Members Bobby1Note Posted September 2, 2012 Members Share Posted September 2, 2012 I went to a local outdoor blues-fest yesterday. There were maybe 200 people at best. PA consisted of four Peavey 2x18" QW subs ( 2 per side), (which sounded pretty good btw), and the mains were EAW JFL 210 Compact line-array boxes. 4-per side. Console was a PreSonus SL-24. The sound was dreadful, totally lacking in mid-range clarity, detail, and punch. Compared to the great sound of the dB Tech line arrays in the other thread, these were night and day. Was it the boxes? or was it the mix? The "constant-curvature" design, meant that the lowest-hanging box, was firing straight down onto the ground, while the second-from-the-bottom box, was also firing down at a very steep angle. It struck me as being very poorly conceived, and not intended to be used with more than 3 boxes per hang. Any thoughts? http://www.eaw.com/products/jfl210/ http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/QW218 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Axisplayer Posted September 2, 2012 Members Share Posted September 2, 2012 It is the mix you heard. JFL210 has been called one of the best sounding two ways ever built by people that don't work for EAW.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Special J Posted September 2, 2012 Members Share Posted September 2, 2012 Agreed, pretty limiting as far as positioning. As far as the sound, who knows? What were the amps? Drive? EAW seems to be a shadow of the company that they used to be, but even back in the day, they put out so many different products. Some of them were pretty great, and then some left you wondering what the hell they were thinking. This seems to fall into the latter category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted September 2, 2012 Members Share Posted September 2, 2012 Limited as far as length of the array (as is the QSC KLA, JBL VRX, etc.) but a very, very good sounding box when used as designed. Not so much a line array as a vertically oriented conventional array. IMO, it was a poorly set up system, either somebody was in over their heads or was educated beyond their own intelligence with regard to how this stuff works. It takes a bit of effort to screw up a system like that IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted September 3, 2012 Author Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 I'm thinking that there may have been a few elements at work here. I have no doubt that the mix was far from ideal; and that was obvious at the outset. The subs totally outran the tops for example. The system was simply not well balanced,that's for sure, but, the extreme down-firing angles of the lowest boxes in the hang, also contributed to the lack of mid-range projection and clarity. The hardware on the boxes, just didn't seem to allow for aiming, like you'd see in a normal J-hang. Set up as they were, they totally lacked in dynamic-range,,,and I really felt that my EF500PB's would probably have blown these things away. To be fair, they probably could have benefited from more elevation. The metal frame from which they were suspended, was probably no more than 15-18 feet tall. I'll see if I can get my hands on some of the pics my friends took. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dennis a Posted September 3, 2012 Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 The "constant-curvature" design, meant that the lowest-hanging box, was firing straight down onto the ground, while the second-from-the-bottom box, was also firing down at a very steep angle. It struck me as being very poorly conceived, and not intended to be used with more than 3 boxes per hang.Any thoughts? I disagree that a four box hang of these speakers with the bottom element aimed straight down will cause a lack of mid range clairty, detail, and punch. At worse, it may cause feedback with the vocal mics on stage but the bottom box can also become a front/near fill by attenuating the entire box rather than shading the HF only. I understand line array theory but I think in this situation you don't really have a line array and worse case scenario is your 4 box hang becomes a 3 box hang plus fill. There is a HF shading switch on each box that could have been set incorrectly or there is a possibility the sound company had a DSP with incorrect settings. My guess is this array might sound better indoors......we are talking about 10" mids and not very many of them. They might have just got lost outdoors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Unalaska Posted September 3, 2012 Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 Bad mix, that's a very capable box Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flanc Posted September 3, 2012 Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 Bad mix, that's a very capable box Agreed. All the components you mentioned would have given me cause to expect a stellar sound experience with headroom to spare given the audience size and presumed coverage. Something was setup wrong or the board engineer was clueless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted September 3, 2012 Author Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 Agreed. All the components you mentioned would have given me cause to expect a stellar sound experience with headroom to spare given the audience size and presumed coverage. Something was setup wrong or the board engineer was clueless. It's easy to generalize, and say the board engineer was clueless, and leave it there, but, I really think there was possibly more to it than that, with this particular deployment. I agree that the mix was bad,,, you just had to hear the vocals for a second-or-two, to realize something was up. It's difficult to pin-point precisely what was wrong with this set-up, but the most evident factor, was that the subs totally outran the mains. There simply was no sparkle, or life, to the mains. I'm pretty sure that the lack of sufficient elevation was one factor. Basically, that bottom box was neutering itself by firing almost straight down,,,, and since the front row of the crowd was roughly 40-50 feet back from the stage, that the rather extreme angle of the second-from-the-bottom box in the hang, didn't help either. I'd say that second box was probably firing into the grass, in front of the front row of seats.The people were seated randomly, in a grassy field, and the lowest box in the hang, was probably no more than 12-15 feet off the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted September 3, 2012 Author Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 Here's a clip from last years gig. I wasn't there, but I assume it was the same rig, since the show was put on by the same guy. (He owns the rig) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted September 3, 2012 Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 I agree with Dennis, i don't think the bottom box had anything to do with what yu heard (and didn't hear). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted September 3, 2012 Author Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 I agree with Dennis, i don't think the bottom box had anything to do with what yu heard (and didn't hear). So, let's take the three top boxes in each hang, out of the equation; Do you think it's a good idea to aim your speaker down at such a steep angle, is a "good" idea? Or, that it "doesn't matter"? Essentially, what was happening here, was that half of the hang wasn't projecting forward. I guess what I'm trying to sort out here, is the proper deployment for a constant-curvature array, vs a typical J-hang. Shouldn't the lowest box in the hang, be aimed at the front row? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dedmeet Posted September 3, 2012 Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 I am curious to hear the answer to the above question, as I may grow into a CC Array in the next few years. That said, I must admit this thread went an unexpected direction. When I saw JFL+QW sub, my expectations were to hear how good the system not sounded, not how bad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted September 3, 2012 Author Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 I am curious to hear the answer to the above question, as I may grow into a CC Array in the next few years.That said, I must admit this thread went an unexpected direction. When I saw JFL+QW sub, my expectations were to hear how good the system not sounded, not how bad! Well, most of the "bad" was in the mix.... no doubt there. It's the rest that I'm trying to sort out. Right now, I'm thinking 1. bad-mix (very obvious)2. wrong mains configuration for that gig (J-hang would've been better, given the support rigging limitations.3. Insufficient elevation to the mains, led to poor geometry/directionality. The bottom of the hang, was simply sloped too far back; partially because of weight-distribution of the hang, and the manner in which the boxes locked together.. (sharp curve). Maybe this hang would have benefited from some sort of counter-balance, or additional support, to prevent the lowest box in the hang being at such a steep angle.4. Or, Maybe four boxes is simply just one too many for this type of array???? Another possibility,,, Is a CCA (constant curvature array) more suited to an audience seated in bleachers/grand-stands, than an audience seated on flat ground (outdoors of course) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members agedhorse Posted September 3, 2012 Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 If you were standing outside of the bottom box's pattern and the environment was not-reflective, it's unlikely that you would hear it's contribution (though it would not help either). It's essentially a waste of resources and one of my chief complaints about the deployment of these products in larget formats than they are designed for. One place a 4 box hange of a product like this would be appropriate IME is in arenas where you are almost downfiring at the same time that you are covering a mezzanine above the main floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted September 3, 2012 Author Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 If you were standing outside of the bottom box's pattern and the environment was not-reflective, it's unlikely that you would hear it's contribution (though it would not help either). It's essentially a waste of resources and one of my chief complaints about the deployment of these products in larget formats than they are designed for. One place a 4 box hange of a product like this would be appropriate IME is in arenas where you are almost downfiring at the same time that you are covering a mezzanine above the main floor. Bingo !!! Anywhere, where there's an elevation at the rear of the seating area. There's also that minimum-height off the floor/ground allows the angle of the lowest box in the hang, to cover the front row of the audience. These questions/answers weren't evident when I posted this thread. I knew something beside the mix wasn't "right", and couldn't quite put my finger on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dennis a Posted September 3, 2012 Members Share Posted September 3, 2012 Basically, that bottom box was neutering itself by firing almost straight down,,,, and since the front row of the crowd was roughly 40-50 feet back from the stage, that the rather extreme angle of the second-from-the-bottom box in the hang, didn't help either. I'd say that second box was probably firing into the grass, in front of the front row of seats.The people were seated randomly, in a grassy field, and the lowest box in the hang, was probably no more than 12-15 feet off the ground. I'm just curious, what kept people 40-50' back from the stage? When designing a system, I would typically include coverage up to the stage (because I would expect people close to the stage) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted September 4, 2012 Author Members Share Posted September 4, 2012 I'm just curious, what kept people 40-50' back from the stage? When designing a system, I would typically include coverage up to the stage (because I would expect people close to the stage) dennis a, First-off, people brought their own chairs, and just set-up wherever they wanted to sit. This show was in a very small community, and the $25. entry-fee, kept a lot of the younger people away. The vast majority in the crowd were 40+, and even 50-60+ years old. Music genre was strictly blues. The show-area, was just a flat and grassy field, which is generally used as an agricultural fair-ground. The seating area was very open, with zero reflective surfaces in all directions. With that layout in mind, it's now easy to understand why the 2-per side ground-stacked subs, outpaced the mains to the extent they did. With two of the mains per hang, pointing away from the crowd (one too high/ and one too low), that basically left only two mains per hang, pointing at the audience,,,, or looking at it differently,,,, one main per dual-18" sub-woofer, pointing at the audience. It's just poor equipment-selection for that application. IMO, it was doomed to fail before the mix was even established. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dedmeet Posted September 4, 2012 Members Share Posted September 4, 2012 OP, I think you've nailed it. Sounds like the wrong tool was used for the job. I suspect that a pair of QW tops per side over those QW subs would have proven more than up to the task if powered and processed properly. Then again, I am still a fan of big boxes powered by big iron in many situations where I have seen people try to use CCAs. Oh well, I guess everyone wants to be able to say they have a 'line array.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bobby1Note Posted September 4, 2012 Author Members Share Posted September 4, 2012 OP, I think you've nailed it. Sounds like the wrong tool was used for the job. I suspect that a pair of QW tops per side over those QW subs would have proven more than up to the task if powered and processed properly. Then again, I am still a fan of big boxes powered by big iron in many situations where I have seen people try to use CCAs. Oh well, I guess everyone wants to be able to say they have a 'line array.' I agree. That's why I initially thought that my four EF500's would have done a better job for that application. The QW subs were impressive btw, and I'd love to hear the QW mains. IIRC, Vinny D runs a pair per side, over TX9's Yorkies. Both of those set-ups would have done a better job for this application IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dedmeet Posted September 4, 2012 Members Share Posted September 4, 2012 The QW mains actually sound quite good. I saw a show some years ago that was the QW218 with a QW4F on top on each side for an outdoor crowd of a few hundred. The kick drum would take your breath away. Tops were clean and loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.