QSC PA Opinions

[catmaninc]

I'm looking to add a couple subwoofers to my 2 CLR Neos to create a small sound system. I have an Axefx II XL and just added a Nord Stage2 piano. I am still in the process of setting up a music room but I can tell from listening with headphones that I'll need subs to cover the low end stuff (synth, B3 Organ, pads, etc.) from the Nord. I also would like to add a mixer. I have grandkids who play sax/clarinet, drums and keyboards so we can have some fun "jamming" when they visit. I like the QSC Touchmix16 as it appears to be easier to get a good mix (preprogammed mixes for drums, horns, vocals,etc.) and has more than enough channels for other family members who "think that they can sing".
I think that the Touchmix can take stereo line level (unbalanced) inputs (Nord) with no need for a direct box. I believe the Axefx has both a mic level (balanced) and line level (unbalanced) and could be connected either way.
I am favoring the QSC KW181 subs (I like the compact size) but am open to suggestions. The CLR's have a switch for use with a sub and I believe that the cutoff is 120HZ.
Am I correct in assuming that I will not need a direct box? Is there any sonic advantage to using a direct box? I would appreciate any suggestions on putting the system together

 

[Rex]

I believe the Axefx has both a mic level (balanced) and line level (unbalanced) and could be connected either way.

The Axe has no mic-level I/O. Signal level and balanced/unbalanced are two different things.

Am I correct in assuming that I will not need a direct box? Is there any sonic advantage to using a direct box?

If your mixer has an appropriate input for each thing you want to run through it (only one input per channel!), then there's no advantage to a DI box.

 

[Randall d]

I'm looking to add a couple subwoofers to my 2 CLR Neos to create a small sound system. I have an Axefx II XL and just added a Nord Stage2 piano. I am still in the process of setting up a music room but I can tell from listening with headphones that I'll need subs to cover the low end stuff (synth, B3 Organ, pads, etc.) from the Nord. I also would like to add a mixer. I have grandkids who play sax/clarinet, drums and keyboards so we can have some fun "jamming" when they visit. I like the QSC Touchmix16 as it appears to be easier to get a good mix (preprogammed mixes for drums, horns, vocals,etc.) and has more than enough channels for other family members who "think that they can sing".
I think that the Touchmix can take stereo line level (unbalanced) inputs (Nord) with no need for a direct box. I believe the Axefx has both a mic level (balanced) and line level (unbalanced) and could be connected either way.
I am favoring the QSC KW181 subs (I like the compact size) but am open to suggestions. The CLR's have a switch for use with a sub and I believe that the cutoff is 120HZ.
Am I correct in assuming that I will not need a direct box? Is there any sonic advantage to using a direct box? I would appreciate any suggestions on putting the system together

This could be a problem for you. The low-pass cutoff for the QSC sub is set to 100 Hz. If the CLR's high pass filter (when the Sub switch is set to On) is 120 Hz, you will have a dip (hole) in your system frequency response between 100 and 120 Hz. You may want to consider getting an active crossover (such as a DBX Driverack) to handle the crossover duties as opposed to using the internal filter on the CLR.

 

[BBN]

This could be a problem for you. The low-pass cutoff for the QSC sub is set to 100 Hz. If the CLR's high pass filter (when the Sub switch is set to On) is 120 Hz, you will have a dip (hole) in your system frequency response between 100 and 120 Hz. You may want to consider getting an active crossover (such as a DBX Driverack) to handle the crossover duties as opposed to using the internal filter on the CLR.

I would think that the QSC mixer he is looking at could handle the crossover duties.
I'm going to look at the manual in a few minutes, but if it doesn't have crossover capabilities....then this is a reason I go with a Behringer X-mixer instead.

* just checked the QSC Touch Mix manual....you can have Eq and Filters applied to any of the outputs, so the Mixer can cover your Crossover duties.


As far as the subs, I think the KW118's would go great with the CLR.
I did a gig with a pair of CRL's on sticks, and a dual 18" JBL SRX728....it sounded great.

If I can ever find a used pair of passive CLR's, I would likely try to gig with those.

 

[BBN]

Might be a little late to this thread, but we've played outside for large crowds with a pair of QSC KW153's and a pair of QSC KW181's (80's rock / metal). We barely even pushed them and there was an insane amount of bass, loud and super clean sound.

I am about to get a 2nd CLR for my Axe-Fx and am looking forward to comparing them to the 153's as part of the PA.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I have heard/tried the same set up you have. It's great and very punchy.
The three way KW153's are a great speaker.

I will be interested to hear how they compare to the CLR. I never ran those side by side.
My guess is that the KW's will sound bigger and beefier, but the CLR's will have a clearer more articulate high mid range.

 

[DavezHear]

I have heard/tried the same set up you have. It's great and very punchy.
The three way KW153's are a great speaker.

I will be interested to hear how they compare to the CLR. I never ran those side by side.
My guess is that the KW's will sound bigger and beefier, but the CLR's will have a clearer more articulate high mid range.

I have both and that's exactly the difference in sound. Our current practice setup we have a pair of KW153's and 181's facing us and have the CLR's in the back corners panned in reverse. Everything running thru the PA (Studio Live) Killer surround effect.

