It was the Technics Hi Fi system V 303. I do not miss it.
https://ia904508.us.archive.org/8/items/technics-katalog-1983/Technics Katalog 1983.pdf
And the SH-8025 graphic equalizer, I am sure of it.
https://ia904508.us.archive.org/8/items/technics-katalog-1983/Technics Katalog 1983.pdf
And the SH-8025 graphic equalizer, I am sure of it.
I think the unsquashed version was first released to the public on Guitar Hero.
Next thing loads of Metallica fans got into that game because the sound quality was so much better and then Metallica released a less compressed one on cd or whatever.
That is the story how I remember it but I am certainly not a Metallica fan by any stretch of the imagination.
Would this justify a two way with a cross over centered at the BBC dip, with an L pad to ajust either a dip are peek, also to accommodate amps with different damping factors?
Speakers are designed to be driven by voltage sources (zero output impedance).
I looked at the PAM 8406 datasheet. The Rds(on) of the P-transistor is ~0.25 ohms. This chip is not designed to drive speakers with crossovers.
As an experiment, you can add small series resistors (0.22-1.0 ohms) to a good amplifier to hear how non-zero output impedance affects the crossover. The results will be completely dependent on the speakers.
On my MG1.6s, I use a 0.39 ohm resistor to attenuate the tweeter by 1dB and reduce the gap between the woofer and tweeter. This makes the speaker sound more coherent.
Ed
I looked at the PAM 8406 datasheet. The Rds(on) of the P-transistor is ~0.25 ohms. This chip is not designed to drive speakers with crossovers.
As an experiment, you can add small series resistors (0.22-1.0 ohms) to a good amplifier to hear how non-zero output impedance affects the crossover. The results will be completely dependent on the speakers.
On my MG1.6s, I use a 0.39 ohm resistor to attenuate the tweeter by 1dB and reduce the gap between the woofer and tweeter. This makes the speaker sound more coherent.
Ed
I use B&W 703s, KEFLS50’=s and Dali 'Oberon' 5s for listening along with a B&W sub bass in a fairly small space. I have no problem with catching the details on jazz and classical recordings. If you've attended classical music events, you will know its not particularly loud aside from the occasional crescendo, and neither is most jazz - of course if you like big band that might be a bit different but its never ear shatteringly loud, but with efficient speakers you can get plenty of SPL's in most listening spaces in any event. The 'Blue Note' in Tokyo is a great venue and I never once found the volume levels overbearing. OTOH, when my youngest played in a band and I went along to listen about 20 yrs ago, my ears rang for days afterwards - I never ever listen to music that loud.
As an aside, both my kids - now in their mid and late 30s - have hearing problems from their days playing in bands. I don't often go to rock concerts, but when I do, I use ear plug attenuators and on occasion have stuffed wet toilet paper in my ears. The last one was Ryan Adams in Manchester a few yrs ago.
Last edited by a moderator:
Plenty of very expensive amplifiers have output impedances way higher than that so I question your assertion. For example https://www.stereophile.com/content/zesto-bia-200-select-power-amplifier-measurements and that's a $16k amplifier.
Looking at the brochures again (those systems look very impressive I must say, great selling point) - the power out put "Ausgangsleistung" is 2 x 50 Watts. At the sound levels I was listening to this must have been 10W or less. I had no idea. I thought it was 100 or 200W.
In some circles 50W x 2 counts as low power, I think.
This amp's output impedance will not be the Rds(on) of the output FETs as it employs NFB. Its a closed loop system, with the loop being closed prior to the output filter. The output filter's impedance plus cabling could easily amount to 0.1 ohm though, so 0.2 ohm seen by the speaker as its BTL.
Basi
I think this is where there is a misunderstanding.
Basic you said you listen at 70db i'm not sure we uwe the same scale:
My loudspeaker should be in the 90dbspl range sensitivity (... but as they are now multiamped it's irrelevant): i listen at ~75dbc spl RMS ( with 20db crest factor allowed so max peak at listening point is 95 dbc ). I'm located 3 meters away so have a loss of 10db ( because of distance).
I need 15db above 1 w so this equal 32w. Then i allow for +3db headroom it makes 64w. If i go crazy and allow +6db headroom i need 128w....
This was for the passive version which i used whith a 150w amp.
When i moved to triamp dsp, in practice i ended using 20w for tweeter, 45w for mid and 75w for low ( because i have a downward tilt eq from 1khz up).
Not far from the 150w i used passive except the headroom is (way) higher.
Am i a power junky?
Not sure.
And since i use a volume control to compensate for the DR of program material to keep listening them at constant rms level of 77db RMS.
i'm not sure to be an spl junky either.
Other observations i've made: in this multi amp configuration difference between amplifier are small or inexistent. It made the use of class A amplifier non justified in my point of view ( my diy F5 drawn approx 180w countinously so i got some Amcron/Crown class ab amp which are not space heaters).
It wasn't the case when passive: the loudspeakers reacted differently to amps.
Indeed.
But without context it doesn't make sense to me: it depend of sensitivity and your listening habits.
I've got nothing against low power amps, and to be blunt i would really like to implement a multiamped F4 based system in the future with some 'downsized' ones to drive a 16ohm compression driver, a regular sized one coupled to a sensitive mid and a differential implementation to drive a sensitive compound of drivers for sub. All driven from pro dac ( +24dbu peak) so with minimal voltage amplification for sub way and attenuators probably required for mid high.
A nice way to lower distortion in my view.
Technics and more generally Japanese brands were 'the avant-garde' of audio at end 70's and during 80's.
How many sp10 in radio station? Price is no object Tad drivers were an offspring of Kenwood's high end division iirc...
Sorry i disgress...
I think this is where there is a misunderstanding.
Basic you said you listen at 70db i'm not sure we uwe the same scale:
My loudspeaker should be in the 90dbspl range sensitivity (... but as they are now multiamped it's irrelevant): i listen at ~75dbc spl RMS ( with 20db crest factor allowed so max peak at listening point is 95 dbc ). I'm located 3 meters away so have a loss of 10db ( because of distance).
I need 15db above 1 w so this equal 32w. Then i allow for +3db headroom it makes 64w. If i go crazy and allow +6db headroom i need 128w....
This was for the passive version which i used whith a 150w amp.
When i moved to triamp dsp, in practice i ended using 20w for tweeter, 45w for mid and 75w for low ( because i have a downward tilt eq from 1khz up).
Not far from the 150w i used passive except the headroom is (way) higher.
Am i a power junky?
Not sure.
And since i use a volume control to compensate for the DR of program material to keep listening them at constant rms level of 77db RMS.
i'm not sure to be an spl junky either.
Other observations i've made: in this multi amp configuration difference between amplifier are small or inexistent. It made the use of class A amplifier non justified in my point of view ( my diy F5 drawn approx 180w countinously so i got some Amcron/Crown class ab amp which are not space heaters).
It wasn't the case when passive: the loudspeakers reacted differently to amps.
Indeed.
But without context it doesn't make sense to me: it depend of sensitivity and your listening habits.
I've got nothing against low power amps, and to be blunt i would really like to implement a multiamped F4 based system in the future with some 'downsized' ones to drive a 16ohm compression driver, a regular sized one coupled to a sensitive mid and a differential implementation to drive a sensitive compound of drivers for sub. All driven from pro dac ( +24dbu peak) so with minimal voltage amplification for sub way and attenuators probably required for mid high.
A nice way to lower distortion in my view.
Technics and more generally Japanese brands were 'the avant-garde' of audio at end 70's and during 80's.
How many sp10 in radio station? Price is no object Tad drivers were an offspring of Kenwood's high end division iirc...
Sorry i disgress...
That makes a lot of sense to me, considering the huge difference in power needed at low frequencies and high; however what if we go a step further, have RIAA equalization applied in all source components (wouldn't that improve the dynamic range/noise floor of CD and negate the use of carrier frequencies on magnetic tape ?), through the amplifier, and have speakers/headphones with naturally falling response at high frequencies to compensate.
You just rediscovered 'pre-emphasis' Cracked case.
Was used on first generation digital converters.
Food for thoughts:
Section 1.3, 'power distribution and spl'
https://sound-au.com/bi-amp.htm
Was used on first generation digital converters.
Food for thoughts:
Section 1.3, 'power distribution and spl'
https://sound-au.com/bi-amp.htm
Sadly, I seem to have a knack of inventing something that's already been invented.