RCF ART 310a vs Alto TS112a?

[hammondman]

Hi,

Has anyone had any experience with the RCF ART 310a active 10" speaker and the Alto TS112a active 12"? How do both of these compare in output and bass response?

[mkfs9]

Can't see Alto keeping up with rcf in any department really.

[hammondman]

Well the RCF is in a different class of speaker but I'm not sure the 10" woofer would be able to keep up with the bigger 12" in the Alto for deep bass at higher volumes or at all?

[jonthomas]

RCF will destroy it above 70 hz, physics favors lager speakers for bass.

[agedhorse]

Maybe, maybe not. Physics is based on more than size.

[RoadRanger]

I'd be very surprised if the RCFs don't have at least a 6db advantage. The altos would be more in the class of my old Peavey PR12Ds - quite OK for smaller gigs over subs (150ish).

[hammondman]

As some of you may have read on some of my other threads I use my TS112a as FOH on acoustic gigs, wedge monitors with my bigger pa and as a keyboard amp for workshops and rehearsals. I have been extremely impressed with the TS112a's for the £300 I paid for the pair!! I've also found it to have quite impressive bass response at moderate volumes! On the acoustic gig's I do I put a small amount of upright bass through the TS112a and it generally sounds great in the venues we do.
The cheapest I've seen the RCF 310a's in the UK is £355 each which is more than double the price of the Alto TS112a's! I don't want to sacrifice the bass response I'm getting with the TS112a's and would ideally be happier with a little more which I don't think I'm likely to get with the 310a's?? Also, apart from having at least as much bass response at higher SPL's the RCF 310 would have to be dramatically better than the TS112a to justify spending more than double the price!!??

[agedhorse]

6dB more is 4x the speaker for twice the price... sounds like cheaper is more expensive in this case eh?

[hammondman]

According to the published specs the Alto TS112a has a maximum SPL of 125db and the RCF has 127db!? Has this 6db difference people are mentioning been measured?
Also, how does the bass response compare on the RCF 310a vs the Alto TS112a?

[agedhorse]

I believe you will find the real measures difference to be close to 6db average. I think you will also find the real world lf response to be similar. Most of the alto stuff I have seen is geared for the lower end market, RCF in general makes more substantial speakers (if you can get over the ugly cosmetics on some of their art lines). There is a reason why the rcf cost more IMO.

[hammondman]

Yes the Alto stuff is definitely geared towards the lower end market but they actually sound surprisingly good! Way better than I was expecting!

I'm not keen on the look of the newer RCF speakers (particularly the 400 series upwards). The 310a looks a little better than those but the older 310A-I has a full grill and looks great!

Have you heard both the Alto TS112a and RCF 310a?

[Al Poulin]

Even cheap stuff these days can sound very good. I've tested quite a few actives that sounded better than their low price tags would suggest. There are always reasons for one product being cheaper than the other however, and often these include shortcuts/compromises = using lower quality parts, circuit boards, a thinner plastic cabinet that almost always result in reduced long term reliability and/or poor performance at higher output levels. (many of these lower priced speakers start limiting quicker than the more expensive ones - Tapco Thumps are a good example of this). IMO, the RCF cab has a much better chance of still being fully functional in 10 years where the Alto will have likely have had at leastone failure of some sort. I've already read of more ALto TS speaker failures than I have about RCF 3 series failures, and the TS have only been out for a short while while the 3 series has been available for 6+ years. If you mostly play at lower levels, the Altos may be just fine, but RCF has been around for a long time and the quality of their speakers and transducers is almost legendary... They are also completely built in Italy as opposed to being assembled in China from various "value" parts.

Al

[Al Poulin]

I would need to add that although the Art 3 line is known as terrific sounding and high SPL speakers, deeper bass response is really not their strong point. Most models in this line offer very little response below 70hz. That said, in today's actives, quite a bit of that deep response is done through processing (bass boost) and this is usually reduced at higher levels.

Al

[agedhorse]

Design decisions often dictate the overall voicing of the speakers, but the 10" drivers in some of RCF's prodicts can excel at low frequency if that's the specific design choice made for the product. Many of RCF's products are designed to be used with a subwoofer. In those cases, it might be a better choice to use a driver with different power-bandwidth strengths as that can improve overall performance in the intended application.

Overall, RCF drivers are very, very good.

[hammondman]

Thanks guys. I think I'll probably stick with the Alto's for the time being. I was using them as monitors on a gig at the weekend and the drummer was particularly impressed with them. He said it was one of the clearest he has heard and found it to be better than what he was used to when playing full time on one of the luxury cruise liners!
I also had a DJ going through my main system and forgot to mute the monitors before setting his levels and the sound absolutely blasted the TS112a's until I quickly muted them. Thankfully this didn't damage them and has given me more confidence in their reliability.

I spoke to one guy who has used both the TS112a's and RCF310a's and he said that the TS112a does have a little extra bass. He said he found them both to be very good and either would be capable of doing a good job. He favoured the RCF310a for acoustic instruments but said he doubted if the RCF was putting out any bass frequencies below 70Hz as Al has already mentioned!