|
New member Username: DarkestcanuckPost Number: 1 Registered: Sep-10 | I just purchased an receiver that is 75 watts per channel. I'm thinking of buying speakers that have a 110Watts RMS, 225Watts Peak rating. I'm not overly concerned with mind blowing louds. Will this amp be enough for these speakers? |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 15398 Registered: Dec-04 | Yes, music will play. Is that sufficient? Or would you like to list the model #'s for a more in depth perspective? |
|
New member Username: DarkestcanuckPost Number: 2 Registered: Sep-10 | 1) Denon AVR1610 receiver 2) Episode ES-500-IC6 (in-ceiling speakers) |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 15400 Registered: Dec-04 | No issue with those working together, DC. |
|
Silver Member Username: EdisonGlendale, CA US Post Number: 930 Registered: Dec-03 | These are some goooood sounding speakers - have a look: http://www.dominantcaraudio.com/store-products-30253--MB-Quart-ALX-65-IW-6-1-2-2 -1-2-way-DAppolito-In-Wall-speaker-system-_41095654.html |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 4276 Registered: Feb-07 | Wattage ratings on speakers are essentially meaningless. You should be more concerned with sensitivity and impedance.. |
|
New member Username: SuperjazzyjamesPost Number: 3 Registered: Oct-10 | Look at the MINIMUM recommended power and the efficiency (often erroneously called sensitivity) rating. The lower, the recommended power and higher the efficiency rating (89 dB at 1 watt at 1 meter) the better. These two numbers will have a lot more to with how loud your system can get than how many watts per channel the amp can muster and how well your system will perform at low and moderate volumes. I have a Denon 80 wpc stereo (2 channel) receiver. When I got it, the speakers I had came with a recommended power rating of 50 to 120 watts each and a eff rating of 85 dB. I replaced them with Mirage OS3s rec power: 10 to 150 watts each. eff: 89 dB. The mirages don't require my amp to work any where near as hard as the old speakers did and the have much better sound quality. The minimum power requirement also effects the dampening factor. Although some would argue that the dampening factor no longer exists or no longer matters, the truth is it will ALWAYS exist and ALWAYS matter. Just ask your tweeters! The lower the this minimum, the easier it will be for your amp to stop your woofer cones which will protect your tweeters and minimize distortion. |
|
New member Username: SuperjazzyjamesPost Number: 4 Registered: Oct-10 | For those interested how many decibels at 1 watt at 1 meter a speaker can deliver, should be called EFFICIENCY, NOT sensitivity. This is a measure of how many dB you'll get at a given wattage. It's like a cars efficiency or miles per gallon. We don't call that sensitivity. The same is true for speakers. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15330 Registered: May-04 | . "Sensitivity: A measure of the efficiency of a loudspeaker. A typical sensitivity figure for a loudspeaker is 87dB. A high sensitivity 94dB or more. A low sensitivity is 80dB or less. (See Efficiency). Low sensitivity loudspeakers require a high amplifier power output to obtain realistic volume levels. High sensitivity loudspeakers will be happy working with low power output amplifiers (20W per channel maximum or lower). Efficiency: A measure of the proportion of electrical energy fed to a loudspeaker that is turned into acoustic energy. Most loudspeakers are very low efficiency transducers (typically around 5 per cent). Only horn loudspeakers manage a much higher efficiency (sometimes around 30 per cent). http://www.enjoythemusic.com/audioterminology.htm#S Sensitivity The minimum input signal required to produce a specified level of output. In an amplifier, the input sensitivity is the amount of voltage at the input necessary to drive the amplifier to its rated power output. Loudspeaker sensitivity is the power level necessary to produce a stated SPL at a given distance from the loudspeaker, usually rated at 1 watt 1 meter. Efficiency The ratio, usually expressed as a percentage, of the useful power output to the power input of a device. The efficiency of a speaker system is the SPL the unit produces at a 1 W RMS input power level measured 1 meter from the unit. Doubling the input power raises the SPL 3 dB. Doubling the number of enclosures raises the SPL 3 dB. Doubling the input power and the number of enclosures raises the SPL 6 dB. Doubling the distance (near field) lowers the SPL 6 dB http://www.cardinalproaudio.com/main/terms.htm#E Efficiency: The percentage of the electrical input power to a speaker that is converted to acoustic energy. Usually specified for speakers, an efficiency measurement can be helpful when matching an amplifier to a particular speaker. Speaker efficiency can range from a fraction of 1 percent to as much as 10 percent or more. Note that efficiency indicates nothing about sound quality, only quantity of acoustic energy for a given input power. A more common way of expressing speaker efficiency is sensitivity. sensitivity (sens): A measurement of speaker efficiency that tells how much sound is produced 1 meter away from the speaker with an input of2.83 volts (1 watt into 8 Ohms). Higher numbers are better. http://eli47.tripod.com/audiogloss.html#s Sensitivity and efficiency are often confused and used interchangeably, which is too bad. Efficiency is a per centage measurement of the power loss when converting (transducing) one form of energy (electrical in this case) into another form of energy (acoustic). Most loudspeakers have very low percentages of efficiency. The average for a domestic speaker system is between 1-2%. A speaker considered to have very high electrical sensitivity domestic system like the Klipschorn (104dB) will be at roughy 10%. Electrical sensitivity is simply a measurement which reflects the acoustic output of a speaker or speaker system when a specified voltage (2.83 volts) is applied across its terminals. For consistency the measurement is taken at 1 meter distance which can, depending on the configuration of the speaker system and the environment in which the speaker operates (half or quarter space or "in room"), falsely claim a too high or too low sensitivity measurement. Be careful with sensitivity specs, they are easily manipulated. Sensitivity has been adopted as the standard for speaker specifications and marketing. Probably because it's far simpler to sell a 90dB speaker than it is a 2% system. "The minimum power requirement also effects the dampening factor." Nope, it does not. The damping factor (DF) will be a value associated with the amplifier, not the speaker. "Although some would argue that the dampening factor no longer exists or no longer matters, the truth is it will ALWAYS exist and ALWAYS matter. Just ask your tweeters!" DF applies only to low frequency drivers - if at all. Mid and high frequency systems to do not have the excursion length nor the mass to require electrical damping from the amplifier. DF, however, is a rather bogus spec which has little implications to the vastly dynamic and ever changing characteristics of most modern day speakers and to those amplifers which employ negative feedback loops. So I suppose we could dance around the semantics of this issue for days. One thing is certain though, not clipping the amplifier's outputs matters most to your tweeters. "The lower the this minimum, the easier it will be for your amp to stop your woofer cones which will protect your tweeters and minimize distortion." Not sure what you mean by "this minimum", I assume you're referring to minimum power requirements. If so, what you've claimed here is also incorrect. Minimum and maximum power handling specs are all but useless. " It's like a cars efficiency or miles per gallon." MPG is not directly related to "efficiency", it's MPG and that's about all it is. Efficiency in an automotive engine is, similar to the amplifier/speaker system, measured as a conversion of energy. In the average vehicle it is a conversion of hydrocarbon fuels to mechanical force, so, it's easy to understand how someone would confuse this with MPG. Off the top of my head I can't remember the terminology used for measuring the efficiency of various fuel types, though petroleum products are the highest bang for the buck at present. Once again the efficiency with which the combustion process converts the gasoline (fuel) into a mechanical energy force will determine how efficient you would deem an engine. 50% is what I remember as the average efficiency of an automobile engine in converting the stored energy of fuel into a mechanical force (horsepower) - though I could be drastically off on this number. The claim is a hemispherical head or multi-valve head will provide more thorough combustion and they are therefore considered more efficienct than a conventional wedge shaped cylinder head or a two valve head. There are, of course, numerous values which will affect the efficiency of an engine; valve timing, the shape of the piston head, friction within the engine itself, intake and exhaust efficiencies, etc. However, MPG is not a value of the engine but more of the drive train in total along with the weight, rolling resistance and aerodynamics of the vehicle (to name a few items which would affect total vehicle efficiency). . |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 15437 Registered: Dec-04 | Last info from college was abouot 37% efficiency(thermal) from a gasoline engine, higher from a diesel, largely due to the higher caloric content of the fuel. 100% for petrol, 109% for diesel. BTW, nitromethane is about 30% caloric content, and creates very little heat. Also...a 100% thermally efficient engine is known as an adiabatic engine. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15331 Registered: May-04 | . "Caloric content"?! For real? |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 1671 Registered: Oct-07 | Yeah, and it tastes like chicken, too. good for dieters. The reason you get more power out of some fuels is burn rate. Low Octane gas actually has MORE energy per gallon than higher octane fuel. You get more energy out of hi octane because of the lower burn rate and the fact of being able to run higher compression. http://www.epi-eng.com/piston_engine_technology/bmep_performance_yardstick.htm Link is to an explanation of BMEP:: Brake Mean Effective Pressure, a good way to compare engines. |
|
Bronze Member Username: SuperjazzyjamesPost Number: 13 Registered: Oct-10 | Getting back to reality (not withstanding Jan's long winded non-sense), The minimum required power refers to how much power it takes to set the woofer con in motion. The more power it takes to set it motion, the more power it will take to stop it (dampen the motion) So the greater the amps power and the less power the speaker requires, the better not only for sound quality, but also for protecting your tweeters from the voltage generated by woofer cone movement. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15337 Registered: May-04 | . James, you've made up your mind so I won't bother explaining the reality of all the things you have wrong in that post. I suppose if I showed you three more explanations of how things actually work, you'd still insist you are right and everyone else is talking long winded nonsense. That's too bad, closing off your mind is the second worst thing you can do. The worst is insulting someone who has been trying to help you. Tell me this, James, if the speaker system states a minimum power requirement of 15 watts, how many watts will be required to pass a signal through the speaker system? In other words, what's the minimum number of watts required to hear sound from that speaker? Can you expand on the how's, why's and wherefore-ever's of what you understand to be the forces involved in your statement, "So the greater the amps power and the less power the speaker requires, the better not only for sound quality, but also for protecting your tweeters from the voltage generated by woofer cone movement"? . |
|
Bronze Member Username: SuperjazzyjamesPost Number: 14 Registered: Oct-10 | Help me? Right! Obviously asking my age and experience is looking for a way to show me disrespect. I don't believe for 1 second that you know how things actually work. I've spoken to those who do and have shown me what can happen when you do things wrong. So enjoy your little fantasy world. Ok? |
|
Bronze Member Username: SuperjazzyjamesPost Number: 15 Registered: Oct-10 | Manufactures recommend minimums so that the woofers are dampened to protect the tweeters and prevent distortion! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15339 Registered: May-04 | . I see you cannot answer the questions I posed. James there comes a point where I cannot help someone as ignorant as you appear to be. And spending my time with you is, as they say, like trying to teach a pig to talk, you only frustrate yourself and the pig. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 15056 Registered: Jan-08 | And the insult goes on! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15340 Registered: May-04 | . Why don't you tell James what's wrong with his ideas, Plymouth? That would be interesting. |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 15058 Registered: Jan-08 | Jan Your problem is that you are not able to discuss without demean the others, tell me how I can take your point after all idioties you posted about me? In my first posts with you I was very polite then you started your idioties! I'm new in this forum then at this time you did not know what kind of experience I had with the result of strong discussion not in your favor, give more clear answers, poeples does not need a romance. Now concerning superjazzyJa(me)s You started trouble with him! Assume it! I'm sure that he is able to discuss with you if you had better attitude! No? |
|
Bronze Member Username: SuperjazzyjamesPost Number: 16 Registered: Oct-10 | Jan, it's not ignorance on my part. It's both ignorance and arrogance on your part. You have the ability to puff yourself up with fancy terminology, but have no idea what those terms mean. I DID answer your question and correctly so. You are not trying to help ANYONE! You are trying to make yourself look knowledgeable when you're not so that we think you're an expert. The truth is that you have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about. Demeaning is YOUR approach as is made clear by how you've attacked Plymouth. What you sew, you shall also reap. Sure, it takes a little more time to read and understand what he says, but that's a matter of patience. Something else you lack. Taking the time to read and understand Plymouth's posts is well worth the time. He is correct in what he says too. Plymouth, I wouldn't waste your time on Jan. Obviously Jan thinks he's superior to everyone else when he's actually not worthy to lick gum off the soles of our shoes. |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 15063 Registered: Jan-08 | superjazzyJa(me)s Thanks for your support! Demean the others is not my way, Jan is a good helper on the majority of his posts but his way to demean the others without understand what he talking about put him in the trouble, sometime listen the others is good so we cannot know everything and we always learn from others. I posted my old experience about amplifier to help new and old Hi-fi guys to improved their system with a lower cost and part available to everybody, sure that will help many poeples to understand what is good to have the purer sound. For those which read this thread I was referring to those link: https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/644131.html https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/656282.html Best regard! |
|
Bronze Member Username: SuperjazzyjamesPost Number: 18 Registered: Oct-10 | You're welcome Plymouth! I know what you mean about experience. I've seen what happens when things are done wrong. When I was a kid, my father took me to barber who had a great system in his shop. He actually knew how to use bipolar transistors for his subs, woofers and midranges tubes for his tweeters and make it sound great! It can be done if you know what you are doing. Ttys Plymouth! :--) |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 15064 Registered: Jan-08 | superjazzyJa(me)s Bi and tri amplication is good for the result of sound but hard to match for the beginner, only a person experimented can easily match it fine, I buyed my first sound generator and decibelmeter then tested my Adcom IMF system to found 2 frequencies which give bad result, the result was not so bad but I corrected the problem then see that it was the little thing which annoyed me, the proof that we can not correct everything only by the listening. My opinion is that Valve tube are now from the past then I'm surprise to see it in many products today as well that in car audio! The reliability is not good at all then the replacement cost for the tube is very expensive, the tube lost its specification very fast then buyers will not undestand why the sound is badly goes down before the complete dead of the tube! I understood this with Adcom, My CD players then my Preamp are powered with 80 volts supply where we can see 12 volts on most, the good point of it is never we will see clipping, they were upgraded with the same 2 steps of capacitors. The CD players was never listened by Rotac like the amplifier but we compared the sound between the Adcom before its modification then a 6000$ CD players that I forgot the name(14 years ago), the sound result was clearly the stronger power supply for the high cost CD players, it cost me 10$ for the modification. What cost I can spend today to get the same result!!!!! Too much for much less! Made a amplifier from nothing is not the good way for me but modified a well made amplifier for few $ is the right thing, If you are able to add Capacitors in your amps power supply, do it and listen! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15342 Registered: May-04 | . https://www.ecoustics.com/cgi-bin/bbs/show.pl?tpc=1&post=1906891#POST1906891 |
|
Bronze Member Username: SuperjazzyjamesPost Number: 19 Registered: Oct-10 | That's probably a good idea Plymouth, but my receiver is still under warranty. Maybe I'll try it another time. |
|
Platinum Member Username: PlymouthCanada Post Number: 15077 Registered: Jan-08 | superjazzyJa(me)s Don't touch it under warranty! With the service manuel I can help you to found what you can replace to improve your receiver. |