Array's Vs Cluster's

[tom1987]

I am current undertaking a project which I have titled Array's Vs Cluster's!

 

I would like to hear from anyone and everyone on what side they stand and why. This is so I can get a feel for what people think as well as all the tech stuff im doing.

 

Many Thanks

 

Tom

[J Pearce]

They are different tools for different jobs.

[mac.calder]

Both have different strengths and weaknesses, which make them more suited for different situations. A well designed system of either type, which has been thought out and installed correctly will give you good results.

 

That said, I am not 'big' on the noise boy front.

[Simon Lewis]

...I would like to hear from anyone and everyone on what side they stand and why.

 

OK.... so there are people who are passionate about point source systems, and those who won't use anything other than line arrays. Both systems have benefits and detractions, and both are simply tools in the sound system designer's resources.

 

Firstly, it is quite hard to achieve either a true acoustic point source or a true line array (well - using loudspeakers anyway!). Certainly, most devices that claim these names have some degree of compromise, and some will never achieve anything near ideal behaviour, because they are just made to look the part.

 

Secondly, falling prey to marketing hype or sound system design myths doesn't help. I'd hope that anyone looking at such a subject can be dispassioante and consider the subject objectively?

 

So, I don't stand on either "side" .... I want a box that meets the phase, frequency, sound pressure, weight, flying, connectivity and coverage requirements for the job.

 

Simon

[Rob_Beech]

Whilst I think Simon has just about said all that needs to be said on the matter, can I ask why you've used the term cluster? Surely if we are talking about a line source such as J series to name a random example and a point source such as Flashlight to name one that isn't the first in peoples heads then they are both types of array. One being line array and the other point source array. Just be careful how you word it, would using the full terms such as line array etc not be a little clearer, it's just a thought, feel free to ignore it.

 

I'll agree with what has been said, they each have their place, and often the other is far from ideal in a given situation. Take a Merc Sprinter, and a Merc C280. they'll both do 30mpg, they'll both do over 100mph, but only one will carry 5 people and park in a normal space, and only one will carry 30kw of PA.

 

So, onto a personal opinion now, I'm not a big line array fan, and the reason for that is because they are over used, they are used by some as a get out of jail free card, in some venues or open spaces they are ideal and for that, USE THEM, but all too often nowadays people use them in completely unsuitable environments and they sound poor in comparison to a properly setup point source system. the "ooooo line array" response to everything REALLY annoys me.

 

 

Rob (who does his weekly shop in a sprinter....but only because the C280 is "headless")

[mackerr]

I am current undertaking a project which I have titled Array's Vs Cluster's!

 

I would like to hear from anyone and everyone on what side they stand and why. This is so I can get a feel for what people think as well as all the tech stuff im doing.

 

Many Thanks

 

Tom

AFAIK arrays and clusters are different words for the same thing. If you mean Line array vs. Point Source array, they are different ways of accomplishing the same thing, providing a defined coverage pattern. Line arrays have a predetermined horizontal coverage and change the vertical coverage angle via array length and interbox angles. Point source arrays can be built to variable vertical and horizontal coverage, but usually have less low frequency control in the vertical dimension. Either one can be well designed and implemented, or poorly designed and implemented.

 

Mac

[swampman]

Another thread (lghting) was started today on how developing technology has changed the technical side of events...

 

When distributing sound adequately to a venue: we have moved on from basically a correct physical placement and skill/design on location (setting up PAs made from individual units of tweeter arrays/horns/directs/horns/Wbins... - usually detailed on a chocolate wrapper!

Nowadays we use the "scientific" portable PC analyses; and a two type of unit (lowmid+mid+hi and sub-bass unit on ground) programming parameter and measurements into the software and it decidiing the layout, delays, etc...

 

Results: Brilliant to TERRIBLE... wrong settings on the best of brands (line arrays especialy because of their simple "physical" appearance - clusters usually require various models and thought) can cause hollows/peaks in frequency response and distribution that result in very poor if not irritating sound for the public, the question is do the "tecnicos" in charge realize it and can they correct it?

[Rob_Beech]

OT : I loved being called tecnico for a few days some years back whilst I was working out there.

 

sorry, told you it was OT.

[Shez]

Have a read of "Sound systems: design & optimisation" by Bob McCarthy - it'll tell you more than you could ever want to know about arraying speakers.

[bruce]

I am current undertaking a project which I have titled Array's Vs Cluster's!

 

I suspect you mean "Arrays Vs Clusters". A trivial point, of course, but a grammar error on the title page of an assessed project is never a good start.

 

(unless, of course, these are "Greengrocer's Array's")

[Bobbsy]

No Bruce. It was "Cluster's last Stand", an open air event where the sound was massacred by a patchy coverage.

 

Okay. I promise to shut up now and stop setting a bad example with OT, one line, quasi-joke posts.

 

Seriously, I think Simon basically said it all. Either system is a compromise trying to achieve the holy grail of even coverage and a lack of phase cancellations but neither is going to be totally successful...ever. I've heard good resorts from both...and abysmal results for both as well. For that reason I'm pretty agnostic on the whole issue.

 

Bob

[ceecrb1]

Slightly OT but I find more interesting, the subject of people insisting on using line arrays or clusters for the "oooo factor" when basic speakers on tripods are needed spread across the area.

(I've a feeling this is more suitable to the corporate/conference events that I work on)

 

Just as others have said. I've seen amazing events with line arrays in conferences.

I've also seen shocking events with line arrays... (I was the tech manager of one, and in a situation where I was unable to change the gear available to what was really needed.... ie.. many small sources.)

 

on the other hand just like with the earlier subjuct, all situations can be done badly... So small sources, I have also seen done very well and very badly.

(however in the corporate side, I have to admit that many of the "badly" done ones are down to client not willing to, or not understand why paying to fly gear etc is worth it)

[6th Order]

Then there's the issue of putting a curve on a line array, causing it to no longer be one! leaving a hybrid of line and curvilinear array. Nice.

[Rob_Beech]

Then there's the issue of putting a curve on a line array, causing it to no longer be one! leaving a hybrid of line and curvilinear array. Nice.

 

Very true, a point so many people very often forget. Most of the "line arrays" you see aren't true line arrays apart from maybe the top few boxes. But as they are they still serve a purpose and are suited to certain applications.

[Chris Hinds]

Have a read of "Sound systems: design & optimisation" by Bob McCarthy - it'll tell you more than you could ever want to know about arraying speakers.

 

Another vote for this textbook - it's perhaps the best example I've come across of the discussion of array design whether point source or line source and will likely as not provide a substantial backing to your efforts. You might also like to look at the L'Acoustics and JBL white papers on the subject while EAW have some good stuff on the KF9xx array which are a different type of thinking again.

 

Regards

 

Chris