"Headroom" - what does it sound like to you?

[meagain]

Another thing, Meagain. It is a little incomplete on your part to say you know your system sounds as good as it will with a high powered, clean amp. How are you capable of saying, despite those musically-trained ears, that A sounds as good a B, when you've never heard B?

I have never, not even remotely, said that the khorns sounds as good as with any other amp. High powered or otherwise. Didn't happen. Didn't say it. All I'm saying is we don't hear any loss of anything when turned loud. It just sounds louder. Period. That's a fact. We do not hear any of the things you insist is happening. Now you say it's there & we just don't hear it which is facinating really. And easy in a spirited discussion as it leaves an open end. But stating we are missing something & don't know it.... That is NOT a fact. Because you're not here. Hence, it's mere assumption on your part. Can you send me data that proves bad things are happening with my amp in my room when I crank it? No. Thus mere assumption & speculation.

About the locksmith story? You just proved my point. Unless I'd been in the home or lived in the building - I would have checked for the backdoor no matter what cr*pola was floating around in my brain to think it didn't exist. And checked on short order. Despite BELIEVEING it didn't exist. You assumed none and made it a fact in your head. Not a good thing. Actually, kinda sounds like a pig-headed thing to do.

Meagain - Out

[ben.]

Meagain, if you want to socialize a bit with some nuts into horns and all kinds of gear, look into a loosely organized group called "Chicago Horn Lovers" or something. There's some real DIY nuts that might be fun to meet. Occasional Klipschie TBrennan is in with that crowd, among others.

[MrMcGoo]

I'm usually labeled as being in the louder is better camp. But.... I usually listen at a tenth of a watt or less for steady state listening to movies and music. Thirty decibel transients are routine in action movies by design. A particularly intense DTS movie may have transients that approach 40 decibels. This means that from a tenth of a watt, I may need from 100 watts for a 30 decibel transient (1,000 x .1 watt = 100 watts) to 1000 watts for a 40 decibel transient (10,000 x .1 watt = 1,000 watts.) During such transients I hear very little other than the big bang or roar intended by the director.

My number one objective in owning a big amp is to not clip my speakers while producing good sound. An excellent benefit that rides along with the big amp is the ability to drive the 2.8 ohm minimum impedance of the RF-7s. Nor does frequency response of my speakers suffer as impedance varies with frequency.

What harm does the big amp do other than irritate members of this forum??? It does not produce audible noise or distortion in the first watt, waste much electricity (45 watts at idle) or produce excessive heat. Yet people think I'm nuts. Well, it takes all kinds.

Bill

[ben.]

I'm usually labeled as being in the louder is better camp.

You don't say...

But.... I usually listen at a tenth of a watt or less for steady state listening to movies and music. Thirty decibel transients are routine in action movies by design. A particularly intense DTS movie may have transients that approach 40 decibels. This means that from a tenth of a watt, I may need from 100 watts for a 30 decibel transient (1,000 x .1 watt = 100 watts) to 1000 watts for a 40 decibel transient (10,000 x .1 watt = 1,000 watts.)

Sooo... 1KW through one RF-7 from about a yard away in a free space anechoic environment is... (taptaptap on da calcaluting thing) roughly 130dBSPL. Adjustments for such things as room gain, more than one speaker, distance from the speaker will affect the accuracy of the calclamations, but others can figger the minutae for me if they like. It should suffice, though, that the transients in the example above would cause damage, pain, and possibly loss of taste (musical or otherwise) regardless of their definitively transitory nature.

During such transients I hear very little other than the big bang or roar intended by the director.

I'm sure.

My number one objective in owning a big amp is to not clip my speakers while producing good sound. An excellent benefit that rides along with the big amp is the ability to drive the 2.8 ohm minimum impedance of the RF-7s. Nor does frequency response of my speakers suffer as impedance varies with frequency.

That's certainly something.

What harm does the big amp do other than irritate members of this forum???

None, but the insistence of some that those who have tried high power amps and favor other choices are "missing something" is a bit ludicrous, especially when supported by such weak arguments as "Well, I listen to loud movies, so you should get a big amp."

It does not produce audible noise or distortion in the first watt,

No? Oh, right - audible... That comes down to relativity, I guess...

...waste much electricity (45 watts at idle) or produce excessive heat.

Too bad, up here I could use a good space heater this time of year.

Yet people think I'm nuts. Well, it takes all kinds.

Bill

That it does.

[DrWho]

For the record, hearing damage is a product of time exposed to certain levels....even 100dB can cause permanent hearing damage if you listen for more than 1 hour straight or something like that. I believe 110dB is 30 minutes, 120dB is 10 minutes, and 130dB is like 2 minutes. You would have to be listening at levels loud enough to perforate an ear drum to cause 'instant' damage....But don't quote me on these numbers - my text book is back at campus and I'm too lazy to search for the real numbers online []

A lot of very fast short peaks aren't very audible - though in a typical home acoustical environment the reverberation of the room makes them moreso. However, when one of these inaudible peaks clip, then it becomes very audible (and that's when tweeters tend to go up in smoke).

Btw, there is also nothing wrong with running lower powered amps and being satisfied with them....but we can definetly calculate the loudest those systems will ever go [] And then it becomes a discussion of the specific music being listened to - seeing if the system can or can't reproduce the information stored on the medium.

[MrMcGoo]

ben,

When have I even implied that because I listen to movies (which can be quite loud) OTHERS should buy a big amp????? A big amp is needed only by folks that may listen to big transients for whatever reason. Folks that listen to chamber music on their Khorns at moderate levels clearly do not need a big amp.

Do you think that it is a pure accident or marketing nonsense that Klipsch put the peak power of the RF-7s at 1,000 watts? It may be that it was accidental, but I doubt it.

As far as the transients are concerned, they are split between the sub and the full frequency array. The other side of that coin is that the explosion may come on a single channel or several. In any case, the big explosions that sometimes surprise me are so loud the wife thinks something very big just hit the house. And all of this comes from a steady state of a tenth of a watt or less.

Bill

[DrWho]

Doc wrote "Sure, the analog sounds better but the CD is a better medium...".

I listen to what sounds better.

Me too [H]

Btw, the reason 2" tape sounds better is because its own natural distortion has a pleasant sound to it. And there is nothing stopping anyone from creating this distortion and then storing it on a CD (and then you don't have to worry about the damage inflicted by listening to the music). []

[AnalOg]

Max wrote:

"Since when do we measure speaker quality by how loud they can go (dynamics in tact or otherwise)? "

Who said anything about measuring the quality of speakers by how loud they can go?

"What would the point be for anyone listening at sane levels - say 85 dB RMS in having anything approaching 400 wpc with a speaker with 104 db/w/m sensitivity and a maximum continuous rating of 100 wpc?"

The point that is being made which I entirely agree with is the higher wattage available the Higher SPL's can be accomplished keeping the dynamics intact.

You ever listen to a really bad stereo system or HT in a box system, I have, my friends & family buy these $300.00 HT systems and ask me to set them up. At 85 dbs. it gives my ears pain in a way that I would perceive it's to loud, on the other hand my systems both HT & 2 channel at 85 dbs. are not fatiguing what so ever. The HT system above say 95 dbs. starts to strain, that is why I'm lusting for more wattage so I can turn it up further without it exhibiting that compression issue that was being discussed earlier in this thread. Mind you I'm only experiencing this with my HT system, I have no issues with dynamics in my 2 channel setup.

Tom

[DrWho]

The HT system above say 95 dbs. starts to strain, that is why I'm lusting for more wattage so I can turn it up further without it exhibiting that compression issue that was being discussed earlier in this thread...

It's crazy but the first time I had my Chorus II's hooked up to a thousand watts I had no clue how loud it was because it was just so clean at those levels. After one song of pure sonic bliss I pulled out the SPL meter and noted I was listening at 100dB (A weighted slow). Sure I thought it was loud, but not 100dB loud. Hearing damage would still occur at these levels so when cranking it I leave an SPL by my side, but since it's so clean it's still enjoyable. But in a way, I kinda missed the power compression because it helps fatten up the sound - and with the Chorus II's and my source material, I just need that extra 2dB below 100Hz - which I can't seem to get because my reciever's LFE out isn't strong enough to drive the input impedance on my pro amp powering the subs (so everything max'ed out all the way results in that same annoying flat response) []

Oh wait, I almost forgot..."I like my super flat response" []

[AnalOg]

The HT system above say 95 dbs. starts to strain, that is why I'm lusting for more wattage so I can turn it up further without it exhibiting that compression issue that was being discussed earlier in this thread...

It's crazy but the first time I had my Chorus II's hooked up to a thousand watts I had no clue how loud it was because it was just so clean at those levels. After one song of pure sonic bliss I pulled out the SPL meter and noted I was listening at 100dB (A weighted slow). Sure I thought it was loud, but not 100dB loud. Hearing damage would still occur at these levels so when cranking it I leave an SPL by my side, but since it's so clean it's still enjoyable. But in a way, I kinda missed the power compression because it helps fatten up the sound - and with the Chorus II's and my source material, I just need that extra 2dB below 100Hz - which I can't seem to get because my reciever's LFE out isn't strong enough to drive the input impedance on my pro amp powering the subs (so everything max'ed out all the way results in that same annoying flat response) []

Oh wait, I almost forgot..."I like my super flat response" []

Dr. Who,

You Hit it on the nose also, that's what I'm talking about!

Tom

[Allan Songer]

What on earth do you guys LISTEN to at these volumes? I am NOT talking about movies (I don't and will NEVER have a Home Theater)--I mean 2-channel music.

[DrWho]

My favorite album is "Once" by Nightwish:

http://www.nightwish.com/

They've got some sample mp3's for you to try out...

[sunburnwilly]

My gosh Allan , What Are You Listening To ? And why the Disdain for Home Theater ? " My system sounds better than any commercial theater around here , I'll put money on it "

[MrMcGoo]

If folks actually did listen at the alleged high volume levels on a sustained basis for very long, they would be not only deaf, but they would have tinnitus as well.

[sunburnwilly]

What ? He He []

[DrWho]

If folks actually did listen at the alleged high volume levels on a sustained basis for very long, they would be not only deaf, but they would have tinnitus as well.

Good thing me parents taught me moderation...my ears test out perfect. [] I can't hear very well above 20kHz anymore, but that's prob an age thing.

[mikebse2a3]

Good Advise in 1977 and 2005

[mikebse2a3]

2nd page

[DrWho]

So add another 10dB of dynamic range and multiply all those levels by 10 []

(for a total of 20dB above the average).

[mobile homeless]

Lordy, Tom...Amazing. Hit it on the nose? Hmmm...It's like almost being on a different page, in my view.

I have heard so few 300-600w solid state amplifiers that I thought did the music justice, it's almost tragic. I have NEVER heard a 1000w amplifier worth a Sh*t in most things important. I dont know what criteria you are using but most of these specimens, including some heavy hitters, have trouble with microdynamics and the more sublime, subtle shading. Some of the high power amps DO ok with macrodynamics but sometimes at the expense of the micro level and with suffering in the tone/timbre, harmonic richness department. They dont do subtle shading well; musicality and nuance suffers.

I am really wondering what the people here are used to hearing and comparing, gear wise, this in their home. Looking at the amplifier that Dr. Who is currently using, I personally cant imagine how this is coming about. We might just be on a whole different experience level here. Only the very BEST high power solid state amps get this right, and in my view, most of them fall short. The fine gradiations of the dynamics are something not always brought to fruit with high power amplifiers. Indeed, in my experience, it's MUCH harder to make a quality high power amplifier that does all the things right.

The last high power SS amplifers that I had were higher quality amplifiers than listed by most of the SS users in this thread. They were B&K Sonata Series M-200 Monoblocks, which would sonically smoke the Crown listed. They were 200Wpc into 8ohms and 400Wpc rated into 4ohms. Frequency Response was 1-45kHz and amperage peak to peak was @150. SN ratio was over 95dB A Weighted (I personally am not into specs because of the lack of always corresponding to listening impressions, this noted over the years). The amps were actually rebiased at the factory to run 100w in Class A. They were hot running beasts. Remember, as Monoblocks, they had separate dedicated power supplies and were actually run off two different circuits in my home. These amps had excellent top to bottom coherency and were tight, quick, and detailed while still being musical. They could also has some impressive slam factor.

They went on the chopping block after being in and out of various systems in my house when both my vintage PP tube and 3.5w 2A3 SET amps sounded more musical, more realistic, and amazingly enough, revealed more dynamic contrasts in the Micro region. My tweaked 14w PP EL-84 amp was actually more OPEN and let go of the notes with more ease. The B&Ks pushing something like My Bloody Valentine at 110dB via my ProAc speakers was a ball and impressed many. But my EL-34 PP gave the recordings more life and vitality.

Personally, I think we are on different pages here with different experiences and reference points, not to mention different criteria for what constitutes quality sonics from top to bottom.

kh

ps - On the Home Theater front, I dont mix the two. I have not heard a home theater system do music anywhere near the capability of my dedicated music system(s). It's a whole different ballgame. On another note, I put the Watts ratings of the B&K in bold since most evidently dont read more than a few words per paragraph.