Members Koopdaddy Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 Just curious, would the 12's be an improvement over for stage monitor purposes?Peavey Impulse 200'shttp://www.peavey.com/assets/literat...s/80300689.pdfandPeavey 112 TLMhttp://www.peavey.com/assets/literat...s/80304871.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Koopdaddy Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 Just curious, would the 12's be an improvement over for stage monitor purposes?Peavey Impulse 200'shttp://www.peavey.com/assets/literat...s/80300689.pdfandPeavey 112 TLMhttp://www.peavey.com/assets/literat...s/80304871.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 Originally Posted by tsaldana3 Question....Ok, so I have used for the past 4 years as monitors, 2 Behringer B212a and 2 Yorkville yx15p.Would four of the 12 inch cabs and a couple of ipr's be a slight upgrade ? IMO, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 Originally Posted by tsaldana3 Question....Ok, so I have used for the past 4 years as monitors, 2 Behringer B212a and 2 Yorkville yx15p.Would four of the 12 inch cabs and a couple of ipr's be a slight upgrade ? IMO, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 Originally Posted by Koopdaddy Just curious, would the 12's be an improvement over for stage monitor purposes?Peavey Impulse 200'shttp://www.peavey.com/assets/literat...s/80300689.pdfandPeavey 112 TLMhttp://www.peavey.com/assets/literat...s/80304871.pdf Yes, for the TLM, probably not for the impulse (other than cosmetics) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 Originally Posted by Koopdaddy Just curious, would the 12's be an improvement over for stage monitor purposes?Peavey Impulse 200'shttp://www.peavey.com/assets/literat...s/80300689.pdfandPeavey 112 TLMhttp://www.peavey.com/assets/literat...s/80304871.pdf Yes, for the TLM, probably not for the impulse (other than cosmetics) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 Originally Posted by tsaldana3 Question.... Ok, so I have used for the past 4 years as monitors, 2 Behringer B212a and 2 Yorkville yx15p. Would four of the 12 inch cabs and a couple of ipr's be a slight upgrade ? My monitor amps are a pair of Peavey IPR1600's and I'm very happy with them. I do have a couple of these and if pack (and stage) space wasn't an issue I'd run six of them: http://www.loudspeakersplus.com/prod...PI-CABSSL112M/ Advantages are lighter weight and plywood cabs. Disadvantages are no SpeakOns and no pole mounts - and I think the DUS's have stronger HF drivers and better support . The DUS are still well under my 50 lb "not stoopid heavy" limit . OTOH the B212A (or newer "D") cabs are surprisingly decent sounding as monitors (they are biamp'd) and I'd not want to bet that the DUS or Loudspeaker+ cabs sound better. YMMV ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 Originally Posted by tsaldana3 Question.... Ok, so I have used for the past 4 years as monitors, 2 Behringer B212a and 2 Yorkville yx15p. Would four of the 12 inch cabs and a couple of ipr's be a slight upgrade ? My monitor amps are a pair of Peavey IPR1600's and I'm very happy with them. I do have a couple of these and if pack (and stage) space wasn't an issue I'd run six of them: http://www.loudspeakersplus.com/prod...PI-CABSSL112M/ Advantages are lighter weight and plywood cabs. Disadvantages are no SpeakOns and no pole mounts - and I think the DUS's have stronger HF drivers and better support . The DUS are still well under my 50 lb "not stoopid heavy" limit . OTOH the B212A (or newer "D") cabs are surprisingly decent sounding as monitors (they are biamp'd) and I'd not want to bet that the DUS or Loudspeaker+ cabs sound better. YMMV ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 Originally Posted by RoadRanger OTOH the B212A (or newer "D") cabs are surprisingly decent sounding as monitors (they are biamp'd) and I'd not want to bet that the DUS cabs sound better. YMMV ... I might. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 Originally Posted by RoadRanger OTOH the B212A (or newer "D") cabs are surprisingly decent sounding as monitors (they are biamp'd) and I'd not want to bet that the DUS cabs sound better. YMMV ... I might. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 ^ It would be an interesting comparison - both using Chinese drivers, one with an active crossover and biamp'd vs the other with a rather good (from the pics) passive crossover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted December 31, 2012 Members Share Posted December 31, 2012 ^ It would be an interesting comparison - both using Chinese drivers, one with an active crossover and biamp'd vs the other with a rather good (from the pics) passive crossover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tomm Williams Posted January 1, 2013 Author Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 Originally Posted by agedhorse Yes, for the TLM, probably not for the impulse (other than cosmetics) Andy. Does that mean you find the Impulse comparable to MXR? You made a comment about the DUS being on par with MXR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tomm Williams Posted January 1, 2013 Author Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 Originally Posted by agedhorse Yes, for the TLM, probably not for the impulse (other than cosmetics) Andy. Does that mean you find the Impulse comparable to MXR? You made a comment about the DUS being on par with MXR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 Originally Posted by Tomm Williams Andy. Does that mean you find the Impulse comparable to MXR? You made a comment about the DUS being on par with MXR Do you mean MRX?Yes, similar though the weight of the MDF is heavier. Sensitivity is within a dB or so, and power handling is about a dB shy as well (using my normalization to real world).If you are in the area, give me a call and you can play around with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 Originally Posted by Tomm Williams Andy. Does that mean you find the Impulse comparable to MXR? You made a comment about the DUS being on par with MXR Do you mean MRX?Yes, similar though the weight of