Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to thread
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Product Reviews
Fulcrum Acoustics New Active Powered FA Series Review
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="John Roberts" data-source="post: 81413" data-attributes="member: 126"><p>Re: Fulcrum Acoustics New Active Powered FA Series Review</p><p></p><p></p><p>Thanks for clearing that up. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>If we ignore duty cycle, and perhaps current output to support low impedance operation. While the underlying technology may be similar, the different customers demand and pay for different feature sets. (I consider duty cycle and current output as features) . </p><p></p><p>Studio is pretty similar to home hifi for application stress.</p><p></p><p>I'll believe that when I see XLRs on the back of my TV monitor.</p><p></p><p>Bedroom recording has always been cross pollenated with consumer gear. Pro is the tail wagged by the far larger consumer market dog. </p><p></p><p>While there are others here more qualified than I to address this, even if using similar drivers, premium boxes may use tighter tolerance drivers for better arraying, better crossover accuracy, etc. </p><p></p><p>As the PR would have us believe. </p><p></p><p>In fact it is harder to design good for cheap gear... Midas and KT was expensive, because they couldn't build it for less. They were available to be purchased for a reason. </p><p></p><p></p><p>There are reported subtle differences in how some of that math is performed (sample rate conversion, etc). They are more similar than different. The industry has not even standardized what Q means in the context of boost/cut EQ, so suggesting that they all work the same is not supported by our experience.</p><p></p><p>I'll take your word for it.. don't recognize either. </p><p></p><p>There are a finite number of convertors and processors practical to select from, but there are differences in the margin from execution.</p><p></p><p></p><p>SMD has not blurred the line between Pro and consumer audio... I would argue that the first hole in the bottom of that boat was the CD... For a while the dynamic range of the consumer playback media was exactly the same as the pro mastering gear (16bit). Historically studios enjoyed superior performance. Since then pro gear has climbed marginally higher (and consumer has sunk even lower MP3 et al). </p><p></p><p>The stronger trend that improved the performance of even value proced consumer gear was large scale IC technology that drove improved (cleaner) processes, and digital audio (a decade or more later).</p><p></p><p>That said, as long as there are different customers with different needs (like duty cycle), they will demand different products, with feature sets more attuned to their specific needs.</p><p></p><p>JR</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="John Roberts, post: 81413, member: 126"] Re: Fulcrum Acoustics New Active Powered FA Series Review Thanks for clearing that up. :-) If we ignore duty cycle, and perhaps current output to support low impedance operation. While the underlying technology may be similar, the different customers demand and pay for different feature sets. (I consider duty cycle and current output as features) . Studio is pretty similar to home hifi for application stress. I'll believe that when I see XLRs on the back of my TV monitor. Bedroom recording has always been cross pollenated with consumer gear. Pro is the tail wagged by the far larger consumer market dog. While there are others here more qualified than I to address this, even if using similar drivers, premium boxes may use tighter tolerance drivers for better arraying, better crossover accuracy, etc. As the PR would have us believe. In fact it is harder to design good for cheap gear... Midas and KT was expensive, because they couldn't build it for less. They were available to be purchased for a reason. There are reported subtle differences in how some of that math is performed (sample rate conversion, etc). They are more similar than different. The industry has not even standardized what Q means in the context of boost/cut EQ, so suggesting that they all work the same is not supported by our experience. I'll take your word for it.. don't recognize either. There are a finite number of convertors and processors practical to select from, but there are differences in the margin from execution. SMD has not blurred the line between Pro and consumer audio... I would argue that the first hole in the bottom of that boat was the CD... For a while the dynamic range of the consumer playback media was exactly the same as the pro mastering gear (16bit). Historically studios enjoyed superior performance. Since then pro gear has climbed marginally higher (and consumer has sunk even lower MP3 et al). The stronger trend that improved the performance of even value proced consumer gear was large scale IC technology that drove improved (cleaner) processes, and digital audio (a decade or more later). That said, as long as there are different customers with different needs (like duty cycle), they will demand different products, with feature sets more attuned to their specific needs. JR [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Product Reviews
Fulcrum Acoustics New Active Powered FA Series Review
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!