Enter the Dragon

[UROK]

Year of the Dragon! Happy Dragon to everyone!

I am Russ. I live in Beijing. Been on here a while. Learned such a lot with much more to learn. I am very very grateful to Bill, Leland, Harley, el ingeniero, and Sydney especially, and to all you guys who share your knowledge and work on the forum. This place is my fav web place and I really want to learn to do this right.

Getting close to beginning builds....ahem...

Initially, 2 x 15" T60, 1 x 2Lab12 T60 (will add at least 6 more dual T60s) , 6 DR280 3012HO (2 melded, 4 NSD), 2 WH10 2512II. For DJing absolutely f-ing banging techno and reggae and dub.

This is an outdoor festival system!

My question is about my next move(s). Amps and DSP. I already have an ITech12000HD for subs. On hunt for a deal on used ITech5000HD for kappas. Need NSD and WH10 amplification. If NU4-6000 proves durable may go with that. How about DSP for NSDs? Do I need to limit them? Defo EQ though. How about WH10s? Need limiting? EQ?

My DJ mixer is an Allen & Heath DB4. I want to run a monitor (booth) mix (on DB4 on TRS jacks - see pic - sorry it's a bit small) to WH10s. Can I / should I run straight into amp and to wedgehorns without DSP?

The main mix is on balanced XLRs to Itechs. The Itechs' DSP - esp limiters - is partly what attracted me to these amps.

So, what about NSDs? Originally I thought of Driverack or similar. Thought would run main mix and monitor mix into DEQ/DCX or the like. But only one stereo input on these units. Is there a way to run to the two mixes? Must to be able to turn booth mix down between records.

If I don't need to or can't use Driverack or DEQ/DCX on WH10s, it leaves shelling out on one of these sorts of units just for NSDs. Seems excessive, no? Could I get away with just a DEQ??

Thanks!

[Sydney]

I want to run a monitor (booth) mix (on DB4 on TRS jacks - see pic - sorry it's a bit small) to WH10s.

Russ: I don't want to start a controversy...
I would not use a WH10 ( a stage monitor with a response tailored for that app ) as a mix/booth monitor for numerous reasons; basically it's the wrong tool for the job.
While this might involve a non-BF design ( don't hate me for that ) I would use a near field monitor or small studio monitor with a flat response.
It would also eliminate the need for sophisticated signal tailoring in the monitor stream.

[UROK]

Ah, sorry, not clear enough: it's a DJ booth mix as opposed to FOH booth type thing. DJs like higher SPL for beat matching and plenty low end definition. The DJ booth speakers have to be able to be heard over other bass reflections etc so you can cue to the true beat. I have mixed lots using near fields and don't like them. The sound is too 'in my ears'. With PA level SPLs having the boxes on the floor is no prob and allows a much better 'total body' sound field to develop IMO. For DJ mixing and esp stereo fx etc this is way better than near fields for givving an impression of what the audience is hearing/feeling. Plus, you can see the dance floor!

[Sydney]

Russ: All I can offer is advise - I can't argue for or against your preference or experience.
Only raise primary issues like non-flat response:
Consider the difference between a stage with multiple amplified sound sources and vocalist that need to have a response "punch through" to raise above stage-mung and the different sonic environment for a DJ.
The Hi-SPL level is another topic all together
Good luck

[UROK]

Thanks, Sydney.

Hi-SPLs is the topic. Avoiding them by turning down the booth mix specifically. That was the initial question. How to run the WH10s (and NSDs)?

Your description of response "punch through" to get above 'stage-mung', though not scientific seems like what I want, TBH! Need to hear bass above any reflections or sound from other systems. WH10 have great bass and won't two cabs smooth the response a bit at any rate?

