• 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!

Incorporating Burst Power and Slew Rate Tests for Amplifier Reviews

I don't agree. I believe the difference between music and non-music sounds lies in the social intention of the participants of the artistic communication. So if the artist intentionally uses random sources in the creation and the audience accepts that intent, it is, whether they consider it successful or not, musical. And it is therefore not possible to determine music from analysis of a signal.
I did not say anything was non-music.
 
A minuscule (albeit nonzero) amount of Emily Dickinson's oeuvre was published during her lifetime.
Art?
Discuss.
 
I don't think so. In that situation the presumption of artistic intent is hard to avoid. Anyone would reasonably deduce that someone did it intentionally as art or work towards. All I mean here is that the slice of bread that happens to come our of your toaster with a recognizable face on it isn't art because the intent is obviously absent absent. You could ofc make it your own art by framing and displaying it to others.


Right! People get invested in it because they are insecure and compensate by appealing to authority/tradition/consensus/etc. The responsible (existentialist?) thing to do instead is claim your opinion as yours and enjoy or suffer the social consequences.

Art is an inherently social activity. Without the social component I'm not sure we have art.

Yes, way off topic. But interesting.
Art has nothing to do with any social aspect, art can be done alone - it does not need to be communicated to or shared with anyone but yourself. EDIT: There may be a social aspect in you communicating with the world/the art piece through itself.
 
Last edited:
In case anyone is wondering how we got here…

Just like a banana with duct tape is not art, so too are measurements that are not really science like, not science.
Even though in the eyes of some they have a beauty of sorts, they are still somewhat nonsensical.
 
In case anyone is wondering how we got here…

Just like a banana with duct tape is not art, so too are measurements that are not really science like, not science.
Even though in the eyes of some they have a beauty of sorts, they are still somewhat nonsensical.
What? You've never heard of an elegant solution, that wondrous intersection of art and science?

A test result which is readily understandable by those not versed in the relevant science, is art (of a sort) and undeniably beautiful. That kind of brings us full circle: the pursuit of tests that provides convincing (or reassuring) answers even when the questions are not sensibly posed.
 
… That kind of brings us full circle: the pursuit of tests that provides convincing (or reassuring) answers even when the questions are not sensibly posed.
Well I did pose the question of whether there is something relevant happening around clipping.
The idea of 2 tones, 32 or hundreds, is not where things are likely at. IMO.
 
It seems relevant to establish the highest dV/dt of natural or synthetic waveforms that could occur in music or home theater environments.

For instance:
- Snare drum hits and cymbals: approximately 10 V/ms (~ 0.01 V/us)
- Synthesized claps and hits: around 20 V/ms (~ 0.02 V/us)
(I asked chatGPT for this, so take the values with a grain of salt)
I don't recall many amplifiers that I've had and worked on (mostly vintage and early vintage) having below 5-10 V/us

I might be oversimplifying, or simply plain wrong, but my understanding is that if an amplifier has difficulties with slewing, it will likely show increasing distortion at high power levels and higher frequencies.
Therefore, if there are concerns about inadequate slew rate, it would be wise to avoid amplifiers with this limitation and also choose one that provides ample power headroom (voltage) for the intended application.
 
It seems relevant to establish the highest dV/dt of natural or synthetic waveforms that could occur in music or home theater environments.

For instance:
- Snare drum hits and cymbals: approximately 10 V/ms (~ 0.01 V/us)
- Synthesized claps and hits: around 20 V/ms (~ 0.02 V/us)
(I asked chatGPT for this, so take the values with a grain of salt)

taking with a grain of salt as suggested. Surely the dV/dt depends highly on the recorded level and the level of amplification.

The sound of a snare drum hit doesn't exist as dv/dt it exists as a pressure wave in air. To get to a dv/dt we must record it to a voltage and then set an amplifcation of that voltage to go to a speaker to reproduce the sound. Chat GPT therefore is either (as usual ) regurgitating rubbish, or making a whole load of assumptions about recording levels, amplification, speaker sensitivity and listening distance.

For example 20kHz at 400W into a 4 ohm speaker (40V sine wave) has (if I've done the maths right) a maximum dv/dt of about 5V/uS (interestingly fairily close to the slew rate of your vintage amps - whodathunk.) This test would probably shred your eardrum in the ms or so it took to shred the tweeter.

So I would suggest that there is no audible sound that comes close to the 0.01 or 0.02 v/us figures chat gpt has come up with.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom