advice for an RLA inspired system |
Post Reply | Page <1 678910 11> |
Author | ||||
mstep77
Registered User Joined: 19 July 2006 Status: Offline Points: 457 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
What size of room are you playing in? How big can the cabs be? Do you have help to move them? Do they have to go up stairs? Which drivers are you using for bass, mid etc? So you have t/s parameters? I can help with hornresp and design. Pm me if you like Cheers, Matt
|
||||
budney
Registered User Joined: 24 July 2017 Status: Offline Points: 43 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Hi Matt,
Room is hopefully going to be big enough for about 200/300 people with plenty of space...still looking really, not rushing that. I guess thats also a factor in which box to go for, I know the Jensen Imperial needs a large room, if it ends up being quite small then I may have to rethink. Cabs can be as big and as heavy as they need to be...I don't want to compromise. Planning for no stairs but if there are then I can find some helping hands. Drivers for bass will be JBL 2225, t/s parameters here. Originally the Waldorf used Tad 1601b, but no way can I afford/find them. JBL 2225 will be good enough the cab I want to build is one of these It looks like a big JBL 4520 but its quite different on the inside, there is no fold, just a straight horn path from the rear of the driver. Closely modelled from the Jensen Imperial, but with a hyperbolic horn. It doesn't go as low as a 4520, but thats the point, its meant to be ran with a sub underneath, controlled by the DJ.
Edited by budney - 17 July 2018 at 9:32pm |
||||
Elliot Thompson
Old Croc Joined: 02 April 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5172 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Hi. I am uncertain what your goal is. However, you will not be able to use the 2402, 2405 in addition to the 2404 together as all three offer different dispersions. Download the specification sheet of all three tweeters and learn what each tweeter was designed for from a dispersion perspective. The 2405 offered the best sound quality (20 kHz) whereas the 2402 was the alternative for those who could not afford the 2405. The JBL 2402 is limited to 15 kHz. The 2404 was never incorporated in the Richard Long System. JBL introduce that tweeter later on when DB Keele left Electro-voice and joined JBL. The Waldorf actually goes lower than the JBL 4520 and offers
a smoother response. The Waldorf concept stems from the Jensen Imperial as you
mentioned and, the name Waldorf is from the old Waldorf Astoria in There was an old article on the Richard Long System (typed from a typewriter) that stems back in the 1970’s posted on the net around 20 years ago. I recall reading it when dial up was standard. It may be still online if you search rigorously. Best Regards, |
||||
Elliot Thompson
|
||||
budney
Registered User Joined: 24 July 2017 Status: Offline Points: 43 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Hi Elliot,
The goal is to have a rla style sound system! I thought of using the 2404 when reading that Scott Fitlin used them, but I know that the best is the 2405. Its also the most expensive! The plan was originally to have 2404 on the stacks then 2405 in the arrays, but then a load of bullets popped up for cheap so I figured why not get all different types, and then I can try different combinations and see which I like the most. I didn't like the idea of the bullets because I'd heard a bullet array before and didn't like the dispersion from it, but I figured if you have enough bullets it would get better... Interesting that you say the Waldorf goes lower than the 4520, others have told me differently. I have however never heard a Waldorf before, have you? I've read that article many times, its been a great inspiration to me. Without that article and the wavemusic forum, I wouldn't have gotten this far. You can still find it on the acoustilog website |
||||
Elliot Thompson
Old Croc Joined: 02 April 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5172 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
I have heard the Waldorf and the JBL 4520. The Waldorf plays lower and has a smoother (non technical terms would be warmer) response than the JBL 4520. Scott and I chatted many of times and, his system differed
from Richard Long concept as Scott had his system in a bumper car facility in There were lots of Richard Long designs in and about Bear in mind the Richard Long Sound system was designed with Disco Music in mind. If you are planning to play modern-day Dance music, you will find yourself making changes to suit your requirements as well. Since you are using very large (by today’s standards) horn-loaded boxes, you need to make sure your tweeters offer a wide dispersion. This is why, reading the specification sheet on the JBL 2402, 2404 and, 2405 is very important in regards to dispersion. For all the posts you read on Wave Music and Lansing Heritage, bear in mind the majority of the comments are from those who are home dwellers which have certain requirements to attain the sound they are aiming for in their home. Since you are building the system to be used in a club, you need to do your own research reading manufacture specifications to get answers the home dwellers would not take into consideration. Best Regards, |
||||
Elliot Thompson
|
||||
Daniel S
Registered User Joined: 08 January 2013 Location: Sweden Status: Offline Points: 160 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
I reckon this is the article Elliot is referring to:
https://www.acoustilog.com/disco1.html Also the Waldorf was not designed to naturally roll off to meet the Levans, instead they overlap in the kick region which I guess is part of what makes up that special "disco" sound. It's not that uncommon to do it that way and I'm pretty sure I remember Tony Rossell (ASS) talking about it on here with one of his designs as well. |
||||
Distortion is evil
|
||||
Elliot Thompson
