# Bose Panaray in large school auditorium?



## AudJ (Oct 15, 2012)

We recently came up with some money to finally replace speakers, amps, (and dsp) in our auditorium. The local pro quoted 10 - Bose ma12 speakers, 2 - mb12 bass modules, 5 - Crown CDI amps (1000 and 2000), and 2- Biamp Nexia Sp processors for the room. I have never heard these units, and it seems like a strange setup. He said current equipment would not suffice for dsp. I would have preferred a Bose Roommatch array system, for the tight area control it offers - no idea how much this would cost. I know what many think about Bose, so I have also looked into Yamaha, Jbl, and QSC. Total budget can not exceed $20k, but would prefer to be less.

Current problem: 2 side speakers are set in the wall at a 45 degree angle to the stage and are running 100w each from a 140w school P.A. Amp. The only input on the amp is mic level, and it was literally designed to have 1 mic to speak. The room is very live with minimal acoustic treatments. There is no $ set aside for acoustics, although it is recognized as something that needs to be addressed in the future. I have adjusted the speaker angle, but there is no way to avoid pointing them at the front of the balcony, which is a huge untreated surface, reflecting everything back at the stage. 

House: seats 1,400. About 140' deep and 83' wide not including the stage. Balcony does not obstruct view or sound to seats below. 

Current equipment: Yamaha LS9-32, DBX Driverack 260, AKG WMS 450 wireless (18 headsets, 2 handheld dynamic), 3 Audio Technica hanging choir mics, various Crown PCC and wired handheld mics. 

Room uses: Large scale school musical, school concerts, assemblies of various needs and adult community orchestra concerts. One goal is to increase rental of the space to outside organizations. 

Any opinions would be welcome. Thank you!


----------



## museav (Oct 15, 2012)

If you are thinking of addressing the acoustics, which it sounds like should be addressed, then it makes sense to look at doing that and the speaker system, or at least establish what you are going to do for both, at the same time so that they can work together. And keep in mind that you can select a speaker system that minimizes the negative impact or interaction with the room but the sound reinforcement and playback system will not change the room acoustics.

As far as the speaker system and processing, the system should be designed specifically for the space and intended use. You have addressed the use a bit and given some basic room information but we don't know much about the room finishes, the seating area shape and size, the potential speaker locations, the existing infrastructure, potential hang or mount locations and so on. It is sort of pointless to recommend solutions that you don't know can actually be implemented in the space. It would also help to know things like if the system is a mono, stereo or LCR system or if front fills, under balcony fills, side fills or anything like that are required. And what about Assistive Listening, if you don't have an ALS system would that have to be part of any speaker system upgrade in order to be ADA compliant?

On what is proposed, it's difficult to comment without knowing how they plan to implement anything or how they came up with the recommendation. I have a feeling they may be designing to the budget as much or more than to the room and needs but that may be something you have to reconcile as $20k is likely to be a very tight budget for an installed speaker system to serve a room that size for the type of events apparently envisioned. When you account for system design and documentation, shipping and storage costs, labor costs, scaffolding and/or lifts, cabling, possibly added equipment rack space, maybe some new conduit or even additional power, system setup and tuning, and so on there is a significant amount of cost likely involved beyond the primary equipment items. Related to that, how go you plan on procuring the system and do you have to obtain multiple competitive bids? If the latter, then you might also need to think about how you avoid receiving three very different bids that may then be difficult to compare.


----------



## deck (Oct 16, 2012)

This is a very similar scenario to something I had to deal with. I would say that if your house seats 1,400, look at Meyer M1D powered line arrays. They sound great for the price, and actually do not weigh that much. Their high end frequency can get to be pretty shrill if run too hot for periods of time. What soundboard is in house, and do you use any additional crossovers? Under balcony fills, try JF-80's, and maybe JF-60 for front fills?


----------



## museav (Oct 17, 2012)

deck said:


> This is a very similar scenario to something I had to deal with. I would say that if your house seats 1,400, look at Meyer M1D powered line arrays. They sound great for the price, and actually do not weigh that much. Their high end frequency can get to be pretty shrill if run too hot for periods of time. What soundboard is in house, and do you use any additional crossovers? Under balcony fills, try JF-80's, and maybe JF-60 for front fills?


Perhaps you missed the description of the existing system, their noting having a maximum total $20k budget and the list of current equipment provided. Especially since there would likely be additional costs related to rigging and power for the arrays in addition to the cost of the arrays themselves, the Meyer M1D is probably a rather impractical option even if it did fit the room and application, which it may not.


As far as the Bose RoomMatch speakers, the last pricing I saw was around $3k to $4k per box while the multichannel PowerMatch amps with integrated DSP are also apparently around $3k per amp. Based on those numbers it would probably be difficult to get an appropriate RoomMatch system within your budget. And having just looked at RoomMatch system for a 1,700 seat (expandable to 2,000 seats) room with just over a 140' depth, I will also say that a RoomMatch system, or a Meyer M1D system for that matter, might be pushed pretty hard for the kind of applications you noted in that size room.

To reiterate, I'm not sure how the $20,000 budget was established but reconciling that budget with what might be appropriate for the room and use may be a major challenge. I'm sure you can do something for $20k or less that may be much better than what you have, but you may have to decide if the improvement possible is sufficient to justify spending the money. What you probably want to avoid is spending the $20k only to find that the results obtained may be better but don't really offer you what you need or create new rental opportunities.

With a fixed budget you may also need to be careful to review the quotes you receive for any potential hidden costs or related work that would be required at additional cost for you. Just to be clear, I am not addressing someone trying to hide costs, but is is fairly common for audio and AV Contractors quoting on work with tight budgets or that will be awarded based on price to exclude not only related work such as power, conduit and ceiling/sheetrock work but also to make assumptions about existing conditions, schedules, work hours, etc. that if not valid could result in additional costs. Just as an example, the proposal noted seems to be going from a DriveRack 260 and a single amp to two Biamp Nexia processors and five Crown CDi amps, so how do they propose mount and power the added equipment? And how do they plan to address going from cabling from an amp to two full range speakers to cabling from five amps to ten speakers and two subwoofers? Is there any related power, conduit, patching, painting, etc. required and if so, is that included in the price quoted or is it to be provided by the Owner? Are they assuming sufficient equipment rack space to be available and is that true or might there be subsequent added cost for a new rack?


----------



## deck (Oct 17, 2012)

That's true. Maybe look at some sound tiles for the walls of the balcony, because that would probably create a huge difference in the quality of sound in your space. Meyer M1D's are not much more new that those arrays, and it comes with the legendary Meyer quality and sound. Maybe look at some used equipment. JBL makes some nice arrays, but some are a little big for the room you described I think. Do you have the power to power the amps for the new system? What if you cut some array boxes and added front and under-balcony fills?


----------



## museav (Oct 18, 2012)

deck said:


> Maybe look at some sound tiles for the walls of the balcony, because that would probably create a huge difference in the quality of sound in your space.


What are 'sound tiles' and do we know that is the primary or only problem? It sounds as though the balcony face is currently a problem but what might be possible or practical to address that would likely depend on a number of factors other than just acoustics.


deck said:


> Meyer M1D's are not much more new that those arrays, and it comes with the legendary Meyer quality and sound.


I don't know enough about the situation to assess if Meyer M1D or Bose RoomMatch array solutions would be good options in this application or what an appropriate solution utilizing them might cost, however it seems pretty clear that it would almost certainly be well over their maximum $20k budget.

When you consider the potential related substructure, conduit, scaffolding/lifts, labor and so on related to installing speaker arrays in existing venues you find that the costs required in addition to the cost of the speakers themselves can vary significantly depending upon the specifics of the venue and arrays. I've worked on projects where this cost was minimal, however I've also worked on projects in smaller venues where having to get to the structure while working around existing ceiling 'clouds', catwalks, ductwork, etc. required more than $20k and a number of dark days just for the related scaffolding. That is just one example of how the existing conditions can potentially affect both the most effective system solution options and the related costs.

And as far as the "legendary Meyer quality and sound" you reference, I find that is due partially to good products and somewhat to marketing but also very much a result of a focus on the products being properly applied. A good product poorly applied can still yield poor results and quite possibly a lesser result than a lesser product properly applied.


deck said:


> Maybe look at some used equipment.


Used equipment can be a good option in many situations, but I generally find it a less practical option for installed speaker systems. In general, the concept of planning or designing a system in advance inherently conflicts with the equipment options being dependent upon what is available at the time of purchase. And many audio Contractors are going to be hesitant to potentially assume liability for the condition, timely delivery, warranty, etc. of equipment they are not providing. They may work with such equipment but be prepared for additional costs and/or delays if the equipment is not in good condition, not received on time, does not operate properly or fails, etc. And they also realize that they will likely be the ones associated with the equipment even if they did not select or provide it.


deck said:


> JBL makes some nice arrays, but some are a little big for the room you described I think.




deck said:


> What if you cut some array boxes and added front and under-balcony fills?


For both audio and acoustics it is usually necessary to have sufficient knowledge of the physical space and the goals in order to be able to offer directly relevant recommendations. And for existing spaces it can also be critical to know how any existing conditions may affect any potential options. Put simply, I don't think we know enough about the space and existing conditions to make informed specific recommendations. Offering general ideas and products may have some value but it is important to understand the limitations and how this differs from offering informed solutions. For example, I don't think we have sufficient information to assess if balcony or under balcony fills are a good or even practical option or how mounting those fill speakers, getting cabling to them, providing the appropriate processing and amplification, properly setting up that processing, etc. might impact the budget. They may be a very good option or a completely ineffective or impractical option, I don't think we have the information necessary to make such a determination.

With line arrays the number of boxes in the array potentially has multiple effects on the resulting array performance. I don't believe that we have sufficient knowledge of the room to determine what would be required to get appropriate or acceptable results from any line array, much less to assess the impact of reducing the number of boxes in an array.


----------



## deck (Oct 18, 2012)

That's true. However, Meyer products are really the best, not just do to marketing, and sound great almost anywhere. We really don't have the info for a system for you at this time, but if the rigging costs are not to high, make sure to find the right box for you facility.


----------



## chausman (Oct 19, 2012)

deck said:


> That's true. However, Meyer products are really the best, not just do to marketing, and sound great almost anywhere. We really don't have the info for a system for you at this time, but if the rigging costs are not to high, make sure to find the right box for you facility.



I'm going to challenge that statement. Meyer boxes are great...when you have someone to set it up and use them correctly, in the right situations. Adding Meyer boxes will not make it magically better. On the contrary, if they were to add a more powerful array, it may make things worse. 

If the op can give some dimensions and possibly pictures, it may help at least narrow down the options. As well as list/show what existing infrastructure is in place for new speakers, as that can greatly affect the total cost, and may reduce the budget for speakers themselves quite a bit. 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## deck (Oct 19, 2012)

I was in on way stating that they would be a "magic" solution, but WHEN USED CORRECTLY, can make a massive difference.


----------



## AudJ (Oct 20, 2012)

There are a lot of quotes, I will do my best to answer questions this way...Sorry


I will try to take pictures Monday when I go in.


Shape of Room and seating shape: Rectangles . It has louvered lath-on-plaster walls and ceiling. House was built to mimic Kleinhan's music hall in Buffalo, but they shoved the design into a rectangle, and put a theatrical stage instead of a concert stage. 


Acoustics: the only changes we would like to make are to treat the back wall and front of balcony. These area already have treatment, but it was painted over at some point, causing partial reflection from the non-perforated areas. Due to the nature of our school budget, there is no possibility of making these changes any time soon. Speaker placement is the bigger issue, but the cost of moving them would be a silly expenditure, given the fact that we need a new system.


Budget: in my state any expenditure over $20k sets into motion a process that is best to avoid when possible. My district has always put anything above that amount through a capital project, which I might die waiting for. That is all the finance people are willing to put in at this time. I have waited 14 years, and this is the largest amount I have ever been offered. Other amounts they have offered in the past have been put into the equipment I listed earlier, one item at a time, over several years.


Fillers: there are only 3 seating rows under the balcony and they are not obstructed at all. The balcony could use fillers if recommended.


Installation: I am aware that the panaray quote was partially based on the reduced installation cost of bolting the speakers to the wall instead of flying, and that flying anything would be preferred, but potentially very costly. I have done a lot of things myself, but I am not touching this one. There are qualified people on staff that may be able to do some of the work, but there would still be equipment rentals etc. This type of install is something we would typically hire out for the liability alone.


Speaker placement: current 2 speakers are both sides of the stage, in-wall locations about 12 feet above the stage, outside the proscenium , at a 45 degree angle to the stage and audience. Center array placement is preferred,but there is nothing currently in place. There are a lot of I-beams that could be used to hang.


I am going to recommend that our architect design something. I don't know if it would count against the budget, but it would be worth it.


Am I right to assume that speakers, amps and DSP should be purchased at the same time? We do have the option to spend until we run out, and get the remainder with next years's budget, but my past experience would suggest that is not a great idea. Also, I am never sure what the budget might be, if there is any $at all...


Is the Driverack 260 usable in any such system? Could the Yamaha LS9 virtual rack be configured to use as temporary DSP? Just looking for ways to break this down a little.


----------



## AudJ (Oct 20, 2012)

museav said:


> With a fixed budget you may also need to be careful to review the quotes you receive for any potential hidden costs or related work that would be required at additional cost for you. Just to be clear, I am not addressing someone trying to hide costs, but is is fairly common for audio and AV Contractors quoting on work with tight budgets or that will be awarded based on price to exclude not only related work such as power, conduit and ceiling/sheetrock work but also to make assumptions about existing conditions, schedules, work hours, etc. that if not valid could result in additional costs. Just as an example, the proposal noted seems to be going from a DriveRack 260 and a single amp to two Biamp Nexia processors and five Crown CDi amps, so how do they propose mount and power the added equipment? And how do they plan to address going from cabling from an amp to two full range speakers to cabling from five amps to ten speakers and two subwoofers? Is there any related power, conduit, patching, painting, etc. required and if so, is that included in the price quoted or is it to be provided by the Owner? Are they assuming sufficient equipment rack space to be available and is that true or might there be subsequent added cost for a new rack?



I didn't mention, but all these costs were included in the original bid. It also included brackets for mounting everything to the walls, and a basic design for our staff to bolt them to the walls. Once hanging, and cables (provided by them) are run (by us), they would come back to adjust angles, set DSP, and do all the tuning.


----------



## museav (Oct 21, 2012)

The party that provided the quote is probably avoiding significant labor cost and even more liability by letting you install the speakers, pull cable, etc. Of course if something isn't done on time, doesn't work right or ever has a problem then that can quickly turn into a 'finger pointing' exercise as responsibility for the system is inherently split.

A very common issue is focusing on the 'stuff' being provided rather than the associated results. You've listed the 'stuff' proposed but what does that represent in terms of results? Is this being a success and the money well spent going to be determined by the equipment purchased, by some (or any) improvement over what currently exists or by it supporting certain goals and meeting certain expectations? If not solely a matter of purchasing products then what improvements are desired or what are the goals and expectations? And how will what is proposed provide those desired results?

An rough analogy might be purchasing a car. If you go to a dealer and say you have $20k to spend on a new vehicle and they came back and recommended a particular vehicle that has four 16" wheels with model X tires, a certain engine, etc., might you want to know whether it is a coupe, sedan, SUV, minivan, truck, etc.? Whether it can haul your family or tools, what mileage it gets, what the warranty is and so on? Maybe some people buy a car based solely on specific features but most probably make a decision based on how it fulfills their needs. And in that regard, is an audio system really that different?

That's why while people can comment on the equipment proposed, for which there may or may not be clear issues, what often really matters is assessing what is proposed in terms of how its expected results compare to the overall goals and expectations defined. In this case, I am not real clear on your goals and expectations or on the results expected with what is proposed. And thus unable to address the questions of whether the expected/predicted results support your goals and meet your expectations and if they don't, is that then a wise investment? If simply being better than the current speaker system is the goal then it sounds like that may be achieved, but if you have any more specific goals or expectations then we don't seem to have the information required to assess how what is proposed relate to them.

For example, on your side, are you expecting the system to support full bands for musicals or concerts? How important is speech intelligibility? Do you have any specific thoughts as to the system being mono, stereo, LCR, etc.? Are there or might there be ancillary signals for ALS, overflow areas, etc. required? Do you have any specific goals in terms of output levels, coverage, response, gain before feedback, etc.? Basically, what do you expect or need from the system?

On the vendor's side, how does what they propose support the goals you've defined to them? Is their proposed solution expected to provide the levels, intelligibility, etc, you want and how is that being assessed? How did they arrive at the proposed solution and did they consider any other options? How do they plan to deploy the ten MA12 speakers and the two subwoofers? I am particularly concerned here as the MA12 has a rather 'unusual' pattern that varies significantly with frequency and in a room with a balcony, some acoustical issues, etc., how they would be deployed would appear likely to be critical to the results. I am also curious as to how they would be used in relation to the two subwoofers proposed and what kind of output levels and response would be expected - with a +/-3dB response to 12kHz with the recommended EQ and a maximum peak output of [email protected], the MA12 are generally much more a speech application speaker than what I would typically associate with musicals, orchestral performances, concerts, etc. That is what I meant when I mentioned their possibly designing for a budget rather than for the application. Those may be limitations you have to accept to stay within your budget but you should probably know what what to expect and what compromises may be involved before purchasing the system.

That segues back to whether what is proposed represents an acceptable result and a good expenditure of the money. You have to make that decision but you should be able to provide the vendor with the information they need to be responsive and they should be able to provide you the information required for you to make an informed decision.


On another aspect, I completely understand the budget issues and often have to work with similar situations. What I usually prefer to do is to first establish a master plan, something that can define the overall goals and some idea of a realistic associated budget that can then serve as a coordinated framework. Once that is established then you can start trying to break what you developed into multiple pieces that can work within the budgetary and contractual conditions imposed. This may be something you can do entirely in-house or you may want to bring in outside help or some combination, I often suggest people first do as much as they can internally as that can make much more effective use of any help they do get, but what can be handled internally can vary greatly.



AudJ said:


> I am going to recommend that our architect design something. I don't know if it would count against the budget, but it would be worth it.


Hopefully you mean that your Architect hire a qualified audio system designer and not that they do it themselves. There are some Architectural firms with qualified in-house audio and AV designers and even fewer individuals that are qualified Architects and qualified audio system designers. Other Architects, at least the ones that care about their Clients, hire qualified Consultants to supplement their own services. And unless the audio is part of a larger project, you may often be better off hiring a Consultant directly. You may want to see if such professional services could be obtained from different funds.


----------



## AudJ (Oct 21, 2012)

museav said:


> The party that provided the quote is probably avoiding significant labor cost and even more liability by letting you install the speakers, pull cable, etc. Of course if something isn't done on time, doesn't work right or ever has a problem then that can quickly turn into a 'finger pointing' exercise as responsibility for the system is inherently split.
> 
> A very common issue is focusing on the 'stuff' being provided rather than the associated results. You've listed the 'stuff' proposed but what does that represent in terms of results? Is this being a success and the money well spent going to be determined by the equipment purchased, by some (or any) improvement over what currently exists or by it supporting certain goals and meeting certain expectations? If not solely a matter of purchasing products then what improvements are desired or what are the goals and expectations? And how will what is proposed provide those desired results?
> 
> ...



I think you articulated everything I was worried about. After reading all the helpful comments here, it is obvious to me that the budget is driving this, not the expected result. Unfortunately this is all in the hands of accountants right now, which is why I am looking for advice. After trying to get to get the project moving for so long, I hate to hit the brakes as soon as it actually starts to roll, but that might be a good move. Yes, the architect uses a qualified audio designer, they did another room in our district not long ago with good results. The difference for that room was it was included in a capital improvement project, and they could start from the beginning as you suggest. My auditorium has not been so lucky, and only safety issues are being addressed in my building through capital spending in the predictable future. 

If I am somehow able to do this and have a good design in place, where should the $20k budget be spent first?

Again, I will try to get pictures up tomorrow.

Thank you!


----------



## AudJ (Oct 22, 2012)

museav said:


> For example, on your side, are you expecting the system to support full bands for musicals or concerts? How important is speech intelligibility? Do you have any specific thoughts as to the system being mono, stereo, LCR, etc.? Are there or might there be ancillary signals for ALS, overflow areas, etc. required? Do you have any specific goals in terms of output levels, coverage, response, gain before feedback, etc.? Basically, what do you expect or need from the system?


Desiring full bands, good speech intelligibility is a must. We have always run mono, and it does the job. Coverage and output just needs to be somewhat even, and appropriate to hear clearly throughout the room, hopefully avoiding dropouts. The biggest challenge in the room is the musical, which is sometimes accompanied by a soundtrack, and sometimes a live orchestra. The volume needs to match or exceed the possible orchestra volume.

I have requested to have a sound designer through our architect come up with a plan for the room. I don't think the current Bose proposal would be good, especially since I am the one who would have to deal with the short-comings of any system.

I am going with
1. Design
2. price
3. see how to fit into the budget.

Anything additional that might be valuable as I start this process would be appreciated. Again, thank you all for getting me on the right track!


----------



## museav (Oct 22, 2012)

AudJ said:


> If I am somehow able to do this and have a good design in place, where should the $20k budget be spent first?


That depends on your priorities and how everything works together. For example, in many cases it may be possible to install the main speakers initially and add subwoofers later. That may not be a feasible option with the Bose MA12 unless you plan on using the pretty much exclusively for voice reinforcement, but it may be possible to fly some other speakers that will provide good coverage and suffice for music until you can later add subs.

The downside to a phased approach to a project is that you will almost always end up paying more than if you did it all at once, in some cases significantly more. But that is often the only practical option unless you can get larger capital funds. I'm actually finding a lot of my higher ed work being funded with "student technology" fees, a separate pot of money dedicated solely for investment in academic support technology. FWIW, I have one university performing arts project where we started on a technology upgrade for an existing venue over 4-1/2 years ago. We've completed Master Planning and 3 of 4 phases of the work, but the funding for the final phase keeps getting pushed back or reassigned. And if it does ever proceed I'll probably be having to create the third design iteration for the system as the related technology and products change so rapidly.


----------



## DJHiggumz (Oct 23, 2012)

I would steer as far away from Bose as you can. They are way overpriced than the performance they provide. Jbl vrx932la is a good choice, but personally I find the sound of the bill fitzmaurice dr line array series unbeatable.


----------



## museav (Oct 24, 2012)

DJHiggumz said:


> I would steer as far away from Bose as you can. They are way overpriced than the performance they provide. Jbl vrx932la is a good choice, but personally I find the sound of the bill fitzmaurice dr line array series unbeatable.


Have you looked at and listened to any of the more recent Bose professional products? They may not be hyping the changes as much as Behringer/MUSIC Group but things have definitely been changing at Bose.

I believe that DIY, home-built speakers with extremely limited (and questionable) available performance data, no integrated and tested flying or mounting provisions, no warranty, no dealer or manufacturer for support, etc. are probably both impractical and inappropriate for professional installations. Since every box is essentially a 'one off' and can vary in terms of components, materials, construction, etc., the data would really only be applkicable to that one box, and thus also makes it difficult to justify the investment, but I've always been curious to see complete testing of some of the BFM designs performed by an independent party like Pat Brown or Ron Sauro.

They're a good choice for some applications, but one concern I'd have with the VRX932LA in this application is that while the wide horizontal pattern might work well for covering up front, it seems like you'd likely have a lot of the energy from the speaker hitting the reflective side walls further back. After looking at the pictures I can see with something like the Bose RoomMatch or Renkus-Heinz Varia with the ability to use wider horizontal pattern boxes for the short throw elements and narrower horizontal pattern boxes for the longer throw elements might seem a good option. I'm not saying the VRX is not an option, just that I'd personally want to look at it in greater detail before recommending it.

Unfortunately, unless there is a catwalk system or other good access above the ceiling then it appears from the pictures as though getting access above the ceiling to assess if/where flying is practical or to actually fly anything may require some significant effort. But then I'm also not sure where they planned on locating the MA12s or how they planned to get cable to them without either surface running the cable or tearing open the ceiling and/or walls so there may be greater access than it appears from the pictures.


----------



## deck (Oct 24, 2012)

I agree with that. There might be a lot of reflection off of the side walls. Assuming your snake system is up-to-date, defiantly replace your arrays FIRST. I do not have experience with the Bose arrays (I use mostly Meyer, EAW, and JBl), but I have heard really mixed things about those type of arrays. That said, you would probably notice a MAJOR difference in sound quality if you changed just the arrays. New subs can come later, espically if you are not doing a whole lot of low-end frequency mixing/audio effects.


----------



## AudJ (Oct 25, 2012)

museav said:


> Unfortunately, unless there is a catwalk system or other good access above the ceiling then it appears from the pictures as though getting access above the ceiling to assess if/where flying is practical or to actually fly anything may require some significant effort. But then I'm also not sure where they planned on locating the MA12s or how they planned to get cable to them without either surface running the cable or tearing open the ceiling and/or walls so there may be greater access than it appears from the pictures.



There is a great catwalk above the ceiling, and lots of structure to hang from. There is actually about 8 ft above the whole ceiling to play with. A center array would need to be designed and hung by pros, which is what I am proposing.

The ma12s were planned to be bolted to the wall next to the current enclosures, with the subs in the enclosures. I think we are close to abandoning that idea though.


----------



## museav (Oct 25, 2012)

AudJ said:


> There is a great catwalk above the ceiling, and lots of structure to hang from. There is actually about 8 ft above the whole ceiling to play with.


That really opens up your possibilities and may be able to help limit the associated costs.


AudJ said:


> The ma12s were planned to be bolted to the wall next to the current enclosures, with the subs in the enclosures. I think we are close to abandoning that idea though.


A 16' tall stack of five MA12s per side may make sense with the concept behind the MA12, however the MA12 Installation Guide notes "Stacks greater than three units will require custom rigging." so maybe they plan on a stack of three to cover the main floor and a separate stack of two for the balcony or something like that.

I could be totally off but this may reflect a common situation with line array type products where people get focused on the vertical pattern and seem to forget about the horizontal pattern. Based on the polar data, the MA12 is apparently almost 180 degree horizontal coverage up to almost 4kHz, which seems to mean that for the entire frequency band critical to speech intelligibility you would have minimal pattern control. That may be good in a wide room or acceptable in a dead room but in your situation it seems to likely result in significant energy hitting the apparently reflective side walls as well as all sorts of interactions between the left and right arrays.

I should note that I don't know what design effort is actually involved in what is proposed. There may be virtually none or they may have modeled the room in Modeler and verified everything. So I am just identifying issues that may be worth considering if that had not already occurred.


----------



## AudJ (Oct 25, 2012)

museav said:


> I should note that I don't know what design effort is actually involved in what is proposed. There may be virtually none or they may have modeled the room in Modeler and verified everything. So I am just identifying issues that may be worth considering if that had not already occurred.



The person who wrote the quote admitted that he didn't spend much time on it because he was trying to get in a quick set of numbers for us to work with. That is part of the reason I initiated this post- to see if this configuration that is unfamiliar to me made much sense. 180 degrees of horizontal is discouraging, given the info available, and a first-hand view of the room

In the meanwhile, I bumped into a friend who connected me with an installer who has designed a lot of impressive locations nationally. He agreed to come in and give us another quote, which is what we need.


----------

