• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

Buckeye Purifi Eigentakt 1ET9040BA monoblock power amplifier Stereophile Measurements

Status
Not open for further replies.
That is Powerline Motorola piezos - they have miniature lamp inside, as a dynamic compressor. So, they maybe withstands more power, but they do not deliver much more SPL.
Now I'm confused.The whole subject of my post is pure power handling,more than 5W to be precise.
Regardless anything else.
So,they can or they can't?And by how much?

(don't want to think that this lamp makes them glow too :facepalm: ,I hope it doesn't )
 
Have a look at medical science studies and their statistics: it's the relative (and not the absolute) statistical evidence that counts (for counts in sale :cool:).
Accordingly one might go to measure at 85, 90 or 95 or even 100 (whatever is preferred) percent of announced Pmax and there we go with relative correlations ...
There are no parallels here. Take a look at this THD+N vs power which could just as well be IMD vs power:

index.php


You can't pick 50 watt for one amplifier on that graph and compare it to 10 watts on another amp's graph. You have to compare at the same power level to make things fair.
 
@amirm ... I believe its time to change how you spec the measured power of amplifiers. You go for the knee but that is so subjective, depending on the distortion profile of the amplifier. Its never consistent.

Instead just pick the 0.1% or -60dB THD+N point as the stated distortion free power. Pick the 1% as the maximum headroom point for the amp while still being moderately distortion free. This scheme enables a fare and consistent comparison of amplifier characteristics from different manufacturer's.
 
So let's say 90% of spec max?
Or 95 :cool:
A IMD measurement signal has +6dB peak level, so max test level should be below 50% of the clipping level at least
 
Last edited:
I'm fine with the knee and 1% - but what's wrong with @amirm using the knee to determine an amp's power rating? Everyone is so concerned about sound engineering and amps' ability to run at levels that are truly sustainable for years of trouble-free use, yes? If so, then isn't it sensible to define power as how much power the amp can put out before its THD starts suddenly and rapidly shooting up?
 
@amirm ... I believe its time to change how you spec the measured power of amplifiers. You go for the knee but that is so subjective, depending on the distortion profile of the amplifier. Its never consistent.

Instead just pick the 0.1% or -60dB THD+N point as the stated distortion free power. Pick the 1% as the maximum headroom point for the amp while still being moderately distortion free. This scheme enables a fare and consistent comparison of amplifier characteristics from different manufacturer's.

We've had this discussion many times before and there's good arguments on either side. Picking a number sounds great in theory, but in practice, it's not that easy. If you increase the resolution (steps), to get more granularity, the time increases, which can cause other issues. Joining two step points with a line means an arbitrary THD number was perhaps never actually tested- only before and after. The plot above likely has only 4 measurement steps above 70W to 130W or so.

Some amplifiers may not even distort to 0.1 or 1% before they trip protection- what do you do then? And others become non-linear so rapidly and vertically, you can't settle on a target 'halfway up' figure. Others rise on such a slope you could argue they became non-linear well before 0.1%.

Amir does fine eyeballing the 'hockey stick/knee', especially with Class Ds, which clip hard and fast
 
Then you can't compare one amp to another.
You can certainly compare the measurements at 90% of the rated output from amplifier A with those from amplifier B, but only if the rated power is determined based on something resembling a standard.
 
This is more about how amplifiers are designed than about speakers.

We wouldn’t test a DAC with steep roll-offs at 40 Hz and 14 kHz and say it’s acceptable just because most music doesn’t have much content outside that range.

Similarly, ignoring an amplifier’s ability to deliver full power across the entire frequency range is overlooking an important part of its performance.
 
The necessary imperfections are to be left on electro-acoustic transducers (speakers). The electrical chain is to be as perfect as possible. The attempts to soften the requirements on amplifiers here are based on emotions.
 
The necessary imperfections are to be left on electro-acoustic transducers (speakers). The electrical chain is to be as perfect as possible. The attempts to soften the requirements on amplifiers here are based on emotions.
Nonsense. Your position is an ideological one, don't fool yourself. An amplifier that does what it needs to do for the load that will be attached to it is already as perfect as necessary. You can prefer overbuilt, overengineered amps. No one is denying you that. But the entire product category does not need to conform to your ideological preferences.
 
Similarly, ignoring an amplifier’s ability to deliver full power across the entire frequency range is overlooking an important part of its performance.
As I have said before, we can build anything. Question is whether you want to pay for that type of over design. Consumers are hugely price sensitive so the market says don't do that. You also have to be ready for some types of amplification to be pushed out of the market if they can't do what you ask.
 
