"Keith R. Williams" wrote in message
. ..
In article , NOspam-
says...
Scott Johnson wrote:
"Keith R. Williams" wrote in message
. ..
says...
150 watts RMS

...another audiophool. "Watts RMS", please!

Don't be so sarcastic. that was all i could see for wattage specs
from the website. if you are gonna be rude, use google and go find
the info yourself!

Aw, don't mind him he's just fishing for a fight. He's all in a
huff
because there is no such thing as Watts RMS, even though it's
(mis)used
all over the place. Whenever you think to write Watts RMS, just
replace
the "RMS" with "average sine-wave power" and you'll probably not set
off
the local land-mines. ;-)

This group (alt.engineering.electrical) does have *engineering*
in it's title. And by the way Tony, "average sine-wave power" is
also meaningless. It's *average power*, depending on the failure
mechanism "average" may be over a wildly different time scale. Of
course there are other failure mechanisms than power.

I don't think "average sine-wave power" is meaningless, especially if it
was qualified with some specific frequency, say 400Hz or 1kHz. Since
we're splitting hairs and all, I think it's more meaningful than just
saying 200W by itself. I mean if it's a 200W speaker, can I put 50V DC
at 4A into it safely? How about 1kV at 200mA? ;-) Why specifically
wouldn't it be correct to say "Watts RMS" if that's the type of V they
multiplied by A to come up with W? Should it be assumed that Vrms is
always used when calculating AC power and Watts RMS is redundant? It
just seems to me that Watts RMS actually could stand for something
specific. Should the audio world just measure it as PEP? ;-)

RMS or Root Mean Square, as for putting dc through a speaker it WILL fry the
coil as a speaker is only designed to take AC, to find the peak wattage of
the speaker divide the RMS by 0.707
"Anthony Fremont" wrote in message
...

"Keith R. Williams" wrote in message
. ..
In article , NOspam-
says...
Scott Johnson wrote:
"Keith R. Williams" wrote in message
. ..
says...
150 watts RMS

...another audiophool. "Watts RMS", please!

Don't be so sarcastic. that was all i could see for wattage specs
from the website. if you are gonna be rude, use google and go find
the info yourself!

Aw, don't mind him he's just fishing for a fight. He's all in a
huff
because there is no such thing as Watts RMS, even though it's
(mis)used
all over the place. Whenever you think to write Watts RMS, just
replace
the "RMS" with "average sine-wave power" and you'll probably not set
off
the local land-mines. ;-)

This group (alt.engineering.electrical) does have *engineering*
in it's title. And by the way Tony, "average sine-wave power" is
also meaningless. It's *average power*, depending on the failure
mechanism "average" may be over a wildly different time scale. Of
course there are other failure mechanisms than power.

I don't think "average sine-wave power" is meaningless, especially if it
was qualified with some specific frequency, say 400Hz or 1kHz. Since
we're splitting hairs and all, I think it's more meaningful than just
saying 200W by itself. I mean if it's a 200W speaker, can I put 50V DC
at 4A into it safely? How about 1kV at 200mA? ;-) Why specifically
wouldn't it be correct to say "Watts RMS" if that's the type of V they
multiplied by A to come up with W? Should it be assumed that Vrms is
always used when calculating AC power and Watts RMS is redundant? It
just seems to me that Watts RMS actually could stand for something
specific. Should the audio world just measure it as PEP? ;-)

In article ,
says...
RMS or Root Mean Square, as for putting dc through a speaker it WILL fry the
coil as a speaker is only designed to take AC, to find the peak wattage of
the speaker divide the RMS by 0.707

Oh, my! ...and I just promised that I wouldn't go ballistic on
an audiophool again.

--
Keith

==========================

"Anthony Fremont" wrote in message
...

"Keith R. Williams" wrote in message
. ..
In article , NOspam-
says...
Scott Johnson wrote:
"Keith R. Williams" wrote in message
. ..
says...
150 watts RMS

...another audiophool. "Watts RMS", please!

Don't be so sarcastic. that was all i could see for wattage specs
from the website. if you are gonna be rude, use google and go find
the info yourself!

Aw, don't mind him 4551 just fishing for a fight. He's all in a
huff
because there is no such thing as Watts RMS, even though it's
(mis)used
all over the place. Whenever you think to write Watts RMS, just
replace
the "RMS" with "average sine-wave power" and you'll probably not set
off
the local land-mines. ;-)

This group (alt.engineering.electrical) does have *engineering*
in it's title. And by the way Tony, "average sine-wave power" is
also meaningless. It's *average power*, depending on the failure
mechanism "average" may be over a wildly different time scale. Of
course there are other failure mechanisms than power.

