agedhorse

OP - why should I believe you? I know enough about this particular topic to recognize all the warning signs in the way you have presented your scenario. Before assuming it's the equipment and/or protocol, and the comments you are making about it, you would be a whole lot better understanding how the communication really works, then verify that the system wiring is installed to the appropriate standards and tested to be sure it's correct rather than boldly assuming so. My money is that there are either mistakes in the wiring, the signal routing, or both. If you don't know the difference between UTP and STP, what a drain wire is, what shielded RJ connectors are, and do not have the appropriate test equipment for this particular signal transmission protocol, it's time to quit arguing with me and hire a real professional. You are in over your head IMO.

if the installation is still under warranty (typically 1 year installation "correctness and workmanship" warranty is required in the US) then get them out and have them properly proof the infrastructure to VERIFY (not guess, of suppose, or say they are "sure" of) that it is indeed correct and they are following all if the appropriate standards.

Here's something to consider about any networked signal... Shared networks in general were not designed for continuous high rate real time data streams. General data is ok with latencies, lost and/or retransmitted frames, etc. not so with live real time high rate data streams. Conflicts, priorities, processing control overhead, dynamic routing issues and more combine to create problems that are covered up in more traditional data operations.

Just because something shares a familiar type of protocol doesn't mean it's inter-opera table with other similar products. For example, RS422 is a signal transport protocol but just because a device is RS422 compliant doesn't mean it's comparable to other RS422 compliant equipment.

Would you be able to try connecting the S16s to the X32 directly, with CAT-5e cables? If everything works perfectly then we know the problem lies within the network infrastructure.

 

If all else fails, you can leave the X32 on deck, connect a wireless router and run your shows with an iPad.

The problem is that it's not a true network, it is a dedicated, closed protocol data stream. It should never be connected through or to any other network.

Cat 5 used as AES-50 really shouldn't go through anything external. It is not an internet protocol, and should be dedicated to the system only. I suspect that somebody installing this did not grasp the concept of the protocol, perhaps they were educated beyond their own intelligence.

STP with shell connected drain wires (inside the Cat5, part of the shielding structure) is what I think Behringer finally ended up settling on, even though UTP will work fine 90% of the time.

I don't think you understood my question.

How long is the CAT5 connection between the stage boxes and how long is the CAT5 connection between the stage box and the console?

Also, is the cable STP or UTP?

If it's STP, what kind of connectors are you using, and are you absolutely sure the shells are terminated to the drain?

CAT5 used in this application is operating essentially as a transmission line, so the wiring depends on the impedance terminations built into the receive amp, and you can't use splitters and couplers (sometimes) and stubs and taps.

I discovered that the readings on the console did not always track the readings on the stagebox, but I think I sorted out that it was due to a different display scale used on the stage box.

What kind of cable are you using for your snake? STP or UTP? How long is is (total legth including any jumpers between boxes?

I recall the lock function locks the local configuration knobs/switches. It's been a while since I set one up though.

Good info IMO

Any problems with the intellistage expandable truss supports holding up? I worked with some a couple months ago and whils it's a cute design I have doubts as to it holding up on the road.

Condensation is only a problem when the air inside the trailer has enough humidity that the water condenses out as the temperature falls below the dew point (100% relative humidity).

I was THE Kelsey service guy out here during the 80's and early 90's. They were the beginning of the compact board market and ahead of their time.

there is another way to properly clean the Kelsey pots and several ways to completely ruin them. PM me and I'll get you the info.

If the board and the amps clip at the same time, and your board has the pro standard of +26dBu output capability, but the input and output of the DRPA (and 260 and many other DSP's) clip at +20dBu, then you will be clipping the DSP 6dB before clipping everything else. This is probably one of the most common user errors with DSP in general. Internally, most DSP's operate at around +6dBu before internal clipping, so there's input and output scaling that occurs inside the DSP boxes.

For proper system operation, set the DRPA's limiters off, set the DRPA to unity gain (0dB in, and out's to average around 0dB... some may be a few db + and the rest a few dB - ) then do the same thing you did before w/ pink noise but set the output level of your console to +12dBu. Turn your amps up to the point of clipping or limiting and THEN set your limiters on DSP so that the amps just no longer clip. Now, when you drive the system hard, the DSP's limiters and drive electronics will have 8dB of headroom on which to work. The term is called complance, and is the differential on which the limiter's gain reduction algotithems can operate while the rest of the DSP's I/O remains in linear operation. The penalty is a little noise.

