are bridged amps common ground?

ka7niq

TroyD wrote: »

You know, Special K.....if pro audio amps are such a great deal, why do you not own them? According to you...a watt is a watt and pretty much an amp is an amp....so why all the different amps, I mean, you've owned them all.

If they are all the same what's the difference?

BDT

I DO own several Pro Amps Troy, along with several high end amps too.
And I DO hear differences in amps, WHEN listening to them flat.
However, try this.
Get a pre amp with decent tone controls, and forget your "audiophile conceptions".
Adjust a CD using the tone controls until it sounds it's best.
Then listen.
Then, substitute another amp, adjust tone controls again, then listen ?
You might find that "differences" in amps suddenly disappear ?

heiney9

ka7niq wrote: »

IF you want to really hear differences in equipment, the SRS 2's are not the speakers.
This is NOT to say they are not a great speaker either.
They are just not as revealing as some other speakers are.
I know, I own a bunch of speakers.

If YOU think you heard a difference, more power to you!

1) Disagree
2) Agree
3) Agree-certainly there are more revealing speaks
4) GAWD we know, we know, you've beat us over the head with all the equipment you've owned or currently own. Christ, let it end!!!!
5) I don't THINK I hear a difference, I do.

John in MA

heiney9 wrote: »

What it comes down to is what's quoted on paper vs. real world. A great personal example is the day an Adcom 535 @ 60wpc disgraced a Yammy rated at 380wpc. On paper ratings don't mean **** and pro gear, as a general rule, seems to inflate or obtain those ratings in a less than consistent manner.

Why is it that a Pass Labs amp rated at 30wpc into 8 or 4 ohms sounds so much better than a 1000 watt Crown? For that matter a First Watt amp is around 15 watts.

I know guys that can get 500hp out of a Chevette, does that make it a Corvette?

I'm done here some of the generalizations made in this thread are ludicris at best.

H9

You got your posts mixed up, I was never making the case for pro amps, just saying that folks are getting caught up in jargon more than they should. A high-watt amp will be capable of a comparitively high current by rule, but there are amps which are capable of higher current for a given wattage than others.

I also never said that you need power to sound good. A quality low-power amp will sound better than a crappy high-power one, especially ones crappy enough to fudge specs. But if you're trying to drive demanding speakers at loud volumes a small amp won't do the job. In which case I'd want a both high quality and powerful amp. 200W Pass Labs instead of the 30W.

Joe08867

Or get a real nice sounding amp and leave the tone controls alone.

Maybe I will try my QSC with a 30 band eq and get that awesome sound I have been looking for.

Apples and oranges.

ka7niq

heiney9 wrote: »

1) Disagree
2) Agree
3) Agree-certainly there are more revealing speaks
4) GAWD we know, we know, you've beat us over the head with all the equipment you've owned or currently own. Christ, let it end!!!!
5) I don't THINK I hear a difference, I do.

Let's talk about point one, ok ?

The SRS speakers use a clever circuit to enhance stereo imaging.
I find they will image with anything that will drive them.
Not so with the B&W 801's.
I have a big Onkyo that drives piss out of them, but soundfield is flat.

heiney9

John in MA wrote: »

You got your posts mixed up, I was never making the case for pro amps, just saying that folks are getting caught up in jargon more than they should. A high-watt amp will be capable of a comparitively high current by rule, but there are amps which are capable of higher current for a given wattage than others.

I also never said that you need power to sound good. A quality low-power amp will sound better than a crappy high-power one, especially ones crappy enough to fudge specs. But if you're trying to drive demanding speakers at loud volumes a small amp won't do the job. In which case I'd want a both high quality and powerful amp. 200W Pass Labs instead of the 30W.

Yeah, I quoted your post by mistake. My comments not related to that post.

heiney9

ka7niq wrote: »

Let's talk about point one, ok ?

