On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 21:36:56 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 20:48:46 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 19:40:00 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Powell" wrote in message

"Matt Zach" wrote

I am looking at my first tube amp. It delivers 40 wpc
class A. I own an inefficient pair of A/D/S 810 speakers.
Will I have problems with this amp driving these speakers ?

The ADS L810 is a three-way acoustic-suspension
speaker (1981). This is an efficient 6 ohm speaker
(94 dB SPL/W/m) with a power rating of 100 watts,
200 watt peak. 40 watts of tube power should be
sufficient for a normal sized room unless you play
your music at excessively loud levels.

Perhaps if the room is small or very live.

You just don't know what you're talking about.

As if you're qualified to judge, Weil.

I've filled large rooms
(in terms of "normal sized" listening rooms - not necessarily
ballroom sized rooms) using 35 wpc amps quite easily.

So have I. I've even made rooms uncomfortably loud with them.
However, I used very high efficiency speakers.

So? I have very high efficiency speakers at the moment (far more
efficient than anything that you currently have, I think), but that's
a moot point. I was referring to filling a large room using speakers
of efficiency of less than 90 dB/1 watt/12 ft driven by 35 wpc amps.

As usual, you've lost track of the thread, Weil.

Since I have to baby-sit you, here's a reminder:

"Matt Zach" wrote in message

I am looking at my first tube amp. It delivers 40 wpc class A. I own
an inefficient pair of A/D/S 810 speakers.
Will I have problems with this amp driving these speakers ?

I can tell you that there was no problem with volume.

I can tell you that ADS 810s aren't 100 dB/watt speakers.

So? I can tell you that "less than 90 dB" speakers aren't 100 dB/watt
speakers either.

I'm thinking specifically of a JBL 01
system.

Are *these* also "inefficient" speakers? If not, then what's your
point/

And, I'm thinking of a large but totally unfurnished room.

Boy, I'll bet *that* sounded great (NOT!). Especially since you either
had to stand or sit on the floor, which might be *your* idea of a
"typicl listening room", but not mine.

I have no idea at all what a typicl listening room would be.

Of course you don't.

Now, how about a "typical listening room"?

If the L810s have 94 dB/w sensitivity, they would be exceptional as
most ADS products run in the more typical 88 to 91 dB/w range.

As well as exceptional for acoustic suspension designs.

Acoustic suspension is just a marketing term.

Hardly. It's a description of a very specific speaker design, as you
well know.

Once upon a time I was so naive that I actually thought that was true. I
don't know if that was when I was 13 or maybe 16. I know better now.

Right. Would you like to elaborate? Keep in mind that we know that you
operate at the 13 year old level...

I can see where it would be a term that you would use, Weil.

I think Villchur probably used it as well.

I'm sure he used it, but after all it was a phrase that his company used to
sell its product. Knowlegeable people learned that it was most definately
just a marketing term shortly after the publication and acceptance of the
ideas of Thiel and Small.

I don't know what "definately" means.

s******

Acoustic suspension has not that much to do with efficiency.

You really *must* be kidding.

I'm totally serious, and BTW I'm far more knowegable about this topic than
you, Weil.,

Right. Want to elaborate?

Looks like a meltdown from Grosse Pointe.

The snow and ice is still plenty deep.

As is the ****.

That much is clear since you seem to be advocating high power amps for
the Quad ESLs as well.

Not at all. Everybody with a brain knows that by modern high performance
standards, they lack dynamic range.

that's not what you claimed early. You claimed that they needed a lot
of power.