Watts what exactly is the sound quality difference? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Watts what exactly is the sound quality difference?



hershon
04-08-2004, 10:36 PM
Can somebody please try to explain to me in non technical human language what is the difference in sound quality in regards to wattage. Assume hypothetically, I'm playing the Who on a classic rock remastered CD on the same DVD player at the same listening volume on a 200 watts receiver speaker system and a 600 watts receiver speaker system in a 20 foot (average sized) living room. For clarification, the listening volume is the same (say it was set on 5 for the 200 watt system and 2 on the 600 watt system). What will I actually hear to my ear differently-anything or will the difference in sound quality be negligible. Will the drums, vocals, guitar, or bass sound different. Will there be any more seperation, clarity, richness or warmth in the sound. I am not interested in what the difference would be hearing classical music or how somewthing is numerically different. I just want to know what the difference will be in what I'm actually hearing. Appreciate any response. Why this doesn't seem to be spelled out on any web page is beyond me.

Geoffcin
04-09-2004, 03:47 AM
Can somebody please try to explain to me in non technical human language what is the difference in sound quality in regards to wattage. Assume hypothetically, I'm playing the Who on a classic rock remastered CD on the same DVD player at the same listening volume on a 200 watts receiver speaker system and a 600 watts receiver speaker system in a 20 foot (average sized) living room. For clarification, the listening volume is the same (say it was set on 5 for the 200 watt system and 2 on the 600 watt system). What will I actually hear to my ear differently-anything or will the difference in sound quality be negligible. Will the drums, vocals, guitar, or bass sound different. Will there be any more seperation, clarity, richness or warmth in the sound. I am not interested in what the difference would be hearing classical music or how somewthing is numerically different. I just want to know what the difference will be in what I'm actually hearing. Appreciate any response. Why this doesn't seem to be spelled out on any web page is beyond me.


The reason it's not spelled out is because it means nothing. Watts do not equate into sound quality, or even loudness for that matter.

kexodusc
04-09-2004, 05:05 AM
The reason it's not spelled out is because it means nothing. Watts do not equate into sound quality, or even loudness for that matter.

What Geoffcin says is correct. I have a 70 watt per channel Adcom amplifier that sounds better at moderate to higher volumes than my 85 watt per channel home theater receiver.. And it goes louder! Figure that out!!!

There are some advantages to having more power. Bass frequencies are generally power hungry, musical spikes have more headroom, and there can be less distortion at louder volumes (but not necessarily). If an amp is well built and well designed though, watts won't necessarily make anything sound better.

As far as sound quality goes, well, some of the nicest sounding amps out there have less than 20 watts per channel, some less than 10 wpc even!!! And their plenty loud enough!

You're asking the right questions!

jackz4000
04-09-2004, 05:38 AM
the quality of the amp section will probably make more of a difference than the watts. There are different ways of measuring and marketing a watt. So watt measurement should be equal, ie: 100 rms watts per channel @ 8 ohms all channels driven, 20-20,000 w/ 0.05% THD. Of course source, cables, room acoustics, speakers will also make a difference. Bass usually needs more power than the mid's. Think quality, before watts. Watts can be misleading.

Geoffcin
04-09-2004, 06:37 AM
What Geoffcin says is correct. I have a 70 watt per channel Adcom amplifier that sounds better at moderate to higher volumes than my 85 watt per channel home theater receiver.. And it goes louder! Figure that out!!!

There are some advantages to having more power. Bass frequencies are generally power hungry, musical spikes have more headroom, and there can be less distortion at louder volumes (but not necessarily). If an amp is well built and well designed though, watts won't necessarily make anything sound better.

As far as sound quality goes, well, some of the nicest sounding amps out there have less than 20 watts per channel, some less than 10 wpc even!!! And their plenty loud enough!

You're asking the right questions!

While I enjoy the sound of a low powered SET amp, they do have some caviates about using them, and with which speakers. On the other hand, if it's well made, even a 50 watt SS amp can change your idea about how much power you need to drive your speakers. With that being said, I have heard rumors about how good your speakers can sound when you hook them up to amps like the Musical Fidelity KW series. Of course no many of us have 100k to spend on amps, but you can see where I'm getting at; All things being equal MORE power is better!

What we really should be talking about is; What makes an amp "good" regardless of power, and where does the law of diminshing returns take hold.

kexodusc
04-09-2004, 06:58 AM
Good point Geoffcin...I wasn't implying that less power is better, certainly not the case, I was trying suggest that the difference between a good 50 watt amp, and a good 100 watt amp isn't necessarily as much as you'd think...definitely NOT double the sound quality. Not even double the volume.

In fact, I'd probably take a 40 watt Arcam integrated amplifier over a 125 watt Marantz or Yamaha stereo receiver anyday.

