QSC K8.2 Keyboard Amplification -- Quick Review

[AnotherScott]

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around an 8" speaker for keyboards. These wouldn't be used for bass. Hard to believe the 10" wouldn't sound better.

You can get plenty of bass out of an 8" speaker, though typically not at the same level as out of a bigger speaker. It's the wrong choice if you're looking for bone-rattling pipe organ of course. But I use the ZXa1 all the time, I've even used it for LH bass on quiet gigs. If it's a "dancier" gig, though, I'll feed my bass patch out to a Markbass CMD12p bass amp. But that EV goes a lot further than you might thing. And *overall* the speaker sounds so good. I mean, so what if I can get more bass out of some other 10 inch, if the tone itself isn't as good, right? EV doesn't make a 10" version of that one, and I've heard numerous 10" speakers that don't sound as good overall as EV's 8.

 

Meanwhile, I succumbed, and did order this new QSC, I'll be curious to compare it.

[dongna]

Meanwhile, I succumbed, and did order this new QSC, I'll be curious to compare it.

I for one will be very interested in reading anything you might post on this...

[cphollis]

Meanwhile, I succumbed, and did order this new QSC, I'll be curious to compare it.

I for one will be very interested in reading anything you might post on this...

 

Same here. Not a lot of folks out there sharing their opinions. Which ones did you get?

[AnotherScott]

Meanwhile, I succumbed, and did order this new QSC, I'll be curious to compare it.

I for one will be very interested in reading anything you might post on this...

 

Same here. Not a lot of folks out there sharing their opinions. Which ones did you get?

ordered a single K8.2.

 

I currently have three of the ZXa1, which get used in a variety of configs, as keyboard amp or as PA mains. Depending on how much benefit I see to the QSC, it could replace one, two, or all three. Or none.

[cphollis]

Meanwhile, I succumbed, and did order this new QSC, I'll be curious to compare it.

I for one will be very interested in reading anything you might post on this...

 

Same here. Not a lot of folks out there sharing their opinions. Which ones did you get?

ordered a single K8.2.

 

I currently have three of the ZXa1, which get used in a variety of configs, as keyboard amp or as PA mains. Depending on how much benefit I see to the QSC, it could replace one, two, or all three. Or none.

 

No denying the ZXa1 brings serious bang-for-buck. I recommend them all the time to my gigging keyboard friends who are on a strict budget. I've been there.

 

That being said, what I liked about the new K8.2 is that I heard serious high-end sound for not much $$$. The more expensive stuff does what it does, fine, whatever. But if you've got the coin, I saw it as a huge upgrade to the other stuff in this price category.

 

No opinion whatsoever on the K10.2 or the K12.2. I've got amazing gear that covers that territory

[jazzpiano88]

Any hint of harshness or excess treble when cranked?

Also, can they knock pictures off the shelves?

 

(I've had to remove all of the pictures in the studio with my Cornwall III's)

 

 

[cphollis]

Can they knock pictures off shelves? Haven't tried that yet, but it's possible

 

Quick update? Tried them at an outdoor gig this evening.

 

As many of you who bring your own amplification know, what sounds good indoors can sound weak and impotent outdoors. No reflections and reverb. The naked sound

 

Well, backyard party for maybe 100 people? Vocals-only PA as usual. Put the K8.2 on poles behind me a few feet. Two guitar players, plus a cave-man drummer. It got LOUD at times.

 

No problem, I had plenty of crisp, clean volume. Surprising bass as well. Nord APs sound pretty durn good -- B3, samples, EP, etc. sounded freakin' fantastic.

 

No problem keeping up with the volume levels, and when it was time for solos, plenty of headroom to cut through the guitar clutter with authority.

 

OK, at the hairy edge when it got REALLY LOUD, maybe there was a bit of honkiness in my APs, but we really shouldn't have been playing that loud.

 

Easy load-in, load-out. Plenty of room to place them where they needed to be. All good.

 

BTW, for these gigs I usually bring bigger gear, like QSC K12s or my Fulcrum Acoustic 12ac units if I wanted to spoil everyone. But the K8.2s brought very solid, professional game, especially considering their $649 price point.

 

EV, Yamaha -- time to get busy

 

 

[AnotherScott]

Haven't tried the two speakers close together facing apart thing. If I wanted that sort of dispersion, I'd go with a vertical line array or the SSv3.

Okay, so I've decided to keep the K8.2. I'm thinking about whether I might want some kind of stereo. Note the "some kind" qualifier... I don't care about actual stereo imaging per se, just something to give the sound some "spread," make it sound less like the sound is coming from a point source box, with maybe a side benefit of providing a little more on-stage sound off-axis, whether for my band-mates, of if I choose to walk around the stage with a {gasp} keytar.

 

Two possibilities:

 

* stack QSC and SS3, something which has been discussed at length in the mega-thread.

 

* use a pair of QSC, next to each other, angled away from each other... or stacked and angled differently, which I think equates to your line array suggestion, though I don't know if that's exactly what you meant.

 

As I see it...

 

2nd QSC advantage over SS3:

* Lighter.

* Cheaper.

* Less fussy about setup.

* The option to also use it for a more traditional "sweet spot generating" stereo presentation if a situation ever calls for it (something I am unlikely to do).

 

SS3 advantage over a 2nd QSC:

* People will get a "stereo-like" effect no matter where they are in the audience.

* The option to use it alone and still have a kind of stereo, albeit trading off the QSC sound quality (something I am unlikely to do).

* and something which could be and advantage or disadvantage... based on comments in that other thread, it seems like the sound doesn't "fall off" as quickly as traditional speakers. This is good to the extent that people farther back still hear you well; but also could be not so good, as that changes the balance between you and the rest of the instruments, depending on where someone is in the audience.

 

My main question is, did I miss anything in that list, in terms of the relative advantages of each approach? (Secondarily, I have another question which I'll put in that other thread.)

[MotiDave]

Haven't tried the two speakers close together facing apart thing. If I wanted that sort of dispersion, I'd go with a vertical line array or the SSv3.

Okay, so I've decided to keep the K8.2. I'm thinking about whether I might want some kind of stereo. Note the "some kind" qualifier... I don't care about actual stereo imaging per se, just something to give the sound some "spread," make it sound less like the sound is coming from a point source box, with maybe a side benefit of providing a little more on-stage sound off-axis, whether for my band-mates, of if I choose to walk around the stage with a {gasp} keytar.

 

Two possibilities:

 

* stack QSC and SS3, something which has been discussed at length in the mega-thread.

 

* use a pair of QSC, next to each other, angled away from each other... or stacked and angled differently, which I think equates to your line array suggestion, though I don't know if that's exactly what you meant.

 

As I see it...

 

2nd QSC advantage over SS3:

* Lighter.

* Cheaper.

* Less fussy about setup.

* The option to also use it for a more traditional "sweet spot generating" stereo presentation if a situation ever calls for it (something I am unlikely to do).

 

SS3 advantage over a 2nd QSC:

* People will get a "stereo-like" effect no matter where they are in the audience.

* The option to use it alone and still have a kind of stereo, albeit trading off the QSC sound quality (something I am unlikely to do).

* and something which could be and advantage or disadvantage... based on comments in that other thread, it seems like the sound doesn't "fall off" as quickly as traditional speakers. This is good to the extent that people farther back still hear you well; but also could be not so good, as that changes the balance between you and the rest of the instruments, depending on where someone is in the audience.

 

My main question is, did I miss anything in that list, in terms of the relative advantages of each approach? (Secondarily, I have another question which I'll put in that other thread.)

 

QSC doesn't look like a portable hot dog grill?

 

btw, you had me at keytar.

[cphollis]

Haven't tried the two speakers close together facing apart thing. If I wanted that sort of dispersion, I'd go with a vertical line array or the SSv3.

Okay, so I've decided to keep the K8.2. I'm thinking about whether I might want some kind of stereo. Note the "some kind" qualifier... I don't care about actual stereo imaging per se, just something to give the sound some "spread," make it sound less like the sound is coming from a point source box, with maybe a side benefit of providing a little more on-stage sound off-axis, whether for my band-mates, of if I choose to walk around the stage with a {gasp} keytar.

 

Two possibilities:

 

* stack QSC and SS3, something which has been discussed at length in the mega-thread.

 

* use a pair of QSC, next to each other, angled away from each other... or stacked and angled differently, which I think equates to your line array suggestion, though I don't know if that's exactly what you meant.

 

As I see it...

 

2nd QSC advantage over SS3:

* Lighter.

* Cheaper.

* Less fussy about setup.

* The option to also use it for a more traditional "sweet spot generating" stereo presentation if a situation ever calls for it (something I am unlikely to do).

 

SS3 advantage over a 2nd QSC:

* People will get a "stereo-like" effect no matter where they are in the audience.

* The option to use it alone and still have a kind of stereo, albeit trading off the QSC sound quality (something I am unlikely to do).

* and something which could be and advantage or disadvantage... based on comments in that other thread, it seems like the sound doesn't "fall off" as quickly as traditional speakers. This is good to the extent that people farther back still hear you well; but also could be not so good, as that changes the balance between you and the rest of the instruments, depending on where someone is in the audience.

 

My main question is, did I miss anything in that list, in terms of the relative advantages of each approach? (Secondarily, I have another question which I'll put in that other thread.)

 

For convenience, we'll call "SSv3+K8.2" approach A, and "pair of K8.2 on poles" approach B.

 

You've got a good list. For me, it's all about venue and intent.

 

Some venues don't have enough space, or have oddly-shaped space which favor approach A. When there's a desire to play less loud and fill the space with more of a background sound, approach A.

 

Other times, there's enough stage space, and your audience is right in front of you and fully engaged. Approach B, please.

 

The differences in volume and clarity are there, but marginal to most listeners.

 

In the other thread, you mentioned that you often don't know the details about the venue until you get there. Approach A will work in all situations, can't say that about approach B. If you show up to a cramped venue with approach B, you'll have to improvise.

 

The extra schlep with approach B with A as a baseline is simple. One extra QSC K.8. A pair of lightweight poles. That's about it.

 

Oh, and there's nothing preventing you from using all three devices at the same time, and getting the best of both worlds

 

Hope this helps?

 

-- Chuck

[AnotherScott]

Thanks for the input.

 

For convenience, we'll call "SSv3+K8.2" approach A, and "pair of K8.2 on poles" approach B.

Okay, but I actually haven't (yet?) used poles! So I was visualizing approach B as the two speakers side by side on the stage floor (angled away from each other) OR the two speakers stacked one on top of the other, one aiming, say, 45 degrees to the left, and the other 45 to the right. Do you have a feeling about which of those two is better than the other, and in either case, does that alter any of your thoughts in comparing approach B to approach A?

 

Approach A will work in all situations, can't say that about approach B. If you show up to a cramped venue with approach B, you'll have to improvise.

The improvise scenario is easy... if it's a problematic stage/venue, just play mono, which is what I've been doing forever anyway.

[RandyFF]

Chuck,

Thanks again for you reviews. Largely based on that i got a K8.2. Loving it! It really feels like it's a kind of holy grail of speakers: relatively light weight, good bass, high fidelity, sounds great on APs, relatively affordable, etc.

 

Haven't taken the time yet to do a shoot out between it and my K10, but so far I'm thrilled to be getting what essentially feels like the bass and sound quality of my K10 but in a lighter, smaller package.

 

And it got me thinking: if they can do this with an 8" speaker, what's possible with a 6.5" speaker that was built to the same spec? If they could get something that was down to 15-20 pounds, had reasonable bass for the size, it's be much easier/doable to have two of those pole or mic stand mounted for perfect, small footprint keyboard monitoring!

 

Anyways, thanks again.

 

Randy

[cphollis]

Thanks for the input.

 

For convenience, we'll call "SSv3+K8.2" approach A, and "pair of K8.2 on poles" approach B.

Okay, but I actually haven't (yet?) used poles! So I was visualizing approach B as the two speakers side by side on the stage floor (angled away from each other) OR the two speakers stacked one on top of the other, one aiming, say, 45 degrees to the left, and the other 45 to the right. Do you have a feeling about which of those two is better than the other, and in either case, does that alter any of your thoughts in comparing approach B to approach A?

 

Approach A will work in all situations, can't say that about approach B. If you show up to a cramped venue with approach B, you'll have to improvise.

The improvise scenario is easy... if it's a problematic stage/venue, just play mono, which is what I've been doing forever anyway.

 

Sorry, I had just assumed you'd be putting them on poles, because (a) that is what they were optimized for, and (b) they sound much better that way.

 

Could you put them down on the floor as wedges facing you? Yes, but sound quality is degraded a bit. Could you put them upright on the floor? Yes, but not designed for that, and aimed at your knees vs. your ears. Could you stack them vertically? Yes, but why? Limited stereo spread that way.

 

Does your approach alter my thoughts? Yes, but not meaningfully.

 

Approach C (two QSC K8.2 not on poles, used as wedges, vertically stacked, etc.) takes no more floor space that approach A.

 

Approach C will always be perceived as a point source, so approach A wins for me as much better fill. Even in a degraded mode, approach C will sound better than the native SSV.3 in terms of tone.

 

I'll call it a sonic tie between approach A and approach C.

 

Best of luck.

[BigJPatton]

I bought the 8.2 out of curiosity and it's certainly a great little PS. It replaced my K10 and I don't think there's much difference, volume and bottom is about the same. Two gigs in and I'm still trying to figure out the best placement but I think in the wedge position works best. The wider sound field is hardly noticeable though, 105° vs 90° is not much.

[cphollis]

Chuck,

Thanks again for you reviews. Largely based on that i got a K8.2. Loving it! It really feels like it's a kind of holy grail of speakers: relatively light weight, good bass, high fidelity, sounds great on APs, relatively affordable, etc.

 

Haven't taken the time yet to do a shoot out between it and my K10, but so far I'm thrilled to be getting what essentially feels like the bass and sound quality of my K10 but in a lighter, smaller package.

 

And it got me thinking: if they can do this with an 8" speaker, what's possible with a 6.5" speaker that was built to the same spec? If they could get something that was down to 15-20 pounds, had reasonable bass for the size, it's be much easier/doable to have two of those pole or mic stand mounted for perfect, small footprint keyboard monitoring!

 

Anyways, thanks again.

 

Randy

 

You're welcome. Glad to help. And happy to hear you're as impressed with the K8.2 as I am. When you A/B vs legacy K10, I think you'll find that the K8.2 comes out ahead in most if not all regards, including all but the lowest bass tones.

 

I agree that 8" isn't the limit. Case in point -- have you ever heard the Bose Soundlink Mini II? Tiny, tiny speaker with surprising bass and room-filling volume. I wouldn't try and gig with it, though

 

Trying to drive more bass through a smaller driver means sturdier mfg, more robust components, more watts and a more aggressive DSP. But I'm sure it's moving in that direction, because we all like smaller, lighter gear.

 

Thanks for the thoughts

 

-- Chuck

[AnotherScott]

Sorry, I had just assumed you'd be putting them on poles, because (a) that is what they were optimized for, and (b) they sound much better that way.

You neglected to factor in © how lazy I am. ;-) The less I have to carry, and the faster I can set up and tear down, the better. It's a big concession just going from the 19 lb ZXa1 to the 28 lb K8.2. ;-)

 

Could you put them down on the floor as wedges facing you? Yes, but sound quality is degraded a bit. Could you put them upright on the floor? Yes, but not designed for that, and aimed at your knees vs. your ears.

I should point out that, for most of the gigs I'm talking about, I'm not in the mains. So these would serve both for me to hear myself AND for the audience (and rest of the band) to hear me. So I would not put them on the floor facing toward me, I would put them on the floor behind me, facing out (same as a guitarist does wth his amp). And personally, I don't care so much whether I hear any kind of stereo or not. My goal here is to give some "spread" to the sound going out to the audience, so it doesn't sound so much like it's coming out of a box when listening from out in the room. And get some better on-stage coverage, as sometimes band members have a hard time hearing me. Though of course if it enhances my own experience, so much the better.

 

Could you stack them vertically? Yes, but why? Limited stereo spread that way.

The why kind of gets back to your comment about considering a line array for some applications, as this creates a kind of line array. (Well, so does the other, but I hadn't thought about the possibility of going vertical until your line array comment put that image in my head.) By having two sound sources as well as angling the two 90 degrees apart (horizontally, i.e. each one 45 degrees off axis one way or the other), the sound should still have more spread and sound less like it's coming from a single point (compared to using a single QSC). And the ambience added by room reflections should be enhanced as well, also helping it to sound less like the sound is coming "from a box." Footprint is smaller than the two side by side. One more benefit is, if I don't use poles, this lifts at least one of the speakers closer to ear level, and removes some boundary effect from it. I'm thinking I might use the QSC's mode settings to roll off some bottom to minimize the boundary effect on the lower of the two speakers, while keeping it flat full range up top. And again, I'm not looking for stereo per se, just something that makes it less specifically localizable to a single box source.

 

Approach C will always be perceived as a point source

Well, I guess that's the question! I don't know if I've ever read a report from someone stacking two PA speakers like that, but I have read at least where people put them side by side and felt they did get some non-point-source spread out of that. (I don't know whether they were using poles or not.) In a minimal experiment at my house, I did feel that two ZXa1s near each other but angled apart created a bigger, more diffuse sound than using a single ZXa1. But I'm not sure how much that experiment in my basement would carry through to a larger space.

 

have you ever heard the Bose Soundlink Mini II? Tiny, tiny speaker with surprising bass and room-filling volume. I wouldn't try and gig with it, though

Funny, I just talked about that in the "Keyboard to play in the street" thread. As good as the little Bose sounds for MP3s, it's pretty much useless for playing a keyboard through. I guess they're doing some DSP stuff in there that is specifically optimized for pre-recorded music. I solved that need with a Klipsch instead, which does a decent job but is quite a bit bigger, despite likewise being marketed as a music player.

[Danielo]

Would you say the k8.2 would be a good addition for someone who intends to play mainly Hammond organ sounds on a clonewheel (say, Crumar Mojo) with LH bass (no pedals to begin with)?

 

I'm planning to upgrade my amplification prior to upgrading the keyboard, and I'm thinking ahead.

 

The SSV3+sub looks nice, but I'm a bit scared and good PPAs look like a safer option.

[BigJPatton]

No, I owned the K8.2 and with my Mojo it wasn't even close to good enough.

 

Forget powered speakers or SS unless all you need is stage monitoring, check the new Motion Sound amps, no need to carry around a sub or small mixer or two, one MS box does it all.

[bjosko]

I also got 2 x K8.2 and have not found the sweet spot for my Mojo with them.

Everything else from my other board ( NS3) are roughly ok, but a bit harsh.

I also had a SS3, it was better for the Mojo, but only barely loud enough as monitor. And the SS3 need a hot input to work well, and position, position, position.

 

I think it is time to blow the dust of my Leslie and bring it back into the game.

[hardware]

Love my 8.2s but no way I can run them w/o a Sub.

I use a 3 Oscillator Monophonic Synth for Bass and Leads.

 

 

[Danielo]

Ok. Thanks for sharing your experience with the 8.2s, guys. It looks like it's not what I'm looking for.

[joemmi]

Hello,

 

I use a K8.2 I've two years now and overall very happy.

Only the fan at home is a bit noticable at low volumes.

So I thought of adding a switch to it in the power line.

But opening the chassis didn't manage to get to the Mainboard.

Anyone managed to disassemble the unit? I asked qsc for the service manual but they wouldn't send it. The original ones is available but they changed it quite a bit.

 

Any ideas?

Thanks

[bill bosco]

sorry for digging up this thread , my k8,2's sound awesome hooked up to my stereo , but not so much for my modx7 , especially the pianos .yesterday i demoed a modx through an alto

ts312 and was impressed . to my ears the pianos were noticeably fuller and warmer , not sure how loud the amp would actually go though . instead of pulling the trigger on purchase , i figured

to look for some feedback . anyone with experience on the similarly priced yamaha dbr12 ? not sure about the reliability of an alto cabinet .i'll probably keep the k8's for home but i need to go back

to a bigger speaker for a stage monitor .

[MotiDave]

Ive read a lot of guys here using 8"s. for me, i"ve never found one to have the low end balls. I play more synth or organ than piano except one band but even piano doesn"t sound full or rich to me. i have an EV 12, love it. 10 is as low as i"d go - keep thinking of getting a pair of 10s in lieu of 12 but almost every gig i play has house sound and I dont need that for stage monitoring. 80% of gigs i don"t bring anything, just use a channel from FOH monitor system and one of their wedges. Sometimes in small clubs they only have 3 wedges up front - then the bass player gets to share in my keys monitoring lol.

 

Thats my real preference which explains a lot about my dedication and investment in personal sound. I"m not the guy who knows anything.

[ajstan]

I had a pair of K8.2s for a while and used them at home, practice and at one gig as monitors. They did not sound good when used as a floor wedge, but sounded really good on poles at ear level, especially with the Nord pianos. I sold them after one gig and converted to IEMs, because if I needed to turn them up as loud as they could go, I was going to damage my hearing. A pair should be more than loud enough for stage monitoring.