NJ_CLS_driver

I forget what the conversion is for Peak vs RMS Power. My Speakers are the MB Quart Q Series Components. Handling Power of 90-170 Watts. What is the power I would need to handle these in RMS Wattage.

Thanks

Austin519

NJ_CLS_driver:
Peak is just RMS*sqrrt(2)...so you would divide peak by the square root of 2, ~.707, to get RMS. But a lot of speaker manufacturers don't go by this rule...a lot of the RMS and peak values are quite arbitrary...but that's the actual conversion.

Austin519

NJ_CLS_driver

Austin, thanks. The reason I was asking, was that I bought the MB Quart QM218.61 Q Series Compontents for the front, and they are rated as 90-170 Watts. No RMS

Austin519

NJ_CLS_Driver:
I understand. I believe they can safely be run up to 200...but don't quote me. How much power are you hoping to throw into them?

Austin519

chizad1980

Hey Austin519: Isn't the conversion multiply instead of divide? Because RMS is always lower than peak. And by dividing it, then the RMS would be greater than peak, which it really isn't.

Austin519

chizad1980:
Nope. The sqrrt(2) is 1.41. So Peak/sqrrt(2) = Peak*.707 = RMS, as I said. The sqrrt(2) > 1.

Austin519

chizad1980

This statement is correct. I didn't read all of your previous one, I just saw the part that says divide and ~.707. That part was incorrect.

Austin519

chizad1980:
My entire statement was correct. The statement I just made that you're agreeing with is the exact same statement as I said first. I believe you just read it incorrectly.

Austin519

chizad1980

Wrong!

Austin519

chizad1980:


"Peak is just RMS*sqrrt(2)...so you would (1)divide peak by the square root of 2,(2) ~.707, to get RMS."

(1) = divide by the square root of 2 = 1/sqrrt(2) ~ .707 = (2)
Now please stop wasting my time by having me come back to this post thinking that someone asked a Q when it's just you being annoying...

Austin519

chizad1980

I know what RMS is! I was just saying that your very first statement was partially incorrect. I am talking about this: 2,(2) ~.707 The ~ means "about" right. Well, what does the other stuff you posted refer to? Because dividing peak by the square root of 2 is correct, you say that, but you also say it is ~.707, which it is not!

nokio

I have an idea!

Both of you stop bitching and give me five dollars each!:P :P :P

chizad1980

:o

Austin519

chizad1980:
"Well, what does the other stuff you posted refer to? Because dividing peak by the square root of 2 is correct, you say that, but you also say it is ~.707, which it is not!"

1/sqrrt(2) ~.707

I've removed my subscription to this thread...so if that didn't clear up what you miscontrued I guess it's a lost cause.

Austin519

chizad1980

That looks more like a right answer than the previous ones. No more debates for me either.