How Loud is 1 Watt?

[fas42]

3 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 That's silly Frank.

1. It would be quite costly, and offer very little benefit , even if you pushed it to way higher than typical domestic levels which have already been shown to be quite low

2. It would be way too bulky to fit into a typical 50/100W Power Amplifier case , so you are looking at much more expensive metalwork as well.

 

The benefit is that the PS is way within its comfort zone, to be able to deliver the energy needed for normal listening levels - an analogy is a high performance car, driven around on normal streets, roads, and speeds: absolutely nothing would faze it; because it's operating way below its theoretical capabilities - in audio, this is what gives one the "effortless listening" experience ...

 

Right, you are willing to sacrifice far greater listening ease, because the metalwork is "more expensive", hmmm, 😝?

[sandyk]

23 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

The benefit is that the PS is way within its comfort zone, to be able to deliver the energy needed for normal listening levels - an analogy is a high performance car, driven around on normal streets, roads, and speeds: absolutely nothing would faze it; because it's operating way below its theoretical capabilities - in audio, this is what gives one the "effortless listening" experience ...

 

Right, you are willing to sacrifice far greater listening ease, because the metalwork is "more expensive", hmmm, 😝?

That's absolute BS Frank

There is far more to how a Power Amplifier sounds than just how it behaves close to  it's rated output power.

How an amplifier sounds is mainly determined by the Input Differential pair/Current Mirror and V.A.S stages, NOT the  more typical Emitter Follower Output devices.

[opus101]

2 minutes ago, sandyk said:

How an amplifier sounds is mainly determined by the Input Differential pair/Current Mirror and V.A.S stages, NOT the  more typical Emitter Follower Output devices.

 

How do you know this? Got any examples? In my experiments a large part of how an amp sounds is the power supply. In other words, the PSRR is very important.

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, opus101 said:

 

How do you know this? Got any examples? In my experiments a large part of how an amp sounds is the power supply. In other words, the PSRR is very important.

 It is important, but it's not the "be all,end all." The main thing is to ensure that the power to the front end remains clean, with additional filtering or voltage regulation if necessary

Current Mirror Discussion - Page 15 - diyAudio

. 

 

 

[fas42]

It's "fix the weakest link" strategy - my original Perreaux 2150B had a weak design for its power supply, and once you pick up the audible misbehaviour that is caused by something not working to an adequate standard, then you "keep hearing it" - in that case, the treble deteriorated when more than a certain level of power was being delivered - ultimately resolved by completely redoing the smoothing caps setup.

 

Current design, especially in active speakers, has evolved - the tiny amps in my current Edifiers are considerably better at getting the job done than the monstrous Perreaux, in its original state; because there has been genuine progress in the way things are engineered ...

[sandyk]

57 minutes ago, fas42 said:

my original Perreaux 2150B had a weak design for its power supply, and once you pick up the audible misbehaviour that is caused by something not working to an adequate standard, then you "keep hearing it" - in that case, the treble deteriorated when more than a certain level of power was being delivered - ultimately resolved by completely redoing the smoothing caps setup.

I thought you had sent that Perraux to the tip MANY years ago .😎

 That is why Electrolytic Capacitors publish Data sheets giving their typical life expectancy.
 

[PeterSt]

11 hours ago, fas42 said:

The classic, square diode bridge rectifier is normally used for any higher powered unit - which is bolted to some heat sinking surface ... not much chance of overheating the silicon, I would think.

 

But Frank, then you still don't get it ...

 

Ales just mentioned the life time of capacitors. This is directly related to heat. OK ?

Each 10C of additional ambient directly influences the life time of the caps. Btw, each 20C too. Haha.

The point (my point) you seem to miss is that each heat radiation from a component should be able to leave the cabinet. If not, heat piles up fast (and you should know with your XMas temperatures over there *if* not in the middle of a wood fire to begin with).

 

I don't think I gave the example, but if I don't have the heat dissipation under control in our (Mach III) PC, *plus* when I don't have the boot process correctly under control (which is a BIOS thing) which makes the system booting from RAM taking 12 minutes for that, the 105W at first becomes 160W towards the end, and the system won't boot because of a fraction of a second the OS adds 100W to it (in W10 this is when the "window" wants to apear). This is in a fully optimized environment (BIOS + OS).

And the only difference from minute 1 to minute 12 is the heat in even an open cabinet. Read: Heatsinks are too small.

Or especially for you Frank: the metal work needs to be more expensive.

Of course we need to keep in mind that this is all in a 10cm height (thus very small) cabinet.

 

 

For understanding, one thing I left out: in this 105W-160W example, the Xeon involved was one tad too "over done" in combination with the 10A (linear) PSU for 12V; replace this 40 core Xeon for a 32 core and 100W (!) remains 100W forever.

 

The importance of this story is ore than crucial, because you won't really notice the increase in heat, BUT you can easily measure it with the IR meter on about each component. That's the heatsink of the PSU, the heatsink on the rectifier diodes, the transformer, the voltage regulators (those who must deliver 10A). In normal mode each is around 45-50C. But in "over done" mode each will be 60C or so.

So what.

... So that extra heat can leaver the cabinet and things get more and more inefficient. And it ends with your music sounding worse and worse.

 

And who is the one telling that systems may deteriorate after a few minutes - and who is even able to hear it on YouTubes ?

Frank.

But now Frank knows why that is (and if the amp only would shut down it would be more obvious).

 

[PeterSt]

FYI:

 

 

yes, that small. But this serves a purpose.

 

[PeterSt]

11 hours ago, fas42 said:

10's of watts is all that's needed, to deafen one - my current active speakers only have 50W driving the mid/bass; and they have no trouble filling the room with SPLs where one has to shout to be heard, if the other is at any distance away.

 

Yes, deafen one. That would be correct. But the big sport is to have a 100dBSPL or so, and NOT deafen.

 

Anyway, let me try to put you up the task to find an article on how much Watts music requires. Work it out for speakers of a given efficiency, if you get far with it in the first place.

Hint: waste of time.

[acg]

1 hour ago, PeterSt said:

But the big sport is to have a 100dBSPL or so, and NOT deafen.

 

It is THE big sport Peter and until one actually hears a speaker capable of big dynamics often they will not believe it possible to have 105dB peaks and be able to hold a conversation.  I often think of it in terms of compression, like compression from the loudness wars, where the gaps between the notes/sounds get squeezed out by whatever it is the speaker is doing instead of making the right sounds.  Holds true for electronics as well, in a lesser way.

[Confused]

10 hours ago, fas42 said:

 

The benefit is that the PS is way within its comfort zone, to be able to deliver the energy needed for normal listening levels - an analogy is a high performance car, driven around on normal streets, roads, and speeds: absolutely nothing would faze it; because it's operating way below its theoretical capabilities - in audio, this is what gives one the "effortless listening" experience ...

 

Right, you are willing to sacrifice far greater listening ease, because the metalwork is "more expensive", hmmm, 😝?

In this analogy, wouldn't the power supply be more analogous to the fuel pump and fuel injection system, with the amplifier itself being the engine?  If you had a massive fuel pump and powerful fuel injectors, this is not going to do you much good with a 500cc engine.  In fact, a better analogy would be an electric car, where you are saying that you need batteries and a motor control system capable of providing massive current, and then run this with very small electric motors.  To have that "effortless driving experience", you need a powerful motor to go with it.

 

As an aside, this topic reminds me of a dealer event I attended once.  This was a Devialet event attended by Devialet's chief engineer for the "Expert" range of amps.  He made a statement that their priories were a) power, b) volume control, c) quality.  This seemed a slightly curious statement, but he spent a long time explaining the rational behind this, even stating that the perfect amplifier design would have "infinite power", whilst ensuring that optimum quality is provided at all power levels.  The reasons behind this were related to transient performance, speaker control and similar.

[sandyk]

8 minutes ago, acg said:

 

It is THE big sport Peter and until one actually hears a speaker capable of big dynamics often they will not believe it possible to have 105dB peaks and be able to hold a conversation.  I often think of it in terms of compression, like compression from the loudness wars, where the gaps between the notes/sounds get squeezed out by whatever it is the speaker is doing instead of making the right sounds.  Holds true for electronics as well, in a lesser way.

Hi Anthony

Given that the dynamic range of RBCD is 96dB, and quiet suburban neighborhoods experience ambient noise levels of approximately 45-50 dB, (USA figures) I find that hard to believe . Perhaps your speakers are acting as an Expander ? 😜

IIEC, you prefer valve amplification too, which has markedly poorer S/N than the best of solid state ? e

Kind Regards 

Alex

[PeterSt]

1 hour ago, sandyk said:

dynamic range of RBCD is 96dB, and quiet suburban neighborhoods experience ambient noise levels of approximately 45-50 dB, (USA figures)

 

Hmm ... How is that related ?

You seem to imply that of 96dB of dynamic range, 45-50 dB falls in ambient noise ?

... Nah, it does not work like that. Juts put up the volume ...

(but I probably did not get what you wanted to say)

[acg]

8 hours ago, sandyk said:

Hi Anthony

Given that the dynamic range of RBCD is 96dB, and quiet suburban neighborhoods experience ambient noise levels of approximately 45-50 dB, (USA figures) I find that hard to believe . Perhaps your speakers are acting as an Expander ? 😜

IIEC, you prefer valve amplification too, which has markedly poorer S/N than the best of solid state ? e

Kind Regards 

Alex

 

 I'm in rural Qld Alex, not suburban USA and room noise is <40dB... which is another thing to get under control of course,  but with 105dB peaks at my chair I have access to 65dB+ dynamic range... but like Peter says, to get more just turn up the volume., which I can do with only a watt or two at my disposal.  105dB peaks are still only a quarter watt of power...

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, acg said:

 

 I'm in rural Qld Alex, not suburban USA and room noise is <40dB... which is another thing to get under control of course,  but with 105dB peaks at my chair I have access to 65dB+ dynamic range... but like Peter says, to get more just turn up the volume., which I can do with only a watt or two at my disposal.  105dB peaks are still only a quarter watt of power...

Hi Anthony

I fail to see what is so unique about that ,other than the extremely low power requirements of your speakers. 

 If you are using valve amplification, then your noise levels aren't as low as can be achieved when using Soilid State optimised to take advantage of low impedance sources such as Peter's DAC. ( much lower than typical input resistor and feedback resistor values using bulk naked film types )

 I also live in a semi rural area in Cooranbong NSW these days, where it is pretty quiet also, other than on some weekends when the Bikies head to their clubhouse at Freemans Waterhole.

 

Kind Regards

Alex 

[fas42]

16 hours ago, sandyk said:

I thought you had sent that Perraux to the tip MANY years ago .😎

 That is why Electrolytic Capacitors publish Data sheets giving their typical life expectancy.
 

 

Nope. It's sitting in its original box, just to the right of me as I type this...

 

Nothing to do with age ... I bought the unit 2nd hand, from Len Wallis - and it had the PS issues when it was in its prime, decades ago. The caps were fine, but they were the typical coffee tin units, with screw terminals. The real problems were that the terminals were not connected properly, internally to the guts of them - when you tightened them down, the whole terminal would turn - and, the impedance characteristics were wrong.

[fas42]

11 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

But Frank, then you still don't get it ...

 

Ales just mentioned the life time of capacitors. This is directly related to heat. OK ?

Each 10C of additional ambient directly influences the life time of the caps. Btw, each 20C too. Haha.

The point (my point) you seem to miss is that each heat radiation from a component should be able to leave the cabinet. If not, heat piles up fast (and you should know with your XMas temperatures over there *if* not in the middle of a wood fire to begin with).

 

Yep, heat is not good ... if for no other reason that you have to pay the bill for all that idling power waste, 🙂. The Perreaux was a cooker, it idled very close to hot; I regularly monitored the heatsinks with a temperature probe; and resorted to unscrewing part of the lid, to let the internals cool - but, I was mad keen back then, and left it running 24/7 - it mattered, unfortunately.

 

11 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

The importance of this story is ore than crucial, because you won't really notice the increase in heat, BUT you can easily measure it with the IR meter on about each component. That's the heatsink of the PSU, the heatsink on the rectifier diodes, the transformer, the voltage regulators (those who must deliver 10A). In normal mode each is around 45-50C. But in "over done" mode each will be 60C or so.

 

Yep, the heatsinks in the Perreaux were typically just under 60C - while just sitting there.

 

11 hours ago, PeterSt said:

So what.

... So that extra heat can leaver the cabinet and things get more and more inefficient. And it ends with your music sounding worse and worse.

 

With what I was using back then, getting "too hot" didn't cause SQ issues.

 

11 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

And who is the one telling that systems may deteriorate after a few minutes - and who is even able to hear it on YouTubes ?

Frank.

But now Frank knows why that is (and if the amp only would shut down it would be more obvious).

 

 

The sound deteriorating is because of completely different reasons - in the sessions with the friend up the road, many a time we have spent trying to resolve such issues - and it often revolves around contact noise building up; nothing to do with heat.

[fas42]

10 hours ago, acg said:

 

It is THE big sport Peter and until one actually hears a speaker capable of big dynamics often they will not believe it possible to have 105dB peaks and be able to hold a conversation.  I often think of it in terms of compression, like compression from the loudness wars, where the gaps between the notes/sounds get squeezed out by whatever it is the speaker is doing instead of making the right sounds.  Holds true for electronics as well, in a lesser way.

 

There's a big difference between a recording that delivers 105dB peaks, versus one with very high average dBs - try an album by Foo Fighters, with the gain right up ... warning: you are now well in the region where permanent ear damage will occur.

 

The ears need breathing room - to have a conversation; if it doesn't exist on that recording, you won't hear the other person.

[fas42]

10 hours ago, Confused said:

In this analogy, wouldn't the power supply be more analogous to the fuel pump and fuel injection system, with the amplifier itself being the engine?  If you had a massive fuel pump and powerful fuel injectors, this is not going to do you much good with a 500cc engine.  In fact, a better analogy would be an electric car, where you are saying that you need batteries and a motor control system capable of providing massive current, and then run this with very small electric motors.  To have that "effortless driving experience", you need a powerful motor to go with it.

 

The reality is that a 500cc engine is good enough ... in audio, 😉. Do the maths, as Peter would say - getting 105 dB in the room is not hard, from the measurement POV ... trouble is, normally that 105dBs sounds pretty awful; so people quickly learn not to bother trying 😁 ... when you get that 105 dB to be a competent 105dB - that's where the listening starts cookin' ...

 

10 hours ago, Confused said:

 

As an aside, this topic reminds me of a dealer event I attended once.  This was a Devialet event attended by Devialet's chief engineer for the "Expert" range of amps.  He made a statement that their priories were a) power, b) volume control, c) quality.  This seemed a slightly curious statement, but he spent a long time explaining the rational behind this, even stating that the perfect amplifier design would have "infinite power", whilst ensuring that optimum quality is provided at all power levels.  The reasons behind this were related to transient performance, speaker control and similar.

 

It's c) that's the key - when the 'right' quality is in the room, then everything else doesn't matter.

 

My cheap active speakers do the volume trick pretty nicely, at this stage - digital control, literally two days ago I wound the setting right back to the absolute minimum; next click, they were completely muted ... at that lowest setting they still projected music into the room at a decent standard; then, steadily wind it up ... more and more, the intensity of the sound just keeps building, with nothing changing in how it comes across. This is not as good as it should be, because mains noise isolation not robust enough yet - but the signs are good that the speakers themselves will do it easily.

[fas42]

2 hours ago, acg said:

 

 I'm in rural Qld Alex, not suburban USA and room noise is <40dB... which is another thing to get under control of course,  but with 105dB peaks at my chair I have access to 65dB+ dynamic range... but like Peter says, to get more just turn up the volume., which I can do with only a watt or two at my disposal.  105dB peaks are still only a quarter watt of power...

 

Very efficient speakers have always been the easiest way to get realistic dynamics, right from the dawn of audio reproduction ... the electronics are barely working at more than an idle - it's when 10's of amps are being moved around that all the SQ anomalies really start bugging one ...

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

Nothing to do with age ... I bought the unit 2nd hand, from Len Wallis

How many years ago was it made, and how many 1,000s of hours would it have had on the main PSU electros ?

Even if you didn't notice that it wasn't sounding right, it would almost certainly have had markedly degraded performance compared with new, due to the higher ESR of the main PSU electros due to age .

BTW, you have told the same story several times before over the years .😜

 

 

[sandyk]

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

trouble is, normally that 105dBs sounds pretty awful; so people quickly learn not to bother trying 😁 ... when you get that 105 dB to be a competent 105dB - that's where the listening starts cookin' ...

 No, that's when your ears start cooking.

https://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/NoiseChart_Poster- 8.5x11.pdf_5399b289427535.32730330.pdf

[fas42]

6 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 No, that's when your ears start cooking.

https://audiology-web.s3.amazonaws.com/migrated/NoiseChart_Poster- 8.5x11.pdf_5399b289427535.32730330.pdf

 

Peaks of 105 dB are chicken feed, compared to some situations ... https://www.noiseandhealth.org/article.asp?issn=1463-1741;year=2014;volume=16;issue=68;spage=40;epage=46;aulast=Rodrigues

 

[sandyk]

2 hours ago, fas42 said:

The real problems were that the terminals were not connected properly, internally to the guts of them - when you tightened them down, the whole terminal would turn

Perhaps too heavy handed , eh ? 😋

[sandyk]

25 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Peaks of 105 dB are chicken feed, compared to some situations ... https://www.noiseandhealth.org/article.asp?issn=1463-1741;year=2014;volume=16;issue=68;spage=40;epage=46;aulast=Rodrigues

 

I was referring mainly to this part  

Quote

when you get that 105 dB to be a competent 105dB - that's where the listening starts cookin' ...

 

Your often posted choice of music also suggests that you frequently exceed these levels, with the associated high risk of hearing damage.