Geoffcin
04-09-2004, 07:17 AM
Good point Geoffcin...I wasn't implying that less power is better, certainly not the case, I was trying suggest that the difference between a good 50 watt amp, and a good 100 watt amp isn't necessarily as much as you'd think...definitely NOT double the sound quality. Not even double the volume.

In fact, I'd probably take a 40 watt Arcam integrated amplifier over a 125 watt Marantz or Yamaha stereo receiver anyday.

Yes, it's almost scary to compare a reciever with an intergrated, or seperate amp, of the same or even LOWER power. It leads you to think that the specs are useless to discribe sound quality, or even POWER?! Which in my view they are. This is at the heart of the posted question, and there's no easy answer for him.

Smokey
04-09-2004, 05:31 PM
At typical average listening levels, speaker is probably demanding between 1-5 watts of RMS power (depending on the sensitivity of speakers). So even 10 watt amplifier seem to get as loud as 100 watt amplifier.

What set these two amplifiers apart is not how loud can they get, but rather how can they deliver momentary musics "peak" passages (that can reach up to 200 watt) at low distortion levels (i.e, THD%, S/N). So the more [reserve*] power your amplifier have, then it is better equipped to handle music power bursts.

*Reserve power is sometimes refer to as Dynamic Headroom of amplifier. So an amplifier with DH of 3 dB can [momentary] deliver twice its continuos [RMS] power.

hershon
04-09-2004, 08:52 PM
I appreciate most of the responses here but most of them such as yours are not in plain simple English, nothing personal. What exactly will I hear in my ears differently if I'm playing a CD by a classic rock band like the who that feature guitar, bass, drums, lead vocals & backing vocals? Will there be more warmth, more clarity in the sound, more seperation, etc. - what exactly will I hear differently on a 600 watt system then a 200 watts system. Terms like peak passage low distortion level,lower db's, don't mean anything to me. I'm talking about hearing human differences not mathmatical technical differences.

Again I'm playing stuff at a loud but not too loud comfortable level in a normal size living room in an apartment. I don't hear any distortion at the level I play stuff at my 200 watts system. I would be playing the volume at the same loudness if I had a 600 watts system.

Thanks, I'm not trying to be mean or sarcastic as I do appreciate feedback but most of what I'm getting is not helpful as its not in plain simple English.

mtrycraft
04-09-2004, 09:57 PM
What Geoffcin says is correct. I have a 70 watt per channel Adcom amplifier that sounds better at moderate to higher volumes than my 85 watt per channel home theater receiver.. And it goes louder! Figure that out!!!

!


I doubt you will like th eanswer:)

vivisimonvi
04-09-2004, 09:59 PM
What exactly will I hear in my ears differently if I'm playing a CD by a classic rock band like the who that feature guitar, bass, drums, lead vocals & backing vocals? Will there be more warmth, more clarity in the sound, more seperation, etc. - what exactly will I hear differently on a 600 watt system then a 200 watts system. Terms like peak passage low distortion level,lower db's, don't mean anything to me. I'm talking about hearing human differences not mathmatical technical differences.

Sometimes technical explanations are necessary, when many people's perception of hearing are quite different from one another (what sounds one way to someone sounds completely different to another)... I'll admit I'm having trouble of defining something in "human" terms without the technical ones.

From your point of view, I will say there's too much technicality involved trying to explain how a 600 watt system sounds different to a 200 watt one, you MUST consider the other factors plain and simple... Perhaps you could visit an audio dealer and listen for yourself. You'll get REAL results, not what someone might tell you.

Although, my ears do LOVE the sound of tubes if that helps any :) (fuller, warmer, and sound better with bass [bass compression is it? ahh, too technical])... It could be a mental thing, how your mind perceives the way you hear things perhaps, and have nothing to do with the equipment whatsoever!! Too psychological for me...

mtrycraft
04-09-2004, 10:02 PM
Can somebody please try to explain to me in non technical human language what is the difference in sound quality in regards to wattage. Assume hypothetically, I'm playing the Who on a classic rock remastered CD on the same DVD player at the same listening volume on a 200 watts receiver speaker system and a 600 watts receiver speaker system in a 20 foot (average sized) living room. For clarification, the listening volume is the same (say it was set on 5 for the 200 watt system and 2 on the 600 watt system). What will I actually hear to my ear differently-anything or will the difference in sound quality be negligible. Will the drums, vocals, guitar, or bass sound different. Will there be any more seperation, clarity, richness or warmth in the sound. I am not interested in what the difference would be hearing classical music or how somewthing is numerically different. I just want to know what the difference will be in what I'm actually hearing. Appreciate any response. Why this doesn't seem to be spelled out on any web page is beyond me.


