I am a small PA hire company and am looking at getting a mid sized rig and wanted some advice on Speakers.

I am doing various stuff ranging from churches, gigs, conferences and also other outdoor event.

I need something that can be set up with one person so weight and size is a main issue, also As I am doing churches and conferences looks are very important I know the TXP isn't the best looking stuff in the world but I wouldn't be able to have plastic molded stuff.

The largest stuff I would need 2 tops and 2 subs for would be a 500 seat marquee with a band at gig level but not stupid level so around 95-100 at desk.

I am looking the the Turbosound TXP series 2 12" tops and 2 18" subs to start me of then I may double up for larger stuff.

Dose anyone have any alternatives they can suggest.

Any help on this would be much appreciated.

I know the RCF TT+ has been recommended a lot lately but you could consider it.

It's a nice looking cab too.
Also the dB tech 50 line could be an option for the budget conscious.

John Denim.

Given some of the quoted prices on KV2 recently I'd have a look at their stuff. Its incredibly powerful and definitely imho in the same league as nexo, d&b, martin audio etc. It's also not bad looking.

M

I have heard and used a few different systems from KV2 and they have all sounded loud but harsh to me, don't know what anyone else thinks.

Not heard the kv2's and although I may get a few jaunts I personally think the Mackie range of speakers is also very harsh, just not with the loudness.

John Denim.

The TXP is good stuff, is powered your primary option? It depends on your budget. If you can afford it, then look at the TQ310DP's with TQ115DP's Smaller but significantly louder than the TXP. More money of course.

Rob

I thought you might mention the comment on kv2 being in the same league as Martin audio Rob?

John Denim.

No, I thought I wouldn't bother.

To be fair, I've never heard a good KV2 system yet, I've only had the pleasure of mixing on one and it was incredibly difficult to work with, eq curves like a rollercoaster just to get a sound that meant you could hear a few things on the stage. It wasn't a bad room either. can't remember what boxes.

However, I can't really slate the systems because I've heard so many good things about them aswell, from trusted sources.

As with all systems its very subjective. Each system has its own sound. I am not a fan of the American sound which means I can often struggle to get on with things like JBL and EV, it certainly doesn't mean they're not good, far from it in alot of cases, it's just not a sound I like. The British sound you get from the likes of Martin, Turbo, F1, Thunder Ridge, etc are more my sort of thing. Neither is right or wrong.


Rob

Yes, it's all very subjective.

I also think it depends on the app, and what you are used to working with, and where.
I know you work large venues and festivals, (Rob Beech) where I work small clubs and halls.
What does the punter or gig goer want to hear?
In general the act they have payed to see, but an overall quality of sound they are used to.
We can't cater for everyone, some like it loud, some like to hear the drummer, some like guitar solo's etc.
All we do basically is provide a sound regulated by our own opinions, which can differ from one engineer to the next.
That is why I love sound engineering, if everyone has a good time we have done our job and should be proud of that.

John Denim.

I would agree that I've never heard a good KV2 system. And that there is not a chance they are in the same league as D&B. But anyway



I was just going to say that if weight is an issue, then it may be more useful to get a pair of the TXD's instead. They are passive, so will require a seperate amp, which may take an extra 2 minute to plumb in, but this will reduce the weight of both the tops and the subs, and getting a pair of subs into a van on your own isn't always the easiest anyway.
Just a thought as you said yourself that size and weight being the main issue.

Dave

Whilst I can see where Dave is trying to come from....

The TXD 121 is 20kg where as the powered version is 22. The single 18 sub in the TXD Range is 28 kg, the Powered is 32.

2 Amps and a Crossover, in a rack, probably on wheels, and big heavy speaker cables for 12kg? I'm not a massive powered box fan, but if you're wanting to save weight then surely the powered option is better here.

OK, forget powered stuff and go British. I would recommend nothing less than the Shermann
MRL401 with the Shermann R118B. Add a pole mount, two amps and a decent crossover and you can forget about your second set of gear. I have some and now wouldn't use anything else - bought mine direct from the factory.
Bob

They are British, and the TQ's are built here aswell.

As good as it might be, is it easy to add to when you need more? There's about 4 people in the UK using it where as I can reel you a list of hire companies with TXD or TQ in stock.

If you want british how about Carlsbro?



Speaker design is one thing we can't beat the germans at.
John Denim.

