aesthetics gland that occasionally goes into reality override mode  ::)  Seriously, that's a disappointing smudge on my view of the K-Array folks.

Obi-Wan: These aren't the droids you're looking for.
Stormtrooper: These aren't the droids we're looking for.
Obi-Wan: He can go about his business.
Stormtrooper: You can go about your business.
Obi-Wan: Move along.
Stormtrooper: Move along... move along.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Peter Morris on May 29, 2011, 06:35:23 am
I am hunting down some speakers for an unusual installation project and checked the K-Array website. I have heard their column speakers a few times and think they're contenders for/in that market.

But the leading headline on their website really disturbs me. See:

http://www.k-array.net/

and the top NEWS story: "A Beautiful Front-fill".

In this news item a sound guy has chosen a fairly long column speaker as a *front fill* speaker in larger theaters.

specs: http://www.k-array.net/downloads/karray/datasheet/KR200S_data_B.pdf

So just to be clear: there is a need to cover across the front seats and the sound dude choose a speaker, which when laid on its side, has 7-degrees horizontal coverage directly on axis to the center of the column. How does this cover more than (say) 3-5 seats with HF and upper MF energy ?

OK, OK. Egregious errors by marketing folks are nothing new in the pro audio market/press and elsewhere. We all know that.

But think about what this does to the basic understanding of electroaocustics for the novice who reads this stuff.

And (equally troubling).... how did the sound dude not notice the lack of HF coverage across the front seats ?

This is not the first time I have seen a column speaker deployed in such a flawed manner. But I find it startling, disturbing and disconcerting to see this on the front page of a pro audio speaker manufacturer's website.

end of rant

Hi Tom

They can be configured as 7 degrees or 120 degrees vertical - see page 4 of the manual

http://www.k-array.net/downloads/karray/documents/kk50vb_manual_09_eng_rev01.pdf

Regards

Peter
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: kristianjohnsen on May 29, 2011, 07:32:50 am
I am hunting down some speakers for an unusual installation project and checked the K-Array website. I have heard their column speakers a few times and think they're contenders for/in that market.

But the leading headline on their website really disturbs me. See:

http://www.k-array.net/

and the top NEWS story: "A Beautiful Front-fill".

In this news item a sound guy has chosen a fairly long column speaker as a *front fill* speaker in larger theaters.

specs: http://www.k-array.net/downloads/karray/datasheet/KR200S_data_B.pdf

So just to be clear: there is a need to cover across the front seats and the sound dude choose a speaker, which when laid on its side, has 7-degrees horizontal coverage directly on axis to the center of the column. How does this cover more than (say) 3-5 seats with HF and upper MF energy ?

OK, OK. Egregious errors by marketing folks are nothing new in the pro audio market/press and elsewhere. We all know that.

But think about what this does to the basic understanding of electroaocustics for the novice who reads this stuff.

And (equally troubling).... how did the sound dude not notice the lack of HF coverage across the front seats ?

This is not the first time I have seen a column speaker deployed in such a flawed manner. But I find it startling, disturbing and disconcerting to see this on the front page of a pro audio speaker manufacturer's website.

end of rant

Hi Tom

They can be configured as 7 degrees or 120 degree vertical - see page 4 of the manual

http://www.k-array.net/downloads/karray/documents/kk50vb_manual_09_eng_rev01.pdf

Regards

Peter


First of all:  That's very cool!

Second:  Somebody has a foot in his mouth...
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 29, 2011, 11:15:34 am
Hi Tom

They can be configured as 7 degrees or 120 degree vertical - see page 4 of the manual

http://www.k-array.net/downloads/karray/documents/kk50vb_manual_09_eng_rev01.pdf

Regards

Peter



First of all:  That's very cool!

Second:  Somebody has a foot in his mouth...

Let me know how they both taste..... YOUR foot and a generous helping of humble pie  ;)

Did it ever occur to you that I actually took the time to read through the News article, then the spec sheets, before I publicly called these folks to task ?

I suspect that others here may also have taken the time to double-check to make sure I was on track, or not. You obviously did not.

Your bad.

Perhaps, in the future, you might not be so fast on the trigger.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 29, 2011, 11:39:00 am
Hi Tom

They can be configured as 7 degrees or 120 degrees vertical - see page 4 of the manual

http://www.k-array.net/downloads/karray/documents/kk50vb_manual_09_eng_rev01.pdf

Regards

Peter

Peter-

Please read the referenced News article again. Nowhere is the KK50vb mentioned.

There are two devices cited and neither of them provides switchable coverage.

Had only the KK50 been mentioned I probably would have found the KK50vb and crossed this off as simply a case of poor reporting and editing (dropping the suffix).

But if you actually READ the News article and look at the specs for the two cited devices you would also (I believe) logically conclude that they do not know what they are talking about. "They" apparently being the user/operator and the marketing person who wrote this piece.

I am not in the habit of taking folks to task on public forums. On the few occasions where I have, I have been very careful to (first of all) not cast aspersions against an innocent party and (secondly) to not be proven wrong or foolish.

In the process of achieving these two goals I read what was available about the two referenced devices. It would not surprise me if some of the folks here who seem to agree with my conclusion also did a little bit of homerwork first, before replying to my post.

The bottom line is that I stand by what I posted.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Robert Lunceford on May 29, 2011, 01:14:29 pm
16 K-Array KK100S used as stage monitor system.

Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Robert Lunceford on May 29, 2011, 01:30:16 pm
K-Array KR200S used as stage monitors.

Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Brian Lloyd on May 29, 2011, 02:17:51 pm
i used the R/H version of these...far from painless. we used 2 pieces per side and 1 sub unit per side to fill a 800 seat hall. they were SO bright we had to cut so much out to compensate that it just sounded horrible. those had the ability to do the DSP but you had to use a network computer to do it. i was hoping for so much more.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Mac Kerr on May 29, 2011, 02:24:39 pm
16 K-Array KK100S used as stage monitor system.

As misguided as the front fill idea may have been, it pales in relation to this. Concave arrays used within the focal point of the array are not a good idea.

Mac
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 29, 2011, 03:32:10 pm
.....those had the ability to do the DSP but you had to use a network computer to do it. i was hoping for so much more.

Are you kidding ?

Why, or how, in the world did you think you could use these without setting them up with the DSP ?

None of the digitally steerable systems come out of the box with a basic setting that would be useable.  They are designed to be meticulously set up to provide one (or several) very well focused beam(s) (lobes) to cover the seats in specific venues. And they require measurement and equalization.

Oy vey, como va.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 29, 2011, 03:42:37 pm
As misguided as the front fill idea may have been, it pales in relation to this. Concave arrays used within the focal point of the array are not a good idea.

Mac

This makes a brain-dart stage monitor look almost like something to reconsider   ???

(http://)
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Frederik Rosenkjær on May 29, 2011, 05:24:47 pm

Once and for all, there is no such thing as cylindrical wave front. (for crying out loud).

Please explain this. Are all text books wrong when they talk about 3dB loss pr. distance doubling? Or are you talking "in practical terms"? (less than infinite line sources)

How about a bolt of lightning?
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Chris Hindle on May 29, 2011, 06:27:01 pm
As misguided as the front fill idea may have been, it pales in relation to this. Concave arrays used within the focal point of the array are not a good idea.

Mac

This makes a brain-dart stage monitor look almost like something to reconsider   ???

(http://)

Let me guess, there's a 2441 in there, just to "hammer" in the dart....
My brain hurts just thinking about those monstrosities. About 25 years ago, I used some that used double 15's. Quite a statement they made....
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: kristianjohnsen on May 29, 2011, 06:39:53 pm
Hi Tom

They can be configured as 7 degrees or 120 degree vertical - see page 4 of the manual

http://www.k-array.net/downloads/karray/documents/kk50vb_manual_09_eng_rev01.pdf

Regards

Peter



First of all:  That's very cool!

Second:  Somebody has a foot in his mouth...

Let me know how they both taste..... YOUR foot and a generous helping of humble pie  ;)

Did it ever occur to you that I actually took the time to read through the News article, then the spec sheets, before I publicly called these folks to task ?

I suspect that others here may also have taken the time to double-check to make sure I was on track, or not. You obviously did not.

Your bad.

Perhaps, in the future, you might not be so fast on the trigger.

I'm hoping someone from K-array chime in to let us know why they report about this usage on their home page if it's such a horrid idea.

I'm also curious as to the difference between KR 200 and KR 200s and what the "s" might stand for.

I'll report back on the taste of my foot if it turns out it was in my mouth.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Robert Lunceford on May 29, 2011, 09:44:48 pm
Let me know how they both taste..... YOUR foot and a generous helping of humble pie  ;)

Did it ever occur to you that I actually took the time to read through the News article, then the spec sheets, before I publicly called these folks to task ?

I suspect that others here may also have taken the time to double-check to make sure I was on track, or not. You obviously did not.

Your bad.

Perhaps, in the future, you might not be so fast on the trigger.


I'm hoping someone from K-array chime in to let us know why they report about this usage on their home page if it's such a horrid idea.

I'm also curious as to the difference between KR 200 and KR 200s and what the "s" might stand for.

I'll report back on the taste of my foot if it turns out it was in my mouth.

The KR200 is the column line-array speaker. The KR200S is a packaged system (S) that consists of two column line arrays and two 18" subwoofers. The subwoofers contain power amps for both the subwoofer and the column arrays.


Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Peter Morris on May 30, 2011, 01:49:02 am
Hi Tom

They can be configured as 7 degrees or 120 degrees vertical - see page 4 of the manual

http://www.k-array.net/downloads/karray/documents/kk50vb_manual_09_eng_rev01.pdf

Regards

Peter

Peter-

Please read the referenced News article again. Nowhere is the KK50vb mentioned.

There are two devices cited and neither of them provides switchable coverage.

Had only the KK50 been mentioned I probably would have found the KK50vb and crossed this off as simply a case of poor reporting and editing (dropping the suffix).

But if you actually READ the News article and look at the specs for the two cited devices you would also (I believe) logically conclude that they do not know what they are talking about. "They" apparently being the user/operator and the marketing person who wrote this piece.

I am not in the habit of taking folks to task on public forums. On the few occasions where I have, I have been very careful to (first of all) not cast aspersions against an innocent party and (secondly) to not be proven wrong or foolish.

In the process of achieving these two goals I read what was available about the two referenced devices. It would not surprise me if some of the folks here who seem to agree with my conclusion also did a little bit of homerwork first, before replying to my post.

The bottom line is that I stand by what I posted.

Hi Tom,

It’s an Italian article, I assume translated to English by a marketing team based on some information sent in by a sound contractor.  From my experience, I would not expect too much from the contractor, or the article in terms of technical accuracy especially given the above.

It did talk about KK50’s – I assumed that they meant KK50vb’s but who knows? …anyway, I wasn’t there to hear if was a good solution or not. I would have thought at that level the contractor would have provided a half reasonable solution, but in 2011 that may not have been the case.

I suspect most of us have never used or listed to the product, including myself. There may well be things that are significant but not detailed in the article.

Bottom line, they do appear to have a product that will work just fine for this application, whether or not their products were deployed correctly in this case is questionable.

The contractor may have only needed to fill a small gap in the centre…they may have been told they can be used for centre fill applications (KK50vb’s) and just assumed (wrongly) it would work with all of their boxes, the marketing team (who never seem to care about engineering) may have made a similar assumption, who knows?

Peter

Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 30, 2011, 08:40:02 am
This makes a brain-dart stage monitor look almost like something to reconsider   ???

(http://)


Let me guess, there's a 2441 in there, just to "hammer" in the dart....
My brain hurts just thinking about those monstrosities. About 25 years ago, I used some that used double 15's. Quite a statement they made....

I used them in 1978-79. Tasco Sound from GB had them. And it must have been the 2441.

If I recall correctly, the conical HF horn (JBL, designed to be used with an acoustic lens in front of it) had a 20-degree coverage pattern. When standing at typical vocalist distance from one of these wedges you could move perhaps a foot or two from left to right (max) before you went out of coverage.

With carefully adjusted EQ they did get loud within that pattern.

..... the "good old days"    ::)
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Ivan Beaver on May 30, 2011, 09:36:01 am
I used them in 1978-79. Tasco Sound from GB had them. And it must have been the 2441.

If I recall correctly, the conical HF horn (JBL, designed to be used with an acoustic lens in front of it) had a 20-degree coverage pattern. When standing at typical vocalist distance from one of these wedges you could move perhaps a foot or two from left to right (max) before you went out of coverage.

With carefully adjusted EQ they did get loud within that pattern.

..... the "good old days"    ::)
That would be considered a pretty narrow pattern-EXCEPT for the fact that below the point at which the very narrow pattern lost pattern control, the rest of the cabinet was spilling stuff all over the stage-interfering with other peoples mixes.

A sound co I used to do a lot of reconing for had some like those-I never really understood why somebody would want such a narrow coverage.  But for somebody who did not move around-I guess it was OK.  They were loud-and to some people that is all that matters.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: John Schimpf on May 30, 2011, 10:25:28 am
Just to be clear, this topic is about how good a system sounds in a picture?

Has anyone actually listened to this system?

It seems like the guy that is using them on an actual tour with actual people is pretty happy with them. Should we just assume that he does not know what he is doing?

Just saying...


John
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tim McCulloch on May 30, 2011, 11:01:49 am
I used them in 1978-79. Tasco Sound from GB had them. And it must have been the 2441.

If I recall correctly, the conical HF horn (JBL, designed to be used with an acoustic lens in front of it) had a 20-degree coverage pattern. When standing at typical vocalist distance from one of these wedges you could move perhaps a foot or two from left to right (max) before you went out of coverage.

With carefully adjusted EQ they did get loud within that pattern.

..... the "good old days"    ::)

"And here comes the icepick in the forehead!" F. Zappa

TASCO - Try Another Sound Co.

MD Systems (John McBride, before Martina got signed) had the KYFO - Kick Your Face Off... as long as you were on-axis.  2x 2225, 1 2450 on either a 2385 or 2386 horn.  I thought of them like Wonder Bread: builds fine hernias 12 ways.

This was one of the first MD products to be 'time-aligned' by Brock Jabara of Galaxy Audio using their new TEFCRON 10.  John was so happy with the results he named his dog Tef.

Thanks for the memory jog.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 30, 2011, 03:30:06 pm
Just to be clear, this topic is about how good a system sounds in a picture?

Has anyone actually listened to this system?

It seems like the guy that is using them on an actual tour with actual people is pretty happy with them. Should we just assume that he does not know what he is doing?

Just saying...


John

Next time you need front fills, John, use some column speakers laid on their sides and let us (me) know how well the show went from the perspective of those who needed additional coverage.

OK ?

Tell you what: I'll buy you a beer just for trying this.

But please do let me know how well it works.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Martyn ferrit Rowe on May 30, 2011, 04:31:35 pm
Down-fall !

Here, I corrected it for you :)

Once and for all, there is no such thing as cylindrical wave front. (for crying out loud).

w/r

Not to Hijack the thread but....

Cylindrical wavefront resources:-

Ch5, p227-p231, "Fundamentals of Acoustics" - Bruneau
Ch7.3, p356-366, "Theoretical Acoustics" - Morse
Ch4, p115-148, "Fourier Acoustics" - Williams
Ch5.13, p133-135, "Fundamentals of Acoustics" -Kinser/Frey

But the big question is - "can cylindrical wavefronts be propagated by these devices?"

cheers
ferrit
(ex-TASCO)
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: John Schimpf on May 30, 2011, 06:52:48 pm
Just to be clear, this topic is about how good a system sounds in a picture?

Has anyone actually listened to this system?

It seems like the guy that is using them on an actual tour with actual people is pretty happy with them. Should we just assume that he does not know what he is doing?

Just saying...


John

Next time you need front fills, John, use some column speakers laid on their sides and let us (me) know how well the show went from the perspective of those who needed additional coverage.

OK ?

Tell you what: I'll buy you a beer just for trying this.

But please do let me know how well it works.

My point is that it IS working, night after night, for thousands of fans.

Is this not the point of what we do? How can you criticize what you have never heard? Have you been to one of these shows and actually listened to this system work (or not work)?

Maybe you should buy the guy who is actually using them a beer for trying it every night, and MAKING HIS CLIENT HAPPY.

John
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Philip Roberts on May 30, 2011, 07:21:21 pm
They can be configured as 7 degrees or 120 degrees vertical - see page 4 of the manual

http://www.k-array.net/downloads/karray/documents/kk50vb_manual_09_eng_rev01.pdf

Does any one know how this switch works?

Interestingly and probably related is that the impedance is 16 ohm is spot mode (7 deg) and 8 ohm in flood mode (120 deg).

Philip
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Ivan Beaver on May 30, 2011, 07:48:45 pm
Does any one know how this switch works?

Interestingly and probably related is that the impedance is 16 ohm is spot mode (7 deg) and 8 ohm in flood mode (120 deg).

Philip
If I had to guess, I would say that most of the drivers (if not all but one) are turned off in the flood mode.  At least that is what appears to be happening in the polars shown.

So a single driver (or a pair or 3) would not have the narrowing as if all the drivers were working.

If the drivers are wired in a series/parallel configuration, the impedance change is not that odd.

Of course the output level would be less if fewer drivers were working.

That is my thought anyway.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Dennis Awrey on May 30, 2011, 08:36:22 pm
Here are a couple MAPP images substituting MM4s for K-Array.
One is a plan view of a straight line of 90 MM4s at 2kHz.
The other is a plan view of 90 MM4s separated into six 5' sections, arrayed into an arc and predicted at 2 kHz
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 30, 2011, 09:04:58 pm
Here are a couple MAPP images substituting MM4s for K-Array.
One is a plan view of a straight line of 90 MM4s at 2kHz.
The other is a plan view of 90 MM4s separated into six 5' sections, arrayed into an arc and predicted at 2 kHz

What can we conclude from this ?

Where are the other 1-octave and 1/3-octave plots ?

 
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tom Young on May 30, 2011, 09:08:26 pm
If I had to guess, I would say that most of the drivers (if not all but one) are turned off in the flood mode.  At least that is what appears to be happening in the polars shown.

So a single driver (or a pair or 3) would not have the narrowing as if all the drivers were working.

If the drivers are wired in a series/parallel configuration, the impedance change is not that odd.

Of course the output level would be less if fewer drivers were working.

That is my thought anyway.

Ivan-

JBL's CBT series (both models) have a narrow (ballpark 25-degrees)  and wide (45-degrees) switch setting.

I think this is accomplised by amplitutde shading and possibly phase adjustment. But all done passively.

FWIW
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Dennis Awrey on May 30, 2011, 09:10:01 pm
Here are a couple MAPP images substituting MM4s for K-Array.
One is a plan view of a straight line of 90 MM4s at 2kHz.
The other is a plan view of 90 MM4s separated into six 5' sections, arrayed into an arc and predicted at 2 kHz

What can we conclude from this ?

Where are the other 1-octave and 1/3-octave plots ?

I can do more....I just selected a frequency in the middle of the vocal range
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Ivan Beaver on May 30, 2011, 09:13:33 pm
What can we conclude from this ?

That the curved array has very erratic coverage?
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Mac Kerr on May 30, 2011, 09:21:21 pm
Here are a couple MAPP images substituting MM4s for K-Array.
One is a plan view of a straight line of 90 MM4s at 2kHz.
The other is a plan view of 90 MM4s separated into six 5' sections, arrayed into an arc and predicted at 2 kHz

It is unclear what point you are trying to make here.

Don't forget that while MAPP Online is a very accurate way to model systems of Meyer speakers, the data in MAPP for each Meyer product is not equivalent to other products. While it is easy to build models of sub arrays, because over their frequency range subs tend to behave more like each other than speakers with mid and high frequency elements, it is not a general purpose modeling engine for other manufacturer's products. Once you get away from a relatively omnidirectional, limited bandwidth, speaker like a sub, you really need the correct speaker data for the model to have any meaning. The data in MAPP Online is derived from very detailed measurements of Meyer's products. It really does not relate to other speakers.

Mac
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Dennis Awrey on May 30, 2011, 09:36:51 pm
Here are a couple MAPP images substituting MM4s for K-Array.
One is a plan view of a straight line of 90 MM4s at 2kHz.
The other is a plan view of 90 MM4s separated into six 5' sections, arrayed into an arc and predicted at 2 kHz

It is unclear what point you are trying to make here.

