DJ Vintage

Hi,

Reading Terry’s 4-part series on PA on the blog, including what to look for when buying, is a must read for you at this point.

I will give you a real quick run down on your questions and the speakers you are looking at.

First and foremost is that in PA: You Get What You Pay For.

There is NO (no exceptions) cheap way to get it loud, great sounding and built for the road.

The QTX look like the run-of-the-mill Chinese OEM speaker. The factory makes a ton of them, several companies buy them, stick their own label on them and sell them. Those manufacturers (usually) don’t spend too much time in designing the technical end of things, nor do they bother getting top quality components. Mostly they will stick in more features than you need, meaning that money is taken away from the main purpose of a PA speaker, making good sound loud music for an extended period of time.

In this case it has a three band EQ and effectively a small mixer (you can hook up a mic I think and a stereo source, like an iPod or MP3 player). As a DJ you don’t need that. Just one input (XLR preferably, but balanced Jack will also do) and a place to stick your power cable and finally a hole that will sit your speaker on a stand. Anything more is really not necessary.

Power. It is 1400W peak, only 350W RMS each (700W total). Not bad, but you are looking at a room with max 140 people for wedding like stuff, 70 if you want it to be headbanging loud. These speakers have only one amp powering both the woofer and the high end. You really want to look at speakers that are bi-amped, i.e. that have two seperate amps built in for the low and the high end. And digital trumps analogue by a long way these days.

Trouble is, can’t get decent bi-amped, digital amp active speakers for the price you mention. So if you want to work something with that budget, there will always be trade-offs, either in power, quality or both.

Sensitivity. With manufacturers like these I have a hard time believing their numbers on sensitivity and max SPL (Sound Pressure Level). Sensitivity means the amount of sound level a speaker produces when it plays 1Watt of power, measured at 1 meter. It is a mark of the efficiency of a speaker. 101dB is a very high value, usually reserved for high end speakers, but I don’t know these, so it might be accurate. Max SPL is the amount of sound level a speaker can bring to the floor when it is running just below distorting.

Quite frankly, if you or your customers can’t afford to buy a decent PA, perhaps you should consider renting til you can buy something that suits your needs. I would not invest a dime in speakers like this, let alone adding a cheap sub. It might be loud in a living room kind of setting with 30-40 people. I am not sure about the quality at high sound levels, although I am afraid that might be something of a letdown.

Good luck with your choices & greetinx,
C.

Daryl Northrop, post: 40139, member: 2350 wrote: You should be able to use audacity. Run your audio out from your mixing board into your microphone in jack. Then, in audacity, set your audio source to microphone (line in) and you should be able to do it.

Not a big fan of offering line level signals on microphone inputs. Usually leads to redlining. The sound circuit in laptops (specially the mic inputs) are usually sub-par in quality and signal handling. So, I’d strongly recommend against that. Also it means running a real time recording application (that needs to talk to the soundcard too) at the same time as you are trying to run a processor and soundcard driver heavy application like dj software. So we have both the extra computer load and the less-than-optimal sound quality of a laptop mic input. Not a good mix in my opinion.

You could go the professional way and get a Zoom (H4N for example) in the 250 euro price range. The Zoom has two microphones so you can record high quality audio anywhere you are too, but of course it has combo XLR/6.3mm Jack inputs too, you can run balanced signal in there if you need it :-).

The Reloop Tape is a nice little gizmo at under a 100 euros, definitely worth it for the price and it does feature a through output, so you can just hook it up between your master out and your PA.

Big difference between the two is that the Reloop only does MP3, the Zoom allows you to record in WAV format. If you don’t want to edit afterwards, MP3 is fine (just stick with 320kbps). If you want to run your mix through some “mastering” before you release it (which I would, since a recording on youtube or something requires a different EQ, compression and such than what comes out of your controller), then a WAV file is much more preferable.

I am no big fan of taking my nice XLR master outputs, converting them to a 3.5mm mini-jack and then take a 3.5mm mini-jack to XLR connector to go to your PA. For one, you have just lossed your balanced signal and you are now trying to get all that high quality sound through a connector made for headphones. Very vulnerable cable too.

Your N4 has booth out though. If you don’t use it for booth (or use the through function of the Reloop, for booth the quality is much less an issue and since you keep your booth speakers close, so is balanced cable), then hooking up your recording device to the booth output is the smartest thing. It gives you the following advantages:

1. You can set your recording level independent of your master level. If you adjust your master level during the night, it doesn’t affect your recording level. Just dial in your booth to give you a 0dB input signal when you are running 0dB on the master output and leave the booth level set for the rest of the night (might be problematic if you use the booth speakers as well though).
2. Booth outputs don’t play microphone signals, so even if you have to use the mic at some point, you just get the music and not the mic on tape.
3. If the Reloop breaks in the middle of your set, at least you don’t lose your master signal, the show goes on.

Hope that helps.

Good luck and greetinx,
C.

Hey Chris,

What is it you intend to do with your PA? Just DJ gigs or are you doing any live sound work too? What role is the mixer playing (for you)?

I have a very strong urge to agree with Terry. I am not, and have never been, a power mixer kinda guy. They are bulky, heavy and the room the amp (controls) take is not going into other things you’d want/like in a PA mixer.

If the only reason you have the power mixer is so you can run your DJ set through it and power your JBL’s, then ditching the mixer and JBL’s and going for some active speakers is the most advisable option.

If you have more/bigger needs, let us know so we can give you some more specific pointers.

Greetinx,
C.

Hi m8,

I personally use only one 18″ (Mackie HD1801 800W RMS) with my two 12″ top ends (Mackie HD1221) and I find it brings me plenty of low frequency power. The thing is that my particular 18″ sub sounded a dry and crisp as a 15″, which is usually not the case. 18″ have a tendency to be … wobbly :). The reason Mackie got this down (together with EAW) is probably excellent components, great design and great build. And, as has been said on this forum and blog time and again: “In PA you get what you pay for”

At these prices you know a few things:

• The cabinet won’t be made out of the best quality materials (wood and such) and probably it is just a square box with two bass ports cut in. Internal bracing is gonna be minimal if any. (This makes manufacturing a cabinet -much- more expensive). Lack of proper bracing means that the cabinet is gonna resonate/rumble because of the high level of energy inside the cabinet it has to deal with. Also roadworthiness would be an issue for me. Don’t want it falling apart after it slid half a meter out of the back of the truck once.
• The speaker driver (the actual moving part) is not gonna be anything special. To give you an idea, a good 15″ sub driver costs more all by itself than this entire 15″ cabinet. 18″ drivers are even more expensive usually.
• The amp will no doubt be analogue. Nothing really wrong with analogue, but it will be a lot heavier than it’s digital counterpart and have less headroom. Meaning when the end is near, the end usually is there too.
• The active ones at least take XLR cabling, the 15″ have these terrible springloaded press lever receptacles (sp?) that you really don’t want to use in a live situation (the slightest pull on the cable and it comes out). Thick cable might not even fit. And they seems to have a pair of mini-jack !? plugs as well, what is that about?
• You will need an active crossover before going into your amp (one for top end, one for the low end amp or active sub). The active one does have some sort of filter (you can set the cutoff frequency between 40Hz and 150Hz) but no high pass output, so if you sit a top end on it, you can’t run a single signal (XLR) cable to the top from the sub, but you have to run two cables from your crossover. For the passive ones you’d want 4-lead SpeakOn connectors (2 of them) on there so you can use one cable to send both the signal from the top end amp and the low end amp to your speakers. You can obviously do stuff like that yourself if you are handy, but just pointing out the drawbacks.

A word on filters. These are, although invisible, one of the most important components. And to make a good one is gonna cost good money, since the components (like coils) can be very expensive in high quality filters. Not in the least because designing a good filter is gonna cost lots of research and test time by some really serious scientists. So at this price offering you know they cannot have put a very good filter in. And filter quality is an absolute factor in sound quality.

I can’t comment on the sound quality of the speakers since I haven’t heard them. But, keeping the “get what you pay for”-adagio in mind and based on a lonnnnnnng experience, I am willing to bet a fair amount that they wouldn’t pass a round of rigourous testing.

And something that is advertised as “Bass DJ Disco PA Sound System Karaoke Party” … well need we really say more :-p!

I try to keep things simple these days. I want true quality gear to own. If I can’t afford it, I’ll rent it til I can. If my customers don’t want to pay for quality gear rental (either mine or stuff I rent in), than I don’t want to do a gig. I don’t have to live off of it and I am not desperate enough to gig to play with inferior material (based on my standards, everyone has his own of course).

As I have said before, I am not into bashing anything or anybody. Just try to look at the offering from a professionals view and point out the issues I see with it, as if I were advising a customer. This is not a speaker I would feel good advising to anyone who wants even a semi-decent solution. The price just belies the possibility of a reasonably good outcome.

Just my two cents (ok, buck and a half lol).

Good luck with whatever you decide.

Greetinx,
.

Thanks.

I understand your point about the 80%. I have to say that with the current quality of PA speakers I find that un-EQ-ed fits my definition of “80%” these days. I’ll admit that I don’t even take any EQ with me to mobile DJ gigs anymore. Either the room is more or less ok and the venue will suit the expectations of the guests or it stinks acoustically and then simple solutions won’t help (enough). I guess I chalk it up to the “venue character” now :-p.

