![]() |
Every amp in one
Jim Lesurf wrote:
The second was that, although measured to deliver 50W into 8 Ohm loads, this fell to 36W into 4 Ohm loads. Again, it was mentioned that the distortion tended to rise as this level was approached. This implies that the available current may also 'soft' clip at a value that may come into play with speakers that don't maintain an impedance of about 8 Ohms across the band. (In such cases the rated power may be misleading as significantly higher powers may be available but with higher levels of distortion than used to rate the max available power. Alas this is one of the many things the HFW review fails to specify.) Jim, I am confused here. I was under the impression that an amp will deliver more power into a 4 Ohm load than into an 8 Ohm load. If the amp delivers 50W into 8 Ohms, then using P = (I^2) * R I = sqrt (50/8) = 2.5 A So, using a 4 OHm load, the amp should deliver P = (2.5)^2 * 4 = 25 W However if it was measured to deliver 36W into 4 Ohms, then I = sqrt (36/4) = 3 A So I take it the current the amp delivers can change with the load? (apologies if this seems elementary, I haven't done these calculations in a while!) |
Every amp in one
In article , Tat Chan wrote:
JustMe wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... And Jim's research did indeed lead staright to what's wrong with the Kraken - appalling current delivery! Into 4 ohms, it can only put out the voltage equivalent of 18 watts into 8 ohms. You just *know* that's going to be audible on peaks........... In this particular setup (by my PC) it remains at a comparitively low volume - I doubt I take it to anywhere near a level at which it'll clip, even with variances from the speakers. Again you say "what's wrong with the Kraken". 1) Do you know that this isn't by design? (And I'm not asking for what *you* consider to be good design in an amplifier, just whether you *know* if this is by design or not). Excuse me for jumping in, but going back to Jim's finding that, "although measured to deliver 50W into 8 Ohm loads, this fell to 36W into 4 Ohm loads", wouldn't this mean the amp was improperly specced or designed? I am under the impression that most amps would deliver more power (not necessarily double) into a 4 Ohm load than an 8 Ohm load. I guess it depends on your standards and how you look at things. An "18 Watt/8 Ohm" amplifier which also drives 36 Watts into 4 Ohms would achieve the usual modern standard [1]. Thus the Kraken could be considered to be perfectly well designed to provide 18 Watts into a nominally 6 Ohm loudspeaker (i.e. one with an impedance of 4 Ohms minimum). It just wouldn't get the "50 Watt" label. However, that may be fine. If the loudspeaker had a sensitivity of, say, = 93 dB at 1 metre for a nominal 8 Ohm Watt then you could still get unclipped peak levels of around 105 dB from an "18 Watt" amplifier - which would be fine for a very reasonable range of music. [1] Some amplifiers exceed this. The older Krells, for example, continue doubling output power down to to 2 Ohms or even lower. -- John Phillips |
Every amp in one
John Phillips wrote:
In article , Tat Chan wrote: Excuse me for jumping in, but going back to Jim's finding that, "although measured to deliver 50W into 8 Ohm loads, this fell to 36W into 4 Ohm loads", wouldn't this mean the amp was improperly specced or designed? I am under the impression that most amps would deliver more power (not necessarily double) into a 4 Ohm load than an 8 Ohm load. I guess it depends on your standards and how you look at things. as long as my amp can drive my speakers, I'm happy ... :) well, that would be one criteria anyway. An "18 Watt/8 Ohm" amplifier which also drives 36 Watts into 4 Ohms would achieve the usual modern standard [1]. yes, that sounds right. I got thrown off by the "50W into 8 Ohms" figure Thus the Kraken could be considered to be perfectly well designed to provide 18 Watts into a nominally 6 Ohm loudspeaker (i.e. one with an impedance of 4 Ohms minimum). so a speaker with a nominal impedance of 6 Ohm has as its minumum impedance, 4 Ohms? I thought it could go below that at certain frequencies. It just wouldn't get the "50 Watt" label. However, that may be fine. If the loudspeaker had a sensitivity of, say, = 93 dB at 1 metre for a nominal 8 Ohm Watt then you could still get unclipped peak levels of around 105 dB from an "18 Watt" amplifier - which would be fine for a very reasonable range of music. yes, the Kraken would be fine for driving very efficient speakers at a "reasonable" listening level. [1] Some amplifiers exceed this. The older Krells, for example, continue doubling output power down to to 2 Ohms or even lower. So the newer Krells might not do this? Cost cutting reasons, or they don't make them like they used to? |
Every amp in one
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:15:48 +1100, Tat Chan