Don't forget that while MAPP Online is a very accurate way to model systems of Meyer speakers, the data in MAPP for each Meyer product is not equivalent to other products. While it is easy to build models of sub arrays, because over their frequency range subs tend to behave more like each other than speakers with mid and high frequency elements, it is not a general purpose modeling engine for other manufacturer's products. Once you get away from a relatively omnidirectional, limited bandwidth, speaker like a sub, you really need the correct speaker data for the model to have any meaning. The data in MAPP Online is derived from very detailed measurements of Meyer's products. It really does not relate to other speakers.

Mac
Then I won't pursue this any further.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Robert Lunceford on May 31, 2011, 01:16:44 am
K-ARRAY KR200S used for stage monitors.

Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Peter Morris on May 31, 2011, 03:09:42 am
Does any one know how this switch works?

Interestingly and probably related is that the impedance is 16 ohm is spot mode (7 deg) and 8 ohm in flood mode (120 deg).

Philip

Bessel array and or variants ? ? ?  - just a thought

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=6012

http://www.extra.research.philips.com/hera/people/aarts/RMA_papers/aar00b.pdf

http://www.angelfire.com/sd/paulkemble/soundf.html

Peter

Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Ivan Beaver on May 31, 2011, 06:35:50 am
K-ARRAY KR200S used for stage monitors.
Just because somebody is using a product a particular way-does not mean that it is correct-or that the usage is giving good results-or better results that would be achieved in a different manner.

Maybe the artisit is happy with it, and there may be other "circumstances" that cause a particular usage or setup--"We cannot have those speakers on the front of the stage be seen" for example.

In the example cited-it would not matter if the product was in the "line mode" or the "point mode" (I forgot exactly what they were called).   A curved aray that is focusing will cause all sorts of combfiltering across the stage.

Just because we can do something-doesn't mean we should do it.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Brad Weber on May 31, 2011, 07:59:06 am
Just to be clear, this topic is about how good a system sounds in a picture?

Has anyone actually listened to this system?

It seems like the guy that is using them on an actual tour with actual people is pretty happy with them. Should we just assume that he does not know what he is doing?

Just saying...
John, I get what you're saying and as Peter noted, there may be something lost in translation and editing but what in the article actually indicates the results are good, that the person doing this know what they're doing or that the people are happy with the results?  People assuming a good result due to the product without that actually being stated seems to reflect more on the marketing than on the product.
 
For example, "Sound professionals present were surprised by the performance of the slimline speakers." means that 'sound professionals' were surprised by the performance in some way.  However, we don't know who those people were and "surprise" is not inherently a good thing and I have been surprised many times by how bad some things sounded.  In fact this reminded me a bit of a comment Dave Gunness made at a trade show regarding how many 'pros' would listen just on axis and apparently never consider off axis response or how the speaker might interact in an array.  Given the comments made in the article and the absence of comments regarding coverage and interaction, one wonders is that perspective is reflected.
 
Although it is likely the impression that was intended, there is nothing in that marketing piece that actually says that qualified live sound pros or the audience were pleased with the overall audio results in that application, it actually seems to focus more on the visual aspect being what defined any success.
 
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Peter Morris on May 31, 2011, 08:40:19 am
  ....  it actually seems to focus more on the visual aspect being what defined any success.

If you have ever done anything for TV - that’s all they are interested in, the visual aspect, forget the live audio! I know - it sucks … but I keep thinking if these little things work half OK what a great compromise for those occasions. 

Peter
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: John Schimpf on May 31, 2011, 09:54:00 am
John, I get what you're saying and as Peter noted, there may be something lost in translation and editing but what in the article actually indicates the results are good, that the person doing this know what they're doing or that the people are happy with the results?  People assuming a good result due to the product without that actually being stated seems to reflect more on the marketing than on the product.
 
For example, "Sound professionals present were surprised by the performance of the slimline speakers." means that 'sound professionals' were surprised by the performance in some way.  However, we don't know who those people were and "surprise" is not inherently a good thing and I have been surprised many times by how bad some things sounded.  In fact this reminded me a bit of a comment Dave Gunness made at a trade show regarding how many 'pros' would listen just on axis and apparently never consider off axis response or how the speaker might interact in an array.  Given the comments made in the article and the absence of comments regarding coverage and interaction, one wonders is that perspective is reflected.
 
Although it is likely the impression that was intended, there is nothing in that marketing piece that actually says that qualified live sound pros or the audience were pleased with the overall audio results in that application, it actually seems to focus more on the visual aspect being what defined any success.

Good points Brian. I appreciate the technical discussion that this topic has created, but I am just confused why the original post suggests that there is no way that this system could possibly work. How exactly do we judge what is right or wrong when it come to something so subjective?

I guess my main point is that we should not be so quick to conclude that our fellow professionals in the field working night after night, successful in what they do with the equipment they choose, are making the wrong choices because a spec sheet says it wont work, or because someone disagrees with the choice.

The question also still remains, has anyone here actually heard this show using these speakers in the venues that they are playing? If an artist likes the sound of these speakers as monitors is he or she wrong for liking them?

John


Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tim McCulloch on May 31, 2011, 10:05:43 am
John, I get what you're saying and as Peter noted, there may be something lost in translation and editing but what in the article actually indicates the results are good, that the person doing this know what they're doing or that the people are happy with the results?  People assuming a good result due to the product without that actually being stated seems to reflect more on the marketing than on the product.
 
