100 watt reciever not louder than 50 wat?
|
New member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 10 Registered: Feb-05 | Is this first statment correct If you have two recievers one with 100 rms watts and the other 50 watts rms and you turn both their volumes up half way, the 100 watt system is only " ever so slightly" louder than the previous. Then the only advantage the 100 watt system would have is that it produced the sound incredibly better than the 50 watt at that same volume. Is this second statement correct. The optimal speaker/reciever match would be the following....for a receiver rated 100 watts rms per channel get speakers that do 50 watts rms at 100 wat max......or......a receiver rated 50 watts rms per channel get speakers that do 25-30 wats rms. What would happen if u had a reciever that did 50 rms per channel, but had speakers that also did 50 rms. Any insite will be appreciated. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TevoChicago, IL USA Post Number: 23 Registered: Feb-05 | [cross posted] from "Wattage specs" thread Neither one of those statements is correct. Wattage is not the sole arbiter of the sonic quality of a given component. There are so many other factors which, in sum, can make or break the sound quality. If having the most accurate reproduction of music/sound was solely dependent on wattage... hi-fidelity would be a cakewalk. And all those folks on single digit wattage s.e.t.'s are out of their minds (j/k). Here, these articles may provide more insight: http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/buyingguides/AVreceiversbuyingguide.php http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/amplifiers/basicamplifiermea surements.php |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Yes, you have so many poor assumptions or missing in action asumptions, that the only thing correct about your comments is you have two receivers. You overlook input voltage, log/linear scale volume controls, gain in the circuits, power supply stiffness and regulation and so on. The articles may clear up some of your informational gaps. But do not go shopping until you understand at least one thing: SPEAKERS DON'T GOT NO WATTS! |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 12 Registered: Feb-05 | Thanks for posting. I definetly understand where u are coming from. This is a concept that i am trying to grasp. I will admit the first examples i gave were quite horrible. BUT I BELIEVE that the theory i am thinking of is correct. NOT THAT U ARE WRONG, just that there is a missunderstanding as to what i want to know....Let me PLEASE try one last time. So, once again are these statments true...... 1. In order to make sound twice as loud you need to add 10 dB to it. 2. Ten times the power is needed to make the sound twice as loud. 3. So, if u wanted a receiver that was twice as loud than a 50 watt, you would need a reciever of 500 watts. 4. So, a 100 watt reciever is only sightly (3dB) louder than a 50 watt. Please try to work with me here. I DEFINETLY accept critisim. It helps me learn. However, i am not at the pont of knowing all factors yet. Im sure that i've left things out.But i really think that im on to something. I will now check out those links while i wait for more imput. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | You are correct IF everything else is equal. The problem is there really are seldom two examples of amplifiers that are equal from 50 to 100 watts. As you spend time listening to better quality components, you will find a very well built 50 watt amplifier will kick a mediocre 100 watt unit out of the room and down the hall. Quality is more important than quantity. So what are you going to do with those two receivers you've got? |
|
Bronze Member Username: DjwagesPost Number: 20 Registered: Jan-05 | Concept 1...Watts = Volts X Amps. Its only a measurement tool. Increase either Volts or Amps to increase wattage. Most mid to low end amps these days use Voltage amplification (150w but weighs only 10 lbs) to boost the wattage rating (small pipe faster flow) They do this to save costs and weight. But try to push lots through a small pipe and you lose efficiency and have a lower ceiling. Higher end amps as well as many older amps use Current (AMP) amplification (big pipe slower flow) to increase wattage. Current amplification has greater potential and is more effecient. Most voltage amplified receivers are over inflated in their wattage ratings. Most current amplified recievers are under rated. Or at least it seems that way when they are put to the test. Concept 2 - Speakers: Their ratings are hard to compare across manufacturers and even sometimes withing the same maker. Most of the non-pro lines of speakers are rated not just based on their peaks but the manufacturers take into account the ignorance of their customers, varying quality of the receiver/amps that will be driving them and adjust the numbers to protect themselves from these factors. I personally ignore RMS (root mean square wattage) and look for peak. You then need to look at the efficiency of the speaker. Then size and number of drivers is the final factor. Size does matter! I does not matter how much wattage you put to a speaker, a 6.5" driver can only produce so many dB. As far as power to produce sound, as frequency decreases linearly there is a parabolic increase required to produce x dB. As this frequency decreases and sound level increases this is where voltage amplification chokes. Thus we see smaller speakers for sale to match up with the cheap amps. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | There are some points in the above post I would take exception to if it were not the fact that everything has its price. I learned long ago in audio (particularly) there are always trade offs. Nothing comes without its cost and if I give you one thing, I'm likely to take away two. Just when you begin to think you have it figured out, you realize how much you don't know. The description of current vs. voltage driven amps is basically true. Though the switch to voltage driven amps began almost thirty years ago when IC output stages were introduced. (And ignores that the oldest technology of vacuum tubes is a voltage source.) I usually explained volts and amps to my customers as the equivalent of horsepower and torque. Horsepower/volts will determine the limits of performance in many areas. Without current or torque to get you off the line and get control of the situation, it will take you forever to get to the point where horsepower/voltage makes a difference. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 14 Registered: Feb-05 | U people are going to get mad at me. It is NOT that i am ingnoring your responses. It may seem like that, but i assure you its not the case. I will definetly read them over and over until i get them. Its just that its way over my head right now. This next senario is for matching speaker to reciever. Not speaker to speaker. To me it seems like the rms watt speck for speakers is not all that important. The more important factors would be decibal sensitivity, size, ohms, and number of drivers. Would it be safe to assume when looking at speakers watts, you only need to make sure its max watt is above ur reciever max output. Therefore, wouldnt it only make sense to pay attention to rms watts on a speaker when comparing it to another speaker ? |
|
Bronze Member Username: TevoChicago, IL USA Post Number: 25 Registered: Feb-05 | No. To me, the most important measurement to look for in a speaker is: frequency response, impedance, and sensitivity. Within reason (+ ~50 watts or so?), it is difficult to overdrive a speaker with too much power. Almost always they are damaged by *underdriving* them, resulting in a phenomenon know as amplifier clipping. I wouldn't get to obsessed with measurements. While they are useful comparators, they don't tell the whole story. And ultimately, the whole story is how well the component- be it speaker, amplifier or source- reproduces music. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 15 Registered: Feb-05 | Tevo, (Keeping within ur reasoning of about 50 watts) Pairing two floor-standing speakers that had a max watt handling of 200 watts....with a reciever that only had a max output of 50 watts per channel...would be a disaster. But, pairng say two satelite speakers that had a max watt of 50 paried with a reciever that had a max output of 100 watts per channel would not be as risky |
|
Bronze Member Username: TevoChicago, IL USA Post Number: 27 Registered: Feb-05 | You are thinking in absolute terms. Hi-Fi has tendency to resist absolute terms.  If you are trying to drive those 200w max rated floor-standers with a 50wpc receiver at moderate listening levels... chances are you may not run into problems. I don't and neither of my systems can be considered "wattage endowed", by any means. Now if you want to fully reproduce the sound pressure levels of your favorite symphony live at concert hall, your amplifier may run out of steam (and clip). You may also notice degradation of the sound- the dynamics of the music become compressed, smeared and distorted. Also, remember that speakers do not present a uniform load throughout the frequency range. A speaker rated at nominal 8 ohms can drop below that *nominal* impedence. Perhaps giving us a practical context of what you require or wish to achieve (component & music wise) can allow us to help you better? Are you building a home theater system? A two-channel stereo system? |
|
jamnpi Unregistered guest | Phill,I think you maybe confusing the power rating (handling) of a speaker with power producing. A speaker doesn't produce power, rather it is rated to be capable of "handling" a certain level of power. One typically would like their speakers to be rated at two to three times the capability of ones receiver/amp , so you don't blow your speakers if driving them at the full power of the amp. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 16 Registered: Feb-05 | Well, it all starts with me just having a natural interest with computers, audio, and video. Specifically i want to set up a mini theater. The theater is going to be in a small room. Maybey even too small for a projector, but ive worked it out and it seems like it will work good enough. With my back against the wall, the screen will be 10 feet infront of me. It is a 10 x 12 foot room. I want surround sound, but those HTIB arent that great in terms of power. My room might not need that much power. I am new to audio, and want to UNDERSTAND things like " how to determine the loudnes at a certain distances". So i can pick out a audio system knowing what it will do for me. I have about a 500 dollar budget, would like to go cheaper though. Just before i wrote this i was looking at this site http://www.musicalfidelity.com/mf/en/News/news.jsp?nid=3777 The info on that place is gold to me. To get even more specific i was at one time trying to determine the better of these two systems: ( I know im comparing a reciever-system to a powered-system.) Yamaha YHT-150....the pdfs are below http://www.yamaha.com/yec/customer/manuals/PDFs/NS-AP1500.pdf http://www.yamaha.com/yec/customer/manuals/PDFs/HTR_5730.PDF Logitech Z 5500....no pdf on this only site below http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/details/US/EN,CRID=2177,CONTENTID=948 6 Both of these systems can be found righ now for $300 each. It seems that computer based speaker systems have caught up and even surpassed the entry reciever-speaker setup. And my interest (which is a big part of my theater project in the first place) has grown to the point of me wanting to know things like wattage per decible. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 17 Registered: Feb-05 | is the table on this page true to all recievers, or does this increase in dB vary from systme to system. http://www.musicalfidelity.com/mf/en/News/news.jsp?nid=3777 |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 18 Registered: Feb-05 | Is it true that the higher the dB speck ur speakers have, the less power is need from a reciever. So, if u had a reciever doing 100 wats per channel. And u had speakers that were doing 80 dB each. And u swaped the speakers with ones that did 90 dB each. The reciever would be processing the sound more efficiently, and thus you would have a louder system than before. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 19 Registered: Feb-05 | So, when u see those HTIB setups, they have it like this..... we have some low end speakers that arent that efficient at producing sound, so we are going to need alot of power to make them work. but instead of actually providing more "quality" power, we will just list a decent watt, but make the reciever do only 6 ohms. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 20 Registered: Feb-05 | would a good example of the above be this sony system.....the pdf is on this page under the specifications header. http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_Display ProductInformation-Start?ProductSKU=HTDDW660&Dept=hav&CategoryName=hav_HomeTheat er_HTSeries#specs |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 21 Registered: Feb-05 | But, at the same time, if i have speakers that are good in the dB department....i dont want to have my reciever watts (or the correct mix of reciever specs) too low, or ill start clipping. Right? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 22 Registered: Feb-05 | Tevo wrote: "Also, remember that speakers do not present a uniform load throughout the frequency range. A speaker rated at nominal 8 ohms can drop below that *nominal* impedence. " So, if u are running a reciever with "low" (im not sure im alowed to say watts any more) watts and the above happens, then i am at greater risk of clipping due to the fact that my reciever now has to work harder to compensate for the ohms drop. Which in fact, is what happens when it "runs out of steam". Could all that above be an example of why an underpowered reciever would do damage. And this could be the one of many examples of why someone would want a reciever with lots of power. Its more like covering yourself from the "left over" factors. --------------------- So, a good way to match a reciever with a set of speakers would be to..... 1. Know how loud in dB i want the sound to be when sitting from the speakers from x amount of distance. 2. Know the sensitivity of the speakers. 3. Know how many watts i will need in order to play the sound at that seating distance, while taking the loss of dB in consideration. ( the loss of dB would be due to the increased distance of speakers to my ears.) number (3) is with the understanding of speaker sensitiviy being rated under the condition of 1 watt / one meter distance (although i dont fully understand how that works) |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 23 Registered: Feb-05 | When comparing the yamaha and sony recievers that i mentioned earlier, it could be said that the yamaha is of much better quality. They both have 6 ohm loads = draw The sony has 50 rms watts per channel, when the yamaha has 100 rms watts per channel = yamaha wins The yamaha has a 0.1 THD, so thier watts are problably very accurate. The sony's has 0.7 THD......so doesnt that mean that sony was just trying to make their receiver "look" better by doing that. So then, the sony's rated rms of 50 watts is b.s. In fact, wouldnt that make it something like 30 rms watts? Or if not that, it would just mean that even though it does 50 watts, its not quality. So then, 50 watts rms at .1 THD at 6 ohms...is better than.....50 watts rms at .7 THD at 6 ohms? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 24 Registered: Feb-05 | Is it a safe assumption, wattage wise, recievers dont really differ from each other that much. So, as a general guideline, just have the reciever do 100 watts to each channel. Then go and scrutinize everything else. ----------- Oh my God listen....Is the first receiver more powerful than the second ( keeiping in mind that all speakers were created equal for this example) 1. 100 watt per channel, 0.1 THD, 8 ohms 2. 100 watt per channel, .7 THD, 6 ohms |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 25 Registered: Feb-05 | If anybody reads any of this God Bless Them..... (If all speakers were created equal for this example) Could this be a list of recievers in order from most powerful to least powerful? 1. 100 watt, 0.1 THD, 8 ohms 2. 100 watt, 0.7 THD, 8 ohms 3. 100 watt, 0.1 THD, 6 ohms 4. 100 watt, 0.7 THD, 6 ohms Now, im pretty sure that (1) and (4) are in the correct places. If anything, i messed up the (2) and (3) place holders. So, what weighs more, total harmonic distortion, or ohms. ( is ohms another name for impedence ) Im thinking its just not possible to "accurately" decide these kind of things without the values of the speakers too. I will never give up. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TevoChicago, IL USA Post Number: 29 Registered: Feb-05 | You're still a little hung up on the spec sheet but I think you're starting to put it together. Ah... now that I see what you intend to do: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0964084988 "Home Theater For Everyone: A Practical Guide to Today's Home Entertainment Systems" by Tomlinson Holman. This should provide you a solid reference on your questions. Cheers. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 27 Registered: Feb-05 | Thanx alot! So many things in my head.... Well, i guess ill give the forums a rest for now. I have some reading to do. |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 352 Registered: Sep-04 | Phil You need to *stop* reading and *start* listening. The various bits of kit can be put together in a whole extra number of combinations, so you can get very different results from each combination. This means that the individual numbers don't necessarily give you much more than a rough guideline to how that piece of kit will perform. It's the combination that counts, and even then, there may be some salient bit of information which is not required to be divulged that could affect the performance of a piece of kit in one combination more than in another combination. Add to this the fact that in your area your dealers will have chosen kit for other reasons such as brand loyalty, markup, after-sales service, their view of which combinations work and which don't, etc. and you will be able to pull together less information, but possibly a better 'feel' for the subject than by simply reading the subject matter. It's a bit like reading the brochure and then visiting the place - the brochure will give you an idea, but the actual experience is a whole other ballgame! Many decent dealers can give you an idea of performance by doing demonstrations. The demonstration gives you a good idea of how the combination works irrespective of the power ratings and speaker numbers. A $500 system will be matched against other similarly priced systems and you may find tat since the system is relatively inexpensive, dealers may not give you demonstration simply becuas eit's not worth their while economically. If you do find a dealer willing to do so (he may have it all setup already), you'll be able to actually hear what all those numbers mean in practice in a particular configuration - and that will mean more to you than all the numbers put together. Go out and hear some stuff. Regards, Frank. |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 353 Registered: Sep-04 | By the way, a 3db difference is twice as loud, not 10db. So if you sit at your couch and the sound received at this point is, say, 80db, then if you turn up the volume so the sound is 83db, it will be twice as loud. 86db is twice as loud as 83db etc. It's a logarithmic scale. Regards, Frank. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TevoChicago, IL USA Post Number: 30 Registered: Feb-05 | Hmmm... I think I need to revisit my physics texts... Although a 3dB change is a doubling of intensity on the decibel scale, I thought 10dB was needed to produce a doubling in perceived loudness, i.e. a sound that our hearing registers as being twice as loud. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 28 Registered: Feb-05 | Thanks for repling Frank, I have been up and down the internet. I've searched through forums, audio inclined sites, and personal sites. For at least 3 or 4 days, nouthing but constant thinking, pondering, and putting "these numbers" with "those numbers". You see, i am doing this not only for the fact that i want a new surround sound system, but to learn as well. Yes, i know it would take years of school to understand audio at the level I DESIRE. And i could go around these fourms all day, but i will not stop thinking until i can grasp a certain understanding of audio. The below is only to explain where i come from. I have been mainly video inclined. Im just a beginner with that too, but i can tell u the differences in video quality based on the "scope aspect ratio" of movies when viewing them on a traditional NTSC tv set with an aspect ratio of 4/3 and a "high defenition" hdtv with an asepect ratio of 16/9. I can tell u that u would be sacrificing your "lines of horizontal resolution" on the NTSC set by dropping from 480 "lines of horizontal resolution" to 267 lines. And i just found that number now by wipping out the xp calculator and dividing the horizontal resoulution of the NTSC tv (640) by the desired aspect ratio (2.4) and arriving at the vertical resolution of 267. all that above i can understand. There are still things i need to learn about video, BUT...... i can tell u that trying to understand audio is completely different. AUDIO IS CRAZY. for example If u were to ask a video guy how much vertical resolution ur tv displayed..... he could say 480, or he could get technical by subtracting certain aspects from the actual broadcast. Giving you a slightly smaller number. But in the end all 4/3 NTSC tv sets have the EXACT SAME vertical resolution. AUDIO IS NOT LIKE THIS...video to a degree seems more defined than audio does. It is possible to determine quality from video mathmatically much better than u could do for audio. Audio is to subjective. And it like that by nature, so there is no "real defenition of what is". Sure the same could be said to many things (including video). But audio is on a much more drastic level. Im still gonna try though......... And yes Frank, i did try to get a demo yesterday, but the circuit city girl couldn't get the demo to work. I'll have to try again sometime But i would like to understand at least the basics of audio before i enjoy the sound from my future system. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 30 Registered: Feb-05 | i thought it was like this..... a decible is the smallest thing the human ear can detect. then, 3 decibles is a sligh noise. and in order for something to be twice as loud as something else, it has to gain in 10 decibles now in order for an ampliphier to produce an increas of 3 decibles, it has to put out twice the watts. And thats why its largarithmic. It has such drastic ratio of watts to decibles. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | "I learned long ago in audio (particularly) there are always trade offs. Nothing comes without its cost and if I give you one thing, I'm likely to take away two." "Hi-Fi has tendency to resist absolute terms." I agree with Frank that you need to be out experiencing what the various components do and sound like when combined. There are some on this forum that have spent decades aquiring our knowledge and it is not so easily condensed into bits and drabs to be useful. My suggestion would be to get out to a decent shop, not a big box store that also sells appliances and computers. Find a shop with a parking lot meant to hold a handful of interested clients. When you enter look around for the salesperson with some gray in their hair. If none are available, ask for the manager and explain you're new to audio and would like a salesperson who will be willing to give you some good information even if you're not ready to buy at the moment. Listen to what the salesperson says and demonstrates. Go from there. P.S. Discount anything a friend with a car hifi or a salesperson who has to shout over the roar of five competing systems has to say. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Totally ignore anyone, male or female, who cannot get the display to operate. It may be that some *6%!!*&%* idiot got in there before and *%$##@* it up. If you think that's really the case, give the salesperson your condolences and run, don't walk, away immediately. Chances are you have found a shop that just promoted the person who sold the most mixers last month. If you persist in frequenting these establishments, you may want to wear a small crucifix for protection at the last minute. Another P.S. I sold audio for 25 years. I have nothing against good salespeople. In fact they have my respect; it's a dificult job at times. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 31 Registered: Feb-05 | i see wat u guys mean....places like circuit city are dumb. I'll walk into those places with questions and only walk out disappointed. I dont even want to get into my best buy experience...that was more like "comedy hour with the audio guy". I will eventually make a point to go somewhere for a worthwhile demo. Its prob the best thing for me. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | You might want to take in a few concerts bewteen now and then to refresh your memory of how music actually sounds. Beyond all the numbers, knowing what you are looking for in sound is more important than simply knowing what you like. |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 358 Registered: Sep-04 | Phil, First, let me apologise if I came across as less than well meaning. I may have been a bit forceful in my note above and did not intend it to be so. I simply meant to make the point that if you go out and hear several systems, you will have much greater understanding of what those numbers mean. With due respect, the lower end of the market such as that which you're looking at isn't catered for particularly well in terms of demo time. The circuit city type places do suffer from less experienced staff and knob twiddling public who screw up settings on a regular basis. Therefore, it's more of a learning experience if you bear screw-ups with a smile since you may learn how the system reacts to changes in settings or components. Given that these larger establishments have little time for the customer due to low profit margins and high turnover, it's not exactly surprising that the quality of the staff is not as good as one would wish. To be honest I feel sorry for those staff since most of the time, those establishments don't even give them much of a chance or the environment to learn about the products they're selling. Your problem is compounded by the fact that a good dealer is unlikely to deal in the lower end stuff so although you'll find expertise there, it's not directly related to your purchasing process, and it's not ethical to go to a dealer and use his time if you have absolutely no intention of paying for it. You have to strike a sensible balance in this. You could be up front with a dealer and say what you're looking for. If he really is a good dealer, he may take you under his wing, or suggest a better location for you. Naturally, he'll try to sell you up to a more expensive system, but at least you've been honest and he knows the score so it's his baby if he spends time with you with no sale. The thing is that the good HiFi dealers aren't in the business for the money. Yes, they sell high priced stuff but generally speaking the HiFi industry is in pretty dire straits due to reduced margins and a shrinking market. What this means is that the better dealers simply love the stuff and want to impart more understanding to the general public, as well as earn their daily crust, so you're more likely to get a better understanding from a good dealer simply because s/he needs to share his passion with people. Regards, Frank. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | It's quite possible a good dealer will have some used gear to include in the sale to get you started. The one function of a good dealer that you will never find in a big box is the knowledge they can impart. Part of that knowledge is how to take your money and, over the course of a few upgrades that are built in to the purchase, get you to a point where you have a very good dollar for sound value. I find a client who is on a path they understand is much more likely to end up where they want to be. Don't get impatient with the upgrades. And listen to live music as much as possible. It eliminates a lot of the clutter in what you hear. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 34 Registered: Feb-05 | i will definetly keep all this in mind. Im starting to think that best buy just wont cut it for me. A more audio centered place just might be the place for me, at the rate ive been talking. But, im not going to be able to do any purchaseing until a few months from now. And as much as id like to go somewhere right now, i dont think it would be fair to the guy spending all his expertice on me. I wouldnt want them to wait months for a sale. And, i would understand and experience any demonstrations much better walking in with a little knowledge. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 35 Registered: Feb-05 | Now, i think im starting to understand why nobody likes me trying to figure this stuff out just based soley on specs. For example..... If u have two recievers, one being a yamaha, the other a sony....now, they both have the same exact specs...and, the same speaker setup. For whatever unknown reason the yamaha will produce a better cleaner sound to the center channel. But the sony, for whatever unknown reason, will produce better overall "lows". now if that could be a realistic, real-world example....then WHAT ARE SPECKS FOR ?? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 36 Registered: Feb-05 | Is this a resonable thought. If u have some really good speakers ( like say 500 watt rms, 2000 watt max ) and a reciever that does 100 watt per channel. And everything is 8 ohms. when ur turning up the volume knob, the speakers are'nt getting very loud...their like " come on, i need more power...COME ON GIVE ME SOME MORE !" then ur reciever is like " well that idiot keeps turning me up so......" and then ur reciever is starting to clip..clip..clip...BANG the dude blew his powerful speakers because he was using an underpowerd amp. |
|
Bronze Member Username: TevoChicago, IL USA Post Number: 32 Registered: Feb-05 | Specifications are a point of reference and useful for comparison and determining the parameters and framework within which a component will function as their designers intended. Just because a certain car has more horsepower doesn't make it a bona fide "better" car than another. Yet it is a useful specification to compare one car with another, yes? My friend, slow down, perhaps get those books that I suggested and just go listen. But... since you you persist... here's some more reading material: http://www.audioholics.com/FAQs/equalvolumelevelsreceivers.php http://www.audioholics.com/FAQs/wattsvsdBs.php http://www.audioholics.com/FAQs/010625_equalpower.php |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Specs are for impressing the rubes and filling space on a piece of paper. Didn't I already put it somewhere in this thread: SPEAKERS DON'T GOT NO WATTS! Go into a decent shop on a slow day in the middle of the week. Explain your situation and they will help you. Do not try to get your education on a busy Saturday. Salespeople make a living at this. Let them earn their money when they can and they will be more interested in helping you when they would otherwise be cleaning shelves. |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 365 Registered: Sep-04 | Jan's on the money. Also walk in and be clear with the dealer. Simply say you're looking to buy a system in a few months' time. A good dealer will talk to you if he has the time. If he says he's sorry but it's really busy then obviously that's life, but if he gives you te time of day, you don't need to feel bad about using his time. I get customers in like you a lot. I spend more time with people like you because eventually you will spend more with me and your sale will be more interesting than many other sales. Regards, Frank. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | If you spend the time with a salesperson, you are under no legal commitment to spend money with that salesperson. Having sold audio for awhile, I'm quite frustrated by those who wish only for the lowest price. I've voiced my opinions about this matter too many times on this forum to repeat the issue. I have seen the questions of "how do I do" this and "how bad did I screw up". A good dealer will give you what you pay for, their service is included in the sale. An internet seller is interested in the next email with an offer of cash. A good dealer is interested in making you happy so you'll return to their brick and mortar shop. A good dealer will eventually know you by name. My opinion, in short, is you will benefit more in the long run by spending a few dollars at a dealer interested in your welfare. The benefit may not be apparent at first, but take my advice, you will see the benefit when your kit sounds better than your friend's for much less money actually spent. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 37 Registered: Feb-05 | i am a person who likes to get the "bang for ur buck deal". I am also the person who likes to "know his system", not just succesfully pick out the right one and use it. Bang for ur buck, to me, means maybey having to pay a little more for the product, but getting alot more back in audio form. NOT THAT I THINK YOU WERE IMPLYING THIS, because by the way u typed it i know you weren't...i am not "cheap"...and i pride myself on that. I believe it makes me a "smarter" person. Example... I would rather not pay 50 "dollars" for 30 "worth of sound". Instead i would rather pay 100 "dollars" for 150 "worth of sound" the above was me "trying" to explain a ratio. |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | That works. The local dealer will get you that exactly. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Thinker311Post Number: 38 Registered: Feb-05 | Now, i will eventually just buy a book,(instead of writing my own on this forum all the time) go to the sales guy, and also let my ears do some thinking. But.......... I can't help it. Proof that i'm going too fast for my own good is that the same thing had to be said twice. I will get that book, for 20 bucks, sure ill get it. I just wish it were titled "the physics of dymamic sound"....and had some kind of atom design of the front. haha, it would look good on my desk...u know. But until i order that thing, i cant stop wandering this and wandering that. Im sorry, but i must bother u with the details of a real-world test i did. This test was not initially to determine the "better" of these two systems.It was only to note thier differences. I will only be listing the watt to tell the "class" each component is in. It seems to me that "music sounds" and "movie sounds" go hand in hand. But to make things as clear as possible, i am mostly interested in movies. Test conditions....... Play two diff scenes in "The Matrix Reloaded". The first scene was a "dialouge scene" where Neo was talking to the Oricle at the park. The second test scene is at the very start of the movie when Trinity smashes out the window. In the room downstairs, i have a sony receiver (100 rms watt per channel) and a pair of bose floor-standing speakers that mesure 31" high, 7" wide. I can only see two 2" cones on each speaker. These speakers ran at 6 ohms, but do not run on any watts. The second setup was in a diff room that was half the size. In there i have my logiech 2.1 system that gives off a total of 33 rms watts. This is connected to a sound blaster audigy 2 sound card. Now, i know that these are two drastically different technologies here with one of my systems being an "active" or "powered" syetem. And i also know ur getting into diff things with one having the source of a "stand alone" dvd player and the other having a computer drive backed by a Pentium 4 processor. However, it still seemed like a pretty good test. Finally, I adjusted the volumes individualy, not together. I adjusted the volume on the sony that i "though" was best for the sony. And then did the same process for my logitech. With that said, the volume of the sony was a little less than half way, and the logitech was dead half. Overall Conclusion...... Even though i was not innitially deciding between the better of the two, it was immediately apparent that i preferred the logitech system. And it was for resons that i didnt think would be main factors in my liking or dis-liking an audio system. I have not solved any problems of my understanding of audio, but am coming closer as to knowing "what i want". But, due to this recent test, i feel that i must start all over in my theories and "overall process" of picking out a system. Details of Test Conclusion...... of couse, being myself, i hypothesized that the sony system would be the better of the two. It had an amplipheir that could pump 100 watts into each of the large floor-standing speakers. So, naturally i thought it would have to be better than a little 6.5 watt per channel pc setup. Well.... the sony did play the movie scenes "louder" than the logi. But it was not "better" sound. the sony played ok but the fact that it was louder (and problably more powerful) did not make it better. A good example of this..... ----------- (the scene) - Trinity crashing out the window. Specifically the sounds of "slow-motion" glass shatter and the effect of a bullet flying past her head just as she points her guns. ----------- with the sony system it was in fact louder. But when the logitech system played it....MAN, what a difference in sound quality. Prob due to the sub woofer, but still, even the semi-high glass noises were great. The flying bullet really "wooshed" by my head. Needless to say gentalmen, this boggled my mind. Not only by the fact that i favored a system with much less power, but by the fact that it was so apparent to me. My whole philosophy has changed, i dont want a system based on the best combination of specks...instead i want a system taliored to the room it will be in..and also made to fit my "preferences". The above will never change the fact that i will still want to put specs on the table. I dont think that i will ever be cured of that. But, my philosophy has changed. Reasons for me perferring the logitech system could be........ well, i was closer the the speakers, which made a difference. But i realize now that i prefer great sound close up, opposed to "ok" sound from far away when listened to at the same dB level. now, the sony had larger speakers, but the fact that the logitech had a sub-woofer made a HUGE difference. I had always planned on getting a sub for my new system. And of course i knew how great a sub could be for explosions, but i didnt know how much they contributed to the "whole" of the system. The sub on the logi not only added loudness to the overall experience, but fullness as well. In fact, after this little demo, i think i could actually cut down on my "desired" power requirements and "overall" speaker standards. Another (and im sure one of the biggest factors) that made the logitech better was size of the room it was in. The room seemed like it could "hold" the sound better than the donwstairs area. the thing that really flipped me out was how much better the logitech performed on the "dialouge scene". It also flipped me out as to how important that is to me. Screw the power rating being high...if it doesnt sound clear when people talk, then i dont care. Amazing that i think this now. just so u know, the room with the logitech is actually gonig to be the room for my new system. i just need to get a system that will do good for the distance i will be listening. So, to end this crazy lengthed post, i will say that now i think i should focus less on "specks" and more on "concepts". |
|
J. Vigne Unregistered guest | Any salesperson will love you. |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 366 Registered: Sep-04 | Phil You're beginning to get a feel for the differences that count now. Don't get too hung up on the configurations. The important thing is that you heard two quite different combinations and that a) you heard a substantial difference and b) can evaluate how the specs work in each combination. Oh and you've just figured out that Bose isn't the best...(sorry - just had to have a go!) Regards, Frank. |
|
Bronze Member Username: DjwagesPost Number: 21 Registered: Jan-05 | You will find that there is a good deal of quality components (budget mid-fi) out there (off the beaten path) that are not much more and sometimes less than the crap you find at Jerkit_Silly (Circuit City) Best Buy etc. Names like NAD, Cambridge, B&W all have nice budget lines that you are much better off with. Yamaha, Denon and HK have decent products in their upper end but just because one is great doesn't mean all of their models are. |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics