Members ChiroVette Posted December 28, 2012 Members Share Posted December 28, 2012 Sorry, guys. Just wanted to see if I could get some opinions on this. It is something I have been wondering about but didn't want to start a whole new thread for. Originally Posted by ChiroVette Since the OP is asking about PRX to VRX upgrade, I have a question (which potentially hijacks the topic lol): How much of an upgrade is the VRX932LAP over the PRX612m?I have heard many mixed reviews of the VRX tops, both powered and passive. Some say they are amazing and beasts and others say they are highly overrated. A couple of people complained about a perceived "hole" in the mid-range. Just asking out of curiosity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChiroVette Posted December 28, 2012 Members Share Posted December 28, 2012 Sorry, guys. Just wanted to see if I could get some opinions on this. It is something I have been wondering about but didn't want to start a whole new thread for. Originally Posted by ChiroVette Since the OP is asking about PRX to VRX upgrade, I have a question (which potentially hijacks the topic lol): How much of an upgrade is the VRX932LAP over the PRX612m?I have heard many mixed reviews of the VRX tops, both powered and passive. Some say they are amazing and beasts and others say they are highly overrated. A couple of people complained about a perceived "hole" in the mid-range. Just asking out of curiosity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted December 28, 2012 Members Share Posted December 28, 2012 I think there is very little difference in output capability of the PRX512 and PRX612. There may be some sound quality difference, but I haven't A/B'd them. I suspect it would be hard to tell which one was better after a little eq. The XLF is simply in a different league than the non-XLF (or any other sub in that price category IMHO). As Agedhorse pointed out, there is 4-5db difference, but even more important than that number is that the output of usable bass frequency produced. For some reason, JBL decided to market a sub with a high end driver (SRX/VRX class) in a MI powered box while none of the other manufacturers did. I did pretty extensive research into subs before buying mine and I can tell you that there is really nothing else at this price point that compares. I suspect that JBL still makes a decent profit from each XLF sold. Considering the success of the product, I think their design decision was a good one from a profit standpoint since people looking for a ~ 1K powered sub would not be looking at anything in the VRX range (~2K). I think it will be a nice upgrade to your rig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted December 28, 2012 Members Share Posted December 28, 2012 I think there is very little difference in output capability of the PRX512 and PRX612. There may be some sound quality difference, but I haven't A/B'd them. I suspect it would be hard to tell which one was better after a little eq. The XLF is simply in a different league than the non-XLF (or any other sub in that price category IMHO). As Agedhorse pointed out, there is 4-5db difference, but even more important than that number is that the output of usable bass frequency produced. For some reason, JBL decided to market a sub with a high end driver (SRX/VRX class) in a MI powered box while none of the other manufacturers did. I did pretty extensive research into subs before buying mine and I can tell you that there is really nothing else at this price point that compares. I suspect that JBL still makes a decent profit from each XLF sold. Considering the success of the product, I think their design decision was a good one from a profit standpoint since people looking for a ~ 1K powered sub would not be looking at anything in the VRX range (~2K). I think it will be a nice upgrade to your rig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 28, 2012 Members Share Posted December 28, 2012 Since it hasn't been mentioned on this thread yet FYI:The PRX5xx and PRX6xx series are basically powered MRX series except for the PRX618S-XLF which is basically a powered SRX718S (as was the PRX718S). Some would consider the SRX the "low end pro grade" JBL line and the MRX the "high end MI grade". The SRX are a significant step up from the MRX although the MRX are quite OK within their SPL limitations. My own rule of thumb for hard rock (drums fully mic'd) indoors is that you need two sub drivers per top of the same series to balance. The XLF being of the series above the other PRX balances nicely one-to-one .My RCF 310A's have roughly the same output as the PRX612m's and my Danley TH-Mini's roughly the same output (above 50Hz) as XLF's and I'm quite happy with that system - except it doesn't "look loud" nor does it have the orange badges . These class of systems are capable of concert level (AKA stoopid loud) for about 200 indoors. Outdoors you really need double the subs to balance. My "big subs" that I use outdoors have about 5db more output than the mini's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 28, 2012 Members Share Posted December 28, 2012 Since it hasn't been mentioned on this thread yet FYI:The PRX5xx and PRX6xx series are basically powered MRX series except for the PRX618S-XLF which is basically a powered SRX718S (as was the PRX718S). Some would consider the SRX the "low end pro grade" JBL line and the MRX the "high