Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
rumble
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

can anyone tell me where to find specs or an owner's manual for a:

YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO POWER AMP (M-50)

thanks

  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Jim Carr
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?


"rumble" wrote in message
ups.com...
can anyone tell me where to find specs or an owner's manual for a:

YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO POWER AMP (M-50)


Ever hear of Google?

http://www.vintageaudiomanuals.com/-XYZ-.htm



  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Zigakly
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

can anyone tell me where to find specs or an owner's manual for a:

YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO POWER AMP (M-50)


I'll summarize for you:

It's not worth summarizing.


  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Powell
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?


"rumble" wrote

can anyone tell me where to find specs or
an owner's manual for a:

YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO
POWER AMP (M-50)

1984 Yamaha M-50: 120 W/ch, 0.01% THD,
S/N 122 dB. MSRP $650.


  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Mike Rieves
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?


"rumble" wrote in message
ups.com...
can anyone tell me where to find specs or an owner's manual for a:

YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO POWER AMP (M-50)

thanks

Yamaha is decent sound reinforcement stuff, amp power is usually
underrated, they put out more than the specs say, but it isn't studio
quality, if that's what you're looking for. .




  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Mark D. Zacharias
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

Mike Rieves wrote:
"rumble" wrote in message
ups.com...
can anyone tell me where to find specs or an owner's manual for a:

YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO POWER AMP (M-50)

thanks

Yamaha is decent sound reinforcement stuff, amp power is usually
underrated, they put out more than the specs say, but it isn't studio
quality, if that's what you're looking for. .



OK, I'll bite. Just what exactly makes a stereo amp of "studio quality"
better than an otherwise excellent stereo amp?

I would concede the Yamaha consumer power amp is not "professional" in terms
of ruggedness etc, also in studio applications I can see that balanced
inputs might be necessary, but for the purpose of reproducing stereo sound,
as opposed to reinforcing it, I cannot think of any qualities that would
make a "studio" amp preferable in terms of sound quality.


Mark Z.


  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
David Nebenzahl
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

Mark D. Zacharias spake thus:

Mike Rieves wrote:

"rumble" wrote in message
roups.com...

can anyone tell me where to find specs or an owner's manual for a:

YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO POWER AMP (M-50)


Yamaha is decent sound reinforcement stuff, amp power is usually
underrated, they put out more than the specs say, but it isn't studio
quality, if that's what you're looking for. .


OK, I'll bite. Just what exactly makes a stereo amp of "studio quality"
better than an otherwise excellent stereo amp?

I would concede the Yamaha consumer power amp is not "professional" in terms
of ruggedness etc, also in studio applications I can see that balanced
inputs might be necessary, but for the purpose of reproducing stereo sound,
as opposed to reinforcing it, I cannot think of any qualities that would
make a "studio" amp preferable in terms of sound quality.


Gold-plated connectors? "Digital-ready"? Rack-mounting? Power supplies
that can supply 1000% of the maximum overload current?


--
I hope that in a few years it [Wikipedia] will be so bloated that it
will simply disintegrate, because I can't stand the thought that this
thing might someday actually be used as a serious reference source.
Because in its current form, it's not to be taken seriously at all.

- Horst Prillinger (see
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/horst.p...06/000623.html)
  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
AZ Nomad
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

On Tue, 23 May 2006 12:43:04 -0700, David Nebenzahl wrote:

Gold-plated connectors? "Digital-ready"? Rack-mounting? Power supplies
that can supply 1000% of the maximum overload current?


gold-plated connectors which wear off on the twenties reconnection;
I'd rather have nickel if I was reconnecting them a lot.

digital ready? BFD: that's a phrase slapped on everything down
to crappy sony headphones over the last 25 years.

rack mounting? OK. 1 difference.

PS that can handle 10x their overload current? I'd rather have an amp
that didn't blow out it's output stages in a heartbeat.


  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
David Nebenzahl
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

AZ Nomad spake thus:

On Tue, 23 May 2006 12:43:04 -0700, David Nebenzahl wrote:


Gold-plated connectors? "Digital-ready"? Rack-mounting? Power supplies
that can supply 1000% of the maximum overload current?


gold-plated connectors which wear off on the twenties reconnection;
I'd rather have nickel if I was reconnecting them a lot.

digital ready? BFD: that's a phrase slapped on everything down
to crappy sony headphones over the last 25 years.

rack mounting? OK. 1 difference.

PS that can handle 10x their overload current? I'd rather have an amp
that didn't blow out it's output stages in a heartbeat.


I was being sarcastic, if you didn't catch that.

D "I don't use smileys" N


--
I hope that in a few years it [Wikipedia] will be so bloated that it
will simply disintegrate, because I can't stand the thought that this
thing might someday actually be used as a serious reference source.
Because in its current form, it's not to be taken seriously at all.

- Horst Prillinger (see
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/horst.p...06/000623.html)
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
David Nebenzahl
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

Mike Rieves spake thus:

"Mark D. Zacharias" wrote in message
. com...

Mike Rieves wrote:

"rumble" wrote in message
groups.com...

can anyone tell me where to find specs or an owner's manual for a:

YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO POWER AMP (M-50)

Yamaha is decent sound reinforcement stuff, amp power is usually
underrated, they put out more than the specs say, but it isn't studio
quality, if that's what you're looking for. .


OK, I'll bite. Just what exactly makes a stereo amp of "studio quality"
better than an otherwise excellent stereo amp?

I would concede the Yamaha consumer power amp is not "professional" in
terms of ruggedness etc, also in studio applications I can see that
balanced inputs might be necessary, but for the purpose of reproducing
stereo sound, as opposed to reinforcing it, I cannot think of any
qualities that would make a "studio" amp preferable in terms of sound
quality.


Nope, the differences would be in flat response, slew rate, THD, IMD,
damping, etc, along with other differences not shown in the published specs.


