PA help please! 12" top suggestions
Last response: in Home Audio
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Hi,
What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock band
playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control of the
mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole band
through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
I'm thinking of used gear, with a budget (for just the tops) of around
£1000 max, or about $1800 ...
At the moment I have 2 pairs of EV S200's for tops (they are rated at
122db each, not sure how true that is), and I'm thinking they may not be
able to take the strain; though you can get some pretty deafening vocals
out of them..
The subs are 18". Previously I've used full range JBL SF15's (and no
subs) .. not good speakers, lots of EQ required there... But
surprisingly the volume seemed enough. If the EV S200's can keep up
with those volume wise, they (S200's) + the 18" subs may be enough.
I like the look of the EAW LA212's but they are out of my price range,
and I cannot find any second hand in the UK. Perhaps some used EAW
FR129z's would be right for this, but again, a bit pricey brand new.
Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
Any thoughts people?
I've got until mid July!
Cheers,
Mark.
Hi,
What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock band
playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control of the
mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole band
through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
I'm thinking of used gear, with a budget (for just the tops) of around
£1000 max, or about $1800 ...
At the moment I have 2 pairs of EV S200's for tops (they are rated at
122db each, not sure how true that is), and I'm thinking they may not be
able to take the strain; though you can get some pretty deafening vocals
out of them..
The subs are 18". Previously I've used full range JBL SF15's (and no
subs) .. not good speakers, lots of EQ required there... But
surprisingly the volume seemed enough. If the EV S200's can keep up
with those volume wise, they (S200's) + the 18" subs may be enough.
I like the look of the EAW LA212's but they are out of my price range,
and I cannot find any second hand in the UK. Perhaps some used EAW
FR129z's would be right for this, but again, a bit pricey brand new.
Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
Any thoughts people?
I've got until mid July!
Cheers,
Mark.
More about : top suggestions
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
"Mark" <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote in message
news:ZbGdnaFyNeSMaQzfRVnysw@pipex.net...
> Hi,
> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock band
> playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control of the mix
> I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole band through the
> PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
>
> I'm thinking of used gear, with a budget (for just the tops) of around
> £1000 max, or about $1800 ...
>
> At the moment I have 2 pairs of EV S200's for tops (they are rated at
> 122db each, not sure how true that is), and I'm thinking they may not be
> able to take the strain; though you can get some pretty deafening vocals
> out of them..
>
> The subs are 18". Previously I've used full range JBL SF15's (and no
> subs) .. not good speakers, lots of EQ required there... But surprisingly
> the volume seemed enough. If the EV S200's can keep up with those volume
> wise, they (S200's) + the 18" subs may be enough.
>
> I like the look of the EAW LA212's but they are out of my price range, and
> I cannot find any second hand in the UK. Perhaps some used EAW FR129z's
> would be right for this, but again, a bit pricey brand new.
>
> Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
>
> Any thoughts people?
>
> I've got until mid July!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark.
look at the Renkus Heinz TRX-121
www.rh.com
--
Michael Gaster
Live Performance Solutions Inc.
"Mark" <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote in message
news:ZbGdnaFyNeSMaQzfRVnysw@pipex.net...
> Hi,
> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock band
> playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control of the mix
> I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole band through the
> PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
>
> I'm thinking of used gear, with a budget (for just the tops) of around
> £1000 max, or about $1800 ...
>
> At the moment I have 2 pairs of EV S200's for tops (they are rated at
> 122db each, not sure how true that is), and I'm thinking they may not be
> able to take the strain; though you can get some pretty deafening vocals
> out of them..
>
> The subs are 18". Previously I've used full range JBL SF15's (and no
> subs) .. not good speakers, lots of EQ required there... But surprisingly
> the volume seemed enough. If the EV S200's can keep up with those volume
> wise, they (S200's) + the 18" subs may be enough.
>
> I like the look of the EAW LA212's but they are out of my price range, and
> I cannot find any second hand in the UK. Perhaps some used EAW FR129z's
> would be right for this, but again, a bit pricey brand new.
>
> Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
>
> Any thoughts people?
>
> I've got until mid July!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark.
look at the Renkus Heinz TRX-121
www.rh.com
--
Michael Gaster
Live Performance Solutions Inc.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Mark wrote:
> Hi,
> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock band
> playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control of the
> mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole band
> through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
Wrong approach.
For small audiences let the band use their back line as they see fit ( use a
crowbar on the lead guitarist if needs be - they always play too loud otherwise
) and just use the PA for vocals.
Graham
Mark wrote:
> Hi,
> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock band
> playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control of the
> mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole band
> through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
Wrong approach.
For small audiences let the band use their back line as they see fit ( use a
crowbar on the lead guitarist if needs be - they always play too loud otherwise
) and just use the PA for vocals.
Graham
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Mark wrote:
> Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
For *80* ppl !!!! ?
Are you actually *intending* to make their ears bleed ?
That's *highly* irresponsible practice. I've comfortably used around 600W to
fill a pub with around 200 ppl in it with vocals and keys going through the PA.
Graham
Mark wrote:
> Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
For *80* ppl !!!! ?
Are you actually *intending* to make their ears bleed ?
That's *highly* irresponsible practice. I've comfortably used around 600W to
fill a pub with around 200 ppl in it with vocals and keys going through the PA.
Graham
Related ressources
- Building new liquid cooled pc need some finishing suggestions please - Forum
- Those new Bose PA speakers - Forum
- Top -10 Technology Disappointments in 2006 - Forum
- How to build a server - or help choosing a pci/ pa -dss compliant host - Forum
- Equipment for a home studio/ PA and hifi center - Forum
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
For future expansion :-) Its not an install.
Mark.
--
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>
>>Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
>
>
> For *80* ppl !!!! ?
>
> Are you actually *intending* to make their ears bleed ?
>
> That's *highly* irresponsible practice. I've comfortably used around 600W to
> fill a pub with around 200 ppl in it with vocals and keys going through the PA.
>
> Graham
>
For future expansion :-) Its not an install.
Mark.
--
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>
>>Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
>
>
> For *80* ppl !!!! ?
>
> Are you actually *intending* to make their ears bleed ?
>
> That's *highly* irresponsible practice. I've comfortably used around 600W to
> fill a pub with around 200 ppl in it with vocals and keys going through the PA.
>
> Graham
>
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Pooh Bear wrote:
>
> Mark wrote:
>
>
>>Hi,
>>What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock band
>>playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control of the
>>mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole band
>>through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
>
>
> Wrong approach.
>
> For small audiences let the band use their back line as they see fit ( use a
> crowbar on the lead guitarist if needs be - they always play too loud otherwise
> ) and just use the PA for vocals.
The local clubs around here with installs seem to put the guitars
through the PA too. I do see what you are saying though; but doesn't
that make it harder to get a good mix out front? What is wrong with the
approach I mentioned? I am still learning so appreciate the advise.
What would you say the crossover point is in number of people (or size
of room) to start doing it how I mentioned?
Cheers,
Mark.
--
Pooh Bear wrote:
>
> Mark wrote:
>
>
>>Hi,
>>What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock band
>>playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control of the
>>mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole band
>>through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
>
>
> Wrong approach.
>
> For small audiences let the band use their back line as they see fit ( use a
> crowbar on the lead guitarist if needs be - they always play too loud otherwise
> ) and just use the PA for vocals.
The local clubs around here with installs seem to put the guitars
through the PA too. I do see what you are saying though; but doesn't
that make it harder to get a good mix out front? What is wrong with the
approach I mentioned? I am still learning so appreciate the advise.
What would you say the crossover point is in number of people (or size
of room) to start doing it how I mentioned?
Cheers,
Mark.
--
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Mark <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
>
>The local clubs around here with installs seem to put the guitars
>through the PA too. I do see what you are saying though; but doesn't
>that make it harder to get a good mix out front? What is wrong with the
>approach I mentioned? I am still learning so appreciate the advise.
It depends on the band.
If the band can balance themselves, a small amp should do just fine.
Then the PA guy only has to balance the vocals to fit in with the backline.
If the band cannot balance themselves, running guitar through the PA
gives the ability to balance the guitar with the bass and drums.
>What would you say the crossover point is in number of people (or size
>of room) to start doing it how I mentioned?
It has as much to do with the band as the room size, but I have seen
500-seat theatres be perfectly well-covered with a small backline. On
the other hand, I have seen bands with totally out of control drummers
where it was impossible to balance them at all in a small room.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Mark <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
>
>The local clubs around here with installs seem to put the guitars
>through the PA too. I do see what you are saying though; but doesn't
>that make it harder to get a good mix out front? What is wrong with the
>approach I mentioned? I am still learning so appreciate the advise.
It depends on the band.
If the band can balance themselves, a small amp should do just fine.
Then the PA guy only has to balance the vocals to fit in with the backline.
If the band cannot balance themselves, running guitar through the PA
gives the ability to balance the guitar with the bass and drums.
>What would you say the crossover point is in number of people (or size
>of room) to start doing it how I mentioned?
It has as much to do with the band as the room size, but I have seen
500-seat theatres be perfectly well-covered with a small backline. On
the other hand, I have seen bands with totally out of control drummers
where it was impossible to balance them at all in a small room.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>
>>Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
>
>
> For *80* ppl !!!! ?
>
> Are you actually *intending* to make their ears bleed ?
>
> That's *highly* irresponsible practice. I've comfortably used around 600W to
> fill a pub with around 200 ppl in it with vocals and keys going through the PA.
>
> Graham
>
The PLX3002 can do just over 500 watts per channel into 8 ohms. The
S200's are 300 watts, and 8 ohms. Using a PLX3002, I am not even quiet
making the double the speaker power rule!
The other PLX3002 is for subs.
Cheers.
Mark.
--
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>
>>Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
>
>
> For *80* ppl !!!! ?
>
> Are you actually *intending* to make their ears bleed ?
>
> That's *highly* irresponsible practice. I've comfortably used around 600W to
> fill a pub with around 200 ppl in it with vocals and keys going through the PA.
>
> Graham
>
The PLX3002 can do just over 500 watts per channel into 8 ohms. The
S200's are 300 watts, and 8 ohms. Using a PLX3002, I am not even quiet
making the double the speaker power rule!
The other PLX3002 is for subs.
Cheers.
Mark.
--
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Mark wrote:
> Pooh Bear wrote:
> >
> > Mark wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock band
> >>playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control of the
> >>mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole band
> >>through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
> >
> >
> > Wrong approach.
> >
> > For small audiences let the band use their back line as they see fit ( use a
> > crowbar on the lead guitarist if needs be - they always play too loud otherwise
> > ) and just use the PA for vocals.
>
> The local clubs around here with installs seem to put the guitars
> through the PA too.
If it's a larger club then that makes sense.
> I do see what you are saying though; but doesn't
> that make it harder to get a good mix out front?
Probably easier for the size of audience you're talking about actually. Ppl will be
able to hear the vocals instead of a wall of sound.
> What is wrong with the
> approach I mentioned? I am still learning so appreciate the advise.
Don't *over-amplify* ! It just gets a mess.
> What would you say the crossover point is in number of people (or size
> of room) to start doing it how I mentioned?
Maybe >100-200 as a rough guide. Depends on the band's back line too. If they only
have 20W amps they may need some help ! If they have the more normal 100W then it's
unlikely they need any PA enhancement up to an audience of maybe 300. It all depends
though, playing style etc etc.....
Graham
Mark wrote:
> Pooh Bear wrote:
> >
> > Mark wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock band
> >>playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control of the
> >>mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole band
> >>through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
> >
> >
> > Wrong approach.
> >
> > For small audiences let the band use their back line as they see fit ( use a
> > crowbar on the lead guitarist if needs be - they always play too loud otherwise
> > ) and just use the PA for vocals.
>
> The local clubs around here with installs seem to put the guitars
> through the PA too.
If it's a larger club then that makes sense.
> I do see what you are saying though; but doesn't
> that make it harder to get a good mix out front?
Probably easier for the size of audience you're talking about actually. Ppl will be
able to hear the vocals instead of a wall of sound.
> What is wrong with the
> approach I mentioned? I am still learning so appreciate the advise.
Don't *over-amplify* ! It just gets a mess.
> What would you say the crossover point is in number of people (or size
> of room) to start doing it how I mentioned?
Maybe >100-200 as a rough guide. Depends on the band's back line too. If they only
have 20W amps they may need some help ! If they have the more normal 100W then it's
unlikely they need any PA enhancement up to an audience of maybe 300. It all depends
though, playing style etc etc.....
Graham
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Mark wrote:
> Pooh Bear wrote:
> > Mark wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
> >
> >
> > For *80* ppl !!!! ?
> >
> > Are you actually *intending* to make their ears bleed ?
> >
> > That's *highly* irresponsible practice. I've comfortably used around 600W to
> > fill a pub with around 200 ppl in it with vocals and keys going through the PA.
> >
> > Graham
> >
>
> The PLX3002 can do just over 500 watts per channel into 8 ohms.
It's a rather more economical use of an amplifier to use its 4 ohm rating to be
honest..
> The
> S200's are 300 watts, and 8 ohms. Using a PLX3002, I am not even quiet
> making the double the speaker power rule!
>
> The other PLX3002 is for subs.
If you stick to amplifying vocals you don't even need the subs.
Graham
Mark wrote:
> Pooh Bear wrote:
> > Mark wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Powering all this is 2 * QSC PLX3002's ..
> >
> >
> > For *80* ppl !!!! ?
> >
> > Are you actually *intending* to make their ears bleed ?
> >
> > That's *highly* irresponsible practice. I've comfortably used around 600W to
> > fill a pub with around 200 ppl in it with vocals and keys going through the PA.
> >
> > Graham
> >
>
> The PLX3002 can do just over 500 watts per channel into 8 ohms.
It's a rather more economical use of an amplifier to use its 4 ohm rating to be
honest..
> The
> S200's are 300 watts, and 8 ohms. Using a PLX3002, I am not even quiet
> making the double the speaker power rule!
>
> The other PLX3002 is for subs.
If you stick to amplifying vocals you don't even need the subs.
Graham
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Scott Dorsey wrote:
> If the band cannot balance themselves, running guitar through the PA
> gives the ability to balance the guitar with the bass and drums.
IME guitar is the very last instrument that needs any help. It's an ego thing I
think.
He may feel he ( for it is always a *he* ) needs a mic in front of the cab
though. Just leave the channel turned down.
Graham
Scott Dorsey wrote:
> If the band cannot balance themselves, running guitar through the PA
> gives the ability to balance the guitar with the bass and drums.
IME guitar is the very last instrument that needs any help. It's an ego thing I
think.
He may feel he ( for it is always a *he* ) needs a mic in front of the cab
though. Just leave the channel turned down.
Graham
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
In article <429233F4.4B918475@hotmail.com>,
Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> If the band cannot balance themselves, running guitar through the PA
>> gives the ability to balance the guitar with the bass and drums.
>
>IME guitar is the very last instrument that needs any help. It's an ego thing I
>think.
Often.
>He may feel he ( for it is always a *he* ) needs a mic in front of the cab
>though. Just leave the channel turned down.
This is basically what we do at festivals. We put a microphone on
everything that could possibly have a microphone on it, then we have
the band play and then figure out which microphones we need to use.
Sometimes it's not anywhere near as many as are up. It's better to
have a mike on stage that you aren't using than to need a mike on
stage that you don't have.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
In article <429233F4.4B918475@hotmail.com>,
Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> If the band cannot balance themselves, running guitar through the PA
>> gives the ability to balance the guitar with the bass and drums.
>
>IME guitar is the very last instrument that needs any help. It's an ego thing I
>think.
Often.
>He may feel he ( for it is always a *he* ) needs a mic in front of the cab
>though. Just leave the channel turned down.
This is basically what we do at festivals. We put a microphone on
everything that could possibly have a microphone on it, then we have
the band play and then figure out which microphones we need to use.
Sometimes it's not anywhere near as many as are up. It's better to
have a mike on stage that you aren't using than to need a mike on
stage that you don't have.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>> Pooh Bear wrote:
>>>
>>> Mark wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock
>>>> band playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full
>>>> control of the mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put
>>>> the whole band through the PA, so we are talking a couple of
>>>> guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
>>>
>>>
>>> Wrong approach.
>>>
>>> For small audiences let the band use their back line as they see
>>> fit ( use a crowbar on the lead guitarist if needs be - they always
>>> play too loud otherwise ) and just use the PA for vocals.
>>
>> The local clubs around here with installs seem to put the guitars
>> through the PA too.
>
> If it's a larger club then that makes sense.
>
>> I do see what you are saying though; but doesn't
>> that make it harder to get a good mix out front?
>
> Probably easier for the size of audience you're talking about
> actually. Ppl will be able to hear the vocals instead of a wall of
> sound.
>
>> What is wrong with the
>> approach I mentioned? I am still learning so appreciate the advise.
>
> Don't *over-amplify* ! It just gets a mess.
>
>> What would you say the crossover point is in number of people (or
>> size of room) to start doing it how I mentioned?
>
> Maybe >100-200 as a rough guide. Depends on the band's back line too.
> If they only have 20W amps they may need some help ! If they have the
> more normal 100W then it's unlikely they need any PA enhancement up
> to an audience of maybe 300. It all depends though, playing style etc
> etc.....
Its not a matter of volume in micing up the whole band, its one of the
best sound. Drums sound better, as does the mix of instruments to the
majority of the audience.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>> Pooh Bear wrote:
>>>
>>> Mark wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock
>>>> band playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full
>>>> control of the mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put
>>>> the whole band through the PA, so we are talking a couple of
>>>> guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
>>>
>>>
>>> Wrong approach.
>>>
>>> For small audiences let the band use their back line as they see
>>> fit ( use a crowbar on the lead guitarist if needs be - they always
>>> play too loud otherwise ) and just use the PA for vocals.
>>
>> The local clubs around here with installs seem to put the guitars
>> through the PA too.
>
> If it's a larger club then that makes sense.
>
>> I do see what you are saying though; but doesn't
>> that make it harder to get a good mix out front?
>
> Probably easier for the size of audience you're talking about
> actually. Ppl will be able to hear the vocals instead of a wall of
> sound.
>
>> What is wrong with the
>> approach I mentioned? I am still learning so appreciate the advise.
>
> Don't *over-amplify* ! It just gets a mess.
>
>> What would you say the crossover point is in number of people (or
>> size of room) to start doing it how I mentioned?
>
> Maybe >100-200 as a rough guide. Depends on the band's back line too.
> If they only have 20W amps they may need some help ! If they have the
> more normal 100W then it's unlikely they need any PA enhancement up
> to an audience of maybe 300. It all depends though, playing style etc
> etc.....
Its not a matter of volume in micing up the whole band, its one of the
best sound. Drums sound better, as does the mix of instruments to the
majority of the audience.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock
>> band playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control
>> of the mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole
>> band through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums,
>> bass, vocals.
>
> Wrong approach.
I disagree completely. The suggestion is an excellent one.
>
> For small audiences let the band use their back line as they see fit
> ( use a crowbar on the lead guitarist if needs be - they always play
> too loud otherwise ) and just use the PA for vocals.
>
Full micing of the band always sounds better. I always recommend this,
no matter what the audience size. The difference in sound between an
unmic'ed and mic'ed band is tremendous. Its not about volume, but sound.
Drums are certainly sound better. The overall sound is just more full
and together when its all mic'ed up.
Unmixed bands have one guitar over there and another over somewher else
such that some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix. Stereo only
works when you are in a small range in the middle of the sound field.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock
>> band playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control
>> of the mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole
>> band through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums,
>> bass, vocals.
>
> Wrong approach.
I disagree completely. The suggestion is an excellent one.
>
> For small audiences let the band use their back line as they see fit
> ( use a crowbar on the lead guitarist if needs be - they always play
> too loud otherwise ) and just use the PA for vocals.
>
Full micing of the band always sounds better. I always recommend this,
no matter what the audience size. The difference in sound between an
unmic'ed and mic'ed band is tremendous. Its not about volume, but sound.
Drums are certainly sound better. The overall sound is just more full
and together when its all mic'ed up.
Unmixed bands have one guitar over there and another over somewher else
such that some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix. Stereo only
works when you are in a small range in the middle of the sound field.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
On 5/24/05 3:08 AM, in article
BpAke.90311$a9.52393@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk, "Kevin Aylward"
<see_website@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:
> Pooh Bear wrote:
>> Mark wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock
>>> band playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control
>>> of the mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole
>>> band through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums,
>>> bass, vocals.
>>
>> Wrong approach.
