What are my rights here in Ontario canada ?

[PENG]

Just to clarify, generally the sensitivity would be measured at 2.83v/1m
I really don't know of a reputable loudspeaker manufacturer that would use any other level to measure sensitivity.

The reason is the power measurement varies with load; 2.83v is "power agnostic"; 1 watt on an 8 ohm speaker but 2 watts on a 4 ohm speaker (load), 4 watts on a 2 ohm load, etc. By using 2.83v you take the impedance out of the equation, and sensitivity can be compared with other loudspeaker systems of inevitably differing impedance (it's also unlikely that any speaker is exactly 8 or 4 or 2 ohms at 1 KHz, the frequency used to measure sensitivity, because all loudspeaker frequency response curves and specifications are referenced to 1 KHz, also for comparative consistency).

So you really would not want (or assume) the sensitivity would be measured at 1w/1m for a 4 ohm speaker. Also, the marketing department (always interested in competitive advantage or in this case, disadvantage) would not want sensitivity for a 4 ohm speaker to be referenced to 1w as that would give a lower dB rating vs 2.83v

Perhaps more importantly, using 2.83v means two speakers connected to the same amplifier* and with the same music or test tone would reflect exactly how loud each would actually play if measured with a Sound Pressure Mwter, or via your ears.

* Assuming the amp was not transformer-coupled, such as most Solid State amps.

And just to clarify, I prefer the 2.83V at 1m method as well, but I am not sure if in fact all reputable manufacturer don't use the 1W at 1m method. In fact I remember seeing some that did, so when it has to do with some seemingly inexplicable damages of the OP's amp I would not want to make such assumption without at least pointing our the possibility. Strictly speaking there are pros and cons for both formats. The 1W/1m is easier for a lot of people who don't know and don't care to know about the power formula, Ohm's law etc., and would just use online calculators that tend to simply estimate how much "Watts" someone needs. Amps still advertised their output in watts into 8,4,2 ohms etc. Anyway, which way is better can be another debate but I am not interested as again, I too, prefer the 2.83V format for speaker sensitivities.

Your citing of the reason is kind of redundant as I already made that point quite clear in my post using an numerical example. Once again, we are almost saying the same thing, sometimes you just need to read people's before offering unnecessary rebuttals.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

It's fine to use 1w/1m if the impedance is 8 ohms. It is exactly the same as 2.83v into 8 ohms.

Since the value for 1w/1m would result in a lower efficiency rating in dB, I would be surprised to learn speakers that have an impedance below 8 ohms (most modern HiFi speakers) would use that figure versus 2.83v

However if you do see a specification where it's is stated as measured at 1w/1m and 4 ohms impedance, simply add 3dB to the efficiency rating.

Manufacturer's efficiency ratings are often found to be off by a few dB versus Lab results in a review, so a certain "fudge factor" should be assumed in any case. I don't feel the reason is a deliberate attempt to misrepresent, it's more likely that the impedance at the test frequency is above or below the averaged response curve. Speaker response curves are pretty ragged, and the averaged level is more likely to represent the experience in a system.

Even reviewers use a certain amount of averaging when they publish frequency response curves which may mask the actual output at some specific frequency used for efficiency test measurements.

 

[Muzique Junkie]

yesterday i had a very satisfying conversation with Mystic audio

What i heard was a satisfying apology ,and humility

100% ownwership of the situation gone south

Im still processing the entire thing .As time passes i feel even more satisfied

Thank you all for your dedicated support through a this

I could not have done it without you all

PS CAM censorship that favours dealers paying for ads is a real disappointment

 

[highfigh]

Did I miss the model of the speakers?

 

[slipperybidness]

yesterday i had a very satisfying conversation with Mystic audio

What i heard was a satisfying apology ,and humility

100% ownwership of the situation gone south

Im still processing the entire thing .As time passes i feel even more satisfied

Thank you all for your dedicated support through a this

I could not have done it without you all

PS CAM censorship that favours dealers paying for ads is a real disappointment

Well, that is a step in the right direction.....how about any $ coming back your way?

 

[Muzique Junkie]

Well, that is a step in the right direction.....how about any $ coming back your way?

Indeed a full refund on the Blue Circle and a good price on the H 360

 

[Muzique Junkie]

Did I miss the model of the speakers?

