There is NO 20 watt per channel minimum for Klipsch speakers

[neo33]

"2) PWK suggested that 20W per channel"

Parrot, can you provide specific reference where PWK wrote such a statement with his signature to signify that he actually wrote it? Else, stop making unfounded statement!

[seti]

----------------

On 8/8/2005 9:13:35 PM coda wrote:

Early tube amplifiers had only very low power capabilities and required very efficient and powerful loudspeaker systems. The horn loudspeaker was the only existing loudspeaker concept which was able to transfer low electrical power into high sound levels. The Klipschorn was literally

made

with low-powered amplifiers in mind. Check out the lead article of the

High Fidelity Magazine 1951

for more insight.

SET was used in some early commercial applications (e.g. 1930s theatre amps), but wasn't really available to the general consumer (and Klipsch community) until the early 1990s via Cary Audio. Paul Klipsch liked the 2A3 tube for a reason. Listen to one to find out, whether PP or SET.

----------------

Coda,

How many watts was PWKs PP 2a3 brook amp?

[Daddy Dee]

I think PWk's 2A3 PP would have been 10 wpc.

[Daddy Dee]

----------------

On 8/8/2005 11:09:15 PM Woodog wrote:

Anything that inspires this kind of passion is something I have GOT to hear for myself.

Woo----------------

Woodog,

That is an interesting observation. Of course, once you hear SET you will either like it or you won't like it.

The thing that seems too tough about it.... is that if you are one of the persons who doesn't like it....

you will be forever compelled to not want any one else to like it either!

With some seasoning, though, you will realize that you don't have to get into an argument every time you hear someone say the sky is not blue.

[neo33]

"the sky is not blue."

The sky *is not* blue!

[edwinr]

----------------

On 8/9/2005 12:45:54 AM Parrot wrote:

Perhaps a quick recap is in order...

----------------

Thanks, Paul. Nicely worded. In my experience, the insecure ultimately resort to rudness or attack when backed into a corner.

...and my recap. I like Jazz. I like many types of music. I like the way some SET amplifiers sound. I also dislike how many other amplifiers sound, SET or otherwise.

Those that ask the question on this Forum, should be entitled to several balanced points of view without intimidation.

On the other hand I can see where certain SET system owners may feel somewhat 'persecuted' because other Forum members (me included) tend to take their choice of amplifier lightly. And maybe I do poke fun at them from time to time. But this is reciprocated by some SET owners, or more likely, by those that claim to be SET owners or fanciers. If you dish it out, you gotta expect some back.

In future I will make an effort to avoid poking fun at the SET faciers and I will try and respect their equipment choice (whether real or imagined) a little more. But others should be allowed to make observations without rudeness.

For those that want to try SET, I am with Paul on this one - listen for yourself, and make the decision accordingly.

EDIT: Maybe I'm wasting my time with this... I'll just go out and drool over some more turntables and have another listen to the Musical Fidelity KW500.

[boomac]

----------------

On 8/8/2005 10:56:35 PM Allan Songer wrote:

Wahoo 'aint a Joe Henderson album any more than Song For My Father is. That's like saying "Up at Minton's Vol 2" is your favorite Grant Green record!

Come on, guys!

----------------

Gary - I think we stepped on our gazooks! I hope he doesn't give us detention!

Allan - You're right, of course, but you have to admit that Joe is fantastic on both those LPs.

[3dzapper]

"Most of us have experimented with spl meters. I was quite amazed that when listening to music at average levels around 95 db, and then resetting the spl meter to peak read, I was hitting peaks around 103 to 105 db."

Congradulations Edwin, you hit ONE WATT on the peaks!!!!!

"The doesn't mean to say that lower powered amplifiers can't work. I just can't see how 3.5 watts can give you that headroom, especially in moderate to large rooms."

You have answered your own question.

No matter the topology, the warmth of SET that some would call distortion, or the drive of SS, which others would call harsh, If YOU enjoy it, it's good. I am fortunate enough to have most of the bases covered.

Personally, if I were limited to a single amp I would opt for a push pull 2A3 amp like PWK's Brooke or my Wrights. 10 to 20 Watts is plenty for MOST music.

Headbangers may need 200.

Rick

[Trey Cannon]

This shows how much I look at this stuff now days....

I am standing on both sides of the fence.

We do not place min power rattings on klipsch speakers.

Use whatever amp you want.

We test all day with 2.83 volts. (1 watt) the speakers can be heard and full bandwidth will be covered.

With todays amps, you can use a 2-3 watt per ch. amp and enjoy full and "loud" music.

On the other hand....I agree that the factor of 5 rule should be used. If you want 1 watt to your speaker, give it 5 watts in the amp. if you want 100 watts at your speaker, give it 500 watts.

If you read between the lines in the DFH and marketing pages you will see that Klipsch as well as other speaker makers were and still have problems with folks blowing tweeters from using small amps and turning them up past the point of clean output.

So to help save the CO. money and problems with "user error" they suggested not using a amp below 20 WPC.

This is not a "do not use amps below 20 WPC with our speakers" statement .

THIS IS A ...HEY DUMMY, QUIT BLOWING UP YOUR SPEAKERS BY OVERDRIVING YOUR LOW POWER AMP. statement.

Jazman, we all know that Paul "rubbs you and other the wrong way" .

BUT, you both are right here.

When you toss my name around, let me know.

I in no way know more than PWK, but I do know where the marketing is coming from. ( well sometimes.)

[Parrot]

----------------

On 8/9/2005 6:56:18 AM 3dzapper wrote:

Congradulations Edwin, you hit ONE WATT on the peaks!!!!!

----------------

No, one watt is not going to yield 103-105dB for music.

As far as I know, Klipsch measures their speakers (one at a time only) in their anechoic chamber and uses a single frequency, maybe 1KHz. (Trey can correct this if it's wrong.) That's definitely not your typical room, and not your typical source! There is no impedance dip taken into account as you'd have to be aware of when using many tube amp designs.

The result is very useful in comparison to other speakers, which will average around 88db/W/meter. 104 dB/W/meter is astounding compared to 88! But it is not meant to imply that one should use a 1W amplifier in his home with music and think that is all he'll ever need to get good clean full-spectrum sound with peaks up to 103-105dB. No way!

There's quite a lot being misconstrued in some posts here. First, no one ever said that someone else can't listen to whatever he wants. It's your money, your ears, your time, your home. I've always advocated hearing all the different amps that you can.

There's also the erroneous proposition that a 10W amp, or 12, or 15, is pretty close to a low-watt SET amp, when actually it's much closer to the 20W recommendation.

Daddy Dee, in another thread, is describing the new pleasure he's finding in Dynaco Mark IIIs. It's a nice read.

[Petrol]

----------------

On 8/8/2005 7:28:51 PM Parrot wrote:

Keep in mind: Jazman started a deliberately provocative thread, one might call it trolling, in which he went out of his way to attack me.

---------------------------------------------------------

In Referance to the above,

--------------------------------------------

jazzman posted:

There is nothing provocative about my thread

_____________________________________________

WTF, over?

jazzman, Even this newbie can easily see from the first sentance of your first post that this thread was pretty much completely launched as an attack . . . and I wonder why.

1. Is it so bad that Parrot considers it folly to place your sound system on a 3 WATT Amp foundation?

er, excuse me, I have no idea What a SET amp is let alone it's power rating...is it 3.5 WATTS? Is that per channel?

2. While I agree that PWK designed, built and marketed great speakers, what does this whole argument have to do with him?

2a. How long ago was "The Dope from Hope" published?

2b. Is it not paper rather then stone upon which it is published?

Back when PWK wrote "Dope", the early days of the trend toward high powered solid state amps, and marketed his speakers based partly on their ability to play loud and clearly with 'modest' amounts of power, they (SS amps) may have well been crap, but the tech has come a long way. I know I risk charges of blasphamy (excuse me, I'm no spelling bee) but it seems to me that he is dead, yet if he were still alive and active in the industry today, would those old 'opinions' remain today?

[fini]

Petrol,

This conflict has been going on way longer than the 2 months you've been here. Don't try to figure it out unless you've got all week to research the archives.

Wow, 6 pages, and 152 replies in 18 hours! Is that a new record? I'd better scan the archives...

[Daddy Dee]

Fini is right. I've just come to accept it as one of those force of nature things.

It's o.k. just requires some caution. Like operating an electric fan near a sack of $***.

[Petrol]

fini & Daddy D,

Thanks for the heads up guys . . .

while I was shocked at how nasty it was getting, I was at the same time hoping to be able to mine a little wisdom out of the incredible pile of debri.

uh, no...that's a lie.

I was infact feel like I was caught staring at a train wreck in progress and couldn't turn away in time to avoid the derailment

[Duke Spinner]

----------------

On 8/8/2005 2:10:41 PM jazman wrote:

I can produce chest pounding bass with my 3.5 wpc 2A3 SET

----------------

the Chest Pounding Bass that i expect at home, comes from the following formula :

Crown K-2

JBL 4430

= ..Much Thump.............

[Speedball]

Hey Jazz old buddy,

You sure have a thing for NOSvalves and his retro gear and mentioning "that" off topic subject when you post is getting a bit old.

.....and you will be the buddy until I say otherwise, have a nice day!

[Speedball]

Duke,

I'd love to hear a K2 & tube Preamp with my RF7's.

[Woodog]

----------------

On 8/9/2005 1:23:09 AM Daddy Dee wrote:

Woodog,

That is an interesting observation. Of course, once you hear SET you will either like it or you won't like it.

The thing that seems too tough about it.... is that if you are one of the persons who doesn't like it....

you will be forever compelled to not want any one else to like it either

With some seasoning, though, you will realize that you don't have to get into an argument every time you hear someone say the sky is not blue.

----------------

Goodness! The world is full of flavors, colors, sensations, etc. I would never ever begrudge someone because they happen to enjoy lime sherbert. In fact, while declining it myself, I would wish them never ending gallons of the stuff!

Woo

[Daddy Dee]

You're a good man, Woo.

[Painful Reality]

----------------

On 8/8/2005 10:29:22 PM NOSValves wrote:

In fact almost all SET design's sold and marketed today are indeed nock off's from the stone ages of audio! Tube audio designers gave up on the topolgy after the 1940's. Hmmmmmm I wonder why

----------------

Ahh this SET vs ... thing.

It's a sport that soon will be as popular as NHL hockey!

Just a correction about your assertion between two diapers change. SET amps were actually NEVER a mainstream thing, even in the stone ages of audio. While the first amp was probably a SET, the second was certainly a PP. Actually the first PP amp date back from 1915 (invented by a certain Mr. Colpitts). To build "powerful 1W amps" a PP circuit was needed since medium power triodes (like a 300B) was not available yet.

The only mainstream SET amp for hi-fi usein the stone age of audio is the Loftin-White amp. This amp used a direct coupled 50 tube (quite similar to a 300B). Other that, the popularity of SET amps had to wait until the late 60, early 70, mostly due to japanese enthusiasts. The only other SET amp that was HUGELY used was teh Western Electric 91A (first issued around 1933). But it's use was restrained to theater since Western Electric did not sell this amp but leased it instead to theaters.

Therefore there is not many knock-off in commercial SET designs. Lots of DIY clones of the WE91A though, a little less for the Loftin-White. Most "knock-offs" would be from amps build by a japanese designer, Dr. Assanno who wrote two books on SET amps (I think in the 70ies).