Old Croc Joined: 02 April 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5172 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Yes, that is the article I was referring to. Overlapping was common due to the limitation of the desired crossover points. Analogue crossovers were 12 dB per octave or less and offered limited frequency tuning points in the low, mid in addition to the high frequencies. To this day, I use 12 dB per octave in addition to overlap frequencies as it eases the workload and brings more of a seamless collaboration. Phase issues are also smaller when you compare 12 dB - 18 dB per octave slope versus 24 dB – 48 dB per octave slope. That sound as you mentioned stems from not only the overlapping of frequencies to the cabinets but also the distortion the old processors brought to the equation. Nowadays digital processing offers severely low noise floors and can be pin-point accurate when selecting a desired frequency. This was the opposite with analogue processing designed in the 1980’s downwards. Distortion response varied per processor and, if you arranged them properly, you can use that distortion to your advantage. Although you can overlap the frequencies on an LMS, you will not achieve the distortion an analogue crossover, analogue equaliser or any other analogue processing added within the chain through an LMS. What people fail to notice is the Waldorf box is elevated off the floor in which, the horns mouth is within the vicinity of your chest to face region. The Levan (Emerald) box mouth was within waist to knees region. So all the bass that many were elated about was from the Waldorf box. Not to mention the majority of Disco tracks offered nothing meaningful below 60 Hz so, the Emerald did not do much work in the bass department. Let us not forget old loudspeakers offered a different sound than what is projected today based on cone materials. TS Parameters differed as well. Best Regards, Edited by Elliot Thompson - 18 July 2018 at 5:42pm |
||||
Elliot Thompson
|
||||
Racks&Stacks
Registered User Joined: 10 February 2006 Location: Germany Status: Offline Points: 204 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
I can attest to the acoustic absorber panels in the acoustilog document being very effective. As new york's club Vinyl turned into Arc (about 2x hte OP's room), the same wall and ceiling absorbers were installed. The sound system did get swapped (danny tenaglia bought the old one for his loft) and the new one had its quirks, but the room sounded undoubtedly tighter. I applied the same approach to Arena Club (about half the size of the OP's room) in Berlin and it made the old sound system sound like something new. 50mm mineral wool panels wrapped in fire-retardent cloth is cheap and fast to install. There are hemp and cotton based insulation products for those concerned about microfibers floating around.
Much has been said about RLA installs, but I think the acoustic treatment was probably a big factor why the garage took off like it did. Other RLA installs were in much more lively acoustic environments
|
||||
Racks&Stacks
Registered User Joined: 10 February 2006 Location: Germany Status: Offline Points: 204 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Just caught this. I heard pioneer's gsa rla inspired system in the past year and hte lens horns definitely do not have even dispersion. Since the boxes are so big, they stick out into a room, and it is easy enough to hear where the horn drops off. just something to consider for your ultimate install
|
||||
budney
Registered User Joined: 24 July 2017 Status: Offline Points: 43 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Could you elaborate on how best to arrange them properly? I was pretty much going to follow the system block diagram from the Acoustilog white paper and use the Urei 525 for the full range out from the GSA crossover, with 2 White Instruments graphic EQs before the Urei 525.
Thats what the DBX Boombox is for
I had planned on doing some acoustic treatment eventually. As you said there are cheap ways to do it, and it would be kind of pointless to spend all this time building this just to stick it in a room thats not properly treated.
I've heard a system with lots of JBL lenses around the room and I thought they sounded fantastic. Maybe if you stood right next to or underneath you couldn't hear them, but in the rest of the room it was great. I can't comment on the GSA lenses, I know they're used in pairs and are smaller than the original JBLs, maybe thats why they weren't too even. I have 4 lenses and drivers a plenty, that area is sorted, my last problem is how to build a Waldorf correctly. Edited by budney - 19 July 2018 at 12:13am |
||||
Elliot Thompson
Old Croc Joined: 02 April 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5172 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
That is not the frame of thought of the sound man that used Analogue equipment. What we did was re-arrange the components until it sound pleasing to our ears. Of course, you can follow the block diagram offered on the sheet of paper. However, experimenting led to such a conclusion and, you should do the same. I own the dbx 500 (I have not used it in decades) and I know what it can do. I also know too much of it lets the bass sound fake. I’m more than certain it was used more as a special effect and not at all times. Offering a HPF @ 20 Hz on the Levan Horn, then using a dbx 500 is counterproductive when, the dbx 500 will bring 20 Hz right back regardless having a HPF @ 20Hz. Best Regards, |
||||
Elliot Thompson
|
||||
Racks&Stacks
Registered User Joined: 10 February 2006 Location: Germany Status: Offline Points: 204 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|||
Well, the goal of sound reinforcement should be for everyone to have the same great experience. One sound one vibe, right? An issue with just about any ground stack design is that there is some room necessary before all the passband's are audible, which is why in any scenario I would prefer to fly or at least angle the tops. to minimize the distance. It is weird to hear the mids and highs from across the room after getting the low mid and bass impact right next to you. That is not how we experience sound in nature. The bigger issue I has with the gsa lens horns was to the sides. The particular install I heard had more than 4 stacks, which did close the holes along the sides of the dancefloor, but introduced more sound sources. A very capable sound engineer did what he could to align everything, but the sound was still different at every point on the dancefloor. The principle behind the gsa/pioneer lens is the same as yours, but yes, turning off one their lenses would have probably improved the sound. Horn design has evolved since the rla days, and measurement technology has allowed us to see how crossover design and horn decisions impact how the sound propagates at the edges of dispersion. Better designs seek to minimize the christmas tree effect as the waveform narrows as one reaches the high frequency limits of a given passband. Depending on your room, center fills might help, is all I am saying. Depends on overall room design, whether the dancefloor is to be perfectly rectangular, if a dj booth and subsequent monitors make some noise, bars placement, etc.
|
||||
Post Reply | Page <1 678910 11> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |