Power?

[Joolsburger]

I notice that a number of posters seem to regard high power amplification as an essential ingredient in a high quality sound system.
I on the other hand regard low power and efficent speakers as a better option all round as I believe that less electronics = more music.

Bearing in mind that with 34 watts of power my system can go so loud as to cause discomfort can anyone explain the need for a 500 watt uberamp?

Before anyone bangs on about headroom and clipping I might point out that at very high SPLs I really don't hear any distortion on my little set. I use a mates tri amped Bryston PMC MB series as a reference when it comes to volumes so I know what big and loud should sound like.
The only reason I can see for big power is to drive power hungry speakers and given that efficient speakers can sound just as good, why bother?

I am not posting this to imply that my system is the be all and end all but I am curious as to the obsession with power that seems to exist in the general hifi world.

Can someone explain why I ought to be ashamed of myself and my 34 watter?

[penance]

well i have a poor lil 50watt p/c

the only reason i would change amp is to get more OOMPH to dreive the dynaudio's, but then that doesnt have to mean high numbers
If i had my time again one thing i would deffo consider is more sensitive speakers and maybe a play with lower powered valve gear

[Mr_Sukebe]

Jools,

You make an interesting point.
On a personal note, in my opinion the best sounding system in Bristol last year was the VPI/Border Patrol/Living Voice system, which is a classic example of low powered valves with high efficiency speakers. I thought it completely stuffed the other kit there.

I think the key aspect is the implications for speakers. From what I've listened to and have read, I get the impression that high efficiency speakers have their own compromises. Part of this will be the requirement for high tolerance drivers as potential issues are more likely to be highlighted by their efficient nature. In addition, I get the impression that bass control is made more difficult.
Now clearly it's possible to build your way around these issues, but at what cost (not only in £, but also in design compromises).

Having a high powered amp allows a different route on speaker design compromises to me made.
For example, I'm assuming that complex crossovers and multi driver speakers are likely to require more drive than say a 2 way unit.

So I think it really comes down to making a decision about which sonic presentation style you prefer. Once decided, then look at the implications on design and find out who builds something suitable for your needs.

[stebbo]

Originally posted by Joolsburger

Can someone explain why I ought to be ashamed of myself and my 34 watter?

You have no reason to be ashamed of anything.

What is important is as you say, quality sensitive speakers that are "matched" to your room size.

[Joolsburger]

I made a very clear choice to persue the low power route early on. I find one other very significant benefit is that I lose very little in the sound at low volumes so my late night listening is very satisfying. I really believe that monster power outputs are a waste of time unless your driving a huge room, something that in the UK is rare.

Also does anyone know the significance of peak current and how that benefits sound quality. My lavardin puts out 10amps which is more than alot of 100 watt amps seem to muster from what I can see.

[penance]

I think current is more important for driving speakers than power output. So a higher current output will (as you mentioned) sound better at lower volumes.

but i may be wrong;)

[greg]

This is interesting to me due to the fact you use a Lavardin. The Lavardin amps are of great interest to me and therefore so is the issue of needing to match them with sensitive speakers. Particularly if I went with the IS. Even the IT is only 40Wpc

On one hand, I have an average (uk) sized room and like late night listening at levels that wont wake the children.
On the other hand, when the family are out, I like to crank it up. I'm very pleased to hear you seem to be able to do both of the above with the IS with the right speakers.

For a while I spose I was headed ignorantly toward krell up the std higher powered solid state chain. The Lavardins albethey solid state do seem to represent something different. The Unico and the Unico i are also of interest to me - cheaper than the lavardin IS!, (yes different in concept - particularly the hybrid Unico - and more powerful). I'm also keen to look into the world of pure valve sound but I'm not really sure where to start or what to expect.

At the end of the day my room is a certain size so as long as I can properly pressurise the space, size isnt really the issue. Is this a fair conclusion?

[Joolsburger]

My Audes are about 90db and 6 ohms they go very loud at about 11 o clock on the dial and stupid loud at 1 o clock. Now uncomfortable volumes can be related to distortion but as I say I have a clean sound right up to the limit and the limit is obvious. I suggest a listen to the Lavardin is worthwhile but not with small power hungry speakers like Dynaudios, better off with large sensitive floorstanders like Proacs or what have you. F|or pure quality the best match I've heard is Compact 7s although they were not quite as good for parties!!

I also had some ls3/5as but it was apparent that the Lavardin was straining at volume with them although late at night they were a superb match.

I think that you'd hear the same story from Nait owners, the valve crew and many other owners of low power amps who chose compatable speakers.

Greg, Some say the Lavardin is too sweet but I think with the right speakers that can be avoided Walrus have an IS reference for 1495 at the minute.

[jtc]

The DNM amps are a great example of a low power design which really seems to work (I've just sold mine, but my time with it was entirely positive). As you climb the DNM power amp ladder from PA1 to PA3 and then onto the top of line PA3^S, the power outputs drop until you get to the PA3^S which has 23wpc on paper. However, it subjectively felt more powerful at any given volume (within reason) than a pair of 200w monoblocks I had in my system for a while.

The key is the speakers - if they're relatively sensitive, and if the amp has a good power supply (the PA3^S is fully regulated and uses custom-made 4-pin capacitors) then there's no reason that in-room use shouldn't be well within the reach of a few watts.

I've moved to a 70wpc amp which is well regarded by many, yet it sounds at times like it has less grip than the DNM, and certainly doesn't have the speed or detail, though it has more bass depth I think.

The point being, depending on your speakers, you might find your big bully boy 200w monoblocks are idling along at one or two watts for most of the time - and perhaps a lower output design, (with the emphasis on the quality of those first few crucial watts rather than the quantity overall) might represent a better choice.

Food for thought, and I will in some ways miss that DNM...

jtc

[merlin]

Originally posted by Joolsburger
I notice that a number of posters seem to regard high power amplification as an essential ingredient in a high quality sound system.


Jools, can't really recall anyone claiming that, but I know some do elsewhere. For me, it's the quality that's important every time, but to be fait here are some loudspeakers (Dynaudio for one) that do seem to require a certain level of grunt.


On a personal note, in my opinion the best sounding system in Bristol last year was the VPI/Border Patrol/Living Voice system, which is a classic example of low powered valves with high efficiency speakers. I thought it completely stuffed the other kit there.

Utterly agree there, even though many felt the Tact dem was the best. I personally found the LV room to have a magic not found elsewhere, and that set up never fails to make me happy.

[Joolsburger]

Jools, can't really recall anyone claiming that, but I know some do elsewhere. For me, it's the quality that's important every time, but to be fait here are some loudspeakers (Dynaudio for one) that do seem to require a certain level of grunt.



Look under the my kit thread... I think actions speak louder than words!!
:)

[greg]

Originally posted by Joolsburger
...Walrus have an IS reference for 1495 at the minute.

You tell me this the day after I decided I should be sensible until July! Damn you.

[Joolsburger]

Plenty of time for sensible later in the year, for the money I doubt you'll do better.


mmmmmmmmm IS reference.

[Robbo]

With my recent tube amp purchase, I have stepped down in power to a lowly 45w/ch. However I'd take quality watts over quantity anyday. With my room and speakers, I have absolutely no lack of power or control, and the music drives along with ease.

Greg, do try to listen to a quality tube setup before you take the plunge with a new amp. A good valve amp is extremely satisfying, IMO.

Cheers, Robbo

[greg]

Could you recommend a good starting point - from the perspective of getting a feel for what tubes/valves can offer?

Incidentally I was surprised to read that the famous Jah Shaka dub sound system use Valve power amps.

[Robbo]

yes, my amp seems to quite like dub too!

How much do you want to spend?

At the more expensive end I would try to listen to some Audio Research or Border Patrol, at the cheaper end, how about some World Audio Design tube kits?

[bottleneck]

The key IMHO is driving the speakers properly, whatever model they are.

I will be using a 9w border patrol amp into my LV's to great effect in a few weeks time. They eat dance music, rock anything you want really, all with 9w. But they are 95db. Unfortunately speakers as sensitive as this are rare.

So, 500w into 85db or 9w into 95db its matching thats got to be key.

Jools - the only point I'd disagree with you on would be regarding the requirement for large amplifiers to drive large speakers.

You are absolutely right IMO in many cases. The 85db Proac Futures as an example.

However, in my experience stand mounted speakers are often the most difficult to drive properly, hence a strange situation whereby people needing the most powerful amplifiers are often in the smallest rooms!.

Of course there are exceptions to this, but Im sure that this is the case for large swathes of standmounts... let me put it like this.... other than the Loth X speaker, can you think of ANY standmount that publishes sensitivity figures of 91db or above?

I pointed this out to Living Voice when I was there a couple of weeks ago, and said that I think there is a gap in the market for sensitive standmount speakers of quality... I doubt that much heed will be paid though!.

Chris

[Lt Cdr Data]

there are a number of routes to hifi heaven, all of which have their proponents, staunch defenders.

You can do fine with a budget set up, way in excess of most midi systems,

You can go the valve route, but even here, the wattages go from anything from 4 watts to hundreds,

the high end tranny route, 100s of watts, or even the dnm, 23 watts,

as long as you match the amp to sympathetic speakers, it really doenst' seem to matter.

