Speakerplans.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General > Amp Forum
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Two Peavey CS1000x bridged vs QSC RMX4050HD stereo
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Two Peavey CS1000x bridged vs QSC RMX4050HD stereo

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
Earplug View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc


Joined: 03 January 2012
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 5592
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Earplug Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Two Peavey CS1000x bridged vs QSC RMX4050HD stereo
    Posted: 18 September 2019 at 1:33pm
"Two amps of exactly (or not far off) the same power output (according to specs) can sound different,"

Very true. A friend here swapped out his RAM BUX 5´s for Crest 8001´s and the difference was crazy - even though the RAM´s were (supposedly) far more powerful than the 8001´s. You don´t know until you try it.

Then again, it might just be more distortion...   Smile


Earplugs Are For Wimps!
Back to Top
toastyghost View Drop Down
The 10,000 Points Club
The 10,000 Points Club
Avatar

Joined: 09 January 2007
Location: Manchester
Status: Offline
Points: 10009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toastyghost Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 September 2019 at 11:27am
Originally posted by Fred_dibna Fred_dibna wrote:

The subs are each loaded with two RCF L18P300 so they can take the power in stereo they subs with the FRC drivers are rated at 2,000 watts AES and the RMX4050HD outputs 1,400 per channel into 4 ohms. Plus music is dynamic not a continuous sinewave.


I would suggest that you read this on power ratings for loudspeakers:
https://www.doctorproaudio.com/content.php?2260-loudpeaker-power-handling&langid=1

In short, your AES rating is calculated from an RMS voltage measurement taken from driving the speaker with a 40Hz to 400Hz pink noise signal, with a 12dB crest factor.

If you’re playing heavier, modern bass focused music then the speaker will approach thermal compression much sooner, due to heating.

A better thing to think about is average power, and ensuring that the amplifier can deliver peaks without clipping. In practice, this means that you would likely get slightly louder peaks from using the bridged amplifier, but the long term output would remain the same. You would of course also run the risk of more easily cooking your coils, if you are not careful with limiting and running the system accordingly.

It’s up to you if this is worth carrying ten tons of amplifier for. Personally, I think that would be much better served in carrying the same weight in more cabinets when more output is needed.
Back to Top
levyte357- View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 27 July 2012
Location: UK, South East
Status: Offline
Points: 6740
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote levyte357- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 September 2019 at 10:42am
Sometimes sound dudes over complicate things.

Sounds like this is more of a hobby, than source of income for you.

RCF L18P300 are not thirsty drivers.

Sell your 4050HDs, and get pair of 5050s, and they will sufficiently/reliably power your cabs, to get you paid for gigs.

Many PA dudes who gig frequently, without large crew, would prefer E90/K20/FFA 10K.

Bridging 5x tonnes of 100 year old Peavey amps,  to drive 8x drivers, is just not how serious sound dudes do it, in 21st century.
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the war room!!".
Back to Top
Fred_dibna View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User
Avatar

Joined: 24 September 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 48
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fred_dibna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 September 2019 at 9:55am
The subs are each loaded with two RCF L18P300 so they can take the power in stereo they subs with the FRC drivers are rated at 2,000 watts AES and the RMX4050HD outputs 1,400 per channel into 4 ohms. Plus music is dynamic not a continuous sinewave.

Edited by Fred_dibna - 18 September 2019 at 9:57am
Back to Top
toastyghost View Drop Down
The 10,000 Points Club
The 10,000 Points Club
Avatar

Joined: 09 January 2007
Location: Manchester
Status: Offline
Points: 10009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toastyghost Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 September 2019 at 7:28am
Originally posted by Fred_dibna Fred_dibna wrote:

I think where the older amps are better is that they're more capable of outputting power continuously at 30 or 40hz whereas the newer amps struggle down that low unless it's a very expensive newer amp.


Cool, but your driver definitely can’t take continuous power of the level that even the RMX4050HD is rated at so it’s much of a muchness.
Back to Top
Fred_dibna View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User
Avatar

Joined: 24 September 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 48
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fred_dibna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 September 2019 at 8:09pm
I think where the older amps are better is that they're more capable of outputting power continuously at 30 or 40hz whereas the newer amps struggle down that low unless it's a very expensive newer amp.
Back to Top
Mikkel View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc
Avatar

Joined: 17 May 2013
Location: Huddersfield
Status: Offline
Points: 523
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mikkel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 September 2019 at 6:32pm
Think your splitting hairs there mate. the difference aint going to be mind blowing. if your really after getting the most out of your cabs why not look for two more 4050HD's? 4000w into each cab at full chat is more than you need (obviously dont run at full volume, but will give ya plenty of  power + all the headroom you want.

Does anyone know the going rate for rmx4050's these days? I would have put them in the 300/400 range. Only guessing mind.

P.s. just seen on cs1000x pdf it outputs 1500w into 4r bridge. ---> https://assets.peavey.com/literature/manuals/80301955.pdf
Not really much of a change from the 4050 in stereo.


Edited by Mikkel - 17 September 2019 at 6:42pm
Back to Top
Fred_dibna View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User
Avatar

Joined: 24 September 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 48
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fred_dibna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 September 2019 at 6:10pm
Originally posted by toastyghost toastyghost wrote:

Originally posted by Fred_dibna Fred_dibna wrote:

Originally posted by levyte357- levyte357- wrote:

Originally posted by Fred_dibna Fred_dibna wrote:

On subs what do you guys think between a QSC RMX4050HD running one sub per channel vs bridging a Peavey CS1000x on each sub? I have two RMX4050HD running four double 18" subs and was wondeirng whether finding four CS1000x and bridging them would sound better, the only problem I worry about is the Peavey amps are old, would having all four serviced be a good idea? Or is it best to stick with the RMX4050HD amps? 


I have a QSC 5050 for sale, that will sound much better than your 4050HD, on 4x subs.

PM me, if interested.


I'd not hear a difference because the RMX5050 specs stated it only outputs 200 watts RMS more per channel and that would yield an extra 0.4db output not even anywhere near noticeable. 


You answer your own question here. A bridged Peavey CS1000X is stated as 1000 watts at 8 ohms, which is 300 watts more than your 4050HD is offering to each driver currently. If you think that 200 watts is a negligible difference, then you're only going to be very disappointed with 300 watts extra, for a lot more weight, and pushing the Peavey amp to it's limits running in bridge mode.

But obviously you know that the RMX4050HD vs RMX5050 the difference in spl is negligible because they're the same manufacturer and series of amplifiers. But stated specs of power output can be inaccurate so comparing a bridged Peavey CS1000x into 4 ohms (not 8, I did mention my subs are dual 18 not single 18) vs an RMX4050HD in stereo there might be some difference. It's widely know the Peavey CS1000x can give as much as power as it's rated continuously all night and it's proper power for sub bass whereas can the RMX4050HD output the power continuously all night and at sub frequencies, i'm not sure. 

Two amps of exactly (or not far off) the same power output (according to specs) can sound different, I know this because I heard the difference between an RMX2450 running subs vs a PLX3002 running the same subs a few years ago. The difference in theory between the power ratings should only be about 1.4db extra spl output from the PLX3002 but the audible difference was quite big to be honest. That's different amp series though and different topology (I think that's the word used) because the RMX series is transformer and the PLX series is switch mode. 
Back to Top
toastyghost View Drop Down
The 10,000 Points Club
The 10,000 Points Club
Avatar

Joined: 09 January 2007
Location: Manchester
Status: Offline
Points: 10009
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toastyghost Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 September 2019 at 5:56pm
Originally posted by Fred_dibna Fred_dibna wrote:

Originally posted by levyte357- levyte357- wrote:

Originally posted by Fred_dibna Fred_dibna wrote:

On subs what do you guys think between a QSC RMX4050HD running one sub per channel vs bridging a Peavey CS1000x on each sub? I have two RMX4050HD running four double 18" subs and was wondeirng whether finding four CS1000x and bridging them would sound better, the only problem I worry about is the Peavey amps are old, would having all four serviced be a good idea? Or is it best to stick with the RMX4050HD amps? 


I have a QSC 5050 for sale, that will sound much better than your 4050HD, on 4x subs.

PM me, if interested.


I'd not hear a difference because the RMX5050 specs stated it only outputs 200 watts RMS more per channel and that would yield an extra 0.4db output not even anywhere near noticeable. 


You answer your own question here. A bridged Peavey CS1000X is stated as 1000 watts at 8 ohms, which is 300 watts more than your 4050HD is offering to each driver currently. If you think that 200 watts is a negligible difference, then you're only going to be very disappointed with 300 watts extra, for a lot more weight, and pushing the Peavey amp to it's limits running in bridge mode.
Back to Top
Fred_dibna View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User
Avatar

Joined: 24 September 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 48
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fred_dibna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 September 2019 at 5:06pm
You might be able to afford a K20 but I can't, it took me two years to save up enough money to build my system that I have, then I got laid off from work and have started on Universal Credit which is piss all money to live on. So now i'll be lucky if I can afford £350 for an amp. But i'm not selling my system no way i've got the amps to power it all still but i'm wondering whether it'd be an advantage in terms of low frequency output changing from two RMX4050HD amps to power my subs to four Peavey CS1000x bridged. 
Back to Top
levyte357- View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 27 July 2012
Location: UK, South East
Status: Offline
Points: 6740
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote levyte357- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 September 2019 at 10:46pm
Originally posted by Fred_dibna Fred_dibna wrote:

They're custom EV QRX218 style subs loaded with RCF L18P300 drivers, i've had them a few years now. I've spoken to a few people on other pro sound forums and they're coming to the same conclusion that the difference between the RMX4050HD and the RMX5050 in terms of capable spl from the subs is amazingly minimal, in theory less than 1db more spl. 


I basically don't rate 2x18 reflex, as it's always the same story, people needing more and more power to drive them, due to very low efficiency.

Get yourself a Powersoft K20 or MC2 E90, and your problems are solved, 2x 2x18 cabs per channel no sweat.

However if you don't often play in venues with proper mains supply, you will suffer.
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the war room!!".
Back to Top
Fred_dibna View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User
Avatar

Joined: 24 September 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 48
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fred_dibna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 September 2019 at 10:03pm
They're custom EV QRX218 style subs loaded with RCF L18P300 drivers, i've had them a few years now. I've spoken to a few people on other pro sound forums and they're coming to the same conclusion that the difference between the RMX4050HD and the RMX5050 in terms of capable spl from the subs is amazingly minimal, in theory less than 1db more spl. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.547 seconds.