8-) Welcome on digitaljockey.it 8-)

Come posizionare casse e monitor (audio)

Discussioni su amplificatori, casse, fly case, cuffie, mic, luci, proiettori e sui metodi di collegamento.
Avatar utente
romo53
Livello: DiJ Newbie
Livello: DiJ Newbie
Messaggi: 182
Iscritto il: 28 ott 2014, 13:01
Contatta:

Re: Come posizionare casse e monitor (audio)

Messaggio da romo53 »

fatto prove.
Ho constatato tutte le vostre affermazioni e sono risultate precise e veritiere (non che non mi fidassi, ma meglio sempre verificare di persona ogni dettaglio per essere preparati e avere un dato di fatto da esporre)
Ovviamente queste prove sono fatte per le volte che fornisco io tutta l'attrezzatura nella serata.
il risultato è che devo prendere un monitor più potente.
Il main, come ribadito da Bazooka (2 casse da 15" 475 watt rms), serve solo per l'eventuale pista (poi da aggiustare come alti, bassi etc in fase di sound check preserata).
Anzi, come già detto da voi e me ne ero accorto in qualche serata, il main può darmi fastidio in fase di dj job, che siano messe in opzione 1 o 2.
I monitor sono troppo poco potenti e vengono coperti dal suono del main.
Opterò per una cassa tipo palco che mi faccia da monitor.....
visto che ho una serata a breve e i soldi non sono molti opterò per
http://www.music-group.com/Categories/B ... 0D/p/P0B1L
a meno che non abbiate delle alternative migliori allo stesso costo
Traktor pro 3.2 & S4 Mk3
Avatar utente
cioce
Livello: DiJ ADMIN
Livello: DiJ ADMIN
Messaggi: 11103
Iscritto il: 23 mar 2009, 12:10
Località: Ferrara
Contatta:

Re: Come posizionare casse e monitor (audio)

Messaggio da cioce »

Per consigli sulle casse attive LEGGI qui viewtopic.php?f=76&t=12934
.: CIOCE DJ :.: DigitalJockey.it & DjForum.it Admin / Official Tester / Handyman :.
Rispondo ai messaggi privati solo in caso di segnalazioni importanti, per domande banali usate il forum.
Il saggio consiglia -> Cioce DJ on YouTube & Recensioni DiJ
Avatar utente
romo53
Livello: DiJ Newbie
Livello: DiJ Newbie
Messaggi: 182
Iscritto il: 28 ott 2014, 13:01
Contatta:

Re: Come posizionare casse e monitor (audio)

Messaggio da romo53 »

in effetti, rileggendo il topic da cui avevo preso spunto in precedenza per prendere le 2 casse attive, sono indeciso se prendere 1 gemini attiva o la behringer F1220D....devo rimanere comunque sotto i 200....visto che mi dite che come monitor me ne basta una.
Traktor pro 3.2 & S4 Mk3
Avatar utente
romo53
Livello: DiJ Newbie
Livello: DiJ Newbie
Messaggi: 182
Iscritto il: 28 ott 2014, 13:01
Contatta:

Re: Come posizionare casse e monitor (audio)

Messaggio da romo53 »

intanto ho scritto alla behringer per avere il dato RMS della F1220D che ha un power di 250 di picco, ma non comunica la RMS (che voi mi avete insegnato come specifica fondamentale da tenere presente).

Risposta:
Thank you for contacting us. We do not always state RMS values for good reason, here is an Answer our CEO posted to another users question a few years ago on the subject it may be of interest to you.

"Your question about power amplifier ratings is an interesting one for several reasons. Although over the years there have been attempts at standardizing the way power amplifiers are measured and rated, it appears to me that even in the face of legislation, there continues to be no consensus in the pro audio industry.
Forgive me for stating what you already know , but for some readers a bit of history may be in order.

There was a time when the accepted method for measuring amplifier power was to inject a sinusoidal signal (usually 1 kHz) and measure the output just as the sine wave began to distort. This type of measurement assumed that the amplifier would be operated in that manner, although we were all aware that actual program material was very different to a sine wave. Regardless, this RMS measurement became a standard.

While there have been several variations on this theme, the net effect of standard practice has always been that power measurements have been based on a continuous sinusoidal signal applied at the input. As imperfect as this system may have been, it did allow consumers to compare one amplifier to another and conclude which one had a higher rated power. Sounds good? Not so fast.

The problem with this method is, as most manufacturers and users discovered over time, that it measures a parameter that may not necessarily be the best predictor of actual amplifier performance. Real program material, whether it be music or speech, is very different from a sine wave and it is a leap of faith to correlate one to the other. Imagine a car that is capable of pulling a heavy load up a mountain compared to one that accelerates aggressively; which one is more powerful? It depends on what your objective is.

I believe that this disparity between what was measured and what was really needed was driven by the measurement technology of the day. In fact, the use of a steady-state sine wave is a throw-back to a time before digital oscilloscopes and programmable signal generators, when pretty much any technician could replicate the measurements on their test bench. Regardless of whether it was the “right” measurement, it was at least a measurement that almost anyone could make.

In the last 10-15 years we have seen the emergence of a whole new breed of amplifiers with power ratings in the thousands of watts, not just hundreds. Respected brands such as Lab Gruppen and Powersoft have led the way into this new realm not by measuring amplifiers the “old” way using a steady-state sine wave but by other means that more closely mimic the dynamics of real program material. The objective is to better quantify the performance of their products in the actual environment where they will be used.

Inherent in this approach is a lack of agreed measurement standards and definitions. I have yet to see published documentation on the precise measurement methods and techniques used by these and other manufacturers claiming specifications based on "maximum output power".

I can only assume that capable engineers are using good judgment in creating test routines that inject impulse signals of sufficient amplitude and duration along with periods of reduced energy to arrive at their power ratings. In any event, most manufacturers must consider this proprietary IP as they are not publishing such data currently.

This brings us to the iNUKE series of power amplifiers that BEHRINGER introduced just over a year ago. iNUKE amplifiers were the culmination of extensive research and development in our engineering team around power efficiency. As I have said in other posts we proudly operate one of the most capable power engineering teams in the industry with extensive experience in both SMPS and Class-D amplification.
Our new patent-pending "Class Zero" technology that combines power supply and amplifier into a single stage was in fact a direct outcome of the research the preceded the iNUKE range. With this new "Class Zero" technology, we have been able to design amplifiers with up to 94% efficiency (AC to AC), which is a remarkable increase of 10-15% compared to the most efficient SMPS and Class-D designs. The final component count and cost will have to be seen until the mature design stage, but energy efficiency in light of carbon footprint reduction and green energy is definitely worth pursuing.

I am proud to say that iNUKE amplifiers have become a tremendous commercial success and are now outselling even our EP4000; one of the most successful power amplifiers of all time. They have also earned the praise of users and the press, who have conducted their own independent testing.

While we always support standards and also ensure that all of our products are UL listed and FCC compliant, even though many of our competitors skirt the law (try searching http://www.fcc.gov to see who has been fined for non-compliance), it appears that power amplifier measurement standards have not kept up with measurement technology.

If such a standard does come to pass, then rest assured that we will follow it right along with venerable competitors such as Lab Gruppen, Powersoft, Crown and QSC among others."
Kind regards,


quindi alla fine il dato RMS non è dato saperlo!!!!
Traktor pro 3.2 & S4 Mk3
Avatar utente
Bazzooka
Livello: DiJ ADMIN
Livello: DiJ ADMIN
Messaggi: 3112
Iscritto il: 23 mar 2009, 12:10
Località: Lago d'Iseo (Bergamo)
Contatta:

Re: Come posizionare casse e monitor (audio)

Messaggio da Bazzooka »

piu' che una risposta tecnica
ti hanno scritto una brochure promozionale
di quelle che si usano per i NON tecnici,
solitamente musicisti solisti e/o cantanti, a cui e' rivolto questo tipo di prodotto
(il filtro feedback di cui si accenna nella presentazione sembra fatto apposta per i microfoni).

Alla fine considera questo diffusore
alla stessa stregua degli altri piu' o meno simili da 250 watt piu' o meno effettivi
e con woofer da 12 pollici, che da soli non son pochi.
Se non hai possibilita' di sentirla e provarla
devi fidarti di quello che promette un prodotto commerciale cosi' com'e'.
Sicuramente e' quanto di meglio puoi pretendere per i tuoi scopi al tuo budget
e ti verra' spesso buona anche quando dovrai far esibire qualcuno oltre il tuo banco.

Augh !
DiJ BAZZOOKA by BAZZOOKA production's S.C.D.Y.e
- VideoDiscoMix -
Amministratore e socio fondatore DigitalJockey.it (segretario)
Beta Tester MixVibes "VFX" - VirtualDJ "VideoMixExpert"
www.Bazzooka.it ......mail to Bazzooka@DigitalJockey.it
Avatar utente
romo53
Livello: DiJ Newbie
Livello: DiJ Newbie
Messaggi: 182
Iscritto il: 28 ott 2014, 13:01
Contatta:

Re: Come posizionare casse e monitor (audio)

Messaggio da romo53 »

per concludere la chiacchierata e grazie a tutti i consigli, ecco la soluzione che ho adottato:
Una Jubi15a PHONIC presa al prezzo di 229 (al prezzo delle 12 perché le 12 erano finite, ho alzato il budget), come spia/monitor.
nel weekend la provo, grazie ancora per l'aiuto
Traktor pro 3.2 & S4 Mk3
Rispondi