I knew this is an open ended question ....besides the obvious or more watts....but I have only used smaller wattage amplifiers 50wpc or less
What does more power actually give you in the sound department ? I think i understand the technical but hooking up a 1kw amplifier sound like?
example more watts gives the music more dynamic character? more dynamic range? etc.. please if you would I would like to know from actual comparisons say from 25 watts to 1000watts etc..
Thank you for your time and responses
Lawrence
What does more power actually give you in the sound department ? I think i understand the technical but hooking up a 1kw amplifier sound like?
example more watts gives the music more dynamic character? more dynamic range? etc.. please if you would I would like to know from actual comparisons say from 25 watts to 1000watts etc..
Thank you for your time and responses
Lawrence
You've already more or less “got it”, Skater. But there are a couple of not-so-obvious shortcomings as well from higher-powered systems.
The Good
1. You can drive 'tighter' speakers that fairly often offer lower volume for a fixed amount of driving power. It can be useful.
2. You can play stuff louder - which like Ketje sez, can drive neighbors to irritation. But it can impress friends.
2a. You can also play hugely dynamic recordings louder. This means you can hear the quiet-stuff better. It also comes though at a cost to one's peace-with-the-neighbors.
3. The amplified sound might (or might not) be cleaner, due to nominally using it in a more reduced (lower) output range (compared to its full potential) most of the time.
4. You might realize a need to “hook up a bunch of speakers” someday - for a party, or whatever. The larger amplifier typically handles this MUCH more gracefully than a smaller one.
The Bad
10. Depending on type of amp, you could end up having quite a bit more power draw. This corresponds to sloughed off heat. In Norway, that's a plus. In Florida, a minus.
11. Many larger amps are "push pull" to varying degree. Its the only way to tame [10] in the linear amplifier world. When this is so, the narrow "low output" region can oft-times suffer from appreciable distortion non-linearities at unpredictable sound output levels.
THIS is more of a “fear” than anything else. Quite a few amplifiers - heck, most of them - are quite smooth even at their lower output ranges. But … just saying.
12. Really big amplifiers (1000+ watt ones) will likely have fans and other noisemakers, especially if they're repatriated from a friend's or Craig's List ex-DJ system. You really don't want fans if you can avoid them.
13. NEW "really big" amplifiers - especially the suspiciously fanless ones - are now almost always “digital”. Which appeals word-wise to a lot of people. Its digital! It must be good, right? No, wait … right?
Why did I use suspiciously? Well because the digital amplification process is so darn efficient that many of the newest amplifiers have next-to-no heat to slough off at all. But the thing is, while they're absolute animals (good way) at moving huge amounts of air thru your speakers and bothering the neighbors, they also suffer at the low end. Sometimes even quite a bit more than older, heavy, linear push-pull amplifiers.
Its really simple to say why: resolution. This is an exaggeration, but check this out:
9 + 11% = 10
10 + 10% = 11
11 + 9% = 12
12 + 8.3% = 13
13 + 7.7% = 14
…
100 + 1% = 101
101 + 1% = 102 …
…
1000 + 0.1% = 1001
1001 + 0.1% = 1002
1002 + 0.1% = 1003
And so on. I point that out because at the low end (close to zero), the changes between the numbers are rather LARGE percentages of each other. At the higher end (in the thousands, in this example), the differences are quite small. 0.1% here.
In the DIGITAL world, with few exceptions, all digital values are in terms of whole numbers (1, 2, 3 … 10, 11, 12 … 1000, 1001, 1002 …). If the quiet sounds (with volume turned down to something reasonable) are close to zero, there is going to be a lot of digital inaccuracy, which will add discernible noise to what you hear.
Remember: on a BIG PA/DJ system, it is almost never played at enjoyable private listening levels. It is a DJ system, meant for a party, to output enough power to make the speakers smell like burned plastic. Jumpin' for Joy, baby.
The neutral
100. Provided you can find a quality amplifier that is larger than a smaller one, or you build one just so, you can expect linearly scaled performance at almost all listening levels.
101. And [100] also should deliver 'reasonable power consumption'. So you're not heating up Florida.
102. And if you become part of the DIY community, perhaps you'll be encouraged to build one of the many, many, many designs here. Slinging solder and learning to read diagrams … is a lifelong disease. Fun one, but still…
___
Just saying,
GoatGuy
The Good
1. You can drive 'tighter' speakers that fairly often offer lower volume for a fixed amount of driving power. It can be useful.
2. You can play stuff louder - which like Ketje sez, can drive neighbors to irritation. But it can impress friends.
2a. You can also play hugely dynamic recordings louder. This means you can hear the quiet-stuff better. It also comes though at a cost to one's peace-with-the-neighbors.
3. The amplified sound might (or might not) be cleaner, due to nominally using it in a more reduced (lower) output range (compared to its full potential) most of the time.
4. You might realize a need to “hook up a bunch of speakers” someday - for a party, or whatever. The larger amplifier typically handles this MUCH more gracefully than a smaller one.
The Bad
10. Depending on type of amp, you could end up having quite a bit more power draw. This corresponds to sloughed off heat. In Norway, that's a plus. In Florida, a minus.
11. Many larger amps are "push pull" to varying degree. Its the only way to tame [10] in the linear amplifier world. When this is so, the narrow "low output" region can oft-times suffer from appreciable distortion non-linearities at unpredictable sound output levels.
THIS is more of a “fear” than anything else. Quite a few amplifiers - heck, most of them - are quite smooth even at their lower output ranges. But … just saying.
12. Really big amplifiers (1000+ watt ones) will likely have fans and other noisemakers, especially if they're repatriated from a friend's or Craig's List ex-DJ system. You really don't want fans if you can avoid them.
13. NEW "really big" amplifiers - especially the suspiciously fanless ones - are now almost always “digital”. Which appeals word-wise to a lot of people. Its digital! It must be good, right? No, wait … right?
Why did I use suspiciously? Well because the digital amplification process is so darn efficient that many of the newest amplifiers have next-to-no heat to slough off at all. But the thing is, while they're absolute animals (good way) at moving huge amounts of air thru your speakers and bothering the neighbors, they also suffer at the low end. Sometimes even quite a bit more than older, heavy, linear push-pull amplifiers.
Its really simple to say why: resolution. This is an exaggeration, but check this out:
9 + 11% = 10
10 + 10% = 11
11 + 9% = 12
12 + 8.3% = 13
13 + 7.7% = 14
…
100 + 1% = 101
101 + 1% = 102 …
…
1000 + 0.1% = 1001
1001 + 0.1% = 1002
1002 + 0.1% = 1003
And so on. I point that out because at the low end (close to zero), the changes between the numbers are rather LARGE percentages of each other. At the higher end (in the thousands, in this example), the differences are quite small. 0.1% here.
In the DIGITAL world, with few exceptions, all digital values are in terms of whole numbers (1, 2, 3 … 10, 11, 12 … 1000, 1001, 1002 …). If the quiet sounds (with volume turned down to something reasonable) are close to zero, there is going to be a lot of digital inaccuracy, which will add discernible noise to what you hear.
Remember: on a BIG PA/DJ system, it is almost never played at enjoyable private listening levels. It is a DJ system, meant for a party, to output enough power to make the speakers smell like burned plastic. Jumpin' for Joy, baby.
The neutral
100. Provided you can find a quality amplifier that is larger than a smaller one, or you build one just so, you can expect linearly scaled performance at almost all listening levels.
101. And [100] also should deliver 'reasonable power consumption'. So you're not heating up Florida.
102. And if you become part of the DIY community, perhaps you'll be encouraged to build one of the many, many, many designs here. Slinging solder and learning to read diagrams … is a lifelong disease. Fun one, but still…
___
Just saying,
GoatGuy
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
what Goatguy said plus
higher power amps are usually better built and if operated at 'normal power' they will not be stressed and hence likely to be more reliable (unless they are very complicated - more parts is less reliable).
for home stereo, you can do quite well enough with 50W per channel unless you have difficult speakers.
higher power amps are usually better built and if operated at 'normal power' they will not be stressed and hence likely to be more reliable (unless they are very complicated - more parts is less reliable).
for home stereo, you can do quite well enough with 50W per channel unless you have difficult speakers.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Hi Guys
There has to be a qualification about the quality of the amplifiers compared. Quite often, within a manufacturer's line the low-power stuff will be built to a tight budget and have performance to match, where their top-end unit has good performance. Not every company does this.
Assuming you have top performing amplifiers of various power ratings, then the differences come down to usable dynamic range.
Do you care to protect your hearing? Do you listen at sane SPL?
If you answered 'yes' to the above, then there is only so much SPL you need and we have to assume that the speakers you have are dynamically linear over this range that YOU use.
At this point, if all of the amplifiers can provide power to produce this dynamic range then theoretically there will be no quality difference between the model that is rated for just 1W above that range or the one with an extra 1kW. We say "theoretically" because the fact is, our hearing is sensitive to incredibly small bits of distortion. So, if all of the amps are unmeasurable using an AP system or similar - and many amps are these days; I've built many - we still do not know how they compare to each other quantitatively.
Practical issues have been mentioned above: power consumption at idle for hifi super-amps can be 2-300W per channel - no fans, no switching, all linear techniques and big heat sinks. The weight is an issue if you have to move them. Cost is an issue for certain - the very best of these super-amps are NOT the most expensive.
In my system, 90dB is as loud as my speakers go linearly but there is no way I can listen to sound that loud. The speakers are efficient so I don't need more than 100mW for the levels I listen at. To accommodate peaks having just a couple of watts is fine and my measurements show me that even a 1W would never clip EVER in this system. So, my own amp is a "super" amp for this system only with a whopping 10W per channel but at <10ppb THD at 20kHz and full output, and at all powers below that - simulated. Measured it is below the resolution of my test gear, so I can't confirm if it is <10ppb or not.
I've had higher power amps running my speakers but those had much higher THD. In their defence, they were mass-produced "serviceable" equipment but not really hifi.
being able to disturb people for kilometres around has no interest to me and I wish those that do such things would cease that activity...
Have fun
There has to be a qualification about the quality of the amplifiers compared. Quite often, within a manufacturer's line the low-power stuff will be built to a tight budget and have performance to match, where their top-end unit has good performance. Not every company does this.
Assuming you have top performing amplifiers of various power ratings, then the differences come down to usable dynamic range.
Do you care to protect your hearing? Do you listen at sane SPL?
If you answered 'yes' to the above, then there is only so much SPL you need and we have to assume that the speakers you have are dynamically linear over this range that YOU use.
At this point, if all of the amplifiers can provide power to produce this dynamic range then theoretically there will be no quality difference between the model that is rated for just 1W above that range or the one with an extra 1kW. We say "theoretically" because the fact is, our hearing is sensitive to incredibly small bits of distortion. So, if all of the amps are unmeasurable using an AP system or similar - and many amps are these days; I've built many - we still do not know how they compare to each other quantitatively.
Practical issues have been mentioned above: power consumption at idle for hifi super-amps can be 2-300W per channel - no fans, no switching, all linear techniques and big heat sinks. The weight is an issue if you have to move them. Cost is an issue for certain - the very best of these super-amps are NOT the most expensive.
In my system, 90dB is as loud as my speakers go linearly but there is no way I can listen to sound that loud. The speakers are efficient so I don't need more than 100mW for the levels I listen at. To accommodate peaks having just a couple of watts is fine and my measurements show me that even a 1W would never clip EVER in this system. So, my own amp is a "super" amp for this system only with a whopping 10W per channel but at <10ppb THD at 20kHz and full output, and at all powers below that - simulated. Measured it is below the resolution of my test gear, so I can't confirm if it is <10ppb or not.
I've had higher power amps running my speakers but those had much higher THD. In their defence, they were mass-produced "serviceable" equipment but not really hifi.
being able to disturb people for kilometres around has no interest to me and I wish those that do such things would cease that activity...
Have fun
And then someone from five miles away on the other side of the lake comes over to say that your ski show is spooking her horses.
what i have heard was a pair mac's new 2000 watt mono blocks playing on a pair of 2 way floorstanders. show was not to see how loud they could push these 100 watt 2 ways just to show how good they could be.
the shock was when dealer turned down so cell phone could be used.
sound was still deep as in depth to the sound stage.something hit me but i was not sure .
went on to hear a hegal 1000watt powering a pair of totem's this too was shocking.
not sure if this is a real effect or just me
but seems big power way down low volume still has open sounstage were lower power seems to have trouble for reason i don't know.
on that note i am building a pair of slewmonster mono too the most power i can get close to 500 watts. time will tell
Statement 11, & this statement Why did I use suspiciously? Well because the digital amplification process is so darn efficient that many of the newest amplifiers have next-to-no heat to slough off at all. But the thing is, while they're absolute animals (good way) at moving huge amounts of air thru your speakers and bothering the neighbors, they also suffer at the low end. Sometimes even quite a bit more than older, heavy, linear push-pull amplifiers.
I myself am beginning to think that. There IS a difference between Dig & Analog. An example of this is my Realistic Sta-2080. A very clean type of sta-2100. Rated at 80wpc at 1w
at 8ohms. This thing will hit 108wpc that I've measured on the one I've keep. I liked Realistic equipment the first time I heard
them. My older but cleaner CD's ran great, (Like my cassettes & R to R Sounded great But all the little DIY projects I have built. ( The DIY kit's I have built have unbelievable low distortion WHICH IS GREAT BUT It changed the sound to a
lot of clairty but no how do you say Soul or Presence. Liked it tamed either the amp. ( which I believe, or the speakers. Hard to figure but the 2080 never heated up W/digital.
For Class-A and Class_A/B designs, most of the lowest noise transistors, and lowest distortion circuit topologies can only be used on "modest" power amplifiers - typically ~100W with issues over 200W. Using one of these "modest" power amps directly connected to each speaker will produce better sound than using one "super" power amp driving passive crossovers across all speakers.
Hi Guys
jplesset: Class-D is NOT linear by definition. It is a switching amp, so it has a variable output impedance and non-optimal matching even into a single nominal load impedance. It is possibly okay for a sub woofer but not full-band high-fidelity audio - even with all the current refinements and improvements in devices since Sinclair built them in the 1960s and Sony did it big time in the 1980s.
Linesource: There is no power limit imposed on different classes of operation. If you can afford the electricity, you can have 1kW+ class-A. You can use whatever devices you consider to be "best". Obviously, the voltage ratings of say a BC550C require that it be cascoded in environments >40V, but that is standard issues to deal with.
GKF: Your experience of the high-watt amp vs the low-watt amp is typical for what is offered by the big manufacturers, as noted previously. There is no technical reason why a low-watt amp has to be inferior in performance to a high-wattage unit. You can use all the same techniques to improve linearity and reduce output stage distortion. One example is that you can parallel the output stage devicesto reduce THD even though you do not need the extra devices for low the rated power output.
It is likely that the low-watt amps you refer to have quite high cross-over distortion, and likely high THD overall.
Have fun
jplesset: Class-D is NOT linear by definition. It is a switching amp, so it has a variable output impedance and non-optimal matching even into a single nominal load impedance. It is possibly okay for a sub woofer but not full-band high-fidelity audio - even with all the current refinements and improvements in devices since Sinclair built them in the 1960s and Sony did it big time in the 1980s.
Linesource: There is no power limit imposed on different classes of operation. If you can afford the electricity, you can have 1kW+ class-A. You can use whatever devices you consider to be "best". Obviously, the voltage ratings of say a BC550C require that it be cascoded in environments >40V, but that is standard issues to deal with.
GKF: Your experience of the high-watt amp vs the low-watt amp is typical for what is offered by the big manufacturers, as noted previously. There is no technical reason why a low-watt amp has to be inferior in performance to a high-wattage unit. You can use all the same techniques to improve linearity and reduce output stage distortion. One example is that you can parallel the output stage devicesto reduce THD even though you do not need the extra devices for low the rated power output.
It is likely that the low-watt amps you refer to have quite high cross-over distortion, and likely high THD overall.
Have fun
Last edited:
Goatguy:
No, no, no. NO!!!
Class D amplifiers are NOT digital amplifiers, there are no bits, not at low level, not at high level. (There are a few rare "digital" amplifiers around, but the digital has nothing to do with class D). But the vast majority of class D amps, including the very big powered ones are as analog as it gets. In fact you will likely find class d amps to be cleaner at low level than the class AB amps. Class AB will have one or two swithching points that can cause issues such as gain halving or doubling at low signal levels, while class D amps are always switching, high level, low level, even no signal - nothing special happens at low level, unlike with class AB.
Not to say class D is perfect, but the "digital" tag doesn't apply. Digital involves integer number based quantized levels and a clocked data rate.
The switching points or widths in class D don't have to occur at any quanta, the possible times are entirely continuous. Class D varies timing to develop voltage levels, rather than varying currents as do Class A or B or AB (and semis generally are pretty accurate with timing and only ok with current control accuracies!).
And again, I'm not claiming superiority for either, but it truly bugs me when I hear the "digital" argument trotted out against class D!
No, no, no. NO!!!
Class D amplifiers are NOT digital amplifiers, there are no bits, not at low level, not at high level. (There are a few rare "digital" amplifiers around, but the digital has nothing to do with class D). But the vast majority of class D amps, including the very big powered ones are as analog as it gets. In fact you will likely find class d amps to be cleaner at low level than the class AB amps. Class AB will have one or two swithching points that can cause issues such as gain halving or doubling at low signal levels, while class D amps are always switching, high level, low level, even no signal - nothing special happens at low level, unlike with class AB.
Not to say class D is perfect, but the "digital" tag doesn't apply. Digital involves integer number based quantized levels and a clocked data rate.
The switching points or widths in class D don't have to occur at any quanta, the possible times are entirely continuous. Class D varies timing to develop voltage levels, rather than varying currents as do Class A or B or AB (and semis generally are pretty accurate with timing and only ok with current control accuracies!).
And again, I'm not claiming superiority for either, but it truly bugs me when I hear the "digital" argument trotted out against class D!
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.