The SRS speakers use a clever circuit to enhance stereo imaging.
I find they will image with anything that will drive them.
Not so with the B&W 801's.
I have a big Onkyo that drives piss out of them, but soundfield is flat.

Actually the circuit, as you call it, was researched and designed around auditory hearing concepts missing from a regular 2 channel signal. It's not an effect or a gimmick or an enhancement circuit. It's based on the principles of human hearing and really does a better job than stereo (which is just as flawed) at conveying what a reproduced soundfield shold sound like. Both methods have their flaws but I find, epecially for live music, it's much more realistic than a plain old stereo.

Nothing can mimmick the human ear and no recording technique can capture all the nuances of "real" sound. All we can do is capture and reproduce a small part of what real lvie sound is about. The SDA's do this differently than a conventional 2-ch stereo.

As always we are at the mercy of the recording technique, mixing and mastering process.

If you get a chance read the SDA white paper it will open your eyes and you will no longer call it a "circuit".

H9

heiney9

Yes, they will "image" with just about anything, but they really open up with top notch gear. The better the gear you throw at them the better they sound by a wide margin.

ka7niq

Joe08867 wrote: »

Or get a real nice sounding amp and leave the tone controls alone.

Maybe I will try my QSC with a 30 band eq and get that awesome sound I have been looking for.

Apples and oranges.

Some material sounds better with tone correction.
And some does not.

It is no "sin" to use tone controls.
Do they do "harm" to the musical signal, yes.
But frequency response errors are the most audible, and sometimes correcting them is a good idea.

I USED to be "one of YOU Guys", I had cryogenically treated silver litz wire insulated off the floor.
I could even HEAR differences in the spacing of the wire from the floor.
I had ground rods driven right through my living room floor to ground all my ****.

I went over all my crossovers with silver solder, and ONLY Teflon insulated my wires.

I have paid big money for speaker cables/interconnects.

Most of my stuff was hard wired, screw connctors, even Cardas.

I had to LEARN that all or much of it is **** the hard way.

I really THOUGHT I heard a difference, and I would resist the truth as I would a lie.

I would encourage anyone who really wants to know to experiment with simple double blind A/B testing.

One day, perhaps you will learn too, as I did.

Until then, enjoy your delusions

ka7niq

heiney9 wrote: »

Yes, they will "image" with just about anything, but they really open up with top notch gear. The better the gear you throw at them the better they sound by a wide margin.

I still have a few amps to try on them.
I won some 6510 drivers on Epay.
I have my horns for sale on Ebay too, along with my VMPS RM 40's and JBL L 7's.

I THINK I might just sell a lot of my speakers off, time for something different ?

How about some Avant Gard's ?
Really want Electrostats again but smoke cigars, maybe some big Magnepan 20.1's or Tympany's, naw, too inefficient ?

Keeping the SRS 2's for now

ka7niq

heiney9 wrote: »

Actually the circuit, as you call it, was researched and designed around auditory hearing concepts missing from a regular 2 channel signal. It's not an effect or a gimmick or an enhancement circuit. It's based on the principles of human hearing and really does a better job than stereo (which is just as flawed) at conveying what a reproduced soundfield shold sound like. Both methods have their flaws but I find, epecially for live music, it's much more realistic than a plain old stereo.

Nothing can mimmick the human ear and no recording technique can capture all the nuances of "real" sound. All we can do is capture and reproduce a small part of what real lvie sound is about. The SDA's do this differently than a conventional 2-ch stereo.

As always we are at the mercy of the recording technique, mixing and mastering process.

If you get a chance read the SDA white paper it will open your eyes and you will no longer call it a "circuit".

H9

Yes, I should read the SDA white paper.
I admit I have not, yet.

treitz3

ka7niq wrote:

I find it easier to post things you can't refute

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! I'm freakin' dyin' over here! Stop it man...please for the love of god, make it stop. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! **snort** Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

ka7niq wrote:

I had to LEARN that all or much of it is **** the hard way.

