A speakers' amplifier power rating

[fmw]

1. I want to be able to hit thx reference on my receiver before the speaker breaks up.

2. I want to be able to fill the theater area all the way to the pool table.

OK, most speakers can handle 105db before failing. The issue will be how much power is needed to do that and that depends on room acoustics and how far the pool table is from the speakers. By the way, in my youth I was Rocky Mountain one pocket champion. You want specific recommndations for unspecific parameters. Have you listened to audio at 85db average and 105db on peaks at the listening position?

 

[Sams]

I think that depends on your definition of mid bass but getting the visceral feel from your music puts a lot of stress on the sub 100 hz range.

Would a bigger subwoofer clean up the highs? Right now the highs become painful at moderate volume(well below the speakers limit). Or is that simply a symptom of a bright room?

 

[fmw]

The addition of a subwoofer will change the average of frequencies reaching your ears. It won't change the highs but it will make them less noticeable on average.

 

[markw]

Would a bigger subwoofer clean up the highs? Right now the highs become painful at moderate volume(well below the speakers limit). Or is that simply a symptom of a bright room?

Perhaps, if you prevent the lows from gong to it. Remember, many woofers also reproduce a sizable portion of the midrange as well.

And, each speaker has it's own sound and they can vary greatly. One man's crisp and detailed can be another's shrill or grating.

 

[ski2xblack]

Back of the napkin quickie estimate, using 10' listening distance, speaker sensitivity of 87db/w (they're rated 90, but given their 4 ohm load that may be slightly exaggerated), and THX standard of 105 db reference level, you're in the ballpark of 150 watts. I don't expect the sub you have to have much of a chance to really keep pace, given the extra power demands for 115 db peak output, your room size, and the limits of that sub. THX reference levels seems within reach of the Revels, but you'll need a couple or three subs.

 

[Sams]

OK, most speakers can handle 105db before failing. The issue will be how much power is needed to do that and that depends on room acoustics and how far the pool table is from the speakers. By the way, in my youth I was Rocky Mountain one pocket champion. You want specific recommndations for unspecific parameters. Have you listened to audio at 85db average and 105db on peaks at the listening position?

Nice

I tried linking my floor plan. The speakers are a few feet from the front wall, left and right of the tv. The seating is about 10-12 feet away from the speakers, the pool table is about 25 feet away from the speakers.

All I know is I have followed the "if it sounds bad turn it down rule" and that maxes out at about -5db on my receiver. I appreciate you all helping me along, do I need to be using an spl meter to continue this thread?

 

[Sams]

Back of the napkin quickie estimate, using 10' listening distance, speaker sensitivity of 87db/w (they're rated 90, but given their 4 ohm load that may be slightly exaggerated), and THX standard of 105 db reference level, you're in the ballpark of 150 watts. I don't expect the sub you have to have much of a chance to really keep pace, given the extra power demands for 115 db peak output, your room size, and the limits of that sub. THX reference levels seems within reach of the Revels, but you'll need a couple or three subs.

It seems like the revel b1 is a better match for the revel m12(http://www.revelspeakers.com/productdetail/~/product/m12.html) doesn't it.

What size driver and amp should I be looking for in a sub to keep pace with my speakers? I guess just one is not an option. What if I wanted to fill the pool table with similar volume when playing CDs? The billiards is about 25 feet or so from the speakers.

 

[fmw]

An SPL meter will certainly help. Was the -5 figure a comfortable listening level for you? Personally it would have me wearing ear plugs in my room. If it was then you need more power.

It wasn't the speakers failing. They fail instantly, usually burning out the voice coil in the tweeter, and they don't come back. It was the amplifier clipping. If the -5 figure is accurate, then even doubling amplifier wouldn't get you there. If not, it might. The SPL meter is the only way to know for sure. The calculators aren't really very useful because they don't and can't calculate boundary gain. You can download some test signals and burn them to disc. They play some pink noise at -5 and see what the meter says. If it says 85db then you are there. If not you will need somewhere about double the power for each 3 db of SPL.

On the plus side, your room should lend itself to good acoustics. It is longer than it is wide, has equal reflective surfaces and lots of room behind the listening position.

So my advice is to buy a cheap SPL meter. You can find them for around $20 on Amazon. Then decide how much volume you actually want, not how much a movie theater says you should want. If it is reference then it is a matter of calculating the amplifier power needed to do that. The calculation should start with the actual measured SPL at -5. Back down until you no longer hear clipping. Then double the amplifier power for each 3 db you want to add.

If you have an AC digital mulitmeter, you can actually measure the power dissipation at the speakers and have even more information.

 

[markw]

Keep in mind, though that that 3 db increase from doubling the power is barely audible, and will be apparent only on peaks. Were it steady, you would be deaf already.

In any case, can your speakers handle twice the power you're currently running?

Now, for an apparent doubling of the apparent loudness, you'll need between 6 - 10 decibels which boils down to four - ten times your current power.

 

[Sams]

An SPL meter will certainly help. Was the -5 figure a comfortable listening level for you? Personally it would have me wearing ear plugs in my room. If it was then you need more power.

It wasn't the speakers failing. They fail instantly, usually burning out the voice coil in the tweeter, and they don't come back. It was the amplifier clipping. If the -5 figure is accurate, then even doubling amplifier wouldn't get you there. If not, it might. The SPL meter is the only way to know for sure. The calculators aren't really very useful because they don't and can't calculate boundary gain. You can download some test signals and burn them to disc. They play some pink noise at -5 and see what the meter says. If it says 85db then you are there. If not you will need somewhere about double the power for each 3 db of SPL.

On the plus side, your room should lend itself to good acoustics. It is longer than it is wide, has equal reflective surfaces and lots of room behind the listening position.

So my advice is to buy a cheap SPL meter. You can find them for around $20 on Amazon. Then decide how much volume you actually want, not how much a movie theater says you should want. If it is reference then it is a matter of calculating the amplifier power needed to do that. The calculation should start with the actual measured SPL at -5. Back down until you no longer hear clipping. Then double the amplifier power for each 3 db you want to add.

If you have an AC digital mulitmeter, you can actually measure the power dissipation at the speakers and have even more information.

At -5db on the receiver after a short bit the highs begin to hurt so I always settle on -10db or lower. I suspect I'm craving more volume because I want more dynamics, thinking volume will give me that.

I'll give the pink noise test a try with an spl meter asap. I'm guessing I should wear ear plugs when doing this?

 

[Johnny2Bad]

Although it's not a hard-and-fast rule, (it should be obvious by now if you're actually reading this thread, that there are no rules when it comes to the subject of loudspeaker power ratings) if you want more sound level without causing damage to the speaker itself, you should have adequate power and choose speakers with higher efficiency ratings.

Broadly speaking a high efficiency speaker plays louder than a low efficiency speaker (note here I'm not referring to Sound Pressure Levels (SPL's) at x watts amplifier power, but rather the ultimate SPL), and much of the difference has to do with the higher efficiency speaker's ability to apply more power to sound pressure rather than heat.

It's also generally true that the most efficient speakers are horn loaded, perhaps you might want to listen to various Klipsch models and see if you like the sound, which will lean towards a "live music" rather than a "studio sound" characteristic.

http://www.klipsch.com

With virtually all horn loaded speakers, there is a characteristic of leading phase from Highs to Lows ... in other words, in time, the tweeter horn leads the mid horn which leads the woofer, which is often conventional (non-horn loaded).

*Phase is a measure that includes time as a variable.

This is also reasonably common in conventional speakers, but typically not quite as pronounced, and there are speakers that try very hard to time align the presentation (Vandersteens are one popular example, and full-range electrostatics or planar magnetics also tend to be time aligned).

http://vandersteen.com

A leading High Frequency (HF) to Low Frequency (LF) phase response tends to produce a clear, crisp and bright sound quality that many listeners enjoy, and many manufacturers don't consider to be a significant negative quality, even though it is a deviation from strict accuracy.

There is typically a rather strong preference amongst listeners; which is to say that people either love horns or hate them. Personally I don't own them and probably never will, but on the other hand I can enjoy the presentation; I don't "hate" them, I just don't prefer them.

However, if you live in a city where you have an opportunity to hear both of the above model lines, you should have a listen to them, you might learn something about your preferences and tolerances.

