Shouldn't wattage be a function of current? P=IV, and the voltage from the wall is fairly constant. I don't understand how you can have two amplifiers with the same power rating and different current capacities. Could someone please explain this? *scratches head*

Power amps are desinged for different loads...high quaility robust amps can go into low impedance loads 1-2Ohms, others only dow 2 4 anything lower and they can handle the lower impedance, which whould require more current to get the same wattage across the lower impedance which would have less voltage across the loads. it is P=EI as the load impedance drops, the voltage across the loads drops so in order to have teh same watts for the workload, more current flow through the load. An AVA XL-600 has 16 output Mosfets while the AVA DH500 has 12..the XL-600 can do lower impance loads with it's higher current capacity drive, using more MOSFETS. The P500 or DH500 with 12 MOSFETS is rated down to 2 Ohms, while the XL-600 can go lower..since speakers can vary with freq, some do drop real low. an inadequete amp would problaby shut down on over temp if it can't handle the load.....Current matters, voltage matters, as does total power ratings...no such thing as too much current capactiy, or too many watts, or too much voltagae capactiy bigger transformers, more output devices, is better. ya can't have sonic realism with pip squeak power supplies, which is was an amp is, a modulated power supply. WATTS, Current is all needs to be big...there is no hi fi without WATTS.

Quote:
I ve been told that amps were resposible for how much bass an amp gives out.

That's a very gross simplification of the amplifier's function and overlooks all that happens in the loudspeaker itself.

Quote:
Ive also heard that the more amps the amp had,the better quality it was.So 2 amps could both have 200 watts,but one has 20 amps the other 60.The 60 amp one would be much more costly and of better quality.

Not exactly. First, it depends on the speakers you choose to go with the amplifier. If the speakers are considered "amplifier friendly", they can live well on voltage without much amperage. Speakers will require large current swings if the impedance is low and the electrical phase angle is severe. Unfortunately, there are many speaker manufacturers who design such products. There are, however, speaker designers who aren't trying to make life difficult for an amplifier and they design more sensible products from the viewpoint of the amplifier.

A speaker such as a Klipschorn, designed in the 1940's when amplifiers had few watts and were tube driven, will not tax the current capacity of any amplifier. The K'horn is a fairly stable 8 Ohm load and rated at 104dB sensitivity so it requires very little "wattage", and mostly voltage, to play quite loud. A less sensitive speaker that has also been around for decades, the LS3/5a, is considered one of the most amplifier freindly speakers on the market. Its original design called for a high 15 OHm nominal impedance and a low 82dB sensitivity. While it required substantially more power to reach a good volume level than the Klipschorn, neither speaker taxed the amplifier driving it in terms of high amperage requirements. The original Wilson Watt, on the other hand, was fairly inefficient and had a very difficult impedance curve and phase angle which made it it suck current like it was KoolAid. It required a reasonably high current amplifier to sound its best. Taking one amplifier and trying it on all three speakers would very likely give you drastically different sound qualities in each system.

While a well built amplifier will typically have larger reserves of power and more control over the speaker, I can't say the amperage is what will always make one amplifier better than another. Most tube based power amplifiers cannot deliver large amounts of current and yet they manage quite well when they are paired with the correct speakers.

If the speaker required no more than a few amps to drive it adequately, the amp with less current might sound no different than, or possibly better than, the amplifier with higher but unused current capability. I wouldn't get hung up on any one specification as the key to good sound quality. A system is a series of components that must work together. When that happens there is a synergy which makes the system more than the sum of its parts. While amperage can be an important part of a system's synergy, it is hardly the one to use as a ruler for good sound. Personally, I prefer to have speakers which won't tax the amplifier in the first place. This allows more options in which amplifier can be used in the system.

http://www.symphonysound.com/articles/tubefriendly.html

http://www.stereophile.com/features/99/index2.html

Thanks, DUP.

Quote:
An AVA XL-600 has 16 output Mosfets while the AVA DH500 has 12..the XL-600 can do lower impance loads with it's higher current capacity drive, using more MOSFETS. The P500 or DH500 with 12 MOSFETS is rated down to 2 Ohms, while the XL-600 can go lower..since speakers can vary with freq, some do drop real low. an inadequete amp would problaby shut down on over temp if it can't handle the load.....Current matters, voltage matters, as does total power ratings...no such thing as too much current capactiy, or too many watts, or too much voltagae capactiy bigger transformers, more output devices, is better. ya can't have sonic realism with pip squeak power supplies, which is was an amp is, a modulated power supply. WATTS, Current is all needs to be big...there is no hi fi without WATTS.

So many here trying to put a simple value on what's important. Sorry not that easy. More watts, into what kind of load with what kind of efficency? More output devices but how well do they load share and have matching gain curves? Can the power supply keep up without voltage sag or large reductions in filtration when heavily loaded?
Besides myself, I have never heard anyone describe an amplifier as a modulated power supply. Exactly correct.

Of course it's correct, i might know something. My amps are capable of 1400+ RMS watts into around 4 ohms or less. the difference in power AC transfoerm using teh exactly same output MOSFETS makes for teh difference between teh P500 version versus teh DH500 version, both are identical ckts 12 output devices, the difference is the AC mains in the P500 is Massive!!! much larger capactiy, and exactly what you say, it is capable of providing voltages, with no sag, as measured by AVA, even they where impressed, how much this thing can do. compared to a DH500. It's all one big power supply. You can't control teh speakers, or drive em to proper levels without a power supply that can do the job. As you increase teh abilty of the amp, it is a noticale improvement using teh exact same speaerks etc, everything becomes less strained, constricted sounding, it seems to open up everything is effortless. The bass becomes more defined, since there is more control over teh speakers, while teh highs and mids just stay clean and no edge. Watts matter, it's a power supply. I've done teh tests, listened and it's instantly nocticeable. Between one amp driving the speakers, then 2 amps driving them, then the best and the way it's now staying 4 amps, bi-amp'd 2 for each speaker, using teh AVA phse inverter. It got better and better with each additional amp. and all teh amps are identical, P500 OmegaStar EX from AVA, 1400W+ RMS in mono, there is no such thing as too much powr capacity, it makes the large difference, even with smaller speakers, the control it has, makes it all improve. The sound is not in teh wires, it's in teh speakers, and how the electronics drive and control em. spend the money on power, not dopey wire nonsense.

Quote:
Of course it's correct, i might know something. My amps are capable of 1400+ RMS watts into around 4 ohms or less. the difference in power AC transfoerm using teh exactly same output MOSFETS makes for teh difference between teh P500 version versus teh DH500 version, both are identical ckts 12 output devices, the difference is the AC mains in the P500 is Massive!!! much larger capactiy, and exactly what you say, it is capable of providing voltages, with no sag, as measured by AVA, even they where impressed, how much this thing can do. compared to a DH500. It's all one big power supply. You can't control teh speakers, or drive em to proper levels without a power supply that can do the job. As you increase teh abilty of the amp, it is a noticale improvement using teh exact same speaerks etc, everything becomes less strained, constricted sounding, it seems to open up everything is effortless. The bass becomes more defined, since there is more control over teh speakers, while teh highs and mids just stay clean and no edge. Watts matter, it's a power supply. I've done teh tests, listened and it's instantly nocticeable. Between one amp driving the speakers, then 2 amps driving them, then the best and the way it's now staying 4 amps, bi-amp'd 2 for each speaker, using teh AVA phse inverter. It got better and better with each additional amp. and all teh amps are identical, P500 OmegaStar EX from AVA, 1400W+ RMS in mono, there is no such thing as too much powr capacity, it makes the large difference, even with smaller speakers, the control it has, makes it all improve. The sound is not in teh wires, it's in teh speakers, and how the electronics drive and control em. spend the money on power, not dopey wire nonsense.

So just to clarify your post. Are you trying to say more power is better? It wasn't really clear.

Quote:
Of course it's correct, i might know something. My amps are capable of 1400+ RMS watts into around 4 ohms or less. the difference in power AC transfoerm using teh exactly same output MOSFETS makes for teh difference between teh P500 version versus teh DH500 version, both are identical ckts 12 output devices, the difference is the AC mains in the P500 is Massive!!! much larger capactiy, and exactly what you say, it is capable of providing voltages, with no sag, as measured by AVA, even they where impressed, how much this thing can do. compared to a DH500. It's all one big power supply. You can't control teh speakers, or drive em to proper levels without a power supply that can do the job. As you increase teh abilty of the amp, it is a noticale improvement using teh exact same speaerks etc, everything becomes less strained, constricted sounding, it seems to open up everything is effortless. The bass becomes more defined, since there is more control over teh speakers, while teh highs and mids just stay clean and no edge. Watts matter, it's a power supply. I've done teh tests, listened and it's instantly nocticeable. Between one amp driving the speakers, then 2 amps driving them, then the best and the way it's now staying 4 amps, bi-amp'd 2 for each speaker, using teh AVA phse inverter. It got better and better with each additional amp. and all teh amps are identical, P500 OmegaStar EX from AVA, 1400W+ RMS in mono, there is no such thing as too much powr capacity, it makes the large difference, even with smaller speakers, the control it has, makes it all improve. The sound is not in teh wires, it's in teh speakers, and how the electronics drive and control em. spend the money on power, not dopey wire nonsense.