 

[mrstrat]

The kicker for us was listening to all of them side-by-side. After listening to all of them extensively the best sounding combination for us was a pair of K10's with the KW181 sub. We play a mix of rock, funk, and pop, in medium sized bar/club venues and they sound amazing. For us the K8's were just too small and the K12's had a strange mid-low frequency thing going on that made them sound boxy. The sales guy said that he owned the K10/KW181 for his sound reinforcement business, and that combo worked at 90% of the venues he was hired for. BTW, he would have made more money selling us the K12's, and still recommended the 10's.

 

[mwd]

Typically how are the KW153's setup when used with the 181's. Can they be put on a pole or could they be just sat on top of the sub?

 

[BBN]

Typically how are the KW153's setup when used with the 181's. Can they be put on a pole or could they be just sat on top of the sub?

I would recommend NOT putting them on the subs.
All tops need to be elevated to get partially over the peoples heads that are standing in front of them.

I usually like my guitar player to stand in front and make sure at least half to 3/4 of a woofer, and the entire tweeter, are above his head.
He's average height.

 

[Rex]

I would recommend NOT putting them on the subs.
All tops need to be elevated to get partially over the peoples heads that are standing in front of them.

It can be done effectively. There is a pole-mount kit available for the 181.

 

[mwd]

Sonically speaking, in a live 'stereo' gig, is there any + or - to putting the two subs in the middle rear of the stage, beside each other, or stacked on each other, as opposed to placing them with the tops on the sides?

Any + or - to running the subs in mono while all else is in stereo?

 

[RDH]

Sonically speaking, in a live 'stereo' gig, is there any + or - to putting the two subs in the middle rear of the stage, beside each other, or stacked on each other, as opposed to placing them with the tops on the sides?

Any + or - to running the subs in mono while all else is in stereo?

There's no benefit to running subs stereo! I don't think placing them in rear of stage would be a good idea , It's not as big of an issue with subs , as with main speakers ,but could run into some time alignment issues !

 

[RDH]

Our band has KW 152's and 181's , They sound great as a general system , however I've never liked the way guitars sound through them ! The 15's just don't have some of the needed frequency response in upper mids need for good guitar tone! I'd like to try the 153's or maybe K10's mentioned above , it's just costly to change horses! Also using the Presonus board, It's great ,but hind sight , I would go with the behringer X32 better effects options and better control apps!

 

[BBN]

It can be done effectively. There is a pole-mount kit available for the 181.

I guess I should have been more specific. Agree that over the sub is fine with the pole mount.
What I meant was, don't put it on top of the sub with nothing in between (and leave it that low to the ground).
Tops need to get over heads.....

 

[Randall d]

If you put two subs together they will acoustically couple and you will get a 3 dB boost over having the same subs apart from each other. If there was a way to put the subs together in the front center of the stage, that would be ideal. But it isn't practical in most places, so you end up putting one on each side. I wonder if one wouldn't be better off putting both on one side and just putting the satellite speaker on its own stand on the other side.

 

[BBN]

Our band has KW 152's and 181's , They sound great as a general system , however I've never liked the way guitars sound through them ! The 15's just don't have some of the needed frequency response in upper mids need for good guitar tone! I'd like to try the 153's or maybe K10's mentioned above , it's just costly to change horses! Also using the Presonus board, It's great ,but hind sight , I would go with the behringer X32 better effects options and better control apps!

If you can rent kw122's and just try them, I would recommend it.
I bet you'd find you like them better.
...and you could likely sell your 153's and get the 122's and make money.

 

[BBN]

Sonically speaking, in a live 'stereo' gig, is there any + or - to putting the two subs in the middle rear of the stage, beside each other, or stacked on each other, as opposed to placing them with the tops on the sides?

Any + or - to running the subs in mono while all else is in stereo?

Never put the subs behind you.
As far as side of the stage or in the middle in front of stage....depends on the room.
Subs put out more when they're against a reflective surface.
So if the stage is higher than the height of the sub, putting in the middle sometimes works great.....you get the reflection off the stage.
If the stage isn't that high.....then on each side of the stage is just fine.
If you're going to get the poles that go into your subs, then it will probably be easier to just use that config every night.

Subs can always be mono.
I run my tops in mono too.
That's more of a personal preference....but IMO the only person that is going to enjoy a stereo mix is the guy standing perfectly in between both of your tops.
Everyone else is getting a lopsided mix....if you have panned anything. And if you're not going to pan anything.....then why go stereo?

 

[Rex]

What I meant was, don't put it on top of the sub with nothing in between (and leave it that low to the ground).
Tops need to get over heads.....

True.

 

[Rex]

If you put two subs together they will acoustically couple and you will get a 3 dB boost over having the same subs apart from each other. If there was a way to put the subs together in the front center of the stage, that would be ideal.

The problem is that, when you put them together, you slam part of the crowd with a chest-thumping sledgehammer—the combined output of both speakers together, plus the 3 dB boost—and in most parts of the house, you'll get that extra 3 dB correlation boost whether they're together or not. Better to keep them separate, splitting the power between the two. If you need an extra 3dB, there's a knob somewhere that you can turn.

 

[dgzieg]

I'm barely qualified to touch on this subject, but I have read enough to know that the subs separated is typically considerably more problematic than the two side by side, ideally center front of the stage. With the two separated the peaks and nulls you get from reflections get much more complicated, and the peaks are higher and nulls are deeper, so you can have enormous bass in one spot, move a few feet and get none. Sub placement is very non-intuitive. Hopefully someone who actually knows what's involved will jump in.