You don't need close to 200wpc

Jstas

LuSh wrote: »

Most (not all) high wattage believers I've come across diverse themselves in the Home Theater realm which is almost entirely based on numbers, features and specifications (don't get me started about ACD) and very little about sound.

Well that makes sense 'cause HT is more about dynamics than sound quality. I mean, SQ plays a big part but you don't need to make sure you can cover the sound of the Death Star gettin' all blowed up or Sauron gettin' his finger cut off in 2-channel music rigs. To be able to handle those audio peaks, you need overhead and the only way to get that is serious power levels. It doesn't even need to be massive power levels. You can get away with an amp rated at, say, 60W per channel over 7 channels and it'll reach all the peaks you'll likely need it to. But if you look at those kinds of amps, you'll notice that the better amps are heavy as hell. Mostly because of the MASSIVE coil of copper in the toroidal transformer in the center of the component.

A big transformer may only be rated at a certain level but the size matters because of things like heat dissipation and magnetic field strength to tame interference levels and cut down on feedback between the signal path and amplification paths. So yeah, for HT, unless you're in a small room or you have VERY efficient speakers, big power is the name of the game.

dkg999

If'n you'all would just hop on the pro-gear bandwagon you would get mega-watt-per-channel power with great sound quality :eek:

Just say'in :rolleyes:

cfrizz

Ricardo wrote: »

Those Gallos are really easy to drive.

Where is Cathy?

I'm here Ricardo.

H9, while I understand what you are saying, the fact is, that you have gone through a lot of amps to find your ideal amp & that's great if someone is interested in doing so.

However, I approach this hobby from a very different direction & with a different purpose in mind.

I want a very good sounding rig that operates to its full potential. It must serve as both a 2 channel & a HT rig.

While a lower power amp may be just fine in a smaller room with only 2 channels, I think it is impractical to ask that amp to drive 5-7 speakers & expect it to sound good.

I don't assume anyone who comes on here asking for help especially for an amp is specifically talking about just 2 channels. Like it or not, HT rules these days in the majority of homes, and if you want it to sound its best & operate to its full potential for years to come then the most efficient & economical way to do that is to get a powerful amp to drive all the speakers.

And lets be honest, those few "quality" watts are going to cost quality money. I looked at that article and at the bottom with the listed gear the price of the "affordable" amp he reviewed is: " $2,500 for F3."

Even if you got it used you are still talking big money. For that money you can buy a higher powered 5 channel amp and still be very happy.

Those of us willing to spend that kind of money are very few.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm not misleading anyone, I'm simply trying to ensure that they have a system that they will be happy with for years to come.

I've had 50, 110, 205, & 405wpc amps all have driven the same almost 21 year old Polk RTA-8T. I didn't hear them play to their full potential until I got the 205wpc Parasound. Hearing is believing, and I'm simply not interested in going back to experiment to see if I can hopefully find another lower powered amp that will operate my Polks to their full potential.

If it's not broke, I'm not going to try to "fix it".

madmax

I like both my Transcendent 1.5wpc and my Manley 200wpc on the efficient horns. Depends on the speaker and what you want it to do. 30 watts on a pair of SDA's just doesn't impress me.
madmax

Jstas

heiney9 wrote: »

You guys commenting about getting tubes in the mix realize this isn't a tube amp, right? It's a 15wpc JFET amp that puts out 10wpc @ 4ohms. It's OK to talk tubes and tube experiences but from some of the comments about wanting tubes, I get the impression you think I'm talking about tubes in this particular thread.

Tubes are good and they are low powered and do a great job as well.

Carry on

H9

I don't think people are commenting on tubes as much because they like them but more because of affordable power.

You keep mentioning Pass. I like his designs because, like Henry Kloss (KLH, Advent, AR, Cambridge Soundworks, Tivoli) had the same simple philosophy. As a result much of his work still stands up today as milestones and benchmarks and even "gear everyone should own at least once".

Nowadays though, everything is complicated. Solid state is affordable in big power. So they make the mass-market gear in big power. A 200 watt per channel amp will run you less than a grand for even some of the nicer stuff. To get a GOOD 30 watt per channel amp now, several grand. Whether you think the more power for less money is the better value or your pocketbook just can't handle the better amp's bigger price tag, the market drifts to that lower price point and bigger power.

If anything, the SS circuitry and designs have become much more efficient and can now easily produce massive power numbers for low cost. That's a good thing! At the same time, it causes the majority of those "in the hobby" to see big power flagship models of stuff and that's what they aspire to 'cause that's what they can afford. Especially since at that price range, many of the lower power alternates are quite honestly, junk.

So what to do if one wants small power in a simple design with high quality? Well, tubes. They are almost always simpler circuits because they are analog amplifiers. There is nothing digital about them. They are cheaper because not only is the technology old, well-established and highly refined in quality and manufacturing processes but it's simple as well. Simple is cheaper because it usually has less parts and less need for high precision tolerances which drive up costs. Lower the number of parts and you lower the overall price. You can make such a difference that you can actually use high quality, more expensive parts and still be at a very attractive price point.

So when people at the level that the majority of the hobby is at start thinking small power, big sound, they immediately go to tubes.

Understandably so. The tube amp I had at PF costs $200 for the complete kit. Add $50 and they'll include matched tubes. The design is insanely simple and if one takes their time putting it together with quality connections, they end up with a giant killer. Easily. I ran it with a set of KLH's. You should hear that amp make Totem Rainmakers sing! 8 watts per channel, baby! All day long!

Find me an 8W per channel stereo amp that is solid state for $250 that isn't a pile of poo or used equipment. It's hard. I've looked.

That's the nice thing about tubes, lotsa bang for your buck! They are also an eye opening experience for many people because of the big power mantras that float around everywhere. Those small tube amps change perceptions and they are a stepping stone to exactly what you are posting about with this thread.

Not to say you're bagging on them, just a different perspective, ya know?

heiney9

John, I love tubes about as much as anyone and I know exactly of what you speak. It just seemed a few people were responding to the article link like I was referring specifically to tubes, this time I wasn't.

I'm a toob head and a huge Pass head, that is for sure.

Cathy, you and I have been here a long time and I get your perspective and in a few instances I agree with some of your thoughts. Just putting another perspective out there for discussion and so far there has been some great discussion. My perspective within this hobby has shifted and I couldn't be happier. I am constantly in my own little audio nirvana. Both rigs give me all the audio pleasure I could want and equal amounts of HT pleasure as well. Even SDA 1C's with 30wpc can shake the foundation when the "Death Star" explodes......whudda thunk!

H9

jinjuku

dkg999 wrote: »

If'n you'all would just hop on the pro-gear bandwagon you would get mega-watt-per-channel power with great sound quality :eek:

Just say'in :rolleyes:

Funny you should say that....

From Chuck Witt at AVS (owns Bryston and Pass btw) on the Peavey IPR 1600:

I used the amplifer for a while in my bedroom system that uses a pair of Dayton 3 way floorstanding speakers with dual 8 inch woofers, 5 1/2" mid, and Seas H1212 tweeters. Over the years I have used many different amps in the bedroom (usually cast offs from the main system) such as Onkyo receivers, Bryston 3B-ST, Hafler DH-220 modified, and currently a Harmon Kardon AV receiver. I heard a much cleaner upper mid range/high range than I have heard with any other of the mentioned units.

If you scoff, you do it at your own loss. Keep painting everything with the same brush. Everything doesn't fit into the boxes like you'd think.

fishbones

Oh boy, here we go...

vstarkwell

I've been curious about this for awhile and am glad I found this thread, if you have a 70 wpc receiver (in my case Luxman R-115) are you really utilizing all 70 wpc?
Do the speakers determine how much wattage is sufficient? in this case they're hooked up to Monitor 10A's.

I hope this question makes sense.

TIA

zingo

I go back and forth with low and high power amps, but I always agree with Nelson Pass on his first watt philosophy. No matter the power output of your amp, make it have good sound quality, and from the first watt. This is especially important to me and my horns.

fishbones

zingo wrote: »

I go back and forth with low and high power amps, but I always agree with Nelson Pass on his first watt philosophy. No matter the power output of your amp, make it have good sound quality, and from the first watt. This is especially important to me and my horns.

Well said. Problem is that mid-fi manufacturers (even good ones) tend to build they're 200 watt amplifiers different than they build their 100 amplifiers. Like with B&K, who I like, most all of their 100 watt amps have 30-35 amps of current PtoP, whereas most of their 200 watt amps are over double that at 75 watts PtoP. This is different design, IMO. So, you have to know the build philosiphy of the manufacturer before jumping into a smaller wattage, IMO.

Erik Tracy

vstarkwell wrote: »

I've been curious about this for awhile and am glad I found this thread, if you have a 70 wpc receiver (in my case Luxman R-115) are you really utilizing all 70 wpc?
Do the speakers determine how much wattage is sufficient? in this case they're hooked up to Monitor 10A's.

I hope this question makes sense.

TIA

It depends.

Kinda like how often do you use up the gas in your car?

...depends...how far you drive each day...how fast you like to drive....freeway...city?

How loud do you like to listen to your music?

How far away do you sit?

What are the acoustics and system layout in your room?

What type of music do you like to listen to?

All of those factor in to how much power demand you put on your receiver.

ben62670

Just something to chew on. Most quality low wattage amps have transformers and capacitors of or near the same value of the big wattage amps. Can you say reserve and dynamics? I can

vstarkwell

Erik Tracy wrote: »

It depends.

How loud do you like to listen to your music?

How far away do you sit?

What are the acoustics and system layout in your room?

What type of music do you like to listen to?

All of those factor in to how much power demand you put on your receiver.

Thanks for the reply,

"How loud do you like to listen to your music?"

Thinking of a clock and vol starts at around 6? I rarely get the volume nob past 10.

"How far away do you sit?

About 11 & 1/2 away

"What are the acoustics and system layout in your room?"

Old house, smallish living room and it's just the receiver, Denon CDP or Wireless feed via airtunes from my Mac.

"What type of music do you like to listen to?"

Jazz Fusion (Stanley Clarke, Freddie Hubbard CTI years, Weather Report), Blues, Reggae, a lot of Dead I like the improvisational aspect less lyrics more instruments

bigaudiofanatic

I would be lying if I did not want to try a tube amp on my system. I am way to curious to hear how a 10 watt tube amp sounds.

thsmith

Could not agree more H9. I think most of the new people buying new Polks could learn from this.

Cry once or cry twice.

It took me about 3 tries but I am happy with my 50wpc.

pearsall001

I want quality with quantity. No baby amps for me...:biggrin:

headrott

I agree that lower powered (WPC) amps potentially sound just as good (or better) than high wattage amps. It has to do with design and parts quality. My 70WPC tube amp is just as dynamic and just has just as much bass slam as my 200WPC (conservatively rated) Aragon 8008bb. The bass on the Aragon is defiantely more tight though. Partially that has to do with the tubes though.

Design and parts quality plays a big role.

Greg

mhardy6647

Safe to say that Nelson Pass has never built, and also probably never designed, a "baby amp".

I find the J-FET amp designs to be very intriguing.

One of the great things about Nelson Pass is that he makes many of his designs, concepts, and schemes available in the public domain for DIY. This is a great resource to the community. Pete Millett and Bruce Rozenblit likewise are generous with their IP.

www.passdiy.com
www.pmillett.com
www.transcendentsound.com (Mostly Bruce's books; Transcendent is his for-profit venture)

indyhawg

bigaudiofanatic wrote: »

I would be lying if I did not want to try a tube amp on my system. I am way to curious to hear how a 10 watt tube amp sounds.

I am curious as well. A tube amp is at the top of my wish list for 2011.

heiney9

Funny how I commented and linked to a Solid State amp and everyone is talking tubes. I'd actually hoped people would read the 1 page article. I guess that's too much to expect.

Phil, I'm guessing you've never heard a top notch 1 or 2 gain stage single ended amp or you wouldn't have made that comment, even though I suspect it's mostly in the spirit of fun.

H9

H9

pearsall001

heiney9 wrote: »

Funny how I commented and linked to a Solid State amp and everyone is talking tubes. I'd actually hoped people would read the 1 page article. I guess that's too much to expect.

Phil, I'm guessing you've never heard a top notch 1 or 2 gain stage single ended amp or you wouldn't have made that comment, even though I suspect it's mostly in the spirit of fun.

H9

H9

Brock, I think we're looking at this from two different directions. Your talking two channel & I'm talking HT. Depending on the speakers the amps you refer to are quite suitable & can sound incredible...no argument from me there. I've heard plenty of low powered tube amps at Stephens place & I've always been very impressed. We even had my AAD's powered by one of Stephens 10watt beauties & it did the trick for two channel listening in a smallish room at moderate to pretty high volumn. It's a whole different ball game when it comes to HT. That's where my reference to quality & quanity comes into play. I could be wrong but I prefer some muscle to handle the demands for a good HT set up.

thsmith

I confess not reading the link before commenting.

I read the link and was surprise how our room size is similiar as well as listening levels.

I get that a 10 watt amp can drive 88db speakers to those levels. I think my 1Cs are 90 or 91 db efficient and would be interesting to hear in my room.

But I am plenty happy with the 50 wpc amp I have and gives me more headroom.

I have had a decent (IMO) 275 wpc amp but rarely went above 25 watts.

Quality is key in all aspects.

Anyway, thanks for the article H9.

With any speaker you need to work with the efficiency factor and your amp, I think.

heiney9

Ok you guys, I do keep thinking 2 channel music listening, not HT. So I see where you're coming from Phil and I can see a few of Cathy's points. Part of this thread was to show large quantities of power are rarely necessary. Part was just to get a different discussion going with many POV's and experiences.

Simplicity, highest quality parts and design ingenuity win everytime.

Good discussion so far and I am talking 2 channel not HT.

H9

nooshinjohn

bigaudiofanatic wrote: »

I would be lying if I did not want to try a tube amp on my system. I am way to curious to hear how a 10 watt tube amp sounds.

I am even more curious to hear how a 400 watt set of tubes sound.

While I do agree that it is not always about the watts in two channel, I feel that for HT is truly is all about the watts. I would love to try some (+-) 50 wpc with the SDA's and see what they sound like some day. The only reason for wanting big power from the set I am building is that they will be paired with Magnepans...

tonyb

Brock, when you say, "you don't need 200 watts ", your not comparing apples to apples. I believe Cathy stated her case very well. Most come here looking for advice on HT amps.
I did read the article, nothing really new there for me but others may take away something from it. Just too many variables go into what is needed to power your gear. The speakers, the room, SPL's you like, the amp itself, class A, A/B, D...and the quality of all. Too blanket of a statement to say 200 watts may not be needed. I do agree on the premiss of it, just that it only applies when the pieces of the puzzle fit.

Ricardo

Funny how different people feel different about things. I want good quality watts for my 2 channel. For my HT, I am perfectly happy with what the receiver puts out. I dear anyone to come listen and then say it doesn't sound good, dynamics are poor, etc.

To each its own (though I am right )

hoosier21

Ricardo wrote: »

Funny how different people feel different about things. I want good quality watts for my 2 channel. For my HT, I am perfectly happy with what the receiver puts out. I dear anyone to come listen and then say it doesn't sound good, dynamics are poor, etc.

To each its own (though I am right )

Same here

heiney9

Ricardo wrote: »

Funny how different people feel different about things. I want good quality watts for my 2 channel. For my HT, I am perfectly happy with what the receiver puts out. I dear anyone to come listen and then say it doesn't sound good, dynamics are poor, etc.

To each its own (though I am right )

I agree Ricardo, when I get the separate HT set up I'll be going with a nice receiver (middle of the line) and a nice sub and a set of TSi's. That's all you really need. My brother has a mid-line Denon and Polk TSi's with a mid-line Polk sub (not Micro-Pro) and it sounds fantastic for movies.

H9

ben62670

I had a 200wpc Sunfire TG and my 150wpc Adcom GFA-7500 beat it in every way. HT and music.