Since when?

Give me longbow over J series any day. Setup properly of course.

Ken proudly promotes British built loudspeakers, and they are impressive. But, so are the British made (if not always British owned!) Martin, Logic, Turbosound and Function 1. Perhaps some of things which start to differentiate the very best loudspeakers from the rest is their ability to maintain a given audio "identity" across a certain product range (to allow a degree of mix and matching), and the ability to array. The latter aspect is perhaps one of the harder things to get right - it's relatively easy to make a loudspeaker sound good on axis, but maintaining a coherent frequency response off axis is harder. I haven't heard Shermann boxes for a little while, but the only negative comments from the owner and user I spoke to at the time were the issues of arrayability and rider acceptance.

Consider the R&D effort put in by the larger loudspeaker manufacturers as they developed crossovers / DSP routines, horns and waveguides to minimise lobing and unwanted off axis behaviour. It's not easy or cheap to do. Whether you are a point source or line array adherent, it is this area which (together with esoteric magnets and high temperature coil assemblies) which has transformed loudspeaker design in the past few years. These costs are ultimately borne out in their products.

I would not knock Shermann, but would suggest that for any given application they may not be right tool for the job. Furthermore, although "powered stuff" might not always be the most appropriate approach, it does make very good financial, technical and logistical sense for many rental companies.


Simon

Totally agree, played in two clubs last week which had just had new KV2 systems installed. Harsh pretty much sums it up for me! I don't know wether it was just cos the systems were set up badly, but at higher volumes I was getting complaints about the treble coming through way too much compared to the rest of it!

Sounds interesting like the larger TQ stuff and have used it alot, has anyone got any idea of pricing?

Don't have the price list on me, But you can expect to pay £1000 per box or there abouts IIRC. I'll check the list and be in touch.

How about the Turbo NuQ 15s?

Looking at their website, the only TQ box made now is the 445 since the NuQ range replaced it?

And the 425 double 15 sub.

You are right, there were some tq's still knocking around so a bargain may be possible. the NuQ are also very very good. with powered and non powered versions. Similar sort of price.

The 445 is still an option, but they'd a bit heavy and expensive retailing at over £2.5k per box for the powered ones. Damn good box though, I have some (non powered) ones, can't beat em.

I see the knowledgeable been having their say in these hallowed halls.

I read it that an enthusiastic Shermann user made his own comment as an assistance to a question about suitable equipment.
He gave a sensible comment about equipment he successfully uses in the course of his business.

Two responders who I doubt have any idea what Bob's Shermann gear even looks like have thrown out the idea of it's use with
little or no logical reasoning.
One of those responders readily admitted he'd not heard Shermann boxes for a little while - how long in fact?

Simon Lewis - you are quite wrong in your misplaced assumptions about Shermann gear (but thanks for saying they're impressive).

In terms of rider acceptance where is this gonna be important when a guy is out to buy a pair of tops and a pair of subs?
Also, in this instance why is arrayability a factor?
You state you do not want to knock Shermann yet you state that for any given application it may not be the right application for the job.
Would you like to be more specific - perhaps suggest that the many hundreds of very satisfied Shermann users aren't using the right gear?
You mention an audio identity.
I assume your thinking in terms of all cabs looking and sounding similar in a complimentary manner such as the recent Barbara Dickson tour
where Shermann RS5 boxes were used FOH along with Shermann R2M as front fills and Shermann MRL3 as wedges - is that what you mean?

In terms of R&D much time and money is allocated to our product and component development; probably an equal percentage
to that of any of the other builders you mentioned.
You also mention drive units and here I admit to selecting the appropriate ready-made items for our use from a number of the
best European suppliers.
Apart from a strict selection policy we do not get in to the design area especialy as the European drive unit manufacturers have the
technology and tooling to deliver the best of these components to our factory door.

In terms of passive crossovers I know of no other company that, as an example, winds it's own inductors to an almost 0% tolerance
and selects its high power capacitors to within 0.5 % of desired value.

Rob Beech - you write without authority on the matter of the cabs mentioned by Bob.

Bob (along with 60 - 70 other firms) is a Shermann RS5/R118B user and this growing network stretches from the Channel Islands to Aberdeen.
He, as do others, has a number of different Shermann boxes in his inventory.
He uses this gear for his own gigs and also cross-hires to other companies.

Finally, I'm not knocking the fact that folk can "have their say" but .... comments should be given from experience and not supposition.
If it doesn't suit you to have a certain item of equipment hailed or slated then come up with some grown-up reason why another item is
more suitable but don't knock gear without a rounded knowledge - and don't assume!

If you don't encounter Shermann in your own small area of working don't incorrectly believe it doesn't exist.

But..........as good as it is...........is it easy to add to........when Jake wants more.... for larger shows.


I know what the 401's sound like. I nearly bought some, but as IIRC only 8 were on offer, I thought, what do I do for the shows I need more than 8. At the time I checked and it was not easy to get hold of more for say 2 days. The martin boxes I went for are available in their hundreds. I cannot and will not knock the sound of the 401 as it is not possible to.

As a small company, I don't have the money to buy as many of a particular box as I need for the largest shows I do. The majority of shows travel with 4 to 8 wedges and a drum fill, but there are shows I do which may require 16 -20 wedges. Another show on the same day might need 8 but this is rare to happen at once. I can't afford 28 to sit on the shelf in the unit where most weeks 20 or more would still be there. Especially when you're looking £1000 per box material. Jake as it appears is a small company in the very early stages. It's unlikely he'll have the funds to buy as many boxes as he's ever going to need. Therefore as with all small companies, the ability to sub hire in more of the kit that you have is crucial. The ability to do this at a useable price to allow them to actually make money is also a bonus. What wedge is worth £30 per day? I don't charge that for TA500 or TA890H/L. Imagine if you need to hire 12 of these, you might aswell not bother doing the show.

I've used the RS5 and RS118B combinations, incidentally from the same hire stock as the Barbara Dickson show's kit comes from and have mixed views on them.

If the OP has a hire company with 401's etc etc in stock nearby and doesn't want both arms and at least the bottom of your left leg for them per day then I'd happily recommend them. If not, then sadly unless he can guarantee never needing any more, (which he says he wants to double up for larger things) I wouldn't recommend them.

Finally, how well do they work with other boxes, Alot of my stuff I'll use my TQ445 up top as, being a 137dB box they are very loud and cope with lots of things without too much hassle. For larger systems I can use these as infills with Aspect or Aspect wide, several companies around here do the same.
These I'm sure would work well with the RS5 as the main system but again, does this have to be bought, or is there a company local to Jake that he can hire for less than the price of a new family car per day?


Rob

Thanks for the reply Rob.

I know where you're coming from with regards to your position in the industry - and that of many others.
Dry hire is or may even be the essential aspect of many hire companies.

What may surprise you (if anything does) is that a significant number of Shermann customers do not dry hire - ever.
We sell them gear, they do their gigs and the only time we hear from them again is if they need additional gear - they
very much do their own thing.
Now some of these guys may have 4 boxes others may have 24.

Getting back to the opening post on this topic Jake made this suggestion; "The largest stuff I would need 2 tops and 2 subs".
Bingo!
In this instance no mention of arrayability or dry hire however, Simon went off-topic on some personal quest that appeared to
be very much directed against Shermann even though it was an age since he'd heard any of our gear.

I fully understand what you say about your own situation heck, I've been in this business long enough to realise what's done and who does it.
Finally, whilst I also accept your comment on the RS5 rig it should be known that it's become a well accepted and widely used system.

Hi, I read it slightly differently.



I took that to mean (perhaps wrongly) that the largest THIS SYSTEM would have to cope with is the above 500 people, the systems in question including the 401's the TQ NuQ and TXP's at a push would do this.

Jake then goes on to say



Which I read as maybe getting more boxes for the stuff larger than the 500 people etc. Perhaps he means buy more, in which case there are endless options, the 401's certainly being one of them.


Rob

Agreed Rob.

Now that we've probably confused the crap out of the poor guy it's up to him to decide what he wants to do.

Ken

Ahh yes, the TXP stuff.

I do sound for small to medium sized gigs (metal and rock and LOUD). I have 2 TXP151s and 2 118s and have used the 121s. If you get yourself the 121s and the 118s then I'd expect you'd be good with the 121s for a 500 person marquee gig, but only 2 118s would struggle. The 121s and the 151s are, IMHO, probably the best active boxes for live music on the market for that price. They have similar throw characteristics as the Aspects (not quite as good, but not much is).
I wouldn't say the same about the 118s, they sound nice but aren't quite loud enough. You'd probably want 4 to get enough thump. I've never heard them, but it might be worth looking at getting a pair of TXD218 subs (2x 18") to go with the TXP121s.

