Dvv you said about Italian engineering . This example is a hydro power station ! 1906 and I think most as designed and still in use . The Hoover dam I have visited which I thought to be pristine in every detail ( it looks new ) . This is as impressive in the generator hall .
The hydroelectric power station Crespi Taccani - Trezzo d'Adda (IT) - Vale's Monkeys Photography - Valerio Li Vigni
The hydroelectric power station Crespi Taccani - Trezzo d'Adda (IT) - Vale's Monkeys Photography - Valerio Li Vigni
I didn't see it specified and am not familiar with the iec test protocols. So I was doing peaks.
But the rail only dropped 20 volts for that so there's still plenty more where that came from.
Yes , Magic ! he is getting more power out than he is putting in ....
He gets out more than anybody except you would ever need.
But seriously, I asked him about that. He said he was down to spitting blood by the time he got the transformers to perform as he wanted them. At those levels, many rules in our little audio world either don't apply any more, or are damn hard to come by.
Consequently, prices go astronomical. At least for this mere mortal.
Completely agreed, Tom, but that was not the aim of my question.
By the time it's delivering exceptionally high power levels, I was wondering why was its power supply not sagging more? I mean, 8,200 uF is anything but exciting, in fact, it's kinda stingy for its price class in those days.
Off hand, I'd expect its power supply to sag more, a lot more.
But we can turn this around. This shows that caps are NOT as important as we seem to think, not unimportant, of course, but not the determining factor. Also, I'd like to mention that the caps it has are from a totally unknown to me South Korean manufacturer, no usual "High Class" fare from Elna, Nichicon, Sanyo, etc.
It appears that two factors seem to be much more important than the electrolytic caps: the engineering, which was not giving up nor doing anything untoward, absolutely stable, and the power transformer. This is quite in line with what DF96 was saying, it's not the size alone, it's the RIGHT size.
I would venture a guess that it's also the topology, especially (but not solely) regarding the output stage. Two pairs of 130W power devices is hardly impressive, but it does make me wonder about all those amps sporting 3 pairs of 180W devices which can't get anywhere near this, despite greater nominal power into 8 Ohms.
Brains again triumph over brawn?
Last edited:
And of course that's exactly how it should be. A 2,000W amp should sound exactly like a 2W amp, if both are running into high efficiency speakers, with peak level output of 1W. Assuming the manufacturers can be believed, and neither produce audible levels of distortion ...
Again, this is all about power supplies. A Krell with a transplant from a Japanese receiver of nominally equivalent power, of the latter's power supply would sound like crap ...
I visited the home of Peter Stein, the man behind ME, years ago; he had the most extreme room treatment I have ever seen. Quite an intense individual, extremely focused; he's very motivated to keep his old products running, I don't think longevity would ever be a problem with them ...
If you're into (potential!) volume you should check out www.Basspig.com The Bass Pig's Lair. Just a nickname, this is the real thing, fully pro setup easily able to maintain 135dB, and he regularly listens at these levels! Not a silly car audio type loudness setup, but for playing orchestral, and other proper recordings ...
Frank
You are most probably right, but then how come other amps, with more capacitance relative to their nominal power, full of output devices, cannot match this situation on their level?
You know, nominally say 150 WRMS, so proprtionally it should deliver at least say 650 WRMS, or so?
Because I think you are right, and since its time for a full refresh is coming up anyway (after 15 years, I'd say it's time), I am going to stick bigger caps inside. There isn't much free space, a bit crammed there, but 10,000 uF will fit, and I'm looking at bigger values if possible. An extra 1,200 uF (or +22%) per cap isn't much, but hey, we take what we can.
And of course that's exactly how it should be. A 2,000W amp should sound exactly like a 2W amp, if both are running into high efficiency speakers, with peak level output of 1W. Assuming the manufacturers can be believed, and neither produce audible levels of distortion ...
Ah, but comparisons were made with several speakers, some of which were less efficient at say 88 dB/1W/1m, and at several volume levels, the highest of which was (to me) ear splitting.
Nada, no way, they always came out practically the same - actually, 100% the same to me, but I have to allow for some possible differences which I may have missed.
I suppose under more extreme conditions some differences would have shown up eventually, but this was a living room test, and there's just so much volume you can take before it becomes unpleasantly loud.
Agreed. My 180 Watt integrated amp uses two 10,000 uF/63V Fisher & Tausche German made caps per suplly line, i.e. 40,000 uF per channel, 80,000 uF for the whole amp. He gets away with 63V caps simply because all his amps run in fully balanced mode. Each half uses 2 Sanken RET 180W (I think?) in a SEPP configuration.
His biggies use as many as 40 Sanken RETs per channel. He's definitely a Sanken guy, something I like to tease him about, as I am definitely a Toshiba man (if Japanese, but Motorola/ON Semi in general).
Wow, that's some serious SPL.
I'm not that lucky. Since it provides 22 dBW, and since my speakers deliver 92 dB at 1W, theoretically I am capable of achieving (92+22) 114 dB SPL/1m. In practice, that's about 2 dB less as speakers are anything but linear power users, but still way more than most.
Anyway, that's more than enough for me, way before that the room loudness becomes intolerably high.
And that brings up an interesting point. I personally believe that an amplifier that can clip cleanly - how's that for an audio oxymoron?! - will be almost impossible to pick. What I mean by that is the situation is not that the power supply is sagging, rather that the combination of gain and voltage rail is such that the amplifier must clip, to be faithful to the volume required.
How can this occur, be so? Well, it you actually look at the waveform of many, highly respectable digital recordings you will see real clipping at a number, or even many points. This is not compression, this is pure clipping, the peak of the waveform has been chopped off as if by a knife. Yet, when you listen to these recordings at normal volumes you do not hear this "highly distorted" moment; it passes in an instant and the ear/brain does not register it.
And that's how a well behaved amp can work: it will clip in real terms maybe many times while playing at high volumes, and this will be completely unnoticeable, just like the "distorted" recording being played at normal volume. Key to this is that the split-second after the clip moment the amp is totally in control again, the fall waveform of that clipped peak is reproduced perfectly.
Which means, for example, that the amp can play, say, 6dB louder for all intents and purposes than it theoretically can, and easily keep up with a much more powerful amplifier, subjectively
114dB is absolutely plenty, my setup I estimate peaks at 106 or so dB, but it has no problem, when running at maximum volume, of being deafening with the right recording. My ears tell me enough's enough, and I go off and do other things ...
Frank
I believe you are taking about dynamic headroom, Frank.
If so, let me refresh your memory - the ancient German DIN 45500 standards recognized this phenomenon since the ate 60oes. This is what they used to call "music power" - German colleagues present here, please correct me if get something wrong.
If memory serves, that was the measure of power an amp could do on a 1:16 basis, when it was driven by pulses 15 times its nominal power, and once as far as it would go for 3% of THD, no clipping. If you look over their older gear, you will notice that they usually managed 20% or more peak power.
When you think about it, there was much sense in that logic, especially for the informed. I've seen amps rated at 40W nominal, but hitting 70W in peaks, which allows me to conclude that this particular device was very unstressed under normal conditions, and that it had a rather good power supply. Remember, DIN standards are all related to 4 Ohms rather than 8, and the vast majority of devices were built to be able to drive two pairs of speakers, which means 2 Ohms.
So when you used them with nominally 8 Ohm speakers, they were usually meatier and more substantial than their Japanese counterparts, despite their much higher nominal outputs into 8 Ohms.
Again, if memory serves, IHF picked up on music/impulse power much later on, something like 1977 or 1978.
Over the years, I have heard many engineers expounding that all this was ridiculous, that it made no sense, and that nominal outpts were all that mattered. Obviously, I disagree, and would suggest to the unbelievers that they pick up a German made device of reasonable quality, refresh it with new capacitors and try again.
As for me, I'm still on the hunt for two German integrated amps I can never forget because of their sound quality as I remember it; one is a Grundig (the German mass production company) V5000, and the other is ASC LV5000 (second generation, mostly the same as the first, but with RCA Cinch plugs rather than DIN 5 pole plugs). And, I must add with some pride, my memory hasn't failed me yet - all my vintage gear performs just as I remeber it did way back then, although RELIABLE audio memory lasts around 15 minutes, so all I had were my generally formulated conclusions from way back then.
If so, let me refresh your memory - the ancient German DIN 45500 standards recognized this phenomenon since the ate 60oes. This is what they used to call "music power" - German colleagues present here, please correct me if get something wrong.
If memory serves, that was the measure of power an amp could do on a 1:16 basis, when it was driven by pulses 15 times its nominal power, and once as far as it would go for 3% of THD, no clipping. If you look over their older gear, you will notice that they usually managed 20% or more peak power.
When you think about it, there was much sense in that logic, especially for the informed. I've seen amps rated at 40W nominal, but hitting 70W in peaks, which allows me to conclude that this particular device was very unstressed under normal conditions, and that it had a rather good power supply. Remember, DIN standards are all related to 4 Ohms rather than 8, and the vast majority of devices were built to be able to drive two pairs of speakers, which means 2 Ohms.
So when you used them with nominally 8 Ohm speakers, they were usually meatier and more substantial than their Japanese counterparts, despite their much higher nominal outputs into 8 Ohms.
Again, if memory serves, IHF picked up on music/impulse power much later on, something like 1977 or 1978.
Over the years, I have heard many engineers expounding that all this was ridiculous, that it made no sense, and that nominal outpts were all that mattered. Obviously, I disagree, and would suggest to the unbelievers that they pick up a German made device of reasonable quality, refresh it with new capacitors and try again.
As for me, I'm still on the hunt for two German integrated amps I can never forget because of their sound quality as I remember it; one is a Grundig (the German mass production company) V5000, and the other is ASC LV5000 (second generation, mostly the same as the first, but with RCA Cinch plugs rather than DIN 5 pole plugs). And, I must add with some pride, my memory hasn't failed me yet - all my vintage gear performs just as I remeber it did way back then, although RELIABLE audio memory lasts around 15 minutes, so all I had were my generally formulated conclusions from way back then.
In the sense that dynamic headroom is a rough measure of how much the supply sags under continuous load. In my book low dynamic headroom is good, because it means the voltage doesn't crumble under stress. The ME amplifier designer proudly states that his amps have 0dB dynamic headroom, meaning that the supply is so stiff that it delivers the same power, whether impulse or continuous.
The story I'm telling about clipping is overall different. An amp clips when it attempts to drive the output to a voltage which isn't available at that moment for it to access -- because the voltage across the output devices need to be typically a volt or two about that "required" voltage. And why that voltage across the output devices is insufficient is for one of two reasons: the "good" reason in my book is that the user has set the volume control "too high", and the designed voltage rail size is simply not large enough; the "bad" reason is that the power supply is under-engineered, and the load currents to the speaker are great enough that the smoothing capacitor reserves are drained severely, to the point of the voltages sagging badly - the voltage across the output devices has dropped below what the gain setting is "demanding" for correct reproduction. This is notorious compression, when the amp sounds like it's run out of "guts" ...
Frank
Last edited:
One of my most unusual experiences was listening to some Western Electric cinema horns ( 1940? ) . First with 2 W 2A3 amps ( ? ) , then with a powerful transistor amp . Both were good . I felt the transistor amp to be better in control . I have heard 2A3's through FAL speakers and felt them more than loud enough . Often loud does not mean dynamic . Just like big TV doesn't always show more picture .
I ran a 300 watt amp to clipping through some Klipshce Horns . It was less impressive than expected . They were happy to do it . 105 db / watt !
One of my customers came back from the USA . He said often people sell big fi . Big fi is almost like hi fi except the piano has a 16 foot key board . That would be fine if big fi can do normal size . In fact we all then would want big fi . His quest never got him that .
To be clear that's what I like . Victorian Beethoven was big fi . All I ask is it should be hi fi on the rare occasions I ask it to be . Tannoy's get close .
I ran a 300 watt amp to clipping through some Klipshce Horns . It was less impressive than expected . They were happy to do it . 105 db / watt !
One of my customers came back from the USA . He said often people sell big fi . Big fi is almost like hi fi except the piano has a 16 foot key board . That would be fine if big fi can do normal size . In fact we all then would want big fi . His quest never got him that .
To be clear that's what I like . Victorian Beethoven was big fi . All I ask is it should be hi fi on the rare occasions I ask it to be . Tannoy's get close .
That's true. Most amps with full voltage regulation have very low dynamic headroom, often below 1 dB, but in return (if done right) they deliver the same voltage across any reasonable load.
I can only agree on both counts.
Although, I'd say, this greatly depends at which point will the amp give up. Even if one discounts the low, low end of audio, where just about anything is possible under duress, we will still find rather large differences between various models from various manufacturers. In relative philosophies, as well.
Some years ago, on vacation in Turkey, I chanced to meet a very nice retired Swiss engineer, who used to work for Studer/reVox. Obviously, we hit the audio subject, and I belated him for what were, in my view, definitely undersized flter caps in their earlier integrated amps (2 4,700uF caps per channel for a nominal 80 WRMS/8 Ohms).
He agreed they could have been bigger, but stressed that their philosophy was to use oversized, high quality transformers, relying on them to quickly supply the extra current.
Indeed, I asked, if so, then why did you, in your professional power amp 740, use no less than 2 33,000uF caps PER CHANNEL? Company policy, he replied, it was assumed that a home bound model would never have to work under the stress a professional model is likely to encounter. To which I replied that I doubted very much that the ears of the professionals, trained as they are, are in fact by default better than those of us regular people. My point being that even at low stress levels, amps with bigger and better caps will sound, well, different than those with smaller caps.
Whoever disblieves should give some of his ear to the old Yamaha 1000 integrated amp. I looked inside and was pleasantly surprised to find just one supply point for both channels, but one consisting of a 47,000 uF cap in parallel with another 22,000 uF cap.
I've never really experienced "big fi". I guess this occurs when the speakers are spread far apart, and the sound still appears to originate from the left, and .. from the right. This is a form of distortion - what should happen is that the image of the piano is locked in the middle, and as the volume increases the intensity of sound rises, and to a large degree it's as if you're moving closer to the instrument ...
Frank
But Nige, it was you Brits who spend all of the 70ies and half of the 80ies blaring about effcient being bad, being brash and losing much detail.
The British audio industry was the one who favored Bextrene so much in the past, everybody and their dog used it, and it slid efficiency down ito the 82-84 dB/1W/1m.
Klipsch? They were so shunned that nobody even talked about them. JBL they couldn't just write off, so theye were mentioned here and there as "oh, yes, that Yank thing".
To us, the readers of British magaiznes, it was quite clear that this story was pushed because Britain could not manufacture high efficiency bass and mid/bass drivers, and if they can't do it, then it's not worth doing.
I'm sorry to be so blunt, but that's the way it was. And it split the European audiophiles into the low British efficiency and high American efficiency groups. The Germans kept their distance and went on producing their own loudspeakers (some of which were excellent), while the French tried to appear neutral, but actually leaned more towards the American efficient models (e.g. Cabasse, 3A, etc).
And this is THE reason why I never liked most of British speakers, they always seem a little lazy and dull for my taste. But still better than most Scandinavian creations, which never failed to sound dead and uninterested, despite some wonderful ideas some had.
And the British speakers I did like were without fail more to considerably more efficient than the average Brit speaker. Spendor BC3 is an excellent example, a speaker to die for, but at 93 dB/1W/1m. No ridiculously small "mid/bass" drivers, but a nice 12" bass driver with muscle. Even "The Fat Man", B&W DM6, used a proper 10" bass. KEF's three tier Reference Standard had a 12" bass and an effciency of around 90 dB/1W/1m.
So, 12" for our top models, but 6.5" mid/bass for the masses? And with a story that big boxes "don't image as well" as the small boxes? Really? And all the time, the simple fact was that the British audio industry was sliding fast into uncompetitive waters due to overpricing.
Indeed they were, and still are.
Tannoy was the exception which confirmed the rule. But it should also be mentioned that Tannoy survived much more due to exports than the British market trade. For example, I was rather (pleasantly) surprised when I realized just how highly respected Tannoy were on the Japanese market (traditionally always favoring local manufacture over imported by a very high degree, almost inpenetrable, but they love Tannoy and JBL and Altec Lansing, all very to extremely efficient speakers).
As for you Dutch, I am very pleased to note that in all my life, I have never been so fairly demonstrated equipment from all over the globe as in Holland. Naturally, there were personal leanings, individual taste if you like, but it was in no way geographically influenced. And no strong leanings for anything even if it was famous. Respect!
Of course! We are talking about a piano here, so that instrument should subjectively be sized correctly. An orchestra, or recorded Broadway production will come across very differently.
I got "into trouble" in another forum talking about this, but my goal is always for the speakers to completely disappear, be 100% invisible in auditory terms. In practical terms, that means if someone is brought into the room blindfolded that he will find it impossible to locate the speakers even if allowed to roam the room freely. Only by stumbling upon them, and touching them will he be certain that he's found them ...
Frank
- Status
- Not open for further replies.