# Your Best Sound System



## DiscoBoxer (Feb 18, 2011)

Just for the sake of fun and to get an idea of what people on CB appreciate.

If money was not an option, and the environment was acoustically perfect for the system you would want, what would you like to have as your perfect sound system. 

Lets limit it to medium size venue of 1000 people or less and the application can be Concert, Theater, Worship, whatever. For those in theater or worship, lets assume that all the operators would have all the skills to run the equipment flawlessly......hey we can all dream, right?


----------



## 65535 (Feb 18, 2011)

I'm a tube guy, so I would probably work out a custom PA system based on tube Amps and some steampunk-esk tube pre-amp/mixer.


----------



## nd925a (Feb 18, 2011)

I haven't had much experience so forgive if I seem ignorant

I would do a theatre appliction
one sub under sl and one under sr
fly a main on each side of stage aimed correctly
and a center speaker
stage monitors and hallway monitors for actors off stage

at foh
24 channel allen and heath or soundcraft
channel and master compression
15 band eq on channels
30 band eq on master

I don't know the major brands for individual pieces so I would ask advice from the vast knowledge available to me on CB


----------



## Footer (Feb 18, 2011)

I'm pretty happy with what I have at my "other" job, its essentially what you would have put on your list if you made it 9 years ago and have 1.5 million collecting dust. With the exception of line arrays in place of the SL/SR cluster, this system is about rider friendly as you can get. 



F.O.H. Loudspeakers & Amplification
Flown L,C,R clusters - 5 Meyer CQ1/2 boxes per cluster (15 total)
- self powered, full range, 1240w, 15" & 2"

On stage subwoofers - 4 Meyer 650P boxes
- self powered, sub frequency, 1240w, dual 18"

On stage front fills

Rear of theater surround

- 9 Meyer UPM 1P boxes
- self powered, full range, 350w, dual 5" & 1"

- 8 Meyer UPM 1P boxes
- self powered, full range, 350w, dual 5" & 1"

F.O.H. Drive (PC Controlled)
Meyer RMS 4.X, SIA SMAART Live, XTA Audio Core Control
XTA DP226 (1), XTA DP224 (8)

F.O.H. Console & Outboard
MIDAS Heritage 1000/48
- 40 mono inputs, 8 stereo inputs, 10 groups, 10 aux
- VCA automation

BSS DPR-404 (2)

Klark Teknik DN-504 (1)

Drawmer DS-404 (2) - quad channel gate (8 channels total)

Klark Teknik DN-360 (2)

Klark Teknik DN-410 (1)

Lexicon PCM-91 (1)

Lexicon PCM-81 (2)

TC Electronic D-TWO (1)

- quad channel compressor (8 channels total)

- quad channel compressor (4 channels total)

- dual channel 1/3 oct. graphic eq (4 channels total)

- dual channel parametric eq (2 channels total)

- digital reverb

- digital effects

- digital delay

6

Microphones & Input
AKG C414BULS (2), AKG C451 (4), AKG CK391 (2), AKG D112 (1),
Shure KSM32 (4), Shure B98D/S (4), Shure SM58 (8), Shure SM57 (12), Shure B58 (4),
Shure B52 (2), Shure SM81 (2), Beyer M88 (1), EV RE20 (1), Sennheiser MD421 II (2),
Neumann KM105 (1), EV 457 (6), Crown PCC160 (4), Crown PZM (2), Countryman 85 Active D.I.
(8), Whirlwind Active D.I. (1), Whirlwind Passive D.I. (10)

Playback & Recorders
Sony PCMR700 DAT player/recorder, Denon DN-M2300R dual MiniDisc player/recorder, Dual
DN-C550R dual CD recorder, Denon DN-C680 CD player, Denon DN-790R cassette
player/recorder

Stage Monitors Loudspeakers & Amplification
Flown sidefill clusters - 2 Meyer UPA 1P boxes per side (4 total)
- self powered, full range, 700w, 12" & 1.5"

Additional fills

Floor wedges

Subwoofer

- 2 Meyer UPA 1P boxes per side
- self powered, full range, 700w, 12" & 1.5"

