my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Home speakers vs. Cinema speakers (Page 3)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Home speakers vs. Cinema speakers Matthew McBride Film Handler Posts: 97 From: Tupelo, MS USA Registered: Oct 2011 posted 10-23-2012 07:02 PM                     quote: Tony Bandiera Jr most of us mere mortals will have to settle for a 2 or 3 way system in our home screening rooms. This is probably quite true. I will say that the design of Brad's room is definitely a base model for how I will build my private screening room. Ah the day that comes (hopefully at some point in my life), though I guess for now I'll have to settle for what I have. I can't complain too much though, as me wife is very understanding.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 10-24-2012 01:57 AM                     quote: Tony Bandiera Jr You and Steve agreeing? Did hell just freeze over or something? Steve and I actually agree about most things. We really only differ about things where he is wrong, like platters.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 10-24-2012 04:52 AM                     Crossover from mid to high is at 2200Hz...not exactly out of the dialog region. In fact, most 3-ways crossover mid to high in the dialog region. Have you heard this little speaker (SC-2150) or are you just applying your experience with the full-size QSC 3-ways to this one? Conversely, the 2-way puts the crossover out of the dialog region. I agree that the QSC 423 is the best 3-way I've heard for Cinema but I would not necessarily translate that to the smaller speaker.  |  IP: Logged Robert Koch Film Handler Posts: 93 From: Williams Ca USA Registered: Apr 2006 posted 10-26-2012 02:54 PM                     I agree with Steve as usual. Three way systems are for the birds for various reasons. Western Electric came out with their infamous "WIDE RANGE" system in 1930 or 32 and what a monstrosity it was. 3 Jensen woofers on a huge wooden baffle resting on the stage floor with a field supply with an 80 tube for each one. A 555 lst with exponential horn on chains somewhere above that and for the icing on the cake a 597 lst was mounted between somewhere. The crossover was in the booth the frequencies I didnt know and did`nt know how to find out. I had two of these ,Egyptian in Ogden Ut and Empire, Placerville Ca. Kind of shows you how the exhibitors loved to spend money upgrading booth equipment.By the time I began[1949] I found woolite stuffed in the hf 597, two of the 80 tubes "out" in the Jensen woofers. A lesson in history, boys, I`m 90 years old.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 10-26-2012 03:51 PM                        Now you guys have got me wondering. Should we cancel the QSC 3-ways and go back to 2-ways?  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 10-26-2012 04:52 PM                     Nah...if you are going to use the SC-423 then you are going to have a fine speaker. It is quite smooth indeed. I would consider the 424, myself...it gets the highs without having to strain. I've been VERY pleased with the QSC 4x3/4x4 stuff. I do normally tri or quad amp when I've used them.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 10-26-2012 04:55 PM                     quote: Mike Blakesley Now you guys have got me wondering. Should we cancel the QSC 3-ways and go back to 2-ways? Nope, you should upgrade to the 4-ways.  |  IP: Logged Tony Bandiera Jr Film God Posts: 3067 From: Moreland Idaho Registered: Apr 2004 posted 10-29-2012 11:27 PM                     ^^^^ What Brad said. Robert, the speakers you refer to are old school technology at best, so you're making a poor comparison IMHO. Modern 3-way designs run circles around the older stuff in most areas, including frequency response, uniformity and time alignment of drivers. quote: Steve Guttag Crossover from mid to high is at 2200Hz...not exactly out of the dialog region. In fact, most 3-ways crossover mid to high in the dialog region. Steve, Steve, Steve. I said the MEAT of the dialog region, which with both male and female voices is well within the passband of the three way designs. Of course both male and female voices have fundamentals outside of the mid band, but that is not what I was talking about. Don't believe me? Simple test, use your RTA and talk normally into one of the mics and see which frequencies are prominent. You'll find the strongest will be in the passband of the midrange driver. (Why do you think they came out with three-way designs in the first place? To avoid the "crossover notch" in the dialog range.) No, I haven't heard the two-ways you mentioned Steve, which I am sure are fine units. But why bother when the three ways are so close in price point? (Especially the new model I linked to originally.) Mike, you will not be sorry with the three way QSC's.