Article View: rec.audio
Article #5391Re: Define "Headroom"
From: Bill Vermillion
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 17:06
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 17:06
94 lines
4877 bytes
4877 bytes
In article <C07G4F.Kxn@news.cso.uiuc.edu> ptg2351@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Panos Tamamidis ) writes:
>bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion) writes:
>>>There has been a lot of discussion on "do I really need a 200 watt amp"
>>>I have seen responses like " a (""better sounding") 100 watt amp can
>>>sound better than a 200 watt amp.
>>When you do the math properly, it sometimes comes out to be
>>cheaper to buy more efficient speakers than buy the amount of
>>power you need.
> Quite correct. Problem is that most of the good speakers produce around 86dB.
> Of course, you can always buy Cerwin-Vega speakers; with an efficiency of
> 100dB you could play really lound even with a K-Mart receiver.
Playing loud isn't the whole answer. Playing loud and accurately is.
That being said, let me destroy any credibility I have on the net by
saying I have heard good Cerwin Vega speakers. Really!
But they wouldn't sound good connected to a K-Mart receiver, that's for
sure. I bought a set about 15 years ago, maybe more. They sounded so
good at the demo - it was a mall wide affair where all audio dealer
participated and CV themselves had things set up. I went home and
brought some of my LP's. Really decent. So I bought the pair.
Somewhere about $800 then.
I took them home and was heart-broken. They sounded like crap - to put
it mildly. So I tried changing a few things. Out with the Dynaco
pre-amp. Hm! Voice sounds better. Out with the Garrard changer.
Better. Replaced ?? cartridge with a Micro-Accoustics eletret 630MP -
about $300 in 1977 dollars. Amazing. They really are pretty decent
speakers, BUT they showed up every flaw in the system.
CV and one or 2 other make highly efficient speakers that are
affordable. In the Audio October Equipment issue - I just visually
scanned the loudspeaker area. Most of the CV's are close to
$1000/pair.
There are 2 or 3 other mfrs that list 100db spl at 1 watt at 1 meter
who have some cheap speakers.
However the majority of the highly efficient speakers are $1000 and
up. WAY UP!. Up to $75,000 per pair.
And the efficient Apogges are in the $30,000 per pair range.
Now - if you have never heard high quality highly efficient playing
dynamic audio - you have really missed something. Note I said 'audio'
and not music.
On 2 separate instances, listening at high levels, my body wanted to
invoke the 'fight or flight' syndrome. One was a locomotive
recording, the other was the jet flyby from Digital Domain.
With wide range speakers, highly efficient, and power in the 200 w/p/c
range on peaks - your body and your mind told you two different things.
Your body wanted to run, because you were about to be hit by a
locomotive while your brain said no - that's coming from the
loudspeakers.
The body gets confusing clues. On lesser systems you either limit the
dynamic range on the low end - where you feel the sound and not hear
it, or there are distortions that tell your body/brain that you are
hearing a recording. These things sounded real!
I don't know if you'd ever need this much to handle just music,
particularly a string quartet, but on non-music it was really amazing.
I remember in the early days of "HI-FI" that the standard jokes
revolved around things like never listeing to music, just locomotives
and such.
I have always beleive in efficient speakers with sufficient power. My
current speakers are recording studio monitors (I spent a lot of time
in studios at one part of my life). I have a set of Fostex LS-3As.
(Fostex makes some expensive high end stuff too - not just the cheap
little multi-tracks they seem to be known for). Rated at 103
db/1w/1m. UGLY!!! Heavy - 170 lps. A studio in town has their
LS-4s. To get an idea of size of those, picture two 18-20 cubic foot
refrigerators laid on their sides, with horns and a slot radiator
tweeter grafted to the top.
The only speakers I have seen that were bigger than those were the
Tannoy "Dreadnaughts". GAWD they were HUGE!. Memory dims over the
years, but they had either 4 or 5 15" woofers per cabinet. They were
supposed to be control room monitors but you'd have to have an awfully
big room to put those in there.
--
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org bill@bilver.uucp
- ..!{peora|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1993Jan2.170618.17836@bilver.uucp>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!att!fang!tarpit!bilver!billReferences:
<5775@gold.gvg.tek.com> <1993Jan1.144834.24253@bilver.uucp> <C07G4F.Kxn@news.cso.uiuc.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: rec.audio Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!att!fang!tarpit!bilver!bill From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion) Subject: Re: Define "Headroom" Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 17:06:18 GMT Message-ID: <1993Jan2.170618.17836@bilver.uucp> References: <5775@gold.gvg.tek.com> <1993Jan1.144834.24253@bilver.uucp> <C07G4F.Kxn@news.cso.uiuc.edu> Lines: 94