PK Sound CX800: 95% efficient??

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
I have looked at output levels with music and pink noise on several of my cabinets, but have never been very interested in "max output", more interested in maximum clean output.

Ok. This is what I was wondering.

To determine distortion, I use sine waves at various frequencies and look at the harmonic output using Smaart's RTA. Since sine waves contain twice the average power of the AES pink noise that most drivers are rated for, the tests must be short, and enough time between test tones so that heat does not build up.

And this. Thanks.


Anyway, I don't know why Patrick revived this thread, PK's specifications give no real data about how loud they are at any given frequency, then he compares a simulation of a cabinet that could not physically be transported to it.

Yeah, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure 20-30 Keystones would have similar effect that everyones experiencing with these 20-30 PK cabs...


Seems as goofy as the name of this thread, the PK Sound CX800 amplifier is 95% efficient, but the cabinet is a typical bass reflex, no more efficient than any other BR of similar size and tuning.
It gets loud simply because the drivers used have good Xmax potential and a voice coil that can handle the power required to push them to Xmax.

Art

The thread title was a simple oversight on my part and I couldn't change the title after realizing the mistake...
 
Yeah, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure 20-30 Keystones would have similar effect that everyones experiencing with these 20-30 PK cabs...
They would have similar SPL output, but would only use 50% of the power the PK subs use doing it.

The U2 360 tour used 24) Clair Brothers B218 subs, and 72) S4 subs powered with upwards of a million watts just for the subs, makes the "100,000 watts of Bone Crushing Sound System Power" on the Excision Execution Tour look like a ghetto blaster by comparison.

Power demands for big LF can really add up, an old friend invited me out to a big touring show (tiny compared to the U2 360 tour) he was production managing, that night the sound system blew a 400 amp three phase service !

The sound guys blamed the light guys (who had a separate 600 amp three phase service) for the power outage because a 30 amp projector was plugged into the sound power distribution :rolleyes:.

Art
 
They would have similar SPL output, but would only use 50% of the power the PK subs use doing it.

The U2 360 tour used 24) Clair Brothers B218 subs, and 72) S4 subs powered with upwards of a million watts just for the subs, makes the "100,000 watts of Bone Crushing Sound System Power" on the Excision Execution Tour look like a ghetto blaster by comparison.

Power demands for big LF can really add up, an old friend invited me out to a big touring show (tiny compared to the U2 360 tour) he was production managing, that night the sound system blew a 400 amp three phase service !

The sound guys blamed the light guys (who had a separate 600 amp three phase service) for the power outage because a 30 amp projector was plugged into the sound power distribution :rolleyes:.

Art

leave it to the vidiots to not ask where to plug in video. still blowing 400 amp service is pretty impressive and a real pain in the ***, hope engineering was onsite with extra fuses haha. what show was that if we are allowed to ask art?
 
Since sine waves contain twice the average power of the AES pink noise that most drivers are rated for, the tests must be short, and enough time between test tones so that heat does not build up.

Can you clarify that. I thought sine wave had 3dB peak to average power while pink noise had 6dB.

The average power during time stays the same. While the peak voltage and power of the pink noise signal is higher.

It does raise the question how the AES rating (tested with pink noise) is only 3dB below peak power (on paper) while the signal peak itself is 3dB above it during that test.
Although it is stated as 3dB above AES (calculated), but doesn't that just make it a number on a paper with no real meaning?

Minimize power compression and risk of damage during test still applies though.
 
Can you clarify that. I thought sine wave had 3dB peak to average power while pink noise had 6dB.

The average power during time stays the same. While the peak voltage and power of the pink noise signal is higher.

It does raise the question how the AES rating (tested with pink noise) is only 3dB below peak power (on paper) while the signal peak itself is 3dB above it during that test.
Although it is stated as 3dB above AES (calculated), but doesn't that just make it a number on a paper with no real meaning?
Regular pink noise has a crest factor of 12 dB, the AES pink noise is compressed to a crest factor of 6 dB, a sine wave has only 3 dB crest factor.

The average power compared to peak is double for the sine wave over the AES rating.

I don't understand your question.

Art
 
Perhaps I understood you wrong, but I thought you said that that a sine wave into a driver produces more power than the pink noise used in AES testing. Even though the RMS of them are the same.
Or that the AES rating is false as the driver can not take the rated power when feeding it sine waves.
Or did you mean peak amplitude being the same for both signals?

That's what I didn't understand from your quote.
 
Perhaps I understood you wrong, but I thought you said that that a sine wave into a driver produces more power than the pink noise used in AES testing. Even though the RMS of them are the same.
Or that the AES rating is false as the driver can not take the rated power when feeding it sine waves.
Or did you mean peak amplitude being the same for both signals?

That's what I didn't understand from your quote.
AES testing uses a compressed pink noise source with only 6 dB crest factor peak to peak, the average power would only be half as much as a sine wave signal of the same peak to peak voltage since it's crest factor is 3 dB peak to peak.
Simply put, 1000 watts AES equals the same average power of a 500 watt "RMS" sine wave.

And a sine wave signal of 1000 watts would only have half the average power of a square wave signal of 1000 watts, as the square wave has 0 dB crest factor.

Since music generally has at least 12 dB crest factor, the AES rating is still fairly conservative.
 
Last edited:
My head is still contradicting me a little.

Mainly this part from AES spec "Power shall be determined as the square of applied rms voltage, as measured with a “true rms” voltmeter, divided by Zmin."

From AES2-1984 (r2003):
2.3 Power-Handling
2.3.1 Test Conditions and Equipment.
The driver shall be mounted on an appropriate constant- or expanding-area acoustical load whose initial area is
no smaller than that of the driver throat. The manufacturer shall specify the method of loading. The driver shall
be excited with a band of pink noise extending one decade upward from the manufacturer’s stated low-
frequency (lf) limit of the device. The noise shall be bandpass filtered at 12 dB per octave, with Butterworth
filter response characteristics, and the peak-to-rms voltage ratio of the noise signal supplied to the lf driver shall
be 2:1 (6 dB). Refer to Appendix C for recommended method. The manufacturer shall state the upper and lower
cutoff frequencies (– 3 dB) of the noise signal.
2.3.2 Test Procedure.
The device under test shall be subjected to successively higher powers and allowed to reach thermal equilibrium
at each increment (approximately 2 h). Power shall be determined as the square of applied rms voltage, as
measured with a “true rms” voltmeter, divided by Zmin. The rated power of the device shall be that power the
device can withstand for 2 h without permanent change in acoustical, mechanical, or electrical characteristics,
greater than 10%.

It does to me sound like that power is actually delivered to the driver (or would if it was a pure resistance). With that in the back of my head I was confused by your earlier statement.

BTW have you had any experience with 15TBW100? Or the *new* FW series?
 
They would have similar SPL output, but would only use 50% of the power the PK subs use doing it.

The U2 360 tour used 24) Clair Brothers B218 subs, and 72) S4 subs powered with upwards of a million watts just for the subs, makes the "100,000 watts of Bone Crushing Sound System Power" on the Excision Execution Tour look like a ghetto blaster by comparison.

Power demands for big LF can really add up, an old friend invited me out to a big touring show (tiny compared to the U2 360 tour) he was production managing, that night the sound system blew a 400 amp three phase service !

The sound guys blamed the light guys (who had a separate 600 amp three phase service) for the power outage because a 30 amp projector was plugged into the sound power distribution :rolleyes:.

Art

Tool and U2 play stadiums.
Excision plays nightclubs.
The experience is completely different.
I've been going to shows for a looooong time, there aren't many 42 year olds that go to EDM shows. And 2011 was the first year I ever heard a venue filed with so much bass that the walls flexed and it was hard to breathe.

Way fun :)
 
I was at a concert with PK sound this weekend, the bass made a significant portion of the ceiling fall into the crowd. My friend and I were hit, but not bad. The person behind us was almost unconscious, we had to get him out of the crowd. They kept the show going for a while and more and more of the ceiling was falling. My friend and I after helping the person who was hit were the first to leave.
 
I was at a concert with PK sound this weekend, the bass made a significant portion of the ceiling fall into the crowd. My friend and I were hit, but not bad. The person behind us was almost unconscious, we had to get him out of the crowd. They kept the show going for a while and more and more of the ceiling was falling. My friend and I after helping the person who was hit were the first to leave.

Ugh, this is seriously what I'm worried about - that this type of bass is something that won't be around for long, because the owners of the buildings are going to wise up. And once that happens, they'll probably set SPL and frequency limits for shows. Naturally, they'll probably overdo it. I'd never considered someone would actually get hurt! Good to hear you're OK.

Was this the Excision show in Boise?
 
Ugh, this is seriously what I'm worried about - that this type of bass is something that won't be around for long, because the owners of the buildings are going to wise up. And once that happens, they'll probably set SPL and frequency limits for shows. Naturally, they'll probably overdo it. I'd never considered someone would actually get hurt!
When Supertramp brought a Martin rig in to a theater in St. Paul around 1978, plaster fell from the ceiling during sound check of the kick drum.

Structural damage from bass is not a new thing, there are many venues (more in Europe than the US) that have already imposed sound restrictions.
 
this seems similar to planning a building to withstand earth quakes, the materials used have to be able to flex and give for bass, the more rigid it is the less likely its going to withstand thousands of watts of bass reverberating through the material..

any idea what the ceiling was made of? thats a seriously scary scenario that could hurt alot of people..

I remember stories of old warehouse raves where they were shaking insulation (probably nasty insulation at that) free with all the bass, but this is the first i've heard of major ceiling chunks falling and hurting people. wow.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.