the MDF is heavier. Sensitivity is within a dB or so, and power handling is about a dB shy as well (using my normalization to real world).If you are in the area, give me a call and you can play around with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Koopdaddy Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 Originally Posted by agedhorse Do you mean MRX? Yes, similar though the weight of the MDF is heavier. Sensitivity is within a dB or so, and power handling is about a dB shy as well (using my normalization to real world). If you are in the area, give me a call and you can play around with them. I used to live in Mountain View, but I am now in CO which is a bit far or I would take you up on that offer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Koopdaddy Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 Originally Posted by agedhorse Do you mean MRX? Yes, similar though the weight of the MDF is heavier. Sensitivity is within a dB or so, and power handling is about a dB shy as well (using my normalization to real world). If you are in the area, give me a call and you can play around with them. I used to live in Mountain View, but I am now in CO which is a bit far or I would take you up on that offer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 ^ Great test LOL. Dunno what the market is for passive monitors these days, especially ones only rated at 225W. While I'm sure they can get plenty loud enough things have gotten crazy out there - a general contractor with "only" a pair of "wimpy" IPR1600 doesn't get taken seriously hereabouts. RMX2450's seem to be the minimum with the hard rockers. Is that crazy or what? We had no problem in the bad old days destroying our hearing with a couple CS800's on the PA and a CS400 on monitors (100 watts per monitor) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 ^ Great test LOL. Dunno what the market is for passive monitors these days, especially ones only rated at 225W. While I'm sure they can get plenty loud enough things have gotten crazy out there - a general contractor with "only" a pair of "wimpy" IPR1600 doesn't get taken seriously hereabouts. RMX2450's seem to be the minimum with the hard rockers. Is that crazy or what? We had no problem in the bad old days destroying our hearing with a couple CS800's on the PA and a CS400 on monitors (100 watts per monitor) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 Originally Posted by RoadRanger ^ Great test LOL. Dunno what the market is for passive monitors these days, especially ones only rated at 225W. While I'm sure they can get plenty loud enough things have gotten crazy out there - a general contractor with "only" a pair of "wimpy" IPR1600 doesn't get taken seriously hereabouts. RMX2450's seem to be the minimum with the hard rockers. Is that crazy or what? We had no problem in the bad old days destroying our hearing with a couple CS800's on the PA and a CS400 on monitors (100 watts per monitor) . Because people do not understand how the numbers work. Period.A box that's a realistic (as in average, with the response in the +/-3dB range) 96dB/1W/1M, rated at a realistic power handling of 225 watts continuous (based on power compression curves) will compete quite well with many of today's exaggerated marketing claims. Powered at 350 watts (reasonable given the way the continuous power is rated, with proper HPF) is going to be pretty impressive. Folks do not understand the loss of sensitivity tradeoff that's made when trying to achieve higher numerical power handling. The point of diminishing returns bitch-slaps you time and time again in the design phase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 Originally Posted by RoadRanger ^ Great test LOL. Dunno what the market is for passive monitors these days, especially ones only rated at 225W. While I'm sure they can get plenty loud enough things have gotten crazy out there - a general contractor with "only" a pair of "wimpy" IPR1600 doesn't get taken seriously hereabouts. RMX2450's seem to be the minimum with the hard rockers. Is that crazy or what? We had no problem in the bad old days destroying our hearing with a couple CS800's on the PA and a CS400 on monitors (100 watts per monitor) . Because people do not understand how the numbers work. Period.A box that's a realistic (as in average, with the response in the +/-3dB range) 96dB/1W/1M, rated at a realistic power handling of 225 watts continuous (based on power compression curves) will compete quite well with many of today's exaggerated marketing claims. Powered at 350 watts (reasonable given the way the continuous power is rated, with proper HPF) is going to be pretty impressive. Folks do not understand the loss of sensitivity tradeoff that's made when trying to achieve higher numerical power handling. The point of diminishing returns bitch-slaps you time and time again in the design phase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 ^ "Perception is Reality" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoadRanger Posted January 1, 2013 Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 ^ "Perception is Reality" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tomm Williams Posted January 1, 2013 Author Members Share Posted January 1, 2013 Originally Posted by agedhorse Because people do not understand how the numbers work. Period. A box that's a realistic (as in average, with the response in the +/-3dB range) 96dB/1W/1M, rated at a realistic power handling of 225 watts continuous (based on power compression curves) will compete quite well with many of today's exaggerated marketing claims. Powered at 350 watts (reasonable given the way the continuous power is rated, with proper HPF) is going to be pretty impressive. Folks do not understand the loss of sensitivity tradeoff that's made when trying to achieve higher numerical power handling. The point of diminishing returns bitch-slaps you time and time again in the design phase. Looking at some of the specs from BagEnd products, their wattage ratings (on some boxes) are astonishingly low but their efficiency ratings are very high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.