end MI grade". The SRX are a significant step up from the MRX although the MRX are quite OK within their SPL limitations. My own rule of thumb for hard rock (drums fully mic'd) indoors is that you need two sub drivers per top of the same series to balance. The XLF being of the series above the other PRX balances nicely one-to-one .My RCF 310A's have roughly the same output as the PRX612m's and my Danley TH-Mini's roughly the same output (above 50Hz) as XLF's and I'm quite happy with that system - except it doesn't "look loud" nor does it have the orange badges . These class of systems are capable of concert level (AKA stoopid loud) for about 200 indoors. Outdoors you really need double the subs to balance. My "big subs" that I use outdoors have about 5db more output than the mini's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted December 28, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 28, 2012 The PRX 718S wasn't around for very long. Does anybody know what the deal with that was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted December 28, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 28, 2012 The PRX 718S wasn't around for very long. Does anybody know what the deal with that was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 28, 2012 Members Share Posted December 28, 2012 Originally Posted by guido61 The PRX 718S wasn't around for very long. Does anybody know what the deal with that was? It was dropped when its replacement (the PRX618S-XLF) came out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 28, 2012 Members Share Posted December 28, 2012 Originally Posted by guido61 The PRX 718S wasn't around for very long. Does anybody know what the deal with that was? It was dropped when its replacement (the PRX618S-XLF) came out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bugzie Posted December 29, 2012 Members Share Posted December 29, 2012 I've only used the XLF's on 2 occasions. I don't own them and they were rented. If you have a GC around, buy a pair and try them out, you can always take them back and upgrade. You will be surprised in the difference in thump from the 518s's. It did me. Seems like JBL got it right on the fist try with the XLF's. Prior to using them my powered sub of choice would have been the QSC. I always thought they were a "musical" sub. The XLF's were an eye opener. After trying them I would be surprised if they don't fill your needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bugzie Posted December 29, 2012 Members Share Posted December 29, 2012 I've only used the XLF's on 2 occasions. I don't own them and they were rented. If you have a GC around, buy a pair and try them out, you can always take them back and upgrade. You will be surprised in the difference in thump from the 518s's. It did me. Seems like JBL got it right on the fist try with the XLF's. Prior to using them my powered sub of choice would have been the QSC. I always thought they were a "musical" sub. The XLF's were an eye opener. After trying them I would be surprised if they don't fill your needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 29, 2012 Members Share Posted December 29, 2012 Originally Posted by Bugzie Seems like JBL got it right on the first try with the XLF's. HaHa, if you count the passive versions that is the sixth(?) iteration of the SR line 1x18 sub. The SR4718 (first in the line?) was pretty meh IMO. There was a later "A" and "X" version (and maybe one more in there?) and then they dropped the "4", put the "X" after the "SR", added an "S" (for subwoofer) at the end and the SRX718S was born. The passive SRX718S is (was?) awesome and the PRX718S and then the PRX618S-XLF are basically powered versions of that. Those get most of their awesomeness from using two motors to power the one cone - using a neo magnet made if possible to have two separate voice coils running in twp separate magnetic gaps in a structure not much bigger than in a "standard" driver . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 29, 2012 Members Share Posted December 29, 2012 Originally Posted by Bugzie Seems like JBL got it right on the first try with the XLF's. HaHa, if you count the passive versions that is the sixth(?) iteration of the SR line 1x18 sub. The SR4718 (first in the line?) was pretty meh IMO. There was a later "A" and "X" version (and maybe one more in there?) and then they dropped the "4", put the "X" after the "SR", added an "S" (for subwoofer) at the end and the SRX718S was born. The passive SRX718S is (was?) awesome and the PRX718S and then the PRX618S-XLF are basically powered versions of that. Those get most of their awesomeness from using two motors to power the one cone - using a neo magnet made if possible to have two separate voice coils running in twp separate magnetic gaps in a structure not much bigger than in a "standard" driver . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted December 29, 2012 Members Share Posted December 29, 2012 Originally Posted by RoadRanger HaHa, if you count the passive versions that is the sixth(?) iteration of the SR line 1x18 sub. The SR4718 (first in the line?) was pretty meh IMO. There was a later "A" and "X" version (and maybe one more in there?) and then they dropped the "4", put the "X" after the "SR", added an "S" (for subwoofer) at the end and the SRX718S was born. The passive SRX718S is (was?) awesome and the PRX718S and then the PRX618S-XLF are basically powered versions of that. Those get most of their awesomeness from using two motors to power the one cone - using a neo magnet made if possible to have two separate voice coils running in twp separate magnetic gaps in a structure not much bigger than in a "standard" driver . I think you perhaps make this appear to be a bad thing...Every quality product line is based on evolutionary engineering. The product evolves as the market indicates it preference to forward direction.The SRX-700 series was JBL's response toward customers looking for a high quality, compact, lightweight, high output package. That was the primary reason for the neo motor and differential drive allowed higher total motor strength without using a much larger (and more costly) slug of Neo. It could have been done with a high grade ceramic magnet but that was not in line with light weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 29, 2012 Members Share Posted December 29, 2012 Originally Posted by agedhorse I think you perhaps make this appear to be a bad thing... Not my intent. The poster thought that the SRX618S-XF was a design with no history behind it that "JBL got right the first time". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted December 29, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 29, 2012 Originally Posted by RoadRanger Not my intent. The poster thought that the SRX618S-XF was a design with no history behind it that "JBL got right the first time". Well, I knew there was a history. I just found it interesting that while the PRX-500 line was upgraded once to the PRX-600 line, there's been 4 different subs. And the 718 sits as the odd-ball because there's no other PRX-700 speakers. So I thought that maybe there was a particular story behind this short-lived, oddly numbered product. But you answered it all pretty well. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mutha Goose Posted December 30, 2012 Members Share Posted December 30, 2012 Originally Posted by OneEng I think there is very little difference in output capability of the PRX512 and PRX612. There may be some sound quality difference, but I haven't A/B'd them. I suspect it would be hard to tell which one was better after a little eq.... I have both 512s and 612s. There is a definite difference between them, especially if you're not bi-amping the 512s (which I don't). I use the 512s for monitors, and 612s for FOH and each is better in these applications IMO. I find the 612s to be smoother in the mid-range, especially off axis. Part of that is the cross-over and part is processing, but that's not all of it. They can also get quite a bit louder. Further, the coverage pattern of the 612s is a lot more conducive to doubling up and is better in rooms with lower ceilings. I prefer my 612s a lot over the 512s for FOH.But I would take (and do ) the 512s over the 612s for floor monitors. The 512s have a far better monitor angle and I prefer the higher lower cut-off for floor monitors. A little less boom and a mid-range that cuts through nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 30, 2012 Members Share Posted December 30, 2012 Originally Posted by Mutha Goose I have both 512s and 612s. There is a definite difference between them, especially if you're not bi-amping the 512s (which I don't). I use the 512s for monitors, and 612s for FOH and each is better in these applications IMO. We're talking about the powered PRX512M (which is biamp'd and procesed), not the passive MRX512M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bugzie Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 I meant in the sense that it's basically a powered version of the SRX 718. I remember reading on quite a few occasions that people kept saying that it was what they were waiting for when the active speaker became accepted. Agreed all of the earlier versions were mediocre at best. To my ears QSC hit a home run when they released the HPR 181. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members OneEng Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 Originally Posted by Bugzie I meant in the sense that it's basically a powered version of the SRX 718. I remember reading on quite a few occasions that people kept saying that it was what they were waiting for when the active speaker became accepted. Agreed all of the earlier versions were mediocre at best. To my ears QSC hit a home run when they released the HPR 181. I never heard the HPR181, but read that the HPR's in general were quite heavy ..... and had some reliability issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ChiroVette Posted January 2, 2013 Members Share Posted January 2, 2013 Plus, if you wanted to go that route, why not go with the KW181 instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 2, 2013 Members Share Posted January 2, 2013 Originally Posted by ChiroVette Plus, if you wanted to go that route, why not go with the KW181 instead? The KW's were not out when the HPR was introduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bugzie Posted January 3, 2013 Members Share Posted January 3, 2013 They are quite heavy. I've never heard of a reliability issue and there are quite a few around here being used as rental stock. Andy is correct, the HPR series was QSC's first stab at powered speakers. The KW's are the "new and improved" version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.