Powered vs. Passive - Page 2

alexevans917 · #16 10-23-2011, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by royd

so... for me, the expandability is more important than a potential stand being knocked over (which has never happened to me in 30 years of gigging).

Thanks! This is what I was thinking too. If there were such an issue with powered speakers being hazardous to the heath of those underneath them, I would have thought they would be much less common.

SRM450, here I come!

The Blood · #17 10-23-2011, 09:30 PM

I play 5 or 6 gigs a month, with ensembles and as a soloist. I lugged some srm-450's for a couple of years and they are heavy, IMO, almost 50 lbs. Passives that size average about 35 lbs. I liked their sound and power when cranked, but there were some things that I didn't like:
1. More wires to keep track of, and extension cords when they're spread apart. One simple cord for passives. The mackies I had required XLR cables for some reason
2. Awkward adjustment from the performer's position. You've got to put your instrument down and walk over to the speaker to see what settings it has.
3. Heavy, as mentioned, and seemed like overkill for most acoustic guitar gigs.
4. Plastic boxes will get scratched after a while. To me, wooden cabinets look better whether they are cloth or hard coated. Maybe its an aesthetic thing.

I sat in with a band that used the Yamaha emx powered mixer and liked it, so I got one, along with some used speakers in wooden birch cabinets. Things I like about this system:
1. EMX's are amazingly light and not pricey.
2. Everything can be easily seen and controlled from the performer's position.
3. I upgraded the internal components on the cabinets (beyer hi frequency drivers from US speaker supply)and they sound amazingly good and don't weigh that much. I've now got 3 sets of speakers in different sizes, for different venues and monitor arrangements. The point being that way more options are available with passive speakers.
4. Since many bands use this type of powered mixer, its easy for others to manage this system if need be. Its been loaned to special friends in need a couple of times.

...One thing I liked about the srm-450's was that they were easy to sell once I decided to move away from that approach, so its easy enough to try them out.

tammuz7000 · #18 10-24-2011, 06:43 AM

I was thinking of the emx as well or QSC OR EV LIVE

Which emx did you get? the 512 or the 312 and how did you determine how many watts...whats the compression like on it?

Also what size speakers did you buy for it?

#19 10-24-2011, 08:38 AM

I have an EMX512SC that I use with EV SX100+ speakers. I am VERY happy with the performance I get out of this system. I have used a bit of the compression and have found it useful in certain situations. The 512 weighs the same as the 312, so I would suggest going for the 512 is you can afford it as it is always good to have more power on hand. Mixer is about 17 lbs. and the speakers are just under 32 lbs. each.

I think it would be an understatement to say that the topic of passive v. powered speakers has been well covered on the AGF, so I will not address it here. It is clear which direction I have gone.

TerryAllanHall · #20 10-24-2011, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Blood

I play 5 or 6 gigs a month, with ensembles and as a soloist. I lugged some srm-450's for a couple of years and they are heavy, IMO, almost 50 lbs. Passives that size average about 35 lbs. I liked their sound and power when cranked, but there were some things that I didn't like:
1. More wires to keep track of, and extension cords when they're spread apart. One simple cord for passives. The mackies I had required XLR cables for some reason
2. Awkward adjustment from the performer's position. You've got to put your instrument down and walk over to the speaker to see what settings it has.
3. Heavy, as mentioned, and seemed like overkill for most acoustic guitar gigs.
4. Plastic boxes will get scratched after a while. To me, wooden cabinets look better whether they are cloth or hard coated. Maybe its an aesthetic thing.

I sat in with a band that used the Yamaha emx powered mixer and liked it, so I got one, along with some used speakers in wooden birch cabinets. Things I like about this system:
1. EMX's are amazingly light and not pricey.
2. Everything can be easily seen and controlled from the performer's position.
3. I upgraded the internal components on the cabinets (beyer hi frequency drivers from US speaker supply)and they sound amazingly good and don't weigh that much. I've now got 3 sets of speakers in different sizes, for different venues and monitor arrangements. The point being that way more options are available with passive speakers.
4. Since many bands use this type of powered mixer, its easy for others to manage this system if need be. Its been loaned to special friends in need a couple of times.

...One thing I liked about the srm-450's was that they were easy to sell once I decided to move away from that approach, so its easy enough to try them out.

Well stated!

jbryant · #21 10-24-2011, 10:32 AM

I personally don't care for powered speakers. I use a Gigrac 600 with a pair of EV z-90's which are 8" woofer / tweeter design. They are incredibly light weight and sound just incredible. My bass player has a pair of powered Mackies the 15" version and we both swear the EV's sound much better. The Gigrac is also a wonderful piece of equipment. I've been using this setup week after week for 5 yeasr and never had any problems and always great sound.

#22 10-24-2011, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbryant

I personally don't care for powered speakers. I use a Gigrac 600 with a pair of EV z-90's which are 8" woofer / tweeter design. They are incredibly light weight and sound just incredible. My bass player has a pair of powered Mackies the 15" version and we both swear the EV's sound much better. The Gigrac is also a wonderful piece of equipment. I've been using this setup week after week for 5 yeasr and never had any problems and always great sound.

I have heard those EVs and they sounded great. If I did not play some outdoor gigs and larger indoor gigs, I might have gotten the ZX1s instead of the SX100+s that I have. I have not heard the Mackies, but I am not surprised that you like the EVs better. In my experience, better quality speakers sound, well, better to my ears.

lschwart · #23 10-24-2011, 11:22 AM

In my passive speaker set up, I use a Yorkville M810 to power my pair of Yorkville YX15s for FOH and two (sometimes 3) YX10s for monitors. I have no complaints about this system except for the fact that the mixer, as I said, has some limitations for the complexities of a 7 piece band. For a smaller acoustic ensemble, I recommend it highly. It would be even better with a pair of EV SX series passive speakers for FOH. I almost bought a pair of EVs, in fact, when I was shopping, but I got such a good deal on the YX15s that I couldn't pass them up at the time. The M810 is a solidly built and very well-designed unit for a band that has to run it's own sound. A little heavier than the EMXs, but with nicely situated handles that make carrying it easy. It's lighter, however, than the comparable Mackie and Peavey units. I expect this thing would take a nuclear blast and not even get all that hot. It barely gets warm running 5 speakers for three hours outside in the middle of a Richmond, VA summer.

I have friends who use Gigracs, and no complaints there either!

For a moderately priced powered speaker set up, I highly recommend the RCF 312a. I know I'm starting to sound like a broken LP about this, but it really is a great speaker, and a no-brainer in comparison with the usual competition (QSC K series, EV Live X, JBL PRX or EON, etc.), if you can get it at the price it's presently going for in the US.

Louis