Peavey CS800 & Wedge Monitor Recommendations
Brian King
some good things about it... is it worth $600US new? Can substantially
better deals be gotten mail-order? If this amp is bogus, what are some good
800W amps?
Also, we we need some wedge floor monitors, in the neighborhood of 150W each.
Can anyone provide info on some popular models? My budget for the monitors
(two) is about $500. thanks.
--
"in this day & age...music performed by humans?...Hum?! - Wilde Silas Tomkyn
"Incorrect grammar is something up with which I will not put!"
Brian King - Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta: gt6...@prism.gatech.edu
John Bell
>Hi. I'd like some opinions about the Peavey CS800 Power amp. I have heard
>some good things about it... is it worth $600US new? Can substantially
>better deals be gotten mail-order? If this amp is bogus, what are some good
>800W amps?
I would not recommend buying CS800's new, as there are several sold every
month in my part of the country (southeast Virginia) for about $300 a piece.
Since the primary value of a CS800 is the fact that they are virtually
indestructable, it makes a lot of sense to buy them used.
On the other hand, you can buy Crown amps (even more indestructable, but far
superior in terms of sound quality) used as well. Since they sound so much
better, you would be better off buying one Crown for the price of two CS-800's.
-----
John Bell
NASA Langley Research Center
be...@hops.larc.nasa.gov
Chris Christensen
>Hi. I'd like some opinions about the Peavey CS800 Power amp. I have heard
>some good things about it... is it worth $600US new? Can substantially
>better deals be gotten mail-order? If this amp is bogus, what are some good
>800W amps?
You can find cheeper amps but I happen to like the Peavey CS-series
amps. The later model ones wihout the cast faceplate.
I like them because they have been reliable, sound fine, I like the
built in limiting and they are a good value. And yes the $600 is a
good price.
--
Chris Christensen The opinions I express are my own,
chr...@gold.gvg.tek.com and sometimes they are wrong!
916-478-3419 FAX 916-478-3887 After all, I *AM* only human.
cul...@ac.dal.ca
> Hi. I'd like some opinions about the Peavey CS800 Power amp. I have heard
> some good things about it... is it worth $600US new? Can substantially
Really? What?
> better deals be gotten mail-order? If this amp is bogus, what are some good
> 800W amps?
How are you measuring power?
I believe that the "800" rating is really 400 W per channel both channels
loaded to 4 ohms.
Well here goes about bogusness and how it relates to a CS800.
It is heavy. like 50 pounds heavy. I think that the new ones
are three rack spaces, the old ones are four, and this is too big.
They are noisy, the input attenuators are nowhere near precision,
or even near matched. The internal card connectors are this stupid
pin design that was origionally for use in a car wiring harness, and
they always have to be replaced. The DDT (tm) circuitry has got to be
sonically the worst compressor/limiter ever designed. The face plates
are replaceable for very little money (30 cdn dollars) so that you can't
really tell how much wear and tear the thing has seen. I could go on but
I won't, other than to say that I f**king hate peavey, I have no time
for anything they make. If I put togeather a show for someone, or a
tech rider, the first item is *NO EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURED BY PEAVEY
CORPORATION IS AN ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTE FOR ANY ITEM IN THIS RIDER*.
I will recommend QSC 1500a as a dependable lightweight amp. I can get them
locally for 100 dollars less than CS 800's and IMO sound better. They only
weigh 34 lbs and put out 350W per ch into 8 ohms and 500W into four ohms,
1000W bridged into eight, min load 4 ohms per channel. They are sensitive
to power line voltage drop, but not so much as Carver amps, and you can
run 2 off one 15 amp circuit and just bring the clip lights on on snare
and kick without any problems.
I think that you are gonna have to spend more than 250 US to get a decent
monitor, however, more like 750 us (1100 cdn).
Mur
Cul...@ac.dal.ca
Cul...@ug.cs.dal.ca
Derk Allen Gates
In article <76...@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt6...@prism.gatech.EDU
(Brian King) writes:
>Hi. I'd like some opinions about the Peavey CS800 Power amp. I have hear
>better deals be gotten mail-order? If this amp is bogus, what are some go
I like Peavey equipment in general. There are better yet more expensive
lines out there, but bang/quality for the buck is pretty high.
I don't think I would buy an amp new. look around and get one used. Take
it to an audio shop and have them look at it and even if it needs minor
service like a volume pot or something it's cheaper than new.
--
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~U2-AC/DC-ZZ TOP-RUSH
/ / /----- / / /---\ --/-- ~ALAN PARSONS PROJECT
/| / / /| / / / / '__ ~JOHN MELLENCAMP-STYX
/ | / / --/ / | / / / _ / / ~JON ANDERSON-STRYPER
/ | / / / / | / / / / / \ ~JOE WALSH-PRINCE-YES
_/ _|/* _/----/* _/ _|/* _/----/ _/--/ __/, INC.~AEROSMITH-RTZ-EAGLES
"We specialize in your favorite music" *TM ~ALARM-PINK FLOYD-EMF
(317)482-1079 - de...@shell.portal.com ~BRYAN HUGHES-CHICAGO
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chris Christensen
Well Mur still suffers from Peaveyitius= the irational fear that a
company that used to build "less than good equipment" could ever get
it right.........
(Text edited)
The posters who commented about buying used Peavey were right! It is
a much better buy. But since I live in a rural area freight to ship
equipment is an important concern, and I STILL LIKE HEAVY AMPS
Further covert Peavey bashing continues......
>How are you measuring power?
>I believe that the "800" rating is really 400 W per channel both channels
>loaded to 4 ohms.
SO what? Peavey has chosen to use a model number that reflects it's
nominal power output into 4 ohms. What's the big deal? Do you _only_
use your amps into 8 ohm loads?
>Well here goes about bogusness and how it relates to a CS800.
>It is heavy. like 50 pounds heavy. I think that the new ones
>are three rack spaces, the old ones are four, and this is too big.
>They are noisy, the input attenuators are nowhere near precision,
So what _is_ wrong with a heavy amp? I choose to use a power amp with
a linear power supply, that's my choice. Oh and by the way I have
run a 2500 watt P.A. from a single wall outlet (120VAC 20A) Try that
with a similar power system that uses other types of supplies!
Are you limited on rack space? What's wrong with a three space amp?
And you feel that the silkscreened numbers and a rotart pot on a QSC
is better? I don't use or rely on the accuracy of panel markings or
attenuators. I line up my system with a meter.
>or even near matched. The internal card connectors are this stupid
>pin design that was origionally for use in a car wiring harness, and
>they always have to be replaced. The DDT (tm) circuitry has got to be
Those stupid connectors are simple, reliable and inexpensive, so what?
>sonically the worst compressor/limiter ever designed. The face plates
The DDT only should come in on peaks, and at very high volume levels,
I use DDT as protection and not as system limiting. Limiting doesn't
sound very good no matter what kind of limiter does it. The DDT
circuit also can compensate for other faults in the system. I had two
theeters shorted out and the DDT reduced the amps gain (dynamically) to a
point where I could not detect a problem. Of course this was in a tri
amp system. The limiting was only happening in the high end.
>are replaceable for very little money (30 cdn dollars) so that you can't
>really tell how much wear and tear the thing has seen. I could go on but
>I won't, other than to say that I f**king hate peavey, I have no time
>for anything they make. If I put togeather a show for someone, or a
>tech rider, the first item is *NO EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURED BY PEAVEY
>CORPORATION IS AN ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTE FOR ANY ITEM IN THIS RIDER*.
I don't know why you have chosen to be so imovable and inflexiable. I
have supplied sound for many touring acts that have come through our
town and the real pro's size up the system and usually are skillfull
enough to make it work.
>I will recommend QSC 1500a as a dependable lightweight amp. I can get them
>locally for 100 dollars less than CS 800's and IMO sound better. They only
>weigh 34 lbs and put out 350W per ch into 8 ohms and 500W into four ohms,
>1000W bridged into eight, min load 4 ohms per channel. They are sensitive
>to power line voltage drop, but not so much as Carver amps, and you can
>run 2 off one 15 amp circuit and just bring the clip lights on on snare
>and kick without any problems.
You have made a good point for me. Any power amp that is "sensitive
to power line voltage drop..." doesn't do it for me. I get into all
kinds of situations and weak power is a lot of them......
I will agree that the QSC amp is probably better than any of the
Peaveys, but I have 10 Peavey amps and they do a good job for me!
>I think that you are gonna have to spend more than 250 US to get a decent
>monitor, however, more like 750 us (1100 cdn).
This is more like what I expect the original poster was after. Like
what I posted to the original request for information.
Have a nice day!
cul...@ac.dal.ca
> In article <1992Dec3.2...@ac.dal.ca> cul...@ac.dal.ca writes:
>
> Well Mur still suffers from Peaveyitius= the irational fear that a
> company that used to build "less than good equipment" could ever get
> it right.........
No, the rational belief that they still don't know what they are doing.
> The posters who commented about buying used Peavey were right! It is
> a much better buy. But since I live in a rural area freight to ship
> equipment is an important concern, and I STILL LIKE HEAVY AMPS
I like heavy quality amps: Bryston, McIntosh. However, I have a problem
with amp racks that have 210 pounds of amplifiers and only have three
amps in them, when it comes time to move them.
> Further covert Peavey bashing continues......
I think that its rather obvious, myself.
>>How are you measuring power?
>>I believe that the "800" rating is really 400 W per channel both channels
>>loaded to 4 ohms.
> SO what? Peavey has chosen to use a model number that reflects it's
> nominal power output into 4 ohms. What's the big deal? Do you _only_
> use your amps into 8 ohm loads?
My point was that he asked for 800W. That's kind of unspecific.
And no, but I only drive one cabinet per amp channel, if at all
possible.
>>Well here goes about bogusness and how it relates to a CS800.
>>It is heavy. like 50 pounds heavy. I think that the new ones
>>are three rack spaces, the old ones are four, and this is too big.
>>They are noisy, the input attenuators are nowhere near precision,
> So what _is_ wrong with a heavy amp? I choose to use a power amp with
> a linear power supply, that's my choice. Oh and by the way I have
> run a 2500 watt P.A. from a single wall outlet (120VAC 20A) Try that
> with a similar power system that uses other types of supplies!
Nothing is _wrong_ with a heavy amp, but I do not want to lift the
rack on to stage, or roll it on the truck or or otherwise expend energy
in gas, money, time, or a wrenched back moving the goddamned things.
