honn
Member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2018
- Messages
- 91
- Likes
- 58
Hi all, okay, the title is obviously a hypothetical since I cannot afford the KEF Blade 2 Meta..!
Please entertain my two assertions to see if my elementary understanding of speaker power amplification is on the right track.
1. Is it correct to say that even the $260 Topping PA5 II+ (2x125 W @ 4 ohm<1%) can sufficiently power the $30K KEF Blade 2 Meta (rated 50-400W, 4 ohm, 86dB) in a medium-sized room of say 2.5 to 3 meters listening distance at 80-85 dB listening level? Okay, to provide some 'headroom' let's throw in the $450 Topping PA7 (2 x 200W @4 ohm<1%) too into the mix! (Not that any real owner of the said KEF would use such an amp (aesthetic considerations and whatnot), but purely from the consideration of sufficient to more-than-sufficient power to properly drive the said KEFs).
2. Is it correct to say that the Audio First Fidelia speaker (84 dB, 4 ohm) is 'harder to drive' than the KEF Blade 2 Meta (86 dB, 4 ohm)?
If any of those two assertions are wrong, please enlighten me!
Thanks a lot.
Please entertain my two assertions to see if my elementary understanding of speaker power amplification is on the right track.
1. Is it correct to say that even the $260 Topping PA5 II+ (2x125 W @ 4 ohm<1%) can sufficiently power the $30K KEF Blade 2 Meta (rated 50-400W, 4 ohm, 86dB) in a medium-sized room of say 2.5 to 3 meters listening distance at 80-85 dB listening level? Okay, to provide some 'headroom' let's throw in the $450 Topping PA7 (2 x 200W @4 ohm<1%) too into the mix! (Not that any real owner of the said KEF would use such an amp (aesthetic considerations and whatnot), but purely from the consideration of sufficient to more-than-sufficient power to properly drive the said KEFs).
2. Is it correct to say that the Audio First Fidelia speaker (84 dB, 4 ohm) is 'harder to drive' than the KEF Blade 2 Meta (86 dB, 4 ohm)?
If any of those two assertions are wrong, please enlighten me!
Thanks a lot.