D-MAN Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Russ, I'm telling you: it's noticably LOUDER from the stock cable to the "fancy" one. Same amp, same wall outlet, same volume control setting, same program. Just powered down and swapped cables. Powered back on. Output volume louder, just enough to notice and we (a friend and I were listening seriously, of course). Increased bass response, and increase in overall soundstage "clarity". Overall verdict: it's a keeper. Telling me that it ain't so doesn't seem to change the effect! Here's another one: AC filtering units, try plugging your high current amp into one and then back into the wall. Notice a difference? DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champagne taste beer budget Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Oh my, I just had another thought.... If I inadvertantly power down my amp (Perreaux 1850, 180 watts@8 ohms, 330@4 ohms), I hear no difference in sound for a while, maybe 6-8 seconds at higher volumes, then it trails of like turning down the volume till it's silent. When that first occured, I'd accidently unplugged it. (Temporarly set up in the garage, long story.) That would indicate to me that all of the "power" needed to make music was being stored in the power supply inside the amp, not coming through the power cord. Since you're generally using a considerably lower amount of amp power that what is available for instantanious bursts, the capacitors must be being refreshed at a rate over and above what is required by the output stage. That power would have to come from the wall outlet, through the power cord. If this thing can run by itself for a bit when unplugged, with no degredation in sound, to my paltry ears, at least, how could a better power cord improve anything? Everything I'm hearing come out of the speakers is already in the amp, stored in the capacitors, just waiting for a demand to be used. The only place I can see a benefit of an upgraded power cord would be in shielding from EMI, but I think that could be resolved with some judicious wiring layout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 That is only the PS caps draining at turn off time, they are constantly charging from the wall outlet and discharging in correspondence with the signal being processed when "active". The goal of the PS is to keep the caps charged as much as possible. It is the stored voltage from the power supply caps that supplies the electrical "pressure" to drive the speakers, the tubes or transistors are just "switches" or "valves" that are used to modulate the PS-supplied stored voltage (or electrical pressure) with the signal being amplified. The amplification possible is only that amount of voltage that can be stored by the power supply. If you get to the point with the signal amplitude where the caps drain out all the way and can't charge back all the way up, you get "clipping". (probably over-simplified, but basically true). But the point is that the PS is in constant control of the AC supply when "on", and there is ALWAYS some current flow even under idle conditions when the amp is on. DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 ---------------- On 3/1/2005 8:09:14 PM Champagne taste beer budget wrote: Oh my, I just had another thought.... If I inadvertantly power down my amp (Perreaux 1850, 180 watts@8 ohms, 330@4 ohms), I hear no difference in sound for a while, maybe 6-8 seconds at higher volumes, then it trails of like turning down the volume till it's silent. When that first occured, I'd accidently unplugged it. (Temporarly set up in the garage, long story.) That would indicate to me that all of the "power" needed to make music was being stored in the power supply inside the amp, not coming through the power cord. Since you're generally using a considerably lower amount of amp power that what is available for instantanious bursts, the capacitors must be being refreshed at a rate over and above what is required by the output stage. That power would have to come from the wall outlet, through the power cord. If this thing can run by itself for a bit when unplugged, with no degredation in sound, to my paltry ears, at least, how could a better power cord improve anything? Everything I'm hearing come out of the speakers is already in the amp, stored in the capacitors, just waiting for a demand to be used. The only place I can see a benefit of an upgraded power cord would be in shielding from EMI, but I think that could be resolved with some judicious wiring layout. ---------------- capacitors baby ........ capacitors.... maybe this analogy will help..... a power supply is like a big water tank.... when you turn on your device (amplifier) - the water tank is filled and then all of the small pipes that run the amp draw their water (current) from that water tank..... on peak demands the water can be drawn down - (but not completely)... as musical demands decrease - the water tank fills up again..... that is why Champagne still heard sound for a few seconds after he unplugged his amp... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champagne taste beer budget Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 ---------------- On 3/1/2005 8:32:21 PM D-MAN wrote: That is only the PS caps draining at turn off time, they are constantly charging from the wall outlet and discharging in correspondence with the signal being processed when "active". The goal of the PS is to keep the caps charged as much as possible. It is the stored voltage from the power supply caps that supplies the electrical "pressure" to drive the speakers, the tubes or transistors are just "switches" or "valves" that are used to modulate the PS-supplied stored voltage (or electrical pressure) with the signal being amplified. The amplification possible is only that amount of voltage that can be stored by the power supply. If you get to the point with the signal amplitude where the caps drain out all the way and can't charge back all the way up, you get "clipping". (probably over-simplified, but basically true). But the point is that the PS is in constant control of the AC supply when "on", and there is ALWAYS some current flow even under idle conditions when the amp is on. DM ---------------- Since nicholiti (sorry if I blew the spelling) liked my analogies, lets try another.... I realize that when unplugged it's running off the caps. They get recharged constantly through the power cord, slight current flow through the cord at low to moderate listening levels, higher at loud levels. (Here's where the analogy starts) Let's say you have a tire with a small leak. A nail in the tread. If you don't touch the nail, there's a little leak. However, if you tilt the exposed nail head, it greatly increases the size of the leak momentarily. Kinda like a cap releasing current to a speaker. If left alone, the leak is 3 cfm (Cubic feet/minute) per hour, but when you move the nail head it increases to 15 cfm per hour for a short time. Obviously, if you keep tilting the nail head for a while, the tire will go flat fairly quickly. Now let's hook up a compressor to the valve stem. It's a full sized, shop style compressor capable of producing 30 cfm at 175 psi. (This would be the power cord. Duh.) As long as you keep the compressor running, the tire can't ever lose pressure, in fact, it would overinflate if you didn't take off the compressor hose at some point. As long as the supply is greater than the demand, there would be no benefit to moving up to a bigger compressor, say 60 cfm @ 250 psi. With the sensitivity of Klipsch speakers, there is a small demand for current flow to get some pretty high sound pressure levels. Hence the use of low wattage amps. You just don't need that much compressor to make some huge sound. Even on cannon shots. Certainly, to my way of thinking at least, any competantly designed amp will be able to produce volumes of sound off the reserves in the caps. Sure, there will always be some current flow through the power cord, but I feel once the caps are loaded up, it would be so small that most any adaquatly built power cord could flow the required current to keep up. Another analogy... What if you had access to a fire hydrant in your front yard and a regulation fire hose, 4" diameter, or whatever they are, but only had a connector for your 5/8' average watering nozzle? You'd get the same flow as if you had a 5/8" hose. What if you had to put that 5/8" hose in the midle of the firemans hose? You'd still only get the flow of a 5/8" hose, even though the rest of it was 4". The strongest chain is only as strong as it's weakest link. If you look inside your amp, I bet you won't find any 6 or 8 gauge wires coming off the power cord input. They'll be little wires, thereby being the final link in the chain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champagne taste beer budget Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Hey Russ, I thought I mentioned caps in my post? I ain't all that smart, but I ain't completly dumb. Yet. Good ANALOGY though, they seem to be running rampant suddenly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 i know you did... but i just love capacitors!!!! (it is the result of a lack of fishing...... winter has been wayyyyyy too long here in minnesota - as you know!!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 To note: Most humans need a 3 db increase to notice a difference. An above average possibly 2 db. I have not, nor have the audiologists I know, ever seen a human notice a 1 db change. All 7 attempted to find any documentation, but could not. dodger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 ---------------- On 3/2/2005 2:10:34 AM dodger wrote: To note: Most humans need a 3 db increase to notice a difference. An above average possibly 2 db. I have not, nor have the audiologists I know, ever seen a human notice a 1 db change. All 7 attempted to find any documentation, but could not. dodger ---------------- Bur for someone claiming they hear a difference, we would have to measure at the very least a 1dB increase. The ability to hear a difference goes down with age as well...1dB is defined as the smallest change that an average young male can detect. There was some study performed a while ago when the dB was established. I have been known to dial in systems to within 1dB on a regular basis (ask colter, I got his system to within .5 dB), but I help myself with the technique I use (finding the extremes of where I hear a difference and then going to the middle of the two). I think it'd be interesting to conduct a test... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 That is my guess, too. The increase in soundstage clarity and increase in low end response is perceived as being definately "louder". It is a slight increase, but definately there. I would agree that it might be +3db at least at some portion of the spectrum or a combination of areas? Or it could be that some unexcited room modes get excited by some change in the signal from the use of better cables, who knows. The model that I have are Audio Quest AC12's, 6ft. I've owned these for 9 years. At least I found the box it came in, the cable itself is unmarked. When I sell the equipment it will be with the stock cables, the fancy cables stay. DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 ---------------- On 3/2/2005 12:22:45 PM DrWho wrote: ---------------- On 3/2/2005 2:10:34 AM dodger wrote: To note: Most humans need a 3 db increase to notice a difference. An above average possibly 2 db. I have not, nor have the audiologists I know, ever seen a human notice a 1 db change. All 7 attempted to find any documentation, but could not. dodger ---------------- Bur for someone claiming they hear a difference, we would have to measure at the very least a 1dB increase. The ability to hear a difference goes down with age as well...1dB is defined as the smallest change that an average young male can detect. There was some study performed a while ago when the dB was established. I have been known to dial in systems to within 1dB on a regular basis (ask colter, I got his system to within .5 dB), but I help myself with the technique I use (finding the extremes of where I hear a difference and then going to the middle of the two). I think it'd be interesting to conduct a test... ---------------- On that I think it would be a very good idea. The amount of testing noting 1 db increase or decrease is not as broad as one would like. Having an ability as that is like having perfect pitch - people ask how do you do that, well I was born with it and have refined it. With my wife having her full