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 ?
Thanks,
Matt

Matt Zach wrote in
:

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 ?
Thanks,
Matt



What do you mean by inefficient? 85db watt/meter? 80db watt/meter? What
would be efficient to you? 90db 2.83v/meter?

r


--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.

"Rich Andrews" wrote in message
.44...
Matt Zach wrote in
:

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 ?
Thanks,
Matt



What do you mean by inefficient? 85db watt/meter? 80db watt/meter? What
would be efficient to you? 90db 2.83v/meter?


And furthermore, how big is the room?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Art wrote:


"Rich Andrews" wrote in message
. 3.44...
Matt Zach wrote in
:

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 ?
Thanks,
Matt



What do you mean by inefficient? 85db watt/meter? 80db watt/meter? What
would be efficient to you? 90db 2.83v/meter?


And furthermore, how big is the room?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption
=---








All important variables. As is the listener's customary volume level with
which he feels comfortable. In short, the question he poses probably can't be
answered by simply looking at amplifier power ratings or speaker effriciency
statistics.



Bruce J. Richman

(Bruce J. Richman) wrote in
:

Art wrote:


"Rich Andrews" wrote in message
.3.44...
Matt Zach wrote in
:

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 ?
Thanks,
Matt



What do you mean by inefficient? 85db watt/meter? 80db watt/meter?
What
would be efficient to you? 90db 2.83v/meter?


And furthermore, how big is the room?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via
Encryption
=---








All important variables. As is the listener's customary volume level
with
which he feels comfortable. In short, the question he poses probably
can't be
answered by simply looking at amplifier power ratings or speaker
effriciency
statistics.



Bruce J. Richman





Well, the questions posed to the original poster certainly won't answer
the question of if he will be having difficulty driving the speakers, it
is a start. I think that trying to determine if the amp is even adequate
for the SPL expected is a good first step. If the speakers are very
inefeccient and he expects 118db, then yes, his amp will had difficulty
driving the load to his satisfaction.

r


--
Nothing beats the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with DLT tapes.

"Rich Andrews" wrote in message
.44
(Bruce J. Richman) wrote in
:

Art wrote:


"Rich Andrews" wrote in message
.44...
Matt Zach wrote in
:

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 ?
Thanks,
Matt



What do you mean by inefficient? 85db watt/meter? 80db
watt/meter? What would be efficient to you? 90db 2.83v/meter?


And furthermore, how big is the room?




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via
Encryption =---








All important variables. As is the listener's customary volume
level with which he feels comfortable. In short, the question he
poses probably can't be answered by simply looking at amplifier
power ratings or speaker effriciency statistics.



Bruce J. Richman





Well, the questions posed to the original poster certainly won't
answer the question of if he will be having difficulty driving the
speakers, it is a start. I think that trying to determine if the amp
is even adequate for the SPL expected is a good first step. If the
speakers are very inefeccient and he expects 118db, then yes, his amp
will had difficulty driving the load to his satisfaction.

Letsee 40 watts is 16 dBw. Your typical home audio speaker runs 90 dB/w.
That means that this 40 watt peanut whistle can't muster 118 dB a meter from
the speaker, let alone create any kind of serious sound field in a typical
listening room. If you consider typical low efficency speakers with 83 dBw
sensitivity, now 1 meter SPL is down to 109 dB. It's really hopeless trying
to do a quality stereo with average or low efficiency speakers and a peanut
whistle for an amplifier.

On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:49:27 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Well, the questions posed to the original poster certainly won't
answer the question of if he will be having difficulty driving the
speakers, it is a start. I think that trying to determine if the amp
is even adequate for the SPL expected is a good first step. If the
speakers are very inefeccient and he expects 118db, then yes, his amp
will had difficulty driving the load to his satisfaction.

Letsee 40 watts is 16 dBw. Your typical home audio speaker runs 90 dB/w.
That means that this 40 watt peanut whistle can't muster 118 dB a meter from
the speaker, let alone create any kind of serious sound field in a typical
listening room.

The first part is a stretch in terms of importance (it's doubtful that
the need to hit 118 dB is very important for the "typical listening
room) and the second is just a blatant lie.

Arny Krueger wrote:

Letsee 40 watts is 16 dBw. Your typical home audio speaker runs 90 dB/w.
That means that this 40 watt peanut whistle can't muster 118 dB a meter from
the speaker, let alone create any kind of serious sound field in a typical
listening room. If you consider typical low efficency speakers with 83 dBw
sensitivity, now 1 meter SPL is down to 109 dB. It's really hopeless trying
to do a quality stereo with average or low efficiency speakers and a peanut
whistle for an amplifier.

