Martin Audio W8C settings.

which boxes?

ws218 or the w8cs?

iam not so sure about the performance of the w8cs kicks...

Cyklist wrote: Was'nt the idea of the W8CS to extend low end extension when flying multiple W8C in arrays anyway?

Yes, sod that!

The W8 story is as follows:

The system was originally developed (in 1993) as the W8 and W8S. The W8 had a pair of 12" horns for the low mid and the W8S was a combined kick / sub box with a 15" horn (kick bin) plus independent, ported, 18" sub. It was optimised as a system for small and medium sized venues, say up to 100ft to the back row. 

Customers then wanted a version which could be flown in neat clusters, so the W8C (Compact) was developed - this is just a cut down W8 with single 12" mid - and the original box was renamed W8T.

They then asked for a compatible flown LF cabinet to go in the cluster and fill in the audible gap between the flown mid and floor stacked subs, because typically the floor subs were WSX which are true subs - they don't do kick. So the W8CS (Compact Sub) was added to the range and in most applications it works well, providing both kick and sub. For modern electronic dance music etc, where huge amounts of sub are required, it can be used in the kick range, between the sub bass and the low mid.

The W8C and W8CS sold a lot better than the original W8T and W8S and as has been noted they are much easier to handle and more versatile in stacks and arrays.

The original crossover recommendations were for the dual 12" mid with close coupled horns and these were not changed to account for the single mid W8C with its smaller effective mouth area. This is because they were likely to be used in combination with the original W8/W8T or in stacks of 2 or more where the mids couple nicely. That is why you will probably find a single box works better with a higher crossover, say 150 Hz, especially if used with a kick bin such as an F2B.

You can build a very effective and neat curved array with columns of W8C interspersed with W8CS, with the cabinet sides butted up together. This provides the optimum splay angle between the W8C's, and the mids are still close enough to add up properly despite the W8CS in between them. In a 3-high stack, it can help to invert the top row of W8C's to couple the 6.5" horns together.

If using the original W8S, the 18" section should be delayed to match the 15" horn depth. A pair of W8S stacked side by side is similar to having a 2x15 horn stacked on top of a BSX or FSX sub.

I should point out that the W8 wasn't intended for large scale festivals or arenas; they were waiting to see how the industry-wide "line array" madness developed before bringing out a separate arena / festival system to follow on from the F2. Of course this eventually led on to the W8Lxx series of line arrays.

However while they were waiting, some customers started getting restless wanting a "long throw" system to add to the W8 for outdoor events and arenas. The marketing department first suggested that the W8 plus a few delays would cover all eventualities, which plainly wasn't the case (don't forget that  their major users were used to the F2 with its exceptional long throw capability). So they then had to come up with something, and that was the W8CT and W8CM or "Wavefront Longthrow".

The W8CT had a vertical array of three 6.5" horns next to six 1" horns, whilst the W8CM had a pair of vertically arrayed 12" mids. Much the same as a classic F2M/F2T stack, but with the smoother sound of the W8 and in the same size cabinets as the W8C and W8CS. But by the time this became available (too late) everyone was wanting one-box line arrays, which are easier and cheaper to fly. So very few were sold before the W8L series of line arrays went into production and rendered them obsolete.

HTH.


Edited by madboffin - 27 January 2016 at 11:12pm

Thanks for posting that. My sheet is dated March 98, so a much earlier version.
The delays are the same, but it it looks like somebody has done a bit of crossover tweaking over the last 18 years. This may be due to the different drive units in later production, or perhaps they just did a complete new set of measurements and optimisations.
I suggest trying both crossovers and going with whichever you prefer the sound of.

But as previously mentioned, this system needs a bit of EQ and HPF adjustment on the 12" mids depending on stacking/arraying.




Edited by madboffin - 03 May 2016 at 4:02pm