We have all been taught Ohms Law as gospel to explain voltage, resistance and current and we have diligently applied Ohms Law as DIYers in our persuit of audio bliss but just as Newtonian Physics was inadequate to explain lightspeed energy we must attempt to find another way to explain what is happening to our music signal as it interacts with a loudspeaker. This thread will introduce the Nania Audio Power Theory to the forum because I think it deserves the full scrutiny of this Forum. If it can hold up against the scrutiny and critical eye of the esteemed peers in this forum, it may prove to have value. Even if it gets shot down in flames I believe it may become an important step to better understanding of what makes a great audio experience and that is what I am here for.
Simply stated, the Nania Audio Power Theory asserts that the amplifier is delivering music to the speaker in a "power profile". I offer that the audio signal is delivered as power and that power has a profile of current times amplitude. In a given time portion of an identical audio signal can be delivered with a profile of 2 amps and 8 mV or 8 amps and 2mV by two different amplifiers. I believe that the amplifier (and the interconnects to a lesser extent) are the determining factor of how the current controls the speaker drivers. A high current sounds like a tighter grip on the speaker drivers which results in less driver transient motion and a tighter more resolute image. Volts will slap the drivers into motion but lose control relatively quickly and the residual motion (transient) from the inertia results in loose control and a poorer image. To make an analogy, voltage is a punch and current is a grab and pull of the speaker drivers. This is the only way that I can reconcile what I hear to what I understand about electronics.
I understand that what I propose may seem blasphemous to many but my ears and many amplifier auditions have forced me to look for a better way to explain what I am hearing and why I am hearing it. I am currently working on a mathematical proof of the Nania Audio Power Theory and am open to any ideas the members of this forum can provide as to what other kinds of electrical instruments (oscilloscopes, etc.) and testing techniques would validate the Nania Audio Power Theory. I am currently using a pair of tektronix 442's (35MHz/2mV resoultion) but I am always looking for new ideas on how to prove my theory.
Simply stated, the Nania Audio Power Theory asserts that the amplifier is delivering music to the speaker in a "power profile". I offer that the audio signal is delivered as power and that power has a profile of current times amplitude. In a given time portion of an identical audio signal can be delivered with a profile of 2 amps and 8 mV or 8 amps and 2mV by two different amplifiers. I believe that the amplifier (and the interconnects to a lesser extent) are the determining factor of how the current controls the speaker drivers. A high current sounds like a tighter grip on the speaker drivers which results in less driver transient motion and a tighter more resolute image. Volts will slap the drivers into motion but lose control relatively quickly and the residual motion (transient) from the inertia results in loose control and a poorer image. To make an analogy, voltage is a punch and current is a grab and pull of the speaker drivers. This is the only way that I can reconcile what I hear to what I understand about electronics.
I understand that what I propose may seem blasphemous to many but my ears and many amplifier auditions have forced me to look for a better way to explain what I am hearing and why I am hearing it. I am currently working on a mathematical proof of the Nania Audio Power Theory and am open to any ideas the members of this forum can provide as to what other kinds of electrical instruments (oscilloscopes, etc.) and testing techniques would validate the Nania Audio Power Theory. I am currently using a pair of tektronix 442's (35MHz/2mV resoultion) but I am always looking for new ideas on how to prove my theory.
nania said:
OK, criticism is what you have asked for and therefore criticism is what you will get.
nania said:
OK, not necessarily any problems thus far.
nania said:
Also true assuming we are using 2 different drivers in fact the same can be said of a single amp when testing driver A vs. driver B.
nania said:
And this is where you go way off the track...
power is the arbitary calculation of voltage x current
current is sqrt(power/impedance)
voltage is therefore current x impedance
Now, granted that the impedance of most drivers is not equal to the resistance (ie. the reactance is not equal to zero) and therefore is frequency dependant but given the same input signal, the same driver and the same power, the voltage and current are determined by the impedance and the power level AT THE DRIVER TERMINALS. Now given we are using the same input signal for the 2 tests, the impedance is also the same for these to tests because impedance is frequency dependant and the frequencies are the same for both tests even if there is multiple frequencies in the singal they are the same for both tests and therefore the impedance is the same for both tests. Given these facts the voltage and current for both tests is IDENTICAL. The obvious exception to this is that all amplifiers add there own sonic signature to the waveform and some reproduce the waveform less faithfully than others; this is the difference in what the amplifier outputs to the driver but you still cannot just reverse voltage with current.
nania said:
By all means test and test some more the results will only serve to prove the above FACTS. Also please note that the only meaningful measurements in this case will be those taken from the speaker terminals as we do not listen to what appears at the amplifier output terminal but rather what appears at the driver terminals.
