BillFitzmaurice.info

gdougherty wrote:This is a forum discussing the design and building of Bill's excellent speakers. While I won't suggest banning mention of SAC over here, I'd like to suggest we not be enablers of laziness and non-participation in the SAC community. IMO, there is no reason to do much beyond pointing people to the SAC forums where many of these questions are already answered.

I agree that most info can and should be available at the SAC forum. I'm hankering to put together a system myself and have spent a good bit of time reading.

However, I think it not out of place for BFM users here to discuss rigs that they're using, whether SAC, digital or analog. All interested can benefit from pertinent info, such as crossover, limiting & EQ settings for BFM cabs.

Mark Coward wrote:

gdougherty wrote:This is a forum discussing the design and building of Bill's excellent speakers. While I won't suggest banning mention of SAC over here, I'd like to suggest we not be enablers of laziness and non-participation in the SAC community. IMO, there is no reason to do much beyond pointing people to the SAC forums where many of these questions are already answered.

I agree that most info can and should be available at the SAC forum. I'm hankering to put together a system myself and have spent a good bit of time reading.

However, I think it not out of place for BFM users here to discuss rigs that they're using, whether SAC, digital or analog. All interested can benefit from pertinent info, such as crossover, limiting & EQ settings for BFM cabs.

Absolutely. Any discussion pertinent to SAC integrating with a BFM system certainly belongs in the BFM mixers and processors forum. The details on building a SAC rig from the ground up seem best left over there, at least to me.

guess it all depends on whether you want a "simply complicated" setup, or a "complicated simple" setup..........

while sound can be as simple or as complicated as you want it, SAC definitely wins once you start adding it all up....