time job (I made a quick answer and offer if needed in the earlier post re: Pergo) at the hearing center, I have my hearing tested monthly. As with my Mother, not much change since our mid to late 20s. For that I am very thankful. If I had a choice in senses of sight or sound, I would choose sound/hearing. dodger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Spinner Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 give it up, D'Man ......AC wire is just that Russ kicked yer a$$ with Facts, not Fiction ... Cables ...when will it end .??? ... p.S. all my Crown Com-Techs, yea, all 3 .... run 18 guage speaker wire, and stock 18 gauge power cords .. Crown obviously felt that that was fine for thier $1500 amp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frzninvt Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 I bought one of these for my NAD T163 A/V pre/pro it did not make any difference at all - perceivable anyway. In addition, it was designed for a three pin connector and my NAD has two so it did not fit nice and snug. I put the stock one back on the NAD and I am using it on my PC it was a waste of money. It looked real pretty though. If someone wants it I will make you a hell of a deal on it and put the stock cord back on my PC. It was close to $100 new - all primo materials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frzninvt Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 I think that the power cords on my DBX BX1's are sufficient don't you? The dual torodial 3.4kw transformers and very large capacitor banks are what make the difference. Can you say 0.1 ohm load for over 30 minutes with 20A current and 100A peaks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yaffstone Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 I think we all need to rewire our houses with 0 gauge wire, at least to the outlet that serves the stereo system. Never mind that that will cary more current than the electric range would need, just don't make any undue resistance for that demanding stereo. I realize it would be cost prohibitive to get the power company to upgrade their lines so I won't suggest that. Perhaps we should all have small nuclear reactors in the back yard for the stereo. Ok, more to the point. 100 W / channel for a monoblock. 100 W / 110 V = 0.9 amp. Even if the amp was 50% efficient that would be 1.8 amps, not enough to stress out any normal power cable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 ---------------- On 3/2/2005 2:28:27 PM yaffstone wrote: I think we all need to rewire our houses with 0 gauge wire, at least to the outlet that serves the stereo system. Never mind that that will cary more current than the electric range would need, just don't make any undue resistance for that demanding stereo. I realize it would be cost prohibitive to get the power company to upgrade their lines so I won't suggest that. Perhaps we should all have small nuclear reactors in the back yard for the stereo. Ok, more to the point. 100 W / channel for a monoblock. 100 W / 110 V = 0.9 amp. Even if the amp was 50% efficient that would be 1.8 amps, not enough to stress out any normal power cable. ---------------- the "small" nuclear reactor wouldn't be big enough if you use a high power McIntosh amplifier.... you would need at least a "medium" nuclear reactor (or larger)...because that amp really "Sucks the juice right out of the wall" LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 That's why its called a high current amplifier. You've heard of those, haven't you? 300 watts per channel, where do you think it comes from? DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 ---------------- On 3/2/2005 2:53:21 PM D-MAN wrote: That's why its called a high current amplifier. You've heard of those, haven't you? 300 watts per channel, where do you think it comes from? DM ---------------- from the power supply.... like every other amplifier the "high current" is what comes out of the power supply.... less than 10 amps going into the amp is not "high current" (directly from the McIntosh owners manual) we can all see that you have not been paying attention!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Russ, you have to consider that the AC voltage is 110-120 at the wall outlet and that voltage doesn't change (more or less). So HOW do you get 300 watts output from 110-120 AC? A 3-watt tube amp uses the same AC outlet (but the PS produces HIGHER VOLTAGE DC, less current, proportionally). Ans: P=IE where wattage or power, P equals current, I times voltage, E. Do not assume that the voltage inside the PS is kept at 110-120 volts DC, 'cause it ain't, it varies between designs but it is quite a bit less (LOWER VOLTAGE, higher current). That's why it's called a high current amp. DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 ---------------- On 3/2/2005 3:53:10 PM D-MAN wrote: Russ, you have to consider that the AC voltage is 110-120 at the wall outlet and that voltage doesn't change (more or less). So HOW do you get 300 watts output from 110-120 AC? A 3-watt tube amp uses the same AC outlet (but the PS produces HIGHER VOLTAGE DC, less current, proportionally). Ans: P=IE where wattage or power, P equals current, I times voltage, E. Do not assume that the voltage inside the PS is kept at 110-120 volts DC, 'cause it ain't, it varies between designs but it is quite a bit less (LOWER VOLTAGE, higher current). That's why it's called a high current amp. DM ---------------- *sigh* 15 amps of current coming out of your wall outlet is 1800 watts 1800 watts = 120 volts x 15 amps i didn't think that i needed to get this basic..... and look at what you just typed - you are agreeing with what i posted above!! the power supply take the 1800 watts of power on the AC side and converts it to DC voltage and supplies the current to the amplifier... the 15 amps of current at 120 volts is the same for ALL amplifiers... a "high current" design will provide more current (watts) on the DC side of the power supply than a "low current" design... and in case you missed it - your "high current" McIntosh only uses 1200 watts or less at maximum volume.... perhaps some research on your part on how a power supply works might make this discussion more profitable for everyone else..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts