Question about a PA System

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

Hi all,
Im in a band and were serously thinking about buying a pa system, as the cost of renting them is just killing us! I seen this set of tops and bins on thomann http://www.thomann.de/ie/the_box_pa_set_1210p.htm which seem pretty good, and this mixer http://www.thomann.de/ie/samson_txm_16.htm
If we were to get those, would we need an amp as well? we would be putting vocal, guitar, bass and maby drums if needed through it. if you havnet guessed, my knowledge of pa systems is pretty poor!
Thanks in advance,
Frank

Savman

Noah Teeny Valentine wrote: »

Hi all,
Im in a band and were serously thinking about buying a pa system, as the cost of renting them is just killing us! I seen this set of tops and bins on thomann http://www.thomann.de/ie/the_box_pa_set_1210p.htm which seem pretty good, and this mixer http://www.thomann.de/ie/samson_txm_16.htm
If we were to get those, would we need an amp as well? we would be putting vocal, guitar, bass and maby drums if needed through it. if you havnet guessed, my knowledge of pa systems is pretty poor!
Thanks in advance,
Frank

Personally, I'd rather sound good thru a rented system, than sound like junk thru a system I'd bought. If you want a PA to run Vocals, Guitars, Bass and Drums, you're looking at €3k to do it properly. Otherwise get 2 Tops and a desk and do a Vocal PA job, skip the mic'ing up of drums and backline.

I'm guessing all your band are into your guitars and drums etc, why bother spending the guts of €1k on that snazzy tube amp if you're just gonna run it thru a bottom of the barrel desk with useless preamps? You might as well sell your amps and get the Behringer equivalent because in the audio world you're only as good as your weakest link.

Good Backline + Crap PA = Crap
Crap Backline + Good PA = Crap
Good Backline + Good PA + Good Musicians = Good

There's no shortcuts.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

point noted.
would a better mixing desk improve the system mentioned above, also what would be yer opinion on the tops and bins.

Savman

Noah Teeny Valentine wrote: »

point noted.
would a better mixing desk improve the system mentioned above, also what would be yer opinion on the tops and bins.

To be honest I'd have no opinion on them, only to say that I'd never buy them myself. Have only come across them in rehearsal rooms.

They'll work to the degree in that they'll make a sound of some sort, whether they sound good is really for you to decide and as for how long they'll last with a gigging band, who knows, YMMV.

If you want a small PA, go for the best 2 tops + desk you can afford or hold off until you can get something half decent. You can always add Subs later if you want.

Eoin Madsen

I'd second all that.

And avoid powered mixers. Amps have to be matched to speakers, not mixers. The entire concept of bundling mixer and amp together was not one made with the matchability, expandability, or life of the equipment in mind. I've never come across one with pres that weren't junk, tbh.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

thanks for the advice, we will probably just get a vocal pa, and use our backline without backing them up. the 2 guitar amps are going to be upgraded in the next few weeks anyway, they will be at least 100w and the bass amp we have is 110w, so id say we will be ok

Gaspode

At the risk of bucking the trend, I wouldn't dismiss the idea of powered mixers totally. Ask yourself some questions first:
What have you been hiring - powered mixer or mixer and power amp? Is it a good make? Did it do the job for you?
Where are you playing - will you need several thousand watts to get yourself heard? Is the venue big enough to warrant miking up a drum kit (the mixer you showed probably wouldnt have enough channels anyway to mike the drum kit properly never mind any other [real] instruments)
What sort of music are you playing - do you want people to listen to you or just to hear you? There is a difference!
Would miking up the vocals be enough if you have good guitar and bass amps?

You probably know the answer anyway. I use a power mixer and while I'm aware of it's limitations, it suits what myself and the lads are doing at the moment. (vocals, acoustic, no drums)

This is all 'imho' by the way, I wont claim to be an expert!!!

Savman

Ah no powered mixers are unbeatable in the small PA market, especially the Dynacord Powermates everyone uses them. They give you very little if any room for upgrade but most people dont need the extra flexibility. They still remain a great all in one solution for so many applications.

Eoin Madsen

Savman wrote: »

They still remain a great all in one solution for so many applications.

They don't have speakers stuck on to them, so they're not really an all in one solution. If convenience is the issue... why not opt for a passive mixer with active speakers? It's the same number of components but it actually makes some sense. A big part of the practical problem with powered mixers is that they're pitched at people who don't know any better. And people who don't know any better tend to have a hard time matching speakers to their mixer.

Passive mixer with active speakers means you can match your setup to your needs - rather than being stuck with a relationship between power and number of channels that makes no sense, and being stuck without the capability to upgrade any part of your system as your needs change. Powered mixers aren't even cheaper ffs. They just suck - plain and simple.

Savman

Eoin when I say all-in-one I'm referring to mixer + effects + amp all in one simple unit. No they're not cheap by any means but they still are a firm favourite for so many weekend warriors.

Yes they are geared toward those who don't know better, but they are still great units for a lot of purposes. Any band playing small gigs could go a whole lot worse than a powered Dynacord mixer.

I agree they are not perfect for pro audio use but for a solution they really can't be beat.

Eoin Madsen

Savman wrote: »

I agree they are not perfect for pro audio use but for a solution they really can't be beat.

I fail to see how they're any better, easier, or cheaper a "solution" than a normal mixer with some active speakers.

The fact that they're a firm favourite doesn't say much, tbh. The standard of live sound in this country is abysmal.

seaner

HI Frank ,
I'm in a band with 3 other lads. 2 guitars, 1 bass and drums. And here's what we have going now....

Dynacord powermate 1000
2 x 15" 350watt 4 ohm tops
2 x 15" 400 watt bins
Dynacord power amp

Orginally we only had the powermate 1000 and the two tops, and seeing as they were 4 ohm we got full whack out of them .

Only recently added the bins to the sound, we made sure we had bins with crossovers built in too. But with the addition of the bins we needed an extra power amp cuz we didn't want to put the bins through the desk too what with the speakers being 4 ohms.

ANyway we're a a 4 piece band. Gigging probably 3 - 4 times a month. Sometimes more sometimes less. But we always split the cost of the gear 4 ways. And i'm not the 'pa' person of the band by no means. So if i've got something above thats 'technically' wrong, i apologise.


We've been together 3 years by the way.

Savman

Eoin Madsen wrote: »

I fail to see how they're any better, easier, or cheaper a "solution" than a normal mixer with some active speakers.

The fact that they're a firm favourite doesn't say much, tbh. The standard of live sound in this country is abysmal.

I don't think you're getting me here. I'm not debating the pros and cons of one set-up versus the other, my whole point is that regardless what you or I think about it, powered mixers are in widespread use. They may not appeal to you, but they obviously appeal to the majority of bands, acoustic duos and rental companies.

Powered Mixers obviously don't float your particular boat but then again you, more than anyone else on here, regularly recommend the cheap Thomann 'thebox' stuff which any self respecting engineer wouldn't touch with a barge pole.

Then you say "the standard of live sound in this country is abysmal" - that's hypocrisy, plain and simple.

Gimme a Dynacord powered desk over dirt cheap shop brand gear any day of the week.

Savman

seaner wrote: »

Orginally we only had the powermate 1000 and the two tops, and seeing as they were 4 ohm we got full whack out of them

That's a very good idea IMHO.

Eoin Madsen

Savman wrote: »

my whole point is that regardless what you or I think about it, powered mixers are in widespread use. They may not appeal to you, but they obviously appeal to the majority of bands, acoustic duos and rental companies.

So what? That's not what this thread is about. When someone asks for a guitar amp recommendation here we don't tell them to think about a Marshall Valvestate just because everyone else gets them and all the rehearsal studios rent them.