Watts are just power rated into a certain load at certain THD, FR band, etc.
Modern, well designed components are transparent.
Different speakers will need different amount of power to drive them to the desired loudness levels.
Volume control position will tell you nothing.

hershon
04-09-2004, 11:20 PM
Appreciate you making the attempt to anser this. If watts apparently is not going to make the difference in hearing the sound a classic CD on a home movie system, can somebody tell me what is? Any systems you'd recommend for under $600 with or without a DVD player/receiver? If so what will be the difference between what I'm hearing in this system then on my Koss C-220 200 watts system? Is the moral of this thread going to be, do not buy a system online or on EBAY without actually listening to it first? Thanks

kexodusc
04-10-2004, 11:10 AM
I doubt you will like th eanswer:)

Don't worry about hurting my feelings...actually if you've got the answer , I'd love to hear it. Thanks.

mtrycraft
04-10-2004, 02:21 PM
Appreciate you making the attempt to anser this. If watts apparently is not going to make the difference in hearing the sound a classic CD on a home movie system, can somebody tell me what is? Any systems you'd recommend for under $600 with or without a DVD player/receiver? If so what will be the difference between what I'm hearing in this system then on my Koss C-220 200 watts system? Is the moral of this thread going to be, do not buy a system online or on EBAY without actually listening to it first? Thanks


I am not sure if I can answere all your concerns.
Speakers, room acoustics and the recording itself it the most critical part of playback. If a speaker is sensitive, that is it playes loud with 1 watts of power as measured by standard protocol, you will need less power. If it is not sensitive, you will need much more. To double the perceived loudenss you need 10 times the power, a logarithmic scale.

What setup do you have now? What is it you dislike about it? If it is the speakers that you dislike, you need to actually listen to them, more the merrier:)

But remember, that listening room will sound different from yours at home. Your acoustic memory to remember one listeing room to another is very poor and unreliable. You may want to try to take one home that you are serious about.

mtrycraft
04-10-2004, 02:26 PM
Don't worry about hurting my feelings...actually if you've got the answer , I'd love to hear it. Thanks.

OK :)

I have a 70 watt per channel Adcom amplifier that sounds better at moderate to higher volumes than my 85 watt per channel home theater receiver..

Unless you did a controlled comparison of these two amps, your perception is unreliable at best.


And it goes louder! Figure that out!!!

Same.

There are some advantages to having more power. Bass frequencies are generally power hungry, musical spikes have more headroom, and there can be less distortion at louder volumes (but not necessarily). If an amp is well built and well designed though, watts won't necessarily make anything sound better.

Your last sentence is correct:)
You need a sub:)

As far as sound quality goes, well, some of the nicest sounding amps out there have less than 20 watts per channel, some less than 10 wpc even!!! And their plenty loud enough!

All relative to what you consider nice and what is loud enough. But that also depends on the speaker sensitivity:)

hershon
04-10-2004, 07:23 PM
My immediate concern on my Koss C-220 (200 watts home theater) is that about 80% of the reviews on Amazon are negative and they say the sound is tinny and the bass is subpar. It's Ok to me in that the DVD's sound OK in surround sound and their is good seperation and stereo sound when I play classic rock CD's, however, it doesn't sound as warm as the CD's I play in my bedroom on a simple two satellite 6 watts each , 1 22 watt subwoofer speaker system (Altec Lansing ACS- these are computer speakers but they sound better than any speakers I've ever had and use them as speakers for my regular stereo system) attached to a Technics SL-PD687 CD player (the subwoofer controls the volume and you don't need to EQ it). These speakers use to be $150 now you can get them on EBAY for $40 and if nothing else they're the best computer speakers I've ever heard, so good I use them as my main stereo speakers as well.

Anyway, I'm trying to see if its worth my while to upgrade my home theater system to something listing for $600 or less that will make my regular CD's sound even better than the stereo unit I have in my bedroom that's 44 watts total. Albeit I was in Best Buy and when I put on a Who CD on a Yamaha 600 watts system, the sound was not significantly better than my Koss C-220 200 watts system, albeit the room accoustics/ambience were different.

Any comments, recommendation would be appreciated as I'm always looking to improve myself if I can afford it.



I am not sure if I can answere all your concerns.
Speakers, room acoustics and the recording itself it the most critical part of playback. If a speaker is sensitive, that is it playes loud with 1 watts of power as measured by standard protocol, you will need less power. If it is not sensitive, you will need much more. To double the perceived loudenss you need 10 times the power, a logarithmic scale.

What setup do you have now? What is it you dislike about it? If it is the speakers that you dislike, you need to actually listen to them, more the merrier:)

But remember, that listening room will sound different from yours at home. Your acoustic memory to remember one listeing room to another is very poor and unreliable. You may want to try to take one home that you are serious about.

mtrycraft
04-10-2004, 08:30 PM
My immediate concern on my Koss C-220 (200 watts home theater) is that about 80% of the reviews on Amazon are negative and they say the sound is tinny and the bass is subpar. It's Ok to me in that the DVD's sound OK in surround sound and their is good seperation and stereo sound when I play classic rock CD's, however, it doesn't sound as warm as the CD's I play in my bedroom on a simple two satellite 6 watts each , 1 22 watt subwoofer speaker system (Altec Lansing ACS- these are computer speakers but they sound better than any speakers I've ever had and use them as speakers for my regular stereo system) attached to a Technics SL-PD687 CD player (the subwoofer controls the volume and you don't need to EQ it). These speakers use to be $150 now you can get them on EBAY for $40 and if nothing else they're the best computer speakers I've ever heard, so good I use them as my main stereo speakers as well.

Anyway, I'm trying to see if its worth my while to upgrade my home theater system to something listing for $600 or less that will make my regular CD's sound even better than the stereo unit I have in my bedroom that's 44 watts total. Albeit I was in Best Buy and when I put on a Who CD on a Yamaha 600 watts system, the sound was not significantly better than my Koss C-220 200 watts system, albeit the room accoustics/ambience were different.

Any comments, recommendation would be appreciated as I'm always looking to improve myself if I can afford it.


I wouldn't expect a difference in amps from what you have, that C220, and in store stuff.
You are trying to compare a 6 watt amp to the C220, on computer speakers? It is that 6 watt amp and the speaker combination.
I would not sell that C220 as it can be useful. Better speakers?

jackz4000
04-10-2004, 08:32 PM
I sure don't mean to be a snotty audio kinda guy, 'cuz I'm not. I got no real idea of what you are lookin' for...exactly. Watts? Can't give you any raves about the Koss HT box set-up or about your Altec computer sound. They are probably..."cute". But, not much more than that. Moon and Townsend would have never listened to their tracks on that stuff.

You need some audio listening experience which you are not really gonna get---with what you got. Here m'boy we are talking HIGH FIDELITY and I got a feeling you ain't never really HEARD it. You will know it the second you hear it...it will knock your socks off. Probably it ain't at the big box stores, but it is out there.

Watts? There are watts and then there are watts. So many variables for the ear. If your Koss was upgraded to 600 watts, there would probably not be a huge difference. You could, for example compare audibly the 200 watts on your Koss HT to....say 200 watts from a Krell or a Levinson amp. A Koss HT watt and a Levinson watt are going to be quite different. One would infer that because of the very different and audible sound. Because we are talking QUALITY. They will definitely sound much different---like from a different planet. Speakers? They are going to make a big difference too.

Forget all about your watts questions....its not really answerable because of variables. Instead, start learning about all the really great equipment out there--- which ain't at Best Buy and Circuit City. Go out and find some audio stores near you or 200 miles away and go and listen. If you are looking for great sound, then you have alot to learn and ain't nothing wrong with learning new things. Tons of experienced and savy guys on this board. Takes a little time. First thing you gotta do---is listen to some high end gear and feel the music. Think high fidelity first and watts...second. Watts alone, are for the ignorant. Like old PT Barnum said, " For the suckers." Either start to learn or be a comfy potato with you box set. Best thing---go out and listen to some great equipment by manufacturers you may never have heard of. Feel the music. Cheerio.

hershon
04-10-2004, 10:10 PM
Appreciate your comments but I don't have the time or patience to make 200 mile journeys, etc. To save some time, and I'm not being sarcastic here, are their any home theater or stereo setups listing under $600 that you would recommend so I could then "journey" to some local stores and check out their sound to see if I notice a difference and want to buy. If you say, that there is nothing in that price range you'd recommend, fine, I'm not going to spend $600 or over no matter what the improvement, its not worth it to me. But anyway, any recommendations would be welcome.

N. Abstentia
04-11-2004, 03:56 AM
Please don't take offense to these comments, but this is how it is:

1) If you don't have the time and patience to do some intense listening tests, then you're not dedicated enough to hear a difference in a high quality setup and a crappy setup. As you said (and I quote) "It's not worth it to me." So don't worry about it.

2) If you ARE looking for the best sound quality, $600 won't do it. Lots of folks here have more than that invested just in cables!

3) To answer your question in plain English, watts has NOTHING to do with sound quality. Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

Keep in mind that power ratings (watts) on equipment found at Walmart/BestBuy/CircuitCity are very misleading which is why I can take a good 50 watt amp bought from real store and blow a 600 watt amp from Walmart/Bestbuy/CircuitCity off the planet.

gonefishin
04-11-2004, 06:08 AM
Appreciate your comments but I don't have the time or patience to make 200 mile journeys, etc. To save some time, and I'm not being sarcastic here, are their any home theater or stereo setups listing under $600 that you would recommend so I could then "journey" to some local stores and check out their sound to see if I notice a difference and want to buy. If you say, that there is nothing in that price range you'd recommend, fine, I'm not going to spend $600 or over no matter what the improvement, its not worth it to me. But anyway, any recommendations would be welcome.



I'm sure you'll get varying answers on this...but it really seems like a good way to get "into" this hobby. Buy a lower budget system so you can start enjoy music today, then...as time and money permits...explore what more expensive systems may sound like. If you like it...you may decide to get into this hobby a little more. But in the mean time...you spend a relatively low amount of money for an audio system. Great idea!

