It seems that high power, over 300w sub amps are commom.
However, finding a 2 channel stereo amp over 50w PC is difficult.
I understand that lows can draw more watts but, so can other freqs, paticularly in transients.
Have the manufactures and general public now become so centered on bass that they no longer care about the rest of the spectrum and dynamic range, etc?
However, finding a 2 channel stereo amp over 50w PC is difficult.
I understand that lows can draw more watts but, so can other freqs, paticularly in transients.
Have the manufactures and general public now become so centered on bass that they no longer care about the rest of the spectrum and dynamic range, etc?
Last edited:
Well, first of all I have to say I'm not sure exactly what kinds of amps you're referring to (and it doesn't help that you posted this in "everything else" instead of one of the other amp-specific forums, to give us a clue).
I can find 2-ch amps in the 100~200 watt p/c class in home hifi and car audio without any trouble. There's not one, not ten, but probably 100's and quite possibly 1000 or more possible candidates in the home audio market, for example. So, the question itself puzzles me and makes me wonder where, exactly, you are looking when you search for options.
There are a few available in much higher power ranges, if 200 w/ch/8ohm isn't enough.
There are a few tube amps in the same class, although I would tend to agree that the 60W and under range is far more common. Sound Reinforcement amps abound in high power ranges. Perhaps it's DIY amps you're referring to? They tend to be under 100 wpc for the most part.
But, assuming we accept your premise that they are rare, and to address the second part referring to sub amps, large sub amps in power ratings above 200W ... sometimes well above ... are common recently (the last 10 years); they were not so common only a short while ago.
To a large extent that is because high order distortions, which tend to be a major aspect of overall subjective sound quality, are not really an issue with a crossover-limited sub application since you simply won't hear the amp via the sub at the frequencies where any issue would manifest itself.
Class D amps of extremely high power are very suitable for sub applications and significantly less expensive than classic AB topology; perhaps not so suitable for full range use.
If you expect full range reproduction, I would bet that, crossover removed from the circuit, the sub amps you refer to would not sound that great in the top end, or would not without substantial attention to details, which add to the cost, that can be dismissed as unnecessary with a sub application.
Low frequencies, aside from a prodigious demand for power, are otherwise easy to design for sound quality wise, especially when information above the LF range required can be discarded or crossover-limited.
But, even if not, anlog does bass pretty good, and digital does bottom very well. An illustrative example might be the much maligned CD's 16/44.1 format which has garnered much debate, criticism, and even derision since it's early 80's introduction. Go ahead and read the articles, comments, and even published papers, from any point during the last 30 years.
How often do they criticize the CD for poor bass performance? It's not only rare, it's far more likely that the bass performance will be praised even as the overall sound quality is derided.
More critical mid and high frequency reproduction demands a different approach, which makes easy solutions that work fine in a sub amp much less easy. Although it is probably a gross simplification to say great bass is easy, it's not far from the truth to say getting good bass amplification is easy while the rest of the low end package can be difficult. At higher frequencies the amp's job is more demanding and it's faults or failures more obvious.
I can find 2-ch amps in the 100~200 watt p/c class in home hifi and car audio without any trouble. There's not one, not ten, but probably 100's and quite possibly 1000 or more possible candidates in the home audio market, for example. So, the question itself puzzles me and makes me wonder where, exactly, you are looking when you search for options.
There are a few available in much higher power ranges, if 200 w/ch/8ohm isn't enough.
There are a few tube amps in the same class, although I would tend to agree that the 60W and under range is far more common. Sound Reinforcement amps abound in high power ranges. Perhaps it's DIY amps you're referring to? They tend to be under 100 wpc for the most part.
But, assuming we accept your premise that they are rare, and to address the second part referring to sub amps, large sub amps in power ratings above 200W ... sometimes well above ... are common recently (the last 10 years); they were not so common only a short while ago.
To a large extent that is because high order distortions, which tend to be a major aspect of overall subjective sound quality, are not really an issue with a crossover-limited sub application since you simply won't hear the amp via the sub at the frequencies where any issue would manifest itself.
Class D amps of extremely high power are very suitable for sub applications and significantly less expensive than classic AB topology; perhaps not so suitable for full range use.
If you expect full range reproduction, I would bet that, crossover removed from the circuit, the sub amps you refer to would not sound that great in the top end, or would not without substantial attention to details, which add to the cost, that can be dismissed as unnecessary with a sub application.
Low frequencies, aside from a prodigious demand for power, are otherwise easy to design for sound quality wise, especially when information above the LF range required can be discarded or crossover-limited.
But, even if not, anlog does bass pretty good, and digital does bottom very well. An illustrative example might be the much maligned CD's 16/44.1 format which has garnered much debate, criticism, and even derision since it's early 80's introduction. Go ahead and read the articles, comments, and even published papers, from any point during the last 30 years.
How often do they criticize the CD for poor bass performance? It's not only rare, it's far more likely that the bass performance will be praised even as the overall sound quality is derided.
More critical mid and high frequency reproduction demands a different approach, which makes easy solutions that work fine in a sub amp much less easy. Although it is probably a gross simplification to say great bass is easy, it's not far from the truth to say getting good bass amplification is easy while the rest of the low end package can be difficult. At higher frequencies the amp's job is more demanding and it's faults or failures more obvious.
Last edited:
Transients are one thing, sustained power at low frequency is another. The power used goes up exponentially when the frequency goes down. Air is not linear, so neither are the wattage's needed.
I find most gear used to have a lack of bass, I think now it is more "flat" which some may consider bass-boosted.
So 300w bass might be a match for ~50wpc, depending on where you cross it over.
Lot's of items these days might rate their items in peak watts, or just lie.
I recently took apart a cheap 250w subwoofer amp,(Audiovox). The actual chip inside was only good for around 45w.
I find most gear used to have a lack of bass, I think now it is more "flat" which some may consider bass-boosted.
So 300w bass might be a match for ~50wpc, depending on where you cross it over.
Lot's of items these days might rate their items in peak watts, or just lie.
I recently took apart a cheap 250w subwoofer amp,(Audiovox). The actual chip inside was only good for around 45w.
Manufacturers try to make what they think we will buy; they're no plot to destroy HiFi but there's also no plot to turn us all into audiophiles either ... there is just a plot to sell ordinary consumers as much stuff as they can be talked into parting money for, whatever that might be. The easiest way to sell more stuff is to make it cheaper, so expect cheap products cheaply made with cheap intentions. Since you can pack a 100W class D sub amp and a TA2020 making 10 or so wpc into a 2.1 package and call it "120 watts" for about $30, why would you make a higher quality 2x 60 wpc class A/B amp that costs you $200 to manufacture if all you can say is it's "120 watts"? I know which one you'll find on the shelves at Wall-Mart, and so do you.
If people stopped listening to music tomorrow morning, they'd switch to making toasters so fast your head would spin. As long as Wall-Mart can sell it, they will make it.
I don't worry or even think much about what the "general public" wants, buys, or owns, since if as you imply they are clueless or confused about audio today, I can assure you there never was a time when they were not.
Anyone who seeks good sound reproduction is a rare beast today but if you somehow believe that it ever was any different, having been in audio retail 40 years ago, I can assure you it never has been. Crap outsold quality then and it outsells quality today, and it will outsell quality 50 years from now. We're a minority; stop worrying what the general public does.
Also, since you took pains to specify "2-channel" amps, I'm wondering if you know that in the US the power output of a 2-channel component amplifier is regulated by federal law to follow a very specific, and quite stringent, power rating procedure. Misrepresenting the power or failing to specify it in a specific way is literally against the law. Multi-channel amps? No problem, you can say almost anything you want; the manufacturers were able to lobby the gov't so the more stringent 2-channel rules do not apply.
So, be sure the lack of "50W stereo" amps is really a lack of stereo amps and not the result of comparing it to "250W" multichannel receivers, many if not virtually all of which could not legally claim 50 watts p/c if they were to pull three channels out of the chassis.
Televisions? Say whatever you want. Portable Stereos? Say whatever you want. Car Stereo? Say whatever you want. 2-channel home amplifier ... stray from the mandated test procedure and wording of your power output specification and you get the Federal Trade Commission on your ***, who can ban your product from the marketplace, force you to revise you product literature, or fine you.
Last edited:
Some 2 channel amps:
Macro-Tech i Series
Crest Audio
All over 1KW per channel.
QSC - CX 2-Channel Amplifiers
BEHRINGER: EPQ1200
All over 100W per channel
Not difficult to find.
Macro-Tech i Series
Crest Audio
All over 1KW per channel.
QSC - CX 2-Channel Amplifiers
BEHRINGER: EPQ1200
All over 100W per channel
Not difficult to find.
Hi,
Most of the time domestically with decent speakers 50W per channel
is all you need, except for parties, huge rooms or volume freaks.
Its a lot easier to make a quality 50W amplifier at a given (budget)
price point than it is to make a nice sounding 200W amplifier.
And TBH most budget amps reflect most budget speakers limits.
Subs can trade off more bass extension and smaller boxes by
requiring more power, sub power does not need to match
the mains power, SPL capability ideally should be close,
but sub SPL is not directly related to its power rating.
rgds, sreten.
Most of the time domestically with decent speakers 50W per channel
is all you need, except for parties, huge rooms or volume freaks.
Its a lot easier to make a quality 50W amplifier at a given (budget)
price point than it is to make a nice sounding 200W amplifier.
And TBH most budget amps reflect most budget speakers limits.
Subs can trade off more bass extension and smaller boxes by
requiring more power, sub power does not need to match
the mains power, SPL capability ideally should be close,
but sub SPL is not directly related to its power rating.
rgds, sreten.
I guess I was not specific enough.
What I was refering to was amps that do not cost the equivelant of a small car.
Also RMS PC X2
Granted, there are qualty, high powered amps out there for thise who can/wish to pay the high price.
However, there are no higher pwered amps that I could find for those on some sort of budget.
If there are mono subs amps of high power that are realtively inexpensive that also contain a pre amp, why are there no inexpensive 2 channel amps also of comparable price, taking into account that it's a two channel amp?
There are inexpensive high powered sub amps, inexpensive multi channel HT amps of high power, but hardly any inexpensive 2 channel amps.
Is 2 channel stereo dying with the general public?
Is reseve power for transients and dynamic range, etc no longer a concern?
Also, are less efficient acoustical suspension speakers (with a "tighter" bass) now considered not "decent"?
Back to my OP... is a" boomy" bass now king with the masses?
BTW, I'm a (former) bass player.
What I was refering to was amps that do not cost the equivelant of a small car.
Also RMS PC X2
Granted, there are qualty, high powered amps out there for thise who can/wish to pay the high price.
However, there are no higher pwered amps that I could find for those on some sort of budget.
If there are mono subs amps of high power that are realtively inexpensive that also contain a pre amp, why are there no inexpensive 2 channel amps also of comparable price, taking into account that it's a two channel amp?
There are inexpensive high powered sub amps, inexpensive multi channel HT amps of high power, but hardly any inexpensive 2 channel amps.
Is 2 channel stereo dying with the general public?
I have been away from high end audio far a while but, when did just adequate volume become the criteria for how much wattage one needs?
Is reseve power for transients and dynamic range, etc no longer a concern?
Also, are less efficient acoustical suspension speakers (with a "tighter" bass) now considered not "decent"?
Back to my OP... is a" boomy" bass now king with the masses?
BTW, I'm a (former) bass player.
Last edited:
Well, you can buy a used Bryston 4B for $1000.00. The birth sheet will probably show about 250w 8 ohm and perhaps 450 4 ohm in stereo mode, they can all be bridged, giving you somewhere around 450 8 ohm per mono channel. Enough?
You can get a new in box Parasound 2250 amp for about $1400, 250w pc with warranty, or a 2125 (200 wpc) for under $800.
You would not really need to replace any of the above until your ears and wallet grow beyond five figures for your entire system. Like I said, there are lots of choices and you don't need to compromise much in the way of sound quality ... there are also plenty of good amps other than those above.
If you want 200 wpc for $500 new, you can get it, but don't bring it to my house. My 40 wpc Anthem Amp1 (used, $700, probably worth half that today) will kick it's ***.
Like I said, I don't see the problem with choices.
You can get a new in box Parasound 2250 amp for about $1400, 250w pc with warranty, or a 2125 (200 wpc) for under $800.
You would not really need to replace any of the above until your ears and wallet grow beyond five figures for your entire system. Like I said, there are lots of choices and you don't need to compromise much in the way of sound quality ... there are also plenty of good amps other than those above.
If you want 200 wpc for $500 new, you can get it, but don't bring it to my house. My 40 wpc Anthem Amp1 (used, $700, probably worth half that today) will kick it's ***.
Like I said, I don't see the problem with choices.
Take any of the examples you provided that are *not* 2-channel amps. Now, read SONY's brief to the FTC regarding amendments to the amplifier rule of 1974 ...
" ... Sony commented that “the additional channels in today’s 5.1 and 7.1 home theater systems are designed to carry vastly different sounds at vastly different levels,”4 Sony commented further that “to maintain the same power ratings if it were necessary to drive all channels simultaneously during testing, virtually all manufacturers would have to change the sound platform of their amplifiers and receivers to be able to sustain such output,” which “would drive up the costs of production considerably, [and] in turn drive up the ultimate cost to consumers.”
In other words, SONY clearly states that it's multichannel amps cannot produce the aggregate power if all channels are driven (eg a 5x 100 watt HT amp can not produce 500 watts). SONY is not alone here; virtually all reputable manufacturers rate their multichannel gear as SONY does.
It is doubtful they could produce even the 2x the per channel power, since the method they adopted in the last decade requires 1 channel driven and 4 at 1/8th power, all at 1 Khz.
So, I put it to you ... do you really think these amplifiers you give as examples are equivalent to a 2-channel amp, which by law must
... be driven by exactly 120V (or 240V for foreign export) RMS sine power wave @ exactly 60 Hz (50 for foreign export) with less than 2% THD;
--- be preconditioned before any specification can be measured, by a signal of 1,000 Hz with all channels driven at 1/8 power continuously for 1 hour, in still air (no fans) at a minimum room temperature of 77F (25C);
Immediately followed by full power with all channels driven simultaneously at the full rated powerband of the amplifier (eg, 20~20KHz) for five minutes continuously at or below the rated maximum THD;
Rated power must be available at every frequency in the powerband specified by the manufacturer, and must be available at all times during the 5-minute full power test procedure.
If the amplifier is rated at multiple load impedances, a separate full test must be conducted for each impedance on the specification sheet. If the amplifier cannot complete the full test at a given impedance, you cannot publish a specification of amplifier power at that impedance.
I'd like to see the car stereo amp that can run at 500 watts for five whole minutes, after running for one hour, without the protection circuit coming on.
Now, here's your subwoofer/home theatre/ amp test:
Fire up the amp, don't precondition (might trigger the protection circuit) run one channel at maximum power with any other channels at 1/8th power, with a 1 Khz test signal (which produces the highest possible power and lowest possible distortion in an audio amplifier), measure it real quick, and send it to marketing. Make absolutely no attempt to find out if the amp can produce that power at, say 20 Hz, because the engineers tell us it can't so we don't want to know; we need plausible deniability. Tell them to multiply the 1-channel number by five to get output for the 5-channel receiver.
Do you really think these amps are equivalent to a stereo amp that must comply with the 1974 FTC Power Rule?
The FTC, by the way, has recently ruled that HT amps in the future will have to adhere to the FTC method but will only need to run 2 channels during the test (left and right front). So, you can expect output power claims for HT amps to fall in the near future.
Also, if the HT setup includes speakers, they get to run the amp at the impedance the speakers are; for example a popular Samsung all-in-one has 3.2 ohm speakers, so it's rated at five times what one channel can produce with a 1 Khz signal into 3.2 ohms, plus what the sub amp makes while running by itself into it's impedance (which I don't know), but they don't need to tell you that when they call it a "925 watt" system. I can guarantee you it cannot produce 925 watts, even into 3.2 ohms. Maybe 200, which is really less than 100 into 8 ohms.
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2010/01/P974222amplifierrule.pdf
Last edited:
Is reseve power for transients and dynamic range, etc no longer a concern?
Also, are less efficient acoustical suspension speakers (with a "tighter" bass) now considered not "decent"?
Back to my OP... is a" boomy" bass now king with the masses?
BTW, I'm a (former) bass player.
Dude you need some new speakers.
In the end you will pay dearly for inefficient speakers.
It takes more power to toss a heavy woofer around and more power to control it enough to sound good.
It's not a matter of "tighter" or "boomy" bass. Good bass is what I'm after.
I currently mostly use low wattage paper/alnico woofers. Heck my most powerful speaker is only 25w. Couple that with a tube or solid state amp with 15w to 50w and your good to go. 30w gives me loads of headroom.
I guarantee I could inflict ear damage on you with these ugly speakers and my 30w tube amp. That's why the other fella said that 50w is substantial for home use. Remember 3db is twice the power.(I think that's right)
These are ugly but sound amazing. There is nothing "tuned" about them lol.
The 12" should really be open baffle as well. I EQ in a moderate amount of bass as it is mostly open baffle.
Each side has a 12"Jensen, 10" Jensen, 8" coral, 3" Tesla and a 5 1/2" whizzer cone on the side.
I can wire them for 8ohm for solid state or 3ohm for my tube amp.
The point being with lightweight speakers I get better sound, the control of the bass is much better then say with a modern heavy "bass" woofer.
Big painted woofers with hundreds of watts might be fine for a kid in a riced out Honda. For me I prefer accuracy, "High Fidelity" if you will.
Attachments
With a name like JoeDJ, we would assume you are looking for pro stuff. Wrong?
You didn't specify a price range.
If you know of any small cars that sell new (or slightly used) for $300, please let us know.
With a name like JoeDJ" ?
Anyway......
Again, I guess I need to give a bit more info.....
I'm looking for an intergrated amp with at leaast 100W RMS pc into 8ohms
Just about everything moderately priced I've seen list the "peak power" @ 4 ohms and does not even list HD specs at full power for example.
Im also wiiling to spend up to $500 for a quality amp.
I'm now retired and have to watch my spending.
BTW, how can anyone say I need new speakers without even knowing what I presently. have?
Personally, I match an amp to speakers, not speakers to the amp.
Last edited:
Here's a minty amp for you, hopefully it stay's under $500, shipping is $46.
MINT BRYSTON 3B NRB 120 WATT AMP | eBay
MINT BRYSTON 3B NRB 120 WATT AMP | eBay
Yes, there are vintage amps available but, I was refering to new. Anyway, that amp is only 60w RMS pc
Last edited:
Would you be willing to break up your budget into preamp and power amp? That might make it easier to find the power you want and still have good source switching and volume control.
Or maybe you already have a preamp?
What a minute, I just remembered a super cheap amp that is actually decent. 100W per channel.
Sherwood RX-4105 Stereo Receiver 252-125
Yeah, I know, Sherwood. But don't be too fast to judge. I saw these when I was at P.E. and they are decent. A buddy has one and thinks it's great. Not the worlds best amp, a little rolled off at the top, but value for money is way up there. Food for thought.
Sherwood RX-4105 Stereo Receiver 252-125
Yeah, I know, Sherwood. But don't be too fast to judge. I saw these when I was at P.E. and they are decent. A buddy has one and thinks it's great. Not the worlds best amp, a little rolled off at the top, but value for money is way up there. Food for thought.
No, I presently don't have pe-amp.
I'm looking for an integrated amp because I fiigured that would be much cheaper.
However, it can be an option.
I was looking at that at one time. I believe the 200w is peak power for both chanels.
So, in reality, it is still about 50w RMS PC
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.