Arny, you should know better. 109 db is LOUD. For a quiet house that
is plenty. Also, if the speakers are inefficient but have a high pressure
level, it will easily fill the entire house with sound - or at least create
the illusion of a decent amount of energy.

Arny Krueger wrote:

[snip]

Letsee 40 watts is 16 dBw. Your typical home audio speaker runs 90 dB/w.
That means that this 40 watt peanut whistle can't muster 118 dB a meter from
the speaker, let alone create any kind of serious sound field in a typical
listening room. If you consider typical low efficency speakers with 83 dBw
sensitivity, now 1 meter SPL is down to 109 dB. It's really hopeless trying
to do a quality stereo with average or low efficiency speakers and a peanut
whistle for an amplifier.

Isn't 109 dB still *very* loud? The following site suggests that it's
comparable to being in the front row at a rock concert:

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/Class/sound/U11L2b.html

This is the kind of volume that'll give you hearing damage if you're
exposed to it for extended periods of time. I don't see why you'd expect
that in order to get minimally "quality stereo" the set up has to be
able to produce ear-damaging volumes. Who listens to their home stereo
at this kind of volume on anything other than a very occasional basis?
Of course, if you don't care about your hearing, then by all means . . .

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
link.net
Arny Krueger wrote:

Letsee 40 watts is 16 dBw. Your typical home audio speaker runs 90
dB/w. That means that this 40 watt peanut whistle can't muster 118
dB a meter from the speaker, let alone create any kind of serious
sound field in a typical listening room. If you consider typical low
efficency speakers with 83 dBw sensitivity, now 1 meter SPL is down
to 109 dB. It's really hopeless trying to do a quality stereo with
average or low efficiency speakers and a peanut whistle for an
amplifier.

Arny, you should know better.

I do.

109 db is LOUD.

Not 109 dB peaks on music with natural dynamics.

For a quiet house that is plenty.

So is a 100 milliwatt transistor radio. But, who are you to say what is
plenty?

Also, if the speakers are inefficient but have a high
pressure level, it will easily fill the entire house with sound - or
at least create the illusion of a decent amount of energy.

Please explain.

On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 15:01:25 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

For a quiet house that is plenty.

So is a 100 milliwatt transistor radio. But, who are you to say what is
plenty?

Who are *you* to say what constitutes "any kind of serious sound field
in a typical listening room".

To imply that it requires 118 dBs is disingenuous.

"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.

Arny Krueger wrote:


For a quiet house that is plenty.


So is a 100 milliwatt transistor radio. But, who are you to say what is
plenty?

Gotcha!

Who are you either?

My stereo has a set of meters on it and at house-filling levels,
it barely peaks at 10 watts in class A mode. 40wpc is fine if
you don't want to listen very loudly.

Powell wrote:

"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.

So that means 94+16=110db out of a 40 watt amplifier. Even
at 10 watts, that's 106db.

I run a set of big 6 ohm speakers like this as well with
three Yamaha CA series power amplifiers. They are rated
at ~20-25wpc in class A mode, IIRC. 5 channels of this
is hellishly loud for movies or music - with the meters only
registering 10 watt peaks, my neighbors complain.

Things rattle and the windows vibrate by this point.
My main speakers are 93db efficient 3 way JBL monitors,
which are fairly close to the ADS L810s in SPL and efficiency.
I once wound it up to 100wpc in A/B(standard) mode - and you
could hear it 500ft away like it was in the next room.

Once. Lol.

40wpc class A should be plenty. If he likes tubes, good
for him - it's not hard to get a small tube amp like this.
Me? I appreciate both, but I like old fashioned transitors
the size of a walnut. Heat handling is a big plus for me.

Now, where did I put that picture of that 100,000watt tube?

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
link.net
Arny Krueger wrote:


For a quiet house that is plenty.


So is a 100 milliwatt transistor radio. But, who are you to say what
is plenty?

Gotcha!

Who are you either?

I spoke in terms of numbers, and I'll stand by them.

My stereo has a set of meters on it and at house-filling levels,
it barely peaks at 10 watts in class A mode.


Peaks on meters are typically a tiny shadow of the power levels involved in
actual musical peaks.

40wpc is fine if you don't want to listen very loudly.

agreed, but speaker efficiency matters.

40 wpc amps match up well for home listening with 96 dB/w speakers.

Modern speakers efficiency average just below 90 dB/w. IOW you want 6 dB or
4 times more power.

Low efficiency speakers like my NHT 2.5s, Magnepans, or Quad ESL run in the
low 80s, at least 4 times more power than average.

"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.

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.

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

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.

"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. I'm thinking specifically of a JBL 01
system. And, I'm thinking of a large but totally unfurnished 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. I can see where it would be a
term that you would use, Weil.

Acoustic suspension has not that much to do with efficiency. The ratio of
bass bandpass to box size does.

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 wpc/1 watt/12 ft driven by 35 wpc amps.

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

I'm thinking specifically of a JBL 01
system. 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.

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.

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

I think Villchur probably used it as well.

Acoustic suspension has not that much to do with efficiency.

You really *must* be kidding.

Looks like a meltdown from Grosse Pointe.

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

"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 wpc/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.

I'm thinking specifically of a JBL 01
system. 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.

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.

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.

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.,

Looks like a meltdown from Grosse Pointe.

The snow and ice is still plenty deep.

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.

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.

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
om

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 wpc/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.

Gheez - how deaf are you? I only listen to music that is
maybe 70-80db and has maybe twice that volume in peaks
at most and it fills the house for everything other than
a party. 100db/watt speakers? That's about what movie speakers
are - huge 100db+ efficient JBL arrays. Louder than hell in
these huge rooms bigger than my whole house.

Nodoby sane *needs* more than 110db, even for peaks unless
their hearing is shot.

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
link.net

Arny Krueger wrote:


"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 ADS 810s aren't 100 dB/watt speakers.

Gheez - how deaf are you? I only listen to music that is
maybe 70-80db and has maybe twice that volume in peaks
at most and it fills the house for everything other than
a party.

Ever been to a live performance of the kind of music you like? Ever measured
the actual sound levels?

I've done that for classical music, jazz, chamber music, country, pop, etc.
In the good seats SPL often show metered peaks (short transients are not
reflected) of 95-105 dB.

Rock concerts? Let's not even go there (at least without ear protection!).

100db/watt speakers? That's about what movie speakers are - huge 100db+
efficient JBL arrays.

True in the days of tubes. Believe it or not, some older theaters use some
of the same speakers now that they used back then, only with updated
electronics.

Far smaller speakers that are commonly available can have close to 100 dB/w
sensitivity. Check out your typical stage monitors or the speakers used for
SR. They generally run 96 dB/w and up with some exceptions like Bose.
They're not exactly huge or vastly expensive. However, the laws of physics
must be honored so they are either rather large or have less efficiency or
have limited bass or some of the above.

In new movie theaters there has been this recent tendency to use of smaller,
lower-efficiency speakers with racks of big power amps. I doubt that we'll
ever see much new construction with big bins of 18" drivers like we had in
the "Earthquake" days. Today: long-stroke drivers, small boxes, equalization
and big power amps.

Louder than hell in these huge rooms bigger than my whole house.

The ear is very level-sensitive. If you want a better approximation of the
sound quality of live music, you have no choice but to roughly duplicate
live music SPLs.

Nobody sane *needs* more than 110db, even for peaks unless their hearing
is shot.

The OSHA zero tolerance point is 115 dB, A-weighted. I very much support not
exceeding OSHA recommendations when listening to music.

My largest personal system can do about 110 dB as measured with a SPL meter
without *any* clipping. The system manual gain control on the surround
processor is set with a small marker at the "unconditional no clipping"
point. My system is smaller and less capable than those belonging to several
of my friends. I have a close friend whose system can easily do 120 dB
without clipping or strain. Parts of it will probably hit 130 dB, but
full-range 15 Hz-20 KHz its max is more like 120 dB. It's big and expensive
but at "live concert" SPLs, it's just cruising.

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 09:31:46 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
hlink.net

Arny Krueger wrote:


"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 ADS 810s aren't 100 dB/watt speakers.

Gheez - how deaf are you? I only listen to music that is
maybe 70-80db and has maybe twice that volume in peaks
at most and it fills the house for everything other than
a party.

Ever been to a live performance of the kind of music you like? Ever measured
the actual sound levels?

I've done that for classical music, jazz, chamber music, country, pop, etc.
In the good seats SPL often show metered peaks (short transients are not
reflected) of 95-105 dB.

Rock concerts? Let's not even go there (at least without ear protection!).

100db/watt speakers? That's about what movie speakers are - huge 100db+
efficient JBL arrays.

True in the days of tubes. Believe it or not, some older theaters use some
of the same speakers now that they used back then, only with updated
electronics.

Far smaller speakers that are commonly available can have close to 100 dB/w
sensitivity. Check out your typical stage monitors or the speakers used for
SR. They generally run 96 dB/w and up with some exceptions like Bose.
They're not exactly huge or vastly expensive. However, the laws of physics
must be honored so they are either rather large or have less efficiency or
have limited bass or some of the above.

In new movie theaters there has been this recent tendency to use of smaller,
lower-efficiency speakers with racks of big power amps. I doubt that we'll
ever see much new construction with big bins of 18" drivers like we had in
the "Earthquake" days. Today: long-stroke drivers, small boxes, equalization
and big power amps.

Louder than hell in these huge rooms bigger than my whole house.

The ear is very level-sensitive. If you want a better approximation of the
sound quality of live music, you have no choice but to roughly duplicate
live music SPLs.

Nobody sane *needs* more than 110db, even for peaks unless their hearing
is shot.

The OSHA zero tolerance point is 115 dB, A-weighted. I very much support not
exceeding OSHA recommendations when listening to music.

My largest personal system can do about 110 dB as measured with a SPL meter
without *any* clipping. The system manual gain control on the surround
processor is set with a small marker at the "unconditional no clipping"
point. My system is smaller and less capable than those belonging to several
of my friends. I have a close friend whose system can easily do 120 dB
without clipping or strain. Parts of it will probably hit 130 dB, but
full-range 15 Hz-20 KHz its max is more like 120 dB. It's big and expensive
but at "live concert" SPLs, it's just cruising.

Poor Arnold, now that he's painted himself in a box that he would
normally not have constructed, he's desperately spinning like a
dreidel at Chanakkah. He's now comparing stage monitors to home
speakers, he's bragging about doing 110 dB wow Arnold, *that's*
ammmmazing Now he supports not exceeding 115 dB but previously, not
being able to hit 118 dBs was the mark of poor performance.

Then of course, there's the denial that acoustic suspension speakers
don't address the design of the speaker - that it's just a "marketing
term". I'm sure that even Tom Nousaine could describe the basic design
principle behind such a speaker described as 'acoustic suspension" and
even he would acknowledge that this speaker is inherently less
efficient than some other designs, espcially the kind of designs that
JBL routinely uses - you know, the dreaded marketing term "bass
reflex".

Oh yeah, I currently have absolutely *no* problem hitting 120 dB with
only a 90 wpc SS amp. Of course, I only like to do that for testing
purposes with earplugs. Normally, I'm like most people, I usually
stick with peaks about 98 - 100 dBs for normal loud listening. And
that's on the rare occasion. Normally, peaks for me are below 90 dB.

Previously, with a speaker rated at 88 dB/watt/12 feet, I could fill a
24 by 22 foot space *easily* with two Dynaco MK3s. Could I hit 110 dBs
peaks? I don't know, since I never measured it. Needless to say, I
could play them as loud as I wished without audible clipping. And I'm
guessing that it would be at least 98 - 100 dBs.

"Arny Krueger" 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.

Based on a sampling of nine new build homes the
average living room is about 17' 6" by 16'6". In this
setting 40-80 tube watts with 94 dB efficiency speakers
will satisfy most listener needs. Personally, I’m more
concerned about midrange tonal quality over ultimate
sound pressure capability.

Frequency response and micro-dynamics often suffer
as speakers are pushed to their limits (100 dB).
Purchasers can be disappointed if they purchase
speakers that are to large for the acoustic environment
in order to favor extreme SPL’s, too.


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.

How would you know?

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 09:31:46 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
link.net

Arny Krueger wrote:


"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 ADS 810s aren't 100 dB/watt speakers.

Gheez - how deaf are you? I only listen to music that is
maybe 70-80db and has maybe twice that volume in peaks
at most and it fills the house for everything other than
a party.

Ever been to a live performance of the kind of music you like? Ever
measured the actual sound levels?

I've done that for classical music, jazz, chamber music, country,
pop, etc. In the good seats SPL often show metered peaks (short
transients are not reflected) of 95-105 dB.

Rock concerts? Let's not even go there (at least without ear
protection!).

100db/watt speakers? That's about what movie speakers are - huge
100db+ efficient JBL arrays.

True in the days of tubes. Believe it or not, some older theaters
use some of the same speakers now that they used back then, only
with updated electronics.

Far smaller speakers that are commonly available can have close to
100 dB/w sensitivity. Check out your typical stage monitors or the
speakers used for SR. They generally run 96 dB/w and up with some
exceptions like Bose. They're not exactly huge or vastly expensive.
However, the laws of physics must be honored so they are either
rather large or have less efficiency or have limited bass or some of
the above.

In new movie theaters there has been this recent tendency to use of
smaller, lower-efficiency speakers with racks of big power amps. I
doubt that we'll ever see much new construction with big bins of 18"
drivers like we had in the "Earthquake" days. Today: long-stroke
drivers, small boxes, equalization and big power amps.

Louder than hell in these huge rooms bigger than my whole house.