>
> I disagree completely. The suggestion is an excellent one.
If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
>
> Unmixed bands have one guitar over there and another over somewher else
> such that some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix. Stereo only
> works when you are in a small range in the middle of the sound field.
Been watching, recording, helping and now playing with a band that does
EXACTLY this and y'know... It WORKS DANDY. Myself and non-deaf friends and
musical aquiantances have prowled different rooms with this group and
NOWHERE does "some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix".
What are we doing that you ain't?
On 5/24/05 3:08 AM, in article
BpAke.90311$a9.52393@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk, "Kevin Aylward"
<see_website@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:
> Pooh Bear wrote:
>> Mark wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock
>>> band playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full control
>>> of the mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put the whole
>>> band through the PA, so we are talking a couple of guitars, drums,
>>> bass, vocals.
>>
>> Wrong approach.
>
> I disagree completely. The suggestion is an excellent one.
If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
>
> Unmixed bands have one guitar over there and another over somewher else
> such that some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix. Stereo only
> works when you are in a small range in the middle of the sound field.
Been watching, recording, helping and now playing with a band that does
EXACTLY this and y'know... It WORKS DANDY. Myself and non-deaf friends and
musical aquiantances have prowled different rooms with this group and
NOWHERE does "some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix".
What are we doing that you ain't?
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
SSJVCmag <ten@nozirev.gamnocssj.com> wrote:
>On 5/24/05 3:08 AM, in article
>BpAke.90311$a9.52393@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk, "Kevin Aylward"
>>
>> Unmixed bands have one guitar over there and another over somewher else
>> such that some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix. Stereo only
>> works when you are in a small range in the middle of the sound field.
>
>Been watching, recording, helping and now playing with a band that does
>EXACTLY this and y'know... It WORKS DANDY. Myself and non-deaf friends and
>musical aquiantances have prowled different rooms with this group and
>NOWHERE does "some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix".
>What are we doing that you ain't?
What you are doing is first of all not panning everything too far too
the edges, and secondly you are probably working in rooms that are
fairly deep and narrow.
The problem with stereo PA is that in some seats, people can hear only
one speaker. That's fine, IF the panning isn't too outrageous. But
if you have the guitar panned hard left and people sitting in front of
the righthand stack, they won't hear any guitar.
A lot of folks like doing silly stereo spectacular tricks, like panning
bongos hard left and right. This can be really neat if you're sitting in
the center. On the far seats, it is not neat at all.
In a narrow and deep room this is much less of an issue because most
folks are far enough from the speaker stacks and nobody is sitting outside
of the stacks. In a wide room this can be serious.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
SSJVCmag <ten@nozirev.gamnocssj.com> wrote:
>On 5/24/05 3:08 AM, in article
>BpAke.90311$a9.52393@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk, "Kevin Aylward"
>>
>> Unmixed bands have one guitar over there and another over somewher else
>> such that some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix. Stereo only
>> works when you are in a small range in the middle of the sound field.
>
>Been watching, recording, helping and now playing with a band that does
>EXACTLY this and y'know... It WORKS DANDY. Myself and non-deaf friends and
>musical aquiantances have prowled different rooms with this group and
>NOWHERE does "some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix".
>What are we doing that you ain't?
What you are doing is first of all not panning everything too far too
the edges, and secondly you are probably working in rooms that are
fairly deep and narrow.
The problem with stereo PA is that in some seats, people can hear only
one speaker. That's fine, IF the panning isn't too outrageous. But
if you have the guitar panned hard left and people sitting in front of
the righthand stack, they won't hear any guitar.
A lot of folks like doing silly stereo spectacular tricks, like panning
bongos hard left and right. This can be really neat if you're sitting in
the center. On the far seats, it is not neat at all.
In a narrow and deep room this is much less of an issue because most
folks are far enough from the speaker stacks and nobody is sitting outside
of the stacks. In a wide room this can be serious.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
SSJVCmag wrote:
> On 5/24/05 3:08 AM, in article
> BpAke.90311$a9.52393@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk, "Kevin Aylward"
> <see_website@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Pooh Bear wrote:
>>> Mark wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock
>>>> band playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full
>>>> control of the mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put
>>>> the whole band through the PA, so we are talking a couple of
>>>> guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
>>>
>>> Wrong approach.
>>
>> I disagree completely. The suggestion is an excellent one.
>
> If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear
> haul.
>
>
>>
>> Unmixed bands have one guitar over there and another over somewher
>> else such that some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix.
>> Stereo only works when you are in a small range in the middle of the
>> sound field.
>
> Been watching, recording, helping and now playing with a band that
> does EXACTLY this and y'know... It WORKS DANDY.
Your rntitled to yur opinion. I still disagree.
>Myself and non-deaf
> friends and musical aquiantances have prowled different rooms with
> this group and NOWHERE does "some parts of the audience can't get a
> decent mix". What are we doing that you ain't?
Nothing. You like a different sound to me, and lots of others who also
think stereo is a no no for band use.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
SSJVCmag wrote:
> On 5/24/05 3:08 AM, in article
> BpAke.90311$a9.52393@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk, "Kevin Aylward"
> <see_website@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Pooh Bear wrote:
>>> Mark wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> What 12" tops would people recommend for a PA to cater for a rock
>>>> band playing to between 80 and 100 people indoors? For full
>>>> control of the mix I intend to keep the stage volume down and put
>>>> the whole band through the PA, so we are talking a couple of
>>>> guitars, drums, bass, vocals.
>>>
>>> Wrong approach.
>>
>> I disagree completely. The suggestion is an excellent one.
>
> If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear
> haul.
>
>
>>
>> Unmixed bands have one guitar over there and another over somewher
>> else such that some parts of the audience can't get a decent mix.
>> Stereo only works when you are in a small range in the middle of the
>> sound field.
>
> Been watching, recording, helping and now playing with a band that
> does EXACTLY this and y'know... It WORKS DANDY.
Your rntitled to yur opinion. I still disagree.
>Myself and non-deaf
> friends and musical aquiantances have prowled different rooms with
> this group and NOWHERE does "some parts of the audience can't get a
> decent mix". What are we doing that you ain't?
Nothing. You like a different sound to me, and lots of others who also
think stereo is a no no for band use.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
On Tue, 24 May 2005 14:54:24 +0000, SSJVCmag wrote:
>What are we doing that you ain't?
Actually playing music & using your ears, maybe?
Instead of making assumptions about what it will sound like because it
looks good on paper?
It's a lot like designing mic preamps that way, huh?
On Tue, 24 May 2005 14:54:24 +0000, SSJVCmag wrote:
>What are we doing that you ain't?
Actually playing music & using your ears, maybe?
Instead of making assumptions about what it will sound like because it
looks good on paper?
It's a lot like designing mic preamps that way, huh?
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
SSJVCmag wrote:
> If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver in a
cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing something?
Not being funny, I am still learning.
Mark.
--
SSJVCmag wrote:
> If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver in a
cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing something?
Not being funny, I am still learning.
Mark.
--
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
In article <JKmdnVhoUsL72w7fRVnyhA@pipex.net>,
Mark <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
>SSJVCmag wrote:
>> If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
>
>You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver in a
>cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing something?
>Not being funny, I am still learning.
No, a guitar amp is a funny thing. It's a single midrange driver in a
cabinet with an open back. It's intended to be operated at levels that
make the driver break up. It's not supposed to reproduce the top end
or the bottom end at all.
The guitar amp is not intended to be a reproduction device... it is not
supposed to accurately reproduce the signal given it. It's part of
a musical instrument, and the distortion modes and cone breakup are part
of the sound and part of why people choose a particular amp.
A PA speaker needs to reproduce a much wider range of frequencies, and
it needs to be a much more accurate device. You don't want to run your
PA cabinet at levels where the cone starts to breakup. It's a sealed
cabinet with a resonant frequency set so that the low end is extended down
to the free air resonance of the driver, or even lower. It's a different
thing altogether.
There is a wonderful quote from Steve Miller in the liner notes to the
Monterey Pop Festival, in which he describes what happened when some
misiguided audio folks convinced him to use Klipsch La Scalas as guitar
cabinets. He says it "made his guitar go straight ahead ten miles and
sound it was coming through a telephone." The upper midrange rolloff
and lower midrange distortion of a guitar cabinet are good for guitars.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
In article <JKmdnVhoUsL72w7fRVnyhA@pipex.net>,
Mark <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
>SSJVCmag wrote:
>> If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
>
>You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver in a
>cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing something?
>Not being funny, I am still learning.
No, a guitar amp is a funny thing. It's a single midrange driver in a
cabinet with an open back. It's intended to be operated at levels that
make the driver break up. It's not supposed to reproduce the top end
or the bottom end at all.
The guitar amp is not intended to be a reproduction device... it is not
supposed to accurately reproduce the signal given it. It's part of
a musical instrument, and the distortion modes and cone breakup are part
of the sound and part of why people choose a particular amp.
A PA speaker needs to reproduce a much wider range of frequencies, and
it needs to be a much more accurate device. You don't want to run your
PA cabinet at levels where the cone starts to breakup. It's a sealed
cabinet with a resonant frequency set so that the low end is extended down
to the free air resonance of the driver, or even lower. It's a different
thing altogether.
There is a wonderful quote from Steve Miller in the liner notes to the
Monterey Pop Festival, in which he describes what happened when some
misiguided audio folks convinced him to use Klipsch La Scalas as guitar
cabinets. He says it "made his guitar go straight ahead ten miles and
sound it was coming through a telephone." The upper midrange rolloff
and lower midrange distortion of a guitar cabinet are good for guitars.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
On 5/24/05 11:51 AM, in article pan.2005.05.24.15.51.45.656274@control.gov,
"Agent 86" <maxwellsmart@control.gov> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 14:54:24 +0000, SSJVCmag wrote:
>> What are we doing that you ain't?
> Actually playing music & using your ears, maybe?
> Instead of making assumptions about what it will sound like because it
> looks good on paper?
> It's a lot like designing mic preamps that way, huh?
I'm concerned about what planet you're from or what thread you're reading
yet responding to it in THIS one.
Let's see...
> Actually playing music & using your ears, maybe?
Recording classical to rock to jazz and folk, live and studio, both stereo
array and multitrack (analog and digital) production for a few decades now,
The work I produced 20 years ago that I was pleased with still holds up, be
it rockabilly, orchestral or electronica so I feel comfortable that I've
always had a talent and an ear and that my skill set only has improved with
experience. As a lousy pianist and a fair guitarist I know what it's like
trying to assemble a personal rig that does what one wants it to, that the
tone has to be 2' in front of the amp or you're screwed, currently playing
my 80 Mesa Mk2b thru a Tremolux cab with Copperheads and actually liking the
amp for the first time in 2 decades of owning it. It took ears, a dedication
to what I WANTED to hear on stage, and advice and experieince from many
way-better players as well, as checks that I'm not nuts to fight to get
there.
> Instead of making assumptions about what it will sound like because it
> looks good on paper?
Paper? Nowhere in this thread have I ever mentioned sound-of-bands-on-stage
as regards theoretical paperwork.
You're confusing me with someone else. Forgiven, fogotten.
> It's a lot like designing mic preamps that way, huh?
I've never in my life designed a preamp... On paper, cardboard, breadboard
or sideboard. Built a couple from kits long ago but that's all.
Again, You're confusing me with someone else. Again Forgiven, forgotten...
But please watch it, stop it as it'll quickly get tiresome.
On 5/24/05 11:51 AM, in article pan.2005.05.24.15.51.45.656274@control.gov,
"Agent 86" <maxwellsmart@control.gov> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 14:54:24 +0000, SSJVCmag wrote:
>> What are we doing that you ain't?
> Actually playing music & using your ears, maybe?
> Instead of making assumptions about what it will sound like because it
> looks good on paper?
> It's a lot like designing mic preamps that way, huh?
I'm concerned about what planet you're from or what thread you're reading
yet responding to it in THIS one.
Let's see...
> Actually playing music & using your ears, maybe?
Recording classical to rock to jazz and folk, live and studio, both stereo
array and multitrack (analog and digital) production for a few decades now,
The work I produced 20 years ago that I was pleased with still holds up, be
it rockabilly, orchestral or electronica so I feel comfortable that I've
always had a talent and an ear and that my skill set only has improved with
experience. As a lousy pianist and a fair guitarist I know what it's like
trying to assemble a personal rig that does what one wants it to, that the
tone has to be 2' in front of the amp or you're screwed, currently playing
my 80 Mesa Mk2b thru a Tremolux cab with Copperheads and actually liking the
amp for the first time in 2 decades of owning it. It took ears, a dedication
to what I WANTED to hear on stage, and advice and experieince from many
way-better players as well, as checks that I'm not nuts to fight to get
there.
> Instead of making assumptions about what it will sound like because it
> looks good on paper?
Paper? Nowhere in this thread have I ever mentioned sound-of-bands-on-stage
as regards theoretical paperwork.
You're confusing me with someone else. Forgiven, fogotten.
> It's a lot like designing mic preamps that way, huh?
I've never in my life designed a preamp... On paper, cardboard, breadboard
or sideboard. Built a couple from kits long ago but that's all.
Again, You're confusing me with someone else. Again Forgiven, forgotten...
But please watch it, stop it as it'll quickly get tiresome.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
On Tue, 24 May 2005 16:21:54 +0000, SSJVCmag wrote:
> I'm concerned about what planet you're from or what thread you're reading
> yet responding to it in THIS one.
The sarcasm was aimed at Kevin A. (he, of the theoretical mic preamp in
another thread around here somewhere), not at you. If you missed that
to start with, I can see why you're confused.
> Let's see...
Let's do. Shall we?
>> Actually playing music & using your ears, maybe?
You asked the (presumably rhetorical) question "What are we doing that you
ain't?". Since you were replying to Kevin, I think it's safe to assume
that "we" refers to yourself and your associates, and that "you" refers to
Kevin. If you've read many of Kev's recent posts, it should be obvious
that HE prefers not use his ears, and probably doesn't play very much
music either. Since you are reportedly getting good results using a
technique he considers lacking, it stands to reason that you probably ARE
using your ears, AND playing music.
Are you with me so far?
>> Instead of making assumptions about what it will sound like because it
>> looks good on paper?
Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not seen the
threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe it'll all make
sense.
Ditto, this next line:
>> It's a lot like designing mic preamps that way, huh?
>
> I've never in my life designed a preamp... On paper, cardboard,
> breadboard or sideboard. Built a couple from kits long ago but that's
> all. Again, You're confusing me with someone else.
Or perhaps you're confusing yourself with somebody else.
On Tue, 24 May 2005 16:21:54 +0000, SSJVCmag wrote:
> I'm concerned about what planet you're from or what thread you're reading
> yet responding to it in THIS one.
The sarcasm was aimed at Kevin A. (he, of the theoretical mic preamp in
another thread around here somewhere), not at you. If you missed that
to start with, I can see why you're confused.
> Let's see...
Let's do. Shall we?
>> Actually playing music & using your ears, maybe?
You asked the (presumably rhetorical) question "What are we doing that you
ain't?". Since you were replying to Kevin, I think it's safe to assume
that "we" refers to yourself and your associates, and that "you" refers to
Kevin. If you've read many of Kev's recent posts, it should be obvious
that HE prefers not use his ears, and probably doesn't play very much
music either. Since you are reportedly getting good results using a
technique he considers lacking, it stands to reason that you probably ARE
using your ears, AND playing music.
Are you with me so far?
>> Instead of making assumptions about what it will sound like because it
>> looks good on paper?
Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not seen the
threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe it'll all make
sense.
Ditto, this next line:
>> It's a lot like designing mic preamps that way, huh?
>
> I've never in my life designed a preamp... On paper, cardboard,
> breadboard or sideboard. Built a couple from kits long ago but that's
> all. Again, You're confusing me with someone else.
Or perhaps you're confusing yourself with somebody else.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Scott Dorsey wrote:
> A PA speaker needs to reproduce a much wider range of frequencies, and
> it needs to be a much more accurate device. You don't want to run your
> PA cabinet at levels where the cone starts to breakup. It's a sealed
> cabinet with a resonant frequency set so that the low end is extended down
> to the free air resonance of the driver, or even lower. It's a different
> thing altogether.
Cheers Scott, I understand now.
How about when people use amp simulators like POD XT's? For instance, I
might have a gig coming up soon with NO guitar amps on stage. I'm
worried that my smallish PA will not cope (EV S200's/18" subs).
I'll at least have a clean stage sound as I control the monitors and
they point directly up at there ears!
PS, one reason I like to mic everything and keep stage volume down is; I
like to multi-track record the gigs and mix them later for the bands.
It usually works really well. I don't like lots of loud backline guitar
noise in the vocal mic though!
Cheers,
Mark.
--
Scott Dorsey wrote:
> A PA speaker needs to reproduce a much wider range of frequencies, and
> it needs to be a much more accurate device. You don't want to run your
> PA cabinet at levels where the cone starts to breakup. It's a sealed
> cabinet with a resonant frequency set so that the low end is extended down
> to the free air resonance of the driver, or even lower. It's a different
> thing altogether.
Cheers Scott, I understand now.
How about when people use amp simulators like POD XT's? For instance, I
might have a gig coming up soon with NO guitar amps on stage. I'm
worried that my smallish PA will not cope (EV S200's/18" subs).
I'll at least have a clean stage sound as I control the monitors and
they point directly up at there ears!
PS, one reason I like to mic everything and keep stage volume down is; I
like to multi-track record the gigs and mix them later for the bands.
It usually works really well. I don't like lots of loud backline guitar
noise in the vocal mic though!
Cheers,
Mark.
--
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
On 5/24/05 12:02 PM, in article BN6dnQG7FK2TzQ7fRVnysA@pipex.net, "Mark"
<marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> A PA speaker needs to reproduce a much wider range of frequencies, and
>> it needs to be a much more accurate device. You don't want to run your
>> PA cabinet at levels where the cone starts to breakup. It's a sealed
>> cabinet with a resonant frequency set so that the low end is extended down
>> to the free air resonance of the driver, or even lower. It's a different
>> thing altogether.
>
> Cheers Scott, I understand now.
One elenment Scott didin;t hit too hard that I feel is quite important to
what you;re trying to get a grip on... By the time a guitar amp is pushed
into the range where it's power amp is starting to get into trouble and
exhibit some real character, and in addition when the SPEAKER is into the
same range (and the pairing of these is what makes ALL the difference), a
20watt guitar amp through an efficient open-back 12" speaker is putting out
a LOT of volume in that 200-3k frequency range! It's a fair match in room
volume for a normal well-tuned loud drum kit. That's a guitar amp working at
it's max and it's fairly growly sounding. You want a CLEAN loud guitar
sound, you need to push more air with more power. Polar opposite example
would be, matching your 20watt guitar guy with say a clean pedal steel
player, who'll have 100watts thru an open-back 15" without any growl and
demanding a MUCH deeper lo-end on those lower strings... Still a fair match.
You'll want a bass amp of 150w or better CLEAN power to keep up with this
ensemble on its own.
This is a midlin-confortable loud rock band and in a small club, if you want
to REENFORCE IT (rather than just 'add a touch of clarity' to a few things),
you have to have a system that can outshout it enough to make the
difference.
>
> How about when people use amp simulators like POD XT's? For instance, I
> might have a gig coming up soon with NO guitar amps on stage. I'm
> worried that my smallish PA will not cope (EV S200's/18" subs).
>
> I'll at least have a clean stage sound as I control the monitors and
> they point directly up at there ears!
This can work well.
>
> PS, one reason I like to mic everything and keep stage volume down is; I
> like to multi-track record the gigs and mix them later for the bands.
> It usually works really well. I don't like lots of loud backline guitar
> noise in the vocal mic though!
The answer here is usually little more than trying to match the guitar rig
to the room needs. Joe Walsh reveled in peeling folk's toupees back with a
Champ... Through the PA.
On 5/24/05 12:02 PM, in article BN6dnQG7FK2TzQ7fRVnysA@pipex.net, "Mark"
<marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> A PA speaker needs to reproduce a much wider range of frequencies, and
>> it needs to be a much more accurate device. You don't want to run your
>> PA cabinet at levels where the cone starts to breakup. It's a sealed
>> cabinet with a resonant frequency set so that the low end is extended down
>> to the free air resonance of the driver, or even lower. It's a different
>> thing altogether.
>
> Cheers Scott, I understand now.
