Jump to content

RCF ART 310a vs Alto TS112a?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

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!!??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

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!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Kinda funny how no one who has responded has actually compared the two speakers in real life but assume the RCF must be better. I have heard of hearing with your eyes, but apparantly people here are hearing with their wallet!;)

 

How was the difference of 6dB determined?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Perhaps engineering experience and a knowledge of the drivers used in the RCF product? I do have extensive experience with RCF and have quite a bit of their product sitting in my shop. I have also designed with their components.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Perhaps engineering experience and a knowledge of the drivers used in the RCF product? I do have extensive experience with RCF and have quite a bit of their product sitting in my shop. I have also designed with their components.

 

And you have had equal experience with Alto?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Believe me, if I had a choice I would choose RCF over Alto any day, but the OP did ask specifically about the low end reponse of the two cabs. I am pretty impressed(and surprised) by the low end on the TS112A. They have more low end than my SRX 712's when compared at equal levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The srx712 was designed specifically to be used with a sub if any real low end was needed. This was a focused trade off to size, weight broadband efficiency and flat response. Normalizing for equiv. metrics, it's considerably more efficient at higher powers than either the art or alto. It's the trade offs made in this particular product and the intended applications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Since we're comparing RCF and Alto here, does anyone have experience with or knowledge of the SXM112a (the Alto 12" coaxial stage monitor)? I've been planning to finish my small PA upgrade with another set of RCF 310a's for use as wedges, but for various financial reasons, I'm wondering if a set of the Altos might be at least a viable, lower cost alternative. This is for a very moderate stage volume situation with a semi-acoustic ethnic music ensemble.

 

Louis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Since we're comparing RCF and Alto here, does anyone have experience with or knowledge of the SXM112a (the Alto 12" coaxial stage monitor)? I've been planning to finish my small PA upgrade with another set of RCF 310a's for use as wedges, but for various financial reasons, I'm wondering if a set of the Altos might be at least a viable, lower cost alternative. This is for a very moderate stage volume situation with a semi-acoustic ethnic music ensemble.

 

Louis

 

They may be viable for that application if you don't need more speaker than they can deliver. That's a different question than saying one is "as good or better" than the other at 1/2 the price. If you only need what the less capable speaker brings to the table than that's the better choice for that application but does not hold true for all applications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

They may be viable for that application if you don't need more speaker than they can deliver. That's a different question than saying one is "as good or better" than the other at 1/2 the price. If you only need what the less capable speaker brings to the table than that's the better choice for that application but does not hold true for all applications.

 

 

Yes. That's the calculus I'm running through right now. I'm thinking that the SXM112a's will do the modest monitoring job I need them to do, and I know that's not because they are as good for this or for several other applications as another pair of 310a's would be.

 

I'm also aware that I'd be giving up some of the advantages of taking one more step in the direction of the fully "modular" approach I've been aiming at (one more pair of 310a's would give me the same speaker all around--as FOH alone or as tops over my little EV subs, as side-fills, and as wedges, plus the extra redundancy and the possibility of doubling up the FOH if I ever need to). All that poised against the simple question of whether or not I'll be able to afford another pair of RCFs any time soon.

 

Louis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...