Bonnie:
-> ...that take time alignment of the drivers out of the picture,
-> which is only one of many things involved in aligning a sound system.
Ever see the gunsight that clips into the E-Track on a Flashlight
system?  That kinda takes care of physical dispertion alignment
in a big way, there...
-> Even the finest sound system in a football stadium will still sound
-> like a football stadium.
You're right.  And there's a point of diminishing returns that can be
reached rather quickly in those environments.
-> Most rock or other concert acts have no consideration of even
-> coverage over the entire room, even spectral distribution over the
-> seating areas.
Right again.  SPL is the _major_ consideration in rock concerts - all
that has to be done is to get a lot of volume to most of the arena, with
frequency response being a secondary consideration (unfortunately).
We're speaking of highly portable, road-rugged systems, designed to do
a down-and-dirty job in as efficient a manner as possible.  And, of
course, the "football arena" reasoning comes into the picture as well.
-> It's the seeming lack of REAL engineering that goes into the design
-> and installation of some of these systems...
I'll tell Roy Clair & M.L. Procise you said that.  }:->  They'll look
you up next time they're in Sacramento...
-> ...but excellent sound takes that extra effort, experience,
-> engineering and tweaking USING TEST EQUIPMENT EXTENSIVELY.
Your use of the word "extensively" concerns me greatly.  In today's one
nighter concert world, and with Teamster, IATSE, and IBEW calls to be
considered, the labor "fat" needs to be trimmed everywhere possible.
If an engineer/operator/whatever is holding up the entire production
crew and union call whilst tweaking a system at 105db, then you've got
major problems on your hands with the promoter. There comes a time
during setup when you've got to call it quits.  The lighting crew can't
focus their 600+ cans while pink noise (or worse, a Yanni CD) is
blasting out from the mains, the ushers and decorators can't hear
themselves think while they prepare the venue, the video people can't
communicate effectively while tweeking their ten Barcos, etc. etc. etc.
There's lots to be said for expediency.  "Close Gets It!" applies
heavily in the modern concert world, where folks have to realize that
there's lots more than _sound_ involved in a production.  The tickets
aren't being sold to folks coming to "hear" the band; those ticket
buyers are looking to "experience" the band.  I guarantee you that
absolutely _no_ major concert artist would perform with a half-setup
sound system - but I also guarantee you that doors would be held for
a half-setup light rig as well.  Same goes for video.
And that's where the plug-n-play systems come into the picture.  Speed
is everything, and if the system can be made mostly pure in a half-hour,
without compromising more than 2% of the seats, well, then, that's
good enough for the evening, thank you very much.  And don't be too
concerned about every last single member of the audience - you can't
please all of the people all of the time, but you _can_ please most of
the people most of the time.
The 2% rule is applied _heavily_ in the midwest, where Contemporary
Group, one of the nation's largest concert promoters, came up with
that theory. The reasoning is simple: of your audience, less than 2%
of them should have a major problem with any aspect of the production.
And in a worst case scenario at a shed, 2% of 25,000 is 500 people.
I don't think it's even possible for an engineer or a system to piss
off 500 folks, even out of 25,000, without destroying the system, or
being called on the carpet by the promoter or the road manager.
Catchya...
Tim ==
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------