Crown Com-Tech's ???

[aw_dee_o]

Anyone familiar with this line of amps? I'm not a huge fan of the "Crown Sound", but i can snag a Com-Tech 1600 and / or a Com-Tech 900 for VERY reasonable prices. Are they worth using for monitors or just to have as spares, etc ??? Any and all help appreciated. Sean

 

PS... I know that they have terminal strip speaker connections, but i can work around this.

[Craig Vecchione]

They also have terminal strip inputs; they're designed for installations, not portable sound systems, but should be rugged enough anyway. If they're cheap enough and the weight isn't an issue, go for it. If any useful PIP modules are included, even better.

[aw_dee_o]

Thanks for the response. I didn't notice the type of inputs used, so i'll have to check into that one too. Went to Crown's website and saw the power ratings, etc... but forgot to look at the input options.

 

As far as weight goes, you can't make BIG power and drive highly reactive loads without a massive power supply, so that part doesn't bother me. I've got some very sturdy wheels & casters on my amp racks : ) Sean

 

[agedhorse]

 

As far as weight goes, you can't make BIG power and drive highly reactive loads without a massive power supply, so that part doesn't bother me. Sean

 

 

Sure you can, if you know what you are doing with your design. Otherwise companies such as QSC, Crown, Lab Gruppen, Crest and other's lightweight models wouldn't be found on the top tours. Crest has discontinued their heavyu weight models for this reason. All of these manufacturers largest models are SMPS and many are class D also.

 

The ComTech is almost identical to the MA series, but with different input/output options, the ability to drive 70 volt lines (by reconfiguring the power supply voltage/VI limiter threshold) and input sensitivity controls on the back.

[aw_dee_o]

I have several "switching" amps that actually "double down" AT CLIPPING ( NOT rated power, but actual clipping ) as impedance is halved. Very few amps in the world will actually do this. As "beefy" as these amps are, they do NOT have the "bass impact" or "balls" of a lower powered but much heavier ( E-I transformered ) Class A amp. This is true even though the switching amps are supposedly not "current limited" according to theory i.e. a TRUE "voltage source" as supported by their doubled output as impedance is halved.

 

Having said that, the "high efficiency" amps do sound cleaner at higher volumes because of the increased headroom and reduced duty cycle, they just don't kick you in the chest when big bass notes hit. For that matter, they don't have the imaging, soundstaging or "sweetness" of treble that a quality high bias design has to offer. Then again, how can it? Reduced duty cycle i.e. using a "sampling rate" means reduced linearity.

 

Most manufacturers are going to switching designs because they are WAY, WAY, WAY cheaper to design, manufacture, package and transport, not because they sound or work better. The fact that they draw less power per output watt also makes them "Pro Sound" friendly, especially when going from gig to gig with non-permanent electrical installs. As far as fidelity or sound quality goes, most don't compete with a good high bias design. Then again, Pro Sound is not really worried about the utmost in "fidelity", as you can't really get good fidelity out of 15" or 12" coupled to a horn tweeter and low grade crossover parts Sean

 

[W. M. Hellinger]

Then again, Pro Sound is not really worried about the utmost in "fidelity", as you can't really get good fidelity out of 15" or 12" coupled to a horn tweeter and low grade crossover parts Sean

So, why are you considering these cheap-assed, crappy sounding, professional application Crown amps?

[W. M. Hellinger]

 

Most manufacturers are going to switching designs because they are WAY, WAY, WAY cheaper to design, manufacture, package and transport, not because they sound or work better.

 

No doubt an amplifier that weighs 1/2 as much as another watt-for-watt will be cheaper to transport; however, as far as "WAY, WAY, WAY" cheaper to:

 

1) design

2) manufacture

3) package

 

please elaborate. Please offer some comparative examples.

 

For example, here is a LPS amplifier:

 

http://www.audiopile.net/products/Amplifiers/AL_Series/AL-1600_cutsheet.asp

 

Here is an example of a SMPS amplifier of approx. similar power and accoutrements which is designed and manufactured by the same company (model PS-1000):

 

http://www.audiopile.net/products/Amplifiers/PS_Series/ps_series_amplifiers.asp

 

I have a fairly good idea of what the AL-1600 and PS-1000 amplifiers cost to design, build, and package. What I know to be true is in direct contradiction to what you assert.

 

It seems to me that some of the lowest priced amplifiers on the market are LPS models, and the SMPS type are typically more expensive, so are basically "all" amplifier manufactures some-how in collusion to pricefix SMPS amps higher than LPS amps?

 

It seems like the SMPS amplifiers are considerably more complex than LPS type, so how could the design be cheaper?

 

It seems like the parts to build the SMPS type amps are more numerous and arguably more expensive.

 

It seems like the packaging is about the same.

[aw_dee_o]

I typed out an in depth response here, but for some reason, it said that i was not allowed to submit posts, even though i was logged in. I have to leave for work, so this will have to wait. Sean

 

[agedhorse]

A SMPS amp is not cheaper to design or manufacture.

 

True class A is not viable for almost any application for power levels greater than 100 or so watts... just like a Mini Cooper is not a viable choice for pulling a 40k lb trailer.

 

C'mon, compare reasonably like apples to apples (or even pears).

 

The amps you talk about reconfiguring power supply and topology to increase current (and decrease output Z) are either Crowns, or most likely have licensed (or stolen) the concept from the Crown VZ topology. I believe they hold several patents on this topology.