How many Watts is your system?

[Seth=L]

i agree with everything you said.but i from the old school were continuse power was the norm and each signal had a amp.

Dave, what does this rating mean to you? (hypothetical reciever amplifier specifications)

100 watts RMS @ 8 ohms (1Khz at 0.08THD)

I am still having trouble understanding what you where talking about when you referenced the picture of the Thule 5 channel amplifier and the Kenwood receiver. Pardon my lack of understanding.

 

[Dolby CP-200]

I see watts as mean of dynamic power output to the loudspeaker array. But it needs special means to make it sound punchy without the harshness of over bright mid and high range that is common with most home cinemas.

http://www.stageaccompany.com/en/support/splcalc.php

 

[no. 5]

...and each signal had a amp.

unless I misunderstood what you meant, each signal does have it's own amp; a five channel HTR has an amp for each channel.

 

[emorphien]

unless I misunderstood what you meant, each signal does have it's own amp; a five channel HTR has an amp for each channel.

yup, that's usually how it works

 

[Dolby CP-200]

Then to be fair, I'll use the heatsink-cooled, class AB, Behringer A500 as an example. 18lbs and it outputs 220 watts x 2(440 Watts), measured, without clipping, into a 4 ohm load. Two of them is only 36lbs. It should not be difficult to get a true 100 x 5 watts, for well below 50 lbs.

-Chris

I’m thinking about buying an array for complex sound system layout and at the crazy price of £118.00 that Turnkey is sealing them at, that’s a steal in any language.

 

[Seth=L]

Dave,

If you look at the Kenwood for example it has two large looking transistors. Those are I.C.s (integrated circuits). They are capable of housing multiple amplifiers. They have transistors, resistors, and other circuit parts similar to a processor would be made with a case protecting several circuit components. This approach is cost effective and I have yet to hear a huge difference between these kinds of output devices and discrete ones, like the ones found on the Thule amplifier.

Looking back at the Kenwood, it has a two channel amp in one I.C., usually the larger one of the two. and the other I.C. will have the center and surround channels housed inside of it. These are attached to the heatsink. This is the only thing that I can possibly think that you were getting at. I wasn't sure if you thought the Kenwood only had two channels.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

I can get 1.21 gigawatt's out of HT system, but only for a brief instant. I'll have to admit, it's a little unreliable due to lightening strikes being a little hard to predict as a power source.

Sincerely,
Dr. Emmett Brown

 

[Seth=L]

I am using my $25 modified Altec Lansing PC speaker system to power my BICs in the living room as a demonstration. It is probably putting out no more than 5 watts per channel. It really sounds quite good.

 

[MDS]

I can get 1.21 gigawatt's out of HT system, but only for a brief instant. I'll have to admit, it's a little unreliable due to lightening strikes being a little hard to predict as a power source.

Sincerely,
Dr. Emmett Brown

Dr. Brown,
I thought your flux capacitor was capable of supplying 1.21 Jigawatts. Mere gigawatts is for wussies.

 

[no. 5]

I can get 1.21 gigawatt's out of HT system, but only for a brief instant. I'll have to admit, it's a little unreliable due to lightening strikes being a little hard to predict as a power source.

Sincerely,
Dr. Emmett Brown

nonsense! all you need is a clock tower.

 

[Dolby CP-200]

Great Scott!

What’s next blowing up 6 feet diameter loudspeakers cones!

 

[NYyankeeboi]

Well perhaps he's asking it as a perception of how much power is being used. Which could depend on impedance or volts. 100 watts for a 2 ohm setup isn't the same as saying 100 watts for a 8 ohm setup.

Yea, thats exactly what I was asking. Thanks, I am kinda new to this sooo...grrr

 

[Ampdog]

100 watts for a 2 ohm setup isn't the same as saying 100 watts for a 8 ohm setup.

A little late in commenting on this.

Yes, I am afraid that 100W into 2 ohms is the same as 100W into 8 ohms, or any other impedance for that matter (not talking of efficiencies). Watt is the unit for energy, which can be (for 100W), 10V into 1 ohm, 14V into 2 ohm, 28V into 8 ohm or 126V into 160 ohm (all voltages r.m.s.). As most amplifiers are constant supply voltage devices (which will also be the maximum available peak-peak signal amplitude available), available watts will decrease with increasing impedance or vice versa. Only the latter cannot rise infinitely, as an amplifier's power supply also has a maximum current limitation.

In all this one must not confuse loudness with available electrical output power. Loudspeaker efficiency and room effects also play a role in perceived loudness.

I am not sure where any confusion lay, but hope this will clarify.

 

[emorphien]

A little late in commenting on this.

Yes, I am afraid that 100W into 2 ohms is the same as 100W into 8 ohms, or any other impedance for that matter (not talking of efficiencies). Watt is the unit for energy, which can be (for 100W), 10V into 1 ohm, 14V into 2 ohm, 28V into 8 ohm or 126V into 160 ohm (all voltages r.m.s.). As most amplifiers are constant supply voltage devices (which will also be the maximum available peak-peak signal amplitude available), available watts will decrease with increasing impedance or vice versa. Only the latter cannot rise infinitely, as an amplifier's power supply also has a maximum current limitation.

In all this one must not confuse loudness with available electrical output power. Loudspeaker efficiency and room effects also play a role in perceived loudness.

I am not sure where any confusion lay, but hope this will clarify.

I wasn't saying it was not the same watts (100 watts is 100 watts), but the demand on the amplifier is different in terms of current is it not?

 

[dave1490]

A little late in commenting on this.

Yes, I am afraid that 100W into 2 ohms is the same as 100W into 8 ohms, or any other impedance for that matter (not talking of efficiencies). Watt is the unit for energy, which can be (for 100W), 10V into 1 ohm, 14V into 2 ohm, 28V into 8 ohm or 126V into 160 ohm (all voltages r.m.s.). As most amplifiers are constant supply voltage devices (which will also be the maximum available peak-peak signal amplitude available), available watts will decrease with increasing impedance or vice versa. Only the latter cannot rise infinitely, as an amplifier's power supply also has a maximum current limitation.

In all this one must not confuse loudness with available electrical output power. Loudspeaker efficiency and room effects also play a role in perceived loudness.

I am not sure where any confusion lay, but hope this will clarify.

i agree with you.

 

[sleeper]

Watts up, Doc?

I often get asked about "how many watts?"

I play in a band and my front of house audio set up is 4800 Watts, not including stage monitoring. I have it set up in my basement for band rehearsals. No, we don't crank it, in case you're wondering. When my friends come over they drool over how big and impressive it all looks... and it sounds pretty good, too.

"4800 Watts, wow!"

Yeah. And I do all my listening on my much better sounding HT system upstairs in the living room.

Yes, watts are an important spec, but taken alone they don't mean a thing.

sleeper.

 

[emorphien]

Yes, watts are an important spec, but taken alone they don't mean a thing.

agreed, but it's an easy number for people to handle and as always, more is better. Just like megapixels in cameras, everyone assumes more is better.

 

[Ampdog]

I wasn't saying it was not the same watts (100 watts is 100 watts), but the demand on the amplifier is different in terms of current is it not?

Quite so, Emorphien, as I have indicated. Only I often found, as I also indicated, that an amplifier's "superiority" is judged only by maximum current demand, but at different watts. I was trying to indicate that that was the wrong approach in terms of subjective "better than" concepts.