Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Matt Lillie" data-source="post: 33189" data-attributes="member: 84">Re: Prediction SoftwareFocus has many options for SPL, can be 1/3 octave, octave, 3 octave, broadband, or user defined range. There are also options for A weighted and flat, as well as peak, program, rms and a &quot;worst case&quot; &quot;flat max&quot;. If I punch in broadband, flat max, A weight, I get a result of 106.7 @ 50&#039;. In the real world, I can touch a hundred (&quot;A&quot;, fast) at that distance with both sides of the PA running and into the limiters. Assuming a 4-6 dB gain over one side as in the software model, that&#039;s over a 10 dB error, and it&#039;s worse than that as the software predicts about 117 dBa peak. All errors added up, that&#039;s about a 20dB difference. Aiming isn&#039;t such a big issue, we&#039;re talking four boxes /side groundstacked in most situations, but the real issue in my mind is that a &quot;tool&quot; that&#039;s supposed to be used by &quot;professionals&quot; shouldn&#039;t be so far out of whack. Which brought me to my question. I know other manufacturers use Focus, is it a QSC issue due to the numbers they provide, or is it a Focus issue? Or my meter that&#039;s about as old as you is severely out of calibration? My eardrums tell me &quot;no&quot;, I know what 100 dBa feels/sounds like. I&#039;m definitely not peaking anywhere near 115! Other than that, I&#039;m just bored on vacation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Matt Lillie, post: 33189, member: 84"] Re: Prediction Software Focus has many options for SPL, can be 1/3 octave, octave, 3 octave, broadband, or user defined range. There are also options for A weighted and flat, as well as peak, program, rms and a "worst case" "flat max". If I punch in broadband, flat max, A weight, I get a result of 106.7 @ 50'. In the real world, I can touch a hundred ("A", fast) at that distance with both sides of the PA running and into the limiters. Assuming a 4-6 dB gain over one side as in the software model, that's over a 10 dB error, and it's worse than that as the software predicts about 117 dBa peak. All errors added up, that's about a 20dB difference. Aiming isn't such a big issue, we're talking four boxes /side groundstacked in most situations, but the real issue in my mind is that a "tool" that's supposed to be used by "professionals" shouldn't be so far out of whack. Which brought me to my question. I know other manufacturers use Focus, is it a QSC issue due to the numbers they provide, or is it a Focus issue? Or my meter that's about as old as you is severely out of calibration? My eardrums tell me "no", I know what 100 dBa feels/sounds like. I'm definitely not peaking anywhere near 115! Other than that, I'm just bored on vacation. [/QUOTE]

Verification