Sounds like this approach may suit you well.


What system should you get?

For $600.00 investment in an audio system...and after reading the approach you would like to have.


I would go to a couple stores in your area. If this is BestBuy, Circuit City, Tweeter and one mo and pop audio store...that would be great.

I would only go with two channel right now...to get the maximum out of your $600.00.

If you can, use a CD or DVD player you already own...this will allow you to get the maximum out of your $600.00

Do you have any current speaker wire or interconnects? If so, what awg (wire gauge) are they? If they're sufficient, use what you have...or buy some lower priced stuff for your new system. This will allow you to get the maximum out of you $600.00.

Now, go to the stores above and pick out an amp/speaker combo that you think sounds good. That's it! Don't worry about what others (me included) think you should or shouldn't buy. Get yourself a speaker/amp combo that you like. If it has bloated bass...who gives a hoot! If it's got a recessed midrange...who gives a hoot! Get a system that has the sound you like, and start enjoy your music and your system. As time progresses you can then decide if this hobby is for you. Then you can drive to different places listening to different systems...paying attention to what your preferences are shaping into. But do this as a progression...and you'll know that you have never made a bad move. Because every system you've bought was purchased because you enjoy it, even if the last system you buy is the first.

Also know that there may be several path you can take to achieve the same goal. Take advice from all of these posts and find a path that suits you and your needs. I doubt any one of us will have a totally correct answer for you. So use the bits ya like from each ;)


most of all...have fun

Geoffcin
04-11-2004, 06:29 AM
Appreciate your comments but I don't have the time or patience to make 200 mile journeys, etc. To save some time, and I'm not being sarcastic here, are their any home theater or stereo setups listing under $600 that you would recommend so I could then "journey" to some local stores and check out their sound to see if I notice a difference and want to buy. If you say, that there is nothing in that price range you'd recommend, fine, I'm not going to spend $600 or over no matter what the improvement, its not worth it to me. But anyway, any recommendations would be welcome.

OK, I got you; You want to spend on the order of $600 and want to know if it's going to sound better than what you have now. The anser is YES, and I can reccomend soemthing for you. Your going to have to take my word on it, as your not going to be aboe to listen to it in a store. My reccomendation is the Cambridge Soundworks Movieworks 5.1. While I don't have the sattilite speakers in this setup, I do have a CSW 12s sub, and it cranks out bass. Here's a link;

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=1499&item=3090103749

If you like the sound of your computer speakers just wait till you here these!

hershon
04-11-2004, 10:57 AM
Thanks for the link which I went to. A few questions for you. I play my system in an average size living room in an apartment complex, therefore it is imperative that I do not have a "booming" bass that causes vibrations and annoys neighbors- personally I do not like the bass to be prominent and/or overbearing, just prefer it being subtle so I can hear bass guitar notes blending in with the rest of the sound. They say in the link that this is "room shaking bass". Won't this then by innapropriate for listening in an apartment especially for someone like me who does not want to be overpowered by bass? Also, in regards to speakers, if my receiver plays 220 watts or so, and other speakers are say 100 watts each speaker, won't those speakers be innappropriate for a 220 watt reciever?

N. Abstentia
04-11-2004, 12:02 PM
Read through this thread again...your receiver will in no way, now how ever produce 220 watts per channel of real power. It will be more like 20-30 watts, so a 100 watt speaker will be fine.

And that sales link saying 'room shaking bass' is like McDonalds saying "we use only the best ingredients." In other words...yeah right!

Smokey
04-11-2004, 12:54 PM
3) To answer your question in plain English, watts has NOTHING to do with sound quality. Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

Sorry, but that statement is not "politically" correct. If you don't have enough power to reproduced music peaks faithfully, then nothing else matter because distortion (mainly clipping) will be introduced into the system...which we can't get rid of.

Having ample power in a system is like having a good foundation for a house. You will need a solid foundation to build on, or the house will come crumbling down at the first sign of weather disaster a.k.a. music clipping :)

N. Abstentia
04-11-2004, 01:12 PM
Policitally correct or not, it's the correct answer.

What does 20 watts sound like?

Can't answer, can you? That's why I say "watts has nothing to do with sound quality".

Smokey
04-11-2004, 02:08 PM
Well, lets look at it this way....

Setup a 20 watt and an 100 watt system and then compare the sound quality of both. Initially at low volume level, both systems will sound the same. But as you get slightly louder, as [listening] time wavers on, you note a slight listening fatigue while listening to lower power system. And the fatigue is cause by [low power] amplifier clipping music passages that are reaching up to couple of hundred watts momentary.

Another example that will demonstrate clipping better would be with a car stereo system. If you turn up a volume on a low powered car stere (as I am sure all of us have done), one will note that as volume is increase, there will be more gargle distorted sound coming out of speakers. The gargle sound is caused by clipping due the fact the amplifier don't have enough juice to reproduced high power music peaks.