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 10-30-2012 02:57 PM                     Tony, Tony, Tony... Generally, the pass band of the human voice is 300Hz - 3KHz. Human hearing is quite critical in the 1KHz-4KHz region...why do you think Dolby-B really went for that area above all of the rest? A 3-way will almost assure you that you are putting the crossover somewhere in the critical listening range of the human voice. It is why cinema speakers always wanted to push the 2-way crossover down as far as they could go without component failure...500Hz was typical and THX tried for 400Hz. 3-ways are not a new thing by any stretch...GOOD ones are new. The normal "sell" on a 3-ways is the notion that it is impossible to get a driver that can play all frequencies equally well at desired volume. If you could get a 1-way system to do that, it would be ideal (no crossover). As such, a 3-way (or other higher way system) should yield lower distortion by allowing each driver to only play in its sweet spot. Getting drivers to match at crossover is near impossible though. The timbre will simply not match even if you can get level to. The characteristics of a cone driver versus a compression driver almost never match. Then there are time artifacts since all of the various drivers will start from a different point in space you will get nodes around the crossover point based on where one is listening to the sound as the sound takes a different amount of time to travel. It gets more complicated as the number of components go up. One of the reasons Altec VOTs lasted so long was they where inherently time-aligned...they picked a crossover that kept the vocal reproduction high and they were VERY efficient (not much power back then). Altec also shifted the LF section to get it as close as possible to the HF section to minimize the voicing as much as possible. In fact, if you look at the QSC 3-way, you'll see a lot of the A7/A5 principles in there though certainly with a much more modern approach to pattern control. On QSC's 4-ways...unlike most others...QSC put the VHF secion coaxial to the HF section so it uses the SAME horn with the SAME path...voicing is going to be near perfect (and it works really well too). 3-ways are about not having a compression driver with the power and the horn with the size to handle the lower frequencies, yet also handle very high frequencies...it has little to do with keeping the dialog out of the crossover...because they don't. More often than not, going to a 3-way is a step down to a good 2-way. The QSC SC-4x3 type speaker is the exception to the rule. Which is why I would use a 413 over the "low-cost" 3-way. Or better yet, go to a good 2-way...they are MUCH easier to get right. I wouldn't be as quick as you to use the SC-423 as the reason why all 3-way speakers (or all QSC 3-way speakers) work...it is the exception, not the rule. It brings all of the virtues of 3-ways and very few of their short comings.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 10-30-2012 05:50 PM                     So Steve, is this where I say "I told you a long time ago that QSC's speakers would impress you", or should I save that for another conversation?  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 10-30-2012 08:45 PM                     Brad, I take it all in and use my own experience...just like everyone else. Was I skeptical about the QSC stage speakers at first...sure...everything that came before them was a disappointment to me and I can still get a 2-way system to do most of what they can do. I like the QSC SC-4x3 and SC-4x4 sound. There are things I like about some JBL speakers too. It is still a happy day when I have a room with JBL 4675 speakers...the results are almost always good (a bad room can't be fixed by good speakers though). I also like seeing Altec speakers (still)...An A4 or A5 is something I can work with...the A7 is too weak in the HF department and the A8 is too much of a compromise for size. Oddly enough, my favorite home speakers remain the ones I have...JBL L-250s...surprise, they are 4-ways. JBL matched drivers when they made them...each pair was serial numbered not only as a unit but to its mate...I've never had stereo imaging as good as them. I run them with their passive crossovers that have VERY shallow slopes...they too defied the norm. 30 years later, they are still my favorite home speakers but I wouldn't use them for a cinema.  |  IP: Logged Paul Vollmers Expert Film Handler Posts: 161 From: Sister Lakes, MI, USA Registered: Jul 2001 posted 10-31-2012 09:08 AM                     I just priced the QSC SC-2150 from a dealer and they are about $1500.00 to $1150.00 each. way out of my hobby price league.  |  IP: Logged Tony Bandiera Jr Film God Posts: 3067 From: Moreland Idaho Registered: Apr 2004 posted 10-31-2012 01:00 PM                     Paul just tell the missus there is no new car this year. And hey, you want to play in the big boy yard you gotta pony up the coin. A lot of people waste more money than that on other stupid things. Seriously, around $6k (with the sub and surrounds) isn't too much to pay for the quality you're gonna get. And realistically, even a modest home screening room done right (Proper screen, sound and masking) is gonna set you back at least $20k. I know many people who have spent double that on a kitchen and at least that on a bathroom.  |  IP: Logged Sam D. Chavez Film God Posts: 2153 From: Martinez, CA USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 10-31-2012 02:06 PM                       Seriously, this is Paul we are talking about!  |  IP: Logged Robert Koch Film Handler Posts: 93 From: Williams Ca USA Registered: Apr 2006 posted 10-31-2012 02:15 PM                     Bravo Steve  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.