Trevor Wilson wrote:


Can anyone define 'Slam' in the context of audio power amps?


**Tell you what to do:

1) Find a nice pair of difficult to drive, full range loudspeakers. A pair
of AR9s, some old Infinity's (Kappa 9, RS1.5, RS2.5, etc), Linn Isobarics,
Duntech Sovereigns, Crown Princes, B&W 801, 802 (et al), KEF 105, 104 (et
al). would all be suitable candidates.
2) Now find two, similarly powered amplifiers. One, a decently designed BJT
amp, with a flat frequency response and adequate current delivery for the
above-mentioned speakers. Rotel, Krell, Arcam all make suitable products.
Now find a low bias MOSFET amp. Perreaux and several other manufacturers
make suitable products.
3) Listen to some music which has fast, dynamic, percussive sounds.

After this, you will probably understand what I mean by the term: 'slam'.


Now I understand!

Slam is an amplifier/speaker combination working as designed,
without being overdriven.

Perhaps you could define a lack of slam.

Roger.

"Old Fart at Play" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:


Can anyone define 'Slam' in the context of audio power amps?


**Tell you what to do:

1) Find a nice pair of difficult to drive, full range loudspeakers. A
pair
of AR9s, some old Infinity's (Kappa 9, RS1.5, RS2.5, etc), Linn
Isobarics,
Duntech Sovereigns, Crown Princes, B&W 801, 802 (et al), KEF 105, 104
(et
al). would all be suitable candidates.
2) Now find two, similarly powered amplifiers. One, a decently designed
BJT
amp, with a flat frequency response and adequate current delivery for
the
above-mentioned speakers. Rotel, Krell, Arcam all make suitable
products.
Now find a low bias MOSFET amp. Perreaux and several other manufacturers
make suitable products.
3) Listen to some music which has fast, dynamic, percussive sounds.

After this, you will probably understand what I mean by the term:
'slam'.


Now I understand!

Slam is an amplifier/speaker combination working as designed,
without being overdriven.

**Nope. At no time should the amplifiers be allowed to exceed their maximum
Voltage/current limits. I thought that was a given, in any proper test. I
specified the above equipment, because it should expose the effect readily.
With other brands/models, the effect may be noticable, but (possibly) less
obvious.


Perhaps you could define a lack of slam.

**Perhaps you could assemble the equipment I mentioned and see for yourself.
Most of it is old and reasonably common.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Old Fart at Play" wrote in message
...
Trevor Wilson wrote:


Can anyone define 'Slam' in the context of audio power amps?


**Tell you what to do:

1) Find a nice pair of difficult to drive, full range loudspeakers. A
pair
of AR9s, some old Infinity's (Kappa 9, RS1.5, RS2.5, etc), Linn
Isobarics,
Duntech Sovereigns, Crown Princes, B&W 801, 802 (et al), KEF 105, 104
(et
al). would all be suitable candidates.
2) Now find two, similarly powered amplifiers. One, a decently designed
BJT
amp, with a flat frequency response and adequate current delivery for
the
above-mentioned speakers. Rotel, Krell, Arcam all make suitable
products.
Now find a low bias MOSFET amp. Perreaux and several other manufacturers
make suitable products.
3) Listen to some music which has fast, dynamic, percussive sounds.

After this, you will probably understand what I mean by the term:
'slam'.


Now I understand!

Slam is an amplifier/speaker combination working as designed,
without being overdriven.

**Nope. At no time should the amplifiers be allowed to exceed their maximum
Voltage/current limits. I thought that was a given, in any proper test. I
specified the above equipment, because it should expose the effect readily.
With other brands/models, the effect may be noticable, but (possibly) less
obvious.


Perhaps you could define a lack of slam.

**Perhaps you could assemble the equipment I mentioned and see for yourself.
Most of it is old and reasonably common.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 17:50:32 +0100, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 17:04:10 +0100, Don Pearce used
to say...

Handwaving were ne'er so lyrical. Unfortunately we are still no nearer
to a clue as to what Slam is...

Do you know what a slammed door sounds like?

Yes?

Well how would _you_ describe the type of sound it makes? Or would you
just find it easier to say the sound has some slam about it?

Or if you wanted to be pedantic how about, fast attack, no decay, no
sustain and a sharp release?

Well, if I were listening to recordings of doors being slammed, then
slam is what I would want to hear.

My listening is much more to do with music - without slamming doors.



OK Don, knock yerself out - here's a bit of both
http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit...w/doorclip.mp3 (2.0 Mb) - all
nice and spitchy throughout (used the wrong sodding copy!) just to keep you
digiphiles happy!

;-)

'Slam' is an artificial effect that can be created by particular amp/speaker
combinations, whether on stage or on HiFi or both (recorded amplified music).
This artificial effect should not be confused with the actual acoustic sound of
a double bass, which doesn't have this dry, thunky kind of 'slam', and is in
fact slower and more resonant with a more 'elastic' kind of envelope, if you
see what I mean. Consequently many who listen to amplified music like the
effect, while those who prefer acoustic music to sound natural would choose a
more faithful form of reproduction. Yes, guys, I am a double bass player
doubling fretless. Andy.

=== Andy Evans ===
Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com
Audio, music and health pages and interesting links.

'Slam' is an artificial effect that can be created by particular amp/speaker
combinations, whether on stage or on HiFi or both (recorded amplified music).
This artificial effect should not be confused with the actual acoustic sound of
a double bass, which doesn't have this dry, thunky kind of 'slam', and is in
fact slower and more resonant with a more 'elastic' kind of envelope, if you
see what I mean. Consequently many who listen to amplified music like the
effect, while those who prefer acoustic music to sound natural would choose a
more faithful form of reproduction. Yes, guys, I am a double bass player
doubling fretless. Andy.

=== Andy Evans ===
Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com
Audio, music and health pages and interesting links.

In article ,
db wrote:
RMS watts + snake-oil

What's an RMS watt?

--
*To be intoxicated is to feel sophisticated, but not be able to say it.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

In article ,
db wrote:
RMS watts + snake-oil

What's an RMS watt?

--
*To be intoxicated is to feel sophisticated, but not be able to say it.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 23:49:29 +0100, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

Or if you wanted to be pedantic how about, fast attack, no decay, no
sustain and a sharp release?

Well, if I were listening to recordings of doors being slammed, then
slam is what I would want to hear.

My listening is much more to do with music - without slamming doors.

So I was correct when I said "if you want to be pedantic"

You might have been if that was what you said - but it wasn't. What
you said was "Or if you wanted to be pedantic how about, fast attack,
no decay, no sustain and a sharp release?"

Rather wide of the mark, you must agree. If you feel the inclination
to misquote yourself, at least have the smarts not to include the
correct version in the post.

The fact remains that my comment was borne of the fact I knew you'd be a
pedantic ****er.

As it is you apparently seemed to not understand what the post was
saying.

Typical ****ing engineer

But wouldn't your comment have worked better if I HAD been a pedantic
****er? As it turned out that was you.

Never mind, heh?

d

_____________________________

http://www.pearce.uk.com

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 23:49:29 +0100, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

Or if you wanted to be pedantic how about, fast attack, no decay, no
sustain and a sharp release?

Well, if I were listening to recordings of doors being slammed, then
slam is what I would want to hear.

My listening is much more to do with music - without slamming doors.

So I was correct when I said "if you want to be pedantic"

You might have been if that was what you said - but it wasn't. What
you said was "Or if you wanted to be pedantic how about, fast attack,
no decay, no sustain and a sharp release?"

Rather wide of the mark, you must agree. If you feel the inclination
to misquote yourself, at least have the smarts not to include the
correct version in the post.

The fact remains that my comment was borne of the fact I knew you'd be a
pedantic ****er.

As it is you apparently seemed to not understand what the post was
saying.

Typical ****ing engineer

But wouldn't your comment have worked better if I HAD been a pedantic
****er? As it turned out that was you.

Never mind, heh?

d

_____________________________

http://www.pearce.uk.com