[sdiy] Re: crystal clear

[Magnus Danielson]

From: Don Tillman <don at till.com>
Subject: [sdiy] Re: crystal clear
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 11:09:09 -0700

>    > Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 17:30:12 +0200 (CEST)
>    > From: Magnus Danielson <cfmd at swipnet.se>
>    >
>    > Giving the RMS power of:
>    >        _________           _
>    > U  = \/ 100 * 8 | = 20 * \/2 V
>    >  b
>    >        ________
>    > U  = \/ 50 * 8 | = 20 V
>    >  t
> 
> Ahhh, that's better.  Isn't that just, y'know, comfortable?

Yes... ;O)

Thing is, it takes some care when introducing the formulas to actually explain
why they hold, which is why people where lost initially.

Also, I chose the sine-wave very intentionally, since this is the reference
waveform when comparing amplifier power.

>    > OK, now somebody got to be satisfied since I did bring the
>    > formulas alongside my argumentations! ;O)
> 
> Who's he talking about?  :-)

Just _*WHO*_ could it be???

> ----------------
> 
> And extending it out to a triamp system:
>   Low amp: 100 watts
>   Mid amp:  50 watts
>   High amp: 25 watts
> 
> Total: 175 watts
> 
> But the full range amp necessary for the peaks is:
>    (sqrt(100) + sqrt(50) + sqrt(25))^2 => 487 watts

Right. And it is much more feasable to build those free smaller amps than a
500 W amp. The point would work even better if we consider building amps for
4 cabinets each side, then each side has a 400 W, a 200 W and a 100 W amp
instead of a 2 kW amp.

If we want to have fun we could also calculate the heat-loss in amps and
compare. It would be even more fun.

Cheers,
Magnus