How can you listen to anything under 200 watt per chnl?

In my living room i now have 230WPC amps before i use to listen to alot of amp/speakers beovox beolab Rotel Yamaha beomaster etc now I look back and think how could I have been an audiophile listening to 30WPC? At that level its all treble and background sounds missing.

Now my Yama P2201 is 230WPC it is room filling vocals, room filling bass guitar full strong midrange can hear alot of intruments in the background speakers are Pioneer HPM 110.
«13

Answers

  • FestYboyFestYboy Posts: 2,972
    Get more efficient speakers and all you need is 10w of high current power to drive you out of the room... I also suspect your room is fighting your speakers...
  • mlistens03mlistens03 Posts: 2,322
    FestYboy’s comment in another thread, regarding my Lafayette receiver and Crown amplifier. :)
    FestYboy wrote: »
    Justin, you need to get your learn on... That Lafayette, may be rated at "only" 22 watts, but it has headroom... and more than the crown (comparatively). So let's do the math: you have a pair of speakers rated at 90 dB/w/m. So at typical listening distance (calling it 9' for ease of math), the pair will net about 88 dB at the listening position. Given this, for every doubling of power, you net 3dB of gain. So, 2 watts comes to 91, 4 = 94, 8 = 97, 16 = 100. So as you can see, the Lafayette can only reach about 102 dB if you go with their rated power (this isn't true, but stick with me here). In order to double the output of the Lafayette, you need to gain another 10 dB (112 dB total output), the amp needs to put out approximately 210 Watts. Keep in mind, 102 db is loud, 112 dB is typical concert levels. This will also get the police called on you for disturbing the peace...

    My point is: you don't need the power you think you need, and you don't use the power the amp is capable of except through transiants. And to answer the first question, going from a 120w amp to a 300w amp will only gain you 3.5dB... which is nothing.

    Micah

    Main system: Technics SL3200, Shure M97xE, Lafayette LR1100 for tuner, Hagerman Audio Labs Bugle 2 phono stage, NAD C352 integrated, Boston Acoustics VR 2, Boston PV500, generic ICs, and BJC Belden speaker cables.

    Desktop: Dell Precision 690 running iTunes, Yamaha RX-v665, Monitor Audio R90s, Velodyne VA-907, generic ICs and speaker cables.
    I've always thought the goal of high-end audio was not to have your neighbors bang on the wall and say, 'Turn that darn music down' but to have your neighbors bang on the wall and say, 'Tell your friends to go home and you can practice later this week'.
  • kharp1kharp1 Posts: 2,582
    I've heard a couple of watts fill a room. Perhaps you're doing something wrong.
    Main System:
    Joule-Electra LA 100 MKIII
    Pass Labs Aleph 30, McCormack DNA-125, Parasound A21
    Marantz SA-14S1
    Usher CP-6311/Tyler Acoustics Taylo Reference Monitor, LSA-1
    Dual SVS SB2000
    Wireworld Equinox 7 bi-wire, Wireworld Silver Eclipse 7 IC

    Secondary Rig:
    Parasound P5, Audio Electronics by Cary Constellation
    Marsh a200s, Audio Elecrtonics by Cary Hercules
    Pioneer Elite DV-45a, Denon DVD-2910
    Klipsch Epic CF-1, Vandersteen 3CE sig
    Analysus Plus Oval

  • mhardy6647mhardy6647 Posts: 19,542
    If one has loudspeakers with triple digit sensitivity (i.e., > 100 dB SPL per watt at 1 meter), it might be easy. Depends on the nature of the loudspeaker load, though (to wit, mostly the impedance curve).

    3.5 watts per channel at my house using loudspeakers with ca. 100 dB per watt @ 1 meter sensitivity. No complaints.


    27138816799_f36a6e03d9_h.jpgDSC_9976 (3) by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

    Most consumer & "audiophile" loudspeakers today tend to have low sensitivities. For example 20 dB lower sensitivity would mean that one hundred times as much power is required to drive a loudspeaker to the same SPL output. Realistically, many loudspeakers today are. ca. 85 dB sensitivity; 3.5 watts into 100 dB speakers, in terms of sheer SPL, would equate to about 111 watts into 85 dB speakers.

  • motorstereomotorstereo Posts: 852
    I've used a 10 wpc t-amp on my 105db efficient klipschorns and that combination will get loud enough to drive you right out of the room. At the other end of the spectrum I also use 1200 wpc monoblocks on my 92db efficient Polk speakers and that combination won't drive you out of the room but they will get your toes tapping with 120 watts showing on the meters. 2 totally different systems and both enjoyable.
  • g7traderg7trader Posts: 39
    I've used a 10 wpc t-amp on my 105db efficient klipschorns and that combination will get loud enough to drive you right out of the room. At the other end of the spectrum I also use 1200 wpc monoblocks on my 92db efficient Polk speakers and that combination won't drive you out of the room but they will get your toes tapping with 120 watts showing on the meters. 2 totally different systems and both enjoyable.

    But does the 10wpc system sound weak and trebly where as the other 1200wpc sounds bassy and warm full of midrange?
  • treitz3treitz3 Posts: 12,524
    No. There is wattage and then there is current.

    Tom
    In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence.

    The best way to enjoy digital music reproduction is to never listen to good analogue reproduction.
  • tonybtonyb Posts: 30,161
    edited October 2
    g7trader wrote: »
    I've used a 10 wpc t-amp on my 105db efficient klipschorns and that combination will get loud enough to drive you right out of the room. At the other end of the spectrum I also use 1200 wpc monoblocks on my 92db efficient Polk speakers and that combination won't drive you out of the room but they will get your toes tapping with 120 watts showing on the meters. 2 totally different systems and both enjoyable.

    But does the 10wpc system sound weak and trebly where as the other 1200wpc sounds bassy and warm full of midrange?

    Nope, just a matter of matching amps to speakers. Some speakers require a heavier dose of current, some don't, to reach the same loudness.

    Should also add, it depends too on the type of music one listens to. Music with faster transients need some more power to reproduce to make it believable and life size.
    Post edited by tonyb on
    HT SYSTEM-2 channel
    Sony 850c 4k
    Pioneer elite vhx 21
    Sony 4k BRP
    SVS SB-2000
    Dynaudio Audience 72
    Polk FX500 surrounds
    Cary xciter dac
    Cullen modded Sonos
    Joule la-100 pre
    B&k Ref 4420 amp

    Cables-
    Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
    Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
    Analysis plus crystal oval ic's
    Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
    Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable

    Kitchen

    Sonos zp90
    B&k 1430
    Tad 803 speakers
  • motorstereomotorstereo Posts: 852
    But does the 10wpc system sound weak and trebly where as the other 1200wpc sounds bassy and warm full of midrange?[/quote]

    Tonyb answered the question very well. In my case I greatly prefer the Polks over the Khorns mainly because I find horns and long term listening not to my liking.

  • mhardy6647mhardy6647 Posts: 19,542
    It's not just about current capability, though -- current capability of a power amplifier will be a key factor for amplifiers with brutal impedance curves... in particular those with dips to extremely low impedance, and especially when those dips occur in a frequency range that corresponds to significant amounts of the signal.

    There was a time when loudspeakers were designed to be acoustically sensitive and electrically efficient (efficiency is the measure of the percentage of electrical power delivered to the speaker which is transduced to acoustic output power). In those days, power was expensive. Now, it is cheap, and the philosophy of loudspeaker design reflects that reality (for better or for worse).

    The development of the acoustic suspension "alignment" by Villchur/Acoustic Research in the 1950s was, arguably, the driver for the popularity of low sensitivty loudspeakers. In the case of the classic AR loudspeakers, the Devil's bargain was to give up gobs of sensitivity (and thus amplifier compatibility, in those days) to get good LF performance (qualitatively and quantitatively) in a small (by the standards of that time) package.

    But I digress...

    :|
  • JstasJstas Posts: 13,688
    My hand built 8W x 2 11BM8 powered tube amp and a set of Klipsch Heresys beg to differ....loudly. Very loudly.
    You're just jealous 'cause the voices don't talk to you!
  • mhardy6647mhardy6647 Posts: 19,542
    edited October 2
    Heresys are very sensitive and very easy to drive :)

    They're also not exactly paragons of low frequency extension, though (nor are my Altecs,
    despite being in much, much larger enclosures).

    For the OP's benefit (if he or she is still hangin' around this thread), there's a fairly unavoidable loudspeaker design concept that's widely referred to as Hoffman's Iron Law.

    1) Bass Extension

    2) High Sensitivity

    3) Small Enclosure

    You can have any pair of those parameters in any given loudspeaker design -- but you cannot have all three.
  • JstasJstas Posts: 13,688
    I dunno, my Heresys dig deep enough me.

    They're Heresy II's, though and they have revised crossover and driver designs from the original.
    You're just jealous 'cause the voices don't talk to you!
  • mhardy6647mhardy6647 Posts: 19,542
    I couldn't find a "published" frequency response curve for any of the Heresy morphs, but this one, for a Hersey 2, looks roughly "right":

    z39kmppv4xsf.png

    source: http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?4624-Will-cane-grill-cloth-block-highs/page2

    The use of a senstive woofer with accordion suspension in a small close enclosure (technicaly, I think, an infinite baffle) limits the LF extension.
  • mhardy6647mhardy6647 Posts: 19,542
    edited October 2
    Yes the newer ones are better than the earlier ones -- and there's nothing at all wrong with what Heresys do... but there is a price paid for their size and sensitivity compared, to, say, the Cornwalls. The latter are ahem rather larger, with concommitant extension in bass output at lower frequencies.

    I had a pair of Cornwalls for a decade... used mostly with single-ended 2A3 amplification (ca. 3.5 watts per channel; same kind of amplifier I currently use with "FrankenAltecs").


  • kharp1kharp1 Posts: 2,582
    Anyone that was in the Volti room when Greg bumped the volume from a scant couple of watts to maybe 20 or 30 watts (think he was running a 35-40 watt Raven) thought the hotel was coming down from an earthquake. Maybe the most intense bass I've ever experienced.
    Main System:
    Joule-Electra LA 100 MKIII
    Pass Labs Aleph 30, McCormack DNA-125, Parasound A21
    Marantz SA-14S1
    Usher CP-6311/Tyler Acoustics Taylo Reference Monitor, LSA-1
    Dual SVS SB2000
    Wireworld Equinox 7 bi-wire, Wireworld Silver Eclipse 7 IC

    Secondary Rig:
    Parasound P5, Audio Electronics by Cary Constellation
    Marsh a200s, Audio Elecrtonics by Cary Hercules
    Pioneer Elite DV-45a, Denon DVD-2910
    Klipsch Epic CF-1, Vandersteen 3CE sig
    Analysus Plus Oval

  • ZLTFULZLTFUL Posts: 4,672
    Those who don't know, don't know that they don't know.

    I am content with 3.5wpc from the ACA Monos, 35wpc from my hybrid EL34 AMC and 100wpc from the VTLs I am fostering for Russ.
    "Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."

    "Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip
  • DSkipDSkip Posts: 15,122
    I'm pretty much stuck in the world of high powered SET - high powered meaning anything double digits.
    audiothesis.com/

    Speakers: Harbeth: 30.2, SHL5+; Usher: Be-10, T-515; Rosso Fiorentino: Elba, Pienza, Certaldo, Fiesole, Volterra; Polk: T50, Signature S15, RTA 15tl, RTi12; Sonner Audio Allegro Unum, Legato Unum, Legato Semis, Legato Duo; Emerald Physics CS-2.8; Klipsch KLF-20
    Preamps: Shuguang S200MK, Dayens Ampino, Parasound P5
    Amps: Shuguang S845MK, Dayens Ampino Monoblocks, Parasound A23
    Integrateds: Triode Corporation TRV-88SER, MastersounD: BoX, Dueventi, Compact 845, Evolution 845; North Star Design Blue Diamond
    Sources: AURALiC Aries, Denon HEOS Link, North Star Design: Magnifico, Supremo, Incanto, Intenso, Venti
    Cabling: Wireworld
    TV: Sony XBR-75X940C
  • delkaldelkal Posts: 345
    edited October 2
    The OP needs to find an amp with the volume displayed in DBs and experiment some. I doubt he rarely used more than 10 watts.

    For a reality check think of this. It takes10 times the power to get an increase of 10 DBs. So lets assume you have a 100 watt amp. Most DB displays max out at +10 to +15 DBs but lets assume your amp maxes out at +10DB.

    That means when you play music at 0DBs (very loud) you are only using 10 watts.

    At -10 DBs (still loud) you are only using 1 watt.

    and at -20 DBs (listening level where you can still talk) you are only using 0.1 watt.


    And another random thought........going from 100 watts to 200 watts will only get you an extra +3DBs. This is the amount that can usually be heard as being louder but usually this is with a text tone. I doubt anyone could really tell while listening to music. Check it out yourself. Listen to some music and increase the volume by 3DBs. Hear any difference? Maybe / maybe not but you just doubled the amount of watts you were using.

    One more......anyone who claims a 100 watt amp is louder than an 80 watt amp is full of it.

  • BlueFoxBlueFox Posts: 10,236
    If your amp doesn't make a 1000 watts per channel with 4 ohm loads then it isn't squat. :)
    Bud - Silicon Valley

    Lumin S1
    Sony XA-5400ES SACD
    Pass XP-22 pre, X600.5 amps
    Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers, SPOD spikes

    Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
    Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
    Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables

    Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
    Three 20 amp circuits.
  • F1nutF1nut Posts: 40,613
    So lets assume you have a 100 watt amp. Most DB displays max out at +10 to +15 DBs but lets assume your amp maxes out at +10DB.

    That means when you play music at 0DBs (very loud) you are only using 10 watts.

    That's a poor presumption.
    And another random thought........going from 100 watts to 200 watts will only get you an extra +3DBs. This is the amount that can usually be heard as being louder but usually this is with a text tone. I doubt anyone could really tell while listening to music.

    I can hear a .5dB increase listening to music.
    One more......anyone who claims a 100 watt amp is louder than an 80 watt amp is full of it.

    You've got a lot to learn.
    Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."


  • pkquatpkquat Posts: 603
    mhardy6647 wrote: »
    concommitant

    Adj. "accompanying especially in a subordinate or incidental way"

    My new word for the day. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/concomitant

    And short story regarding efficiency. I was helping out in an old theater that was getting refurbished. They had two big Electro-voice speakers for the sound. I think they had 15" or 18" woofers and a horn. A small battery operated FM radio easily drove them directly and filled the theater. Then I brought in my old generic walkman style tape player that was designed for old not very sensitive headphones. Setting the volume at 2 is max. or more on today's devices, and I think 3 would destroy most of today's small headphones. With that it was like a small rock concert in the theater. As I recall the original theater amp was about 10W and was told that was more than enough. That was a big lesson in efficiency.
  • delkaldelkal Posts: 345
    edited October 3
    F1nut wrote: »
    So lets assume you have a 100 watt amp. Most DB displays max out at +10 to +15 DBs but lets assume your amp maxes out at +10DB.

    That means when you play music at 0DBs (very loud) you are only using 10 watts.

    That's a poor presumption.

    And another random thought........going from 100 watts to 200 watts will only get you an extra +3DBs. This is the amount that can usually be heard as being louder but usually this is with a text tone. I doubt anyone could really tell while listening to music.

    I can hear a .5dB increase listening to music.


    One more......anyone who claims a 100 watt amp is louder than an 80 watt amp is full of it.

    You've got a lot to learn.

    What is the correct assumption then? I did try and simplify the numbers some to make my description clear but it is a close approximation. How far off am I?
    I am glad you think you can hear a 0.5 DB increase but I will call BS. Especially if this is listening to music and not a pure test tone. Plus or minus 3 DB's is generally regarded as the level which MOST people can hear a change with a test tone. I know some peoples hearing is better and I am sure there are some 18 year olds that might be able to hear a 1 DB change (with a test tone). But you are not 18 anymore.

    Everyone can try this for themselves. Close your eyes and start listening to music. Then have someone else turn the volume up and down 1 DB. You won't notice any change. Experiment how far they have to go till you can reliably hear a difference and report back.

    The power ratio between an 80 and a 100 watt amp is 1.25x. Coincidentally a 1.26 increase in power gets you 1 DB more sound. So I guess your ears are so sensitive you can not only hear the difference but you also consider it a louder amp?



  • mlistens03mlistens03 Posts: 2,322
    I can't hear 1 DB louder. I can barely hear 2.
    With test tones, maybe, I never thought to try, I'll give that a try later, but definitely not with music.
    Micah

    Main system: Technics SL3200, Shure M97xE, Lafayette LR1100 for tuner, Hagerman Audio Labs Bugle 2 phono stage, NAD C352 integrated, Boston Acoustics VR 2, Boston PV500, generic ICs, and BJC Belden speaker cables.

    Desktop: Dell Precision 690 running iTunes, Yamaha RX-v665, Monitor Audio R90s, Velodyne VA-907, generic ICs and speaker cables.
    I've always thought the goal of high-end audio was not to have your neighbors bang on the wall and say, 'Turn that darn music down' but to have your neighbors bang on the wall and say, 'Tell your friends to go home and you can practice later this week'.
  • mhardy6647mhardy6647 Posts: 19,542
    ZLTFUL wrote: »
    Those who don't know, don't know that they don't know.

    I am content with 3.5wpc from the ACA Monos, 35wpc from my hybrid EL34 AMC and 100wpc from the VTLs I am fostering for Russ.

    I thought the ACA was closer to six watts... :|
  • mhardy6647mhardy6647 Posts: 19,542
    pkquat wrote: »
    mhardy6647 wrote: »
    concommitant

    Adj. "accompanying especially in a subordinate or incidental way"

    My new word for the day. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/concomitant

    And short story regarding efficiency. I was helping out in an old theater that was getting refurbished. They had two big Electro-voice speakers for the sound. I think they had 15" or 18" woofers and a horn. A small battery operated FM radio easily drove them directly and filled the theater. Then I brought in my old generic walkman style tape player that was designed for old not very sensitive headphones. Setting the volume at 2 is max. or more on today's devices, and I think 3 would destroy most of today's small headphones. With that it was like a small rock concert in the theater. As I recall the original theater amp was about 10W and was told that was more than enough. That was a big lesson in efficiency.

    1. I hope I spelled it right! :blush:

    2. The ol' demo dealers liked to do for Klipschorns was to drive one with the earphone output of a transitor radio. The result (with a loudspeaker with 104-ish dB sensitivity) is pretty striking. :|
  • JstasJstas Posts: 13,688
    If by "pretty striking" you mean like a 2x4 with a rusty nail in it to the face then I would tend to believe you.
    You're just jealous 'cause the voices don't talk to you!
  • motorstereomotorstereo Posts: 852
    I am glad you think you can hear a 0.5 DB increase but I will call BS. Especially if this is listening to music and not a pure test tone. Plus or minus 3 DB's is generally regarded as the level which MOST people can hear a change with a test tone. I know some peoples hearing is better and I am sure there are some 18 year olds that might be able to hear a 1 DB change (with a test tone). But you are not 18 anymore.

    Count me in as being able to hear .5 db increases. My Mcintosh C100's volume control is calibrated in .5 db steps and a .5db change up or down is quite noticeable even to these 62 year old ears. 3db would be 6 steps on the volume control and that is a huge change in the sound. I'm betting there's not a single member here that can't easily hear either of those changes.
  • Viking64Viking64 Posts: 3,604
    I'm betting there's not a single member here that can't easily hear either of those changes.

    zmxhl65v44o2.jpg
  • FestYboyFestYboy Posts: 2,972
    Count me in as being able to hear .5 db increases. My Mcintosh C100's volume control is calibrated in .5 db steps and a .5db change up or down is quite noticeable even to these 62 year old ears. 3db would be 6 steps on the volume control and that is a huge change in the sound. I'm betting there's not a single member here that can't easily hear either of those changes.

    This raises the question: is that .5 dB shift on the pre amp stage or the power output stage? I suspect it makes a difference.
«13
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!