|
|
how good are class D amplifiers?
In article , John Phillips
wrote: On 2007-05-14, Jim Lesurf wrote: In article l, jaap wrote: I got to this opinion speaking with fellow musiclovers, who share a passion for the best obtainable. Most got tube amps under 5W per channel, some built their own, often accomplished by single driver speakers. Ah, so 'the best' means soft clipping to alter the sounds in ways you prefer. I see. ... As usual, it depends on details. For 5W (+7 dBW) driving rather sensitive (but available) conventional speakers of 94 dBA/W sensitivity you get unclipped peaks up to 101 dBA at 1 metre and maybe 95 dBA at the listening position. [snip rest of details] I agree entirely with what you wrote. I am therefore curious about Jaap's line of argument which seems to be that low power capabilities for the amplifier are somehow inherently 'better' in his opinion in terms of sound. Thus the inference... :-) 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 |
how good are class D amplifiers?
In article ,
Bob Latham wrote: Why would you need a double blind test on a 'feature' that is so obvious? 1) Because it isn't obvious to me, I've never heard it. 2) Because that is the standard reply to anyone claiming to hear an audible difference between two things, is it not? Ok. Have you any well recorded 'light' music from the '70s? The sort of album which has a variety of songs on it all with an orchestral backing - and also close to the maximum time you can cram on an LP? Perhaps by Streisland, Bassey, Diamond, Neilson - that sort of thing? Well recorded MOR pop without electronic gimmicks? If you can't actually hear the difference in quality between the first and last tracks on this sort of LP load them into your computer and look at them on a spectrum analyser. It's quite revealing. I'm actually trying to think of one which has a reprise at the end which might give an even more meaningful listening only comparison. -- *A nest isn't empty until all their stuff is out of the attic Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote If you can't actually hear the difference in quality between the first and last tracks on this sort of LP Yeah...?? load them into your computer and look at them on a spectrum analyser. You *are* kidding - right...??? It's quite revealing. That certainly was (wot new?), but forget that stupidity and tell me what is the correct Pipex 'hostname' and what 'username' it expects for ftp transfers to my website - I've tried all the likely candidates and it ain't having none of it...?? I'm actually trying to think of one which has a reprise at the end which might give an even more meaningful listening only comparison. Streuth! You've obviously got no work on today..... -- *A nest isn't empty until all their stuff is out of the attic Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"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....?? |
how good are class D amplifiers?
On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:06:54 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote: That certainly was (wot new?), but forget that stupidity and tell me what is the correct Pipex 'hostname' and what 'username' it expects for ftp transfers to my website - I've tried all the likely candidates and it ain't having none of it...?? dslftp.dsl.pipex.com Login is your primary Pipex username, not including "@whatever" If you've not used it before, I seem to remember having to activate the webspace in the Pipex Control Panel. Maybe not. |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"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? |
how good are class D amplifiers?
On Tue, 15 May 2007 07:36:09 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: 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? Why shouldn't a 10W amp into an efficient speaker sound as loud as a 100W amp into a less efficient one? And, quite independently, why shouldn't one pair sound better than the other? The fault comes in when you invent the wrong reasons for one sounding better. |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in message ... On Tue, 15 May 2007 11:06:54 +0100, "Keith G" wrote: That certainly was (wot new?), but forget that stupidity and tell me what is the correct Pipex 'hostname' and what 'username' it expects for ftp transfers to my website - I've tried all the likely candidates and it ain't having none of it...?? dslftp.dsl.pipex.com Login is your primary Pipex username, not including "@whatever" If you've not used it before, I seem to remember having to activate the webspace in the Pipex Control Panel. Maybe not. Not used it before? Wot TF's this then: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/ Scotch Mist? (Can't believe you haven't seen any of the 10,000 - no, make that 20,000 links to that site I've posted over the last few years!) Anyway, I've actually managed to get 'up there' since I posted but I still can't see any files or folders yet! (I'm now wondering if the server site is down - wouldn't be surprised, knowing Pipex!!) Nevertheless, thanks for that! I knew that useless little **** Plowie (also Pipex, I believe) couldn't/wouldn't come up with the goods - pointless *yap* is all he's any good for! :-) |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in
message On Tue, 15 May 2007 07:36:09 -0400, "Arny Krueger" wrote: 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? Why shouldn't a 10W amp into an efficient speaker sound as loud as a 100W amp into a less efficient one? Why would anybody in their right mind present this as a fair comparison of amplifiers? But all that amplifier weirdness aside, the high efficiency speaker can only have equivalent bandpass if it is vastly larger. Why would anybody in their right mind present that as a fair comparison of speakers? I've got it - let us make a big fuss over the fact that a 7 liter Cobra is faster than a 35 cc motorbike. Obvious proof that 1970s technology is superior, right? ;-) |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "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 Cleaner? Who said anything about that? (Interesting litle 'pop-up', that one...) 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? Not nearly as suspect as someone who can make those suppositions on kit he doesn't know/hasn't heard - *reeks* of prejudice that does, but I guess the speakers' sensitivity figures flew over your head, as they did Plowie.... |
how good are class D amplifiers?
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. S. -- http://audiopages.googlepages.com |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Keith G" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "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 Cleaner? Who said anything about that? (Interesting litle 'pop-up', that one...) 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? Not nearly as suspect as someone who can make those suppositions on kit he doesn't know/hasn't heard - *reeks* of prejudice that does, but I guess the speakers' sensitivity figures flew over your head, as they did Plowie.... Following your own self-contradictory illogic Keith, why would your claimed sensitivity numbers be meaningful at all to me, given that I haven't heard them? |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in message ... On Tue, 15 May 2007 07:36:09 -0400, "Arny Krueger" wrote: 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? Why shouldn't a 10W amp into an efficient speaker sound as loud as a 100W amp into a less efficient one? And, quite independently, why shouldn't one pair sound better than the other? The fault comes in when you invent the wrong reasons for one sounding better. Quite.... |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in message On Tue, 15 May 2007 07:36:09 -0400, "Arny Krueger" wrote: 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? Why shouldn't a 10W amp into an efficient speaker sound as loud as a 100W amp into a less efficient one? Why would anybody in their right mind present this as a fair comparison of amplifiers? Who did? But all that amplifier weirdness aside, the high efficiency speaker can only have equivalent bandpass if it is vastly larger. Who said anything about 'bandpass'? Why would anybody in their right mind present that as a fair comparison of speakers? Who said it was? I've got it - let us make a big fuss over the fact that a 7 liter Cobra is faster than a 35 cc motorbike. Obvious proof that 1970s technology is superior, right? ;-) And you've got the brass arse to call me 'illogical'...?? (I guess it must be ****ing with rain in Merkin Land as well....) |
how good are class D amplifiers?
On Tue, 15 May 2007 12:52:01 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote: Not used it before? Wot TF's this then: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/ Scotch Mist? (Can't believe you haven't seen any of the 10,000 - no, make that 20,000 links to that site I've posted over the last few years!) Anyway, I've actually managed to get 'up there' since I posted but I still can't see any files or folders yet! (I'm now wondering if the server site is down - wouldn't be surprised, knowing Pipex!!) It seems to be there. A page of hi-fi, a page of bikes, a page of odds-and-sods and one of MP3s. Is that what there should be? What's the latest recording? Seems a bit cruel leaving those early attempts up there - over-close miking with lots of key noise and (dare one say?) not very good performances. That's where we all started, but I'm sure both recordist and musician have listened, learned and progressed since then. You certainly seem to have enough recording gear! |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "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 Cleaner? Who said anything about that? (Interesting litle 'pop-up', that one...) 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? Not nearly as suspect as someone who can make those suppositions on kit he doesn't know/hasn't heard - *reeks* of prejudice that does, but I guess the speakers' sensitivity figures flew over your head, as they did Plowie.... Following your own self-contradictory illogic Keith, why would your claimed sensitivity numbers be meaningful at all to me, given that I haven't heard them? Steady on, squire - you'll have the Plowborg round your ears, going on about your lack of knowledge of electronics and/or banging on about the Laws Of Physics.... ....except that he'll probably append that to one my posts, if he follows his usual, twisty form.... |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"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. Not including likely restrictions in bandwidth, that cause the sound to be weighted towards the frequency ranges where the ear is most sensitive. I His IMFs have a sensitivity of around 84dB/watt, so his 100 watt amplifier will provide a level of around 104dB. The purported 5 dB difference is probably mostly just a numbers thing. 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. Yes, the 8 wall valve setup is not likely to be a paragon of undistorted, pure sound. Keith made no claims as to which sound better (at least not in this thread) only loudness. Speaking of loud horn-loaded narrowband systems, what about Keith just cutting to the chase and buying a surplus fire siren? |
how good are class D amplifiers?
Keith G wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote If you can't actually hear the difference in quality between the first and last tracks on this sort of LP Yeah...?? load them into your computer and look at them on a spectrum analyser. You *are* kidding - right...??? It's quite revealing. That certainly was (wot new?), but forget that stupidity and tell me what is the correct Pipex 'hostname' and what 'username' it expects for ftp transfers to my website - I've tried all the likely candidates and it ain't having none of it...?? Have a look on your pipex pages, I have left pipex now, so I can't tell you what they should be. It will be something like address: dslftp.dsl.pipex.net username: your pipex username password: your pipex password -- Nick |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"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??) |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in message ... On Tue, 15 May 2007 12:52:01 +0100, "Keith G" wrote: Not used it before? Wot TF's this then: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/ Scotch Mist? (Can't believe you haven't seen any of the 10,000 - no, make that 20,000 links to that site I've posted over the last few years!) Anyway, I've actually managed to get 'up there' since I posted but I still can't see any files or folders yet! (I'm now wondering if the server site is down - wouldn't be surprised, knowing Pipex!!) It seems to be there. A page of hi-fi, a page of bikes, a page of odds-and-sods and one of MP3s. Is that what there should be? Yes, the site's OK but I can't access it yet! What's the latest recording? Seems a bit cruel leaving those early attempts up there - over-close miking with lots of key noise and (dare one say?) not very good performances. That's where we all started, but I'm sure both recordist and musician have listened, learned and progressed since then. You certainly seem to have enough recording gear! The problem for both of us is lack of continuity due to lack of opportunity atm. Those recordings are virtually all *first takes* for both of us - Swim is rusty by about 10 years on the clart and over 20 years on the piano (or was) and I'm new to recording anyway, so it's a series of 'Square One' starts atm and there hasn't been anything newer to replace those early attempts yet. There's no rush, it'll sort in time... |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Nick Gorham" wrote Have a look on your pipex pages, I have left pipex now, Hah! Tell me about it.... so I can't tell you what they should be. It will be something like address: dslftp.dsl.pipex.net username: your pipex username password: your pipex password I'm 'up there' OK but I can't see any files or folders yet - maybe it's the freebie 'CoffeeCup' software...?? It'll sort..... |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Keith G" wrote in message
Asitappens, I've made no comments on comparative sound 'quality' between these two systems elsewhere, either - The myth here is that one comments on the sound of a system in a total vacuum - no reference to any other system or live music ever heard. |
how good are class D amplifiers?
On Tue, 15 May 2007 14:05:54 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote: The problem for both of us is lack of continuity due to lack of opportunity atm. Those recordings are virtually all *first takes* for both of us - Swim is rusty by about 10 years on the clart and over 20 years on the piano (or was) and I'm new to recording anyway, so it's a series of 'Square One' starts atm and there hasn't been anything newer to replace those early attempts yet. There's no rush, it'll sort in time... So what DO you do with all those microphones and other recording gear? At: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/myhifi/myhifi.htm you list a pair of Oktavas, a pair of SE1As, a pair of LD condensers, a ribbon mic, preamps........ That's a LOT of gear for someone who's barely started :-) |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message Asitappens, I've made no comments on comparative sound 'quality' between these two systems elsewhere, either - The myth here is that one comments on the sound of a system in a total vacuum - no reference to any other system or live music ever heard. The key words in my post (above) are 'no' and 'comments'..... |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in message ... On Tue, 15 May 2007 14:05:54 +0100, "Keith G" wrote: The problem for both of us is lack of continuity due to lack of opportunity atm. Those recordings are virtually all *first takes* for both of us - Swim is rusty by about 10 years on the clart and over 20 years on the piano (or was) and I'm new to recording anyway, so it's a series of 'Square One' starts atm and there hasn't been anything newer to replace those early attempts yet. There's no rush, it'll sort in time... So what DO you do with all those microphones and other recording gear? At: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/myhifi/myhifi.htm you list a pair of Oktavas, a pair of SE1As, a pair of LD condensers, a ribbon mic, preamps........ That's a LOT of gear for someone who's barely started :-) Not really - the Oktavas and ribbon weren't too cheap but the others weren't expensive. The rationale is as follows: Oktavas - mostly clart (stereo or mono) SE1As - piano (stereo) at the end of the spindly booms CAD GLXwhatever LDs - general, knockabout (very cheap but good) Ribbon - mono clart, speech, fondling/admiring.... (I just like microphones! :-) I also have a Samson multi-pattern USB mike for 'voice emails' which doesn't seem to like this Nuvistor laptop I'm on atm (yet) - which is arse, because half the reason for getting it was to be able to expand my 'scope' and get *cleaner* recordings with the other mics, which is also not happening yet..!! |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Keith G" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message Asitappens, I've made no comments on comparative sound 'quality' between these two systems elsewhere, either - The myth here is that one comments on the sound of a system in a total vacuum - no reference to any other system or live music ever heard. The key words in my post (above) are 'no' and 'comments'..... Well, if you admit that you said comparative, then you're sunk. Oh, you did. Sorry about that! |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote in message . .. "Keith G" wrote in message Asitappens, I've made no comments on comparative sound 'quality' between these two systems elsewhere, either - The myth here is that one comments on the sound of a system in a total vacuum - no reference to any other system or live music ever heard. The key words in my post (above) are 'no' and 'comments'..... Well, if you admit that you said comparative, then you're sunk. Oh, you did. Sorry about that! I spend half my life sunk, but I've no idea what you are driving at - try to build *positively* on the 'I like them both' bit I posted earlier.... (This is all very strange - I am 20 miles from my 'usual 'computer place.....) |
how good are class D amplifiers?
In article ,
Keith G wrote: Nevertheless, thanks for that! I knew that useless little **** Plowie (also Pipex, I believe) couldn't/wouldn't come up with the goods - pointless *yap* is all he's any good for! :-) You may have nothing better to do than sit on your computer all day, but I'd only just got back home. -- *Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder... Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
how good are class D amplifiers?
In article ,
Serge Auckland wrote: 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. Full range? 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. A PA horn would sound louder still. -- *Why don't sheep shrink when it rains? Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
how good are class D amplifiers?
In article ,
Keith G wrote: If you can't actually hear the difference in quality between the first and last tracks on this sort of LP Yeah...?? Why are you commenting on this part of the thread since you refused to give an answer to a straightforward question about it? load them into your computer and look at them on a spectrum analyser. You *are* kidding - right...??? No. I assumed you'd have such a programme given the money you spend on mics etc and the amount of recordings you put on your site via a computer. It's quite revealing. That certainly was (wot new?), but forget that stupidity and tell me what is the correct Pipex 'hostname' and what 'username' it expects for ftp transfers to my website - I've tried all the likely candidates and it ain't having none of it...?? I haven't a clue as I don't have and never have had a website. Have you tried asking Pipex if you've lost the paperwork? I'm actually trying to think of one which has a reprise at the end which might give an even more meaningful listening only comparison. Streuth! You've obviously got no work on today..... I've just come back from installing a new consumer unit at a friend's place in Basingstoke. Have you done anything useful today apart from whinging? -- *A day without sunshine is like... night.* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
how good are class D amplifiers?
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Serge Auckland wrote: 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. Full range? Full enough for the purposes. The missing bottom and top are already way down on the F-M hearing curves that they won't change the perceived loudness to any appreciable extent. The 100dB/watt sensitivity figures are normally given at mid frequencies anyway. My reply was to illustrate that a SET/horn system was capable of playing louder than a high power SS/TL system. I made no comment about quality. Afaiac, I would probably prefer the sound of a loudhailer to the SET/horn, but I would have to hear them under double-blind conditions..... S. -- http://audiopages.googlepages.com |
how good are class D amplifiers?
On 2007-05-15, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , John Phillips wrote: On 2007-05-14, Jim Lesurf wrote: In article l, jaap wrote: I got to this opinion speaking with fellow musiclovers, who share a passion for the best obtainable. Most got tube amps under 5W per channel, some built their own, often accomplished by single driver speakers. Ah, so 'the best' means soft clipping to alter the sounds in ways you prefer. I see. ... As usual, it depends on details. For 5W (+7 dBW) driving rather sensitive (but available) conventional speakers of 94 dBA/W sensitivity you get unclipped peaks up to 101 dBA at 1 metre and maybe 95 dBA at the listening position. [snip rest of details] I agree entirely with what you wrote. I am therefore curious about Jaap's line of argument which seems to be that low power capabilities for the amplifier are somehow inherently 'better' in his opinion in terms of sound. Thus the inference... :-) I once listened to a low power valve amplifier with occasional and obvious clipping. The owner was enthusiastic but to me it just sounded unpleasant as it crunched (albeit softly) against the power rails. However it's clear there are those who disagree with me. In deciding how much power to deploy, one of the interesting questions that has proved difficult to answer definitively is "how loud is an orchestra" (when you are in good seats not too far from the stage). To get back to the original subject (class D amplifiers) I was eyeing up the Rotel 2 x 500 W box (which has had good reviews even from some sections of the audiophile press) and thinking "27 dBW + 88 dBA/W = 115 dBA". That's probably enough! However I wonder if my current 'speakers would be distorting so much at 115 dBA output (even just on peaks) that it would not be too pleasant. -- John Phillips |
how good are class D amplifiers?
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote: **There is little anyone can do for seriously deluded individuals. Single driver speakers (outside electrostatics) are utterly appalling. Which electrostatic speaker uses a genuine single full range driver? BTW I'm agreeing with you about single driver speakers. ;-) -- *Dancing is a perpendicular expression of a horizontal desire * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
how good are class D amplifiers?
On Wed, 16 May 2007 18:00:31 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote: Which electrostatic speaker uses a genuine single full range driver? Stax ear speakers? ;-) -- Chris Isbell Southampton, UK |
how good are class D amplifiers?
In article , John Phillips
wrote: In deciding how much power to deploy, one of the interesting questions that has proved difficult to answer definitively is "how loud is an orchestra" (when you are in good seats not too far from the stage). For me, the real questions here aren't so much with measuring the sound level you'd get in such a seat. They are in translating that into what is required at home in a domestic room. There are various problems with this translation. The replay may be in stereo, and not 'surround' the listener with the orginal soundfield. The listening room may impose its own reflections, which changes the perceived level from the one implied by an (anechoic chamber) sensitivity value for the speakers. My own experience is that the sound pressure levels required for a convincing result at home are often far lower than those reported as being present in the hall. For the above reasons I am quite doubtful of the claims made by Mobile Fidelity that you need high power amps even with low efficiency speakers. Although this will all depend a lot on the details of the listening room, etc, etc. Similarly, although doubtful of the idea that in some magic way a low power amp is 'superior' simply by virtue of having low power limits, I suspect that many people - including myself - would be fine with a well-made low-power amp. The snag, though, is being able to tell what will be needed given all the above variables. Hence erring on the side of generosity may be wise. 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 |
how good are class D amplifiers?