HTH
Chris

A more expensive alternative but more managable and flexible would be 4 single 18's you then have the option of taking 2 or 4, and easier to manage, especially on your own.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "throw characteristics" and how they compare to aspect. Could you expand further on that.

I'm a little confused by that one too.

'Throw' is a term banded around a lot and I often find it hard to pin down exactly what people are actually referring to. I always take it as a reference to a given box's FAR. Is that what you mean? If so how do you make the link between TXP and TA?

I have to confess I haven't used any TXP personally, but I've worked with TXD systems in various formats pretty extensively and had always assumed (and please correct me if I'm wrong!) that TXP was simply a powered version of the same box? They're excellent value for money I agree, probably my favourite boxes in that price bracket, but I wouldn't have thought that there's an easy comparison to Aspect in anything other than the general overall voicing of the box.

The component map for turbo speakers is available here: http://www.turbosound.com/lab/index.html
It suggests that the TXP121s and 151s have different compression drivers to the TXDs and very similar woofers. The TXD and TXP subs have the same drivers. I've never heard TXD, so I can't comment about sound difference, but my assumption is that they'd be fairly similar.
I have no idea what FAR stands for, would anyone be able to enlighten me?
Right, what I mean by throw is how well they seem to project the sound, no idea if there's a proper technical term for it. It's that thing that I find with the Aspects (not heard many other concert-size PA systems) where if I stand 5m away and listen, then stand 40m away, they sound just as clear. Whereas with other boxes I've used (most of them say Peavey or Ma**ie on them), the high frequencies are nowhere near as clear 10m away as they are standing next to the cab.
I reckon the TXPs can "throw" this clear sound in a similar way to the aspects up to about 25-30m, just they're not as loud.
I haven't used all that many PA systems yet, but this is just my 2p.

Hopefully that's unconfused people, but who knows.

Chris

Yes I am following what you guys are saying.

But one of my min points was what else is there like the TXP something that could do a 500 seat marquee with band but with only 1 sub and top per side and also something that is well recognized in the industry and also something that can be set up but one person ( The TQ 445's are a little to heavy to get on a stand with one person.)

Any advice on other makes and models would be much appreciated.

Aside from the suggestions of TQ / NuQ and the Shermann. And the RCF TT, and the KV2. Blackline F12 and S18 combinations if you don't have to have powered. Though they're more expensive than the turbo's. TXD and TXP are a budget range where as Blackline isn't.

Have you got any idea of budget for the entire system?

Rob

My post was more in response to the second post in a couple of days from Bob, saying we should buy British and Shermann;-)

Although straying from the specific needs of the OP, I was raising the point that they are perhaps not the answer to every situation.

Rob Beech has commented more comprehensively in the mean time...

That Turbosound sheet makes for an interesting read (as far as these things go!). As I understand it, the TS part numbers on the TXD range refer to OEM drivers/cones, so I'd be intrigued to know what, if any, difference there is between the two CDs listed for TXD/TXP.

FAR is Front Aspect Ratio and is essentially how the power from a box is focused at any given frequency or range thereof.

I have used Malcolm Hill power cube rigs for this kind of application before with pleasing results. Don't see too many of them around these days. One top and one sub a side might struggle a little to get up to the higher SPL if that's what you're after, but it is an option that no-one else had suggested, thus I thought I should put it out there.

We had some of the powered TXP 118 and 151's on demo a while back.
Really not impressed at all. They sounded very scratchy at decent volumes and far from the 130db sound pressure advertised, I found the tweeters were cutting out and just over 100.

If you've got the budget for a full turbo rig like that, I'd save up a bit longer and get a pair of d&b e8's and a pair of e15. They're small, loud and sound fantastic!

Without wanting to broach any guidelines on the Blueroom but if you are interested in either TXP or NuQ or even TQ self-powered products why not give us or one of our dealers a call. There is demo gear available that could be tried out for both logistical (can I lift it, does it fit in the car/van) and performance (does it fill a 500 seat marquee etc) reasons. And, as a fair kind of bloke, the same would be true of my mates up at KV2 (hello Andy, Andy, Mick etc) etc only too happy for people to try the gear out.

