"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Keith G" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..

"Keith G" wrote in message


"jaap" wrote

As for the orchestra which is in need of 10 or more
watts to be reproduced correctly, this is again a
(1970) sales story. Right now I am listening through a
1.5 watt amplifier giving me more than enough
decibells to feed the 4x6 meter room. Hardrock or
orchestra, no problem. The problem is with the
loudspeakers, not having made serious progress since
1960.

I run two parallel systems: 100 SS Watts into 82 (84?)
dB speakers and 8 or 9 valve Watts into high 90s
speaker - the valve setup blows the other one away on
the *loudness* front!!

No prejudice there.

Yours or mine....??

Good question. The claim that a 10 watt amp sounds louder and cleaner
than a 100 watt amp only makes sense if there is something very wrong
with the 100 watt amp. When it turns out that the reliably-audible
defects tend to cluster around the 10 watt amp, then doesn't the person
making the claim become suspect?
Knowing Keith's equipment, it comes as no surprise:-

His horns have a sensitivity of about 100dB/watt, so his 8 watts will
provide a level of around 109dB.

His IMFs have a sensitivity of around 84dB/watt, so his 100 watt amplifier
will provide a level of around 104dB.

So, his 8 watt valve set-up will sound louder. This is before any
subjective loudness increase caused by higher distortion in the valve
set-up.

Keith made no claims as to which sound better (at least not in this
thread) only loudness.



Correct.

Asitappens, I've made no comments on comparative sound 'quality' between
these two systems elsewhere, either - they are quite different and I like
them both. The only thing I will say is I don't like the horns on the SS
amps....

(Which is probably why a lot of people say they don't like horns - if
they've not heard them with valves, or triodes in particular??)