Speakerplans.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General > Newbie Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - AES vs RMS
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

AES vs RMS
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Elliot Thompson View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 02 April 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5175 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Elliot Thompson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: AES vs RMS
    Posted: 01 July 2013 at 10:04am

Originally posted by Pasi Pasi wrote:

Except like i posted, that standard has been updated and that graph is incorrect.


You still need to take into consideration where you are rolling off the bass frequencies in your LMS. Following any type of standard made by someone other than yourself which, may not be how you are actually using the product in question, is bound to have detrimental affects in the long run.

Best Regards,
Elliot Thompson
Back to Top
Pasi View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc


Joined: 25 April 2010
Location: Knutsford
Status: Offline
Points: 2732 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 July 2013 at 7:24am
Except like i posted, that standard has been updated and that graph is incorrect.
Back to Top
Elliot Thompson View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 02 April 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5175 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Elliot Thompson Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 July 2013 at 3:50am

Originally posted by Mircea Bartic Mircea Bartic wrote:

a comparison of the different speaker measuring methods:





I believe common sense is in order. If you know you are not going offer a –3 dB point at 60 Hz as the AES graph shows on your LMS, it does not make logical sense to use AES stated wattage as if it is some type rule embedded in stone.

The majority of AES papers were written decades ago. It does not take into consideration the evolution of music and how frequencies that were considered very low 30-40 years ago are not good enough in this day and age.

Best Regards,
Elliot Thompson
Back to Top
pfly View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc


Joined: 25 October 2007
Location: Helsinki, Fin
Status: Offline
Points: 2828 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pfly Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 June 2013 at 8:34pm
I suspect that 1500 watts or so at 500hz could actually be more punishing to modern sub driver than at 1500 watts at 60hz, given that the driver excursion stays within xmax. This is because at 500hz the driver won't be moving that much and is not moving any air inside the motor structure.

RMS / AES / whatever power rating is mostly heat related power rating anyway. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Back to Top
MarjanM View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 10 February 2005
Location: Macedonia
Status: Offline
Points: 7816 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MarjanM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 June 2013 at 3:50pm
As an addition to what Pasi said you can always do your own torture tests and see what it can do.
But hat does not include +10db at 40Hz :-)
Marjan Milosevic
MM-Acoustics
www.mm-acoustics.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MM-Acoustics/608901282527713
Back to Top
Pasi View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc


Joined: 25 April 2010
Location: Knutsford
Status: Offline
Points: 2732 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 June 2013 at 2:48pm
Originally posted by levyte357- levyte357- wrote:


Yeah right...  Good luck waiting for that.. LOL

Final comment, AES ratings aren't worth anything "IMHO", except selling drivers to the un-informed.



No need to wait. Measurement documents are available from all manufacturers at least to designers. I have piles and piles of those documents and they specify clearly what was done and how it was done.

But to you for example Xmax is just one number. To me there is 4 different Xmax limitations...
Back to Top
levyte357- View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 27 July 2012
Location: UK, South East
Status: Offline
Points: 8128 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote levyte357- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 June 2013 at 2:26pm
Originally posted by Pasi Pasi wrote:


If the rated power for given lf driver/enclosure combination is different from that observed when the driver is mounted on the standard baffle to radiate into 2pi steradians, the manufacturer shall so state.


Yeah right...  Good luck waiting for that.. LOL

Final comment, AES ratings aren't worth anything "IMHO", except selling drivers to the un-informed.



Edited by levyte357- - 30 June 2013 at 2:27pm
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.
Back to Top
Pasi View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc


Joined: 25 April 2010
Location: Knutsford
Status: Offline
Points: 2732 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pasi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 June 2013 at 2:08pm
4.5 Power handling

4.5.1 Test conditions and equipment

The lf driver shall be mounted in free air so that the direction of motion of diaphragm is in horizontal plane and so that there is no appreciable air loading from adjacent structures. The driver shall be excited with a band of pink noise extending one decade upward from the manufacturer's stated lf limit of the device. The noise shall be bandpass filtered at 12dB per octave with Butterworth filter response characteristic, and the peak-to-rms ratio of the noise supplied to the lf driver shall be 2:1 (6 dB). Refer to Appendix C for the recommended method. The manufacturer shall state the upper and lower cutoff frequencies (-3dB) of the noise signal.

5. Low frequency enclosures

5.2.4 Additional power handling information.

If the rated power for given lf driver/enclosure combination is different from that observed when the driver is mounted on the standard baffle to radiate into 2pi steradians, the manufacturer shall so state.
Back to Top
levyte357- View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 27 July 2012
Location: UK, South East
Status: Offline
Points: 8128 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote levyte357- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 June 2013 at 11:55am
In terms of 18" drivers, might be simpler to say, ignore AES ratings, and consider accuracy of RMS ratings, to be linked with driver manufacturer reputation.

Have seen some 18" drivers rated @ 2400W AES, luckily I know many of them wouldn't survive 900W in correctly tuned reflex, but many don't.


Edited by levyte357- - 30 June 2013 at 11:56am
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.
Back to Top
azlan View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User
Avatar

Joined: 09 January 2012
Location: W12
Status: Offline
Points: 364 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote azlan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 June 2013 at 11:06am
as a general rule, the AES rating will be around half the RMS, which is in turn half the program rating, which could well be half the peak rating, depending on how the company in question measures it.

The reason for this is a 3db increase in level equates to a doubling of output power from an amp, the average signal for AES is 6db below the peak, but only 3db for RMS (usually), Programe is a term usually used to describe a speakers performance with real world audio (usually with a dynamic range of anywhere from 3-10db!)

Remember though,  if you cant afford an amp that can deliver buckets of headroom, so long as you don't clip the amp you should be fine, and on paper, even if the amp can only supply half the rated peak output, you should only lose about 3db from the maximum volume (not all that much really!)
Back to Top
Mircea Bartic View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 18 February 2005
Location: Romania
Status: Offline
Points: 2582 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mircea Bartic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 June 2013 at 10:59am
a comparison of the different speaker measuring methods:
general manager & head designer at nexus-acoustics research
http://www.facebook.com/nexus.acoustics.research

Ex Nexus_3
Back to Top
levyte357- View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 27 July 2012
Location: UK, South East
Status: Offline
Points: 8128 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote levyte357- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 June 2013 at 10:28am
Originally posted by MarjanM MarjanM wrote:

Originally posted by GEB GEB wrote:

AES power handling is perhaps one of the best defined ratings for loudspeakers.

It is simply pink noise filtered between 125Hz and 8kHz with a peak to average ratio of 6dB and applied over a period of two hours. It is one of the better indicators of both the thermal and mechanical aspects of power handling.

^ Found this on another website, hope its helpfull.

So then this is totally wrong for subs power measurement.


+1

Always knew AES ratings for 18" sub-woofers was pile of crap, from experience of certain driver behavior, driven 40-120hz, between 500-800W.

AES power rating (for Sub drivers), about as useful as power amplifier ratings @ 1khz, for large amps intended for sub.






Edited by levyte357- - 30 June 2013 at 10:29am
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>

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 0.155 seconds.