wrote: Jim Lesurf wrote: The second was that, although measured to deliver 50W into 8 Ohm loads, this fell to 36W into 4 Ohm loads. Again, it was mentioned that the distortion tended to rise as this level was approached. This implies that the available current may also 'soft' clip at a value that may come into play with speakers that don't maintain an impedance of about 8 Ohms across the band. (In such cases the rated power may be misleading as significantly higher powers may be available but with higher levels of distortion than used to rate the max available power. Alas this is one of the many things the HFW review fails to specify.) Jim, I am confused here. I was under the impression that an amp will deliver more power into a 4 Ohm load than into an 8 Ohm load. If the amp delivers 50W into 8 Ohms, then using P = (I^2) * R I = sqrt (50/8) = 2.5 A So, using a 4 OHm load, the amp should deliver P = (2.5)^2 * 4 = 25 W However if it was measured to deliver 36W into 4 Ohms, then I = sqrt (36/4) = 3 A So I take it the current the amp delivers can change with the load? (apologies if this seems elementary, I haven't done these calculations in a while!) It's simply that the amp has limits on both output voltage and ouput current. 50 watts into 8 ohms represents the 20 Vrms limit of its output voltage, while the 36 watts rating at 4 ohms indicates a low current capability of only 3 amps. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
Every amp in one
On 24 Nov 2004 23:56:20 GMT, John Phillips
wrote: In article , Tat Chan wrote: JustMe wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... And Jim's research did indeed lead staright to what's wrong with the Kraken - appalling current delivery! Into 4 ohms, it can only put out the voltage equivalent of 18 watts into 8 ohms. You just *know* that's going to be audible on peaks........... In this particular setup (by my PC) it remains at a comparitively low volume - I doubt I take it to anywhere near a level at which it'll clip, even with variances from the speakers. Again you say "what's wrong with the Kraken". 1) Do you know that this isn't by design? (And I'm not asking for what *you* consider to be good design in an amplifier, just whether you *know* if this is by design or not). Excuse me for jumping in, but going back to Jim's finding that, "although measured to deliver 50W into 8 Ohm loads, this fell to 36W into 4 Ohm loads", wouldn't this mean the amp was improperly specced or designed? I am under the impression that most amps would deliver more power (not necessarily double) into a 4 Ohm load than an 8 Ohm load. I guess it depends on your standards and how you look at things. An "18 Watt/8 Ohm" amplifier which also drives 36 Watts into 4 Ohms would achieve the usual modern standard [1]. Thus the Kraken could be considered to be perfectly well designed to provide 18 Watts into a nominally 6 Ohm loudspeaker (i.e. one with an impedance of 4 Ohms minimum). It just wouldn't get the "50 Watt" label. However, that may be fine. If the loudspeaker had a sensitivity of, say, = 93 dB at 1 metre for a nominal 8 Ohm Watt then you could still get unclipped peak levels of around 105 dB from an "18 Watt" amplifier - which would be fine for a very reasonable range of music. [1] Some amplifiers exceed this. The older Krells, for example, continue doubling output power down to to 2 Ohms or even lower. On a point of information, Krells before the KAV series were always specified as doubling rated power right down to 1 ohm. This isn't repealing the laws of physics however, as my '50 watt' KSA-50 mk II actually puts out 105 watts into 8 ohms, 195 watts into 4 ohms, and does indeed drive 440 watts continuously into a 1 ohm load. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
Every amp in one
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 18:45:21 -0000, "JustMe" wrote:
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:40:39 -0000, "JustMe" wrote: The comparisons I made were using a PC's line out as a source (both CD and 320kb/s MP3) and a pair of B&W LM1 speakers, at my desk, however I have made similar comparisons using more "hifi" sources and superior speakers. The pre/power amps are currently driving a pair of original Mission 752s which together sound staggeringly good. A fine speaker, indeed. Whoops - I meant VM1s with regard to the B&Ws, although I doubt you were referring to those as "fine" :o) Correct - although they're fine as PC speakers. And Jim's research did indeed lead straight to what's wrong with the Kraken - appalling current delivery! Into 4 ohms, it can only put out the voltage equivalent of 18 watts into 8 ohms. You just *know* that's going to be audible on peaks........... In this particular setup (by my PC) it remains at a comparitively low volume - I doubt I take it to anywhere near a level at which it'll clip, even with variances from the speakers. Again you say "what's wrong with the Kraken". 1) Do you know that this isn't by design? I don't care. Any SET amp is bad by design. (And I'm not asking for what *you* consider to be good design in an amplifier, just whether you *know* if this is by design or not). See above. I'm using 'wrong' in the context of not sounding like any other good amplifier. You may well like that 'wrongness', indeed you have so stipulated. 2) If I like what the amp does, then what is wrong with it, to me? Nothing, for you. OTOH, the effects decribed would be not unlike one of the classic nonlinearities of valve amps, so that may be why you like it. I cannot comment on this, although I have only heard one or two valve amps in such a context, so haven't the range of reference as I do with SS amps. You might say that one man's "nonlinearity" is another man's "sweet". Indeed, but if seeking a repacement, it's helpful to know *why* the one you like, sounds the way it does. What are you studying at the moment? He's a lecturer in electronics and physics at St Andrews University. He's not filling in the exam paper, he's creating it............. I misinterpreted his statement. Yes, he knows what he's talking about. That is clear from Jim's posts. He also engages with interest, enthusiasm and without condescension - I'm sure he's a very good teacher. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