The ear is very level-sensitive. If you want a better approximation
of the sound quality of live music, you have no choice but to
roughly duplicate live music SPLs.

Nobody sane *needs* more than 110db, even for peaks unless their
hearing is shot.

The OSHA zero tolerance point is 115 dB, A-weighted. I very much
support not exceeding OSHA recommendations when listening to music.

My largest personal system can do about 110 dB as measured with a
SPL meter without *any* clipping. The system manual gain control on
the surround processor is set with a small marker at the
"unconditional no clipping" point. My system is smaller and less
capable than those belonging to several of my friends. I have a
close friend whose system can easily do 120 dB without clipping or
strain. Parts of it will probably hit 130 dB, but full-range 15
Hz-20 KHz its max is more like 120 dB. It's big and expensive but
at "live concert" SPLs, it's just cruising.

Poor Arnold, now that he's painted himself in a box that he would
normally not have constructed, he's desperately spinning like a
dreidel at Chanakkah.

Obviously Weil, the whole discussion is so far over your head that it
appears to you that the whole world is spinning. In fact, its your head that
is spinning.

He's now comparing stage monitors to home speakers,

No such thing. Simply pointing out that it doesn't take a monstor speaker in
a theater to have high efficiency.

he's bragging about doing 110 dB wow Arnold, *that's*
ammmmazing

Perhaps to you, Weil. As I later point out, it's far from exceptional in the
audiophile circles that I travel.

Now he supports not exceeding 115 dB but previously, not
being able to hit 118 dBs was the mark of poor performance.

Weil, you're making this up too,

Then of course, there's the denial that acoustic suspension speakers
don't address the design of the speaker - that it's just a "marketing
term".

Prove me wrong.

I'm sure that even Tom Nousaine could describe the basic design
principle behind such a speaker described as 'acoustic suspension" and
even he would acknowledge that this speaker is inherently less
efficient than some other designs, espcially the kind of designs that
JBL routinely uses - you know, the dreaded marketing term "bass
reflex".

More likely than not, Tom would categorize common box speakers as being
either vented or sealed box. That's the modern terminology - ever since the
80's at the latest.


Oh yeah, I currently have absolutely *no* problem hitting 120 dB with
only a 90 wpc SS amp.

That's great Weil, but aren't you the big tubed amp fan?

Of course, I only like to do that for testing
purposes with earplugs. Normally, I'm like most people, I usually
stick with peaks about 98 - 100 dBs for normal loud listening. And
that's on the rare occasion. Normally, peaks for me are below 90 dB.

Weil, I seriously doubt that you lack the resources to actually stand behind
these claims.

Previously, with a speaker rated at 88 dB/watt/12 feet, I could fill a
24 by 22 foot space *easily* with two Dynaco MK3s.

If two of those speakers fill an entire 24 x 22 foot room, then they are
very large speakers indeed.

Could I hit 110 dBs
peaks? I don't know, since I never measured it.

Weil, thanks for so quickly admitting that your former claim of "hitting 120
dB with only a 90 wpc SS amp" is worthless.

Needless to say, I
could play them as loud as I wished without audible clipping. And I'm
guessing that it would be at least 98 - 100 dBs.

Weil, thanks for so quickly admitting that your former claim of "hitting 120
dB with only a 90 wpc SS amp" is worthless, because as you now admit, your
SPL numbers are just your guesses.

"Powell" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" 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.

Based on a sampling of nine new build homes the
average living room is about 17' 6" by 16'6". In this
setting 40-80 tube watts with 94 dB efficiency speakers
will satisfy most listener needs. Personally, I'm more
concerned about midrange tonal quality over ultimate
sound pressure capability.

Frequency response and micro-dynamics often suffer
as speakers are pushed to their limits (100 dB).
Purchasers can be disappointed if they purchase
speakers that are to large for the acoustic environment
in order to favor extreme SPL's, too.


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.

How would you know?

Looked at a bunch of ADS product spec sheets. Why don't you post the URL of
the ADS spec sheet you claim to be citing?

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 14:11:30 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 09:31:46 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
link.net

Arny Krueger wrote:


"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 ADS 810s aren't 100 dB/watt speakers.

Gheez - how deaf are you? I only listen to music that is
maybe 70-80db and has maybe twice that volume in peaks
at most and it fills the house for everything other than
a party.

Ever been to a live performance of the kind of music you like? Ever
measured the actual sound levels?

I've done that for classical music, jazz, chamber music, country,
pop, etc. In the good seats SPL often show metered peaks (short
transients are not reflected) of 95-105 dB.

Rock concerts? Let's not even go there (at least without ear
protection!).

100db/watt speakers? That's about what movie speakers are - huge
100db+ efficient JBL arrays.

True in the days of tubes. Believe it or not, some older theaters
use some of the same speakers now that they used back then, only
with updated electronics.

Far smaller speakers that are commonly available can have close to
100 dB/w sensitivity. Check out your typical stage monitors or the
speakers used for SR. They generally run 96 dB/w and up with some
exceptions like Bose. They're not exactly huge or vastly expensive.
However, the laws of physics must be honored so they are either
rather large or have less efficiency or have limited bass or some of
the above.

In new movie theaters there has been this recent tendency to use of
smaller, lower-efficiency speakers with racks of big power amps. I
doubt that we'll ever see much new construction with big bins of 18"
drivers like we had in the "Earthquake" days. Today: long-stroke
drivers, small boxes, equalization and big power amps.

Louder than hell in these huge rooms bigger than my whole house.

The ear is very level-sensitive. If you want a better approximation
of the sound quality of live music, you have no choice but to
roughly duplicate live music SPLs.

Nobody sane *needs* more than 110db, even for peaks unless their
hearing is shot.

The OSHA zero tolerance point is 115 dB, A-weighted. I very much
support not exceeding OSHA recommendations when listening to music.

My largest personal system can do about 110 dB as measured with a
SPL meter without *any* clipping. The system manual gain control on
the surround processor is set with a small marker at the
"unconditional no clipping" point. My system is smaller and less
capable than those belonging to several of my friends. I have a
close friend whose system can easily do 120 dB without clipping or
strain. Parts of it will probably hit 130 dB, but full-range 15
Hz-20 KHz its max is more like 120 dB. It's big and expensive but
at "live concert" SPLs, it's just cruising.

Poor Arnold, now that he's painted himself in a box that he would
normally not have constructed, he's desperately spinning like a
dreidel at Chanakkah.

Obviously Weil, the whole discussion is so far over your head that it
appears to you that the whole world is spinning. In fact, its your head that
is spinning.

He's now comparing stage monitors to home speakers,

No such thing. Simply pointing out that it doesn't take a monstor speaker in
a theater to have high efficiency.

Of course it doesn't. Hell, Klipsch routinely sells relatively small
boxes with high efficiency. So does JBL.

I *will* point out that I don't know what a "monstor" speaker is
though.

he's bragging about doing 110 dB wow Arnold, *that's*
ammmmazing

Perhaps to you, Weil. As I later point out, it's far from exceptional in the
audiophile circles that I travel.

The comment was obviously intended to be sarcastic.

Now he supports not exceeding 115 dB but previously, not
being able to hit 118 dBs was the mark of poor performance.

Weil, you're making this up too,

Nope.

Then of course, there's the denial that acoustic suspension speakers
don't address the design of the speaker - that it's just a "marketing
term".

Prove me wrong.

I can't help if if you don't know what "acoustic suspension" refers
to.

I'm sure that even Tom Nousaine could describe the basic design
principle behind such a speaker described as 'acoustic suspension" and
even he would acknowledge that this speaker is inherently less
efficient than some other designs, espcially the kind of designs that
JBL routinely uses - you know, the dreaded marketing term "bass
reflex".

More likely than not, Tom would categorize common box speakers as being
either vented or sealed box. That's the modern terminology - ever since the
80's at the latest.

I didn't say how he'd categorize them. I said that he could describe
the basic design simply from the term "acoustic suspension". I'm sorry
that you can't. I'd brush up on my speaker terminology if I were you.

Oh yeah, I currently have absolutely *no* problem hitting 120 dB with
only a 90 wpc SS amp.

That's great Weil, but aren't you the big tubed amp fan?

Unlike you, I'm pretty openminded and flexible. I have an audio/video
90 wpc SS 5 channel receiver, a pair of 250 watt SS monoblocks, a 45
wpc tube integrated amp and a pair of 35 watt monoblock tube amps. I
also have a powered subwoofer based computer speaker system.

Of course, I only like to do that for testing
purposes with earplugs. Normally, I'm like most people, I usually
stick with peaks about 98 - 100 dBs for normal loud listening. And
that's on the rare occasion. Normally, peaks for me are below 90 dB.

Weil, I seriously doubt that you lack the resources to actually stand behind
these claims.

Doubt all you'd like.

Previously, with a speaker rated at 88 dB/watt/12 feet, I could fill a
24 by 22 foot space *easily* with two Dynaco MK3s.

If two of those speakers fill an entire 24 x 22 foot room, then they are
very large speakers indeed.

Actually, your sarcasm aside, they are pretty large speakers indeed
(although, in the general scheme of things, I wouldn't call them "very
large"). Weighing 120 lbs each and 45 inches tall, they aren't small,
although they have a fairly reasonable footprint. Plus, they go to 33
hz all by themselves. Not too shabby.

Could I hit 110 dBs
peaks? I don't know, since I never measured it.

Weil, thanks for so quickly admitting that your former claim of "hitting 120
dB with only a 90 wpc SS amp" is worthless.

You seem confused. My statement refers to a pair of speakers rated at
88 dB/watt/12 ft driven by two 35 w tube monoblocks, not a pair of
speakers rated at 98 dB/watt/1mtr driven by a Denon AVR 2800. The
reason that I can't state with certainty about the peaks is that, at
the time, I had no sound pressure meter, as I do now.

Needless to say, I
could play them as loud as I wished without audible clipping. And I'm
guessing that it would be at least 98 - 100 dBs.

Weil, thanks for so quickly admitting that your former claim of "hitting 120
dB with only a 90 wpc SS amp" is worthless, because as you now admit, your
SPL numbers are just your guesses.

Once again, you seem confused. The quote refers to my current setup,
not the previous setup noted. Please try to pay atention.

Arny Krueger wrote:

Ever been to a live performance of the kind of music you like? Ever measured
the actual sound levels?

Sure have.

I've done that for classical music, jazz, chamber music, country, pop, etc.
In the good seats SPL often show metered peaks (short transients are not
reflected) of 95-105 dB.

Exactly. Since his 94db efficient speakers will go up to ~110db with
a 40WPC class A tube amp, I don't see the need for more than that.

True in the days of tubes. Believe it or not, some older theaters use some
of the same speakers now that they used back then, only with updated
electronics.

http://www.jblpro.com/pages/cinema/cinema.htm

Last I checked, this is wha tmost of the new major chains install.
Of course note the lack of low-end(done on purpose so as to not
hammer the building's walls and frame too badly) response and the
inaccuracy.

35 Hz - 20 kHz (-10 dB) for the 4675C. 100db efficient, 1200w max.
Yep. 140db. Owch.

HT at *home* is like a live concert at home - you get better clarity
and frequency response than the "real" thing. You don't need that much
sound as you're not fighting 50-60db+ of crowd and background noise.

Far smaller speakers that are commonly available can have close to 100 dB/w
sensitivity. Check out your typical stage monitors or the speakers used for
SR. They generally run 96 dB/w and up with some exceptions like Bose.

Heh. I know. Bose - well, Bose is Bose. Lol.

In new movie theaters there has been this recent tendency to use of smaller,
lower-efficiency speakers with racks of big power amps. I doubt that we'll
ever see much new construction with big bins of 18" drivers like we had in
the "Earthquake" days. Today: long-stroke drivers, small boxes, equalization
and big power amps.

http://www.jblpro.com/pages/cinema/3000.htm I see a LOT of these in local
theaters as well - much smaller than the systems of old. Maybe 2000 watts
in the entire setup and most of that by the banks of surrounds.
http://www.jblpro.com/pages/cinema/surround.htm - sometimes this.

Ususally I see 3 of the wedge shaped surrounds on a side, one in each
corner, and two on the back wall. Lots of smaller speakers.

The mains usually are something like:
http://www.jblpro.com/pages/cinema/2way_scrn_ary.htm
Bigger array of smaller speakers. No, it's not a 120db+ system,
and requires more power, but then again, 400-500watts is plenty
for normal movies.

Now, IMAX - (grin) - whole other story.

The ear is very level-sensitive. If you want a better approximation of the
sound quality of live music, you have no choice but to roughly duplicate
live music SPLs.

No you do not. If the background noise(people/etc) ambient noise(trucks
going by and drone from the freeway 2 miles away and...) are removed,
you don't need as loud as real life to simulate it as the music doesn't
have to fight its way to you over all of that crud.

"Arny Krueger" 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.

Based on a sampling of nine new build homes the
average living room is about 17' 6" by 16'6". In this
setting 40-80 tube watts with 94 dB efficiency speakers
will satisfy most listener needs. Personally, I'm more
concerned about midrange tonal quality over ultimate
sound pressure capability.

Frequency response and micro-dynamics often suffer
as speakers are pushed to their limits (100 dB).
Purchasers can be disappointed if they purchase
speakers that are to large for the acoustic environment
in order to favor extreme SPL's, too.


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.

How would you know?

Looked at a bunch of ADS product spec sheets.

Quack, quack, quack...

Why don't you post the URL of
the ADS spec sheet you claim to be citing?

Stereo Directory & Buyers Guide 1982, page 154.

dave weil wrote:

You seem confused. My statement refers to a pair of speakers rated at
88 dB/watt/12 ft driven by two 35 w tube monoblocks, not a pair of
speakers rated at 98 dB/watt/1mtr driven by a Denon AVR 2800. The
reason that I can't state with certainty about the peaks is that, at
the time, I had no sound pressure meter, as I do now.

Even then, that's 102db max. Not 110db, but that's still very
loud. Ah - that 35W is maximum nominal rating - they can do
instantaneous peaks a bit higher than that with no ill effects
as long as the power supply is up to it.

Arny's full of it as usual. For home listening of stereo music
for enjoyment, that's plenty. For a party - no, it's going to
not be up to the task.

"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
link.net...
Arny Krueger wrote:

Letsee 40 watts is 16 dBw. Your typical home audio speaker runs 90 dB/w.
That means that this 40 watt peanut whistle can't muster 118 dB a meter
from
the speaker, let alone create any kind of serious sound field in a
typical
listening room. If you consider typical low efficency speakers with 83
dBw
sensitivity, now 1 meter SPL is down to 109 dB. It's really hopeless
trying
to do a quality stereo with average or low efficiency speakers and a
peanut
whistle for an amplifier.

Arny, you should know better. 109 db is LOUD. For a quiet house that
is plenty. Also, if the speakers are inefficient but have a high pressure
level, it will easily fill the entire house with sound - or at least
create
the illusion of a decent amount of energy.


In the 1970's, people were very happy with 40 wpc.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 15:01:25 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

For a quiet house that is plenty.

So is a 100 milliwatt transistor radio. But, who are you to say what is
plenty?

Who are *you* to say what constitutes "any kind of serious sound field
in a typical listening room".

To imply that it requires 118 dBs is disingenuous.


not only that, its lying.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Socky said:

To imply that it requires 118 dBs is disingenuous.

not only that, its lying.

Don't praise the Beast if you want him to behave better.

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message



In the 1970's, people were very happy with 40 wpc.

That pretty well sums it up - toobs and vinyl are for people who think that
nothing has improved in audio over the past 30 years.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message



In the 1970's, people were very happy with 40 wpc.

That pretty well sums it up - toobs and vinyl are for people who think
that
nothing has improved in audio over the past 30 years.


We are only talking volume. People listening to head banging heavy metal
were happy with 40 wpc.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

That pretty well sums it up - toobs and vinyl are for people who think that
nothing has improved in audio over the past 30 years.


That shows how little you know about people who prefer tubes and vinyl.

"Arny Krueger" wrote

In the 1970's, people were very happy with 40 wpc.

That pretty well sums it up - toobs and vinyl are for people
who think that nothing has improved in audio over the past
30 years.

How would you know? Your empirical in-home tube
experience ended 20 years ago.

My largest personal system can do about 110 dB as
measured with a SPL meter without *any* clipping.

Hehehe, HAHAHA... right!

Define your technical notion of clipping and the role
frequency response plays in it, if any?

I have a close friend...

Here comes the self-infatuation...

... whose system can easily do 120 dB without
clipping or strain. Parts of it will probably hit 130 dB,
but full-range 15 Hz-20 KHz its max is more like 120
dB.

Quack, quack, quack...

It's big and expensive but at "live concert" SPLs,
it's just cruising.

Really? Define "expensive" with make and model
of speaker? I think you just cooked up this story
in your head, mr. Narcissist.

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ...
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
link.net...
Arny Krueger wrote:

Letsee 40 watts is 16 dBw. Your typical home audio speaker runs 90 dB/w.
That means that this 40 watt peanut whistle can't muster 118 dB a meter
from
the speaker, let alone create any kind of serious sound field in a
typical
listening room. If you consider typical low efficency speakers with 83
dBw
sensitivity, now 1 meter SPL is down to 109 dB. It's really hopeless
trying
to do a quality stereo with average or low efficiency speakers and a
peanut
whistle for an amplifier.

Arny, you should know better. 109 db is LOUD. For a quiet house that
is plenty. Also, if the speakers are inefficient but have a high pressure
level, it will easily fill the entire house with sound - or at least
create
the illusion of a decent amount of energy.


In the 1970's, people were very happy with 40 wpc.

More specifically, in the late '70s, an acquaintance of mine had a
pair of ADS/Braun 810s powered by a mid-line (40-50 wpc) Yamaha
receiver. That amount of power was very adequate in a fair sized
living room. My guess would be that the tube amp might be happier
driving the lowish impedance of the 810s and clip more gracefully in
the bargain (and, in case anyone is wondering, I am not big tube amp
proponent).

"Bill McCullough" wrote in message
om...
(and, in case anyone is wondering, I am not big tube amp
proponent).

Ok, so you like small tube amps!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---