Yorkville NX Vs. QSC K Series

[MrJoshua]

I've always been of the opinion that once you get above a certain minimum amount of quality, you're far more dependent on the operator than the equipment to get the sound right. I wouldn't turn my nose up at any of the systems mentioned in this thread. If you can't sound good with a NX or a K series or anything else of comparable quality, it probably isn't the gear's fault.

 

That said, I have a pair of K-10s that I use as monitors. They work very well. I run them as mains from time to time at small gigs where we'll only be putting vocals through the mains, and they work fine for that too. They're small and lightweight, but they can get loud and they sound good. That's pretty much what I ask for out of a speaker.

[Rumorsband]

Sounds like if all I want to do is lighten my load a bit and not lose any quality of sound I can use the K10's with my NX sub. If want to step it up a bit then look into the PRX 600 series.

[jaswrx]

yes, but I think the K-10 will lighten your load and sound better the the outdated NX55. The PRX will go even louder, not sure if they sound better though.

[335BoB]

Gimme EV's over both choices just my opinion.

Well "I" feel better!

[Bobby1Note]

I am skeptical of this, something tells me that there is something specifically skewed here. Just a gut feeling, which is generally pretty accurate.

Maybe one of the DJ's comments regarding the PRX612m's "plastic appearance" has something to do with it, :lol: Ironic that he calls a wood cabinet "plastic looking", then praises the K-12 which is not only "plastic", but with a painted finish.

Again, this so-called "review" reads like a music-store showroom review (no crowd noise/ no distance between reviewer and cabs.)

[Bobby1Note]

yes, but I think the K-10 will lighten your load and sound better the the outdated NX55. The PRX will go even louder, not sure if they sound better though.

 

You just don't quit, do ya. Tell me, does this also mean the PRX612m "outdates" the now older K-Series????? (weighs less/louder/wood cab)

 

If I've got this straight, all Yorkville has to do is add a 1200w "module", limit the snot out of it (like the other guys), but it will then "outdate" all the other boxes, because of wattage bragging rights,,,, and,, it's "new & improved". Have I got that straight?

 

If you've ever taken time to read Yorkvilles product descriptions, you'll see at the bottom of each page "specifications subject to change without notice". Example; when the NX55p first came out, it weighed 47 lbs. The most recent spec is 41 lbs. Previous to that, it was 42 lbs. Not a peep, no hoopla from Yorkville.

[jaswrx]

Bobby,

 

Go listen to A K-10! Enough Said. The Nx55p cannot keep up. I should have sold you my NX55's. I also had NX520p's (the original one)

[Rumorsband]

Ok Now behave... LOL I really do admire the passion you guys have for each of these speakers...I mean that. If everyone would look at my initial post, I never said I was unhappy with Yorkville, but I said I would like to lighten my load and not lose any sound quality. If I need to spend money to do so then I want to get better than I have. I thought the K10's might do just that as a lateral move...lighter and just as good. That was the basis of my first post. I also posted that the York dealer I bought from lost a band member that used to help transport his bands sound system. A client bought and then reneged on a pair K10's so he is using them instead of his NX55's. He said they sound really good, but if he had the room...he'd still be using the NX55's. He said in smaller rooms they sound just as good as the NX's but hasnt tried anywhere where he would have to push them. Maybe I should just go back to full range cabs 15's w/horn and forget the sub... LOL ... The PRX 615's look pretty good...

[Bobby1Note]

jaswrx, I appreciate the offer. I would probably have bought them too, but I already own four of them.

In my case, for those events that require more "juice", I bought four EF500pb's. Now, THAT was an upgrade.

[Al Poulin]

I have nothing against the QSCs - they are great speakers BUT the 1000 watt thing has annoyed the {censored} out of me from the start and still annoys me and would actually prevent me from buying them Period. Kind of like Behringer printing 1200 watts right on their new 1200 watt powered tops. WTF?

 

Printing bogus numbers to sell a speaker pisses me off. And people just love it for some reason. The 350 watt RCF ART312As keep up with the Ks and are honestly rated at 350 watts RMS. Oh - and they sound better too. But what's the first thing the young guys say when I recommend them... But they're only 350 watts. That can't be loud compared to 1000.

 

500 watts on the horn QSC??? It's a {censored}ing 75 watt horn for {censored} sakes!

 

http://professional.celestion.com/pro/pdf/CDX1-1745.pdf

 

Anyway, rant over.

[agedhorse]

Maybe one of the DJ's comments regarding the PRX612m's "plastic appearance" has something to do with it, :lol: Ironic that he calls a wood cabinet "plastic looking", then praises the K-12 which is not only "plastic", but with a painted finish. Again, this so-called "review" reads like a music-store showroom review (no crowd noise/ no distance between reviewer and cabs.)

Sounded like a retail sales advertisment review.

[agedhorse]

If I've got this straight, all Yorkville has to do is add a 1200w "module", limit the snot out of it (like the other guys), but it will then "outdate" all the other boxes, because of wattage bragging rights,,,, and,, it's "new & improved". Have I got that straight?.

 

 

Actually, Yourkville used program power in their advertisments and specs, so they played the bragging game just like everybody else, except that inflates the comparison to continuous (RMS) power by 50%.

 

Let's keep things on an apples to apples basis.

[agedhorse]

I have nothing against the QSCs - they are great speakers BUT the 1000 watt thing has annoyed the {censored} out of me from the start and still annoys me and would actually prevent me from buying them Period. Kind of like Behringer printing 1200 watts right on their new 1200 watt powered tops. WTF? Printing bogus numbers to sell a speaker pisses me off. And people just love it for some reason. The 350 watt RCF ART312As keep up with the Ks and are honestly rated at 350 watts RMS. Oh - and they sound better too. But what's the first thing the young guys say when I recommend them... But they're only 350 watts. That can't be loud compared to 1000. 500 watts on the horn QSC??? It's a {censored}ing 75 watt horn for {censored} sakes! http://professional.celestion.com/pro/pdf/CDX1-1745.pdf Anyway, rant over.

Al, the K series LF section is 500 watts RMS and appropriately processed. The amp module is the same for the HF section, only limited by both impedance and processing and for good reason. No different (actually better than IMO) the Canadian company that begins with Y and uses program power which is 50% inflated over the "RMS" power.

Pick your position but be sure to understand the facts behind them.

[Bobby1Note]

Actually, Yourkville used program power in their advertisments and specs, so they played the bragging game just like everybody else, except that inflates the comparison to continuous (RMS) power by 50%. Let's keep things on an apples to apples basis.

 

 

 

Hmmm, I don't see it that way, Andy. As I see it, they're still pumping their claimed wattage, in a way that the speaker is normally used,,, playing music. Roughly 1 1/2 x RMS, which strikes me as a safe operating level, and one which you frequently recommend, is it not?

 

I do see some of the "other guys" using "continuous" instead of RMS, and when you dig a little deeper into their specs, they say "continuous music power".

[agedhorse]

Hmmm, I don't see it that way, Andy. As I see it, they're still pumping their claimed wattage, in a way that the speaker is normally used,,, playing music. Roughly 1 1/2 x RMS, which strikes me as a safe operating level, and one which you frequently recommend, is it not? I do see some of the "other guys" using "continuous" instead of RMS, and when you dig a little deeper into their specs, they say "continuous music power".

 

 

No, the amp that they call 1500 watts is really 750 watts RMS (continuous). It's a marketing calculation that causes this conversion from what I have measured as well as someone else here on the forum. The 1500 watts is a "program power" number that they use consistently with their speaker products and have for quite some time.

 

When I use the term continuous, I mean continuous "RMS" (which is power based on the RMS voltage), not any type of music power.

[Bobby1Note]

No, the amp that they call 1500 watts is really 750 watts RMS (continuous). It's a marketing calculation that causes this conversion from what I have measured as well as someone else here on the forum. The 1500 watts is a "program power" number that they use consistently with their speaker products and have for quite some time. When I use the term continuous, I mean continuous "RMS" (which is power based on the RMS voltage), not any type of music power.

I'm unaware of any "1500w" amp claims at Yorkville, other than their 21" sub (which is higher yet). The point I'm making is this, they clearly state it's music power, or "program power" as they call it. They're not using the word "continuous", nor trying to create a false impression from what I can see.

On the other hand, guys who deliberately use oversized amp-modules for marketing purposes, then limit those same amp's outputs, and claim that they're a "1000w " speaker, instead of more precisely stating, speakers WITH 1000w continuous (but limited) amp modules. Well, that strikes me as being awfully misleading. Surely, no one's going to suggest that the K-Series speaker, not amp module is capable of 1500w music power, are they? There's only 4dB difference in claimed "max SPL" with the NX55p.

[dcastar]

I'm unaware of any "1500w" amp claims at Yorkville, other than their 21" sub (which is higher yet). The point I'm making is this, they clearly state it's music power, or "program power" as they call it. They're not using the word "continuous", nor trying to create a false impression from what I can see. On the other hand, guys who deliberately use oversized amp-modules for marketing purposes, then limit those same amp's outputs, and claim that they're a " 1000w " speaker , instead of more precisely stating, speakers WITH 1000w continuous (but limited) amp modules . Well, that strikes me as being awfully misleading. Surely, no one's going to suggest that the K-Series speaker, not amp module is capable of 1500w music power, are they? There's only 4dB difference in claimed "max SPL" with the NX55p.

Why you guys always want to compare 'max' or 'peak' SPL's is beyond me. You should be most concerned with the speakers sensitivity (or how efficiently it uses the power provided) and then look at it's Continuous SPL...

Speaker A with 100db Sensitivity requires 1000w to achieve 130db of output.
whereas
Speaker B with 103db Sensitivity requires 500w to achieve 130db of output.

Big difference... especially when you're concerned about power draw at certain venues.

[agedhorse]

To refresh your memory: http://www.yorkville.com/products.asp?type=71&cat=31&id=213

1500 watts (program power)

Matt V kept insisting that Yorkville powered this sub with 1500 watts but did not understand that there was a 50% conversion for program power in marketing terms. This is a 750 watt sub using RMS rating methods.

Oversizing the amp AND using proper dynamics procesing is a great solution and it works very well when done by guys who understand whatthey are doing and have access to driver test data including thermal measurement data and mechanical excursion versus frequency data.

On the K series, 500 watts RMS on the LF is fine (remember there is some pretty sophisticated processing going on) and the HF is probably capable of 250 watts into the driver impedance with plenty of supervised processing and with short durations (mSec) I'm sure the HF driver can handle the HF transients of a 250 watt RMS rated amp. It's all in the art of processing.

[agedhorse]

With well designed processing, it's possible to extract a couple extra dB of sensitivity from a driver's design where you have control of what happens at the lower part of the response spectrum. This is one of the secret arts of speaker design. It helps if you understand both the speaker side as well as the amp/processing side. Tricks in one can benefit the other.

[Shaster]

I suspect there may be a few different reasons why Yorkville uses program power, but I don't think it was originally to boost their ratings. In the old days people used to use peak power, and IIRC Yorkville was one of the first in Canada to use program - making their ratings seem smaller.

When Yorkville first started in Canada they were really only competing with themselves, because they didn't export much (if at all). Yes, as far as bar band stuff, there were Shure Vocal Masters and a few Kustom PA's around in the 60's and early 70's (in Canada) but Yorkville filled a void that was created by HUGE import taxes on American made PA gear. I know a little of what I speak because I bought my first Traynor tube PA when I was a junior in high school back in 1969.

According to Yorkville they use program power because of some mumbo jumbo that's listed in some of their literature...makes matching amps easier.... Who knows if they actually currently believe that or not, but once a philosophy is started it's tough to switch.

Another thing is that many of their speaker manufacturers use program power for thier speakers (18 sound, B&C) maybe they thought it would be more Italian, thus cooler, to list in program power. In anycase they do make it clear that it's program power and not RMS. Anybody that cares can easily see that, anybody who doesn't know about program/RMS probably doesn't care.

For me it's like metric versus inches and yards - as long as someone spells it out I'm cool.

BTW regarding the whole outdated thing, I'm trying to get rid of my Stradivarius, it's so bloody old... along with some funky old mics called Neumann, and some ridiculous amps apparently called pre CBS Fender somethings...

[Bobby1Note]

Why you guys always want to compare 'max' or 'peak' SPL's is beyond me. You should be most concerned with the speakers sensitivity (or how efficiently it uses the power provided) and then look at it's Continuous SPL... Speaker A with 100db Sensitivity requires 1000w to achieve 130db of output. whereas Speaker B with 103db Sensitivity requires 500w to achieve 130db of output. Big difference... especially when you're concerned about power draw at certain venues.

 

 

dcaster, you're preaching to the choir. I already know that.

 

The point I'm making here, has to do with the claim that the K-Series K-10 "kills" the NX55p, yet they claim 4dB more in Max SPL.

 

Efficiency, is a whole n'uther topic I wanna discuss as this thread progresses, but we're not there yet. Glad you brought it up though, because it's important to me too, especially when I'm playing with a 12vDC battery/inverter power-source. It seems to me that the subject of 'efficiency" has been conveniently ignored so far in this thread.

[Bobby1Note]

To refresh your memory: http://www.yorkville.com/products.asp?type=71&cat=31&id=213 1500 watts (program power) Matt V kept insisting that Yorkville powered this sub with 1500 watts but did not understand that there was a 50% conversion for program power in marketing terms. This is a 750 watt sub using RMS rating methods. Oversizing the amp AND using proper dynamics procesing is a great solution and it works very well when done by guys who understand whatthey are doing and have access to driver test data including thermal measurement data and mechanical excursion versus frequency data. On the K series, 500 watts RMS on the LF is fine (remember there is some pretty sophisticated processing going on) and the HF is probably capable of 250 watts into the driver impedance with plenty of supervised processing and with short durations (mSec) I'm sure the HF driver can handle the HF transients of a 250 watt RMS rated amp. It's all in the art of processing.

 

 

Andy,

 

I recall when Matt V. was here, and the goings-on at that time. I was a noob here back then.

 

Matt's "understanding" of watts back then, really has nothing to do with Yorkvilles claims however. Again, Yorkville clearly states "program power", or roughly 1.5x RMS, which is what I see you recommend to folks, all the time.

 

If Yorkville deliberately left out the phrase "Program Power", and simply stated "watts", then that would indeed be potentially misleading; but that is clearly not the case.

[Bobby1Note]

BTW regarding the whole outdated thing, I'm trying to get rid of my Stradivarius, it's so bloody old... along with some funky old mics called Neumann, and some ridiculous amps apparently called pre CBS Fender somethings...

I'll take 'em off your hands for,,,,, ummmm,,,,,,, $50 bux,

[Bobby1Note]

deleted duplicate post, sorry.

[335BoB]

Well I think I'm pretty convinced I should keep these 1000watt K8's and get rid of these outdated (and ugly) SxA360's that are only 350 watts LF and 150 watt HF. (Sorry but I'm keeping my old Fenders!)