Speakerplans.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General > Amp Forum
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - PL380 vs PL6 vs Crest Pro vs 9200
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

PL380 vs PL6 vs Crest Pro vs 9200

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Message
Peter Jan View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc
Avatar

Joined: 16 December 2008
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 1019
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Peter Jan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2009 at 5:08pm
Originally posted by levyte357 levyte357 wrote:


Could that not be described as the amps drawing less power, because they output less, at certain input "frequencies"?


That could be a possible reason, but class-D has an efficiency of about 90-95% and a class H amp like PL6.0 won't pass the 70-75% mark on low power levels and even a bit less at full power. The difference is wasted in heat and that extra heat comes at the cost of AC power.
 

Back to Top
Dislexic View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc
Avatar

Joined: 21 November 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 815
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dislexic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2009 at 5:24pm

Has to be said I've been using the pro 9200 & 8200 for a few years now and never had them running hot, no more than luke warm tbh. Always running from a 13A plug and never been any problem. Running subs & bass bins mainly with the 9200 and mids with the 8200. My 9200 has been running 4&2 ohms fine. Loads of headroom and squeeky clean sounding amps. nice & efficient yes :)

Back to Top
Elliot Thompson View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 02 April 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5172
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Elliot Thompson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2009 at 5:47pm


Originally posted by levyte357 levyte357 wrote:


Could that not be described as the amps drawing less power, because they output less, at certain input "frequencies"?


All one needs to do is calculate how much amperage is needed produce watts. For bass frequencies at low impedances you need current.

Many manufactures just increase the rail voltage to get more volume. However, the power supply remains the same.

Download the Lab Gruppen owner’s manual on the FP 13000. The difference between using 195 volts versus 170 volts is more output in a 4-ohm load. However, both settings will give you the same wattage under 2-ohm loads. Two ohm loads relies on current. If the amplifier’s power supply is not robust enough to deliver it, it cannot be done.

That’s why QSC made it perfectly clear what to expect from the PL 380. The Powerlight 6.0 never needed a disclaimer for it could deliver it’s stated wattage continuously.


Best Regards,


Edited by Elliot Thompson - 23 January 2009 at 5:53pm
Elliot Thompson
Back to Top
king david View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc


Joined: 17 January 2007
Location: italy
Status: Offline
Points: 1324
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote king david Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2009 at 6:03pm
EDIT: Just found these amp shootut results (again),

http://www.binkster.net/AmpShootout_20-20k_results.xls

hi!
the crest pro 8200 come out strong from the test, isnt it?
Back to Top
levyte357 View Drop Down
The 10,000 Points Club
The 10,000 Points Club


Joined: 10 May 2004
Location: UK, London
Status: Offline
Points: 11743
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote levyte357 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2009 at 7:12pm
Originally posted by king david king david wrote:

EDIT: Just found these amp shootut results (again),

http://www.binkster.net/AmpShootout_20-20k_results.xls

hi!
the crest pro 8200 come out strong from the test, isnt it?


The Crest 8200 isn't on the list, the below is an extract of the more interesting amps.

Bink Amp Shootout March 27-28, 2004 Manufacturer rating in Watts/ch, 4 Ohm stereo mode Shootout results: Both channels working, channel A highest clean level or level just prior to 1% THD+N, 117vac supply Shootout results: Both channels working, channel A highest clean level or level just prior to 1% THD+N, 96vac 'sagging' supply Inputs terminated with 600 Ohms
Mfr Model 1k 20-20k 20Hz 1kHz 20kHz 20Hz 1kHz 20kHz Noise at idle, in dBr A
Crest 8001 1225 1200 800 1141 1728       -70.645
Crest 8002 1400 1350 1311 1480 1822 1313 1481 1828 -80.061
Crest 9200 2200 1950 1282 1664 1504       -79.548
Crown MA-3600VZ   1565 310* *         -70.187
EV CP 3000S 1100 900 905 1069 1304 573 675 856 -80.099
EV P3000 RL 1300 1200 1043 1174 1778       -69.233
QSC MX 3000a 1250 1200 1059 1242 1905       -72.477
QSC PL 6.0 II 2200 2050 1719 1893 3241 1289 1723 2853 -76.926
QSC PL 6.0PFC 2650 2500 2289 2549 2890       -77.624
QSC PL 9.0PFC 3400 3200 3152 3293 4804 * 3021 4766 -76.806

Compare how close in "real performance" the QSC MX3000a is to the Crest 9200.

Even more suprising is the comparison between MX3000a and EV P3000.



"Who am I? I'm the guy who does his job.. You must be the other guy".
Back to Top
Peter Jan View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc
Avatar

Joined: 16 December 2008
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 1019
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Peter Jan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2009 at 7:14pm
Originally posted by Elliot Thompson Elliot Thompson wrote:

All one needs to do is calculate how much amperage is needed produce watts. For bass frequencies at low impedances you need current.

Many manufactures just increase the rail voltage to get more volume. However, the power supply remains the same.

Raising the voltage does get higher Watts at any impedance, but with the same capacity of power supply will "bottom out" faster at heavy loads/low impedance speakers.
The total possible amount of Watts will be the same, but the impedance at which that amount is reached, will be different.

Originally posted by Elliot Thompson Elliot Thompson wrote:

Download the Lab Gruppen owner’s manual on the FP 13000. The difference between using 195 volts versus 170 volts is more output in a 4-ohm load. However, both settings will give you the same wattage under 2-ohm loads. Two ohm loads relies on current. If the amplifier’s power supply is not robust enough to deliver it, it cannot be done.

An amp making the same amount of power in different loads, is only an indication that the power supply is exhausted, the power supply puts a hold on more current to the amp(s).
If an FP 13000 does that, than it's nothing more than a feature of that particular amp and it's not the only one doing it. You're making a generalisation of a typical example.
Every load relies on current and voltage versus impedance. A low impedance needs more current versus voltage than a higher impedance, but the capacity of the power supply is what makes an amp stop making power in a certain impedance. Switch mode power supplies, if properly made, can hold their voltage (almost) on a fixed level till current limiting sets in. That is something a classic power supply can not, but it can feed an amp decently for contineous sinewave measurement. A switch mode supply simply cannot do that and that's why the ways to measure those newer amps are adjusted to more real world ways of measurements. The "old" way of stating so much Watts contineous at that impedance was fine to compare the classic transformer-rectifier-cap supplies, but it is like comparing apples to oranges with switch-mode supply amps versus classic amps. For the same voltages the amps have on their supply rails, the switch mode amp will come out a test as being slightly better versus the classic supply amp IF ( big IF ) you measure under the conditions that are used nowadays. Let's be honnest on this, an amp needs to make power in real-world loads with real-world types of signals fed into it and that's where switch-mode amps do it better than classic amps for the same voltage supply rails. If you're testing amps the old way ( contineous sine wave ), you will see the classic amps shine over the switch-mode amps. Comparing like that was fine in the old days to get an idea what an amp could do, but comparing two different topologies of power supplies to one another is just plain wrong. Think of it like this : have you ever listened to a contineous 1 kHz sinewave at 8000 Watts ? I hope not... but that is the old way of bench testing amps.

Originally posted by Elliot Thompson Elliot Thompson wrote:

That’s why QSC made it perfectly clear what to expect from the PL 380. The Powerlight 6.0 never needed a disclaimer for it could deliver it’s stated wattage continuously.

Maybe QSC didn't add a disclaimer with the PL's of that era, at least not as clear as they do now, stating you need to measure under this or that condition to come to the figures printed, but that doesn't mean the PL's could deliver contineous what was stated, because they could definately NOT do that. The Powerlights of the first generation ( PL1.0, 1.4, 1.8, 4.0 ) were total disasters in real-wold use, because of a very bad dimensioning of the switch-mode supplies. The second generation ( with the limiter switches in the front ) were a huge step up, but the reputation of the Powerlights suffered a long time because of those first series. After that QSC had their act nicely together with switch-mode technology.



Edited by Peter Jan - 23 January 2009 at 7:23pm
Back to Top
Marvin View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc


Joined: 28 December 2007
Location: London UK
Status: Offline
Points: 1029
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Marvin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2009 at 7:29pm
WHen your ready Leyvte for the crest 9200/8200 just give me notice. if you have any gigs coming up soon or want a demo of the PL380 again give me notice and i can get one off my  mate for you yo try. p.s i did tell the guy £750 sounds steep for a 8001 but all i could do is put the word out for him.
Back to Top
Elliot Thompson View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 02 April 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5172
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Elliot Thompson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2009 at 8:26pm

Originally posted by Peter Jan Peter Jan wrote:




If you're testing amps the old way ( contineous sine wave ), you will see the classic amps shine over the switch-mode amps. Comparing like that was fine in the old days to get an idea what an amp could do, but comparing two different topologies of power supplies to one another is just plain wrong. Think of it like this : have you ever listened to a contineous 1 kHz sinewave at 8000 Watts ? I hope not... but that is the old way of bench testing amps.


The problem with the new way of testing amplifiers is the assumption that everyone only needs an amplifier to perform on short-term conditions and, not long-term.

A person would go deaf listening to a 1 kHz sine wave tone @ 8000 watts. Not to mention there is no driver that could withstand such a tone fed 8000 watts without burning up. However, having a 40% duty cycle from 100 Hertz down using multiple 8-ohm woofers each offering a Re of 5 ohms totalling 8000 watts for 6, 12, 24 hour events continuous has been happening around the globe for decades. And there are more sine waves being reinforced today from 50 Hertz down than 10, 20, or 30 years ago.

I would not say the topology is at fault but more the designer that has adopt the new standard. It enables them to cut cost by using a weaker power supply. Marketing is a funny thing you know. It offers claims it is beneficial for the user to have an amplifier that will operate on a standard AC receptacle. However, they fail to mention that they benefit as well by not having to focus on a more robust power supply for they know the receptacles these amplifiers will be connected to will not withstand the amount of wattage claimed on the spec sheet on a long-term basis.

Those that use a genny or carry their own distro, will find the amplifiers thermal ling before the source breaks down if they happen to find them selves requiring 40% duty cycles for events that fall anywhere from 6 – 24 hours continuous.

Best Regards,     
Elliot Thompson
Back to Top
Peter Jan View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc
Avatar

Joined: 16 December 2008
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 1019
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Peter Jan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2009 at 9:20pm
Originally posted by Elliot Thompson Elliot Thompson wrote:

  The problem with the new way of testing amplifiers is the assumption that everyone only needs an amplifier to perform on short-term conditions and, not long-term.
A person would go deaf listening to a 1 kHz sine wave tone @ 8000 watts. Not to mention there is no driver that could withstand such a tone fed 8000 watts without burning up.

Of course no such driver exists, thank god for that Big smile, but I assume you got the idea of what I was trying to point out...

Originally posted by Elliot Thompson Elliot Thompson wrote:

However, having a 40% duty cycle from 100 Hertz down using multiple 8-ohm woofers each offering a Re of 5 ohms totalling 8000 watts for 6, 12, 24 hour events continuous has been happening around the globe for decades. And there are more sine waves being reinforced today from 50 Hertz down than 10, 20, or 30 years ago.

I do agree !  Even if no speaker has it's minimum impedance all the way over his used frequency band and even counting for impedance altering due to the used type of cabinet those speakers are in, low frequency sinewave-like signals are much more common these days than let's say before the nineties.

Originally posted by Elliot Thompson Elliot Thompson wrote:

  I would not say the topology is at fault but more the designer that has adopt the new standard. It enables them to cut cost by using a weaker power supply. Marketing is a funny thing you know. It offers claims it is beneficial for the user to have an amplifier that will operate on a standard AC receptacle. However, they fail to mention that they benefit as well by not having to focus on a more robust power supply for they know the receptacles these amplifiers will be connected to will not withstand the amount of wattage claimed on the spec sheet on a long-term basis.

Yup, you're right. The topology isn't at fault, but those adopting it definately are and they get away with it under the convenient cover of the marketing-umbrella and in the process asking more money for what I think, should be a cheaper amp or at least priced on par with classic amps instead of a substantially more expensive one.
Those insane powerlevels the recent amplifiers are supposed to be capable off, may not be entirely possible on a real-world long-term basis, but it does one thing in a very sneaky way... it covers up the fact that the amps can't really make their claims true, because there definately IS a serious amount of power available, but you seldom or even never reach it.

Originally posted by Elliot Thompson Elliot Thompson wrote:


Those that use a genny or carry their own distro, will find the amplifiers thermal ling before the source breaks down if they happen to find them selves requiring 40% duty cycles for events that fall anywhere from 6 – 24 hours continuous.

Indeed, and again covering up the fact that such amps can't really make their claims true in the real world.
In this world, you can get away with a lot of crap as long as you can keep fooling people that an amp of 10-15000 Watts is better. I think it must do wonders for peoples egos... mine-is-bigger LOL , bragging rights, whatever...  Funny, because 10-15 years ago and earlier than that, we all did it with lot less powerfull amps and not so high-tech speakers ( if you believe all claims made by speaker manufacturers of course Wink ) and got the job done also and I think not one bit less good.