With the limiters, it's a fine line between adequate steepness and overshoot versus audible artifacts, but if you are using this primarily as protection, it's not a big deal.

This is good general DSP information, and understanding the interanal AND exteral gain structure of all devices in the system are a big part of troubleshooting performance issues and maximizing the full potential of any DSP product.

Don't use contact cleaner on it, over time the resistive elements will be destroyed. Then you will end up with a steaming pile of unfixable junk.

Looks like another ProClub 12+3. Nice little board for somebody into the "vintage" thing.

The ProClubs were a slanted faceplate unit built into the flitecase. It was the first transformerless input mixer and worked great. It was simple but effective. IIRC it also was the first mixer of theirs to have an internal power supply.

Nope, the flag was a tribute to their UK orgins, the company was based in the US from the 70's IIRC, Hawthorne NJ, phased out Kelsey to start Crest Audio (amps first then mixers), then Peavey bought the remains.

I was involved as Kelsey was being retured and Crest came into being. I did their repairs on the west coast.

http://www.soundcitysite.com/sc_webpages/history_2.htm

They were really a good transition between MI level boards (think Peavey, Tapco, Tangent, Fender, Sunn) and the pro stuff.

Kelsey? They were sooooo 1970s you just had to reopen old wounds didn't you?

I paid for a lot of college with Kelsey DMI. I have very fond memories.

The Kelsey I used was British and was reliable as a Jaguar all the ground screws loosend up from transport ah but when it worked

Except that it was built in the U.S. Most were built in Hawthorne, NJ IIRC.

The wood was dark mahogany on the earlier ones and on the very last units they were oak.

They were a real transformer coupled input console, very high quality and compact at the time, for it's position in the marketplace anyway. Not very expensive either given the era... about $100/channel street price.

The power supply consists of a ~40VA transformer, filter caps and full regulators for +/-Vcc. You can not use any kind of standard adapter.

I have 2 used ones in stock.

One is a test bench supply for servicing the consoles (up to 16 channels) and the other is a custom rack mount supply that we built for some customers when we were servicing these consoles.

The smaller test bench supply is $125, the rack mount pro supply is $200. PM me if interested.

Thanks for completely confirming my observations.

The difference between 126.5dB and 135dB is literally out of the universe. That's a power factor difference of 8X... so big that of course it jumped off the page at me because I know what it possible with these products down to some pretty minute details.

Your comment about efficiency of the subs confirms my hunch that you really don't have the slightest idea what you are arguing. The efficiency of any speaker is the ratio of Acoustic power (SPL) out to electrical power in. This is different for every point within the frequency spectrum and for folded horns, and that one specifically, there is a hugh tradeoff in the bandwidth (the range of frequencies) and the efficiency. The premise of most folded horns is to trade off the very low frequencies for better efficiencies at a higher frequency. Specifically in the SP-1, the 20-45Hz efficiency it traded off for better efficiency in the 45-100Hz area. Otherwise, the cabinet would get too big and heavy and costly to be practical.

Redacted from an online article "A horn loaded speaker can have a sensitivity as high as 110 dB at 2.83 volts (1 watt at 8 ohms) at 1 meter. This is a hundredfold increase in output compared to a speaker rated at 90 dB sensitivity, and is invaluable in applications where high sound levels are required or amplifier power is limited." Hence my initial comment about the Peavey SP1 Bottom speaker which we had installed the Electro Voice EVM15's bare speaker, that had a maximum db level of 135db at 300 watts could technically put out 150db out of the horn. Running a "clean" dedicated 400 watts frequency spectrum defined and dedicated power to the low end 200 -2000hz (not sub sonic) (again I said I ran an active x-over tri-amp system) per folded horn was very efficient, very clean and very loud.

I think your numbers are so optimistic as to be out of this universe. They are complely unrealistic.

You are also neglecting the fact that the SP1 low frequency extension was terrible. It's most efficient around 50-70Hz.

Sure most apeakers today are direct radiating... that's what ported speakers are.

They are not "acoustic suspension" or "infinite baffle" if that's what you ment.

Only the monitor console had transformers on the split out IIRC. Good attempt but only fair execution.

Carvin made an 8 track mixer for recording. Ugh.