New JBL PRX 600 series

[agedhorse]

 

ok- I know the K is digital, I said it right there. All I know is that there is more latency to the new stuff because of the processing whereas there isn't latency (minor) in the old stuff which would point towards minimal digital processing.

 

 

I think you are making some assumptions that are not necessicarily accurate. More latency does not have to mean more procressing, some "latency" may occur in the class D amp (waveform management) and well as intentional latency or delay added to some predictive limiting algorithems. All of this can occur using exactly the same DSP platform, therefore differences in what appears to be latency may (and probably does) have nothing to do with the amount of processing but what the engineer intended with his/her algorithems.

 

Reading too much into this BUT it does point out that just mixing and matching speakers from different manufacturers or even different model lines can result in unpredictable results. Always good to double-check resiults with measurements and compare to what's expected.

[1tribe]

I did hear that JBL is not using the gating feature on the new boxes, have you noticed this at all?

[jwlussow]

 

I did hear that JBL is not using the gating feature on the new boxes, have you noticed this at all?

 

 

That

[Tysonviolin]

I have not noticed any gating. The boxes sound wide open with no input.

[JoeDirt]

 

Reading too much into this BUT it does point out that just mixing and matching speakers from different manufacturers or even different model lines can result in unpredictable results. Always good to double-check resiults with measurements and compare to what's expected.

 

 

Well hopefully the PRX718S matches up well with the 612M because I am not that impressed by the response graph on the 618 series.

[philw44]

 

Well hopefully the PRX718S matches up well with the 612M because I am not that impressed by the response graph on the 618 series.

 

 

Agree.Doesn't seem particularly great for live music.

 

Won't go low enough to reproduce lowest notes of bass guitar and response drops off at the 'kick thump' frequencies.

[RoadRanger]

Won't go low enough to reproduce lowest notes of bass guitar and response drops off at the 'kick thump' frequencies.

Bass cabs typically drop off at 60hz and the kick thump is up around 100hz last I knew.

[agedhorse]

The 618XLF is a pretty substantial sub IMO, maybe you are confusing it with the compact "S" version???

[JoeDirt]

The response curve that JBL publishes for the 618XLF doesn't match up that well to a 718S. Unless I am reading it wrong.

[philw44]

 

The 618XLF is a pretty substantial sub IMO, maybe you are confusing it with the compact "S" version???

 

 

Your right i did, apologies.

 

Edit: Still, i do notice that there is a 10dB sway from say 80-100hz. That's pretty substantial?

[RoadRanger]

Still, i do notice that there is a 10dB sway from say 80-100hz. That's pretty substantial?

If you use their recommended crossover frequency of 90Hz no prob.

[philw44]

If you use their recommended crossover frequency of 90Hz no prob.

 

Fair point, i need to read these spec sheets more closely

[Rezrover]

 

I did hear that JBL is not using the gating feature on the new boxes, have you noticed this at all?

 

 

I thought the guy who brought up the "gating issue" was trying to run them as soft as possible and that's were it became an issue.

If he actually used them as a "loudspeaker", he probably wouldn't have noticed anything at all.

[hemismith]

 

I thought the guy who brought up the "gating issue" was trying to run them as soft as possible and that's were it became an issue. If he actually used them as a "loudspeaker", he probably wouldn't have noticed anything at all.

 

 

A lot of people complained about that, but gating ought to be based on the input, not the output, so if you have your gain structure right it shouldn't be a problem. (Right?)

[Tysonviolin]

The xlf subs are great. I played show on Saturday at Flux53 in Oakland with 4 xlfs and 4 612s up 8 1/2 feet on poles and the sound was incredible. We were playing electronica in the vein of Chemical Brothers or Glitch Mob and the system was no where near max output. I can't wait to mix Alison Brown this coming Saturday with the same rig. I think I will go with 2 xlfs though.

[Charlie6string]

 

I've been waiting for a new product to be released - The PRX 512s have dropped in price drastically over the last month or so...

 

 

I hate to say it, but I'm a little PO'd that I bought a set of 515's for $2198.00 and 3 months later they were going for $1600. Ouch. Of course no one knew there was going to be a price drop...(right?) Now with the new series im really torn.

 

My question is: All spec's being (as far as I can tell) equal is it worth going for a set of 600's? I transport the pa and my guitar gear in an American built "sedan" and the space alone might be worth it for me.

 

I use the 515's for live performances. No bass cabs. Small to medium clubs, and actually at an outdoor gig this weekend. They sound fantastic.

[Randyman]

Tysonviolin,

Thanks for the early report! Have been looking around for awhile now and you're the first person I've found that's got them.

 

Snds like you love 'em! What are you comparing them to? I've never used 12 or 15" two ways made for pro sound reenforcement and wonder about the harshness I hear more often than not in live sound: overall too much going on around 1-3k (I'm a bit more sensitive there than most people) in general.

 

I've got a Fender PD-250 system (stereo speakers, each with (2) 6.5" speakers), and while they obviously struggle with the lower low end, I have yet to hear a live sound speaker that sounds near as good. That's my benchmark- it sounds like an extraordinarily good home stereo speaker, and whether at loud or soft volumes it's detailed, rich, not harsh in the least, gorgeous sound.

 

Thanks for your reports! Any chance you'll get the Prx 635 as well- have been curious about 3 way systems, and at 60 pounds this one looks light for a 3 way.

[monthlymixcd]

 

They sound fantastic.

 

 

I'm sure they do... don't beat yourself up... enjoy the cabs you have. Over the 5 years or more that you'll use them the price diff is no big deal.

[Erik-RMCAudio]

Just an FYI the PRX718S is discontinued. They have replaced it with the PRX618S-XLF. Not sure why they did this because the PRX718S was our best selling sub but it's done and the PRX618S-XLF's are now shipping. The LF driver is the same in the new one the main difference I can see is the dual 500 watt driver design. I have not heard the difference between them but the specs say the XLF goes lower in frequency 30Hz as opposed to 40 Hz.

 

Another helpful hint is the manual suggests using the SS4-BK24 for the speaker pole between the PRX618S-XLF and the PRX635's but according to JBL those are not made yet and there is no pricing. I'm assuming because of the height of the PRX635's the regular SS4-BK's might be too high in some situations. Hopefully they will get on the ball and make the 24" versions soon.

[JoeDirt]

FYI, but SS4-BK's would not fit in my PRX718S. I had to return them and get the SS3's.

 

SS4's are larger and threaded on the sub end and it flat out would not fit in the hole on the top of the PRX718S.

[beerguy156]

Just talked to one of the sales guys at SW. They did a side-by-side comparison with the QSC KW153's and the PRX 635. He said the PRX's sound better hands down. A bit surprising to me. They also compared the QSC K12 and the PRX 612...he like the K12's better. All opinion, but very interesting. Sounds like JBL has some winner's here.....

[Randyman]

Beerguy said:

 

Just talked to one of the sales guys at SW. They did a side-by-side comparison with the QSC KW153's and the PRX 635. He said the PRX's sound better hands down. A bit surprising to me. All opinion, but very interesting. Sounds like JBL has some winner's here.....

 

 

Yeah, esp. considering:

PRX 635: 60 pounds, 36" h, 1500 watts, $999

QSCKW153: 87 pounds, 43" h, 1,000 watts, $1,299

 

Questions remains:

? For those times when bringing a subwoofer is not an option, does a 3 way system (with 6.5" mid) have considerably more woof than the comparable 15" 2-ways made by the same manufacturer in the same product line (Prx 635 vs prx 615m)?

 

? Is the mid-range noticeably better than (again, with 3-ways with a 6.5" mid horn) 2-ways in the same product line? Does the vocal range project better and with less harshness (the downfall of most sound systems to my ears)?

[agedhorse]

It all depends. There are (pro) 2 way cabinets that stomp on mid grade 3 ways, and there are directivity differences as well.

[Randyman]

agedhorse wrote:

It all depends. There are (pro) 2 way cabinets that stomp on mid grade 3 ways, and there are directivity differences as well.

 

 

Yes, I've seen other posts with that same reply. However I'm not likely to jump to the price point of a pro product, so a 3-way around $1,000 is worth investigating further, esp. the PRX 635, because the weight at 60 pounds is doable if there are significant benefits over the prx 615m. What kind of directivity differences are you referring to?

 

So- within the same product line- what are the likely benefits of a tri-amped 3-way 15" cabinet compared to a 15" two way?

 

What I'm imagining the differences to be:

~ the 15" speaker is not trying to cover mid range, so it can be dedicated for subwoofer frequencies and do a better job at that than a 2-way

~ the 6.5" can be dedicated to the mid-bass and mids, and project vocals better

 

If the Prx 635 is significantly better than the 615m in those regards, than it's a breakthru product: pricepoint and weight. Doing all my own schleeping and having recently thrown my back out, my goal is to produce some serious lows without having to resort to a sub, which is even heavier. This would be for small to medium sized bars.

 

So I'm interested in hearing about the advantages / disadvantages of comparably priced 2 ways vs. 3 ways for having a one box solution. Can't wait for the prx 6xx line to get more in circulation so some of these comparisons can be made. Any experience with other mid-range boxes?

 

Thanks,

Randelph

[agedhorse]

If you need a cabinet that will do monitor duty, the 615M cabinet will do this but the 635 won't.

 

Within the same line, on the 3 way, the midrange vertical dispersion will probably be quite a bit wider which may be a distinct disadvantage, but the midrange may be a little more natural, probably won't be much difference in low end because even though the cabinet is overall larger, internal volume must be subtracted by the size of the internal mid sub-enclosure.

 

This is a good case for trying them both out in the acoustic environment they will be used in.