P=V*I P=120*20 P=2400W available RMS. This means that obviously
you are not driving it very hard, as you can't make power out of thin air,
meaning that you can get away with 2500W instantaneous out of the storage
caps, but you can't get long term power that way. Besides, assuming your
triamped CS800 rig, on most source, you are only really pushing real power
to the bins and mids, with very little power going to the highs.
Although, if you want to talk about real fear, I do shows for an audio
company that's all Carver 1.5's. The last show I did was 3 1.5s on
one fifteen amp circuit. *Shiver*
>What's wrong with a three space amp? Are you limited in rack space?
No, but I am limited in vehicle space. The smaller and lighter the gear
is, the less you have to spend to move it around. If the racks are small
enough to fit in a station wagon, then you don't have to rent a cargo van.
The same applies to any show, ie. there's a big difference between renting
a cube van for a week, and renting a five ton for a week.
> And you feel that the silkscreened numbers and a rotart pot on a QSC
> is better? I don't use or rely on the accuracy of panel markings or
> attenuators. I line up my system with a meter.
No, but they don't claim (QSC) to be marked with sensitivity ratings.
Oh, and they only have 2 numbers, 0 and 11 (which I think is a Spinal
Tap take off) to indicate off and full on, where mine always sit.
>>The DDT (tm) circuitry has got to be
>>sonically the worst compressor/limiter ever designed. The face plates
> The DDT only should come in on peaks, and at very high volume levels,
> I use DDT as protection and not as system limiting. Limiting doesn't
> sound very good no matter what kind of limiter does it. The DDT
> circuit also can compensate for other faults in the system. I had two
> theeters shorted out and the DDT reduced the amps gain (dynamically) to a
> point where I could not detect a problem. Of course this was in a tri
> amp system. The limiting was only happening in the high end.
That's not what i'm trying to say. I am trying to say that 1, when the
DDT circuit is bypassed, the amp sounds better, and 2, some limiters
sound better than others. DDT is one of the others.
But, could you hear any top end? If not, I would say that that's a detection
of the problem. And reducing gain is what comps/limiters do, but possibly
this could be done more effectively with adjustable limiters in line after
the crossover. And, with a dead short, I would rather see the amp shut down,
than keep trying to drive it.
>>are replaceable for very little money (30 cdn dollars) so that you can't
>>really tell how much wear and tear the thing has seen. I could go on but
>>I won't, other than to say that I f**king hate peavey, I have no time
>>for anything they make. If I put togeather a show for someone, or a
>>tech rider, the first item is *NO EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURED BY PEAVEY
>>CORPORATION IS AN ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTE FOR ANY ITEM IN THIS RIDER*.
> I don't know why you have chosen to be so imovable and inflexiable. I
> have supplied sound for many touring acts that have come through our
> town and the real pro's size up the system and usually are skillfull
> enough to make it work.
I think that the key phrase here is "make it work". I have used CS800s
and CS1200s on gigs before, but I don't want to. The purpose of the rider
is to make sure we get gear to provide an optimum performance, and not
just "make it work". The real purpose of the clause is to prevent some
boob from going down to the local music hole in the wall and saying
I have this gig, so give me anything you have and I'll make it make noise
for them.
>>I will recommend QSC 1500a as a dependable lightweight amp. I can get them
>>locally for 100 dollars less than CS 800's and IMO sound better. They only
These are NEW prices, not used!
>>weigh 34 lbs and put out 350W per ch into 8 ohms and 500W into four ohms,
>>1000W bridged into eight, min load 4 ohms per channel. They are sensitive
>>to power line voltage drop, but not so much as Carver amps, and you can
>>run 2 off one 15 amp circuit and just bring the clip lights on on snare
>>and kick without any problems.
> You have made a good point for me. Any power amp that is "sensitive
> to power line voltage drop..." doesn't do it for me. I get into all
> kinds of situations and weak power is a lot of them......
> I will agree that the QSC amp is probably better than any of the
> Peaveys, but I have 10 Peavey amps and they do a good job for me!
It all depends on what you're after. The last gig I did with peavey product
was the Nova Scotia Celtic Festival. I got shafted and had to do the
smallest stage. Since I was house tech, I had to create (no info, as usual)
PA requirements out of thin air, and when i finally got some info, I needed
3 amps and console plus what was already on the list. This is 2 days before
the gig, mind you, in the busiest summer that Hfx has ever seen. My buddy
Brad says "no problem, I can get anything" which is fine, as he's providing
everything else over and above house stuff. He shows up the day of the gig,
and in the five ton is this BIG black box. As I'm wheeling the box down the
ramp, I say "Wkat the FUCK is in this, dimmers?". At which point, he turns
with a weird little grin on his face and says "No, that's your amp rack,
its Frank's monitor rack." Lo and behold, 2 CS1200s and a CS800.
Using a Bose 802/302 rig, (which, oddly enough works quite well for
folk/celtic/accoustic, although useless for anything else) really pointed
out to me:
1: the CS1200 sounds much better than the 800
2: They both sound better with DDT off
3: The QSC sounds better than both.
4: I hate Bose almost as much as Peavey
By the way, that rack weighs 300 pounds.
> Have a nice day!
Ditto 8)
> --
> Chris Christensen The opinions I express are my own,
> chr...@gold.gvg.tek.com and sometimes they are wrong!
> 916-478-3419 FAX 916-478-3887 After all, I *AM* only human.
Chris Christensen
(NOTE; the text IS heavily edited!)
Mr. Cullen and I trade jabs!
My coment suggested that he suffers from Peaveyitus
>No, the rational belief that they still don't know what they are doing.
I submitt an change in my diagnosis: "Peavyaphobia"
Those who suffer fromt it are deluded to believe that thair
imformation on the topic is the right information.....This .phobia can
have one of many prefixes and applies to all facets of life, as we
know it! :-)
And for-the-record: I will never ask anyone to believe anything I say.
It's up the the readers of this forum to decide.
This paragraph described my fondness of heavy amps!
>I like heavy quality amps: Bryston, McIntosh. However, I have a problem
>with amp racks that have 210 pounds of amplifiers and only have three
>amps in them, when it comes time to move them.
My amp racks weigh in at 250 lbs each....I have a CS-1200, CS-800 and
Ramsa WP-9220 plus the Rane Xover.
>>>How are you measuring power?
>>>I believe that the "800" rating is really 400 W per channel both channels
>>>loaded to 4 ohms.
>My point was that he asked for 800W. That's kind of unspecific.
>And no, but I only drive one cabinet per amp channel, if at all
>possible.
I agree that the original poster was talking in simple terms.
I usually run two or three drivers per amp channel. I am
reconfiguring the system so my normal system will have no more than
two drivers per amp channel (and present a 4 ohm load).
We then go at the weight issue and I speak of running a 2500 watt P.A
from one wall outlet!
>Nothing is _wrong_ with a heavy amp, but I do not want to lift the
>rack on to stage, or roll it on the truck or or otherwise expend energy
>in gas, money, time, or a wrenched back moving the goddamned things.
Yea I do complain about it to. I do have a lift gate on the sound
truck that mitigates the lifting issue. And I rarely work a job where
I an required to lift an amp rack alone so two of us usualy can manage
the racks without a lot of problem......
>P=V*I P=120*20 P=2400W available RMS. This means that obviously
>you are not driving it very hard, as you can't make power out of thin air,
>meaning that you can get away with 2500W instantaneous out of the storage
>caps, but you can't get long term power that way.
We _are_ talking about audio here aren't we. Crest factors of about
12 dB and even if it's compressed we don't sustain long term power.
It is my firm belief that the storage and supply cabablities of the
caps in the supply contribute a great deal to the "goodness" of amps
with linear power supplies.
Also I do count on the fact that a circuit breaker will pass more than it's
rated current. It does have to time to cool a bit..... In between
peaks! :-)
>Besides, assuming your triamped CS800 rig, on most source, you are only
>really pushing real power to the bins and mids, with very little power
>going to the highs.
Of course you're right here, and as noted above I run a CS-1200,
CS-800 and the Ramsa. BUT.....Don't forget the conversion efficency
of my nasty and heavey linear supply amps! Use a factor of %50 when I
request amp power. So I count on each amp rack consuming 5000 _peak_
watts.
>Although, if you want to talk about real fear, I do shows for an audio
>company that's all Carver 1.5's. The last show I did was 3 1.5s on
>one fifteen amp circuit. *Shiver*
I would expect that the amps are loafing along and or the speakers are
incredibly efficient or you are doing soft shows or, or....
>>What's wrong with a three space amp? Are you limited in rack space?
>No, but I am limited in vehicle space. The smaller and lighter the gear
>is, the less you have to spend to move it around. If the racks are small
>enough to fit in a station wagon, then you don't have to rent a cargo van.
>The same applies to any show, ie. there's a big difference between renting
>a cube van for a week, and renting a five ton for a week.
Point noted. But for the record I suggest you don't damn the amps for their
weight and or size without applying you own personal situation to the
discussion!
>> And you feel that the silkscreened numbers and a rotart pot on a QSC
>> is better? I don't use or rely on the accuracy of panel markings or
>> attenuators. I line up my system with a meter.
>No, but they don't claim (QSC) to be marked with sensitivity ratings.
>Oh, and they only have 2 numbers, 0 and 11 (which I think is a Spinal
>Tap take off) to indicate off and full on, where mine always sit.
Not a problem, I do the same. But still won't rely on the panel
markings of any amp if I am forced to use the markings, and I have
had specific situations to do that.
The discussion led to the Peavey DDT circuit.
>That's not what i'm trying to say. I am trying to say that 1, when the
>DDT circuit is bypassed, the amp sounds better, and 2, some limiters
>sound better than others. DDT is one of the others.
The DDT circuit on the late model Peavey amps does not bypass when the
DDT defeat switch is thrown. The circutry is is always in circuit.
The act of DDT is only defeated. The amp can't sound different?
>But, could you hear any top end? If not, I would say that that's a detection
>of the problem. And reducing gain is what comps/limiters do, but possibly
>this could be done more effectively with adjustable limiters in line after
>the crossover. And, with a dead short, I would rather see the amp shut down,
>than keep trying to drive it.
You missed my quick description of how the DDT works. The DDT in a
Peavey amp senses the feedback loop of the amplifier. If the circuit
senses an upset in the loop (for ANY reason) is starts to reduce the
input signal.
This is totally different than that a normal compressor or limiter
does. It's the same NET effect but the DDT is inside the feedback loop of
the amp! It's a gteat place to have that kind of protection.
The short that I was driving wasn't a dead short. It was a driver
shorted out. There is a difference.
>>>tech rider, the first item is *NO EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURED BY PEAVEY
>>>CORPORATION IS AN ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTE FOR ANY ITEM IN THIS RIDER*.
>> I don't know why you have chosen to be so imovable and inflexiable. I
>> have supplied sound for many touring acts that have come through our
>> town and the real pro's size up the system and usually are skillfull
>> enough to make it work.
>I think that the key phrase here is "make it work". I have used CS800s
My description wasn't intended as a performance compromise statement.
>and CS1200s on gigs before, but I don't want to. The purpose of the rider
>is to make sure we get gear to provide an optimum performance, and not
>just "make it work". The real purpose of the clause is to prevent some
>boob from going down to the local music hole in the wall and saying
>I have this gig, so give me anything you have and I'll make it make noise
>for them.
I have supplied sound to many performers. Riders are great and
wonderful but have to be put into perspective. I have done shows with
Donovan. His rided called out six large bins and thousands of watts
per side for all shows. Even the club gigs that I supplied sound on.
The seating was 150, and it was just him and his guitar.
The show happened, it was great and I did it with my Peavey amps!
More discussion on Quality of OSC, Peavey, etc.
>It all depends on what you're after. The last gig I did with peavey product
>was the Nova Scotia Celtic Festival. I got shafted and had to do the
>smallest stage. Since I was house tech, I had to create (no info, as usual)
I am sorry you got shafted, or that you feel you got shafted. I will
regret doing a job and not bid on it again if I would rather not do
it. But I try very hard to keep my attidude in line and do what I am asked.....
>PA requirements out of thin air, and when i finally got some info, I needed
>3 amps and console plus what was already on the list. This is 2 days before
>the gig, mind you, in the busiest summer that Hfx has ever seen. My buddy
>Brad says "no problem, I can get anything" which is fine, as he's providing
>everything else over and above house stuff. He shows up the day of the gig,
>and in the five ton is this BIG black box. As I'm wheeling the box down the
>ramp, I say "Wkat the FUCK is in this, dimmers?". At which point, he turns
>with a weird little grin on his face and says "No, that's your amp rack,
It is to your credit that you did pull it off.
>its Frank's monitor rack." Lo and behold, 2 CS1200s and a CS800.
>Using a Bose 802/302 rig, (which, oddly enough works quite well for
>folk/celtic/accoustic, although useless for anything else) really pointed
>out to me:
>1: the CS1200 sounds much better than the 800
>2: They both sound better with DDT off
>3: The QSC sounds better than both.
>4: I hate Bose almost as much as Peavey
Oh my! Peaveyphobia and Bosephobia all in one gig! I see now why you
are tweeked! I hope you recover from the infection soon, I'm
surprised that the hospital let's you log onto the NET....... :-)
Did you have the QSC and Peavey in a side by side direct comparison?
>By the way, that rack weighs 300 pounds.
Ah! it's only 50 lbs heavier than mine's!
>> Have a nice day!
>Ditto 8)
My intent is not to flame, though it may read that way in print! :-)
cul...@ac.dal.ca
>
> Mr. Cullen and I trade jabs!
Out come the boxing gloves. (and no one calls me Murray, let alone Mr. Cullen)
> I submitt an change in my diagnosis: "Peavyaphobia"
> Those who suffer fromt it are deluded to believe that thair
> imformation on the topic is the right information.....This .phobia can
> have one of many prefixes and applies to all facets of life, as we
> know it! :-)
But I don't dislike everything, or even particularly their amps. I just
feel that there are better amps out there for less money
(at least in Halifax). However, I do like those little 112's.
two way box, 12 and 1 inch drivers, not bad, for the price.
> And for-the-record: I will never ask anyone to believe anything I say.
> It's up the the readers of this forum to decide.
As for me, BELIEVE WHAT I SAY, FOR I AM THE OMNISCIENT(?) AUDIO GOD
(Scuffle, scuffle) There, sorry about that, more of my psychiatric problems
attempting to overcome me.8^)
> My amp racks weigh in at 250 lbs each...
Some load impedance questions deleted.
> We then go at the weight issue and I speak of running a 2500 watt P.A
> from one wall outlet!
>
>>Nothing is _wrong_ with a heavy amp, but I do not want to lift the
>>rack on to stage, or roll it on the truck or or otherwise expend energy
>>in gas, money, time, or a wrenched back moving the goddamned things.
>
> Yea I do complain about it to. I do have a lift gate on the sound
> truck that mitigates the lifting issue.
But, Audio guys aren't allowed to have those! The agent is responsible
for finding the cheapest truck available, and it doesn't even have a ramp.
> And I rarely work a job where
> I an required to lift an amp rack alone so two of us usualy can manage
> the racks without a lot of problem......
I don't know, its still a big lift onto a four foot stage.
Ohm's law and power equation deleted.
> We _are_ talking about audio here aren't we. Crest factors of about
> 12 dB and even if it's compressed we don't sustain long term power.
> It is my firm belief that the storage and supply cabablities of the
> caps in the supply contribute a great deal to the "goodness" of amps
> with linear power supplies.
I'll put it this way. Give me a thrash band or an alternative band
and 100 people in a slam pit, and I'll give you two to one that that
20A breaker is the first thing to go, with your rig.
> Also I do count on the fact that a circuit breaker will pass more than it's
> rated current. It does have to time to cool a bit..... In between
> peaks! :-)
Ath this point, I start wishing for a 3x100A distro.8-)
>>Besides, assuming your triamped CS800 rig, on most source, you are only
>>really pushing real power to the bins and mids, with very little power
>>going to the highs.
> Of course you're right here, and as noted above I run a CS-1200,
> CS-800 and the Ramsa. BUT.....Don't forget the conversion efficency
> of my nasty and heavey linear supply amps! Use a factor of %50 when I
> request amp power. So I count on each amp rack consuming 5000 _peak_
> watts.
>
>>Although, if you want to talk about real fear, I do shows for an audio
>>company that's all Carver 1.5's. The last show I did was 3 1.5s on
>>one fifteen amp circuit. *Shiver*
> I would expect that the amps are loafing along and or the speakers are
> incredibly efficient or you are doing soft shows or, or....
Exactly the point I was trying to make in the first place! My idea of an
optimum system is when the amps kack out before the ac does. (But hopefully
never!)
>>>What's wrong with a three space amp? Are you limited in rack space?
>>No, but I am limited in vehicle space. The smaller and lighter the gear
>>is, the less you have to spend to move it around. If the racks are small
>>enough to fit in a station wagon, then you don't have to rent a cargo van.
>>The same applies to any show, ie. there's a big difference between renting
>>a cube van for a week, and renting a five ton for a week.
> Point noted. But for the record I suggest you don't damn the amps for their
> weight and or size without applying you own personal situation to the
> discussion!
Personal Situation: I own half a dozen of various turnarounds, 50 feet of
multipair, and some insert cables. I do not own any consoles, speakers,
amps, mics, processing, etc. However, I work for a Band that has their
own gear that *just* fits in a GMC Vandura. ANY extra equipment equals a
cube van. I also work for a duo (accoustic guitars and voice) that
tries to fit everything in whatever vehicle they can borrow from
a friend or relative. I also work for two audio companies, Aurora,
who owns that Vandura and tries damn hard to keep everything small enough
to fit in it, and ABI, who rents five-tons all the time, because stuff
just won't fit in a cube for (Insert Band/Festival/Venue). Also house
audio tech at the Dal Student Union, and occasionally at clubs downtown
or with other bands. So all of those situations have happened to me at
one time or another.
> Not a problem, I do the same. But still won't rely on the panel
> markings of any amp if I am forced to use the markings, and I have
> had specific situations to do that.
But the CS 800, by labelling, encourages people to rely upon them.
> The discussion led to the Peavey DDT circuit.
>>That's not what i'm trying to say. I am trying to say that 1, when the
>>DDT circuit is bypassed, the amp sounds better, and 2, some limiters
>>sound better than others. DDT is one of the others.
> The DDT circuit on the late model Peavey amps does not bypass when the
> DDT defeat switch is thrown. The circutry is is always in circuit.
> The act of DDT is only defeated. The amp can't sound different?
But it no longer does anything? then it would seem to me that not all
of the circuitry is in the circuit. roughly analagous to a lightbulb
when it's not on, the circuit's still there, but it's not working.
But, this is splitting hairs.
A whole bunch of junk about DDT(tm) deleted.
My judgement came about after listening to _A Decade of Steely Dan_
_Brothers in Arms_, _The Pleasure and the Pain_ (The Box, out of
Montreal) and various Celtic albums supplied by the promoter. I decided that
I liked the sound of the system better at all volume levels with the
DDT disengaged. Maybe I'm crazy, but my ears are all I've got to go by
and both I and the people that employ me trust them.
>>>>tech rider, the first item is *NO EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURED BY PEAVEY
>>>>CORPORATION IS AN ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTE FOR ANY ITEM IN THIS RIDER*.
>>> I don't know why you have chosen to be so imovable and inflexiable. I
>>> have supplied sound for many touring acts that have come through our
>>> town and the real pro's size up the system and usually are skillfull
>>> enough to make it work.
>>I think that the key phrase here is "make it work". I have used CS800s
> My description wasn't intended as a performance compromise statement.
But if you don't supply what they ask for, then it is a compromise, even
if they wanted gear of a lesser quality (note that I'm not trying or intending
to make a value judgement of your system). A case in point is _The Tragically
Hip_ who are a medium size Canadian band. Their FOH Engineer's preferred PA
is an Adamson Accoustic rig. This is a Canadian company that's starting to
make inroads into the States, so you may not have heard/heard-of them.
The last time they played Dal, they were bought rider extra, and a local
company cot the contract to do their show. The FOH guy refused a kit
of 8 Meyer MSLs and six 650-RS, and took 16 martin 2x15 bins and 12 martin
RS-1200s instead, because hey felt that the Martin kit better suited the
Band. Now, I personally would kill to use MSLs instead of Adamson, but...
Oh, yeah, the venue at Dal is 1200 standing, and 85 feet from the proscenium
to the back wall.
