Anyone used or heard these in a live setup yet? Heard one at a DJ clinic but that didn't tell me much.
Yorkville PSA1?
- Thread starter John Chiara
- Start date
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
I have used these on two shows both with the same act, a top 40 DJ replacement cover band. In both instances I used one per side with the matching subs an pole mounts set to the greatest height. The larger of the two events was a wedding in an 80'x40' converted church hall, audience size was approximately 300.
I measured the on-axis response of the speakers using Smaart and an Earthworks M30. In the "single speaker" setting, the speakers required a 4dB cut at about 450Hz with a Q of 0.8 and a -3dB cut at 10kHz with a Q of 2.8 to give me a flat amplitude trace. Once this was done, the speakers performed extremely well. Two notes: First, I found the directivity of the HF element to be accurate to the published specifications - it took me some time to position the speakers correctly to cover my audience area, and the results were very good. Second, matching one of the PSA1S per PSA1 did not give me the output I was hoping for, however I was not able to deploy the subs in a cluster.
I noticed the limiter light engaging during the DJ portion of the event, and although it was not audible to me, I did not push the system past that point. With matched input gain settings on the tops and subs, the system has a peak or "haystack" of +14dB at 80Hz relative to the crossover point (100Hz.) I reduced the input gain on the subs substantially because I prefer mixing on a relatively neutral system.
I would like to do a side by side comparison between these, the JBL VRX932LAPs, Mackie HDAs and QSC KLA12s. Unlikely to ever get the chance though.
I have used these on two shows both with the same act, a top 40 DJ replacement cover band. In both instances I used one per side with the matching subs an pole mounts set to the greatest height. The larger of the two events was a wedding in an 80'x40' converted church hall, audience size was approximately 300.
I measured the on-axis response of the speakers using Smaart and an Earthworks M30. In the "single speaker" setting, the speakers required a 4dB cut at about 450Hz with a Q of 0.8 and a -3dB cut at 10kHz with a Q of 2.8 to give me a flat amplitude trace. Once this was done, the speakers performed extremely well. Two notes: First, I found the directivity of the HF element to be accurate to the published specifications - it took me some time to position the speakers correctly to cover my audience area, and the results were very good. Second, matching one of the PSA1S per PSA1 did not give me the output I was hoping for, however I was not able to deploy the subs in a cluster.
I noticed the limiter light engaging during the DJ portion of the event, and although it was not audible to me, I did not push the system past that point. With matched input gain settings on the tops and subs, the system has a peak or "haystack" of +14dB at 80Hz relative to the crossover point (100Hz.) I reduced the input gain on the subs substantially because I prefer mixing on a relatively neutral system.
I would like to do a side by side comparison between these, the JBL VRX932LAPs, Mackie HDAs and QSC KLA12s. Unlikely to ever get the chance though.
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
Hi,
I am a bit late to the party on this, but I did direct comparison and listening tests with the PSA1, the DB Tech DVA T4, and the QSC KLA12. The PSA1 was by far the poorest sounding box of the 3 options. Absolutely mediocre IMHO, which is a real shame - I wanted it to be much better. I also was not a fan of the rigging.
Its best quality was the Danley Paraline gizmo - it has the most consistent coverage/off axis response of the 3 boxes.
To me it sounds like Yorkville skimped on the HF driver choice though in trying to meet a price point. 6 drivers in the PSA vs 2 in the KLA12 likely means QSC could afford to include a superior HF driver. I personally did not like the PSA's voicing, but even after EQ I could never get the PSA to sound "right" to my ears - something in the upper mids just seemed strange, and EQ had no effect on this. The KLA on the other hand appears to be voiced along the lines of the L'Acoustic "reinforced contour" concept, which I quite like.
I also did gigs in the same room comparing these speakers, and the KLA was consistently better sounding and required less EQ.
Having said that, in this case, the KLA12 was the clear winner. YMMV. I have gone on to use the KLA12's in 2 per side and 3 per side configurations for small outdoor festivals, small arenas, HOW's, and various other gigs and have yet to be disappointed.