All we are getting out of that statement is "I'm learning the hard way that much of what I say is ****"

michaeljhsda2 wrote:

Resorting to personal attacks? You are losing focus on what this forum is about.

ka7niq wrote:

You are SUCH a dumb ****....not dumb **** gullible "audiophiles" like you....Hey dumbass......

Ferst off, I learnt backin d'a terd grade dat in mee daeis of early edumacation dat dumbass is axtcuallie two werds. At least Micheal was smart enough to step back and maybe learn something. It seems you are the one who is losing focus. My virgin ears can't handle those kinds of words.

ka7niq wrote: »

I TRY to be objective about things.

Sure you do, we can tell. It's obvious. :rolleyes:

heiney9 wrote: »

All most of us are saying is you could do a lot better if excellent sound is your goal.

Yessiree!

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Yes, I do have some questions.

1. Ohm's power law can be written in two forms:
a) Power (watts)= current-squared times resistance [P=I^2xR]
b) Power (watts)= voltage-squared times resistance [p=V^2xR]

Question 1: If all watts are the same, why the need for two power formulas?

2. My understanding is that voltage is an electromotive force that drives electrons through a conductor. Furthermore, current is a flow of electrons, or charge, through a conductor. My understanding is that the charges, or electrons, are the entities in a circuit that actually do the work. In other words, the more charges you have, the less force you need to do a certain amount of work.

Based on this, it would appear that it would be more advantageous to have an abundance of current rather than an abundance of voltage.

Voltage and current can be thought of as analogous to water pressure and water in a pipe. If you needed to turn a propeller at a certain speed by forcing water through it, you could do two things:

1. Use a small amount of water and a high level of water pressure. (The low current case.)
2. Use a large amount of water and a commensurately lower level of water pressure. (The high current case.)

Question 2: Which would be better?

I have other questions also, but I would like to address these first. Thank you for offering to share your knowledge with us.

Did you even read this post? I'm curious as to what your answer(s), Googled or not would be. That is if your reading comprehension can handle actually answering the questions without losing focus again.

jdhdiggs

Before you guys go poking fingers, might want to check out Raife's post as it has a SERIOUS typo in it that refutes almost all of his points. There are not two power equations, just 1.

W=VI

All the rest is algebra and Ohms law. It should read W=I^2*R or W=V^2/R (Notice the divides, not multiplies...)

Other than that, Ka7 is owning all of you guys on all points but one: HA amps sound better than professional amps... Why? Design. Peace!

DarqueKnight

You are spoiling my fun James. However, I will go back and fix equation 1b to read either:

Power (watts)= voltage-squared divided by resistance [p=V^2/R]

Power (watts)= voltage-squared times the reciprocal of resistance [p=V^2x1/R]

treitz3

awww, man you took part of the fun away!

ka7niq

treitz3 wrote: »

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! I'm freakin' dyin' over here! Stop it man...please for the love of god, make it stop. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! **snort** Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!


All we are getting out of that statement is "I'm learning the hard way that much of what I say is ****"



Ferst off, I learnt backin d'a terd grade dat in mee daeis of early edumacation dat dumbass is axtcuallie two werds. At least Micheal was smart enough to step back and maybe learn something. It seems you are the one who is losing focus. My virgin ears can't handle those kinds of words.


Sure you do, we can tell. It's obvious. :rolleyes:


Yessiree!



Did you even read this post? I'm curious as to what your answer(s), Googled or not would be. That is if your reading comprehension can handle actually answering the questions without losing focus again.

You know what you can Kiss, right
THAT is your reference, nothing more, nothing less.

ka7niq

jdhdiggs wrote: »

Before you guys go poking fingers, might want to check out Raife's post as it has a SERIOUS typo in it that refutes almost all of his points. There are not two power equations, just 1.

W=VI

All the rest is algebra and Ohms law. It should read W=I^2*R or W=V^2/R (Notice the divides, not multiplies...)

