Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bjm362

  • Birthday 04/01/1964


  • Location
    Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States of America

bjm362's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. Great reply! I do think I may have found a possibility of a reasonably priced alternative though. Remembering that in my original question I am only looking at signal from the output of the board to the amp rack, I have to wonder if a small number of line level Bluetooth transmitters and receivers could not work. The only issue I see there is that I cannot find any using pro-line line level. They seem to be all made for home audio line level (A difference from +4 to -10db). If they will produce enough signal it should work, but might produce some undesired side effects when pushed..
  2. I appreciate your response. It does give me some alternatives to consider. To be honest though, some of what I posted I could have been just a bit clearer on. That would have helped us both. Ultimately I may have to switch goals to a digital board, but that isn't my goal at the moment. I think the Behringer Xair18 would do everything I wanted it to if they just made a controller for it that I liked. I will try to restate my current goal more clearly as this may help a bit. My primary concern currently in asking this is being able to send signal from an analog board to an amp rack/racks. Initially I would need four channels of send and receive (Main Left, Main Right, Mon 1 and Mon 2). While 5,6 or 7 each would be even better I could work well with 4. In truth though, your comments do remind me I need to look around more before I decide. All the more reason for starting a thread like this and reading replies! I sold my 16 up/4 down snake already. The current picture in my mind is just simply getting wireless mics to send signal to the board. A talk back mic could be wired, but then what to replace the 4 down channels with?
  3. I hope I am posting this in the right forum ​What I am looking at is that Behringer, Soundcraft etc are currently making digital mixers that an be controlled via a laptop or tablet. This sounds like a great idea in theory, but I have seen in practice that it is not what I want. ​I do want to avoid the hassle of a 16 up 4 down snake. Having to haul it around, having to run it at gigs and having to store it. ​I also dislike the idea of mixing live, hearing something I need to adjust and having to scroll through a menu to fix it. ​I do realize I can get wireless mics and get signal to the board, but that still leaves an issue unresolved. I would also like to wirelessly send my main outs and my monitor outs to my rack. ​Is there a device/devices I can use that will accept signal from my board then send it wirelessly and reduplicate it at the appropriate impedance/signal strength into my amp rack?
  4. This box is closer to what I actually want to build with these. there is a improvement I know I can make with these that does not add significant weight, but does increase their versatility quite a bit! http://dbdynamixaudio.com/single-fold-on-axis-transmission-line-enclosure-calculator/
  5. I had found something like this years back, but just saw this. I think some of you guys may find this interesting too. http://dbdynamixaudio.com/quarter-wave-flared-vent-t-line-horn-bass-reflex-enclosure-calculator/
  6. I have went to the link used to make his example box. That example is a good starting place to design a box. It is similar to how Bass Box Pro worked. I am also looking at some other links to replace some of the design functions that were available in that program. If I build a BR box though I feel like I should design a diffuser to increase loading. Looking at the box in the example also kind of makes me more interested in two things for these drivers. Saving them longer until I can build some tops with them. Then I only need to design my own crossovers. I already have ample links for that. Or trying my hand at my own ideas for a hybrid sub. Before I go buy wood I am taking a harder look at BR boxes thanks to the input here. As always all input is appreciated, especially that that has provided additional resources for making this decision!
  7. The fact that Sub-woofer as a term used in my trade is a misnomer and what it actually means is relevant as far as I am concerned. A true sub-woofer would operate in the sub human hearing range (below 20hz). That is what the term actually means, but is not how it is used. Hifi subs as you pointed out typically operate down to 20 hz, but in live sound generally reproducing anything below 40 hz is a waste of resources. The BR boxes WRGKMC is recommending are capable of a pretty good deal of what I am trying to do. They will operate well down to 45 hz as a light duty sub. They won't be excessively heavy and they will operate even better in the other role I want them for. Even though they operate better there, that is actually where they fall short on what I am trying to do. Support above my subs (80hz to 200 or 300hz) in a big system. I am just trying to get as much out of this all the way around as possible. That is why one of the examples I was looking at is a tapped horn/chamber load hybrid. It is productive deeper than traditional horn theory says it should be. The Chamber loading helps it get deeper, while the tapped horn uses energy from both sides of the driver in correct phase to almost double its output ability. The downfall of this is a narrow operating range. Outside of that range the tapped horn is no longer in phase on both sides and creates cancellation. The other horn design meets the range and production goals with this driver, but is bulkier,heavier and a bit more difficult to build. The old Triflex subs would be a good compromise between all of the goals, but even having used them myself, I do not have sufficient details to build. Plus I would still want to be able to divide that box in two. I may be trying to get too much out of this, but the time to weigh it out is before I build....
  8. Again, great post WRGKMC I am familiar with Parts Express and count it as a resource. I have seen kits there and links to different companies "suggested enclosures". I will have to look for other speaker building plans/free resources on there. I have built some cabinets before (sealed), and may wind up having to do a bass reflex design with this. I no longer have a Bass Box pro, so finding an online calculator would be a plus if I do that kind of cabinet. I have reworked some bass reflex cabs too, but not while I had BB Pro. I did not do any while I had the benefit of that resource. Part of what I am trying to accomplish is a reasonably priced, compact, not too heavy, very productive and also versatile (at least can be used as a light duty sub in a lower powered system and midbass in in a bigger system) cabinet. Yeah, I realize there are going to be some compromises between these goals. I feel like you may want to look at the links I provided though. It may interest you quite a bit. More so the current designs than the oldschool Triflexes. Your point about them making good PA tops is very valid. That was one of the things I had considered when I bought these. Unfortunately that really is not what I need most right now. Power sources available already varies dramatically. Peavey XR-684, T-Pro 1000, Pyle PTA1200, Behringer NU4-6000. So at 4 ohms I CAN look at 200w,360w, 600w, 880w, 3000w depending on which amp and in what configuration.
  9. Thank you for taking a look anyway. For anyone interested, here is a link to the oldschool Triflex system. Of course I would be using bigger better more modern tops, but that sub could be quite useful for smaller gigs. It has been my experience that even at gigs where subs are not required everything still sounds better with them. http://assets.peavey.com/literature/manuals/80370224.pdf Some options I have been looking at. Cubo 12 http://www.freespeakerplans.com/bass-cabinets/14-cubo-12 Punisher Horn MKII https://www.freespeakerplans.com/plans/14-plans/basscab/45-punisher-mk2
  10. The last thread I started here I got a lot of really good info/feedback, so I felt like this was a good place to talk about this. I have a pair of 4 ohm 12s I am trying to decide what to do with. They are MCM 55-3242s, which are no longer in production. Specs are: General Specifications: Nominal Diameter: 12 inch Rated Impedance: 4 ohms Operating Bandwidth: 30Hz ~ 3.2KHz Power Handling Capacity: 350W RMS Sensitivity (1W/M): 96 dB Voice Coil Diameter: 2.5 inch Overall frame diameter: 12.28" Thiele-Small Parameters: Resonance Frequency Fs: 36.23 Hz DC Resistance Re: 3.4 ohm Mechanical Q Factor Qms: 2.823 Electrical Q Factor Qes: 0.446 Total Q Factor Qts: 0.385 Equivalent Cas air load Vas: 121.67 liters Efficiency Bandwidth Product EBP 81.2 Voice coil overhang X-max 7 mm Physical Information: Cutout: 11.10" Mounting Depth: 5.51" Basket: Cast Aluminum Magnet Type: 67 OZ Cone Material: Non-Pressed Paper Surround: Cloth Dust Cap: Paper Damper: Cloth My original plan for these if I remember correctly was something similar to the original Peavey Triflex system. These being part of the sub box. Except instead of one 212 sub box, I was thinking two 112s (two 112s coupled being the same response as one 212). There are other potential uses, but something of that nature could come in real handy right about now. Especially being divided into two boxes for easier handling. Links to good plans that would work well for light duty subs would be bonus. Even more bonus if they could be also used as moderate duty kick bins crossed over above my FH118s....
  11. I just re read some of this, and I am glad I did as I had missed one of WRGKMC's comments. I felt like I should express that I saw a great deal of excellence in his reply. I also do see quite a bit of difference in what theory I was taught as a youth and what is currently being taught. I have seen at least one example of the positive flow, which when I was young we were told did not occur. Electricity we were told ONLY flowed from negative to positive. I do feel like I have a broader view as a result of this conversation and appreciate all participants.
  12. By now you know that even if I disagree with you I am willing to openly and honestly look at your viewpoint. I still want to watch and take a good look at the links before going to far into this. I feel like that is only fair. I do want to state that I believe there is a paradox involved here. A paradox that is going to leave your last statement both true and untrue. I just had a few minutes to check on this, more later... Current flows the entire circuit or does not flow at all. A surge may be a part of that current and though traveling at lightspeed may not complete the circuit path before it is stopped.....
  13. I have to add that it may be a few days before I get to go over those links. I am looking forward to it as this the benefit of this kind of conversation. Getting to learn something. Tonight I have practice/song learning and arrangements. Tomorrow night I have a gig and Saturday I have a rehearsal....
  14. Interesting. This could also be an interesting discussion. I am going to state how I understand both from theory that was taught when I was young, through lifes experience, as well as one small change in recent technological discoveries. Electricity flows from negative to positive. In AC current it alternates. In DC it modulates, but travels in one direction. Therefore there is a first component. That is how theory was taught when this old man was a kid. My life's experience supports that (The lightbulb example from earlier was real life.) The only thing that I have seen ACTUAL evidence of to change how this was taught was super high speed filming of lightning strikes. There actually is a positive energy surge traveling the other . However it is minuscule in comparison to the negative energy surge it takes to make that happen. Any tech can tell you there is a first component to be damaged in a circuit....... Next I will look at your links shortly to see if they turn my world upside down......
  15. I thank you for your patience isaac42. The way you expressed it this time jarred what was not registering in my memory. It has after all been 40 years since I read the difference between parallel and series circuits. For some reason I was remembering that as "In the parallel circuit each driver sees the full power." Hopefully that explains why every time I looked at your calculations I thought you were dropping power twice. Sorry about that. When I decided to calculate voltage I got a little curious what voltage my NU4-6000 produces per channel (440watts @ 8ohms) or 59.33V per channel. In another forum commercial forum the Guru that owns had implied that the NU4-6000 was not any good (while unaware that I owned one) because it was not 60v per channel. I still think 59.33v is pretty close from a 4 channel amp. If I really need more than that I have two pairs that can be bridged to produce 109.54v each. Processing all of this has really been good for me in deciding best power distribution plan and what I want to build. Unfortunately, I still am not going to be able to accomplish what I want to without horn loading the LF section too.
  • Create New...