> I have supplied sound to many performers. Riders are great and
> wonderful but have to be put into perspective. I have done shows with
> Donovan. His rided called out six large bins and thousands of watts
> per side for all shows. Even the club gigs that I supplied sound on.
> The seating was 150, and it was just him and his guitar.
Reminds me of when Long John Baldry played Dal's club (legal limit 270).
His agent sent us his arena rider, with Hi-pac, Lo-pac, 40 ch FOH, 12 mixes
on stage! We used 4 Bose 302, and 8 802, with 6 QSC 1500s, 4 mixes on stage
3 EV 1202, 2 martin LE200, and a 16ch yamaha pm1200 with 2 stereo strips.
> The show happened, it was great and I did it with my Peavey amps!
> More discussion on Quality of OSC, Peavey, etc.
>>It all depends on what you're after. The last gig I did with peavey product
>>was the Nova Scotia Celtic Festival. I got shafted and had to do the
>>smallest stage. Since I was house tech, I had to create (no info, as usual)
> I am sorry you got shafted, or that you feel you got shafted. I will
> regret doing a job and not bid on it again if I would rather not do
> it. But I try very hard to keep my attidude in line and do what I
am asked.....
Make no mistake, I had a good time, but I had to give the choice bits away
because I had to staff three stages, and thus had to reserve the least
appetizing for myself, hence being shafted.
>>its Frank's monitor rack." Lo and behold, 2 CS1200s and a CS800.
>>Using a Bose 802/302 rig, (which, oddly enough works quite well for
>>folk/celtic/accoustic, although useless for anything else) really pointed
>>out to me:
>>1: the CS1200 sounds much better than the 800
>>2: They both sound better with DDT off
>>3: The QSC sounds better than both.
>>4: I hate Bose almost as much as Peavey
> Oh my! Peaveyphobia and Bosephobia all in one gig! I see now why you
> are tweeked! I hope you recover from the infection soon, I'm
> surprised that the hospital let's you log onto the NET....... :-)
> Did you have the QSC and Peavey in a side by side direct comparison?
No, but I use the same combo with QSC at least three times a week and
have done so for 3 and one half years so far. For two of those years
I mixed Exclusively on 802/302 combos.
Oh, and according to Bose reps, NO ONE ELSE in the world uses 802s/302s
for an alternative/rock P.A . No wonder I'm crazy, my workplace has made
me this way.
>>> Have a nice day!
>>Ditto 8)
> My intent is not to flame, though it may read that way in print! :-)
But look at it this way. We're creating a great thread for this group to
read, as it's been pretty dry lately.
Mur
Cul...@ac.dal.ca
Cul...@ug.cs.dal.ca
Mark Payne
>Although, if you want to talk about real fear, I do shows for an audio
>company that's all Carver 1.5's. The last show I did was 3 1.5s on
>one fifteen amp circuit. *Shiver*
Our 2K rack is a Caver 1.5 (Drives the 4 off JBL M330's tops) and a Harrison
K3000 (the one I asked you about Chris).. This drives the 4 TOA SDB 15" SUBS
(100 Hz crossover). The other rack has a CS1200 (one only !) and the third
has 3 CS800's. Oh and then there's a couple of CS800 monitor racks. We can
drive multiple 2K rigs or one 5K rig with these.
I like 2U 1K units .. I like the Carver for its weight. In the UK I'm sure the
power situation is much better. The 2K Harrison/Carver rack is happy off one
240V 13A feed and I'll also load on one CS800 if pushed. At 240V rather than
110V the losses in the power frontend are reduced by a factor of 4 (losses are
I^2*R). On an AB test with the Harrison, the CS1200 and the Carver (all 1.2K)
running the subs.. I can't tell the difference.
I have heard it said that you can hear a Carver recovering from a kick drum
beat but I think that this is crap.. Maybe true on a 110V supply which most
of netland will be on.
>This is totally different than that a normal compressor or limiter
>does. It's the same NET effect but the DDT is inside the feedback loop of
>the amp! It's a geat place to have that kind of protection.
Ahhhh DDT on Peavey Amps... I can't fault it. It gives me a lot of confidence,
especially working with Band "Engineers" who normall have never had to pay
for a @@@@@@@ driver themselves. I never turn it off.
>>>tech rider, the first item is *NO EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURED BY PEAVEY
>>>CORPORATION IS AN ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTE FOR ANY ITEM IN THIS RIDER*.
Now this is just stupid. I'd never want to work with people who make these
sort or requests because they will turn out to be prejudiced assholes in
101 other areas as well. These are the same peeps that ask for a 40 CH 10K
rig for a 500 capacity venue. They can normally be found being "road managers"
for crap indie bands because they play worse than the members of the band
(difficult) and they know shit about sound. "We only use SM58's on vocals"
he said as I shrugged and put away the Beyer M88's. "We must have a gate on
the snare and overheads"... The venue is for 150+ and the snare is out
of the PA and its still too loud.
>I think that the key phrase here is "make it work". I have used CS800s
You don't have to "make it work". This is a fine amp for the money. In the
UK I can get them at »500. The inputs are only quasi balanced but the
Xover is doing this job anyway and we build in balancing Xformers into the
monitor racks.
Bottom Line..
If you want quality amps, don't suffer from designer label mentality, have
a big van with a tail lift (as Chris has told us more than once :-) and are
on a budget (who isn't), Then the Peavey Cs800 and CS1200 are good amps.
If you have a little more money you get something as good that's a little
lighter.
Bottom Bottom Line..
Dont work with Indie bands.... Oh alright then.. but only when the kids are
going hungry.
--
_______________________________________________________________________________
Mark Payne | Mail: m...@hpwin052.uksr.hp.com |
___________|________________________________|_________________________________
Hewlett Packard, Amen Corner, Cain Road, Bracknell, Berkshire RG12 1HN
I think you will find that HP are not, in any way involved in, influenced by
or responsible for opinions that I express here.... I think....
Jack Van Breen x2666 dept220
discussion is going. I find it very enlightening to read about thier
experiences and 'why they feel the way they do'.
Good job. This is the way the net should work.
(BTW: I happen to now like Crown's for bang4buk vs. weight, but I have used
the 'new' peavey's w/ good results as well:)
--
Jack Van Breen (standard disclaimer, these are my own ...)
Product Support, Wyse Technology, San Jose, CA
...!uunet!wyse!jvb
j...@wyse.com
William Spencer
>It is my firm belief that the storage and supply cabablities of the
>caps in the supply contribute a great deal to the "goodness" of amps
>with linear power supplies.
That's right, storage comes from caps, not from linear power supplies.
So do any "lightwieght" amps have big caps, or do small ones come with the
territory? Are any such amps recommended without "ifs" and "buts"?
Bill s
cul...@ac.dal.ca
> REGARDING STUFF ON POWER AMPS AND PEAVEY..
> power situation is much better. The 2K Harrison/Carver rack is happy off one
> 240V 13A feed and I'll also load on one CS800 if pushed. At 240V rather than
> 110V the losses in the power frontend are reduced by a factor of 4 (losses are
> I^2*R). On an AB test with the Harrison, the CS1200 and the Carver (all 1.2K)
> running the subs.. I can't tell the difference.
Yes, but what about mids\upper mids, is there a difference there?
> I have heard it said that you can hear a Carver recovering from a kick drum
> beat but I think that this is crap.. Maybe true on a 110V supply which most
> of netland will be on.
You can, but that's when you've got a really big kit and the line voltage is
dropping down to 105-100 at the distro.
>>This is totally different than that a normal compressor or limiter
>>does. It's the same NET effect but the DDT is inside the feedback loop of
>>the amp! It's a geat place to have that kind of protection.
>>>>tech rider, the first item is *NO EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURED BY PEAVEY
>>>>CORPORATION IS AN ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTE FOR ANY ITEM IN THIS RIDER*.
> Now this is just stupid. I'd never want to work with people who make these
> sort or requests because they will turn out to be prejudiced assholes in
Glad to meet you too mark!
> 101 other areas as well. These are the same peeps that ask for a 40 CH 10K
> rig for a 500 capacity venue. They can normally be found being "road managers"
> for crap indie bands because they play worse than the members of the band
> (difficult) and they know shit about sound. "We only use SM58's on vocals"
Well, I play guitar worse than most of those bands, because I don't play
guitar- or piano-or bass-or drums-or sing. However, I do play bass trombone,
tuba and sousaphone well enough to get paid for it, and also tenor trombone,
baritone, and euphonium.
> he said as I shrugged and put away the Beyer M88's. "We must have a gate on
> the snare and overheads"... The venue is for 150+ and the snare is out
> of the PA and its still too loud.
Well, I'm guilty of "I'll only use a 535 on *his* vocal, because its the
only thing I've tried that suits" but then again, I will have asked for a
535 on the rider for lead vocal, or brought one. As for gating and such
with drums, that's just stupidity.
If I show up at a gig where I've asked for 16ch,one or two sweep mids
four auxes (ex. Yamaha PM1200, Soundcraft Delta, Soundcraft 200B)
and get a Peavey SRC instead, I'm pissed, because that just isn't in the
same ballpark. That's what the line is for, or for asking for
2x31 band equalisers (Ex Klark-Technik, White, Urei) and getting 15 year old
peavey 1U shit instead, that's been sitting in a basement for 8 years.
Oh, yeah and i don't do sound for crap indie bands, because they
can't afford me. I do sound for venues that do that type of show, but then
the venue pays me.
>>I think that the key phrase here is "make it work". I have used CS800s
> You don't have to "make it work". This is a fine amp for the money. In the
I keep trying to say that there are better amps, at least in my area, FOR
LESS MONEY than a CS800.
Besides, for half the gigs I do, I could get by with 30 W per box, it just
has to be really good clean 30W.
> UK I can get them at »500. The inputs are only quasi balanced but the
> Xover is doing this job anyway and we build in balancing Xformers into the
> monitor racks.
> Bottom Line..
> If you want quality amps, don't suffer from designer label mentality, have
Hey, a lot of people that have never heard of Crest think that Peavey
IS a designer label.
> a big van with a tail lift (as Chris has told us more than once :-) and are
> on a budget (who isn't), Then the Peavey Cs800 and CS1200 are good amps.
There, I've gotten through the whole post without being rude or obnoxious,
even though Mark is infering that I am an ignorant prejudiced asshole.
Prejudiced maybe (who isn't about something), asshole sometimes, but
not ignorant by a long shot.
