Running a DBX PA for Monitors

[Ori0n]

When you guys are using a DBX PA for monitors and for mains.

How is the setup different for your monitors than mains?

 

if you use the reference mic do you use it on the stage?

 

Thanks!

[Not Serial]

do you mean a DRPA? i don't think this would be the best solution for wedges myself.

[Ori0n]

Yeah a DRPA, i have read on many threads on here about people using one for FOH one for monitors.

 

From what i've read it seems to be a better solution to just EQ the monitors and leave it at that.

[Not Serial]

i think you would need a DRPA for each wedge as the left and right is tied. maybe you are thinking of a different dbx driverack?

[ihateyouguys]

iirc the peavey vsx series allows for different settings for each i/o. might be better for monitor use.

[agedhorse]

Maybe an analog eq for monitors would be even better???

[SpaceNorman]

 

When you guys are using a DBX PA for monitors and for mains. How is the setup different for your monitors than mains? if you use the reference mic do you use it on the stage? Thanks!

 

 

I use a DRPA unit on our monitors - and find that it works well for us. Our monitor rig consists of 4 same model Yamaha floor wedges - "daisy chained" in two strings of two - with each string driven by 1/2 of a QSC 2450 (the implication being that we're not trying to EQ disparate speaker enclosures with the DPRA and it's "linked" limitation). Second, I will forthrightly state that I'm not a sound guy - and happily make concessions in sound for the sake of speed and ease of setup (therefore suggesting that I haven't noticed the issues that other posters cite as being reasons that the DRPA has problems with monitors).

 

For me - monitor setup is simple. I position and cable the 4 wedges. Then, after the house mains have been EQ'ed (using the DRPA we have for the mains...) - I move the RTA mic cable to monitor DRPA and place the RTA mic stand in the middle of the stage. Then I run the DRPA EQ "wizard" to EQ the monitors - using the "smooth curve" frequency response with the highs slightly rolled off. Once that's done - I run the "AFS" (Automatic Feedback Suppression) "wizard" using 6 fixed filters. If I'm able to crank the "aux" outs to the 3 o'clock position before feedback - the setup will get me through the night with no problems. In the two years I've been using the DRPA's - there have been maybe two or three occassions that I've had to manually tweak the results we got with the EQ wizard.

 

Admittedly - I'm not the most discerning in terms of tuning the PA and monitors. Rather, I'm a keyboard player that got stuck running sound from stage. I love the fact that with the DRPA, I can EQ and ring out the monitor rig to a consistent and acceptable setting in 3-4 minutes in 99% of the setups that I do.

 

When I set it up using this process - and leave the AFS function running so that it can turn on "Live" filters when needed in the course of the night - it's basically a "set it and forget it" operation for me. ..and that couldn't make me happier!

[Ori0n]

Thanks SpaceNorman!

 

I know that the DRPA has a setup "Wizard", does the Peavey VSX26 have anything similar, if anyone here knows that.

 

I am in the same situation as Space...... a bass player caught running sound, not necessarily from stage, but it'll be close i'm sure.

 

Thanks!

[WynnD]

I would think that the auto EQ and anti-feedback filters would be helpful for a loud band. Drop the volume and most of those issues go away. (This has got to be the most ignored suggestion in the forum.) On the other hand, you can't take advantage of most of the other functions that are part of the unit. (most people don't bi-amp their monitors and real world environments shouldn't allow you to blow up either amps or monitor speakers and still keep your hearing.)

 

The real question is, Do you have $500 to blow on it?

[SpaceNorman]

 

I would think that the auto EQ and anti-feedback filters would be helpful for a loud band. Drop the volume and most of those issues go away. (This has got to be the most ignored suggestion in the forum.) On the other hand, you can't take advantage of most of the other functions that are part of the unit. (most people don't bi-amp their monitors and real world environments shouldn't allow you to blow up either amps or monitor speakers and still keep your hearing.) The real question is, Do you have $500 to blow on it?

 

 

Maybe I'm not understanding how you see the relationship between EQ and volume. Isn't it typical to adjust the speaker EQ when you put them in a new physical space regardless of volume? Are you suggesting that only loud bands need to EQ their monitors? Move a PA system that was set up in a large open wedding hall that used a 12 x 20 "scaffold" type stage (hollow underneath) and was properly tuned for THAT environment - and now set it up in a small club setting (solid stage, low ceilings, corner location, etc) - and the system EQ will need some significant adjustment.

 

Speaking to your question about the DRPA's value. The DRPA's two channels of (albeit "linked" channels), compressor/limitor functions, Automatic feedback suppression features, "real time analysis" features, as well as crossover functions - make it a real "swiss army knife" in terms of features and functionality. When you consider that a DBX 231 (2 channel / 31 band graphic EQ) lists for $199, a DBX 266XL compressor/limitor lists for $149 - the $500 for those two functions PLUS Real Time Analysis and Automatic Feedback Suppression doesn't seem out of line. (Let's not debate whether those prices could be reduced by purchasing Behringer or other makes...I cited DBX products to try to keep the comparison as close to apples to apples as I could).

 

As far as the benefit of dropping the volume is concerned - I do not disagree with you at all. Controllng volume is critical. It is however relative to the type of music and type of gigs. As a six piece (bass, drums, guitar, keys, sax and singer (note that 5 of the 6 of us sing) - providing dance entertainment for weddings, class reunions, private parties and corporate gigs for crowds that typically range between 100 - 500 people - we're not working in a restaurant / lounge jazz / dinner set volume environment. We do a good job of controlling our stage volume - and religiously check with our clients to ensure that our overall volume is good. We certainly are not a loud act by any stretch - however the venues and material we play demand that our PA be turned up to the point that the system must be properly EQed and tuned to avoid feedback.

[agedhorse]

Compression/limiting for overall monitor mixes is useless, and if you need real limiting your amp already has that (assuming it's properly sized for the speakers which, IMO it's too large but that's another story), so there's no value to that function in the DRPA for your application.

 

Really what you need is just an eq, the 231 is perfect for the application. If you (really) need RTA and auto-feedback supression then I suppose that's one possible application for the DRPA, but that's a featutre I specifically do not use for monitors. I believe the input graphic is the only module that is not stereo linked (but can be?) in the DRPA.

 

My experience w/ feedback supressors hasn't been reliable enough for pro applications, I prefer to do it manually and then when everybody is happy leave well enough alone. I also operate well below the threshold of feedback, and the gear is all pro level gear, biamped monitor mixes etc.

[Axisplayer]

AH is right, but if the monitors are matched you can also get some benefit from using the PEQ's to tune the boxes, and the GEQ to adjust for room. (It gives me a baseline to work from.)

 

I had DRPA's and DBX 1231's for each monitor channel (a pair of each for 4 channels,) but have decided to downsize the rig physically and rather than remove the DRPA's I removed the 1231's. I felt like I got more benefit from having them (allowing that someday I may actually bi-amp the monitors) as a redundancy for main FOH processing than I did keeping the 1231's.

 

Since you pay only a little more for the DRPA than for a 1231 EQ, I viewed it as a premium for smaller rack size. Anything beyond that was a freebie.

[agedhorse]

It has more to do with most people not having adequate equipment to analyze properly to get much benefit from parametrics, the parametrics are linked on the DRPA anyway, and generally without the proper analysis equipment the results are likely to be worse. I also suggest strongly that the user interface of the DRPA grapgic eq is less than friendly or even useful when needed most. It's utterly unuseable as a monitor graphic on the fly when there are lots of other things going on around monitor world.

[jwlussow]

 

It has more to do with most people not having adequate equipment to analyze properly to get much benefit from parametrics, the parametrics are linked on the DRPA anyway, and generally without the proper analysis equipment the results are likely to be worse. I also suggest strongly that the user interface of the DRPA grapgic eq is less than friendly or even useful when needed most. It's utterly unuseable as a monitor graphic on the fly when there are lots of other things going on around monitor world.

 

 

I agree. I love my DR260 for FOH but nothing beats a good old slide pot for quick adjustments on the fly. The DR260 is a bit more "real time" friendly but not enough for monitors, IMO. Monitors would benefit more from a decent 31 band EQ than the Driverack. That being said, the Driverack CAN do the job and simply not using the crossover is no problem. It will be there when you need it.

[Craig Vecchione]

I've had a DRPA for years and like it a lot. But for monitors? Can't think of a more ill-fitting tool.

 

1. You want fast access to adjust EQ. DRPA is way too slow.

 

2. You have multiple mixes for your monitors, but can only adjust a linked stereo EQ. Unacceptable.

 

3. Comps. Unusable.

 

4. Limiters. Not needed if you have amps with them.

 

5. Subharmonic Synth. Do I need to explain this?

 

6. Parametric. Nice, if only they weren't linked.

 

7. AFS/auto EQ. Again, linked.

 

8. If you really need 1u max, then get a 1u single 31-band EQ and run all your monitors from one send. Having all the processing linked hurts your mixes so much it probably wouldn't hurt much more to use only 1 mix......

[Axisplayer]

Craigv, the GEQ can be used as dual mono so it can be unlinked. The PEQ is linked but not an issue if the monitors are matched. It may be slow for some to use, but I leave it on the GEQ window ready to use so not an issue. Speed has NEVER once been a problem. I am a computer geek by trade however.

 

Andy, don't know why you hate the interface so much. I MUCH prefer it to the VSX26 I use for mains. In fact, except for the features in the VSX being superior to the DRPA, I prefer the operation, and speed of changes to the VSX. What do you dislike about it more than most one RU units.

[SpaceNorman]

My experience w/ feedback supressors hasn't been reliable enough for pro applications, I prefer to do it manually and then when everybody is happy leave well enough alone. I also operate well below the threshold of feedback, and the gear is all pro level gear, biamped monitor mixes etc.

 

I specifically LIKE the automatic feedback suppression features of the DRPA on monitors. I can literally HEAR when the AFS kicks in and clamps one of the live filters on a frequency. It's usually when when our vocalist screws up (i.e., starts dancing around with a mic in her hand and allows it to down and into a monitro wedge, wanders somewhere she oughtn't be with the wireless, etc) - or when we're forced to setup in a "cave" where the feedback threshold is low in relationship to the overall volume (i.e., those hollow underneath, in a corner/in an alcove, low ceilings, etc). Regardless of how or why - I'm damn happy when it does. With the DRPA and AFS - I don't find myself on the receiving end of glares from bandmates when the monitors emit an occasional squeak or squawk. The AFS seems to do a darn good job of nipping it in the bud.

 

As I've said elsewhere in this thread - I ain't a soundguy. If I my primary job was to run sound - I suspect I too would rather use other tools and techniques that would give me more precise controls over EQ (and by extension feedback) - and would rather use my own ears to tune and tweak things. However, I'm a keyboard player who would much prefer to focus on the music I'm making - and as such, I'm thankful for the DRPA with all it's automated features that cut the amount of time I spend EQing and tuning our system to a consistent 10 minutes during setup and then keep an "eye" on things throughout the evening to deal with the occasional squeak or squawk while I'm busy playing!

 

The SpaceNorman

[Craig Vecchione]

Craigv, the GEQ can be used as dual mono so it can be unlinked. The PEQ is linked but not an issue if the monitors are matched. It may be slow for some to use, but I leave it on the GEQ window ready to use so not an issue. Speed has NEVER once been a problem. I am a computer geek by trade however. Andy, don't know why you hate the interface so much. I MUCH prefer it to the VSX26 I use for mains. In fact, except for the features in the VSX being superior to the DRPA, I prefer the operation, and speed of changes to the VSX. What do you dislike about it more than most one RU units.

 

I wasn't clear in #2 that I meant the parametric, but my issue with the GEQ is that it's slow to access. Having to press the EQ button, then get to the correct (L/R) display, then jogdial to the correct frequency, then ^/v the value....in real-time, that's horrifically slow for monitors, where things change in a much more dynamic way than FOH.

 

You can make a cow do a horse's job, but I doubt anyone (including the cow) will be very happy with it.

[agedhorse]

 

Andy, don't know why you hate the interface so much. I MUCH prefer it to the VSX26 I use for mains. In fact, except for the features in the VSX being superior to the DRPA, I prefer the operation, and speed of changes to the VSX. What do you dislike about it more than most one RU units.

 

 

It's difficult to get around in fast, easy to make imple visual mistakes, etc. AND... the DBX interface is one of the BETTER ones!!!

[boomerweps]

Price. Everyone says a $500 unit. Yup, that's what many, including the mega chain GC/MF sells it for. HOWEVER, you can get them SHIPPED in via various eBay dealers for well under $400, close to $350. Just check to make sure they are real authorized retailers and not "grey market" shadow resellers. New without warranty at higher cost is worse than used that worked dependably.

 

Boomerweps

[WynnD]

For SpaceNorman. Low volume bands don't have feedback problems. (Groups that don't need mikes for flute stage volumes.) Monitors are either unnecessary or can be adjusted totally to the pleasure of the performer. I realize that most bands are louder than that. (Some a lot louder.) Those are the bands that will benefit most immediately from an anti-feedback system. The automated EQ for setup will also be a help.

[SpaceNorman]

 

For SpaceNorman. Low volume bands don't have feedback problems. (Groups that don't need mikes for flute stage volumes.) Monitors are either unnecessary or can be adjusted totally to the pleasure of the performer. I realize that most bands are louder than that. (Some a lot louder.) Those are the bands that will benefit most immediately from an anti-feedback system. The automated EQ for setup will also be a help.

 

 

I'm struggling to understand your point WynnD. While statements like "low volume bands don't have feedback problems" may read like a profound statement on the forum - the fact of the matter is that in reality, it's not accurate. To illustrate my point, let's consider a scenario that virtually all of us have experienced. Think of a presentation in a high school auditorium - with a soft spoken teacher trying to talk to a large crowd. Folks in the back are yelling that they can't hear her - yet every attempt turn up the system results in feedback. Surely you won't suggest that the folks at the back of the room should try to read lips....or argue that the problem is that the teacher is too loud.

 

Neither can I reconcile your claim that "monitors are either unnecessary...or can be adjusted totally to the pleasure of the performer". As a keyboard player who typically sits 20...ish feet to the right and slightly behind our lead vocalist with a drummer more or less in between - I'm of the opinion that monitors are necessity and not a "pleasure" item - if in fact said drummer is actually playing his drums (at any level). I suspect you'll probably find a couple knowledgeable and experienced folks on the forum that would support that opinion.

 

The only bands that don't have the potential for feedback problems are those that don't use amplication of any sort - an option that is typically out of the question for most bands you see who are playing a venue larger than a living room - and/or - with an audience of more than a handful of people.

 

If you use a PA system and microphones to amplify your sound - it MUST be properly tuned and adjusted. The DRPA is simply a tool to help with that tuning and adjusting.