megajocke said:PMPO power is calculated by taking the peak power and multiplying it with the ratio between sales people and engineers squared. Or possibly cubed if it is computer-speakersI have a pair of "160W" computer speakers... the driver is a 2" or something like that...
Some nice definitions guys, keep 'em coming 😀5th element said:
Sony RMS power at Link mode
Sorry Guys, a little late to respond to this one but then better late than never.
Even I am peeved off the whole PMPO thing. It comes naturally to "audio" companies to mention it in PMPO so much so that if any company mentions RMS then they are doing a favor and are honest about their products.
Case in point, SONY. I am hunting for my "Audio system" currently. Ok their products are good, cameras and even the commercial audio, but they also seem to have joined the PMPO race. They have 4000W PMPO churned out through two 3-inch drivers with extra cone movement or something. RMS rating is 140+140W RMS at LINK mode. Could someone throw light on this so-called link mode. Anybody using Sony Audio here, just thought someone might other than the odd player, does it qualify as Quality Sound. Cos I plan to get a commercial sound system until I make my own GC.
Cheers mate,
Ajay Lewis.
Sorry Guys, a little late to respond to this one but then better late than never.
Even I am peeved off the whole PMPO thing. It comes naturally to "audio" companies to mention it in PMPO so much so that if any company mentions RMS then they are doing a favor and are honest about their products.
Case in point, SONY. I am hunting for my "Audio system" currently. Ok their products are good, cameras and even the commercial audio, but they also seem to have joined the PMPO race. They have 4000W PMPO churned out through two 3-inch drivers with extra cone movement or something. RMS rating is 140+140W RMS at LINK mode. Could someone throw light on this so-called link mode. Anybody using Sony Audio here, just thought someone might other than the odd player, does it qualify as Quality Sound. Cos I plan to get a commercial sound system until I make my own GC.
Cheers mate,
Ajay Lewis.
Re: Sony RMS power at Link mode
if it's home hifi check the power rating on the back (this is how much power it draws from the mains) and divide that by however many channels of amplification it has, that will give you a rough idea of it's power capability.
ie, my yamaha AX 592 2ch amp has a 220w rating on the back and it tested at around 110w a channel.
wipeout said:
if it's home hifi check the power rating on the back (this is how much power it draws from the mains) and divide that by however many channels of amplification it has, that will give you a rough idea of it's power capability.
ie, my yamaha AX 592 2ch amp has a 220w rating on the back and it tested at around 110w a channel.
reply
lol more watts doesn't make sound better quality!
The only thing more watts rms is good for to handle more current than lower wattage speakers,which doesn't matter in a hifi situation,but in a pa situation it does!
Sensitivity doesn't make a better quality sound either,just a louder one!
It's the cone material and surround material and three small parametres[QTS,Vas,X max,EBP,etc] which determines the overall sound characteristics!
Like for example: a lightweight untreated paper cone with a rubber surround will give a natural sound usually.
lol more watts doesn't make sound better quality!
The only thing more watts rms is good for to handle more current than lower wattage speakers,which doesn't matter in a hifi situation,but in a pa situation it does!
Sensitivity doesn't make a better quality sound either,just a louder one!
It's the cone material and surround material and three small parametres[QTS,Vas,X max,EBP,etc] which determines the overall sound characteristics!
Like for example: a lightweight untreated paper cone with a rubber surround will give a natural sound usually.
Re: reply
It actually seems that there is an inverse relation between power output & amplifier quality (ie it is WAY easier to build a really excellent small amp).
dave
Bull said:
It actually seems that there is an inverse relation between power output & amplifier quality (ie it is WAY easier to build a really excellent small amp).
dave
b-square said:
Any time you have to use more than 1 (SE) or 2 (PP) devices you start to have problems with sound quality.
dave
b-square said:
If that comment is aimed at the comment in my post -- i don't consider that a generalization, but a fact of life.
dave
dave, just when i was hoping to build a parallel push pull sing El84s you suggest that one should not use multiple tubes atleast not more than 2 (PP).
navin said:just when i was hoping to build a parallel push pull sing El84s you suggest that one should not use multiple tubes atleast not more than 2 (PP).
Sorry... but no 2 devices are ever quite the same, so when paralleled you get their average. But everything is a tradeoff -- if you need more power maybe a meatier tube (ie EL34)?
That said, i've heard some amps with paralleled output devices, one just wonders how the same amp would sound with half the tubes.
dave
its all how you look at it........
High efficiency is great, but it is usually required when something else is a hog. The example in the first post refers to an 8 watt amp. What is the efficiency of that thing? So high efficiency speakers are required because we want Class A, with little heat, and a small electric bill....... A great man once said "All things are relative", or wait, was it "All things are invarient"???????????
High efficiency is great, but it is usually required when something else is a hog. The example in the first post refers to an 8 watt amp. What is the efficiency of that thing? So high efficiency speakers are required because we want Class A, with little heat, and a small electric bill....... A great man once said "All things are relative", or wait, was it "All things are invarient"???????????
planet10 said:
The "problems" with sound quality are entirely in the ear of the beholder. It might be more difficult or more expensive to build an amp of a given "quality" with higher power output, but that is not quite the same thing.
How does the Aleph-X fit into your model?
b-square said:
The one that Nelson is building for First-Watt may well be the best sounding one (20W -- so it will likely be a pair of devices in full Class A differential -- a subspace of PP)
dave
If you see an acronym other than RMS power, walk away from the product. The maker obviously has no scruples and would sell dehydrated water to his own mother.
planet10 said:
1. I did consider 2 x EL34 instead of 4 x EL84 but i was told that 4x EL84 sounds better.
2. i figured to control biasing using a SS biasing ckt so that all 4 tubes are biased to the same degree
navin said:
I've found that 4 x EL84s have just slightly more detail but 2 x EL34s have better bass response. You must bias individually to do it right in a multi pair PP.
my el84 amp will be used above 300hz or so. my plan is to have a bi amp system running about 300-400hz (near BSC) and use the gain of the amp tom compensate for baffle step. the bass amp will be a SS. See the India Group Amp Project on this forum for details on that. the 2 amps will then feed 2 wide range drivers (jordan 125/53 or Fostex 165/83 or such) via a PLLXO.
so far the only part i have nailed down is the amps (EL84 PPP + Group amp). I still have to nail down the drivers, box size, etc...
the object of this speaker is that is must compete with the life style offerings from B&W, KEF, Dali etc...so the box cant be very large....if there is a box that is 🙂
so far the only part i have nailed down is the amps (EL84 PPP + Group amp). I still have to nail down the drivers, box size, etc...
the object of this speaker is that is must compete with the life style offerings from B&W, KEF, Dali etc...so the box cant be very large....if there is a box that is 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.