For example, "Sound professionals present were surprised by the performance of the slimline speakers." means that 'sound professionals' were surprised by the performance in some way.  However, we don't know who those people were and "surprise" is not inherently a good thing and I have been surprised many times by how bad some things sounded.  In fact this reminded me a bit of a comment Dave Gunness made at a trade show regarding how many 'pros' would listen just on axis and apparently never consider off axis response or how the speaker might interact in an array.  Given the comments made in the article and the absence of comments regarding coverage and interaction, one wonders is that perspective is reflected.
 
Although it is likely the impression that was intended, there is nothing in that marketing piece that actually says that qualified live sound pros or the audience were pleased with the overall audio results in that application, it actually seems to focus more on the visual aspect being what defined any success.

Good points Brian. I appreciate the technical discussion that this topic has created, but I am just confused why the original post suggests that there is no way that this system could possibly work. How exactly do we judge what is right or wrong when it come to something so subjective?

I guess my main point is that we should not be so quick to conclude that our fellow professionals in the field working night after night, successful in what they do with the equipment they choose, are making the wrong choices because a spec sheet says it wont work, or because someone disagrees with the choice.

The question also still remains, has anyone here actually heard this show using these speakers in the venues that they are playing? If an artist likes the sound of these speakers as monitors is he or she wrong for liking them?

John

When I design a system, the performance is not "subjective."  There are objective criteria to be met, often with a third party proof of performance evaluation.  If things don't work the way I said they would, we don't get paid.

That said, the issue presented by the OP is that, as pictured (and without further details in the article), this is not a "normal" deployment of the product.  There is no data showing measured results, no specific information regarding changes in processing or hidden switches that somehow make the K Array a stellar performer in the pictured application.

As neither the sound designer nor K or Sennheiser has posted to give us that information, I fully understand Mr. Young's skepticism.  He is not one to make public statements without careful consideration and, based on my knowledge of these types of systems I have no trouble accepting his premise.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: kristianjohnsen on May 31, 2011, 04:09:25 pm
John, I get what you're saying and as Peter noted, there may be something lost in translation and editing but what in the article actually indicates the results are good, that the person doing this know what they're doing or that the people are happy with the results?  People assuming a good result due to the product without that actually being stated seems to reflect more on the marketing than on the product.
 
For example, "Sound professionals present were surprised by the performance of the slimline speakers." means that 'sound professionals' were surprised by the performance in some way.  However, we don't know who those people were and "surprise" is not inherently a good thing and I have been surprised many times by how bad some things sounded.  In fact this reminded me a bit of a comment Dave Gunness made at a trade show regarding how many 'pros' would listen just on axis and apparently never consider off axis response or how the speaker might interact in an array.  Given the comments made in the article and the absence of comments regarding coverage and interaction, one wonders is that perspective is reflected.
 
Although it is likely the impression that was intended, there is nothing in that marketing piece that actually says that qualified live sound pros or the audience were pleased with the overall audio results in that application, it actually seems to focus more on the visual aspect being what defined any success.

Good points Brian. I appreciate the technical discussion that this topic has created, but I am just confused why the original post suggests that there is no way that this system could possibly work. How exactly do we judge what is right or wrong when it come to something so subjective?

I guess my main point is that we should not be so quick to conclude that our fellow professionals in the field working night after night, successful in what they do with the equipment they choose, are making the wrong choices because a spec sheet says it wont work, or because someone disagrees with the choice.

The question also still remains, has anyone here actually heard this show using these speakers in the venues that they are playing? If an artist likes the sound of these speakers as monitors is he or she wrong for liking them?

John

When I design a system, the performance is not "subjective."  There are objective criteria to be met, often with a third party proof of performance evaluation.   If things don't work the way I said they would, we don't get paid.

That said, the issue presented by the OP is that, as pictured (and without further details in the article), this is not a "normal" deployment of the product.  There is no data showing measured results, no specific information regarding changes in processing or hidden switches that somehow make the K Array a stellar performer in the pictured application.

As neither the sound designer nor K or Sennheiser has posted to give us that information, I fully understand Mr. Young's skepticism.  He is not one to make public statements without careful consideration and, based on my knowledge of these types of systems I have no trouble accepting his premise.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc

Considering the level of artists you work for I'm pretty darn sure you get plenty of chances to deploy gear as per VERY subjective opinions, too.  And the way I understand that level of the business, if those subjective criteria are not met, that's when you don't get paid...
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: John Schimpf on May 31, 2011, 05:27:38 pm
Good points Brian. I appreciate the technical discussion that this topic has created, but I am just confused why the original post suggests that there is no way that this system could possibly work. How exactly do we judge what is right or wrong when it come to something so subjective?

I guess my main point is that we should not be so quick to conclude that our fellow professionals in the field working night after night, successful in what they do with the equipment they choose, are making the wrong choices because a spec sheet says it wont work, or because someone disagrees with the choice.

The question also still remains, has anyone here actually heard this show using these speakers in the venues that they are playing? If an artist likes the sound of these speakers as monitors is he or she wrong for liking them?

John


When I design a system, the performance is not "subjective."  There are objective criteria to be met, often with a third party proof of performance evaluation.   If things don't work the way I said they would, we don't get paid.

That said, the issue presented by the OP is that, as pictured (and without further details in the article), this is not a "normal" deployment of the product.  There is no data showing measured results, no specific information regarding changes in processing or hidden switches that somehow make the K Array a stellar performer in the pictured application.

As neither the sound designer nor K or Sennheiser has posted to give us that information, I fully understand Mr. Young's skepticism.  He is not one to make public statements without careful consideration and, based on my knowledge of these types of systems I have no trouble accepting his premise.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc


Considering the level of artists you work for I'm pretty darn sure you get plenty of chances to deploy gear as per VERY subjective opinions, too.  And the way I understand that level of the business, if those subjective criteria are not met, that's when you don't get paid...

Well Kristen, I do as much as possible to make sure that what I am asking for is provided. And yes, of course my opinions are subjective! I like to think that I do a great job, and I am fortunate to keep working year after year. I like to think that a lot of my choices allow me to put on a better production that is easy for the crew to execute, and for the backline and sound companies to provide for.

Thank you for proving my point exactly. I am just trying to stick up for the poor guy that everyone is hammering on here. You know, the guy with the gig, that has the writeup on a major manufacturers website. The company obviously likes the fact that this equipment can be used in many different ways. Versatility is a big selling point, no?

No need for the personal attack btw. You don't have any idea who you are talking to.

John

Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Chris James on May 31, 2011, 07:01:33 pm
So if the original question was "what in the world are they thinking?" maybe the answer is from one of their Kobra specs....or am I missing something?
The spec sheet says:
"The KK50vb moves the goal post even further from the competition with its patented (pending) variable beam engineering. All Kobra systems have the ability to be mounted in the traditional vertical manner or horizontally making them all but invisible installations such as TV studios ,places of worship ,etc .The KK50vb has another advantage: it can change the coverage from the usual 7° to an amazing 120° at the mere flick of a switch. This ability coupled with its diminutive size and weight make this an unparalleled line array system that is perfect for almost any venue from small clubs to large outdoor events.

I think all the Kobra series have this technology, I dont know for sure but I have heard an install, they work fine, sound much like any other hi passed front fill, they have installed them in what is considered one of the finest concert halls in North America for acoustics the George Weston Recital hall in Toronto to augment an L'acoustic sound system. They are extremely particular about everything that is installed into that venue so draw your own conclusions.
http://www.tocentre.com/georgeweston
Maybe the patent pending is the reason for the lack of explanation on how they work but they do work.



Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Brad Weber on May 31, 2011, 10:17:03 pm
So if the original question was "what in the world are they thinking?" maybe the answer is from one of their Kobra specs....or am I missing something?
The spec sheet says:
"The KK50vb moves the goal post even further from the competition with its patented (pending) variable beam engineering. All Kobra systems have the ability to be mounted in the traditional vertical manner or horizontally making them all but invisible installations such as TV studios ,places of worship ,etc.The KK50vb has another advantage: it can change the coverage from the usual 7° to an amazing 120° at the mere flick of a switch. This ability coupled with its diminutive size and weight make this an unparalleled line array system that is perfect for almost any venue from small clubs to large outdoor events.
As already noted, what is referenced in the article are the KK50 and the KR200 and not the KK50VB.  Even if the KK50 was the KK50VB, that would not be relevant to the KR200, so I think we can probably drop the 'flood' aspect of the KK50VB as being relevant other than that some may have thought it was relevant without verifying it.
 
I think all the Kobra series have this technology, I dont know for sure but I have heard an install, they work fine, sound much like any other hi passed front fill, they have installed them in what is considered one of the finest concert halls in North America for acoustics the George Weston Recital hall in Toronto to augment an L'acoustic sound system. They are extremely particular about everything that is installed into that venue so draw your own conclusions.
http://www.tocentre.com/georgeweston (http://www.tocentre.com/georgeweston)
Maybe the patent pending is the reason for the lack of explanation on how they work but they do work.
The KR200 that the article notes was used for the larger venues is not even part of the Kobra series, it is part of the Red Line series intended for portable use and the stated nominal pattern is 100 horizontal by 10 degrees vertical for the KK50 and 100 degrees horizontal by 7 degrees vertical for the KR200.  Neither seems to have any reference to or option for a wide pattern operating mode.
 
As far as some of the K-Array products being used successfully elsewhere, like any speaker, just because a model provided good results when properly applied for an application does not mean that every similar model applied in any manner would provide similar results in every application.  Even the best product can be poorly applied and I believe that the whole point of the OP was the application of the product and how two speakers oriented such that they have a horizontal pattern that is not only quite narrow at some frequencies but that also varies significantly with frequency, especially for the KK50, would serve successfully for front fill.  One has to think the resulting level and response would vary significantly throughout the seating area covered by the front fills.
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Tim McCulloch on June 01, 2011, 12:03:16 am
No need for the personal attack btw. You don't have any idea who you are talking to.

John

That was probably pointed my way, John.

I'm all about giving the artist what they need to be presented in the artistic manner they desire, and I've done some silly things (that I tried to talk them out of) because, as Kristian points out, that's what we're hired to do.

Regardless of how this deployment sounds, if the artist is happy with it; if whomever signs the cheques is happy...

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: kristianjohnsen on June 01, 2011, 01:40:50 am
Good points Brian. I appreciate the technical discussion that this topic has created, but I am just confused why the original post suggests that there is no way that this system could possibly work. How exactly do we judge what is right or wrong when it come to something so subjective?

I guess my main point is that we should not be so quick to conclude that our fellow professionals in the field working night after night, successful in what they do with the equipment they choose, are making the wrong choices because a spec sheet says it wont work, or because someone disagrees with the choice.

The question also still remains, has anyone here actually heard this show using these speakers in the venues that they are playing? If an artist likes the sound of these speakers as monitors is he or she wrong for liking them?

John


When I design a system, the performance is not "subjective."  There are objective criteria to be met, often with a third party proof of performance evaluation.   If things don't work the way I said they would, we don't get paid.

That said, the issue presented by the OP is that, as pictured (and without further details in the article), this is not a "normal" deployment of the product.  There is no data showing measured results, no specific information regarding changes in processing or hidden switches that somehow make the K Array a stellar performer in the pictured application.

As neither the sound designer nor K or Sennheiser has posted to give us that information, I fully understand Mr. Young's skepticism.  He is not one to make public statements without careful consideration and, based on my knowledge of these types of systems I have no trouble accepting his premise.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc


Considering the level of artists you work for I'm pretty darn sure you get plenty of chances to deploy gear as per VERY subjective opinions, too.  And the way I understand that level of the business, if those subjective criteria are not met, that's when you don't get paid...

Well Kristen, I do as much as possible to make sure that what I am asking for is provided. And yes, of course my opinions are subjective! I like to think that I do a great job, and I am fortunate to keep working year after year. I like to think that a lot of my choices allow me to put on a better production that is easy for the crew to execute, and for the backline and sound companies to provide for.

Thank you for proving my point exactly. I am just trying to stick up for the poor guy that everyone is hammering on here. You know, the guy with the gig, that has the writeup on a major manufacturers website. The company obviously likes the fact that this equipment can be used in many different ways. Versatility is a big selling point, no?

No need for the personal attack btw. You don't have any idea who you are talking to.

John

Wholy smokes, John!

First of all, my name is Kristian, Kristen is a girl's name (here at least).

I was responding to Tim McC, that's why I qouted his last post and additionally made the part I was responding specifically to into "bold lettering".

I was in fact in agreement with you all along (and I believe I managed to be that without making a personal attack towards Tim McC):
What I was pointing out was that even if most pro audio designs are supposed to "measure flat in every seat" and all that - very often, if the artist, producer or just the guy writing the check decides on something that makes that "perfect" design impossible, then that's what going to be the new "correct" for that gig.  If it gets the job done sucessfully, it's good.

So the request for no personal attacks goes right back at'cha.  I have no idea who you are, but let us know, now that you started down that road.  For the record:  I'm a audio nobody running a small sound co in a small city in Norway.

Kristian Johnsen
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: John Schimpf on June 01, 2011, 08:37:16 am
Well Kristen, I do as much as possible to make sure that what I am asking for is provided. And yes, of course my opinions are subjective! I like to think that I do a great job, and I am fortunate to keep working year after year. I like to think that a lot of my choices allow me to put on a better production that is easy for the crew to execute, and for the backline and sound companies to provide for.

Thank you for proving my point exactly. I am just trying to stick up for the poor guy that everyone is hammering on here. You know, the guy with the gig, that has the writeup on a major manufacturers website. The company obviously likes the fact that this equipment can be used in many different ways. Versatility is a big selling point, no?

No need for the personal attack btw. You don't have any idea who you are talking to.

John


Wholy smokes, John!

First of all, my name is Kristian, Kristen is a girl's name (here at least).

I was responding to Tim McC, that's why I qouted his last post and additionally made the part I was responding specifically to into "bold lettering".

I was in fact in agreement with you all along (and I believe I managed to be that without making a personal attack towards Tim McC):
What I was pointing out was that even if most pro audio designs are supposed to "measure flat in every seat" and all that - very often, if the artist, producer or just the guy writing the check decides on something that makes that "perfect" design impossible, then that's what going to be the new "correct" for that gig.  If it gets the job done sucessfully, it's good.

So the request for no personal attacks goes right back at'cha.  I have no idea who you are, but let us know, now that you started down that road.  For the record:  I'm a audio nobody running a small sound co in a small city in Norway.

Kristian Johnsen

Sorry Kristian, I misunderstood.

John
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Mac Kerr on June 01, 2011, 11:05:23 am
Wholy smokes, John!

First of all, my name is Kristian, Kristen is a girl's name (here at least).

That's OK, he seems to think Brad is Brian as well. ;-)

Mac
Title: Re: what in the world are they thinking ?
Post by: Lee Richard on June 02, 2011, 06:27:07 am
Another goof after some reading, an article on Ziogiorgio (http://www.ziogiorgio.com/viewnews.php?id=31736) about the KR400S being used at the Lincoln Center in New York. The article quotes:
 "With the K-array, the sound dispersion is 120 degrees horizontally, and only seven degrees vertically. This allows you to reach every audience member with greater precision." 

After reading the manual, the specs are:
Coverage           
Horizontal 90°
Vertical mechanically variable  6°-20°