MAB
Major Contributor
Without a doubt.He can have that.
It's much stranger that the 70th member on ASR waits five years to post 19 times in two days guns blazing and then disappears.
I'll leave the internet for today..
Without a doubt.He can have that.
It's much stranger that the 70th member on ASR waits five years to post 19 times in two days guns blazing and then disappears.
I'll leave the internet for today..
See you in 5…I'll leave the internet for today..
He can have that.
It's much stranger that the 70th member on ASR waits five years to post 19 times in two days guns blazing and then disappears.
I'll leave the internet for today..
How do you know that he’s nr. 70? I think that number in the profile is just the age.. according to the Wayback machine, ASR already had 88 members on April 18th 2016.It's much stranger that the 70th member on ASR
You would think someone with the name "Zaphod" would appreciate the additional headroom....Surely not the Zaphod, Zaphod Beeblebrox .
unfortunately age!!How do you know that he’s nr. 70? I think that number in the profile is just the age.. according to the Wayback machine, ASR already had 88 members on April 18th 2016.
oh. well now I feel silly*How do you know that he’s nr. 70? I think that number in the profile is just the age.. according to the Wayback machine, ASR already had 88 members on April 18th 2016.
oh. well now I feel silly*
It's easy to find out a member's number!
"at" them (e.g., @voodooless) and then look at the BB code that's generated when the post is parsed. Click on "Preview" on the top right in the editor.
Hover over the link created by using "@" and look at the link generated. The member number's part of the URL.
Hold my beer and watch this.
View attachment 349240
______________
* OK, I've felt silly for a long time. Part of my raffish charm.
If headroom is comparable to crest factor of a music signal, then you can say that you have optimized your budget correctly."headroom" is looking a bit like "undersized power supply relative to the circuits theoretical maximum
I am arguing from a position of logic.But you're only repeating "headroom is a measure of how bad an amplifier is" in every single post. Also not very technical or reasoned?
Amplifier A MIGHT sound better than amplifier B. That would depend on a huge number of factors. However, that was not what I was referring to. Amplifier C is the preferred one.I wish I could remember the source, but tests were done in the 1970s or '80s with three amplifiers of identical circuit but different power supplies. They all provided 100 watts into 8 ohms continuous, but were configured as follows:-
A) Conventional Sagging Supply, providing 100 watts continuous, but 150 watts on 'short-term' peaks.
B) Stabilised supply providing 100 watts continuous, but no extra on peaks.
C) Stabilised supply providing 150 watts continuous but no extra on peaks.
Blind listening tests were carried on with a panel of 'experienced' listeners and amplifiers were rated as to preference. Volume was set to whatever the panel felt comfortable with, so not level matched. Output level was monitored, but there was no attempt to avoid clipping on peaks. This is in line with how people normally listen to music.
Not surprisingly, Amplifier C came out best, but amplifier A came out as clearly preferable to amplifier B thus indicating that peak power, i.e. headroom, was more important than continuous output power.
The testing was reported in either HiFi News or Wireless World (might even have been both) but I can't now find a reference.
Allowing headroom is ALWAYS a Good Thing, whether just for peaks or continuously, and I take a somewhat dim view of an amplifier with little headroom that may just be adequate but would fail if listening to high dynamic range music.
S.
Better in what way?A stiff power supply in an otherwise identical amplifier to one with a 'soft' power supply will always measure and probably sound better.
Come to think of it -- ohm (volts per ampere) is the SI unit of measurement for resistance. The measure of conductance (the inverse of resistance) is (was ) commonly expressed in units of mhos ( which is, of course, ohms backwards).
So... if headroom measures amplifier badness, perhaps we should consider measuring amplifier goodness in units of moordaeh?
I mean, possibly not -- it sounds like one of those words that, if said thrice in succession, would summon demons.
OK, my work is done here.