Hi Diy'rs
Which Amp is better to use for Sub
LM3886 Parallel Mono 120 watt @ 4Ohm
https://www.eightaudio.in/collectio...um-120watts-lm3886-parallel-amplifier-eapsp86
or
TDA72934 Mono 200 watt @ 4Ohm.
https://www.eightaudio.in/products/ea-tda7294-200-watts-stereo-bridge-amplifier
Both use same 24-0-24 @ 5A
I am using LM3886 single chip and its working good.
But little confuse with LM3886 Parallel Mono and TDA72934 Mono.
i found that Price of TDA72934 Mono is almost half compare to LM3886 Parallel Mono and it is also more powerful board to use.
Please advice
Br
Ved
Which Amp is better to use for Sub
LM3886 Parallel Mono 120 watt @ 4Ohm
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
https://www.eightaudio.in/collectio...um-120watts-lm3886-parallel-amplifier-eapsp86
or
TDA72934 Mono 200 watt @ 4Ohm.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
https://www.eightaudio.in/products/ea-tda7294-200-watts-stereo-bridge-amplifier
Both use same 24-0-24 @ 5A
I am using LM3886 single chip and its working good.
But little confuse with LM3886 Parallel Mono and TDA72934 Mono.
i found that Price of TDA72934 Mono is almost half compare to LM3886 Parallel Mono and it is also more powerful board to use.
Please advice
Br
Ved
Last edited:
if you sortha wanna stick to analouge stuff witch.. actually i my self do...
then lm3886 is not a good choice as parallel chipamp.
tda7293/94 are more suited to that, they can be put in paralell with less effort and.. actually it does not hurt to have more than 2 of them set up like that. basicly it can pump a hell lot of amps. sometimes it does mather.
class d is not a bad choice btw, its efficient. and low freq. the class d operation mode is unnoticable.
then lm3886 is not a good choice as parallel chipamp.
tda7293/94 are more suited to that, they can be put in paralell with less effort and.. actually it does not hurt to have more than 2 of them set up like that. basicly it can pump a hell lot of amps. sometimes it does mather.
class d is not a bad choice btw, its efficient. and low freq. the class d operation mode is unnoticable.
Tom, I couldn't even guess as to whether the parallel LM3886 or parallel TDA7294 would do better. I have to hazard a guess as to neither are suited to sky-high power output goals. I also think that we'd need more information as to what was the application, room, environment, speaker, and other details.
Those two chips are just not my first call as to high output power applications. What is the room size?
I'll meet you half way.
I'm getting 100 W (4 Ω) from my Modulus-286 which uses two LM3886es in parallel with a composite loop around them to ensure good performance. So you can get the power, but it requires a lot of knowhow and experience to get there if you want good results.I'm reasonably comfortable with the 100 W I measure on the MOD286, but I wouldn't push the LM3886 beyond that. The thermal system (heat sink) gets really gnarly at that point.
If you want more than 100 W, there are better ways to go about it. I'd be looking at something with a discrete output stage for sure.
Another way to approach this would be to ask if you actually need the power. That'd depend on room size, distance from speakers to listening position, number of speaker drivers and whether you use a bi/tri/quad amp setup, speaker efficiency, desired peak SPL, etc. There are lots of knobs to turn and the amplifier power is only one of those knobs.
For those interested in the math, I go through it on my Taming the LM3886 pages: https://www.neurochrome.com/taming-the-lm3886-chip-amplifier/thermal-design/#RealWorldDesignExample
Tom
there are notes in the LM3886 pdf for PA100, BR100, and BPA200 setup. the question would be do you like the sound that ic makes for you and do you think its worth extra effort to use that IC. you could also go the route of the route of getting the "audio sector's" LM4780 kits which is a PA setup. would make going the BPA200 route eaiser since its one ic per board vs 4 ic's/4 boards. the problem then becomes how fast the heat can be removed the 4780 ic for 4ohm load.
room size aside, if you needed more power. i think class D would be the way to go if your going to bi-amp/tri-amp a speaker. for me i think thats the best route to get what quality of sound your after. since you can better tailor the power to each driver. you then could use a single LM3886 for the tweeter and either a PA-100(dual 3886's) or the 4780 in PA setup such as the audio sector kit. then the class D imo for the bass range, depending on the IC doesnt have the best SNR or 1%THD to RMS power output.
For me it is a long over due project, i was going to go passive xover and tri amped. im not thinking to cut cost down and simplify things, a mini DSP. for me my amp choice is the LM3886 for both the tweeter and the mid range with the bass being handled by a class D amp. im still not sure which class D amp to go with but i am looking at using Ti based ic amp. one i think i might go with is this one from Sure, looking at the balance of SNR to RMS power output at 1%THD.
Sure Electronics' webstore 2 x 300W Class D Audio Amplifier Board Compact - TAS5630
it might be a tad on the high side for RMS then what i need. i have to account for losing 1/3 the power to the resistors. this post explains it
thoughts on sub design - Techtalk Speaker Building, Audio, Video Discussion Forum
i will be using two 740p's per side for bass duty.
so many choices its hard to figure out what to do... what sold me was listening to the LM3886 chipamp kit i have on some old Altec Lansing speakers i picked up for a local pawn shop. the difference in sound from a 5.1 receiver set to stereo mode vs the LM3886 stereo setup was to me, night and day sound wise. the LM3886 sounded that much better vs the receiver.
room size aside, if you needed more power. i think class D would be the way to go if your going to bi-amp/tri-amp a speaker. for me i think thats the best route to get what quality of sound your after. since you can better tailor the power to each driver. you then could use a single LM3886 for the tweeter and either a PA-100(dual 3886's) or the 4780 in PA setup such as the audio sector kit. then the class D imo for the bass range, depending on the IC doesnt have the best SNR or 1%THD to RMS power output.
For me it is a long over due project, i was going to go passive xover and tri amped. im not thinking to cut cost down and simplify things, a mini DSP. for me my amp choice is the LM3886 for both the tweeter and the mid range with the bass being handled by a class D amp. im still not sure which class D amp to go with but i am looking at using Ti based ic amp. one i think i might go with is this one from Sure, looking at the balance of SNR to RMS power output at 1%THD.
Sure Electronics' webstore 2 x 300W Class D Audio Amplifier Board Compact - TAS5630
it might be a tad on the high side for RMS then what i need. i have to account for losing 1/3 the power to the resistors. this post explains it
thoughts on sub design - Techtalk Speaker Building, Audio, Video Discussion Forum
i will be using two 740p's per side for bass duty.
so many choices its hard to figure out what to do... what sold me was listening to the LM3886 chipamp kit i have on some old Altec Lansing speakers i picked up for a local pawn shop. the difference in sound from a 5.1 receiver set to stereo mode vs the LM3886 stereo setup was to me, night and day sound wise. the LM3886 sounded that much better vs the receiver.
I find this entirely accurate.I'll meet you half way.
Let's blame the marketeers for equating quality to output power.
One element in pro-sound is the amount of decibels it takes to cover a given area; however, marketing people seem to lack for accurate information and then injuries result. It is rather hard to predict from which area a costomer got an estimate on what their needs were.
The thread title.
The thread title has ignored the fact that thermal interface size of the chip is the same.
The efficiency as proposed by the datasheets is rather similar. Although it is an outright inappropriate usage in both cases, I can report that the efficiency is similar.
The power output will also be similar.
As it has already been proofed that the wattage output is not a relevant quality measure, then more information is necessary.
Mainly, illustrate the room size and speaker load.
P.S.
The LM3886 has been improved? with an entirely plastic casing that hinders relevant output power and the TDA7294 has been cheapened during production so that the TDA7296 datasheet is more applicable (although one could use TDA7293 for higher power needs, successfully). So, one should not apply all of online lore as relevant today. Production differences do exist, and they're awfully inconvenient.
The thread title has ignored the fact that thermal interface size of the chip is the same.
The efficiency as proposed by the datasheets is rather similar. Although it is an outright inappropriate usage in both cases, I can report that the efficiency is similar.
The power output will also be similar.
As it has already been proofed that the wattage output is not a relevant quality measure, then more information is necessary.
Mainly, illustrate the room size and speaker load.
P.S.
The LM3886 has been improved? with an entirely plastic casing that hinders relevant output power and the TDA7294 has been cheapened during production so that the TDA7296 datasheet is more applicable (although one could use TDA7293 for higher power needs, successfully). So, one should not apply all of online lore as relevant today. Production differences do exist, and they're awfully inconvenient.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.