Speakerplans.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General > Advanced Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - what to do with tsw721
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

what to do with tsw721

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Message
topcat View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 04 December 2013
Location: Middle East
Status: Offline
Points: 169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote topcat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2015 at 11:07am
Originally posted by Daveswindog Daveswindog wrote:

You've missed the point..

No, I got your point. But honestly,if things like Milo are sounding rubbish under your command, I can assure you that you are doing it wrong, not the system.
Trust no-one.
Back to Top
djkrusada View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 16 February 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 158
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote djkrusada Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2015 at 12:34pm
Originally posted by Hvedstrup Hvedstrup wrote:

I still think that properly deployed, amped and processed Floodlight stack will hold up against almost anything available. 

+1. Especially if you limit to systems of comparable cost :)
Back to Top
norty303 View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 18 August 2004
Location: Eastbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 8806
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote norty303 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2015 at 12:38pm
Quote have practically no natural lift


Where does the 'unnatural' lift come from then? Are the wings purely cosmetic?

I agree on the inherent instability being the root of good manoeuvrability (like too steep head angle on motorbike gives fast turn in, but lots of tank slappers - hence steering dampers), but a wing is a wing is a wing, and must provide lift in some degree to get off the ground. It might require high airflow or high angle of attack (or both) but it still possesses a 'natural' lift property.
My laser stuff: Frikkin Lasers
Back to Top
Daveswindog View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 19 February 2011
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 16
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Daveswindog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2015 at 6:47pm
Originally posted by topcat topcat wrote:

Originally posted by Daveswindog Daveswindog wrote:

You've missed the point..


No, I got your point. But honestly,if things like Milo are sounding rubbish under your command, I can assure you that you are doing it wrong, not the system.


This particular system was designed, implemented, installed and setup by The man himself. Sorry, it just sounds like it's trying to push too much, like I said though, that's my ears. This has been my experience using, listening and being involved with it.

Back to the topic.
Back to Top
topcat View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 04 December 2013
Location: Middle East
Status: Offline
Points: 169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote topcat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2015 at 10:30pm
Originally posted by norty303 norty303 wrote:

Quote have practically no natural lift


Where does the 'unnatural' lift come from then? Are the wings purely cosmetic?

I agree on the inherent instability being the root of good manoeuvrability (like too steep head angle on motorbike gives fast turn in, but lots of tank slappers - hence steering dampers), but a wing is a wing is a wing, and must provide lift in some degree to get off the ground. It might require high airflow or high angle of attack (or both) but it still possesses a 'natural' lift property.

It's wings obviously have the ability to position themselves in a position so as to create lift (I am sure you understand - by increasing air speed over the top side of the wing)... one of the perks of it being deliberately based on the control system positioning the foreplanes (the shark fin shaped things at the front) and flaperons (the flaps-cross-ailerons at the back, since it's a Delta Wing) with little lift in the wing's 'neutral' position is that it flys just as well upside down as it does upright. Perhaps my original description was a bit poor, but essentially traditionally aircraft wings are designed to induce lift in their normal position, the Typhoon's do not do this, and have to be adjusted into position to perform a lift (or indeed any other) function. The instability induced by the neutral position of the surfaces is that they make thousands of adjustments each second to maintain steady flight - hence why the aircraft is all fly-by-wire, no human pilot could make that number (and complexity) of adjustments manually.
Trust no-one.
Back to Top
topcat View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 04 December 2013
Location: Middle East
Status: Offline
Points: 169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote topcat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2015 at 10:31pm
Originally posted by Daveswindog Daveswindog wrote:

Originally posted by topcat topcat wrote:

Originally posted by Daveswindog Daveswindog wrote:

You've missed the point..


No, I got your point. But honestly,if things like Milo are sounding rubbish under your command, I can assure you that you are doing it wrong, not the system.


This particular system was designed, implemented, installed and setup by The man himself. Sorry, it just sounds like it's trying to push too much, like I said though, that's my ears. This has been my experience using, listening and being involved with it.

