BillFitzmaurice.info

BrentEvans wrote:

ripNdeb wrote:Still no stereo + sub inputs Does DBX make such a thing?

Not at a reasonable price point. You have to go up to the Driverack 4800, which is stupid expensive.

Ashly 3.6sp is the most reasonable one on the market that doesn't bear the ugly yellow triangle. The EQ in it is a bit limited, but it's enough to smooth out your system. Just plan on having something else for feedback control.

I'll give a shout out the the Protea 3.6 . . I'm using it in an intimate performance hall venue and it works perfectly. However, I'm not using the 3rd input as a sub input, but rather a stage monitor input. With six outputs and the internal crossover structure, you don't need to send a sub signal to the input, just dial one of the outputs to your lowpass preference and use the very intuitive, easy to configure signal matrix feature to sum the main left/ right input audio to that output. And although it has no remote feature built in, it does interface with a PC through USB, so you could link up remotely to the PC and control it that way.

I love this little box.

Hackomatic wrote:

BrentEvans wrote:

ripNdeb wrote:Still no stereo + sub inputs Does DBX make such a thing?

Not at a reasonable price point. You have to go up to the Driverack 4800, which is stupid expensive.

Ashly 3.6sp is the most reasonable one on the market that doesn't bear the ugly yellow triangle. The EQ in it is a bit limited, but it's enough to smooth out your system. Just plan on having something else for feedback control.

I'll give a shout out the the Protea 3.6 . . I'm using it in an intimate performance hall venue and it works perfectly. However, I'm not using the 3rd input as a sub input, but rather a stage monitor input. With six outputs and the internal crossover structure, you don't need to send a sub signal to the input, just dial one of the outputs to your lowpass preference and use the very intuitive, easy to configure signal matrix feature to sum the main left/ right input audio to that output. And although it has no remote feature built in, it does interface with a PC through USB, so you could link up remotely to the PC and control it that way.

I love this little box.

Having the third input for aux fed subs is still useful in some situations.

BrentEvans wrote: Having the third input for aux fed subs is still useful in some situations.

I always run aux-fed subs. I'm going to need a DSP unit with three inputs, huh?
Is it possible to run mono, and use one channel of a Driverack for the mains, and the other for subs?
I have a Driverack PA+ available to me that I can play with, but I've never looked into that capability with it.

Ryan Sober wrote:

BrentEvans wrote: Having the third input for aux fed subs is still useful in some situations.

I always run aux-fed subs. I'm going to need a DSP unit with three inputs, huh?
Is it possible to run mono, and use one channel of a Driverack for the mains, and the other for subs?
I have a Driverack PA+ available to me that I can play with, but I've never looked into that capability with it.

Yes, that works, but stereo is better.

One of the nice benefits of using something like the Ashly is that you can still feed your main mix into the subs at a lower level, so you don't lose a certain amount of warmth, and then use the aux to goose the subs and add a little more as needed.

If I was running strictly FOH sound and not having to run sound off the stage sometimes, I would probably go to to aux-fed subs. But, at the crossover points I'm using, I sure like having the subs add warmth to vocals. If I could crossover at under 100hz....I don't think it would matter.

Bruce Weldy wrote:If I was running strictly FOH sound and not having to run sound off the stage sometimes, I would probably go to to aux-fed subs. But, at the crossover points I'm using, I sure like having the subs add warmth to vocals. If I could crossover at under 100hz....I don't think it would matter.

I guess it depends on the style of music being played. I'm usually most concerned with keeping low guitar palm-mutes out of the subs. The 'wub' sound eats sub power and headroom, and sounds like pure mud.

Ryan Sober wrote:

Bruce Weldy wrote:If I was running strictly FOH sound and not having to run sound off the stage sometimes, I would probably go to to aux-fed subs. But, at the crossover points I'm using, I sure like having the subs add warmth to vocals. If I could crossover at under 100hz....I don't think it would matter.

I guess it depends on the style of music being played. I'm usually most concerned with keeping low guitar palm-mutes out of the subs. The 'wub' sound eats sub power and headroom, and sounds like pure mud.

That's why you high pass each channel on the mixer. I use the high pass on everything - even the bass and kick. Keeps unwanted rumble out of the low end....especially helps with overheads and hi-hat mics that can pick up rumble through the mic stand.

Bruce Weldy wrote:That's why you high pass each channel on the mixer. I use the high pass on everything - even the bass and kick. Keeps unwanted rumble out of the low end....especially helps with overheads and hi-hat mics that can pick up rumble through the mic stand.

+1

Bruce Weldy wrote:

Ryan Sober wrote: I guess it depends on the style of music being played. I'm usually most concerned with keeping low guitar palm-mutes out of the subs. The 'wub' sound eats sub power and headroom, and sounds like pure mud.

That's why you high pass each channel on the mixer. I use the high pass on everything - even the bass and kick. Keeps unwanted rumble out of the low end....especially helps with overheads and hi-hat mics that can pick up rumble through the mic stand.

Bad part of that is, generally, the per-channel hipass isn't enough.
Why bother with imperfect separation, when perfect is possible?

Ryan Sober wrote: Bad part of that is, generally, the per-channel hipass isn't enough.

That depends on your mixer. If you have sweepable high pass, it's usually fine. If it's just a button, it's not enough... but then again pro mixers don't just have buttons.

BrentEvans wrote:

Ryan Sober wrote: Bad part of that is, generally, the per-channel hipass isn't enough.

That depends on your mixer. If you have sweepable high pass, it's usually fine. If it's just a button, it's not enough... but then again pro mixers don't just have buttons.

Exactly. I'm typically stuck with an old Peavey RQ series mixer. Sounds fine, but not nearly enough features.

BrentEvans wrote:

Ryan Sober wrote: Bad part of that is, generally, the per-channel hipass isn't enough.

That depends on your mixer. If you have sweepable high pass, it's usually fine. If it's just a button, it's not enough... but then again pro mixers don't just have buttons.

Yep....mine is continuously variable. The switch is better than nothing.

Ryan Sober wrote:

Bruce Weldy wrote:

Ryan Sober wrote: I guess it depends on the style of music being played. I'm usually most concerned with keeping low guitar palm-mutes out of the subs. The 'wub' sound eats sub power and headroom, and sounds like pure mud.

That's why you high pass each channel on the mixer. I use the high pass on everything - even the bass and kick. Keeps unwanted rumble out of the low end....especially helps with overheads and hi-hat mics that can pick up rumble through the mic stand.

Bad part of that is, generally, the per-channel hipass isn't enough.
Why bother with imperfect separation, when perfect is possible?

There is no perfect for every situation. At FOH, aux subs are fine. Running off the stage is a different animal. You have to know what you are hearing in the monitors is what's coming out front. Yeah, I know my monitors aren't hitting as low as the subs - but at least I know the bottom end is there. With aux subs, I'd never be sure that they are working unless I step out front.

Even running FOH though, if I need more sub, I just go add some gain in the driverack....so, it ain't too hard.

So is the PA2 a complete replacement for the DEQ/DCX combo? I dont want to spend the money but Im having some problems with one of the inputs/outputs on my DEQ box that is putting a static sound into the signal path. it comes and goes, grows louder and then disappears with a loud pop. Not sure what causes it. But it only comes out in the left channel and in the booth monitors which gets a summed left and right input. My right channel is perfectly clear with no static. Its either send my box in for a repair bill or just cut my losses and replace all the equipment with what looks to be a definite step up in functionality. Im liking the live autoEQ functionality.

tuna wrote:So is the PA2 a complete replacement for the DEQ/DCX combo? I dont want to spend the money but Im having some problems with one of the inputs/outputs on my DEQ box that is putting a static sound into the signal path. it comes and goes, grows louder and then disappears with a loud pop. Not sure what causes it. But it only comes out in the left channel and in the booth monitors which gets a summed left and right input. My right channel is perfectly clear with no static. Its either send my box in for a repair bill or just cut my losses and replace all the equipment with what looks to be a definite step up in functionality. Im liking the live autoEQ functionality.

You have the early stages of Behringer Syndrome, which if allowed to progress will drain you financially and emotionally. It is like a cancer that lurks among healthy gear. The only Rx is to have it surgically removed and undergo a DBX transplant. Not the news you wanted to hear, but the blunt truth.