Speaker input/wattage question

[John Galvan]

Hi,

I have a pair of Panasonic SB-ZR80 speakers and the input on the back
of each one is listed at 200 watts at 8 ohms. Are these capable of
handling 200 watts per channel or 200 total (meaning from a 200W
receiver w/ 100 per channel). I'm guessing that it's 100 per channel
but wanted to check with other people about this. The new stereo
receiver I'm considering is rated at 120 watts per channel, so would
that be okay with these speakers? Sorry if this is a stupid question,
but I'm new to this.

Thanks!
John

[Trevor Wilson]

"John Galvan" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Hi,
>
> I have a pair of Panasonic SB-ZR80 speakers and the input on the back
> of each one is listed at 200 watts at 8 ohms. Are these capable of
> handling 200 watts per channel or 200 total (meaning from a 200W
> receiver w/ 100 per channel). I'm guessing that it's 100 per channel
> but wanted to check with other people about this. The new stereo
> receiver I'm considering is rated at 120 watts per channel, so would
> that be okay with these speakers? Sorry if this is a stupid question,
> but I'm new to this.

**Power ratings on speakers are always per speaker (system). However, there
is a 'gotcha'. (Ain't there always?) A 200 Watt (domestic) speaker is
unlikely to be able to cope with 200 Watts of continuous (aka: RMS - RMS, in
this instance, being a misnomer) power. What the number means (in simple
terms) is this:

A 200 Watt rated speaker system can be safely connected to an amplifier
rated at 200 Watts, which is driven by clean, undistorted music.

The manufacturer is assuming a peak to average ratio of around 10dB, which,
in simple terms, means that the average power into the speaker is around 20
Watts. If the amplifier is clipped, or driven with continuous sine wave type
signals for any length of time, the speaker may be destroyed.

What a cop-out, eh?

[ASIDE] My second pair of speakers (I built them in 1973) were a pair of KEF
transmission lines (Bailey design). KEF rated the speakers for 30 Watts of
power handling. I replaced the pitiful crossovers with something more
substantial and operated them for many years with my Marantz Model 500 power
amplifier. Since I was young and foolish, much of this time the Marantz was
operating close to it's maximum power ratings (250 Watts per channel).
Except for a couple of damaged crossover caps and one faulty B139 voice coil
(traced to faulty manufacturing) I never had a problem.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Slev in London[_2_]]

"John Galvan" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Hi,
>
> I have a pair of Panasonic SB-ZR80 speakers and the input on the back
> of each one is listed at 200 watts at 8 ohms. Are these capable of
> handling 200 watts per channel or 200 total (meaning from a 200W
> receiver w/ 100 per channel). I'm guessing that it's 100 per channel
> but wanted to check with other people about this. The new stereo
> receiver I'm considering is rated at 120 watts per channel, so would
> that be okay with these speakers? Sorry if this is a stupid question,
> but I'm new to this.
>
> Thanks!
> John
>

I'll keep it simple, it won't be a problem.
Your speakers will have also have a sensitivity rating, something like 90db,
this is how loud they will go for one watt at one metre etc.
The bandwidth is unknown but thats doubtful to be a problem, the speakers
have a nominal impedence of 8ohms which is an easy load.
Assuming you'll be using them in a domestic situation, with a mainstream
brand receiver, you won't be pumping more than a handful of watts into them
to achieve desired volume/bandwidth. Go for it.

[John Galvan]

Hi Trevor,

Thanks for the reply, that helps!

This leads me to another question: is a 120W per channel receiver
powerful enough to drive 200W speakers? I've read that damage can
occur due to lower power receivers and amplifiers. The receiver I'm
considering is the Harman Kardon HK3480. Again, sorry if this is a
stupid question!

Thanks!
John


On Jun 14, 4:14 pm, "Trevor Wilson" >
wrote:
> "John Galvan" > wrote in message
>
> ups.com...
>
> > Hi,
>
> > I have a pair of Panasonic SB-ZR80 speakers and the input on the back
> > of each one is listed at 200 watts at 8 ohms. Are these capable of
> > handling 200 watts per channel or 200 total (meaning from a 200W
> > receiver w/ 100 per channel). I'm guessing that it's 100 per channel
> > but wanted to check with other people about this. The new stereo
> > receiver I'm considering is rated at 120 watts per channel, so would
> > that be okay with these speakers? Sorry if this is a stupid question,
> > but I'm new to this.
>
> **Power ratings on speakers are always per speaker (system). However, there
> is a 'gotcha'. (Ain't there always?) A 200 Watt (domestic) speaker is
> unlikely to be able to cope with 200 Watts of continuous (aka: RMS - RMS, in
> this instance, being a misnomer) power. What the number means (in simple
> terms) is this:
>
> A 200 Watt rated speaker system can be safely connected to an amplifier
> rated at 200 Watts, which is driven by clean, undistorted music.
>
> The manufacturer is assuming a peak to average ratio of around 10dB, which,
> in simple terms, means that the average power into the speaker is around 20
> Watts. If the amplifier is clipped, or driven with continuous sine wave type
> signals for any length of time, the speaker may be destroyed.
>
> What a cop-out, eh?
>
> [ASIDE] My second pair of speakers (I built them in 1973) were a pair of KEF
> transmission lines (Bailey design). KEF rated the speakers for 30 Watts of
> power handling. I replaced the pitiful crossovers with something more
> substantial and operated them for many years with my Marantz Model 500 power
> amplifier. Since I was young and foolish, much of this time the Marantz was
> operating close to it's maximum power ratings (250 Watts per channel).
> Except for a couple of damaged crossover caps and one faulty B139 voice coil
> (traced to faulty manufacturing) I never had a problem.
>
> --
> Trevor Wilsonwww.rageaudio.com.au
>
> --
> Trevor Wilsonwww.rageaudio.com.au
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com

[David Martel]

John,

You can't damage speakers by running them at less than their maximum
wattage. If you have 200 watt speakers and a 200 watt/ch. amp with the
volume knob cranked 1/2 way you are only sending about 20w to each speaker.
Thus using a 120 watt amp with a 200 watt speaker should not damage
anything.

Dave M.

[dizzy]

John Galvan wrote:

>Hi Trevor,
>
>Thanks for the reply, that helps!
>
>This leads me to another question: is a 120W per channel receiver
>powerful enough to drive 200W speakers? I've read that damage can
>occur due to lower power receivers and amplifiers. The receiver I'm
>considering is the Harman Kardon HK3480. Again, sorry if this is a
>stupid question!

There is a simpler answer to your questions. Speaker power ratings
are BS and should be ignored. In most all cases, they are either
large-enough, physically, to produce the music at the volumes you
want, or they are not. Obviously a lot of bass demands more size.

[Mr.T]

"David Martel" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> You can't damage speakers by running them at less than their maximum
> wattage.

You can certainly damage any speaker by running it at less than it's maximum
RATED wattage under a large number of different circumstances. Most speakers
do not specify the spectral or dynamic content permitted, and in any case
many wattage claims are fanciful at best.
The wattage rating for each driver will give you a better idea, but you
still need to know whether it is peak power (and for how long) continuous
"music power" (and what constitutes "music") or real continuous average/rms
power (and with what type of test signal)

Fact is many speakers are damaged by far less power than their claimed
rating. For example small vented boxes are easily damaged at low frequencies
well below their nominal power rating, and no tweeter handles as much power
as the rating claimed for the complete enclosure.

MrT.

[Trevor Wilson]

"John Galvan" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Hi Trevor,
>
> Thanks for the reply, that helps!
>
> This leads me to another question: is a 120W per channel receiver
> powerful enough to drive 200W speakers?

**It should be.

I've read that damage can
> occur due to lower power receivers and amplifiers. The receiver I'm
> considering is the Harman Kardon HK3480. Again, sorry if this is a
> stupid question!

**Any decent quality speaker should be able to cope with the output of any
decent amplifier, as long as regular music is being played and distortion is
not allowed to occur.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[DW]

Yeah, you should be fine with that setup. Your speakers are probably rated
at 200 watts max (as opposed to RMS) per speaker. The main precaution for
compatability would be not to overdrive your speakers, and the easiest way
to tell is by listening to the speakers -they'll tell you when they are not
liking the volume level (i.e. they'll start to sound distorted and/or thin).
Really, you should be okay as long as you keep the volume level no higher
than 50% of maximum setting.

Happy listening!



"John Galvan" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Hi,
>
> I have a pair of Panasonic SB-ZR80 speakers and the input on the back
> of each one is listed at 200 watts at 8 ohms. Are these capable of
> handling 200 watts per channel or 200 total (meaning from a 200W
> receiver w/ 100 per channel). I'm guessing that it's 100 per channel
> but wanted to check with other people about this. The new stereo
> receiver I'm considering is rated at 120 watts per channel, so would
> that be okay with these speakers? Sorry if this is a stupid question,
> but I'm new to this.
>
> Thanks!
> John
>

[Trevor Wilson]

"DW" > wrote in message
...
> Yeah, you should be fine with that setup. Your speakers are probably
> rated at 200 watts max (as opposed to RMS) per speaker. The main
> precaution for compatability would be not to overdrive your speakers, and
> the easiest way to tell is by listening to the speakers -they'll tell you
> when they are not liking the volume level (i.e. they'll start to sound
> distorted and/or thin). Really, you should be okay as long as you keep the
> volume level no higher than 50% of maximum setting.

