How much poer do I need for Klipschorns?

[ClaudeJ1]

Nice upgrade - BTW the PA7 II is rated at 325 watts into 4 ohms. chris

So 350 vs. 225 watts= 25.44 dbWatts vs. 23.52 dbWatts, a mere 1.9 db difference on peaks. I don't think you will hear the difference. You may smell the smoke from the voice coils however, as you will far into the thermal, non-linear power compression and distortion at that point. Time to bow out of this thread.

[Deang]

Clearly, many have damaged their hearing to the point where extreme power levels are now required to create a perceived loudness level that at some point in the past was probably being accomplished with 50 wpc. That's the way hearing damage works.

[tblake10]

I have a larger room (20x20) and prefer more power like garyrc. They max out at 100 watts and that is what I'm running now. I'd like to have a tube amp and looking for at least 60 watts per channel.

In my case it is not about turning it up louder. I try to be careful and pick my spots to do that. The 100w amp sounds better than the 25w amp at low levels as well as higher. It could be that the mac 100w amp is just a better match with my mac preamp or some other factor than just wattage.

[ClaudeJ1]

I have a larger room (20x20) and prefer more power like garyrc. They max out at 100 watts and that is what I'm running now. I'd like to have a tube amp and looking for at least 60 watts per channel.

In my case it is not about turning it up louder. I try to be careful and pick my spots to do that. The 100w amp sounds better than the 25w amp at low levels as well as higher. It could be that the mac 100w amp is just a better match with my mac preamp or some other factor than just wattage.

It's really not the power, but the topology and it's interaction with the speaker.

[Axz Hout]

x

[Islander]

There's a difference between average listening levels and peak transients. While one or two watts may be all you need most of the time, the transients like drumbeats need much more power, sometimes as much as hundreds of watts, to accelerate the speaker cone or diaphragm fast enough to sound exactly like the real musical instrument, or at least as close as technology permits.

Voice coil overheating is not a factor in these instances, because they last for only fractions of a second. However, if your amp or amps cannot put out the needed power when it's called for, it's not possible to have truly realistic dynamics.

In my opinion, it's best to have an amplifier that has both high peak power available when needed, and very little noise or distortion in the under-10 watt region where it will usually be operating. It's difficult to find an inexpensive amp with both of those characteristics.

Edited December 29, 2013 by Islander

[twistedcrankcammer]

Nice upgrade - BTW the PA7 II is rated at 325 watts into 4 ohms. chris

So 350 vs. 225 watts= 25.44 dbWatts vs. 23.52 dbWatts, a mere 1.9 db difference on peaks. I don't think you will hear the difference. You may smell the smoke from the voice coils however, as you will far into the thermal, non-linear power compression and distortion at that point. Time to bow out of this thread.

ClaudeJ1,

I already have one Nakamichi PA-7II on the center speaker and have never smoked a woofer yet. The PA-7 and the PA-7II both have the same signature sound. I like the build quality of the PA-7II better, but I like the Klip lights on the PA-7 as the PA-7II never had them. I don't Klip the Amp that way and I can turn the volume just past the 9 oclock position before I start to Klip the amp. The Klipsch PA-7 brings around $800 or so on eBay, while the PA-7IIs are bringing $1200 each. I guess it is about having the best and biggest Amp that Nakamichi put out. It also cost about $75 to ship one of these amps, so then I get it, Pay another $75 to ship it to a Nakamichi specialist, then pay about another $250 to get it recapped, realays cleaned and lubed and have the phase adjusted, then ship it back, so I also don't mind putting that much into tunning up a $1200 amp as dropping that into an $800-$850 amp. I've already done this to the PA-7II that I own, so I will have about $1675 in each amp times four amps or roughly $6700.

Roger

Edited December 30, 2013 by twistedcrankcammer

[psg]

This vinyl album has no RIAA restrictions in the grooves, no compression - they really wiggle! I think it has some 60 dB increase from the whisper of the rain to the thunder claps. Then there is the locomotive noise from the passing train towards the end. You need a lot of headroom to play this at even 1/4 watt to start off at.

Then you can't be starting of at 1/4 W if peaks are 60 dB higher (One million times higher at 250 000 W). I'd believe it if you started out at 0.00025 W with peaks one million times higher at 250W.

[Axz Hout]

x

[Don Richard]

This vinyl album has no RIAA restrictions in the grooves, no compression - they really wiggle! I think it has some 60 dB increase from the whisper of the rain to the thunder claps. Then there is the locomotive noise from the passing train towards the end. You need a lot of headroom to play this at even 1/4 watt to start off at.

Then you can't be starting of at 1/4 W if peaks are 60 dB higher (One million times higher at 250 000 W). I'd believe it if you started out at 0.00025 W with peaks one million times higher at 250W.

He must be talking about min to max, not average to max.

[tigerwoodKhorns]

I use a 300 Watt/channel SAE Mk 2500 amp on my Klipschorns. Sounds great with plenty of headroom. chris

This was the Klipsch answer to the power needed question -

I try to keep my levels in the 80-85 db range (JBL used to recommend 75). This keeps things loud enough and detailed enough. Based on your posted letter, I use about 1/100th of 1 watt to do this (10 milliwatts) or 20 db less, which is 1/4 as loud, which agrees with my own measurements of amplifier power going to my passive Xover. A 300 Watt amplifier is a 25 dbWatt amplifier, which means you can reach 125 db peaks, which are pretty obnoxious to my ears. I would say YES you have tons of headroom. That would translate about about 45 db headroom for me. The only thing I wish to point out is that Signal to Noise ratios in amplifiers are referenced to full output, so, all other things being equal, the guy with less powerful amplifiers will also have less noise.

JBL hit the nail on the head for me.

I found that as I started using better speakers, my listening levels went down. K Horns were the first speaker where I had that experiance. I cranked them to 120 db a few times for the novelty, but that was in the first 6 months of ownership and about 12 years ago.

Recently, I pulled out a Rat Shack meter and measured 85 db continuous for what I considered about as loud as I want to listen nowadays and 75 db for about normal levels. At these levels I can hear all of the details and do not feel the urge to turn it up. Disclaimer - this was not on Heritage speakers, but the hot rodded speakers everyone uses around here should be the same.

[Axz Hout]

x

[ClaudeJ1]

This vinyl album has no RIAA restrictions in the grooves, no compression - they really wiggle! I think it has some 60 dB increase from the whisper of the rain to the thunder claps. Then there is the locomotive noise from the passing train towards the end. You need a lot of headroom to play this at even 1/4 watt to start off at.

Then you can't be starting of at 1/4 W if peaks are 60 dB higher (One million times higher at 250 000 W). I'd believe it if you started out at 0.00025 W with peaks one million times higher at 250W.

Right on, mon ami. 1/4 W through a Khorn (x2 channels) is about 92 db 10 feet away. A Khorn simply cannot do 152 db peaks (jet plane taking off). 0.00025 W is -30 db from that at a very audible 62 db at the sweet spot, which would take you to 122 db peaks, which a pair of Khorn can do easily, as you suggest, but it's still "screamin' loud." output. I once measured a steady 107 db in Cobo Hall, Detroit during Rush's Power Windows tour and I needed earplugs.

measured 85 db continuous for what I considered about as loud as I want

That is my experence also, most of the time with Khorns + a LaScala up front and Belles in rear corners, in the middle of the room meter touching 85 dB is loud enough. More like 75 dB normally for music and 60 dB for TV.

But now and then I can be a kid again :emotion-22: chris

Me 3. Just measured with my iPhone and Rad Shack meter 80-85 is excellent on Slow setting. Peaks never show more than about 15 db more on the best MUSIC recordings.

Edited December 30, 2013 by ClaudeJ1

[ClaudeJ1]

At the quiet end of that demo record, you would be pretty close to the noise floor of the vinyl and original master tape combined regardless because 60 db is about the best you could get out of that distribution medium unless you have something like a DBX compander, like Gene Czerwinsky of Cerwin Vega had on his locomotive recordings (the best I've ever heard.......scary stuff). This is the guy who designed the "Corner Plug" subs for the movies Earthquake, which was banned because it caused plaster to fall from old theater ceilings (a lawyer's field day).

Edited December 30, 2013 by ClaudeJ1

[Axz Hout]

x

[ClaudeJ1]

60 db is about the best you could get out of that distribution medium

I think it has some 60 dB increase

Perhaps 30 dB would better more realistic chris

Agreed. Measurements would tell the exact numbers as opposed to the popular "emotional testing" methods employed everywhere on the web.

[ClaudeJ1]

I use a 300 Watt/channel SAE Mk 2500 amp on my Klipschorns. Sounds great with plenty of headroom. chris

This was the Klipsch answer to the power needed question -

I try to keep my levels in the 80-85 db range (JBL used to recommend 75). This keeps things loud enough and detailed enough. Based on your posted letter, I use about 1/100th of 1 watt to do this (10 milliwatts) or 20 db less, which is 1/4 as loud, which agrees with my own measurements of amplifier power going to my passive Xover. A 300 Watt amplifier is a 25 dbWatt amplifier, which means you can reach 125 db peaks, which are pretty obnoxious to my ears. I would say YES you have tons of headroom. That would translate about about 45 db headroom for me. The only thing I wish to point out is that Signal to Noise ratios in amplifiers are referenced to full output, so, all other things being equal, the guy with less powerful amplifiers will also have less noise.

JBL hit the nail on the head for me.

I found that as I started using better speakers, my listening levels went down. K Horns were the first speaker where I had that experiance. I cranked them to 120 db a few times for the novelty, but that was in the first 6 months of ownership and about 12 years ago.

Recently, I pulled out a Rat Shack meter and measured 85 db continuous for what I considered about as loud as I want to listen nowadays and 75 db for about normal levels. At these levels I can hear all of the details and do not feel the urge to turn it up. Disclaimer - this was not on Heritage speakers, but the hot rodded speakers everyone uses around here should be the same.

Yo, Mr tigerwoodKhorns. Methinks we are twin sons of different mothers on this issue. Agree 100% and also read the JBL thing. Hope we never need hearing aids in our old age unlike some of the less disciplined power freaks, eh?

[Axz Hout]

x

[Chris A]

I think that it is useful to talk about live music loudness levels. In my experience, sitting on stage during symphony orchestra (clarinet section) I found that it could get fairly loud but not as loud as the location of the French horn players who often sit right in front of the trumpets and trombones. Also I find that crashing cymbals and loud tympani can be overwhelmingly loud.

See the following link for measured on-stage loudness levels for symphony musicians:

http://www.etymotic.com/publications/erl-0022-1991.pdf

As you can see, typical levels are below 100 dB(A) [why they used dB(A) is beyond me - it should be dB© for these sound levels]. I like to hear my symphonic music as if I was sitting on the front row, or perhaps on stage for certain pieces that I played.

Note however that these levels can exceed 120 dB(A): see table I at the bottom of the third page, column 2.

So, if accuracy of reproduction means anything to anyone here then having the ability to reproduce transients in the range of 120 dB(A) [~118 dB©] is actually needed. My system has no problem reaching 120 dB© peaks for symphonic music (especially when in multi-channel mode playing 5.2), but the average SPLs are down in the 80-90 dB© range. However, I don't listen at these levels when my spouse is in the room. Females, as a group, apparently perceive SPL about 10 dB louder than males typically do, IIRC.

For stage bands (i.e., big bands such as Gordon Goodwin's Big Phat Band, Bob Mintzer, Stan Kenton, Maynard Ferguson, Harry James, etc.) these SPLs can go much higher, but I never have tried to reproduce the levels found on-stage in front of the trumpet section...20 rows out in the audience is loud enough. I also have never tried to reproduce disco or rock-and-roll concert levels (Genesis is the last one that comes to mind).

YMMV.

Chris

Edited December 31, 2013 by Cask05

[ClaudeJ1]

so it appears that keeping it between 80-90 for normal listening with no female in the room is "keeping it REAL."

No one I know of has ever sat in the middle of a symphony orchestra, and the "average" distance would be 20 rows back, with the inverse square law and room reverberant field meet, which should be at least 10 db down from the first row.........is my guess. The last time I went to a Symphony, I coudn't believe how low of a volume it was in the quiet passages, and the only time it got loud is briefly.

The most dynamic thing I have ever experienced is the Stravinsky's "Rite of Spring."

Edited December 31, 2013 by ClaudeJ1