Amps have it easy these days...

[Gimpy Ric]

I got into this addiction before Subwoofers were available to the masses, back in 1981, so full range speakers were a must. My first system I bought when I was 17 years old was some Technics junk, and some good JBL L-46'S. I'm an admitted bass junkie, so I worked those 8"s pretty hard

My next system was for real as any 21 year old Army guy could get: Big JBL L-100 T's, an NAD pre amp, NAD amp, and Denon CD Player. The Amp is (I still have it) an NAD 2200, 100 x 2 into 8 ohms, and a bad a** 600 x 2 into 2 ohms! Yes, I blew a few 12's back in the day and had them rebuilt .

Not sure why NAD amps aren't more popular around here, with all these threads about wimpy receivers and 4 ohm loads

But enter the almighty subwoofer! Not sure how everybody else's stuff is setup, but at my house, if your a freq below 80 Hz your going to the subwoofer. Bass is so much harder on amps than anything else, even at reference levels your tweeters are only getting a handful of watts, but pumping those woofers is WORK.

So tell me, have subwoofers made amps wimpy these days? Most towers sport small 5 1/2" to 6 1/2" "woofers", really just glorified midranges in my opinion, as we crossover most of the time to a sub.. Most of us have subs, so is it ok that our amps are getting lazy?

BTW, here are some serious FULL RANGE SPEAKERS:

http://www.krksys.com/products_m2-18.php

 

[furrycute]

Holy smokes!

Is your NAD really stable down into 2 ohm loads? That's some serious power you got there!

I've been wondering about the same thing. Used to see all those big towers with 15" woofers in the old days. Nowadays all you see are towers with 6.5" woofers. What's up with this? Can today's 6.5" drivers dig as deep as those 15" drivers of the old days?


Most of today's receivers are pretty wimpy, 4 ohm loads will fry the majority of today's receivers. Not even many mass market integrated amps can handle 4 ohm loads. For sheer muscle power, you have to dig fairly deep into your pockets.

 

[MDS]

I don't think subwoofers have made amps wimpy because I know there are still quite a few very powerful amps being made and even new ones being developed. However, I think subwoofer and sophisticated bass management are making amps unnecessary and perhaps even irrelevant.

Unless you have an extremely large room or very insensitive speakers you just don't need godzilla driving your speakers.

 

[bandphan]

Holy smokes!

Is your NAD really stable down into 2 ohm loads? That's some serious power you got there!

I've been wondering about the same thing. Used to see all those big towers with 15" woofers in the old days. Nowadays all you see are towers with 6.5" woofers. What's up with this? Can today's 6.5" drivers dig as deep as those 15" drivers of the old days?


Most of today's receivers are pretty wimpy, 4 ohm loads will fry the majority of today's receivers. Not even many mass market integrated amps can handle 4 ohm loads. For sheer muscle power, you have to dig fairly deep into your pockets.

if you have two 6 1/2 woofers the surface area is equal to a 13" single woofer,and more effective in dispersing heat being more accurate, and with the additional voice coil, (effective cone area) the entire freq range would be flater. So the answer to digging as deep would be yes in an apples to apples instance.

 

[zhimbo]

if you have two 6 1/2 woofers the surface area is equal to a 13" single woofer

Actually, that's the same area as a 9.2 inch woofer. (Area increases with the square of the radius).

 

[Seth=L]

Actually, that's the same area as a 9.2 inch woofer. (Area increases with the square of the radius).

I was gonna say, that can't be right.

 

[mike c]

bored :

 

[wire]

I got into this addiction before Subwoofers were available to the masses, back in 1981, so full range speakers were a must. My first system I bought when I was 17 years old was some Technics junk, and some good JBL L-46'S. I'm an admitted bass junkie, so I worked those 8"s pretty hard

My next system was for real as any 21 year old Army guy could get: Big JBL L-100 T's, an NAD pre amp, NAD amp, and Denon CD Player. The Amp is (I still have it) an NAD 2200, 100 x 2 into 8 ohms, and a bad a** 600 x 2 into 2 ohms! Yes, I blew a few 12's back in the day and had them rebuilt .

Not sure why NAD amps aren't more popular around here, with all these threads about wimpy receivers and 4 ohm loads

But enter the almighty subwoofer! Not sure how everybody else's stuff is setup, but at my house, if your a freq below 80 Hz your going to the subwoofer. Bass is so much harder on amps than anything else, even at reference levels your tweeters are only getting a handful of watts, but pumping those woofers is WORK.

So tell me, have subwoofers made amps wimpy these days? Most towers sport small 5 1/2" to 6 1/2" "woofers", really just glorified midranges in my opinion, as we crossover most of the time to a sub.. Most of us have subs, so is it ok that our amps are getting lazy?

BTW, here are some serious FULL RANGE SPEAKERS:

http://www.krksys.com/products_m2-18.php

I personally like 2 channel with out a sub . i have a sub on my 5.1 and my puter system .
I agree with the NAD's or equal or better , there beefy and can really crank it out .