Here is a picture of wave form from two amplifiers:
<img src="http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~jcgl/Scots_Guide/audio/clipping/fig4.gif">

Although both amplifiers might have the same power ratings, but the right figure doesn't look anything like the left figure. So an amplifier that produce the right figure is labeled as high THD% (total harmonic distortion) amplifier (fatigue listening), while the amplifier that produces the left wave form is labeled as low THD amplifier albeit both amplifiers having the same power ratings.

So it is always recommended to buy highest power amplifier with the lowest THD% figure :)

Geoffcin
04-11-2004, 05:05 PM
Thanks for the link which I went to. A few questions for you. I play my system in an average size living room in an apartment complex, therefore it is imperative that I do not have a "booming" bass that causes vibrations and annoys neighbors- personally I do not like the bass to be prominent and/or overbearing, just prefer it being subtle so I can hear bass guitar notes blending in with the rest of the sound. They say in the link that this is "room shaking bass". Won't this then by innapropriate for listening in an apartment especially for someone like me who does not want to be overpowered by bass? Also, in regards to speakers, if my receiver plays 220 watts or so, and other speakers are say 100 watts each speaker, won't those speakers be innappropriate for a 220 watt reciever?


The answer is YES, you will have control over how much bass your sub puts out. For HT, the ability to "shake the room" is nessasary for the low frequancy effects to be rendered correctly. You do not have to set you sub to that lever for audio.

Your reciever will not be to much power for these speakers at all.

N. Abstentia
04-11-2004, 08:39 PM
Well, lets look at it this way....

Setup a 20 watt and an 100 watt system and then compare the sound quality of both. Initially at low volume level, both systems will sound the same. But as you get slightly louder, as [listening] time wavers on, you note a slight listening fatigue while listening to lower power system. And the fatigue is cause by [low power] amplifier clipping music passages that are reaching up to couple of hundred watts momentary.


Hmm..I don't know if I can agree with that. I'll guarantee you that I can take a 20 watt amp made by Linn or Levinson or Arcam or something like that, put it up against a Sears system that says '100 watts' on the front and my 20 watt system will leave it in the dust.

Now I know you're assuming all things are equal with your post, but the original poster is not. He just asked (something like) "will a 400 watt system sound better than a 100 watt system?" You just can't answer that question.

mtrycraft
04-11-2004, 08:47 PM
Hmm..I don't know if I can agree with that. I'll guarantee you that I can take a 20 watt amp made by Linn or Levinson or Arcam or something like that, put it up against a Sears system that says '100 watts' on the front and my 20 watt system will leave it in the dust..


Maybe yes, maybe no. You are speculation of course or you would not have claimed this.

Rodzilla
04-12-2004, 02:00 AM
oh i think he's "likely" right...things have gotten abysmal with regards to published specs...how many HT amps say 100 wattsx5 on them?have a looksee on the back panel..if the power consumption ain't 500 watts or more it really just ain't doin it,no way,no how,not in all channels at once at least,you can't put out more than you take in...[how many people just looked and went "ahhhcrap!"???]theres a lot of 5x100 watt HT receivers out there with about 150-200 watt power consumption ratings...these ratings are true,they have to be to get UL and CSA approval

i have a sherwood reciever that claims 35/ch...power consumption is rated at bang on 70watts...it's likely putting out about 10-15 real watts continous,considering that the amp makes heat and does other stuff besides amplify...that's all coming out of the 70 going in,it actually can't put out 35w/ch into any load ..i also have an NAD 304 int. it also claims 35/ch but it's power consumption is well over 200 watts...you wanna tell me they sound the same?not hardly!both are rated for 4 ohm loads but even at low volumes where neither should be working the NAD will absolutely clean the floor with the sherwood in sound quality and dynamics....it does put out 35/ch and has 5.5db of short term headroom besides..it's not so much the quality of those watts but the fact that you actually do have them on tap,not just on paper...and computer speaker's amp ratings???they come from some alternate universe..apparently

smokey..thd ain't what you're talking about there,thd is "total harmonic distortion"...it's noise that the amp is adding to the output at some multiple of the original signal[harmonics]it's vanishingly low in almost all modern amplifiers...clipping is just exceeding the amps power supply...when the output voltage swing goes higher than the voltage on the PS rails...it can't get any higher,you run out of juice and you get the waveform you're showing,you're asking the amp for more than it's got...and it'll try anyway...if you increase the voltage on the rails[+vc,-vc wider apart]you'll actually get it and a higher powered amp in the process...a modern amp should shut off putting out that sort of stuff...you're basically feeding the power supply voltage to your speakers and the protection relay "should" kick out if the circuit has been designed properly,DC voltage will cook your speakers in a hurry

Smokey
04-12-2004, 02:16 PM
How many HT amps say 100 wattsx5 on them? Have a look and see on the back panel..if the power consumption ain't 500 watts or more it really just ain't doing it, no way, no how, not in all channels at once at least. You can't put out more than you take in.

You have to realize that power rating into speaker is different than the consumption power rating on its back panel. The channel power ratings are refer to as "apparent" power (which mean not all of it is consumed)-because the speaker is an inductive load. But the consumption power [from AC cord] is refer to as "real" power (all of it is consumed). So most of time, they will not match up. You might have 100x5 watt power rating, but consumption power will be less than 500 watt.


I have a sherwood receiver that claims 35/ch...power consumption is rated at bang on 70watts....I also have an NAD 304 int. it also claims 35/ch but it's power consumption is well over 200 watts...you wanna tell me they sound the same?

As it was said before, you also have to take into account Dynamic Headroom and THD rating of amplifier. If they are not equal in those department also, of course they will not sound the same. Sherwood probably can put out as much as power as NAD, but with much higher THD distortion rating. If you look at computer speaker power ratings, most of them are rated well over 100 watt. But the catch here is that their THD are high also (such as 10% THD).

So a 100 watt amplifier with high THD will sound like crap when compared with a 100 watt amplifier with low THD rating (preferably below 0.3 percent).


Smokey, THD ain't what you're talking about there. THD is "total harmonic distortion"...it's noise that the amp is adding to the output at some multiple of the original signal [harmonics]. it's vanishingly low in almost all modern amplifiers...clipping is just exceeding the amps power supply.

You statement about THD-meaning adding harmonics to original signal is correct. So going from there, a clipped signal will also add harmonics to original signal since clipped signal resemble a square wave. And square waves are full of harmonics. That is why when amplifier is pushed beyond it rated output, its THD will increased due to the fact that clipped signal is adding unwanted harmonic into the original signal :)

jackz4000
04-12-2004, 04:42 PM
With a good ear, one will "hear" the difference in quality and pure junk equipment. Also, AC power consumption from the AC plug is not the same as the rms output of an amplifier or receiver.

Once upon a time in the Stereo world there were specific measurements of an amp mandated by the FTC. Standards. At that time, Stereo was the "big wave" that everyone wanted to catch. Everyone was going to buy into Stereo. There were alot of "junk" peddlers too. And there were companies striving to build the absolute best. Because at the time there were so many unscrupulous manufacturers making incredible claims in regard to wattage output and distortion. "Peak Power". That FTC standard became the standard for all the reputable audio manufacturers at the time and for the consumer.... it gave a "standard" to help measure products. It was a good aid to the consumer in the stereo days. I still think the ear is the best.

HT is now the new "big wave" for manufacturers to catch. Everyone is going to have an HT rig. From NY to Omaha. From the USA to Malasyia. It's like a goldrush. It is a goldrush. Its a dollars and cents thing. It's biz and margins. Profit and loss. There is big money to be made within this window of opportunity. With HT, there are no real FTC standards, like there were with Stereo, except for the standards a manufacturer will use to best market their product. A couple tech's who work at big reputable companies have told me that their companies HT specs are measured in such a way as to inflate the # 's for the best marketing # 's. They were not thrilled, but the word comes down from up top. And they want to keep their jobs.

Anyway, the quality will all be in the build of the amp or pre-amp section. And then the speakers. It will all be up to the manufacturer to decide just what the build will be. The cost out and the selling price. And there are great quality manufacturers out there who do a solid build. Quality is timeless...you hear it with you very own ears. Usually quality will cost more.

Today most wattage and THD # 's can be almost comical. Last month, with a friend we stopped by the home of his friend to drop a couple things off. It became comical 'cuz the guy just HAD to show us the HT set-up he had put together....for $6000. He just had to impress me. He had devoted his whole living room to it...it was like a shrine. His wife has demanded a new addition, a new living room and it's being built. I really wanted to go. After politely listening for 15 minutes we left. The big TV he got for $2000 and $4000 he spent for audio.

As we pulled away, I had to laugh and mentioned it's a good thing the guys a plumber, 'cuz he doesn't know a thing about sound. For $4000, he gave alot of money away. But, he is happy. Absolutely thrilled. I know I wouldn't be. " It's 800 watts". Lotta BIG # 's in the supposed wattage....but, he got taken in by the HT goldrush. Why? Because he knew next to nothing about amps and sound, which with that knowledge would have yielded him a much better set-up for 1/2 the price. Watts? Its all in the quality of the build.

mtrycraft
04-12-2004, 07:49 PM
oh i think he's "likely" right...things have gotten abysmal with regards to published specs...how many HT amps say 100 wattsx5 on them?have a looksee on the back panel..if the power consumption ain't 500 watts or more it really just ain't doin it,no way,no how,not in all channels at once at least,you can't put out more than you take in...[how many people just looked and went "ahhhcrap!"???]theres a lot of 5x100 watt HT receivers out there with about 150-200 watt power consumption ratings...these ratings are true,they have to be to get UL and CSA approval

Perhaps if one doesn't understand what is written, in this case 5X100 watta, or 100 qatts X 5, then one should ask questions. Many assume that this rating is all channels driver at the same time, right? That is not what the spec states. It states each channel can output 100 watts. When do you need 100 watts at the same time? Which music or movie?

i have a sherwood reciever that claims 35/ch...power consumption is rated at bang on 70watts...it's likely putting out about 10-15 real watts continous,


Do you have evidence of this? If so, write to FTC and tell them that Sherwood is lying and breaking the advertisement rules and amp rating standards.

it actually can't put out 35w/ch into any load .