Finally, if you find you like the sound of one or another horn-loaded speaker, you may well also find you've solved the problem outlined in your Original Post (OP).

 

[Sams]

Keep in mind, though that that 3 db increase from doubling the power is barely audible, and will be apparent only on peaks. Were it steady, you would be deaf already.

In any case, can your speakers handle twice the power you're currently running?

Now, for an apparent doubling of the apparent loudness, you'll need between 6 - 10 decibels which boils down to four - ten times your current power.

It sounds like it might be safer to get more dynamics in my system than try to buy enough power to fill my space. What's the best way of doing that? Should I be looking at horn speakers, or speakers with many drivers like high end rbh or the Boston acoustics m350? Or 15/18" subs?

Right now my system is flat, regardless of what's playing. I think that's why I feel I'm running out of volume at the theater seating(even though I really can't creep to thx reference). I could give up trying to fill the billiards area if it requires 1200 watts of amplification(sounds like I would need a pro amp stack).

 

[Swerd]

There is typically a rather strong preference amongst listeners; which is to say that people either love horns or hate them. Personally I don't own them and probably never will, but on the other hand I can enjoy the presentation; I don't "hate" them, I just don't prefer them.

Amen to that. Before buying any horn type speaker, you should first listen to them.

Like J2B, I can't say I hate horn speakers, but I know I don't prefer them. In the horn speakers that I have heard, they nearly always sound so noticeably different that I doubt if I would be happy with them.

 

[fmw]

At -5db on the receiver after a short bit the highs begin to hurt so I always settle on -10db or lower. I suspect I'm craving more volume because I want more dynamics, thinking volume will give me that.

The best way to improve dynamics is to improve subwoofers.

 

[Sams]

Although it's not a hard-and-fast rule, (it should be obvious by now if you're actually reading this thread, that there are no rules when it comes to the subject of loudspeaker power ratings) if you want more sound level without causing damage to the speaker itself, you should have adequate power and choose speakers with higher efficiency ratings.

Broadly speaking a high efficiency speaker plays louder than a low efficiency speaker (note here I'm not referring to Sound Pressure Levels (SPL's) at x watts amplifier power, but rather the ultimate SPL), and much of the difference has to do with the higher efficiency speaker's ability to apply more power to sound pressure rather than heat.

It's also generally true that the most efficient speakers are horn loaded, perhaps you might want to listen to various Klipsch models and see if you like the sound, which will lean towards a "live music" rather than a "studio sound" characteristic.

http://www.klipsch.com

With virtually all horn loaded speakers, there is a characteristic of leading phase from Highs to Lows ... in other words, in time, the tweeter horn leads the mid horn which leads the woofer, which is often conventional (non-horn loaded).

*Phase is a measure that includes time as a variable.

This is also reasonably common in conventional speakers, but typically not quite as pronounced, and there are speakers that try very hard to time align the presentation (Vandersteens are one popular example, and full-range electrostatics or planar magnetics also tend to be time aligned).

http://vandersteen.com

A leading High Frequency (HF) to Low Frequency (LF) phase response tends to produce a clear, crisp and bright sound quality that many listeners enjoy, and many manufacturers don't consider to be a significant negative quality, even though it is a deviation from strict accuracy.

There is typically a rather strong preference amongst listeners; which is to say that people either love horns or hate them. Personally I don't own them and probably never will, but on the other hand I can enjoy the presentation; I don't "hate" them, I just don't prefer them.

However, if you live in a city where you have an opportunity to hear both of the above model lines, you should have a listen to them, you might learn something about your preferences and tolerances.

Finally, if you find you like the sound of one or another horn-loaded speaker, you may well also find you've solved the problem outlined in your Original Post (OP).

This was my first ever speaker purchase, http://www.klipsch.com/products/gallery-g17-air

It was a few years ago and I returned it, but I thought the horn effect was neat. It sounded like the band, especially the singer was actually stuck inside the speaker. I can see horns being fatiguing though, I never really listened to more than an album on it.

 

[ski2xblack]

Sams, I would recommend the same subs mentioned upthread, and base your decision on overall room volume you're trying to fill. Multiple subs is not about added output, but smoother response over more of the room. A pair of sufficiently powered 15's from the usual suspects would be a good place to start. As for equal loudness back at the billiards table, perhaps a pair of zone 2 speakers back there.

fmw, I completely agree that actual measurements trump any calculated guestimate, but the OP doesn't yet have an spl meter, and probably lacks an appropriate multimeter too. But it's still just a guess. I used the myhometheater calculator which gives about 4db/m loss with distance, so there is what seems reasonable room gain factored in. Without it, he'll need 300 w to hit the same spl at the same distance, and that's well in the red for both amps and speakers. He could very well be clipping his amps when trying to listen loudly, even with some room gain, particularly if trying to achieve similar volumes back at the billiards table! LOUD seems to have him bumping up against the limits, amp, speaker, or both, but at least he's taken to heart "if it sounds bad turn it down immediately" advice. Proper subwoofage seems the obvious low hanging fruit, and would likely transform his enjoyment enough that he could live happily within the limits of his Revels.

 

[ski2xblack]

With Klipsch, Sams would be trading dynamic capability for neutrality, even if he were to go up the Klipsch food chain quite far ($$). I'm not sure any Klipsch would be as neutral as his Revels, maybe the THX 650's, but they won't bring much more dynamic range, being rather small.

I kind of like Sams Revels, and I think he probably does too, so let's let him solve his subwoofer problem first.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

This was my first ever speaker purchase, http://www.klipsch.com/products/gallery-g17-air

It was a few years ago and I returned it, but I thought the horn effect was neat. It sounded like the band, especially the singer was actually stuck inside the speaker. I can see horns being fatiguing though, I never really listened to more than an album on it.

[Please excuse this Off Topic post]

There are so many outstanding loudspeakers in the $500 to $2000/pair price range, the newer Klipsch models would not make my short list. But I don't need greater SPLs as the OP seems to; you do have to match your goals with your gear.

However, if you've ever had the opportunity to hear any of the "Classic" Klipsch models, the ones with horn-loaded woofers as well as mids and highs, you might be in for a surprise.

They have extremely low distortion in comparison to conventional drivers, and although they require proper setup and placement, there is no "stuck inside the speaker" effect whatsoever.

I can honestly say that one of the finest sound systems I've ever heard used Klipschorns. La Scala's and Belle Klipsch can also hold their own. Not cheap, though.

My respect for horns doesn't extend to Altec Voice Of The Theatre's (604's) but Tannoy also makes some very good sounding drivers with horn HF's in a coaxial, and time aligned, format. UREI also made Studio Monitors with Time-Aligned Coaxial HF Horns that are used even today in the big studios favoured by Record Companies.

Horns are a paradox in that they can be inexpensive yet are extremely difficult to do right, and that means many people come to a conclusion based on a poor implementation. The good ones are not cheap by any means, but a home theatre with 100-plus dB SPL's from 10 watts of Class A power per channel is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[Sams]

With Klipsch, Sams would be trading dynamic capability for neutrality, even if he were to go up the Klipsch food chain quite far ($$). I'm not sure any Klipsch would be as neutral as his Revels, maybe the THX 650's, but they won't bring much more dynamic range, being rather small.

I kind of like Sams Revels, and I think he probably does too, so let's let him solve his subwoofer problem first.

To sum up the thread so far:

1. Use an spl meter to see what spl I'm getting at the loudest comfortable volume on the receiver, at the theater seating, to figure out if replacing the 150 watt Denon with 300, 600, 1200 and so on watts of amplification is a solution to get the volume I want to fill the space.

2. A pair of high powered 15" subwoofers(not 12"s) would be the most likely way to get a bigger experience within the revels volume limits.

3. If all else fails, revisit audioholics for advice on choosing more sensitive speakers to replace the revels.

How's that's sound? Seems like #2 would be the easiest. Or maybe just skipping to #3 if I need more power after the spl test.

 

[Swerd]

However, if you've ever had the opportunity to hear any of the "Classic" Klipsch models, the ones with horn-loaded woofers as well as mids and highs, you might be in for a surprise…

[Remaining Off Topic ]

I once heard Volti Vittorias at an audio show. They seem to be similar to the older Klipshorns. They sounded excellent, unlike any other 'horn' speaker I've heard. However, they come at a price well above my pay grade.