Again nothing is as simple as using just one parameter to rate a system. Lots of watts with a strong power supply is a good base to start with but not the complete story. The ability of the circuits that modulate the power supply voltage sent to the speakers is just as important and just as difficult to implement. Good rise times, modulates all frequencies equally, tolerant of a wide range of loads both resistive and reactive, immune to resonance (oscillation).
Lots of watts is not the answer if those watts are bad watts.

Dup, thought that you might be interested in this item.
Unbelievable power! Blow out the windows on every house on the block with 1500 watts of pure, raw power!
Technical Pro Integrated Receiver Model# RX-500B Larger View
Technical Pro Integrated Receiver Model# RX-500BTechnical Pro Integrated Receiver Model# RX-500BTechnical Pro Integrated Receiver Model# RX-500B

Technical Pro Integrated Receiver
MSR: $199.00
Heartland
America Price

$149.99
Item No. WW22-96771

Select Color

1 Year Extended Product Agreement
Only $14.99

When you buy from us, you can be sure you're getting the best price!
Technical Pro Integrated Receiver
Now you don

" I've done the tests, listened and it's instantly noticeable. "

Whoa there DUP- did I just read that correctly? You WHAT? You... I can hardly believe it...LISTENED?!!!!!? and the difference was NOTICEABLE? So you're saying aside from measurements, you actually listen to, and discern for yourself, the difference between equipment. In essence, using a personal and subjective opinion. Man, it's getting cold. Hell must have just frozen over...

Measure and listen oh yeah. Stuff measures and sounds good, what a concept! AVA at 1400W RMS+ has measurable stuff like .01$ or less distortion, 800v/us slew, fast is always better....and POWER that is real....not $199 watts....If you looked at the specs on that $199 high wattage, you can be sure it's not the same. Given teh same specs, the more watts is gonna be better, just cus' it has more control over teh speakers, and just is more effortless in doing what it does. Done it proved it, it's real. from a pittance of slightly under 300W pc, then 2 mono per side then 4 mono per side, each time teh wattage increased, using identaical amps, more watts sounds teh best, effortless less constricted, it just opens up, and on teh same speakers...WATTS, there is no substitute. No such thing as hi fidelity with 9 watts or clock radio specs in power. Don't car how efficient your speakers are, if teh power ain't there when needed for some slam and IMPACT, it sounds lifeless flat and not REAL. If ya wanna beleive that some grossly overpriced 3 watt amp is somehow hi fidelity, you are fooling yourself. No magic wires are gonna change anything, it needs power to move air and speakers to move air, not magic wires, or connectors, or AC line cords with magic contacts and insulation.

Here

Quote:
The lower the output impedance of the amplifier over the frequency band of interest the more power will be delivered into the load.

