PVx 15's
Re: PVx 15's
Have things changed? Yes. The market, mainly. As other manufacturers began to drop RMS ratings and list the Program or Peak ratings, it made Peavey speakers look like they were less capable. Imagine the following comparison chart.
Brand A: 300 Watts program
Brand B: 400 Watts program
Peavey: 200 Watts RMS
So Peavey began changing the spec to match what the rest of the industry is doing. In my humble opinion, the Program rating is a more "real world" rating than RMS so I'm all in favor of it.
Brand A: 300 Watts program
Brand B: 400 Watts program
Peavey: 200 Watts RMS
So Peavey began changing the spec to match what the rest of the industry is doing. In my humble opinion, the Program rating is a more "real world" rating than RMS so I'm all in favor of it.
Re: PVx 15's
Thanks for the information.
What Peavey amp would you recommend for driving these speakers?
UK Peavey engineers at the old UK HQ that was in Corby recommended matching amp and speaker rms (continuous) values, although I know some musicians use 1.5x speaker rms value for the power amp. Does this advice still stand, or has it changed?
What Peavey amp would you recommend for driving these speakers?
UK Peavey engineers at the old UK HQ that was in Corby recommended matching amp and speaker rms (continuous) values, although I know some musicians use 1.5x speaker rms value for the power amp. Does this advice still stand, or has it changed?
Re: PVx 15's
I would get the self-powered ones and not bother with a power amp.djronh wrote: What Peavey amp would you recommend for driving these speakers?
Re: PVx 15's
dedmeet makes a great recommendation of going with the powered ones. It's a great cabinet for the money and the nice thing about powered is that you know the amplifier is designed perfectly for the speaker.djronh wrote:Thanks for the information.
What Peavey amp would you recommend for driving these speakers?
UK Peavey engineers at the old UK HQ that was in Corby recommended matching amp and speaker rms (continuous) values, although I know some musicians use 1.5x speaker rms value for the power amp. Does this advice still stand, or has it changed?
Barring that... The general recommendation here is to get an amp that is 75-80% of the PROGRAM power of the speaker. In this case that would mean a 300 watt power amp. The IPR2 2000 is a great choice. And did you notice that 75% of the program power is also 1.5 x RMS? Same power, different formula.
Re: PVx 15's
https://peavey.com/support/technotes/po ... _POWER.pdf
Quote:
If you are looking for a recommendation so that you would be relatively free of blowing up the speaker under almost any real world condition, you should pick an amplifier that can deliver the continuous rating of the speaker or a little less.
That would be 200wrms (continuous) per channel?
Which is what Peavey engineers in Corby recommended.
The IPR2000 supplies a peak of 370wrms into 8ohm. That is more than 80%?
If any input clipping occurred the rms power might double.
Is the IPR2000 the lowest powered class D amp you sell?
The tailored amps in the active PVx 15's supply 325wrms to the driver..but they have electronic protection whereas the passive versions don't.
Quote:
If you are looking for a recommendation so that you would be relatively free of blowing up the speaker under almost any real world condition, you should pick an amplifier that can deliver the continuous rating of the speaker or a little less.
That would be 200wrms (continuous) per channel?
Which is what Peavey engineers in Corby recommended.
The IPR2000 supplies a peak of 370wrms into 8ohm. That is more than 80%?
If any input clipping occurred the rms power might double.
Is the IPR2000 the lowest powered class D amp you sell?
The tailored amps in the active PVx 15's supply 325wrms to the driver..but they have electronic protection whereas the passive versions don't.
Re: PVx 15's
Here's a link that explains it: https://peavey.com/support/technotes/po ... _POWER.pdf
The way Peavey is rating the IPR2's these days is a little confusing. Here's the spec from Peavey's website for the IPR2 2000:
Rated Watts 2ch x 8 ohms:
370 watts 20ms repetitive burst
325 watts 1% THD
300 watts 0.15% THD, both channels driven @ 1kHz.
Now I could be wrong, but before they started all this nonsense, they would have come out and just said "300 watts x 2 at 8 ohms per channel" because that's how they used to rate things: a 1kHz sine wave into both channels with the maximum input voltage before clipping.
In the end, I can tell you that I have countless customers running the PVX and PR series speakers, which are all rated at the 400 watts program, with the IPR2 2000 and it's predecessor, the IPR1600. I've seen very few failures and when I do see speaker failures, 95% of the time it's because the customer tried to get hip-hop style bass out of a 15" full-range cabinet. In other words, they wanted the speaker to sound like a subwoofer and they cranked up the bass knob until clipping. Run the thing using your ears and your brains and you will never fry PVx 15's with an IPR2 2000.
The way Peavey is rating the IPR2's these days is a little confusing. Here's the spec from Peavey's website for the IPR2 2000:
Rated Watts 2ch x 8 ohms:
370 watts 20ms repetitive burst
325 watts 1% THD
300 watts 0.15% THD, both channels driven @ 1kHz.
Now I could be wrong, but before they started all this nonsense, they would have come out and just said "300 watts x 2 at 8 ohms per channel" because that's how they used to rate things: a 1kHz sine wave into both channels with the maximum input voltage before clipping.
