Ski Bum

~6 watts will take you further than you might expect, but it's a good idea to keep a bigger amp on hand for those times you want to crack the plaster. The Decware amps are more about resolving inner detail and imaging prowess, all that proverbial single-ended stuff, which they do quite well.

There is still room involvement, even in Chris' LEDE treated room. Later reflections, those from sound that has to traverse the room, are preserved, which helps create the illusion of space. Those later reflections are also a perfect tonal match to the on-axis response, simply because they mainly ARE the on-axis response, and thus don't call attention to themselves as would the early reflections from the often irregular off-axis response of a wide dispersion speaker. Also, without the early reflections, all the depth and ambiance encoded in the recording is more fully revealed, giving quite a bit of perceived depth behind the plane of the speakers. While I think that's about as good as it gets with two channel, it can be a rather "enveloping" experience.

Chris, that "envelopment broadening" you mentioned a couple posts up is exactly what Toole has extensively covered in his books and articles on reflected sound, perception, and preferences. Seems that those of us who prefer 'less room' and to let the recordings paint the picture are in the minority. Toole acknowledges our existence, but doesn't shine the light on the approach as much as he does on the direct radiator types the masses prefer. And it's kind of ironic, since you're absolutely correct that "envelopment is easy" with the right method. I still have tons of respect for Toole and his willingness to aggregate all the research. For the Toole fans, or just those who want to learn more about acoustics, there is a new edition of his book coming out, if it's not out already. (Seems relevant given the thread title. Great reference, full of myth-skewering and pragmatic info, even if those of us who use horns and controlled dispersion speakers have to kind of determine what best applies to us.)

Although Marantz gives a rather cryptic 1.2v spec for their pre-outs, the OP's Marantz might swing considerably more. One that was bench tested by Audioholics could swing 7v unclipped from it's pre-outs, although I don't recall which model it was. Another they tested could do over 4v unclipped. OP's Marantz may actually be juicy enough to drive Quicksilvers to full output.

My apologies for the snark, unclefred. I thought you were employing the standard audiophool "golden ear" canard about not being able to hear magic fuses, but you were clearly referring to Klipsch speakers, a sentiment with which I wholeheartedly agree.

Unclefred, with the iron-clad reasoning you've presented, I'm sold! What fuses and AC cords do you recommend to me so I can hear (or listen to?) what you've been hearing (listening to?)? I'm dying to hear all that I've been missing out on, so help a brother out.

See avatar for the stands...regarding Cardinal Rule 5, with furniture legs or open stands like I use, there indeed is a loss of boundary reinforcement in the lower octaves, but that can be countered by using subs, applying eq, or both. Also, elevating and aiming the mids appropriately can improve imaging a great deal.

Well that sucks. Sincere best wishes that this is not a huge financial disaster. If finances are not a tremendous worry, then the logistical stuff can actually be a blessing in disguise, in terms of forcing new routines and the satisfaction gained from gracefully rolling with the punches that life throws your way. As others mentioned, the irreplaceable stuff (you, your family, and your heroic dog) came through unscathed. Be strong, stay positive.

Yeah, I agree that the Quad was among the more interesting circuits. Why they never licensed it I cannot fathom, as it's simpler, lower maintenance, and superior to traditional a/b as it completely side-steps crossover distortion. I seem to recall the old Stasis amps using it. It looks like Benchmark appropriated the feed-forward error correction part, but used a modern supply and better a/b amps for the dumpers. And it does look nice. Good thing (for the wallet at least) I don't presently have need for a SOTA amp, but if I did, that Benchmark would be at the top of the list. Any budding DIY-ers looking for an interesting case study in circuits should google up the Quad current dumpers, just for their own edification.

I knew the patents had expired, but I didn't know anyone besides Quad was building a current dumper. Are you sure? (Not that it matters, just curious as I've always wondered about Peter Walker's clever little amps.)

In spite of the smaller cab, the fortes are probably a better over-all compromise with Hoffman's Iron Law, digging as deep or slightly deeper than CW, at the cost of a few db/w of sensitivity. The new horns have only gotten positive reviews, in the fortes and the similar mumps in the KI 396, when heard by those at the gathering.

Forgive me if this is lacking sensitivity, but listening to fuses and power cords is complete lunacy. What the hell have you guys been smoking?

Well, I wouldn't call it a lower end amp. It's probably just fine when operated within it's limits, but it is modestly powered to begin with, and probably current limited into low impedance when bridged. Bridged amps can run hot too. I generally avoid bridging, except for maybe bomb-proof pro amps driving subs.

Bridged amp channels may not like the load presented, as they'll "see" it as half. It could be the AVR produces more than adequate power into the load, while the bridged Adcom channels can't. And Yamaha kit is pretty nice, with pretty respectable amp sections. Either way, it seems you've found a workable solution, so it's time to start crankin some tunes.

That monoprice amp is a hybrid: tube pre amp, ss amp stage. It's still a bit modestly powered for RP-160's IMO. The low power amps we discuss are typically used with much larger and more sensitive Klipsch Heritage models, although if yours is a strictly near-field type setup it may actually work for you. (Tell us more about the specifics of your rig.) For $100, you'll have to either DIY or get something on the used market. An AVR that's a few years old but otherwise sufficient power-wise would suffice, and they're dime-a-dozen.

Some highly subjective qualifiers... My speakers are stand mounted, and I have considerable eq down low to restore what's lost perching them up there (and being away from any corners/walls). That includes a half octave wide 4-6 db boost at 35 hz, with a steep lpf below that. It results in being quite the power sucker, particularly when the big bass arrives. Two watts just isn't enough. Audible, objectionable clipping easily achieved with the flea watters in this setup (they fared much better when the fortes were stuffed into a smaller room). The big bass hits don't have a chance. On the plus side, it sounds pretty lovely at low levels, and with less bassy content they can stretch a bit louder. I can bring several amps rated at 50w to their knees before reaching outrageous volumes, evidenced by the strident sound that results from audible clipping. These are from cheap to respectable (Yamaha receiver to ATI power amp). If I hook a deep breather (Crown or Yamaha pro amps, some of the big NAD amps that can puke out hundreds of watts, at least for a little while), my ears become the limiting factor. Club-like, pant flapping volume, no sense of stridency or compression, even at the most ridiculous levels. It's quite exhilarating, actually, but you guys already know this.

Stasis. Or a consumer driven circle jerk of sorts, where they rip each other off, wealth transfers around, but the society fails to advance. I fear we may actually be on that planet already.

1.5v, times four equals 6v peak, or ~36w. That was pretty loud, but if I had a few additional beers I think I could have set the reference level even higher! Cool test, but it seems a bit of a rubber yardstick, as while the 0db max level of digital sources is ensured, my amp's clipping status at post-beer volumes is still questionable.

Power demands for audio are not linear. That's why we spend most time under one watt, why most dynamic range is realized in the first watt, and also why copious power may be required. Think of the crest factor of music, since that's what we listen to, and the dynamic power required to reproduce it. +3db requires doubling of the power, +10db requires ~10x the power, +20db requires ~100x the power, and for those classical and opera fans, +30db requires ~1000x the power. If your average levels are 0.1 w or so because you use high sensitivity speakers, most amps will produce the 10 watt (+20db) peaks easily. Start with less sensitive speakers, however, and you very quickly run into needing ridiculous amounts of dynamic power, even at moderate levels.

They have an interesting history (well, if your a healthcare provider like me I suppose). They were initially developed to facilitate legitimate medical research into cannabinoid pathways, as THC is a controlled substance in most places, which precludes such research. (We're still suffering from that, with cannabis still inexplicably classified as a Schedule 1 drug...oops, political drift, sorry.) Anywho, of course it was subsequently used for recreational purposes, having similar effects as the real thing, only with much higher abuse potential. The specific compounds are all quite similar, allowing various peddlers to change from one formula to another as authorities caught on and began imposing controls. They were made illegal mainly due to use within the military ranks (the analogs don't result in a hot piss test), with some literally chain smoking the crap and getting all sorts of weird.

From a pharmacological perspective, the synthetic THC analogs are quite a bit worse than the natural stuff. They have twice the affinity for cannabinoid receptors in our nervous system as actual THC. Tolerance builds rapidly, making it kind of pointless, and risky in terms of pulmonary and psychological health (compulsive/addictive behavior). The shit is bad news. If you really want the full blown "lab rat experience", then feel free to smoke synthetic THC analogs.

Agree w/ Bill. The 316 is fairly modest in the amp department, as NAD doesn't employ their supply trickery (class g/h, which brings lots more dynamic power) until the 326 model and up.

Fortes can image beautifully. Try them with extreme toe in, where the axis cross well in front of your chair...sit back and marvel at the sonic image they throw...it will be deep, wide, and, perhaps most curiously, stable as you move around with a sweet spot that covers a much wider area.

I sure hope my tenants leave me a beater pair of 'Scalas! I think you should listen to them for a while. Music via 'Scalas yields a ton of grins. Not sure how many musical grins would equate to what you lost, but transcendent bliss is hard to put a dollar value on.

Fries has the SW-115 for less than five bills right now, a smokin deal on a very respectable sub. If you go outside the Klipsch brand, check subs from Hsu, SVS, and PSA. Not sure about the other questions. I suspect they use class d since there are no heat sinks. I would imagine a 100w (200w peak) class a/b amp would run too hot for inside a speaker cab without external heat sinks, but that's just a guess. Sensitivity is kind of irrelevant, since it's a powered speaker where Klipsch did the amp matching.