Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Three Word Post Whore's Delight
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by time2kyl View PostThat and you have more speakers than a company show boat!!!Originally posted by G-MONEYIt hurts me to say it but go OU but only for this weekend!!!!
Comment
-
Originally posted by time2kyl View PostI would hate to see you with something like a RZ4. You would have to take all your speakers and then buy about 10 more to fill up all the space.Originally posted by G-MONEYIt hurts me to say it but go OU but only for this weekend!!!!
Comment
-
Supreme Tigé Master
- Apr 2007
- 12007
- Lake Carl Blackwell, Stilly, USA
- 54 Bellcraft, 56 Burchcraft, 61 LoneStar, 75 Catalina 27
Well, the 60's are rated to 150 RMS. The 80's are rated to 200 RMS.
A somewhat conservative approach would be to power them both with an amp that would deliver 150 watts RMS per channel into a four ohm load.
An approach that requires a little sobriety would be to go with an amp that matched the 80's and slightly over-powered the 60's. Emphasis here is on the word slightly.
I am not certain how Tim rates his speakers for power handling, but I suspect they would not have thermal issues in a slightly over-power condition. Just know that the COMBINATION of over-power and amplifier clipping will be a bad thing for the speakers for sure. We ought to double-check with him on the subject...
Finally understand, my position on the subject is an interesting one. I am personally okay with having an amp that is capable of putting out more power than the speaker is advertised to handle, but one has to be mindful of the audible sounds of distress in the system to prevent failure of a component.
It makes me a little nervous advocating this approach, but I do so knowing it is as easy to blow a speaker with an underpowered amplifer as one that is over-powered. The key is hearing and knowing when your stereo is making sounds it is not supposed to, and taking steps to fix it or turn it down.It's not an optical illusion.
It just looks like one.....
Comment
-
Originally posted by Domsz06 View Postspeaking of that, i'm going to uncover the boat and clean it up some this weekend, crank the tunes, top the batteries, hook my ballast upHoney I'm home!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Domsz06 View Postspeaking of that, i'm going to uncover the boat and clean it up some this weekend, crank the tunes, top the batteries, hook my ballast up
and I might crank the tunes today make sure everyone is awakeEverything happens for a reason
I live my post whore life 30 seconds at a time
Comment
-
Originally posted by philwsailz View PostWell, the 60's are rated to 150 RMS. The 80's are rated to 200 RMS.
A somewhat conservative approach would be to power them both with an amp that would deliver 150 watts RMS per channel into a four ohm load.
An approach that requires a little sobriety would be to go with an amp that matched the 80's and slightly over-powered the 60's. Emphasis here is on the word slightly.
I am not certain how Tim rates his speakers for power handling, but I suspect they would not have thermal issues in a slightly over-power condition. Just know that the COMBINATION of over-power and amplifier clipping will be a bad thing for the speakers for sure. We ought to double-check with him on the subject...
Finally understand, my position on the subject is an interesting one. I am personally okay with having an amp that is capable of putting out more power than the speaker is advertised to handle, but one has to be mindful of the audible sounds of distress in the system to prevent failure of a component.
It makes me a little nervous advocating this approach, but I do so knowing it is as easy to blow a speaker with an underpowered amplifer as one that is over-powered. The key is hearing and knowing when your stereo is making sounds it is not supposed to, and taking steps to fix it or turn it down.Honey I'm home!
Comment
Comment