Other than that, Ka7 is owning all of you guys on all points but one: HA amps sound better than professional amps... Why? Design. Peace!

They KNOW who their daddy is now, LOL
Never said ALL pro amps sound better then all HA amps either.
Only that SOME pro amps ain't bad

ka7niq

DarqueKnight wrote: »

You are spoiling my fun James. However, I will go back and fix equation 1b to read either:

Power (watts)= voltage-squared divided by resistance [p=V^2/R]

Power (watts)= voltage-squared times the reciprocal of resistance [p=V^2x1/R]

Here is some "fun" for ya http://www.the12volt.com/ohm/page2.asp
Try the second one
MIGHT find yer "75 amps of current" amplifier is useless as balls on a priest into a 4 or 8 ohm load

Might want to put this knowledge into an upcoming version of your compendium ?
Oh, along with the Correct equations for Ohms Law ?

heiney9

ka7niq wrote: »

Here is some "fun" for ya http://www.the12volt.com/ohm/page2.asp
Try the second one
MIGHT find yer "75 amps of current" amplifier is useless as balls on a priest into a 4 or 8 ohm load

Might want to put this knowledge into an upcoming version of your compendium ?
Oh, along with the Correct equations for Ohms Law ?

Hmmmmmm.....when the last time Pachabel's Cannon could NOT be fit into a nice little algebraic equation.

Systems

ka7niq wrote: »

you find yer "75 amps of current" amplifier is useless as balls on a priest into a 4 or 8 ohm load

A typical multi way speaker with a passive crossover does not usually present a purely resistive load there is also inductance and capacitance etc.
Also its impedance varies with frequency so trying to predict the amount of current necessary just from ohm's law is flawed.Speakers like electric motors run on current,feed the electric motor more current it runs faster,feeding a speaker more current would improve its transient response.An higher current amp will be better able to deal with difficult speaker loads and have better control of the drivers.

DarqueKnight

jdhdiggs wrote: »

Before you guys go poking fingers, might want to check out Raife's post as it has a SERIOUS typo in it that refutes almost all of his points. There are not two power equations, just 1.

W=VI

SERIOUS typos notwithstanding, what other points in my post are refuted?

Every electrical engineering textbook I have seen further breaks down ohms power law into two parts depending on whether current or voltage is the major component in the power generated. It is important to make the distinction. From the equation you stated above, Power is the product of voltage and current. For example, for a device requiring a 100 watts to operate, that 100 watts can be generated in several ways:

1. 100 volts @ 1 amp.
2. 50 volts @ 2 amps.
3. 25 volts @ 4 amps.
4. 20 volts @ 5 amps.
5. 10 volts @ 10 amps.

According to W=VI, 1-5 above might suffice, if the device has a current requirement of 10 amps or less. What if the device requires 15 amps of current to operate? In that case, 1-5 above will be inadequate, even if the total wattage requirement is met.

The main point I was trying to make was that high power does not necessarily equate to high current as was stated here:

ka7niq wrote: »

If the amp produces the power it must produce the current, if the amp produces the current it must produce the power. This fact is inescapable, but it is amazing how much misinformation is spread in its ignorance.

Any Questions ?

ka7niq

treitz3 wrote: »

awww, man you took part of the fun away!

New, Daddy is gonna allow YOU to have some fun, and educate some of the lost souls here in the process
Go here http://www.the12volt.com/ohm/page2.asp
Scroll down to the second calculator.
Enter 100 for watts, and 4 for resistance in ohms, click the equals box, and the current will be displayed.
NOW, leave the resistance alone, but enter 200 watts, recalculate.
Current goes up.

Now, go to 400 watts, recalculate, current increases even more

A powerful amplifier is a high current amplifier.
An amplifier is NOT "high current" if it is not also powerful.

AS can be seen from the calculator, 200 watts into 4 ohms only takes 7.73 amps of current :eek:

And THAT is at a full 200 watts of power too.