**Utter nonsense.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Serge Auckland]

"Trevor Wilson" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> "DW" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Yeah, you should be fine with that setup. Your speakers are probably
>> rated at 200 watts max (as opposed to RMS) per speaker. The main
>> precaution for compatability would be not to overdrive your speakers, and
>> the easiest way to tell is by listening to the speakers -they'll tell you
>> when they are not liking the volume level (i.e. they'll start to sound
>> distorted and/or thin). Really, you should be okay as long as you keep
>> the volume level no higher than 50% of maximum setting.
>
> **Utter nonsense.
>
>
> --
> Trevor Wilson
> www.rageaudio.com.au
>
Rather depends on what is meant by 50% of maximum setting:- If it means half
rotation, i.e. 20dB down on normal log pots, then I completely agree. If, on
the other hand, it means half-power, then it's reasonable advice.

S.

--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

[GregS]

In article >, "Serge Auckland" > wrote:
>
>
>"Trevor Wilson" > wrote in message
.. .
>>
>> "DW" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Yeah, you should be fine with that setup. Your speakers are probably
>>> rated at 200 watts max (as opposed to RMS) per speaker. The main
>>> precaution for compatability would be not to overdrive your speakers, and
>>> the easiest way to tell is by listening to the speakers -they'll tell you
>>> when they are not liking the volume level (i.e. they'll start to sound
>>> distorted and/or thin). Really, you should be okay as long as you keep
>>> the volume level no higher than 50% of maximum setting.
>>
>> **Utter nonsense.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Trevor Wilson
>> www.rageaudio.com.au
>>
>Rather depends on what is meant by 50% of maximum setting:- If it means half
>rotation, i.e. 20dB down on normal log pots, then I completely agree. If, on
>the other hand, it means half-power, then it's reasonable advice.

How would you determine half power.

How would you determine average power.

greg

[Mr.T]

"GregS" > wrote in message
...
> >>> Yeah, you should be fine with that setup. Your speakers are probably
> >>> rated at 200 watts max (as opposed to RMS) per speaker. The main
> >>> precaution for compatability would be not to overdrive your speakers,
and
> >>> the easiest way to tell is by listening to the speakers -they'll tell
you
> >>> when they are not liking the volume level (i.e. they'll start to sound
> >>> distorted and/or thin). Really, you should be okay as long as you keep
> >>> the volume level no higher than 50% of maximum setting.
> >>
> >> **Utter nonsense.
> >Rather depends on what is meant by 50% of maximum setting:- If it means
half
> >rotation, i.e. 20dB down on normal log pots, then I completely agree. If,
on
> >the other hand, it means half-power, then it's reasonable advice.

Or vice versa maybe. But unfortunately many/most amps/recievers will deliver
FULL power at 1/2 pot rotation when coupled to a CD player with 2V output.
The extra 20dB of gain is for lower level input sources.

> How would you determine half power.
> How would you determine average power.

Measure it! You'd first need to measure a speaker to destruction at all
frequencies though, to determine the REAL power handling data rarely
supplied by the manufacturer.
A costly exercise! :-)

MrT.

[Eeyore]

"Mr.T" wrote:

> "GregS" > wrote
>
> > >>> Yeah, you should be fine with that setup. Your speakers are probably
> > >>> rated at 200 watts max (as opposed to RMS) per speaker. The main
> > >>> precaution for compatability would be not to overdrive your speakers,
> > >>>and the easiest way to tell is by listening to the speakers -they'll tell
> you
> > >>> when they are not liking the volume level (i.e. they'll start to sound
> > >>> distorted and/or thin). Really, you should be okay as long as you keep
> > >>> the volume level no higher than 50% of maximum setting.
> > >>
> > >> **Utter nonsense.
> > >Rather depends on what is meant by 50% of maximum setting:- If it means
> > >half rotation, i.e. 20dB down on normal log pots, then I completely agree.
> If,
> > >on the other hand, it means half-power, then it's reasonable advice.
>
> Or vice versa maybe. But unfortunately many/most amps/recievers will deliver
> FULL power at 1/2 pot rotation when coupled to a CD player with 2V output.
> The extra 20dB of gain is for lower level input sources.

A far, far better solution is to use active variable gain stages.

Graham

[George M. Middius]

The Ursine Donkey brayed:

> A far, far better solution is to use active variable gain stages.

Do the imaginary groupies in your fantasies call you "Poopiekins"?





--

Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence.

[Earl Kiosterud]

"John Galvan" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Hi Trevor,
>
> Thanks for the reply, that helps!
>
> This leads me to another question: is a 120W per channel receiver
> powerful enough to drive 200W speakers? I've read that damage can
> occur due to lower power receivers and amplifiers. The receiver I'm
> considering is the Harman Kardon HK3480. Again, sorry if this is a
> stupid question!
>
> Thanks!
> John
>
>
> On Jun 14, 4:14 pm, "Trevor Wilson" >
> wrote:
>> "John Galvan" > wrote in message
>>
>> ups.com...
>>
>> > Hi,
>>
>> > I have a pair of Panasonic SB-ZR80 speakers and the input on the back
>> > of each one is listed at 200 watts at 8 ohms. Are these capable of
>> > handling 200 watts per channel or 200 total (meaning from a 200W
>> > receiver w/ 100 per channel). I'm guessing that it's 100 per channel
>> > but wanted to check with other people about this. The new stereo
>> > receiver I'm considering is rated at 120 watts per channel, so would
>> > that be okay with these speakers? Sorry if this is a stupid question,
>> > but I'm new to this.
>>
>> **Power ratings on speakers are always per speaker (system). However, there
>> is a 'gotcha'. (Ain't there always?) A 200 Watt (domestic) speaker is
>> unlikely to be able to cope with 200 Watts of continuous (aka: RMS - RMS, in
>> this instance, being a misnomer) power. What the number means (in simple
>> terms) is this:
>>
>> A 200 Watt rated speaker system can be safely connected to an amplifier
>> rated at 200 Watts, which is driven by clean, undistorted music.
>>
>> The manufacturer is assuming a peak to average ratio of around 10dB, which,
>> in simple terms, means that the average power into the speaker is around 20
>> Watts. If the amplifier is clipped, or driven with continuous sine wave type
>> signals for any length of time, the speaker may be destroyed.
>>
>> What a cop-out, eh?
>>
>> [ASIDE] My second pair of speakers (I built them in 1973) were a pair of KEF
>> transmission lines (Bailey design). KEF rated the speakers for 30 Watts of
>> power handling. I replaced the pitiful crossovers with something more
>> substantial and operated them for many years with my Marantz Model 500 power
>> amplifier. Since I was young and foolish, much of this time the Marantz was
>> operating close to it's maximum power ratings (250 Watts per channel).
>> Except for a couple of damaged crossover caps and one faulty B139 voice coil
>> (traced to faulty manufacturing) I never had a problem.
>>
>> --
>> Trevor Wilsonwww.rageaudio.com.au
>>
>> --
>> Trevor Wilsonwww.rageaudio.com.au
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
>
John,

The well-repeated notion of damaging a speaker from an underpowered amplifier relates to one
thing only -- running it to a power level where it clips enough to generate excessive and
continuous high-frequency content, which can indeed blow tweeters. 120 Watts from a 120
Watt amplifier is the same as 120 watts from a 200 Watt amplifier, as long as neither is
clipping.

It's true that other things can blow speakers. For example, a continuous sine wave, just
below amplifier clipping, could heat up and damage a speaker more readily than music just
below clipping in the same amplifier. The power is greater. It relates to the waveforms,
and their crest factors. Excessive very-low-frequency material, as others in this thread
have mentioned, can damage woofers, particularly in vented speakers. The cone motion is
excessive, and can literally bottom out the voice coil, or rip the spider and surround up.
Tweeters have substantially less power capability than do woofers, as the content of pretty
much any music has less overall power in the high part of the spectrum. So an undistorted
high-frequency-only sound upwards of the power capability of the amplifier, played long
enough, could burn out a tweeter.

Wattage numbers have considerably less meaning than given them by many people. They're used
mainly to sell stuff. The wattage of music varies all over the place. In short, your 120
Watts vs. 200 Watts is really nothing to be concerned about. If it can play loudly enough
without clipping, you're good to go. If it can't, you won't find it all that much louder
with a 200 Watt amplifier -- about 2.2 dB.

Regards from Virginia Beach,

Earl Kiosterud