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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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.

 

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

Austin519

 

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.

 

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

 

Wrong!

 

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

 

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!

 

I have an idea!

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

 

:o

 

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

 

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