I don't think "average sine-wave power" is meaningless, especially if it
was qualified with some specific frequency, say 400Hz or 1kHz. Since
we're splitting hairs and all, I think it's more meaningful than just
saying 200W by itself. I mean if it's a 200W speaker, can I put 50V DC
at 4A into it safely? How about 1kV at 200mA? ;-) Why specifically
wouldn't it be correct to say "Watts RMS" if that's the type of V they
multiplied by A to come up with W? Should it be assumed that Vrms is
always used when calculating AC power and Watts RMS is redundant? It
just seems to me that Watts RMS actually could stand for something
specific. Should the audio world just measure it as PEP? ;-)

"Edward Steele" wrote in message
...
RMS or Root Mean Square, as for putting dc through a speaker it WILL fry
the
coil as a speaker is only designed to take AC, to find the peak wattage of
the speaker divide the RMS by 0.707

Well that has got to be the funniest I have seen for the month.

You can be sure of one thing on this NG....... BAD AND RUBBISH ADVICE!!!!

Note: you can apply DC to a voicecoil.

IIRC RMS is not simply Peak power *0.707

coil as a speaker is only designed to take AC, to find the peak wattage of
the speaker divide the RMS by 0.707


Well that has got to be the funniest I have seen for the month.
You can be sure of one thing on this NG....... BAD AND RUBBISH ADVICE!!!!
Note: you can apply DC to a voicecoil.

Yup, this is how one of the theil small parameters is measured. They
apply DC to the coil and measure the actual mechanical force the coil
can apply.

IIRC RMS is not simply Peak power *0.707

RMS is exactly .707 * the peak voltage of a wave. Note that some
companies advertise peak power as both sides of a sine wave added together.

eg. A sub running at 800 watts peak would have 400 watts on one side of
the wave and 283 watts RMS. If a sub can take an advertised 400 watts
RMS, then technically it can take a peak to peak wattage of 1131.5 watts.

Just my $,02 of course

Aaron

In article ,
says...
coil as a speaker is only designed to take AC, to find the peak wattage of
the speaker divide the RMS by 0.707


Well that has got to be the funniest I have seen for the month.
You can be sure of one thing on this NG....... BAD AND RUBBISH ADVICE!!!!
Note: you can apply DC to a voicecoil.

Yup, this is how one of the theil small parameters is measured. They
apply DC to the coil and measure the actual mechanical force the coil
can apply.

IIRC RMS is not simply Peak power *0.707

RMS is exactly .707 * the peak voltage of a wave. Note that some
companies advertise peak power as both sides of a sine wave added together.

Exactly sqrt(2) (approximately .707), true for perfect sine
waves.

eg. A sub running at 800 watts peak would have 400 watts on one side of
the wave and 283 watts RMS. If a sub can take an advertised 400 watts
RMS, then technically it can take a peak to peak wattage of 1131.5 watts.

Oh, my! Watts RMS is nonsensical. Peak watts is nonsensical in
reality. Sure one can multiply instantaneous I*V, but it's
temperature that kills such things. Average power is of
importance (averaged over the thermal time constant of the
device).

Just my $,02 of course

--
Keith

What??You pay two ****ing cents for a message??

--
Dimitris Tzortzakakis,Greece


Ï Aaron Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá óõæÞôçóçò:
...
coil as a speaker is only designed to take AC, to find the peak wattage
of
the speaker divide the RMS by 0.707


Well that has got to be the funniest I have seen for the month.
You can be sure of one thing on this NG....... BAD AND RUBBISH
ADVICE!!!!
Note: you can apply DC to a voicecoil.

Yup, this is how one of the theil small parameters is measured. They
apply DC to the coil and measure the actual mechanical force the coil
can apply.

IIRC RMS is not simply Peak power *0.707

RMS is exactly .707 * the peak voltage of a wave. Note that some
companies advertise peak power as both sides of a sine wave added
together.

eg. A sub running at 800 watts peak would have 400 watts on one side of
the wave and 283 watts RMS. If a sub can take an advertised 400 watts
RMS, then technically it can take a peak to peak wattage of 1131.5 watts.

Just my $,02 of course

Aaron

"Tzortzakakis Dimitrios" wrote in
message ...
What??You pay two ****ing cents for a message??

--
Dimitris Tzortzakakis,Greece

Since you're from Greece, I don't know if you're trying to make a joke or
not.

The phrase, 'my two cents worth' (also written several other ways), is just
an expression. Much like the phrase, 'in my humble opinion', the author is
just offering his opinion. Comes from the idea that everyone has opinions,
and they usually aren't worth much (say, around two cents ;-)

daestrom
P.S. Not trying to say that Keith's opinion is worthless, just explaining
the phrase ;-)