dodger Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 I didn't want to hijack the thread anymore, but I did want to sato Shawn, Erik and Wolfram thanks for the advice and recommendations. Much Appreciated. Win Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 Don't fool yourself there is no device made (affordably speaking) that can track the actual power usage of a amplifier while playing music. You have no clue how much power you may really be using when strolling along at 1 watt average. You may prefer the sound produced by the perceived superiority of these low powered SET amps. IMHO opinion its a fantasy you delude yourself into thinking they have more detail and delicacy when in reality there just playing the mid range accurately everything else is just softened or recessed back. Nothing wrong with liking it but mind you but facts are facts. Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 You make an excellent point, NOSValves. It appears that people make erroneous judgments all the time on this, including misunderstanding what a stated rating of 104dB/1W/1Meter means in the real world. They figure if they never hit 104dB on their SPL meter, they must not be using even 1 Watt. Others think if they have their volume control 1/2 way up, they are using at most only half of their amp's rated power (especially if the volume control has little -dB markings on it). I read once somewhere what the McIntosh meters really show. Unfortunately I don't remember what it was! I think it responded reasonably accurately at only a certain frequency range (not low bass). If anyone knows/remembers better than I do, please post. The meters were more for looks than anything else. If McIntosh really thought 3W was sufficient, they wouldn't be making multi-hundred watt amps, would they? Where are all those McIntosh SET amps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted May 22, 2005 Author Share Posted May 22, 2005 Craig: In truth, I am realling not saying I think SET amps are superior, and have recently heard some REALLY awesome sounding 6L6, EL 34, and PP 6BQ5 amplifiers that are far more powerful than any SE triode amp I have or have heard. There is just something I like about them -- and that is all. My premise has always been that it's just a personal choice, indeed despite the facts that you mention, which I know are true in terms of frequency response. You're right, I can't argue that fact. Yet, there are lots of men and women who love the sound of their low power single-ended amplifiers, but I would say just as easily to them that their preference for that type of amplifier does not mean it's better in an absolute sense than more powerful (and indeed probably more linear)topologies. After all, it's not so much a topology debate as it is an issue over power. Paul is also absolutely correct about the volume control position/power issue, but he's wrong about our rocking the joint with harp music. Lately, it's been Perfect Circle, Tool, recent and less recent King Crimson, Audio Slave and some others that have had that responsibility. I love harp music, too, though! Erik Marie is getting angry since I'm not down helping with din-din, so I'd better get off. She doesn't laugh at my flea amps, either! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted May 22, 2005 Author Share Posted May 22, 2005 PS: Thanks, Shawn! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 Erik, "Paul is also absolutely correct about the volume control position/power issue" Correct that to...."Paul is also sometimes correct about the volume control position/power issue." As a mater of fact in your system you can tell me exactly what your max peak possible volume levels would be *at the listening position* per speaker in 5 seconds or less and it would be accurate as long as the amps aren't compressing/clipping. That is what is so nice about having a calibrated volume control. Remember when you balanced all channels to 75dB in the setup on the Lex? That also calibrates the volume control, as it does on any THX certified pre-pro. To tell the max possible peak level per speaker at the listening position simply take whatever your main volume level says on the Lex. and apply it to 105dB. So if your front panel volume control says -20dB you do... 105dB - 20dB.... which equals 85dB. 85dB is the max possible peak level per speaker at the listening position with your volume set at that level. If your front panel says -10dB 105dB -10dB = 95dB Front panel says +10dB 105dB +10dB = 115dB Knowing this it is possible to get a fairly decent idea on how much power would be required for the peaks at the volume setting you are running on the Lex. This is for digital sources, with analog sources it isn't quite as exact because of different input levels and such. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 " If McIntosh really thought 3W was sufficient, they wouldn't be making multi-hundred watt amps, would they? Where are all those McIntosh SET amps?" McIntosh was targetting their amps for the vast majority of speaker systems for greater market appeal. For an awful lot of speakers out there 3w wouldn't be enough even at lower listening levels. Like it or not for some very efficient speakers with some listeners preferences 3w could in fact be enough power. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 The key here is: enough power for what? Enough power to please a nonsophisticated listener is an entirely different matter than enough power to confidently reproduce full-bandwidth music at realistic levels under real-life conditions without clipping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 "The key here is: enough power for what?" For what I already said.... to satisfy *that* listeners preferences. Believe it or not but people can have different preferences then you do and in no way does that make them wrong. How many restaurants have you been to with a single item on the menu? How many different makes of amplifiers are there? How many different models of loudspeakers are there? "Enough power to please a nonsophisticated listener" Just because a listener may not be trying to reproduce concert hall volume levels in no way shape or form makes them an unsophisticated listener. In fact I'd wonder if those that *only* care about 'how loud does it go' might not be the more unsophisticated listener. Quite simply I highly doubt many that think they listen at these levels regularly actually in fact do. An RS SPL meter while listening to the music won't reliability give you this info as it will be strongly influenced by room boom which can inflate the numbers by 10 or even 20dB higher. If you want a better way of determining your actual peak SPL level per speaker listen to your system at whatever your *normal* level is. Now, without touching your volume control, play a 1kHz test tone from any test CD though one of your speakers only. Most CDs have this at -20dB. At the listening position measure your SPL of that 1kHz tone. Whatever you get now add back in whatever the recorded level of the test tone was. So in the above case add 20dB to your measured SPL level. That number is your actual peak SPL level per speaker at the listening position. "is an entirely different matter than enough power to confidently reproduce full-bandwidth music at realistic levels under real-life conditions without clipping." More people in 'real-life' have other family members or neighbors who would object to these sorts of volumes very often. An awful lot of people would also have all sorts of objects in their room 'singing along' too if they really tried these levels and actually had full bandwidth reproduction (which a K'Horn won't give you). Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seti Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 I can't wait to get my passive sub going as I have been putting it off till I get an AH! cdp. Members here have given me several affordable options for xovers and amps just need to sell some plasma. I haven't given much thought to using headphones since the lots on either side of my house are empty so neighbors are never a worry : ). Hmm something else to buy lol. The headphone amp on bottlehead.com looks pretty good. My friend has a Balanced Audio Technology sytem with some headphones I might have to go listen to it since I declined last time he offered to let me listen. It never fails on this forum say that you like SET or low powered amps and there is always someone to tell you why you shouldn't like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 If the discussion is merely one's personal preference, there is nothing to argue about. To use your restaurant example, one guy likes celery, another guy prefers steak. There's not much point in trying to convince one or the other that he is wrong. However, if the celery guy insists that there are just as many calories in a stalk of celery as there is in a steak, and that he gets as much energy out of a celery stalk as he would a steak, then there's something to argue. And it doesn't matter whether someone has the opinion that the celery has as many calories. The only place opinion matters is whether he likes the taste of celery or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 There is one thing in using a Radio Shack SPL meter. However there is another to use a meter that can be professionally calibrated, can be be set for frequency ranges and the results stand up in a Court of Law if used as the factor in issuing a Summons. Plus there has to be a sense of humour in calling a 105 advertised watt RMS per channel a flea amplifier. Come on guys no-one said SET or PP was better. I thought I'd get a good chortle out Craig and a WHAT out of Paul. Erik did note that if needed the extra power would be there. Besides, they have those baby blues. I know I'd tire of it quickly, but it would be kind of neat to have bulbs that exact shade. But I'm still going to follow Shawn's advice on headphones. Compared to falling asleep watching the TV, listening to music, I feel much more rested. Unless you guys are pulling my leg again. Almost dinner, time to figure what to cook. Seriously, hope all have a relaxing enjoyable night. Take Care - tonight's the new Crossing Jordan - Paul, a lot of the times that it's just a female I found out it's Jill. Kinda Neat. Take care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 ---------------- On 5/22/2005 3:21:43 PM dodger wrote: Take Care - tonight's the new Crossing Jordan - Paul, a lot of the times that it's just a female I found out it's Jill. Kinda Neat. ---------------- Not following what you're saying here. I think Jill Hennessy was much better in "Law and Order." She's too glamorized on "Crossing Jordan," you know, walking in slow motion in ads, her long hair blowing back, that kind of thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 The discussion was fine until I made what most would think to be a humorous response. I apologize Erik, Shawn and Wolfram. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 ---------------- On 5/22/2005 3:39:43 PM Parrot wrote: ---------------- On 5/22/2005 3:21:43 PM dodger wrote: Take Care - tonight's the new Crossing Jordan - Paul, a lot of the times that it's just a female I found out it's Jill. Kinda Neat. ---------------- Not following what you're saying here. I think Jill Hennessy was much better in "Law and Order." She's too glamorized on "Crossing Jordan," you know, walking in slow motion in ads, her long hair blowing back, that kind of thing. ---------------- Sorry Paul: The singing. It's obvious she's taken some lessons from her twin the model. I remembered when I made a comment once before, you noted about some of the music used. Not the mainstream. To me, even though her sister is the model Jill has the looks starting back from Law and Order. I would love to have a Victrola like Dr. Macy's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 "There is one thing in using a Radio Shack SPL meter. However there is another to use a meter that can be professionally calibrated, can be be set for frequency ranges and the results stand up in a Court of Law if used as the factor in issuing a Summons." I totally agree. The meter that can be set for frequency ranges (or is a calibrated RTA anyway) won't be tricked like the RS SPL meter if only a certain band is seriously boosted (room boom) relative to the rest of the spectrum. Those meters will also typically off flat measurements, something the RS meter can't do. Even still calibrated meters like that (I have one) still can miss quick SPL peaks and in some cases the mic's distort or compress and high levels. That is why if you figure out max SPL from a known recording level (that 1kHz test tone I was talking about) it can give you accurate info without having to worry about room boom, very quick peaks, mic compression and such. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dzapper Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 Erik, Something is puzzling me. A harp's lowest frequency is about the same as a piano roughly 32Hz, a frequency the Khorn has no trouble reproducing. This is especially true if it is equalized as with your Lex. Could it be that your headphones are not as linear as your Lex'ed Khorns? Rick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 Rick, Isn't around 33hz the -3dB point for a K'Horn? There is also potentially another huge factor here... the room. It is likely the room is throwing the bass response all helter skelter... as rooms tend to do. Rooms tend to also resonante at certain frequencies which can contribute to an indistinct/muddy sound as they hold on to specific frequencies longer then they should. With headphones you avoid all of that. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dzapper Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 Right around there in an anechoic envrionment. Depending on the room, there can be a little bass boost there as well. You really should come down south here and listen to the Khorns Shawn. We stopped lynching people from Massachusetts years ago.-) Rick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted May 23, 2005 Author Share Posted May 23, 2005 Rick: "Erik, Something is puzzling me. A harp's lowest frequency is about the same as a piano roughly 32Hz, a frequency the Khorn has no trouble reproducing. This is especially true if it is equalized as with your Lex. Could it be that your headphones are not as linear as your Lex'ed Khorns?" Actually, I think the overall response may in fact be more 'accurate' with headphones than when listening with loudspeakers. The acoustic aspects of our room have improved with some carefully placed soft wall hangings (hand-woven throw rugs), but there are still times when certain low frequencies seem out of proportion and a little 'peaky.' Shawn mentioned this very thing above. I honestly think headphones are more revealing of subtle aspects of a recording, including the acoustic characteristics and 'sound' of where the recording took place, than are the Klipschorns -- or really any other speaker, for that matter, where the fidelity to the recording may be influenced and altered by the room, itself. The very low frequency I mentioned having heard with headphones was lower, I believe, than 32 Hz, and don't think it was produced by the harp. It was really more like a bass pedal note -- very, very low, and something I don't remember hearing when listening to this same CD without headphones. I'm sure it was there, but just attenuated by the LF response limitations of the horns. I absolutely want to supplement our system with a subwoofer. Win: You have nothing to apologize for! Erik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.