View Full Version : Diffrence between Cx62's & Cx64's

mega1268

10-28-2005, 07:29 PM

I know 1's 2 ohm and 1's 4 ohm but the 2 ohms are rated for 150 and the 4 ohms 1 is rated for 75 watts. Is this because its twice as effiecent? Is there any audible Effect if im running it off a 800.4. which is 200x2 at 2 ohm 100x2 at 4 ohm.

InhumanAcura

10-28-2005, 07:56 PM

i never noticed that..kinda wierd.

interested to know the answer as well

Vestax

10-28-2005, 08:24 PM

Ummm... I don't know where you got your specs from but the Chamaleon sets are both rated the same regardless of impedance at 150 wrms. If you're not sure, check the ID site.

The reason why you'll get more from your amp is because the resistance is lower on the 2 ohm set.

squeak9798

10-28-2005, 09:15 PM

Ummm... I don't know where you got your specs from but the Chamaleon sets are both rated the same regardless of impedance at 150 wrms. If you're not sure, check the ID site.

The reason why you'll get more from your amp is because the resistance is lower on the 2 ohm set.

http://www.imagedynamicsusa.com/products_page.php?id=cx&type=midrange

strong*I*bumpin

10-28-2005, 11:58 PM

62's=2ohms,64's=4ohms

Vestax

10-29-2005, 12:52 AM

http://www.imagedynamicsusa.com/products_page.php?id=cx&type=midrange

Squeak, you trying to ruin me? :p:

Okay I didn't realize he was getting a dedicated driver because the chamaleon set as a hole are rated the same wattage:

http://www.imagedynamicsusa.com/products_page.php?id=chameleon&type=midrange

It's best to call ID and verify because it wouldn't make sense to do it like that.

mega1268

10-29-2005, 09:27 AM

lol i was about to say. Its half the wattage im positive of that lol. They have all teh same specs besides the RMS and Ohm So i sorta put 2 and 2 together and fiqured that it would do teh same thing with the 75 watts as it woudl do with the 150 watts. When impedence goes up doesnt effiecentic-ness go up. I recall some1 saying that about the Extremis.

squeak9798

10-29-2005, 11:30 AM

62's=2ohms,64's=4ohms

Thank you captain obvious

:eyebrow:

mega1268

10-29-2005, 11:53 AM

whats the first thing i said in my post........ i knew some idiot would do that.

must be a typo cuz the cx52 and cx54 have the same power rating.

although, you never know...

strong*I*bumpin

10-29-2005, 02:38 PM

Thank you captain obvious

:eyebrow:

:D

mega1268

10-29-2005, 02:48 PM

must be a typo cuz the cx52 and cx54 have the same power rating.

although, you never know...

Yea i noticed that to. But..... like i coudlent stand if it said 50 and left out the 1 but 75 is just a completeley diffrent number. Im gonna call them on monday and see what the deal is. if there is a 2 ohm and 4 ohm version whats the point of getting the 4 ohm version. 9x outta 10 ull be getting double the power at 2 ohm's?

the_noob

10-29-2005, 03:41 PM

You shouldn't really notice a difference in either set. The only difference you may see is that with the 4 ohm set, it will be slightly easier on your amp, but, then again, assuming you have a 2 ohm stable amp, that shouldn't matter too much.

if there is a 2 ohm and 4 ohm version whats the point of getting the 4 ohm version. 9x outta 10 ull be getting double the power at 2 ohm's?

Well I guess for those people with

[email protected], there's really no need for the 2ohm set cuz that would be ridiculous headroom. Or it's also cuz some amps aren't 2ohm stable (which is kinda rare these days, but is true for a number of 4ch amps when you bridge em). Of course this is all speculation and I like to propagate false information :D

mega1268

10-29-2005, 05:03 PM

shouldent notice a diffrence? If they are getting 100 watts or 200 watts isent that a 3 db diffrence or does that rule not apply to 6"s. I dunno im just asking not saying ur wrong

the_noob

10-29-2005, 05:40 PM

shouldent notice a diffrence? If they are getting 100 watts or 200 watts isent that a 3 db diffrence or does that rule not apply to 6"s. I dunno im just asking not saying ur wrong

If the efficiency on the 2ohm driver equaled the efficiency on the 4ohm driver, then you would be correct. Despite the fact that they are each rated at 91dB's, you have to consider that they are both (most likely) rated at 2.83v's. Now, I'm no squeak or jmac, but basically, 2.83v's will equal 1 watt at 8ohm's. When the impedance is lowered to, say, 4 or 2ohm's, more power is seen. That is the same reason why an amp that will produce 100 watts at 4ohm's will produce 200 watts at 2ohm's. So, they are both rated at 91db's, but that is because at 2.83v the 2ohm driver received twice as much power, and that is where that 3db gain in output comes from. So, once again assuming that both drivers were rated at 2.83v, the actual efficiency of the 4ohm driver would be 88db's and the actual efficiency of the 2ohm driver would be 86db's. Of course, because of the lower impedance, it will receive twice as much power as the 4ohm driver, and, therefore, there should be no difference in ouput.

I hope I explained that correctly.

twoohfour

10-30-2005, 10:28 AM

If the efficiency on the 2ohm driver equaled the efficiency on the 4ohm driver, then you would be correct. Despite the fact that they are each rated at 91dB's, you have to consider that they are both (most likely) rated at 2.83v's. Now, I'm no squeak or jmac, but basically, 2.83v's will equal 1 watt at 8ohm's. When the impedance is lowered to, say, 4 or 2ohm's, more power is seen. That is the same reason why an amp that will produce 100 watts at 4ohm's will produce 200 watts at 2ohm's. So, they are both rated at 91db's, but that is because at 2.83v the 2ohm driver received twice as much power, and that is where that 3db gain in output comes from. So, once again assuming that both drivers were rated at 2.83v, the actual efficiency of the 4ohm driver would be 88db's and the actual efficiency of the 2ohm driver would be 86db's. Of course, because of the lower impedance, it will receive twice as much power as the 4ohm driver, and, therefore, there should be no difference in ouput.

I hope I explained that correctly.

not entirely sure you did, but i know less than you do for sure so it might as well be right ;)

dylan would know the answer...

squeak9798

10-30-2005, 10:53 AM

According to the webpage, they are measured 1w/1m rather than 2.83V/1m.

But you are correct; 2.83V on an 8ohm speaker is 1w, on a 4ohm speaker is 2w and on a 2ohm speaker is 4w. Which would mean if they were rated at 2.83V you would need to subtract 3db from the 4ohm speaker's rated sensitivity and 6db from the 2ohm speaker's rated sensivity.

But since they were supposedly measured at 1w rather than 2.83V, this would not stay true. The rated sensitivity should be accurate as-is.

mega1268

10-30-2005, 12:37 PM

but they are both 93? not 88 and 85

twoohfour

10-30-2005, 12:59 PM

On this same topic, i recently picked up a pair of CX62s (just the mids)... can they take 225w @ 2 ohms per side?

mega1268

10-30-2005, 04:01 PM

since they are only rated at 150... id say yea lol just becareful :thumbsup:

twoohfour

10-30-2005, 04:24 PM

i know someone here has to have experience