One elenment Scott didin;t hit too hard that I feel is quite important to
what you;re trying to get a grip on... By the time a guitar amp is pushed
into the range where it's power amp is starting to get into trouble and
exhibit some real character, and in addition when the SPEAKER is into the
same range (and the pairing of these is what makes ALL the difference), a
20watt guitar amp through an efficient open-back 12" speaker is putting out
a LOT of volume in that 200-3k frequency range! It's a fair match in room
volume for a normal well-tuned loud drum kit. That's a guitar amp working at
it's max and it's fairly growly sounding. You want a CLEAN loud guitar
sound, you need to push more air with more power. Polar opposite example
would be, matching your 20watt guitar guy with say a clean pedal steel
player, who'll have 100watts thru an open-back 15" without any growl and
demanding a MUCH deeper lo-end on those lower strings... Still a fair match.
You'll want a bass amp of 150w or better CLEAN power to keep up with this
ensemble on its own.
This is a midlin-confortable loud rock band and in a small club, if you want
to REENFORCE IT (rather than just 'add a touch of clarity' to a few things),
you have to have a system that can outshout it enough to make the
difference.
>
> How about when people use amp simulators like POD XT's? For instance, I
> might have a gig coming up soon with NO guitar amps on stage. I'm
> worried that my smallish PA will not cope (EV S200's/18" subs).
>
> I'll at least have a clean stage sound as I control the monitors and
> they point directly up at there ears!
This can work well.
>
> PS, one reason I like to mic everything and keep stage volume down is; I
> like to multi-track record the gigs and mix them later for the bands.
> It usually works really well. I don't like lots of loud backline guitar
> noise in the vocal mic though!
The answer here is usually little more than trying to match the guitar rig
to the room needs. Joe Walsh reveled in peeling folk's toupees back with a
Champ... Through the PA.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Mark <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
>
>How about when people use amp simulators like POD XT's? For instance, I
>might have a gig coming up soon with NO guitar amps on stage. I'm
>worried that my smallish PA will not cope (EV S200's/18" subs).
God, I hate those things. Give it a try and see... depending on how
they are set up, they can produce a lot of high frequency stuff or
maybe not.
>I'll at least have a clean stage sound as I control the monitors and
>they point directly up at there ears!
Also, your big advantage here is that you can turn the levels on the
guitars down if the PA system is starting to break up. On the other
hand, you can't do anything about the drummer so you still don't have
real control over the mix.
>PS, one reason I like to mic everything and keep stage volume down is; I
>like to multi-track record the gigs and mix them later for the bands.
>It usually works really well. I don't like lots of loud backline guitar
>noise in the vocal mic though!
You'd be surprised what proper amp placement and a high-directivity
mike can do for you. The Neumann KMS105 will do an amazing job of
keeping the backline out of the vocal feeds if the vocalist knows how
to use it. Then you set up ambient mikes on the stage front in order
to get the distant backline sound.
I think there is a recording on the next-to-last RAP CD set, which was
done with a single stage pair plus three vocal feeds from Beyer M-500s.
The vocals sound very clean and integrate well with the stage sound.
I was very pleased with it.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Mark <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
>
>How about when people use amp simulators like POD XT's? For instance, I
>might have a gig coming up soon with NO guitar amps on stage. I'm
>worried that my smallish PA will not cope (EV S200's/18" subs).
God, I hate those things. Give it a try and see... depending on how
they are set up, they can produce a lot of high frequency stuff or
maybe not.
>I'll at least have a clean stage sound as I control the monitors and
>they point directly up at there ears!
Also, your big advantage here is that you can turn the levels on the
guitars down if the PA system is starting to break up. On the other
hand, you can't do anything about the drummer so you still don't have
real control over the mix.
>PS, one reason I like to mic everything and keep stage volume down is; I
>like to multi-track record the gigs and mix them later for the bands.
>It usually works really well. I don't like lots of loud backline guitar
>noise in the vocal mic though!
You'd be surprised what proper amp placement and a high-directivity
mike can do for you. The Neumann KMS105 will do an amazing job of
keeping the backline out of the vocal feeds if the vocalist knows how
to use it. Then you set up ambient mikes on the stage front in order
to get the distant backline sound.
I think there is a recording on the next-to-last RAP CD set, which was
done with a single stage pair plus three vocal feeds from Beyer M-500s.
The vocals sound very clean and integrate well with the stage sound.
I was very pleased with it.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Guilt By Association...
I hate that!
On 5/24/05 12:54 PM, in article pan.2005.05.24.16.54.13.493716@control.gov,
"Agent 86" <maxwellsmart@control.gov> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 16:21:54 +0000, SSJVCmag wrote:
>
>> I'm concerned about what planet you're from or what thread you're reading
>> yet responding to it in THIS one.
>
> The sarcasm was aimed at Kevin A.
(here snip much details as to Kevin's preamp stuff that I FORCIBLY avoided
once it went south...)
> Since you are reportedly getting good results using a
> technique he considers lacking, it stands to reason that you probably ARE
> using your ears, AND playing music.
I can only hope...
> Or perhaps you're confusing yourself with somebody else.
-THAT- happens all the time here... Hell I spent most of last week as a Jedi
Knight at charity movie openings!
I'm Not Kevin
We're cool (one hopes...)
Guilt By Association...
I hate that!
On 5/24/05 12:54 PM, in article pan.2005.05.24.16.54.13.493716@control.gov,
"Agent 86" <maxwellsmart@control.gov> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 16:21:54 +0000, SSJVCmag wrote:
>
>> I'm concerned about what planet you're from or what thread you're reading
>> yet responding to it in THIS one.
>
> The sarcasm was aimed at Kevin A.
(here snip much details as to Kevin's preamp stuff that I FORCIBLY avoided
once it went south...)
> Since you are reportedly getting good results using a
> technique he considers lacking, it stands to reason that you probably ARE
> using your ears, AND playing music.
I can only hope...
> Or perhaps you're confusing yourself with somebody else.
-THAT- happens all the time here... Hell I spent most of last week as a Jedi
Knight at charity movie openings!
I'm Not Kevin
We're cool (one hopes...)
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Agent 86 wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 16:21:54 +0000, SSJVCmag wrote:
>
>> I'm concerned about what planet you're from or what thread you're
>> reading yet responding to it in THIS one.
>
> The sarcasm was aimed at Kevin A. (he, of the theoretical mic preamp
> in another thread around here somewhere), not at you. If you missed
> that to start with, I can see why you're confused.
>
>> Let's see...
>
> Let's do. Shall we?
>
>>> Actually playing music & using your ears, maybe?
>
> You asked the (presumably rhetorical) question "What are we doing
> that you ain't?". Since you were replying to Kevin, I think it's
> safe to assume that "we" refers to yourself and your associates, and
> that "you" refers to Kevin. If you've read many of Kev's recent
> posts, it should be obvious that HE prefers not use his ears,
This, of course isn't true. I use my ears a lot, but only when required.
Designing straight peices of wire with gain, does not require ears. Its
a technical issue. You need to get over this, mate.
One of these days people might actually pay attention to what I write,
and not make it up as they go along.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Agent 86 wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 16:21:54 +0000, SSJVCmag wrote:
>
>> I'm concerned about what planet you're from or what thread you're
>> reading yet responding to it in THIS one.
>
> The sarcasm was aimed at Kevin A. (he, of the theoretical mic preamp
> in another thread around here somewhere), not at you. If you missed
> that to start with, I can see why you're confused.
>
>> Let's see...
>
> Let's do. Shall we?
>
>>> Actually playing music & using your ears, maybe?
>
> You asked the (presumably rhetorical) question "What are we doing
> that you ain't?". Since you were replying to Kevin, I think it's
> safe to assume that "we" refers to yourself and your associates, and
> that "you" refers to Kevin. If you've read many of Kev's recent
> posts, it should be obvious that HE prefers not use his ears,
This, of course isn't true. I use my ears a lot, but only when required.
Designing straight peices of wire with gain, does not require ears. Its
a technical issue. You need to get over this, mate.
One of these days people might actually pay attention to what I write,
and not make it up as they go along.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <JKmdnVhoUsL72w7fRVnyhA@pipex.net>,
> Mark <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
>> SSJVCmag wrote:
>>> If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate
>>> gear haul.
>>
>> You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver
>> in a cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing
>> something? Not being funny, I am still learning.
>
> No, a guitar amp is a funny thing. It's a single midrange driver in a
> cabinet with an open back.
Not my Fender Twin it aint. Its got the two speakers, and I closed the
back up. I hate that open back mid sound. I like to get a bit more bass.
It makes up for the 0.028 I use as my bottom E string:-)
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <JKmdnVhoUsL72w7fRVnyhA@pipex.net>,
> Mark <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
>> SSJVCmag wrote:
>>> If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate
>>> gear haul.
>>
>> You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver
>> in a cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing
>> something? Not being funny, I am still learning.
>
> No, a guitar amp is a funny thing. It's a single midrange driver in a
> cabinet with an open back.
Not my Fender Twin it aint. Its got the two speakers, and I closed the
back up. I hate that open back mid sound. I like to get a bit more bass.
It makes up for the 0.028 I use as my bottom E string:-)
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Agent 86 wrote:
> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not seen the
> threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe it'll all make
> sense.
While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very low
output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is significant.
--
ha
Agent 86 wrote:
> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not seen the
> threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe it'll all make
> sense.
While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very low
output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is significant.
--
ha
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Mark wrote:
> SSJVCmag wrote:
> > If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
>
> You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver in a
> cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing something?
> Not being funny, I am still learning.
You're missing something.
The typical guitar speaker is intentionally very coloured compared to its PA
version.
Graham
Mark wrote:
> SSJVCmag wrote:
> > If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
>
> You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver in a
> cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing something?
> Not being funny, I am still learning.
You're missing something.
The typical guitar speaker is intentionally very coloured compared to its PA
version.
Graham
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Mark wrote:
>
>> SSJVCmag wrote:
>> > If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
>>
>> You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver in a
>> cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing something?
>> Not being funny, I am still learning.
>
>You're missing something.
>
>The typical guitar speaker is intentionally very coloured compared to its PA
>version.
You should have seen the monitor wedges they dumped on me this weekend.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Mark wrote:
>
>> SSJVCmag wrote:
>> > If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
>>
>> You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver in a
>> cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing something?
>> Not being funny, I am still learning.
>
>You're missing something.
>
>The typical guitar speaker is intentionally very coloured compared to its PA
>version.
You should have seen the monitor wedges they dumped on me this weekend.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>
>>SSJVCmag wrote:
>>
>>>If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
>>
>>You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver in a
>>cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing something?
>>Not being funny, I am still learning.
>
>
> You're missing something.
>
> The typical guitar speaker is intentionally very coloured compared to its PA
> version.
>
> Graham
>
If you examine the cone of most guitar amp speakers you`ll see that they
have concentric ridges moulded into the paper, unlike a "PA" speaker
which is usually smooth and quite rigid. the ridges make the cone less
stiff and encourage it to distort or "trash out" - as our leftpondian
friends would say - at lower powers.
Strangely for some odd reason the diaphragms of aluminium coned speakers
often have these ridges spun (pressed?) in even tho they advertise them
on the strength of their rigidity.
ron
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>
>>SSJVCmag wrote:
>>
>>>If you want to move up in volume a major step, with commensurate gear haul.
>>
>>You say that, but a guitar amp is usually just a single 12" driver in a
>>cab.. a bit like your average PA speaker. Or am I missing something?
>>Not being funny, I am still learning.
>
>
> You're missing something.
>
> The typical guitar speaker is intentionally very coloured compared to its PA
> version.
>
> Graham
>
If you examine the cone of most guitar amp speakers you`ll see that they
have concentric ridges moulded into the paper, unlike a "PA" speaker
which is usually smooth and quite rigid. the ridges make the cone less
stiff and encourage it to distort or "trash out" - as our leftpondian
friends would say - at lower powers.
Strangely for some odd reason the diaphragms of aluminium coned speakers
often have these ridges spun (pressed?) in even tho they advertise them
on the strength of their rigidity.
ron
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Scott Dorsey wrote:
> God, I hate those things. Give it a try and see... depending on how
> they are set up, they can produce a lot of high frequency stuff or
> maybe not.
Why do you hate them? I'm just curious and would honestly like your
opinion. They seem to be really sort after these days, people seem to
prefer them to the SX300's for instance. People tend to say they are
quiet sweet sounding. I don't have much for comparison really, except a
pair of JBL SF15's that I find really honky vocals.
> Also, your big advantage here is that you can turn the levels on the
> guitars down if the PA system is starting to break up. On the other
> hand, you can't do anything about the drummer so you still don't have
> real control over the mix.
I'm the drummer on this occasion ;-) Someone will be looking after the
desk for me.
> You'd be surprised what proper amp placement and a high-directivity
> mike can do for you. The Neumann KMS105 will do an amazing job of
> keeping the backline out of the vocal feeds if the vocalist knows how
> to use it. Then you set up ambient mikes on the stage front in order
> to get the distant backline sound.
I do have one of them, and yes I've noticed that they always seem to
sound fairly clean when I monitor that channel.
> I think there is a recording on the next-to-last RAP CD set, which was
> done with a single stage pair plus three vocal feeds from Beyer M-500s.
> The vocals sound very clean and integrate well with the stage sound.
> I was very pleased with it.
I'll have to get hold of that RAP CD set sometime! I've been meaning to
find out how for a while now. I got into recording initially (I think
it was you that advised me on getting the Josephson C42's, I love them!)
but have recently tried my hand at doing live too. Because of the
financial drain, I partly wish I'd stuck to recording for now and spent
the money there instead.
Cheers,
Mark.
--
Scott Dorsey wrote:
> God, I hate those things. Give it a try and see... depending on how
> they are set up, they can produce a lot of high frequency stuff or
> maybe not.
Why do you hate them? I'm just curious and would honestly like your
opinion. They seem to be really sort after these days, people seem to
prefer them to the SX300's for instance. People tend to say they are
quiet sweet sounding. I don't have much for comparison really, except a
pair of JBL SF15's that I find really honky vocals.
> Also, your big advantage here is that you can turn the levels on the
> guitars down if the PA system is starting to break up. On the other
> hand, you can't do anything about the drummer so you still don't have
> real control over the mix.
I'm the drummer on this occasion ;-) Someone will be looking after the
desk for me.
> You'd be surprised what proper amp placement and a high-directivity
> mike can do for you. The Neumann KMS105 will do an amazing job of
> keeping the backline out of the vocal feeds if the vocalist knows how
> to use it. Then you set up ambient mikes on the stage front in order
> to get the distant backline sound.
I do have one of them, and yes I've noticed that they always seem to
sound fairly clean when I monitor that channel.
> I think there is a recording on the next-to-last RAP CD set, which was
> done with a single stage pair plus three vocal feeds from Beyer M-500s.
> The vocals sound very clean and integrate well with the stage sound.
> I was very pleased with it.
I'll have to get hold of that RAP CD set sometime! I've been meaning to
find out how for a while now. I got into recording initially (I think
it was you that advised me on getting the Josephson C42's, I love them!)
but have recently tried my hand at doing live too. Because of the
financial drain, I partly wish I'd stuck to recording for now and spent
the money there instead.
Cheers,
Mark.
--
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Mark wrote:
> Scott Dorsey wrote:
> > God, I hate those things. Give it a try and see... depending on how
> > they are set up, they can produce a lot of high frequency stuff or
> > maybe not.
> Why do you hate them? I'm just curious and would honestly like your
> opinion. They seem to be really sort after these days, people seem to
> prefer them to the SX300's for instance. People tend to say they are
> quiet sweet sounding. I don't have much for comparison really, except a
> pair of JBL SF15's that I find really honky vocals.
I think Scott was referencing the POD, but I could be wrong.
--
ha
Mark wrote:
> Scott Dorsey wrote:
> > God, I hate those things. Give it a try and see... depending on how
> > they are set up, they can produce a lot of high frequency stuff or
> > maybe not.
> Why do you hate them? I'm just curious and would honestly like your
> opinion. They seem to be really sort after these days, people seem to
> prefer them to the SX300's for instance. People tend to say they are
> quiet sweet sounding. I don't have much for comparison really, except a
> pair of JBL SF15's that I find really honky vocals.
I think Scott was referencing the POD, but I could be wrong.
--
ha
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
hank alrich wrote:
> Agent 86 wrote:
>
>> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not
>> seen the threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe
>> it'll all make sense.
>
> While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very low
> output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is significant.
The papers were a technical design exercise, showing the strengths and
weakness of some typical approaches. They are not a construction
project.
I understand that that those unfamiliar with standard and current
analogue design practices might well view simulation with some concern.
However, this is a position due to ignorance of the way modern circuits
are actually designed by 10,000s of professional design engineers today.
As I have stated prior, the design of complex high transistor count
(10,000) analogue i.c.s entirely by simulation is the normal state of
affairs. Professional analogues designers of i.c.s simple never
breadboard designs. All modern op-amps, including all these used for
audio applications, are designed completely by the use of simulation. I
hope this clarifies the position as to the value of simulation for those
not up to date on current technological practices.
Those unfamiliar with the type of tools used in design, might want to
check out Cadence, http://www.cadence.com/. Typically a tool set licence
of design->layout might cost $30k, per seat, per year.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
hank alrich wrote:
> Agent 86 wrote:
>
>> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not
>> seen the threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe
>> it'll all make sense.
>
> While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very low
> output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is significant.
The papers were a technical design exercise, showing the strengths and
weakness of some typical approaches. They are not a construction
project.
I understand that that those unfamiliar with standard and current
analogue design practices might well view simulation with some concern.
However, this is a position due to ignorance of the way modern circuits
are actually designed by 10,000s of professional design engineers today.
As I have stated prior, the design of complex high transistor count
(10,000) analogue i.c.s entirely by simulation is the normal state of
affairs. Professional analogues designers of i.c.s simple never
breadboard designs. All modern op-amps, including all these used for
audio applications, are designed completely by the use of simulation. I
hope this clarifies the position as to the value of simulation for those
not up to date on current technological practices.
Those unfamiliar with the type of tools used in design, might want to
check out Cadence, http://www.cadence.com/. Typically a tool set licence
of design->layout might cost $30k, per seat, per year.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Mark <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> God, I hate those things. Give it a try and see... depending on how
>> they are set up, they can produce a lot of high frequency stuff or
>> maybe not.
>
>Why do you hate them? I'm just curious and would honestly like your
>opinion. They seem to be really sort after these days, people seem to
>prefer them to the SX300's for instance. People tend to say they are
>quiet sweet sounding. I don't have much for comparison really, except a
>pair of JBL SF15's that I find really honky vocals.
No, it's the POD thing that I hate, not the speakers. The problem with
them is partly that you can get a huge variety of different tones out
of one, and guitarists usually do in the course of the set, and some of
them aren't very good, and all of them have different levels. Many of
them are much brighter than a real guitar amp would ever be, which can
give you a lot of trouble fitting them in.
>> I think there is a recording on the next-to-last RAP CD set, which was
>> done with a single stage pair plus three vocal feeds from Beyer M-500s.
>> The vocals sound very clean and integrate well with the stage sound.
>> I was very pleased with it.
>
>I'll have to get hold of that RAP CD set sometime! I've been meaning to
>find out how for a while now. I got into recording initially (I think
>it was you that advised me on getting the Josephson C42's, I love them!)
>but have recently tried my hand at doing live too. Because of the
>financial drain, I partly wish I'd stuck to recording for now and spent
>the money there instead.
I think there's actually more money in PA work, at least around here, but
I personally avoid it. Spend the fifteen dollars or whatever Harvey wants
and get a copy of the latest CD set. Spend another seven bucks and get the LP.
Harvey?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Mark <marks@nospamhere.com> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> God, I hate those things. Give it a try and see... depending on how
>> they are set up, they can produce a lot of high frequency stuff or
>> maybe not.
>
>Why do you hate them? I'm just curious and would honestly like your
>opinion. They seem to be really sort after these days, people seem to
>prefer them to the SX300's for instance. People tend to say they are
>quiet sweet sounding. I don't have much for comparison really, except a
>pair of JBL SF15's that I find really honky vocals.
No, it's the POD thing that I hate, not the speakers. The problem with
them is partly that you can get a huge variety of different tones out
of one, and guitarists usually do in the course of the set, and some of
them aren't very good, and all of them have different levels. Many of
them are much brighter than a real guitar amp would ever be, which can
give you a lot of trouble fitting them in.
>> I think there is a recording on the next-to-last RAP CD set, which was
>> done with a single stage pair plus three vocal feeds from Beyer M-500s.
>> The vocals sound very clean and integrate well with the stage sound.
>> I was very pleased with it.
>
>I'll have to get hold of that RAP CD set sometime! I've been meaning to
>find out how for a while now. I got into recording initially (I think
>it was you that advised me on getting the Josephson C42's, I love them!)
>but have recently tried my hand at doing live too. Because of the
>financial drain, I partly wish I'd stuck to recording for now and spent
>the money there instead.
I think there's actually more money in PA work, at least around here, but
I personally avoid it. Spend the fifteen dollars or whatever Harvey wants
and get a copy of the latest CD set. Spend another seven bucks and get the LP.
Harvey?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
"Ron(UK)" <ron@lunevalleyaudio.com> wrote in message
news![:D]( ":D")
6vvgi$joi$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
> If you examine the cone of most guitar amp speakers you`ll see that they
> have concentric ridges moulded into the paper, unlike a "PA" speaker which
> is usually smooth and quite rigid. the ridges make the cone less stiff and
> encourage it to distort or "trash out" - as our leftpondian friends would
> say - at lower powers.
I've always thought about putting these drivers in a monitor wedge and
drilling a few holes in the back just for the guitarist to use instead of
his 4x12 or whatever behemoth he's using. What is it about guitarists that
make them think they have ears in the back of their knees? OK, the first
couple of rows of the audience might get a bit more guitar than they
bargained for but it can't be much more than they would have gotten from the
stack pointed straight at them.
Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs? Guitarists
would be able to hear themselves, stage volume would come down, FOH bleed
would be reduced and they will have something else to put their feet on
during their widdly solo moments.
Phildo
"Ron(UK)" <ron@lunevalleyaudio.com> wrote in message
news
6vvgi$joi$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...> If you examine the cone of most guitar amp speakers you`ll see that they
> have concentric ridges moulded into the paper, unlike a "PA" speaker which
> is usually smooth and quite rigid. the ridges make the cone less stiff and
> encourage it to distort or "trash out" - as our leftpondian friends would
> say - at lower powers.
I've always thought about putting these drivers in a monitor wedge and
drilling a few holes in the back just for the guitarist to use instead of
his 4x12 or whatever behemoth he's using. What is it about guitarists that
make them think they have ears in the back of their knees? OK, the first
couple of rows of the audience might get a bit more guitar than they
bargained for but it can't be much more than they would have gotten from the
stack pointed straight at them.
Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs? Guitarists
would be able to hear themselves, stage volume would come down, FOH bleed
would be reduced and they will have something else to put their feet on
during their widdly solo moments.
Phildo
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Watts on guitar amps don't mean much. Ever heard a Matchless 30W?
They get screaming stoopid loud. The guy I played with ran his in 15W
mode and he was still screaming stoopid loud--- with GREAT tone.
Erich
Watts on guitar amps don't mean much. Ever heard a Matchless 30W?
They get screaming stoopid loud. The guy I played with ran his in 15W
mode and he was still screaming stoopid loud--- with GREAT tone.
Erich
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Phildo wrote:
> "Ron(UK)" <ron@lunevalleyaudio.com> wrote in message
> news![:D]( ":D")
6vvgi$joi$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
>
>>If you examine the cone of most guitar amp speakers you`ll see that they
>>have concentric ridges moulded into the paper, unlike a "PA" speaker which
>>is usually smooth and quite rigid. the ridges make the cone less stiff and
>>encourage it to distort or "trash out" - as our leftpondian friends would
>>say - at lower powers.
>
>
> I've always thought about putting these drivers in a monitor wedge and
> drilling a few holes in the back just for the guitarist to use instead of
> his 4x12 or whatever behemoth he's using. What is it about guitarists that
> make them think they have ears in the back of their knees? OK, the first
> couple of rows of the audience might get a bit more guitar than they
> bargained for but it can't be much more than they would have gotten from the
> stack pointed straight at them.
>
> Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
> be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs? Guitarists
> would be able to hear themselves, stage volume would come down, FOH bleed
> would be reduced and they will have something else to put their feet on
> during their widdly solo moments.
>
> Phildo
>
>
Jon who plays guitar with EK2 does just that,
guitar/pod/poweramp/monitor wedge
Ron
www.lunevalleyaudio.com
Phildo wrote:
> "Ron(UK)" <ron@lunevalleyaudio.com> wrote in message
> news
6vvgi$joi$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...>
>>If you examine the cone of most guitar amp speakers you`ll see that they
>>have concentric ridges moulded into the paper, unlike a "PA" speaker which
>>is usually smooth and quite rigid. the ridges make the cone less stiff and
>>encourage it to distort or "trash out" - as our leftpondian friends would
>>say - at lower powers.
>
>
> I've always thought about putting these drivers in a monitor wedge and
> drilling a few holes in the back just for the guitarist to use instead of
> his 4x12 or whatever behemoth he's using. What is it about guitarists that
> make them think they have ears in the back of their knees? OK, the first
> couple of rows of the audience might get a bit more guitar than they
> bargained for but it can't be much more than they would have gotten from the
> stack pointed straight at them.
>
> Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
> be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs? Guitarists
> would be able to hear themselves, stage volume would come down, FOH bleed
> would be reduced and they will have something else to put their feet on
> during their widdly solo moments.
>
> Phildo
>
>
Jon who plays guitar with EK2 does just that,
guitar/pod/poweramp/monitor wedge
Ron
www.lunevalleyaudio.com
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Kevin Aylward wrote:
> hank alrich wrote:
> > Agent 86 wrote:
> >
> >> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not
> >> seen the threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe
> >> it'll all make sense.
> >
> > While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very low
> > output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is significant.
>
> The papers were a technical design exercise, showing the strengths and
> weakness of some typical approaches. They are not a construction
> project.
< snip bullshit >
Have you looked at TI's PGA2500 ? I'm sure it would appeal to you.
Graham
Kevin Aylward wrote:
> hank alrich wrote:
> > Agent 86 wrote:
> >
> >> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not
> >> seen the threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe
> >> it'll all make sense.
> >
> > While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very low
> > output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is significant.
>
> The papers were a technical design exercise, showing the strengths and
> weakness of some typical approaches. They are not a construction
> project.
< snip bullshit >
Have you looked at TI's PGA2500 ? I'm sure it would appeal to you.
Graham
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Phildo wrote:
> "Ron(UK)" <ron@lunevalleyaudio.com> wrote in message
> news![:D]( ":D")
6vvgi$joi$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
> > If you examine the cone of most guitar amp speakers you`ll see that they
> > have concentric ridges moulded into the paper, unlike a "PA" speaker which
> > is usually smooth and quite rigid. the ridges make the cone less stiff and
> > encourage it to distort or "trash out" - as our leftpondian friends would
> > say - at lower powers.
>
> I've always thought about putting these drivers in a monitor wedge and
> drilling a few holes in the back just for the guitarist to use instead of
> his 4x12 or whatever behemoth he's using. What is it about guitarists that
> make them think they have ears in the back of their knees? OK, the first
> couple of rows of the audience might get a bit more guitar than they
> bargained for but it can't be much more than they would have gotten from the
> stack pointed straight at them.
>
> Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
> be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs? Guitarists
> would be able to hear themselves, stage volume would come down, FOH bleed
> would be reduced and they will have something else to put their feet on
> during their widdly solo moments.
>
> Phildo
Hah ! My 'wedges' of old
( bought from the guy who's now - long been in fact - MD of HHB btw - we met
when he still lived at his Mum's place and I re-diaphragmed a couple of RCF
drivers for him whilst my friend and I reduced the level in the drinks cabinet )
had Fane Crescendos in them !
Made a lot of noise for sure. Wasn't actually too bad in fact ! They had
aluminium thingies in the middle too.
Graham
Phildo wrote:
> "Ron(UK)" <ron@lunevalleyaudio.com> wrote in message
> news
6vvgi$joi$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...> > If you examine the cone of most guitar amp speakers you`ll see that they
> > have concentric ridges moulded into the paper, unlike a "PA" speaker which
> > is usually smooth and quite rigid. the ridges make the cone less stiff and
> > encourage it to distort or "trash out" - as our leftpondian friends would
> > say - at lower powers.
>
> I've always thought about putting these drivers in a monitor wedge and
> drilling a few holes in the back just for the guitarist to use instead of
> his 4x12 or whatever behemoth he's using. What is it about guitarists that
> make them think they have ears in the back of their knees? OK, the first
> couple of rows of the audience might get a bit more guitar than they
> bargained for but it can't be much more than they would have gotten from the
> stack pointed straight at them.
>
> Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
> be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs? Guitarists
> would be able to hear themselves, stage volume would come down, FOH bleed
> would be reduced and they will have something else to put their feet on
> during their widdly solo moments.
>
> Phildo
Hah ! My 'wedges' of old
( bought from the guy who's now - long been in fact - MD of HHB btw - we met
when he still lived at his Mum's place and I re-diaphragmed a couple of RCF
drivers for him whilst my friend and I reduced the level in the drinks cabinet )
had Fane Crescendos in them !
Made a lot of noise for sure. Wasn't actually too bad in fact ! They had
aluminium thingies in the middle too.
Graham
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Phildo wrote:
< snip >
> Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
> be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs?
That's a damn fine idea actually ! I would suggest in *addition* rather than
replace. You'll never replace the comfort factor of a 4x12 !
Cheers, Graham
Phildo wrote:
< snip >
> Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
> be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs?
That's a damn fine idea actually ! I would suggest in *addition* rather than
replace. You'll never replace the comfort factor of a 4x12 !
Cheers, Graham
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
In article <4295FC4E.D7760681@hotmail.com>,
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
>
> Phildo wrote:
>
> < snip >
>
> > Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
> > be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs?
>
> That's a damn fine idea actually ! I would suggest in *addition* rather than
> replace. You'll never replace the comfort factor of a 4x12 !
Oh, no. That's the whole *point* of the exercise: to LOWER
the volume level by using less speakers and pointing them at
the guitarist's head so that he can actually hear them for once.
--
---Michael (of APP)...
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/6/austinpowerplantmusic...
In article <4295FC4E.D7760681@hotmail.com>,
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
>
> Phildo wrote:
>
> < snip >
>
> > Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
> > be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs?
>
> That's a damn fine idea actually ! I would suggest in *addition* rather than
> replace. You'll never replace the comfort factor of a 4x12 !
Oh, no. That's the whole *point* of the exercise: to LOWER
the volume level by using less speakers and pointing them at
the guitarist's head so that he can actually hear them for once.
--
---Michael (of APP)...
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/6/austinpowerplantmusic...
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
"Ron(UK)" <ron@lunevalleyaudio.com> wrote in message
news![:D]( ":D")
74oc4$gi$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
>> Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges
to
>> be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs? Guitarists
>> would be able to hear themselves, stage volume would come down, FOH bleed
>> would be reduced and they will have something else to put their feet on
>> during their widdly solo moments.
>>
>> Phildo
> Jon who plays guitar with EK2 does just that, guitar/pod/poweramp/monitor
> wedge
>
Sounds like a sensible man.
Maybe companies like Marshall should start thinking about making cabs that
can be used as wedges?
I used to work with a female bass player who had one of those little hartke
wedge shaped bass amps. She just put it out front next to her main wedge and
that was all she ever needed. Never any problems with excessive bass sound
from the stage.
Phildo
"Ron(UK)" <ron@lunevalleyaudio.com> wrote in message
news
74oc4$gi$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...>> Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges
to
>> be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs? Guitarists
>> would be able to hear themselves, stage volume would come down, FOH bleed
>> would be reduced and they will have something else to put their feet on
>> during their widdly solo moments.
>>
>> Phildo
> Jon who plays guitar with EK2 does just that, guitar/pod/poweramp/monitor
> wedge
>
Sounds like a sensible man.
Maybe companies like Marshall should start thinking about making cabs that
can be used as wedges?
I used to work with a female bass player who had one of those little hartke
wedge shaped bass amps. She just put it out front next to her main wedge and
that was all she ever needed. Never any problems with excessive bass sound
from the stage.
Phildo
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>
>> hank alrich wrote:
>>> Agent 86 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not
>>>> seen the threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe
>>>> it'll all make sense.
>>>
>>> While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very low
>>> output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is significant.
>>
>> The papers were a technical design exercise, showing the strengths
>> and weakness of some typical approaches. They are not a construction
>> project.
>
> < snip bullshit >
>
> Have you looked at TI's PGA2500 ?
You pointed me to ths before. Its quite a nice part.
>I'm sure it would appeal to you.
>
Why?
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>
>> hank alrich wrote:
>>> Agent 86 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not
>>>> seen the threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe
>>>> it'll all make sense.
>>>
>>> While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very low
>>> output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is significant.
>>
>> The papers were a technical design exercise, showing the strengths
>> and weakness of some typical approaches. They are not a construction
>> project.
>
> < snip bullshit >
>
> Have you looked at TI's PGA2500 ?
You pointed me to ths before. Its quite a nice part.
>I'm sure it would appeal to you.
>
Why?
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Phildo wrote:
>
> < snip >
>
>> Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor
>> wedges to be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker
>> cabs?
>
> That's a damn fine idea actually ! I would suggest in *addition*
> rather than replace. You'll never replace the comfort factor of a
> 4x12 !
Or to remind one once again, this local band http://www.expos-e.co.uk/,
whose guitar player is at http://www.jibbering-wreck.com/, uses 4 of
4x12.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Phildo wrote:
>
> < snip >
>
>> Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor
>> wedges to be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker
>> cabs?
>
> That's a damn fine idea actually ! I would suggest in *addition*
> rather than replace. You'll never replace the comfort factor of a
> 4x12 !
Or to remind one once again, this local band http://www.expos-e.co.uk/,
whose guitar player is at http://www.jibbering-wreck.com/, uses 4 of
4x12.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Erich wrote:
> Watts on guitar amps don't mean much. Ever heard a Matchless 30W?
> They get screaming stoopid loud. The guy I played with ran his in 15W
> mode and he was still screaming stoopid loud--- with GREAT tone.
Very effective no doubt.
As has been mentioned elsewhere - speaker cones for guitar amps are
designed to give that *tone* colouration.
If they breakup at 15-30W it's a lot more manageable than the pair of
4x12s ! Your hearing may also live to see another day too..
Grahm
Erich wrote:
> Watts on guitar amps don't mean much. Ever heard a Matchless 30W?
> They get screaming stoopid loud. The guy I played with ran his in 15W
> mode and he was still screaming stoopid loud--- with GREAT tone.
Very effective no doubt.
As has been mentioned elsewhere - speaker cones for guitar amps are
designed to give that *tone* colouration.
If they breakup at 15-30W it's a lot more manageable than the pair of
4x12s ! Your hearing may also live to see another day too..
Grahm
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Michael wrote:
> In article <4295FC4E.D7760681@hotmail.com>,
> rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
> >
> > Phildo wrote:
> >
> > < snip >
> >
> > > Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
> > > be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs?
> >
> > That's a damn fine idea actually ! I would suggest in *addition* rather than
> > replace. You'll never replace the comfort factor of a 4x12 !
>
> Oh, no. That's the whole *point* of the exercise: to LOWER
> the volume level by using less speakers and pointing them at
> the guitarist's head so that he can actually hear them for once.
Yes - I know that - but try explaining it to a guitarist ! ;-)
The monitor wedge in front of them will at least have half a chance of getting
them to turn down by giving them a direct sound source.
There's the 'cosmetics' of the back line to consider too. You don't have any cred
as a guitarist if you don't have an amp behind you.
Graham
Michael wrote:
> In article <4295FC4E.D7760681@hotmail.com>,
> rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
> >
> > Phildo wrote:
> >
> > < snip >
> >
> > > Maybe guitar amp manufacturers should think about making monitor wedges to
> > > be powered from guitar amps in place of the main speaker cabs?
> >
> > That's a damn fine idea actually ! I would suggest in *addition* rather than
> > replace. You'll never replace the comfort factor of a 4x12 !
>
> Oh, no. That's the whole *point* of the exercise: to LOWER
> the volume level by using less speakers and pointing them at
> the guitarist's head so that he can actually hear them for once.
Yes - I know that - but try explaining it to a guitarist ! ;-)
The monitor wedge in front of them will at least have half a chance of getting
them to turn down by giving them a direct sound source.
There's the 'cosmetics' of the back line to consider too. You don't have any cred
as a guitarist if you don't have an amp behind you.
Graham
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Kevin Aylward wrote:
> Pooh Bear wrote:
> > Kevin Aylward wrote:
> >
> >> hank alrich wrote:
> >>> Agent 86 wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not
> >>>> seen the threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe
> >>>> it'll all make sense.
> >>>
> >>> While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very low
> >>> output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is significant.
> >>
> >> The papers were a technical design exercise, showing the strengths
> >> and weakness of some typical approaches. They are not a construction
> >> project.
> >
> > < snip bullshit >
> >
> > Have you looked at TI's PGA2500 ?
>
> You pointed me to ths before. Its quite a nice part.
>
> >I'm sure it would appeal to you.
>
> Why?
It's an IC for one thing. It also looks to be a very elegant design.
Graham
Kevin Aylward wrote:
> Pooh Bear wrote:
> > Kevin Aylward wrote:
> >
> >> hank alrich wrote:
> >>> Agent 86 wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not
> >>>> seen the threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then maybe
> >>>> it'll all make sense.
> >>>
> >>> While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very low
> >>> output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is significant.
> >>
> >> The papers were a technical design exercise, showing the strengths
> >> and weakness of some typical approaches. They are not a construction
> >> project.
> >
> > < snip bullshit >
> >
> > Have you looked at TI's PGA2500 ?
>
> You pointed me to ths before. Its quite a nice part.
>
> >I'm sure it would appeal to you.
>
> Why?
It's an IC for one thing. It also looks to be a very elegant design.
Graham
Archived from groups: alt.audio.pro.live-sound,rec.audio.pro (More info?)
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>
>> Pooh Bear wrote:
>>> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>>>
>>>> hank alrich wrote:
>>>>> Agent 86 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not
>>>>>> seen the threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then
>>>>>> maybe it'll all make sense.
>>>>>
>>>>> While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very
>>>>> low output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is
>>>>> significant.
>>>>
>>>> The papers were a technical design exercise, showing the strengths
>>>> and weakness of some typical approaches. They are not a
>>>> construction project.
>>>
>>> < snip bullshit >
>>>
>>> Have you looked at TI's PGA2500 ?
>>
>> You pointed me to ths before. Its quite a nice part.
>>
>>> I'm sure it would appeal to you.
>>
>> Why?
>
> It's an IC for one thing. It also looks to be a very elegant design.
>
I just find that rising distortion at low signals to be a bit
irritating. I would like to know why.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Pooh Bear wrote:
> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>
>> Pooh Bear wrote:
>>> Kevin Aylward wrote:
>>>
>>>> hank alrich wrote:
>>>>> Agent 86 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Another reference to Kevin's imaginary mic preamp. If you've not
>>>>>> seen the threads on that subject, try to look for them. Then
>>>>>> maybe it'll all make sense.
>>>>>
>>>>> While the simulated preamp has very low noise, it also has very
>>>>> low output, as in none, so the noise to signal ratio is
>>>>> significant.
>>>>
>>>> The papers were a technical design exercise, showing the strengths
>>>> and weakness of some typical approaches. They are not a
>>>> construction project.
>>>
>>> < snip bullshit >
>>>
>>> Have you looked at TI's PGA2500 ?
>>
>> You pointed me to ths before. Its quite a nice part.
>>
>>> I'm sure it would appeal to you.
>>
>> Why?
>
> It's an IC for one thing. It also looks to be a very elegant design.
>
I just find that rising distortion at low signals to be a bit
irritating. I would like to know why.
Kevin Aylward
informationEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.
Related ressources:
- ForumUse PA or Backline for electric guitars??
- ForumNew Build ~$2k Need Opinions/ Suggestions ! *EDITED*
- ForumIsrael takes out top Hamas general. Hamas vows hell is coming.
- ForumOpinions for Church PA and Recording/Control Room Mix
- Forummy msi p6n diamond caught on fire(not joking) Please help
- ForumWant to build new PC - help or suggestions please
- ForumThinking of adding a peltier and cold plate... suggestions ?
- ForumAntec 100 top fan stopped by 8-pin eatx 12 v clips. Help
- ForumEVGA 670 FTW vs GIGABYTE 670 WF3 vs ASUS 670-DC2 non top
- ForumOver the top extreme gaming pc
- ForumHelp me build a PC please
- ForumSP2500's or Another Subwoofer?
- ForumI need surround sound card advice please.
- ForumSeeking help restoring father's LP
- ForumMixing, Any additional suggestions?
- More resources
Read discussions in other Home Audio categories
!