We wouldn’t test a DAC with steep roll-offs at 40 Hz and 14 kHz and say it’s acceptable just because most music doesn’t have much content outside that range.
??? An amp playing 20 kHz at 50 watts is not rolling off anything. It may simply go into protection if you push it harder. There is no analogy with a DAC there.
 
As I have said before, we can build anything. Question is whether you want to pay for that type of over design. Consumers are hugely price sensitive so the market says don't do that. You also have to be ready for some types of amplification to be pushed out of the market if they can't do what you ask.
As I’ve mentioned multiple times, there’s no requirement for the manufacturer to redesign anything -it’s simply a rating.
I believe this argument may be a red herring.
??? An amp playing 20 kHz at 50 watts is not rolling off anything. It may simply go into protection if you push it harder. There is no analogy with a DAC there.
I think the analogy works well in the argument that an amplifier doesn’t need to deliver full-rated power at high frequencies since there’s typically no significant content in that range, and speakers may not handle it well.

Both arguments suggest that if we justify the performance of one piece of equipment based on the content it typically handles, we should consider applying the same reasoning consistently across other types of equipment.
 
As I’ve mentioned multiple times, there’s no requirement for the manufacturer to redesign anything -it’s simply a rating.
I addressed that. I said that some topologies will be pushed out of the market for no good reason because they won't be price competitive if they do as you say.

Customers will also pay more if they trust this kind of spec, opting for a more expensive amp that can produce full power at 20 kHz.

So once again, no free lunch here. You have that option today to pay more but vast majority of you do not.
 
Both arguments suggest that if we justify the performance of one piece of equipment based on the content it typically handles, we should consider applying the same reasoning consistently across other types of equipment.
You do that already for speakers, yes? You are not demanding that they all go down to 20 Hz at the same level as 100 Hz, correct? You are going to say they are mechanical products so that is OK. By the same token, high current and voltage amplification costs money whereas DAC buffer stage does not. So you have to accept some compromises there as well.

Of course, just like you can buy full range speakers, you can also buy amplifiers that go from DC to 50 kHz+ with no degradation. Just don't say that this has to be pushed to everyone. Customers are in a bliss that they can get a $150 amplifier that produces a ton of clean power but has some limiting at either end of the spectrum. They could pay $2000 and not have that but that is not what they want.
 
In my book they do,and they assures us for it too!

View attachment 419983

Pff...
C'mon, it's not their problem if people cannot read and understand the datasheet, clearly stating the impedance is 30R+0.3uF, with its actual consequences on true power dissipated in the driver. This true power doesn't have any relevance in practice anyway. People want to know which amp they can safely use the driver with, and there the power rating @8Ohm is the usual spec given for amps and that's what they refer to here for convenience.
 
I addressed that. I said that some topologies will be pushed out of the market for no good reason because they won't be price competitive if they do as you say.

Customers will also pay more if they trust this kind of spec, opting for a more expensive amp that can produce full power at 20 kHz.

So once again, no free lunch here. You have that option today to pay more but vast majority of you do not.
Well, isn’t it a matter of educating the average consumer about how they often don’t need full power at high frequencies?

While specifications matter to some audio equipment buyers, many consumers focus more on features like overall sound quality, design, and ease of use. They may not consider high-frequency power essential.

This should keep a wider variety of products that deliver good sound quality and value without needing to meet every high-performance spec. As a result, budget-conscious buyers and those looking for simpler options can still find equipment that fits their preferences without feeling pressured to choose the highest-specss. Additionally, manufacturers can still disclose their ratings as they see fit, such as providing burst ratings or other specifications they choose.
You do that already for speakers, yes? You are not demanding that they all go down to 20 Hz at the same level as 100 Hz, correct? You are going to say they are mechanical products so that is OK. By the same token, high current and voltage amplification costs money whereas DAC buffer stage does not. So you have to accept some compromises there as well.
True.
Of course, just like you can buy full range speakers, you can also buy amplifiers that go from DC to 50 kHz+ with no degradation. Just don't say that this has to be pushed to everyone. Customers are in a bliss that they can get a $150 amplifier that produces a ton of clean power but has some limiting at either end of the spectrum. They could pay $2000 and not have that but that is not what they want.
Manufacturers have the liberty to choose which ratings to include in their specifications after disclosing the FTC rating. Customers will still have the chance to buy amplifiers that provide the same value for their money as before. In my opinion, the only difference will be the inclusion of the FTC rating.

Ultimately, I don't believe we’ll gain much more from discussing this in theory. Only time will reveal how it plays out in practice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom