Destination: Moon
Senior Member
Couldn't this be readily measured?
Although the interesting thing is still dynamic power, right? The ability to cope with transistence peaks. crest factor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crest_factor
Take for example this little vintage NAD receiver:
NAD 7240PE
Power output: 40 watts per channel into 8Ω (stereo)
https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/nad/7240pe.shtml
How well does it handle peaks? It is designed to handle it in a sensible way, but check what it can do in dynamic power in 2 Ohm ( to use 2 ohm speakers for a long time I would not do that with a NAD 7240PE).
So how many watts are needed and when?
Then for the sound quality as usual other factors to consider Signal to noise ratio, distortion, damping factor (low such can be reflected in distortion and ,even uneven frequency response .... I think)
As others have mentioned. What kind of music you play. Modern compressed, a thick even carpet of tones then not many watts are needed. It does not place any major demands on the amplifier. That in itself is good, for the amplifiers. Not so fun for our ears.
On the answer to that question, IMHO @Charles Sprinkle has it correct. See his posts (emphases mine):...
So how many watts are needed and when?
...
...
That having been said, if you play a pure sine wave at exactly the frequency of the minimum impedance for an extended period of time, you should expect that the amplifier will thermally protect itself from this abuse. Music has a crest factor of between 12dB and 15dB or even more. Even when pushed all the way into limit, the amplifier is going to see more than 9dB of crest factor with music or other actual program material. Even with only 6dBCF, the amplifier would be within thermal power specs given by the amplifier manufacturer. (And this at minimum impedance.)
So which way is the right way to measure power? I have something to say about that. The traditional way of rating "power" as V^2/R with sine waves is in my opinion complete nonsense. Power amplifiers don't amplify power. They amplify voltage. People don't hear watts. They hear SPL. We provide output "power" ratings as a reference, and yes, they are honestly measured and specified as described above. But I hope we all understand that actual power produced into a reactive load with complex impedance using real music or program material is going to be substantially less than headline "power" ratings.
...
Now if I was selecting an amplifier to power a passive loudspeaker, here's how I would do it. I would test the loudspeaker to see at what voltage it reached 10% THD. I would select an amplifier to provide this much voltage by reverse calculation of "power" specification, and verify that the amplifier could provide the peak current requirements. For peak current capabilities of an amplifier (when not directly specified), reverse calculate the RMS voltage with the lowest rated impedance, then multiply that number by 1.4 to get peak voltage. Peak voltage across the lowest rated impedance yields peak current capability. Of course there are other factors to consider when selecting an amplifier, but this will ensure that the amplifier doesn't clip or shut down before full output is achieved.
Also do you think the compression tests are indicative of the woofer's maximum linear excursion? That would truly be 'the limit'.
The bottom line is quite simple: there is a point where there is too much power. Not just in terms of distortion (which is certainly arguably audible) but mainly in terms of the actual frequency response. We all agree we can read a frequency response graphic. This is wasted power that doesn't even get translated as additional SPL; it's just lost in the ether. Quite literally, a waste of power. So keep this in mind when you are looking at such things; at some point the response changes depending on how much input voltage it receives.
A 20 or 30W amplifier putting-out 20W is no different than a 200W amplifier putting-out 20W (assuming no clipping and all else being equal).Does A More Powerful Amplifier Make Speakers Sound Better?
That's actually a myth that clipping damages speakers. It's the higher volume/power that damages speakers. When you get into clipping the total power does go up and low-mid frequencies get clipped while the high frequencies (which normally have less energy) keep going-up with the volume control. It's mostly just the louder high frequencies rather than the clipping that kills tweeters. ...It actually gets a little more complicated than that and often the distortion-related harmonics are lower than the original high frequencies and with severe distortion you can actually loose highs.is clipping audible or is just that it could damage speakers?
Unfortunately no... You can check for clipping with an oscilloscope or some amps have clipping indicators and/or power meters.Couldn't this be readily measured?
With this you open up a can of worms.
Many people like me, like thing easy. RMS power is easy, and gives you a good orientation. Dynamic power is very complex. What time? 1ms,20ms,100ms? A long 30Hz sin bass? A short kick drum bass? How long is long enough for highly compressed music or for uncompressed. And this are just some questions you could ask.
With RMS power, you know this amp can deliver this power at least for some minutes.
Its on you to open up this can of worms. I stay easy give me RMS power and i know what i have. Give me as example pmpo power and i start laughing.
So tell me why i should care for such shiit?
https://www.techtree.com/content/ne...bo-series-wireless-karaoke-party-speaker.html
You see? Thats the can of worms you like to open. A toy rated at 10kW. Did you ever looked at a 10kW PA?
Thats a small 3kW PA.
https://www.thomann.de/intl/the_box_pro_achat_rock_n_roll_bundle.htm
How you like to compare?
100W can easily clip during peaks in dynamic recordings with mainstream loudspeakers.200W?? You sure?? Because 200W is actually alot of power and is very costly as well. Most of the mainstream amps don't even hit 100W.
Does Capitalizing Each Word Make Them More Important? Sorry, couldn't resist.
My answer: maybe. Depends.
100W can easily clip during peaks in dynamic recordings with mainstream loudspeakers.
No. He didn't leave anything out. His question is plain and simple. And very good. What was it that you didn't understand about the O.P.?It's also your post as well as the title.....did you leave something out like maybe the specifics for consideration/comment?
Good question and one I have always wondered about myself. IMO it is possible that a powerful amp can make a speaker sound better. But there are a lot of variables involved in that scenario. Not the least of which is placebo. I switched from a yammy AVR with 95 wpc to an amp with 200 wpc and IDoes A More Powerful Amplifier Make Speakers Sound Better?
Why settle for non-linearity in power output? The genuine measured power could be 400W@4R then 800@2. I mean where does it end? I still think a 75W-100W w/linear output is enough for most home audio nearfield listening. For a bigger room and speakers then more is better. Then we get into multiple pairs of speakers with multiple power amps and lotsa bass and a system to be heard. So not sure about the whole 350W to 500W@8R thing comes from when one can have bigger and more speakers.Get a minimum in 2021 of 200wpc (genuine measured power @8R /~350W@4R) and be happy for a long time.
Ooops, talk about anticlimax. Sorry about that.
Attached image NAD's own data on dynamic effect. Not too bad, though. If they are right now, that is.
Although the interesting thing for this thread is not the NAD receiver but this with dynamic effect in general.
I just used that NAD reviver as an example.