Hi,
I am a bit late to the party on this, but I did direct comparison and listening tests with the PSA1, the DB Tech DVA T4, and the QSC KLA12. The PSA1 was by far the poorest sounding box of the 3 options. Absolutely mediocre IMHO, which is a real shame - I wanted it to be much better. I also was not a fan of the rigging.
Its best quality was the Danley Paraline gizmo - it has the most consistent coverage/off axis response of the 3 boxes.
To me it sounds like Yorkville skimped on the HF driver choice though in trying to meet a price point. 6 drivers in the PSA vs 2 in the KLA12 likely means QSC could afford to include a superior HF driver. I personally did not like the PSA's voicing, but even after EQ I could never get the PSA to sound "right" to my ears - something in the upper mids just seemed strange, and EQ had no effect on this. The KLA on the other hand appears to be voiced along the lines of the L'Acoustic "reinforced contour" concept, which I quite like.
I also did gigs in the same room comparing these speakers, and the KLA was consistently better sounding and required less EQ.
Having said that, in this case, the KLA12 was the clear winner. YMMV. I have gone on to use the KLA12's in 2 per side and 3 per side configurations for small outdoor festivals, small arenas, HOW's, and various other gigs and have yet to be disappointed.
Last edited:
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
Jeff, are you using the KLA or KW subs with the mentioned rig? If so, how do you feel about them? Thanks.
Jeff, are you using the KLA or KW subs with the mentioned rig? If so, how do you feel about them? Thanks.
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
Hi,
The KLA and KW subs are basically the same sub aside from minor differences (KLA sub flyable etc). They are a decent powered sub. Similar in output and sound quality to JBL PRX618 or Mackie HD1801 if that is any help.
Hi,
The KLA and KW subs are basically the same sub aside from minor differences (KLA sub flyable etc). They are a decent powered sub. Similar in output and sound quality to JBL PRX618 or Mackie HD1801 if that is any help.
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
So you chose the KLA over the T4? Or you own both and simply compared them?
So you chose the KLA over the T4? Or you own both and simply compared them?
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
Purposes of the shootout were for a purchase for the company that I do most of my sound work with. I don't personally own them.
Yes, the KLA was chosen over the T4. The T4 can certainly scale up more, however aside from this, (which was not the primary consideration for purchase), the KLA sounded better to my ears, was easier to deploy (don't require a special pole mount adapter for small setups and has M10 threads for flying without the flybar if desired), and generally felt better built. The T4's build quality didn't really impress me, and the demo cabs ended up having to be sent back due to an amp issue, which didn't inspire confidence.
Purposes of the shootout were for a purchase for the company that I do most of my sound work with. I don't personally own them.
Yes, the KLA was chosen over the T4. The T4 can certainly scale up more, however aside from this, (which was not the primary consideration for purchase), the KLA sounded better to my ears, was easier to deploy (don't require a special pole mount adapter for small setups and has M10 threads for flying without the flybar if desired), and generally felt better built. The T4's build quality didn't really impress me, and the demo cabs ended up having to be sent back due to an amp issue, which didn't inspire confidence.
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
No problem.
For the record, the KLA's are a good sounding midrange box that are excellent IN THEIR INTENDED MARKET. They get very loud for their size too, but fixed angle vertical arrays are not always the most ideal solution for every environment, and don't scale up much - Beyond 3 per side the vertical coverage is impractical in most applications. 2 per side on sticks or 3 per side flown is a pretty impressive little rig though, suitable for lots of applications. They also make a pretty stout front fill on bigger shows.
Sorry for the topic swerve, given that this thread is about the Yorkville PSA. I don't really have much else to say about that particular box. I like Yorkville as a company and try to support fellow Canadians, but IMHO they missed the boat with the PSA1.
The PSA does certainly demonstrate Danley tech well. The danley designed HF waveguide "Paraline" works very well from a coverage and consistency perspective (no surprise there). Too bad that was the extent of their influence in this box.
No problem.
For the record, the KLA's are a good sounding midrange box that are excellent IN THEIR INTENDED MARKET. They get very loud for their size too, but fixed angle vertical arrays are not always the most ideal solution for every environment, and don't scale up much - Beyond 3 per side the vertical coverage is impractical in most applications. 2 per side on sticks or 3 per side flown is a pretty impressive little rig though, suitable for lots of applications. They also make a pretty stout front fill on bigger shows.
Sorry for the topic swerve, given that this thread is about the Yorkville PSA. I don't really have much else to say about that particular box. I like Yorkville as a company and try to support fellow Canadians, but IMHO they missed the boat with the PSA1.
The PSA does certainly demonstrate Danley tech well. The danley designed HF waveguide "Paraline" works very well from a coverage and consistency perspective (no surprise there). Too bad that was the extent of their influence in this box.
Last edited:
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
My fault I was just trying to understand your comparison and choice with the KLA. Back to the PSA1 discussion!
My fault I was just trying to understand your comparison and choice with the KLA. Back to the PSA1 discussion!
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
LOL.....That part I know, I was just wondering if you used either sub with the KLA system you have been using and if you liked them.
Sorry for the hijacking, didnt mean for this to happen.
best regards
LOL.....That part I know, I was just wondering if you used either sub with the KLA system you have been using and if you liked them.
Sorry for the hijacking, didnt mean for this to happen.
best regards
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
As near as I can tell, the PSA1 uses either the venerable BMS 4550 driver which is used in a number of Danley boxes including the "flagship" SH50 or it uses the 4544 which I believe is a somewhat cheaper (and lighter) alternative model. But I wouldn't really call either an "economy" driver. I do wonder about the power amp driving the compression drivers in the PSA1. The spec sheet lists 75 watts with 200 watt peaks for the HF amp. The 4550 is rated for 80W continuous and 450W peak, per driver! [the 4544 is rated 80W cont and 400W peak] The 200w peak amp seems like it could be a little undersized. But that's just armchair reverse engineering speculation based on the service manual and spec sheet. I've never seen or heard this box in person and I don't know the design philosophy and engineering decisions that went into it.
As near as I can tell, the PSA1 uses either the venerable BMS 4550 driver which is used in a number of Danley boxes including the "flagship" SH50 or it uses the 4544 which I believe is a somewhat cheaper (and lighter) alternative model. But I wouldn't really call either an "economy" driver. I do wonder about the power amp driving the compression drivers in the PSA1. The spec sheet lists 75 watts with 200 watt peaks for the HF amp. The 4550 is rated for 80W continuous and 450W peak, per driver! [the 4544 is rated 80W cont and 400W peak] The 200w peak amp seems like it could be a little undersized. But that's just armchair reverse engineering speculation based on the service manual and spec sheet. I've never seen or heard this box in person and I don't know the design philosophy and engineering decisions that went into it.
Last edited:
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
Having used the BMS 4550 and 4552ND in my own DIY projects I have a lot of love for them. I was also under the impression that Yorkville was going to go with that driver in the PSA1, but when I heard it, I thought.... there is NO way. I can't recall who commented on this, maybe it was the Yorkie rep, but eventually I found out that they indeed had NOT used this driver and had gone with a cheaper option. I don't know if it is the 4544 or something else, but at any rate, it didn't leave me impressed, even when I was trying hard to give it the benefit of the doubt.
Having used the BMS 4550 and 4552ND in my own DIY projects I have a lot of love for them. I was also under the impression that Yorkville was going to go with that driver in the PSA1, but when I heard it, I thought.... there is NO way. I can't recall who commented on this, maybe it was the Yorkie rep, but eventually I found out that they indeed had NOT used this driver and had gone with a cheaper option. I don't know if it is the 4544 or something else, but at any rate, it didn't leave me impressed, even when I was trying hard to give it the benefit of the doubt.
Re: Yorkville PSA1?
I have used the 4 tops and 4 subs PSA1 system which are light weight and have simple controls and good coverage but the price range is not good when compared to KLA.
I have used the 4 tops and 4 subs PSA1 system which are light weight and have simple controls and good coverage but the price range is not good when compared to KLA.