Hi, I am new here and must say that there is some great advise given and hope you can help me out. I run a Martin Audio system of 2xS15 and either 2X12 (F12) or 2x15 (F15) dependant on gigs. Currently I am using a C Audio Pulse 1100 which means one side runs the subs and one the tops. Now the S15's are 750w a side AES, and yet the F12's are 300w AES. The Martin site says a suitable power for the subs are 600-1500w into 4 ohms and the F12 are 400-1000w into 4 ohms. If I were to buy an amp that runs 1500w a side would this damage the F12's even if patched through the M3 controller? I here abot damaging speakers if underpowering them but what about exceeding the power? Is it as simple as just having the tops at a reduced volume?
Short answer: Yes you can damage speakers by dissipating too much power in them.
Longer answer: Correctly set up limiters are your friend. You could easily use a 3000W amp with a 50W speaker - it would be a little pointless but there's no reason why it can't be done safely.
Bear in mind that subs need more power in order to achieve a similar level to tops so 750W subs with 300W tops may not be a bad match. Also remember that power handling isn't related to volume in any useful way - just because a speaker can handle more power doesn't mean that it's louder.
PS. Welcome to the forum!
Longer answer: Correctly set up limiters are your friend. You could easily use a 3000W amp with a 50W speaker - it would be a little pointless but there's no reason why it can't be done safely.
Bear in mind that subs need more power in order to achieve a similar level to tops so 750W subs with 300W tops may not be a bad match. Also remember that power handling isn't related to volume in any useful way - just because a speaker can handle more power doesn't mean that it's louder.
PS. Welcome to the forum!
QUOTE (Shez @ 5 Aug 2008, 7:49 PM) 
Short answer: Yes you can damage speakers by dissipating too much power in them.
Longer answer: Correctly set up limiters are your friend. You could easily use a 3000W amp with a 50W speaker - it would be a little pointless but there's no reason why it can't be done safely.
Bear in mind that subs need more power in order to achieve a similar level to tops so 750W subs with 300W tops may not be a bad match. Also remember that power handling isn't related to volume in any useful way - just because a speaker can handle more power doesn't mean that it's louder.
PS. Welcome to the forum!
Longer answer: Correctly set up limiters are your friend. You could easily use a 3000W amp with a 50W speaker - it would be a little pointless but there's no reason why it can't be done safely.
Bear in mind that subs need more power in order to achieve a similar level to tops so 750W subs with 300W tops may not be a bad match. Also remember that power handling isn't related to volume in any useful way - just because a speaker can handle more power doesn't mean that it's louder.
PS. Welcome to the forum!
Thanks Shez, so given that my M3 controller is both a limiter and crossover, would I be ok to use a 1500w a side amp and let the controller do its work on the top, but also give my subs the full power they crave
Not necessarily. It all depends on the level and the gain of the amplifiers. It's not easy to tell how much power you are sending to the speakers at a given level at the input to the Processor. You need to adjust the output levels of the processing when the amps are on their highest setting. This means that you can't exceed the level you want.
Unfortunately the M3 is very limiting in its features so full advantage of this can't really be done using this.
Rob
Unfortunately the M3 is very limiting in its features so full advantage of this can't really be done using this.
Rob
QUOTE (Rob_Beech @ 5 Aug 2008, 8:22 PM)
Not necessarily. It all depends on the level and the gain of the amplifiers. It's not easy to tell how much power you are sending to the speakers at a given level at the input to the Processor. You need to adjust the output levels of the processing when the amps are on their highest setting. This means that you can't exceed the level you want.
Unfortunately the M3 is very limiting in its features so full advantage of this can't really be done using this.
Rob
Unfortunately the M3 is very limiting in its features so full advantage of this can't really be done using this.
Rob
So is it best to stick with an 1100w a side amp as opposed to a 1500w?
Not necessarily as you can still damage the speakers with an exactly matching power amplifier, The speakers will only draw as much power as required off the amp up to a certain extent, Problems arise when there are fed a distorted signal that is clipping
All I can say is that with a correctly configured processor/limiter there is no reason why not to use the larger amp.
All I can say is that with a correctly configured processor/limiter there is no reason why not to use the larger amp.
QUOTE (Steve Thomas @ 5 Aug 2008, 6:56 PM)
would I be ok to use a 1500w a side amp and let the controller do its work on the top, but also give my subs the full power they crave
As Rob hints at, there's no way for the controller to know how powerful the amp following it is. If you know the maximum voltage that the speakers can handle (easily calculated) and the voltage gain of the amplifier (decent manufacturers supply this info; it can be measured if not) then you can set up a limiter appropriately. I've not used an M3 but from Rob's comments suspect it may not be the best bit of kit for the job.
What you have to remember is that doubling the power will give you an extra 3dB in a perfect world. However when you start to push boxes harder you lose alot more power as heat so this increase could be lower still.
The program material is equally as important as anything else here. If you're going to go with heavily compressed program material then the maximum amplifier size should be kept somewhat lower than if you were putting a non compressed source through it like a live band. For this a larger amount of headroom is required, for short transients.
There is no reason why a box like an F12 can't handle in excess of 600watts with generic program material or as a stage monitor, infact mine regularly do without any issues. I wouldn't however let a DJ play music through them at 0dB on a 600watt amp all night as the average level would rauise above the rms rating on the speaker.
So to go back to your setup. 1500 watts against 1200watts is going to be very little increase in noticeable level. I'd suggest the largest amps you can on the system as the amps have to work at a more reasonable level, but remember that just becasue you have more system headroom, you don't have to use it.
A generic digital LMS will give you FAR more control than the M3
The program material is equally as important as anything else here. If you're going to go with heavily compressed program material then the maximum amplifier size should be kept somewhat lower than if you were putting a non compressed source through it like a live band. For this a larger amount of headroom is required, for short transients.
There is no reason why a box like an F12 can't handle in excess of 600watts with generic program material or as a stage monitor, infact mine regularly do without any issues. I wouldn't however let a DJ play music through them at 0dB on a 600watt amp all night as the average level would rauise above the rms rating on the speaker.
So to go back to your setup. 1500 watts against 1200watts is going to be very little increase in noticeable level. I'd suggest the largest amps you can on the system as the amps have to work at a more reasonable level, but remember that just becasue you have more system headroom, you don't have to use it.
A generic digital LMS will give you FAR more control than the M3
QUOTE (Rob_Beech @ 5 Aug 2008, 9:15 PM)
What you have to remember is that doubling the power will give you an extra 3dB in a perfect world. However when you start to push boxes harder you lose alot more power as heat so this increase could be lower still.
The program material is equally as important as anything else here. If you're going to go with heavily compressed program material then the maximum amplifier size should be kept somewhat lower than if you were putting a non compressed source through it like a live band. For this a larger amount of headroom is required, for short transients.
There is no reason why a box like an F12 can't handle in excess of 600watts with generic program material or as a stage monitor, infact mine regularly do without any issues. I wouldn't however let a DJ play music through them at 0dB on a 600watt amp all night as the average level would rauise above the rms rating on the speaker.
So to go back to your setup. 1500 watts against 1200watts is going to be very little increase in noticeable level. I'd suggest the largest amps you can on the system as the amps have to work at a more reasonable level, but remember that just becasue you have more system headroom, you don't have to use it.
A generic digital LMS will give you FAR more control than the M3
The program material is equally as important as anything else here. If you're going to go with heavily compressed program material then the maximum amplifier size should be kept somewhat lower than if you were putting a non compressed source through it like a live band. For this a larger amount of headroom is required, for short transients.
There is no reason why a box like an F12 can't handle in excess of 600watts with generic program material or as a stage monitor, infact mine regularly do without any issues. I wouldn't however let a DJ play music through them at 0dB on a 600watt amp all night as the average level would rauise above the rms rating on the speaker.