Maybe you missed the earlier post where someone gave some of the
published specs for this amp. One of them was 0.01% THD. If true, I
would think that would be plenty good enough for studio use, assuming
the other specs are on par with it.


--
I hope that in a few years it [Wikipedia] will be so bloated that it
will simply disintegrate, because I can't stand the thought that this
thing might someday actually be used as a serious reference source.
Because in its current form, it's not to be taken seriously at all.

- Horst Prillinger (see
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/horst.p...06/000623.html)


  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Mike Rieves
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?


"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
.com...
Mike Rieves spake thus:

"Mark D. Zacharias" wrote in message
. com...

Mike Rieves wrote:

"rumble" wrote in message
egroups.com...

can anyone tell me where to find specs or an owner's manual for a:

YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO POWER AMP (M-50)

Yamaha is decent sound reinforcement stuff, amp power is usually
underrated, they put out more than the specs say, but it isn't studio
quality, if that's what you're looking for. .

OK, I'll bite. Just what exactly makes a stereo amp of "studio quality"
better than an otherwise excellent stereo amp?

I would concede the Yamaha consumer power amp is not "professional" in
terms of ruggedness etc, also in studio applications I can see that
balanced inputs might be necessary, but for the purpose of reproducing
stereo sound, as opposed to reinforcing it, I cannot think of any
qualities that would make a "studio" amp preferable in terms of sound
quality.


Nope, the differences would be in flat response, slew rate, THD, IMD,
damping, etc, along with other differences not shown in the published
specs.


Maybe you missed the earlier post where someone gave some of the published
specs for this amp. One of them was 0.01% THD. If true, I would think that
would be plenty good enough for studio use, assuming the other specs are
on par with it.


Unfortunately, the published specs have little to do with the sound of an
amp, and THD alone is virtually meaningless unless it is very high. The
Yamaha Natural Sound line was a consumer/home line of products.Yamaha
doesn't claim this amp as being a studio amp, why would you?
Would you use home Hifi speakers as studio monitor speakers? If not then
why would you use a hime hifi amp to power your studio monitors? I'm not
saying the M-50 wouldn't sound okay with some monitor speakers, I'm just
saying I wouldn't buy an M-50 to power my studio monitors and I wouldn't
recommend that anyone else do it. If you just happen to have an M-50 laying
around and you need something to power your monitors until you can afford
something better, then go ahead and use it. :-)


  #12   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Mark D. Zacharias
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

Mike Rieves wrote:
"Mark D. Zacharias" wrote in message
. com...
Mike Rieves wrote:
"rumble" wrote in message
ups.com...
can anyone tell me where to find specs or an owner's manual for a:

YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO POWER AMP (M-50)

thanks

Yamaha is decent sound reinforcement stuff, amp power is usually
underrated, they put out more than the specs say, but it isn't
studio quality, if that's what you're looking for. .



OK, I'll bite. Just what exactly makes a stereo amp of "studio
quality" better than an otherwise excellent stereo amp?

I would concede the Yamaha consumer power amp is not "professional"
in terms of ruggedness etc, also in studio applications I can see
that balanced inputs might be necessary, but for the purpose of
reproducing stereo sound, as opposed to reinforcing it, I cannot
think of any qualities that would make a "studio" amp preferable in
terms of sound quality.



Nope, the differences would be in flat response, slew rate, THD, IMD,
damping, etc, along with other differences not shown in the published
specs. Just like studio monitor speakers, studio monitor amps have
different requirements than do sound reinforcement systems, or even
living room stereo systems. I've used Yamaha sound reinforcement
equipment will good results in the past, and I have nothing against
them in this respect. However, Yamaha sound reinforcement and
consumer home equipment isn't designed for the studio, any more than
any other company's SR or home equipment is.



You've not really answered the question. THD, IM, slew, etc are ordinary
specs which were quoted for consumer stuff as well.

"other differences not shown in the published specs."

Doesn't make it on a technical group. If someone else used that line on you,
you'd probably hammer them, yes?

I'm not disagreeing about the desirability of a studio monitoring amp for
studio monitoring applications, I'm just not sold on the sonic reasons,
except possibly the exceedingly minor sonic differences from using balanced
inputs, etc. I'm thinking that in a studio environment the primary reason
for balanced inputs is mainly for hum rejection, not sound quality as such.

Then there are issues of reliability. Many of Yamaha's consumer amps were
somewhat flammable. I think it's reasonable to assume that a professional
amp would tend to be more reliable, since the internal parts used , the
construction and (hopefully) electrical design are done in a much less
cost-conscious manner than consumer gear.

Once again - not necessarily any sound-quality related reasons, just
practical stuff for the professionals.


Mark Z.


  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

David Nebenzahl wrote:

Maybe you missed the earlier post where someone gave some of the
published specs for this amp. One of them was 0.01% THD. If true, I
would think that would be plenty good enough for studio use, assuming
the other specs are on par with it.


These actually aren't such bad amplifiers, and they are better than a lot
of the stuff sold today as (ahem) monitor amps.

But full power THD specs don't tell you anything useful these days. In
fact, if you compare something like the Yamaha to a something like the
Aragon or Levinson amp with the same power rating, you'll find they sound
different and that a lot of this has to do with the lower output impedance
of the better amp as well as the coloration in the electronics.

On the other end of the scale, the Yamaha probably sounds a lot better
than an Alesis RA-100 for the same reasons.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #14   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

"Mike Rieves" wrote in message

"David Nebenzahl" wrote in
message
.com...
Mike Rieves spake thus:

"Mark D. Zacharias" wrote in
message
. com...

Mike Rieves wrote:


Yamaha is decent sound reinforcement stuff, amp power
is usually underrated, they put out more than the
specs say, but it isn't studio quality, if that's
what you're looking for. .


I've heard stuff like this from Guitar Center sales persons, so the words
don't impress me unless they are backed up.

OK, I'll bite. Just what exactly makes a stereo amp of
"studio quality" better than an otherwise excellent
stereo amp?


Good question.

I would concede the Yamaha consumer power amp is not
"professional" in terms of ruggedness etc, also in
studio applications I can see that balanced inputs
might be necessary, but for the purpose of reproducing
stereo sound, as opposed to reinforcing it, I cannot
think of any qualities that would make a "studio" amp
preferable in terms of sound quality.


Good attack on a sweeping generalization.

Nope, the differences would be in flat response, slew
rate, THD, IMD, damping, etc, along with other
differences not shown in the published specs.


Many good home amps do well in these regards.

Maybe you missed the earlier post where someone gave
some of the published specs for this amp. One of them
was 0.01% THD. If true, I would think that would be
plenty good enough for studio use, assuming the other
specs are on par with it.


Power amp THD specs are often just a matter of choice of power levels. For
esample, if you want 1% THD out of a typical midrange QSC power amp, just
run it a little way into clipping. If you want 0.01% THD out of it, run it
just below clipping.

Unfortunately, the published specs have little to do
with the sound of an amp, and THD alone is virtually
meaningless unless it is very high.


Note that in order to appear to have a leg to stand on, our correspondent
ignores the big caveat above:

"assuming the other specs are on par with it."

You can tell when someone is cornered: They stop answering the questions
that are asked, and instead answer questions that agree with their agenda.

The Yamaha Natural
Sound line was a consumer/home line of products.Yamaha
doesn't claim this amp as being a studio amp, why would
you?


In fact Yamaha does specifically claim that some members of their "natural
sound" product line is suitable for both home and studio use.

Would you use home Hifi speakers as studio monitor
speakers?


Depends on the home hifi speakers in question. Using appropriate home hifi
speakers for studio monitors is a time-honored practice. I believe that at
least one well-known and widely-respected poster here uses Magnepans as
studio monitors.

If not then why would you use a hime hifi amp
to power your studio monitors?


These words transport me back to Guitar Center, again. :-(

I'm not saying the M-50
wouldn't sound okay with some monitor speakers, I'm just
saying I wouldn't buy an M-50 to power my studio monitors
and I wouldn't recommend that anyone else do it.


Given the obvious demonstrated biases against using equipment that has the
slightest odor of home audio on it, this statement is hardly surprising.
What's missing is any actual substance.

If you just happen to have an M-50 laying around and you need
something to power your monitors until you can afford
something better, then go ahead and use it. :-)


Can we all say "Damn with faint praise"?


  #15   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Powell
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?


"Mike Rieves" wrote

Would you use home Hifi speakers as studio
monitor speakers?

Depends on the speakers and the application, no?
Ever hear of B&W 800 or 801 in studio use,
for example? Plenty of Paradigm Studio 20s,
for example, being used at the low end (low
cost), too.


If not then why would you use a hime hifi amp
to power your studio monitors?

Huh? There are several hi-fi amp manufacturers
with superior (specs, performance & sound) to
the studio amps. And my count there are 61
manufacturers of Hi-Fi power amps using XLR
connections, so that can't be a limitation either.









  #16   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Dr. Dolittle
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?



Scott Dorsey wrote:

On the other end of the scale, the Yamaha probably sounds a lot better
than an Alesis RA-100 for the same reasons.
--scott



But, but, but,,

The Alesis is a "studio amp". (..)

  #17   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

"Dr. Dolittle" wrote in message


Scott Dorsey wrote:


On the other end of the scale, the Yamaha probably
sounds a lot better than an Alesis RA-100 for the same
reasons. --scott


But, but, but,,


The Alesis is a "studio amp". (..)


;-)

Arguably, in name and chassis format only. For openers - unbalanced inputs.


  #18   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
David Nebenzahl
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

Scott Dorsey spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

Maybe you missed the earlier post where someone gave some of the
published specs for this amp. One of them was 0.01% THD. If true, I
would think that would be plenty good enough for studio use, assuming
the other specs are on par with it.


These actually aren't such bad amplifiers, and they are better than a lot
of the stuff sold today as (ahem) monitor amps.

But full power THD specs don't tell you anything useful these days. In
fact, if you compare something like the Yamaha to a something like the
Aragon or Levinson amp with the same power rating, you'll find they sound
different and that a lot of this has to do with the lower output impedance
of the better amp as well as the coloration in the electronics.

On the other end of the scale, the Yamaha probably sounds a lot better
than an Alesis RA-100 for the same reasons.


Again with the "may sound different from other [studio] amps". I've got
to take exception to that as a sort-of audiophool belief.

By definition, if two amplifiers both have extremely low distortion,
they should "sound" approximately the same, right? Again, this is
*assuming* (see disclaimer below) that other relevant specs (probably
most importantly things like transient response) are in the same
ballpark; I have no reason to believe that they wouldn't be in what
appears to be a high-quality amplifier like this.

DISCLAIMER:

Yes, I understand that I do not know what the other specs for the
amplifier under discussion are; and neither do you. This is Usenet,
remember? not a peer-reviewed engineering paper. So sue me.


--
I hope that in a few years it [Wikipedia] will be so bloated that it
will simply disintegrate, because I can't stand the thought that this
thing might someday actually be used as a serious reference source.
Because in its current form, it's not to be taken seriously at all.

- Horst Prillinger (see
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/horst.p...06/000623.html)
  #19   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

David Nebenzahl wrote:
Again with the "may sound different from other [studio] amps". I've got
to take exception to that as a sort-of audiophool belief.


Go out and listen to some amps. They sound different. The differences
aren't anywhere near as big as the differences between speakers, but they
are clearly audible in an A/B comparison between amps of varying topologies.

By definition, if two amplifiers both have extremely low distortion,
they should "sound" approximately the same, right? Again, this is
*assuming* (see disclaimer below) that other relevant specs (probably
most importantly things like transient response) are in the same
ballpark; I have no reason to believe that they wouldn't be in what
appears to be a high-quality amplifier like this.


Sure, but that just shows that the THD measurement is useless as a measure
of distortion today. Take a look at some of those 1970s amps that relied
on huge amounts of feeback to get linearity. The Dyna ST-120, for instance,
has a really low THD number, but the 1 KHz square wave response into an 8 ohm
load is so bad that it looks visibly screwed up on a scope. It's really good
at reproducing sine waves, but not so good with anything else.

Yes, I understand that I do not know what the other specs for the
amplifier under discussion are; and neither do you. This is Usenet,
remember? not a peer-reviewed engineering paper. So sue me.


I don't know what the actual specifications of the amp are... I have never
done a full distortion spectrum on it, nor have I actually measured the
output impedance or checked out impulse response. Because of that, I have
to rely on my ears.

There are plenty of useful specifications that will tell you a lot about
an amplifier. You will not, however, find them on the manufacturer's data
sheet because the LAST thing the manufacturer wants you to know is how the
product actually performs. Data sheets are marketing information and not
technical information.

THD into a fixed resistive load was useful information back in the 1940s,
when you could assume that all amps had the same basic topology and that
the load would be transformer-matched to the output stage. Today you cannot
make any of these assumptions.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #20   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
GregS
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

In article , David Nebenzahl wrote:
Scott Dorsey spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

Maybe you missed the earlier post where someone gave some of the
published specs for this amp. One of them was 0.01% THD. If true, I
would think that would be plenty good enough for studio use, assuming
the other specs are on par with it.


These actually aren't such bad amplifiers, and they are better than a lot
of the stuff sold today as (ahem) monitor amps.

But full power THD specs don't tell you anything useful these days. In
fact, if you compare something like the Yamaha to a something like the
Aragon or Levinson amp with the same power rating, you'll find they sound
different and that a lot of this has to do with the lower output impedance
of the better amp as well as the coloration in the electronics.

On the other end of the scale, the Yamaha probably sounds a lot better
than an Alesis RA-100 for the same reasons.


Again with the "may sound different from other [studio] amps". I've got
to take exception to that as a sort-of audiophool belief.

By definition, if two amplifiers both have extremely low distortion,
they should "sound" approximately the same, right?


Right.
And of course, amps do not sound all by themselves.
Well sometimes they make funny noises.


gs


  #21   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
GregS
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

In article , (GregS) wrote:
In article , David Nebenzahl
wrote:
Scott Dorsey spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

Maybe you missed the earlier post where someone gave some of the
published specs for this amp. One of them was 0.01% THD. If true, I
would think that would be plenty good enough for studio use, assuming
the other specs are on par with it.

These actually aren't such bad amplifiers, and they are better than a lot
of the stuff sold today as (ahem) monitor amps.

But full power THD specs don't tell you anything useful these days. In
fact, if you compare something like the Yamaha to a something like the
Aragon or Levinson amp with the same power rating, you'll find they sound
different and that a lot of this has to do with the lower output impedance
of the better amp as well as the coloration in the electronics.

On the other end of the scale, the Yamaha probably sounds a lot better
than an Alesis RA-100 for the same reasons.


Again with the "may sound different from other [studio] amps". I've got
to take exception to that as a sort-of audiophool belief.

By definition, if two amplifiers both have extremely low distortion,
they should "sound" approximately the same, right?


Right.
And of course, amps do not sound all by themselves.
Well sometimes they make funny noises.


Oh I bought a Yamaha int.amp on Ebay and fixed it up. I used it for a year.
Had a switch to throw it into class A at 15 watts. It may have made a difference. There
was more problems in the switches than anything else making an effect.
Very neat amp otherwise.

greg
  #22   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
David Nebenzahl
 
Posts: n/a
Default Anyone know about these other amps?

GregS spake thus:

Oh I bought a Yamaha int.amp on Ebay and fixed it up. I used it for a year.
Had a switch to throw it into class A at 15 watts. It may have made a difference. There
was more problems in the switches than anything else making an effect.
Very neat amp otherwise.


Speaking of other amps, I wonder if anyone here can tell me anything
about two high-end home audio amps I have, one of which was given to me,
the other purchased cheap at a secondhand store, both running perfectly
(the Kyocera required a trip to the repair shop to replace some small
electrolytics, and I replaced the big ones myself):

1. Technics Stereo Integrated D.C. Amplifier SU-V6X (preamp/amp)
2. Kyocera R-851 Quartz Synthesized AM/FM Stereo Tuner/Amplifier


--
I hope that in a few years it [Wikipedia] will be so bloated that it
will simply disintegrate, because I can't stand the thought that this
thing might someday actually be used as a serious reference source.
Because in its current form, it's not to be taken seriously at all.

- Horst Prillinger (see
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/horst.p...06/000623.html)
  #23   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
CWCunningham
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

