1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Amp crossover settings

Discussion in 'In-Car Entertainment' started by Leddy, Sep 2, 2004.

  1. imported_officedog
    Online

    imported_officedog Guest

    [Sep 8, 2004]
    [ QUOTE ]
    Dean_T said:


    I'll shut up now /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

    [/ QUOTE ]

    /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

    #41
  2. AndyMac
    Offline

    AndyMac Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    30
    [Sep 8, 2004]
    Leddy don't get me started on our superb new range of mfp's, 40% faster printing than the equivalent Minolta/Konica? Too late.....
    #42
  3. Leddy
    Offline

    Leddy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Sep 8, 2004]
    I would tend to disagree....

    See attached. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
    #43
  4. AndyMac
    Offline

    AndyMac Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    30
    [Sep 8, 2004]
    But if you increase the gain setting on our machines you get the attached.
    That wasn't a test undertaken by independent Xerox analysts per chance. Printing blank pages as usual. That old favorite.
    #44
  5. Leddy
    Offline

    Leddy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Sep 8, 2004]
    Our test was done by BLI, mixed network load - sets/stapled sets/duplex/ etc.

    Your comparison is nice though, shame its against a 265 thats 4/5 years old!!!
    #45
  6. AndyMac
    Offline

    AndyMac Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    30
    [Sep 8, 2004]
    Exactly the same model as on your comparison, hardly our fault that Xerox take forever to refresh their lineup. Can't actually see a 65ppm printer/copier in their lineup.
    Very off-topic, sorry everyone (he started it Dad!)
    #46
  7. Leddy
    Offline

    Leddy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Sep 8, 2004]
    Nah my comparisoon has the WCP65, the DC265 had a powerpc processor for goodness sake!

    You'll also notice on my comparison since HP moved from Canon engines to Konica Minolta engines the productivity has reduced even though the rated speed has increased. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
    #47
  8. AndyMac
    Offline

    AndyMac Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    30
    [Sep 8, 2004]
    Forgive my ignorance but where did you get the idea that a Work Centre Pro 65 was a DocuCentre 265. This test was done on a WorkCentre Pro 65 which I think abbreviates to a WCP65, so like for like comparison.
    It's not all about procesor speed anyway, it's ultimately down to print driver and formatter board, and some IT managers seem to have a bit of a issue allowing Xerox drivers on their network. So even if it was faster (which it isn't) it ain't gonna be printing anything cos it won't be connected. Nice "copier" though.
    #48
  9. AndyMac
    Offline

    AndyMac Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    30
    [Sep 8, 2004]
    Anyway what the f*ck are we talking about work for?
    #49
  10. S3tony
    Offline

    S3tony Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2004
    Messages:
    396
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Sep 9, 2004]
    good question!

    /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beerchug.gif
    #50
  11. Leddy
    Offline

    Leddy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Sep 18, 2004]
    Well, finally got around to fitting my amp today.

    The install went very smoothly which, as AndyMac knows, wasn't the case when using other amps previously!!!

    For the moment its running 5 channel, but I have only connected the rears and the sub channel as i didn't have time in the end to run the new speaker cable to the fronts. To be honest, the Alpine 9812rr head unit I have is doing an admirable job of driving my Focals at the front.

    First off, what I must say, is that with this new amp there is no hissing, popping at startup or any other crackling noises, nothing but crisp clear sound. The gain for the sub (with some testing with bass heavy tracks), did indeed need to go to 3/4, anything less just didn't drive the little JL amp hard enough. Maybe if the sub channel had more RMS power it wouldn't be neccesary, but trust me, it NEEDS to go to 3/4.

    All in all I am well chuffed with the results, only quandary now is whether to bother amping the fronts as I am not sure I'll get any benefit.
    #51
  12. imported_maviceuk
    Online

    imported_maviceuk Guest

    [Sep 18, 2004]
    Leddy

    I amped the front to with a puny panasonic amp for my AMSS install
    I was amazed at the improvement over the standard chorus hu

    suppose it depends how good the amp is in your HU


    #52
  13. imported_maviceuk
    Online

    imported_maviceuk Guest

    [Sep 18, 2004]
    oh, and for the record

    I have set the Macsub gain as per the manufacturers guidlines /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh_roll.gif
    Amp gain to sub set to 85% - no clipping, distortion, hum - just clear controlled bass
    Rear gain set to 50%

    Crossover setting - I have settled at 80Hz - sounds best to my ears.

    #53
  14. imported_maviceuk
    Online

    imported_maviceuk Guest

    [Sep 21, 2004]
    Sorry, RMS is about 1/3 of peak power - see below extract


    Power?

    There are different ways in which power is measured by amplifier manufacturers to make people think that their amps have more power than others. Laws of physics tell us that Power can be obtained by multiplying Current and Voltage. For example, if your amplifier gets 12 volts, and it draws 20 amps, then power would be 240 watts, right? Not exactly. In the real world, amplifiers waste 50% or more of the power in the form of heat. That leaves you with only 120 watts.

    Things get more complicated than that. There are different ways to measure power. Power can be measured for top to bottom of the signal (Peak, or Max, etc). Another way to measure power is From the zero-level to the top half (usually called music power). The most accurate way to measure power is RMS (root mean square) watts. The RMS value is obtained by squaring the value of the signal, taking the average, then the square root. This is the equivalent of the actual power delivered. Most reputable manufacturers use the RMS rating.
    To get RMS power from peak or max power just divide by three. Music power is just half of peak power. For example, an amplifier is rated at 100w (peak) per channel. The so called Music power would be only 50w per channel. The RMS power would be 33w per channel. Big difference, isn't it? Be careful when checking specifications of amps before buying, to see what you are really getting. Always ask for the RMS power of an amplifier.

    Confused enough? There is more. Some companies rate their amplifiers using unrealistic conditions, for example calculating power at 15 volts, under 2 ohms, at 10% distortion, etc. Make sure you see the actual test voltages and loads.

    #54
  15. imported_maviceuk
    Online

    imported_maviceuk Guest

    [Sep 21, 2004]
    Corrr....how techy does that attachement look....nice wave /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif.



    Leddy

    basically that means that your 60W is actually 20rms (more or less)

    still, pretty good for a HU amp

    #55
  16. Leddy
    Offline

    Leddy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Sep 21, 2004]
    Thanks Noggy,

    Amping them with my MRV F450 would give me 30WRMS per channel for the fronts, would be interesting to see how much better if anything it would be...
    #56

Share This Page