In the end, I can tell you that I have countless customers running the PVX and PR series speakers, which are all rated at the 400 watts program, with the IPR2 2000 and it's predecessor, the IPR1600. I've seen very few failures and when I do see speaker failures, 95% of the time it's because the customer tried to get hip-hop style bass out of a 15" full-range cabinet. In other words, they wanted the speaker to sound like a subwoofer and they cranked up the bass knob until clipping. Run the thing using your ears and your brains and you will never fry PVx 15's with an IPR2 2000.
Re: PVx 15's
Do you mean if you hear distortion turn the volume down?
It's quite a powerful combination.
I've matched the speaker and amp rms values all my life.
I was worried about the speakers blowing.
Hm so it's just 300wrms into 8 ohm..life get more tricky by the minute.
It's quite a powerful combination.
I've matched the speaker and amp rms values all my life.
I was worried about the speakers blowing.
Hm so it's just 300wrms into 8 ohm..life get more tricky by the minute.
Re: PVx 15's
That's exactly what I mean. Plus...... Don't try to make what is one of Peavey''s most affordable speakers be as loud as their most expensive speaker. Don't try and get dubstep style bass out of a full-range, entry level cabinet.djronh wrote:Do you mean if you hear distortion turn the volume down?
I
And that's a very safe way to go about things. Feel free to continue doing that. You won't hurt anything, but you also won't be getting all that the speaker has to offer.djronh wrote:t's quite a powerful combination.
I've matched the speaker and amp rms values all my life.
I was worried about the speakers blowing.
It's just the marketers being marketers. Speakers used to always be rated with 1w/1m for SPL, +/- 3db for frequency response, etc. in an anechoic environment. Then a marketer figured out they could post "better" numbers by going -10dB on the frequency response and posting "half-space" numbers. People bought it.djronh wrote:Hm so it's just 300wrms into 8 ohm..life get more tricky by the minute.
Some evil marketer decided that a stereo input channel could be counted as two channels, making what would previously have been called a 9 channel mixer into a "10 channel" mixer.
And in this case, some marketer decided that the power amp would look "bigger" if they posted the 20ms repetitive burst output rather than the old RMS 1k continuous number.
Re: PVx 15's
Thank you for all your help.
- Roger Crimm
- Member
- Posts: 963
- Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:03 pm
- Location: Meridian, MS USA
- Contact:
Re: PVx 15's
Actually you can't really blame marketers there, that actually makes more "engineering sense" due to advances in technology. If you compare the old class AB or H designs with class D using sine waves, the class D amp will lose every time. Yet, the Class D amp would produce just as much SPL playing MUSIC.Josjor wrote: And in this case, some marketer decided that the power amp would look "bigger" if they posted the 20ms repetitive burst output rather than the old RMS 1k continuous number.
We aren't entertaining our audiences using sine waves folks. It's time for us to all stop judging the technology of 2017 using the testing methods of 1977.
Re: PVx 15's
I know the sine wave was always a silly rating, but my point is more to the fact that EVERYBODY (reputable ones, anyway) was using that same sine wave rating and so we could at least come close to an apples to apples comparison. Now there are several ratings and it makes it harder to do that when not everyone is posting how they reached the published rating.Roger Crimm wrote:Actually you can't really blame marketers there, that actually makes more "engineering sense" due to advances in technology. If you compare the old class AB or H designs with class D using sine waves, the class D amp will lose every time. Yet, the Class D amp would produce just as much SPL playing MUSIC.Josjor wrote: And in this case, some marketer decided that the power amp would look "bigger" if they posted the 20ms repetitive burst output rather than the old RMS 1k continuous number.
We aren't entertaining our audiences using sine waves folks. It's time for us to all stop judging the technology of 2017 using the testing methods of 1977.
Which, while I'm at it.....Cudos to Peavey for actually showing how they got the ratings. Peavey has pretty much always been the standard-bearer for that.
Re: PVx 15's
I own a pair of pvx 15's and run 300 watts to each with no problem. They have good bass output with that power applied to them. But , like stated above, i use my ears and experience to not over drive the speakers. If I ever need more bass I will add my pair of pv118's and hook up a second GX3 amplifier. I use the crossover function on both amps to run one pvx15 and one pv118 per amp.
Never had any complaints with any type of music.
(Saving up to purchase two pvx sub's)
Never had any complaints with any type of music.
(Saving up to purchase two pvx sub's)
Re: PVx 15's
Thank you very much !Josjor wrote:Here's a link that explains it: https://peavey.com/support/technotes/po ... _POWER.pdf
The way Peavey is rating the IPR2's these days is a little confusing. Here's the spec from Peavey's website for the IPR2 2000:
Rated Watts 2ch x 8 ohms:
370 watts 20ms repetitive burst
325 watts 1% THD
300 watts 0.15% THD, both channels driven @ 1kHz.
Now I could be wrong, but before they started all this nonsense, they would have come out and just said "300 watts x 2 at 8 ohms per channel" because that's how they used to rate things: a 1kHz sine wave into both channels with the maximum input voltage before clipping.
In the end, I can tell you that I have countless customers running the PVX and PR series speakers, which are all rated at the 400 watts program, with the IPR2 2000 and it's predecessor, the IPR1600. I've seen very few failures and when I do see speaker failures, 95% of the time it's because the customer tried to get hip-hop style bass out of a 15" full-range cabinet. In other words, they wanted the speaker to sound like a subwoofer and they cranked up the bass knob until clipping. Run the thing using your ears and your brains and you will never fry PVx 15's with an IPR2 2000 autojeux.