• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

ASR/amirm has opened my eyes.

"His listening would only tell what his ears heard." It may be that listening tells mostly what his built-up memory-based templates of sound are which could be seen as bias or sound expectations. It might be hard in fact to accurately hear and to hear freshly and originally. It is like trying to see an automobile for what it is as if you have not had 20, 30 or 40 years of marketing conditioning programming and polluting your concept of automobiles.
 
I'm trying to bring it all together to make a decision. Even subjective views can have merit and what I've seen is amir's at least is shaped by data.

I think I've done my due diligence.

It's time to make a phone call.
 
Last edited:
True. But I've heard an amp with greater Watts strains less at lower powers. Kind of a big block vs small block to use an automobile analogy.

But point well taken regarding the amp's load. It will be driving the mid bass, mids and highs. I made the same point with PS Audio regarding 1200W and the One.R having its own powered subwoofers.

Here's my part of a comment I made in a post I started in the PS Audio forum:

"Lastly even the PS Audio tech concured that for wattage the M1200s are way overkill for my loudspeakers. He still (of course) recommended the 1200s."

And some of the replies:

"Keep in mind that the “excess” power an amp can bring to the equation isn’t simply unused and therefore wasted. It’s been my experience that amps tend to sound their best when they’re far from being fully taxed, and they have substantial reserves of power for transients. So while the M1200s may appear on paper to be “way overkill” for your speakers (I assume he meant relative to your speakers’ sensitivity), the presence of that much extra headroom will make an audible difference, in my opinion."


"For whatever reason, 1200 watts is bothering you. It shouldn’t. Seriously.
I listen at under 1 watt of power going to the speakers. With 2 amps (monblocks), a preamp, music source, and 2 subwoofers, I use about 130 watts of electricity total when listening to music (according to my P12 regenerator).
My M1200 monoblocks sound WAY more dynamic than my 45 watt per channel tube amps, again, while listening below 1 watt.
The M1200’s sound more dynamic and sound really good at lower sound levels, and with much more “magic”."


"I was using the M1200’s with 97db speakers (until I recently upgraded the speakers), and the M1200’s sounded fantastic with them, and have a wonderful full sound at low volume. So I really would not worry about overkill."


It goes on and on.

So since I'm currently driving the loudspeakers with 750W/channel on tap now I thought to get closer to that. And yes I (still) agree with the PS Audio on the one point we both agreed upon that 1200W is overkill for these loudspeakers.
That's all bullshit. All extra power is simply not used. What you want to do is some basic calculations of what kind of power you need for the SPL you want at your listening position. I tend to use the THX reference standard, so 85dB average with 105dB peaks. Calculate what power you need to reach 105dB (so 102dB with a single speaker) with two speakers of your choice and get an amplifier that can provide that power. This of course ignores the fact that most speakers won't be able to reach that kind of SPL anyway, but at least you aren't SPL limited by your amplifier in that case.
 
That's all bullshit. All extra power is simply not used. What you want to do is some basic calculations of what kind of power you need for the SPL you want at your listening position. I tend to use the THX reference standard, so 85dB average with 105dB peaks. Calculate what power you need to reach 105dB (so 102dB with a single speaker) with two speakers of your choice and get an amplifier that can provide that power. This of course ignores the fact that most speakers won't be able to reach that kind of SPL anyway, but at least you aren't SPL limited by your amplifier in that case.
We can disagree.

I've done the calculations. db per distance per watts needed. I have efficient speakers with their own powered subwoofers. Sitting ten feet or so away listening at a reasonable sound level only a few watts are needed to drive the speakers however I don't listen all the time at "reasonable " levels AND I don't just plop down rigidly in front of them. I, like many people, move about the house doing things. So I can be many feet away with walls between me and the source yet still want to hear. This is where those extra watts come in. Further I may not always have efficient speakers with impedance dropping to 2 ohm. I have no plans to do amp "rolling". What I get needs to drive any speaker in my scenario.

Thanks for your thoughts. For a good understanding I recommend this informative video. He uses the same automotive analogy I've heard before.

 
Thanks for your thoughts. For a good understanding I recommend this informative video. He uses the same automotive analogy I've heard before.
His analogy is wrong though as far as fidelity is concerned (reliability and power consumptions are other matters). If an amplifier clips at 40 watts, and you stay at 38, you get the same fidelity as an amplifier that puts out 400 watts. It is not like engine noise and friction.

The reason to have more power is simple: you have no idea how loud you are listening to music. All of his math is for not if you don't know that one number. He is throwing out 70 db, 80 dB, etc. as if those are things that any audiophile has measured or even knows how to measure.

Unless you have a desktop system, you need a few hundred watts of power.
 
All of his math is for not if you don't know that one number.
I presume that you meant:

naught​

pronoun​

1. nothing
Example: "he's naught but a worthless fool"
  • nothing at all
  • nought
  • nil
  • zero

noun​

1. the digit 0; naught.
 
I've called PS Audio more than once before and spoken with the sales/tech and I felt they were telling me what I wanted to hear.

To their credit, they did find me some missing manual pages for my old PS Audio 6.2 preamp which I sold off here on the ASR market during Covid. Of course, a guy named Randy owned PS Audio back when that was made... ;)

I have an active XO speaker set up with multiple amps and use the Icepower 1200AS2 for my woofers (15" but crossed to 18" sub at 65Hz) and Hypex NC252MP for mid range and have always had plenty of reserve power even with DSP taking its chunk. My individual speaker drivers have a minimum of 92dB sensitivity.

You should be more than fine with your new amp, still overkill but you saved lots of money and got upgraded as well! Enjoy and welcome to ASR.
 
Unless you have a desktop system, you need a few hundred watts of power.
Not IME. My amp clips around 75 watts into 8 ohms and I've never clipped it even when system was set up in a church hall (about basketball court size).

Room at home is fairly large (29' x 12') and it rarely draws more than 0.75 watts, the bias indicator light comes on if more than that is drawn for over a second, so I'd know.

dB app on phone shows around 70dB average levels, I know they are not that accurate but even if it is 20 percent out....

Am I missing something crucial here?
 
His analogy is wrong though as far as fidelity is concerned (reliability and power consumptions are other matters). If an amplifier clips at 40 watts, and you stay at 38, you get the same fidelity as an amplifier that puts out 400 watts. It is not like engine noise and friction.

The reason to have more power is simple: you have no idea how loud you are listening to music. All of his math is for not if you don't know that one number. He is throwing out 70 db, 80 dB, etc. as if those are things that any audiophile has measured or even knows how to measure.

Unless you have a desktop system, you need a few hundred watts of power.
Yours is a viewpoint which I appreciate. I'll have to look at the curves sometime. My brain needs a rest from that last round of data sheet diving. :) But I would think an amplifier rated at 40W being pushed to its limit at 38 is going to have more noise and distortion than one using 1/10 its capability. This would make Hi(er) fidelity at those 38 Watts less if not altogether unattainable. Whereas the 400W amp wouldn't break a sweat. Even rated at 40W continous can that smaller amp realistically maintain that. Perhaps. Again I'll peruse the curves again.

Perhaps he was thinking distortion too. I can't remember his exact verbiage but his argument would be more convincing if he considered more than raw power as there are other things to think about.

It took me a moment to catch his "naughts". I can't remember the last time I've ever heard that. British!

When I mentioned I wish the amp had more "horsepower " and was asked what did I need all that power for now you know. As I said I might be in another room or moving from room to room. Or find myself one day driving some really inefficient loudspeakers. Before someone mentions it I don't necessarily wear earbuds or headphones inside as they would mask everything.

I look forward to the Apollon. I'd post how it sounds but as we've discussed that would be subjective and unique only to my ears.

Again thanks all. I enjoy learning and this has been an education. Amir thank you for the invaluable advice.

Much appreciated. I've gotten my questions answered.
 
Last edited:
It took me a moment to catch his "naughts". I can't remember the last time I've ever heard that. British!
I learned "naught" from my father , who was a third generation Charleston, SC man. His side of our family goes to our great, great grandfather, who was a stowaway (at the age of 12) on a ship that came from Hamburg, Germany t Charleston, SC (USA). Here, when I was under 30, it was relatively common to "naught" being used in a sentence. Now I hear it rarely. I had no idea that it was British. I never heard a British person use it when I was on an island that was British for 13 months.
 
We can disagree.

I've done the calculations. db per distance per watts needed. I have efficient speakers with their own powered subwoofers. Sitting ten feet or so away listening at a reasonable sound level only a few watts are needed to drive the speakers however I don't listen all the time at "reasonable " levels AND I don't just plop down rigidly in front of them. I, like many people, move about the house doing things. So I can be many feet away with walls between me and the source yet still want to hear. This is where those extra watts come in. Further I may not always have efficient speakers with impedance dropping to 2 ohm. I have no plans to do amp "rolling". What I get needs to drive any speaker in my scenario.

Thanks for your thoughts. For a good understanding I recommend this informative video. He uses the same automotive analogy I've heard before.

I don't find THX reference levels a reasonable output level, so I find it a good baseline for an extreme scenario. Because 105dB for your mains and 115dB for the LFE channel is beyond what most would consider reasonable, plus many loudspeakers won't reach those SPL levels (and if they do compression is most likely happening). You need about 400W to reach 103dB with a single loudspeaker with 86db/W sensitivity at 4 meters (so 106dB for a pair).

Can I ask what kind of loudspeakers you will be using? JBL M2 or something similar?
 
Last edited:
I learned "naught" from my father , who was a third generation Charleston, SC man. His side of our family goes to our great, great grandfather, who was a stowaway (at the age of 12) on a ship that came from Hamburg, Germany t Charleston, SC (USA). Here, when I was under 30, it was relatively common to "naught" being used in a sentence. Now I hear it rarely. I had no idea that it was British. I never heard a British person use it when I was on an island that was British for 13 months.
Honestly I have no idea if it's British or not. If you're going to put out a YouTube video don't use odd verbiage. Keeping up technically is enough without decoding sentences.
 
I don't find THX reference levels a reasonable output level, so I find it a good baseline for an extreme scenario. Because 105dB for your mains and 115dB for the LFE channel is beyond what most would consider reasonable, plus many loudspeakers won't reach those SPL levels (and if they do compression is most likely happening). You need about 400W to reach 103dB with a single loudspeaker with 86db/W sensitivity at 4 meters (so 106dB for a pair).

Can I ask what kind of loudspeakers you will be using? JBL M2 or something similar?
Goldenear Triton One.R
 
It's archaic and likely used regionally if used at all.
I just had no clue that it was British. I think that because we are a port city that there are more words that are used here that came from other countries than places more than 100 miles inland.
We also have some interesting pronunciations of street names & locations around here (probably due to this city having been around since 1670 and people arriving by sea from all over the world.
A reporter from the mid-west lived her for a while and compiled how we say certain towns, cities, islands & street names:

BARRE– To improve their strength, posture, and flexibility, many women turn to an exercise called the Barre (sounds like ‘bar’) Method which incorporates ballet moves. This is not the way we say the word in Charleston. Here it is pronounced like ‘berry’.

BEAUFORT– One of the most popular destination spots in the Lowcountry is the picturesque coastal town of Beaufort. I took French in high school + college so I thought the proper way to say it was BO-fort. But it’s actually BYOU-fert.

But, if you happen to find yourself in Beaufort, North Carolinaforget what I just told you. There, they say BO-furt.

Similarly, ‘Beaufain Street’ is pronounced BYOU-fane.

DAUFUSKIE
– I remember the first time I saw this word. It was while reading an article in The Post and Courier. Fortunately, I was reading by myself and didn’t have to say it aloud because I would have butchered it. The way to pronounce Daufuskie is duh-FUH-ski. (It's an island)

GAILLARD– You can hardly go a day in the Holy City without seeing the word, ‘Gaillard’. Not only is it a popular surname, but it’s also the name of our performing arts center. Initially I thought it was Gayle-yard, but I was soon corrected. The proper way to say it is gil-YARD.

HASSELLHow would you pronounce Hassell? Like hassle, right? Wrong. Here in the Lowcountry, it’s HAZE-ul. (a street)

HORRY
– If, as a kid, I’d pronounced Horry like the way it looks, my mother would surely have sent me to my room for being disrespectful to women. But the ‘H’ is silent, so you’ll want to say OH-ree. (the name of a county [also a town] near here)

HUGERHEW-JERR? HUE-JEE? HUH-GEE? No, no, and definitely not. ‘Huger’ is correctly pronounced you-JEE. (a street)

LEGAREDespite seeing this word countless times, I still pronounce it luh-gare. Old timers usually give me a dirty look when I do this. Avoid the same fate as me and say it properly. It’s luh-GREE. (a street)

LESESNE– Lesesne is pronounced luh-SANE– as in, it’s insane how much the spelling + pronunciation of this street differ from one another.

MANIGAULT– The only reason I know the proper way to say Manigault is because I know a guy here in town with that last name. Had I not gotten the pronunciation from him, I probably would have said, manny-GAULT. But it’s actually MAN-uh-go. (there is a historic family home that belongs to: guess who?)

MAZYCKSay what? This name requires a double-take before even making a first attempt at its pronunciation– and you’ll still likely get it wrong. This street name is pronounced muh-ZEKE.

PRIOLEAU
– This is another one of those words that even locals have a hard time pronouncing. I initially thought the right way to say it was pre-oh-low. But the correct way is PRAY-lo.

SIMONSSimon says, ‘you don’t pronounce Simons Street like the name Simon.’ It’s actually pronounced SIMM-uns.

VANDERHORST
– There is debate over the official pronunciation. Some contend it is ‘VAN-DROSS’, but some old school Charlestonians will insist it’s pronounced as spelled– with all three syllables. (a street, as well as many other things)
 
dB app on phone shows around 70dB average levels, I know they are not that accurate but even if it is 20 percent out....

Am I missing something crucial here?
It could be many dBs out. It is also not always possible to know if the amp is clipping. Quick excursions there can make the sound a bit harsher/brighter but otherwise not sound like anything is broken.
 
Goldenear Triton One.R
Oh, then I wouldn't be too worried about the quality of the amplifier. I'd be more worried about the scathing treble and uneven directivity. Hopefully you can fix that with some EQ.
 
It could be many dBs out. It is also not always possible to know if the amp is clipping. Quick excursions there can make the sound a bit harsher/brighter but otherwise not sound like anything is broken.
90db speaker - 93dB for two.
Deduct 6dB for listening distance
so 1 watt gives 87dB
Assume average level 80dB and 20dB headroom - need to reach 100dB
2 watts - 90dB
16 watts - 99dB
32 watts - 102dB
64 watts - 105dB

On paper it's enough. But is it? Freely admit I am looking for an excuse to buy a Neurochrome 686. ;)
 
90db speaker - 93dB for two.
Deduct 6dB for listening distance
so 1 watt gives 87dB
Assume average level 80dB and 20dB headroom - need to reach 100dB
2 watts - 90dB
16 watts - 99dB
32 watts - 102dB
64 watts - 105dB

On paper it's enough. But is it? Freely admit I am looking for an excuse to buy a Neurochrome 686. ;)
It scales up fast with lower sensitivity and greater distances.
 
Back
Top Bottom