Though I did manage to clip the a1000 on vocal transients which was suprising, that has lots of power transistors, so there must be more than meets the eye...something inherent in the design

and 12 watts of valve was enough, though on real bass heavy tracks, turned up, it did complain, so I would go for at least 90dbs the more the better.

I would say generally 20 watts min for valves.

Interestingly, the actives I have owned have not seemed as loud as the power suggests, though I wouldln't want to crank up the ATCs, its just that the other amps seem to respond more to going loud if you know what I mean. You can turn them up, and they go loud easy, whereas the actives you really have to turn them up to respond, maybe caus they are voiced to be listened to louder.

[Robbo]

Interestingly, the actives I have owned have not seemed as loud as the power suggests, though I wouldln't want to crank up the ATCs, its just that the other amps seem to respond more to going loud if you know what I mean. You can turn them up, and they go loud easy, whereas the actives you really have to turn them up to respond, maybe caus they are voiced to be listened to louder.

I believe mainly it is due to the fact that ATCs have have pitifully low sensitivity. For example I read a mag review of the passive SCM10s and they had a sensitivity of 80 db/w IIRC. No wonder the actives have so many watts in them, they need them to get the things to go loud enough!

Not sure what sensitivity the 3 ways have though.

[Lt Cdr Data]

Its weird as well robbo they have MONSTER magnets, weighing more than most speakers themselves, so I don't know why they have such low 85 db for the 9 inch sensitivity, you are looking about 6 dbs below the average for that size driver.
The cones must be REALLY heavy, yet the bass isn't huge, sure its there, just not emphasized.

[sideshowbob]

whereas the actives you really have to turn them up to respond, maybe caus they are voiced to be listened to louder.


One of the things I like about ATCs is that loud or quiet, they sound good. I suspect I listen at lower levels than many here, and the ATCs were the first speaker I'd had here for any length of time that had some real life in them at lower volumes.

I used to run low-powered Sugdens into high efficiency floorstanders, and have now gone the opposite route of lots of power and insensitive speakers. Both approaches seem to offer similar sonic benefits to my ears, it's the systems in between that seem to struggle.

-- Ian

[Robbo]

The cones must be REALLY heavy, yet the bass isn't huge, sure its there, just not emphasized.

As you say they must be very heavy, and the cabinets very well damped. You'd think the heavy cones would obscure fine detail and dynamic attack etc. but obviously thats not the case.

[HenryT]

Originally posted by bottleneck
can you think of ANY standmount that publishes sensitivity figures of 91db or above?

I pointed this out to Living Voice when I was there a couple of weeks ago, and said that I think there is a gap in the market for sensitive standmount speakers of quality... I doubt that much heed will be paid though! Good point Chris! :) There certanly were one or two high efficiency standmounters a few years back, but seemingly things have dried up of late. Models I can think of from the recent past with 91db(+) efficiency were any of the single driver DC (dual concentric) based standmounts that Tannoy use to make. Also, some of the single (or multiple) driver Uni-Q standmounts that KEF made were also of high effciency. Also speaking of single drive unit speakers, Rhdeko, a brand I've only ever heard once (at a hi-fi show) and never again had a rather nice speaker which caught my attention once.

There is something you get in terms of immediacy to the sound with high sensitivity speakers, which IMO is very rarely heard and much harder to achieve (if at all) with lower efficiency designs. Having said that, I'm an "in-between" person as I've yet to hear a (very) high efficiency design which doesn't sound mildly coloured to my ears.

[ANOpax]

This (possibly a little self-serving) link (http://www.atma-sphere.com/papers/myth.html) from the well respected Ralph Karsten of Atma-sphere may help to explain things.

I also recall reading somewhere that modern transistor amps have evolved they way they have because of major shortcomings in the evolution of dynamic speaker driver technology. I'm sure the resident cone'n'dome experts can shed some light on this...

reg

[adam]

My Copland CTA 401 is only 25 watts,and i had no problem with its power output at all,Ive used it,along with many others using Sonus Faber speakers,it's currently driving some B&W P6 too great effect,but the best it really sings with are some spendors sp100 a match made in heaven sheer bliss,and plenty powerful enough.

[wadia-miester]

Although I use the watt or 2, I don't feel it's essential for good quality sound, many occations I've heard 9 watts sound like 200 with ease, again the Border Patrols & Lv stuff sound pretty damn fine, Manley steel heads (best sound I heard to date, after mine ;) ) superb with B&w 805's sigs odd match yep, but the sounded awesome, had 40w to them?.
Horns, can go very loud and dynamic if a little coloured for me, but again not huge power needed, another good sound a Lavvy Ref (45 watter?) Shahinnan stand mounts and a densen xs 400 producing a smart sound too.
I favour the less efficent speaker that needs to be 'told' what going on by a large spherical object amplifier, it the current ability and control that does it for me, Lee Lumley monoblocks were quite passible too, even with the shearwaters, careful matching can yield superb results Wm

[michaelab]

Originally posted by bottleneck
Of course there are exceptions to this, but Im sure that this is the case for large swathes of standmounts... let me put it like this.... other than the Loth X speaker, can you think of ANY standmount that publishes sensitivity figures of 91db or above?
Yep - all the Reference 3A standmounts are around 92dB:

See: http://www.reference3a.com/mmdecapo.htm

as an example :)

Michael.

[Rodrigo de Sá]

Since I own a Lavardin (model IT), 40 odd watter and given the fact that I listen to a lot of organ music, my contribution may be useful.

Gregg: if you want to have it loud during the day and quiet yet accurate during the night, I would recommend the IT.

I matched the Lavardin to some Proac Futures. They work very well together.

My room eats away bass (no, not even a sub helps - it eats the bass at around 50-60 Hz) but I find the Lavardin/proac good. I often listen to Bruckner's Symphonies rather loud. But the beautiful thing of the Lavardin is that (within limits) works as well at full power 2-3 o'clock as it does at very low levels indeed.

Do I miss power? (I used to have a 100 Watter)? In a way, the answer is yes. But I know of no other solid state amplifier that can beat the Lavardin in timbric purity, treble limpidity and transient resolution.

Is it soft sounding? Not at all. It is just clean; you don't hear harshness, and that cleanness may be strange if you are not accustomed to acoustic music live. If you are, odds are that you'll like the Lavardin.

I never listened to anything as uncoloured and pure.

[bottleneck]

Originally posted by michaelab
Yep - all the Reference 3A standmounts are around 92dB:

See: http://www.reference3a.com/mmdecapo.htm

as an example :)

Michael.

Interesting! nice one mike.

I notice these little 2-way monitors have no crossover.

I bet this is a determining factor in their higher than usual sensitivity.

Im a bit perplexed though... they rate the frequency range as:

Frequency response: 42 Hz. - 20.000 Hz. /3 dB.

Isnt that impossibly low for a small monitor?
If so, would that not throw the accuracy of the sensitivity figures published into question aswell?.. or maybe it could go down that low. What do u think?

[technobear]

Originally posted by bottleneck
I notice these little 2-way monitors have no crossover.

Only the bass unit has no crossover. The tweeter must have at least a capacitor.

This design philosophy is similar to the small EPOS speakers except EPOS don't use carbon fibre. I'm a big fan of carbon fibre drivers :)
Originally posted by bottleneck

Im a bit perplexed though... they rate the frequency range as:

Frequency response: 42 Hz. - 20.000 Hz. /3 dB.

Isnt that impossibly low for a small monitor?
Not really. Firstly the bass units are 8.25 inch which is quite large for a mini-monitor. Secondly I can think of quite a few other makes who's mini-monitors go lower - Dynaudio and ProAc to name but two that come to mind. The Dyns are rather low in efficiency though.

They look good. Wish I'd had access to them when I was looking for standmounts.

[Lt Cdr Data]

Originally posted by sideshowbob
One of the things I like about ATCs is that loud or quiet, they sound good. I suspect I listen at lower levels than many here, and the ATCs were the first speaker I'd had here for any length of time that had some real life in them at lower volumes.


-- Ian

I have invariably found that 99% of box speakers respond better to a bit of power, they do sound better when driven.
Missions particularly, but others too.

I don't know if its the ear as in fletcher-munson...the curves showing the ears sensitivity to sound at different frequencies.
That is the rationale behind the Jap loudness controls which boost the treble and bass on cheap nasty stuff.
It could be why some small speakers have boosted treble and bass, too.

[SCIDB]

Hi,

I'm another small wattage user. I have used a few sub 10 watts per channel amps. I currently use a Border Patrol single ended amp which is rated at 9 watts. I too use Living Voice speakers. The Avatars OBXs. I also use Impulse horn speakers. I like the low power amp/ high sensitivty speaker approach. I don't find them lacking for my tastes in music. (Some of it bass heavy).

I agree that the amp has got to be able to drive the speakers in question. The quality of the amp, the ease of the load & type of speaker build can make the job easier. Light drivers such as doped paper will require less force to move them, good for subtle changes in the music, but need to be controlled. Horn speakers can go loud with little power but are usually big & can have a certain colouration. Using the Impulse horns, you can detect some coloration but you can get use to it & not notice it.

Most of the music you hear is at very low power, the peaks can draw big power. These peaks can last only a fraction of a second so having a high sensitivty will help to cope with this.

All systems have trade offs. As Robbo has stated it's all down to quality of the equipment & what you are happy with. (Strengths you like & weaknesses you can live with)

SCIDB