1 x Europower 2500 - 2x750 W at 4 Ohm for monitors

Europower sounds like a Behringer product... this is the last topic we had on [[url=http://[/URL]="http://recording.or…"]Behringer amps[/]="http://recording.or…"]Behringer amps[/]. Not pretty.

What's the 2 mixers for? Is one of them not big enough?

Ummmm? How about some in ear monitors? So much greener. Uses much less power than those heavy wedges on the stage and the associated power gulping amplifier. Less junk to schlep.

I said in ear not rear!
Ms. Remy Ann David

I don't know if "junk" was an intentional poke at the Peavey monitors. I will say that those have to be the loudest dang thangs that they ever made. That 4" compression driver on a conical is just magic with a Shure Beta87 (NOT). They require a bit of processing to keep them under control and sounding good. I too would vote for IEMs, but only if they can be done right. They will clean up your sound out front quite a bit. That will be better than new speakers and amps at this point.

Seriously? A 4" HF pusher?
My computer speakers have 2" woofers...
Do you use them as bright bass amps or something?

They are DTH2 drivers in a monitor config with a round horn. They be loud and outta' control.

Codemonkey wrote: 1 x Europower 2500 - 2x750 W at 4 Ohm for monitors

Europower sounds like a Behringer product... this is the last topic we had on [[url=http://[/URL]="http://recording.or…"]Behringer amps[/]="http://recording.or…"]Behringer amps[/]. Not pretty.

What's the 2 mixers for? Is one of them not big enough?

It indeed is a Behringer product. Actually I read quite a lot of OK reviews about it and it's cheap - as with anything else from Behringer. As this amp is bought for the purpose of powering two monitors, I thought that it would be a place where I could save some money until I can afford to invest in better quality.

I have two mixers at the moment because I got the Powermate cheap and it's useful in small venues. But I would go with the Soundcraft if I had to choose at any point.

RemyRAD wrote: Ummmm? How about some in ear monitors? So much greener. Uses much less power than those heavy wedges on the stage and the associated power gulping amplifier. Less junk to schlep.

I said in ear not rear!
Ms. Remy Ann David

Since I've found that interaction on stage seems to be lowered a bit by adding in-ears for some reason, I would prefer not to use them, and it's quite an investment buying it for all 5 band members, since it's me who's spending the money on this setup.

sheet wrote: I don't know if "junk" was an intentional poke at the Peavey monitors. I will say that those have to be the loudest dang thangs that they ever made. That 4" compression driver on a conical is just magic with a Shure Beta87 (NOT). They require a bit of processing to keep them under control and sounding good. I too would vote for IEMs, but only if they can be done right. They will clean up your sound out front quite a bit. That will be better than new speakers and amps at this point.

Why would it clean up the sound FOH? I don't fully understand.

Since I've found that interaction on stage seems to be lowered a bit by adding in-ears for some reason, I would prefer not to use them, and it's quite an investment buying it for all 5 band members, since it's me who's spending the money on this setup.

You need to make the monitor mixes better then. Interaction should not change one iota because the monitor is in ear or a wedge. There is significant and huge advantages to not having wedges causing mic bleed and feedback loops AND each musician having their own mix volume. 95% of floor wedges are too loud anyway.

Oh, and just because five guys are onstage together doesn't make it a given that they have good ensemble. Even a rock band can play like chamber musicians...nay! Should play like chamber musicians! Otherwise it's just five guys standing on a stage independently diddling themselves.

Why would it clean up the sound FOH? I don't fully understand.

Instead of having 100dB wedges blaring at the mics (which are going to the monitors AND FoH) you have no bleed into them. The mic therefore has much more gain before feedback, and without the delay effect happening with the mic, you get less strange effects and also is easier to work with.
Also since the stage volume will come down by a large amount it means the FoH guy has less to battle against.

In our church, I match everything to the drums (and then some). We took measures to bring the drums down a reasonable volume and it makes things workable.

TheJackAttack wrote: Oh, and just because five guys are onstage together doesn't make it a given that they have good ensemble. Even a rock band can play like chamber musicians...nay! Should play like chamber musicians! Otherwise it's just five guys standing on a stage independently diddling themselves.

Thanks for the reply. I am more than aware of this, I live from playing drums and have done so for some time now and it might just be me who's sensitive, but since you're all advising the same thing I'll start saving up the cash. It's quite an investment, at least in Denmark it is.. :)

Codemonkey wrote: Why would it clean up the sound FOH? I don't fully understand.

Instead of having 100dB wedges blaring at the mics (which are going to the monitors AND FoH) you have no bleed into them. The mic therefore has much more gain before feedback, and without the delay effect happening with the mic, you get less strange effects and also is easier to work with.
Also since the stage volume will come down by a large amount it means the FoH guy has less to battle against.

In our church, I match everything to the drums (and then some). We took measures to bring the drums down a reasonable volume and it makes things workable.

I must admit it makes alot of sense. What would you recommend me buying then? Thanks alot for your replies as well.