Extremely Disappointed

[Duran 387]

Nick, make me a woofa that I can plug into my 480 volt, 30 amp wall sockets.

Please and thank you!

you have 480 volt wallsockets LMAO

[lee 2]

nah, he just has 4 normal ones configured in series.

kidding...

[SubSam 21]

The Square wave form does not see more power. It sees 5 volts for a longer period of time.

[...]

It sees over 50% more energy for that given period of time, that one cycle. That builds up over an extended period of time more..and more..and more. It is all about time, not the power itself.

Energy over time is the definition of power.

There is one thing left about this statement that has yet to be explored, and it is the most obvious and explanatory fact that we can learn here: there's two kinds of power at hand here. Electrical, in mathematical terms P=iV (current x voltage) and mechanical, W=Force*d/t. Obviously at the flat end of the clipped curve the woofer just burns (no freq), as Nick was stating above. The electrical energy doesn't translate to mechanical energy ( force x distance ), but increases dissipation energy, as you stated above, iV/t, in electrical terms. Now if the voltage is capped, but the average power has increased (square wave integral vs sinal), where does that power come from? Taking V out of the energy dissipation, where V=IR, E=(I^2)R/t. At clip, the t remains constant over each cycle, but the current increases which dramatically effects heat dissipation which in turn raises R which also directly relates to energy dissipation. Point in case, clipping causes more heat. Period. Over long periods, ur effed.

Two kinds of electrical power?? No. In AC it is just average power. Sine or square the wave is described appropriately by it.

No. As stated above there's electrical force and mechanical force at play, which are very much interrelated when converting sinal electrical signals into mechanical sound waves. When you aren't creating movement with your output electrical power, the only place for the energy to go is to dissipate as heat, which happens to 99% of the electrical energy that goes into a woofer anyways.

To anybody defending whether clipping is worse for your speaker than a normal sine I ask you this: Why would one want to make their speaker even less power efficient (on average) while generating more heat?

It's the opposite of appropriate car audio practices.

[///M5 2,833]

The Square wave form does not see more power. It sees 5 volts for a longer period of time.

[...]

It sees over 50% more energy for that given period of time, that one cycle. That builds up over an extended period of time more..and more..and more. It is all about time, not the power itself.

Energy over time is the definition of power.

There is one thing left about this statement that has yet to be explored, and it is the most obvious and explanatory fact that we can learn here: there's two kinds of power at hand here. Electrical, in mathematical terms P=iV (current x voltage) and mechanical, W=Force*d/t. Obviously at the flat end of the clipped curve the woofer just burns (no freq), as Nick was stating above. The electrical energy doesn't translate to mechanical energy ( force x distance ), but increases dissipation energy, as you stated above, iV/t, in electrical terms. Now if the voltage is capped, but the average power has increased (square wave integral vs sinal), where does that power come from? Taking V out of the energy dissipation, where V=IR, E=(I^2)R/t. At clip, the t remains constant over each cycle, but the current increases which dramatically effects heat dissipation which in turn raises R which also directly relates to energy dissipation. Point in case, clipping causes more heat. Period. Over long periods, ur effed.

Two kinds of electrical power?? No. In AC it is just average power. Sine or square the wave is described appropriately by it.

No. As stated above there's electrical force and mechanical force at play, which are very much interrelated when converting sinal electrical signals into mechanical sound waves. When you aren't creating movement with your output electrical power, the only place for the energy to go is to dissipate as heat, which happens to 99% of the electrical energy that goes into a woofer anyways.

To anybody defending whether clipping is worse for your speaker than a normal sine I ask you this: Why would one want to make their speaker even less power efficient (on average) while generating more heat?

It's the opposite of appropriate car audio practices.

You need a waves class. The mechanical force is just what opposes the electrical and is inconsequential in the topic at hand.

Look up average power before you respond and do the math calculating the difference in average power between a sine wave and a square wave and you will have your answer. The motion isn't all that important either. Think about what percentage of the power is actually converted into motion...and if you come up with a big number think again.

[rameleg 0]

I have to side with Nick on this one... it is not so much that there is additional current..but there is additional heat build up due to a stationary coil for a longer period of time... coil coiling is done typically through the motion of the coil and the air flow as the result.. when the coil is at rest it has little to no heat disipation properties... heat wicking from the steel is about it... and that will not cool a coil that is seieing 200v @ 20a... We also use a Crown amp to torture test our prototypes or "test mules".. I would venture to guess we see a 50-75% higher failure rate if I flip the square wave switch... even when the clamped power doesnt change..

Ryan

[Impious 1,476]

I would venture to guess we see a 50-75% higher failure rate if I flip the square wave switch...

You apparently don't understand the difference in average power between a sinewave and squarewave.

[rameleg 0]

I would venture to guess we see a 50-75% higher failure rate if I flip the square wave switch...

You apparently don't understand the difference in average power between a sinewave and squarewave.

I most certainly do... and yes it is seeing peak current for a longer durration thus the AVERAGE power applied to the coil is raised... ... we are basically arguing the same point from different angles...

the coil DOES in fact see more average current... thus it gets hotter...

the coil DOES have a significant more time in a "resting" position at the top of the wave so it cant disipate the additional heat caused by the higher avg current... so technically we are both correct....

I just personally believe and have witnessed the fact that I can use our big crown and there are no issues.. use the smaller Crown (1/2 the power) and square the wave and we have issues... and I don't believe that the "AVERAGE" current that the woofer sees is drastically different.. but the time at" rest" not disipating heat has increased 10x...

[///M5 2,833]

Please go look up the DEFINITION and DERIVATION of where and how electrical power was defined. It COMPLETELY accounts for wave shape and exactly justifies what Brad & I are saying. Equal power = equal heat generation. If you propose anything different you are disagreeing with Physics, not with us.

[Duran 387]

You guys are arguing a different perspective, but coming to the same conclusion. Wave shape differs, power remains the same, but the time at which said power is applied is LONGER with the square wave vs. a sin wave, how are you guys not seeing this?

[///M5 2,833]

You guys are arguing a different perspective, but coming to the same conclusion. Wave shape differs, power remains the same, but the time at which said power is applied is LONGER with the square wave vs. a sin wave, how are you guys not seeing this?

Actually you didn't read that right either. Average power is a function of TIME which means same Average power = same heat. There is no longer as that is part of the average power equation.

[SubSam 21]

You guys are arguing a different perspective, but coming to the same conclusion. Wave shape differs, power remains the same, but the time at which said power is applied is LONGER with the square wave vs. a sin wave, how are you guys not seeing this?

Actually you didn't read that right either. Average power is a function of TIME which means same Average power = same heat. There is no longer as that is part of the average power equation.

Maybe you will see what I'm getting at if I say it this way: yes I know your average power goes up with a square wave obviously without even calculating anything I can see there's more area under the curve. I know. Stop telling me. But what you can't seem to get is the sound wave, traveling through air, is not electrical. It is kinematic. Newtons laws. No Schro. So with a square wave and a sine wave you have the same mechanical period, same amplitude, same DEEBEEZ.

But one way much more electrical power converts to heat than the other. Period. A sine wave is the most electrically efficient way to create a mechanical sound pulse. It just comes down to efficiency.

[shizzzon 461]

So with a square wave and a sine wave you have the same mechanical period, same amplitude, same DEEBEEZ.

OK, you have entered my territory now.. Part of that sentence is wrong.

I agree with same amplitude only when viewing it as sine peak vs square peak.

Now, same mechanical.. that's a tricky statement to make.

What exactly are you implying about same mechanical?

A square wave is made up of more than 1 center frequency unlike a sine wave which only has 1 center frequency, hence the reason a square wave sounds.. violent and ackward.

A speaker trying to produce this will have a different mechanical properpty and there is NO way to guarantee it's maximum excursion is the same from sine vs square because of this.

And, sine vs square does NOT produce the same dB. I have physically done that test and know this.

To sum the test up-

When the amplifiers are providing a clean signal, a square wave is significantly louder than a sine, over 1db easy.

However, when the source square wave is clipped.. the sine wave prevails and the output is the complete opposite. The sine wave clipped is now over 1db louder than a clipped square wave.

There is more information in a square wave.. easy for it to be louder on the meter than a sine.. but only up to a certain point.

In competition, running into clipping can still increase pressure output but only to a certain point until you clip too much and start to lose pressure.

When using a square wave, the headroom is FAR lower when going into clipping on the amp, therefore will suffer pressure output loss far sooner which results in a clipped sine wave boasting over a clipped square wave.

Maximum overall scores driven into clipping- sine wave is louder.

When running low power OR clean power, the square wave is pulling more power out of the amp even though both waves share the same peak amplitude.

This is because there is more information present in a square wave but less headroom,

[///M5 2,833]

You guys are arguing a different perspective, but coming to the same conclusion. Wave shape differs, power remains the same, but the time at which said power is applied is LONGER with the square wave vs. a sin wave, how are you guys not seeing this?

Actually you didn't read that right either. Average power is a function of TIME which means same Average power = same heat. There is no longer as that is part of the average power equation.

Maybe you will see what I'm getting at if I say it this way: yes I know your average power goes up with a square wave obviously without even calculating anything I can see there's more area under the curve. I know. Stop telling me. But what you can't seem to get is the sound wave, traveling through air, is not electrical. It is kinematic. Newtons laws. No Schro. So with a square wave and a sine wave you have the same mechanical period, same amplitude, same DEEBEEZ.

But one way much more electrical power converts to heat than the other. Period. A sine wave is the most electrically efficient way to create a mechanical sound pulse. It just comes down to efficiency.

This discussion is about heat and square/sine/clipped waves. I made a VERY simple, mathematically correct statement and for some reason everyone is being stupid about it.

Equal average power in both square and sine waves will equal the SAME heat. Not sure at all what the hell this has to do with a sound wave, nor cone motion for that matter. The discussions was on thermal destruction of drivers.

[rameleg 0]

So technically we are all right.. we just seem to have a defferent prospective as to what causes the actual failure... Final conclusion: Unicorns are much louder than mermaids.. because unicorns are real.. duh...

[tejcurrent 13]

I believe the confusion is that M5 is stating equal average power is equal, period (which is true). Nick on the other hand while agreeing on average power, is saying that while voltage and amperage is the same, the actual total power over the duration is greater in a square signal, and that the lack of rest period adds to heat and speaker failure. Correct me if I'm wrong as I just skimmed things since this turned into a really long thread, but Nicks testing seems to be closer to real world application than what you're saying M5. Most people either set their gains by ear, or with a DMM without using an O-scope. Even people using a clamp meter will get the same 100v 10a, and assume they set their gains properly, when in fact the square signal of the same voltage and amperage will be applying the peak output for a longer period of time. Either way they may have 1000 watts, but with one being damaging to the sub.

Sort of like starting up a tread mill and having the "warm up" time where you gradually increase from a walk to a run and back for the cool down, or you could just run full speed the whole time. You may have a 'peak' of 5mph, but you're going to be worn out running full speed the whole work out.

Also glad the OP got his sub taken care of, Fi's C/S has always been great imo.

[///M5 2,833]

I believe the confusion is that M5 is stating equal average power is equal, period (which is true). Nick on the other hand while agreeing on average power, is saying that while voltage and amperage is the same, the actual total power over the duration is greater in a square signal, and that the lack of rest period adds to heat and speaker failure. Correct me if I'm wrong as I just skimmed things since this turned into a really long thread, but Nicks testing seems to be closer to real world application than what you're saying M5. Most people either set their gains by ear, or with a DMM without using an O-scope. Even people using a clamp meter will get the same 100v 10a, and assume they set their gains properly, when in fact the square signal of the same voltage and amperage will be applying the peak output for a longer period of time. Either way they may have 1000 watts, but with one being damaging to the sub.

Sort of like starting up a tread mill and having the "warm up" time where you gradually increase from a walk to a run and back for the cool down, or you could just run full speed the whole time. You may have a 'peak' of 5mph, but you're going to be worn out running full speed the whole work out.

Also glad the OP got his sub taken care of, Fi's C/S has always been great imo.

The bold part of your sentence is wrong. Duration is part of the power calculation. You cannot remove time from power.

The comment was made clipping kills speakers and we responded by saying no, too much average power kills speakers. Then the argument ensued, which is funny because it has turned into a discussion far from the comment that there was issue with.

Heat is directly proportional to average power. The shape of the wave doesn't matter at all (other than of course it can change the amount of power).

[Fi Car Audio 64]

Wish this had a different thread title...lol... popping it back up every day just doesnt look so good

OK... M5 is correct with what he says heat wise. It is what it is when averaged. Period.

But in reference to the original statement that clipping kills speakers... there are other factors that I had mentioned in a previous post about mechanical when dealing with square vs sine. Square waves are significantly tougher mechanically on speakers that sine. Measured in detail with accelerometers on our end. Clipping is not just "heat", but mechanical stress as well. Not to mention all the ugliness that some amps like to do when clipped. For OUR speaker with cooling, they also have the distinct problem of less cooling (excursion) for the same power, resulting in increased heat Watt per Watt (square vs sine wave form). This is only a comment on our speakers... as that is all we measured.

Thanks,

Scott

[CrazyKenKid 64]

someone who is bored one day should should go though this post and repost the valuable info here lol!

actually I may do this in MAY! lol! when school is out! lol! 10pages of reading and my mind hurts lol!

here is what i got so far:

kid blows sub, sub attacks kid and heat is from the devil to kill all electrical stuff! and square waves with eat children whole and unicorns are real! lol!

JK if no one goes though this in May i will go through it! sound good!

[jesseadkins187 5]

I cant believe this thread is still going

[CrazyKenKid 64]

I cant believe this thread is still going

that is what she said to the energizer bunny!

[jesseadkins187 5]

I cant believe this thread is still going

that is what she said to the energizer bunny!

LMFAO!

[C4W18 0]

battle of the brains in this mofo.

[Adrian_D 520]

You guys are arguing a different perspective, but coming to the same conclusion. Wave shape differs, power remains the same, but the time at which said power is applied is LONGER with the square wave vs. a sin wave, how are you guys not seeing this?

Actually you didn't read that right either. Average power is a function of TIME which means same Average power = same heat. There is no longer as that is part of the average power equation.

So with a square wave and a sine wave you have the same mechanical period, same amplitude, same DEEBEEZ.

For me, that had mixed results. One setup kept gaining as much as I could turn up the gain and one setup drops in score when I get above a certain clipping threshold.

[teambrownnote 2]

I'm not comfortable with the idea of bouncing my KIA off the rev limiter.. I love my KIA.

[BILTD 60]

Thread should be closed. No need to bring it up