# Which line UP of equipment ??



## dave.riley3 (Oct 21, 2014)

I have a large room ( big box ) with several hi-Q resonant frequencies ( church )...

The room has several frequencies ( 6+ ) where feedback becomes a definite problem to be overcome...

I run the mixer output into a Behringer Feedback Destroyer which works great...
Next is a 31 band EQ used to flatten the room response...

My question is, which of the two devices ( feedback destroyer or 31 band EQ ) should come first in the chain??

I can make an argument for either way but what do you think???

TNX much from DaveR


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

I think I'd put the Feedback Destroyer in first, because your overall room flattening may include some boost to the frequencies the mic(s) are feeding back at.

That said, I don’t know that I would daisy-chain them like that. I’d suggest sending all the mics to a subgroup (or at least the ones with feedback problems) and then insert the Feedback Destroyer on that subgroup. Alternately, if only it’s only one mic with the feedback problem (e.g a lapel mic) then I’d insert the FD on that channel only.

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## dave.riley3 (Oct 21, 2014)

Thanks very much, Wayne...

It IS only one mic which is all we use 95% of the time, BUT the room needs EQ all by itself, and the dominant modes of hi-Q feedback looks like a very large RF cavity with about 6 dominate modes or frequencies where a 6db hole is punched and certainly takes those problems away, always the same frequencies too, so I opened the BW up to 3/60 octave first, then the 31 band EQ does a nice post over all job, plus I shut down the base below 200hz and everything over 8kc. is also dumped...
There are some really complex feedbacks at 10kc +/- so it now looks like a clean wideband telephone circuit where most of the voice energy is...
Thanks for the good heads up... We agree and it does sound OK...

The contemporary music team is a sub group and they do their own conditioning...

DaveR


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Gotta love church design of days past. Looks are taken into first priority and the acoustics are not given much thought. Our old church seated 1800 and had a large pyramid type design (from the floor to the highest point was 80ft and all wood beams) it was a acoustic nightmare. Our new building was designed around sound and what a difference that made.

I agree, the 1/3 EQ should be placed on the mains just before the amp and the feedback destroyer on the sub group with the vocal mic/s. Have you given any thought is moving the house speakers forward (yes I know that may be a huge task) It sounds like some of your issues could be fixed by moving them.


----------



## dave.riley3 (Oct 21, 2014)

Thanks, Tony for the inputs... This church is the last of the original Pilgrim churches and this ( the fifth ) building was built in 1850 complete with embossed tin ceiling and lots of windows...
If it were an RF cavity I would have a very narrow passband filter with peaks around 8 mhz... No need for that but I did fairly well as described and with consensus from y'all...
Thanks much from REW audio student DaveR

* this is a great venue...


----------