Mur
Cul...@ac.dal.ca
Cul...@ug.cs.dal.ca
Mark Payne
Hello Mur...
>There, I've gotten through the whole post without being rude or obnoxious,
>even though Mark is infering that I am an ignorant prejudiced asshole.
>Prejudiced maybe (who isn't about something), asshole sometimes, but
>not ignorant by a long shot.
Sorry... My blood got boiling and I forgot to put the "Human Filter" on.
I am sure you are not "ignorant" or "obnoxious" .. I never used these words.
I am sure that you are prejudiced... but then we all are. The attack was not
on you personaly but on an attitude that I have seen that your post was in
the rough direction of...
Lets put the Peaveyphobia thing aside because that just gets my prejudiced
asshole into a spasm and will confuse the point I want to make. This is
about technical PA spec requirements from bands and venues...
1. The first problem I have with the rider thing is that when you are working
at the "one off", none touring end of the PA market, you build a flexible
rig that will do most jobs very well .. Not brilliant.. because there's no
point. You never get the time to get the last 10% of sonic brilliance out
of the band anyway.
You Build on a budget.
You Build with compromises.
You find the solution Amp/speaker/desk/compressor/processor/graphic etc
that works for your rig and you trundle the thing out with you engineering
skills as a package. We ALWAYS get the bands/Venues comming back for more
because the FOH and stage sound is very nice.. we work fast and do a good
job.
What graphic is in the FOH rack is actually irrelivant. In fact my FOH
graphic is a 12 band small "Technics" HIFI unit (horrors ! Where's the
Clark Technic ? what about the headroom ??). The fact is that it works
and I've never needed anything else.
The point is that the Rider normally reflects the rig that the Venue/Sound
Man dreams of. As sound Engineers we should be providing a SOLUTION, the
details of this are up to us. Let them judge on the SOUND not the racks.
2. What business are we in ?? Equipment Hire or Engineered PA. I'm not in
Equipment Hire. Maybe the Technical Rider is really a hire list. I turn
up and am reponsible for the production of sound from unloading to loading.
If a band/venue want me to drop off a load of stuff to their spec and let
them get on with it... This aint for me.
3. I do most of my work for small bands and Venues (200-700 caps..). The last
band I had a real hard time with was "The Power Of Dreams" who had done
a couple of dates with U2. There FOH technical rider was a list of the
gear the was in the U2 touring rig. The Promoter's PA budget was »250
and the venue was 300 strong. We did a good solid 3K with 1.5K foldback
and the bands engineer turned his nose up at the subs because he had been
using Courts and the desk cause the like to have a gate and compressor
on every channel ("like when we were on tour with U2").
He did the mix and he was very good. We would not have got the vocals up
in the mix like he did. At the end of the gig he admitted that it was one
of the best sounds they had had ("we got across").
4. I never understand Mic Requirements. I can maybe just see the point on
vocals... But who cares what I put on snare ? I'm using Ramsa S2 clip
mikes at the moment cause the quality is nice and it saves on stands..
Geoff (?) from Toto (God Rest Him :-() turned me onto these. When I can
afford more I'll use them on Toms as well and use the Beyer 201's for
something else. The point is that most band engineers have never seen an
S2 ("oh haven't you got an SM57 ?")... well actually NO I DON'T WHY DON'T
YOU TRY THIS FOR GOD'S SAKE YOU SILLY PRAT.. YOU MIGHT LIKE IT !! (I can
say these things among Friends can't I ?? because I have to smile and
say nice persausive things to get them to use this brilliant piece of kit.
5. I always make a point of talking to the band/bands engineer befor the gig.
I can then find out what the scoop is on the riders.. Often you can clear
things up. The problem is when you are quoting against a job to the promotor
who will NOT understand this stuff. You are quoting against a technical
spec I will say.. "look this is crazy.. We don't have this stuff.. this
is waht we do and the price is »xxx" but I know another firm will say
"cool no problems .. the price is »xxx" and then the turn up with a rack
full of Peavey Gear :-).
I hope this post is a little more intellegent than my first Knee Jerk reaction.
Sorry if I offended Mur....
Regards to Chris and Mur
Jack Van Breen x2666 dept220
And right after I had posted how nicely this discussion was going:):)
In article <1992Dec14....@ac.dal.ca> cul...@ac.dal.ca writes:
>
>There, I've gotten through the whole post without being rude or obnoxious,
>even though Mark is infering that I am an ignorant prejudiced asshole.
>Prejudiced maybe (who isn't about something), asshole sometimes, but
>not ignorant by a long shot.
> Mur
>
Actually, I don't believe he EVER refered to you.. He was actualy refering
to the folks he has had to work with (unless he has worked for you:):) who
seem to ask for the ridiculas just because they can:):)
I realize that it's hard to keep our emotions out of something that we love
to do (as you obviously do) but sometimes we have to take two steps back
and re-read a post, to be sure we have been slammed:):) I don't think that
Mark ever ment to imply that you didn't know what you were doing, just that
he has had to work with those who dont' (just as you have also:)
Still this has been an enlightening series. Hope to see more.
BTW: anybody got a good way to figure out the peaks in a monitor system
(with out a spectrum anylizer:):)
Chris Christensen
(Jack Van Breen x2666 dept220) writes:
>I just wanted to compliment Mur and Chris on the Very Gentlemanly why thier
>discussion is going. I find it very enlightening to read about thier
>experiences and 'why they feel the way they do'.
>Good job. This is the way the net should work.
As long as usefull information is presented in a manner similar to the
way that this discussion has progressed I agree with your observation
and accept the compliment!
>(BTW: I happen to now like Crown's for bang4buk vs. weight, but I have used
>the 'new' peavey's w/ good results as well:)
I don't expect to have many Peavey supporters come out here in this
forum because they fear professional rebuttal (?) I am sure that there
are others who could contribute to the discussion, and I don't mean
to suggest that Peavey/heavey amp types only post!
Chris Christensen
>chr...@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen) writes:
>>It is my firm belief that the storage and supply cabablities of the
>>caps in the supply contribute a great deal to the "goodness" of amps
>>with linear power supplies.
>That's right, storage comes from caps, not from linear power supplies.
Point made, but I can't think of a linear power supply that doesn't
use caps :-)
And the real point is that a power amp that uses a large reserve via
caps would have the general tendancy to sound better IMHO.......
>So do any "lightwieght" amps have big caps, or do small ones come with the
>territory? Are any such amps recommended without "ifs" and "buts"?
Yes, inquiring minds want to know!
Nathan F. Janette
Payne) writes:
> 4. I never understand Mic Requirements. I can maybe just see the point on
> vocals... But who cares what I put on snare ?
This statement seems to be the essence of your argument, if I
understand correctly. The answer is, I care, because different mics
do indeed affect the sound differently. Even within the realm of mics
that are "good enough to do the job", their may well still be enough
difference between the contenders to make an "artistic" decision
with the choice.
To me, there is much more to live sound than just "getting the job done".
My experience has been with small clubs in this area for the most part,
and I often get strange looks from house soundfolks when I want to use a
different mic on our female vocalist. Why do I insist on using an EV
ND/757 on her voice rather than a SM58? The answer is, with no flames
intended, that if I have to explain it to you you just wouldn't get it.
One either hears the difference, or not: crisp high end vs. no high end.
It's hard for us to argue this point, because it may just be that if I had
the chance to personally hear your system with it's 12 band hifi eq I
would think it was the greatest, but intellectually, and based upon my
own experience, I would be highly surprised.
--
Nathan Janette "I'm a NeXTstep man,
Dept MB&B, Yale Univ I'm a NeXTcube guy"
New Haven, CT
nat...@laplace.biology.yale.edu (NeXT)
Brian Kauffman
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>My experience has been with small clubs in this area for the most part,
>and I often get strange looks from house soundfolks when I want to use a
>different mic on our female vocalist. Why do I insist on using an EV
>ND/757 on her voice rather than a SM58? The answer is, with no flames
>intended, that if I have to explain it to you you just wouldn't get it.
>One either hears the difference, or not: crisp high end vs. no high end.
With no flames intended, your response seems unduely insulting & patronizing.
Why don't you simply state the difference & your preference?
-Brian
Galen Watts
>(with out a spectrum anylizer:):)
Yes, we do it all the time with a readily available acoustic measuring system:
Our Ears.
You need to FLATTEN the eq, turn it up until it squeals at ONE frequency, then
pull down the band on the eq. The first time is trial and error, so maybe you
shouldn't do it at a gig. If the band you pull down doesn't affect the squeal,
try the one above or the one below.
Until you get to the point where you can tell what band by the sound, it's
going to be hunt and dip, but once you know where your monitors have peaks,
you know which ones to dip first.
One thing that really bugs me is monitor engineers who use the 31 band eq's
for tone shaping, like when they grab 500-2400 Hz and pull it all down so the
"curve" on the sliders looks good. 31 band eq's were meant to NOTCH out peaks,
not as a Bass-Mid-Treble device.
You cannot boost and you cannot cut more than 6dB without changing the response
of the EQ outside of the band your adjusting.
I've been at it a few years and I've found techniques that work consistently,
and most of the time people say "that won't work" and then I have great fun
showing just how full of Fertilizer they are.
Galen Watts.
John Henders
>Mark Payne writes:
>>.....On an AB test with the Harrison, the CS1200 and the Carver (all 1.2K)
>> running the subs.. I can't tell the difference.
>Yes, but what about mids\upper mids, is there a difference there?
>
I have to agree with Murry here. The mids and high range is
definately more whee the quality of a power amp is noticable, and this
to my ears is where a Peavey( at least the older CS800's I've use )
falls short. However, I differ on QSC's as well. I've heard that the
newer series is better, but the older QSC's, to me, don't sound that
good either. And yes, this is from direct a-b'ing, as a freind of mine
manages one of thwe local PA rental outfit's and often calls me when
their testing amplifiers when considering a purchase. Recent listening
tests involved a QSC, Crown and Crest through their TurboSound rig, and
there were definate differences. Personallyu, I would have a difficult
time choosing between the Crown and Crest, as the differences were
slight when compared to the QSC. Older amps available used around here
for reasonable $ that also sound better to my ears are Bryston, H&H, and
even Yamaha's, though with the Yamaha's there are reported reliability
problems, which coupled with Yamaha's well know habit of taking a few
drivers with them when they go, would make me a bit nervous.
>
>> Now this is just stupid. I'd never want to work with people who make these
>> sort or requests because they will turn out to be prejudiced assholes in
>Glad to meet you too mark!
>> 101 other areas as well. These are the same peeps that ask for a 40 CH 10K
>> rig for a 500 capacity venue. They can normally be found being "road managers"
>> for crap indie bands because they play worse than the members of the band
>> (difficult) and they know shit about sound. "We only use SM58's on vocals"
Having done a lot of tours "pimping on a different rig every night,
I'd like to suggest that there are other factors involved. In order to
minimise the variables in a job fuill of them, cmbined with little
sleep, and everything else that can go wrong on a tour, having a
consistant sound is important, and even though the other microphone may
be far superior to a 58, a 58 is a known factor. I know what it wll soud
like, and can relate that to all the other different factors to get a
mix together in the 1 hour I've got to learn all the quirks of a
different PA every night. I bring my own effects rack with gates,
compressor, delay and reverb for the same reason. Sure, the 480XL in the
house rack may be far superior, bt I don't have the time to spend with
the manual in one hand, figuring out how to get the sound I want. I have
a show to do, and the less distractions the better.
One tour I did, with a female vocalist known to be very picky about
monitors, we brought 2 1202's and a graph for her. On a couple of shows,
the PA suppliers would want me to try their new, knock them dead monitor
design. I'd only do this after we'd wire monitors we'd brought, so when
she showed up at sound check, we wouldn't have to waste here time
switching them if she didn't like them. Both times we did this, she
asked for here EV's, so I stopped bothering with other monitors. I then
had to deal with the scorn of the occassional PA supplier who couldn't
beleive I'd reject their wizbang monitor for the cheap EV's, but I
didn't care, as it was my job to keep the band happy, not them.
>Well, I'm guilty of "I'll only use a 535 on *his* vocal, because its the
>only thing I've tried that suits" but then again, I will have asked for a
>535 on the rider for lead vocal, or brought one. As for gating and such
>with drums, that's just stupidity.
Well thanks Murray. Personally, I like a gate on the kick drum, even
in small rooms. Actually, especially in small rooms. But I bring my own,
just so I don't have tyo deal with attitude.
>There, I've gotten through the whole post without being rude or obnoxious,
>even though Mark is infering that I am an ignorant prejudiced asshole.
>Prejudiced maybe (who isn't about something), asshole sometimes, but
>not ignorant by a long shot.
Well, almost. ;-)
As I've also worked as house sound engineer at several large venues
around Vancouver, I'd just like to toss in one further comment. When
you've worked a room for a while, you get to know it well enough you can
probably mix anything in there without a sound check. But it's easy to
forget that the guy visiting on your rig has mixed 20 shows in the last
month in 20 different rooms on 20 different rigs. Personally, I try to
make that guys job as easy as I can, without letting my ego or
prejudices get in the way. Some guys will flail, no matter what help you
give them, but that's your job.
--
"If Rush fans were braindead, why are there so Bruce Bufalini
many people posting to alt.music.rush?" PSU
cul...@ac.dal.ca
>>BTW: anybody got a good way to figure out the peaks in a monitor system
>>(with out a spectrum anylizer:):)
>>Jack Van Breen (standard disclaimer, these are my own ...)
> Yes, we do it all the time with a readily available acoustic measuring system:
> Our Ears.
> You need to FLATTEN the eq, turn it up until it squeals at ONE frequency, then
> pull down the band on the eq. The first time is trial and error, so maybe you
> shouldn't do it at a gig. If the band you pull down doesn't affect the squeal,
> try the one above or the one below.
The cheater's way is to get it near the "regeneration point"* and start
slowly boosting each band untill it rings and then pulling it down, the
earlier rings going down farther than the later ones. Note that this is a
quick and very dirty way to do monitors, and either way, if you induce really
high levels, you run the risk of damage before the band even gets onstage.
Most Embarrasing ;8-() (* for fans of Davis and Davis 8-)
> Until you get to the point where you can tell what band by the sound, it's
> going to be hunt and dip, but once you know where your monitors have peaks,
> you know which ones to dip first.
Commonly referred to as pitch or ear training in music circles. I actually
had a sax player tell me that the monitors were ringing just a bit at
B below middle C, and boy, was he surprised that I got rid of it instantly.
Also, as an aside, musicians never believe me when I tell them that
really good engineers have really good pitch, but you gotta, not in terms
of note but in frequency, and you have to get the harmonics, as well as
the fundamental.
> One thing that really bugs me is monitor engineers who use the 31 band eq's
> for tone shaping, like when they grab 500-2400 Hz and pull it all down so the
> "curve" on the sliders looks good. 31 band eq's were meant to NOTCH out peaks,
> not as a Bass-Mid-Treble device.
> You cannot boost and you cannot cut more than 6dB without changing the response
> of the EQ outside of the band your adjusting.
Well, sometimes you do what you have to do. If you have a howl at 6.3kHz,
from really bad reflections, and a mic with _PRESENCE PEAK_(ARRGH), sometimes
you have to do the big scoop to save the gig, obviously at the expense of the
monitors.
I think that the "Nice Curve" approach that I often see is people who have l
earned/been taught to mix on a system that has constant directivity horns,
and no eq in the crossover, so that you have to do it on the graph. They
have learned that the eq _should_ look like that, and then come onto a
system with horn eq, or no constant directivity, and do the same thing,
and get a really forward presence (read unbelievably fucking bright), and
think that thats a great sound. Then they come to our bar, with the Bose
802 system (BOSESHIT (TM)), no horns, just 64 four-and-one-quarter inch
drivers, and just loose it. HAHAHA! Then, halfway through soundcheck, they
ask how the curve _should_ look. So I flatten the curve, and fix 125, 200,
400, 630, 800, and 1k, (Bose problem points), and say "that should be fine".
And it is! HAHAHA!
But, seriously, I have seen a disturbing trend of dual operators locally,
the band soundman, who mixes, and the PA tech, who fixes the graph over
his shoulder. Even in Arena gigs. This is crazy! Why does anyone
bother to pay a soundman for a tour if he has to be Babysat?
Mur
Cul...@ac.dal.ca
Cul...@ug.cs.dal.ca
I will be off-line from Dec 19 to Dec 27.
cul...@ac.dal.ca
> Let me try this again....
> Hello Mur...
Hi Mark;
>>There, I've gotten through the whole post without being rude or obnoxious,
>>even though Mark is infering that I am an ignorant prejudiced asshole.
>>Prejudiced maybe (who isn't about something), asshole sometimes, but
>>not ignorant by a long shot.
> Sorry... My blood got boiling and I forgot to put the "Human Filter" on.
> I am sure you are not "ignorant" or "obnoxious" .. I never used these words.
> I am sure that you are prejudiced... but then we all are. The attack was not
> on you personaly but on an attitude that I have seen that your post was in
> the rough direction of...
Obnoxious is definitely mine, as I had this urge to be. 8-) Ignorant
is in ref to the comment about "they know shit about sound"
As we all know, lack of knowledge equals ignorance, and I assumed that
I was included by default in the group.
> Lets put the Peaveyphobia thing aside because that just gets my prejudiced
> asshole into a spasm and will confuse the point I want to make. This is
> about technical PA spec requirements from bands and venues...
> 1. The first problem I have with the rider thing is that when you are working
> at the "one off", none touring end of the PA market, you build a flexible
> rig that will do most jobs very well .. Not brilliant.. because there's no
> point. You never get the time to get the last 10% of sonic brilliance out
Well, I try if I am touring as the "Band Engineer", and knowing the band, the
material, the this, the that, I for one try to explain the minimum equipment
that I need in the minimum amount of paper.
> You find the solution Amp/speaker/desk/compressor/processor/graphic etc
^^^^
You can tell that this guy is really posting from the UK, for all you
novice forgers 8-).
> graphic is a 12 band small "Technics" HIFI unit (horrors ! Where's the
> Clark Technic ? what about the headroom ??). The fact is that it works
> 2. What business are we in ?? Equipment Hire or Engineered PA. I'm not in
> Equipment Hire. Maybe the Technical Rider is really a hire list. I turn
> up and am reponsible for the production of sound from unloading to loading.
> If a band/venue want me to drop off a load of stuff to their spec and let
> them get on with it... This aint for me.
I think of the Production business as a combination of both. The service
you are selling is a package of rented equipment as a system, with people
to ensure that it is set up properly, functions effectively and sounds
adequate. The rider is a best guess (for mine anyway) of what minimum
equipment standards we need to meet the promoter/ticket holder/patron's
expectations.
Also, an important point for me is that if the promoter decides to buy
the performance and rider, instead of supplying himself, my rider is
what _Will_ be in the truck. No ifs or buts, maybe some ands. 8-)
> 3. I do most of my work for small bands and Venues (200-700 caps..). The last
> band I had a real hard time with was "The Power Of Dreams" who had done
> a couple of dates with U2. There FOH technical rider was a list of the
> gear the was in the U2 touring rig. The Promoter's PA budget was »250
> and the venue was 300 strong. We did a good solid 3K with 1.5K foldback
> and the bands engineer turned his nose up at the subs because he had been
> using Courts and the desk cause the like to have a gate and compressor
> on every channel ("like when we were on tour with U2").
I fell asleep, and dreamt of Neve, SSL, Gamble, Midas......8-)
But, seriously, 250 pounds? that's around 400 CDN! I might be able
to get a small rock kit for one night for 650, but that's calling in big
favours, BIG favours, and I'll still have to get a truck and do the gig
by myself.
Man, let me tell you, there would be a good possibility of the band
refusing to play if that was the promoter's budget.
> 4. I never understand Mic Requirements. I can maybe just see the point on
> vocals... But who cares what I put on snare ? I'm using Ramsa S2 clip
> mikes at the moment cause the quality is nice and it saves on stands..
> Geoff (?) from Toto (God Rest Him :-() turned me onto these. When I can
> afford more I'll use them on Toms as well and use the Beyer 201's for
> something else. The point is that most band engineers have never seen an
> S2 ("oh haven't you got an SM57 ?")... well actually NO I DON'T WHY DON'T
> YOU TRY THIS FOR GOD'S SAKE YOU SILLY PRAT.. YOU MIGHT LIKE IT !! (I can
> say these things among Friends can't I ?? because I have to smile and
> say nice persausive things to get them to use this brilliant piece of kit.
Well, at your market position (easy to tell I'm a commerce student by day, eh?)
the so-called engineers are very likely happy just to see that familiar piece
of gear, as I'm sure that when they do the big tour, they are allowed to
unmute the channels they are using, and move the faders, but not to touch
any eq, trim, or the mains. All under the supervision of the pa tech,
of course. 8-)
> 5. I always make a point of talking to the band/bands engineer befor the gig.
> I can then find out what the scoop is on the riders.. Often you can clear
> things up. The problem is when you are quoting against a job to the promotor
> who will NOT understand this stuff. You are quoting against a technical
> spec I will say.. "look this is crazy.. We don't have this stuff.. this
> is waht we do and the price is »xxx" but I know another firm will say
> "cool no problems .. the price is »xxx" and then the turn up with a rack
> full of Peavey Gear :-).
At which point, band takes the promoter aside, and tells him where to shove
his gig, if they were at all serious about the rider. I mean, even trying to
meet some of the rider is ok, but sometimes its just better to not even bother.
> Sorry if I offended Mur....
Ahh, I'm a big boy, I can take it. Besides, its exam time, and I'm crabby
and irritable, can't work, and do tend to blather on. 8-)
Mur
Cul...@ac.dal.ca
Cul...@ug.cs.dal.ca
I will be off-line from Dec 19 to Dec 27. So, if you have something
exciting to post, post it now, or mail it to me, so that I can blather
away when I get back.
John Henders
>>BTW: anybody got a good way to figure out the peaks in a monitor system
>Yes, we do it all the time with a readily available acoustic measuring system:
>Our Ears.
>You need to FLATTEN the eq, turn it up until it squeals at ONE frequency, then
>pull down the band on the eq. The first time is trial and error, so maybe you
>shouldn't do it at a gig.
As an alternate method, I often flatten the graph, turn the monitors
up until before feedback, back them off a bit, then check the mike,
while listening both for tone, and peaks. This can give you a really
good sounding monitor that will cut for the vocalist through the stage
sound. After getting a sound I like I'll run the volume up to check for
squeals, in case the vocalist wants more after the set begins. Of course
to do this efficiently, you need you're monitor graphs on stage, whether
you have an onstage monitor mix or not, but this isn't usually a
problem.
I've also found that being able to listen to what the singer
actually wants to hear from their monitor is important. Some vocalists
prefer to have a lot of bottom end on their voices, while others
(females especially), prefer none.
Galen Watts
>Galen Watts writes:
>>>BTW: anybody got a good way to figure out the peaks in a monitor system
>>>(with out a spectrum anylizer:):)
>>>Jack Van Breen (standard disclaimer, these are my own ...)
>> Yes, we do it all the time with a readily available acoustic measuring system
>> Our Ears.
>
>slowly boosting each band untill it rings and then pulling it down, the
The only problem with boosting the EQ is unless it's a very good one, you get
other frequencies outside of the band your tweaking going up and down also.
Sometimes the EQ is wired so octaves are summed on the same amp so you get
interaction of octaves and octaves are hard to tell apart in a noisy situation.
>
>Commonly referred to as pitch or ear training in music circles. I actually
>had a sax player tell me that the monitors were ringing just a bit at
>B below middle C, and boy, was he surprised that I got rid of it instantly.
>Also, as an aside, musicians never believe me when I tell them that
>really good engineers have really good pitch, but you gotta, not in terms
>of note but in frequency, and you have to get the harmonics, as well as
>the fundamental.
>
>> One thing that really bugs me is monitor engineers who use the 31 band eq's
>> for tone shaping, like when they grab 500-2400 Hz and pull it all down so the
>> "curve" on the sliders looks good. 31 band eq's were meant to NOTCH out peaks,
>> not as a Bass-Mid-Treble device.
>> You cannot boost and you cannot cut more than 6dB without changing the response
>> of the EQ outside of the band your adjusting.
>
>Well, sometimes you do what you have to do. If you have a howl at 6.3kHz,
>from really bad reflections, and a mic with _PRESENCE PEAK_(ARRGH), sometimes
>you have to do the big scoop to save the gig, obviously at the expense of the
>monitors.
Next time, try shifting the monitor cabinet a little, even as small as a few
inches can make a world of difference at 4k on up. We try to put the monitor
to one side of the mic stand so the reflections go to the other side and not
into the mic. WATCH OUT FOR COWBOY/BASEBALL HATS. If we're doing country, I
wear a cowboy hat when I check for rings. You'd be amazed at the difference.
( Or maybe not )
>
>
>But, seriously, I have seen a disturbing trend of dual operators locally,
>the band soundman, who mixes, and the PA tech, who fixes the graph over
>his shoulder. Even in Arena gigs. This is crazy! Why does anyone
>bother to pay a soundman for a tour if he has to be Babysat?
Because the band's guy is usually some band member's friend/brother/cousin/
lover who needs a job. When I babysit, I set the EQ before (when possible)
the band's people get there. If they readjust the EQ, I don't touch it, but
I do keep a sharp eye on the overall limiting. We did a gig where the band's
manager was the soundman. Never lend this guy a car, he drives with the pedal
on the floor constantly. This was the only gig I saw the promoter come out
with four security guys and haul the band's engineer away. Needless to say,
the sound improved immediately and immensly. In fact, I had to turn down the
band's offer to mix the rest of the tour.
Can't close the door when the walls cave in.
Galen Watts
Jim T. Rusby
>
>This statement seems to be the essence of your argument, if I
>understand correctly. The answer is, I care, because different mics
>do indeed affect the sound differently. Even within the realm of mics
>that are "good enough to do the job", their may well still be enough
>difference between the contenders to make an "artistic" decision
>with the choice.
>
>To me, there is much more to live sound than just "getting the job done".
>
>My experience has been with small clubs in this area for the most part,
>and I often get strange looks from house soundfolks when I want to use a
>different mic on our female vocalist. Why do I insist on using an EV
>ND/757 on her voice rather than a SM58? The answer is, with no flames
>intended, that if I have to explain it to you you just wouldn't get it.
>One either hears the difference, or not: crisp high end vs. no high end.
Do I infer correctly that you are speaking from the perspective of a band
member or sound engineer for a band? If so , your preference may be a
result of working with the same person night after night. You have made a
legitimate artistic decision. I think most of us would "get it" because
it gives you (and your client/coworkers) the sound you want.
Time after time artists tell me they ask for SM58's because they know what
to expect, not that it is necessarily the best choice. Go figure.....
>It's hard for us to argue this point, because it may just be that if I had
>the chance to personally hear your system with it's 12 band hifi eq I
>would think it was the greatest, but intellectually, and based upon my
>own experience, I would be highly surprised.
This is a great statement! It also applies to discussions of analog vs.
digital, spaced omni vs. coincident miking for recording, a/d
converters, tubes vs solid state etc etc.... Sometimes, a visiting
performer rep will come up to me and ask questions about whats in the rack
etc. I usually counter with "Hows it sound, answer mine and I'll answer
yours" . ( Since I am now in a house tech situation, I can get away
with this impertinent attitude- couldnt do it when I was for hire)
Likewise , I like to listen to other systems before examining their gear.
I always feel embarassed to have actually enjoyed listening to name brands
that I never took seriously.
Still, we all are obligated to give our clients and employers the benefit
of our experiences and the biases that have subsequently developed.
jr
Mark Payne
"new product" section is a unit that is an "automatic feedback eliminator".
I only had a quik squint at this but the basic idea is that it can detect up to
Mark Payne
>BTW: anybody got a good way to figure out the peaks in a monitor system
>(with out a spectrum anylizer:):)
>Jack Van Breen (standard disclaimer, these are my own ...)
My 93 Canford catalogue (Big UK gear distributor) just came through and
in it is an "automatic feedback eliminator". I have only scanned the info
on this but it has 9 different notch filters which it adjusts and assigns
to the unstable frequencies that it detects. It works inline.. all the while.
I need to check this out more because it sounds like a real lazy tool to have
in the front monitor mix. I can't imagine how shuch a thing could work reliably
.. I wonder what happens if the vocalist holds a note for any length of time..
:-)
I'll let you know..
Jack Van Breen x2666 dept220
>
>Likewise , I like to listen to other systems before examining their gear.
>I always feel embarassed to have actually enjoyed listening to name brands
>that I never took seriously.
>
Actually, I don't get embarresed any more:)
One of the BEST sounding systems I've heard in a LONG time was all
Peavey:):() (No REaLLY:):) It was at a locals stores anniversery party in
the parking lot. They were using the Peavey Mark VII (psudeo studio board)
and the HDH1(2???)(the big 3 way processed jobs:) Anyway, Very Clean, Clear
and Punchy ('till one bands soundman decided to mix in the red:):) I was
impressed to the point that if I ever get to write a 'rider' I'd spec it
as my system of choice;)
(See Chris, there ARe other's who like peavey:):)
--
Jack Van Breen (standard disclaimer, these are my own ...)
Jay Kadis
known for featuring new local acts. Their PA was the usual hodge-podge of old
Peavey gear with a well-worn Biamp board. The sound man was having a hard time
getting the house sound EQ'ed, so I glanced over his shoulder to see the MXR
10-band graphic that served the house feed: all the faders were in the full
cut position. I asked him why: "I like to use the mixer EQ" was his answer.
No wonder nothing ever sounded good. I introduced him to a little equalizer
theory (you know...overlapping bands, comb filters, etc.). While the sound
didn't improve dramatically, at least we didn't sound like we were singing
through a vocoder. The monitor system there was hopeless...side fills with
torn cones (!!) that you could see flapping in the breeze...so we actually
relied on the slap-back to get an idea what was getting out to the audience.
Builds character.
cul...@ac.dal.ca
> I (Mur) write:
>
>>Well, I'm guilty of "I'll only use a 535 on *his* vocal, because its the
>>only thing I've tried that suits" but then again, I will have asked for a
>>535 on the rider for lead vocal, or brought one. As for gating and such
>>with drums, that's just stupidity.
> Well thanks Murray. Personally, I like a gate on the kick drum, even
> in small rooms. Actually, especially in small rooms. But I bring my own,
> just so I don't have tyo deal with attitude.
Well, I think that the kick is a different issue than trying to gate/comp
or otherwise control a snare that is present more from stage volume than
from the PA, which is what Mark and I were talking about. For one thing,
the kick itself isn't going to overpower the PA without being in the mix.
Secondly, the typical rock kick sound is a radical strip eq, combined with
medium to hard gating, and possibly severe compression as well, compared
to the usually flatter snare strip. Note that this presumes that the drummer
can tune his kit, and has his snare sounding at least close to the way the
band thinks it should be.
Mur
Cul...@ac.dal.ca
Cul...@ug.cs.dal.ca
I'm offline from Dec 19 to Dec 27.
Chris Aaron Caudle
|> My 93 Canford catalogue (Big UK gear distributor) just came through and
|> in it is an "automatic feedback eliminator". I have only scanned the info
|> on this but it has 9 different notch filters which it adjusts and assigns
|> to the unstable frequencies that it detects. It works inline.. all the while.
|>
|> I need to check this out more because it sounds like a real lazy tool to have
|> in the front monitor mix. I can't imagine how shuch a thing could work reliably
|> .. I wonder what happens if the vocalist holds a note for any length of time..
|> :-)
I'm not sure if this is the model to which you are referring, but Sabine make a
model called FeedbackEliminator, if memory serves me correctly. A friend of mine
uses one on monitors in his band, and seems pleased with the results. I can't
comment much personnally, but he is a very experienced musician and sound tech, so
I think it would be at least worth looking into.
Chris Caudle
cau...@owlnet.rice.edu
cul...@ac.dal.ca
> One of the BEST sounding systems I've heard in a LONG time was all
> Peavey:):() (No REaLLY:):) It was at a locals stores anniversery party in
> the parking lot. They were using the Peavey Mark VII (psudeo studio board)
> and the HDH1(2???)(the big 3 way processed jobs:) Anyway, Very Clean, Clear
> and Punchy ('till one bands soundman decided to mix in the red:):) I was
> impressed to the point that if I ever get to write a 'rider' I'd spec it
> as my system of choice;)
Just to prove that I don't hate Peavey, I really don't mind these cabinets.
The only problem I've ever heard about with the cabinet is that there is
a tendancy for the phase plug in the horn to disintegrate. I've heard them
a few times, (never mixed) and I think that you can get a pretty good
sound from them. The cabinet is available, I guess, as a one piece,
or as a sub and mid/high combo, basically cutting the cabinet in half.
Note: I'm not endorsing the box as a fidelity box, but as a rock box.
Apogee 3X3, Meyer MSL3 = Fidelity, Martin RS1200, Elite MX2000 = Rock Box.
Just for those who are wondering if I'm lowering my standards.8-)
Mur
Cul...@ac.dal.ca
Cul...@ug.cs.dal.ca
Logan Shaw
>In article <1992Dec8.1...@ac.dal.ca> cul...@ac.dal.ca writes:
...
>>its Frank's monitor rack." Lo and behold, 2 CS1200s and a CS800.
>>Using a Bose 802/302 rig, (which, oddly enough works quite well for
>>folk/celtic/accoustic, although useless for anything else) really pointed
>>out to me:
>>1: the CS1200 sounds much better than the 800
>>2: They both sound better with DDT off
>>3: The QSC sounds better than both.
>>4: I hate Bose almost as much as Peavey
>
>Oh my! Peaveyphobia and Bosephobia all in one gig! I see now why you
>are tweeked! I hope you recover from the infection soon, I'm
>surprised that the hospital let's you log onto the NET....... :-)
I had Peavey-hate, and I decided to get over it for awhile. So, when my
church bought a new mixer, I said "Hey, why not go with that Peavey one"
for various reasons, including getting a good deal at a dealer we know.
During the purchase, I felt nervous, since I had knowingly gone along with
the purchase of Peavey equipment. "It's alright", I told myself, "you'll
get the mixer back to the church, hook up the new system, and it'll work
fine - you'll see." So, I take all the stuff, start hooking it up, and set
zillions of knobs, and then I turn it all on.
Lo and behold, I noticed that something was being noisy and producing hiss.
So, I took our cheap equalizer out of the signal path, and to my surprise,
the noise was still there. Where did I eventually determine that the
noise was coming from? The only Peavey component in the system - the
new mixer. It's basically o.k. - I can work around it and adjust things
to minimize it. However, I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO. My Peaveyphobia went into
remission for a few short days, and now it is back.
At that point I became aware of a startling trend - every piece of Peavey
equipment I've ever used has sounded noticeably bad in some way:
(1) Another of the church's sound systems has a pair of Peavey speakers.
No matter what I do, they just sound bad.
(2) My roommate has a Peavey keyboard amp. Even with the levels carefully
set and only his Ensoniq SQ-1 hooked up, I can't get rid of the hum. Not
to mention the fact that it just doesn't sound very good at all.
(3) The church has Peavey stage monitors, only we don't use them because
the little attenuator knobs turn freely and continuously instead of only
one turn, and their sound is comparable to the water damaged paper cone
factory installed 4x10" speakers installed my 1980 Oldsmobile.
(4) Come to think of it, every time I have encountered a Peavey monitor,
it also has sounded very bad. In fact, I don't think any of the ~10
models of speakers I've judged actually sounded decent. I've *never*
noticed a speaker sounding pretty decent and then seen the word "Peavey"
on it.
etc...
They way I see it, Peavey is to sound equipment as Sears is to clothing.
Usually, it's cheap and it works, but nobody in their right mind actually
would prefer it if they had a choice.
I have the same basic opinion about Bose, though I don't have very much
personal experience to back that up. (What I do have has been negative,
of course.)
Adios,
Logan
--
_________-_________
________---________
_________-_________
_________-_________
Jim T. Rusby
>
>My 93 Canford catalogue (Big UK gear distributor) just came through and
>in it is an "automatic feedback eliminator". I have only scanned the info
>on this but it has 9 different notch filters which it adjusts and assigns
>to the unstable frequencies that it detects. It works inline.. all the while.
>
This is probably the Sabine Feedback Exterminator. I tried one out and was
quite impressed with the results. Its in mono, so you need one per feed.
We used it on a vocal jazz setup last year and had no problems at all.
The only thing it takes is a few minutes to memorize the resonant freqs
and after that it is pretty smart.
The only thing I found was that the control of monitor eq was taken from
me. Even using a board parametric to crisp up the mix (at the artist
request) or other such tweaks requires re-setting the device to the new
conditions. They arent cheap, whereas you can buy perfectly reasonable
eq for less.
Otherwise, its about time something like this came up.
jim
>
John Henders
>John Henders writes:
>> (Mur) wrote:
>> >>>..........As for gating and such
>>>with drums, that's just stupidity.
>> Well thanks Murray. Personally, I like a gate on the kick drum, even
>> in small rooms.
>
<discussion on how kick is actually different than other drums
deleted>
Well, see, here's where we get in trouble with sweeping
generalizations. ;-) Instead of saying thuings like " all Peavey gear is
sh*t", we should say something like " Every piece of gear I've ever used
by Peavey has definately not sounded as good as equivalent gear from
other manufacturers. in similar situations". At least that's my personal
opinion. The only exception I've found are those 16x6 monitor boards
which seem to do the job well enough, as bands don't complain abnout
them, though it's difficult to say because I haven't had to sit and
listen to one all night. One PA company I did monitors for had a 40
channel Mark II monitor board that wasn't to bad. I like the feature on
it that let you set the pfl volume separately for channels and mixes.
One thing that people in other parts of the world should realise is
that Canada, for some reason, has a fairly high standard of gear used at
gifgs for the level of the bands using it as compared to anywhere in the
world that I've heard of except Australia. Bar bands in Eastern and
Western Canada were touring with 3 way Martin setups and 40k of lights
10 years ago. When someone mentions a budget of UK250 for shows, as
Murray said, it would be difficult to get that kind of pricing here
without pulling in some serious favours, and you'd have to set it up
yourself.
earthbound misfit, I
> [...EQing a PA...]
>
> As an alternate method, I often flatten the graph, turn the monitors
> up until before feedback, back them off a bit, then check the mike,
> while listening both for tone, and peaks. This can give you a really
> good sounding monitor that will cut for the vocalist through the stage
> sound.
This is interesting, because I've noticed something similar. Possibly it's my
inexperience, but when I'm adjusting the monitor EQs I find that just standing
at the desk and adjusting for howls will not sufficiently flatten the
response, it seems fine with plenty of headroom in the monitors before things
will start to feedback until someone uses a mic, when it quickly becomes
apparent that things are still ringing. I've found it's important to get up on
stage by the main vocal mics and listen to the reponse through the monitors
and adjust for that.
- k
--
Craig Harding kil...@acme.gen.nz ACME BBS +64 6 3551342
"Jub'er lbh pnyyvat n obmb?"
Galen Watts
>jhen...@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca (John Henders) writes:
>> [...EQing a PA...]
>> As an alternate method, I often flatten the graph, turn the monitors
>> up until before feedback, back them off a bit, then check the mike,
>> while listening both for tone, and peaks. This can give you a really
>inexperience, but when I'm adjusting the monitor EQs I find that just standing
>at the desk and adjusting for howls will not sufficiently flatten the
>response, it seems fine with plenty of headroom in the monitors before things
>will start to feedback until someone uses a mic, when it quickly becomes
>apparent that things are still ringing. I've found it's important to get up on
>stage by the main vocal mics and listen to the reponse through the monitors
>and adjust for that.
With onstage monitors, the placement of anything onstage will affect the
resonant modes (feedback), even the location of people. One of the best
things I've found that really works is (if time permits) to get a few
stagehands and have them stand at the mics with their fingers in their ears.
Ring out the system this way, and you'll have minimally few problems when
the band comes on for soundcheck. It even helps to have someone sit in
the drum kit (no playing!!!) and ring that out, but you know the drummer
will come on and change everything anyway.
SCREEEEECH!!!!!!
Galen Watts, KF0YJ
John Henders
gw21...@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Galen Watts) writes:
>With onstage monitors, the placement of anything onstage will affect the
>resonant modes (feedback), even the location of people. One of the best
>things I've found that really works is (if time permits) to get a few
>stagehands and have them stand at the mics with their fingers in their ears.
>Ring out the system this way, and you'll have minimally few problems when
>the band comes on for soundcheck. It even helps to have someone sit in
>the drum kit (no playing!!!) and ring that out, but you know the drummer
>will come on and change everything anyway.
If you have stagehands, try the opposite approach sometime. Get the
stagehand to adjust the eq at your direction, while you talk into the
mike and tell him to boost or cut frequencies. Try to get the monitor to
sound good vocally. This assumes you can identify frequencies by ear,
but if you can't it's good ear training.