Which receiver setting is best??
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2267 Registered: Jan-05 | I was curious and thought I'd get some feedback on this. I run mostly 4ohm speakers, but leave my receiver set at 8ohms. I've tried it both ways, and prefer leaving the receiver as is. Does anybody think that is wrong?? Should I change the setting, and why?? I personally think it sounds just as good using the 8ohm mode, plus it's easier on the receiver, right? |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5422 Registered: May-04 | How do you figure it's easier on the receiver? If it sounds "just as good" set on 8 Ohms and you have 4 Ohm speakers, why not place it on the 4 Ohm setting where it still sounds "just as good"? Why do you think they gave you the option? Do hand crank your car windows instead of using the power option because it lets in just as much air? Do you eat grass because you get just as full? Do you have any idea what the actual impedance of your speakers will be at any one frequency? |
|
Gold Member Username: Project6Post Number: 3743 Registered: Dec-03 | uh-oh |
|
Gold Member Username: DmwileyPost Number: 1007 Registered: Feb-05 | For once, I agree with Jan. Now I'm sure I need to have my head examined. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5424 Registered: May-04 | I can do that for you. Lean over the scanner and email a picture. |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 835 Registered: Sep-04 | Paul, You've got Cerwin Vegas - I thought they were 8 ohm. Also, typically an amp wired for 4 ohm operation suffers a little more distortion than one wired for 8 ohm operation. I don't know why this is, but it's something I was advised of by a friend of mine who is a HiFi manufacturer. Strictly speaking it should mean that 8-ohm operation is a little better. Regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2269 Registered: Jan-05 | Frank, I've been told that it was best to use the 8 ohm setting too, and no....mine are 4 ohm speakers. The newer CVs are 8 ohm though. Im a little disappointed in Jan though, because I thought he'd be capable of an answer with a little substance. |
|
New member Username: KidstereoPost Number: 9 Registered: Aug-05 | Paul, if your speakers are 4 ohms, and you run your receiver or amp at 8 ohms, there is a good chance that when you turn your stereo up to reference levels, or even close, you will blow your receiver. If your speakers are 4 ohm, then you must have an amp or receiver that can handle a 4 ohm load. Always avoid impedance mismatches. |
|
Silver Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 873 Registered: Jun-05 | Paul you have to factor in that you are putting lots of stress on the amplifiers,and remember I know you have the utmost praise for your Yammie.First of all it doesent have the dampning rating as a stereo amp to handle those kind of loads#2 you dont have the peak currents to deal with such a difficult load,which is in absolute terms modest Amps and small power supplies#3 you are running the risk of blowing a channel or worse all the channels,but hey its your money if you blow it you are gonna regret letting the wifey spend 7K on that carpet,but you know what you are doing right your a A/V expert right Huhh....? |
|
New member Username: NetsurferPost Number: 3 Registered: Sep-05 | Paul, assuming you aren't running a tube type receiver your output IC's probably aren't too happy right now. They probably retail for 10-35 dollars a piece and you probably have between 2 and ten of them, add in $100 labor to replace them..... Well, you see where this is going. Impedance mismatch is never a good thing, especially in solid state equipment, that is why there is a switch. If it was my receiver and it was running in an imbalanced situation, meaning its IC's are running hotter, shortening the probable life of the receiver, I sure as heck would flip the switch NOW, no matter "how it sounds". In the old days of tubes this wasn't as critical maybe that is where some of the lore comes from. That was then, this is now. PS: I recently had to replace 4 output IC's on one surround channel in my amp. The total repair cost with a two day burn in and rebalancing of those IC's set me back $257.00. Happy Listening, Mitch |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5428 Registered: May-04 | Paul - I long ago accepted the fact that you will always be disappointed in me and I in you. I've learned to let go and get on with my life. It's time you do the same, fella. First, let me tell Frank that Paul's Yamaha receiver is not wired into four Ohm output configuration. His receiver has a switch that can be slid to either eight Ohm operation or four Ohm protection mode. The point of this switch is to provide protection when the amplifier is connected to a low impedance load. This is in no way an amplifier that is wired for a four Ohm load. It is an amplifier that is adapted to work into four Ohm load without going into thermal run away. That's the answer, Paul, I thought you might have understood that from the answer I provided. As Mr. Wiley implies, my answer is correct if you know what the issue really is. The switch that allows four Ohm operation is a protection switch/circuit. I am not privy to what or how Yamaha designs their protection switch to operate. In a most basic function, it could be no more than a load resistor placed in line to maintain a higher impedance load. In some cases it could be a circuit which limits voltage/current flow to keep the amplifier running cooler. To find out which type of protection circuit your receiver utilizes, you will have to contact Yamaha or one of their representatives. There is no "correct" answer beyond what I have already provided until you know what type of protection devices you are dealing with. But, I hasten to add, the issue is protection. I cannot believe that the owner's maunal which came with your receiver doesn't state something to the effect "when connected to four Ohm rated speakers, switch the amplifier to four Ohm operation". In that case, why would you not do as instructed? It is a matter of protecting the amplifier against the possibilty of damage to itself by a loose nut at the volume control. If you can detect no difference in sound quality when the switch is providing its alotted protection, why not utilize the protection just in case? Here are two more examples of protection that might make more sense to you. Do you ignore house, health and automobile insurance because nothing has happened yet? I probably don't want to know the answer to that question, because I'll find out I'm paying higher rates since you think it works just as good without. OK. How about this for an issue of protection? How many kids do you have? I bet you wife takes care of that protection, doesn't she? Tawaun gave a very good answer. Go kiss your wife and aplogize to her for everything. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5429 Registered: May-04 | One more thing. You should know what the total impedance swing, across the frequency bandwidth, of your speakers amounts to. But, I said that before and got ignored. Let me make it more easily understood. At any given frequency, you should have some idea what the impedance load of the speaker system is that your amplifier's output stages are working into. Then add to that, the amount of electrical phase shift included in the impedance swing is also important to know since that determines whether your speakers are a reactive, resistive or benign load to the amplifier. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5431 Registered: May-04 | i've got 95 ford. i been running it with the hand brake on and not letting it get out of second gear cause i was told the engine has more power the higher it revs. At first this seemed to make the car not run right. But after 5o,ooo miles with the hand brake on it doesn't seem to matter anymore. Will this affect the sound of my car hifi? And i know this isn't the right part of the forum but when should i change the oil and do i have to change all of it? oils really expensive right now thanks to those dirty rotten arabs. |
|
Silver Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 883 Registered: Jun-05 | Jan if Paul doesent understand anything you said then leave him be,I mean good god Paul you already know that your speakers are 4 ohms,I mean what kind of responses are looking for,the 4 ohm to 8 ohm switches are there and you know it,I mean come on man its idiot proof even someone of your low level intelligence can understand that it is for safety precautions so you dont damage your amp or your speakers.Are you sure you have been to college it certainlly doesent show,hell im questioning high school now,going to visit one of your buddies for drunken poker doesent count Paul. |
|
anonymousII Unregistered guest | For one real experts answer to this question go to audioholics.com/techtips/buyingguides/AVreceiversbuyingguide.php. You'll find it differs from the self appointed experts on this board and makes much more sense. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2280 Registered: Jan-05 | I dont think there is a firm 'best way'. The answer probably varies for each reciever brand/make which is why I asked for feedback, because I thought it was an interesting question to ask that hasnt been touched on before in this forum. Which is best??? I think it depends on your receiver. It just so happens that my receiver happily drives them to their fullest which is all that matters. I think those who are blowing channels driving 4 ohm speakers can only blame themselves for buying cheap receivers. |
|
Silver Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 896 Registered: Jun-05 | Or by ignoring the impediance settings like your doing. |
|
anonymousII Unregistered guest | Obviously Paul and Tawaun have not read the item I mentioned. |
|
Silver Member Username: DiabloFylde Coast, England Post Number: 237 Registered: Dec-04 | anonymousII, You will find that a lot of people don't bother to look at references unless provided with a link. If you do, e.g. Audioholics recommendation on speaker selection switches, then they get read more. See the 'formatting tips' at the bottom of the posting screen to see how it is done. I notice that Gene DellaSala isn't offering any compensation in case his advice is wrong. Paul has obviously been using the 8 ohm setting at high volumes for quite a while, so the Yamaha isn't going to die instantly. But if the output circuits are subjected to higher than intended temperatures for many months it would be expected for their life to be shortened. |
|
anonymousII Unregistered guest | diablo, Thanks for the help with the link. I am not a very computer literate guy. My passion is audio not computers. Gene doesn't offer compensation nor does he need to. His point is that lowering the current is the wrong thing to do is correct and self evident if given a little thought. I would certainly take his advice much more seriously as someone who has been a pro in this field for years than the self appointed experts on this increasingly shrill and repetitive board. Again, thanks for the help and happy listening to all. |
|
Silver Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 899 Registered: Jun-05 | Well anonymous 2,how can a man like you say anything negative about anyone that has the courage to post their user id,while you hide behind a anonymous wall for safety like a hurricane is gonna crash into you.(gimme a break grow some balls before you say anything about anyone you coward)It didnt take expert to figure out that now did it? |
|
anonymousII Unregistered guest | Tawaun, It is because of people like you that earlier this year I decided to stop posting on this board. I am a long time gold member who though I didn't post for several months continued to read this board daily. A few weeks or so ago I couldn't contain myself any longer and had to reply to a particular question and have not been able to stop since. I find it amusing that your above post attacking me is the first from you I have read that is anywhere close to coherant or grammtically correct. Your usual rantings are barely readable. Maybe it takes someone to point out how wrong you are about a particular subject to get you to comment so it can be understood. Instead of slamming me why don't you learn how to use the English language correctly. |
|
Silver Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 903 Registered: Jun-05 | Well if your a gold member dont hide behind that anonymous id,just be a man and put your real user id up.Its funny how you ghosts come on here with so many opinions of what people who register say or insults for what they say,but why are you to cowerdly to say who are?Because the opposing insulte could make you look even more foolish than you already look.What is it is your ego that fragile? |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5470 Registered: May-04 | Impedance Selector Switches This so called feature, used by some manufacturers, is designed to prevent overheating of the receiver or damage to its output transistors because of excessive current flow. The manufacturer accomplishes this in one of 2 ways: 1) Stepping down rail voltage supplied to the power amp or 2) feeding half the signal strength to a voltage divider of power resistors. Both of these methods severely limit dynamics and current capability of the power amp. This results in an audible decrease in bass capability and dynamics transient sound because the 4 ohm setting effectively increases the receiver's output impedance. Unfortunately many manufacturers put these features on their products to ease customer concerns with driving low impedance loads and for safety reasons when getting UL approvals. Note: In order to meet UL requirements, a receiver cannot be rated down to 4 ohms without having this switch onboard. Receivers without this switch are usually rated down to 6 ohms. In most cases, well designed receivers can easily handle 4 ohm loads safely and efficiently. It is highly recommend to keep the impedance switch set to 8 ohms regardless of your speakers impedance and make sure your receiver has plenty of ventilation. I still say the switch is your best protection when driving a speaker that presents a difficult load to the amplifer. I would say the important words here are "for safety reasons" and "well designed receivers". I was unaware the UL rating was dependent on this switch; however, the UL is concerned with safety and ignoring the UL guideline is a bit of foolishness comparable to leaving the plates off the AC outlets in the nursery. What type of safety are we talking about here? I would guess the type that possibly goes up in flames along with the rest of your house. I've certainly seen output transistors and boards that were scorched enough to start a fire. In fact, in a famous ad for a Marantz 2270B receiver ... well, let's just say, the house did burn down. As to a well designed receiver; when was the last time someone bought a new receiver they thought was not well designed? Even if it is not well designed, the average user thinks their system is top notch. Most of us know that is not always the case. So who is to say whether what any one person owns is a "well designed receiver"? Personally, I'd prefer a few more assurances than that blanket statement. Whether the protection circuit places resistors in the signal path or limits voltage/current, the effect is to raise the output impedance of the amplifier. To what degree? One advantage to a "well designed" transistor amplifier is their inherent low output impedance when direct coupled throughout and then to the speaker terminals. Usually this output impedance is less than 0.1 Ohm. In many cases lower than that number. Even raising this impedance to 0.2 Ohm will not have dire consequences in terms of output frequency response or amplifier damping factor unless the speaker connected at the outputs is of a very reactive nature. In which case a 0.1 Ohm output impedance amplifier still may have frequency deviations and overheat trying to deliver enough current to the outputs. While broadly correct in his statement, Mr. DellaSala does his readers a Julian Hirsch type disservice by such simplifications and advice. I assume if you asked Mr. DellaSala how to make ice cream, his answer would be, "get a cow". Knowing how your speaker will mate with your amplifier is still the best advice, in my opinion. A benign load at five Ohms is much easier to drive than a "nominal" eight Ohm load that peaks at 28 Ohms and has a dip in the bass response down to 3 Ohms. If that is coupled with a drastic electrical phase angle, a direct coupled amplifer will not like the load no matter whether it is "well designed" or not. It may survive, but frequency and damping factor will suffer under the latter instance and not so much under the former. If you cannot hear a difference with the switch in the four or the eight Ohm position, why take the chance? Let me repeat Mr DellaSala's advice with one short edit. This feature, used by some manufacturers, is designed to prevent overheating of the receiver or damage to its output transistors because of excessive current flow. Doesn't that sound better than: This so called feature, used by some manufacturers, is ignored by those who wish to cause overheating of the receiver and damage to its output transistors because of excessive current flow. As Mitch pointed out, if you want to blow up your receiver, it is your choice. But then why'd you bother to ask? |
|
Silver Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 906 Registered: Jun-05 | Most receivers cant handle thoses kind of impediance loads to begin with this thread also ties into that thread "Which way to spend" we covered most of this kind of stuff but I Guess thats why some of us into seperates were stating these kind of facts about receivers anyway lots of people payed it no mind,some speakers are just to harg for a receiver to handle,the Totem Mani 2 for instance has one of the most brutal impediance curves on the planet.Some speakers should never be mated to a receiver they are simply just not good enough,always consider if you are purchasing a receiver what speaker just wont work,some are not meant to be driven by a receiver,thats just the way the game is so is a $5k receiver a good idea i think not.A little off subject but then again it isnt. |
|
anonymousII Unregistered guest | Jan, Your smart alec comment about Julian Hirsch is totally uncalled for. The late Mr. Hirsch was one of the true giants of audio of the last 50 years and once again you have demonstrated your typical arrogant attitude. It's obvious you think you know more than the real experts who do this for a living and actually publish their opinions and facts in the real audio press but I think not. How many products have you tested and evaluated compared to Hirsch or DellaScala? Drop the know it all crap. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5472 Registered: May-04 | What's made you so touchy and so willing to call people names while you hide behind an unwillingness to show your identity? Someone tick you off and now you're afraid to show your self? Just a little bit of a wuss? Look, p-head, I came here to answer a question; I did , several times - you haven't. You came here to start fights. That everyone wants to knock somebody else off on this forum is getting very old. Stop being a smartass and say something useful or go back to reading your spec sheets. You pointed to an article that said what I said about how the function was performed. The article then went on to make a very unwise suggestion. If the switch was not there for protection, tell me in your anonymous gold member wisdom, why would it be required by the UL? Are you in the habit of ignoring UL recommendations? The comment regarding Mr. Hirsch was more than well intended and only a few complete fools would take it any other way. You call me arrogant. The definiton of arogant is proud. I'm proud enough to put my name on my posts and to answer questions. You do neither so you must not be very proud of the answers that gave you that revered gold member standing. Point out the error in what I say or go to another thread - on another forum. And now for a sniveling rebuttal by a complete fool .... take it away anonymousll |
|
anonymousII Unregistered guest | You did not answer my question. What makes you more of an expert than Hirsch and DellaSala? I already pointed out the error of your response to the original question by bringing up Mr. DellaSala's answer. That you think it is unwise is typical. You know more than everyone and try to prove with every post. If I want to answer a poster I will regardless of what you want me to do and I'll use whatever ID I want. I did not get back on this board to pick a fight with anyone. That type of poster is why I quit several months ago. Your attitude is very condesending and your know it all responses made it impossible for me not to respond. I sincerely do not wish for this forum to deteriorate into a shouting match so let's just both knock it off and agree to disagree on this point. Heck, Paul brought it up originally so let's blame him. For now, I wish you all a good night. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5473 Registered: May-04 | No wonder you can't answer a question; you can't read. DellaSala makes the suggestion you ignore UL safety recommendations. You shouldn't have to be smarter than anyone else or have tested any equipment to know that is very bad advice. The switch is there for protection. Use it or buy speakers and an amplifier that you know are better suited to one another. That is the answer. How many times do I have to repeat it? |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5474 Registered: May-04 | "If I want to answer a poster I will regardless of what you want me to do and I'll use whatever ID I want." Yeah, if you want to stick beans up your nose, you can do that too; huh? What kind of childish answer is that? Grow up, get a name and post a real answer that you thought up yourself. Don't rely on "experts" that give dangerous advice. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2293 Registered: Jan-05 | diablo, Your link sums up exactly what I've always been told with regards to the Impedance Selector Switch. Maybe it's meant to be a safety net for those who own crappy receivers that arent able to properly drive behemoth 4ohm speakers. Maybe they're scared their cheap underpowered receiver cant carry the load and will crack under pressure? Why someone would spend $1000 or more on a quality receiver and proceed to strip it down by using it with one arm tied behind it's back is beyond me. |
|
anonymousII Unregistered guest | I can read just find. I choose to believe someone else besides you and you can't handle that. I tried to bury the hatchet but your inflated ego won't allow that to happen. On this particular subject even Paul, who you consantly belittle has a closer grasp on the truth than you. I look forward to reading more of your sage advice on receivers. As to my use of anonymousII. Why does that bother you so much? It's just a name. Lots of posters don't use their real names on this board and there is no requirement that they do so. I didn't realize you set the rules here. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5479 Registered: May-04 | A'l - Go blow! If you look around this forum you can find multiple examples of how I deal with this forum. I can handle, in a similar manner, any discussion that is sensible and made in a civil fashion. Here lately the second of those qualities seems to be in particularly short supply on this forum. My original reply to your post was civil. Go back and read it. I didn't even address you; instead I civilly and calmly addressed the issue of the safety violation. You took offense at some comment that wasn't even directed at you. Then you decided I was fair game for some insults. You've done nothing but instigate since you supposedly showed back up on this forum, resurrected like Lazurus from your "former" gold status but cowering behind a veil. What name you choose doesn't bother me. It's your loutish behaviour that bothers me. Your recommendation of following a safety violation is not sensible and you choose to believe it because someone in an online journal promotes the idea. And because you have decided you won't believe any advice I give. How grown up is that? Can you not hold two ideas in your skull at the same time? How sensible is it to suggest violating safety codes just to spite someone on a forum? You tried to bury the hatchet after impugning my character one or more times. How grown up is that? Just what the hell is wrong with you? You get an answer and when it doesn't agree with what you want to foolishly think, so you call the person giving the answer arrogant and condescending. Then you complain when the next answer shows some anger at being attacked over and over again. A'l - Just how goofy are you? Paul - You ask a question, get an answer repeatedly and then choose to ignore the answer in favor of some twisted logic you prefer since it suits your distorted approach to audio. Of course, the de rigueur insult to everyone who isn't you is included. Why did you ask the question in the first place if you only wanted an answer that justified your own actions? This is like thinking your walls "absorb" signals beneath 36Hz. It's wrong, it's stupid, but you want to believe it because it's convenient to you. You want an answer only if it agrees with what you have already decided with no logic what so ever applied. You could have, and have, found a dozen stupid answers on your own. It's called a search engine, Paul. On your computer it's probably called a "what stupid things can I say" engine, but it's still there. Just how goofy are you? Here's the propsition I will make with both of you. Read my answers one more time. Find out why I say what I say. It's laid out in a sane and logical approach to the question. Then take this action instead of attacking me personally or ignoring my opinions based on shear ignorance. Show me a technical reason, demonstrate an example of where my statements are incorrect and I will discuss the situation in a civil and respectable manner. Do not lead me to somebody who you have just read. Especially when that person suggests actions that are not only senseless but extremely dangerous. Discuss this correctly or shut the hell up! Calling me arrogant one more time is not discussing the issue! Got it? I know I'm f...ing arrogant. So what? Telling me that for the thousandth time on this forum accomplishes what? Makes you feel better than me? Lets you avoid answering in a sane fashion? Lets you disengage your brain one more time? Get on with discussing hifi or get the hell off the forum. Stop calling me and everyone else on this forum arrogant or whatever the hell you want to call someone. Just get on with discussing hifi in an intelligent and civil manner. Please. OK, now for some p-brain to call me arrogant again ..... |
|
p-brain Unregistered guest | Jan, you are arrogant. Just so you are not disappointed.  |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2297 Registered: Jan-05 | Im worried about blowing my V-8 engine because of it's excessive horsepoer. I mean, c'mon...anything with that much horsepower might tempt me to use them. I think I'll remove a few cylinders and plug their voids to 'protect' my engine from working it's best. Sincerely, receiver owner with impedence selector set at 4ohms. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5483 Registered: May-04 | p - ha Paul - I'm very sorry. I forgot to add into the last post; P.I.S.S. 200 I'm going to need a new scale if you keep this up. |
|
anonymousII Unregistered guest | Jan, At least you recognize your own arrogance. That's a start. Do not tell me or anyone else to get off this forum. You do not run this even though you seem to think you do. Your insult of Mr. Hirsch is just plain wrong. How dare you insult someone of his credentials. Who are you? Just another poster, nothing more. You have every right to post here just as I do. Many of your posts are interesting even though you constantly insult other people. I'll keep reading and posting and look forward to your next ego trip. |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 841 Registered: Sep-04 | anonymousII, I think you were too late when you said "I sincerely do not wish for this forum to deteriorate into a shouting match". FWIW, I don't know why but Jan seems to have gone off the deep end on this one. It's a bit out of character in my (relatively short) experience. I am a little concerned with Mr DellaSala's advice. Some amplifiers really cannot cope well with '4-ohm' loads and this is why the switch became popular in the 70's. Tube amps really suffer of course, and they don't have a switch but a 4-ohm tap, so they take the more correct solution that DellaSala describes. This is true for pretty much all tube amps, and so the advice should not be ignored for them. Solid state amps can cope with more difficult loads more easily, partly due to higher damping factors (generally) and partly due to the use of lots of negative feedback. The thing is, if there is a switch, then the manufacturer is telling you that the amp requires that load setting for more difficult loads. If you ignore the setting, then at the least you will shorten the life of the output transistors. Now given that the more reliable solid state amplifiers go on for 20 years or more, then shortening could mean a lifespan of 10 years which is not exactly a bad length of time, but it is worth knowing. I am also surprised at this business of the UL requirement. AFAIK, this is not correct, since there are many amplifiers that have both 4 and 8 ohm ratings and which have no switch. In fact, I can't think of a single modern amp or receiver that actually has a switch. However, I am in the UK so perhaps the manufacturers get away without the switch because we don't have this regulation. I can't think that the likes of Arcam, Rotel, NAD, Cyrus and Chord Electronics, all of whom have a US presence, would add the switch to their amps for the US and not have it in the UK. Regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5484 Registered: May-04 | Frank - Just to clarify. I've gone off the deep end for several reasons. Some have nothing to do with this forum but instead dealing with an inability in my Nation to look a problem squarely in the face and see a solution. The problem is we have a way of thinking that dismisses rational thought for belief based on how someone wants it to be. It would take thousands of pages to make any sense of this but that is whay I have gone off the deep end. I reached a tipping point last week with the largest disaster in my Nation's history and it is spilling over into many of the things I do. This is not the place to discuss this issue. Also, as I stated above, what good does it do to call me arrogant? Get on with a sensible discussion and let's be done with it. Thank you for taking that course, Frank. "Solid state amps can cope with more difficult loads more easily ... " I have to disagree, Frank. A direct coupled solid state amp (which probably 99% of all consumer s.s. amps are direct coupled) cannot cope with high or low impedance loads on the same scale as a transformer coupled amplifer whether tube or solid state. A t.c amplifer will be able to safely provide essentially the same power output into 16 or 4 Ohms where a d.c. amp will have difficulties with either extreme unless it is very "well designed". Output impedance and damping factor will change to a greater extent with the t.c. amp, but there are many benefits to stability in this design none the less. Output impedance and damping factor also change with the d.c. amp; and if it is not well designed, it will have serious problems operating outside the relatively small impedance load it was designed for. I would think lower end products such as Sony or Yamaha receivers meant for the UK would have a different production than similar US models just as they have different connectors and voltage requirements. Higher end, more robustly built American products do not have this switch. This is an issue Mr. DellaSala conveniently did not fully address. Instead, he chose the words "well designed". This is not helpful for the reason I stated. Who buys a product they think is not well designed? A direct coupled Mark Levison, McIntosh, Krell, etc., power amplifier does not have a switch for four or eight Ohm operation. This switch is a concession to the manufacturers who would prefer to build less than "well designed" amplifers with less than "well designed" power supplies. Apparently the UL decided it was enough of a safety issue that it required a "protection" device in order to hopefully insure the amplifier would not cause serious damage to itself and the user. |
|
anonymousII Unregistered guest | Frank, I think it's a given that driving 4 ohm speakers with say a cheap Kenwood would be a bad idea. I have no doubt whatever that my receiver, with it's large power supply, capacitors, heat sinks etc could drive such speakers with ease. Paul's original question concerned his Yamaha 2500. I see no reason why this unit cannot drive his 4 ohm speakers, regardless of the impedence setting. I know people who do and have read several posters last year who do the same thing. This was a hot topic on this board 1 1/2-2 years ago or so. I don't think it was ever resolved then as it is not now, I guess. Every man for himself. Sorry about our disagreement on the speakers board about the MA's. I am sorry you feel the way you do and we all have our own reasons for such beliefs. All I can tell you is I did research for about 1 1/2 years before I bought my MA silver system and am very happy with it. I would consider switching to Dynaudio Audience series [4 ohm speakers!] but don't think they are much if any better than my MA silvers. Maybe we can talk about this on the speaker forum. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5485 Registered: May-04 | "How dare you insult someone of his credentials. Who are you?" I'm someone who has little respect for Julian Hirsch. And I can say what I want about him just as you can, and frequently do, say what you want about anyone who crosses your path. Let me ask one more time. How childish are you? Does this further the discussion? Are you Mr. Hirsch's child? Mr. DellaSala's child? If not, what is your problem? Discuss the issue at hand; not some frivilous slight you seem to want to turn into a Civil War. Grow up! |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1382 Registered: Feb-04 | Paul wrote: Maybe it's meant to be a safety net for those who own crappy receivers that arent able to properly drive behemoth 4ohm speakers. So you're saying that your receiver, which has such a switch, is a crappy receiver that isn't able to properly drive behemoth 4ohm speakers? Is this switch required? h/k receivers don't have one and are rated down to 4 ohms. I haven't noticed one on nad receivers rated down to 2 ohms either. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5496 Registered: May-04 | tee hee! "well designed" my aunt bertha. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5499 Registered: May-04 | I don't believe anyone (possibly Frank) has addressed the most obvious issue that I raised. If you cannot hear a difference when the switch is in either position and you have been told the switch offers some degree of protection, why would you not use the switch? Does it make you feel more like a he man to abuse your amplifier? Or, are you possibly thinking maybe you can't hear well enough to notice if there is a difference? Either way. Why not use the switch if you can't hear a difference? No one is going to know you have the switch in the four Ohm position. Why not take advantage of the protection it offers? Hmmmmm? Anyone? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Hallen1007Charlotte, North Carolina USA Post Number: 25 Registered: Jul-05 | Jan, just stop. You have stated your position, and if others disagree then so be it. Your opinion is respected, as you seem very knowledgeable. But when 2 people are carrying on foolishly, people on the outside of the argument cannot tell who the fool really is. Just let it go. There will always be people who post anonymously, but they still may have a valid point. Paul actually brought up a good topic, but as usual already had an answer in his mind. Paul will be Paul, god bless him. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 643 Registered: Oct-04 | "I have no doubt whatever that my receiver, with it's large power supply, capacitors, heat sinks etc could drive such speakers with ease." That wouldn't be a Pioneer Elite VSX-55TXi receiver would it? I miss your posts, and wish you wouldn't have let some of the members get to you. Some users here require people to back up statements they've made with a well prepared essay complete with a thesis statement. I do not, and have learned a lot more from people who share their experiences without a firm grasp of everything they are talking about, than from any one else. |
|
anonymousII Unregistered guest | Kano, No I don't have a Elite 55. I have it's predessor, the 45. I have considered an "upgrade" to the 56 or the new 74 but can't see where either is much of an improvement. The fact that Pioneer redesigned their amps on the new models and the 74 is 10 pounds lighter than the 56 is a cause for some concern. I look forward to seeing some evaluations of this unit and the new models from other manufacturers that will be coming out in the next few months. I did a google search on the 74 and came across a lengthy discussion with a couple of owners of the 74. Some say the new amp has extended highs and is very clean. Hope it's not bright. For now I'll sit tight. I asked Frank his impression of the Dynaudio Audience series speakers on the speaker forum and would like any others to chime in also. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5503 Registered: May-04 | Herman - What I've asked seems, to me, to be the crux of the discussion. If you can't tell a difference, why not get the protection. That seems simple enough. |
|
New member Username: Gene_dellasalaPost Number: 2 Registered: Dec-03 | I notice a lot of hostility on this forum from a few individuals who are ruining the experience for everyone else. Since some of these individuals are insinuating I am offering bad advices I thought I would pipe in and clarify a few issues. Please check out page 2 of my Yamaha R-XV4600 review: http://www.audioholics.com/productreviews/avhardware/YamahaRX-V4600HTp2.php you will see the measurement differences between the "low" setting (less than 8 ohms) and the "High" setting (8 ohms or more). I always recommend keeping this switch in its default setting and using common sense when mating a receiver with inefficient 4 ohm speakers in large rooms. All the switch is doing is stepping the rail voltage down so when UL tests the amp at a specified distortion level, the amp will achieve that distortion level sooner since it runs out of headroom more quickly than it would with the 8 ohm setting. This in turn generates less heat since the amp isn't driving as hard. You really aren't buying any protection for driving low impedance loads and you actually risk clipping the amp more since it can run out of headroom more easily. The switch is there more for certification purposes. The reason you don't see this switch on separate amps is twofold: 1) They typically have more heat sink area, and bigger power supplies and can better manage the heat 2) They aren't UL certified and don't have to meet the requirement. I also discussed this topic at AVS as well as our own forums. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6086931&highlight=audioholics#po st6086931 PS. I appall the insults certain individuals have directed towards the late great Julian Hirsch. He was an upstanding gentleman and is truly missed in this industry. www.audioholics.com |
|
Unregistered guest | Hello. Welcome to the forum. And, thank you. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5506 Registered: May-04 | Mr. DellaSala - Welcome. Since I was the first to bring up Mr Hirsch's name, I would like you to explain what "insults" are being inferred by this statement: "Mr. DellaSala does his readers a Julian Hirsch type disservice by such simplifications and advice." I did not insult anyone, in my opinion, I made a comparison between two individuals. I certainly did not suggest he was anything other than a gentleman. Please clarify your position. I will apologize if needed. I believe it should be obvious I am not insinuating you are giving bad advice. I have rather plainly stated that exactly. In the case of a cheap receiver which employs a group of inexpensive load resistors to artificially keep the impedance loading on the amplifier at higher levels, I can see no reason to use the switch as this type of operation can easily lead to the resistors becoming as hot as the output devices. I can't understand why this sort of "protection" is allowed on the market other than to satisfy a watts per dollar price point. As I suggested, the user should be aware of what type of impedance protection is provided by the switch on any one product. Wouldn't you agree, sir? However, stepping down the rail voltages will limit the current flow when the amplifier is faced with a demanding load. This will keep the amplifier running at lower temperatures in conditions beneath abusive levels; will it not? Are lower operating temperatures not better for the amplifier? Your issues with the limiting function of the low impedance switch seem to be based on the early onset of clipping. But, isn't that a bit like saying go ahead and clip your amplifier when it's on the higher impedance load. In other words, why be concerned about sound quality at clipping? Isn't it better to tell someone not to clip their amplifier at all? What I am seeing from your tests on the Yamaha with the high impedance and low impedance settings is a difference between 134 watts vs. 95 watts when run into an 8 Ohm load. I see a difference between 210 vs. 180 watts when run into a 4 Ohm load. Mr. DellaSala, in either case, we are talking a difference of about 1dB in volume level before the ampilifer clips when the switch is engaged. Is this seriously what you are concerned with? 1db? You speak of limited dynamics (with the switch in the low impedance setting) yet you use RMS power output as your example of this limiting. Why is that? One has little to do with the other in most listening situations beneath clipping; wouldn't you agree? That is, unless the amplifer is set into clipping on a constant basis. That this switch will allow clipping to occur at a lower level is, to me, still as vague and obscure a concept as a "well designed" receiver would seem to be. You give two reasons for separate amplifers not having the switch. 1) They typically have more heat sink area, and bigger power supplies and can better manage the heat 2) They aren't UL certified and don't have to meet the requirement. My opinion would be any amplifier that does not have adequate heat sinking for the amount of voltage and current, and therefore heat, it will produce is not well designed. It is an overheating disaster waiting to happen? Wouldn't you agree? At the very least, the amplifier is likely to be less reliable than an amplifer with adequate heatsinking. Additionally, any amplifer that has scrimped on the power supply to the extent the amplifer is in danger of self immolation is not a well designed amplifier, in my opinion. Would you agree? If so, why not just call it such in your reviews instead of making excuses for poor design. Adjusting the size of the heatsinks downward is dangerous and foolish. Adjusting the size, regulation and storage capacity of the power supply downward is marketing. Explaining the function and importance of a properly designed power supply is one of the most difficult tasks a salesperson has in demonstrating why one amplifer is better designed and built than another, lesser, often much cheaper product. Yet, to someone who has just a beginning grasp of power supplies and their importance, it is often one of the most obvious reasons one amplifer costs substantially more than another amplifer of equal or even higher wattage. Why is it so difficult to demonstrate? Because the salesperson cannot take the top of the amplifier off and point to items that most customers understand. One capacitor looks very much like another capacitor to most people. After the salesperson explains what a capacitor looks like, of course. A salesperson cannot demonstrate what an amplifier sounds like with a poorly designed power supply and then what the same amp sounds like with a well designed power supply. So for decades the receiver manufacturers have been skimping on the power supplies more and more. It has become the equivalent of cutting the budget to the libraries when a city needs more cash flow. Only a few people use the libraries, so only they will notice. Only a few people will understand the importance of the power supply, so they will not be the shopper we want to appeal to. Designing a power supply on the cheap should be a crime. But, for those same decades, receiver manufacturers have told salespeople to sell the faceplate not the internals. I really can't see how any amplifer that requires loading down the outputs with resistance or limiting the power supply voltages can be considered "well designed". Your second justification for the inclusion of the switch is that amplifers that have proper heat sinking and power supply design aren't UL listed. Is this a true statement for all separate power amplifers? I guess if a Yamaha amp needed the UL listing, they might use this switch. What about McIntosh, Rowland Research, Conrad Johnson, etc. They are not UL listed? If they want a UL listing for some reason, and why wouldn't they, would they be required to have a switch? If not, is that because they are better designed? Doesn't that make the receivers not as "well designed"? At what point do you draw the line between good and bad design? The point has been raised - and I do not know if it is valid or not - HK and NAD receivers do not have a low impedance switch despite their reputation for driving low impedance loads. Where would this place them in relation to other receivers which incorporate a switch? Which would be well designed and which would be not so well designed? In the intial link to Audioholics, you stated; "Unfortunately many manufacturers put these features on their products to ease customer concerns with driving low impedance loads and for safety reasons when getting UL approvals." What type of concerns? What safety reasons? You also suggest the user/buyer demonstrate some "common sense" when mating speakers to amplifers. "This is the reason I usually recommend keeping this switch in its default "High" setting and using common sense when mating a receiver with inefficient 4 ohm speakers in large rooms." The common sense I believe I have argued for on this thread is for the user to know what the impedance load of his speakers actually amounts to along with the phase angle of the system. This should get them some idea of whether their speakers should be considered a resistive, a reactive or a benign load to an amplifier. Is this the sort of "common sense" you advocate? Once the user knows this information I suggest the purchase of an amplifier that can easily drive that load without any limiting or loading functions. Is that what you consider a common sense approach? Are the switches provided because most consumers don't follow this advice? Is that the type of concerns you speak of? Will unknowingly, or knowingly, mismatching speakers to a receiver cause the safety issues you mention? And, just being curious, what exactly are "inefficient" 4 Ohm speakers? Maybe it's just me, but that reads as if the impedance load of the speaker equates to a more or less efficient design. Aren't we really talking about speakers that are often not "well designed" when we combine low impedance and inefficiency? And wouldn't that amount to a system that was not "well designed" when mated to an amplifer that can't drive a low impedance load very well? This whole process seems intended to allow very poor choices on the part of many, many people. Finally, my point throughout this thread has been this. If, as was stated in the first post, the user cannot hear a difference between the two settings on the amplifier, why shouldn't some protection be used? This, of course, assumes the circuit under consideration merely limits the total RMS power output of the amplifier to approximately 1dB of difference. If the amplifer can deliver 180 clean watts of power with the switch in line, and the user can hear no difference, do you really think it is detrimental that those last 30 watts are not there when put against running the amplifer at a lowered temperature. Which is seriously more important to you; the extra 30 watts or the lowered temperature of the amplifer? Surely the lower tempeerature should give overall better performance over a longer lifespan with fewer problems. How can that be considered a bad thing? I'm sorry to make this such a long post. However, that is partially why I feel your brief explanation of the low impedance switch is dangerous advice. There are more things to be considered than just an extra 30 watts. I also find your terminology of "well designed", "common sense", and the somewhat cavalier attitude towards "safety reasons" to be very inadequate when trying to educate buyers in the intricacies of putting together a well constructed system of components. This, sir, is where I think you are operating on the level that had been the hallowed stomping grounds of Mr. Hirsch and the Hirsch-Houlk Labs in the latter days of Stero Review. I see no insult in that remark, just an observation. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2302 Registered: Jan-05 | Well said Gene. I couldnt agree more, and your resisting of any unnecessary bloviating was an added bonus. I think everyone appreciates your concise and to the point response. |
|
Anonymous | sorry, Paul: about the only thing that can be said with any degree of relative certainty about "everyone" here is that "everyone" here regards you as the forum resident moron and unwitting clown, which about 95% of your 2302 posts sadly illustrate time and again. Only YOU are unaware of your abject status on this forum. Don't you think you should finally get a clue? Enough already! |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5510 Registered: May-04 | Paul, you agree with anyone who agrees with you. How can you agree when you still don't understand what he's saying? Why didn't you excoriate Mr. DellaSala for liking an amplifer smaller than yours? Criminy! He may even like some little, tiny boutique speakers more than he likes boomy bathtubs. Why don't you ask him, Paul? |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 645 Registered: Oct-04 | Jan Vigne's post contained exactly 32 questions for DellaSala. I find that very amusing. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5514 Registered: May-04 | You miscounted. |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 849 Registered: Sep-04 | Thankyou Mr DellaSala for your enlightening posts here and on AVS. So as I understand it, the switch in the receiver you reviewed simply reduces the voltage rail and therefore runs the amplifier at 20% below capacity (or thereabouts). In my view, this is a good reason to run on the sub 6-ohm setting. True, the amp will clip more readily, but this also means that it will improve longevity when driving 4 ohm loads since it will run at lower temperature while not clipping. Solid state amps generally clip in a very nasty manner, immediately perceptible to most people as 'distortion'. If the amp clips more readily, people are more likely to turn down the volume and so drive the amp less hard and make it last longer than on the higher setting. Of course, if people do not recognise the distortion (as they never seem to do in nightclubs for example!), then damage could occur to the speakers. According to your article you rated the amp at 180 watts into a 4-ohm load. If the end-user realy was driving the thing at full volume, this would be very loud indeed, even in larger than average rooms. It would take continuous driving to damage the components, the odd clipped peak would not have a significant effect. I guess if the usual listening level is well within the performance envelope of the amp (i.e. not partying all the time ) then the 8 ohm setting would be appropriate since the odd peak might miss being clipped, but this could lead to the general volume level being raised and the amp more stressed. These are the reasons I was somewhat concerned by the recommendations. Those less technically able could read your comments and accept them without considering the ramifications as I've described. I guess I could be completely off the mark, in which case I would appreciate very much being put right. I certainly found your descriptions on the clipping issues enlightening since I had not twigged that the clipping could be viewed in this way. Regards, Frank. |
|
Anonymous | > Why didn't you excoriate Mr. DellaSala for liking an amplifer smaller than yours? Jan, I don't think Paul knows what "excoriate" means. It hasn't been used yet by Bill O'Reilly on Fucks' News. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5517 Registered: May-04 | Yeah, but I used "bloviate" a while back and now Paul thinks its the best word in his vocabulary. I think of this as "Word for the Day" for Paul and we'll drag him into a world where soon he'll be quoting Dostoyevsky. Yeah, that'll happen; here have a toke! |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2307 Registered: Jan-05 | jans bloviating comment is just another example of a lie. That's all to familiar from 'his kind'. He knows the truth. And yes, I think it's a good Idea to run your receiver in a stripped down mode.......not. Hey, I have 4 ohm speakers, so Im going to chop down my receivers ability to drive them well by even more........great idea. And jan, I do belive that butchering your receiver capabilities will make a sonic difference. Just because I didnt detect a difference in a brief test doesnt mean the difference isnt there. Based on my response, it shouldnt take a rocket scientist to determine that I realize that a receivers performance will clearly be hampered by doing so. Buying a receiver, and operating it with a handicap makes no sense to me. As it stands, my receiver doesnt get hot. Yea, it gets warm, as does any receiver, but never hot. I suppose if you have a cheap receiver with little capability, you might need to baby it, protect it, and play at low volumes to avoid damaging it. I guess for some, chopping down it's capability even more is a good thing. In summary, if you have large speakers that need a lot of power to drive 'well', you're only biting off your nose to spite your face by handicapping your power source. Heck, buying a receiver and running it like a girlyman is about as stupid as buying a sports car, and never driving over 55 because you're afraid of what might happen. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 646 Registered: Oct-04 | 1 dB of volume level between running in 4 Ohm protecton vs. 8 Ohm will clearly hamper the receiver's performance? 1 dB less volume is the difference between loud and low volumes? 1 dB less volume makes you a girlyman? Here's an idea, turn the receiver to 4 Ohm mode and see if you can make the amp clip at high volumes. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2308 Registered: Jan-05 | Im clearly not talking about volume. I love it when people like Kano 'always' automatically pipe in that silly response. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 648 Registered: Oct-04 | Everyone seems to agree that the only thing affected by running the receiver with the switch on 4 Ohms is that the receiver starts to clip at a lower volume. So what ARE you talking about Paul? |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2309 Registered: Jan-05 | I also think it's funny that the same people who always say........."but your only gaining 1db" are the same people who own petite little 70watt amps. They rationalize their tiny power supply by comparing marginal gains in volume gained by increasing power, and completely neglect the real benefits which have absolutely nothing to do with an extra couple of dbs. I guess if they've always owned tiny little speakers that are small enough to be driven well by a HTIB, how could they know what I'm talking about? |
|
Anonymous | > I think of this as "Word for the Day" for Paul and we'll drag him into a world where soon he'll be quoting Dostoyevsky. heh, Paul probably thinks Dostoyevsky is a brand of vodka! |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2310 Registered: Jan-05 | BTW, I was even able to detect subtle improvements in speaker performance by 'only' going from 100WPC to 125WPC, and dbs had nothing to do with the improvement. Needless to say the improvement from when I previously went from 45wpc to 100wpc was quite dramatic.(for the slow people, Im still NOT talking about dbs) Even a small girlyman 45watt NAD can easily make my speakers play VERY LOUD. However, when you compare the output when they're driven by a REAL receiver, the output will sound quite different. Once again, Im sure those who own paperweights for speakers, probably cant understand what I'm talking about. |
|
Anonymous | Paul do you think you could EVER conduct a *mature* discussion with ANYone about ANYthing without resorting to your usual broken-record insults? Goofy and childish you've always been, but now you're getting BORING. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5520 Registered: May-04 | To clarify; 1 dB is less than the step between notches on many volume controls. The difference between 180 watts and 210 watts is equal to about 0.5dB if I figure it correctly. Paul, we know your hearing is sensitive enough to hear that. Yeah, sure, you can do that. No one else can, but you can. Gimme back that doobie, Paul, you've had enough! What is that crap about "bloviate"? You never used the word until I accused you of doing it. Now you stick it whereever you "think" it fits. You even used it on this thread. Incorrectly, but you used it. "And jan, I do belive that butchering your receiver capabilities will make a sonic difference." Yes, and I believe sparks fly out of your butt each time you post. "Just because I didnt detect a difference in a brief test doesnt mean the difference isnt there." That's what I said earlier, Paul. You couldn't hear the difference even if there was one to be heard. "Based on my response, it shouldnt take a rocket scientist to determine that I realize that a receivers performance will clearly be hampered by doing so. What response? Your insistence you're right in the face of evidence you are not? I'm so confused about what you think, Paul. (Did I actually write that? Think - Paul?) Doing what will hamper the performance how? Explain it to me again. You place the switch in the low impedance position and what happens? That affects the sound how? Now about those large speakers that need lots of power. I thought the CV's were very efficient and played plenty loud. I didn't think they were girly man speakers that ate up a lot of power and didn't fill the room. I thought they were silver back bathtubs that were so powerful they had the walls absorbing 36Hz signals. Wowsers! Now I'm even more confused than before. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2311 Registered: Jan-05 | The CVs are efficient, but you need a lot of power to drive them well. How many times must I repeat myself before you catch on?? I guess since you neither own any power, or speakers larger than a shoebox, you couldnt possibly understand what Im saying. Yes, a wimpy little 70watt NAD can play my speakers as loud as you can bear, but they'll sound like crap in the process. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5521 Registered: May-04 | Dostoyevsky? paul probably thinks it's some girly man furrin' car that some wimpy liberal would drive to save the planet. p, honestly, if you don't know the difference between wattage and power supplies. Well, what can I say? And, there should be no difference between 100 and 125 watts if the amplifiers and speakers are "well designed". 'Sides, how do you know when you were using 100 watts and then 125 watts. In case you don't know it, paul. If you're playing at the same volume through the same speakers - you're using the same amount of power each time. This is getting boring, p! |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5522 Registered: May-04 | "The CVs are efficient, but you need a lot of power to drive them well." P.I.S.S. 40 or 50 "You obviously have no clue." P.I.S.S. *%#@!!*(&&%^$##@!!!!!!!!!! Aww, look, now you went and broke the thingy! |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2312 Registered: Jan-05 | I could care less about a russian writer who lived eons ago. In fact, I could care less about any russians. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2313 Registered: Jan-05 | Jan, Not only can you hear the difference, you can also "see" the difference. All you need to do is look at the main driver during moderately loud playback, and the difference is also obvious to the eye. Once again, since you own nothing but underpowered boutique halfpint stuff, there is no way you could possibly understand. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5524 Registered: May-04 | Mr. DellaSala - In case you're wondering; the P.I.S.S. is a scale we've come up with that amounts to Paul's Idiotic Statement Score. Until recently it had been a 1-10 scale. We may need to recalculate the metering system. I'm certain you can defend your own ideas, Mr, D; but I would warn you to be careful who else you might be giving aid and comfort. The brain dead walk among us! |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5525 Registered: May-04 | "Jan, Not only can you hear the difference, you can also "see" the difference. All you need to do is look at the main driver during moderately loud playback, and the difference is also obvious to the eye." Goll'dangit! Wait a minute, wilya, p. I'm trying to get this P.I.S.S. stuff up and running again and there you go overloading the whole darn system. What in the world are you talking about? You can tell the difference in how the drivers move? Oh, p! I gotta go, p. I can't do this any more without my head hurting. |
|
Anonymous | > I could care less about a russian writer who lived eons ago. In fact, I could care less about any russians. whelp, back to NASCAR now...yeeeeeee-haw! |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2315 Registered: Jan-05 | yes, You can see the difference by how the drivers move.......it just goes to show how very little you really know. |
|
Anonymous | Jan, I advise you to modify your P.I.S.S. meter so that it can accept oh, several hundred digits. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2316 Registered: Jan-05 | Im not a nascar fan, but I do watch the occasional race if I stumble onto one while channel surfing when nothing else is on.(providing it's in HD) Based on your audio choices, Im guessing you have no practical experience with HD either. |
|
Anonymous | how would you know what my audio choices are, Paul? oh that's right, you know the audio choice of anyone who doesn't have crappy CVs with huge SVS sub. another astounding leap of logic from that Bermuda Triangle known as Paul's Skull! |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2317 Registered: Jan-05 | I wasnt paying attention. I was responding to jan for something he didnt say, and had I realized the comment was made by an anon-idiot, I wouldnt have responded. I'll be sure to pay better attention next time. |
|
Anonymous | yes Paul, paying attention is a very good thing, as is OPENING YOUR MIND. But first things first: you have to take your head out of your a s s. |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 862 Registered: Sep-04 | I'm sorry bloviate is not a word in the English dictionary so it doesn't exist. You Americans may think it exists, but it doesn't. It's not a word, so there... Hee hee |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5541 Registered: May-04 | Frank - "Bloviate" is in my Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, which, according to the MWCD has "authority and innovation". Which are you blokes lacking; authority or innovation?sf |
|
Silver Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 914 Registered: Jun-05 | "Wimpy 70 watt amps" so Paul surely you dont think your small power supply Yammie is equal to a 70 watt true amplifier with large power supplies that doesent have some sissy 4 ohm to 8ohm switch,just because your amp says 125 watts on paper? |
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