In article , Serge Auckland
wrote: Dave Plowman (News) wrote: In article , Serge Auckland wrote: 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. Full range? Full enough for the purposes. The missing bottom and top are already way down on the F-M hearing curves that they won't change the perceived loudness to any appreciable extent. The 100dB/watt sensitivity figures are normally given at mid frequencies anyway. That may be drawing an incorrect conclusion by misapplying the curves. The key point will be that the music either will have audible bass/treble when replayed with a 'flat' system or not. (By rthat, I mean that the presence of the low bass and high treble have an audible effect.) If it does, then using speakers that fail to reproduce the bass/treble will alter the audible results. The FM curves simply imply that a higher sound pressure was required in the first place for the music to have the audible bass/treble. The curves were also based on isolated sinewave audibility IIRC. This isn't at all the same thing as when listening to a composite sound as the physiology, etc, of human hearing system isn't simply working by linear superposition. 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 |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ... In article , Keith G wrote: You *are* kidding - right...??? No. I assumed you'd have such a programme given the money you spend on mics etc and the amount of recordings you put on your site via a computer. No - missing the point as ever. What I was commenting on was the your suggestion to someone who said he couldn't hear a difference that he should *measure* it until he can... I haven't a clue as I don't have and never have had a website. Have you tried asking Pipex if you've lost the paperwork? Soted now, thank you - it was a setting in the software. I'm actually trying to think of one which has a reprise at the end which might give an even more meaningful listening only comparison. Streuth! You've obviously got no work on today..... I've just come back from installing a new consumer unit at a friend's place in Basingstoke. Have you done anything useful today apart from whinging? I don't whing - I leave that to you.... |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message .. . "Keith G" wrote in message ... "Trevor Wilson" wrote I own a Marantz Model 18 Receiver, dating from 1968. It originally cost US$1,200.00 and was the most power receiver on the planet, back then. For it's time, it was quite a sophisticated product, employing full complementary silicon outputs, relay protection system and other nifty stuff. It was critically appraised by reviewers at the time and when I purchased mine (ca: 1977) I was stunned at how much better it sounded than many contemporary amplifiers of similar (60 Watts) or even more power. Just for yuks, I recently compared it to a more modern Marantz amplifier (cost around AUS$1,000.00). No comparison. The modern amp was somewhat better sounding. And, allowing for inflation, the modern amp was MUCH less expensive. Don't even get me started on loudspeakers. The technology for designing speakers has improved in leaps and bounds over the last 40 years. S'funny, we keep getting told how 'good amps' don't have a sound....??? **Because that is a fact. The ideal amplifier has no 'sound' of it's own. No amplifier is ideal. Therefore no amplifier has no 'sound' of its own then? |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message .. . "Keith G" wrote Speaker improvements? Try getting hold of a pair of cheap, 30 year old Tannoys/Rogers/Quads/KEFs, just for starters.... **Actually, 30 years is too tight a limitation. I did say 40 years. I say this, because I modded a pair of B&W DM7-II speakers a few years back. After replacing the old caps and inductors, they sounded very good indeed. They employed many of the characteristics valued in modern speakers. They STILL sound bloody good. Well there you go - that's a start isn't it? |
how good are class D amplifiers?
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote Do you ever read what you write? I try not to - there's always a mistake in it.... I'd suggest you try again - it's at the top of this post. If you can't tell a resistor from a capacitor you should stick to low voltage battery operated equipment. Valve equipment fiddled with by the totally unskilled can be a fire risk. Wake up FFS - try to spot when someone's taking the ****.... (Look up 'Socratic Irony and scale it down to *country boy* part feigned/mostly real ignorance and you'll be in the right neck of the woods... ;-) |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:40 PM. |
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