Dynaudio Focus 340

 

[slipperybidness]

Indeed a full refund on the Blue Circle and a good price on the H 360

Well, finally!

I wonder what changed his mind?

Oh well, score one for the good guys.

 

[Muzique Junkie]

Well, finally!

I wonder what changed his mind?

Oh well, score one for the good guys.

Thank you

 

[mtrycrafts]

Well, finally!

I wonder what changed his mind?

Oh well, score one for the good guys.

Is that like a Monster lawsuit? When the public heat is on, the suit disappears.

 

[mtrycrafts]

...

PS CAM censorship that favours dealers paying for ads is a real disappointment

Curious what this is.

 

[lovinthehd]

Curious what this is.

Forum at Canadian Audio Mart....had me wondering for a bit.

 

[Muzique Junkie]

Curious what this is.

Sorry i was not clear

Canuck audio mart , and in the forum for negative feedback

Some censorship leans to favour of the dealers who coincidentally pay for ads there


This dealer came through , he was nt censoring , so thats not directed at him

@lovinthehd Sorry for the confusion

And thanks to all for the assistance , patience and endurance with me to all members

 

[lovinthehd]

Sorry i was not clear

Canuck audio mart , and in the forum for negative feedback

Some censorship leans to favour of the dealers who coincidentally pay for ads there


This dealer came through , he was nt censoring , so thats not directed at him

@lovinthehd Sorry for the confusion

And thanks to all for the assistance , patience and endurance with me to all members

LOL forgot it was Canuck instead of Canadian.

 

[Muzique Junkie]

LOL forgot it was Canuck instead of Canadian.

Yes were a buch of Canuckleheads over here LOL

 

[mtrycrafts]

LOL forgot it was Canuck instead of Canadian.

Well, for us it is Canadian. For him, it is Canuck.

 

[Muzique Junkie]

LOL

https://www.chapterhouse.ca/collections/captain-canuck

 

[Mustang1993]

Did the equipment failure happen while you were listening to it or was it off ? Do you use a surge suppressor ? Is the place you bought the amp at a member of the Better Business Bureau ?

 

[Muzique Junkie]

Did the equipment failure happen while you were listening to it or was it off ? Do you use a surge suppressor ? Is the place you bought the amp at a member of the Better Business Bureau ?

Its all settled

He finally admitted fault ,apologized and i got a full refund

It failed blew up when powered on.No surge suppression

 

[Johnny2Bad]

Once again, we are almost saying the same thing, sometimes you just need to read people's before offering unnecessary rebuttals.

What? This is Audioholics. Unnecessary rebuttals are the law around here.

But, we are not "almost saying the same thing", and I did read your post before offering my necessary clarification. I don't see it as a rebuttal, as in debating, but again this is Audioholics so debating seems to be the norm.

" ...
In the OP's case, I would agree that those Dyns are not easy loads, as they have specified sensitivity of 87 dB and impedance of 4 ohms. It sucks that they did not say 87 dB at 2.83V or 1W but let's assume it is at 2.83V just to be on the safe side. So that's equivalent to speakers specified as 8 ohms nominal with sensitivity at 84 dB at 2.83V, or 81 dB 1W/1M.
..."

87dB/2.83V/1m 4 ohms is exactly the same as 87dB/2.83V/1m 8 ohms, not 84dB.

87dB/2.83V/1m 8 ohms is exactly the same as 87dB/1w/1m 8 ohms

87dB/2.83V/1m 4 ohms is exactly the same as 87dB/2w/1m 4 ohms

Given a specific input level (let's say, 1dBu or 750mV/600 ohms) an amplifier without output transformers (ie most Solid State amps) will put out twice as much power in watts into 4 ohms versus 8 ohms, but if you were to measure the output voltage level it will be the same into both impedances.

Your last sentence would be correct if you said "let's assume it is 1W ... that's equivalent to speakers specified as 8 ohms nominal with sensitivity at 84dB at 2.83V." [because 2.83v/1m @ 8 ohms is equal to 1w/1m @ 8 ohms]. Obviously the 81dB reference is incorrect.

You don't come across as someone who doesn't know this stuff, so maybe you were a coffee short when you posted. But there is a reason for my post, and it's not just to be argumentative.