[Sydney]

I'm going on the published response graph* and the description of design usage** as per the sales page.
* Not flat for a reason
** A stage monitor for performers.
At this point I've said enough about the WH10

I realize that a DJ could be someone who simply xfades music ( with very little on no microphone or vocal interaction ), to a performer who work loops or FX with extensive vocals.
DJ mixer boards differ from other mixers in that they often have specific features that DJ's might need, that others do not. They are tools designed for that industry, often not including features that other boards have ( ie matrix flexibility )
Other boards ( monitor, recording FOH mixers etc ) are set up for different purposes.
Functionally speaking there is usually a workaround to splitting signals.
It then becomes a matter of where ( before input, or in the board matrix, or after the board output ) and advantages and limitations with each method.
Such as independence of signal vs automatic control - such as wet/dry mix, and duck-down, and pre/post fade.
On this basis it's real hard to offer advice.
I've made plenty of setup recommendations but usually had the advantage of knowing, and being physically present to understand the critical details of the whole total scenario.

BTW: After all this time you are "introducing" yourself

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

WH10 have great bass and won't two cabs smooth the response a bit at any rate?

Do you have EQ? If so the response curve is moot. As a for instance, the DR200 for home theater mains and W6 for surrounds isn't what I'd recommend, because they do require EQ that most HTs don't have (and they're stupid loud for HT ). But when you get a couple of free hours wade through this long diatribe, and note who came out on top compared to some very well regarded, not to mention seriously expensive, commercial alternatives:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1353217

[Grant Bunter]

WH10 have great bass and won't two cabs smooth the response a bit at any rate?

Do you have EQ? If so the response curve is moot. As a for instance, the DR200 for home theater mains and W6 for surrounds isn't what I'd recommend, because they do require EQ that most HTs don't have (and they're stupid loud for HT ). But when you get a couple of free hours wade through this long diatribe, and note who came out on top compared to some very well regarded, not to mention seriously expensive, commercial alternatives:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1353217

Marathon indeed, from head to toe. Any reason you didn't suggest corner or wall loading of the T39's Bill?

[Sydney]

Do you have EQ? If so the response curve is moot.

Interesting word moot, it has several definitions including "Subject to debate; arguable"
So "what is moot to one may not be to another"
I'm guessing that here: moot is NOT "Subject to debate; arguable"

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

Marathon indeed, from head to toe. Any reason you didn't suggest corner or wall loading of the T39's Bill?

To tell the truth I couldn't sift through all that without it putting me in nap mode, so I didn't notice how he'd set them up.

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

Do you have EQ? If so the response curve is moot.

Interesting word moot, it has several definitions including "Subject to debate; arguable"
So "what is moot to one may not be to another"
I'm guessing that here: moot is NOT "Subject to debate; arguable"

Moot in this case is that it just doesn't matter.

[Dave Non-Zero]

The DCX unit has 3inputs, and 6 outs, all capable o being independent, so you could use a pair for FOH and the third as a monitor processor.
You could have the chain thus-
for FOH - stereo out mixer into DEQ- DEQ stereo into DCXinputs 1&2- out to mono sub, plus L+R mains.
For mons- mixerboothout - straight into input 3 of DCX - out one of the remaining outputs. (the DCX has enough parametric eq to process monitors I reckon. Hipass, tone control etc)

that leaves you still with 2 of the DCX outs to use for delay stacks, full range side fills, whatever.

[88h88]

^^ I was wondering about how to sort out a set of monitors myself. Cheers for that Dave.

[Sydney]

Originally I thought of Driverack or similar.

Good Idea Russ,
( If it was my name on the contract I'd go with a DriveRack or better. )

[UROK]

The DCX unit has 3inputs, and 6 outs, all capable o being independent, so you could use a pair for FOH and the third as a monitor processor.
You could have the chain thus-
for FOH - stereo out mixer into DEQ- DEQ stereo into DCXinputs 1&2- out to mono sub, plus L+R mains.
For mons- mixerboothout - straight into input 3 of DCX - out one of the remaining outputs. (the DCX has enough parametric eq to process monitors I reckon. Hipass, tone control etc)

that leaves you still with 2 of the DCX outs to use for delay stacks, full range side fills, whatever.

Thanks, Dave. Yer a star!

How about the NSDs?