The analogy is the process i choose to optimise antenna position. The booster reception/amplification is made to be minimum first then it is easier to see which antenna position will give best reception.
Dont forget that there are many good amps that are not suitable with most speakers. If the speaker produced is rather amp independent then we can choose the best amp easily.
Of course this is done with understanding of what to be expected.
Easiest way is to give the speaker excellent sensitivity, with very benign impedance. A favourite memory is being in a large electrical store, and test driving a good quality Klipsch pair with a nothing Japanese receiver - did a brilliant job relatively speaking, made most of what I heard at the recent audio show sound quite pathetic in comparison - had dynamics, clean treble, life and SPLs that got your body moving. Plus, got the store chappie running from the other side of the cavernous place to yell, "Turn it down!" ... 😀
The amp is for the real sound test. Sensitivity is only an option (for example sensitivity vs lows extension). Flat impedance doesnt guarantee anything. Almost.
Yes, never any guarantees ... but IME amplifiers as a breed are pretty flimsy, or used to be, so make the job for them as easy as possible: 96dB sensitivity, 8R speakers means that even a miserable 60 watter with poor current delivery capabilities has no problems punching out 115dB peak SPLs or better - result? Realistic sound ....
Of course. No hi end speaker will sound good with a single ended 2N3055. You got the point. Its a conceptual thinking.
Btw. Your numbers tell nothing but what speaker you are using hehe
I can go to over to most peoples homes and they have nothing more than a glorified boombox system which have little real bass output, compounding the problem with poor placement. Many complain it's too much and don't want deep deep because to them that's boom boom. Which I found rather odd as you would too. When I mention adding a sub or what not and hear the price tag of doing such they typically scoff. Even a few hundred is ridiculous to them, often citing that they didn't pay much more for everything else total 10-15 years ago and these are people with 6 figure incomes.
So no they don't run, they enjoy on a daily basis. Funny the people whom do run are the ones that already got sucked into the marketing psychobabble of high end, blowing tens of thousands at local high end shops. Are so over it refuse to drop a penny more because of the abuse. Like my friend Chet, his speakers are biamped with Krell mono blocks. The one thing he does like is the power conditioner (prior to it breaking) bragging about the (common) power outages we have and how he can enjoy for a half an hour when everything else is a blackout. Yes, his favorite part had nothing todo with audio, just a grossly overpriced UPS he dropped $3k for on eBay and the manufacture refuses to repair because he wasn't the original owner regardless of how much money he's willing to throw their way. Obviously the only $$$ amount they are interested in is selling something new and toss the old into a landfill 🙄
I'm starting from scratch (no system at all) and my active speakers will be at the heart of the system. Having invested ~$1k so far, when hearing those kind of numbers think I'm nuts for spending so much and yet this is paltry compared to most anything considered high end.
So far I haven't even added in the cost of power supplies to run all 8 channels. Have what I need to test with and can run 1 speaker half power or two @ perhaps 20% before current limitation kicks in. The toroids will run around $200 or so. Have some old CGS computer grade caps that are massive that I'm been saving forever just for a project like this. Nor money for the enclosure is added, this is an afterthought so to speak, cost will be what it has to be regardless. 🙂
When it comes to bass, I'm not worried how deep or how much. A dozen 6.5" midbasses with ~1700cm² surface area solve that problem with ease. Even compensating for the room while being driven from four different points.
Last edited:
It is pretty hard for a driver to embellish a transient. Pretty easy to f it up. Think about it.
Efficient flat on axis ( at least) low distortion speakers at "your" spl, plus powerful low distortion amps will just about guarantee no "fatigue" a shotgun approach.
A lot of us have discovered that when people eschew B.S. these days they are considered either eccentric or dangerous. Be aware that the real answer to even this "audio" question requires that objective truth be layed bare. This will not be popular. I suggest that everyone downloads all of the (incredibly free!) back issues of " "The Audio Critic" long live the king of no bullschitt, the ninety year old and still productive Peter Aczel, purveyor of the unpopular truth.
In other words the answer to this question is above many times over. The key to knowing what "is" is already inside your head. A clue....Regarding amplification: "Real" numbers do not lie. Period.
Guaranteed
But will leave you with wanting more 'space' if done shotgun.
It was meant to say that (1) even the best speaker cannot sound good with terrible amp, which is obvious but (2) we cannot use that fact to say that amp is the most important (3) there must be a minimum requirement for an amp to be called mediocre.
What is lacking does not cause fatigue, it may be irritating because we know the content exists, but non the less it's not fatiguing, simply missing. Perhaps you should go back and re read everything said in context to the discussion instead of nit picking everything on it's own, taking what is either directly stated or implied out of context.
Building experimental aircraft is another "hobby", one that if not spot on can and will kill you. I take what I do with the upmost scrutiny and dedication. When you have been employeed to do both of these being professional isn't kiddy science, it's an absolute requirement.
"What is lacking does not cause fatigue, it may be irritating because we know the content exists, but non the less it's not fatiguing, simply missing. Perhaps you should go back and re read everything said in context to the discussion instead of nit picking everything on it's own, taking what is either directly stated or implied out of context."
The point I'm discussing is that <100Hz content is necessary for comfortable long term listening, fatigue free. Without <100Hz content sound is "flat" as much venue information lies in the LF. You don't find listening to something that sounds flat and fake fatiguing? I find irritation of this sort fatiguing. How could something that is irritating NOT be fatiguing? Making your brain fill in extra info, making your brain listen "through" high distortion levels, all of those departures make listening a more tiring process. Do we really want to differentiate "tiring vs. fatiguing" "irritating vs fatiguing" etc? Is this a stupid semantic argument?
"Building experimental aircraft is another "hobby", one that if not spot on can and will kill you. I take what I do with the upmost scrutiny and dedication. When you have been employeed to do both of these being professional isn't kiddy science, it's an absolute requirement."
And that has nothing to do, again, with the discussion.
The point I'm discussing is that <100Hz content is necessary for comfortable long term listening, fatigue free. Without <100Hz content sound is "flat" as much venue information lies in the LF. You don't find listening to something that sounds flat and fake fatiguing? I find irritation of this sort fatiguing. How could something that is irritating NOT be fatiguing? Making your brain fill in extra info, making your brain listen "through" high distortion levels, all of those departures make listening a more tiring process. Do we really want to differentiate "tiring vs. fatiguing" "irritating vs fatiguing" etc? Is this a stupid semantic argument?
"Building experimental aircraft is another "hobby", one that if not spot on can and will kill you. I take what I do with the upmost scrutiny and dedication. When you have been employeed to do both of these being professional isn't kiddy science, it's an absolute requirement."
And that has nothing to do, again, with the discussion.
Everything stated was an effort to explain one specific point or another, of which you disregarded and only comment on as disingenuous, delusional and blatantly false once nitpicked. Forest from the trees my brother.
I don't require an audience, but if I am so far off the mark, why are you the only one to say so? There are far more knowledgeable people here that could easily rip me a new one if incorrect with detailed fact or even theory for that matter. Why haven't they? Where is your proof?
Heck I'll climb out on a limb here, I make many comments in support of and against this or that theory, use of, how to, et al. and am rarely corrected. Do I make mistakes? Heck ya, nobody "knows it all" and I'm here to learn what I may have missed, misconstrued in my mind etc and do it without hesitation. If wrong I truly want to know. But that means I want facts, the proof of and why I have it all wrong.
You've proved nothing but who'll be the next contestant on the Price is Right.
I don't require an audience, but if I am so far off the mark, why are you the only one to say so? There are far more knowledgeable people here that could easily rip me a new one if incorrect with detailed fact or even theory for that matter. Why haven't they? Where is your proof?
Heck I'll climb out on a limb here, I make many comments in support of and against this or that theory, use of, how to, et al. and am rarely corrected. Do I make mistakes? Heck ya, nobody "knows it all" and I'm here to learn what I may have missed, misconstrued in my mind etc and do it without hesitation. If wrong I truly want to know. But that means I want facts, the proof of and why I have it all wrong.
You've proved nothing but who'll be the next contestant on the Price is Right.