Every amp in one
In article , Stewart
Pinkerton wrote: And Jim's research did indeed lead staright to what's wrong with the Kraken - appalling current delivery! Into 4 ohms, it can only put out the voltage equivalent of 18 watts into 8 ohms. You just *know* that's going to be audible on peaks........... OTOH, the effects decribed would be not unlike one of the classic nonlinearities of valve amps, so that may be why you like it. Well, the reports that I've now read from the URL that 'JustMe' gave seem to contradict the HFW review in some respects, so the situation is not entirely clear. One 'nice' thing from my POV is that one of the other reviews comments to the effect that the Kraken is designed to 'soft clip' so my guess on that may be correct. There are also - apparently - at least two versions of the Kraken, and their behaviours may differ. One review (HFC) comments that the version under test delivers more current (5.5A) than a previous version. They also say they got a dynamic power of 90W into 4 Ohms. The review in HFW (Sept 92) said the power was 50W/8Ohms but just 36W/4Ohms. However NK commented that this was distortion limited, so the actual available power may be higher. Taking the HFW values literally implies limits of 20Vrms (2.5Arms) into 8Ohms and 12Vrms (3Arms) into 4 Ohms if I calculate correctly. The claimed 90W into 4 Ohms in the HFC review implies (assuming they mean short-burst mean power) 18.9Vrms (4.7Arms). The 4.7Arms for a sinewave implies a peak current of 6.7A which is above the 5.5A value they quote. Taken at face value, the results seem inconsistent in detail, but make me suspect two things: 1) That the amp and PSU can deliver higher currents and voltages for short bursts than for sustained delivery. 2) That the o/p impedance may be 'high' - i.e. above 0.1 Ohms. One report says the distortion level and frequency response alter as the amp warms up. This may mean it is a low feedback design, which seems consistent with (2). Hence I suspect that this amp may be one that at times measures less well with continuous sinewaves than it actually performs on music. Can't be sure though, for the usual reasons - i.e. the reviews may simply contain errors of fact, and certainly omit details that would tell us more. BTW Afraid I found the website awkward to use. e.g. Data in large (6MB in one case) PDFs that are essentially large bitmaps scans of the pages. Not a very efficient way to provide a few pictures and some lines of text. Interesting data, but I wish it had been provided as simple HTML, etc. Took ages to download on my old dial-up connection. Then involved manipulating 35MB+ bitmaps to read/print. :-/ He's a lecturer in electronics and physics at St Andrews University. He's not filling in the exam paper, he's creating it............. Yes, he knows what he's talking about. My wife might disagree. Depends upon whether I'm agreeing with her, or not... :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Every amp in one
In article , Tat Chan
wrote: Excuse me for jumping in, but going back to Jim's finding that, "although measured to deliver 50W into 8 Ohm loads, this fell to 36W into 4 Ohm loads", wouldn't this mean the amp was improperly specced or designed? I am under the impression that most amps would deliver more power (not necessarily double) into a 4 Ohm load than an 8 Ohm load. I think others have already explained this apparent puzzle in detail. But, to confirm, yes, the problem may be that the amp in question cannot deliver sustained (or peak) currents high enough to allow the power to double. What is not clear from the reviews/reports I have seen on the Kraken is how much this occurs with real musical waveforms as opposed to continuous sinewaves... How much it may 'matter' depends on info we don't have, and the choice of loudspeakers, music, etc... Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Every amp in one
In article , Tat Chan
wrote: Jim Lesurf wrote: The second was that, although measured to deliver 50W into 8 Ohm loads, this fell to 36W into 4 Ohm loads. So I take it the current the amp delivers can change with the load? (apologies if this seems elementary, I haven't done these calculations in a while!) The higher resistance loads may mean the amp voltage limits before the maximum current it can deliver is required. This is almost unavoidable at some point. Just that Krell and some others put this point well below 4 Ohms, and others do not. :-) Slainte, Jim -- Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html |
Every amp in one
In article , Tat Chan wrote:
Thus the Kraken could be considered to be perfectly well designed to provide 18 Watts into a nominally 6 Ohm loudspeaker (i.e. one with an impedance of 4 Ohms minimum). so a speaker with a nominal impedance of 6 Ohm has as its minumum impedance, 4 Ohms? I thought it could go below that at certain frequencies. I thought not, BICBW. [1] Some amplifiers exceed this. The older Krells, for example, continue doubling output power down to to 2 Ohms or even lower. So the newer Krells might not do this? Cost cutting reasons, or they don't make them like they used to? I have only seen the specs for KSA-80s and other Krells of that vintage, and this is what I recall, so I cannot say anything for more modern Krell amplifiers. SP says the doubling goes down to 1 Ohm with the KSA-50. -- John Phillips |
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:53 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk