15" or 18" sUBS

[addoaddo]

I currently use a pair of Sherman Speakers (2 x 15” plus horn) mainly for disco use but occasionally for use with Bands. To imrove the sound I would like to add a pair of subs to the set up. Initially I thought about adding a pair of 18” bins to match these speakers but I been advised that for recorded music 18” subs can sound muffled due to high compression on modern music.

 

I know the 18” would be better for live use but am worried that they will not be good for the Disco side of the business. Has any had such an experience / view?

[Rob_Beech]

I'd be interested to know who told you that, then I can remember to ignore anything I hear from them in the future. I would suggest you do the same.

 

Every sub is different. There are 15 inch subs that sound lower and louder than 18's and 18's that sound more punchy than 15's. You tend to find that you get what you pay for. If you're thinking about sticking with the same brand then I wouldn't really worry what size of your subs are, they'll perform very well. I'd recommend 18's below your current boxes. When you compare a 15 to an 18 in the same range you'll find the 18 louder and lower generally.

 

The best advice I can give is to listen to some boxes and see what works for you.

 

I have 1x15 1x18 2x15 and 2x18 subs in my stock, they all perform differently but I can generally get them all to do as I wish on their level (eg I wouldn't expect a 1x15 to perform like a 2x18, but I can tailor their sound to suit most aaplications).

 

Additionally the loading of the drivers makes more of a difference than the size. Listen to an EV Xsub vs a Turbo TSW718. Both 2x18 boxes, both very different sounding.

[MrBoomal]

In my opinion it all comes down to money. Inexpensive subs will probably sound slightly muffled whatever you play through them. The Meyer 18in subs I have in my venue will not sound muffled. Then again they are silly money.

 

It is more then likely true that a cheap 15in will sound "cleaner" then a cheap 18in.

 

The best thing for you to do is to hear the subs you want, playing the music you want to play.

 

 

edited because Rob got in first and made me look a bit simple. Can you guess I come from a lighting background?

[johndenim]

Just my 2p.

 

I have had a pair of Peavey 118xt's for a few years now.

No matter what I have tried, I have never have gotten a decent 'sub' from them.

Maybe a bit of extra 150 - 60 hz, but it always sounds muffled and muddy.

 

The best 18" subs I have heard are the rcf tt's.

Please feel free to mock!!

 

I have also heard the 15"

budgets also by rcf which wipe the floor with my peaveys.

Maybe the built in dsp in powered cabs has something to do with it?

I know that someone who can set up a lms may disagree!

 

Other mf's such as turbosound, ev, even thomanns 'the box' are recommended.

But for me 18" everytime.

[subsOn]

I would suggest you look at some direct radiating 18's, rather than horn loaded, as I'm guessing your application tends toward the smaller venue. While they may not "throw" as far, you wll get better results in the nearer field.

 

There are also a number of well priced DSP units on the market (such as the DBX range) which will enable you to add some processing, time alignment and eq on your subs, which will also make a big difference. Start off with the manufacturers recommended settings, and you will more than likely be pleasantly surprised. There are very few pro manufacturers who make subs which don't require processing of some sort. You will also be able to adjust the relative levels of your subs to your top boxes, taking into consideraton the voltage gain of your amps as far as limiters go. If this sounds complicated, it's because live sound is complicated. Sorry.

 

I would also recommend that you buy an amplifier that is at least double the power handling of your subs, i.e. for a 4 ohm sub rated at 500w rms I would use an amp that can deliver at least 1kW rms per channel into 4 ohms. This will allow for peaks and means that your amplifier will not be running at maximum all the time, and more importantly your sub should be getting a relatively distortion-free signal from the amp at all times.

 

I would add, avoid the Thomann subs like the plague. I measured them with Smaart in a small venue I had the misfortune to mix in recently, and while the rest of the PA was adequate for the size of the venue, the Thomann boxes had a huge peak at 80 Hz and virtually nothing else. They are, in my experience, a one note sub.

 

 

best of luck with whatever you decide upon.

 

alan singfield,

 

glasgow uk.

[Rob_Beech]

I would STRONGLY advise you declare WHICH thomann subs you are talking about rather than tie them all in the same bunch. The TP218 (MKII) Are one of the best subs I've ever used, and I've used most. I prefer them to the B2, I prefer them to the TSW 718 and 218, I prefer them to the SB850 and 1000.

I use these for named acts on tours. Not one note at all.

[Ken Hughes]

Hi AA

 

I would recommend 18s as you already have 15" on your existing boxes.

 

I have four s/h 18s coming in early next week in part-ex / right price too.

 

Ken

[Rob_Beech]

I'd probably look no further than this offer.

[subsOn]

I would STRONGLY advise you declare WHICH thomann subs you are talking about rather than tie them all in the same bunch. The TP218 (MKII) Are one of the best subs I've ever used, and I've used most. I prefer them to the B2, I prefer them to the TSW 718 and 218, I prefer them to the SB850 and 1000.

I use these for named acts on tours. Not one note at all.

 

I'm referring to "The Box" TA 18 subs as mentioned by a previous poster. I should have made that more clear.

 

Would you care to specify which name acts on which tours you have used them on? I see most of the world's major PA companies and especially most of the UK ones on a fairly regular basis, yet I can't recall seeing any Thomann subs so far. I have no reason to doubt what you say as I don't believe I have ever heard them, but I can't help thinking that if a £750 sub is as good as you say, everyone would be using them instead of their J subs. However, I am quite prepared to be proved wrong. Perhaps you could post some reference traces or some other measurement data to back this up?

 

cheers,

 

alan.

[Rob_Beech]

I didn't see a mention to the specific sub or I would have assumed you meant those. Anyway, we know now.

 

 

The issue is NOT with the sub itself, but with the badge on it. The reason a £750 sub isn't going to go on a named acts tour who have a specific rider is because it doesn't say D&B, Martin, EAW, Turbosound or the likes on it. Not because of its sound. There is nothing wrong with the subs or other boxes from the list there, or others similar. I own boxes from all 4 of those manufacturers. But they don't match any rider requests and simply never will. So a touring named act that just wants a GOOD sound in medium sized venues and couldn't really care less what it says on the front and/or back is happy to use these because they are interested in the results not the badge. Please don't make the mistake thinking I'm talking about the rolling stones here, but regular old time favourites like Alvin stardust are more than happy with them. James Taylor and Rick Wakeman are also happy. The list goes on, certainly not on arena shows but 1 or 2 per side in theatres up to a couple or 3 thousand seats or so.

 

If you are ever down this way and would like a listen then do let me know.

[subsOn]

....

 

If you are ever down this way and would like a listen then do let me know.

 

 

I'd like to hear them, I'm intrigued. Certainly if they are as good as you say they are, there are plenty of applications where they might be a suitable budget alternative. How about as a drumfill sub, or how about a 15" version?

 

As you correctly state, the badge on the front is the selling point as far as high end touring goes. I have plenty of experience with the smaller scale touring market also. I've seen some weird and wonderful systems at this level, from D+B J series to Martin F2, and a whole load of home made black boxes, some of which work, and some that don't. I came into the industry at a time where there were considerably fewer budget products on the market - the Allen and Heath GL3 was launched about a year after I started doing sound. At that time a budget FOH desk meant a second hand Soundcraft 800B or a 500, rather than a Mackie or a Behringer. It was expensive to get into sound, because there was no demand for cheaper poorer sounding alternatives. I was brought up by my mentors and peers to strive for the highest quality in audio, given the equipment available to you. I fully understand that the high level kit just doesn't make sense financially for a lot of businesses, although they would often like to own the best. That's why I'm interested in your claims about the performance of these Thomann subs, and why in the absense of a listen, I asked if it were possible for you to post some measurement data about them. As I said previously, I'm quite prepared to believe that they are suitable for the applications you describe, although I confess to being a little cynical about their performance compared to the other boxes you named. I'd love to be proved wrong, I'm always keen to hear new things. What kind of amplification do you use with them, and what processing is required to get the performance? You'll know, for example, as an EAW SB owner that a lot of their subs (including SB850 and SB1000) have a 6dB lift at 35Hz in the processor in order to flatten the response of the box.

 

My other concern, which is not something aimed at you Rob, is the idea that good quality audio is easily attained by spending a few quid on some MI brand systems and buying a few cheap mics. These budget systems are much better than they used to be, but so are the expensive ones. There are a lot of small time operators who set up in business as rental companies but attempt to punch well above their weight, or undercut their competitors to gain work. This in particular is one of the reasons why it's still really hard to make a living as a sound engineer, and why the going rate for a gig is still so low compared to other skilled jobs, although it is also true that because we don't have any recognised standards in audio production, anyone can call themselves a sound engineer, and no-one can say they're wrong.

 

No two sound engineers will ever agree that a mix is "correct" or even good. It sounds ok, but I would have done it differently.... I'm not talking about the extremely controversial area of mixing when I talk of standards, but all the other elements that make up the working day, all of which are equally as important to the safe and effective running of a gig. I say to anyone who asks about mixing that the first thing to ask yourself is "can I hear all the instruments and vocals clearly?", which I believe is the basis on which people can build their own skills and style.

 

People will buy equipment that makes sense to them financially. That will always be the case. It makes sense for equipment that is aimed at the budget end of the market to be easier for the less-skilled operator to use, but that doesn't have to mean they should have compromise on the audio.

 

Owning equipment however doesn't make you any more of an expert sound engineer than owning a copy of photoshop makes you a photographer, or owning some overalls and a monkey wrench makes you a plumber. I actively support the training and education of those wishing to gain a foothold or further themselves in the industry, and I try to take advantage of any education I can get, but I strongly object to those who claim that sound is easy and readily accessible to anyone. It's not, it's an extremely complex subject which takes years of experience and practice to learn well, in fact one never stops learning about it.

 

/rant

 

Apologies for going off topic. It's hard not to associate budget equipment with poor quality audio, which only serves to prove my prejudice. If anyone else has any budget gems they would like to share, I'd love to hear about them.

 

alan singfield