Overpowering speakers

Discussion in 'OT Technology' started by veonake, Jul 1, 2005.

  1. veonake

    veonake OnT poster, OT lurker

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,235
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NYC
    Disclaimer: Not to sound like a dick, but I prefer only those respond that are very solid in their answer. Opinions (guesses) I don't need, since they are probably about as much of a gut feeling as I have about it. I.E. 04, Zemo, and some others I'd much appreciate your advice. Thanks.

    I will be receiving a pair of infinity kappa perfect 6.1's within an hour that will replace my polk audio mm6 components. The problem I have is that currently I'm putting about 200w/channel to them, and they are rated for something like 150W RMS. No problems with that much power so far, and I don't turn them up loud enough to use all that power. The new Infinitys are only rated to 100W RMS, but have 400W peak power handling. Significantly more dynamic range than my Polks. So, the question: is it wise to run 200W RMS to these speakers? I know it's almost always better to overpower than underpower, but is this pushing the limit?

    I also want to use my Eclipse CD8053's internal x-over rather than the supplied one, which I would be forced to use if you guys say I should only run the 100 watts, making me run them off one channel of my amp. Currently I am bi-amping (or is it bi-wiring?) my mids and tweets (one channel to mid, one to tweet).
     
  2. cctyler

    cctyler Mornin'

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2001
    Messages:
    2,095
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Winnipeg, Mb, Canada
    More importantly what is providing the 200watts/channel? If its a quality amp, 200 clean watts wont do any harm. Speakers usually become damaged because of 'dirty', clipped power from the amp.

    How good is the crossover in the Eclipse? I don't know much about that deck, but I haven't seen many that have dedicated outputs for a mid and a tweet to give you the ability to xover them seperately. So you're esentially running 100 watts to the mid and 100 watts to the tweeter? Using either a 4 channel amp or two 2 channel amps?

    I would be more inclined to bridge 2 channels of the amp and use the supplied active crossover.


    On a site note, I just went from powering my Boston Pro's with a Diamond D300.2 to using the internal amp on my Pioneer.....I feel bad for the Boston's, completely different sound.
     
  3. Eng

    Eng New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    Messages:
    158
    Likes Received:
    0
    just keep the gains below the maxed out position. I always buy a higher rated amp for my speakers. this way the amp won't be pushed too hard and distort your speakers
     
  4. veonake

    veonake OnT poster, OT lurker

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,235
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NYC
    Well, the Eclipse CD8053 is one of the best decks you can buy before going to some units from Nakamichi, Denon, or McIntosh. The xover should be pretty good. Yes, essentially 100 watts to tweet and 100 to the woofer. Of course the tweeter is has the gain turned down relative to the mid. One 4-channel. And, I think you mean bridge the amp and use the passive xover, not active. And I used to run the supplied passive xover, doesn't sound nearly as good as going through the deck. Why did you start using the internal amp of your pioneer? And, why run boston pro's off a pioneer deck? Is it pioneer premiere?
     
  5. cctyler

    cctyler Mornin'

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2001
    Messages:
    2,095
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Winnipeg, Mb, Canada

    Sorry I meant passive, I've been out of the audio loop for a while now. What I'm trying to get at is does the Eclipse allow you to turn the pre-outs into a sub/mid/tweet unlike the basic three sets of outpts on most decks that are sub,front, and rear? Otherwise how do you control the xover of the mid and tweet unless you use the amps xovers or an active crossover. (got it right that time) or bridge the amp and use the supplied passive?

    Something wierd happend to my Diamond 300.2, after a 3 hour road trip it started turning on and off. Im pretty sure it was starting to overheat. I let it cool and it won't turn on now. I bought the amp used and it had been worked on before. Someone had replaced a resistor in the temp sensing area of the board, causing it to think it was overheating when it really wasn't. A local repair guy fixed it, but Im wondering if the new resistor didn't shutdown the amp in time and it melted something.

    I have to go back to the lake (3 hours) so I hooked up the Pioneer (Premiere 720) to the Boston's so I could at least have some tunes. I hate to do it, but I need some kind of music.
     
  6. veonake

    veonake OnT poster, OT lurker

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,235
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NYC
    Yes, there are low/mid/high outputs on the Eclipse, which is how you use the on-board active x-over. I have the x-overs turned off on all my amps. It actually has 6 outputs, to allow a 16 volt balanced connection, but my amp can't handle that high of an input signal, so I run 8 volts unbalanced. You should research this deck, you might find yourself itching to buy one yourself :).

    Sorry to hear about your amp situation. Are you sure it is worth the repair cost, or would it be better in the long run to get something else?
     
  7. StraX22

    StraX22 Stuckitude

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,012
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SA / Hou, TX
    Having headroom is always good.

    I buddy of mine was running a set of 165KPs in his kickpanels with about 800 watts per kick (custom passive XO). He never "blew" a speaker, though he did melt his TLR diaphrams every few months.
     
  8. XR250rdr

    XR250rdr OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    24,468
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    Ca
    If you hook the Kappas up as you have the MM6s it will be fine. Without mucking around in more detail now, biamping a comp set with 100W to each driver is pretty much the same power level as running 100W per side and the passive over minus some insertion losses from the passive components. Bridging the amp will yield ~400W to each side. I feel that is probably too much power without being very careful.

    The problem I see with biamping the set is you dont know what the response curves of the Infinity drivers look like.

    Often factory supplied passive xovers are more than just standard hi/low pass filters. One important other function is whether the passive over EQs out any driver nonlinearities as well. So sometimes biamping without a good EQ (read: 50-100 band) works great, that is if the drivers behave themselves until well out of the pass band. Some very good drivers don't always behave though (eg. some Seas mids have a huge spike at one cone resonance freq, 7kHz IIRC). That is where a good EQ is absolutely necessary. Also the passive xover may incorporate overlapping and/or different Q filters to acheive a flat freq response. And maybe look at it this way as well, Infinity didnt pay a team of acoustical engineers to work probably several months to design that passive xover for nothing.

    I would try and set it up both ways and see which way you like better. I hope I didnt misread the whole thread till now :o
     

Share This Page