Oh, right...I was just being goofy, I pictured a giant step up transformer ala photonicinduction. I wouldn't expect that to ever happen with a musical signal and an amplifier.
Edit: I'm thinking more like 10kV, 5a...PAH-DOW!
Last edited:
None. The magnetic forces will try to pull the core to the center.I wonder how many kilowatts it would take to fire the iron core out of an inductor?
But I like the way you think...
jn
None. The magnetic forces will try to pull the core to the center.
But I like the way you think...
jn
Haha, yeah, I wasn't sure what forces are exerted on it. I guess that makes sense.
The materials used wouldn't have to be any more durable than your amplifier's power supply.
If I remember right, this was indoor use?
Having used the same loudspeakers in an 18000 seat venue my OPINION is they should be fine. 30 subs 18 fr and 64 full size line array boxes.
Now it is mandatory to use a DSP processor.
These loudspeakers used at rated power will last 100 hours and half will fail by 200 hours.
A compressor should be set I the DSP to keep average power to 25% rated power with about a 3/1 ratio and a 250mS time constant for the woofers, 25 mS mids and 5 mS for the highs. Triamping is best. But if bi amp then you can split the audio in the DSP and recombine it before or into the amplifiers.
Now asan experiment I fed sine waves and square waves into a compression driver until failure. With 6 runs of each the failures were at the same power level for both.
Now as virtually all non pro amplifiers have bogus power ratings as do many loudspeakers using those as a guide is not really useful.
The EV ratings are accurate.
Now doing room eq in an empty room for playback is not really productive. Instead a house curve should be used.
These days I woud put a 4 dB boost at 75 hertz an octave wide and another at 6000 hertz 3 dB and 1.5 octaves. All before the compressor. The final DSP stage should be a fast 10/1 limiter at at least 10/1 at the rated power.
Reviewed and noted the usuall sell phone typos too much pain in the a to really fix.
Now it is mandatory to use a DSP processor.
These loudspeakers used at rated power will last 100 hours and half will fail by 200 hours.
A compressor should be set I the DSP to keep average power to 25% rated power with about a 3/1 ratio and a 250mS time constant for the woofers, 25 mS mids and 5 mS for the highs. Triamping is best. But if bi amp then you can split the audio in the DSP and recombine it before or into the amplifiers.
Now asan experiment I fed sine waves and square waves into a compression driver until failure. With 6 runs of each the failures were at the same power level for both.
Now as virtually all non pro amplifiers have bogus power ratings as do many loudspeakers using those as a guide is not really useful.
The EV ratings are accurate.
Now doing room eq in an empty room for playback is not really productive. Instead a house curve should be used.
These days I woud put a 4 dB boost at 75 hertz an octave wide and another at 6000 hertz 3 dB and 1.5 octaves. All before the compressor. The final DSP stage should be a fast 10/1 limiter at at least 10/1 at the rated power.
Reviewed and noted the usuall sell phone typos too much pain in the a to really fix.
Last edited:
Here's a few tips that I don't think anyone has mentioned yet:
- First- the subs are separated from the mid-high cabinets by quite a bit. This means that for most listeners, there will be significant comb filtering, unless a relatively STEEP crossover slope is used between the subs and mid-high cabinets. What this means, is that the response will have cancellations, due the phase difference between the arrival of the sound between the sub and mid-high cabinets- and those cancellations will be different EVERY PLACE in the room, from every other place. The only way to minimize this, is to use a VERY STEEP crossover- to minimize the overlap between the sub and mid-high cabinets. The steeper the better- 24dB/octave would be where I'd be looking to go.
- Also, with the subs that separated from the mid-highs- there is going to be quite a confusing effect, with part of the spectrum appearing to come from low in the room, and the rest from up high. This, most people will find, is fatiguing in itself, even if the response is "flat" at one position. The lower the crossover point, the better this "subjective integration" will be to the listener. OTOH, the lower the crossover point, the more likely the mid-high cabinets will over-excurt/overload, at high power. So, this is a trade-off. If you can keep the crossover below 100 Hz without distortion from the mid-high cabinets, you will usually be at least OK...
That all said- bi-amping is VERY BENEFICIAL to this sort of setup. It's easy to get a high-slope (steep) crossover from an electronic crossover- but VERY COMPLICATED and EXPENSIVE (not to mention, a waste of amp power) to do it in a passive crossover.
Even a cheap Behringer or DBX crossover (18dB/octave) is FAR better than a passive crossover. Those can usually be gotten for just over a hundred USD. That, and a second amp (and it doesn't necessarily have to be quite as big as the first one- as long as it has at least 70% or so of the REAL power of the existing amp. Use the existing one for the subs, and the smaller one for the mid-highs), and you're in business. Plus, bi-amping is almost like a "power multiplier"- IME, I've found that two 200 watt amps in bi-amp, is quite a bit louder than a single 400 watt amp full range. This is primarily because you don't need power-eating passive crossovers in the bass range, and because you can more expediently balance the power needs between lows and highs (the highs don't need as much, so you can run the *** out of the bass amp (occasional clipping on a sub, as long as it isn't continuous, won't really hurt anything or sound that bad), while "taking it easy" on the mid-high amp (mid-high clipping is VERY annoying to listen to, and causes damage to fragile tweeters quickly)...
Once this is sorted, the advice about EQing the speakers and room can commence- it will be MUCH EASIER to get meaningful and useful results from tuning, once the system is set up this way, in a basic sense...
Regards,
Gordon.
- First- the subs are separated from the mid-high cabinets by quite a bit. This means that for most listeners, there will be significant comb filtering, unless a relatively STEEP crossover slope is used between the subs and mid-high cabinets. What this means, is that the response will have cancellations, due the phase difference between the arrival of the sound between the sub and mid-high cabinets- and those cancellations will be different EVERY PLACE in the room, from every other place. The only way to minimize this, is to use a VERY STEEP crossover- to minimize the overlap between the sub and mid-high cabinets. The steeper the better- 24dB/octave would be where I'd be looking to go.
- Also, with the subs that separated from the mid-highs- there is going to be quite a confusing effect, with part of the spectrum appearing to come from low in the room, and the rest from up high. This, most people will find, is fatiguing in itself, even if the response is "flat" at one position. The lower the crossover point, the better this "subjective integration" will be to the listener. OTOH, the lower the crossover point, the more likely the mid-high cabinets will over-excurt/overload, at high power. So, this is a trade-off. If you can keep the crossover below 100 Hz without distortion from the mid-high cabinets, you will usually be at least OK...
That all said- bi-amping is VERY BENEFICIAL to this sort of setup. It's easy to get a high-slope (steep) crossover from an electronic crossover- but VERY COMPLICATED and EXPENSIVE (not to mention, a waste of amp power) to do it in a passive crossover.
Even a cheap Behringer or DBX crossover (18dB/octave) is FAR better than a passive crossover. Those can usually be gotten for just over a hundred USD. That, and a second amp (and it doesn't necessarily have to be quite as big as the first one- as long as it has at least 70% or so of the REAL power of the existing amp. Use the existing one for the subs, and the smaller one for the mid-highs), and you're in business. Plus, bi-amping is almost like a "power multiplier"- IME, I've found that two 200 watt amps in bi-amp, is quite a bit louder than a single 400 watt amp full range. This is primarily because you don't need power-eating passive crossovers in the bass range, and because you can more expediently balance the power needs between lows and highs (the highs don't need as much, so you can run the *** out of the bass amp (occasional clipping on a sub, as long as it isn't continuous, won't really hurt anything or sound that bad), while "taking it easy" on the mid-high amp (mid-high clipping is VERY annoying to listen to, and causes damage to fragile tweeters quickly)...
Once this is sorted, the advice about EQing the speakers and room can commence- it will be MUCH EASIER to get meaningful and useful results from tuning, once the system is set up this way, in a basic sense...
Regards,
Gordon.
Remember the subs are running <100Hz, where you can't locate the LF source.
Also, the room is going to do far worse things to the LF response than the interaction between subs and tops, which might cause a null around 100Hz. I doubt it, though - you've got lots of different sources, so complete cancellation ain't gonna happen.
Chris
Also, the room is going to do far worse things to the LF response than the interaction between subs and tops, which might cause a null around 100Hz. I doubt it, though - you've got lots of different sources, so complete cancellation ain't gonna happen.
Chris
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.