Either PM me or contact the office - details on the website. We won't bite and a "test drive" should help you decide on where to invest your money for best return

Tim McCall
ME & Asia Market Manager
TURBOSOUND Ltd

What a nice man Tim is....I'd be more than happy to sort a demo out for anyone interested, especially those that think all KV2 boxes sound gritty, grainy, dry, distorted or any of those other subjective terms! The best way of doing this is a blindfold test with other boxes that are being considered.....

If the HF drivers are cutting out when producing over 100dB at 1m then there is quite clearly a fault with the box. This is not exactly tricky to work out. For this sort of level the boxes would require only a few hundred milliwatts!!!



Rob

I would agree with you if it wasn't all 4 boxes.

They were pre prod evaluation boxes so perhaps it's been sorted out now?

*edit* this was normally towards the end of the night when they were pretty warm. They were being tested to replace a martin vrs800/bsx rig and just didn't have the power or clarity at high volumes

Where was you measuring 100dB?

I think we can all safely assume that a box for a reputable manufacturer isn't going to do this by default. That's not to say they wont have any issues with boxes, but we can't throw the idea out of the window and class this as their natural behaviour.

we'll assume for the sake of argument that the HF section is 100dB 1w/m over its frequency range determined by the crossover in the box. This is probably a little conservative and may well be 3 or 4 dB out. It matters not. To get 100dB we simple need 1 watt. To get say 110dB which we'll say is the level they cut out, we need 10 watts. They're rated higher than this, as is the amp.

You say you disagree with me that it was a fault as it was with all 4 boxes, I can't quite understand how a box of this type could be like this without it being faulty.


Rob


Edit : 2 completely different styles of system. 1 would have been suitable, the other therefore not. Which way round was it?

Convo with Rob aside...
The martins were suitable for a 500cap venue, the turbo's struggled.
We had 4 subs and 4 tops that sounded nice once you've added some eq to them but they simply run out of steam too early.

If it's essentially speakers on sticks you are looking at, I'd definitely recommend the d&b e series, or if you can afford it Q10's and Qsubs

Just ridiculous what's being said on here. People have to wise up to the capability and more importantly the way to work with KV2. It's technicians, operators, leads, mixers, processors, artists, dj's and managers (who should be the ones learning how's it's used and making sure said former list know what they're working with!) that's under scrutiny when using KV2. Their systems give an optimum performance of all frequencies right across the board. Meaning that if people are drastically EQing things that maybe already sound bad at source, then quite franky, it's going to sound f***ed. You have to go back to basics, gain lighter, turn-up the fader, job done. We've got BSS FCS960 graphics that haven't been touched yet either whilst working with our ES System.

But the comments are coming from everywhere. Can't be everyone that's wrong. I've heard good reports and bad reports, currently more bad reports, and haven't had good experiences my self. It's a shame as I'm sure it's capable of providing SR on par with things in and above its price range.

With the systems I've used I've needed drastic EQ to get a sound that isn't impossible to listen to, and even then it's still tiring. This is with known source material (which is fine). Going back to basics is one thing but I'm sure you can appreciate I am aware of how to mix.


Rob

Lets not go OT though.

I'm afraid that I also have to go with the 'KV2 does not live up to its reputation' crowd.

Initially, when it started to appear on the scene there were a lot of people trying it and saying "Wow! This is great!". I didn't get a chance to hear it for myself until some of the local venues started to have it installed. Initial listenings were good. Stick a CD through it and it sounds quite nice. However, when dealing with live music it behaves a little differently.

There seems to be something missing in the mid-range and you do need to compensate with the EQ relatively strongly. It is almost like the boxes have been voiced with the good 'ol 'smiley face' EQ. Sounds lovely for playback but much more difficult to work with for live music. In club environments it should work well but personally I would stay clear of it for live work.

Steve

Guys, We've been running KV2 systems for around 5 years: from the little 'EX' active system up to the more powerful 'ES' and most recently, the bigger VHD system. We're a small company and we cannot aford costly mistakes; it's without the doubt the best money we've EVER spent; it has, on countless occasions, embarrassed 'name' systems of much bigger size and cost, and I'd reccommend it to anyone. With the greatest of respect, there'd have to be something seriously wrong in the setup for these systems to sound harsh.