BillFitzmaurice.info

EAW Anya. A 285lb line array module that's incredibly intelligent and, I'd imagine, the price of a midsize car.
http://www.anyalives.com/

For the sake of discussion you could simply build 4 T60's, a pair of DR 250's per side and the equipment required to handle them and you could get this output, and avoid the "magic". It sure does look pretty though .

They must have hired the Bose marketing department.
A nice speaker I'm sure, but not at all unique.

Each module includes 14 high frequency transducers, six mid frequency transducers and dual 15-in low frequency transducers as well as nearly 10,000 acoustic watts of class D amplifier power.

Those individual units must be ridiculously huge. I'd hate to have to assemble an entire column of them.

10,000 acoustic watts...! Isn't that enough to deafen everyone within a 3 miles radius?

88h88 wrote:

Each module includes 14 high frequency transducers, six mid frequency transducers and dual 15-in low frequency transducers as well as nearly 10,000 acoustic watts of class D amplifier power.

Those individual units must be ridiculously huge. I'd hate to have to assemble an entire column of them. :shock:

They go up from and come back down onto caster boards. You leave the system in building blocks of 3-4 units per stack, lift one and pin the next stack under it. There's very little lifting and muscling of a setup like this. This is not a rig that's handled without motorized hoists and adequate structural support.

As far as individual box size, they're not tiny but they seem smaller than the big Vertec boxes.

As far as matching with DR series, not even close in terms of the processing magic that goes on inside the DSP to steer the output where you want it and reduce it where you don't. And in terms of output, At minimum its in line with a DR300 if not better given the kind of high excursion 15's used in them and the rest of the driver complement. The DR series has the upper hand in sensitivity and power requirements, but rigs using boxes like this don't care. They just spec bigger generators or feeds.

I do like the "butterfly" look where the midhorn is incorporated in the exterior shape of the cab.

Charles Jenkinson wrote:10,000 acoustic watts...! Isn't that enough to deafen everyone within a 3 miles radius?

This is another case of the advertising department fabricating some wild specs. I don't know what the efficiency of those boxes are, maybe 15% if they are horn loaded, but they certainly aren't producing 10,000 acoustic watts.

10,000 watts of power amp output perhaps, and most likely all fed by a single 15A U ground.

gdougherty wrote: The DR series has the upper hand in sensitivity and power requirements, but rigs using boxes like this don't care. They just spec bigger generators or feeds.

Exactly.....

Power and number of drivers can overcome cabinet efficiency easily. These type of boxes live in a different world than we do. Trying to compare these or Vertecs to Bill's boxes is apples and oranges.

We are fortunate to have Bill's designs that allow us to get really good results from a lot less dollars. I mixed a couple of bands a while back at a Relay for Life event on JBL line arrays (the new micro vertecs) and subs. One side of that configuration (3 tops, 1 mid-bass, 1 sub) cost more than my entire PA system. And that doesn't even count the i-Tech amps that ran all of that stuff.....and monitors....and monitor amps....etc.

My point is - comparing that stuff to what we do is like taking a knife to a gun fight. You can argue all day about the efficiency of the knife, it's lower cost, and how little energy it takes to use - but, you still ain't gonna' win.

I often just shake my head when I see folks talking trash about JBL, EAW, and the other big boys - saying their stuff is crap. Well, it's not. Now, if you want to talk about the low-end consumer stuff - fine. But when you start in on the pro-line gear - it's no worse than when ignorant people disparage Bill's boxes when they know nothing about them.

Just because you don't believe a chart or their claims - doesn't mean that they don't perform. We just need to keep some perspective if we want to be taken seriously. We have great designs that work really well with very little power and they don't cost much to build....and they are way better than a lot of the consumer junk out there. But, to compare them to touring rigs is silly.

Bruce, this is an interesting view you have presented. For example, if the rig needs to be flown, a BFM rig is out of the question. It wasn't designed for that, and doesn't meet structural requirements or certification. This all costs money to meet these requirements.

I often get the impression from posts on this forum that the BFM speakers are invincible and beyond reproach. The fact is, they are an efficient box and work well for the intended purpose, but certainly cannot compete with a large touring system. Another shortcoming would be pattern control, especially the HF component; a real horn compression driver is more expensive to be certain, but for valid reason.

byacey wrote:
I often get the impression from posts on this forum that the BFM speakers are invincible and beyond reproach. The fact is, they are an efficient box and work well for the intended purpose, but certainly cannot compete with a large touring system. Another shortcoming would be pattern control, especially the HF component; a real horn compression driver is more expensive to be certain, but for valid reason.

I'd just like people to be realistic in their expectations. The boxes we build here are great. They will outperform off-the-shelf systems that cost 4 times as much. And that's why I tout them and brag on 'em everywhere I go.

Bill has made it clear many times on the forum that he designed these boxes for the DIYer, keeping them efficient and cost effective. And that's what brought us all here in the first place.

I have no doubt that he could design boxes that would not only compete, but possibly outperform the best designs out there.....but none of us would build 'em, because the component cost would blow our budgets out of the water.....

There's a tool for every job.

Yes I would Bruce
I would catch hell for it but I would still build em!

TimpBizkit wrote:I'm trying to imagine setting individual time delays on each melded array element to change vertical dispersion

I won't even try imagining someone letting you set 'time delays on each melded array element to change vertical dispersion' on a line array with this price tag - so don't worry, that will not be expected of you no matter what

Bruce Weldy wrote:I have no doubt that he could design boxes that would not only compete, but possibly outperform the best designs out there..

How do you know that I haven't? Non-disclosure agreements prevent me from saying what designs I've done and which companies I've done them for.
What I can say is that technically the DR is king. The construction doesn't lend itself to inexpensive mass production, so it remains a DIY only cab, as DIY and our authorized builders don't have the overhead or labor costs that commercial outfits do. The HF section of the DR isn't perfect, but if I made it so average builders wouldn't be able to build them. I'm content with them being the best they can be that can still be built by just about anyone.

Bill Fitzmaurice wrote:

Bruce Weldy wrote:I have no doubt that he could design boxes that would not only compete, but possibly outperform the best designs out there..

How do you know that I haven't? Non-disclosure agreements prevent me from saying what designs I've done and which companies I've done them for.
What I can say is that technically the DR is king. The construction doesn't lend itself to inexpensive mass production, so it remains a DIY only cab, as DIY and our authorized builders don't have the overhead or labor costs that commercial outfits do. The HF section of the DR isn't perfect, but if I made it so average builders wouldn't be able to build them. I'm content with them being the best they can be that can still be built by just about anyone.

Amen