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
|
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