You know this because you bench tested this unit?

.i also have an NAD 304 int. it also claims 35/ch but it's power consumption is well over 200 watts.

How do you know this? The label on the back? Try again, that ain't it.

..you wanna tell me they sound the same?

Well, only a DBT will tell you one way or the other. But existing evidence would indicate this as long as you don't exceed the design specs. You have evidence to support your proposition?


both are rated for 4 ohm loads but even at low volumes where neither should be working the NAD will absolutely clean the floor with the sherwood in sound quality and dynamics...

That is your speculation not supported by evidence. I understand your supposition unsuported.

.it does put out 35/ch and has 5.5db of short term headroom besides.

Is that in the specs? But you said it means nothing. Or just the ones you dislike for some reason?


and computer speaker's amp ratings???they come from some alternate universe..apparently

If that is what it is, perhaps yes. :)

mtrycraft
04-12-2004, 07:59 PM
Once upon a time in the Stereo world there were specific measurements of an amp mandated by the FTC. Standards.

This standard has not been cancelled it is still in force.

HT is now the new "big wave" for manufacturers to catch. Everyone is going to have an HT rig. From NY to Omaha. From the USA to Malasyia. It's like a goldrush. It is a goldrush. Its a dollars and cents thing. It's biz and margins. Profit and loss. There is big money to be made within this window of opportunity. With HT, there are no real FTC standards, like there were with Stereo, except for the standards a manufacturer will use to best market their product.

FTC has not updated the specs to standardize multi channel amps. The old standard is still in force when you rate for two channel operation.
And, most tested models do perform to their claimed power into 2 channel simultaneou operation.



For $4000, he gave alot of money away. But, he is happy.

I should hope so. He bought it to please himself only, no one else, right?

gonefishin
04-12-2004, 08:12 PM
Hmmm...while you guys bring up several good pints of discussion.


Smokey, your sure right that you don't want to push your amps into clipping. If a persons system is clipping during normal use...They simply need to get...either a new amp, new speakers or turn the volume down. In this clipping situation there is little use talking about sound quality of the amp or system. Because neither the amp or system is operating within it's intended use.

But I think a better way to talk about Watts, would be to say that...Watts are relative. They are relative to the speakers you are using, They are relative to the room and They are relative to your listening preferences. While you certainly don't want any gross mismatch in your system(clipping), a general recommendation on how many Watts will work best for all people cannot be given. So...generic numeric Watt recommendations are useless, not necessarily Watts themselves.


have fun!

jackz4000
04-12-2004, 08:45 PM
mmtrycraft, Yes, still in effect. A pretty good standard too.

Yes, again. I would think most reputable manufacturers will list their 2 channel specs appropiately. ie: 20-20K, 100 rms watts per channel both channels driven @ 8 ohms w/0.05% thd or 1% thd. Its the other 3, 4 or 5 channels. Then we have the one channel driven # 's or 150 watts at 1khz. Lotta people (nobody here) see that watt # and thats all they see. Kinda funny. So many people without a basic audio understanding, just go by the biggest watt #.

The plumber. Yeah, he was so thrilled with "800 watts" that I just hadda go and make sure I didn't say anything to let him think otherwise....for $4000 he blew plus the wife's new living room in progress, my lips are sealed. He is now going to get a sub, that will probably be a gigawatt or 2. I think he will become a more expensive plumber.

I got a friend I work with, nice guy, wife, 2 kids and the whole package. Knows not much about audio. Just bought a HT set-up. He is thrilled too 'cuz that new $225 Pioneer is "500 watts." There are watts and then there are...watts.

Smokey
04-13-2004, 06:01 PM
But I think a better way to talk about Watts, would be to say that...Watts are relative. They are relative to the speakers you are using, They are relative to the room and They are relative to your listening preferences.

Hey GF, glad you still hanging around these parts.

I do agree with your statement. Somebody that own a Klipsch speaker might not need as much as power a person that have Magneplanar speakers that have lower sensitivity. But as general middle of road guide, it might be good advice to buy highest power (with lowest THD) amplifier one's budget allows. There is no such a thing as having too much power :)


I found the spoon.

I hope you put it back, or Eyespy will be furious :D