jt1stcav Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 Thanks, Erik. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 ---------------- On 5/22/2004 6:56:45 PM Lon Armstrong wrote: It's been my experience as well that about 2 watts per channel SET is the best sound. . . with the right speakers in the right room of course! ---------------- And the right imagination Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lon Armstrong Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 Alright, snicker if you want, but what I see is the voice of INEXPERIENCE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fini Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 ---------------- On 5/22/2004 8:39:48 PM Klipschfoot wrote: Nothing like the missus admiring someone else's equipment. ---------------- It ain't the meat, it's the motion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chops Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 I can safely say that these 12 watts of tube power I have right now seems to be more than enough for even my KG 5.5's! ---------------- On 5/23/2004 7:21:46 AM paulparrot wrote: Let's get serious, shall we? 1.8W can't compare to 40W. And the right imagination ---------------- Just like my father always says..... "Some people like a little a$$.... Some people like a lot of a$$.... But no body likes a WISE-A$$!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDBRbuilder Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 TommyC, What these tube guys are trying to explain to you between taking pot-shots at each other over which type of tube stuff is best (or really necessary) is that although your aquaintenance's amps are rated at 40wpc, you were likely only hearing no more than about two-five watts rms being USED with those LaScalas out of the total power available from that amp. Or...at least I HOPE that was their point being made! Like I said on one of your other threads, whenever it comes to tubes around here, an opinion war that often escalates into a flame war tends to begin...sad but true! Take a hint, guys! He wants your opinions, but could care less about your opinions of each others' opinions! OK? There is a tactful way of doing things, ya know? Remember...opinions are just that...your OPINIONS! The efficiency of horn-loading and in particular of Klipsch horn-loaded speakers provides high SPL's with low wattage input. This also applies to the non-fully-horn-loaded Klipsch models like the Heresy and the Cornwall, although their efficiency will be a BIT lower. IOW...You don't have to spend big bucks for lots of watts with Klipsch speakers. Just HOW MANY watts you want is up to you, though...but I personally would NOT recommend any power source rated at over 105 wpc rms for the older Heritage line models simply because PWK said "NO MORE THAN THAT" for good reason and he knew what he was talking about! Besides, you can already blow the windows outta a house with five watts on em, so 105 watts is already just overkill, IMHO! Don't get all caught-up in ratings given by amplifier manufacturers about "headroom" and such, because the amount of headroom NEEDED for complex musical passages is directly related to the ability of the power supplies to supply both channels for musical peaks and the efficiency of the speakers to begin with...and those manufacturers never tell you what speakers THEY are using to get those headroom figures (if any)...or which real musical passages they used (if any). Specifications from manufacturers are a good thing to know, but in reality they mean very little to what you actually hear in most cases. For example, you can have a solid-state stereo amp that specs give as having 25wpc, but its single power supply struggles to get both channels there without clipping...and you can have another amp with the same rating that has twin power supplies and has no difficulty at all...and sounds like it is providing much more power than the first one before it goes into clipping. There is a big difference in how each manufacturer does their spec ratings, even though it is SUPPOSED to be "standardized" to some extent. For an example of this, you can take an old H/K 430 TWIN_POWERED stereo receiver in good operating condition with its conservatively-rated 25 wpc...hook it up to a pair of LaScalas and a decent CD player, pop in Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven"...crank the volume control on the H/K 430 up to around 10 o'clock and be into your "look at me, I'm Jimmy Page in concert" air guitar routine in no time flat...while the pimply-faced kid a block or so down the road is into HIS "Look at me, I'm Jimmy Page in concert" air guitar routine while listening to what is coming out of those speakers in YOUR house over a block away! AND...you will not roll off the steady increase in volume decibels available until you hit around 12:30-1 o'clock on the volume control...(clipping will kick in around 1:30-2 o'clock in SOME cases, so don't go there)but you had better not be in the same room with those LaScalas for very long at the 1 o'clock position (if you get that far), if you value your hearing! Just ask Rick Tate...HE CAN TELL YA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piranha Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 TommyC, Welcome to the Forum and the world of 104db speakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 ---------------- On 5/23/2004 9:34:45 AM HDBRbuilder wrote: Remember...opinions are just that...your OPINIONS! ---------------- Obviously true. The problem is when people confuse facts and opinions. One can have an opinion that a 1.8W amp is the most glorious sound he has ever dreamed of and no one can argue against it, as it's just someone's opinion. But it is a fact that a 1.8W amp cannot do what a 40W amp can do. There is no opinion involved; this is physics. To deny that it is a fact is absurd and people with absurd ideas cannot be taken seriously. Someone might have an opinion that a Bose cube sounds better than a Klipschorn. He's welcome to that opinion. But if he says a Bose cube is more efficient than a Klipschorn, or moves just as much air as a Klipschorn, etc., that is factual misrepresentation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cut-Throat Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 People's opinions on amplifiers matter only if they own all types of amplifiers, including SET, Push Pull, Hybrid tube Solid State. People expressing opinions of amplifers that they do not own are ridiculous. Anyone who lists specs of amplifiers as an indication of how they will sound should not be taken seriously. In their misguided logic if a 40 watt amplifier sounds better than a 20 watt amplifier then a 2,000 watt amplifier should be even better yet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricktate Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 12 o-clock on volume,,,OMG i have not even been to 11 o-clock i dont think..lol,,,,Andy is right it is LOUD at 10 o-clock....Be afraid....very afraid...Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 Some of you SET guys are a real hoot. If I wanted a SET amp, I'd buy a SET amp. Do you think they're hard to find? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 "People's opinions on amplifiers matter only if they own all types of amplifiers, including SET, Push Pull, Hybrid tube Solid State. People expressing opinions of amplifers that they do not own are ridiculous." C'mon Kevin, now THAT's "ridiculous". This works out pretty good for you since you are probably the only person on the forum that fits those qualifications. So I guess no one here can have opinion here except you!! Why do you keep all of those other amps around anyways? Why not just sell them all and get a few more 1.8 watt amps? I've been hinting at this for a while, but now I'll just come out and say it -- unless you're using the ALKs or the AK-4, Klipsch Heritage is a terrible choice for SET amps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazman Posted May 24, 2004 Share Posted May 24, 2004 ---------------- On 5/23/2004 9:17:45 PM DeanG wrote: I've been hinting at this for a while, but now I'll just come out and say it -- unless you're using the ALKs or the AK-4, Klipsch Heritage is a terrible choice for SET amps. ---------------- Dean, That is THE MOST RIDICULOUS THING YOU HAVE EVER SAID. Maybe even the most ignorant. Are you getting enough sleep? Klipsch out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted May 24, 2004 Share Posted May 24, 2004 I think you have missed Kevin's point, Dean. He never said he is the only one allowed to have an opinion. I think the point was that he is, in my opinion, in a more qualified position to state HIS IMPRESSIONS of the differences in sound between his different amps. Others have commented on the inefficiency and distortion characteristics of SET amplifiers, but do not have the pleasure (or lack thereof...)of a direct comparison. Kevin does. He is not basing his judgement on laws of physics or formulae, but on what he hears. I find this type of reporting to be the most honest, and I would say that "Rediculous" it absolutely is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted May 24, 2004 Share Posted May 24, 2004 "I've been hinting at this for a while, but now I'll just come out and say it -- unless you're using the ALKs or the AK-4, Klipsch Heritage is a terrible choice for SET amps." I was very suprised to see this! The following statement is a direct quote from an article Vacuum Tube Valley did on the Klipschorn (also including an interview with PWK)in 2000: "Any good triode amp, one lung or two, will make the Klipschorn sing. "A good 2A3 amp is scary-good with a K-horn, and similar results can be had with 300B amps as well." It seems some don't share that same opinion, Dean, which was really stated as if it were more of a fact. I'm sorry! I have what I think to be a decent 2A3 amplifier, and think it sounds wonderful with Klipschorns -- as does the 40 watt SS kenwood, the PP 6V6 retored Crafstman amps, Edster's Monarchy, and the Moondogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted May 24, 2004 Share Posted May 24, 2004 Not the religious divide again!!! I just calculated the cubic feet in my listening room at around 3000. When I am on my own and want to listen to my music loud it hits 93dB at my listening position (100 to 101 @ 1 meter) PEAK. I measured this on Sunday - and it was quite a surprise - I had