which (5K) amp to buy |
Post Reply | Page 123 14> |
Author | ||
Tommes
Registered User Joined: 01 June 2012 Location: Belgium Status: Offline Points: 126 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 02 June 2012 at 5:57am |
|
Hi everyone,
Been following topics for several years on speakerplans and finally decided to register myself and post a small topic. I've been using several of QSC's MX3000a for almost 15 years now and never had one failing on me. Pretty good i think 15 years using the same amps, but now i simply want to buy some new stuff. The MX3000a has been used on 8, 4 and 2 ohms, and although it is not that powerfull (according to todays standards), it still packs one hell of a punch. So the new amp(s) will have to be damn good to beat the QSC experience. The amps i'm thinking about are: QSC RMX 5050 Crest CA18 Crest 9001 AA V6001 Let's start with the RMX5050. I've never worked with it, but i'm thinking about that one because i'm a hughe fan of QSC and this is the best they have to offer at the moment (and please don't start about PL3 ). I've not read anything negative on the web about this amp, but also didn't find that much of really positive notes. From a schematic perspective, the RMX seems almost the same as the MX series. So it can't be bad, can it? But why is it so damn cheap? Chinese manufacturing? QSC sells this amp as a 5K amp, but looking more closely to the specs, you see that it only delivers this power at 1Khz with 1%THD. Compared to the Crest CA18, that's less power. I've heard these Crests on several occasions and they always sounded like music to my ears. Is it the higher damping that does it? I know that when you take the cables into account, the damping of the amp doesn't make that much of a difference, but still... What makes an amp with a higher damping sound different if it doesn't matter? Looking at Crest, one can not get around the old 9001. Everyone is saying that it is a beast (take a look at this boy's damping) and they are pretty reliable. The only down side, when it fails, it really fails (catching fire etc...) Oh yes, it apparently also likes high current outlets. And then there is the AA V6001. Looks good on paper. Looks good on the inside. Costs almost nothing. Very reliable according to what i've read from several users. So what's the down side to this amp? Even if it would be some watts underpowered compared to specs, it still seems a pretty good deal to me. Before i forget, i left out the Crown MA5000vz because i used to use these now and then, and they had a high failure rate, so, even though it sounds pretty good, it's definately not my favourite. So is there anyone out there who would be so kind to help me decide? Personal experience is always the best info. Thanks. Tom PS: i also might be able to buy some QSC PL9.0pfc, but read a lot about the power supply failures... |
||
Keen
Young Croc Joined: 30 May 2011 Location: Brisbane, Aus Status: Offline Points: 1203 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Hi Tom,
I don't know much about amps and haven't used any of the ones you've mentioned. Have you seen this resource? http://www.abeltronics.co.uk/amptesting.php Simon |
||
Tommes
Registered User Joined: 01 June 2012 Location: Belgium Status: Offline Points: 126 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Hi Keen,
Yep!
Know abeltronics, but they didn't test the AA V6001 or the RMX5050 (atleast i didn't came accross these 2).
Thanks for the pointer anyway
I would have expected that the amp gurus (and i know they are there) would be all over this topic.
Maybe they are just tired of telling the same story over and over again?
Anyway, buying new amps is a big thing, not only do i need to take the budget (which is not that big) into account, but i also want to buy something that goes on and on for years and sounds nice in the process.
So any info is very much appreciated...
|
||
shagnasty
Old Croc Joined: 30 July 2007 Location: Guildford, UK Status: Offline Points: 7685 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I'd get the PL 9.0.
None of the amps you listed are lighter and the RMX series is a very poor cousin to the MX3000, concert system have PL 9.0s for £750 which they will work, AFAIA most PSU issues with these babies were in the US (I guess running 208V@60Hz) not the European models...
|
||
levyte357
The 10,000 Points Club Joined: 10 May 2004 Location: UK, London Status: Offline Points: 11743 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
|
Aren't those the 110V versions, not 220V? |
||
"Who am I? I'm the guy who does his job.. You must be the other guy".
|
||
shagnasty
Old Croc Joined: 30 July 2007 Location: Guildford, UK Status: Offline Points: 7685 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
|
TBH I haven't checked, as they are on teh UK website I "assumed" 240V, I am on the verge of buying one as I am bored with using bridged amps on low-end, worth a call, if they are 120V thaey are a waste of space as they are the one that blew up (no surprise there you build and amp that needs a 25mm mains lead in a 3u box and it dies), but in hindsight you need 95V rails to drive 4k5 into 2r so using a 120V supply to generate a 190v ones is a bit, well, daft, they may have down better running it 2phase and neutral with no PSU and just stuffing the mains straight out it's arse!
But good point, I may call on Wed and find out!
|
||
Tommes
Registered User Joined: 01 June 2012 Location: Belgium Status: Offline Points: 126 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Lighter as in less weight?
Lighter than what exactly?
I've read over and over again that conventional amps seem to do a better job on the low end than the ones with SMPS.
We tested a PL4.0 next to a MX3000a (both just below clipping) and the MX3000a seemed to punch much harder even though it has less power.
So i'm not that in to SMPS amps.
That being said, pretty much everyone seems to agree that the PL9.0 is maybe the best one can find.
And i also read that the PSU failures seem to be confined to the 110V version.
So maybe the PL9.0 is still an option.
But why are you saying that the RMX is a very poor cousin of the MX?
From a pure electronic point of view the RMX is very similar to the MX.
So is it something mechanical (like inferior transfomers) that makes it worse?
Or is it just because it is so cheap that everyone assumes that it's bad?
Anyone out there with RMX5050 experience?
And AA V6001 experience anyone?
|
||
levyte357
The 10,000 Points Club Joined: 10 May 2004 Location: UK, London Status: Offline Points: 11743 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Careful with that.. According to this thread, apparently, we've all been doing it wrong for years, and our ears are not accurate enough to tell us if one amp can push subs harder than another. Apparently you need bench with oscilloscope, volt meter, current meter, cabs mic'd up to measure the distortion, to see if it's that making the lower rated amp sound louder, or it maybe psycho acoustics causing you think it's louder, even if it "actually" is. Can't possibly be that a lower rated transformer amp is performing according to spec on sub, and the higher rated lightweight isn't. </sarcasm> Edited by levyte357 - 02 June 2012 at 9:30pm |
||
"Who am I? I'm the guy who does his job.. You must be the other guy".
|
||
shagnasty
Old Croc Joined: 30 July 2007 Location: Guildford, UK Status: Offline Points: 7685 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Less weight than a Mx3000a, they are all proper iron copper amps, the RMX series aren't built as well as the Ex4000/Mx3000, chassis is a bit flimsier and the PSU "looks" less impressive, I borrowed a 5050 and TBH a Pair of bridged SR-707 left it for dead, yes the 707s were mathmatically gonna kill it into 4r but even when we calibrated teh 707s down to the power of the 5050 the 707 had a LOT more balls and depth (also weighed nearly twice as much!!!! )
QSC make some fine amps, but they also make some budget amps and IMHO the RMX series is built more to cost than spec, the AA V6001 isn't a common amp in the Uk so I wouldn't like to comment on but I never seen one on a tour, where as the please , CAs and 900x seem to have clocked up a good few million miles between them around the globe....
As for a PL 4.0 vs a MX3000a I've done the same with a EX4000 (which I belive is a MX 3000 with an open input architecture) and on 18s I'd say the EX had it but for 21s it seemed to fall behind the PL 4.0, truth is the PL 4.0 is a kick amp not a sub amp, you want a PL 6.0 min really to make a big noise...
go to a shop and pick any RMX amp, you'll instantly feel your Mx was made to last a bit longer, in a listening test i would wager a PL 4.0 over the 5050 any day...
S
|
||
shagnasty
Old Croc Joined: 30 July 2007 Location: Guildford, UK Status: Offline Points: 7685 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
That my method of using 6 21s to see how far i can blow a small child down a warehouse at standard temprature and pressure isn't that scientific??
Amps/Volts/Hertz/Watts/THD, all nonsense and won't catch on IMHO, flying kids that's what the people wanna see....
|
||
levyte357
The 10,000 Points Club Joined: 10 May 2004 Location: UK, London Status: Offline Points: 11743 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I've said here for years, in terms of sub & 5K amps, the RMX 5050 is not that strong, not as good as CA18 or MA5000VZ, and got shot down every time. People say the RMX are a budget range, and I've begun to see why. I only use my 4050HDs in 4 ohm bridge mode, so oodles of power there. The 240V PL9, will just be too much power for most people. Audiocenter DA12.2 is another way of getting approx 1.8kwpc @ 4 ohms. |
||
"Who am I? I'm the guy who does his job.. You must be the other guy".
|
||
shagnasty
Old Croc Joined: 30 July 2007 Location: Guildford, UK Status: Offline Points: 7685 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Just use 1.5mm cables then!
|
||
Post Reply | Page 123 14> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |