Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Featured content
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
What's new
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
Varsity
Shootout: KF650e vs DX1565
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="Peter Morris" data-source="post: 57096" data-attributes="member: 652"><p>Re: Shootout: KF650e vs DX1565</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="font-size: 12px">Hi Silas,</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="color: #000000">I usually ran both my 650e’s and 650z’s 3-way active. In 2-way mode, they generally did not have the output I needed. As a guess, I got about 6dB more in 3-way mode.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="color: #000000">In 3-way mode with one or two boxes, the lows always ran out first. With six boxes a side the HF was the first to run out. I was using a QSC - PL1.8 on the HF and occasionally it would clip (450W into 8 ohms)</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="color: #000000">The “Z” versions goes noticeably louder, not far behind an 850. The mids are 109 dB/w/m for the 650z compared to 107 dB/w/m for the 650e and the Z takes a bit more power. The HF diver also does a bit better 110 dB/w/m compared to 107 dB/w/m. The trick to get maximum SPL out of the Z’s was to take the load off the 15 by crossing over to the sub a bit higher – 110 Hz – 120Hz.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="color: #000000">Throw --- I will argue that throw does exist but its not related to the inverse square law that everyone seems to take about on this board. People talk about throw because for some reason they perceive some speakers throw more than others do. The question is - what are they talking about? What is it they perceive? I think throw is more about about articulation and clarity at distance than SPL. At say, 300 to 400 ft some speakers will sound clearer and more "in your face" than others. </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="color: #000000">I attended a shoot out the other day – 8 boxes of db Technologies DVA T12, Nexo Geo 12s and EAW KF730. The T12’s were clear and articulate to about 300ft. The Nexo and EAW had similar clarity but only to about 200ft. The boxes were all at the same SPL level measured at 100ft i.e. the T12s threw 50% further than the Nexo or EAW.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="color: #000000">Gunness Focuing (GF) improves clarity: - the frequency, phase and impulse responses are all improved, so it also improves the throw of a speaker, but there is a small price, GF seems costs a small amount of output capacity. It can use quite a bit of energy correcting stuff especially in the VHF area. In some cases (e.g. EAW KF730) there is something like 24dB of boost and cut in the HF driver. That uses amplifier power and adds a little more stress to the mechanical components…. but the sound quality is excellent!</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="color: #000000">Inside a venue, if you can keep the sound away from the walls and ceiling you will reduce the amount of reverberant energy at the back of the room and the system will be clearer and more "in your face" - the system will be perceived to have better throw.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'arial'"></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Peter Morris, post: 57096, member: 652"] Re: Shootout: KF650e vs DX1565 [FONT=arial][SIZE=3]Hi Silas,[/SIZE] [SIZE=3][COLOR=#000000]I usually ran both my 650e’s and 650z’s 3-way active. In 2-way mode, they generally did not have the output I needed. As a guess, I got about 6dB more in 3-way mode.[/COLOR][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][COLOR=#000000]In 3-way mode with one or two boxes, the lows always ran out first. With six boxes a side the HF was the first to run out. I was using a QSC - PL1.8 on the HF and occasionally it would clip (450W into 8 ohms)[/COLOR][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][COLOR=#000000]The “Z” versions goes noticeably louder, not far behind an 850. The mids are 109 dB/w/m for the 650z compared to 107 dB/w/m for the 650e and the Z takes a bit more power. The HF diver also does a bit better 110 dB/w/m compared to 107 dB/w/m. The trick to get maximum SPL out of the Z’s was to take the load off the 15 by crossing over to the sub a bit higher – 110 Hz – 120Hz.[/COLOR][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][COLOR=#000000]Throw --- I will argue that throw does exist but its not related to the inverse square law that everyone seems to take about on this board. People talk about throw because for some reason they perceive some speakers throw more than others do. The question is - what are they talking about? What is it they perceive? I think throw is more about about articulation and clarity at distance than SPL. At say, 300 to 400 ft some speakers will sound clearer and more "in your face" than others. [/COLOR][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][COLOR=#000000]I attended a shoot out the other day – 8 boxes of db Technologies DVA T12, Nexo Geo 12s and EAW KF730. The T12’s were clear and articulate to about 300ft. The Nexo and EAW had similar clarity but only to about 200ft. The boxes were all at the same SPL level measured at 100ft i.e. the T12s threw 50% further than the Nexo or EAW.[/COLOR][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][COLOR=#000000]Gunness Focuing (GF) improves clarity: - the frequency, phase and impulse responses are all improved, so it also improves the throw of a speaker, but there is a small price, GF seems costs a small amount of output capacity. It can use quite a bit of energy correcting stuff especially in the VHF area. In some cases (e.g. EAW KF730) there is something like 24dB of boost and cut in the HF driver. That uses amplifier power and adds a little more stress to the mechanical components…. but the sound quality is excellent![/COLOR][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][COLOR=#000000]Inside a venue, if you can keep the sound away from the walls and ceiling you will reduce the amount of reverberant energy at the back of the room and the system will be clearer and more "in your face" - the system will be perceived to have better throw.[/COLOR][/SIZE] [/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Pro Audio
Varsity
Shootout: KF650e vs DX1565
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!