If you

It's really not a "subjective" opinion. since it's comapred to what it sounded like LIVE, to what i hear at home. that's actually more objective, since it is being compared to what i heard live. It is either like teh live event or it's not. Which is what it's all about. None of the well I like the bloated warm sounds of highly distored tubes REPRODUCING the stuff, cus then you are not reproducing you're creating, which is why, tube guitar amps are used, over driven to distort and create the tones wnated at the live event. Which is why they have teh pedal boards with all kinds of distortion effects. Back at home, i don't wanna be adding my own soudn to teh sound created at teh event, either LIVE or the studio, where they also CREATE teh tone they want, I REPRODUCE, not create. When a CD player with some insane tube ckts to add that tube sound, you are not reproducing, you are creating new tone. distorted speakers at teh live event create teh tone for teh guitars etc....I don't want to add or change that. and to get teh full SLAM and IMPACT of teh live event, it takes lotsa WATTS and DRIVERS that can deal with it, no watts, no hi fi. Quality watts, with no distortion no lag, no sound of it's own, REPRODUCTION, not creating the sound. If you want teh cymbals to stay on top of some LARGE drum sounds and wailing guitar, with teh shimmer and sheen of LIVE, it needs POWER, to be keeping the highs sparkly clean, and true, while bass notes and wailing guitars are going on, $199 high powered amps of unknown origin ain't doing it, come on, QUALITY watts, not toy watts. The $3500 guitar heads that only put out 60W Class A ain't toy 60 Watts...neither are the 100W MArshall amps, or Komets. They are driven into overdrive with control and purpose..My 4800+W are never driven to overdrive...can't, don't want to. do more live events, you'll get it. Events with some power to teh show, not whomping bass hip hop either, but music with some energy and guitar wailing, throw in a Hammond keyboard, pretty soon ya gots some sounds, keeping it clean at home needs watts, sicne it took 32,000 watts to make it happen LIVE. You ain't recreating it at home with a 100W clock radio, can't happen

Quote:

It's really not a "subjective" opinion. since it's comapred to what it sounded like LIVE, to what i hear at home. that's actually more objective, since it is being compared to what i heard live.

dup, do you have any idea why Gordon Holt started Stereophile and why the reviews were termed "subjective"? Did you read his comments in this month's magazine?

Quote:
It's really not a "subjective" opinion. since it's comapred to what it sounded like LIVE, to what i hear at home. that's actually more objective, since it is being compared to what i heard live. It is either like teh live event or it's not. Which is what it's all about. None of the well I like the bloated warm sounds of highly distored tubes REPRODUCING the stuff, cus then you are not reproducing you're creating, which is why, tube guitar amps are used, over driven to distort and create the tones wnated at the live event. Which is why they have teh pedal boards with all kinds of distortion effects. Back at home, i don't wanna be adding my own soudn to teh sound created at teh event, either LIVE or the studio, where they also CREATE teh tone they want, I REPRODUCE, not create. When a CD player with some insane tube ckts to add that tube sound, you are not reproducing, you are creating new tone. distorted speakers at teh live event create teh tone for teh guitars etc....I don't want to add or change that. and to get teh full SLAM and IMPACT of teh live event, it takes lotsa WATTS and DRIVERS that can deal with it, no watts, no hi fi. Quality watts, with no distortion no lag, no sound of it's own, REPRODUCTION, not creating the sound. If you want teh cymbals to stay on top of some LARGE drum sounds and wailing guitar, with teh shimmer and sheen of LIVE, it needs POWER, to be keeping the highs sparkly clean, and true, while bass notes and wailing guitars are going on, $199 high powered amps of unknown origin ain't doing it, come on, QUALITY watts, not toy watts. The $3500 guitar heads that only put out 60W Class A ain't toy 60 Watts...neither are the 100W MArshall amps, or Komets. They are driven into overdrive with control and purpose..My 4800+W are never driven to overdrive...can't, don't want to. do more live events, you'll get it. Events with some power to teh show, not whomping bass hip hop either, but music with some energy and guitar wailing, throw in a Hammond keyboard, pretty soon ya gots some sounds, keeping it clean at home needs watts, sicne it took 32,000 watts to make it happen LIVE. You ain't recreating it at home with a 100W clock radio, can't happen

Hi Dup,

I hope your view does not include tube preamplifiers, since tube preamplifiers can have extremely low distortion and designed not have that tubey sound I have also heard in some tube brand preamplifiers and amps. I also like live music and the natural, emotional instruments/voices reproduced.

Take care.

I think that big Watts equaling reality is absolutely true for you. If I'm correct, you tend to enjoy mainly rock, and at high volumes. For the music you prefer, loud IS real, so watts are necessary. However, for the person who wants to replicate a laid-back jazz club, power is less important to capture the dynamics, especially when played back at levels that are realistic for that sort of venue. Also, consider that people like myself live in apartments with (a) small listening rooms and (b) neighbors. Consequently, my 50W amplifier is more than adequate to reproduce my favored music at levels that are appropriate for the sensitivity of my ears and the size of my room. My little integrated will play uncomfortably loud without distortion. Works for me! You're more than welcome to live in kilowatt territory, though!

Regards,

Subjective is really just a personal "preference" ain't it? If i compare it to the live event, and want that same thing, that's OBJECTIVE. cus' it either sounds live and REAL with teh SLAM and impact of a live event!!! If it ain't live, it ain;'t hi fi, it ain't real. No personal preferences can make it real, make it live. Moaing and writing 3 pages of this bit of glare or this bit of sonic nuance, that is petty nonsense, ain't about is it REAL, does it slam ya, and recreate teh live imapct of either an orchestra slamming away, or a 3 pice amplified band wailing some Buddy guy, with shimmer cymbals, while teh guitar tears it apart, all the layers in perfect pristine clarity, nutin SUBJECTIVE, it's OBJECTIVE REAL, it eitehr is or it ain't. Starting a magazine esposing personal preferences how one amp sounds smooth, while teh otehr one sounds slightly this or that, does it sound REAL..can it produce the slam of live music, if it don't it's all nothing, no verbage about this or that , using all them words JGH put into his subjective dictioanary years ago, means anything. LIVE, REAL that's hi fi, not personal preferences, about the warmth or grain of this or that. How can you have a subjective view of whether it's LIVe or REAL? And measuements are gonna start off, showing can it do it? A 7 watt 3% distortion piece ain't gonna make it happen, so why bother writing 3 pages of JGH verbage, why did DSD get devloped, to further teh clarity of teh reproduction, by eliminating distortions, and things that change what's on teh original recording, to get it more REAL. The insturments that create teh soudns to begin with can have the subjective preferences, sicne musicans are creating it, to what tone, sound they want, different guitars have different tone, keyboards etc. Reproctuion has no personal preferences, is is live, is it real?? How can that be subjective?

Dup,

I would absolutely love to hear your setup. I wonder if you would consider hosting a meet. You have some pretty interesting components and ideas of what music should sound like. I would very much like to hear your implementation of it for myself.

OK, you obviously don't know why Holt started Stereophile and you didn't read his comments in this month's magazine.

Quote:
Subjective is really just a personal "preference" ain't it?

No, it is not. It is a set of personal references but not merely a group of personal preferences. A lot of people prefer their car system to live music. That hardly makes their preference usable as a reference.

Quote:
If i compare it to the live event, and want that same thing, that's OBJECTIVE.

What grade did you make it to in school? Do you own a dictionary?

Quote:
Here

I just was listening the .....now get this rocker dude...Ray Charles SACD Ray Charles Sings Basie Swings on Telarc. Hmmm, now at lifelike real levels, those horns are taking some energy to bite through the rest of teh music and his singing. Watts, plenty of em. While the bass line keeps it's abilty to be clean, easily followed bass pattern, not one note blurr, like teh BLOSE sound. Ray ain't no rock dude now is he....then i switch over to some Dave Hole...wailing away, he makes that guitar cry...it ain't happening with ant power, nor with speakers that can't use the power to move teh air. Why are pianos so large, cus they need to move teh air with it's sound boards....cus' a tiny piano sounds like a........tiny piano. Playing a bass tone on teh piano at teh same time as some sparling high notes, sure takes some power to keep it clear and separate....Any quality speaker, use 100 mini watts, then hook to a 1000W amp, and not any louder, you will instatnly hear better sound, things become more defined, seems less strained, more open...always has, always will. I'm not talking bout some unuseable speakers, that ain't hi fi to begin with, even stuido mini monitors are used at high volumes, right in your face, takes power, to keep it pristine clear, so you hear all teh details, while allowing the bass to do it's thing. Watts and Porsche, there is no substitute. Why do you think they got a guy names Charlie WATTS to be in the Rolling Stones, they needed his POWER.

Well, in all fairness, that's Big Band, which is indeed louder than jazz played in smaller groups and at smaller venues. I understand the importance of headroom with many types of music, I just don't believe hundreds of watts are required for some material. Unless the amplifier is distorting on peaks at your desired listening level, I see no benefit to having more power. Since you enjoy listening at high levels, I see how it's important that your equipment have the stones to belt it out.

Not all music is loud, though, and it's not universal that huge power is a necessity when striving for high fidelity sound. Loudness is not synonymous with realism for all types of music, and if you find that's the case, perhaps you need to lower your noise floor.

Ahhh, to each his own. That's part of the fun of this hobby; For every hi-fi enthusiast, hi-fi can mean something different.

Keep on crankin', Wattmeister

P.S. "Ray Sings, Basie Swings" is at the top of my to-buy list.

dup, glad to hear your system does better than Bose. That's quite a high water mark you've set for yourself! I assume that's one of your "personal preferences", muts be betetr than BLOSE!

But I really don't care how loud your system plays. Anyone who has done this hobby for awhile understands the tradeoffs to fidelity which must be made when LOUD and SLAM are your only concerns and what the overall results of such preferences will be. Some of us simply want our systems to be able to reproduce music with fidelity to the live performance. LOUD and SLAM are a far reach from "dynamically shaded" and "goosebumps". And a few of us have more than two references for what live music does.

However, you, dup, cannot rewrite the dictionary to make words fit your desired meaning even if you cannot correctly spell them. You obviously have no grasp on what "subjective" and "objective" mean. Even if you consider the bass line on Ray Charles not to be blurred, your concepts of fidelity are muddy. If conjuring up some bizarre system of "personal preferences" is how you think everyone should go about putting together a system with fidelity to the original sound, you've just missed the last 45 years of HiFi.

dup, why do you believe it's important to constantly inform us about how your system works and ... uhh ... "sounds"? Do you think we don't know your "personal preferences" by now? We do not need a BLOW by BLOW of how your system makes your testicles feel. No one else on the forum does this. Are you merely the aberration which proves the rules?

JGH started a magazine, that is still in publication, all about how individuals think the thing they just listend to, is how it is supposed to be. Until next month's issue of course. And I do agree with ya Jan, why should you care, about how it sounds. Since the entire reason for this magazine is about how something sounds, based on someone's opinon and preferences, no? Which means measurements would cure that personal preference issues. But then there are personal preferences about which test equipment to use to measure with in the first place?

Look up the term fidelity, and the enhanced version HI fidelity. Truth to the original maybe? So in my esposing it's roots, it's real meaning, thre is no hi fi coming out of 9 watts, with 4 inch woofers. That's merely hearing about 1/64th of the real thing.

Quote:
We do not need a BLOW by BLOW of how your system makes your testicles feel.

ROFLMAO

OMG I have beer and salted snacks all over my office now

thanks Jan and DUP

Quote:
JGH started a magazine, that is still in publication, all about how individuals think the thing they just listend to, is how it is supposed to be. Until next month's issue of course. And I do agree with ya Jan, why should you care, about how it sounds. Since the entire reason for this magazine is about how something sounds, based on someone's opinon and preferences, no? Which means measurements would cure that personal preference issues. But then there are personal preferences about which test equipment to use to measure with in the first place?

You are kidding me now; right? That's what you really get from all this?!

Quote:
Look up the term fidelity, and the enhanced version HI fidelity. Truth to the original maybe? So in my esposing it's roots, it's real meaning, thre is no hi fi coming out of 9 watts, with 4 inch woofers. That's merely hearing about 1/64th of the real thing.

I don't have beer and salted snacks on my desk at 11:48 on a Sunday morning no matter when Daylight Saving time occurs (I bet you even have an opinion on that, eh, dup?); but, still, I nearly choked on that response. What have you been drinking, dup? "esposing" That's terrific! ROTFL!!!

OK, ahem ...

Seriously, dup, do you own a dictionary?

My comment of 1000:1 rated power was to illustrate that an amplifiers power rating Vs the ability to deliver power are not necessarily linked.
Power that is lost (not delivered to the speaker) can be looked at as being dissipated in the amplifiers equivalent series resistance. This series resistance acts as half of a potential divider - the speaker load forming the other half.

Take two amplifiers:
1) The Chord SMP1400 rated at 1000W into 8 ohms and Rout measured at 0.23ohms. (Ignoring the 6

Why do I need a dictionary? If I can't spell, how wood I know how to look up teh wurd, if I don't know how to spell it? What gud is a dictionary? If you don't know how to spell it, how do you find it?

Quote:

Because output impedance in ALL amplifiers is many, many times smaller than the load impedance, power transfer is determined by the power supply voltage level and its ability to maintain that voltage under load. Amplifier output impedance vs. load impedance does effect frequency response but not power output to any significant amount.

If by many many times lower you mean around 1:10, then I

It's all about transfer of power from source to load..and such. And that's not one dictator giving power to his brother When in doubt, WIK it..I learned this when I was a mere student of electronics...way way way back, but not that far back, color tv and the cassette where around a long time already. LP's where $3.33 at E.J. Korvette's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impedance_matching

Well, I guess you've got me totally confused. I'm not even sure how you make your assumptions when one amplifier is measured with 6' of cable attached and the other is apparently measured with no cable attached. Maybe both amps were measured in the same fashion but that's not how the literature reads. Do we know the Chord's output impedance without any cable attached? Or if the same cable is used to take measurements with both amplifiers? As I said, I'm confused here and not able to sort out how you come to your conclusions.

Your posts read as if a lower output impedance will produce more power into any load at any frequency. This certainly can't be what you are implying. If it were, and an increase in output impedance from 0.08 to 0.23 Ohms would produce your stated 10% difference in power delivery, then I would assume this amplifier shouldn't work into any load. http://stereophile.com/tubepoweramps/1205vtl/index4.html

You ask the question, "Which one delivers more power to the speaker?" That is a question not answered in the measurements nor the text. What we can see is which amplifier delivers more "power" into a load resistor. That hardly gives us an answer when reactive speakers are put into the equation. It does suggest you are stating the obvious when you say "an amplifier's power rating Vs the ability to deliver power are not necessarily linked." Anyone who lives by rated power output or believes higher power is elemental to good sound is seriously missing the point.

In any event, I'm not clear how your post answers the original quesion of the thread which is, "I ve been told that amps were resposible for how much bass an amp gives out.Ive also heard that the more amps the amp had,the better quality it was.So 2 amps could both have 200 watts,but one has 20 amps the other 60.The 60 amp one would be much more costly and of better quality."

Regarding the lowering of output impedance I would say your second method of achieving this goal by way of increasing NFB is potentially quite harmful to the sound quality. Your first method of increasing the number of output devices in parallel has, IMO, an equal number of drawbacks if not necessarily the same drawbacks as the NFB approach.

Quote:
If I can't spell, how wood I know how to look up teh wurd, if I don't know how to spell it?

Gee, dup, I guess you could do some work and some research rather than just making stuff up! How do you suppose the rest of us learned to spell "the"? If nothing else, buy a dictionary to install on your computer. Most of them have a spelling assist to help you find the correct spelling and meaning of a word. That would at least keep down the amount of crap you post without any basis in reality or just make up to try to convince yourself you're not wrong.

Speaking of no basis in reality;

Quote:
... thre is no hi fi coming out of 9 watts, with 4 inch woofers. That's merely hearing about 1/64th of the real thing.

With approximately 85% of music's energy coming between 80 Hz to 10kHz it would appear a 4" woofer situated in an enclosure capable of in room response down to about 50-55 Hz would be capable of a tad more than your projected 1/64th of "the real thing". Beyond that, do you know anyone using a nine watt amplifier with a 4" woofer? Please, dup, try to stick to some semblance of how this stuff all works together to make music rather than just noise.

Whether or not the rest of us (those who have more than two "preferences" for "the real thing") should scrap our existing systems and buy a copy of your megawatt amplifiers and humongous speakers is answered in Art Dudley's "Listening" column in the November issue. If you haven't read this article just yet, please, take a look at the final paragraph of the portion entitled "Alta fidelidad" (p.44). That should put to rest your continuous rants about watts and speakers and SACD since I suspect Dudley has forgotten more about real audio and live music than you've even thought you knew.

Quote:
It's all about transfer of power from source to load..and such. And that's not one dictator giving power to his brother When in doubt, WIK it..I learned this when I was a mere student of electronics...way way way back, but not that far back, color tv and the cassette where around a long time already. LP's where $3.33 at E.J. Korvette's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impedance_matching

If you impedance matched a power amplifier to a loudspeaker the output impedance of the power amplifier would be around four to eight ohms depending on loudspeaker. The damping factor would then be around one, assuming the speaker impedance did not vary much with frequency, are you sure want an impedance match?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_theorem#Impedance_matching
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_theorem#Proof

Quoting wikki entries does not really answer the question of "do you want a damping factor of one?". Do you understand why amplifiers are designed with a low output impedance and so have a high damping factor i.e a lot greater than one?.

Damping factor...ie...internal resistance /external resistance is also freq dependant, just like the impedance of the speaker, if you where to look at the formula for "reactive" loads on impedance matching, power transfer, you would get it. I used Wik to show you what they is talkin' bout. Better than i could explain, it has formula and all kinds of nifty explanations. If IMPEDANCE matching wasn't an isuse why do tube amps have output transformer taps to MATCH the load. There, I rest my case. some old stuff had 4, 8 16 and 32 Ohm taps, I remeber seeing them, and I ain't that old.

A perfect voltage amplfier would not have a frequency dependent output impedance. A perfect voltage amplfier has to give the same voltage at its output regardless of load, how can it do that if it has an output impedence?.

Is an audio amplifier a voltage or current supply. And if you look up the definition of "amplifier" it really has nothing to do with increasing anything. An amplifier is a device that has it's output controlled by it's input, that's all. An op amp is just such a device. An audio "power supply" is what you are talking about with this stuff. When you have a "perfect" device in anything then it will do what you want, they are getting pretty close. to give the same voltage out as the input is back to impedance matching, for maximum transfer.

Quote:
Is an audio amplifier a voltage or current supply. And if you look up the definition of "amplifier" it really has nothing to do with increasing anything. An amplifier is a device that has it's output controlled by it's input, that's all. An op amp is just such a device. An audio "power supply" is what you are talking about with this stuff. When you have a "perfect" device in anything then it will do what you want, they are getting pretty close. to give the same voltage out as the input is back to impedance matching, for maximum transfer.

The majority of hi-fi amplifiers will try to maintain a contant voltage for a given input regardless of load. A perfect audio amplifier with a gain of 10 would give 10 volts out for 1 volt in. It would give 10 volts if you put an 8 ohm load a 4 ohm load a 2 ohm load or a even a 0.1 ohm load on its output. To do this the output impedance would have to be zero. If the amplifier output impedance was 8 ohms and it had an 8 ohm load the output would be 5 volts and not 10 and its output power would be a quarter of a perfect amplifier. Try your self with some different numbers.

Quote:
It's all about transfer of power from source to load..and such. And that's not one dictator giving power to his brother When in doubt, WIK it..I learned this when I was a mere student of electronics...way way way back, but not that far back, color tv and the cassette where around a long time already. LP's where $3.33 at E.J. Korvette's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impedance_matching

As illustrated by

Why are there 4,6,16 Ohm taps on a tube out amp? If Impedance matching didn't matter, then why worry about it with having different taps? Impedance "matching" it matters. If you read teh description about REACTIVE loads, they deal with it differently than pure resitive load. What speaker do you have that ain't reactive? Maybe one with an open coil?

You boys might want to try something more productive than trying to break through that brick wall. Here's an idea.

---

100 bottles of beer on the wall, 100 bottles of beer
Take one down, pass it around, 99 bottles of beer on the wall

99 bottles of beer on the wall, 99 bottles of beer
...

Quote:
Well, I guess you've got me totally confused. I'm not even sure how you make your assumptions when one amplifier is measured with 6' of cable attached and the other is apparently measured with no cable attached. Maybe both amps were measured in the same fashion but that's not how the literature reads. Do we know the Chord's output impedance without any cable attached? Or if the same cable is used to take measurements with both amplifiers? As I said, I'm confused here and not able to sort out how you come to your conclusions.

I ignored the 6

Quote:
And if you look up the definition of "amplifier" ...

Yea!!!!! You bought a dictionary!

Quote:
... it really has nothing to do with increasing anything.

But you're still making shit up to suit your purpose.

amplifier n. one who or that which amplifies or enlarges, esp. an electronic component or circuit for amplifying power, current or voltage.

And you even spelled it correctly, dup. What went wrong?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_amplifier Unless it is a Power amp...otherwise it can be on eof many types of "amplifier". so keep learning, read this not just the first sentence either. servo amp, operational amp, voltage amp, power amp..the term amplifier, is vauge, and it doesn't mean what you think, unless qualified, I know we are talking bout' power amplifiers, so why did someone mention it only maintains a voltage across the speaker, and you can also see, that an audio amplifer is just basically a power amplifer modulated power supply., now back the impedance issue, without impdeance matching, there is no transfer of max power. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_amplifier

dup.

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Encyclopedias do not give "definitions". Dictionaries provide definitions. Wikipedia is an on line encyclopedia - of sorts. Therefore, you can't find a definition in Wikipedia.

If you'll go back to your original link to "impedance matching", dup, you will find two references to "impedance bridging" as the method employed to make amplifier to loudspeaker power transfer function. Both references specifically state impedance matching does not work for a low output impedance amplifier working into a higher impedance reactive load such as a loudspeaker.