<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: d&amp;b subwoofer placement</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cordernotes.com/blog/system-configuration/db-subwoofer-placement/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cordernotes.com/blog/blog/db-subwoofer-placement</link>
	<description>thoughts regarding art, music, and technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:54:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Wilshaw</title>
		<link>http://www.cordernotes.com/blog/blog/db-subwoofer-placement/comment-page-1#comment-5904</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Wilshaw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:32:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cordernotes.com/blog/?p=1168#comment-5904</guid>
		<description>I was not aware of the fly options on the B2.  It seems obvious in the software, but I would love to hear the ground stack cardiod scenario.  Please let me know about the bang vs the buck.  See you soon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was not aware of the fly options on the B2.  It seems obvious in the software, but I would love to hear the ground stack cardiod scenario.  Please let me know about the bang vs the buck.  See you soon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: timcorder</title>
		<link>http://www.cordernotes.com/blog/blog/db-subwoofer-placement/comment-page-1#comment-5750</link>
		<dc:creator>timcorder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 19:11:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cordernotes.com/blog/?p=1168#comment-5750</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re right that in the ArrayCalc software, it would seem there should be no contest in the decision.  The hangups are a couple of things:

#1) The spaced configuration we&#039;re in now sounds really good in the room.  Especially when it comes to low end, I learned from our process with Acoustic Dimensions that if prediction/configuration software has a weakness with accuracy, its with subwoofers.  Ultimately it doesn&#039;t matter what a picture looks like if it sounds good in the room.  The spaced set sounds good as you walk the space.  I&#039;ve always preferred to have ground stacked subs for the extra chest energy over flown subs.

#2) We&#039;ll lose a significant lighting position if we fly the cardioid array due to the size of the array.  Also, the B2&#039;s are not designed from the manufacturer to fly so our integrator will have to create a custom fly rig for the array.  The primary reason I think we&#039;d ever fly them is to get them off the stage deck for artistic and aesthetic reasons.

#3) Since we are almost an entirely in-ears stage, the bands are loving the feel of extra low energy on stage with the subs on the deck, especially compared to what we&#039;re coming from with our old rig.  Out front, I feel like there&#039;s plenty of low end in the PA and the band gets solid energy on stage without it becoming a bleed problem in mics.  Seems like a win/win for both parties.

We are going to experiment with a cardioid cluster on the stage deck in a few weeks to see what the difference actually is in the space and I&#039;ll report back once that test is concluded.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re right that in the ArrayCalc software, it would seem there should be no contest in the decision.  The hangups are a couple of things:</p>
<p>#1) The spaced configuration we&#8217;re in now sounds really good in the room.  Especially when it comes to low end, I learned from our process with Acoustic Dimensions that if prediction/configuration software has a weakness with accuracy, its with subwoofers.  Ultimately it doesn&#8217;t matter what a picture looks like if it sounds good in the room.  The spaced set sounds good as you walk the space.  I&#8217;ve always preferred to have ground stacked subs for the extra chest energy over flown subs.</p>
<p>#2) We&#8217;ll lose a significant lighting position if we fly the cardioid array due to the size of the array.  Also, the B2&#8242;s are not designed from the manufacturer to fly so our integrator will have to create a custom fly rig for the array.  The primary reason I think we&#8217;d ever fly them is to get them off the stage deck for artistic and aesthetic reasons.</p>
<p>#3) Since we are almost an entirely in-ears stage, the bands are loving the feel of extra low energy on stage with the subs on the deck, especially compared to what we&#8217;re coming from with our old rig.  Out front, I feel like there&#8217;s plenty of low end in the PA and the band gets solid energy on stage without it becoming a bleed problem in mics.  Seems like a win/win for both parties.</p>
<p>We are going to experiment with a cardioid cluster on the stage deck in a few weeks to see what the difference actually is in the space and I&#8217;ll report back once that test is concluded.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel</title>
		<link>http://www.cordernotes.com/blog/blog/db-subwoofer-placement/comment-page-1#comment-5717</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:28:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cordernotes.com/blog/?p=1168#comment-5717</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s a huge difference. Could you explain to an amateur like myself why the first configuration is even an option? What is good there? To me it looks like a no brainer easy decision to go with option 2.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s a huge difference. Could you explain to an amateur like myself why the first configuration is even an option? What is good there? To me it looks like a no brainer easy decision to go with option 2.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

