Help on picking an amp

[Rob Babcock]

To be accurate, those SPL's cause hearing damage at sustained levels. Much live acoustic music contains very brief peaks that are much louder than most home audio systems can reproduce. Even OSHA permits fairly high SPL levels at work, provided the duration is very brief. Although interestingly enough, OSHA regulations are starting to hinder some orchestras...

There are many nice amps you can get for $800 or so, and used can be a good way to go. You can often get a used PS Audio HCA-2 or a used Rotel for that price.

One good thing about using an external amp is that your receiver might run a lot cooler. My Denon runs pretty damn hot when driving my speakers (I've had several Denons and all ran hot), but pretty cool when used as a preamp.

And given that people can hear level diffs of 1 dB or less, the 3 dB increase you get from doubling power can be meaningful. Even if you prefer to measure music over listening to it.

 

[WmAx]

To be accurate, those SPL's cause hearing damage at sustained levels. Much live acoustic music contains very brief peaks that are much louder than most home audio systems can reproduce.

(1) You won't find those peaks in 99% of recordings -- they have been limited and/or dynamically compressed.

(2) The peaks that are louder than an average good hi-fi full range system using floor standing speakers of reasonable efficiency[89db/watt, for example] can produce are very uncommon, even in live acoustic music, unless you mean the SPL produced when sitting IN the band[think of sitting 10 feet from a drum kit, which can be enough constant SPL to cause hearing damage if the drums are being played loudly]. The SPL in a normal audience sitting position/perspective of unamplified music is not exceeding the limits of a speaker as specified when powered by even a lower powered amplifier. An 89db/1watt/1meter speaker pair, when used in an average room, will produce 87dB with only 1 watt per channel[89db, -9db for two more meters(SPL drops 6db for each doubling of distance) on top of the 1 meter that SPL efficiency is calcuated with to equal 3 meters total distance from speaker(s), +4 dB for two semi-correlated sound sources, +3 for typical room boost on efficiency] at the listening position that is 3 meters from the speaker(s). Just 64 watts/channel would produce 105dB with the given example, assuming the speakers are not the limiting factor. But you did not specify which perspective: do you intend to reproduce SPLs equal to that of sitting in a band or orchestra or a realistic perspective of what one would experience as an audience member?

-Chris

 

[mulester7]

.....forget 100 watts is added to 100 watts to produce only an increase of 3 db of sound pressure....forget reference levels that cause ears to bleed....sizable watts in a quality slave amp brings an improvement in sound quality.....

 

[Rob Babcock]

You completely misunderstand Chris- I didn't mean to imply that your average recording can do that. Although you can get pretty impressive dynamic range. I only point out the old cliche that more power= ear damage is all wet. But if you do some poking around, you'll easily see that many many recordings can cause your amp to clip audibly when you attempt to acheive realistic levels. Of course, with a really good recording, you'll have trouble with the dynamics almost no matter how much power you have.

Understand, though, that it sounds really disingenuis to go on ad nauseum about how even the smallest level diff will sound "better" in an ABX test and turn around and claim doubling the power doesn't have any worthwhile effect on sound. Trot out any formulas you like and crunch the numbers, but you're still left with a very audible 3dB. Noticeably better is better. That's all I'm saying.

Lastly, when a guy asks what amp he should buy, telling him not to bother might satisfy some need you have to preach, but it's not what he asked.

 

[corysmith01]

Lastly, when a guy asks what amp he should buy, telling him not to bother might satisfy some need you have to preach, but it's not what he asked.

Bravo Rob. I wanted to post something to this effect last night. This guy was simply looking for recommendations and opinions on how to best spend $800 on an amp...and here we are, 5 pages later. It had gotten incredibly tedious to fight through all of this...hopefully the poster realizes that not all of his questions will elicit this sort of rambling. Many of us here to like to actually address the original post and throw out a suggestion or two.

 

[MacManNM]

Bravo Rob. I wanted to post something to this effect last night. This guy was simply looking for recommendations and opinions on how to best spend $800 on an amp...and here we are, 5 pages later. It had gotten incredibly tedious to fight through all of this...hopefully the poster realizes that not all of his questions will elicit this sort of rambling. Many of us here to like to actually address the original post and throw out a suggestion or two.

Agreed. I am guilty of falling into the traps of certian individuals who don't seem to realize that this is a HOBBY, and listening is subjective. If someone wants to add an amp, or upgrade their CD player because they believe thier existing equipment is lacking, why not help them with thir choice? I am getting sick and tired of all of this debate on what will and will not make a difference. People are entitled to their opinions, however, they should not beat them into people. This is a forum to share facts, ideas, and OPINIONS. This is really getting old.

 

[WmAx]

You completely misunderstand Chris- I didn't mean to imply that your average recording can do that. Although you can get pretty impressive dynamic range. I only point out the old cliche that more power= ear damage is all wet.

My only point was that a standard 100 watt/channel amplifier is more than capable of producing SPLs that are ear damaging with a typical speaker and listening set up as I described earlier.

But if you do some poking around, you'll easily see that many many recordings can cause your amp to clip audibly when you attempt to acheive realistic levels. Of course, with a really good recording, you'll have trouble with the dynamics almost no matter how much power you have.

I might not even have an amp, or speakers, or ears... but if I did, I could assure you that I would have analyzed my amps, speakers and recordings to ensure that no audible clipping would ever occur with my particular stereo and musical selections[which might possibly include many uncompressed/unlimited acoustic recordings]. So, maybe you mean that someone else should be suprised... Also, even if someone has a situation which goes beyond the generous one that I provided example of in the last reply.... it should be noted that very short durations of peak clipping are not audible. When actual durations of clipping occur that are audible, it is obvious[think of a static-like(but worse) horrid sound on peaks] to someone that actuallly listens critically. If one was really worried about clipping and were not capable of measurements/analysis, they could take something like a purist opera recording[just an example] that has huge dynamic swing of the singers[which in this music it is not uncommon for a female voice to hold a constant note for loud and long enough to detect clipping in the peaks without much trouble].

Understand, though, that it sounds really disingenuis to go on ad nauseum about how even the smallest level diff will sound "better" in an ABX test and turn around and claim doubling the power doesn't have any worthwhile effect on sound. Trot out any formulas you like and crunch the numbers, but you're still left with a very audible 3dB. Noticeably better is better. That's all I'm saying.

Yes, 3dB is certainly noticable. But it does not help to add 3db additional capability when you don't practically use the existing power that you already have. What, for example, would be audibly gained in normal applications by using >100 watts on the example situation I provided in the last reply?

Lastly, when a guy asks what amp he should buy, telling him not to bother might satisfy some need you have to preach, but it's not what he asked.

I am just pointing out the practical details relevant to the subject, to ensure that the buyer is as informed as is possible when making their decision.

-Chris

 

[Pyrrho]

So as soon as one lists their equipment, and relays how they listen to it, give their honest opinion, it's inaccurate, unsubstantiated speculation? What's wrong with biased listening preferences? Why is that flawed if it's mentioned up front? At what point does ones opinion become substantiated?

Have you ever gone to a live performance and agreed with friends/companion that the performance sounded great? Or that another performance sounded terrible?

There is nothing wrong with biased listening preferences when discussing types of music or particular performances. However, when judging whether or not a piece of equipment will actually alter the sound, it is essential that one keep bias out of it. One is there trying to ascertain a matter of fact, not a mere opinion. (For one piece of equipment to sound better than another, it must first be audibly different. Once a difference is established, then, by all means, say what you prefer, which may or may not be the one that most accurately reproduces the original signal, as, for example, many people prefer to boost their subwoofer setting instead of having a flat frequency response.)

A biased listening session is about as useful as judging a race by looking at the finish line to see who crosses first, without bothering to see if the participants started at the same starting line. And without level matching amplifiers, listening to them is exactly like just keeping your eyes on the finish line without bothering to determine whether they started from the same place. One cannot properly judge which is the faster runner that way, nor can one properly judge which amplifier sounds better without level matching.

Of course, one must also listen double blind, as one is judging the sound, not the sight, of the equipment. It is no mystery that people can pretty much always tell audio components apart when they can see them, but that tells us nothing about whether or not someone can actually hear a difference.

 

[mulester7]

Of course, one must also listen double blind, as one is judging the sound, not the sight, of the equipment

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/mulester77/detail?.dir=47f8&.dnm=7bd5.jpg&.src=ph

 

[Pyrrho]

Of course, one must also listen double blind, as one is judging the sound, not the sight, of the equipment

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/mulester77/detail?.dir=47f8&.dnm=7bd5.jpg&.src=ph

It is funny how many audiophools insist on gaining special insights by not matching levels and by peeking at the brand names of the equipment that they are supposedly distinguishing by sound alone.

 

[Pyrrho]

(1) You won't find those peaks in 99% of recordings -- they have been limited and/or dynamically compressed.

...

-Chris

Indeed. When things are not extremely compressed, people complain:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/B00001ZSXC/ref=cm_rev_next/102-2689827-0185763?_encoding=UTF8&customer-reviews.sort_by=-SubmissionDate&n=5174&s=classical&customer-reviews.start=11

Some of the later reviews also go back and forth on the issue of whether or not there is too much dynamic range:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/B00001ZSXC/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/102-2689827-0185763?_encoding=UTF8&s=classical

It is, by the way, a fabulous recording, a steal at the price. But if one only likes severe compression, then one will hate it.

 

[mulester7]

It is funny how many audiophools insist on gaining special insights by not matching levels and by peeking at the brand names of the equipment that they are supposedly distinguishing by sound alone.

.....Pyrrho, when you have no choice but to experience time-gap between comparative hearings changing rca's and speaker wires, that's one thing, and I'll admit, the points of reference could, and probably do, lose credibility for comparison...but even then, how would not being able to see help with the problem of time-gap and memory decay?....but, when one timbre quality is coming from the front speakers, and another timbre quality is coming from the rears, at the same time, same source signal, same pre-amp, same speakers, it doesn't matter if you know which electronic components being compared are applied where....in fact, it's better at that point that you do know....there's no better comparison than being able to hear both items doing what they do at the same time.....

 

[Pyrrho]

.....Pyrrho, when you have no choice but to experience time-gap between comparative hearings changing rca's and speaker wires, that's one thing, and I'll admit, the points of reference could, and probably do, lose credibility for comparison...but even then, how would not being able to see help with the problem of time-gap and memory decay?....but, when one timbre quality is coming from the front speakers, and another timbre quality is coming from the rears, at the same time, same source signal, same pre-amp, same speakers, it doesn't matter if you know which electronic components being compared are applied where....in fact, it's better at that point that you do know....there's no better comparison than being able to hear both items doing what they do at the same time.....

With such a listening situation, you have the speakers in different locations, and therefore they are likely to sound different even if everything else is exactly the same. (Also, most processors are not able to send the same signal to the front and rear at the same time, as that is not what one normally wants to do.) To listen to just a difference in amplifiers, one needs to use the same speakers in the same position, and switch between the amplifiers. (And, as mentioned before, they must be level matched, and one must listen blind....)

 

[mulester7]

and switch between the amplifiers

.....and there's the problem unless the difference is sizable....and no processing, I said same signal.....

 

[Snap]

I agree with the post that said try the Yammy first. As far as the QSC is concerned...I have 4 of them....I put them in my church. Great sounding amps for "Live Sound" not quite sure that you will like them for Home Audio. Totaly different sound.

NOTE: I did not get through the other pages of the this thread before posting, so I will say in advance "Sorry" if this issue has been addressed or some how the thread has morfed into some other type discussion. Forums tend to do that once they get 2 or more pages long.

 

[mtrycrafts]

. If someone wants to add an amp, or upgrade their CD player because they believe thier existing equipment is lacking, why not help them with thir choice?

So then you don't want enlightenment offered to those newer posters???
Let them be in a fog???
Knowing more never hurts anyone, then they can make informed choices.
Knowing less can be dangerous.




I am getting sick and tired of all of this debate on what will and will not make a difference.


Don't participate in those posts. Easy choice to make.


This is a forum to share facts, ideas, and OPINIONS. This is really getting old.

Oh, you want facts but not too much. But facts include explanations why things are and beliefs may not be based in facts. People come and go. Maybe you should quiz them if they know what is useful to make informed choices.

 

[mulester7]

I agree with the post that said try the Yammy first. As far as the QSC is concerned...I have 4 of them....I put them in my church. Great sounding amps for "Live Sound" not quite sure that you will like them for Home Audio. Totaly different sound.

NOTE: I did not get through the other pages of the this thread before posting, so I will say in advance "Sorry" if this issue has been addressed or some how the thread has morfed into some other type discussion. Forums tend to do that once they get 2 or more pages long.

.....finally, a report of sorts on QSC....what did you hear using them for home audio, Snap?, and what did you choose over them for home audio?....Snap, come on now, amps sound different????, haha....

 

[mulester7]

. If someone wants to add an amp, or upgrade their CD player because they believe thier existing equipment is lacking, why not help them with thir choice?

So then you don't want enlightenment offered to those newer posters???
Let them be in a fog???
Knowing more never hurts anyone, then they can make informed choices.
Knowing less can be dangerous.




I am getting sick and tired of all of this debate on what will and will not make a difference.


Don't participate in those posts. Easy choice to make.


This is a forum to share facts, ideas, and OPINIONS. This is really getting old.

Oh, you want facts but not too much. But facts include explanations why things are and beliefs may not be based in facts. People come and go. Maybe you should quiz them if they know what is useful to make informed choices.

.....Son, I suspect you could use a dose of salts......

 

[Snap]

Mulester7- I did not see your post and replied to your PM instead of the post.

Cliff Notes on my PM to Mulester7

Problems with QSC in HT application.

1. Fans on QSC are LOUD
2. QSC Amp powering was not IMHO as detailed as my Denon 3805.
(That is my feelings. But then again I do not think that my RX-V-557 sounds as detailed as my AVR-3805 but I like them both for what I use them for)
3. I THINK that the QSC is designed for Pro Speakers and not HT speakers like Phase Tech, Def Tech, B&W etc. They are made to power EV, EAW, JBL, Meyer Sound Labs ETC.
4. I love QSC amps. Like I mentioned above I have several of them. I actually perfure them to Crown. (NO STONE THROWING.... that it just my PREF!)
5.

Got to run....kido is getting into stuff!

 

[mulester7]

Mulester7- I did not see your post and replied to your PM instead of the post.

Cliff Notes on my PM to Mulester7

Problems with QSC in HT application.

1. Fans on QSC are LOUD
2. QSC Amp powering was not IMHO as detailed as my Denon 3805.
(That is my feelings. But then again I do not think that my RX-V-557 sounds as detailed as my AVR-3805 but I like them both for what I use them for)
3. I THINK that the QSC is designed for Pro Speakers and not HT speakers like Phase Tech, Def Tech, B&W etc. They are made to power EV, EAW, JBL, Meyer Sound Labs ETC.
4. I love QSC amps. Like I mentioned above I have several of them. I actually perfure them to Crown. (NO STONE THROWING.... that it just my PREF!)
5.

Got to run....kido is getting into stuff!

.....thanks, Snap, and there's an honest report, guys.....he installs systems in Churches, and should be a qualified reporter, but we all hear differently.....