All I meant is if you don't like the sound of it, then the term is "I don't like it" and that's fine.

But to say something is rubbish when it is clearly not, credited by the fact that it's the first choice of many if not most international opera houses and recital halls; is factually incorrect and silly.
Trust no-one.
Back to Top
Sapro2 View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User
Avatar

Joined: 31 January 2015
Location: Somerset
Status: Offline
Points: 354
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sapro2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2015 at 11:04pm
Originally posted by topcat topcat wrote:

Originally posted by Daveswindog Daveswindog wrote:

All I hear when I'm using Line array systems is distortion and loads of processing, this makes my ears fatigue. 



Which line arrays are you using? And who set them up?

Martin still build 'honest' systems with very little processing. Yes other companies use processing to drive their systems instead of focussing on cabinet design, but they still make great sounding systems. Any idiot can set it up badly though.

Some people think processing means bad because they believe sound was supposed to be made in boxes. Blissfully unaware that bad sound can be made just as easily by wood and glue as it can by PCBs and copper. And good sound, likewise.

Modern fighter planes - like the Typhoon we have in the UK - have practically no natural lift or stability. If you put a Typhoon in a wind tunnel it would just bounce around like a coke can in a tornado. Turn on it's computer system, and it flies perfectly dead straight. But not only this - it can roll, climb, dive, and yaw in a fraction of the space that a traditionally designed aircraft would need; because of the technology it employs and the fact that the aircraft does not fly because of simple laws of physics.

Modern speaker processing can act in a similar way. By giving the processing what seems like an unstable box; providing the processing knows exactly how the box will behave in given circumstances, it can apply processing that makes the box infinitely more responsive and versatile. It's not what the purists want to hear, but it's why so many modern speaker manufacturers have taken that line. 


The reason the Typhoon can barely fly is to give it agility. It can turn tighter than pretty much anything.
Splat Soundsystem
Baby Sham pram Soundsystem
Sapro - SoundCloud
https://soundcloud.com/sapro
DJ Sapro. West country free party DJ and Producer.
Back to Top
topcat View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 04 December 2013
Location: Middle East
Status: Offline
Points: 169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote topcat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2015 at 10:58am
Originally posted by Sapro2 Sapro2 wrote:

Originally posted by topcat topcat wrote:

Originally posted by Daveswindog Daveswindog wrote:

All I hear when I'm using Line array systems is distortion and loads of processing, this makes my ears fatigue. 



Which line arrays are you using? And who set them up?

Martin still build 'honest' systems with very little processing. Yes other companies use processing to drive their systems instead of focussing on cabinet design, but they still make great sounding systems. Any idiot can set it up badly though.

Some people think processing means bad because they believe sound was supposed to be made in boxes. Blissfully unaware that bad sound can be made just as easily by wood and glue as it can by PCBs and copper. And good sound, likewise.

Modern fighter planes - like the Typhoon we have in the UK - have practically no natural lift or stability. If you put a Typhoon in a wind tunnel it would just bounce around like a coke can in a tornado. Turn on it's computer system, and it flies perfectly dead straight. But not only this - it can roll, climb, dive, and yaw in a fraction of the space that a traditionally designed aircraft would need; because of the technology it employs and the fact that the aircraft does not fly because of simple laws of physics.

Modern speaker processing can act in a similar way. By giving the processing what seems like an unstable box; providing the processing knows exactly how the box will behave in given circumstances, it can apply processing that makes the box infinitely more responsive and versatile. It's not what the purists want to hear, but it's why so many modern speaker manufacturers have taken that line. 


The reason the Typhoon can barely fly is to give it agility. It can turn tighter than pretty much anything.

Is that not what I said?
Trust no-one.
Back to Top
Sapro2 View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User
Avatar

Joined: 31 January 2015
Location: Somerset
Status: Offline
Points: 354
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sapro2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2015 at 11:16am
Sorry, yes rereading it was. My bad, i have talked with the guys who fly them so just repeating what they said.
Splat Soundsystem
Baby Sham pram Soundsystem
Sapro - SoundCloud
https://soundcloud.com/sapro
DJ Sapro. West country free party DJ and Producer.
Back to Top
Daveswindog View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 19 February 2011
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 16
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Daveswindog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2015 at 1:11pm

[/QUOTE]

All I meant is if you don't like the sound of it, then the term is "I don't like it" and that's fine.

But to say something is rubbish when it is clearly not, credited by the fact that it's the first choice of many if not most international opera houses and recital halls; is factually incorrect and silly.
[/QUOTE]


Yes, that's how I started. I've just answered your questions.

Personally I'd prefer my workhouse to be simple: for example, your plane analogy. If, these systems are in place to enable this to fly, and the system was to fall over, seems to me there would be an unusable lump of metal falling out of the sky. Of course there will be redundancy but Same with a PA that is heavly processed. There's always a compromise, therefore, why not strive to perfect something before the need to correct it by adding anomalies and distortion added by processing.
www.daveswintonproduction.com.au/
https://www.facebook.com/DWSwinton
https://www.facebook.com/DaveSwintonSound
Back to Top
nickyburnell View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc


Joined: 06 February 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 4410
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nickyburnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2015 at 2:15pm
Originally posted by Daveswindog Daveswindog wrote:




All I meant is if you don't like the sound of it, then the term is "I don't like it" and that's fine.

But to say something is rubbish when it is clearly not, credited by the fact that it's the first choice of many if not most international opera houses and recital halls; is factually incorrect and silly.
[/QUOTE]


Yes, that's how I started. I've just answered your questions.

Personally I'd prefer my workhouse to be simple: for example, your plane analogy. If, these systems are in place to enable this to fly, and the system was to fall over, seems to me there would be an unusable lump of metal falling out of the sky. Of course there will be redundancy but Same with a PA that is heavly processed. There's always a compromise, therefore, why not strive to perfect something before the need to correct it by adding anomalies and distortion added by processing.[/QUOTE]

Amen Clap
It's everything, not everythink!
Back to Top
topcat View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 04 December 2013
Location: Middle East
Status: Offline
Points: 169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote topcat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2015 at 3:08pm
Originally posted by Daveswindog Daveswindog wrote:


Quote

All I meant is if you don't like the sound of it, then the term is "I don't like it" and that's fine.

But to say something is rubbish when it is clearly not, credited by the fact that it's the first choice of many if not most international opera houses and recital halls; is factually incorrect and silly.



Yes, that's how I started. I've just answered your questions.

Personally I'd prefer my workhouse to be simple: for example, your plane analogy. If, these systems are in place to enable this to fly, and the system was to fall over, seems to me there would be an unusable lump of metal falling out of the sky. Of course there will be redundancy but Same with a PA that is heavly processed. There's always a compromise, therefore, why not strive to perfect something before the need to correct it by adding anomalies and distortion added by processing.

With the aircraft - you are correct, the computers go down and it will be heading earthwards very quickly with no control at all. But this is a result of the aircraft's manufacturers - in the Typhoon's case, several contributors from companies who have built some incredible things from tanks to aircraft carriers and everything in between - deciding that it's not a compromise per se, it (giving the aircraft any aerodynamic stability) is a direct hinderance to it's agility.

Frankly, I refuse to believe that people like Meyer, L'Acoustics and D&B are simply incapable of producing acoustically perfect box designs. Indeed Martin used to take the no-processing approach, and have moved to more processed systems with their latest product and there seems to be a more or less unanimous agreement that the newer is the better sounding. Perhaps, contrary to your own belief, the PA manufacturing industry has discovered - since Floodlight - that the way to get optimum sound reproduction from a wooden enclosure is to design it with electronic processing in mind which is able to get the best from the box?

There is big competition between the major manufacturers and frankly were there any merit in the no-processing kind of design, I am sure people would be focussing their efforts in that region rather than straying from it.


Edited by topcat - 02 May 2015 at 3:08pm
Trust no-one.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.06
Copyright ©2001-2023 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.563 seconds.