Powered Mixers obviously don't float your particular boat but then again you, more than anyone else on here, regularly recommend the cheap Thomann 'thebox' stuff which any self respecting engineer wouldn't touch with a barge pole.

I have recommended it where it's appropriate. Telling someone looking for a practice rig on a €500 budget to either not bother at all or to blow it all on half of an EV subwoofer doesn't make any sense. I've heard "The Box" speakers sounding better than equally cheap speakers, so if someone asks me what to spend that kind of money on, I tend to suggest those.

Gimme a Dynacord powered desk over dirt cheap shop brand gear any day of the week.

Lovely sentiment. I'd agree, but that's not the choice. Those items wouldn't be in the same price bracket, so the comparison is irrelevent.

Savman

Eoin Madsen wrote: »

So what? That's not what this thread is about. When someone asks for a guitar amp recommendation here we don't tell them to think about a Marshall Valvestate just because everyone else gets them and all the rehearsal studios rent them.

Nope, but they could do a whole lot worse than Marshall.

I have recommended it where it's appropriate. Telling someone looking for a practice rig on a €500 budget to either not bother at all or to blow it all on half of an EV subwoofer doesn't make any sense.

I don't remember telling anyone to buy half an EV sub and reading back over the thread the OP never mentions a system for 'practice'. Granter he never mentions gigs either but one would assume when he talks about renting that it's for the purpose of live performance.

Those items wouldn't be in the same price bracket, so the comparison is irrelevent.

Actually it's very relevant, the guy asked about PA systems and you shot down the notion of a powered mixer. I'm telling you, as someone who used one for 3 solid years of gigging, they are an excellent solution for small gigs. I'm also trying to point out that they are also the weapon of choice for so many people in this country. Maybe, like you're suggesting, all those powered desk users are clueless, or maybe you're just plain and simply wrong.

Incidentally, I've been using Active Speakers for a while now and the extra leads running to each unit is an issue. I can explain to a novice over the phone how to get a Powered Desk & Passive speaker combo up and running, it's pretty much fool proof.

I don't know whether you just like going against the flow to be different or wha', but I'm telling you these units are insanely popular for a very good reason. If you can't see that reason, well the advantages of Powermates are obviously lost on you. But the one we owned was well used and abused and never skipped a beat. That's a fact, out there in the real world you have to be able to rely on these things. Active Speakers are fine too if you're that way inclined but personally I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss anything so successful as the Dynacord Powermate range.

Gaspode

Eoin Madsen wrote: »

I fail to see how they're any better, easier, or cheaper a "solution" than a normal mixer with some active speakers.

The fact that they're a firm favourite doesn't say much, tbh. The standard of live sound in this country is abysmal.

I find that the 2 main reasons why bands sound abysmal are A: the venue is totally unsuitable for live music (>95% of pubs) and B: it's just too bloody loud.
In an actual live music venue (i.e. not the back room of a pub, something designed with music in mind), the PA is generally an in-house one and the sound tends to be fine.
The problem is your average pub band. They are often stuck in a corner, or facing away from the audience or in a room with a really low roof. From my experience bands tend to make sure they are heard by everyone in a 3 mile radius rather than concentrating on getting a decent sound. They dont seem to understand the difference between sound and volume.

I've seen bands with both powered mixers and bands with the active speaker setup, and either is equally likely to sound crap imo. I think its a lack of understanding of the venue, the audience, and how to use the PA they have to suit those that tends to be the problem.

Eoin Madsen

Savman wrote: »

I don't remember telling anyone to buy half an EV sub and reading back over the thread the OP never mentions a system for 'practice'. Granter he never mentions gigs either but one would assume when he talks about renting that it's for the purpose of live performance.

I never said you did. I was simply outlining how your criticism of my recommendation of budget equipment made no sense.

Actually it's very relevant, the guy asked about PA systems and you shot down the notion of a powered mixer. I'm telling you, as someone who used one for 3 solid years of gigging, they are an excellent solution for small gigs. I'm also trying to point out that they are also the weapon of choice for so many people in this country.

No, it's not relevent. Of course a Dynacord is going to be better than a set of active Behringer speakers or some junk like that. He didn't ask "should I spend €500 or €1500". If you can take any powered mixer or a comparably priced system with the active component not built into the mixer, I'm saying that there's no logical reason to chose the powered mixer.

And, as I was pointing out, Marshall Valvestate is also a weapon of choice for so many people in this country. There are better amps for the money, plain and simple, but people still buy them.

Incidentally, I've been using Active Speakers for a while now and the extra leads running to each unit is an issue. I can explain to a novice over the phone how to get a Powered Desk & Passive speaker combo up and running, it's pretty much fool proof.

So you're saying that having two extra power leads, on a stage or in a room which is going to have to have plenty of power sources in most cases anyway, is so inconvenient that clearly the sacrifice of having a completely unversatile and unspecialised system is justified?

I don't know whether you just like going against the flow to be different or wha',

Could you possibly make a logical argument to support your position rather than persistantly trying to make this a personal thing?

but I'm telling you these units are insanely popular for a very good reason. If you can't see that reason, well the advantages of Powermates are obviously lost on you.

Okay. So what's the reason?

But the one we owned was well used and abused and never skipped a beat. That's a fact, out there in the real world you have to be able to rely on these things. Active Speakers are fine too if you're that way inclined but personally I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss anything so successful as the Dynacord Powermate range.

Yes, the Dynacords are decent, and undeniably successful. But if Dynacord had released a technically identical range of mixers and seperate poweramps it would have been better. That's the point I'm making, in case this is not clear enough.

Maybe, like you're suggesting, all those powered desk users are clueless, or maybe you're just plain and simply wrong.

I'm quite open to the possibility that I haven't forseen every possible sound reinforcement scenario and there might be compelling reasons to use a powered mixer. I've given reasons why I think there isn't. But it's not enough to just keep insisting that I'm wrong. If I'm wrong, prove it.

Eoin Madsen

deswalsh wrote: »

I find that the 2 main reasons why bands sound abysmal are A: the venue is totally unsuitable for live music (>95% of pubs) and B: it's just too bloody loud.
In an actual live music venue (i.e. not the back room of a pub, something designed with music in mind), the PA is generally an in-house one and the sound tends to be fine.
The problem is your average pub band. They are often stuck in a corner, or facing away from the audience or in a room with a really low roof. From my experience bands tend to make sure they are heard by everyone in a 3 mile radius rather than concentrating on getting a decent sound. They dont seem to understand the difference between sound and volume.

I've seen bands with both powered mixers and bands with the active speaker setup, and either is equally likely to sound crap imo. I think its a lack of understanding of the venue, the audience, and how to use the PA they have to suit those that tends to be the problem.

I'd agree with that, except in adding that there are practically no venues that were made to be live music venues in this country. Even the ones that are now dedicated to music are essentially conversions of spaces that were built without acoustics in mind.

Powered mixers don't in and of themselves result in some abstract degradation in sound vs. other arrangements. But they do increase the probability that the sound system won't suit the venue or band, and that the speaker and amp impedence in the system will be mismatched.

Savman

Eoin Madsen wrote:

If you can take any powered mixer or a comparably priced system with the active component not built into the mixer, I'm saying that there's no logical reason to chose the powered mixer.

And I disagree, having used both types of systems.

Eoin Madsen wrote:

So you're saying that having two extra power leads, on a stage or in a room which is going to have to have plenty of power sources in most cases anyway, is so inconvenient that clearly the sacrifice of having a completely unversatile and unspecialised system is justified?

Most rooms do not have the power freely available. All well and good if you're playing a decent venue but as you already pointed out there's a lack of them. Most pubs are not band friendly and certainly do not have "plenty of power sources" - most times you get 2 or 4 sockets if you're lucky.
The system is versatile, I've personally used it from rock gigs to school gigs to speech-only gigs and everything in between.
I was also at a gig recently where they were using a Powermate to mix on and ran the signal into some extra poweramps to power a FOH Dynacord stack. How much more versatile can it be ffs?

Eoin Madsen wrote:

Okay. So what's the reason?

Go and use one in anger every night.:rolleyes:

Eoin Madsen wrote:

But if Dynacord had released a technically identical range of mixers and seperate poweramps it would have been better.

Er, they actually have. They have the CMS mixers if you're that way inclined, but then you're also lugging around a big poweramp as well as your speakers. Completely impractical and far too expensive unless you're a regular working band, and even a fair few working bands use powered desks.

I recommend Powered desks, you don't. Whatever floats your boat.

Eoin Madsen

Savman wrote: »

And I disagree, having used both types of systems.

I've used a variety of systems, including powered mixers on numerous occasions. I've never bought a live rig, so I have no personal ownership bias or attachment.

Most rooms do not have the power freely available. All well and good if you're playing a decent venue but as you already pointed out there's a lack of them. Most pubs are not band friendly and certainly do not have "plenty of power sources" - most times you get 2 or 4 sockets if you're lucky.

And you bring power extensions of course, as do the band to power their equipment. It's not a big deal. For a small gig it means an extra socket on either side of the stage area if you use active speakers. And if you have seperate poweramps, the requirement doesn't change anyway.

The system is versatile, I've personally used it from rock gigs to school gigs to speech-only gigs and everything in between.
I was also at a gig recently where they were using a Powermate to mix on and ran the signal into some extra poweramps to power a FOH Dynacord stack. How much more versatile can it be ffs?

The number of things you've used it for is not an indication of versatility. If yoy have a specific reason to use the exact wattage and impedence of the built in amp then I'm sure it's grand, of course. But any rig you extend from that will always require you to use that amp as part of the system or else you're "lugging" around a powered mixer for nothing.

It simply doesn't make a lot of sense to package a amp and mixer together - it makes an assumption that you'll need a given number of channels, auxilliaries etc. for a given amount of power. You could do a speech only gig with a single aux 4 channel mixer and a power amp and speakers that suited the size of the room. The fact that you could get by with a powered mixer doesn't exactly recommend it. The wattage might be inadequate and the mixer excessive. Or vice versa. In terms of financial commitment, you could as easily buy a seperate system of exactly the same spec and have the option to replace (ie resell) any given part of it. There is no practical advantage to integration in a system for general use, and considerable disadvantage to any specific systems that don't fit the generic spec of a powered mixer.

Er, they actually have. They have the CMS mixers if you're that way inclined, but then you're also lugging around a big poweramp as well as your speakers. Completely impractical and far too expensive unless you're a regular working band, and even a fair few working bands use powered desks.

You realise the total weight and volume for a comparable system will be more or less the same, just distributed differently? The power amp in a Powermate would fit into a 2U rackmount, which is hardly much of a task to be "lugging" around, given that the desk will be correspondingly lighter.

I recommend Powered desks, you don't. Whatever floats your boat.

Indeed.

Savman

Eoin Madsen wrote: »

I've never bought a live rig, so I have no personal ownership bias or attachment.

You're right dude, I really just love Dynacord and I want to seem them do well financially :rolleyes:

The number of things you've used it for is not an indication of versatility.

Riiight.

I'm wasting my time here and this is going nowhere.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

thanks for the advice.
how about this? http://www.thomann.de/ie/tmixthebox_pm184xii_paset_4.htm
there would just be vocal going through it, nothing else

as for pubs not being set up for bands, tell me about it! its a joke in some places!!!

highlydebased

I have a set of Thomann brand 'The Box' active speakers. They are fine. While, yes I do get nervous about them giving up mid gig. I've gigged them rigorously at parties, discos etc (im a DJ). but they are grand. My only complaint is having to run an extension lead to the speaker and they get very hot.


Dynacord stuff is great, but WAAAAAAAAY to expensive.