Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Rane PE-17 or Ashly PQX-571, any opinions?
Any constructive opinions?
(Other than putting both in the "PA junk" category?) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
I feel like a hook is slowly flowing past me, tempting me to bite...
If you actually have some legitamate question about parametric equalizers, please be more specific, and provide some background about what use they are needed. Best regards, John |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I feel like a hook is slowly flowing past me, tempting me to bite...
If you actually have some legitamate question about parametric equalizers, please be more specific, and provide some background about what use they are needed. Best regards, John |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
RLS wrote:
Any constructive opinions? (Other than putting both in the "PA junk" category?) They both work. They are both pretty good as "PA junk" gear goes. They can both be upgraded a little bit with some tinkering. I'd probably pick the Ashly personally. In that price range, though, you could get a used Orban. I'd take the Orban over either. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
RLS wrote:
Any constructive opinions? (Other than putting both in the "PA junk" category?) They both work. They are both pretty good as "PA junk" gear goes. They can both be upgraded a little bit with some tinkering. I'd probably pick the Ashly personally. In that price range, though, you could get a used Orban. I'd take the Orban over either. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Apologies for not being more specific: I didn't mean to start a
controversy. I want to experiment with a parametric eq to control bass response in a home setting. The common feaure of these two devices are that their filters don't have constrained frequency ranges: they can be all be set, say, to operate in the 20Hz-200Hz range. Most other (affordable) devices don't offer this flexibiltiy. Regards, - rls ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 02:42:27 GMT, "John Halliburton" wrote: I feel like a hook is slowly flowing past me, tempting me to bite... If you actually have some legitamate question about parametric equalizers, please be more specific, and provide some background about what use they are needed. Best regards, John |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Apologies for not being more specific: I didn't mean to start a
controversy. I want to experiment with a parametric eq to control bass response in a home setting. The common feaure of these two devices are that their filters don't have constrained frequency ranges: they can be all be set, say, to operate in the 20Hz-200Hz range. Most other (affordable) devices don't offer this flexibiltiy. Regards, - rls ---------------------------------------------------------------------- On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 02:42:27 GMT, "John Halliburton" wrote: I feel like a hook is slowly flowing past me, tempting me to bite... If you actually have some legitamate question about parametric equalizers, please be more specific, and provide some background about what use they are needed. Best regards, John |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"RLS" wrote in message
I want to experiment with a parametric eq to control bass response in a home setting. The common feaure of these two devices are that their filters don't have constrained frequency ranges: they can be all be set, say, to operate in the 20Hz-200Hz range. Most other (affordable) devices don't offer this flexibiltiy. Last time I wanted a parametric to fool with, I picked up a Behringer PEQ 2200 NIB for $59 including shipping on eBay. On the bench and in initial use, it is just fine. Don't know how it will hold up, but for the price... It's not in a mission-critical application. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"RLS" wrote in message
I want to experiment with a parametric eq to control bass response in a home setting. The common feaure of these two devices are that their filters don't have constrained frequency ranges: they can be all be set, say, to operate in the 20Hz-200Hz range. Most other (affordable) devices don't offer this flexibiltiy. Last time I wanted a parametric to fool with, I picked up a Behringer PEQ 2200 NIB for $59 including shipping on eBay. On the bench and in initial use, it is just fine. Don't know how it will hold up, but for the price... It's not in a mission-critical application. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for the advice.
As I wrote above: the difference between these two and the Orban is that their filters don't have constrained frequency ranges: they can all be set, say, to operate in the 20Hz-200Hz range On 11 Sep 2004 00:47:40 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote: RLS wrote: In that price range, though, you could get a used Orban. I'd take the Orban over either. --scott |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for the advice.
As I wrote above: the difference between these two and the Orban is that their filters don't have constrained frequency ranges: they can all be set, say, to operate in the 20Hz-200Hz range On 11 Sep 2004 00:47:40 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote: RLS wrote: In that price range, though, you could get a used Orban. I'd take the Orban over either. --scott |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
RLS wrote:
I want to experiment with a parametric eq to control bass response in a home setting. Never mind, then. That doesn't work very well. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
RLS wrote:
I want to experiment with a parametric eq to control bass response in a home setting. Never mind, then. That doesn't work very well. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Dorsey wrote:
They both work. They are both pretty good as "PA junk" gear goes. They can both be upgraded a little bit with some tinkering. I'd probably pick the Ashly personally. What sort of tinkering? Just curious, because I own the Ashly. I'd assume swapping out opamps? What replacement would you suggest? thanks. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Dorsey wrote:
They both work. They are both pretty good as "PA junk" gear goes. They can both be upgraded a little bit with some tinkering. I'd probably pick the Ashly personally. What sort of tinkering? Just curious, because I own the Ashly. I'd assume swapping out opamps? What replacement would you suggest? thanks. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Dorsey wrote:
They both work. They are both pretty good as "PA junk" gear goes. They can both be upgraded a little bit with some tinkering. I'd probably pick the Ashly personally. What sort of tinkering? Just curious, because I own the Ashly. I'd assume swapping out opamps? What replacement would you suggest? thanks. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Scott Dorsey wrote:
They both work. They are both pretty good as "PA junk" gear goes. They can both be upgraded a little bit with some tinkering. I'd probably pick the Ashly personally. What sort of tinkering? Just curious, because I own the Ashly. I'd assume swapping out opamps? What replacement would you suggest? thanks. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
agent86 wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: They both work. They are both pretty good as "PA junk" gear goes. They can both be upgraded a little bit with some tinkering. I'd probably pick the Ashly personally. What sort of tinkering? Just curious, because I own the Ashly. I'd assume swapping out opamps? What replacement would you suggest? Swapping out opamps, and using better quality capacitors in the time constants. I _think_ the Ashly also benefits from running ground busses and cleaning the ground noise up a little bit, as well as installing improved supply decoupling. And I think (like the Orban 622) you run into stability problems with better supply decoupling unless you first improve the grounds. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
agent86 wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: They both work. They are both pretty good as "PA junk" gear goes. They can both be upgraded a little bit with some tinkering. I'd probably pick the Ashly personally. What sort of tinkering? Just curious, because I own the Ashly. I'd assume swapping out opamps? What replacement would you suggest? Swapping out opamps, and using better quality capacitors in the time constants. I _think_ the Ashly also benefits from running ground busses and cleaning the ground noise up a little bit, as well as installing improved supply decoupling. And I think (like the Orban 622) you run into stability problems with better supply decoupling unless you first improve the grounds. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
As I wrote above:
the difference between these two and the Orban is that their filters don't have constrained frequency ranges: they can all be set, say, to operate in the 20Hz-200Hz range Two of the Orban 642B's four bands cover that range, & the 2 channels can be internally cascaded to provide 8 bands, four of which cover your desired range. Scott Fraser |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
As I wrote above:
the difference between these two and the Orban is that their filters don't have constrained frequency ranges: they can all be set, say, to operate in the 20Hz-200Hz range Two of the Orban 642B's four bands cover that range, & the 2 channels can be internally cascaded to provide 8 bands, four of which cover your desired range. Scott Fraser |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Opinions on a digital audio workstation? | Pro Audio | |||
rane sm82 monitor question | Pro Audio | |||
RANE MLM82A: How Does It Compare to Mackie VLZ or Behringer UB mixers? | Pro Audio | |||
FS: ASHLY 4.24C PROTEA digital crossover - system processor, like new | Marketplace | |||
Ashly crossover dial indicators not accurate | Pro Audio |