When you soundcheck in a “bald” room when it is empty, I find that usually the influx of the audience dampens that sufficiently. So I tend not to worry if an empty room is a little harsh. Add to that the fact that most people over 30 will have a drop of in high frequency hearing increasing with age … :).

Some rooms can be real bass-traps indeed. I usually end up turning up the bass on my DJ mixer channels and just remember that “zero” that day is +3dB or so.

I received NO complaints all of last year and have played from the medieval cellar to outdoor noisy markets and from a church to a wooden pancake hut :). And I know it has been less than desirable on a few occasions (and also that short of putting an extra hour in and bringing in extra gear I could not have fixed those problems). Point being that most people don’t really care unless it is really really horrible.

That money is an issue I understand too. I

My point is that rather than spend a little money on something that might not be the right tool or do damage in the wrong hands, it is better accept the room as is and just go with what you got :).

As I said on the blog in one of my comments: “If only there were simple answers” !

Greetinx,
C.

Terry_42, post: 40012, member: 1843 wrote: Some comments on part II (especially for Chuck):
I agree that for a guy that already payed some dues a grafic EQ would be more sufficient, especially if your controller can act as a mixer too. However the guide is aimed at total newbies and in my experience a grafic EQ is overwhelming for most people who first encounter them. A 3 Band EQ on a small PA mixer is less intimidating and you can start getting the idea how the whole soundcheck thing works…

Ok, time to put this issue to bed :).

I agree with you on the fact that sounding out (EQ-ing) a room is an art, a skill that requires lots of dedicated training and practice. Even with tools like noise generators and Real Time Analysers it is not a job to be taking on by someone that doesn’t have a clue. I personally don’t even use a graphic EQ anymore (for live sound), but have a Roland true 2x 4-band full parametric EQ. I need the needle point bandwidth (very narrow, narrower than even the 1/3 octave of a graphic EQ) and at the same time the broad bandwidth (wider to do more of a filtering/shelving EQ) to get it right. And sometimes all the problems are close together in frequency and being able to set every EQ band exactly where I need it is very helpful. I figure if there are more than 4 serious problem areas (frequencies), then the place is an acoustic nightmare and I just tackle the 4 worst bits and be done with it.

Where I disagree is that a PA mixer, or more specifically it’s EQ is a good alternative tool. EQ-ing is done for three very specific reasons (and I know you know this already, but I am trying to make the general point for the other readers):
1) As an effect. This is the way us DJ’s use it when we turn down the bass on the incoming song in a mix, or mix out the mids to get rid of some conflicting vocals.
2) As a sound shaping tool. This is the realm of recording/mastering engineers and, to an extend, of live sound engineers. It is a creative/corrective tool to make live performances or recorded material sound as intended.
3) As a means to correct a room’s acoustics.

Now for 1), the EQ on controllers/DJ mixers is just fine. No finesse, just basic fixed bandwith, fixed frequency control.
For 2) at least 3 or 4 band (partially or full) parametric EQ is needed. In DAWs you see even higher band numbers now.
And then for 3), which is the issue at hand. The EQ on a PA mixer is, by definition, meant to shape sound, correct for little flaws in the recorded sound and mostly to provide for space in the mix. Especially on the smaller mixers that have been brought forward as a good solution, the EQ is pretty much the same as on your DJ mixer. But, where on a DJ mixer/controller it is exactly the right tool for the job, it is unsuitable to compensate for room acoustics.

Short example. The mid EQ on a PA mixer is very broad bandwidth, meaning that if the center frequency is say 2 KHz and you turn it up or down, it will affect frequencies from as low as 512Hz or 1 KHz up to as high as 8KHz. So if the room has a nasty bug at 4KHz and you would want to bring that down, You would dial it down til the bug is gone. At that point, a whole lot of frequencies that were just fine have been lowered too, most noticeable 2KHz which has gone down more than the 4KHz. So, using the EQ on a PA (bar some exceptions) to compensate for the room is virtually impossible. I dare state that using it in that way inevitably leads to a total sound that is worse than the original bug you tried to fix with it.

I am not very good at drawing, but since a picture says more than a thousand words, I gave it a shot. This is a highly simplified rendition, but it should serve to show the point I am trying to make.

What you see is a frequency chart. In (non-existing) ideal circumstances, if a room is totally flat, you would measure 0dB in all frequencies if you send pink noise through your speakers.

In the top graph, you see our example room, with a nasty bug @ 4000Hz or 4KHz. At that particular frequency, for whatever reason, this room sounds +6dB louder. The rest is flat (for clarification purposes).

The second graph displays what happens to the frequencies if you turn down the mid EQ with a 2KHz centre frequency to the point where there is a -6dB dip @ 4KHz.

In the third graph I have overlayed the frequency curve from the EQ setting over the room graph. The result is that the 4KHz spike is gone. The very bad news is that you have done significant damage to the sound between 1KHz and 4Khz, with a -12dB dip!!! at 2KHz.

The 4th graph shows you what a graphic 1/3 octave equalizer could do (again, simplified for clarification). It has about the same graph but inverted AND you can turn it down at the 4KHz, leaving all other frequencies untouched. With this kind of EQ it is (theoretically) possible to get a room totally neutral/flat.

If you now compare the first and third graphs, you can clearly see that a relative precise problem, a +6B spike @ 4KHz, by using an unsuited EQ has turned into a broad problem. Ask yourself, would you rather have the spike @ 4KHz and have all other frequencies sound fine? Or do you want no spike and accept that a big part of your sound has suffered for it?

Please don’t attack me about EQ curves being a bit more narrow on fixed EQs and all kinds of technical details. I know! But I wanted to make a visible point so that those not in the know get a basic understanding how fixing one thing can lead to (bigger) trouble elsewhere and why you need the right tools trying to tackle a problem

Which draws me to the following conclusion for DJs that use a PA (rented or their own) in an unknown venue:

• Unless you have the skills, the knowledge, the practice and the tools to do it, stay away from messing with the room acoustics. Assuming you have a decent to good sounding PA (neutral that is), trust me that it will sound best untouched.

An important thing to remember here is the expectation of the crowd. I think I mentioned the medieval cellars in my home town Utrecht before. It is (even with the right gear) not possible to get the sound right there. However, the people that come there expect it to sound like you are playing in a medieval cellar, so they are not disappointed if the sound is not like in a theater or rockpodium.

Same with 19” stuff, now my mobile setup I have a “quarter rack” with amps, EQ and 19” top loaded PA mixer… This stuff is nearly perfect, but would blow any newbie out of their socks budget wise and technically.

Agreement again. 19″ outboard racks can be very impressive and overwhelming in all their glorious buttons and lights extremes. So going for a more “familiar” look of a PA mixer seems a good plan.
As I have explained before, the extra EQ I think should not be used, so can be left out of the equation.
PA mixer are primarily made to handle mono instrument channels and most channels are geared for microphone usage. Microphones need preamps. Sound automatically goes through the preamps when you use the XLR connectors. I have seen DJs with mixers with XLR outputs stick them straight into the mic inputs of a PA mixer and then wonder why the heck they have to keep their master output almost closed and the gain on the PA mixer all the way down to prevent from redlining. And microphone preamps do color the sound (a bit, but still. Some more than others) and can introduce artifacts into your sound, including extra noise. Thus you need to use the 1/4 jack connectors, this is the line in for the channel and passes the mic preamp. On many PA mixer there might be an insert 1/4 jack as well. This does something completely different, but if you stick your jack in it, be sure that you don’t get sound or that it comes into the sound chain in the wrong place. This means a lot of things can go wrong just hooking up your DJ gear to a PA mixer if you don’t know what you are doing!

Finally, to control, for example, 3 stereo source (2 DJ setups, a backup/intermission iPod) and 1 extra microphone (wireless for the MC of the evening for example), you already need a 7 channel mixer which doesn’t exist, so 8-channel bare minimum. And you have to worry about two faders per stereo hookup.
That is why I suggested a DJ mixer. You can find a simple 4-channel DJ mixer that can take line inputs on all 4 channels and still has an input for one or two microphones for very little money. Don’t touch the EQ on it (like with the PA mixer), but one fader per stereo input, RCA connectors that can only take the line level output from your DJ setup and VERY familiar for a DJ. If you can use a controller, you can use a DJ mixer and there is nothing on there to confuse you.

In closing, an alternative is using a line mixer. Line mixers have 4,6 or 8 inputs (typically) for -as the word suggests- line inputs. The good news is that it utilises BALANCED 1/4 jack inputs. So from your controller/mixer XLR or balanced jack into the line mixer without having to worry about hums, noises and loss of signal.

On the front simple rotary buttons for volume. Either a volume and pan (left/right balance) button or a L and a R volume.
Some have on/off push buttons or switches on the front too. Usually they will have one or two mic inputs also.
And they don’t have EQs and mic preamps (on the stereo channels) to worry about.

300-400 euro should get you a good one that will serve your purpose for a long long time.

It’s become quite an explanation, but I hope I have made my opinion clear. It is up to everyone to decide for themselves what they want of course. Wish everybody good luck with the choices they make and I hope this information can help a little in making those choices.

Greetinx,
C.

Lol, back on monitor/booth huh. 🙂

Glad you got something that works for you.

Greetinx,
C.