RCF HD10a's vs QSC k10's

[iago]

Hi guys,

has anyone done an a/b comparison on these two speakers & if so what's the verdict? Want to use them for side-fills/monitoring for on stage corporate/wedding band work mostly.

Thanks,

J

[Bazza]

I'm not sure if this will help, but I own a pair of RCF 310as and a pair of K12s. I use them for my acoustic duo and discos. The RCFs have more clarity, the QSCs are louder with more thump (as you would expect from bigger speakers).

The K10s are very good and I haven't heard the RCF model you mention. I'm certain either would suit your needs.

Regards

Bazza

[Sam Spoons]

I have QSC K12s (most natural on acoustic guitars, voices and recorded material) and Yamaha DXR10 (a little more flattering, warmer with a more scooped mid range), both great though. I also have an Alto TS110A which has less power/volume and isn't as well defined but for the price..... I listened to a couple of RCFs and us a pair on a regular gig I do, they are very good too. I'd say nearly any reputable make active will do the job, my least fave was the Mackie SRM450 mk2. The choice (as it was for me) will come down to what pleases your ears.

[OneEng]

I like the sound of the K10 better than the K12. The RCF310a has a smoother horn than the K10 IMHO.

[iago]

Thanks fella's. Was gonna go for the QSC k10's but found these RCF HD's & general opinion seems to be that they're both good but the RCF's are sweeter sounding with higher fidelity...especially at higher volumes. SPL is identical on both so one wonders about the QSC 1000 watt tag (false advertising or the amp just isn't as efficient as the RCF??)...strange also that you'd need 500 watt for the HF driver anyway?? However, the input section on the QSC is useful...although not sure how much I'd actually use it.

Speakers are always subjective as we all know. I guess the rest of my system is RCF so prob makes sense i stick to the brand I know & trust even though I'm sure the QSC's are great speakers. Pity nobody here has heard the RCF HD's 1st hand & they appear to be less available in local stores for me to have a listen to. I've been told that they're RCF's competitor against QSC's K range, so you'd hope with them being a more modern range that they would have succeeded in beating the QSC's in overall sound.

[Sam Spoons]

Efficiency (and we're talking about speaker efficiency here, the amp gives out an easily measurable number of watts) is more significant than power, the JBL PRX512M claims 132 dB from 500 watts continuous (is nobody quoting RMS watts anymore?) where the QSC K12 claims only 131dB from twice that. Either way they're both bloody loud. My DXR10s quote 90 watts 1/8th power consumption (i.e. 0.4 amps at 230 volts) from 700 watts 'continuous' and 132dB max. The K12s quote 1.13 amps 1/8th power from 1000 watts for slightly less SPL. I'd say that SPL is probably as good a measure of loudness as we can hope for and use ears to determine quality. The number of dBs you get out compared to the number of watts you supply to the mains input is the true measure of efficiency (but it still takes no account of sound quality). At the end of the day what we need is loud/clean/cheap (ok, and reliable) so when I went looking for a new system I decided what I could afford (then, after listening, more or less doubled it) and listened to a range of speakers. For better or worse I now have what I liked best/could afford on the day, K12s for FOH and DXR10s for monitors.

[OneEng]

Sam,

It isn't even that honest

For the most part, what they are doing isn't actually lying. There are in fact 2 500W amplifiers in the enclosure.

I suspect that the woofer in a 12" speaker can only handle around 200-300W continous (The JBL PRX400 for example is 300W continous). It is possible that the 500W amp for the woofer gets exercised on peak transients a little. The HF horn likely only gets around 60W though. The HF amp is limited to prevent speaker damage, but for economies of scale, they use the same amp module.

My DSR112's have different amps for the HF and LF (450W and 850W). I can say that the DSR's have a better bottom than the PRX612's, but the difference isn't huge despite what the wattage would suggest.

Sadly, even the SPL number is crap. The measurement technique used can cause the readings to be inconsistent between manufacturers. There are several frequency weighting specifications for the single SPL number you see. See this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighting_filter

First, practically any HF driver can create enough noise to cause pain. This is how a 10 QSC KW speaker can have the same SPL as a Meyer sound UPA-1P (very high end great sounding box).

If the SPL is measured using the C curve standard, you get a much better idea of the overall sound coming out of the box, but it is still possible that the HF is blasting while the LF sucks.

Most SPL meters use the A curve since their primary purpose is NOT to determine the output of pro sound gear, but rather to see if the sound levels in various areas will damage your hearing. See this link for more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_level_meter

Finally, even if the SPL is measured the same way, and the speaker is balanced in its output, who says it isn't putting out 140db SPL of sound that is so offensive that no one wants to hear it?

Your best bet is to hear them yourself. The next best bet is to talk to people that have heard lots of different speakers and get their opinion. The very LAST thing to look at is the speaker specs, but if you HAVE to use this route, the look at SPL first and just ignore the power rating completely.

[Sam Spoons]

Nicely explained OneEng The moral is "use your ears"

[Joel Nichols]

I use Art 310As on a regular basis, and own a pair of K10s myself. In my experience, I much prefer the K Series, mostly because of its flatter, more neutral sound compared to the RCFs, which seem to have a bit of a "smiley" curve built in to them. I find I'm left with with more freedom for creativity when mixing using the QSCs, whereas with the RCFs - while the top end is beautifully smooth - I'm always searching for more mid range clarity and punch.

The fact that the QSCs also have the inbuilt mixer, tilting pole cup, and ecosystem of outdoor covers, cases, etc. makes them an extremely versatile choice as well - one of my best purchases to date.

I haven't tried the HD Series myself though, I'd be interested to hear it.

[Sam Spoons]

That was my take on the K12 compared to all the other speakers I tried, it's more neutral sounding. My Yamaha DXR10s are nice speakers (I couldn't justify K10s for monitors) but also seem to have a smily curve built in.

[MarkPAman]

I use Art 310As on a regular basis, and own a pair of K10s myself. In my experience, I much prefer the K Series, mostly because of its flatter, more neutral sound compared to the RCFs, which seem to have a bit of a "smiley" curve built in to them.

Agreed, though to be fair to RCF, the 310A is a much cheaper cab. the 4PRO or HD are closer in price and performance, while my TT series beats the K10 by a mile IMHO.

[damoore]

Sam,

It isn't even that honest

Actually I think its worse than that because the specs generally give the performance of the speaker at 1W of input plus a "MAX SPL" number. But those 1W specs tell you absolutely nothing about the speaker's performance at max SPL.

Building a speaker that works well at high SPL is much harder and more expensive than building one that works well at 1W. But from the specs you can't tell the difference.

Plus you need to listen at high SPL to tell the difference, which is hard to do in your typical shop.

[iago]

Mark have you heard the HD & 4PRO series? I know the 4PRO series is slightly more expensive (think about £100 difference).

If so which would you recommend? People seem to be raving about the HD series...but hadn't even considered the 4PRO until you mentioned them. I'd be using them predominantly for stage monitoring/side fills.

[Jorge]

Actually I think its worse than that because the specs generally give the performance of the speaker at 1W of input plus a "MAX SPL" number. But those 1W specs tell you absolutely nothing about the speaker's performance at max SPL.

Building a speaker that works well at high SPL is much harder and more expensive than building one that works well at 1W. But from the specs you can't tell the difference.

Plus you need to listen at high SPL to tell the difference, which is hard to do in your typical shop.

I think this is a very important point. When you audition a speaker one of the most valuable pieces of information you can get is how good, or how bad, the speaker sounds at the SPL at which you will be using it. This would require a large room with decent acoustics, which is hard to find in music or pro audio shops. Field auditions at gigs are hard to interpret because you don't know what EQ, compression and other effects are being used and you don't know the source material very well. It would be nice if manufacturers would present anechoic frequency response and polar plots at 1/8 and 1/2 max power as well as at 1 watt, but I don't see market forces causing that to happen anytime soon. The 30 day return policies, inefficient and wasteful as they are, are one potential solution to this. What I have done in the past when there is no 30 day return policy is make my best purchase judgement then buy one unit and test it under real life conditions and buy the second once I decide I like it.

[OneEng]

Sam,

It isn't even that honest

Actually I think its worse than that because the specs generally give the performance of the speaker at 1W of input plus a "MAX SPL" number. But those 1W specs tell you absolutely nothing about the speaker's performance at max SPL.

Building a speaker that works well at high SPL is much harder and more expensive than building one that works well at 1W. But from the specs you can't tell the difference.

Plus you need to listen at high SPL to tell the difference, which is hard to do in your typical shop.

I completely agree.

You can get away with a fairly inexpensive speaker if all you want is to amplify a guitar and a couple of guys singing in a small bar for 50-100 people.

If you want to play a full rock band for 300 people outdoors, it is quite a different story.

From my experience, there are 4 classifications of speaker systems.

• Crap - doesn't sound good at any volume
• Small duo, acoustic rig for small indoor areas - little need for bottom end, speaker is not required to be very loud.
• Full rock band setup for indoor 90Hz where the tops are running the show. Most of the bass guitar is here and the impact of the kick is here. It costs more money to design speakers that can pop out these frequencies with authority.
  
  Another place where I have heard a large difference between "good tops" and "poor tops" is at higher SPL from the horn. Good tops sound clear and smooth even when very loud while poor tops get harsh and brittle .... and just plain horrible sounding when the volume goes up.
  
  Incidentally, I agree that the K10 has fantastic round bottom for a 10" speaker. For acoustic gigs, I think I would still prefer the smooth HF of the RCF's, but YMMV.

[OneEng]

If you ever get a chance to hear a Meyer rig, that is an excellent example of a VERY nice sounding speaker system.... of course, one would expect that if you are paying >$4000.00 per box (more than I paid for my entire FOH speaker setup).

On the other end of the spectrum (no offence to anyone using these speakers) a JRX system would lie in the "not good" sounding arena.