So to go back to your setup. 1500 watts against 1200watts is going to be very little increase in noticeable level. I'd suggest the largest amps you can on the system as the amps have to work at a more reasonable level, but remember that just becasue you have more system headroom, you don't have to use it.
A generic digital LMS will give you FAR more control than the M3
Ok, one day I will start another thread about a digital LMS recommendation (as this is all new to me). The main reason for my question is that I am looking to fase out my Pulse amp as it has been worked hard for over 5 years now and has just started becoming temperamental and un reliable, plus it's a big (depth amp). This sytem is for live 5 piece pop/covers band (bass, drums, keys, guitar and vocals) use in an environment of up to 350 people and I love the Martin's and so just wanted to know my options on amps. Given that I have good speakers I have been looking at MAudio, Lab Gruppen at 1500w a side or things like QSC (3602 or a 236 Powerlight) at 1100w a side. Any recommendations on the above?
QUOTE (Steve Thomas @ 5 Aug 2008, 7:36 PM)
one side runs the subs and one the tops
That seems a pointless exercise to use 1 amp in mono to run both sets of speakers. Run both of the tops off of the amp you have, one on each channel, then buy a new amp for your subs that is better matched.
Josh
QUOTE (smalljoshua @ 5 Aug 2008, 9:35 PM)
QUOTE (Steve Thomas @ 5 Aug 2008, 7:36 PM)
one side runs the subs and one the tops
That seems a pointless exercise to use 1 amp in mono to run both sets of speakers. Run both of the tops off of the amp you have, one on each channel, then buy a new amp for your subs that is better matched.
Josh
I thought I might open up a can of worms here
Why do I need 2 amps (and remember, I have already stated that my existing amp is becoming un reliable), when one amp has served me well. Also, If I keep this amp then your recommendation will see me pumping 800w a side into 2 speakers rated at 300w each.
You can, with the necessary speaker management get a replacement amp and use 1 side for the subs and 1 side for the tops. There is no problem with this at all, you will however have to remember this will only be a mono system but perfectly useable.
However, what I WOULD suggest is 2 identical amps, running the left channel as the subs and the right channel as the tops. Why not one amp for subs and one amp for tops? What's the point in letting one amp slog it out every night whilst the other ticks over? use both Power supplies. This gives you a stereo system, and redundancy incase an amp ever does fail, you can run the system in mono until the amp that fails gets repaired.
On a budget, TA2400, on a larger budget, QSC PLX series, Crown XTI's (these have built in processing so you could skip on the LMS, and even have 1 rack behind each stack to minimize speaker cable runs. On a larger budget still, you can look at the likes of MC2, Lab G, and the Crown Itech Range. You'll notice I'm keeping clear of heavy amps (with the exception of the budget TA2400).
Rob
However, what I WOULD suggest is 2 identical amps, running the left channel as the subs and the right channel as the tops. Why not one amp for subs and one amp for tops? What's the point in letting one amp slog it out every night whilst the other ticks over? use both Power supplies. This gives you a stereo system, and redundancy incase an amp ever does fail, you can run the system in mono until the amp that fails gets repaired.
On a budget, TA2400, on a larger budget, QSC PLX series, Crown XTI's (these have built in processing so you could skip on the LMS, and even have 1 rack behind each stack to minimize speaker cable runs. On a larger budget still, you can look at the likes of MC2, Lab G, and the Crown Itech Range. You'll notice I'm keeping clear of heavy amps (with the exception of the budget TA2400).
Rob
Added to that the Tapco J2500.
It is identical to the QSC RMX Amps but with bigger capacitors and power supply.
Been reading about it and it looks promising.
It is also highly reccommended on speakerplans.com/forum
Josh
It is identical to the QSC RMX Amps but with bigger capacitors and power supply.
Been reading about it and it looks promising.
It is also highly reccommended on speakerplans.com/forum
Josh
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.