Polk SRS 2's are 90 db at 1 watt and are a 4 ohm load.

Go SEE how LITTLE current is actually required ?

I CAN see having a high current amp IF you have Apogees, or other really low impedance speakers.
But like a race car driven on the street in rush hour traffic, it will never show it's stuff into a 4 or 8 ohm load.

Sometimes, a high current design is an indication the designer paid attention to OTHER sonic parameters like damping factor, low output impedance, slew rate, TIM, recovery from clipping, and overload characteristics.

And, there is just plain PRIDE of ownership.

ka7niq

GV#27 wrote: »

A typical multi way speaker with a passive crossover does not usually present a purely resistive load there is also inductance and capacitance etc.
Also its impedance varies with frequency so trying to predict the amount of current necessary just from ohm's law is flawed.Speakers like electric motors run on current,feed the electric motor more current it runs faster,feeding a speaker more current would improve its transient response.An higher current amp will be better able to deal with difficult speaker loads and have better control of the drivers.

GREAT POINT
Actually it is Reactance we are concerned with.
The LOWER the output impedance of an amp, the higher it's damping factor or control of the drivers are.
But again, lets look at the 4 ohm example of the calculator ?
Say at an output of 50 watts into 4 ohms it takes 3 amps of current ?
All we have to do is measure the LOWEST impedance the speaker drops to, and use it as a kind of predictor of how much current needs we will have ?

It is at 2 ohms and below where real amps and pretenders are soon separated.

treitz3

Jesus H. Christ, where do you putz boys come from? I am proud for you that you own ****, even though I can smell it from here. I am also proud that the rest of us listen to better than amplified K-Mart sound.

Tell you what sweetie, when you answer some of other folk's questions [revised and joking aside], I'll answer yours. I am an ex-engineer and I have probably forgotten more than you will ever know, so I won't have a problem.

Keep Googling. :rolleyes:

If one goes back and reads what ka7niq is spewing, we all should be happy with a BB/CC 900w boom box....it's obviously high current and high power. In fact I believe him...I'm off to go get one.

RuSsMaN

I think that's enough, for the greater good of the forum.

disneyjoe7

It's the SUN in Florida I'll tell ya...

heiney9

Sure is nice when life fits into a tidy little formula. :rolleyes: The formulas you linked to are just but one very small part of what make a good amp. If you don;t understand that then you have no clue.

H9

DarqueKnight

ka7niq wrote: »

AS can be seen from the calculator, 200 watts into 4 ohms only takes 7.73 amps of current :eek:

What the calculator does not tell you is that most audio amplifiers employ some type of CURRENT LIMITING circuitry. In other words, the output current of most amplifiers is not anywhere near the linear relationship shown in the calculator. This is the pitfall of knowledge without understanding.

Since you are so enamored of looking things up on the web and taking them at face value, here is a link on current limiting:

Wikipedia Article On Current_limiting

DarqueKnight

ka7niq wrote: »

Might want to put this knowledge into an upcoming version of your compendium ?
Oh, along with the Correct equations for Ohms Law ?

The vast majority of Compendium owners/readers already possess far more than a superficial understanding electical theory, musical acoustics (remember that fiasco?), and audio theory. Therefore, it would be a waste of time to include such information in any future Compendium versions, if any. Based on your posts here, I realize that you would get a lot out of me providing such information, just as I am sure you have gotten a lot out of my responses to your misleading and misinformed "tutorials". You are welcome to the last word. I grow weary of such sport.

Systems

ka7niq wrote: »

GREAT POINT
Actually it is Reactance we are concerned with.

Yes more precisely it is capacitive,and inductive reactance that make up the complex impedance of a speaker.Because of this complex impedance that is made up of reactance and resistance you cannot using ohm's law accurately calculate the current requirements as though it were a pure 4 or 8 ohm resistor.