# How much power do you really need?



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

Hello everyone.

There is a doubt I have since constantly read about power handlings in advices on threads and builds logs... And franquly, sometimes I would like to ask: Really?

Unless you are on Open Show scenario, or High SPL competitions... Why go for 300 w (rms, of course) Midbases? Why do anyone need 4 10's Subs running 1,200 w ???

I'm an enthusiast SQ oriented person, and, to say the truth, my whole systems must deliver barely 800 watts (400 into 6 ch for speakers, and 400 for a single 10 subwoofer in ported box), all this in a medium sized sedan, and I'm really happy with the output I get. Even I can say almost never I push my volume out their limits... (If I do, Its impossible to keep a conversation or hear anything outside de vehicle, so...

Why should I need more power?? Are I missing something?? Are many guys taking in count MAX wattages for their gear? Are they just bragging?


----------



## Arete (Oct 6, 2013)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> There is a doubt I have since constantly read about power handlings in advices on threads and builds logs... And franquly, sometimes I would like to ask: Really?
> 
> ...



Do some reading on headroom. I know that is part of it. The other part is understanding how much return in volume you actually get once you pass say 100 Watts. You have to double the power for a 3decible increase. So say you are running 150 watts to your mid bass but want more volume. To have much noticeable difference you must double the power. This applies to subs as well of course. Now some speakers are also very inefficient. So in order to get the most out of them it is imperative to give it as much as you can. Whereas with say pro audio speakers or a sub like the Idmax v3 underpowering isn’t as much of an issue.


----------



## Grinder (Dec 18, 2016)

^^^^^ X2

I would only add; if you're happy with the output (and SQ) of your system, you certainly _don't_ need more power.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> There is a doubt I have since constantly read about power handlings in advices on threads and builds logs... And franquly, sometimes I would like to ask: Really?
> 
> ...



For regular listening levels, you don't need more power.

Headroom is nice, but it is mostly over hyped. At listening levels 100 watts to a midbass will be every bit as good as 300 watts. Having extra power for dynamic peaks is nice, but an amp is already capable of short dynamic bursts beyond it's RMS power. It is correct that you need double the power for only 3dB more output, but you can have a very respectable system with 50 watts per channel to the front stage (lower frequencies to require more power than higher). Most people significantly over estimate how loud they are actually listening, 100dB from speakers less than 3' is incredibly loud, and that is easily done with less than 100 watts.


----------



## quickaudi07 (May 19, 2010)

I don't know what is too much just because you have 210 W RMS going to your mids is that too much? absolutely no. I love the dynamics of more power to the mids and other speakers, can you blow them yes, but be smart about it and everything will play nice


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

quickaudi07 said:


> I don't know what is too much just because you have 210 W RMS going to your mids is that too much? absolutely no. I love the dynamics of more power to the mids and other speakers, can you blow them yes, but be smart about it and everything will play nice


Correction: 210 watts AVAILABLE to the mids. What is actually going to them is much, much lower.


----------



## quickaudi07 (May 19, 2010)

Hehehe with me, the mids are getting all of it lol ahhaha

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

quickaudi07 said:


> Hehehe with me, the mids are getting all of it lol ahhaha
> 
> Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


No, no they aren't. Unless you constantly listen at 106dB (this is a rough example, if you post the speaker's sensitivity we can be more accurate). At 3dB lower (still ear bleed levels) you're already down to 105 watts, go down to 100dB and you're down to 55 watts.


----------



## quickaudi07 (May 19, 2010)

Yes yes I agree with you but my mids are not so efficient so they could take the power I'm throwing at them. I push them but once in a while I like it loud and clean.. I never push my mids over their limit. 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


----------



## chub'n-tuck (Nov 8, 2017)

Just speculation, but I thinkIt all depends on how much power your speakers require. Getting speakers that require 80 watts and providing them that power will yield positive results, I think underpowering will result in loss of output and clarity. My component speakers require 250watts passive per side. I have compared the sound to that of speakers rated at lower watts and mainly noticed a difference in midbass and midrange response. Speakers that can handle more power can provide more clarity and keep up with the tweeters with increasing volume, resulting in a more full and balanced sound. Initially, when I was underpowering my speakers I noticed a lot of harshness in the tweeters. I believe this was because the tweeters were more easily driven with lower watts, while the midbass/midrange speaker was simply not being provided enough juice. i believe higher power ratings can provide more clarity when being given the proper power and also add some clarity and punch in the midbass region. Midbass requires a lot more power, hence the necessity for a more powerful speaker. I noticed a large difference in the warmth and boldness of vocals. I think midbass is 100-400 hz or something. 400 hz is a crucial band for vocals, and one that (without me even being aware) was lacking in my previous setups. I've noticed improvements in the lower frequency bands that need more power to produce, and they add character and clarity to every aspect of the music. That being said, plenty of lower power rated speakers provide beautiful and full sound given the proper power. I'm not extremely well versed in car audio, it's a hobby. That being said, from what I've observed, this is my best guess as to why sq enthusiasts opt for speakers with a higher power rating.


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

chub'n-tuck said:


> ... My component speakers require 250watts passive per side...


Really? It sound tooooo much! I think you must look for RMS power instead MAX power... 



chub'n-tuck said:


> ...from what I've observed, this is my best guess as to why sq enthusiasts opt for speakers with a higher power rating.


I believe low distortion and built quality go first than power handling for SQ.


----------



## drop1 (Jul 26, 2015)

I always try amps at lower power first. Always. Then I try those same amps bridged. There is no comparison. The difference between 100w and 300w on every speaker I've tried is huge. Everything just sounds better. 

Don't knock it till you try it. When using amps that put out the speakers rms the results are underwhelming. Even at lower volumes.


----------



## Truthunter (Jun 15, 2015)

IDK, I've got ARC 4150xxk "80 watts rms" per channel supplying ZR800s and Morel Virtus 402 component set and I can turn it up to the point where it's way too loud for listening for any longer than just a few minutes without sustaining short term hearing loss.

The ZR800s are in the front doors and have no HPF on them currently until I install sub. The doors are very well acoustically treated & sealed (see my build log). I was considering a change to make more power available to them since they are rated for 150wrms. But I realized that the current volume levels can be turned up to the point that, with certain bass heavy material, I feel like the welds on the door skins may fail... I can feel the kick in the seat and I've been told it can be felt in the rear seats too... I've been asked what subs I have in the rear (none)... on 80wrms... Albeit, I believe this amp is capable of much higher clean dynamic power. Maybe, once they serve as mid-bass only duty I will see the need for more power but I really don't think the doors can handle it without additional metal bracing.

So, from my experience, I really don't see a need for so much power on midbass speakers if using a quality amp that puts down clean dynamic power and see even less of a need with mids/tweets.

Another thing I don't understand the use of oversized power wire & fusing... maybe carry over from the 1k+ watt bass head crowd :dunno: But most are using class D amps these days the require less amperage and music is dynamic so the max amperage spikes occur is split second bursts. I think some just feel better/safer with overkill.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

chub'n-tuck said:


> Just speculation, but I thinkIt all depends on how much power your speakers require. Getting speakers that require 80 watts and providing them that power will yield positive results, I think underpowering will result in loss of output and clarity. My component speakers require 250watts passive per side. I have compared the sound to that of speakers rated at lower watts and mainly noticed a difference in midbass and midrange response. Speakers that can handle more power can provide more clarity and keep up with the tweeters with increasing volume, resulting in a more full and balanced sound. Initially, when I was underpowering my speakers I noticed a lot of harshness in the tweeters. I believe this was because the tweeters were more easily driven with lower watts, while the midbass/midrange speaker was simply not being provided enough juice. i believe higher power ratings can provide more clarity when being given the proper power and also add some clarity and punch in the midbass region. Midbass requires a lot more power, hence the necessity for a more powerful speaker. I noticed a large difference in the warmth and boldness of vocals. I think midbass is 100-400 hz or something. 400 hz is a crucial band for vocals, and one that (without me even being aware) was lacking in my previous setups. I've noticed improvements in the lower frequency bands that need more power to produce, and they add character and clarity to every aspect of the music. That being said, plenty of lower power rated speakers provide beautiful and full sound given the proper power. I'm not extremely well versed in car audio, it's a hobby. That being said, from what I've observed, this is my best guess as to why sq enthusiasts opt for speakers with a higher power rating.


Speakers don't require any power. Their power rating is a limit, not a requirement. You cannot underpower a speaker, less power will result in less output, but not less clarity. Speakers that can handle more power in no way offer more clarity, they can simply handle more power. 

Power and clarity have nothing to do with each other. Some speakers that can handle more power, are better speakers than some that can handle less power, but there is no relationship between power and clarity. 

We perceive loud as better psychologically at first, even when louder is more distorted. It could be easy to believe that a speaker that is getting more power (louder) sounds better, when if fact it has more distortion, and less clarity.

Even a speaker with terribly efficiency of 80dB per watt will reach 104dB with 250 watts, and that's a single speaker. Add the other one from the pair and you have 107dB. At listening levels you are not using anywhere near that kind of power.


----------



## chub'n-tuck (Nov 8, 2017)

gijoe said:


> chub'n-tuck said:
> 
> 
> > Just speculation, but I thinkIt all depends on how much power your speakers require. Getting speakers that require 80 watts and providing them that power will yield positive results, I think underpowering will result in loss of output and clarity. My component speakers require 250watts passive per side. I have compared the sound to that of speakers rated at lower watts and mainly noticed a difference in midbass and midrange response. Speakers that can handle more power can provide more clarity and keep up with the tweeters with increasing volume, resulting in a more full and balanced sound. Initially, when I was underpowering my speakers I noticed a lot of harshness in the tweeters. I believe this was because the tweeters were more easily driven with lower watts, while the midbass/midrange speaker was simply not being provided enough juice. i believe higher power ratings can provide more clarity when being given the proper power and also add some clarity and punch in the midbass region. Midbass requires a lot more power, hence the necessity for a more powerful speaker. I noticed a large difference in the warmth and boldness of vocals. I think midbass is 100-400 hz or something. 400 hz is a crucial band for vocals, and one that (without me even being aware) was lacking in my previous setups. I've noticed improvements in the lower frequency bands that need more power to produce, and they add character and clarity to every aspect of the music. That being said, plenty of lower power rated speakers provide beautiful and full sound given the proper power. I'm not extremely well versed in car audio, it's a hobby. That being said, from what I've observed, this is my best guess as to why sq enthusiasts opt for speakers with a higher power rating.
> ...


. Good to know, wasn't aware of that. I will say though, that I thought my speakers sounded like crap at all volumes until I gave them more power. Now they are the best speakers I've ever owned. I don't play it too loud either, I prefer sound quality. What would cause such a drastic difference? It seems the added power directly resulted in added clarity and sound quality


----------



## chasingSQ (Sep 25, 2017)

the proper answer is all !


----------



## chub'n-tuck (Nov 8, 2017)

drop1 said:


> I always try amps at lower power first. Always. Then I try those same amps bridged. There is no comparison. The difference between 100w and 300w on every speaker I've tried is huge. Everything just sounds better.
> 
> Don't knock it till you try it. When using amps that put out the speakers rms the results are underwhelming. Even at lower volumes.


Thats what I've experienced myself. I was so disappointed til I bridged my amp to supply more power to the front stage, only after doing so did I understand why my speakers cost what they did. The change in quality (not volume!) was palpable.


----------



## chub'n-tuck (Nov 8, 2017)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> chub'n-tuck said:
> 
> 
> > ... My component speakers require 250watts passive per side...
> ...


youre right that was too much. Whoops. The peak power rating is 250, continuous is 125


----------



## Arete (Oct 6, 2013)

gijoe said:


> For regular listening levels, you don't need more power.
> 
> Headroom is nice, but it is mostly over hyped. At listening levels 100 watts to a midbass will be every bit as good as 300 watts. Having extra power for dynamic peaks is nice, but an amp is already capable of short dynamic bursts beyond it's RMS power. It is correct that you need double the power for only 3dB more output, but you can have a very respectable system with 50 watts per channel to the front stage (lower frequencies to require more power than higher). Most people significantly over estimate how loud they are actually listening, 100dB from speakers less than 3' is incredibly loud, and that is easily done with less than 100 watts.


Very good point. I think the bigger reason here is the headroom debate. It’s also a ton of anecdotal evidence from people that are running a lot of power that it sounds better. Anecdotal evidence can go a long way when you are dealing with people wanting to do everything they can to improve the sound. Plus I think people just err on the side of caution... like “I got this extra amp on hand I might as well bridge it and see what happens.” 

Chances are if I had a 4 channel on hand at this moment I’d be one of those people. Just because. ?


----------



## quickaudi07 (May 19, 2010)

I'm running Mosconi Zero4 and Zero1 for my system. I have head room for days. But at the same time I like to turn it up and want my system to keep up with my needs. And I'm very happy my system and satisfied, till next upgrade. Pillars are next and tweeters in OEM location  thinking of going IB as well..

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

Garcbomber said:


> Have you ever sat in a 140-150db+ SQL application?
> 
> I'm guessing not, you never forget the feeling. Take a little puff the magic dragon beforehand, then tell me your system is "enough".


140dB is well beyond the threshold of pain. A person literally cannot perceive sound quality at that level. Listening at that level will cause immediate damage.


----------



## chub'n-tuck (Nov 8, 2017)

gijoe said:


> Garcbomber said:
> 
> 
> > Have you ever sat in a 140-150db+ SQL application?
> ...


immediate damage begins at 110 decibels if I'm not mistaken. 86db is when hearing loss begins to become an issue.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

chub'n-tuck said:


> . Good to know, wasn't aware of that. I will say though, that I thought my speakers sounded like crap at all volumes until I gave them more power. Now they are the best speakers I've ever owned. I don't play it too loud either, I prefer sound quality. What would cause such a drastic difference? It seems the added power directly resulted in added clarity and sound quality


What would cause the difference? Did you add a proper amp when you were running off of head unit power before? Adding power, as long as the previous power was clean and unclipped/distorted, did NOT add clarity. Our minds are powerful and will justify anything that we spend our time and money on. You heard a difference largely because you convinced yourself beforehand that you would.


----------



## quickaudi07 (May 19, 2010)




----------



## Grinder (Dec 18, 2016)

chub'n-tuck said:


> immediate damage begins at 110 decibels if I'm not mistaken. 86db is when hearing loss begins to become an issue.


Dangerous Decibels » How Loud is Too Loud?


Bear in mind that music is not continuous dB.

And I've been lead to believe that non-distorted music doesn't have quite the same NIHL potential as distorted music.


----------



## JH1973 (Apr 21, 2017)

Great topic OP and very legitimate question.The appeal for more power is there for a lot of car audio enthusiasts.And the question of "why" is a good one.I believe the bottom line is that more power is better because it takes much less effort to achieve the same result.

That last sentence does not answer the "why" for a lot of people but it is a very important truth when it comes to sound quality.


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

Grinder said:


> Dangerous Decibels » How Loud is Too Loud?


Good Infographic.

@Garcbomber should take a look


----------



## Garcbomber (May 26, 2017)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> Good Infographic.
> 
> @Garcbomber should take a look


Annual hearing work check is tip top! My vehicle is far from sniffing 140s today, just a good massage on my work commute is enough now that I'm in my 30s.

You'd be surprised on how many people have hearing loss just from driving with their window(s) down often, it's the higher frequencies that will get you.


----------



## drop1 (Jul 26, 2015)

chub'n-tuck said:


> drop1 said:
> 
> 
> > I always try amps at lower power first. Always. Then I try those same amps bridged. There is no comparison. The difference between 100w and 300w on every speaker I've tried is huge. Everything just sounds better.
> ...


Same. That power brings so much goodness. Punch, snap, greatly improved midbass and transients are very 3 dimensional.
With low power everything sounds so static and flat.


----------



## chub'n-tuck (Nov 8, 2017)

gijoe said:


> chub'n-tuck said:
> 
> 
> > . Good to know, wasn't aware of that. I will say though, that I thought my speakers sounded like crap at all volumes until I gave them more power. Now they are the best speakers I've ever owned. I don't play it too loud either, I prefer sound quality. What would cause such a drastic difference? It seems the added power directly resulted in added clarity and sound quality
> ...


No, I didn't convince myself beforehand of anything. That's preposterous. using "our minds are powerful" as a means to strengthen your point and invalidate my observation is just absurd. It's true, our minds are powerful and can play tricks on us, however that is not always the case. Its definitely not the case here. I'll give you all of the factors and events that took place that lead me to this conclusion. I bought 2 sets of hsk165 components for front and rear and powered them with a ks300.4 amp by arc audio. All speakers were run passive and provided 90watts each. The sound was not worth the money and I began scouring the internet for answers. The speakers produced lackluster midrange, not a lot of midbass, and the highs were immensely harsh (to the point it was too uncomfortable). After going through all potential culprits, speaker fase, equalizing, etc I was getting nowhere. I wasn't pleased and completely willing to abandon the speakers for another set if need be. Someone suggested I bridge the amp and just use the front soundstage. This would provide each component set with 350watts of power. A little bit over the recommended limit, but various forums explored this combo with no bad results. In fact, many suggested this combo in this configuration. After bridging I was just taken back by the clarity. I could finally hear all of the subtle and not so subtle nuances that I wanted to. It was like I was missing entire components of the songs. In various songs on my headsets i would be surprised to hear certain notes being played because the speakers simply weren't able to reproduce the music correctly. On top of that, the harshness is nearly completely eliminated and symbol crashes and other high treble instruments and sounds are audible and recognizeable, as opposed to the tinny and harsh mush being produced prior. If I had them side by side the difference would be night and day. I'm not convincing myself of anything, the difference is there. I can attribute no other logical factor to the increase in sound quality other than the watts being provided. I can finally hear all of the instruments in the song, none are nearly inaudible or left out. Trust me, if I wasn't pleased with the result i would have purchased a new set. I was actually so unpleased prior to the change that I wanted my stock infinity system back.


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

drop1 said:


> Same. That power brings so much goodness. Punch, snap, greatly improved midbass and transients are very 3 dimensional.
> With low power everything sounds so static and flat.


How?

A smaller amplifier with the same damping factor and noise/distortion should be the same.
Unless the smaller is amp is clipping how are the two amps different in the level below the ~50W range?

Now in tautological sense, a better amp is better, but is it better from more power, or are the better amps just generally also more powerful ones?


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

chub'n-tuck said:


> No, I didn't convince myself beforehand of anything. That's preposterous. using "our minds are powerful" as a means to strengthen your point and invalidate my observation is just absurd. It's true, our minds are powerful and can play tricks on us, however that is not always the case. Its definitely not the case here. I'll give you all of the factors and events that took place that lead me to this conclusion. I bought 2 sets of hsk165 components for front and rear and powered them with a ks300.4 amp by arc audio. All speakers were run passive and provided 90watts each. The sound was not worth the money and I began scouring the internet for answers. The speakers produced lackluster midrange, not a lot of midbass, and the highs were immensely harsh (to the point it was too uncomfortable). After going through all potential culprits, speaker fase, equalizing, etc I was getting nowhere. I wasn't pleased and completely willing to abandon the speakers for another set if need be. Someone suggested I bridge the amp and just use the front soundstage. This would provide each component set with 350watts of power. A little bit over the recommended limit, but various forums explored this combo with no bad results. In fact, many suggested this combo in this configuration. After bridging I was just taken back by the clarity. I could finally hear all of the subtle and not so subtle nuances that I wanted to. It was like I was missing entire components of the songs. In various songs on my headsets i would be surprised to hear certain notes being played because the speakers simply weren't able to reproduce the music correctly. On top of that, the harshness is nearly completely eliminated and symbol crashes and other high treble instruments and sounds are audible and recognizeable, as opposed to the tinny and harsh mush being produced prior. If I had them side by side the difference would be night and day. I'm not convincing myself of anything, the difference is there. I can attribute no other logical factor to the increase in sound quality other than the watts being provided. I can finally hear all of the instruments in the song, none are nearly inaudible or left out. Trust me, if I wasn't pleased with the result i would have purchased a new set. I was actually so unpleased prior to the change that I wanted my stock infinity system back.


What's preposterous is that you're dismissing the affect of psycho-acoustics and claiming that more power (even though at a give listening level you were using the same power bridged as not bridged) smoothed out "immensely harsh" high frequencies. More power cannot do that.


Output is directly proportional to power. If you are listening at 90dB the speakers are receiving the same amount of power whether there is a 100 watt amp providing that power, or a 1,000 watt amp. You do understand that, right?


----------



## Arete (Oct 6, 2013)

:snacks:


----------



## chub'n-tuck (Nov 8, 2017)

gijoe said:


> chub'n-tuck said:
> 
> 
> > No, I didn't convince myself beforehand of anything. That's preposterous. using "our minds are powerful" as a means to strengthen your point and invalidate my observation is just absurd. It's true, our minds are powerful and can play tricks on us, however that is not always the case. Its definitely not the case here. I'll give you all of the factors and events that took place that lead me to this conclusion. I bought 2 sets of hsk165 components for front and rear and powered them with a ks300.4 amp by arc audio. All speakers were run passive and provided 90watts each. The sound was not worth the money and I began scouring the internet for answers. The speakers produced lackluster midrange, not a lot of midbass, and the highs were immensely harsh (to the point it was too uncomfortable). After going through all potential culprits, speaker fase, equalizing, etc I was getting nowhere. I wasn't pleased and completely willing to abandon the speakers for another set if need be. Someone suggested I bridge the amp and just use the front soundstage. This would provide each component set with 350watts of power. A little bit over the recommended limit, but various forums explored this combo with no bad results. In fact, many suggested this combo in this configuration. After bridging I was just taken back by the clarity. I could finally hear all of the subtle and not so subtle nuances that I wanted to. It was like I was missing entire components of the songs. In various songs on my headsets i would be surprised to hear certain notes being played because the speakers simply weren't able to reproduce the music correctly. On top of that, the harshness is nearly completely eliminated and symbol crashes and other high treble instruments and sounds are audible and recognizeable, as opposed to the tinny and harsh mush being produced prior. If I had them side by side the difference would be night and day. I'm not convincing myself of anything, the difference is there. I can attribute no other logical factor to the increase in sound quality other than the watts being provided. I can finally hear all of the instruments in the song, none are nearly inaudible or left out. Trust me, if I wasn't pleased with the result i would have purchased a new set. I was actually so unpleased prior to the change that I wanted my stock infinity system back.
> ...


 I'm not dismissing psychoacoustics, I'm saying it isn't the case here. My brother can attest to the immense difference this simple change made. Yes, I do understand that output is proportional to power. This change was to the sound quality, clarity, and harshness. These were the only things I wanted to fix. The system got abnoxiously loud before, it just sounded like crap. I could care less how loud it gets, I'm not trying to lose hearing. Perhaps the change is some other factor that went undetected. Maybe my amplifier has something going on where it is not working proplerly when using 4 channels. Maybe I should examine the amp, it was used when I bought it. I swear on my life though, the sound changed greatly. I didn't even want to listen to it before.


----------



## Grinder (Dec 18, 2016)

chub'n-tuck said:


> No, I didn't convince myself beforehand of anything. That's preposterous. using "our minds are powerful" as a means to strengthen your point and invalidate my observation is just absurd. It's true, our minds are powerful and can play tricks on us, however that is not always the case. Its definitely not the case here. I'll give you all of the factors and events that took place that lead me to this conclusion. I bought 2 sets of hsk165 components for front and rear and powered them with a ks300.4 amp by arc audio. All speakers were run passive and provided 90watts each. The sound was not worth the money and I began scouring the internet for answers. The speakers produced lackluster midrange, not a lot of midbass, and the highs were immensely harsh (to the point it was too uncomfortable). After going through all potential culprits, speaker fase, equalizing, etc I was getting nowhere. I wasn't pleased and completely willing to abandon the speakers for another set if need be. Someone suggested I bridge the amp and just use the front soundstage. This would provide each component set with 350watts of power. A little bit over the recommended limit, but various forums explored this combo with no bad results. In fact, many suggested this combo in this configuration. After bridging I was just taken back by the clarity. I could finally hear all of the subtle and not so subtle nuances that I wanted to. It was like I was missing entire components of the songs. In various songs on my headsets i would be surprised to hear certain notes being played because the speakers simply weren't able to reproduce the music correctly. On top of that, the harshness is nearly completely eliminated and symbol crashes and other high treble instruments and sounds are audible and recognizeable, as opposed to the tinny and harsh mush being produced prior. If I had them side by side the difference would be night and day. I'm not convincing myself of anything, the difference is there. I can attribute no other logical factor to the increase in sound quality other than the watts being provided. I can finally hear all of the instruments in the song, none are nearly inaudible or left out. Trust me, if I wasn't pleased with the result i would have purchased a new set. I was actually so unpleased prior to the change that I wanted my stock infinity system back.


Check the calibration of your instrumentation. 



> "...when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth..."
> 
> - Sherlock Holmes (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle)


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

chub'n-tuck said:


> I'm not dismissing psychoacoustics, I'm saying it isn't the case here. My brother can attest to the immense difference this simple change made. Yes, I do understand that output is proportional to power. This change was to the sound quality, clarity, and harshness. These were the only things I wanted to fix. The system got abnoxiously loud before, it just sounded like crap. I could care less how loud it gets, I'm not trying to lose hearing. Perhaps the change is some other factor that went undetected. Maybe my amplifier has something going on where it is not working proplerly when using 4 channels. Maybe I should examine the amp, it was used when I bought it. I swear on my life though, the sound changed greatly. I didn't even want to listen to it before.


I'm not doubting that you heard a difference, I'm not even doubting that there was an actually difference, I'm saying that adding more power isn't what did it.

Here's another fun one to chew on:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echoic_memory

Basically, we cannot remember with any real accuracy sounds that we hear beyond 3-4 seconds. Spending a few minutes, hours, days, whatever, swapping equipment and trying to make accurate before and after comparisons is impossible. You can hear drastic differences, but not subtle ones. We can easily convince ourselves of changes that we hear despite our inability to actually hear them. It's pretty interesting.


----------



## Truthunter (Jun 15, 2015)

Speaker break-in or maybe gain structure


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

Truthunter said:


> Speaker break-in or maybe gain structure


Gain structure is literally just power, unless there was clipping in the first place, it would be the same as adjusting the volume knob. 

It is possible that in the first scenario the amp was being clipped, which is why is sounded so bad. But it's not fair to say that more power made the speakers sound better. Sending the speakers a clean signal instead of a clipped on is what fixed the problem, not more power.


----------



## Grinder (Dec 18, 2016)

Truthunter said:


> *Speaker break-in* or maybe gain structure


I thought of break-in too - but ruled it out, based on the suddenness of the change.


----------



## chub'n-tuck (Nov 8, 2017)

gijoe said:


> Truthunter said:
> 
> 
> > Speaker break-in or maybe gain structure
> ...


i checked for clipping prior to resorting to a bridged set up and messed around with the gains. So it's definitely not that.


----------



## Grinder (Dec 18, 2016)

gijoe said:


> ...Here's another fun one to chew on:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echoic_memory
> 
> Basically, we cannot remember with any real accuracy sounds that we hear beyond 3-4 seconds. Spending a few minutes, hours, days, whatever, swapping equipment and trying to make accurate before and after comparisons is impossible. You can hear drastic differences, but not subtle ones. We can easily convince ourselves of changes that we hear despite our inability to actually hear them. It's pretty interesting.


Very interesting (though I don't really understand much of it). 

Funny... I'd almost swear I've "heard" this resonating effect in my mind (but then, maybe that's how it works).


----------



## chub'n-tuck (Nov 8, 2017)

gijoe said:


> chub'n-tuck said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not dismissing psychoacoustics, I'm saying it isn't the case here. My brother can attest to the immense difference this simple change made. Yes, I do understand that output is proportional to power. This change was to the sound quality, clarity, and harshness. These were the only things I wanted to fix. The system got abnoxiously loud before, it just sounded like crap. I could care less how loud it gets, I'm not trying to lose hearing. Perhaps the change is some other factor that went undetected. Maybe my amplifier has something going on where it is not working proplerly when using 4 channels. Maybe I should examine the amp, it was used when I bought it. I swear on my life though, the sound changed greatly. I didn't even want to listen to it before.
> ...


You make a good point, and it's probably attributed to some other factor that I missed in my inspection the first time around. I think this anomaly is worth looking into. I wouldn't make such a point about it, if the change didn't take place in a 5 minute period and make such a drastic change. It is amazing what our brains are capable and in-capable of. I'll give that link a read. I don't want to take this thread hostage, I just used my experience to add to the convo, but I've probably been lead to believe something incorrect due to the events that have took place with my setup over the past couple days.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

chub'n-tuck said:


> You make a good point, and it's probably attributed to some other factor that I missed in my inspection the first time around. I think this anomaly is worth looking into. I wouldn't make such a point about it, if the change didn't take place in a 5 minute period and make such a drastic change. It is amazing what our brains are capable and in-capable of. I'll give that link a read. I don't want to take this thread hostage, I just used my experience to add to the convo, but I've probably been lead to believe something incorrect due to the events that have took place with my setup over the past couple days.


It's not just you. The idea that power somehow increases clarity is a myth that many people believe. When an amplifier amplifies the signal it has no way of adding clarity to the signal (it can color it with distortion though), it simply makes the signal "bigger." The same information is there regardless of how loudly you play it.


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

chub'n-tuck said:


> ... My brother can attest to the immense difference this simple change made. Yes, I do understand that output is proportional to power. This change was to the sound quality, clarity, and harshness. These were the only things I wanted to fix. The system got abnoxiously loud before, it just sounded like crap. I could care less how loud it gets, I'm not trying to lose hearing. Perhaps the change is some other factor that went undetected. Maybe my amplifier has something going on where it is not working proplerly when using 4 channels. Maybe I should examine the amp, it was used when I bought it. I swear on my life though, the sound changed greatly. I didn't even want to listen to it before.


Of course we believe it ... but this "great" improvement in the quality of the sound (regardless of the available power), can only be explained through the faulty previous amplifier. Or not?


----------



## Grinder (Dec 18, 2016)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> Of course we believe it ... but this "great" improvement in the quality of the sound (regardless of the available power), can only be explained through the faulty previous amplifier. Or not?


Same amplifier was bridged...


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

Grinder said:


> Same amplifier was bridged...


I Mean previous test stage hehehe...

Men... those electronic devices just fail sometimes... I don´t know...


----------



## Arete (Oct 6, 2013)

Interesting read. 

Amplifier Headroom - Technical Info & How To's - SSA Car Audio Forum


----------



## Arete (Oct 6, 2013)

And another.... Blog - Soft to Loud: The Nature of Power and Dynamic Headroom | Axiom Audio


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

More power = potential for more volume. That's it.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## maybebigfootisblurr (Nov 4, 2011)

chub'n-tuck said:


> No, I didn't convince myself beforehand of anything. That's preposterous. using "our minds are powerful" as a means to strengthen your point and invalidate my observation is just absurd. It's true, our minds are powerful and can play tricks on us, however that is not always the case. Its definitely not the case here. I'll give you all of the factors and events that took place that lead me to this conclusion. I bought 2 sets of hsk165 components for front and rear and powered them with a ks300.4 amp by arc audio. All speakers were run passive and provided 90watts each. The sound was not worth the money and I began scouring the internet for answers. The speakers produced lackluster midrange, not a lot of midbass, and the highs were immensely harsh (to the point it was too uncomfortable). After going through all potential culprits, speaker fase, equalizing, etc I was getting nowhere. I wasn't pleased and completely willing to abandon the speakers for another set if need be. Someone suggested I bridge the amp and just use the front soundstage. This would provide each component set with 350watts of power. A little bit over the recommended limit, but various forums explored this combo with no bad results. In fact, many suggested this combo in this configuration. After bridging I was just taken back by the clarity. I could finally hear all of the subtle and not so subtle nuances that I wanted to. It was like I was missing entire components of the songs. In various songs on my headsets i would be surprised to hear certain notes being played because the speakers simply weren't able to reproduce the music correctly. On top of that, the harshness is nearly completely eliminated and symbol crashes and other high treble instruments and sounds are audible and recognizeable, as opposed to the tinny and harsh mush being produced prior. If I had them side by side the difference would be night and day. I'm not convincing myself of anything, the difference is there. I can attribute no other logical factor to the increase in sound quality other than the watts being provided. I can finally hear all of the instruments in the song, none are nearly inaudible or left out. Trust me, if I wasn't pleased with the result i would have purchased a new set. I was actually so unpleased prior to the change that I wanted my stock infinity system back.


I feel that the key factor in his experience has been overlooked. Going from front and rear speakers (no processor) to front only will almost definitely provide better clarity.


----------



## BrainMach1 (Jun 19, 2014)

For the more power discussion, I found these comments by Stephen Mantz in post 8 to be interesting. 


http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63751

This leads me to believe "head room" talk is overrated. 

More power mean more volume.

I happen to be using a series 7 Zeus and Thor soon to be replaced because they are both acting "funny"


Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## seafish (Aug 1, 2012)

kfinch said:


> I feel that the key factor in his experience has been overlooked. Going from front and rear speakers (no processor) to front only will almost definitely provide better clarity.


That is an EXCELLENT and perfectly valid point. Multiple speakers playing the same frequencies can and will cause "comb filtering" which can and will cause smearing and frequency cancellation among other things.


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

kfinch said:


> I feel that the key factor in his experience has been overlooked. Going from front and rear speakers (no processor) to front only will almost definitely provide better clarity.


Good point...


----------



## chub'n-tuck (Nov 8, 2017)

kfinch said:


> chub'n-tuck said:
> 
> 
> > No, I didn't convince myself beforehand of anything. That's preposterous. using "our minds are powerful" as a means to strengthen your point and invalidate my observation is just absurd. It's true, our minds are powerful and can play tricks on us, however that is not always the case. Its definitely not the case here. I'll give you all of the factors and events that took place that lead me to this conclusion. I bought 2 sets of hsk165 components for front and rear and powered them with a ks300.4 amp by arc audio. All speakers were run passive and provided 90watts each. The sound was not worth the money and I began scouring the internet for answers. The speakers produced lackluster midrange, not a lot of midbass, and the highs were immensely harsh (to the point it was too uncomfortable). After going through all potential culprits, speaker fase, equalizing, etc I was getting nowhere. I wasn't pleased and completely willing to abandon the speakers for another set if need be. Someone suggested I bridge the amp and just use the front soundstage. This would provide each component set with 350watts of power. A little bit over the recommended limit, but various forums explored this combo with no bad results. In fact, many suggested this combo in this configuration. After bridging I was just taken back by the clarity. I could finally hear all of the subtle and not so subtle nuances that I wanted to. It was like I was missing entire components of the songs. In various songs on my headsets i would be surprised to hear certain notes being played because the speakers simply weren't able to reproduce the music correctly. On top of that, the harshness is nearly completely eliminated and symbol crashes and other high treble instruments and sounds are audible and recognizeable, as opposed to the tinny and harsh mush being produced prior. If I had them side by side the difference would be night and day. I'm not convincing myself of anything, the difference is there. I can attribute no other logical factor to the increase in sound quality other than the watts being provided. I can finally hear all of the instruments in the song, none are nearly inaudible or left out. Trust me, if I wasn't pleased with the result i would have purchased a new set. I was actually so unpleased prior to the change that I wanted my stock infinity system back.
> ...


the rear was only being played when I had passengers in the car. Otherwise the fader was set completely to the front.


----------



## Arete (Oct 6, 2013)

An example of some serious headroom. 

PASMAG | PERFORMANCE AUTO AND SOUND - The Doctor Is In: Scott Buwalda's 2003 Infiniti G35


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

All the talk of "headroom" is complete nonsense.......speakers have no "overthrow" built in.....if a speaker is driven to its either thermal or excursion limits at 50 watts, there is no more to be had, so feeding it 200 watts is useless, and a waste of your time and money, not to mention severely limiting the lifespan of their drivers if they dig a little to deep into the amps reserves and overheat the coils. Most people drastically overestimate the power required to drive their speakers, and overdriving them simply leads to distortion.......of course some folks buy very powerful amplifiers, then bury their gains, and tout all this headroom they're taking advantage of.........nonsense.


----------



## Truthunter (Jun 15, 2015)

Arete said:


> Interesting read.
> 
> Amplifier Headroom - Technical Info & How To's - SSA Car Audio Forum


Very good read. I've read elsewhere that judging an amplifiers output capability by just a RMS rating is flawed/incomplete and that article kind of explains why. What I got out of it is an amp can test fine for it's RMS rating but fall on it's face during short transients. Better amplifiers can produce those short transient levels without significant rise in distortion. I think the majority of the mainstream amplifiers out there are designed for RMS ratings (what consumers look for) and don't perform well for transients... so a fix is just to use amps rated way higher in order to make up for it. Makes sense. Also makes sense why some amps are 2-4x the price of others with the same RMS ratings.


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

Arete said:


> An example of some serious headroom.
> 
> PASMAG | PERFORMANCE AUTO AND SOUND - The Doctor Is In: Scott Buwalda's 2003 Infiniti G35


Clearly, this was a marketing oriented project (putting emphasis in two things: this brand is innovative enough to run tweeterless, and it can handle HUGE amount of power with not being damaged, and of course, sound great and looking good).

Nothing wrong with this, very legit practice. But not a real life practical system.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Truthunter said:


> Very good read. I've read elsewhere that judging an amplifiers output capability by just a RMS rating is flawed/incomplete and that article kind of explains why. What I got out of it is an amp can test fine for it's RMS rating but fall on it's face during short transients. Better amplifiers can produce those short transient levels without significant rise in distortion. I think the majority of the mainstream amplifiers out there are designed for RMS ratings (what consumers look for) and don't perform well for transients... so a fix is just to use amps rated way higher in order to make up for it. Makes sense. Also makes sense why some amps are 2-4x the price of others with the same RMS ratings.


I agree with this, well, mostly.....I think that power ratings are a very poor measure of an amplifier's performance, almost as inconsistent as power handling for speakers. I once replaced a home reciever with another model with about half the rated power. The origional was a pioneer with 125 watts, the replacement was an onkyo with a 70 watt rating. To say the onkyo wiped the floor with the pioneer would be a major understatement. Same thing a few years later with a 100 wpc kenwood car amp, changed to a "underrated" mtx with 37.5 wpc.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

claydo said:


> All the talk of "headroom" is complete nonsense.......speakers have no "overthrow" built in.....if a speaker is driven to its either thermal or excursion limits at 50 watts, there is no more to be had, so feeding it 200 watts is useless, and a waste of your time and money, not to mention severely limiting the lifespan of their drivers if they dig a little to deep into the amps reserves and overheat the coils. Most people drastically overestimate the power required to drive their speakers, and overdriving them simply leads to distortion.......of course some folks buy very powerful amplifiers, then bury their gains, and tout all this headroom they're taking advantage of.........nonsense.


the fact that this is coming from Clay should mean something lol


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> the fact that this is coming from Clay should mean something lol


Lmao....I once argued the whole headroom thing with a member here, he told me that only folks who built loud systems and listened above "conversational" volume would ever understand the need for all this headroom......I may have peed a lil bit laughing before I responded!


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

claydo said:


> All the talk of "headroom" is complete nonsense.......speakers have no "overthrow" built in.....if a speaker is driven to its either thermal or excursion limits at 50 watts, there is no more to be had, so feeding it 200 watts is useless, and a waste of your time and money, not to mention severely limiting the lifespan of their drivers if they dig a little to deep into the amps reserves and overheat the coils. Most people drastically overestimate the power required to drive their speakers, and overdriving them simply leads to distortion.......of course some folks buy very powerful amplifiers, then bury their gains, and tout all this headroom they're taking advantage of.........nonsense.


It is not complete non sense, but practically maybe it is...

Even if the there is no thermal issues if the amplifier clips, then the speaker will driven with a squarer-wave/position.

if it is a band limited 4K+ tweeter getting a watt then that is usually ~86dB, and in a weighting with the rest (Mids and woofer) then it should be approaching 95dB. Then with headroom it should be peaking ~40W at the same RMS listening level.

Of course without some SPL and voltage/wattage, then a guess of clipping or headroom needs is purely a guess... usually a wrong one.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

i knew he would chime in.. lol

my car has 50 watts per channel on the front stage (before eq and level matching). i'd love for you to tell me its not loud enough after listening to it. some members here have. I know some were very surprised to hear that


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

SkizeR said:


> i knew he would chime in.. lol
> 
> my car has 50 watts per channel on the front stage (before eq and level matching). i'd love for you to tell me its not loud enough after listening to it. some members here have. I know some were very surprised to hear that


Statements like this make me feel I'm not crazy...


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

Werd Nick, folks expect my total to be rated in the thousands, not hundreds, so the real numbers always confound them. A watt rated @ 1% distortion is in no way an accurate comparison to a watt rated into .05%......some designs are simply superior to others, as there are many factors at play when comparing power......

And, yet another wrench into the game......monetary investment is not always reflective of the competency of the design.......just sayin.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> Statements like this make me feel I'm not crazy...


you arent. all things equal, more power = potential for more volume. thats it


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

claydo said:


> Werd Nick, folks expect my total to be rated in the thousands, not hundreds, so the real numbers always confound them. A watt rated @ 1% distortion is in no way an accurate comparison to a watt rated into .05%......some designs are simply superior to others, as there are many factors at play when comparing power......
> 
> And, yet another wrench into the game......monetary investment is not always reflective of the competency of the design.......just sayin.


yup. my sub amp CAN put out 1400 watts, but i probably use less than 200 for 95% of my listening (i keep my remote gain knob turned way down, just cracked above nothing). so yeah, while keeping things linear and maxing out my front stage, im using way less than 1k total.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> you arent. all things equal, more power = potential for more volume. thats it


Quite true, just remember the limits to this potential are set by the drivers, not the power available. (Assuming limits of the drivers are met by the amplifiers.....of course.)


----------



## Grinder (Dec 18, 2016)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> Statements like this make me feel I'm not crazy...


“Insanity is contagious.”  

― Joseph Heller, Catch-22


----------



## SQLnovice (Jul 22, 2014)

SkizeR said:


> i knew he would chime in.. lol
> 
> my car has 50 watts per channel on the front stage (before eq and level matching). i'd love for you to tell me its not loud enough after listening to it. some members here have. I know some were very surprised to hear that


Install in progress and I was a little concerned that 100 watts to my TM65v2 will not be enough. 
Thanks 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

SQLnovice said:


> Install in progress and I was a little concerned that 100 watts to my TM65v2 will not be enough.
> Thanks
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk


Well to be fair. I tuned a set of those that were on 125 watts just yesterday. They had lower output than everything else.

Disclaimer: I did not look at, nor mess with any of the amp gain settings. 

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## GEM592 (Jun 19, 2015)

Like anything in the engineering world, it is a trade off.

In my opinion, adding more power is often the easiest way to improve overall performance. (Somebody above said it makes everything easier, I agree.) First, it is hard to argue that it hurts to add power - only in install inconvenience and cost. Second, adding power is easy - just increase it. Especially in these days of higher efficiency amps, I would think people would jump all over it. It is okay to be satisfied with the output of a driver at a certain level, but that doesn't mean there isn't more there. And don't talk to me about driver power specs. Please. 

I think many, especially on this forum, are essentially minimalists. I get it. Cars these days are smaller, and it is harder to accommodate larger installs in general. You want to think there is no better way to do what you did. Less is more. There is real life and all of that. Plus the wife doesn't want you to take all the cargo area. Fine.

I will say more about the headroom concept some other time. It is short-sighted to dismiss it out of hand as car audio mythology.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

GEM592 said:


> I will say more about the headroom concept some other time. It is short-sighted to dismiss it out of hand as car audio mythology.


im all for it. hell, i recently did 2 installs that both had 300+ watts per speaker of class A/B power. but, i think its asinine that a lot here recommend throwing 3x the rated power to every person in every situation, and to people who dont understand why. Its almost always never needed


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> im all for it. hell, i recently did 2 installs that both had 300+ watts per speaker of class A/B power. but, i think its asinine that a lot here recommend throwing 3x the rated power to every person in every situation, and to people who dont understand why. Its almost always never needed


Indeed, if ya do it because ya want to.....awesome, i would never try to talk a man down. Much like my big three arguement a few years back, by all means do whatcha want........I just don't want it to be accepted as "mandatory practice" amongst folks who might not know better.


----------



## SQLnovice (Jul 22, 2014)

SkizeR said:


> Well to be fair. I tuned a set of those that were on 125 watts just yesterday. They had lower output than everything else.
> 
> Disclaimer: I did not look at, nor mess with any of the amp gain settings.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk


I'll keep that in mind. Thanks 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk


----------



## GEM592 (Jun 19, 2015)

SkizeR said:


> im all for it. hell, i recently did 2 installs that both had 300+ watts per speaker of class A/B power. but, i think its asinine that a lot here recommend throwing 3x the rated power to every person in every situation, and to people who dont understand why. Its almost always never needed


I can agree that it is not for everyone, certainly. In some situations, and maybe (as you suggest) even in most situations, doubling this or that amp's output makes no sense at all, and the effort should be redirected elsewhere. Fair enough. For example, I will say that there is basically a checklist you should have to meet before going crazy with the amp power - driver quality, deadening, 12 V stability in the car, willingness to work on the tune, etc. So yeah.


----------



## claydo (Oct 1, 2012)

SQLnovice said:


> Install in progress and I was a little concerned that 100 watts to my TM65v2 will not be enough.
> Thanks
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk


By all means, if you already have the 100 watts there to test with....rough in the amp, do some tuning, may tickle yer fancy, may not. If you have yet to purchase the power, guidance may be helpful.


----------



## I800C0LLECT (Jan 26, 2009)

Going to a get together really helps to reflect on these things. I heard Clay's car... It's a beast!

I pillaged a 28 watt @4ohm amp for a home sub. With the 8ohm sub presented I was worried about volume. My friends came over and loved the impact it added to movies and music. They all thought it must have been a thousand watt amp shaking the room.

These days I don't care about power.


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

GEM592 said:


> ...
> For example, I will say that there is basically a checklist you should have to meet before going crazy with the amp power - driver quality, deadening, 12 V stability in the car, willingness to work on the tune, etc. ...


Well with those amps with the PWM/MOSFET/Regulated-supply... is the 12V stability an issue? 

_______
I was about 8 I think, and my grandfather had a radio repair business. This was quite a while ago...

So he was explaining as to how he made his first crystal set radio...
Me: How do you do it?
GP: In my day, first you grew the crystal... And it has to be done right
Me: If it is bad can I just use 2 or 3 bad ones to make a good one?
GP: No 2 wrongs never make a right, and 100 bad crystals are not a good crystal.

Later - He said we went to Wall North, or maybe South, Dakota 30+ years after first listening to their radio station on his crystal set with my great GF... And he said on the radio it sounded like New York in size and majesty...

I guess with Nov-11 just passing it is fitting to mention that he was a radio man in WWII and likely in the newly used RADAR.
_______

Basically give me a decent 50W or 40W amp, and we will see/hear how it sounds compared to some modern 200W+ jobs.


----------



## Jeffdachefz (Sep 14, 2016)

drop1 said:


> I always try amps at lower power first. Always. Then I try those same amps bridged. There is no comparison. The difference between 100w and 300w on every speaker I've tried is huge. Everything just sounds better.
> 
> Don't knock it till you try it. When using amps that put out the speakers rms the results are underwhelming. Even at lower volumes.


this x 100. Sometimes its not the speaker, when you push the amp past its clean output levels, the speaker's sound quality goes way down. With headroom you are guaranteed much cleaner output when you turn it up. Even at lower volumes my speakers sounded better without changing anything else than bridging. 450 watts rms per 6.5 inch midrange hits the spot. Didnt really get a great bit louder but it got a hell of a lot clearer and smoother vs 145 watts unbridged.


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

Jeffdachefz said:


> *this x 100.* Sometimes its not the speaker, *when you push the amp past its clean output levels, the speaker's sound quality goes way down. *....


BS... (Multiplying by -20dB)

- When you push an amp the input the speaker is altered.
Like Carla-Jean Moss said... "The speaker has no say."

it is all about the amp. Whether a 20/30/40/50W anp is enough is what an oscilloscope is all about.

And then there is a anti-tautology of "it is not the speaker", and "it is the speaker's sound output".


----------



## Jeffdachefz (Sep 14, 2016)

Holmz said:


> BS... (Multiplying by -20dB)
> 
> - When you push an amp the input the speaker is altered.
> Like Carla-Jean Moss said... "The speaker has no say."
> ...


again with the semantics. 

You go clip your 4 channel and tell me how your front stage sounds. Distorted signal and unclean power ruins sound quality. What causes that? Overdriving your amp to force it to do power it cant actually do aka poor gain settings.

solution, get a stronger amp or work on the install/tune.


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

Jeffdachefz said:


> again with the semantics.
> 
> You go clip your 4 channel and tell me how your front stage sounds. Distorted signal and unclean power ruins sound quality. What causes that? Overdriving your amp to force it to do power it cant actually do aka poor gain settings.
> 
> solution, get a stronger amp or work on the install/tune.


How can you overdrive an amp with well settled gains? 

In any case, you "overdrive" your source output, and then get a clipped signal. The key is match the source output with the amp input gain.


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> How can you overdrive an amp with well settled gains?
> 
> In any case, you "overdrive" your source output, and then get a clipped signal. The key is match the source output with the amp input gain.


If I could choose the most important things in quality of the sound, -besides speakers phase and media quality, it's going to be "signal input-output matching".

Power, brands, topology, even install will be behind these.


----------



## quickaudi07 (May 19, 2010)

Its more of user preference and how much power do they want to put in their car, are they going to use all of it? they may not, but its there if needed to be.

Everyone has their tolerance for volume knob, we all have different ears, and what might be loud to some, maybe not be loud to others... 

I like to have more than not enough


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

quickaudi07 said:


> Its more of user preference and how much power do they want to put in their car, are they going to use all of it? they may not, but its there if needed to be.
> 
> Everyone has their tolerance for volume knob, we all have different ears, and what might be loud to some, maybe not be loud to others...
> 
> I like to have more than not enough



Ok, I just have to say it. I keep seeing this "we all have different ears" which may be true, but 100dB is loud regardless of who you are, our ears aren't so different that 100dB is quiet to some people. 

At high volumes you simply cannot hear details in music. Our ears are designed to protect themselves against damage, so at high volumes the muscles in our ears tightened to reduce the movement of the hammer. High volume is high no matter who you are. Some people like it louder than others, but 50 watts is good for more than 100dB with an 87dB per watt speaker (not particularly efficient). People drastically overrate how much power they are using.


----------



## quickaudi07 (May 19, 2010)

gijoe said:


> Ok, I just have to say it. I keep seeing this "we all have different ears" which may be true, but 100dB is loud regardless of who you are, our ears aren't so different that 100dB is quiet to some people.
> 
> At high volumes you simply cannot hear details in music. Our ears are designed to protect themselves against damage, so at high volumes the muscles in our ears tightened to reduce the movement of the hammer. High volume is high no matter who you are. Some people like it louder than others, but 50 watts is good for more than 100dB with an 87dB per watt speaker (not particularly efficient). People drastically overrate how much power they are using.


True......

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


----------



## MB2008LTZ (Oct 13, 2012)

You need enough to get to 88 MPH....after that anything is possible...!!!


----------



## Grinder (Dec 18, 2016)

MB2008LTZ said:


> You need enough to get to 88 MPH....after that anything is possible...!!!


1.21 Gigawatts!!!


----------



## Jeffdachefz (Sep 14, 2016)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> How can you overdrive an amp with well settled gains?
> 
> In any case, you "overdrive" your source output, and then get a clipped signal. The key is match the source output with the amp input gain.


no sh*t sherlock. 

this holmz guy quoted me on what I said in my other post and said its bullsh*t. this my post.

"this x 100. Sometimes its not the speaker, when you push the amp past its clean output levels, the speaker's sound quality goes way down."

Then i told him to go clip his amp to see if what i'm saying is bullsh*t or not. 

Then you come in and say some basic @ss sh*t without even reading the back story.

When you clip aka over driving your amps past is clean output levels, your speakers start to distort or crackle or even make your drivers sound peaky. 

100 rms amp clipped will make more power, its not clean power its dirty power, anyone thats ever clamped tested an amp with an oscope and clamp meter knows what kind of power numbers you get clean vs clipped.




ANDRESVELASCO said:


> If I could choose the most important things in quality of the sound, -besides speakers phase and media quality, it's going to be "signal input-output matching".
> 
> Power, brands, topology, even install will be behind these.


you've got to be joking lmao...

In a real SQ install, you only need to go up to a certain amount of volume to get judged properly. You wont even come close to using 60% of your amplifier power with the level the judges score with. That means you only need to set the gain till where the mid, midbass and tweeter blend smoothly and properly while getting just enough output which is usually at a very moderate volume. You dont need to get the max pre-out voltage of the head unit and get the max output out of the amp, this aint some SPL show. 

While everything else you mentioned is WAAAAAAY more important than setting gains. Just having gains to maximize clean power output alone while everything else with the install and overall system design is bad means your system is absolute sh*t. Install and tune is above all else. Gain is included in the tune but its not paramount to properly match the pre-out voltage unless you are doing spl and trying to max out on clean amplifier output for that one note burp.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

ya no **** dawg, that dirty power yo..


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

Jeffdachefz said:


> no sh*t sherlock.
> 
> this holmz guy quoted me on what I said in my other post and said its bullsh*t. this my post.
> 
> ...


If you are going to the trouble of making an emotional critique then include the post...


Holmz said:


> BS... (Multiplying by -20dB)
> 
> - When you push an amp the input the speaker is altered.
> Like Carla-Jean Moss said... "The speaker has no say."
> ...


Apologies of if you perceived it as personal attack, rather than as a general question - although my tone was a bit strong, so I can see how you did.

I do not know how to make my 50W amp clip as the sound is so damb loud at 1W coming out of the tweeters I look like "11" with blood running out the ears and nostrils.

Basically we are saying the same thing about clipping, which is that clipping does not help the sound quality.
However this thread is about how much power is enough - which is what the BS and -20 dB part referred to.

Basically where we differ is that you are saying that a 300W amp will sound better than a 50W amp... If the 50W amp is not clipping then I am questioning as to how the 300W amp will sound better?
Unless there is some oscilloscope measurements or some other way to show that the signal was actually clipping, then I cannot see how the 50W amp is not enough.

Clearly if you are comparing brand-A 50W amp with brand-B 300W amp, then I have no way of knowing what you are hearing and whether it was clipping or some other nuance or totally different amp topology.

The question still remains as to how much power is enough. 50W seems like enough if one is under 1W-RMS on the output.

I am happy to have it further explained to me as to why that may be incorrect.

You do not even need the speaker - just chuck a resister in there and see if the thing is clipping or not.


----------



## Jeffdachefz (Sep 14, 2016)

It would depend on your speaker's efficiency and output goals, some inefficient speakers, 50 watts is no where near enough. However Even at lower volume levels after bridging my 4 channel, the sound is much smoother, detailed and less peaky than if the speakers were only on seperate channels. Sounding better at higher volumes then yes thats a simple explanation but even at lower volumes where it'll be the same DB level between 145 watts each channel vs 450 watts bridged and the bridged setup sounded better that phenomenon i cant explain.


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

Jeffdachefz said:


> It would depend on your speaker's efficiency and output goals, some inefficient speakers, 50 watts is no where near enough.


Right - And depending on the speaker's efficiency and output goals, then it may be enough.
Who's to know without an SPL meter, and either a scope or a volt meter and/or the speaker efficiency numbers?

In my 3-way case, ~15% of the sound power being in the tweeter range needs to be added with the mid-range and the woofer's sound power. So 1W RMS out of the 50W amplifier is going to be around 95-100 dB (SPL) when added with a MR and woofer at the same level.

Once one knows either the RMS Watts, or the efficiency and SPL required, then the peak voltage can be checked to see if the signal will be clipping and how much or how often it will be clipping.




Jeffdachefz said:


> However Even at lower volume levels after bridging my 4 channel, the sound is much smoother, detailed and less peaky than if the speakers were only on seperate channels. Sounding better at higher volumes then yes thats a simple explanation but even at lower volumes where it'll be the same DB level between 145 watts each channel vs 450 watts bridged and the bridged setup sounded better that phenomenon i cant explain.


I believe it, but if you cannot explain the phenomenon, then it may not be safe claim that it is the watts that are mechanism for the goodness.
(I thought that the output impedance changed when bridging some amps?, and hence damping factor?)

We cannot really claim that bridging is always better unless we generally know it is... e.g. :
- Does a 50W amp bridged generally sound better than a 100W not bridged.
or 
- Does a 450W amp unbridged mono amp generally sound worse than your 145W amp bridged to 450W...


I can see no other metric for answering the OP's question on "What size amp do I *really* need" than using Watts as a way to get the peak voltage than can be supplied. (and efficiency/SPL-goal to determine the peak voltage)

Otherwise we just throw out the usual answer of, "more watts is always better", or "power should be clean", which doesn't say how we get cleanness nor at what level cleanness appears. Or we talk about amplifiers being over-rated or under-rated, which means that we cannot trust anything about them or their ratings.


----------



## gijoe (Mar 25, 2008)

Jeffdachefz said:


> It would depend on your speaker's efficiency and output goals, some inefficient speakers, 50 watts is no where near enough. However Even at lower volume levels after bridging my 4 channel, the sound is much smoother, detailed and less peaky than if the speakers were only on seperate channels. Sounding better at higher volumes then yes thats a simple explanation but even at lower volumes where it'll be the same DB level between 145 watts each channel vs 450 watts bridged and the bridged setup sounded better that phenomenon i cant explain.


You can't explain it because it's purely psychological. Power=output, you don't add detail with more power. Playing a speaker at a given dB level uses the same amount of power regardless of whether the amp is bridged or not.


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

gijoe said:


> You can't explain it because it's purely psychological. Power=output, you don't add detail with more power. Playing a speaker at a given dB level uses the same amount of power regardless of whether the amp is bridged or not.


That is a much smoother answer than that post #81 that opens with "BS..."

However it is theorhetically possible that there could be some some difference between bridged and non bridged that is not power and headroom driven, like output impedance.
Basically we do not know if it is psychological or if there is some real part to it. It is up to him to supply some proof that something different is real, and he mentioned a scope earlier on, so I am confident he can understand the phenomenon if he wants to.


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

The only way I can see to know the truth about "bridging magic", is to measure (with RTA) spl and speaker responses from previously settled amps at same wattage, one Bridged and the other not Bridged.
For sure it has been done in the past.

Or asking to the "Mythbusters" guys tell us the truth


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> The only way I can see to know the truth about "bridging magic", is to measure (with RTA) spl and speaker responses from previously settled amps at same wattage, one Bridged and the other not Bridged.
> For sure it has been done in the past.
> 
> Or asking to the "Mythbusters" guys tell us the truth


Either one does the measurement and shows it as proof, or one cannot claim the magic exists based upon their testimony and their brothers testimony.

Here îs how I would do it.
Run amp-A into a resister and digitize the signal.
Do the same with amp-B
Compare both signals with the source signal.

You can also do this with the microphone near the speaker and comparing speaker output to the true source.

My great sounding tube amps have huge harmonic distortion compared to the old NAD which does not sound special... (I used the microphone approach.)
And I know that the NAD is not special because it was also cheaper.


----------



## Dremgragen (Jul 14, 2008)

> If I do, Its impossible to keep a conversation or hear anything outside de vehicle, so...


First 8 seconds of this clip is all I have to say to you or any passenger in my car. 

https://youtu.be/E1Oy0oK38gc

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

Dremgragen said:


> First 8 seconds of this clip is all I have to say to you or any passenger in my car.
> 
> https://youtu.be/E1Oy0oK38gc


LoL


----------



## chasingSQ (Sep 25, 2017)

SkizeR said:


> Well to be fair. I tuned a set of those that were on 125 watts just yesterday. They had lower output than everything else.
> 
> Disclaimer: I did not look at, nor mess with any of the amp gain settings.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk


they were on 145 watts per channel


----------



## chasingSQ (Sep 25, 2017)

quickaudi07 said:


> Its more of user preference and how much power do they want to put in their car, are they going to use all of it? they may not, but its there if needed to be.
> 
> Everyone has their tolerance for volume knob, we all have different ears, and what might be loud to some, maybe not be loud to others...
> 
> I like to have more than not enough


exactly , sometimes i need to go to 11 ! when i cant, i get pissed after all the work we put into our systems , and i know everybodys 11 is different but 
i need that choice in my life ... lol


----------



## JH1973 (Apr 21, 2017)

Dremgragen said:


> > If I do, Its impossible to keep a conversation or hear anything outside de vehicle, so...
> 
> 
> First 8 seconds of this clip is all I have to say to you or any passenger in my car.
> ...


Freaking hilarious!! You made my morning....LOL


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

audirsfaux said:


> they were on 145 watts per channel


What's the crest factor on that?

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## BrainMach1 (Jun 19, 2014)

So out of curiosity, I guess up the home system with the external sub turned off. Most music was plenty loud at 85 dB. Rock was nicely loud in the 90's. I cranked it until my ears hurt and that was peeking at 106 db. 

Sure made me rethink what enough power is. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## chasingSQ (Sep 25, 2017)

SkizeR said:


> What's the crest factor on that?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk



well thats a good question nick , it depends on the level of shennanagins per octave /divided by the nonsense level and of course / squared by the post count


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

I've come to the opinion that you don't have enough power until you have no chance of using all of it without blowing something up. Most decent systems tuned within their limits (not forcing speakers to play lower than they want to) should be able to get plenty loud while going down the interstate WITH WINDOWS ROLLED UP as long as there's CLEAN power to spare. My way of doing things is to set the master volume to just above my maximum volume with headunit on 38/38 (yes it's clean up to max with factory amp bypassed) and tuck the remote away and just use the headunit volume. It's not claydo loud but I don't have his cone area either.


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

SkizeR said:


> What's the crest factor on that?


~22/7

What is 11 is SPL dB?
There is an 11 from the upside down, but some number is dB would be be more meaningful than a movie quote.




BrainMach1 said:


> So out of curiosity, I guess up the home system with the external sub turned off. Most music was plenty loud at 85 dB. Rock was nicely loud in the 90's. I cranked it until my ears hurt and that was peeking at 106 db.
> 
> Sure made me rethink what enough power is.


It is a way to put it into metrics.

I was thinking I need ~100, but found the same thing yesterday with the SPL meter. 90-95 is getting irritatingly loud.

In the Mrs Subaru a classical CD was at 40 which is where the knob stops. The peak was ~85, and e quite passages down ~70 or below. It needs another 5-10dB and podcasts and books on tape often come through (estimating here)~80dB with quiet parts lower... so any recording not fully loaded needs some room for extra gain.

The OSHA exposure limit versus time is somewhere ~85dB and hearing the music at 85dB it is not quiet.


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

Hillbilly SQ said:


> My way of doing things is to set the master volume to just above my maximum volume with headunit on 38/38 (yes it's clean up to max with factory amp bypassed).


Wich HU do you have?


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> Wich HU do you have?


Factory u-connect 8.4 with Pac Ampro sending clean unmolested signal from the screen via rca cables. Works just like an aftermarket headunit. Once you get the factory amp out of the signal chain it really is a nice headunit.


----------



## JH1973 (Apr 21, 2017)

Hillbilly SQ said:


> ANDRESVELASCO said:
> 
> 
> > Wich HU do you have?
> ...


How did you bypass the factory amp and maintain door chimes,blinkers,navigation, Bluetooth?


----------



## High Resolution Audio (Sep 12, 2014)

I'm crazy and do things differently than most.

The minimum wattage I would consider is 100 Watts per channel on tweeters and midrange. 

500 watts on each mid bass

600 watts on each sub woofer


I have an amplifier for every driver (almost) the midranges share one amp.

I use to listen to music at about 95 DB with peaks about 102

I have found with proper EQ ( which means fixing all peaks ) that I can now listen to some music at 112 -118 DB without ear strain.

Taming peaks and having the right response curves makes everything sound so smooth. When it sounds smooth, in my experience, one can listen to higher levels without it hurting.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

High Resolution Audio said:


> I'm crazy and do things differently than most.
> 
> The minimum wattage I would consider is 100 Watts per channel on tweeters and midrange.
> 
> ...


Don't forget about low distortion. I quit trying to explain to people why loud music isn't painful if you smooth out the response and keep distortion down. They tell me I don't know what I'm talking about:laugh:


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

JH1973 said:


> How did you bypass the factory amp and maintain door chimes,blinkers,navigation, Bluetooth?


https://www.crutchfield.com/p_541AP...face.html?search=ch41&osp=ampro+ch41&skipvs=T

Their first take on this was a turd and the idatalink harness wasn't out yet. And I didn't know about the one I just linked so I got the Fix82. Once I learned that the one I'm running is the real deal I immediately bought one and it's THE BEST thing I've done and will ever do for this system. You literally unplug the big plug from the factory screen and put this harness inbetween the big plug and the screen. Then run as many as 3 rca cables.


----------



## High Resolution Audio (Sep 12, 2014)

Hillbilly SQ said:


> Don't forget about low distortion. I quit trying to explain to people why loud music isn't painful if you smooth out the response and keep distortion down. They tell me I don't know what I'm talking about:laugh:


I believe you. Smoothing out the response we both agree on. 

Low distortion as well. Part of the reason I run extra power to each driver is to allow it to have plenty of clean power. I was taught that as an amp gets closer to it's maximum output the distortion increases. 

Use double or triple rated power of the speaker and the amps will not be pushed, the speaker will see clean, distortion-free power. 

I also set my amp gains at 1/2 way (max) and make cuts only on the EQ, no boost.

Also, I try not to max out volume unless I'm playing Uncompressed music, such as music put out on the Cheskey Records Label. 

With uncompressed music, it seems like I can max out the volume without hearing distortion.


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

[


High Resolution Audio said:


> =I use to listen to music at about 95 DB with peaks about 1w02
> 
> I have found with proper EQ ( which means fixing all peaks ) that I can now listen to some music at 112 -118 DB without ear strain.
> 
> Taming peaks and having the right response curves makes everything sound so smooth. When it sounds smooth, in my experience, one can listen to higher levels without it hurting.


I guess it is a personal preference. In my case, this just don't apply. Must say I have very sensitive ears (can hear up to 17khz!)...so, it depends...


----------



## High Resolution Audio (Sep 12, 2014)

ANDRESVELASCO said:


> I guess it is a personal preference. In my case, this just don't apply. Must say I have very sensitive ears (can hear up to 17khz!)...so, it depends...


I can only hear up to 15K. 

So I make steep cuts after 15 K getting steeper and steeper as the frequencies get higher. 

Even though I cannot hear them, my fear is that if I left them playing loud they could still hurt my ears.


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

Omg 112-118?
I'm not judging I like loud too, and in the same time I have hard time to measure what's too loud. What db weight do you use guys?
It so depends of mic position(S), driver efficiency and placement, cabin size, noise treatment, engine/road noise, speed, traffic, file type, cones area, distortion and target curve etc. So that's just too much parameters to try to compare.
(I'd be curious to learm from spl guys here).

Well I can just say that for a while I just used the max power I could afford, just to put that out of the equation as I didn't know much, so yeah 4 or 10x the rms dumb minimal gain etc
But it just doesn't make sense now, when everything else in the chain got better.
So now I'm downgrading slowly. Maybe now something like 10/50/150/300W for horns/mid/bass/sub (4 way). It could even be half that, if I didn't keep these old beloved ****ty records.


----------



## Weightless (May 5, 2005)

A weighting up to 100db, c weighting over 100.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

High Resolution Audio said:


> I'm crazy and do things differently than most.
> 
> The minimum wattage I would consider is 100 Watts per channel on tweeters and midrange.
> 
> ...


Well if we are talking about music ~95 dB then a 50W Amp is enough.
As you raising the bid to 112-118, then I can see where you want hundreds of watts.

So it seems pretty meaningless to discuss power needed with an SPL needed.
I usually consider upwards 110 dB outside the realm of SQ.
Saying that one needs a system capable of generating permanent hear loss without distortion is noteworthy.

I agree that low distortion can be a lot more pleasing. In a way this is worse, as people still turn it up, and in your case 112-118 would generally be considered high... And 'clearly' in the domain of generating permanent haring loss. If you are going to generate hearing loss, then does it really need to be clear and clean?

The OSHA limit is pretty short.


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

Heh, I bet our bailer at work exceeds the osha threshold. A lot of the time I push the button and take off running.

My hearing isn't what it used to be. I've also been in 150db + spl rigs (never mine!) but only for short thrill rides. If I would have known then what I know now I would have never listened as loud as I did. Just glad I never had the ability to really get that loud with what I had. I still like having way more power than I'll ever need but ONLY to keep the amps from clipping.


----------



## danmathew (Nov 24, 2017)

I only believe on performance. Is power a major fact??


----------



## Dremgragen (Jul 14, 2008)

I like to listen loud... louder than my speakers perform at recommended power (when gain is set to <1% THD/no clip). My components have never cried mercy when i have fed more power, and they always satisfy that desire for more volume when offered more power, so I'm of the mind to always feed more power if you can. No idea what dB I actually listen at though, probably 90-100. I never feel fatigued after even an hour or two. 

I'd also say they don't sound as good at any volume with just recommended power compared to more power (85w vs 150w on 70w recommended), but some here seem convinced that this cannot possibly be the case, as if you're insulting their religion by not believing what they do. Nor is it entirely provable either way, so I'll just agree to disagree on that. 

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk


----------



## ANDRESVELASCO (Dec 7, 2015)

danmathew said:


> I only believe on performance. Is power a major fact??


I think power is a major fact for SPL and Open Show competitions, or for psicologycal reasons.

Last night I could listen to an Audi with "bang and olufsen" upgrade, and although it lacked in power and sub was a s**t, man... The separation, imaging and well equalized was really notable.

I'm not an expert, but in my way of thinking, for SQ there are many others major things before than power.


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

Dremgragen said:


> I like to listen loud... louder than my speakers perform at recommended power (when gain is set to <1% THD/no clip). My components have never cried mercy when i have fed more power, and they always satisfy that desire for more volume when offered more power, so I'm of the mind to always feed more power if you can. No idea what dB I actually listen at though, probably 90-100. I never feel fatigued after even an hour or two.


Those dB meters can be had for a pretty cheap amount. I think I spent 20$ but it could have been more. And I totally understand that a non clipping system has a unique quietness about it. Whether that is quieter or safer I will leave to a doctors or audiologist to answer.

So we have seen the extremes with SkiezR saying 50W is enough, And others saying 500w is required.

I can make a cogent arguement for 50w being enough using math and an OSHA table.
I am confident that lawyer could likely make a case with the 500w/channel.




Dremgragen said:


> I'd also say they don't sound as good at any volume with just recommended power compared to more power (85w vs 150w on 70w recommended), but some here seem convinced that this cannot possibly be the case, as if you're insulting their religion by not believing what they do. Nor is it entirely provable either way, so I'll just agree to disagree on that.


More power may sound better. Is it true for every amplifier, at all volumes, for all topologies, for all brands? And is it measurably better? Or psychologically better.

So this is nothing like religion as one can measure any amp at any power level and get the THD+N. However there is magic and wonder sprinkled over the whole audio industry. The main similarity is that we believe what we want to believe, or are trained to believe, or are lead to believe.
And different as we can demonstrate the amp & speaker's sound to lots of people.

Then there are the magical phrases of "clean power", "underrated", etc, which are probably trying to describe some other real and measurable attribute.


----------



## chasingSQ (Sep 25, 2017)

Holmz said:


> Those dB meters can be had for a pretty cheap amount. I think I spent 20$ but it could have been more. And I totally understand that a non clipping system has a unique quietness about it. Whether that is quieter or safer I will leave to a doctors or audiologist to answer.
> 
> So we have seen the extremes with SkiezR saying 50W is enough, And others saying 500w is required.
> 
> ...


i really think it all comes down to preference . right? . you may love your system i may think its just not enough no matter what math you apply to it .


----------



## Holmz (Jul 12, 2017)

audirsfaux said:


> i really think it all comes down to preference . right? . you may love your system i may think its just not enough no matter what math you apply to it .


Exactly.

What I recommend the fellow from Laredo do is this:
1) Buy a meter
https://www.amazon.com/Decibel-30-1...coding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=RSJVFGYJP9C3164NVWJ7

2) Sit in some cars and with the meter near the ear, see what the max level is that he would like to achieve.

3) Do the same with the meter not on Max-hold to get a feel for the average level.

Then with that information he can use the speaker's SPL efficiency in dB/Watts, and determine the RMS watts from the SPL he measured in step #2/#3.

It will be a watt or 2 or 4. Then the 15 dB gets applied as a good estimate of the signal needed for headroom. Or he just lives with some clipping, which I have heard from experienced installers (AW).

And yeah... there will be cabin gain and cancellation and bunch of unknowns, but it will be a decent way to arrive at some reasonable number.

If it is a passive then it will need more watts compared to a 2 or 3 way where each band is being serviced independently and the power in each band is less than the totality.

I am no a professional installer, so what I do or recommend, needs to be tempered with some experience and common sense.
For me the common sense numbers are 40/40/70 Tweeter/MR/MB or 50/100/100, or perhaps 50/100/200. I have not seen tweeters that claim to have a peak watts in the 500W range so I doubt that much power is needed.

However if his meter readings are 110dB then it is much different than my liking levels of ~90dB. If he has a target level, then some cogent recommendations can be made from that.


----------



## Elgrosso (Jun 15, 2013)

Weightless said:


> A weighting up to 100db, c weighting over 100.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk


Good to know thx.
I always forget and mixed both curves, but these are numbers I saw.
But there's not much difference between both my meters, usually only few dbs , less than 5 (red and grey from PE, one is A, one is C).

Side note, I'm actually studying passive crossovers to test both mids and horns on the same amp, that is pushing only 50w at 8 ohms.
Pretty sure it will be enough.


----------