Also, for reference, anolgue audio equipment such as amplifiers etc is voltage driven with voltage gain. Speakers are current driven and so the output voltage of the amp determines the amount of current that will in effect drive the Speakers.
Audio Freak
No, that is not what the theory describes. The power profile is the resultant volts times current delivered by an amplifier to identical loudspeakers with identical interconnects using the same interval of music.
Here is where I disagree. A music signal has frequencies and amplitude (power) and the clarity of its delivery is determined by the current holding the coils true to it. The driver coils are in a symbiotic relationship with the signal so as the impedence changes in the drivers so does the voltage current relationship. That is the underlying problem, the changing impedence screws up the signal. If I may make an analogy, the loudspeaker is an object at rest on a parabolic ("U shaped") surface. I am a audio signal with an intention to move the object a certain distance up and down the parabola several times within a time interval. I may grab the object firmly and walk it up and down in a controlled manner or slap it every time I want it to move. I may be able to slap it just right sometimes and time it so that the momentum of the object doesn't create unnecessary resistance but once the object starts moving I may have to slap it as the object is moving back toward me which will require a great deal more force (volts) to overcome its momentum and that is what creates the disparity in the power profile. The signal wants to make 20mV at 42Hz but finds a larger than expected impedence and so a degradation of the signal results. I know that this requires a certain degree of unlearning which is always unpopular but do you see what I am trying to get at? The Nania Audio Power Theory implies that the amplifier has a great deal to say about what kind of load it will drive. For any other readers who have patiently followed this thread, I invite your inputs. Is AudioFreak right when he says I'm "way off track"?
another comment :
Don't you mean current? and hence, guess what? no 'disparity in the power profile' (i prefer ohms law
)
And furthermore since current is determined by the voltage applied by the amp and the 'speaker impedance (which maybe in the complex plane i think), the current drawn cannot be changed (if the power supply,cables,FETs etc are meaty enough, this shouldn't be a problem).
Don't you mean current? and hence, guess what? no 'disparity in the power profile' (i prefer ohms law
)And furthermore since current is determined by the voltage applied by the amp and the 'speaker impedance (which maybe in the complex plane i think), the current drawn cannot be changed (if the power supply,cables,FETs etc are meaty enough, this shouldn't be a problem).
Volts simply will not occur across a speaker coil without current flow. When current flows through a wire, it emits a magnetic flux.
This is how a speaker works generally. Maybe in your world you have speakers that can turn into capacitors and whatever as they wish, but not here on earth so far.
EDIT: I know 10 year olds who haven't got a clue about electronics, but they do understand how an amp and speaker work together when I explain it to them.
This is how a speaker works generally. Maybe in your world you have speakers that can turn into capacitors and whatever as they wish, but not here on earth so far.
EDIT: I know 10 year olds who haven't got a clue about electronics, but they do understand how an amp and speaker work together when I explain it to them.
OK guys, no need to be too personal!
And just for the record, i do picture your U shape analogy and i think it stinks!
Nania, please keep my email address and once you have made some money from your theorys, you can flame me down.
To coin a nice phrase from Nelson Pass,
I wish you all the best listening to negative impedance amps or whatever else your theory brings
And just for the record, i do picture your U shape analogy and i think it stinks!
Nania, please keep my email address and once you have made some money from your theorys, you can flame me down.
To coin a nice phrase from Nelson Pass,
I wish you all the best listening to negative impedance amps or whatever else your theory brings
Hmmm, nania, I wouldn't speak, you've been rambling on as a 2 year old would, and quite incessantly too! It's quite obvious that your hanging at the end of a flaming thread and it's not gonna hold much longer. Seems by the previous quote from Pass that your continuing a losing game someone else already started. I gather this is not very good news for you.
P.S. Some of us have it and some don't, but you've been full of it for years.
EDIT: Go and work for Microsoft, you'll be the new CEO in no time!
P.S. Some of us have it and some don't, but you've been full of it for years.
EDIT: Go and work for Microsoft, you'll be the new CEO in no time!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.