lets assume high end amps such as AUDISON

is 60W enough for midbass driver or 100W better?

is 4 *60W enough to run thru a 3 way bi-amp x-over? therefore 60w for tweeter & midrange and another 60w for midbass. or is 100W better

Is 180W enough for a 10" SUB or is 300-400 Watts better.

Looking for really good SQ. NOT SPL

To keep things as dynamic as possible put all the power you can to the speakers.

Boog-ass............. you can get exceptional SQ from limited power. The amps should match with the drivers you have purchased. This whole MORE power thing is so BS............. mind you, if you want it, I'll hazard a guess that all of us in the retail/distribution side of things have no issues selling it too you. But do you really need it is what you have to ask yourself.......... or should I say, do your speakers really need it to work optimally?!??!?!? Some do and some definitely don't.

My opinion is go with lot's of power, but I'm building for a very specific goal (IASCA).

In Rina Beckhams truck she has 1600 watts and 5 speakers. Really she's only putting out maybe a few hundred because the gains are all the way down, and the crossover levels are also turned down.

Why so much power when we don't use it ?

The system has the ability to be dynamic and never run out of power (thus causing poor reproduction)

Two ways to go, lot's of power, or efficent drivers, or both.

I wrote in another post (same topic) my opinion on this one. Do a serch others also posted on this one.

Me.....I like big power and good drivers [img]graemlins/headbang.gif[/img]

go with as much power as your wallet allows, its always better to not have to drive your amplifiers into clipping, which could easily be done with a 60x4 amplifier when you really get on the volume, more power is not bs, and the benefit of having alot of power is that its easier to match to the speaker

Try and get enough power that you can turn it up without hearing distortion to your maximum listening level. ie: If your speakers handle 100 RMS but you never turn your radio above the point that delivers 50 RMS before it's too loud, then 50 RMS would have been enough.

In general, more power is better. Turning it up is harder than turning it down. You'll never get 150 RMS out of a 100 RMS amp (excluding underrating) but it's real easy to get 50 RMS out of a 100 RMS amp.

In the words of Christian Slater in True Romance "It's better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it." Buy as much power as you can afford, then buy more.

In reference to Audison VRx amps:

They use an output distortion limiter to curb the amp from being overdriven. At 2% distortion, the input gain is rolled back to limit clipping on the output stage. Simply put, they have a volume control to turn down the volume when you exceed the output capability of the amp.

Some other amps have this feature as well, but they do cost a fair penny. (this being one of a plethora of high end features)

For an actively powered 3 way, I'd recomend 50 watts for tweeters, 50 watts for midranges, and around 100 watts for midbasses. Assuming a moderately efficent speaker system is used, this should give realistic reproduction of most all music.

For an actively powered 2 way, I'd use 50 watts for tweeters, and 50 to 100 watts for midrange.

But....

I'm a bit of a dynamic headroom junky, so I subscribe to Jamie's formula if you can afford it.


Just as a note, some of the best high end home audio amps in the world are under 50 watts per channel.

Adam

but they arent typically used to listen to metallica or 50 cent at warp level for 30 minutes straight, all the while not providing the proper amount of current to the amp

Aren't most high-end amplifiers underrated like a "mofo," as one might say ?

^ I don't think so anymore. Used to be the case back in the day though.


More power. As Ettore said - you can't get 150watts out of a 100watt amp if you find you need the 150watts. True, you may overspend but if you buy it too small and have to rebuy you will spend even more [img]graemlins/dunno.gif[/img]


Personally, my plan is 75x2 for the tweeters, 75x2 for the mids, and 300x2 for the midbass. I like midbass :D

I am currently using a 150 WPC (TU-600) front stage and 1000W amp to my sub, so yeah if you want it loud like live music is pull out the wallet and punch out the power.

BUT I was actually sounding every bit as good (though absolute volume was compromised) with my 75W x 4 amp (TU-4360). I am not convinced that little amp didn’t sound BETTER than its big brother.

Having ample power "on tap" helps with "headroom" -- the transition from quiet passages to musical peaks. If you have the gain control on your amplifier all the way off (like I do) than all the better -- the amplifier has something left when needed. Underpowered speakers are more likely to blow than "overpowered" speakers.

No, pushing an amplifier into clipping to attain the desired volume blows speakers ;)

Feeding 50 watts to a 100 watt speaker isn't going to hurt it ... Trying to get 100 watts out of a 50 watt amplifier probably is ;)

[ July 23, 2004, 07:23 PM: Message edited by: Jmac ]

HELLO!!!!! You are being somewhat redundant ;) What I mean by "ample power" is that the amplifier is not being overdriven (ie clipping) -- usually this means someone is driving a 25w (RMS @ 4ohms) at full gain with the volume at 30 (out of 30), usually with the loudness on and the bass at full, and they wonder why there is distortion! ;)

Yes but he is pointing out that "underpowering" is not the right word to use technically. It is easy to say underpowering though, where as I have tried to explain the concept of clipping to some people, and no matter how simple you make it and how many drawings you make they don't get it.

smart system design and a good quality amp should get you right where you want to be. ex. i use a orion 2100hcca in 4 ohm stereo mode to run my quart mids and tweets, not alot of power but my amp never clips and has tons of headroom, now defro uses single amps per spkr with tons of power and his car is probable one of the top sounding cars in north america!! both cars sound great but are done with different enginering concepts. my point is take alot of info, pic out what applies to you and experiment. remember half of car audio is trial and error and the other half is beer and whiskey shooters!!!

yes. thats why mike called it underpowering, a very basic term even the most beginners could understand, if described properly. [img]graemlins/thumb.gif[/img]

Except that if you actually run 50 watts or less from an amplifier that can produce up to 50 watts cleanly into a speaker that can handle 100 watts, it won't hurt the speaker [img]smile.gif[/img] Most beginners are under the impression that you WILL blow the speaker if you run this 100 watt speaker off this 50 watt amplifier, no matter the settings on the amplifier, because the speaker is being "underpowered."

Anyways, the point is that it's better to buy more power than you think you'll need [img]smile.gif[/img]

I have had no problem feeding 3x recommended power to my speakers.

After the install, and the equipment you use, it's all about the power. :D

[ July 24, 2004, 03:18 AM: Message edited by: Chadxton ]

Thanks for all the comments.

So, here is another question

VRx lower power but higher end

VS.

LRX higher power but not the highest end in the lineup

Same Money.

Which one would you choose?

Is it a power question or a SQ question
... can you hear a difference? probably not
... is one noticibly louder? probably not (assuming same ratings)
... can you afford both
... does image/ appearance matter

SQ question but enough power is required to drive the speakers well

Yes, I can afford both.

Get the bigger version of the VRx [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Just cause you got an amp that is able to put out 300W doesn't mean you're feeding that much power to the speaker...

^Yes I know. But the dynamic potential is what the power is all about..

depends, were just fitting a car with all macrom for a show in winnipeg, we want to get it in the 1-600 watts basic class.. I think were only giving the subs 120 a piece right now< might change. from what I've heard for the sq portion you don't need alot of power for the subs.

more is great just depends on what you need

It is a yin/yang thing if you go low power you need efficient drivers to hit 'minimum' SPL levels. I have heard many home systems with satisfying SPL levels with only 13 watts or so (but not playing sub bass heavy music). BUT to get realistic bass slam you need some headroom and some watts (120 W should be enough in a quiet car).

Just cause you got an amp that is able to put out 300W doesn't mean you're feeding that much power to the speaker... </font>[/QUOTE]This brings up another point -- many "higher end" car and home amplifiers are "biased" in such a way that in many class "a/b" amplifers (for example Parasound or Quad) the first 10% of the amplifiers capability is biased towards class a -- So, in many cases, not over driving the amplifer allows it to operate more towards the class "a" scale of its bias.

I agree Mike, it's not just a question of power quantity, but quality of power.
Power as in Watts, is like Horsepower to an engine, and Amperes are like torque, but all the horsepower without the right amount of torque won't go far.
If it's SQ you are after, and you CAN afford a better amplifier and interconnects, then get as much power as you can afford, and the best SQ amp you can buy, the Audison is a very nice sounding amplifier, so no matter which model you opt for, it's a good choice with many head units and speakers.

And the more class A bias there is, the closer to it being class A it would be. [img]tongue.gif[/img] Somewhat silly of a statement, but it makes sense. There really only needs to be about 5% Class A bias to cover the 'notch' that the Class B transistors create for the first .6v or so. :D


Now what would be REALLY cool is if someone listed all the amps on earth and state how much Class A bias each one has. [img]tongue.gif[/img] ...well at least the ones I have.

what about Class 'eh ?

interesting that not one person agree's with dawg's statements about and abundance of power being bogus, funny fact of the day!

Ok so i have two subs that handle 300 watts each, but my amp only pushes a little more than 200 watts to each sub, if i had that extra 100 more watts for each sub, what kind of difference in output would i receive?

^^^I agree with Tom, but I'm a horrible example of the opposite.

you agree but dont use the logic in your own system, your funny adam!

I was careful NOT to disagree, there are several thought processes on this and many ways to sonic heaven. I was all about low power last year (300 watt total) and have made 90 watts (total) systems (Front rear and Sub) but with my painfully inefficient drivers I had to go up in the wattage to get the SPL I need for competition (SPL swings, EQ enduro, showing off). Am I hypocritical… no! I would love to go down in power consumption.

Personnally, I really don't care if people don't agree with me. A lot of the cars I've seen or judged SQ wise have spent loads of cash on gear and gobs of power and they still didn't sound anywhere near what they should have given the money invested and the power in the systems. Better could be done by system matching the gear. Power isn't everything, unless you know how to "use it properly" and "install it properly". Very few here are in the league of Jamie or are doing things like Adam. All I was trying to do was give the guy a realistic idea about reality and not to follow the tread of spending like mad as it's NOT necessary to do so to achieve what he wants. Ridicule that if you want............. doesn't matter to me either way and I still stand behind what I said.

i wasnt ridiculing, just pointing out a reality, so going by what youve said, an abundance of power can be beneficial, and not a waste of resources, if used properly and coupled with a proper installation, now that doesnt sound bogus

defro, I'm a sick puppy [img]tongue.gif[/img]