Cheers and have a nice weekend ! Wink


Edited by Peter Jan - 23 January 2009 at 9:24pm
Back to Top
Xmax extreme View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 23 May 2006
Location: Pilipinas
Status: Offline
Points: 308
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Xmax extreme Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 January 2009 at 10:51am
exciting stuff guysThumbs Up...keep the discussion going...
Downloaded the techinical data of the lab, the FP14000 has more ouput current capability which is 83A peak compare to the  FP1300 which has 53A, with 195V remains constant on both models..
Maximum Excursion

Don't criticize your own competition, it looks like a publicity of your own commercial products.
Back to Top
levyte357 View Drop Down
The 10,000 Points Club
The 10,000 Points Club


Joined: 10 May 2004
Location: UK, London
Status: Offline
Points: 11743
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote levyte357 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 January 2009 at 1:31pm
Originally posted by Xmax extreme Xmax extreme wrote:

exciting stuff guysThumbs Up...keep the discussion going...
Downloaded the techinical data of the lab, the FP14000 has more ouput current capability which is 83A peak compare to the  FP1300 which has 53A, with 195V remains constant on both models..


Have spoken to a few friends who own a few Labg amps, and it seems their strong point is not large current drawing for sub, but stability of amp, under sagging/hostile supply.


Edited by levyte357 - 24 January 2009 at 1:31pm
"Who am I? I'm the guy who does his job.. You must be the other guy".
Back to Top
Elliot Thompson View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 02 April 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5172
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Elliot Thompson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 January 2009 at 1:57pm


Originally posted by Peter Jan Peter Jan wrote:



Indeed, and again covering up the fact that such amps can't really make their claims true in the real world.In this world, you can get away with a lot of crap as long as you can keep fooling people that an amp of 10-15000 Watts is better. I think it must do wonders for peoples egos... mine-is-bigger LOL , bragging rights, whatever...  Funny, because 10-15 years ago and earlier than that, we all did it with lot less powerfull amps and not so high-tech speakers ( if you believe all claims made by speaker manufacturers of course Wink ) and got the job done also and I think not one bit less good.Cheers and have a nice weekend ! Wink



Here is a story I must share for it is most appropriate in such a discussion. In 2007, there was a Subwoofer Shootout in New York. We had five Powersoft K Series amplifiers at our disposal. Four I believe were K 10s and, the fifth was a K 8.

Only one K 10 was used being fed 240 volts. This seemed to be more than enough due to damaging two series of EM Acoustics Subwoofers. A pair of Quakes, the 215s, in addition to a single Danley 115. The damaged drivers all offered either 8 or 4-ohm nominal load. The K 10’s meter bridge was averaging on the second LED.

The Bassmaxx line comes along a little bit later and, things change rather quickly. One pair Z 5000 & one pair of Trips sucked the life out of the K 10 and, the amplifier is constantly clipping. The Trips in particular kept the Powersoft K 10 in constant clip despite numerous attempts of reducing the gain at front of the house. The Trips offers three 8-ohm woofers inside one cabinet whereas, the Z 5000 offers four 8-ohm woofers.

You might find this part rather interesting when the Trips were being driven. As I evaluate the meter bridge on the K 10, the amplifier’s average power is illuminating the first two output LED indicators however, jumps straight to sixth indicator (red/clip) franticly as if something is wrong. That type of erratic behaviour only comes from the power supply not being strong enough to maintain the constant current needed when driving low impedance loads on a long-term basis with strong low frequency (40 – 35 Hz) emphasis. What I found most interesting is once the K 10 began to clip, the average indicators increased from the first two output LED indicators to the fourth indicator as time progressed. Before anyone ask no, it did not get any louder when the average power LED indicators increased.

Since the shootout was focused primarily on subwoofers and not amplifiers, you will not find the above passage mentioned on the review I made on PSW. Bare in mind that 98% of the test program was Trance music. There was a QSC PL 9.0 available however, it couldn’t be used for it required 120 volts and, the distro was wired to 240 volts.


Best Regards,


Edited by Elliot Thompson - 24 January 2009 at 2:04pm
Elliot Thompson
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.06
Copyright ©2001-2023 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.