Ron’s New System

[Audiohertz2]

The issue is that bass notes consume the most power- the lower you go the more power needed. Some people, who have under-powered amps for the speakers they are using, may well run the amp close to full power quite a lot. In cheaper systems, this issues often leads to damaged tweeters.

A full power measurement tells a lot about how an amplifier is doing. Hopefully the amp isn't used at full power since the amp, if you want the most out of the investment you have in it, should be pretty well loafing, even if its a powerhouse transistor type with which you could use for welding.

The thing is in the bass there's things you might not be aware of that can gobble amplifier power, like record warp or material that the speakers can't reproduce. Stuff like that can cause the amp to work a lot harder than you think it is. This is harder to see on higher efficiency speakers since the woofers tend to have less excursion.

Clip recovery , evenness in clipping , power supply sag , rail noise , et al ..

 

[PeterA]

Doubt you are only using 10% on Peaks …!

My speakers are 105 dB, 16 ohm. My amplifiers are specified as 18 W. I have a small room and listen at 75 to 85 dB. Peaks are around 90 to 95.

Do you think I ever use maximum power? How loud do you think it would get in my room if I were to use 5 W if one watt produces 105 DB at 1 m? Just curious. I never listen more than high 90s.

 

[Audiohertz2]

well its not that simple , but i will try and simplify and you said 10% which is 1.8watts , i never said you were using max power ..!

If you are using 1 watt RMS you will need 100-200 watt RMS for peaks on music with high crest factors .

So if we assume all ur assumptive specs are correct you can back into what you may typically need for ur typical listening levels..!

Assumption 1 : Your speakers are actually 105db /M/W

Listening distance ..?
Assumption 2: you are using Max 1.8Watts

Pretty obvious you are using more than 1.8watts on peaks ..

 

[Audiohertz2]

My speakers are 105 dB, 16 ohm. My amplifiers are specified as 18 W. I have a small room and listen at 75 to 85 dB. Peaks are around 90 to 95.

Do you think I ever use maximum power? How loud do you think it would get in my room if I were to use 5 W if one watt produces 105 DB at 1 m? Just curious. I never listen more than high 90s.

If we use 105db and listening distance of 4m ur dropping 3 db per M. Thats 93db 1watt one speaker. Thats from your horns only , the bass is affected by more complex factors like room gain ( the whole speaker does ) which may or maynot create the same effect more or less.

So adding the second channel picks up min 3db making 96db/1watt ..!

So if ypu are really listening at
1. 4M
2. 85db avg din

Then you are using approx .25watt RMS to achieve this level which means you are actually clipping your amps on dynamic peaks so 100%..

Now drop that to 75db avg din and you are pretty close to 100% on dynamic peaks.

Your original estimate of 1.8watt max , is not in the ball park , hence my original comment ..

Corrected

 

[Atmasphere]

There’s enuff Tilt there to tell the full story, the output looks better than the input..
or

did you mean the top trace was the generator?

No- the bottom trace is the generator! Not sure why the transformer (which was loaded at 8 Ohms) did that but it might be due to a HF rolloff. If so its not something I've experienced before.

Clip recovery , evenness in clipping , power supply sag , rail noise , et al ..

On top of that, a full power measurement can show if there's an instability at or near clipping. This can happen even if the amp is zero feedback due to a poor choice of stopping resistors in the grid (or base, gate) circuits of the amp; I've seen a good number of amps that don't have any stopping resistors. You run them up to near clipping and little oscillations appear at some point of the sine wave. You may not be able to hear the frequency, which will be ultrasonic, but you can hear the envelope it creates. This would cause the amp to sound harsher at or near full volume and have a less graceful overload and overload recovery.

If we use 105db and listening distance of 4m ur dropping 3 db per M. Thats 83db 1watt one speaker. Thats from your horns only , the bass is affected by more complex factors like room gain ( the whole speaker does ) which may or maynot create the same effect more or less.

So adding the second channel picks up min 3db making 86db/1watt ..!

So if ypu are really listening at
1. 4M
2. 85db avg din

Then you are using 1 watt RMS to achieve this level which means you are actually clipping your amps on dynamic peaks so 100%..

Now drop that to 75db avg din and you are pretty close to 100% on dynamic peaks.

Your original estimate of 1.8watt max , is not in the ball park , hence my original comment ..

Tube amps without feedback can have very graceful overload character which can be nearly inaudible if the amp has instantaneous recovery. The harmonic generation would convince you that it was loud so you might never realize the amp is overloading.

 

[Audiohertz2]

For ultrasonic ringing and stability , give it the old capacitor (ESL sim) shunt across the dummy load ..

Enjoy

 

[DasguteOhr]

If we use 105db and listening distance of 4m ur dropping 3 db per M. Thats 83db 1watt one speaker. Thats from your horns only , the bass is affected by more complex factors like room gain ( the whole speaker does ) which may or maynot create the same effect more or less.

So adding the second channel picks up min 3db making 86db/1watt ..!

So if ypu are really listening at
1. 4M
2. 85db avg din

Then you are using 1 watt RMS to achieve this level which means you are actually clipping your amps on dynamic peaks so 100%..

Now drop that to 75db avg din and you are pretty close to 100% on dynamic peaks.

Your original estimate of 1.8watt max , is not in the ball park , hence my original comment ..

quite ok, except for the calculation error we are at 93db/1watt

 

[Audiohertz2]

quite ok, except for the calculation error we are at 93db/1watt

Silly me

 

[DasguteOhr]

Silly me

All fine..10db for ear is twice loud mathematically it would be 6db but the ear does not understand mathematics

 

[Atmasphere]

For ultrasonic ringing and stability , give it the old capacitor (ESL sim) shunt across the dummy load ..

Enjoy

A zero feedback amp is not likely to care about that. FWIW really high feedback self-oscillating class D amps don't either.

 

[PeterA]

Ralph, what is the significance of needing to see the measurement at full power? Do listeners often push their amps when playing music in their rooms to full power? I am guessing I rarely ever use more than 10% of my amps full power, even when I listen very loud.

If we use 105db and listening distance of 4m ur dropping 3 db per M. Thats 93db 1watt one speaker. Thats from your horns only , the bass is affected by more complex factors like room gain ( the whole speaker does ) which may or maynot create the same effect more or less.

So adding the second channel picks up min 3db making 96db/1watt ..!

So if ypu are really listening at
1. 4M
2. 85db avg din

Then you are using approx .25watt RMS to achieve this level which means you are actually clipping your amps on dynamic peaks so 100%..

Now drop that to 75db avg din and you are pretty close to 100% on dynamic peaks.

Your original estimate of 1.8watt max , is not in the ball park , hence my original comment ..

Corrected

Thank you. I appreciate your analysis. I had told Ralph that I was guessing I rarely use more than 10% of fulll power for my amplifier. Listening distance is 14 feet. Most listening is 65 or 75 dB for classical and maybe 75 to 85 for rocking jazz. Peaks 90-95.

I think Ralph had written that one wants the amplifier to loaf along and for SETs not to exceed 20% of full power to minimize distortion, but it might be only 10%.

My bass is a horn speaker augmented by the front corners of my room, acting as the flare. My speakers are full horns.

Thank you for correcting me about the 10% max power. It does look from your calculations that I do in fact, rarely exceed that. And I am glad I’m not using a 5 W or 2 W SET.

 

[microstrip]

Thank you. I appreciate your analysis. I had told Ralph that I was guessing I rarely use more than 10% of fulll power for my amplifier. Listening distance is 14 feet. Most listening is 65 or 75 dB for classical and maybe 75 to 85 for rocking jazz. Peaks 90-95.

I think Ralph had written that one wants the amplifier to loaf along and for SETs not to exceed 20% of full power to minimize distortion, but it might be only 10%.

My bass is a horn speaker augmented by the front corners of my room, acting as the flare. My speakers are full horns.

Thank you for correcting me about the 10% max power. It does look from your calculations that I do in fact, rarely exceed that. And I am glad I’m not using a 5 W or 2 W SET.

IMO the errors associated to inaccuracies of such estimations are too large to be trustful. For example, most horns don’t maintain cylindrical wave beyond the mouth — the wavefront gradually diverges, so the actual drop lies between –3 and –6 dB per doubling.

The easier way to get a proper estimation is measuring the sound level using a CD player, a test CD such as HiFi News CD and a RMS voltmeter. Or, sorry Peter, a streamer playing the same tracks!

 

[PeterA]

IMO the errors associated to inaccuracies of such estimations are too large to be trustful. For example, most horns don’t maintain cylindrical wave beyond the mouth — the wavefront gradually diverges, so the actual drop lies between –3 and –6 dB per doubling.

The easier way to get a proper estimation is measuring the sound level using a CD player, a test CD such as HiFi News CD and a RMS voltmeter. Or, sorry Peter, a streamer playing the same tracks!

No need to be sorry Francisco. I appreciate the estimates in the math and hearing from people who know something about this. There was always something to learn. I’m confident that my amplifiers work well with my speakers in my room as I am enjoying playing my record collection.

 

[Audiohertz2]

IMO the errors associated to inaccuracies of such estimations are too large to be trustful. For example, most horns don’t maintain cylindrical wave beyond the mouth — the wavefront gradually diverges, so the actual drop lies between –3 and –6 dB per doubling.

The easier way to get a proper estimation is measuring the sound level using a CD player, a test CD such as HiFi News CD and a RMS voltmeter. Or, sorry Peter, a streamer playing the same tracks!

The ratios are what's important , no need to fuss over the actual numbers , its academic..!

Assumptions everywhere , start with the actual speaker sensitivity , Measured ?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron, are you going to share any listening impressions with us? Given such a variety of electronics, did you prefer one speaker over the other and which DAC was more convincing at bringing Stevie Nicks into the room in front of you?

Hi Peter,

It's really up to the person I was helping if he wants to discuss his impressions.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron exhibited with them and has praised them. He also likes the sound of SETs. He might consider Ralph’s Class D monos which Ralph says sound like SETs without the weaknesses and cad drive tougher loads.

Two close friends now use Class D amps. If either of them were interested in exploring other Class D amps I would be fascinated to get their thoughts on a direct comparison to Ralph's Class D amps.

 

[Ron Resnick]

It’s basically Ralph making this claim and since he designs competitor technologies…well…

Have you heard Ralph's Class D amps?

 

[Ron Resnick]

As this is Ron's system thread, has he not mentioned many times that he loves the sound of Lamm SETs?

I like Lamm SET, Absolare PSET, Viva Aurora and MastersounD PSET, among others.

 

[PeterA]

Hi Peter,

It's really up to the person I was helping if he wants to discuss his impressions.

Thanks, Ron. What were your impressions. I am mostinterested in reading what you thought about the two speakers with tge various amplifiers and the two DACs

 

[Ron Resnick]

Thanks, Ron. What were your impressions. I am mostinterested in reading what you thought about the two speakers with tge various amplifiers and the two DACs

On Lyras: Burmester 159 monos versus Constellation Statement stereo versus VAC 300 monos with LampizatOr Horizon360

-- I am a single issue voter. All I have to do when applying my personal preferences is figure out which component makes vocals sound more real, alive and in the room. For me this was the VAC tube amps, especially with the VAC Reference preamp.

-- Boulder 3010 preamp: Still no likey! Still dry and forensic. Still a champion of resolution and detail. Still stunning finishing quality and build quality.

-- Applying general listening criteria, I found the Constellation to be slightly warmer and fuller-sounding than the 159. But the 159 had an "aliveness" that I liked. The Burmester had a bit more upper midrange energy which I did not care for. But this made the Burmester sound a touch more resolving. (There's always the question with a component which has more upper midrange energy than the competitor whether that upper midrange energy is providing merely the illusion of greater resolution.) All amps sounded better to my ears with the VAC preamp.

-- In general I think solid-state amplifier and tube preamp is a very rational way to go. For someone who is not a single issue voter the solid-state amplifier contributes control and dynamics and punch in the bass, while the tube preamp contributes some warmth, aliveness and dimensionality.

The build quality of both the Burmester and the Constellation is top-notch. Between the two, I preferred slightly the build quality of the Burmester, as I did not care for the thin top plate of the Constellation. The top plate of the Constellation is touted as being made of titanium. I guess this is supposed to sound fancy and expensive, but I don't see the point if it's going to wind up feeling a bit thin.

The Burmester has a large and unique momentary on/off switch. You pull down on this large, two pillared control like it's the master switch for a missile launcher. It definitely gives good switch.

The 159 is a classy, if art deco looking, affair. Actually, I think the Constellation might be considered to be a bit art deco looking as well.


On XVX: Burmester 159 monos versus D'Agostino Relentless monos with dCS Varese

I found the Relentless to be warmer and fuller than the Burmester. Again the Burmester had an aliveness that I found attractive and a bit hard to explain.


Across all three of these flagship, state-of-the-art solid-state amplifiers there is no loser. If you are a solid-state person and you randomly picked one of the three, and you never heard the other two, you'd think you must have the best solid-state amplifier in the world. I think I can say accurately that the selected preamp in the system swings the resulting sound more than does the differences among the amplifiers themselves.


DACs:

-- I continue to prefer the Horizon360 to the MSB Select II with Digital Director.

-- Literally since the late 1980s when I attended dCS auditions at Lyric Hi-Fi in Manhattan I have not cared for dCS DACs. I found them dry and sterile and uninvolving right up to the Apex. The Varese is different. The Varese makes the sound that dCS DACs should've been making for all of these years!

I have not heard the Varese in direct comparison to another SOTA DAC, but I have now heard it enough (also at Brian Berdan's on XVX and D'Agostino) to be able to say confidently that the Varese is a great DAC. Anyone auditioning flagship DACs certainly has to hear the Varese. The Wadax also is a great DAC. Varese versus Wadax versus Sentinel all in the same system would be a fascinating comparison.

I am sure I personally would still prefer the Horizon, unsurprisingly.