SR pros on this forum

[JuniorJBL]

I have a church with 4 SR4735x FOH mains.
I know that room has a lot to do with how it will sound but I only have what I have to work with.
HF is way down on the RTA with almost none at 16k and MF is very muddy. The room is a fan shape and holds about 600-700 people.
The speakers are in the ceiling right over the front edge of the stage.
The stage is shaped like:
\______/

With steps around all three sides.
There ar 2 4735's in the center and 1 on each side. They are at about a 25 degree angle. Does anyone have some ideas as to what aproach I should take to get some clarity to this system? Should I add some UHF drivers, more horns maybe 2" throat horns.
The room is about 150' deep and about 250' wide. Eveything is powered by crown and we use a Soundcraft sprit live 24 and a DBX Driverack 260.
Thanks for all of your input.
Shane

[Ken Pachkowsky]

HF is way down on the RTA with almost none at 16k and MF is very muddy. Should I add some UHF drivers, more horns maybe 2" throat horns.
The room is about 150' deep and about 250' wide. Eveything is powered by crown and we use a Soundcraft sprit live 24 and a DBX Driverack 260.
Thanks for all of your input.
Shane

It is normal to have severe HF rolloff 15 to 20+ db at that frequency. Its beyond what most people can hear. I think I read somewhere most of the population can't hear above 15K. As far as adding 2 inch horns, I am not sure.

I would post a message to BO or JBL Dog or others. These guys are FOH engineer types and could be of much greater assistance. It would appear you have decent gear so I am sure thats not the issue.

Hopefullly one of them will help you out.

Ken

[boputnam]

...we use a ... DBX Driverack 260How...?

----------------

(ps: My first fiddling, would be to bypass that, completely. Take it OUT of the signal path. Not that it is misbehaving, per se - it maybe doing exactly what someone told it to do - but maybe it is not doing what is needed...)

[JuniorJBL]

How...?

----------------

(ps: My first fiddling, would be to bypass that, completely. Take it OUT of the signal path. Not that it is misbehaving, per se - it maybe doing exactly what someone told it to do - but maybe it is not doing what is needed...)

Running in mono providing eq/crossover and delay out of the board. It would be hard to bypass this piece.
I could remove it and run them by themselves but the system is tri-amped.

[boputnam]

Hi, Shane...

This will be tedious to diagnose, so let's go slow - we need to understand the signal path.

Some background:
A. Is this a new problem?
B. When did it develop, and what was it like, before?
C. The Live 4x2 - is it in good condition? Are you certain you are giving a full-pass signal (non EQ'd) to the driverack?
D. Any reason to suspect the 4735's are not working properly?
E. If you send a full-pass signal (low gain) to each component of the 4735, what does it sound like? Do the cabinet elements work when the dbx is bypassed?
F. Is there a chance you have crosswired the tri-amping TO the speakers (ex the dbx)? Sorry, but my roadygoofs love to cross-wire my mains, just to tease me at soundcheck...

Now:
Check each of the band passes, separately. My understanding is, the:
LF is good
MF muddy
HF low gain

1. Double check all the settings on the driverack - make sure you know what it is doing.
2. Ensure it is not in "auto" mode.
3. Use the driverack merely as a crossover, and keep all gains at unity.
4. APPLY NO EQ (either parametric or 28-band).
5. Ensure there is no C/L on.
6. Ensure the Feedback Eliminator is OFF.


Basically, use the dbx thingy as a crossover ONLY as a start.

How does it sound?

[JuniorJBL]

A little more background on this system:

I thought it was tri-wired but it is bi-wired.

A: This is not a new problem
B: it has always been a tough room to make sound good
C: as far as I could tell it should be full pass out to the driverack and the live 4x2 is in good shape no dead pots or functions.
D: Not to my knowledge
E: I have not done this yet.
F: Possible


Yes:
LF is fair to good (a little hollow sounding)
MF is muddy and loud
HF low gain and muffeled

As far as the driverack is I did undo all eq/c/l and fe
Started with flat muted the sub
To my ear WAY to much mid and the rta shows about +12 in the 1K area with a Q of wide so in other words mild slope within a few K above and all the way down to about 200-160Hz

Next:
This is what I think has to to with some of the problems in this room.

1: speakers are 2 in the center and 1 per side.
The sides are vertical w/MF/HF plate vertical as well.
Centers are mirror image MF/HF plate to the center running vertical and the cabs are horizontal.
When you walk down the center isle it sounds like you are spinning around as you walk. Phasing is horible. I used the driverack to run the centers out of phase 90 degrees and that made a semi-big difference.

My thoughts were to move the center speakers out to the edge of the center and move sides over next to them to form a \__ __/ like that. (I did not look to see that may BAD diagram in my first post made know sense).

It would seem that this would give better seperation Please correct me if I am wrong because to move these beasts is rather tough. They are about 22' in the air and you can only get a one man lift in the room so you need rigging so that 2 people on the floor can control them.
I will be back over there in about an hour so I can try some other things.
Also after changing the phase I ran the rta w/pink noise and did a "by ear and eye" eq tring only to cut with the eq and it did sound somewhat better but still struggling in all areas for clarity.

Thanks again for your input.
Shane

[Akira]

My thoughts were to move the center speakers out to the edge of the center and move sides over next to them to form a \__ __/ like that.



a picture would mean everything.

in live reinforcement placement is everything. we have a saying in the industry "1 in the air is worth 2 on the ground'
without seeing the installation, my guess is you hit it right on the nail...
PLACEMENT PLACEMENT PLACEMENT
Generally, when doing a hall, a single point source array in the front center of the room is the way to go. ie: "the Grande ole Oprey" or Albert Hall or any Turbosound installation

the shape you drew above should be modified so that the two front speakers are not in the same plane, thus cancelling each other out. They should be arc'd using the identical splay as the side speakers, forming an unbroken continuous wave front. The result is a "point source array" which is perfectly in phase as you walk around the perimeter of the room.

p.s. for this to work all speakers must be identical. In this case you must align all MF/HF plates so that all boxes are in a vertical line array.

[boputnam]

Hi, Shane...

Maybe you and Akira are on the right track.

I do worry about lobing, and phasing, but, I'm not convinced - yet - that the signal is ready for you two... :p

Before you move anything around, can you isolate, and run only the centers? And, then only the sides? Is there any difference / improvement? If there is, and you like the sound of one over the other, then you two are on the richt track. :)

If not, then there remains, IMO a signal quality problem we have not yet gotten to.

I think it's important you run the Live 4x2 straight through to the power amps, bypassing the dbx. This will only require a couple of (long...?) XLR cables. I'd loan you some but we are not near enough... Switch the SR4735x to fullrange (use the internal passive xover). Then, input into the Live 4x2 some souce material - use one of the stereo strips with EQ (rather than a line or tape input). How does it sound?

[boputnam]

I thought it was tri-wired but it is bi-wired.

A: This is not a new problem
These two thoughts concern me.

You have inherited this system, correct (someone else put it together)? If so, there is very likely an issue with the bi-amp wiring - this is VERY common, and could be an easy fix.

Try my suggested passive full-range, non-dbx trial first. If that works, my friend, you may only have a bi-amp wiring issue...

[JuniorJBL]

Here are some pics of where the 4735's are.

[JuniorJBL]

There are some thoughts as to bi-wire problems.
This system has been built over a 10 yer period. The amps were just replaced from old crests to the Crown CT series. I did not install the amps or speakers but I can tell you getting to the speakers is a pain in the @ss. I can do this sometime this week.

I did redo all connections at the board and yes it would be easy to bypass the DBX.

As you can see from my pic they are behind the screens and very hard to get to. I also hate working high in the air trying to move a 250lb object.:blink:

[JuniorJBL]

Sorry for not posting in the right area:o:

[boputnam]

WOW!! Glad for the pics. Beautiful place. Anyway...

Yea - let's answer all signal-path questions possible, first. Obviously, any moving of cabinets is an extreme solution - although it may be the one.

Question - are the cabinets sitting on their heads (horn, down?).

Anyway, when you can get up there and run the cabling into the passive network, and completely bypass the dbx, we will be most interested in the report. :yes:

With those long cable runs, there easily could be cross-wiring issues. Make notes of the cabling colors / labels before your ascent, and verify what is in the loft. TAKE A LOT OF NOTES, and some pictures. It may be worth experimenting on your own with some intentional cross-wiring down at ground level, and just see if there is any improvement. Things could be mighty scrambled. :dont-know Anyway, it won't hurt anything...

[JuniorJBL]

Horns on the sides are up.

Cabs are horizontal in the center. and the horns are in the middle w/horn on top.
It looks like we might get the lift out on wed night.:)

[boputnam]

It may be worth experimenting on your own (before the ascent...) with some intentional cross-wiring down at ground level, and just see if there is any improvement. Things could be mighty scrambled. :dont-know Anyway, it won't hurt anything...Give it a try...

[Oldmics]

Can you run pink noise thru a channel on the console.Make sure that the channel supplying the pink noise has the E.Q. in bypass mode.


Bypass all equalisers for the mains (foh eq,dbx driverack,etc) and then take a reading with your RTA and post a picture of it here.

I"m thinking the horns are not functioning correctly.

Oldmics

[chad]

I'd have to second the notion that something is phased back asswards. Personaly, I'd probably put a guy in the air and a guy at the console and:

1) play recorded music through each enclosure individually to ensure that each driver in each cabinet is functioning

2) do the 9v battery trick to ensure that each cab is phased properly

Good luck and keep us posted on your findings...:).

[pelly3s]

galaxy audio sells a phase checker which isnt too expensive. most problems tend to be phase issues. in theory the low end drivers should be seperated no more than 1/5 the wavelength of the frequency the box is tuned for, but most of the time that is impossible so ignore i said that. check phase on everything and see how that works for you first.

[JuniorJBL]

Phase has been checked!
HF was out of phase at the amp. (amps are in mono running both center speakers 2amps per cluster. LF amps are Crown CTs 1200's and HF's are CTs 600's.) so that means that both HF's from the center were out of phase from the rest of the system.
1 LF is out of phase but I reversed it at the connection outside the box.
Everything is in phase now.

BTW I was wrong about what speaker it was. They are Venue 3115's.
http://www.jblpro.com/pub/obsolete/venue/vs3115.pdf

Phase problem is still evedent as you move around. Not as bad as before but still bad. Some areas sound fine and others sound very bad.
The side speakers sound way better then the centers. Sorry I did not get a pic.

The 3115's must use some kind of crossover for the LF. This is the design. They are running in the bi-amp mode.

From the looks of things, it looks as though I am going to have to move them.
I did run the boxes w/o the driverack and no difference.

JBL recomended crossover points
http://www.jblpro.com/tunings/venue.pdf

BTW all drivers are working!

Thanks again for all your help.
SHane

[JuniorJBL]

I'd have to second the notion that something is phased back asswards. Personaly, I'd probably put a guy in the air and a guy at the console and:

1) play recorded music through each enclosure individually to ensure that each driver in each cabinet is functioning

2) do the 9v battery trick to ensure that each cab is phased properly

Good luck and keep us posted on your findings...:).

