PA speaker choice, Peavey or JBL?
Joe Topor
the unpowered version of the JBL EON. We can use one as a monitor when
needed, and the weight savings is roughly half of the Peaveys. My only
problem is that the spl on the Peavey is 100db and the jbl is 97 db. Since
we're only using a Yamaha powered mixer rated at 300 watts, i'm thinking
we'll be clipping the amp alot more. We've used inefficient Crate 12 floor
monitors before and drove them real hard just to get a decent level. I don't
want to regret making the change and have to invest in more power later.
Any thoughts on jbl efficiency?
Mike Tulley
wrote:
I think that JBL have correctly specified the speaker's efficiency,
and you have correctly identified the problem. The JBL is only half as
loud as the Peavey. You will need twice as much power from your
powered mixer. It hasn't got it.
SO, if you swap the Peaveys for the EONs, you will only carry half the
weight, but you will be 3dB quieter. Sometimes it just works that way.
I'm not familiar with the Peavey sp5ti, so I can't comment on their
sound. I'm not a fan of the powered JBL EON15: honky, uneven response,
with some strange things happening in the midrange. The EON15 G2s are
better.
Maybe you should think about powered speakers for your mains, and use
the amp in the mixer to drive your monitors? I know, I'm talking about
spending more money. However, if you can find a pair of Yorkville
EF500P or Mackie SRM450 used, I would recommend them over the JBL
EONs.
Mike T.
George Gleason
"Mike Tulley" <mkt...@invalid.telusplanet.net> wrote in message
news:2tldvv0clmgf5bh4d...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 07:16:56 -0500, "Joe Topor" <gnl...@charter.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Our band currently has a pair of peavey sp5 ti. We're thinking of getting
> >the unpowered version of the JBL EON. We can use one as a monitor when
> >needed, and the weight savings is roughly half of the Peaveys. My only
> >problem is that the spl on the Peavey is 100db and the jbl is 97 db.
Since
> >we're only using a Yamaha powered mixer rated at 300 watts, i'm thinking
> >we'll be clipping the amp alot more. We've used inefficient Crate 12
floor
> >monitors before and drove them real hard just to get a decent level. I
don't
> >want to regret making the change and have to invest in more power later.
> >
> >Any thoughts on jbl efficiency?
> >
> I think that JBL have correctly specified the speaker's efficiency,
> and you have correctly identified the problem. The JBL is only half as
> loud as the Peavey. You will need twice as much power from your
> powered mixer. It hasn't got it.
a 3 dB diffrence is not 1/2 as loud
it is 10 dB that is required to create twice the dBSPL
what your refering to is the JBL take 2x the power to be as loud as the
peavey
it takes 10x the power to produce a doubling of dBSPL
there would be a diffrence but not as major a diffrence as your stating
George
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.556 / Virus Database: 348 - Release Date: 12/26/2003
Kent Baker
"George Gleason" <g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:slBJb.275115$Ec1.9...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
This is not really true. +3 db IS twice as loud, but human perception
requires a +10 db difference for a human to perceive the sound as twice as
load.
Hubert Barth
>This is not really true. +3 db IS twice as loud, but human perception
>requires a +10 db difference for a human to perceive the sound as twice as
>load.
I´ll take +6dB as *twice* as loud.
+3dB in level will need twice as much power but will not double SPL.
regards
--
Hubert Barth
Cologne/Germany
http://www.bigbands.de
George Gleason
"Hubert Barth" <hubert...@netcologne.de> wrote in message
news:bt6u37$heh$1...@newsreader2.netcologne.de...
> "Kent Baker" <n...@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> >This is not really true. +3 db IS twice as loud, but human perception
> >requires a +10 db difference for a human to perceive the sound as twice
as
> >load.
>
> I´ll take +6dB as *twice* as loud.
> +3dB in level will need twice as much power but will not double SPL.
>
accepted that it take 10x the power to produce 2x the dBspl
but as I said the 3 db diffrence in effeciency is not a MAJOR diffrence
Hubert Barth
>
>"Hubert Barth" <hubert...@netcologne.de> wrote in message
>news:bt6u37$heh$1...@newsreader2.netcologne.de...
>> "Kent Baker" <n...@nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>> >This is not really true. +3 db IS twice as loud, but human perception
>> >requires a +10 db difference for a human to perceive the sound as twice
>as
>> >load.
>>
>> I´ll take +6dB as *twice* as loud.
>> +3dB in level will need twice as much power but will not double SPL.
>>
>I agree with this math wise but hearing is not exactly linear and it is
>accepted that it take 10x the power to produce 2x the dBspl
>but as I said the 3 db diffrence in effeciency is not a MAJOR diffrence
Agreed, hearing is not linear. That makes measuring "Loudness" for
medical / protective use so difficult. Time of exposure and density
(crest factor) also comes to effect.
regards
--
Hubert
Tim Perry
> Agreed, hearing is not linear. That makes measuring "Loudness" for
> medical / protective use so difficult. Time of exposure and density
> (crest factor) also comes to effect.
>
> regards
> --
> Hubert
according to this research http://www.acoustics.org/press/133rd/4pppa3.html
increasing loudness is interpreted by the ear as a change in pitch.
Dan Mills
> "George Gleason" <g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>>> I´ll take +6dB as *twice* as loud.
>>> +3dB in level will need twice as much power but will not double SPL.
>>>
>>I agree with this math wise but hearing is not exactly linear and it is
>>accepted that it take 10x the power to produce 2x the dBspl
>>but as I said the 3 db diffrence in effeciency is not a MAJOR diffrence
>
> Agreed, hearing is not linear. That makes measuring "Loudness" for
> medical / protective use so difficult. Time of exposure and density
> (crest factor) also comes to effect.
I think 3db is double anything that scales linearly with POWER, but 6db is
double for anything that scales linearly with voltage or current.
Note that these 2 numbers are equivalent for linear loads as doubling the
applied voltage will increase the power 4 times = 6db.
In no case is 10db double anything except perceved loudness (not dbSPL),
dbSPL is a measure of acoustic pressure variation (not perceved volume or
power) so while increasing the spl by 10db will be perceved as double the
volume that is NOT doubling the spl, it is increasing it by sqrt (10) times
(SPL is linear with applied voltage to the first order).
The key is to realise that db is defined as a measure of POWER ratios,
attempting to apply it to anything which is not linear with power will
cause strange scaling issues.
Regards, Dan.
--
And on the evening of the first day, the lord said.... LX1, Go!
And there was light.
The email address *IS* valid, do not remove the spamblock.
George Gleason
"Dan Mills" <dmi...@spamblock.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bt7650$38a$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk...
> Hubert Barth wrote:
>
> > "George Gleason" <g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >
> >>> I´ll take +6dB as *twice* as loud.
> >>> +3dB in level will need twice as much power but will not double SPL.
> >>>
> >>I agree with this math wise but hearing is not exactly linear and it is
> >>accepted that it take 10x the power to produce 2x the dBspl
> >>but as I said the 3 db diffrence in effeciency is not a MAJOR diffrence
> >
> > Agreed, hearing is not linear. That makes measuring "Loudness" for
> > medical / protective use so difficult. Time of exposure and density
> > (crest factor) also comes to effect.
>
>
> I think 3db is double anything that scales linearly with POWER, but 6db is
> double for anything that scales linearly with voltage or current.
>
> Note that these 2 numbers are equivalent for linear loads as doubling the
> applied voltage will increase the power 4 times = 6db.
>
> In no case is 10db double anything except perceved loudness (not dbSPL),
> dbSPL is a measure of acoustic pressure variation (not perceved volume or
> power) so while increasing the spl by 10db will be perceved as double the
> volume that is NOT doubling the spl, it is increasing it by sqrt (10)
times
> (SPL is linear with applied voltage to the first order).
>
> The key is to realise that db is defined as a measure of POWER ratios,
> attempting to apply it to anything which is not linear with power will
> cause strange scaling issues.
the only thing that matters is what we hear
so it is a valid comparison
for you to hear a doubling of volume it take 10x the power
unless you consider listening to music a lab experiment , it would be best
to talk about what PEOPLE experiance not measuring devices
If I made something 6 dB louder nobody would say that is twice as loud
you need to achieve a 10 dB increase before
it become 10x louder as percieved by listeners
and after all it is the listener we serve NOT the math
Saxology
> I think 3db is double anything that scales linearly with POWER, but 6db is
> double for anything that scales linearly with voltage or current.
>
> Note that these 2 numbers are equivalent for linear loads as doubling the
> applied voltage will increase the power 4 times = 6db.
>
> In no case is 10db double anything except perceved loudness (not dbSPL),
> dbSPL is a measure of acoustic pressure variation (not perceved volume or
> power) so while increasing the spl by 10db will be perceved as double the
> volume that is NOT doubling the spl, it is increasing it by sqrt (10)
times
> (SPL is linear with applied voltage to the first order).
>
> The key is to realise that db is defined as a measure of POWER ratios,
> attempting to apply it to anything which is not linear with power will
> cause strange scaling issues.
>
I can go for this math for sure. Voltage versus power ratio yields the
20log or 10log difference. Recall that (10log(x^2)) = (20log(x)) What I am
not sure about is which applies to SPL. Is pressure a linear or a power
function? Also, SPL is defined at 1m (typically).
My bet is that at distances greater than 1m, and human hearing being a
non-linear device, George's 10x rule might well be approximately equal to
perception of the listener. The human ear is a baffling and wondrous
device.
-Sax
Dan Mills
> the only thing that matters is what we hear
> so it is a valid comparison
> for you to hear a doubling of volume it take 10x the power
> unless you consider listening to music a lab experiment , it would be best
> to talk about what PEOPLE experiance not measuring devices
> If I made something 6 dB louder nobody would say that is twice as loud
> you need to achieve a 10 dB increase before
> it become 10x louder as percieved by listeners
> and after all it is the listener we serve NOT the math
> George
>
I quite agree.
However when doing system design these differences really start to matter,
and understanding the specification sheets and what they actually mean (in
real life)is important.
For some reason the decibel seems to cause huge amounts of confusion which
is mostly not warranted in my view.
3db difference in loudspeaker specified sensitivity is nothing to get
excited about, and may actually be within the measurement error between the
different manufacturers test rigs....
Dan Mills
> I can go for this math for sure. Voltage versus power ratio yields the
> 20log or 10log difference. Recall that (10log(x^2)) = (20log(x)) What I
> am
> not sure about is which applies to SPL. Is pressure a linear or a power
> function? Also, SPL is defined at 1m (typically).
I think it is a linear function? Not sure tho.
Also SPL is not specified at one meter, loudspeaker sensitivity is often
specified as SPL @ 1M with 1W drive (also for maximum output).
Note also that the maximum output is often quoted in a echoic room, not free
field (makes the numbers look better). This is often done by calculation
using microphones in the far field......
> My bet is that at distances greater than 1m, and human hearing being a
> non-linear device, George's 10x rule might well be approximately equal to
> perception of the listener.
It is widely accepted as valid at any distance, and I have no argument with
this reasonable working model (but watch the threshold shift!), just that I
think that perceived volume and dbSPL need to be kept well seperate in the
mind.....
The human ear is a baffling and wondrous
> device.
That it is.
Tony Roe
<g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>"Hubert Barth" <hubert...@netcologne.de> wrote in message
>news:bt6u37$heh$1...@newsreader2.netcologne.de...
>> "Kent Baker" <n...@nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>> >This is not really true. +3 db IS twice as loud, but human perception
>> >requires a +10 db difference for a human to perceive the sound as twice
>as
>> >load.
>>
>> I´ll take +6dB as *twice* as loud.
>> +3dB in level will need twice as much power but will not double SPL.
>>
>I agree with this math wise but hearing is not exactly linear and it is
>accepted that it take 10x the power to produce 2x the dBspl
George you've said this twice now, so I guess it's not a typo as I originally
thought. But clearly you didn't mean to mention dB SPL (or any other objective
measurement for that matter) - if 1W produces 97dB SPL (say), 10W is not going
to produce 194dB SPL.
Tony (remove the "_" to reply by email)
George Gleason
"Tony Roe" <tony...@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:g6levvgisslar8lg8...@4ax.com...
I often trip over the words trying to express the though
one of the reasons I don't write tech manuals
while the understanding is solid, the ability to transfer that understanding
in written communications often come out wrong
Pooh Bear
> Hubert Barth wrote:
>
> > "George Gleason" <g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >
> >>> I´ll take +6dB as *twice* as loud.
> >>> +3dB in level will need twice as much power but will not double SPL.
> >>>
> >>I agree with this math wise but hearing is not exactly linear and it is
> >>accepted that it take 10x the power to produce 2x the dBspl
> >>but as I said the 3 db diffrence in effeciency is not a MAJOR diffrence
> >
> > Agreed, hearing is not linear. That makes measuring "Loudness" for
> > medical / protective use so difficult. Time of exposure and density
> > (crest factor) also comes to effect.
>
> I think 3db is double anything that scales linearly with POWER, but 6db is
> double for anything that scales linearly with voltage or current.
>
> Note that these 2 numbers are equivalent for linear loads as doubling the
> applied voltage will increase the power 4 times = 6db.
>
> In no case is 10db double anything except perceved loudness (not dbSPL),
In fact the correct term to use here would be phons.
>
> dbSPL is a measure of acoustic pressure variation (not perceved volume or
> power) so while increasing the spl by 10db will be perceved as double the
> volume that is NOT doubling the spl, it is increasing it by sqrt (10) times
> (SPL is linear with applied voltage to the first order).
>
> The key is to realise that db is defined as a measure of POWER ratios,
> attempting to apply it to anything which is not linear with power will
> cause strange scaling issues.
The 3dB sensitivity drop with the JBLs still makes the 300W Yamaha amp 'seem'
like 150W - like for like - compared to the Peaveys.
Graham
Pooh Bear
> > I think 3db is double anything that scales linearly with POWER, but 6db is
> > double for anything that scales linearly with voltage or current.
> >
> > Note that these 2 numbers are equivalent for linear loads as doubling the
> > applied voltage will increase the power 4 times = 6db.
> >
> > In no case is 10db double anything except perceved loudness (not dbSPL),
> > dbSPL is a measure of acoustic pressure variation (not perceved volume or
> > power) so while increasing the spl by 10db will be perceved as double the
> > volume that is NOT doubling the spl, it is increasing it by sqrt (10)
> times
> > (SPL is linear with applied voltage to the first order).
> >
> > The key is to realise that db is defined as a measure of POWER ratios,
> > attempting to apply it to anything which is not linear with power will
> > cause strange scaling issues.
> >
>
> I can go for this math for sure. Voltage versus power ratio yields the
> 20log or 10log difference. Recall that (10log(x^2)) = (20log(x)) What I am
> not sure about is which applies to SPL. Is pressure a linear or a power
> function?
Now you're getting to the point !
When I was attending my sound engineering course I once asked that question
w.r.t. crossovers. The lecturer ( with an acoustics PhD ) could't advise if the
correct situation was to cross over at -3dB ( equal power ) or -6dB ( equal
pressure ). Many solutions, including one of my own compromise with -4.5dB.
Vectors then come into matters to confuse things further..
> Also, SPL is defined at 1m (typically).
>
> My bet is that at distances greater than 1m, and human hearing being a
> non-linear device, George's 10x rule might well be approximately equal to
> perception of the listener. The human ear is a baffling and wondrous
> device.
10dB = 1 Bel = an increase/decrease of 1 phon ( approx due to loudness contours
) at mid range frequencies but v flakey esp at LF. 0 phons @ 30Hz = 64dB !.
Compare that to 20dB@16kHz for 0 phons.
Phons are the correct measure of loudness for human hearing. Maybe we should
have phon meters ? See Fletcher and Munson. Human hearing only gets vaguely flat
at around 90dB and above
Phons and dBs are pretty much identical @ 1kHz
Graham
Pooh Bear
> Saxology wrote:
>
> > I can go for this math for sure. Voltage versus power ratio yields the
> > 20log or 10log difference. Recall that (10log(x^2)) = (20log(x)) What I
> > am
> > not sure about is which applies to SPL. Is pressure a linear or a power
> > function? Also, SPL is defined at 1m (typically).
>
> I think it is a linear function? Not sure tho.
>
> Also SPL is not specified at one meter, loudspeaker sensitivity is often
> specified as SPL @ 1M with 1W drive (also for maximum output).
>
> Note also that the maximum output is often quoted in a echoic room, not free
> field (makes the numbers look better).
Not by any decent manufacturer.
> This is often done by calculation using microphones in the far field......
I test @ 1m !
> > My bet is that at distances greater than 1m, and human hearing being a
> > non-linear device, George's 10x rule might well be approximately equal to
> > perception of the listener.
>
> It is widely accepted as valid at any distance, and I have no argument with
> this reasonable working model (but watch the threshold shift!), just that I
> think that perceived volume and dbSPL need to be kept well seperate in the
> mind.....
Yup, not least the frequency content.
Graham
Joe Topor
monitors?
We started out just running vocals through the PA, but at the last gig, we
were spread out across the stage and ended up miking the harp and lead
guitar as well.
am I asking too much from a single enclosure and poweerd mixer?
joe
"Mike Tulley" <mkt...@invalid.telusplanet.net> wrote in message
news:2tldvv0clmgf5bh4d...@4ax.com...
BOB URZ
Joe Topor wrote:
> Anybody else have preferences for lightweight pa speakers that can double as
> monitors? We started out just running vocals through the PA, but at the last
> gig, we were spread out across the stage and ended up miking the harp and lead
> guitar as well.
>
> am I asking too much from a single enclosure and poweerd mixer?
>
> joe
Grundorf ST-122M
http://grundorf.com/stseries/index.htm
affordable too.
Bob
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Thomas Bishop
How would you compare these to the Yamaha s112ivs or sm12iv? I'm looking at
both of these monitors, but for the same price if the Grund sounds better
then I'll get that. Thanks for your advice.
Thomas
BOB URZ
Thomas Bishop wrote:
I would leans toward the Grunds. These are not the solution to everyone's
problems. But, i have used them and and been impressed with them for
what they cost. They have the slant cuts for monitor use. And with the
stand flange on the end, stick it on a pole and use it as a medium duty
mains. I would NOT put a 1000 watts into them, but 200 to 300 watts
are doable. You would be hard pressed to find a better speaker in
its price range.
Peter Larsen
> "Kent Baker" <n...@nospam.net> wrote:
> >This is not really true. +3 db IS twice as loud, but human perception
> >requires a +10 db difference for a human to perceive the sound as twice as
> >load.
> I´ll take +6dB as *twice* as loud.
I'll take 5, because it appears to be 2.5 and 5 dB steps that are
approximated in musical performances by unamplified musicians. The "10
dB" apply for sinewaves in headphones, in which case it quite probably
is right, but there also does exist the risk of rapid ear adaptation,
the ear is designed to suppress steady state signals because they are
"low risk". Also there is the addition of increased physical sensation
with louder broadband sound.
> +3dB in level will need twice as much power but will not double SPL.
>
> regards
> --
> Hubert Barth
> Cologne/Germany
> http://www.bigbands.de
--
***************************************************************
* \\\\\\\ Quality Ascii handcrafted by Peter Larsen /////// *
* \\\\\\\ My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk /////// *
*********************************************************
Roger W. Norman
and use the 300 watts from the Yammie for monitoring. Requires a little
creative connecting, but essentially it can be done. I believe the Yammie
has mains inserts, if I recall correctly.
However, if you want to give yourself a little extra, look on Ebay, pick up
a Spirit F1, run your mics into that, take the Main outputs from the mixer
and run them into the powered EONs (or whatever). Take the auxes you'd like
(the F1 has 3) and run them to the inputs on the Yammie, and use
Mains/Monitors switch selection, and use Mains output for one monitor mix
and the Monitor bus for mix number two, all powered by the Yammie.
Total cost in addition to the G2 powered speakers would be maybe $200 used
for the F1, but the flexibility goes up. Besides, the Spirit has better mic
pres, so it can't hurt.
But I could suggest that it's not a matter of the EONs or not, it's a matter
of efficiently using what you have with a little augmentation from some
reasonable but inexpensive equipment and proper forethought. I personally
don't like the EONS unless it's the 10s, but for your purposes I don't know
if they'd work or not. Not something to put an entire rock band through,
but I've seen a number of jazz bands with horns, guitar, drums, piano, bass,
etc., put through them. The EON 15s just sound honky to me and I have an
EON 15Pack, which is a mixer built onto the EON 15. Can't use it for piano,
vocals sound dead, etc.
So what I'm saying is check out some powered speakers, and unless you're
over 50 like me, learn how to haul the heavier equipment without carrying it
and get something decent. Powered EONs won't be cheap and unpowered EONs
sound cheap.
And all of the above may not reflect what you want to do at all. I'm taking
the wild hair guess that you have everyone hooked up to the Yammie. Perhaps
your better bet is just to get a really nice monitor or two.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
RAP FAQ and Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at
www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.
"Joe Topor" <gnl...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:vvdchd8...@corp.supernews.com...
Adair Winter
Adair
Roger W. Norman
loud. Ears don't like the math.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
RAP FAQ and Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at
www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.
"Hubert Barth" <hubert...@netcologne.de> wrote in message
news:bt6u37$heh$1...@newsreader2.netcologne.de...
Roger W. Norman
what one shoots for. In terms of things like recording, 6 dB may well
double the rms value which means that you've eaten up headroom with a
minimal increase because of the overall increase in mixing. 6 dB on an
instrument is different than 6 dB on the two bus, and 6 dB on the two bus is
only slightly louder while 10 dB is noticeably louder. So it depends on
where you apply the 6 dB increase.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
RAP FAQ and Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at
www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.
"George Gleason" <g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3xFJb.276061$Ec1.9...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Roger W. Norman
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
RAP FAQ and Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at
www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.
"Saxology" <Saxolo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:VbGJb.22391$IM3....@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Roger W. Norman
along with a source being played at 65 dB in a room. In tune? Slightly
flat? Bring the volume up. In tune? Still flat or slightly sharp? It's
also seen often in recording with headphones as one is either flat when they
can't hear, and sharp when the music is a little too loud. Finding the
right mix between source and perception is pretty hard to do, but when it's
right, it's absolutely a known. I've never tried it, but I assume that were
I playing a guitar and had someone else move the volume through say 65 dB to
90 dB it would almost doppler in comparison to the tuning of the guitar.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
RAP FAQ and Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at
www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.
"Tim Perry" <timperry...@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:ZxEJb.2573$uF6.1...@news1.news.adelphia.net...
Roger W. Norman
helpful. A 2" compression horn with a 1" diameter outlet has real
compression characteristics and is much more tameable. Smoother too, and
far more likely to work at the hypercardioid nulls than a 1" compression
horn. At normal cardioid, the 1" will do the job but you'd better have the
ability to attenuate the horn.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
RAP FAQ and Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at
www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.
"BOB URZ" <"sound(remove)"@inetnebr.com> wrote in message
news:3FF83822...@inetnebr.com...
Roger W. Norman
for vocalists. Either higher or lower sits well with me, but 1 to 2k is
right in the middle, giving neither a good representation of the character
of the voice, nor the depth.
Just my preference.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
RAP FAQ and Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at
www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.
"Adair Winter" <drumme...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:EafKb.27$bw.15...@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
reese thomas
news:3ffae1ee$0$6756$61fe...@news.rcn.com:
> Except that 1" compression horns sound like ass. Spitty, and not real
> helpful.
You are crazy. Many of the worlds sweetest sounding cd equipped cabinets
employ 1' drivers. In the extreme high end they tend to be much smoother.
It all boils down to xover points, power handling . .
A 2" compression horn with a 1" diameter outlet has real
> compression characteristics ......
OK I'm very confused abouyt this advice. The accepted vernacular of a 1" cd
is vc ize, not exit. ONLY Yammaha bucks that trend , calling their 1"
drivers 2", because of vc Size. ALL 1' drivers that I know of have from
1.75 to 2" vc.
Only 2" exit drivers are called 2" by the (legitimate) industry, and have
vc from 3 to 4 inches.
Roger W. Norman
crazy. Fine. I don't mind. Nobody that's out of their mind would, right?
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
RAP FAQ and Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at
www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.
"reese thomas" <thomasta...@strato.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9469728BFEA7...@216.168.3.50...
Roger W. Norman
dialect. It's the use of terminology that defines the reference. And I've
yet to see a 1" compression driver that sounded smooth on stage. But I
could be crazy. Certainly my ex-wife views me as such. I guess sometimes
the medicine works and sometimes it doesn't.
--
Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
RAP FAQ and Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at
www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.
"reese thomas" <thomasta...@strato.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9469728BFEA7...@216.168.3.50...