TOINO said:
Dear Lars
As a mater of fact I have made a search about your hold posts and it seems that what’s happening now is nothing new...you have a STORY!!!...
The following is just one exemplary reaction from another annoyed member:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=279879#post279879
But I could show more… if you wish…
Mr. Moderators this is nothing new.
Thank You for bringing up this excellent thread from 2003. (I don't think you have to go back 3 years to find a person who is annoyed with me btw
)If you read the whole thread, here is some technical debate, and suddenly Mr. Jocko is just annoyed, without any visible reason. What ticked him off is hard to see. Can you?
There are many other threads at hand where (usually the same 2-3) people use the forum as sort of anger management. Jocko also did that in some other threads back then, if i remember correctly, but that doesn't last forever. Now Mr. Jocko is banned, (so that must be the important message to 2-3 other people here).
I might add that today i am still on good standing with Jocko, (like in the thread above) and actually talk with him on e-mail sometimes.
classd4sure said:
This is really funny...!
Conspiration theory?
Some time ago Mr. Lars complains in the following terms:
Lars Clausen said:Magura: Annoyed about what?
The fact that my posts were removed by the moderators, supposedly for colliding with someone else's marketing plan (who's company name is to be found atop on the front page of www.diyaudio.com) raises the question if diyaudio.com is truely a non-commercial discussion forum, or just a stealth marketing tool for this same corporation.
I have received ample proof to convince me of the latter, and therefore i will move to ask the moderators to remove all my posts ever made here on diyaudio.com.
As this very post would undesirably reveal the true nature of diyaudio.com (in my judgement), i think you will see that it will also be erased by the moderators very soon.
Take care everone! Things are not always what they appear.
All the best from Lars Clausen
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=320939#post320939
Look everyone,
I think everything has been said that can be said here.
One member keeps changing his arguments, one moment supporting fredos, one post later say he's bad too. One moment complaining about commercialism in the main threads, the next saying: those poor commercial guys, what will they do when they have to be in that AVB place.. ?
We have a plan to fix this conflict. We will impliment it as we can. As has been pointed out many times, we are volunteers and only have so much time. As I have pointed out, this thread is wasting that time, although it has given us some useful suggestions. One reson we havern't gotten this thread into the AVB is because we got no response from fredos (of course it is quite possible that his spam filter deleted my e-mail)
I don't see any point to continue this discussion, which is quite off topic in fredos' thread. Later we may come clean it up.
The whole point of the commercial thread is that is where the commercial guys will discuss their products. Please keep in mind that they can post all they want in the regular forums if they aren't pushing their products.
ANY FURTHER OFF TOPIC POSTS HERE REGARDING AVB, commercialism, past history, etc will be deleted. If members don't follow this warning there will be repercussions.
Variac
fredos said:
Hi Fredos
As every body could see in your first post in this thread, the rack supporting the Crowns is very badly constructed!
Those amplifiers aspire fresh air from front and exhaust laterally.
They are not enough lateral space to permit the normal amplifiers operation!
How could you expect that they work fine in that strange conditions?
TOINO: " ... Those amplifiers aspire fresh air from front and exhaust laterally. ... How could you expect that they work fine in that strange conditions? ..."
An that's Fredo's whole point ... his amplifiers work in under these conditions and the Crown amplifiers do not ... and that is a very, very good reason for supplying us all with the original post(s), to enlighten us all to "problems" associated with other amp builders' installations and the appropriate "resolutions" and "DIY fixes" of his own doing.
An that's Fredo's whole point ... his amplifiers work in under these conditions and the Crown amplifiers do not ... and that is a very, very good reason for supplying us all with the original post(s), to enlighten us all to "problems" associated with other amp builders' installations and the appropriate "resolutions" and "DIY fixes" of his own doing.
Hi FastEddy
The point here it is only one question of common-sense and professionalism.
I mean that you can’t force the Crowns to work in those conditions without problems…
They are analog machines inherently inefficient but they are reliable
In the Crown photos I only see incompetence in the assembly.
I believe that they will work ok if properly assembled… by a competent person...
The point here it is only one question of common-sense and professionalism.
I mean that you can’t force the Crowns to work in those conditions without problems…
They are analog machines inherently inefficient but they are reliable
In the Crown photos I only see incompetence in the assembly.
I believe that they will work ok if properly assembled… by a competent person...
TOINO said:I mean that you can’t force the Crowns to work in those conditions without problems…
They are analog machines inherently inefficient but they are reliable
In the Crown photos I only see incompetence in the assembly.
I believe that they will work ok if properly assembled… by a competent person...
I agree TOINO. I said the exact same thing back on the first page of the thread.
Yes BWRX I have see your post.
Now Fredos, the loudspeaker company you talk about in:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1017355#post1017355
it is also not modest in their proclaims .
At least they use your method for assert the fantastic power/efficiency.
106dB-1W-1m for a bass-reflex dual loudspeaker box is a Guinness World Record!
Ouch..! 143.8 dB max Spl...
is it continuous or just 1uS burst?
The nearest thing i know is the one on the photo!
My humble technical advice with such loudspeaker efficiencies is that you must install yours lowest powerful amplifiers!
The 12K HVI is clearly not necessary as it will work at low power levels….
Wau!!! I have the entire picture now! That way the amplifiers never heat and will leave forever!...
Now Fredos, the loudspeaker company you talk about in:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1017355#post1017355
it is also not modest in their proclaims .
At least they use your method for assert the fantastic power/efficiency.
106dB-1W-1m for a bass-reflex dual loudspeaker box is a Guinness World Record!
Ouch..! 143.8 dB max Spl...
is it continuous or just 1uS burst? The nearest thing i know is the one on the photo!
My humble technical advice with such loudspeaker efficiencies is that you must install yours lowest powerful amplifiers!
The 12K HVI is clearly not necessary as it will work at low power levels….
Wau!!! I have the entire picture now! That way the amplifiers never heat and will leave forever!...Attachments
TOINO: " ... I mean that you can’t force the Crowns to work in those conditions without problems ..."
Then the situation <b>should have been fixed</b> (as per you and BWRX) or the amps <b>should have been replaced</b> (as per Fredo & Company) ... which is what was done = replacement with something <b>that would work</b> in that environment ... and the successful results were posted here ... which is what I wanted to read about and several others as well.
Look, broadcasting a successful upgrade involving new, relatively untried technologies is or should be what this whole audio blog / forum / discussion is about. The notice did as it should, produce discussion about what was wrong, initially, and what was done to resolve the questions. Thanks to all for this.
Technically, the use of a more thermally efficient amplifier was called for, the rebuilding of the equipment rack was not. ... If the equipment rack had been rebuilt to accomodate the less efficient amps, then I would have liked to read about that too ... and surely the reverse argument would have insued ...
.... as for the commercial aspects of this thread ...
That being said and considering the source, a commercial manufacturer, that there should have been a posting in the vendors' bazaar is fine and as it should be. I personally would like to see both = the successful installation announcement here in /Amplifiers/Class-D as well as the announcement in the vendors' bazaar.
I was enlightened and occasionally entertained with this thread ... I say keep 'em coming. I am relatively new here, so my suggestions probably don't carry much weight and I would, of course, bow to the moderators and long time bloggers, knowing that this kind of thing has been discussed ad infinitum before I came.
Then the situation <b>should have been fixed</b> (as per you and BWRX) or the amps <b>should have been replaced</b> (as per Fredo & Company) ... which is what was done = replacement with something <b>that would work</b> in that environment ... and the successful results were posted here ... which is what I wanted to read about and several others as well.
Look, broadcasting a successful upgrade involving new, relatively untried technologies is or should be what this whole audio blog / forum / discussion is about. The notice did as it should, produce discussion about what was wrong, initially, and what was done to resolve the questions. Thanks to all for this.
Technically, the use of a more thermally efficient amplifier was called for, the rebuilding of the equipment rack was not. ... If the equipment rack had been rebuilt to accomodate the less efficient amps, then I would have liked to read about that too ... and surely the reverse argument would have insued ...
.... as for the commercial aspects of this thread ...
That being said and considering the source, a commercial manufacturer, that there should have been a posting in the vendors' bazaar is fine and as it should be. I personally would like to see both = the successful installation announcement here in /Amplifiers/Class-D as well as the announcement in the vendors' bazaar.
I was enlightened and occasionally entertained with this thread ... I say keep 'em coming. I am relatively new here, so my suggestions probably don't carry much weight and I would, of course, bow to the moderators and long time bloggers, knowing that this kind of thing has been discussed ad infinitum before I came.
Quick reply that the original rack was instaled by one of the biggest sound company in montreal, and most of installation of Crown everywher was done in that way. Anyways, first bad design was to take air from front and push into a rack to heat it...Engineer have not think a lot to do that...Sorry! So they should sold a rack to fit their unusual design, what they dont do. Most instalation have a lot of different rack enclosure, product should work in majority of enclosure!
What you think about this?
Fredos
What you think about this?
Fredos
Hi Fredos,
Selling to night clubs is always a cost cutting exercise. I gave up night clubs years ago, waste of time. It's hard to do a proper job in there. Then it's hard to collect sometimes.
-Chris
Engineer didn't have any choice. That's the way it's done. However, there is also supposed to be a fan to exhaust the heat. The spaces in the front are supposed to be covered with a blank panel. There are ventilation shelves made for convection cooled amps that accept cool air from the front and guide it through the fins and into ........ the cabinet.
Selling to night clubs is always a cost cutting exercise. I gave up night clubs years ago, waste of time. It's hard to do a proper job in there. Then it's hard to collect sometimes.
-Chris
Yeah...But if you look into the rack of the picture, front was fully open to take air and back was fully open to exhaust air. With convection, their it is no convection restriction. So you suppose that this instalation was bad before I put the D-Amp? If amplifier can work in that configuration, that's means they can run stand alone on a table???? What else? Space between amplifier was the reason why they blow? Just to let you know that they was stacked before and that was worst. What should be a good installation for that kind of amplifier? 1 amplifier in each room with direct air conditioning on each one? Seriously, dont tell me everybody that this installation was not good before I change the amplifiers!!! Originaly, like I told, bad design was to take air form inside and exhaust it on the side....Why they jsut dont have reverse the blade of the fan to exhaust air in the front? Tghat give the same air flow in amplifier!
Thermal management is a big part of devellopement of an amplifier and should never be done without thinking a lot about reliability and worst case under stupid user abuse under rain and near a heater! Oh...I forget....Expect too that this stupid user will drop a beer on the amplifier 30 minute before the end of the show...Include that in your design : 30 minute beer's proof circuits!
Have a nice day!
Fredos
Thermal management is a big part of devellopement of an amplifier and should never be done without thinking a lot about reliability and worst case under stupid user abuse under rain and near a heater! Oh...I forget....Expect too that this stupid user will drop a beer on the amplifier 30 minute before the end of the show...Include that in your design : 30 minute beer's proof circuits!
Have a nice day!
Fredos
This is true, but the Crown MA3600s exhaust out the SIDES. In the picture you show it appears that there is almost zero room for them to breathe out the sides.fredos said:
fredos said:
BWRX said:
Open this up http://www.crownaudio.com/pdf/amps/125113.pdf
and have a look at page 6.
It wasn't good for the Crown amps!fredos said:
fredos said:
I fully agree, thermal management is a huge part of the development of pro audio amps - especially ones with lower efficiency. The problem is that you can almost never account for user stupidity. That's why they show you proper installation pointers in the manual. Even then, you can always ask Crown! It's not too difficult to pick up the phone and give them a call when you want to know the best way to implement your brand new multi-thousand dollar amp...
http://www.crownaudio.com/gen_htm/express/documents/138350.pdf
There's some more technical literature they provided to help the user/installer determine power and cooling requirements.
The pro audio company I used to work for used portable racks (6 MA3600VZs per rack) with very minimal space around the sides like you show in your pictures, BUT they also had two large (about 7-8" diameter) fans at the bottom of the rack that pulled air down and out because the back of the rack was closed off. That's part of the reason you need to keep the front sealed, so the exhaust doesn't loop back around the front. With our racks sealed front (amps stacked directly on top of each other) and back (cover in place so no airflow out the back) and the two fans in the bottom there was only one path for air to flow: in the front of the amps, over the internal heatsinks, out the sides, and down out the bottom. That's proper thermal management.
Let me also make it clear that I am no way saying your amps are bad, Fred. In fact, it's a testament to the robustness of your amps that they worked so well in that environment! I'm just saying it was not at all optimal for the Crown amps, so it was sort of unfair to say that Crown sucked because yours worked and theirs didn't.
Let me also make it clear that I am no way saying your amps are bad, Fred. In fact, it's a testament to the robustness of your amps that they worked so well in that environment! I'm just saying it was not at all optimal for the Crown amps, so it was sort of unfair to say that Crown sucked because yours worked and theirs didn't.
Hi Fredos,
The final point to make is that you really want to pressurize a rack. If you create a vacuum, it sucks all the dust in. It's better to filter the inbound air and blow it out all the cracks. Equipment rack 101.
It's always easy to knock another product if you ignore some facts.
-Chris
The final point to make is that you really want to pressurize a rack. If you create a vacuum, it sucks all the dust in. It's better to filter the inbound air and blow it out all the cracks. Equipment rack 101.
It's always easy to knock another product if you ignore some facts.
-Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.