QSC K8 Audition & Some Personal Thoughts - Page 7

SpruceTop · #91 01-03-2010, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby1note

The parent company, Loud Technologies, is hanging on by a thread apparently. Mackies' production machinery has been seized by the Chinese manufacturer from what I understand.

Loud Technologies also owns EAW. I can't begin to imagine a pro-audio world without EAW.

Bob

Thanks Bob,

I don't know what we'd do without feedback from those in the know. Could LOUD's undoing be based on Mackie's presence in their roster of companies?

Regards,

SpruceTop

BoB/335 · #92 01-03-2010, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby1note

The parent company, Loud Technologies, is hanging on by a thread apparently. Mackies' production machinery has been seized by the Chinese manufacturer from what I understand.

Loud Technologies also owns EAW. I can't begin to imagine a pro-audio world without EAW.

Bob

EAW?? What's EAW???

SpruceTop · #93 01-03-2010, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoB/335

EAW?? What's EAW???

Eastern Acoustic Works.

BoB/335 · #94 01-03-2010, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geokie8

A few people are going to have problems with my methodology, but I think it's possible to interpolate the K8's frequency response (-3 dB) using the rest of the speakers in the same line and comparing responses to other speakers like the JBL.

The 510 goes down to 58 Kz (-10 dB) and 70 Kz (-3 dB).
The K10 goes down to 56 Kz (-10 dB) and 60 Kz (-6 dB).
Interpolating the figures would give the K10 a frequency response of 69Kz +/- 1 dB (-3 dB).

The K8 goes down to 61 Kz (-10 dB) and 66 Kz (-6 dB).
Interpolating the figures would give the K8 a frequency response of 74 Kz +/- 1 dB (-3 dB).

I think the interpolated figure is accurate enough for purchasing purposes. The K8 cabinet was not designed as a dual purpose speaker (main & monitor) and there would be no other reason but for the lack of bass response.

Of course, that doesn't mean that a singer/guitarist couldn't use the K8 as a main. And you could even use your Taylor baritone -- especially if you had a way to slightly raise the lower frequencies (i.e., EQ).

One more thing: I'm lost with QSC's design of a 500 watt amp for the low frequencies and another 500 watts for the high frequencies. It takes a lot more power to generate the lows than it does the highs. For comparison's sake, the 510 devotes 220 watts to the lows and 60 watts to the highs for a balanced response. I think around 400+ watts of the QSC speakers are unused and that it should properly be marketed as (approximately) a 560 watt speaker. That would make it twice as powerrful as the JBL -- which the Max SPL indicates it is.

OK, I'm prepared. Slam away!

geokie8

I'm confused. What are you saying the K8 was designed for?

BoB/335 · #95 01-03-2010, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpruceTop

Eastern Acoustic Works.

(PSsstttt!!! Did you see my

?)

SpruceTop · #96 01-03-2010, 05:48 PM

Just for the record, not only Mackie, but all--if I'm not mistaken--mainstream Pro sound gear, of which Mackie, JBL, QSC, EV are some names, is "Designed & Engineered In The U.S.A." but made in China.

Regards,

SpruceTop

Bobby1note · #97 01-03-2010, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoB/335

I was just wondering why the EV SxA100 is never mentioned in these powered speaker wars.

http://www.electrovoice.com/products/209.html

I think EV has a pretty good rep, don't they?

EXCELLENT loudspeaker BoB/335. Highly regarded in pro-sound circles, depending of course on the application.

Vocal intelligibility is top-notch throughout the SXa series. I was also impressed with the intelligibility of the SXa250, despite the fact that it's a 15" box. I found the vocals to be better than some 12" boxes I compared them to. Quite a surprise actually.

Bob

SpruceTop · #98 01-03-2010, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoB/335

(PSsstttt!!! Did you see my

?)

Dang It, Bob! Did I see your

? I'm so wound-up that I can't even see my next beer let alone one of them goofy

!

Regards,

SpruceTop

geokie8 · #99 01-03-2010, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoB/335

I'm confused. What are you saying the K8 was designed for?

Sorry, that bit was unclear.

As part of a main -- usually in conjunction with a sub. Unlike his bigger brothers, the cabinet shape precludes it from being aimed up at the performer.

geokie8

BoB/335 · #**100** 01-03-2010, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geokie8

Sorry, that bit was unclear.

As part of a main -- usually in conjunction with a sub. Unlike his bigger brothers, the cabinet shape precludes it from being aimed up at the performer.

geokie8

So the K8 was NOT designed to be used alone. Is that in their literature somewhere?

BoB/335 · #**101** 01-03-2010, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpruceTop

Dang It, Bob! Did I see your

? I'm so wound-up that I can't even see my next beer let alone one of them goofy

!

Regards,

SpruceTop

Have a shot with that beer. Maybe you'll unwind a bit. Going to watch a movie with the wife. Wondering how many pages I'll have to catch up on when I get back. maybe I could have her pause it once in a while or I could run in here if she has to use the bathroom!

geokie8 · #**102** 01-03-2010, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoB/335

So the K8 was NOT designed to be used alone. Is that in their literature somewhere?

I said that it wasn't designed to be used as a monitor (and then gave my pure speculation on why it was not). If it wasn't designed to give a proper response for the performer, it's probably not designed to give a proper response for the audience. But we're talking a full band with drums, bass and keyboards. Acoustic guitar and vocals is quite a bit different.

geokie8

GordonHLau · #**103** 01-03-2010, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herb Hunter

Because I'm a filthy swine. Seriously though, one of the differences is that I based my assumption on measured data. Your assumption was based on a subjective impression. Nevertheless, if you had said your initial impression was that the BagAmp wasn't loud enough for you purposes, I might not have questioned your post (though I might have still pointed out that a line array need not be as loud as a conventional speaker to fill the back of a room with sound to an equal level) but to me, headroom has to do with reserve power; power available to handle transients above the average sound level. Establishing that is something that requires objective measurements.

You are just digging a bigger hole for yourself Herb. I DID say I didn't think the BagAmp was loud enough which is why I wanted to check out the K10. You don't even know how loud the BagAmp can go since you've NEVER heard it. Your the pot calling the kettle black. Objective measurements? When the difference is this big, I don't need measurements. My ears do just fine. You somehow think that the line array could make up for the headroom difference. That's a HUGE assumption on your part. Again, you've never heard the BagAmp and you don't have any objective measurements to even give you an idea how much headroom it has. And do you really think QSC is going to put out something that doesn't have clean power with plenty of headroom above the average sound level? They are competing with Mackie, JBL, Yorkville, etc. News flash for you, QSC makes quality stuff.

Gordon

buzzardwhiskey · #**104** 01-03-2010, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoB/335

Aren't you glad he's not wasting his time on the Mackies?

I thought the Mackie's were 12" models (I'm specifically interested in 10 and maybe 8's).

sdelsolray · #**105** 01-03-2010, 06:13 PM

Confirmation bias is strong in this thread.