|
|
Post by redtechie on Jun 30, 2017 10:30:50 GMT -5
Hello,
I had a question regarding power rating into 4ohm loads with all channels driven on a 7-module model. The specs on this page (https://emotiva.com/products/amplifiers/xpa-gen3) metnion all channels driven on 8ohm loads (220 watts RMS for 7-channels). But what are those ratings for all channels (7) driven on 4ohm loads? It just mentions what the wattage and distortion is for 1&2 channels driven on 4ohms.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by redtechie on Jul 5, 2017 14:28:16 GMT -5
Anyone?
|
|
|
|
Post by Axis on Jul 5, 2017 14:40:29 GMT -5
There are figures for all seven channels driven into 4 ohms. Are you worried that there will be distortion that will effect all seven channels driven into 4 ohms ? Emotiva makes amps that go low with ohms without distortion. I would think it would be safe to say whatever the distortion is with a XPA Gen 3 seven channel amp all seven channels driven, it would be inaudible. Output in watts ? Don't know for sure, but very good if I am right !  |
|
|
|
Post by pknaz on Jul 6, 2017 3:33:26 GMT -5
It is important to note that all channels driven is not a real-world scenario, and so is usually meaningless from a total power perspective. the XPA-7 Gen 2 is about 315 Watts/Channel all channels driven at 4 ohm, I would expect the Gen 3 would be very similar in specs.
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs 
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,181
|
Post by geebo on Jul 6, 2017 7:04:25 GMT -5
300 ~ 325 would be my guess. The difference in those two numbers is negligible.
|
|
|
|
Post by redtechie on Jul 6, 2017 20:02:32 GMT -5
Great thanks all, this helps!
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jul 10, 2017 12:09:34 GMT -5
the XPA-7 Gen 2 is about 315 Watts/Channel all channels driven at 4 ohm, I would expect the Gen 3 would be very similar in specs. Well....I don't know about that!! The XPA-7 gen 2 was a REAL BEAST. That's 2215 watts of power the amp has to output. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jul 11, 2017 14:25:35 GMT -5
Well....I don't know about that!! The XPA-7 gen 2 was a REAL BEAST. That's 2215 watts of power the amp has to output.
Which on a continuous basis would require at least a 20 amp outlet. And a 'never gonna happen' scenario.
Given the real and dynmaic nature of whatever you're listening to, 10 watts per speaker with 100 watt peaks?
I can't imagine 70 watts continuous with 700 watt peaks 'all seven driven'
With the reasonable loads that most HT oriented speakers are, that is drive you out of the house-loud.
I don't know that I'd worry about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Axis on Jul 11, 2017 14:50:15 GMT -5
Well....I don't know about that!! The XPA-7 gen 2 was a REAL BEAST. That's 2215 watts of power the amp has to output. Which on a continuous basis would require at least a 20 amp outlet. And a 'never gonna happen' scenario. Given the real and dynmaic nature of whatever you're listening to, 10 watts per speaker with 100 watt peaks? I can't imagine 70 watts continuous with 700 watt peaks 'all seven driven' With the reasonable loads that most HT oriented speakers are, that is drive you out of the house-loud. I don't know that I'd worry about it. Everybody here listens to there home theater at volume levels so high that dogs bark and cats cry ! Everybody here needs 700 watts to shake there room with sound effects baby ! We go *bleep*oo for cocoa puffs ! We go *bleep*oo for watts ! Why is cockuu being bleeped ? What about if I want to say cockuu clock ? |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jul 16, 2017 14:24:21 GMT -5
With power averaging 7x70 / 700 watt peaks, I'd have an Audiologist on retainer.
Higher sensitivty speakers would just make the matter even Louder!
Even if only 3 and Maybe 4 channels at a time are so stressed with the others asking for less power.
|
|
|
|
Post by adaboy on Jul 16, 2017 21:51:26 GMT -5
Well....I don't know about that!! The XPA-7 gen 2 was a REAL BEAST. That's 2215 watts of power the amp has to output. Which on a continuous basis would require at least a 20 amp outlet. And a 'never gonna happen' scenario. Given the real and dynmaic nature of whatever you're listening to, 10 watts per speaker with 100 watt peaks? I can't imagine 70 watts continuous with 700 watt peaks 'all seven driven' With the reasonable loads that most HT oriented speakers are, that is drive you out of the house-loud. I don't know that I'd worry about it. Everybody here listens to there home theater at volume levels so high that dogs bark and cats cry ! Everybody here needs 700 watts to shake there room with sound effects baby ! We go *bleep*oo for cocoa puffs ! We go *bleep*oo for watts ! Why is cockuu being bleeped ? What about if I want to say cockuu clock ? Waiter 🖐️ I think I want what he's having! |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jul 17, 2017 5:55:32 GMT -5
Well....I don't know about that!! The XPA-7 gen 2 was a REAL BEAST. That's 2215 watts of power the amp has to output. Which on a continuous basis would require at least a 20 amp outlet. And a 'never gonna happen' scenario. Given the real and dynmaic nature of whatever you're listening to, 10 watts per speaker with 100 watt peaks? I can't imagine 70 watts continuous with 700 watt peaks 'all seven driven' With the reasonable loads that most HT oriented speakers are, that is drive you out of the house-loud. I don't know that I'd worry about it. True to both. In real world listening, you aren't going to be using that power. But if one is buying a amp that can put out 2215 watts of power (remember capcitance will allow it to do so for a short time), then one has to say an amp that cannot do so and an amp that can is not the same thing. Most people won't use the power of a Basx A-700/UPA-700. (But I'd take the XPA-7 gen 2 over the A-700/UPA-700 and pay more for it  ) That's why I paid for a XPA-1 gen 2 though I had a very nice UPA-2. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jul 17, 2017 14:42:37 GMT -5
|
|
) That's why I paid for a XPA-1 gen 2 though I had a very nice UPA-2. 