Stein2,
That looks like an Audiostatic?
I have a friend that runs his Audiostatic panels just fine on a very strong 35w/ch tube amp, and in his room which is likely something on the order of 14 x 14 roughly speaking it is more than loud enough.
If you need more voltage swing, you can bridge a pair. So build the pair you are building now, and if you need 4x the output power, then you can build another pair and bridge them?
Fwiw, I doubt that you will get anything like 98-100db sensitivity from your bass line source. You will get some power handling though. And a bit depends on the wiring scheme as to what you will end up with - if it is a 2 ohm load (for example), then you will gain some apparent output from the amp sinking more current (assuming the amp can do this). Also, I would not count on the manufacturer's SPL rating, they are usually taken at midband, not at LF... measure it urself and see.
_-_-bear
That looks like an Audiostatic?
I have a friend that runs his Audiostatic panels just fine on a very strong 35w/ch tube amp, and in his room which is likely something on the order of 14 x 14 roughly speaking it is more than loud enough.
If you need more voltage swing, you can bridge a pair. So build the pair you are building now, and if you need 4x the output power, then you can build another pair and bridge them?
Fwiw, I doubt that you will get anything like 98-100db sensitivity from your bass line source. You will get some power handling though. And a bit depends on the wiring scheme as to what you will end up with - if it is a 2 ohm load (for example), then you will gain some apparent output from the amp sinking more current (assuming the amp can do this). Also, I would not count on the manufacturer's SPL rating, they are usually taken at midband, not at LF... measure it urself and see.
_-_-bear
bear said:
Not Audiostatic, made by a local builder who has still a long way to go before he becomes a respected name in international terms, or just might get lucky ... or not...
These run easily if matched up with a Quad405 (but then, 405 was designed for that sort of load) and it remains to be tested when all of the four F5 channels are finished. Then I'll see what's next...
Something scratches my head.
Let us have three amps, one big, one medium, one small.
config 1: big for basses, medium for mediums, small for highs. This works say not too bad.
config 2: swap big and small amps (big for highs, small for basses) this does not works. Basses do not accept a small amp.
So what?
Let us have three amps, one big, one medium, one small.
config 1: big for basses, medium for mediums, small for highs. This works say not too bad.
config 2: swap big and small amps (big for highs, small for basses) this does not works. Basses do not accept a small amp.
So what?
bobodioulasso said:
I'm with you.
They should have had to bring their consideration of the peak acoustic powers of instruments and voices into their thoughts, too. Each instrument or voice has difference. For example, if we compare peak acoustic power Watts/ sound power level (SPL) dB, it is as follows:
- Pipe Organ: 12.6 W/ 131dB
- Bass drum: 10 W/ 130dB
- Trombone: 6.5 W/ 127dB
- Singers: 2 W/ 123dB
- Grand piano: 0.45 W/ 116dB
- Trumpet: 0.33 W/ 115dB
- Double bass: 0.16 W/ 112dB
- Piccolo: 0.08 W/ 109dB
- Flute: 0.05W/ 107dB
- Triangle: 0.05W/ 107dB
. . .
. . .
>
<
stein2 said:
Not Audiostatic, made by a local builder who has still a long way to go before he becomes a respected name in international terms, or just might get lucky ... or not...
These run easily if matched up with a Quad405 (but then, 405 was designed for that sort of load) and it remains to be tested when all of the four F5 channels are finished. Then I'll see what's next...
kwayzee triker ;
these quad405 you heard with these panels were made accordingly to stock schematic , even with eeny weeny ECC83 as substitute for input OP;
there is no 100W/channel even in wildest dreams ....... yup for true 8ohms , but everything bellow 8ohms is just triggering 405's internal current limiting , way bellow 100W
Aleph 5 will make these panels bleed , if you're deaf enough .....
Babowana said:
I'm with you.
They should have had to bring their consideration of the peak acoustic powers of instruments and voices into their thoughts, too. Each instrument or voice has difference. For example, if we compare peak acoustic power Watts/ sound power level (SPL) dB, it is as follows:
- Pipe Organ: 12.6 W/ 131dB
- Bass drum: 10 W/ 130dB
- Trombone: 6.5 W/ 127dB
- Singers: 2 W/ 123dB
- Grand piano: 0.45 W/ 116dB
- Trumpet: 0.33 W/ 115dB
- Double bass: 0.16 W/ 112dB
- Piccolo: 0.08 W/ 109dB
- Flute: 0.05W/ 107dB
- Triangle: 0.05W/ 107dB
. . .
. . .
>
This is slightly misleading since one usually does not stand in the loft with the pipes, and the organ is played in a very large room where you the listener is a considerable distance away... I also am pretty darn sure that a flute can do more than 107dB (assuming these are 1M measurements?) when played to do that.
Almost no one has a home hi-fi system that can even produce one (1) acoustic watt...
_-_-bear
"It"?? It is what?
Perhaps a more complete statement would be in order?
The reason that a smaller amp is acceptable, in many instances, is twofold:
- the tweeter tends to have a higher sensitivity (worth 3-6dB or more)
- If you FFT (for example) a CD track and look at the levels, you'll see that there is less level at HF, so less power might be acceptable.
But, I'd go with the general gist of the earlier comment on having all the drivers capable of similar output levels - or put another way, all capable of exceeding some threshold that is appropriate to the situation. (the same threshold criteria would not apply to a speaker in a 10x10ft or M room as would one that was for a 75x75ft room)
_-_-bear
Perhaps a more complete statement would be in order?
The reason that a smaller amp is acceptable, in many instances, is twofold:
- the tweeter tends to have a higher sensitivity (worth 3-6dB or more)
- If you FFT (for example) a CD track and look at the levels, you'll see that there is less level at HF, so less power might be acceptable.
But, I'd go with the general gist of the earlier comment on having all the drivers capable of similar output levels - or put another way, all capable of exceeding some threshold that is appropriate to the situation. (the same threshold criteria would not apply to a speaker in a 10x10ft or M room as would one that was for a 75x75ft room)
_-_-bear
just a last thing to say
http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm
scroll down to 1.3 - Power Distribution and SPL
http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm
scroll down to 1.3 - Power Distribution and SPL
samoloko said:
The testing F5 I've built (now rebuilding from scratch) had 17.8VAC on bridge (Graetz) and around 21.8VDC on amp, loaded, on a 500VA transformer with separate secondaries for L & R channel. Found that it often depends on the transformer, but never had the bridge getting hot . (35A/250V, one per channel) ... what bridge do you have?