We did just that! Thanks Chad:)

[Zilch]

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Venue%20Series/VS3115-WH.pdf

Shows the network.

No filter on the LF in any mode.

Mid filter is bypassed in the tri-amp mode.

Mid/high driver combo is rotatable for the ones that are horizontal....

[boputnam]

Phase problem is still evident as you move around. Not as bad as before but still bad. Some areas sound fine and others sound very bad.
The side speakers sound way better then the centers. Wow, Shane - cool.

I always revert to checking the signal path and wiring before I blame the components - but to do that, one must get back to first principals. Well done. Nice job. BTW, where did you find the cross-wiring to be?

I wonder if what you are now describing is actually "lobing" and not a phase problem, per se. Different solutions...

Do you need the centers, really? Maybe with the corrected wiring, you've got plenty of SPL and good enough "spray" with just the sides? Dunno... I'm not understanding why they would sound any different than the sides. You checked all the wiring up in the loft, too? Maybe standing the Centers on their heads, might help? Maybe the sides are getting a beneficial MF/HF reflection off the proscenium walls - the centers would not be getting that, and are not spraying as effectively to the floor. Again, dunno...

And, as Zilch notes, the passive xover is between the MF and HF, at 1.6kHz. I don't know that you need to go tri-amped, but the dbx could handle it (but you need more amps...).

[JuniorJBL]

I have set the crossover points and slopes as per the JBL manual.
I am sure that standing the speakers vertical would help but if I am going to do that I may as well move them out to the edges 5' and get the "stereo" effect.
Not that my signal would be stereo (but it can be) and yes the only thing about Tri-amping is 2 more amps. So I thing bi-amp is our better approach.
I am not sure when we will do the switch but it should be soon. I will remember my camera next time and get lots of pics.

Any other suggestions are welcome.:)

Shane

[JuniorJBL]

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/Venue%20Series/VS3115-WH.pdf

Shows the network.

No filter on the LF in any mode.

Mid filter is bypassed in the tri-amp mode.

Mid/high driver combo is rotatable for the ones that are horizontal....

I was looking for that info;)

[chad]

....I may as well move them out to the edges 5' and get the "stereo" effect.....I will remember my camera next time and get lots of pics.

Any other suggestions are welcome.:)

ShaneMoving the center cluster out to the sides was going to be my next suggestion:D.

Oh, and yes we'd like to see pics of the rig:applaud:.

[edgewound]

Hi Shane....your patience is admirable...nice detective work.

Is it really necessary for two speakers in the center? I'd flip the speakers so the horn is on the bottom to minimize reflections off the ceiling that can cause phase and lobing problems. One center speaker will simplify your solution so two close units don't fight with each other. If you must keep the two centers, I'd splay them so the horns' coverages don't overlap and cause lobing problems, still keeping all speakers in the array oriented with the horns on the bottom.

[JuniorJBL]

Hi Shane....your patience is admirable...nice detective work.

Is it really necessary for two speakers in the center? I'd flip the speakers so the horn is on the bottom to minimize reflections off the ceiling that can cause phase and lobing problems. One center speaker will simplify your solution so two close units don't fight with each other. If you must keep the two centers, I'd splay them so the horns' coverages don't overlap and cause lobing problems, still keeping all speakers in the array oriented with the horns on the bottom.

I am now going for placement of left and right with the way the room is designed this should be a semi-standard FOH setup. But you are right I am not aiming to keep it center. When they are moved I will end up with a left side and a left front same with the right.

So kinda like they do for large format concerts.
Example: Vertec's will create a curve when you fly them. It will be sorta like that on a MUCH MUCH smaller scale.:D

[edgewound]

I am now going for placement of left and right with the way the room is designed this should be a semi-standard FOH setup. But you are right I am not aiming to keep it center. When they are moved I will end up with a left side and a left front same with the right.

So kinda like they do for large format concerts.
Example: Vertec's will create a curve when you fly them. It will be sorta like that on a MUCH MUCH smaller scale.:D

Sounds like you've got the scenario under control. Your church is fortunate to have a guy like you putting in so much effort and care to improve the system. Lots of people just don't understand and under-appreciate the undertaking of arranging a good sound system.

[Tom Loizeaux]

It's great to know that all your drivers and cabinets are in phase...however, sometimes switching phase on a peticular driver can "improve" the over-all sound. Crossovers rotate phase, depending on the slope, and, of course, distance from the listener can "create" phase problems...which sometimes can be reduced by switching or rotating phase or using some time delay on certain units.
It can get complicated!

Tom

[Zilch]

If the two center ones are playing mono and both aimed forward, they'll majorly interfere with each other.

Consider the directivity spec. Horizontal coverage (-6dB) is 70 degrees.

I'd keep the centers horizontal, woofers at center, rotate the mid/high horns into the normal vertical position, angle them out at 67.5° with respect to each other (total included angle), and then tilt them down 25° to 30°. The vertical coverage (-6dB) is 50°. There seems little point in bouncing half of that (500 Hz to 16 kHz) off the ceiling other than to compound the problem with spurious reflections....

Alternatively, if you want the center narrower, keep the mid/high in the horizontal orientation, angle them out at 45° with respect to each other (included angle), and tilt down 35° to 40°.

I'm not an SR pro, and I haven't studied the Sound Reinforcement manual (in the JBL Pro website tech library) , but I do know those specs mean quite a bit with respect to placement and intelligibility.

[JuniorJBL]

If the two center ones are playing mono and both aimed forward, they'll majorly interfere with each other.

Consider the directivity spec. Horizontal coverage (-6dB) is 70 degrees.

I'd keep the centers horizontal, woofers at center, rotate the mid/high horns into the normal vertical position, angle them out at 67.5° with respect to each other (total included angle), and then tilt them down 25° to 30°. The vertical coverage (-6dB) is 50°. There seems little point in bouncing half of that (500 Hz to 16 kHz) off the ceiling other than to compound the problem with spurious reflections....



Currently they are set in a "v" across the center at about 30 deg. They also tilt down about 25-30deg.
The woofers are on the outside so to change them I would have to take them down and change the rigging points or swap one for the other. either way I have to take them down to do anything with them.

I will try to draw a diagram so all can understand what is happening.
Thanks All:bouncy:

[Zilch]

I will try to draw a diagram so all can understand what is happening.
Thanks All:bouncy:Are the rotatable mid/high assemblies vertical or horizontal, that is, is the tweeter above the mid or to the side?

[JuniorJBL]

Are the rotatable mid/high assemblies vertical or horizontal, that is, is the tweeter above the mid or to the side?

Vertical

[Zilch]

O.K., so when they mounted the cabinets horizontal, they rotated the mid/high back to the vertical orientation. I think the problem is that the angle is too small, and the mid/highs are cross-firing at the center and interfering with each other.

You can test this by rotating the mid/high assemblies back to the horizontal, which would require less of an angle, as the dispersion angle would be 50° as opposed to the present 70°. Work with only the centers playing to get their problem defined.

The design was engineered, apparently. Can you consult with the original designer?

"What were you thinking, dude?" :blink:

Are the side speakers at the front, or up behind the same screens in the angled sections? If they're all up there together, I agree you want to horizontally array them all as you are thinking. I see your choices of coverage angles as 200° (4 X 50°), 240° (2 X 50 + 2 X 70°), or 280° (4 X 70°). I'd keep the two center ones running mono, probably.

I'm not there, so I may have my head in a dark place about this, of course....

[Akira]

whenever you combine multiple line array trapezoidial speakers in a cluster, you must mount them vertical. whenever you fly line array traps, you should position the speaker with horn down. be concerned with horn placement only, aiming all HF drivers in an arc for a combined even wave length coverage; the trapedoial design will naturally take care of the radiating quality of the other drivers. trapezoid designs are not built that way to look cool. they are built that way because the shape of the enclosure is designed to work in certain configurations. even in a front load cabinet, a trap design will throw further than a rectangular box. line arrays, especially with two or more identical drivers will also have better throw characteristics. this is in fact why a trap design and a vertical array go hand in hand.
DO NOT place the cabinets side by each or even separated by 5' aimed in the same plane.
p.s. assuming all components are firing correctly, go for a physical solution...the third rule of sound: Correct physical problems physically; correct electronic problems electronically. No amount of technical brilliance can make up for a physical solution or have the impact of proper physical driver alignment.
finally, what the SR industry now calls "line array" is in fact a horizontal dispersing enclosure with a small tightly controlled vertical beam. this new breed of enclosure is designed to fly vertical from top to bottom, sometimes in a configuration 20 high and only one wide! again, messing with this configuration and placing them side by side would totally destroy the acoustic alignment of the cluster.

[boputnam]

I'm not there, so I may have my head in a dark place about this, of course....But, Zilch - how could we tell...? :rotfl:

[boputnam]

DO NOT place the cabinets side by each Great post, Akira.

Tho', you might want to revise the quote, to avoid any confusion...

[JuniorJBL]

I do know who installed but they nolonger work for the company.

Also I found out that one HF driver was disconnected after they first installed them.

This leads me to belive that they had this problem and were looking for a fast fix.

I am not sure what you mean by "Do Not place them side by each"
Please bring clarity:blink: to my world.

:)

[mikebake]

SR4735, (sound reinforcement) VS3115 (venue) and CS3115 (cinema) are all basically the same unit. I have four of them and they are worth preserving in your venue; the vocal intelligibility with them can be quite excellent, as can LF reproduction when used in multiples. It is a good box; hope you keep plugging away; sounds like you are close.

[JuniorJBL]

Yes the sides sound really good, so I do want to keep going towards the goal:applaud:

[Zilch]

Says 3115 may suitably be horizontal mounted:

http://www.jblpro.com/pub/manuals/Install_guide.pdf

Says sides should be delayed:

http://www.jblpro.com/pub/install/V_SP_Array_guide.pdf

See Fig. 3 & 5 here:

http://www.jblpro.com/ae/pdf/AE_PD%20Array%20Applications%20Guide%20Rev%20C.pdf

More of general interest, but see last photo:

http://www.jblpro.com/pages/Reprint_LowRes_NoMarks.pdf

[Akira]

Great post, Akira.

Tho', you might want to revise the quote, (side by each) to avoid any confusion...

that's my "Canadian" coming out...a joke on the french.
whenever we do a gig with them Quebec guys they tell us, "set all those speaker over dere side by each" :D

JuniorJBL: of course it was meant side by side

[boputnam]

whenever you combine multiple line array trapezoidial speakers in a cluster, you must mount them vertical. ... DO NOT place the cabinets side by (side)...Hey...

Yea, I got that, but the last statement, above, seems to contradict the first. 'splain...?

[Oldmics]

Yeah,I"m with Bo on this one!

Respectfully Akira some clarification on your terminlogy is requested.

What is a "combine multiple line array trapezoidial speakers in a cluster"?

Are you referring to multiple trap enclosures with all of its componets oriented in the same plane? and then wrapped into a single cluster?

If my above statement is correct then the multiple enclosures will not act as a line array system.It would be a spherical radiating enclosure that has its componets aligned in the same plane (be it horizontal or vertical)

Or what you refer to in a later post as a "vertical array".

I guess my confusion lies in the intermingling of the term "line array" with trap enclosures.

You also make the comment "a trap design will throw further than a rectangular box."

Are you talking individualy or multiple enclosures?The "throw" charactoristics are defined thru sound pressure levels which are calculated from the use of multiple enclosures,enclosure style (if line array-focusing of the boxs) and hang heigth.

There is no difference in "throw" when comparing one rectangular box to one trap enclosure.This takes into account that the same componets and componet configuration loading (horn ,front load,etc) is utilised and only the exterior cut being different.

I think we are thinking on the same page with only the dialect being different.

Just looking to ease mine and Bo"s confusion.

Best regards,Oldmics

[edgewound]

Yeah,I"m with Bo on this one!

Respectfully Akira some clarification on your terminlogy is requested.

What is a "combine multiple line array trapezoidial speakers in a cluster"?

Are you referring to multiple trap enclosures with all of its componets oriented in the same plane? and then wrapped into a single cluster?

If my above statement is correct then the multiple enclosures will not act as a line array system.It would be a spherical radiating enclosure that has its componets aligned in the same plane (be it horizontal or vertical)

Or what you refer to in a later post as a "vertical array".

I guess my confusion lies in the intermingling of the term "line array" with trap enclosures.

You also make the comment "a trap design will throw further than a rectangular box."

Are you talking individualy or multiple enclosures?The "throw" charactoristics are defined thru sound pressure levels which are calculated from the use of multiple enclosures,enclosure style (if line array-focusing of the boxs) and hang heigth.

There is no difference in "throw" when comparing one rectangular box to one trap enclosure.This takes into account that the same componets and componet configuration loading (horn ,front load,etc) is utilised and only the exterior cut being different.

I think we are thinking on the same page with only the dialect being different.

Just looking to ease mine and Bo"s confusion.

Best regards,Oldmics

Nice clarification Oldmics:applaud:

[boputnam]

I guess my confusion lies in the intermingling of the term "line array" with trap enclosures.I'm suspicious therein lies my confounding, but then again, if it's a part of the first part and not part of the second part then I'm fine. :D

[JuniorJBL]

I'm suspicious therein lies my confounding, but then again, if it's a part of the first part and not part of the second part then I'm fine. :D

:blink:

[Akira]

sorry, i was talking about two separate system designs...

When I refer to a vertical line array in a trapezoidial design, I am merely referring to a line array of drivers, ie: in this case 3 drivers mounted in a direct line--not a group of speakers mounted vertically.
This is quite different than the new series of vertical line array systems which do exactly that. These enclosures rely on a wide horizontal splay coupled with a tightly controlled vertical beam; the opposite of a trap. I don't know a lot about these new systems and have had no hands on experience with them. But, in comparing the two systems I like to think of a trap system as identical multiple mini boxes forming a summed image while the new line arrays are almost like a series of wide firing full range horns draped from top to bottom in a tall single row.

In a trap format the goal is to create a full image box with certain beam characteristics which enable blocks or clusters of identical enclosures to be used together to form a seamless "point source array." Meaning the sound image from multiple boxes grow in size, proportion and SPL in direct ratio to the number of units combined. Walking around the perimeter of the room will reveal a single image point source per cluster group. And yes the combined image can be made spherical and often is with a single large cluster in the front middle of the room. Think of a mirror ball cut in half so there is no ceiling coverage. This was a radical but old idea, which changed the thinking from a previous generation of P.A. systems that where folded horn loaded and used separate bins for bass, mid and highs. Since each enclosure is it's own full range source, the concept makes absolute sense as the number of units need only grow proportionately with the venue. With a folded horn system and even the new line array systems, you can't do that.

The shape of the box and alignment of the drivers ABSOULTELY CHANGES THROW CHARACTERISTICS.
I have A/B' trap and rectangular enclosures one on one and in a cluster with the identical driver setup and identical power rack processing, outdoors where it really matters:
(2) E120 (1) 2445 with 2380 Biradial.
amp rack: BSS 24db/octave Linkwitz Riley with QSC MX2000 bottom and QSC MX1500 top

The traps threw way further and the rectangular box with off set drivers sounded way better. The traps had far superior summing characteristics than the rectangular boxes, so yes design shape plays into it. While the rectangles sounded much better standing alone like a very loud studio monitor which does not gain as much from doubling side by side and increases driver interference as a result of firing in the same plane.
I only tell you this story because I built the above series of rectangular boxes while a competitor built the traps. This design mistake cost me a very large sale...but, that's how we learn, isn't it?

p.s. I will be posting pics of this and other designs on another post shortly.

[Akira]

Yeah,I"m with Bo on this one!



You also make the comment "a trap design will throw further than a rectangular box."

Are you talking individualy or multiple enclosures?The "throw" charactoristics are defined thru sound pressure levels which are calculated from the use of multiple enclosures,enclosure style (if line array-focusing of the boxs) and hang heigth. There is no difference in "throw" when comparing one rectangular box to one trap enclosure.

First let me say I am no expert when it comes to building boxes. Rather it became a function of neccessity when I needed to replace my "B" line of P.A. systems from the old horn designs to the then new line of full range boxes.
Originally, like you I believed that identical drivers in a properly designed bass reflex enclosure would put out the same SPL regardless of, as you say "exterior cut." Physics tell me that is absolutely true.
This being the case if one design is louder 100' away, then physics also say that the same volume of sound must be more narrowly focused in beam to sound louder at a greater distance.
In your above example you infer that throw is a function of: "The "throw" charactoristics are defined thru sound pressure levels which are calculated from the use of multiple enclosures,enclosure style (if line array-focusing of the boxs) and hang heigth. This being the case, if one style of box throws no better than another style of box, then there would be no advantage between either system when combining multiple enclosures.

p.s. I was not aware of the deficencies in my own design (below) until I was up for bid with another builder. The potential customer was a medium sized touring company who heard my excellent sounding boxes in a club. (their main application) We set up different combinations with the competing designs set on a loading dock firing into an empty field. The difference was night and day...a lesson in design I will never forget. BTW, my design sounds like a big studio monitor and when using the rig with 4 tops and 4 subs a side, you can clearly hear the entire image 150' at the back of a room. It was only in an out door application where I was taken to school.

[Zilch]

I doubt that the shape of the box "focuses" the sound field.

I've always viewed the tapered sides as merely facilitating clustering the cabinets at the proper angle.

BUT, the same models offered in different dispersion angles don't have different side angles.

See also the concept of "Exploded cluster," I linked to above, which seems more like the presently troublesome installation.

They gotta be really close to sum at higher frequencies.

Apparently, I know nothing.... :(

Is there a JBL clustering/rigging manual that describes this?

[Ian Mackenzie]

I doubt that the shape of the box "focuses" the sound field.

I've always viewed the tapered sides as merely facilitating clustering the cabinets at the proper angle.

BUT, the same models offered in different dispersion angles don't have different side angles.

See also the concept of "Exploded cluster," I linked to above, which seems more like the presently troublesome installation.

They gotta be really close to sum at higher frequencies.

Apparently, I know nothing.... :(

Is there a JBL clustering/rigging manual that describes this?

Try the tech library at jbppro.com or the better Pa bibles..its not something you can pick up in 5 minutes and come up on here comment fluently on! You might have to go back to school depending on your level of education...was that Cal tech?

I recall Bo's engineer was into all this stuff.

[Akira]

Try the tech library at jbppro.com or the better Pa bibles..its not something you can pick up in 5 minutes and come up on here comment fluently on! You might have to go back to school depending on your level of education...was that Cal tech?

...maybe I'll have to go back to school. :p
if you look at the pic above there is something about it's design that made it sound fabulous close up front, dispersing immediately. I designed the box on it's smallest possible baffel space and size with the horn, thinking shape and alignment would make very little difference.

[Zilch]

O.K., called "Planar" arrays, you set the included splay angle as desired. The angle of the cabinet sides defines a nominal (not necessarily optimal) splay:

http://www.jblpro.com/ae/pdf/BRACKET1.pdf

Exploding the cluster creates increasingly overlapping sound fields at greater distances where path length differences become proportionately smaller....

[Crash]

Why are non-SR Pros even posting in this thread? :banghead:
I was hoping to learn something. :(

[Ian Mackenzie]

Why are non-SR Pros even posting in this thread? :banghead:
I was hoping to learn something. :(

Good point but perhap being on the Off Topic Forum say it allll:rotfl: ,

Hey , we need a spell checker.....the thread title ain't too good either

SR pros on this fourm :blink:

[Crash]

Oh

[JuniorJBL]

Hey , we need a spell checker.....the thread title ain't too good either

SR pros on this fourm :blink:

:blah:

[Ian Mackenzie]

Apparently, I know nothing.... :(

1st quote of the week
Affirmative Will Robinson


BTW, my design sounds like a big studio monitor and when using the rig with 4 tops and 4 subs a side, you can clearly hear the entire image 150' at the back of a room. It was only in an out door application where I was taken to school.

2nd quote of the week.

Well mine sounds like a big studio monitor because it is...but I know what you mean. By the way you are giving you age away.

My best recollection of a PA box sounding like a studio monitor was the Clair Bros S4 cabinet...2 2240's 4 K110's, 2 2441, 2 2405's per box. The Roadies JBL 4350...nothin even comes close.

Get 20 or so of those per side of the stage and you got something worth listening to..sheer brute force.....

[JuniorJBL]

First this is what we have

[JuniorJBL]

This is what I think we need. And yes there is tilt as well but I did not draw it.

BTW This is top view just in case there is :blink:

[Zilch]

You said the centers were running mono. Do we correctly presume the two sides are stereo, L & R?

Are you proposing to split the feed to the separated centers, then, or continue in mono?

[JuniorJBL]

You said the centers were running mono. Do we correctly presume the two sides are stereo, L & R?

Are you proposing to split the feed to the separated centers, then, or continue in mono?

Everything is mono. I would like to have a L/R stereo only as I think this would be a better approach to this type of room/setup.

The other problem is this is a church and people do not want to see ANYTHING!

So we do this "behind the sceen":slink:
Shane:)

[Oldmics]

If you guys don"t mind,I"m gonna continue my chat with Akira.

I wanted to keep it in this thread for those following (although it should go to its own place so that we may concentrate on JuniorJBLs situation)

Akira-the pictured enclosures are your workmanship? I say-Nice Job:applaud:

So when you compared those boxes to trap enclosures-You lost out in the SPL war?

The first thing to consider is the reason for the enclosure.



The enclosure keeps the front wave from meeting the rear (inside the enclosure) wave.



Rear cavity volume can be calculated on any enclosure shape whatsoever be it square,rectangular,trapezoid,etc.



The shape of the enclosure does not matter to the speaker driver (yeah,yeah,I know cubes are bad due to standing waves-I’m trying to keep it short).The only thing that matters to the speaker driver is the enclosure volume.



Again I submit that as long as the volume of two given boxes (be it rectangular or trapezoidal) are identical and that ALL of the components used are identical and loaded in the same fashion along with the porting being identical ,the two boxes will produce the same sound pressure level (or throw).



This is only a singe box comparison. This also precludes that both enclosures are built of similar materials and no standing wave issues are encountered due to construction techniques or inappropriate materials used.



When multiple enclosures are utilized trap boxes have a slight advantage because of there ability of mutual coupling. Rectangular enclosures also can do this (piles of Clair S4s) but a trap box will have a wider frequency range of beneficial mutual coupling. This is due to tighter component spacing.



In my opinion,the biggest deficency of trap enclosures or rectangular boxes in a vertical array is comb filtering (regardless of how incrementally narrow the horns horizontal pattern exhibits).



This is where the line array systems are superior.Checkout this link for line array information



http://www.prosoundweb.com/lsi/tech/la/la.php (http://www.prosoundweb.com/lsi/tech/la/la.php)



The information is a few years old but still applicable



Point source arrays don”t exist (except in the minds of the marketing departments):blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: :blah: .

Again the comb filtering issue.


The closest thing I have heard to point source is a mono Tannoy system.

There has to be another reason why your boxes lost in the shootout.It would take a pile "o" test gear and lotsa time to find out why-But it was not because of the shape of the enclosure.

Oldmics-still learning that I"ll never know it all

[chad]

Why are non-SR Pros even posting in this thread? :banghead:
I was hoping to learn something. :(

:D

1) I personally configure, hookup, eq, troubleshoot and mix live sound nearly every weekend of the year. The venues range from 50 to 500 occupants, the room acoustics range from gorgeous to absolutely horrid. Primarily my SR work is for my own personal band, but hey - I've dealt with pro audio for 20 some years and also get hired by local club bands to mix their FOH.

2) Would you please give your definition of "SR Pro"??

3) I think this forum needs an SR section, as the majority of discussion is related to home audio and studio monitors.

:band:

[Akira]

i seem to have inadvertently hi-jacked your thread.
i would like to start a new thread as there is an interesting topic i would like to learn more about: box design in general

NOW BACK TO WHAT'S IMPORTANT...let's keep on topic and help shane out.

as for your diagrams:
i can see two problems with diagram #1. all speakers should be vertically aligned which you are correcting. and, the mouth of the front enclosures is out of alignment with the sides. this combined with the system problems you have mentioned now totally makes sense.
diagram #2 is an improvement and depending on the buttress (pic) that hides the speakers maybe your only practical layout. the ideal configuration is a true half spiral splay with all cabinets tightly together, but that doesn't seem possible.
i try to avoid placing speakers in close proximity firing in the same plane like a wall. (your two fronts) but, if it works that's all that matters. i would try playing the two front's only in your new configuration and see how they sound on their own. this may also be a good time to try EQ and finer placement adjustments--you want it to sound good and cover it's intended area. for now pretend the sides don't matter. you say the sides sound good. again play them on their own. do the same for the opposite side and in all three listening tests, also walk around the room and notice spill off and anomalies as the sound becomes increasingly off axis. that will give you a clue if the room still sounds bad when the full system is on. if all three sides sound good individually, then you would think combining them all should work out.
where the corners meet in the buttress which is also the same plane as your L/R speaker pairs, is a potential problem for the audience in direct line of them. this would be the acoustic boundry between front and side....but, there's only one way to find out.
i have worked in rooms with a similar layout and while not ideal are not a problem. i think that your end result should yield a decent sound. please follow through on your updates and we will promise not to interfere. :thmbsup:
p.s. not sure why you would prefer stereo; i'd keep the system mono.

[JuniorJBL]

As far as others talking about whatever that is fine with me I am just glad that when I do post you guys answer.

The reason for stereo is there is a LOT of video in the room w/ four projectors lots of stuff. This would be my primary reason. It does look like we are trying to plan a day within the next two weeks to move the speakers and to have enough time to maybe move them to a different location if what we have talked about does not work. This would probably be the saturday after thanksgiving.

I will also try to get better pics of all the room so people can see everything in the works.

There are other issues w/this room as well that I would like to address but as we all know it is better to tackle one problem at a time.;)


Thanks again to all who have put there 2c in to get to this point.

Shane:bouncy:

[Zilch]

Before you move anything, try disconnecting (turning off) one of the centers first. I'm betting everything will improve substantially, even though the aiming of the remaining active speaker is not optimal.

My analysis: They've packed 240° of controlled dispersion into 150°. There's major overlap of the sound fields with concomitant phase interference. That's why they disconnected one of the tweeters. They shoulda killed the mid, as well, which is also giving you excessive midrange emphasis.

When you connected them out of phase, you nulled out the overlap at the center and one of the sides, which you perceived as an improvement, a clue as to how to fix it.

The "spinning" you hear walking down the center is the two centers overlapping in the middle. In mono, it's the entire frequency range creating phase issues. Turning one of them off reduces the total dispersion (horizontal, of the complete system,) to 180°, a better match to the space. Separating the centers as you propose would reduce the problem at the center, but increases the interference with the sides.

If disabling one of the centers works, remove one of them and fly the remaining one upright after rotating the M/H assembly back to vertical and re-aiming it straight out. Keep the present downward tilt angle, which increases the splay in the direction of the listeners, reducing the remaining overlap.

As I read the JBL tunings, they're only provided for passive and triamp modes. You'll have to work out what's appropriate for your biamp setup, not shown. Schematic tells me the full mid/high filters remain in play in the biamp mode, simplifying the task.

I suspect the four units could be made to work very nicely with more precise aiming and downward tilt adjustments, but perhaps not within the constraints of the existing screened platform. That's a task requiring 3-D modeling of elliptical cone sections, well beyond my capabilities. There are likely resources available at JBL for that, but I don't have access to them.

As you know, stereo would create it's own new set of difficulties....

[JuniorJBL]

What you are saying is it may be better to have 3 instead of 4?

[boputnam]

What you are saying is it may be better to have 3 instead of 4?Thanks, Shane... I'm gettin' lost too. :blink:

But, I also wanna congratulate and thank-you for being so open about this problem, and for seeking ideas / advice here. We have ALL learned a great deal from the varied posts and suggestions on this, whether we are posting or just reading.

Too often we muddle along, without understanding what or why. The ideas here seem to be getting you closer to some substantial improvements. That is pretty darn cool... :)

[Zilch]

What you are saying is it may be better to have 3 instead of 4?'Zactly. And you can easily try it to see, though without repositioning the center speaker that is running, it will not be as good as after you do.

Draw 60° angles coming out of the speakers in the present and proposed postionings and see how quickly they overlap to interfere with each other. Spec sheet says they're actually 70° wide at -6 dB from 500 Hz up, average, i.e., worse.

Look at the horizontal polar plots in the spec sheet. At -6 dB, they're 60° wide all the way out through 16 kHz. That's why I say draw with 60°.

The downward tilt increases the splay of the boxes, and works in your favor to further minimize the overlap while covering more of the audience area and reducing reflections off the walls and ceiling....

[Earl K]

- Zilches instincts are correct . HiFi & the basic principals behind a "Good Install " aren't mutually exclusive.
- ( ie ; as in Home HiFi , the fewer sources the ear has to contend with , the better ) .
- "Sources" can easily include reflected sound , like the many focussed reflections offered up by glass, brick and stone .

- For the most coherent sound you want each geographical location ( anywhere ) to be "acoustically serviced" by only a single source. Think about that for a moment. Any more than that and anything can and will happen . You've previously discovered the down side of the "anything" syndrome.


What you are saying is it may be better to have 3 instead of 4?
Sort of but ,,,,
- it's unfortunately never that simple . A single 1.75" diaphragm isn't going to come anywhere close to providing the necessary resolution ( necessary for live music ) within the typically "acoustically-challenged" environment found in a church . It can easily be overwhelmed when just voice is the playback source .

- Your initial instincts/thoughts of increasing the size of the hi-frequency horns' diaphragms' are very likely a good avenue to pursue. For Instance : A single 3" diaphragm has twice the surface area compared to a single 1.75" diaphragm . A single 4" diaphragm has four times the surface area. The numbers are; 3.1 sq", 6.3 sq" & 12.5 sq" for the three sizes of diaphragms. Surface area in any pistonic device ( diaphragm ) , when driving through a "point source" device ( like a horn ), does translate into greater resolution / clarity & lower distortion ( with a bunch of other things being equal ) .

- Since your boxes have rotatable mid/hi horn modules / setup ( orient ) the 4 of the boxes so that those midrange horns never ever overlap .
- Study the product brochures and memorize the horns 6 db down points in both the vertical & horizontal planes. Line up all 4 of your boxes so that these ( 6 db down ) points ( for the horns ) are parallel to each other. This might mean that you need to choose a "module orientation" that provides the narrowest horizontal coverage. Why ? it's still about coverage and one boxes horn module is not going to be able to provide the @ 120° to 140° horizontal spread needed in the front section. . Obviously , each box ( & it's module ) will need to be rotated away from each other so that their actual horn coverages never overlap .

(i) Draw the mid-horn coverage patterns ( horizontal & vertical ) out on paper. Hopefully the HiFreq. horn follows the same coverage pattern as the low-mid horn . If they differ much , these boxes are getting close to being a lost cause for proper implementation . I'd suggest making little paper cutouts that represent the enclosure as well as the projected coverage emanating out from the horn walls ( for about a 10' distance ) . This must all be done to scale.

(ii) Overlay these paper coverage standins onto a ( scale ) drawing of the churches layout . This would represent a " plan view". Play with the four boxes/coverage cones to get the best / seamless coverage that has no overlap.

(iii) Do the same coverage exercise with a "sectional" ( elevated ) view . I'd suggest "aiming the center of the horns" at the row of pews that are about 1/3 the distance from the back pews ( providing this focus actually gives some horn coverage to the pews closest to the front ) . If you aim the horns too high, you can easily blow too much acoustic energy into the back walls / which exaccerbates the typically "tragic" acoustics found in modern churches / and will return this reflected acoustic energy as echo into the central area .

(iv) The above "coverage exercises" are, of course, quite simplistic to accomplish if you are handy with the manipulation of CAD files .
- If you are ; see if you can get the churches original files in DWG or DXF format emailed to you , for use with your progam. If you contact the original architects, you might be pleasantly surprised to discover they have these files available . Getting files like this ( even in paper form ) can sure save a lot of time taking physical measurements.


- Eventually ( in a couple of days ), I'll post some links to reference books that you need to own . You need these because it seems, you've allowed yourself to be turned into the churches' "resident PA expert" and ( like it or not ) your credibility is now being put to the test .

Cheers

[JuniorJBL]

This info is VERY good stuff :applaud: .
I would like thank everyone has contributed. :bouncy:


Earl k
Yes I can get the .dwg file anytime I would like. I don't use much CAD myself but The people I work with do. I understand your direction and I wished I had thought of that myself. That is pretty much basic troubleshooting steps if you think about it.

I do not have to do all this until I just draw it.

Zilch
You actually said the same thing in a few posts back basicly saying the same thing.

This is what I will do in the next few days. I will try and PDF a copy of the print. SWEET ;)

Shane

[Zilch]

Zilch
You actually said the same thing in a few posts back basicly saying the same thing.Heh, heh. That means I thought it through again and came to the same or similar conclusion, making it worthy of reiteration, to my mind.

[I also forget stuff.... :p ]

[JuniorJBL]

(Most valuable forum)

This is just a great place to be!!

Thanks Guys:applaud:

[Zilch]

Per Earl's suggestion, equilateral triangles effectively model -6 dB 60° horizontal sound field of VS3115. Multiples joined at apex illustrate vertical distribution, as desired:

1) Three-cabinet proposal.

2) Front view shows no field overlap at listening height. Significant phase interaction would only occur along the two lines where the triangle bases intersect.

3) Nested triangles show on-axis at front (left) and ~20° down. Add bigger ones to model the full 40° vertical field.

Replicate using actual dimensions, heights, and angles to see what you've got going on there.

Yes, the projections are really conical sections, so it's not fully described by this method.

Zilch only does "Quick and Dirty."

O.K., I'll quit now.

Model's for sale for $1.00 so's I be "SR Pro."

[Wanna see my elliptical oblate stairway model? :p ]

[Oldmics]

Cool !!!!!!!!!!! Speaker Origami :)

[boputnam]

Hell - that last one looks like the Flying Nun doing a phaser scan... :rotfl:

Good one, Zilch!

[Zilch]

Hell - that last one looks like the Flying Nun doing a phaser scan...Heh. I was gonna expedite the process with a Chinese takeout container.

[Angles were wrong, tho.... :p ]

[JuniorJBL]

That is cool:applaud: .

I am going to get the dimensions in the next day or so.

:thmbsup: Thumbs to the Zilchster:applaud:

[Akira]

i like the three cab solution the best. the key is, you are always stuck with that covered buttress that hides the speakers, making it impossible to setup the perfect splayed cluster. i think that is the main impediment to this install and the source of your problems. my guess is that the room doesn't sound that bad. is there a balcony in the rear center? what is the distance from stage to back wall? this is where the 4th cab could work well. in a 3 cab solution i feel that all speakers should be vertically aligned with horn down.
installation is mostly common sense. when you look at the paper design it all comes together--three sided overhang...three acoustic sources. a very simple solution has now eliminated the biggest obstacle.
it kind of gets you scratching your head thinking, "why didn't i think of that?"
hat's off to you zilch.

[JuniorJBL]

There is no balcony in the rear. The stage is about 30' deep with seating for the choir. We are also working on deadening the stage area to deal with feedback issues.

It does appear that the 3 cab solution would be the best;) .

We shall from this point on call this "Zilchster mode"
Unless someone has a better name, Zilch?

[Lancer]

Zilch only does "Quick and Dirty."Yes. :( Please work on rectifying that. Altec and JBL aren't based on Quick and Dirty. You've done a great job reading up on everything I've posted the past five years. Drop the "quick and dirty", increase attention to detail, round out your data acquisition gear and I think you'll pretty much have it.

Thanks :cheers:

[Zilch]

:cheers:

[Zilch]

I believe a four-cab solution can also be found that will fit within the screened buttress and may provide better (wider) coverage at the sides, but it'll require re-aiming of all of the cabinets.

Once Shane makes his more accurate model, he'll be able to see by moving his triangles to the various likely locations, including clustered pairs at the corners.

See top of P.5 here, but using only two cabs, for example:

http://www.jblpro.com/pub/install/V_SP_Array_guide.pdf

He also has the 40° horizontal, 60° vertical option still available.

The present alignments seem to keep the direct field well off the stage. I'd guess the feedback problem is coming from side or rear-wall reflections....

[JuniorJBL]

The present alignments seem to keep the direct field well off the stage. I'd guess the feedback is coming from side or rear-wall reflections....

Also comes from loud monitors.
The people who play are kind-of do it my way ore I cant do it. They like to have monitors so loud that they hear themselves like singing to the car radio when you drive down the road.
No experiance here :no:

We also have a full Shure wireless headset system and not many want to use it.

[Zilch]

Also comes from loud monitors.Use a multi-channel dynamic feedback destroyer.

That'll fix 'em.... :p

[boputnam]

Also comes from loud monitors. ... They like to have monitors so loud Close to Zilch, but more hands-on: Have you EQ'd the monitor feeds as best you can? I mean REALLY rung them bastards out until the troublesome frequencies are not so excited and your GBF is increased substantially?

Either do it the old fashioned way, or run them through that dbx 260, get a curve, and pose it onto your monitor graphic(?) EQ's. Be harsh, man - and NOTCH!! DO NOT BOOST - this is a source of much of your trouble. Us SR guys know... :biting:

[Zilch]

Interesting. Same system in slightly different cabs for different purposes:

http://cgi.ebay.com/JBL-VS3115-SR4735X_W0QQitemZ7365397208QQcategoryZ47094QQrdZ1Q QcmdZViewItem

SR4735X (left) and VS3115:

[boputnam]

Interesting. Same system in slightly different cabs for different purposes:Hey, Shane...

Looking at them cab's, when/if you get one on ground level for any period of time, you should collect some time-alignment measurements. Since you're running them bi-amped, you have a chance to improve the coherence, if needed.

[JuniorJBL]

Close to Zilch, but more hands-on: Have you EQ'd the monitor feeds as best you can? I mean REALLY rung them bastards out until the troublesome frequencies are not so excited and your GBF is increased substantially?

Either do it the old fashioned way, or run them through that dbx 260, get a curve, and pose it onto your monitor graphic(?) EQ's. Be harsh, man - and NOTCH!! DO NOT BOOST - this is a source of much of your trouble. Us SR guys know... :biting:

I have rung them out but I have not used the driverack that is a good idea.
I have 2 DBX 1/3 octave graphics.(2 monitor channels) And yes always cut cut cut!;)

[JuniorJBL]

Hey, Shane...

Looking at them cab's, when/if you get one on ground level for any period of time, you should collect some time-alignment measurements. Since you're running them bi-amped, you have a chance to improve the coherence, if needed.

How would I do that:blink:

[JuniorJBL]

Interesting. Same system in slightly different cabs for different purposes:

http://cgi.ebay.com/JBL-VS3115-SR4735X_W0QQitemZ7365397208QQcategoryZ47094QQrdZ1Q QcmdZViewItem

VS3115 (left) and SR4735X:


the vs3115 is on the right

[mikebake]

Tuning calls for something like 416ms delay on the woofer in biamp mode.
Hey, Shane...

Looking at them cab's, when/if you get one on ground level for any period of time, you should collect some time-alignment measurements. Since you're running them bi-amped, you have a chance to improve the coherence, if needed.

[boputnam]

How would I do that:blink:Hmm...

No access to SmaartLIVE? In that case, Mike seems to know something quite specific:

Tuning calls for something like 416ms delay on the woofer in biamp mode.Input that into the woof's sends (outputs). Might tighten things-up a bit.

From here, under "Venue Series": http://www.jblpro.com/pages/tunings/tunings_main.htm

[JuniorJBL]

Tuning calls for something like 416ms delay on the woofer in biamp mode.

Is use the recomended cross/slope from that page but I did not look at the top, only the bottom of that page. OOOOPS!:banghead:
I do understand that as the mid is a-bit deeper in the box than the woofer.
Another good call:applaud:

[boputnam]

Is use the recomended cross/slope from that page but I did not look at the top, only the bottom of that page. OOOOPS!:banghead:
I do understand that as the mid is a-bit deeper in the box than the woofer.
Another good call:applaud:It's that, but there is also delay imparted by the passive xover that this should address, in-part. JBL is great, as are many manufacturers, to offer setting advice on how to vastly improve the performance of their products now that loudspeaker controllers/processers are being widely offered/adopted.

dbx Driverack, and like-products of other makers, are AMAZINGLY powerful controllers. The makers realize that offering these products is a double-edged sword - there are highly variable levels of knowledge of end-users, and not all will do the necessary homework or set-up.

Ironically, from what I understand, this is akin to JBL's internal discussions about the large-format Studio Monitors (4343, 4345, 4350, and 4355 series) at the time, wherein JBL worried the complexity involved in proper acoustical set-up would/could result in too many being poorly implemented and result in end-user disatisfaction. They ultimately shied away from the offering... :(

I set my 4345's up very deliberately, and boy-howdy they are unequalled. If you ever get a chance... :yes:

[Oldmics]

Bo"s Quote

"
dbx Driverack, and like-products of other makers, are AMAZINGLY powerful controllers. The makers realize that offering these products is a double-edged sword - there are highly variable levels of knowledge of end-users, and not all will do the necessary homework or set-up.

Ironically, from what I understand, this is akin to JBL's internal discussions about the large-format Studio Monitors (4343, 4345, 4350, and 4355 series) at the time, wherein JBL worried the complexity involved in proper acoustical set-up would/could result in too many being poorly implemented and result in end-user disatisfaction. They ultimately shied away from the offering... :(
"

And now all that matters are PROFITS-Harmon shareholders bottom line!

I look at it as "Children Running With Scissors"

Oldmics

[boputnam]

I look at it as "Children Running With Scissors"Bingo.

You do have quite a way with words... :p

[boputnam]

OK, we got me there.

I loath the "Auto" function on these processors. I think I can understand the reason for designing them-in (read: MARKETING), but they are simply wrong, IMO.

I'm with you, Oldmics, all the way...

[JuniorJBL]

When eq'ing stage monitors is it best to put the mic at approx the same place as the person using it would be?

[boputnam]

Yea, but things aren't quite "equal" since there's no waterbags (artists) on stage.

Let 'em RING!!

[Lancer]

I look at it as "Children Running With Scissors"Around the Swimming Pool...

[boputnam]

Oh, and Shane...

Don't be afraid to turn the mics around, toward the wedges. Aggravates the excitement...

We haven't talked about the wedges - what are they?

You should shelve / roll-off the LF below the useful range of the monitor (typically 75-80Hz) and likewise at the high-end (typically 16kHz). If there aren't (adjustable) Hi-pass / Lo-Pass filters on your monitor EQ, just do it with the faders.

[Mike Caldwell]

Hello
I may be late to the party but would it be possiable to do a left - center - right configuration in your system. That way the vocals could primarly in the center cluster with music mix to the left and right with some in the center and vise versa with the vocals. That would also give you an easy way to control the levels to each zone. The center could be ran higher for the longer thow and the sides lower if need be. That would require more processing. Or.....keep the system mono but have a center zone and the sides together on a separte zone that would still give you the level control between center and sides and you could still do it with the one DBX 260 that you have.
You mentioned back a ways that some of the amps were run mono is that bridged mono...if so be sure to use the red+ connectors for the outputs and not the red and black of each channel doing that will put the cabinets out of phase/polarity with each other.

Just some ideas
Mike Caldwell

[Mike Caldwell]

Hello
Here's another thing to look at, are the recessed areas behind the screens/grill cloth boxed in such as a floor, sides and top forming a box that the speakers are hung in. If so when the speakers are pulled back and splayed they most likely will be hitting some of the sides and the bottom of the recessed area and the sound will be reflecting out of it in any direction. In this it would even be worse if the cabinets are upside down with the horns aimed into the bottom of the box. Let us know whats behind the curtain as far as building construction goes.
I know of an install that has just a center cluster that is in a reccesed "box" behind a scrim and if did make the coveage in the room very unperdictable.


Mike Caldwell

[BooBoo Magoo]

I don't know anything about SR Pros so I can't comment.

[boputnam]

Hey, Shane...

How 'bout an update - huh, pretty please? :yes:

[JuniorJBL]

Hey, Shane...

How 'bout an update - huh, pretty please? :yes:

It looks like we will do some work on this right after Thanksgiving.
I did a mock-up and it looks like 3 speakers is the ticket. We will start by disconnecting 1 speaker in the center and see what it sounds like. we did this before but I was not listening for good sound I was only listening for phase.

That was my bad.:o:

I will also post more pics when we do this so you can get a good idea of what the room looks like.
Thanks for asking Bo:bouncy:

[chad]

Ok then, the fourth speaker that you "don't need...."

....I'll pay freight, send it to me so it will have a loving home of coddling and cuddling.

:):D

[JuniorJBL]

Ok then, the fourth speaker that you "don't need...."

....I'll pay freight, send it to me so it will have a loving home of coddling and cuddling.

:):D


It will probably end up being a monitor or somthing like that. But I would have to say that if it does not have a home when I am done then it would end up a my house:bouncy:

[Zilch]

But I would have to say that if it does not have a home when I am done then it would end up a my house:bouncy:I'll trade you my precision-crafted origami model for it.... :p

[JuniorJBL]

We were upended after trying to get this done. Lots of things have changed except the speakers.
Finding time to do this has been a problem as well as getting people to relinquish there time in the sanctuary.
Updates as of late.


1) New Yamaha M7CL (WOW big sound quality diff)
2) all in-ear monitors in use
3) new construction to the building going to start in May. No changes to the sanctuary but we might be able to change some things.
4) still have to do things in a "during the week" time frame.

I will get lots of pics, dimensions. Maybe we can find the optimum configuration. May get a chance to pull the screens this week sometime, take good measurements and pics.


Thanks for all who have helped me in the past!!:)

[JuniorJBL]

Also one other thing.

Would it be a good idea to fly the subs? 2 2242's.

When on the floor they can be to loud for the people in the front.
We normaly run the system at about 85 to 90db.



Maybe one of our Moderators could change my spelling mistake of the title? :slink:

[Mr. Widget]

Maybe one of our Moderators could change my spelling mistake of the title? :slink:Oh, alright. :D


Widget

[JuniorJBL]

Thanks Mr. Widget!!!!!:)

[Zilch]

I still have the model here. :)

[Last time I asked Mr. Widget to correct a typo, he erased my thread.... :p ]

[boputnam]

Also one other thing.

Would it be a good idea to fly the subs? 2 2242's.

When on the floor they can be to loud for the people in the front.
We normaly run the system at about 85 to 90db.
Yes, Shane that is commonly done.

Depending upon the depth of the hang you can accomodate, they are usually flown highest, above the mains. Or, you could fly them high, but behind the mains. By flying them, they will be in acoustic phase with the mains so that will alleviate having to sort that out. :)

[Mike Caldwell]

Flying the subs you will loose some overall output from the lack of the boundary effect of the floor wall ect. Not necessary a big issue for you it sounds like you have more advantages from flying them. It will just feel/sound a little different at first from what you have been used to.
Are the sub cabinets flyable, proper track, suspension points ect.

Mike Caldwell

[4313B]

[Last time I asked Mr. Widget to correct a typo, he erased my thread.... :p ]Sweet! :applaud::rotfl:

j/k ;)

Would it be a good idea to fly the subs? 2 2242's.I'm no SR Pro but Doug says the 2242H's are flown in large multiples to gain mutual coupling. Just two might not do what you think they ought to do. I would imagine just two would like some boundary reinforcement. Otherwise you might end up EQ'ing the crap out of them and blowing them up. Maybe stick them real close together and fire them in an arc.
When on the floor they can be to loud for the people in the front.Oh, stick them up near the ceiling then.

Note that I didn't read through this thread and don't remember anything about it so I have no idea what the size of your venue is.

[Mike Caldwell]

After going back a refreshing myself from the start of this post a couple things jumped out at me. I mentioned this back a ways but you had mentioned the amps being in mono. Is/was that the switch by the input levels that is either dual or mono or was it the switch by the input connectors that is the "Y" switch. If the dual / mono switch is in mono the amp is in bridge mono operation, only input #1 is used and the output is from both of the + outputs only with Ch.1 being + and Ch.2 acting as -. However....you can still use each set of outputs independently if you connect the + lead to the - terminal and the - lead to the + terminal only on Ch.2 output. This will correct the polarity flip that takes place on Ch. 2 in the bridged mono mode. Channel 1 is the only input to connect to when in mono operation. The "Y" switch is just a jumper that ties both inputs together as if you connected a "Y" cable to the amps inputs. One input signal feeds both amp channels. The dual / mono switch would be the dual position if using the "Y" switch.

The woofer delay should be .416ms, with 416ms delay on the woofer that would be one strange sounding speaker or a very large cabinet with really long mid range and hi frequency horns!


Mike Caldwell

[JuniorJBL]

Thanks for all the replies!!:applaud:

I spent Saturday measuring the room and taking pics. (I will be resizing the pics this evening and posting the info).

As far as mono it is the signal I am sending from the console. The only amp that is bridged is the sub amp because we are only using 1 2242 at this point. So we use the amps in a ch1 ch2 format. I did not get a pic of the amp rack but will get one on Wednesday when I am there working on the system. As far as the sub cabs go, I will be making them so I can put rigging points where needed.

We will disconnect one of the centers and also run 2 pair of 10awg to each cabinet so I can do any wiring changes from the ground not in the air. We have to get the one man lift out every time we want to do work on them. We are hoping to get a catwalk put in when they start construction this time:bouncy:.

We have also found out that the driverack has the SRX version of the speaker tunings and used that Sunday and made little bit better MF!!:)

I took 40 pics of the entire room,stage. So I will be sifting through them today.

I will also be able to show everyone possible sub locations. This will help to find the pros and cons to the situation.

Thanks again for all of your input and knowledge!!:D

[boputnam]

Tuning calls for something like 416ms delay on the woofer in biamp mode.


...with 416ms delay on the woofer that would be one strange sounding speaker or a very large cabinet with really long mid range and hi frequency horns!Yeah, agreed. I double-checked what Mike posted and it is indeed what JBL recommends. New to me... :blink:

[JuniorJBL]

It does sound like alot!:blink:

[boputnam]

It does sound like alot!:blink:Not only the magnitude, but that there is any.

Typically, time alignment involves delaying the MF and HF to align with the LF. One measures the LF impulse and then delays the rest to match. This seems backwards, but it is right in their recommended tunings. I have no experience with these.

[Mike Caldwell]

The correct delay is .416ms (point 416ms) just under one half millisecond. the decimal on that tuning spec page is tiny.

Mike Caldwell

[JuniorJBL]

Thanks Mike!!It did sound better when we used the SR4735X tunings on the drive rack 260.:)

[JuniorJBL]

I just received the drawing for the Sanctuary. I will put some dimensions to it soon.;)

[JuniorJBL]

OK!!

We moved the speakers yesterday. WOW what a job that was. There is still 2 more to move but..... NO MORE LOBING!!!!!:applaud: All Gone- buh bye- see ya!

I have some pics and will post them in a couple of hours.
Shane

[JuniorJBL]

Pic time!!

We did this with our 1 man lift pulleys and ratchet straps.:nutz:
We also removed 4 old 3-ways that were for the old organ. The new placement is permanent and the sides will be moved to mirror the centers on the corners.

This has eliminated the phasing/lobing completely. They currently are at about 45 degrees just about 3 feet apart. Once the sides are mated to the centers we will have this portion of the project done.:thmbsup:
The spec sheet for the 3115's shows the sides at 22.5 degrees.
With speaker tunings in place on the DR260 pretty simple to get a really nice flat response up to about 9K. HF still lacking but do-able (is that a word?).

Any questions or suggestions are gladly welcome.!!:D

[JuniorJBL]

:banana:I must say Vocals are down-right AMAZING!!

When we were done we did a BIG :dancin:

[JuniorJBL]

As you can see in the last pic the last installers put a eye bolt in the cab. With so many rigging points on this speaker you would think someone would say to themselves "why would we need to put this here it must be wrong":blink:

[Mike Caldwell]

Lag bolt style eye bolts for any rigging applications are BIG NO NO!!!!

Since these cabinets have been hung and re hung you may want to check the mid and high horn orientation. On some of those models it could be rotated for either vertical or horizontal cabinet use.

Mike Caldwell

[JuniorJBL]

Lag bolt style eye bolts for any rigging applications are BIG NO NO!!!!

I certainly understand that. We used lifting eyes!!:) You can see 2 of them on the front shot of the 3115's. The (Other installers) must of had a eyebolt wedgie!!:applaud:


Since these cabinets have been hung and re hung you may want to check the mid and high horn orientation. On some of those models it could be rotated for either vertical or horizontal cabinet use.

Mike Caldwell

Yes while on the ground :D (keyword!!) we rotated the mid/hi combo to orient them properly.

[Zilch]

I don't understand what's shown in the middle of the first pic.

Are they splayed inward and crossfiring?

Is that how they ended up?

[JuniorJBL]

The picture is deceiving. They were actually pointed away from each other. LF to the center. woofs were out of phase with each other:blink:

The final was the cabs vertically to the outside.

[JuniorJBL]

I'm no SR Pro but Doug says the 2242H's are flown in large multiples to gain mutual coupling. Just two might not do what you think they ought to do. I would imagine just two would like some boundary reinforcement. Otherwise you might end up EQ'ing the crap out of them and blowing them up. Maybe stick them real close together and fire them in an arc.


I think I would like to design a pair of boxes that would hold 2 2242's each. That way if 2 is not enough then I could build and add the second box to the array.The only problem I can See would be the design itself.
The wedge of the loft is 1' at the bottom 3' at the top by 4' tall. but the opening is only 3' tall. It is about 10' wide up there
Any design recommendations. Horn loaded maybe?:dont-know

[JuniorJBL]

Srx728s sub.:) With a Crown XLS 5000:D

http://www.crownaudio.com/amp_htm/xls.htm#specs

[JuniorJBL]

I would like to talk about front fill.
The first 2-3 row's of pews are not covered by the 3115's because of the overhang of the speaker loft.

I would like to place 6 near field speakers to fill the void. I was thinking JBL MS26's. Or should I build cabs to place 2 for all 3 "sides" of the stage?:hmm:

[Earl K]

Hi,

I would like to place 6 near field speakers to fill the void. I was thinking JBL MS26's. Or should I build cabs to place 2 for all 3 "sides" of the stage?

- Buy a twin 6" front-fill type speaker that uses a small compression driver ( ie; avoid buying any product that uses a HiFi tweeter on a shallow wavequide like the MS26 does ).
- The JBL 2407 or 2408 compression drivers are a perfect fit for this front fill application .
- JBL markets small 6" by 6" waveguides ( & are very inexpensive ) / ask Zilch for particulars.

- Now that you're bringing fill speakers to the front / keep the subs on the floor . Find a reasonable & out of the way place / if they offend by muddying the sound then stick a "fill speaker" on top of each ( & balance to taste ) .

- FWIW & IMO, flying subs in a church environment is a bad idea if they don't get the benefit of some extra loading from a wall/roof intersection ( as in; flown in plain view & painted to match the decor ) .

- If you put the subs in the existing soffit, I see that only resulting in an ongoing major headache for all concerned ( especially if you turn them up to make up for any loss from "on-floor loading" ).
- Also, that overhead soffit appears to my eyes to be far from being a "rattle-free" zone". It'll require a lot of strengthening and damping to make it a sub friendly environment / not just a "rattle-trap" that worries the devoted ( mostly thinking about falling vanity panels ) .

>< cheers :)

[Mike Caldwell]

Front fills do not necessarily need to be fed with the full mix that going to the mains and should be high pass filtered around 125hz/150hz. If your mixer has an unused post fade aux you can create a mix just for the fills, with just vocal and maybe some lighter instruments. If your mixer has a matrix mix feature you could do some what the same thing by building a fill mix from the subgroups.

Where are you planning on putting the fills, if there on the front lip of the stage judging from the picture and the apparent stage height the front row may be the only ones getting much benefit from them.

Mike Caldwell

[JuniorJBL]

Hi,


- Buy a twin 6" front-fill type speaker that uses a small compression driver ( ie; avoid buying any product that uses a HiFi tweeter on a shallow wavequide like the MS26 does ).
- The JBL 2407 or 2408 comprssion drivers are a perfect fit for this front fill application .
- JBL markets small 6" by 6" waveguides ( & are very inexpensive ) / ask Zilch for particulars.

- Now that you're bringing fill speakers to the front / keep the subs on the floor . Find a reasonable & out of the way place / if they offend by muddying the sound then stick a "fill speaker" on top of each ( & balance to taste ) .

- FWIW & IMO, flying subs in a church environment is a bad idea if they don't get the benefit of some extra loading from a wall/roof intersection ( as in; flown in plain view & painted to match the decor ) .

- If you put the subs in the existing soffit, I see that only resulting in an ongoing major headache for all concerned ( especially if you turn them up to make up for any loss from "on-floor loading" ).
- Also, that overhead soffit appears to my eyes to be far from being a "rattle-free" zone". It'll require a lot of strengthening and damping to make it a sub friendly environment / not just a "rattle-trap" that worries the devoted ( mostly thinking about falling vanity panels ) .

>< cheers :)


Thanks for your input Earl!:) I will find a different speaker or make some for the fill's (maybe the ac26's?)
http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/support/getfile.aspx?doctype=3&docid=1082

I was thinking about that space being a rattle trap and was going to put somewhat of a box (made from some plywood) up there with insulation and what not. I was hopeing to get a little boundry effect out of that as well. But your suggestion is way eiaser!! :D

[JuniorJBL]

Front fills do not necessarily need to be fed with the full mix that going to the mains and should be high pass filtered around 125hz/150hz. If your mixer has an unused post fade aux you can create a mix just for the fills, with just vocal and maybe some lighter instruments. If your mixer has a matrix mix feature you could do some what the same thing by building a fill mix from the subgroups.

Where are you planning on putting the fills, if there on the front lip of the stage judging from the picture and the apparent stage height the front row may be the only ones getting much benefit from them.

Mike Caldwell


Thanks Mike for that as well!!:)

I will check out what the console can do. It would surprise me if it could not do it. btw it is a Yamaha M7CL-48.

I was planning on putting the fills on the front of the stage maybe on about a 1' pole on each corner. The stage is 2' tall and the backs of the pews are 28". I may not be able to put them on poles either because people might not like them. Even if the front row is the only beneficiary it will be better then it is now. With the repositioning of the mains the 3rd & 2nd row is much better then it used to be!!:)

[Earl K]

- The JBL series that I would recommend ( for your front fill ) is from Installed Sound (http://www.jblpro.com/products/Installed/index.html) . It's called AE Compact. (http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/General/ProductFamily.aspx?FId=63&MId=2)
- I'm torn between recommending ( without hearing them first ) either the AC26 or the AC18.
- I'm partial to single eights & am more familiar with the 2408h driver / whereas the 2414H driver in the AC26 is a complete unknown to me .
- Start with 4 units and see if that is enough .

>< cheers :)

[JuniorJBL]

Thanks Earl for the info.
Maybe they would have some instock at Listenup here in Denver so I could take a listen.
Maybe some other forum members have heard or know something more about these as well.:)

[Zilch]

The problem with AE Compact is cost, of course.

You can make these little EconoWaves for peanuts (the 6" square 90° x 90° waveguide is $6,) though I'd probably be using some woofer other than 116H for SR.

The 8" 90° x 50° PT waveguide might be a better choice ($14,) and there is also a 120° x 50° variant of that one for $12.

The 1.5" throat version used in VP compact is mighty nice ($100 ea.,) also, but I don't have a "cookbook" passive crossover for that one. I run BMS 4555 active on those.

http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/support/getfile.aspx?doctype=3&docid=776

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/VP%20Series/VP7210-95DP.pdf

[JuniorJBL]

They are a bit pricey. Zilch I would be interested in designing a system that could be used in this application. I would like to use passive crossovers for these as well so as to not have to buy more amps. What and how do recommend:bouncy:

[JuniorJBL]

Dost' thine eyes deceiveth me or dost thou shpekers levitate:D

[Earl K]

They are a bit pricey. Zilch I would be interested in designing a system that could be used in this application. I would like to use passive crossovers for these as well so as to not have to buy more amps. What and how do recommend

What's a "bit pricey" actually translate into ?

- I know that the waveguides, the compression drivers and the same textured paint are all available . The "ts parameters" for the 228H woofer have been published / though the 228H itself isn't yet listed ( at this time ) as being available from the JBL parts list ( this could change when the next updated "parts-list" comes out ) .
- Pro quality 8" midbass woofers are certainly available for substitution . But even with one of these choices ( in hand ) , the DIYer is still left well short of the sort of finished product which JBL offers here .

Is the price differential that great to warrant a DIY effort ?

>< cheers :)

[grumpy]

Dost' thine eyes deceiveth me or dost thou shpekers levitate

Special thick white Velcro to accommodate the 2g tipover test. ;)

[JuniorJBL]

What's a "bit pricey" actually translate into ? $700 ea X6 =$4200


- I know that the waveguides, the compression drivers and the same textured paint are all available . The "ts parameters" for the 282H woofer are published though the 282H isn't listed ( at this time ) as being available from the parts list .
- Pro quality 8" woofers are certainly available for substitution . But even with one of those ( in hand ) , the DIYer is still left well short of the sort of finished product which JBL offers here .

Is the price differential that great to warrant a DIY effort ?

>< cheers :)

I am still trying to determine if that would be the case.

[JuniorJBL]

Special thick white Velcro to accommodate the 2g tipover test. ;)


:rotfl:

[Earl K]

Hi,

$700 ea X6 =$4200
$700.00 a piece is a competitive price .

>< cheers :)

[JuniorJBL]

Hi,

$700.00 a piece is a competitive price .

>< cheers :)

Yes it is! I may still go that route.:)

[Zilch]

EconoWaves run ~$200 a pair for compression drivers, waveguides, crossover parts and boards.

You still have to provide woofers and cabinets.... :dont-know

[JuniorJBL]

EconoWaves run ~$200 a pair for compression drivers, waveguides, crossover parts and boards.

You still have to provide woofers and cabinets.... :dont-know


This is a very viable route as well. I would like to point out that I personally am providing the work and parts out of my own pocket. This would be why it could be a good DIY project. I can get a lot of help but the money will still come from the same place. This is my donation to the church. I do not want to skimp on quality but watching the $$$ fly out of my pocket is a concern as well.

Please help with anything that can be contributed to this cause.

I am sorry I did not put forth this info earlier but I am doing the absolute best that I can manage.

Once again THANKS for all who have given advice thus far and for all who continue to do so!!:applaud:

[Zilch]

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=150939

There's not much about the 6" and 8" waveguides in there, but some. Use "Search this Forum" to find it. There's over 5000 posts in that thread. The basics are all linked from Post #1.

If you have access to someone with cabinet-building skills, see Johnaec's thread on the floor monitors he built here on LHF for an idea of what's involved in doing a professional job of it. Note how he used JBL grilles purchased from JBL Pro Parts.

[JuniorJBL]

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=150939

There's not much about the 6" and 8" waveguides in there, but some. Use "Search this Forum" to find it. There's over 5000 posts in that thread. The basics are all linked from Post #1.

If you have access to someone with cabinet-building skills, see Johnaec's thread on the floor monitors he built here on LHF for an idea of what's involved in doing a professional job of it. Note how he used JBL grilles purchased from JBL Pro Parts.

Thanks Zilch.

Cab skilz in my shop or my friend's (much bigger than mine and a master Cabinet Maker to boot!!)

That would not be a problem. Just want to have a fit-n-finish sound to the speaker.
I will run down that thread tonight!!:)

[Zilch]

If you have cab building capability, call JBL Pro Parts with the part number and ask for price and availability of 228H woofers. I expect they are available. Then decide if you want 90° or 120° horizontal dispersion and build AC18/95 or AC18/26 equivalents, either with E'Wave drivers and crossovers (I have the boards for $20 a pair) or with the stock tweeter and schematic. The black Duratex finish is know on this forum. The part numbers for the woofer, grille, and waveguides are on the tech sheets:

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/AE%20Series%20Compact%20Models/AC1895-WH.pdf

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/AE%20Series%20Compact%20Models/AC1826-WH.pdf

If you decide to go with the stock tweeters, get pricing for the networks, as well; sometimes they're cheaper than you can build DIY.

2408H(-1?) tweeters may be available from the notorious Hector on eBay.

Consider building your subs into the stage. Scott (SMKSoundPro) knows the drill on that; send him a PM and invite his advice here, if you and others think that approach might be workable....

[JuniorJBL]

Thanks for the info Zilch!:applaud:

I Would also like some opinions on maybe putting some other speakers in the loft pointing at the first rows.:dont-know

I also wondered about putting 2 3115's in a horizontal line array on each side and trying to find 2 more 3115's for the center to do the same with. The reason I am thinking this is for mf/hf floor coverage. Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated. That would probably eliminate the need for others pointed at the first rows as well.


This morning went well!:D

Clarity was amazing!! Now it is time for some fine tuning:). It is a lot nicer to have a system that you are not fighting/compensating for all of the problems and get on with a good clean mix!

[boputnam]

Front fills do not necessarily need to be fed with the full mix that going to the mains and should be high pass filtered around 125hz/150hz. If your mixer has an unused post fade aux you can create a mix just for the fills, with just vocal and maybe some lighter instruments. If your mixer has a matrix mix feature you could do some what the same thing by building a fill mix from the subgroups.Good one...

[JuniorJBL]

Hi,

$700.00 a piece is a competitive price .

>< cheers :)
I did not mean to say I would not put forth the money, I just want to find the best option for the problem at hand. I would like to check all secnerios and then implement the best one. I really would like to do this one time. There is a lot of very qualifide indivduals on this forum to help me get to this point. If I have been rude please tell me and I will correct myself. I really do need/want your help.;)

[Earl K]

I Would also like some opinions on maybe putting some other speakers in the loft pointing at the first rows.:dont-know

- You appear to be asking a question about "an either or scenario" ( & I'm guessing because of some unstated cosmetic issues ) .

- Re ; Coverage from "Front-Fills" or "Down-Fill" ( for the first three rows ) / which choice offers the greatest efficacy ?

- If that's the pertinant question, then my answer is; "Front Fills" ( for various reasons ).

- One example ; "Front fills" should represent less of an issue from "on stage feedback" / vs / flown down-fills providing they are driven from a separate board feed ( as suggested by Mike )
- Your present setup is blessed with a modest degree of acoustic separation that occurs between your main clusters and your stage area / I suggest that you don't throw that away .

>< cheers :)

[Earl K]

I also wondered about putting 2 3115's in a horizontal line array on each side and trying to find 2 more 3115's for the center to do the same with. The reason I am thinking this is for mf/hf floor coverage. Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated. That would probably eliminate the need for others pointed at the first rows as well.

- I think this approach is really more trouble than it's worth .
- You're essentially talking about creating a high-powered down-fill .

- As I see it, to keep the two stacked cabinets from overlapping their primary coverage patterns ( thus creating lobbing ), either the main top box or ( the bottom ) downfill cabinet is going to be aimed in such a way so that one of them is going to spill onto some area that doesn't need or want reinforcement.
- The only way to tell for sure is to look at an CAD elevation of the whole setup / with all the enclosures & their coverage patterns mapped in .

>< cheers :)

[JuniorJBL]

- You appear to be asking a question about "an either or scenario" ( & I'm guessing because of some unstated cosmetic issues ) .

Yes this is what i was asking. Sorry I was unclear about that.



- Re ; Coverage from "Front-Fills" or "Down-Fill" ( for the first three rows ) / which choice offers the greatest efficacy ?

- If that's the pertinant question, then my answer is; "Front Fills" ( for various reasons ).

- One example ; "Front fills" should represent less of an issue from "on stage feedback" / vs / flown down-fills providing they are driven from a separate board feed ( as suggested by Mike )
- Your present setup is blessed with a modest degree of acoustic separation that occurs between your main clusters and your stage area / I suggest that you don't throw that away .

>< cheers :)

Ok This has answered my delima that I have been causing myself :bash:

Thanks Earl!!:applaud:

I will start to do some looking as to maybe some used equipment but the overall package may be to just get matching right from the get-go.
Amps may be eaiser to find used vs spec'd speakers for this install.

[Earl K]

This morning went well!:D

Clarity was amazing!! Now it is time for some fine tuning:). It is a lot nicer to have a system that you are not fighting/compensating for all of the problems and get on with a good clean mix!

- Then I'd suggest leaving things sit for a while ( just not 3 1/2 years ;) ) .

>< cheers :)

[JuniorJBL]

- Then I'd suggest leaving things sit for a while ( just not 3 1/2 years ;) ) .

>< cheers :)
:banghead: :rotfl:

[Ethan Masterson]

Thanks Earl for the info.
Maybe they would have some instock at Listenup here in Denver so I could take a listen.
Maybe some other forum members have heard or know something more about these as well.:)

hey juniorjbl,

fascinating thread! I've been reading along with interest for pages and pages until i get to the last page and here find out you are here in Denver! me too! heh. :applaud:

anyway I work for HP Marketing, the local manufacturer's rep for JBL here in Centennial, and used to work with Norm over at ListenUp. I kind of doubt that ListenUp would have any of the AE series in stock to demo. Most people are bringing these in on an as-needed basis for installation.

Of course as the manufacturer's rep we are often required to buy samples of new product, so we do have an AC15 and an AC28/26 in our warehouse stock as demo units. I don't know if you would be interested in a demo, but if you are fairly centrally located here in Denver I'm sure we could work something out. Give me a call anytime [during work hours heh] - 303-804-9566 and we can work something out. :)

[JuniorJBL]

Thanks Ethan!!

I am in Lakewood. I may be able to have that happen.
Norm has not been stocking to much these days but usually does a good job of getting me what I need in a timely manner.
I will give you a call sometime next week.
Shane

[Ethan Masterson]

Thanks Ethan!!

I am in Lakewood. I may be able to have that happen.
Norm has not been stocking to much these days but usually does a good job of getting me what I need in a timely manner.
I will give you a call sometime next week.
Shane

Sounds good. As to the question of what these sound like, of course I'm going to say they sound great. :)

Funny story though, we had a customer try to install some of these AE compacts into a gentlemen's club down in AZ...they were expecting these to rock hard! With the rocking, and the booty shaking and the...:blink:....uhhhh, yeah, not so much. They probably would have been better off with Control 29s or 30s...ah well...

They are great as fills though, especially if you have some other speakers in the mix to fill out that bottom end. I'm still trying to suss out from the pictures where the best place to put them would be though...:dont-know

[Zilch]

Funny story though, we had a customer try to install some of these AE compacts into a gentlemen's club down in AZ...they were expecting these to rock hard! With the rocking, and the booty shaking and the...:blink:....uhhhh, yeah, not so much.Pole dancin'? :D

[JuniorJBL]

Nother Question.

Is rear fill a bad thing? Wondering if it is possible to put small speakers in the rear for mf/hf fill as I would do in the front?

[Earl K]

Is rear fill a bad thing? Wondering if it is possible to put small speakers in the rear for mf/hf fill as I would do in the front?

(i) Speakers should be arranged to reinforce the original sound wave(s) /not fight it .
(ii) Speakers are way more effective when peoples ears are aimed towards them.

>< cheers :)

[JuniorJBL]

Thanks for your reply Earl!!:)This is as I figured, So maybe I should try to aim the 3115's more toward the back and then look to try to cover the first 6-8 rows? I am probably stretching here!!:banghead:

[Zilch]

"8-inch Symmetrical Field Geometry LF transducer with a copper-clad aluminum edge wound aluminum voice coil and copper-clad pole piece that improves performance by reducing voice coil inductance and distortion."

Crossed at 2.1 kHz in AC18/95:

http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/support/getfile.aspx?doctype=3&docid=1080

Heavier'n 'bout anything.

Suspension's tight, but not as tight as 2118H.

"Camera angle, right?"

Nope, magnet's really this big:

[JuniorJBL]

Looks as tho this driver my be made for JBL instead of by them.:hmm:

That is one big mag!!

[Earl K]

- I should have guessed Zilch would buy a sample . :applaud:

- The frame looks quite flimsy for the size of magnet ( is it, Zilch ? ).

- Regardless, any driver that's dedicated to the install market shouldn't really have an issue with frame strength once the speaker is physically placed . .

- OTOH, a flimsy frame would be an issue for my usage ( I service a market where portablity demands a lot of ruggedness ) . Too bad ( for me ), since the specs. for this transducer (as well as the pricing ) are both spot-on .

>< cheers :)

[Mike Caldwell]

It does have a very "import OEM" look to it.

[Zilch]

The frame looks quite flimsy for the size of magnet ( is it, Zilch ? )Remember that the driver is small overall. We're not talking 2235H here. I'll put a mic on it and determine the gauge.

In any case, I THINK I'll be using all eight mounting holes with this one. I have all of the parts to build up a pair of AC18/95, and I'm tempted to order a pair of 226H, as well, for AC16 clones.


OTOH, a flimsy frame would be an issue for my usage ( I service a market where portablity demands a lot of ruggedness ) . Too bad ( for me ), since the specs. for this transducer (as well as the pricing ) are both spot-on .Seems like supporting the magnet would not be difficult, but neo would certainly be nicer for portables.

Are there comprehensive specs available somewhere?

The AC15 tweeter is cute, BTW.

[Extra credit for figuring out what the two extra holes are for.... ;) ]

[Zilch]

0.054" = 17 Ga.

[Micrometer now magnetized.... :p ]

[JuniorJBL]

[Extra credit for figuring out what the two extra holes are for.... ;) ]


A ported tweeter!:p

[grumpy]

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/AE Series Compact Models/AC15-WH.pdf

threaded holes? ... grill mounting.

[Zilch]

Threaded holes? ... grill mounting.... And Grumpy SCORES!

Look how the ports are stealthed in between the drivers there.

They certainly packed that design into a minimum-size envelope.... :thmbsup:

[BMWCCA]

http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/AE Series Compact Models/AC15-WH.pdf
(http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/AE%20Series%20Compact%20Models/AC15-WH.pdf)
threaded holes? ... grill mounting.
Fixed the link.

[Zilch]

AC16, left, 0.38 cuft, tight, needs an arcuate nibble out of the waveguide bottom edge.

AC15, right, 0.25 cuft, fits fine.

Must all be flush-mounted for the grilles to go on.

Yeah, I'll do a DIY thread; just tossin' out the concept here.... :yes:

[JuniorJBL]

Those are certinly large magnets. Do you know if they are OEM's?

[Zilch]

Those are certinly large magnets. Do you know if they are OEM's?They are assembled with a glue apparently no longer permitted to be used in the U.S.

That's the 6.5" and 5.25" I'm showing there. Not sure yet, but I believe the 8" combo will fit in the 0.75 cuft PE cab.

Ports for the 16 and 18 will have to be in the back, but I think I can squeeze them in front on the 15.... :yes:

[Mike Caldwell]

The one on the left appears to have a bucking or canceling magnet on it for use near video monitors and TV's. With the thinning number of CRT type monitors and TV's I wonder how much longer those will be produced! In a town near by Panasonic had built a very large CRT production factory. About five years ago it completely shut down.

Mike Caldwell



Those are certinly large magnets. Do you know if they are OEM's?

[PioneerGuy75]

Hey Shane! Just got through reading this thread and what a pickle you got yourslef into!

Congrats for doing so much work to fix it right! :D

I am in Denver Too!! I am not a SR Pro but this sounds like an interesting project you are working on!

Keep up the good work!!

[PioneerGuy75]

Bump :hmm:

[JuniorJBL]

Sorry for the non reply I have been very busy at work. The project moves slowly forward all the time. I will have more time after this week to give details. :)

[PioneerGuy75]

:confused:

[PioneerGuy75]

Bump

Any further progress?

[JuniorJBL]

We are now waiting on funding. Probably this summer/late spring.:)

[PioneerGuy75]

Ah Ok Thanks for the update! :D

[PioneerGuy75]

:lurk: