Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[George Reiswig]

For example, Martin Audio W8VDQ combines line array and differential dispersion technologies to provide an advanced solution to the requirement of even coverage over wide angles and throw distances. Short throw horizontal dispersion is 120º, narrowing to 100º as throw increases. Let's see what you have to say, there is also QSC KLA, L Acoustics Kiva, Jbl VRX etc

This sounded like marketing material copy/pasted. If so, it should be taken with a large measure of salt.

You have access to some really seasoned and well-educated pros on this forum, but your tone is coming across (to me, at least) as challenging and dismissive of their expertise. If you actually want to learn, you have to be open…genuinely open… to the possibility that your preconceptions are wrong. If you don’t want to learn, then you probably don’t need to ask questions here.

PS - sincere thanks to the many professionals here who share their hard-won knowledge with people like me who know just enough to be dangerous and are liable to fall into the Dunning-Kruger trap.

[Nick Tims]

I mean I get a lot of spl with 4 tops having a total of 8 HF drivers than the point source, I do rock and metal concerts and outdoors even compact as it sounds very good. Even the sound engineers who come up with those bands are happy with the sound.

[Caleb Dueck]

Let's see what you have to say, there is also QSC KLA, L Acoustics Kiva, Jbl VRX etc

KLA and VRX are NOT a line array, and they both suck, badly.  Yes I have heard and deployed them personally.  Trying to prove your endeavors are better than the worst wanna-be "line array" doesn't instill any confidence.  Kiva/Kilo I've used (our company designed, installed, and tuned a system), it's a line array at some frequencies, but it's not like the other two. 

Threads like these simply prove why trusting someone's DIY project speakers is a bad idea.

[Tim McCulloch]

KLA and VRX are NOT a line array, and they both suck, badly.  Yes I have heard and deployed them personally.  Trying to prove your endeavors are better than the worst wanna-be "line array" doesn't instill any confidence.  Kiva/Kilo I've used (our company designed, installed, and tuned a system), it's a line array at some frequencies, but it's not like the other two. 

Threads like these simply prove why trusting someone's DIY project speakers is a bad idea.

And worse, believing the bullshit.  Nick has been placed in my Iggy Bin.

[Nick Tims]

KLA and VRX are NOT a line array, and they both suck, badly.  Yes I have heard and deployed them personally.  Trying to prove your endeavors are better than the worst wanna-be "line array" doesn't instill any confidence.  Kiva/Kilo I've used (our company designed, installed, and tuned a system), it's a line array at some frequencies, but it's not like the other two. 

Threads like these simply prove why trusting someone's DIY project speakers is a bad idea.

I'm curious what sound systems sound good if they don't. I listened to line array L Acoustics V Dosc. Kara, Jbl VTX, Funktion One, Adamson, RCF HDL, TT, Alcons That it's an aspect doesn't interest me, but that you do your job with them and you hear it clearly. What do you find impossible to achieve a sound system?

[Ivan Beaver]

For example, Martin Audio W8VDQ combines line array and differential dispersion technologies to provide an advanced solution to the requirement of even coverage over wide angles and throw distances. Short throw horizontal dispersion is 120º, narrowing to 100º as throw increases. Let's see what you have to say, there is also QSC KLA, L Acoustics Kiva, Jbl VRX etc

It is very simple.  When you have more than one box covering the same area, you WILL have interference (I don't care what the marketing dept says).

That interference is called combfiltering, and varies with freq based on the different arrival time of the different boxes.

That is what affects "the throw".  The more boxes you have, the more interference (now at more freq) you have.

That is the physics, and the marketing dept can't get around it, no matter what they say.

[Ivan Beaver]

I mean I get a lot of spl with 4 tops having a total of 8 HF drivers than the point source, I do rock and metal concerts and outdoors even compact as it sounds very good. Even the sound engineers who come up with those bands are happy with the sound.

Yes, more drivers can produce more SPL, all thing else being equal.

However unless the drivers are designed to work together (and multiple boxes of the same model are NOT going to sum together as well as a single source that is designed to).

I'm glad the guests are happy, but that does not change the science and the problems.  You have to remember that MOST people are use to hearing interference, and they think it is "correct", simply because they don't have a good reference.

When you take a "proper point source" and one limiting point (it could be price, or size, or weight etc) the multibox solution is generally going to lose in either SPL or sound quality.

But if you are simply comparing 1 box to a pile of other boxes, and SPL is the only thing that matters, you will come up with different results.  But that is not a fair comparison.  Something has to be equal to even begin to compare.

[Nick Tims]

That's what I wanted to say that I need spl and it helps me a lot, I didn't want to attack anyone but the discussion was different.
https://files.fm/u/s8tm5qkdu8 A demo as an idea what this system made by me sounds like. I amplify them with Gruppen Lab old Lab series.

[George Reiswig]

It is very simple.  When you have more than one box covering the same area, you WILL have interference (I don't care what the marketing dept says).

That interference is called combfiltering, and varies with freq based on the different arrival time of the different boxes.

That is what affects "the throw".  The more boxes you have, the more interference (now at more freq) you have.

That is the physics, and the marketing dept can't get around it, no matter what they say.

For those of us who really are here to learn, I'd like to understand a bit more about this. I realize that physics would dictate the best possible source would be a single point, but physical driver limitations* mean that you can only displace so much air per given driver. So speaker systems end up being built with multiple drivers, often covering the same frequencies. Am I wrong in assuming that when you say "When you have more than one box covering the same area, you WILL have interference," this principle also applies to multiple drivers within the same box?

An example is what I have: the DB Technologies IG4T. 4 drivers deliver the low-mid frequencies. When they are stacked, they stack so that the horns are closest together.

So (overly simplistically), although there is some destructive interference, it is taken advantage of in a way that helps create a more controlled, cylindrical dispersion pattern? And that you can make it so the inverse-square law is tricked a bit by the vertical spread of the drivers?

*barring the use of a horn to combine multiple drivers

[Scott Holtzman]

For those of us who really are here to learn, I'd like to understand a bit more about this. I realize that physics would dictate the best possible source would be a single point, but physical driver limitations* mean that you can only displace so much air per given driver. So speaker systems end up being built with multiple drivers, often covering the same frequencies. Am I wrong in assuming that when you say "When you have more than one box covering the same area, you WILL have interference," this principle also applies to multiple drivers within the same box?

An example is what I have: the DB Technologies IG4T. 4 drivers deliver the low-mid frequencies. When they are stacked, they stack so that the horns are closest together.

So (overly simplistically), although there is some destructive interference, it is taken advantage of in a way that helps create a more controlled, cylindrical dispersion pattern? And that you can make it so the inverse-square law is tricked a bit by the vertical spread of the drivers?

*barring the use of a horn to combine multiple drivers

Destructive interference occurs when the drivers are not located within 1/2 wavelength (of lowest frequency) of each other.  Easy to achieve with subs.  100Hz is 12 feet!  It is very difficult at high frequencies, needs specially constructed waveguides that reach to the extent of the enclosure to form a single waveguide.  Not going to get that in a prosumer product. 

[ProSoundWeb Community]