"Mark D. Zacharias" wrote in message
. net...
| Mike Rieves wrote:
| "Mark D. Zacharias" wrote in message
| . com...
| Mike Rieves wrote:
| "rumble" wrote in message
| ups.com...
| can anyone tell me where to find specs or an owner's manual for a:
|
| YAMAHA NATURAL SOUND STEREO POWER AMP (M-50)
|
| thanks
|
| Yamaha is decent sound reinforcement stuff, amp power is usually
| underrated, they put out more than the specs say, but it isn't
| studio quality, if that's what you're looking for. .
|
|
| OK, I'll bite. Just what exactly makes a stereo amp of "studio
| quality" better than an otherwise excellent stereo amp?
|
| I would concede the Yamaha consumer power amp is not "professional"
| in terms of ruggedness etc, also in studio applications I can see
| that balanced inputs might be necessary, but for the purpose of
| reproducing stereo sound, as opposed to reinforcing it, I cannot
| think of any qualities that would make a "studio" amp preferable in
| terms of sound quality.
|
|
|
| Nope, the differences would be in flat response, slew rate, THD, IMD,
| damping, etc, along with other differences not shown in the published
| specs. Just like studio monitor speakers, studio monitor amps have
| different requirements than do sound reinforcement systems, or even
| living room stereo systems. I've used Yamaha sound reinforcement
| equipment will good results in the past, and I have nothing against
| them in this respect. However, Yamaha sound reinforcement and
| consumer home equipment isn't designed for the studio, any more than
| any other company's SR or home equipment is.
|
|
| You've not really answered the question. THD, IM, slew, etc are ordinary
| specs which were quoted for consumer stuff as well.
|
| "other differences not shown in the published specs."
|
| Doesn't make it on a technical group. If someone else used that line on you,
| you'd probably hammer them, yes?
|
| I'm not disagreeing about the desirability of a studio monitoring amp for
| studio monitoring applications, I'm just not sold on the sonic reasons,
| except possibly the exceedingly minor sonic differences from using balanced
| inputs, etc. I'm thinking that in a studio environment the primary reason
| for balanced inputs is mainly for hum rejection, not sound quality as such.
|
| Then there are issues of reliability. Many of Yamaha's consumer amps were
| somewhat flammable. I think it's reasonable to assume that a professional
| amp would tend to be more reliable, since the internal parts used , the
| construction and (hopefully) electrical design are done in a much less
| cost-conscious manner than consumer gear.
|
| Once again - not necessarily any sound-quality related reasons, just
| practical stuff for the professionals.
|
If the frequency response at 20khz is reasonably flat (preferably +-0db, but no
more than say 2db down), then the slew rate is perfectly adequate for quality
sound.

THD and IM are typically measured at a small percentage of the amps output ...
but then reasonable listening volumes are also at a small percentage of rated
output. As long as they are below 3% at your intended listening levels, you
probably will never be able to hear any effect.

The IM and THD specs of your speakers will entirely dwarf the specs of your amp,
so your choice of speakers and the quality of your room will have more effect on
the quality of sound reproduction than the specs of your amplifier.

Peak current is probably far more important than the typical (often stellar)
specs of a good home amplifier, but chances are very good that you'll never tax
your amps current abilities unless you intend to listen VERY loud. Driving
moderately efficient speakers at 5 watts will fill your environment with enough
sound that you'll have to yell at someone sitting next to you in order for them
to unserstand what you're saying. Assuming your amp is capable of 50W continuous
per channel this gives you over 9 db of headroom before you reach the continuous
limits. Some amps are ready to handle transients beyond continuous rating for
those rare circumstances. So the question of peak current really comes down to
how loud you intend to monitor, the louder, the more wattage you'll want for
headroom. If you're worried about your amp bursting into flames, you'll want
more continuous headroom, since higher wattage implies heftier heat sinking
ability. If you get a high enough wattage amp with vents in the top, you may be
able to make toast for snacking during those long sessions.

You'll probably want to make sure that your speaker outs can handle the speaker
load. IE if your outs are 8 ohm only, you'll want to make sure that you're not
going to be driving 4 ohm speakers. Also 4 ohm speakers will knock 3db off of
your headroom.

Damping can also be important, but it's very interactive with your speakers, and
beyond my tiny understanding to discuss ... there's lots of sharp guys here who
may be able to describe the implications.


--
CWC
============================
It's not that nice guys finish last,
They have a whole different notion
where the finish line is.
============================


  #24   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Mike Rieves
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?


"Powell" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rieves" wrote

Would you use home Hifi speakers as studio
monitor speakers?

Depends on the speakers and the application, no?
Ever hear of B&W 800 or 801 in studio use,
for example? Plenty of Paradigm Studio 20s,
for example, being used at the low end (low
cost), too.


Did you not catch the "Studio" in Paradigm Studio 20's?
BTW, the Paradigms are $700.00 and the B&W's are much, much higher. Surely
you aren't attempting to compare these to an inexpensive mid-line Yamaha
consumer power amp!
In any event, just because some folks use home hifi speakers as studio
monitors doesn't mean that they make good stduio monitors. We had this
discussion a while back in this group, and I believe that the consensus was
that home hifi speakers belong in the living room. Just to be clear on this,
many studios have home hifi speakers setting around for listening tests, to
see how a mix will sound on home equipment, but no por studios and very few
home studioists (other than those who can't afford real monitor speakers)
actually mix on home speakers. Amplifiers selection usually isn't as
critical as speaker selection, but if you want great mixes, everything in
the chain has to be right.


If not then why would you use a hime hifi amp
to power your studio monitors?

Huh? There are several hi-fi amp manufacturers
with superior (specs, performance & sound) to
the studio amps. And my count there are 61
manufacturers of Hi-Fi power amps using XLR
connections, so that can't be a limitation either.


Studio monitor equipment isn't necessarily better sounding that other
equipment, it's more accurate than other equipment. As for "superior" sound,
superior for what use?
Connectors don't matter, most pro SR amps have XLR connectors.
Use whatever you want to mix on, but keep in mind that if you don't hear
it correctly, you won't mix it correctly. If you want to use an M-50 to
drive your studio monitors, be my guest! :-)
Keep in mind that most home hifi equipment is built to sound good in a
typical living room, and there is a world of difference between a typical
home living room and a decent studio control room, even a home studio.
Studio monitor equipment is designed to be accurate so that the mixing
engineer can hear every nuance and detail in the mix, something that isn't
necessarily desirable in a home hifi system, where folks just want the music
to sound good.



  #25   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Mike Rieves
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?


"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
David Nebenzahl wrote:

Maybe you missed the earlier post where someone gave some of the
published specs for this amp. One of them was 0.01% THD. If true, I
would think that would be plenty good enough for studio use, assuming
the other specs are on par with it.


These actually aren't such bad amplifiers, and they are better than a lot
of the stuff sold today as (ahem) monitor amps.

But full power THD specs don't tell you anything useful these days. In
fact, if you compare something like the Yamaha to a something like the
Aragon or Levinson amp with the same power rating, you'll find they sound
different and that a lot of this has to do with the lower output impedance
of the better amp as well as the coloration in the electronics.

On the other end of the scale, the Yamaha probably sounds a lot better
than an Alesis RA-100 for the same reasons.
--scott


The Alesis RA-100 was an attempt to build an accurate studio amp for those
who couldn't afford a good studio amp, and it did this fairly well. There
are probably many hifi amps that sound better than the Alesis and some of
them might even make better studio monitor amps, but none of them are as
low-priced as the Alesis. In my experience, all the Yamaha Natural Sound
equipment colors the sound to some extent, that's part of their "nautral"
sound.




  #26   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Mike Rieves
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?


"Mark D. Zacharias" wrote in message
. net...
Mike Rieves wrote:
You've not really answered the question. THD, IM, slew, etc are ordinary
specs which were quoted for consumer stuff as well.

"other differences not shown in the published specs."



Doesn't make it on a technical group. If someone else used that line on
you, you'd probably hammer them, yes?



Specs are measured with the amp driving a pure resistive load, which
makes them all but meaningless when you consider that speakers are a highly
reactive load. This should be common knowledge in a technical group.
BTW, I failed to notice that this was a cross post. I'm replying from
home-studio which is not a technical group. I wish folks wouldn't cross post
like that, or at least have "CROSS POST!!!" in the subject line. My future
replies will be to home studio only.


  #27   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Powell
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?


"Mike Rieves" wrote

Would you use home Hifi speakers as studio
monitor speakers?

Depends on the speakers and the application, no?
Ever hear of B&W 800 or 801 in studio use,
for example? Plenty of Paradigm Studio 20s,
for example, being used at the low end (low
cost), too.


Did you not catch the "Studio" in Paradigm Studio 20's?

If you are suggesting that Paradigm is marketing the
entire Studio & Signature product line of speakers
for recording studio use you are sadly misinformed.


BTW, the Paradigms are $700.00 and the B&W's
are much, much higher.

No, the MSRP is actually $800 for the version 3.
And B&W are $16K and $11K respectively. And
the "much, much higher" in studio use are the Wilson
Audio top models at $79K and $125K.


Surely you aren't attempting to compare these to an
inexpensive mid-line Yamaha consumer power amp!

And why not?


In any event, just because some folks use home hifi
speakers as studio monitors doesn't mean that they
make good stduio monitors.

Couldn't it be equally said that just because a
speaker is marketed as *studio* doesn't mean
that it's a "good studio monitor", no?


We had this discussion a while back in this
group, and I believe that the consensus was
that home hifi speakers belong in the living
room.

Quack, quack, quack...


Just to be clear on this, many studios have home hifi
speakers setting around for listening tests, to see
how a mix will sound on home equipment, but no por
studios and very few home studioists (other than those
who can't afford real monitor speakers) actually mix
on home speakers.

If you are producing commercial works only based
on the sound of the mixing speakers then you are
probably producing low fidelity works. Fine for
commercials spots, mp3 and such but bad for
complex musical CD presentations.


Amplifiers selection usually isn't as critical as
speaker selection, but if you want great mixes,
everything in the chain has to be right.

Agreed.


If not then why would you use a hime hifi amp
to power your studio monitors?

Huh? There are several hi-fi amp manufacturers
with superior (specs, performance & sound) to
the studio amps. And my count there are 61
manufacturers of Hi-Fi power amps using XLR
connections, so that can't be a limitation either.


Studio monitor equipment isn't necessarily better
sounding that other equipment, it's more accurate
than other equipment.

Gobbledegook.


As for "superior" sound, superior for what use?

More gobbledegook.


Connectors don't matter, most pro SR amps have
XLR connectors.

"Connectors don't matter"... Huh? If you need
XLRs are you suggesting converting to single
end instead?


Use whatever you want to mix on, but keep in
mind that if you don't hear it correctly, you won't
mix it correctly.

How would you know?


If you want to use an M-50 to drive your studio
monitors, be my guest! :-)

I think it's a good starting place for the OP.


Keep in mind that most home hifi equipment is built
to sound good in a typical living room, and there is
a world of difference between a typical home living
room and a decent studio control room, even a home
studio.

Hehehe... oh, right! Why produce a product
that sounds good in the consumer's living room,
it's only the limited studio version that counts.
That makes no sense whatsoever.


Studio monitor equipment is designed to be accurate...

What, Hi-Fi amps arn't?


so that the mixing engineer can hear every nuance
and detail in the mix, something that isn't necessarily
desirable in a home hifi system, where folks just
want the music to sound good.

Mmmm... so the actual speakers selected/purchased
by the engineer isn't based on personal preferences?
One thing that is crystal clear is that you own a lousy
home audio system.









  #28   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Powell
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?


"Mike Rieves" wrote

Some high-end hifi amps do make good studio amps,
but one can generally get an amp designed for studio
use that sounds just as good in the studio for a
considerably lower price.

"Considerably lower price"... that seems to be
the crux of the whole amp issue for you, mr.
Broke-A$$®.






  #29   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Jim Carr
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

"Powell" wrote in message
...

Couldn't it be equally said that just because a
speaker is marketed as *studio* doesn't mean
that it's a "good studio monitor", no?


Nope. It says in Wikipedia that they are not allowed to do that.


  #30   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
David Nebenzahl
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

Jim Carr spake thus:

"Powell" wrote in message
...

Couldn't it be equally said that just because a
speaker is marketed as *studio* doesn't mean
that it's a "good studio monitor", no?


Nope. It says in Wikipedia that they are not allowed to do that.


Ah, that settles it then.


--
I hope that in a few years it [Wikipedia] will be so bloated that it
will simply disintegrate, because I can't stand the thought that this
thing might someday actually be used as a serious reference source.
Because in its current form, it's not to be taken seriously at all.

- Horst Prillinger (see
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/horst.p...06/000623.html)


  #31   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

"Mike Rieves" wrote in message

"Powell" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rieves" wrote

Would you use home Hifi speakers as studio
monitor speakers?

Depends on the speakers and the application, no?
Ever hear of B&W 800 or 801 in studio use,
for example? Plenty of Paradigm Studio 20s,
for example, being used at the low end (low
cost), too.


Did you not catch the "Studio" in Paradigm Studio 20's?
BTW, the Paradigms are $700.00 and the B&W's are much,
much higher. Surely you aren't attempting to compare
these to an inexpensive mid-line Yamaha consumer power
amp!


I'm very pleased to notice that I'm not the one who has to defend gross
generalities like:

"Would you use home Hifi speakers as studio monitor speakers?"

taken as a rhetorical question.

To re-iterate, given my choice of home hifi speakers, yes I would (and have)
used home hifi speakers for monitor speakers, and vice-versa. It can work.

In any event, just because some folks use home hifi
speakers as studio monitors doesn't mean that they make
good stduio monitors.


Yet another gross generality that I'm pleased to not have to defend.

We had this discussion a while back
in this group, and I believe that the consensus was that
home hifi speakers belong in the living room.


Who is this all-mighty "we"?

Just to be
clear on this, many studios have home hifi speakers
setting around for listening tests, to see how a mix will
sound on home equipment, but no pro studios and very few
home studioists (other than those who can't afford real
monitor speakers) actually mix on home speakers.


Where is the statistical study that supports this claim? BTW it can't exist
because it contains instantly false hyper-generalizatinos like "no pro
studios and very few home studioists (other than those who can't afford real
monitor speakers) actually mix on home speakers."


Amplifiers selection usually isn't as critical as speaker
selection, but if you want great mixes, everything in the
chain has to be right.


There is no such thing as a unique or narrowly-defined "right" when it comes
to things like this.

"Right" is very context-sensitive. Because of this it is also a moving
target.

If not then why would you use a hime hifi amp
to power your studio monitors?


Huh? There are several hi-fi amp manufacturers
with superior (specs, performance & sound) to
the studio amps. And my count there are 61
manufacturers of Hi-Fi power amps using XLR
connections, so that can't be a limitation either.


Studio monitor equipment isn't necessarily better
sounding that other equipment, it's more accurate than
other equipment.


Wrong again. In fact there is no reliable, generally-agreed upon definition
about even what studio monitor equipment is. Furthermore "studio monitor
equipment" has historicially included pieces of work such as the Yamaha
NS-10 which is probably less accurate than a huge number of speakers that
sold primarily for home use.

As for "superior" sound, superior for
what use? Connectors don't matter, most pro SR amps have
XLR connectors.


I think that just about everybody who understands the advantages of balanced
inputs and has the budget for including them would prefer to use a power amp
with balanced inputs over one without, all other things being equal. Let me
remind you that the Alesis RA-100 which is a power amp that many love to
hate, was widely sold as "studio monitor equipment" and lacks balanced
inputs.

Use whatever you want to mix on, but
keep in mind that if you don't hear it correctly, you won't mix it
correctly.


Which begs the question - what is correct? Let me advance the theory that if
your target audience is people listening with iPods, mixing and/or mastering
on iPod-like equipment can make a lot of sense. And if you think that
necessarily involves problematical compromises in terms of sonic accuracy,
let me suspect that you've never carefully listened to a well-made .wav
(actually it will be an AIFF but most Ipod-familiar techies know what I
mean) using a pair of say Shure E-3s, E-4s or E-5s.

If you want to use an M-50 to drive your studio monitors, be my guest!
:-)


Speaks to your prejudices, I fear.


Keep in mind that most home hifi equipment is built
to sound good in a typical living room, and there is a
world of difference between a typical home living room
and a decent studio control room, even a home studio.


Is your point here that near-field speakers and mid-field speakers are
different? Guess what - lots of pro studios don't have near-field monitors
at all, or if they have them, they don't do most of their work on them.

Studio monitor equipment is designed to be accurate so
that the mixing engineer can hear every nuance and detail
in the mix, something that isn't necessarily desirable in
a home hifi system, where folks just want the music to
sound good.


Where is it written on stone that just because the reproduction is very
accurate, it can't sound good?

It isn't. In fact one of the founding tenets of home High Fidelity is that
accurate reproduction sounds best, all things considered.


  #32   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
.com
Jim Carr spake thus:

"Powell" wrote in message
...

Couldn't it be equally said that just because a
speaker is marketed as *studio* doesn't mean
that it's a "good studio monitor", no?


Nope. It says in Wikipedia that they are not allowed to
do that.


Ah, that settles it then.


Agreed. ;-)


  #33   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

"Mike Rieves" wrote in message


Specs don't tell the whole story, or even a significant
part of it.


Someone obviously believes that all spec sheets are the same.

Amps with the exact same specs may sound
quite different from one another, and how an amp handles
the reactive load that a real world speaker represents is
another matter entirely.


How amplifiers handle reactive loads can and have been speced.

You don't see specs for things like this on a $99 Sherwood 100wpc stereo
receiver, which is not to say that said receiver might or might not actually
handle some of the more reactive loads around pretty well.

Amps specs are measured using a
pure resistive load, which is only a vague, inaccurate
approximation of a real world speaker.



Again, true for some but not all amp spec sheets.

Studio amps, in
general, are designed to provide accurate drive to a wide
range of reactive speaker loads, so that the sound coming
from the speaker is an accurate representation of what is
going into the amp, this may not necessarily true of a
hifi amp.


This is an over-generalization that is impossible to defend.

Some high-end hifi amps do make good studio
amps, but one can generally get an amp designed for
studio use that sounds just as good in the studio for a
considerably lower price.


I will agree that home audio gear above a certain price point is often a
poorer value than comparably-priced pro audio gear.


  #34   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Arny Krueger
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

"CWCunningham" charlesw-at-blackfoot.net wrote in message


Damping can also be important, but it's very interactive
with your speakers, and beyond my tiny understanding to
discuss ... there's lots of sharp guys here who may be
able to describe the implications.


Damping is a wierd spec because it is based on questionable logic. It is
based on loudspeaker impedance, but loudspeakers are generally thought to be
independent of power amps and we all know that loudspeaker impedance is a
strong function of frequency.

The better spec would be amplifier source impedance, which is a property of
just the power amp. Source impedance can be specified as a set of numbers
or a curve, as it also varies with frequency. But at least it doesn't change
every time you change the speaker.


  #35   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

Mike Rieves wrote:

The Alesis RA-100 was an attempt to build an accurate studio amp for those
who couldn't afford a good studio amp, and it did this fairly well. There
are probably many hifi amps that sound better than the Alesis and some of
them might even make better studio monitor amps, but none of them are as
low-priced as the Alesis.


No? Look in the Adcom, Rotel, and Parasound catalogues. Even Tascam makes
something that sounds acceptable in that price range.

The RA-100 is an example of when you try and cut costs too far.

In my experience, all the Yamaha Natural Sound
equipment colors the sound to some extent, that's part of their "nautral"
sound.


Well, everything does color the sound. That's the way electronics are.
Some are cleaner and some are less clean. Some are euphonic and some are
not. If you want uncolored sound, you need to listen to live acoustic
music.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."


  #36   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Mike Rieves" wrote in message
et

Specs don't tell the whole story, or even a significant
part of it.


Someone obviously believes that all spec sheets are the same.


Usually they are. In fact, at least five or six different manufacturers
in China are using the same data sheet for their microphones... even though
they are actually different products. And the numbers off the datasheet
actually are copied off the U87 data sheet.

I guess if the numbers are good enough for Neumann, they're good enough for
us.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #38   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Les Cargill
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

Jim Carr wrote:
"Powell" wrote in message
...

Couldn't it be equally said that just because a
speaker is marketed as *studio* doesn't mean
that it's a "good studio monitor", no?



Nope. It says in Wikipedia that they are not allowed to do that.



SO LET IT BE WRITTEN. SO LET IT BE DONE!

--
Les Cargill
  #39   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
CWCunningham
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

"Mike Rieves" wrote in message
. ..
| Studio monitor equipment isn't necessarily better sounding that other
| equipment, it's more accurate than other equipment. As for "superior" sound,
| superior for what use?
| Connectors don't matter, most pro SR amps have XLR connectors.
| Use whatever you want to mix on, but keep in mind that if you don't hear
| it correctly, you won't mix it correctly. If you want to use an M-50 to
| drive your studio monitors, be my guest! :-)
| Keep in mind that most home hifi equipment is built to sound good in a
| typical living room, and there is a world of difference between a typical
| home living room and a decent studio control room, even a home studio.
| Studio monitor equipment is designed to be accurate so that the mixing
| engineer can hear every nuance and detail in the mix, something that isn't
| necessarily desirable in a home hifi system, where folks just want the music
| to sound good.
|
This is a total misunderstanding. HiFi is by definition the set of
specifications for ultimate accuracy (High Fidelity) in sound reproduction. Back
when the term was coined, there were minimum specifications for what was, and
what was not Hi Fidelity. Over time as the state of the art in reproduction
systems evolved, those specifications also evolved such that hifi in the 50's
outperformed hifi in the 40's. Eventually the state of the art in reproduction
systems evolved to such a degree that you would be hard pressed to find
moderately priced home stereo equipment that does not meet and/or exceed the
stringent specifications for High Fidelity. In fact, run of the mill equipment
these days specs so well that the term HiFi has fallen into disuse because if
you're looking for quality equipment, you can find it under a myriad of brand
names in colors that will match your decor.

If you're only interested in a boombox or a car stereo or an mp3 player, all
bets are off, but if you want accurate reproduction; 1) You know better than to
buy toys. 2) You'll find the consumer market flooded with excellent choices.

This is not to say that pro grade equipment should be avoided for pro sound
production applications, but I will go so far as to say that if you have quality
modern consumer reproduction equipment, you'll have to spend a lot of cash to
get pro grade equipment that is more accurate in any meaningful sense.

(speakers are an exception and should be carefully chosen by ear with a
guaranteed return policy so that they can be evaluated in their intended
environ).

--
CWC
============================
It's not that nice guys finish last,
They have a whole different notion
where the finish line is.
============================


  #40   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.pro,alt.music.home-studio
Les Cargill
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yahama "natural sound" amp specs?

Arny Krueger wrote:

"CWCunningham" charlesw-at-blackfoot.net wrote in message



Damping can also be important, but it's very interactive
with your speakers, and beyond my tiny understanding to
discuss ... there's lots of sharp guys here who may be
able to describe the implications.



Damping is a wierd spec because it is based on questionable logic. It is
based on loudspeaker impedance, but loudspeakers are generally thought to be
independent of power amps and we all know that loudspeaker impedance is a
strong function of frequency.

The better spec would be amplifier source impedance, which is a property of
just the power amp. Source impedance can be specified as a set of numbers
or a curve, as it also varies with frequency. But at least it doesn't change
every time you change the speaker.




Speaker cabinets* can be expressed as a phase
plot/group delay curve ( as a function of
frequency). This from WinISD.

*acgtually, cab/driver combo...

That seems a whole lot more useful...

--
Les Cargill
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Yahama "natural sound" amp specs? rumble Pro Audio 236 June 9th 06 06:04 PM
Linkwitz' Orion design William Eckle High End Audio 60 March 6th 05 04:44 PM
WANTED: Info or Specs for KLH model Thirty-One Speakers ? unc80 Marketplace 0 May 5th 04 04:13 AM
Specs for Blaupunkt ODWA1200 12" old model subs??? Berlinwall5985 Car Audio 2 December 11th 03 04:48 PM
MTX Woofer Specs vern Car Audio 4 September 26th 03 02:04 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:13 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"