expected the figure to be rather higher. In other words I think our definitions of loud may be the source of much of the differences. I guess Paul, Dean et al would call this quiet. What this means to me is that I could quite happily run an amp with a couple of watts of power and never clip the damn thing (if my speakers were 99dB/w/m sensitivity or more, that is). I therefore may well conclude that a 1.8 watt SET amp produces the best sound I have ever heard - however farcial that seems to others, and that it contains all the headroom I will ever need. The fact that said amplification is not capable of exceeding my requirements is going to be as relevent to my selection as the top speed rating for a car. One car may indeed be capable of going 10 mph faster than another, or 100 mph for that matter, but if I never drive at more than 40 mph below the top speed of the lower what difference does it make to me? Of course in reality I run a 70 wpc ultra linear amp - God knows why? Oh yes - I remember now - I like the way it sounds!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted May 24, 2004 Share Posted May 24, 2004 It's not a matter of how loud an amp can play, Max. It's what the quality of that loud playing is like. You can play a cheap clock radio loud. That doesn't make it a Klipschorn. 1.8W amps cannot command speakers like, say, 40W can. That is a fact, not an opinion. And I find it very disappointing that there continue to be people posting who do not understand the difference between fact and opinion. One can prefer the sound coming out of a 1.8W amp (opinion) but it can't move the air and control the bass like a 40W amp (fact). I rarely have commented on the quality or lack thereof of SET. That's because it's irrelevant, because they don't meet the minimum criteria. For an analogy, let's say you are looking to haul two tons of gravel. Your attention is going to be on what truck can perform that task the best. If you have a few guys who insist that bicycles are fabulous and tell you how much they enjoy their bikes, what incredible feats of engineering they represent, the exotic lightweight material used in their frames, etc., are you going to pay them any mind when it comes to hauling gravel? No, you're going to spend your time figuring what the best truck is that you can find. Similarly, if you want to play anything of substance, realistically, you aren't going to waste time auditioning a bunch of flea-powered amps. A 1.8W amp can play any recording, sure, and so can a clock radio. You can tell it's a symphony recording on a clock radio too; that proves nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted May 24, 2004 Share Posted May 24, 2004 Paul, Now you are confusing me, genuinely: "One can prefer the sound coming out of a 1.8W amp (opinion) but it can't move the air and control the bass like a 40W amp (fact)." Are you saying that at, say, 90 db @ 1 meter from a pair of speakers rated at 104 db/w/m a 40 wpc amp will move more air and control the wooder better than a 1.8 wpc one can? I am not arguing with you - I have no experience of a 1.8 watt amp (actually I have only ever heard one SET amp on my speakers and that was 8 watts), but this is the first time I have ever seen this mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDBRbuilder Posted May 24, 2004 Share Posted May 24, 2004 Dean, I guess that because YOUR K-horns are the newest version, then that makes the AK4 the only factory made network that works on SET? Just remember ONE thing, here. The only reason the AK4 ever came out was to get a network into those K-horns currently in manufacture to perform with the CURRENT drivers used in them on a par with what the AA network was doing when it first came out in conjunction with the drivers being used at the time it came out...with a slight addition of maybe straightening-out just a tad of the reponse curve as tested on frequncy generators (which ain't music). I see all too often on this forum where test results are being used to compare an AA network to this or that. But, one thing that I DON'T see is the backround info for the testing to begin with...such as WHEN the AA being compared was built and how much have its caps and such degraded over the last 30 or so years?...and just how many AA's were tested to get the SCIENTIFIC METHOD tests averaging from?...and even if it was a newly built AA, then how can that compare to an original AA in original condition, since none of the same manufacturers of the parts are building those parts with the same innards or in the same way or with the same quality control (if they are building them at all!)? Anybody can come up with a comparison test of a pair of networks using lab equipment, but how many are actually using the SCIENTIFIC METHOD which is how you keep the test from being erroneously skewed to begin with? From what I see that is NOT happening! I ain't a scientist, but I sure as hello know what the SCIENTIFIC METHOD is and why it is called such! I haven't even so much as seen the validation data given on the complete standards under which most of these tests written about on here are taken, yet! As for SET, it was considered OLD TECHNOLOGY when the Heritage speakers were developed, and it was not used in that development or in the testing processes to any great extent, if at all. But that doesn't mean that the speakers available when SET was in its original heyday are gonna sound better for use on SET amps than Heritage speakers are. Does it? Was the AK4 developed around SET amplification requirements? NO! Does it sound better to YOU in YOUR K-horns with THOSE drivers in YOUR listening environment (which ain't an anechoic chamber) on YOUR amplification? YES. SO? The point IS that Heritage DO sound good on the right SET amplification...AND on the right ANY KIND OF AMPLIFICATION...which is WHY they are still being bought and praised. As for SET, especially that in the 2watt range, it IS enough to power the Heritage speakers, but it just isn't enough to power them to the extremely high decibel amounts some folks desire to hear complex mucical passages at without having something get a bit sacrificed in the process. This is plain scientific fact...not opinion. Even PWK himself said "what we need now is a good FIVE-watt amp"...NOT a good TWO-WATT AMP...but a good FIVE WATT AMP! Does that mean that one can;t find listening enjoyment in using a two-watt amp? No. It just means that something is gonna suffer at higher decibels because there just isn't enough watts available to pull from at those higher decibels. Does that mean that, for example, one can't have live performance levels with 2 watts? No...not if that live performance is being heard from mid-row-center at a loud rock concert...or even closer to home for the two-watt crowd is how the performance on speakers can be equivalent to listening to an unamplified string quartet at live levels...which is PERFECT analogy for performance for SET amplification at just 2 watts available. Simple math shows that although it only takes a watt to power a K-horn, they were designed to handle 105 watts. The louder you want it, then the more watts you are gonna need to keep from taxing an amp (call it headroom or whatever)...and to ENSURE the drivers are getting what they need to ACCURATELY reproduce the transients and complex musical passages at the correct level of volume across the board...plain and simple. When you demand more decibels out of a 15-inch woofer, it is gonna try to suck more watts outta the amp! If those watts aren't there to begin with, then SOMETHING SOMEWHERE is NOT gonna be able to do its job CORRECTLY and ACCURATELY. You can't have a fuel pump on a car designed to provide steady consistent flow of gasoline to an engine running UP TO 3000 rpm, then try to run that engine at 5000 rpm and expect that same fuel pump to provide enough gas to it. SOMETHING IS GONNA SUFFER. At the very least the mixture is gonna end up too lean to provide desired performance. FORUM MEMBERS, One more time I would like to REITERATE that this thread was started by a guy who is new to Klipsch speakers and who wants our opinions, but could care less about OUR OPINIONS OF EACH OTHERS' OPINIONS! SO...let the flame war end HERE (before the flames get TOO high)and if you can't give him some CONSTRUCTIVE advice, then don't bother to post to begin with! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie dave Posted May 24, 2004 Share Posted May 24, 2004 Max, you are stepping into damping factor and instantaneous peak power ratings, something that you don't want to involve most SET amps in discussing. One item we are missing in this small brushfire is that we are not discussing SET amps in general, but an extremely well designed and built set of monoblocs with custom features, not something you cruise over to your local stereo store and buy off the shelf. If you have a 6,000 cu. ft. room that runs 25 ft wide x 20 ft.deep x 12 ft. ceiling, if you run the Moondogs at one watt accoustical power(a gift, but make it easy,) you will see 104 dB at 1 meter(3 ft.) Let us put your listening position at 15 feet and run the math. The SPL reduction factor will be the term (3/15) squared, x 2, or 8% of the SPL level at 3 ft. You will be subject to an SPL field of around 98 dB, bare and unreflected, in a perfect world. If you factor in normal losses, ie an imperfect seal (with Khorns,) electrical to accoustical energy losses, etal, and SPL levels drop accordingly. Mike Stehr has the identical Magnavox SE console amp in WA being run on Cornwalls. For what we wanted, it is a great setup for listening. It won't get you playing air guitar to Metallica, but it can put you toward the upper deck seats in a stadium. If you want seats on the field, then you will generally be forced into the wattage that Dean and Paul are discussing. If we are arguing the merits of the Moondog consistently topping 108 dB at five paces in a normal or distant field listening environment, it will be incapable of delivering such levels. It will exhibit at least some clipping that is audible, though in a musical manner. I like both SET and PP, and have had both stalking around in the house. I also have Khorns setups in stellar and less than stellar corners(to my chagrin,) and have heard the amazing differences caused by environment. The truest statement is Klipsch speakers sound great with good equipment, with everything else subject to argument Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts