On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:31:32 GMT, "Form@C" wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 11:09:48 +0000, Ian Molton wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 08:27:50 GMT
"Form@C" wrote:

It's no use turning down a
100-200W monster amp because you arn't running them at their best.

what?

Sorry, it wasn't very clear was it? What I meant to say is that "high"
power amps are usually designed and set up to produce their best results
an appreciable way up to their rated power output.

No, they aren't.

They won't perform at
their best at a very low percentage of that level.

Absolute garbage!

I *know* that many are
*supposed* to be class A at low levels, but they are generally not
designed as class A amps, and are not really running as such (the output
stage quiescent current is usually too low to allow correct class A
operation on a class AB amp).

Excuse me? A class AB amp *always* runs in class A up to some
predetermined level, which may be less than 1 watt or as many as 50
watts. I use an amplifier which runs in true class A up to 50 watts
into 8 ohms, and in class AB above that level, up to its rated maximum
of 400 watts into 1 ohm. It sounds just fine at very low levels.

Thus it is a mistake to judge low-power
audio systems by simply turning down the volume on existing "high" power
equipment & changing the speakers for more sensitive ones.

Depends on the amp......................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

I have often found that the easiest way to deal with bass is just not to
do
it at all! Small, sealed (infinite baffle) enclosures made with very
heavy
damped panels and a simple crossover using very high quality drive units
often sound fantastic (BBC monitor LS1 fans may now smile smugly) BUT
they
need vast amounts of amplifier power to produce any response below 100Hz
(and no - a subwoofer is not the answer)

Oh yes, it is! And BTW, those speakers can't *handle* vast amounts of
power, so you are stuck with no bass.
--

Hi Stewart

I think you are actually agreeing with me in an argumentitive fashion... but
thats OK.
My point is that it is often best to sacrifice the bottom couple of octaves
and concentrate on getting the rest "right" - something which small IB
cabinets do very well.
Introduce a sub into the room and pass the sick bags.
The idea is to find a system which sounds good WITHOUT anoying the
neighbours. Having the big power amp on hand means that the amp will be
cruising but will still have an iron grip of the speaker hence the need for
powerfull amps in the real world (and yes I have used 8 watt single ends
into big efficient cabinets with good results - but still no bass and
limited volume)

David

I have often found that the easiest way to deal with bass is just not to
do
it at all! Small, sealed (infinite baffle) enclosures made with very
heavy
damped panels and a simple crossover using very high quality drive units
often sound fantastic (BBC monitor LS1 fans may now smile smugly) BUT
they
need vast amounts of amplifier power to produce any response below 100Hz
(and no - a subwoofer is not the answer)

Oh yes, it is! And BTW, those speakers can't *handle* vast amounts of
power, so you are stuck with no bass.
--

Hi Stewart

I think you are actually agreeing with me in an argumentitive fashion... but
thats OK.
My point is that it is often best to sacrifice the bottom couple of octaves
and concentrate on getting the rest "right" - something which small IB
cabinets do very well.
Introduce a sub into the room and pass the sick bags.
The idea is to find a system which sounds good WITHOUT anoying the
neighbours. Having the big power amp on hand means that the amp will be
cruising but will still have an iron grip of the speaker hence the need for
powerfull amps in the real world (and yes I have used 8 watt single ends
into big efficient cabinets with good results - but still no bass and
limited volume)

David

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:23:33 -0000, Roy wrote:

I listened to a pair of ATC SCM10s driven by an AVI 250W/ch amp with a power
meter attached. Listenening at realistic (not thunderous) levels to Sibelius
Violin Concerto, the quiet introduction drew barely a watt per channel with
a few moments of maybe 5w. The orchestral tutti (2 very loud chords) drew an
instantaneous 400W per channel.

I remember one of the hi-fi magazines carrying out that exact same
experiment, and being amazed at the results. Presumably the AVI
amplifier concerned was the rather large and ungainly, but sonically
beautiful, 250wpc stereo power amplifier that they made for a while?
I once had a demonstration at Cornflake of that amplifier, coupled
with the S2000MP pre-amplifier driving a pair of ATC SCM20 passives.
The sound that this combination made was quite amazing, absolutely
natural combined with seemingly limitless headroom.

--
Anthony Edwards

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 13:23:33 -0000, Roy wrote:

I listened to a pair of ATC SCM10s driven by an AVI 250W/ch amp with a power
meter attached. Listenening at realistic (not thunderous) levels to Sibelius
Violin Concerto, the quiet introduction drew barely a watt per channel with
a few moments of maybe 5w. The orchestral tutti (2 very loud chords) drew an
instantaneous 400W per channel.

I remember one of the hi-fi magazines carrying out that exact same
experiment, and being amazed at the results. Presumably the AVI
amplifier concerned was the rather large and ungainly, but sonically
beautiful, 250wpc stereo power amplifier that they made for a while?
I once had a demonstration at Cornflake of that amplifier, coupled
with the S2000MP pre-amplifier driving a pair of ATC SCM20 passives.
The sound that this combination made was quite amazing, absolutely
natural combined with seemingly limitless headroom.

--
Anthony Edwards

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:31:32 GMT
"Form@C" wrote:

I *know* that many are
*supposed* to be class A at low levels, but they are generally not
designed as class A amps, and are not really running as such

Ah, in which case you mean you arent dealing with Hi Fi amps ;-)

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup.

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 12:31:32 GMT
"Form@C" wrote:

I *know* that many are
*supposed* to be class A at low levels, but they are generally not
designed as class A amps, and are not really running as such

Ah, in which case you mean you arent dealing with Hi Fi amps ;-)

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup.

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 14:34:37 +0000 (GMT)
Jim Lesurf wrote:

I once used parallel pairs of
ESL57's for a while. :-)

Jim, you're a sick, sick, (and very lucky) individual ;-)

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup.

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 14:34:37 +0000 (GMT)
Jim Lesurf wrote:

I once used parallel pairs of
ESL57's for a while. :-)

Jim, you're a sick, sick, (and very lucky) individual ;-)

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup.

Jim Lesurf wrote:


FWIW I use +200Wpc amps with speakers like ESL63's and before that ESL57's.
Been doing this for around 20 years, now. Generally I only play at quite
low mean power levels. The results sound fine to me even though I never go
anywhere near 200 Wpc. Having an amp that can drive difficult loads means
the amp is finding this task easy, even when I once used parallel pairs of
ESL57's for a while. :-)



Any idea what's the best way to stack ESL57's?
Should they be coplanar or focussed at the listener's head?

--
Roger.