- 10 Meyer UM 1P
- self powered, full range, 700w, 12" & 1.5"

- 1 Meyer USW 1P
- self powered, sub frequency, 700w, dual 15"

Stage Monitors Drive
dbx DriveRack
- 480R remote (1), 482S (3)

Stage Monitors Console & Outboard
Crest X12 Monitor
- 40 x 12 + 4 matrix and A/B outputs
- 4 band parametric on each of 12 main sends

Digitech MultiFX

- digital effects


----------



## BillESC (Feb 18, 2011)

Kyle, you're such a show off.... LOL

I'd use a KV2 ES series system like the one I installed in the National Geographics Society's museums auditorium in Washington, DC. They already had a completely digital front end, just wanted to upgrade from the original EAW speaker system.


----------



## Footer (Feb 18, 2011)

BillESC said:


> Kyle, you're such a show off.... LOL



Its not my PA... and I don't get to run it that often... hell, our house audio guy rarely gets to use it for any big show because most shows we bring in have an engineer.


----------



## avkid (Feb 18, 2011)

Mine already exists.
(12) boxes ADR Audio L2821 (2 hangs of 6)
(6) ADR Audio JD21 (isobaric 21/18)
(6) ADR Audio M1225 wedges
(4) ADR Audio U103 (front fills)
Dolby Lake
That much anyway.

This is dreaming...
(2) Soundcraft Vi6 consoles
Ramlatch snakes 
Motion Labs Distros
Anvil cases for everything
CAT entertainment genset 
Custom Peterbilt straight truck with a pintle hitch and air lines for the genset


----------



## metti (Feb 18, 2011)

Currently mixing a show (musical theatre) in a 650ish room. 

Center hung Vertec. Smaller Vertec delays and fills. Vertec subs. VP7212 for monitors. 2 box Meyer UPA-1P clusters for L/R. Meyer MM-4XP for hidden FX playback. VP7212 for cast/musician monitors.

All of the system is powered except the small Vertec fills and they are on Lab.Gruppen C88:4s. 

Soundweb London system processing. 

DM1000 w/ 2x MY16AD and 4x Presonus Digimax FS at FOH.

QLab with MOTU 828mk3 for playback. 

Shure UHF-R w/ UR1M and Countryman B6 elements for wireless.

Wired mics include PCC160, various mounting configurations of DPA 4099, Heil PR22, Shure KSM141, Shure Beta57, Sennheiser e609, other stuff I forget.

If I could get my dream system for this particular gig I would have replaced the Vertec and other JBL gear with everything Meyer, used a Digico SD8-24 at FOH (severe space considerations), switched to Sennheiser 3000 Series for wireless (still B6s), and kept pretty much the same wired mic selection except I would have gotten some DPA 4011As instead of the KSM141s.


----------



## chausman (Feb 19, 2011)

I'd be happy with anything above what I have right now!

Which for anyone interested, it is:
Behringer Eurodesk MX3282A
(2) QSC GX3s
(2) Carvin 822s
(1) Peavey PV118s
(4) Kustom KSC10M
Behringer Compressor/limiter/gate
Peavey crossover
(6) Samson R1(1 in superscript)
(1) Shure PG47
(1) Old Shure w/l mic with Beta 58 head & SM 58 head
(2) Samson UHF w/l bodypack mics.


----------



## museav (Feb 20, 2011)

My dream system would be the one that lets me best support the performance with the greatest level of ease and effectiveness. What makes it a 'dream' would be the functionality and results, not just that certain products were used.

What I find very interesting is that everyone has focused solely on the equipment items with no mention of things like system performance, number and location of connections, ease of maintenance, having good power, etc. What if you had your dream console but it's in a tiny booth where you can barely see the stage, is totally out of the speaker coverage and is 100 degrees or hotter in there when you mix> Is that still a dream or did it just become a nightmare?


metti said:


> If I could get my dream system for this particular gig I would have replaced the Vertec and other JBL gear with everything Meyer, used a Digico SD8-24 at FOH (severe space considerations), switched to Sennheiser 3000 Series for wireless (still B6s), and kept pretty much the same wired mic selection except I would have gotten some DPA 4011As instead of the KSM141s.


This is an example of a common gross misconception. Assuming that a certain, in this case Meyer, name directly associates to good result or high quality performance is a mistake. Meyer makes some very good products, however that does not mean they anything they make would be right for every room or that simply using a brand relates to a good result. One of the biggest advantages I feel that I have when designing systems is that I don't have to narrow myself down to specific brands and can instead make decisions based on the expected performance in that specific application rather then simply on the name on the product.


----------



## Stookeybrd (Feb 20, 2011)

A perfect sound system would have 100% coverage with zero sightline problems and can go from quiet to loud with no noticeable EQ change and sound good, whether that is flat or bass heavy or high end heavy. Also, I want even sub coverage in the audience without any spillback on stage. The image should be center stage with the potential to shift up/down and left/right when actors move around the stage.

(Disclosure: I received paychecks for building and installing the BBAJ system.)
My personal favorite system(not the best) I've heard was the Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson system. Really, it was two systems packed into one. During dialogue, small speakers fed by lavs would provide basic reinforcement to the dialogue happening. Then, instantly, large array and large point source boxes would switch on and the actors would be singing into handhelds with a rocking band. The change in sound was exhilarating and put a smile on my face. Loved those transitions in the show


----------



## metti (Feb 20, 2011)

museav said:


> This is an example of a common gross misconception. Assuming that a certain, in this case Meyer, name directly associates to good result or high quality performance is a mistake. Meyer makes some very good products, however that does not mean they anything they make would be right for every room or that simply using a brand relates to a good result. One of the biggest advantages I feel that I have when designing systems is that I don't have to narrow myself down to specific brands and can instead make decisions based on the expected performance in that specific application rather then simply on the name on the product.


 
While I appreciate the point you are trying to make and I agree with you 100% regarding the importance of considering more than a brand name, you are wrong about what my process was in this particular instance. I am not assuming anything. I have worked in this venue on several different shows with pretty different rigs each time since there isn't a suitable permanent system in place. One production for which I was A1 had a gorgeous sounding Meyer system (MICA main array with MINA fills/delays). This system sounded better than most of the other systems I had heard in this space. When I was offered the opportunity to design a show there, I initially speced a similar system but I eventually reworked the system design and went with the Vertec for budget reasons. I am pretty happy with how the Vertec rig sounds for our purposes and I would probably spec it again if I was given the same budget for the same type of show but the MICA/MINA system sounded better. There could very well be a different system that would sound as good if not better but I know there is a Meyer rig that would work better than what I have.

In keeping with the first part of your comment, I actually considered the venue when I listed what my dream system would be. The reasons I chose a DM1k for this show instead of some of the other boards I could have gotten was because the mix position in this venue is tiny. The SD8-24 is also relatively small and could comfortable fit in our space. If I could really, dream I would get an SD7 and a much larger booth but that was never going to be possible.

Again, I agree with what you are saying in general but I think you jumped to an unreasonable conclusion about my post.


----------



## bishopthomas (Feb 20, 2011)

museav said:


> What I find very interesting is that everyone has focused solely on the equipment items with the greatest level of ease and effectiveness.



I agree and it's why I haven't posted a response. I think it's a fun thread but it's too vague to be answered adequately.


----------



## metti (Feb 20, 2011)

bishopthomas said:


> I agree and it's why I haven't posted a response. I think it's a fun thread but it's too vague to be answered adequately.


 
I think that this quote from the OP, "Just for the sake of fun", sort of sums up the direction this should be going in. (Hopefully) No one is going to think this thread actually constitutes advice on what to buy for what circumstances.


----------



## avkid (Feb 20, 2011)

museav said:


> What I find very interesting is that everyone has focused solely on the equipment items with no mention of things like system performance, number and location of connections, ease of maintenance, having good power, etc.


 Mine has guaranteed good power and easy connections.
There happens to be an amazing system tech on my speed dial, so I didn't worry about optimization.
I'm also authorized to repair the loudspeakers and know how and where to get the desks repaired.

My post was actually thought out. (unusual for me, I know)


----------



## museav (Feb 20, 2011)

metti said:


> I think that this quote from the OP, "Just for the sake of fun", sort of sums up the direction this should be going in.


The whole comment was "Just for the sake of fun and to get an idea of what people on CB appreciate" and the thread title is "Your Best Sound System". The question seemed to be about what you appreciate in terms of a sound system and my point was that what I appreciate in a sound system is what the system as a whole can do and how well it works and that it was interesting that people seemed to be equating "sound system" with individual products and not to the system in terms of function, design or results.

If you want to have fun with "what gear I'd like to have" that's great, but I'm guessing that what people appreciate in the best sound system really relates more to the functionality and results.


metti said:


> (Hopefully) No one is going to think this thread actually constitutes advice on what to buy for what circumstances.


My experience is that you can't make that assumption and that many people do make just such conclusions, in fact I would say that the comment "...to get an idea of what people on CB appreciate" indicates that may be seen as the intent.

I have heard Meyer rigs that sounded great and ones that sounded terrible. It is the combination of good equipment, proper application of the equipment, well considered system design and good system tuning that all combine to make a great system. Cut corners on any one of these components and the result can be less than ideal. Focusing on or giving credit to just the equipment reflects and fosters misconceptions.


----------



## waynehoskins (Feb 20, 2011)

museav said:


> What if you had your dream console but it's in a tiny booth where you can barely see the stage, is totally out of the speaker coverage and is 100 degrees or hotter in there when you mix? Is that still a dream or did it just become a nightmare?



You just described an outdoor theatre I worked at one summer in college. Once the sun went down it would get down to a cool 98 degrees in there, which both I and the booth's pet spider, who set up camp next to me, appreciated. 



museav said:


> This is an example of a common gross misconception. Assuming that a certain, in this case Meyer, name directly associates to good result or high quality performance is a mistake. Meyer makes some very good products, however that does not mean they anything they make would be right for every room or that simply using a brand relates to a good result. One of the biggest advantages I feel that I have when designing systems is that I don't have to narrow myself down to specific brands and can instead make decisions based on the expected performance in that specific application rather then simply on the name on the product.


 
I've also heard exceptional Meyer rigs (I'll admit, often the places that can afford them also go to the trouble of having the system designed and installed correctly), but I've heard a lousy one too. Actually, the lousy one doesn't sound bad, it just doesn't cover. The folks at the venue became frustrated with the underbalcony fills at some point (at least 1/3 of the seating is under the balcony and covered by the UB fills) and simply disconnected them rather than resolve the problem. It's a nightmare to mix in there; I did a simple event, a funeral, there the other month and had to bring in a delay for the CR monitors just to be able to mix (from the booth at the back of the UB).

But hey, why not?, I'll play the game too.

I like a large-format console. I generally prefer analog simply for the ease of seeing all the knobs and lights at the same time and adjusting anything at the grab of a knob, but a large enough digital board where I don't have to do layer-flipping is fine too. I will say the Roland M400 wouldn't be my first pick for no reason other than I don't like how the compressors behave.

If analog, add in good outboard. ACP88s, DBX 900 trays, etc. I like the BSS gates and comps for money vocals. Decent verb; I've been happy with the SPX90 family when I've used them; also the M-One I like.

Give me a good PA. Fit nicely to the room, whatever that is. Capable of doing concert levels if necessary. Stereo (with full coverage) or LCR is fine. I'm slightly partial to Renkus. I like Crown amps, with QSC a close second. For processing, Londons or Nexias or something of the sort.

I'd like at least one KMS 105 in the mic box. They sound absolutely beautiful.

For body mics if we're doing theatre, give me MKE2-Golds any day of the week over E6s or B6s. Since we're dreaming, let's go with 24 coordinated channels of SK5212. For general speech, I'd pick a few MKE2s on tie clips, a few DPA 4066s, and a few handheld transmitters. Ooh, put a 105 capsule on at least one of them.

Copper snake, plus some Cat-5 or Cat-6 beside it for any digital stuff now or later. Digital snake just isn't quite my favorite yet, but I wouldn't want to rule out an A&H iLive/T system at some time either. Like Brad, I like dry tie lines. Run them everywhere. There are never too many tie lines.

Also, quick easy access from the mix position to stage and to restroom and to vending machine.


----------



## Dillon (Feb 20, 2011)

The important thing to remember is that there does not exist a system that is perfect for every situation. The trick is to find the right system for the right application. 

This is too much fun to pass up.

I have a lot of systems I love. I took a CQ system out with a Broadway tour. It sounded good for the type of show it was. We rolled through a house with a d&b "C" rig, which instantly became my new favorite sounding box.

LCS is my favorite console/system to program (and ultimately, mix) on.


----------



## metti (Feb 21, 2011)

Dillon said:


> LCS is my favorite console/system to program (and ultimately, mix) on.


 
The couple times I have had to opportunity to work with a Matrix3 system I really liked it. Those were both straight plays so their were input light and playback heavy which I felt the Meyer system really excelled out. I would love to try one out on a musical but, alas, cost goes way up when you starting adding in lots of input and control surface hardware.


----------



## DiscoBoxer (Feb 21, 2011)

The intent of this post was to be vague to allow some room for flexibility in the interpretation.

I am happy to see the forum remain moderate as I honestly did expect some brand wars to take place. I did want a feeler on the brands/models that folks love but then I would like to know why. Muse is very good at analytic thinking, and pointed out exactly the other half I was seeking. Practical application-ease of use and the details such as cable management.

I assumed most that would respond to this post, naturally would visualize a venue they have worked in or were impressed by, and then tailor a system to meet their needs in that space. A user's perspective is very different from that of an integrator when it comes to approach of system design and I wanted to welcome those different views.

I do share in having some favorite brands. The reasons for such do not follow design trends as much as it is based on application, proven reliability, and valued features. I have seen fantastic DSPs installed in systems where the average user had access and were "over-using" the technology in ways that were actually hurting the sound. In some of these cases the selection of the DSP was a bad choice, but in this forum we were to assume that everyone would have the skills necessary to operate flawlessly.

Tell me why you choose some of the equipment that you love.

Keep em' coming!


----------



## SHARYNF (Feb 21, 2011)

DiscoBoxer said:


> The intent of this post was to be vague to allow some room for flexibility in the interpretation.
> 
> ...they have worked in or were impressed by, and then tailor a system to meet their needs in that space. A user's perspective is very different from that of an integrator when it comes to approach of system design and I wanted to welcome those different views....


 
These sort of posts and discussions can be interesting but also can lead to a habit of poor decision making. There is a lot to be learned (especially for the less experienced folks that might be on this forum) about the integrators view point. There is a big tendency to look at a situation and immediately jump to I like xxxx and YYY so how do I make it work in this situation, or XYXYXY who I respect likes YYY o BBB and so I should look there.

I raised this issue in another thread where I made the point that the context is important in recommendations. For the most part, products from reputable manufacturers can all sound excellent in the right situation. If this were not the case that for instance all installs or equipment selections when budget was no object would have by now moved to all the same solution. Clearly that is not the case.

The point that is easily overlooked and really is the key to a successful selection is the room and its design and what modifications are possible, and the uses of that room

So for instance using NYC as an example if I were asked what system I would recommend for Carnegie hall vs Radio City Music vs Schubert Theater vs Bitterend vs Central Park Center stage obviously they all would be very different

So in the discussion there needs to be the context, and also why the selection. 

Especially since this is a "learning forum" it is easy to unconsciously set up poor practices. It is too easy to start with a list of favorite vendors and equipment and start deciding

It is like line arrays, in the right situations they are great, in the wrong, they are awful

Sharyn


----------



## DiscoBoxer (Feb 22, 2011)

Sharyn I agree with your points as they are very valid. I understand that some people viewing are learning and may jump to buy something because they see 5 people use it without giving a thoughful approach to the variables in thier specific application.

This is why I am happy that folks like yourself commit your time to the forum, because you and others can provide challenges to the posts, thus keeping it on track to be educational.......as well as fun!


----------



## macwhiz (May 8, 2012)

nd925a said:


> I haven't had much experience so forgive if I seem ignorant
> 
> I would do a theatre appliction
> one sub under sl and one under sr
> ...



Thats almost exactly what my school has. Except we have a 48 Channel Allen and Heath.


----------

