ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Down

Author Topic: QSC Amp Choice  (Read 6277 times)

Chuck Nottle

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 63
QSC Amp Choice
« on: January 04, 2008, 01:42:46 pm »

I am looking to buy an either a PL4.0 or RMX4050HD. Both amps have similar specs and will be for 2 single 15" subs presently, but also buying for future needs.

Beside weight and cost, is there anything else I am missing between the 2 ??

I have read other threads and some seem to think that the weight of the power supplies matter when using for sub duty. Is there a really a noticeable difference?

Thanks for any input.
Logged

Vinny D'Agostino

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 495
    • http://www.myspace.com/vinnydagostino
Re: QSC Amp Choice
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2008, 01:53:03 pm »

I switched from a QSC PLX3402 to a RMX4050HD and feel that there is a definite improvement in the sound of my subs using the 4050...
I can't compair it to the sound of the PL4 I have never heard one Crying or Very Sad
Would you be buying the PL4 new (old stock) or used?

Chuck Nottle

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 63
Re: QSC Amp Choice
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2008, 02:14:41 pm »

Hey Vinny,

Some of the recent threads seem to agree with you.

I am also using a PLX3204 on sub duty right now.  I know when I upgraded from a CE1000 there was a big difference in head room. Which is why I am considering a better upgrade.

I am looking at either 4050 new or PL4.0 used.
Logged

Vinny D'Agostino

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 495
    • http://www.myspace.com/vinnydagostino
Re: QSC Amp Choice
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2008, 02:29:02 pm »

Well if you go with the 4050 new you get the 6-year warranty with it.
Shop Ebay for a *B* stock 4050HD you can get some good deals, that how I bought mine.

Chuck Nottle

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 63
Re: QSC Amp Choice
« Reply #4 on: January 04, 2008, 02:52:42 pm »

As always, it comes down to Weight, Cost and Performance, not necessarily  in that order. It's the perfomance between the 2 that I am unsure of.
Logged

Bob Lee (QSC)

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1788
Re: QSC Amp Choice
« Reply #5 on: January 04, 2008, 06:40:14 pm »

One big difference is that the RMX4050HD is still being made, while the PL4.0 was discontinued some time ago.

If weight matters for bass, you can always add a barbell weight to the rack. Wink

The PL4.0 has a maximum gain of 80
Logged
Bob Lee
Applications Engineer, Tech Services Group QSC Audio
Secretary, Audio Engineering Society
www.linkedin.com/in/qscbob

"If it sounds good, it is good."
 -Duke Ellington

Mario Salazar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 221
Re: QSC Amp Choice
« Reply #6 on: January 05, 2008, 12:46:43 am »

I wonder if anyone can post the link on the discussion on why the weight of the PSU makes a difference.  I power my subs with 3402 and have thought them to be a bit wimpy (EAW 250RD2s) but I always thought it was the speaker not the amp.  THis is interesting, though I don;t want it to be true because my back hates the 77 lbs of the RMX 4050HD Embarassed
Logged

John Roberts {JR}

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 0
Re: QSC Amp Choice
« Reply #7 on: January 05, 2008, 10:43:35 am »

Mario Salazar wrote on Fri, 04 January 2008 23:46

I wonder if anyone can post the link on the discussion on why the weight of the PSU makes a difference.  I power my subs with 3402 and have thought them to be a bit wimpy (EAW 250RD2s) but I always thought it was the speaker not the amp.  THis is interesting, though I don;t want it to be true because my back hates the 77 lbs of the RMX 4050HD Embarassed


Weight only correlates with extra output (mostly thermal headroom) when the design is using the same technology. When mixing comparisons between different technologies all bets are off.

One example to make this point involves amplifier class. The old CS1200(x) was a fine amp for it's day (still is OK as long as you don't have to lift it) but because it is Class AB it requires more transformer and heatsink while putting out less power than smaller and lighter Class G GPS or PV models. Class D delivers even better efficiency, requiring less power from mains and heatsink, for similar output.

A second place in power amps where technology differences confuse simple comparison is the power supply. While HF switchers are sometimes criticized as being weak in bass region, there is absolutely no inherent design reason for that. A small transformer passing smaller packets of current, thousands of times more often than large transformer will be indistinguishable from old heavy iron. Just like with any design, it can be poorly executed and inadequate reservoir capacitance on the primary side could cause such symptoms. These primary reservoir caps are a size and cost constraint so it may be a place where some corners get cut.

Just like all conventional amps are not created equal, all switchers are not created equal. Don't try to judge an amp by the technology used, other than in general terms. Do listen to what other users report as that may reveal how well that technology is executed.

JR  
Logged
 https://www.resotune.com/


Tune it, or don't play it...
-----

Bob Leonard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4669
Re: QSC Amp Choice
« Reply #8 on: January 05, 2008, 12:39:51 pm »

This is a discussion that's been had many times. What you'll get for replies will be varied so the only thing I'll say is that I pulled a 3602 off of my subs and went to the 4050HD. I don't care about the weight and that has never been a part of my criteria when purchasing an amp. What I feel is a big part of amplifier performance is reserve power. In my opinion the use of a seperate power supply for each side of the 4050HD is a huge advantage, the reason for the additional weight, and the reason the 4050 seems to have endless power. I have not seen the 4050 clip since I put it to use and the amp runs cool to the touch all day long. There is a reason for the HD as in 4050HD. It stands for heavy duty, and the 4050 lives up to it's claims, and my subs have never sounded better. As for the PL4.0, if all things are equal I would still buy the 4050 because it's still a production amplifier and warranties do count. Good luck. Smile
Logged
The roar of the grease paint, the smell of the crowd.

John Roberts {JR}

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 0
Re: QSC Amp Choice
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2008, 02:54:10 pm »

Bob Leonard wrote on Sat, 05 January 2008 11:39

This is a discussion that's been had many times. What you'll get for replies will be varied so the only thing I'll say is that I pulled a 3602 off of my subs and went to the 4050HD. I don't care about the weight and that has never been a part of my criteria when purchasing an amp. What I feel is a big part of amplifier performance is reserve power. In my opinion the use of a seperate power supply for each side of the 4050HD is a huge advantage, the reason for the additional weight, and the reason the 4050 seems to have endless power. I have not seen the 4050 clip since I put it to use and the amp runs cool to the touch all day long. There is a reason for the HD as in 4050HD. It stands for heavy duty, and the 4050 lives up to it's claims, and my subs have never sounded better. As for the PL4.0, if all things are equal I would still buy the 4050 because it's still a production amplifier and warranties do count. Good luck. Smile


I repeat my caution about trying to impute performance from technology (dual power supplies?) .

In fact the 4050 is similar to 1850 in design philosophy where the rail voltages are backed off, to give more thermal capacity but at some reduced peak power. The 1850, uses a 2450 heat sink and device complement, but only puts out 1850 peak.  Likewise the 4050 is a 5050 heatsink/power stage, running at cooler rail voltages.

This is just good conservative engineering, and more a variance in design details than a different technology. The 4050 trades peak power, for more thermal capability than the very similar 5050 due to a simple spec change of transformer voltage. For hard flogging a 2 ohm load the 4050 won't beat the 5050 for how loud it gets short term, but it will win for how long it plays loud.    

JR
Logged
 https://www.resotune.com/


Tune it, or don't play it...
-----
Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.037 seconds with 21 queries.