or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Audio theory, Setup and Chat › External DAC Questions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

External DAC Questions - Page 8

post #211 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by beaveav View Post


So, yeah, why would somebody go to all the trouble of simulating that amp just to prove a point to a stranger online - a stranger who just changed his username, no less.

Yes, I too remember him posting here less than a year ago under a different handle. I wonder if he even remembers what it was?
post #212 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post


Yes, I too remember him posting here less than a year ago under a different handle. I wonder if he even remembers what it was?


First of all, why are you guessing at my gender (again)? Your memory is mistaken and what would it matter if you remember me commenting on this or any forum? You made a very bold claim inside this thread, were you technically reaching/guessing?

post #213 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I notice that the manual departs from usual conventions by apparently not containing any specifications. I am therefore mystified why I even spent as little time with the manual as I have p there seems to nothing remarkable about it at all. Its only virtue, according to the manual, is reliability.

The amplifier itself appears to not be in current production, probably because it contributed to the well known financial failure of Hafler. I see that one is for sale here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/HAFLER-P1000-Trans-Ana-2-Channel-Professional-MOSFET-Power-Amplifier-/201028415629

If someone showed that it had any sterling technical performance features that warranted even just this discussion... ;-)


i.e. is word-for-word

post #214 of 267
 
Frequency Response: 20Hz to 20kHz, ±0.1dB
 
0.1Hz to 100kHz, +0/–3dB
 
Slew Rate: 20 V/μs
 
Damping Factor: 900 (to 1kHz); 400 (to 10kHz); 40 (to 100kHz)
 
Signal-to-Noise: 100dB below rated output “A” weighted
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
*see full page specifications -ii-
 
**Manual detail(s): specification, comprehensive circuit theory, block diagram, isolated block diagrams, PCB component layout, parts list

Edited by bralas - 1/30/14 at 4:51am
post #215 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by bralas View Post

http://www.hafler.com/techsupport/pdf/MAN1482B_P1000_man.pdf
 
Frequency Response: 20Hz to 20kHz, ±0.1dB
 
0.1Hz to 100kHz, +0/–3dB
 
Slew Rate: 20 V/μs
 
Damping Factor: 900 (to 1kHz); 400 (to 10kHz); 40 (to 100kHz)
 
Signal-to-Noise: 100dB below rated output “A” weighted
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
*see full page specifications -ii-
 
**Manual detail(s): specification, comprehensive circuit theory, block diagram, isolated block diagrams, PCB component layout, parts list

For some reason I did a text search on the word "specifications" in Acrobat and didn't find that information. Now that you've pointed it out, there seems to be nothing exceptional.

I had no page numbers to work with, so I did the best I could. Just like the semi-mysterious patent reference before it with no link or patent number, it seems like some people don't believe in providing usable references. It's just hit and run with them, or so it seems. Caveat Emptor!
post #216 of 267

Jim Strickland's benchmark amplifier design is integrated into industry reference near/midfield powered monitors:

 

Meyer Sound HD-1 (linked inside this thread)

JBL LSR series

Dynaudio BM15A

 

I personally own (3) Hafler P1000 and (5) JBL 4408 modified with top-of-the-line Morel drivers via Parts Express.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

*I am willing to submit one P1000 for pro analysis to David, Mark or Amir. Interested??

post #217 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by bralas View Post

Jim Strickland's benchmark amplifier design is integrated into industry reference near/midfield powered monitors:

Meyer Sound HD-1 (linked inside this thread)
JBL LSR series
Dynaudio BM15A

Please document that. I did a google search for HD-1, LSR, etc. and strickland and don't seem to be able to find much.
post #218 of 267

http://www.meyersound.com/sites/default/files/hd-1_ds.pdf

 

The HD-1 incorporates a two-channel power amplifier and a sophisticated active crossover with optimized pole-zero filters for acoustical transparency and a flat frequency response. The power amplifier features complementary MOSFET output stages and operates at class A at low to moderate levels (less than 90 dB SPL) and class AB at high levels.

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

 

This is very design I modeled my own system upon. I researched all components (speaker drivers & amp) the Meyer Sound HD-1 is simply legendary in my industry. The Morel drivers I selected are superior in specifications to the HD-1. I speak from experience, my home reproduction components mirror what is actually used in bleeding edge (DAW) mastering environments.    

post #219 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by bralas View Post

http://www.meyersound.com/sites/default/files/hd-1_ds.pdf

The HD-1 incorporates a two-channel power amplifier and a sophisticated active crossover with optimized pole-zero filters for acoustical transparency and a flat frequency response. The power amplifier features complementary MOSFET output stages and operates at class A at low to moderate levels (less than 90 dB SPL) and class AB at high levels.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

No apparent mention of Strickland, and so the claim appears to remain an minor factoid - a anecdote that might interest his fans. I have to admit it - I'm more of a fan of people who do things that I can hear the benefits of. That leaves a lot of people who specialized in traditional style power amps out of my realm of greatest interest. IMO we live in a world that is full of very pleasant and useful studio monitors and amplifiers.
Quote:
This is very design I modeled my own system upon. I researched all components (speaker drivers & amp) the Meyer Sound HD-1 is simply legendary in my industry. The Morel drivers I selected are superior in specifications to the HD-1. I speak from experience, my home reproduction components mirror what is actually used in bleeding edge (DAW) mastering environments.    

I'm happy that this makes you happy. ;-)

Did you read the thread about all of the lack of consistency of audio production listening environments?
post #220 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

@Glimmie -- FYI, a friend and I added a large capacitor bank to a DH220 many years ago and the result was substantially enhanced bass, measured and heard. Virtually no change in the rest of the spectrum. One of the times a mod did some real good. We changed the power bus wiring to the output modules at the same time, so it's possible that helped, but the DH220's power supply appeared to need some help...

Given that the basic performance of the DH220 is quite good, what was the nature of the measured improvement?

IIRC bass below ~100 Hz had slightly better THD into a speaker load, almost no change into a resistor.

The real difference was using 10 - 100 Hz square waves; much less "tilt" observed indicating the supply was sagging before adding the extra power supply caps. I think (but am not 100% certain after all this time) that the output impedance was a little lower and a little flatter in the LF region, but the square wave response was where we saw the largest change.

Sound was assessed into Magnepan Tympani's (forget which model), B&W 801's, Magnepan MG-II's, Infinity IRS-2's, few others we owned or that were in the store where I was working at the time. Seems like we also tried a couple of ESL's (Quad, Beveridge) but I seem to recall nobody really liked the Hafler driving them before or after the mod, memory is pretty fuzzy on that. We did a combo of blind, double-blind, and sighted testing over a few weeks. The biggest difference between our modified amp and a stock amp was in the bass. Again IIRC any time we thought the high end was smoother/better due to the small cap changes, BT/DBT did not confirm though we did not do a lot of runs.

I should note this was one of the early models, no idea if later ones were better, and don't know anything about the Trans-Nova line.

An interesting aside, since we're already off-topic, is that replacing the input cap (an electrolytic) with a film cap resulted in slightly better step response and lower THD over most of the spectrum, but IIRC nobody could tell in a blind test. This was in the 80's when the famous Walt Jung cap article came out in Audio and replacing "bad" caps was all the rage. We also bypassed all the big decoupling caps and such but were never convinced there were audible benefits.
Edited by DonH50 - 1/30/14 at 8:03am
post #221 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post


No apparent mention of Strickland...

Did you read the thread about all of the lack of consistency of audio production listening environments?

I got my information from Meyer Sound located Berkley, CA. Since our studio used their HD-1 surrounds, I was in direct communications. As far as listening environments, I worked directly with mixing guru Bob Katz. He was quit impressed with yours truly. We had two calibration targets 79 dBSPL and and 85 dBSPL for full motion picture dynamic. Used my ICON Pro Tools (DAW) to generate pink noise and measured @ mixing position: 

 

  http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_neutrik_minilyzer_ml/  

 

Neutrik ML-1 and matching Neutrik mic assy' The ML-1 system recall calibrated the tool. Measured long term C weighting.

post #222 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

The real difference was using 10 - 100 Hz square waves; much less "tilt" observed indicating the supply was sagging before adding the extra power supply caps. I think (but am not 100% certain after all this time) that the output impedance was a little lower and a little flatter in the LF region, but the square wave response was where we saw the largest change.

Unless the amp is clipping, low-frequency square wave response tilt has nothing at all to do with power supply capacitor value.
post #223 of 267
post #224 of 267
This will seem like a stupid question but I'm sure there is a logical answer, I just don't have the technical understanding. Between say an Arcam and an Onkyo, I noticed that with the Arcam, the sound was very soft at a given master volume setting. I had to turn the knob much higher in order for the sound to increase. With the Onkyo, the volume was louder at any given setting, even though the Arcam had significantly more power available.

Now this can aid in the perception of the amp sounding lazy, or laid-back or whatever. Simply because the volume doesn't ramp up as quickly as another. So I'm sure there is a perfectly technical explanation for this.

Is it the volume pot? Not enough gain at low volumes? I'm honestly interested to know why some amps are like this. Again, the Arcam had twice the clean power, but it sounded almost lazy, because it was relatively soft at a low gain. Any technical explanation would be appreciated.

I am referring to integrated amplifiers here, NOT AVRs.
Edited by Heinrich S - 1/30/14 at 11:45am
post #225 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

@Glimmie -- FYI, a friend and I added a large capacitor bank to a DH220 many years ago and the result was substantially enhanced bass, measured and heard. Virtually no change in the rest of the spectrum. One of the times a mod did some real good. We changed the power bus wiring to the output modules at the same time, so it's possible that helped, but the DH220's power supply appeared to need some help...

What I am doing is taking apart two DH220's and will be running 3 amp sections off two power supplies in parallel - a 1.5x improvement. This is for an LCR setup and these will be in the mid bass/midrange band. And the left over forth module is for spares. Of course all electrolytic caps are being replaced but they are in otherwise pristine condition.

I'll start a new thread with some pics and include the class A tweeter amps as well. We can discuss power amp design there and put this thread back on track!
post #226 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by andyc56 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

The real difference was using 10 - 100 Hz square waves; much less "tilt" observed indicating the supply was sagging before adding the extra power supply caps. I think (but am not 100% certain after all this time) that the output impedance was a little lower and a little flatter in the LF region, but the square wave response was where we saw the largest change.

Unless the amp is clipping, low-frequency square wave response tilt has nothing at all to do with power supply capacitor value.


Hmmm... I started to explain all the reasons why PSRR and tilt are coupled, and why certain circuit topologies are better/worse, but after a little more thought the only practical change I would make to your statement is from "nothing at all" to "very little". I clearly remember the results, but now am struggling (30+ years later and with a whole lot more experience) to remember what I did that would have affected that, like changing feedback/coupling caps and such... I do know the amp was not clipping (I was testing mostly in the 1 - 10 W range) and don't think it was normal thermal shifts (which feedback should compensate and would have been the same no matter how stiff the rail). And, one thing that did pass DBT was better, tighter bass. Whatever I did.
post #227 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

This will seem like a stupid question but I'm sure there is a logical answer, I just don't have the technical understanding. Between say an Arcam and an Onkyo, I noticed that with the Arcam, the sound was very soft at a given master volume setting. I had to turn the knob much higher in order for the sound to increase. With the Onkyo, the volume was louder at any given setting, even though the Arcam had significantly more power available.

Now this can aid in the perception of the amp sounding lazy, or laid-back or whatever. Simply because the volume doesn't ramp up as quickly as another. So I'm sure there is a perfectly technical explanation for this.

Is it the volume pot? Not enough gain at low volumes? I'm honestly interested to know why some amps are like this. Again, the Arcam had twice the clean power, but it sounded almost lazy, because it was relatively soft at a low gain. Any technical explanation would be appreciated.

I am referring to integrated amplifiers here, NOT AVRs.

Different designs have different gain structures so in general I would not expect two different amps from different manufacturers to play at the same volume for the same setting of the volume knobs. AVR's that calibrate absolute level do not have that issue. Usually.
post #228 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glimmie View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

@Glimmie -- FYI, a friend and I added a large capacitor bank to a DH220 many years ago and the result was substantially enhanced bass, measured and heard. Virtually no change in the rest of the spectrum. One of the times a mod did some real good. We changed the power bus wiring to the output modules at the same time, so it's possible that helped, but the DH220's power supply appeared to need some help...

What I am doing is taking apart two DH220's and will be running 3 amp sections off two power supplies in parallel - a 1.5x improvement. This is for an LCR setup and these will be in the mid bass/midrange band. And the left over forth module is for spares. Of course all electrolytic caps are being replaced but they are in otherwise pristine condition.

I'll start a new thread with some pics and include the class A tweeter amps as well. We can discuss power amp design there and put this thread back on track!

Can you still get output devices for them? One of my biggest pains was when the outputs in my Counterpoint amp died and I discovered there is no way to get new ones. There was a guy who would rebuild them but he no longer does this.

Can we talk about trucks? How far off-topic can we get? smile.gif - Don

p.s. My measurement mic is an Earthworks M30, since mics were mentioned.
post #229 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

I clearly remember the results, but now am struggling (30+ years later and with a whole lot more experience) to remember what I did that would have affected that, like changing feedback/coupling caps and such...
I'd guess that a change to the lower -3dB frequency was probably made at some point. Here's a SPICE simulation of a 200 Hz square wave with a simple HPF having -3 dB frequencies of 20 Hz and 2 Hz.





It looks like the -3 dB frequency needs to be about 1/100 of the square wave fundamental frequency for the tilt to be negligible.
Edited by andyc56 - 1/30/14 at 12:05pm
post #230 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

Different designs have different gain structures so in general I would not expect two different amps from different manufacturers to play at the same volume for the same setting of the volume knobs. AVR's that calibrate absolute level do not have that issue. Usually.

If that's the case, then that would explain why people hear different things with different amps. So correct me if I'm wrong, but it's the input sensitivity of the volume pot that is lower or higher depending on the amp? I just want to know that I'm understanding the cause of the issue.

The Arcam integrated amp in my case sounded anemic compared to the Yamaha integrated. The Yamaha sounded more lively and energetic. I suspect the reason was due to the input sensitivity being higher on the Yamaha.

Take a look here and tell me what you think :

Yamaha :

Minimum RMS output power
(8
Ω
, 20 Hz to 20 kHz, 0.019% THD)
[A-S500] ................................................................ 85 W + 85 W
[A-S300] ................................................................ 60 W + 60 W
(6
Ω
, 20 Hz to 20 kHz, 0.038% THD) [Except for Asia model]
[A-S500] ............................................................ 100 W + 100 W
[A-S300] ................................................................ 70 W + 70 W
• Dynamic power per channel (IHF) (8/6/4/2
Ω
)
[A-S500] ......................................................... 130/150/185/220 W
[A-S300] ......................................................... 100/120/140/150 W
• Maximum power per channel [U.K. and Europe models only]
(1 kHz, 0.7% THD, 4
Ω
)
[A-S500] ........................................................................... 120 W
[A-S300] ............................................................................. 95 W
• IEC power [U.K. and Europe models only]
(1 kHz, 0.019% THD, 8
Ω
)
[A-S500] ........................................................................... 100 W
[A-S300] ............................................................................. 75 W
• Power band width
[A-S500] (0.06% THD, 42.5 W, 8
Ω
) ................. 10 Hz to 50 kHz
[A-S300] (0.06% THD, 30 W, 8
Ω
) .................... 10 Hz to 50 kHz
• Damping factor (SPEAKERS A)
1 kHz, 8
Ω
................................................................... 240 or more
• Maximum effective output power (JEITA)
(1kHz, 10% THD, 8
Ω
) [Asia, China, Taiwan and Central/South
America models only]
[A-S500] ........................................................................... 130 W
[A-S300] ........................................................................... 100 W
(1kHz, 10% THD, 6
Ω
) [China, Taiwan and Central/South
America models only]
[A-S500] ........................................................................... 150 W
[A-S300] ........................................................................... 110 W
• Input sensitivity/Input impedance
PHONO (MM)........................................................ 3.0 mV/47 k
Ω
CD, etc. .................................................................. 200 mV/47 k
Ω
• Maximum input signal
PHONO (MM) (1 kHz, 0.003% THD).................. 60 mV or more
CD, etc. (1 kHz, 0.5% THD) ................................... 2.2 V or more
• Output level/Output impedance
REC............................................................ 200 mV/1.0 k
Ω
or less
• PHONES jack rated output/Impedance
CD, etc. (Input 1 kHz, 200 mV, 8
Ω
)
[A-S500] ............................................................. 430 mV/470
Ω
[A-S300] ............................................................. 360 mV/470
Ω
• Frequency response
CD, etc. (20 Hz to 20 kHz) ............................................ 0 ± 0.5 dB
CD, etc. PURE DIRECT on (10 Hz to 100 kH

Arcam :

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
INTEGRATED AMPLIFIER POWER AMPLIFIER
Output power (20Hz-20kHz at 0.5%THD)
8ohms, both channels 100W 100W
8ohms, single channel, 1kHz 110W 110W
4ohms, single channel, 1kHz 170W 170W
Harmonic Distortion, 100W, 8

at 1kHz 0.02% typical 0.02% typical
Peak current rating ±25A ±25A
L/R Crosstalk -80dBV at 1kHz -
Frequency response ± 0.5dB - 10Hz-20kHz
Input impedance - 7.5k

Input sensitivity 740mV (Normal Gain)
1.0V (Low Gain)
INPUTS
Line inputs:
Sensitivity 160mV -
Noise (CCIR) ref. rated power -100dB -100dB
Input impedance 10k

-
Overload margin >30dB -
A/V loop input (A/V mode):
Sensitivity 680mV -
Input impedance 7.5k

-
Power amp in:
Sensitivity 740mV (Normal Gain)
Pre-amplifier Output:
Nominal output level 800mV -
Maximum output level 8V -
Output impedance

Is there anything in the above specs that lead you to think the Yamaha would play louder than the Arcam at a lower volume position?
Edited by Heinrich S - 1/30/14 at 12:24pm
post #231 of 267
Everybody, please stop feeding the trolls.
post #232 of 267
I'm not trolling around!?! I'm asking a legitimate question and I was hoping for an explanation based on the spec I provided! mad.gif
post #233 of 267
Feeding the troll or appitizing the egos... not much difference IMO.
post #234 of 267
Hi Heinrich,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

Is there anything in the above specs that lead you to think the Yamaha would play louder than the Arcam at a lower volume position?
No, the specs really don't tell you much if both amps are close to each other in power. If you compare two amps of different power, then of course the more powerful one should be louder.

When two amps are both rated at 100 watts, then which is louder with the volume up half-way, as an example, would depend on the design engineer. One engineer might have that the full 100 watts available with the volume at 80%, while another might prefer 100%. It is the maximum gain of the amplifier that would make the difference in volume, and that is a parameter that is rarely published.
post #235 of 267
Quote:
I'm not trolling around!?! I'm asking a legitimate question
Which you've asked and been answered 50 times already, in this and other threads. And, let's not forget, you are an admitted troll.
post #236 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkHotchkiss View Post

Hi Heinrich,
No, the specs really don't tell you much if both amps are close to each other in power. If you compare two amps of different power, then of course the more powerful one should be louder.

When two amps are both rated at 100 watts, then which is louder with the volume up half-way, as an example, would depend on the design engineer. One engineer might have that the full 100 watts available with the volume at 80%, while another might prefer 100%. It is the maximum gain of the amplifier that would make the difference in volume, and that is a parameter that is rarely published.

So the input sensitivity has nothing to do with it? Or is it due to gain structure on the amp? So basically there is no spec that will explain it. If everything in audio can be explained technically, then I find it difficult to understand why this can't be supported by a spec.
post #237 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

If that's the case, then that would explain why people hear different things with different amps. So correct me if I'm wrong, but it's the input sensitivity of the volume pot that is lower or higher depending on the amp? I just want to know that I'm understanding the cause of the issue.

The Arcam integrated amp in my case sounded anemic compared to the Yamaha integrated. The Yamaha sounded more lively and energetic. I suspect the reason was due to the input sensitivity being higher on the Yamaha.

Take a look here and tell me what you think :

Yamaha :

Minimum RMS output power
(8
Ω
, 20 Hz to 20 kHz, 0.019% THD)
[A-S500] ................................................................ 85 W + 85 W
[A-S300] ................................................................ 60 W + 60 W
(6
Ω
, 20 Hz to 20 kHz, 0.038% THD) [Except for Asia model]
[A-S500] ............................................................ 100 W + 100 W
[A-S300] ................................................................ 70 W + 70 W
• Dynamic power per channel (IHF) (8/6/4/2
Ω
)
[A-S500] ......................................................... 130/150/185/220 W
[A-S300] ......................................................... 100/120/140/150 W
• Maximum power per channel [U.K. and Europe models only]
(1 kHz, 0.7% THD, 4
Ω
)
[A-S500] ........................................................................... 120 W
[A-S300] ............................................................................. 95 W
• IEC power [U.K. and Europe models only]
(1 kHz, 0.019% THD, 8
Ω
)
[A-S500] ........................................................................... 100 W
[A-S300] ............................................................................. 75 W
• Power band width
[A-S500] (0.06% THD, 42.5 W, 8
Ω
) ................. 10 Hz to 50 kHz
[A-S300] (0.06% THD, 30 W, 8
Ω
) .................... 10 Hz to 50 kHz
• Damping factor (SPEAKERS A)
1 kHz, 8
Ω
................................................................... 240 or more
• Maximum effective output power (JEITA)
(1kHz, 10% THD, 8
Ω
) [Asia, China, Taiwan and Central/South
America models only]
[A-S500] ........................................................................... 130 W
[A-S300] ........................................................................... 100 W
(1kHz, 10% THD, 6
Ω
) [China, Taiwan and Central/South
America models only]
[A-S500] ........................................................................... 150 W
[A-S300] ........................................................................... 110 W
• Input sensitivity/Input impedance
PHONO (MM)........................................................ 3.0 mV/47 k
Ω
CD, etc. .................................................................. 200 mV/47 k
Ω
• Maximum input signal
PHONO (MM) (1 kHz, 0.003% THD).................. 60 mV or more
CD, etc. (1 kHz, 0.5% THD) ................................... 2.2 V or more
• Output level/Output impedance
REC............................................................ 200 mV/1.0 k
Ω
or less
• PHONES jack rated output/Impedance
CD, etc. (Input 1 kHz, 200 mV, 8
Ω
)
[A-S500] ............................................................. 430 mV/470
Ω
[A-S300] ............................................................. 360 mV/470
Ω
• Frequency response
CD, etc. (20 Hz to 20 kHz) ............................................ 0 ± 0.5 dB
CD, etc. PURE DIRECT on (10 Hz to 100 kH

Arcam :

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
INTEGRATED AMPLIFIER POWER AMPLIFIER
Output power (20Hz-20kHz at 0.5%THD)
8ohms, both channels 100W 100W
8ohms, single channel, 1kHz 110W 110W
4ohms, single channel, 1kHz 170W 170W
Harmonic Distortion, 100W, 8

at 1kHz 0.02% typical 0.02% typical
Peak current rating ±25A ±25A
L/R Crosstalk -80dBV at 1kHz -
Frequency response ± 0.5dB - 10Hz-20kHz
Input impedance - 7.5k

Input sensitivity 740mV (Normal Gain)
1.0V (Low Gain)
INPUTS
Line inputs:
Sensitivity 160mV -
Noise (CCIR) ref. rated power -100dB -100dB
Input impedance 10k

-
Overload margin >30dB -
A/V loop input (A/V mode):
Sensitivity 680mV -
Input impedance 7.5k

-
Power amp in:
Sensitivity 740mV (Normal Gain)
Pre-amplifier Output:
Nominal output level 800mV -
Maximum output level 8V -
Output impedance

Is there anything in the above specs that lead you to think the Yamaha would play louder than the Arcam at a lower volume position?

In a non-calibrated system? NO, because I don't see a sensitivity spec for the Yamaha. Of course, as long as your preamp can deliver enough voltage to drive the amp to the power desired, sensitivity is essentially meaningless. At the exact same volume, each amp will be putting out the exact same power. Exact same. Rule of the universe. If it's really really important to you for that power to come at some particular setting on a particular volume control, you have all the ability in the world to make it so. Calibrating speaker levels, adjusting input levels for specific sources, etc. All to chase something that is meaningless.

Unless the system as a whole has been calibrated to a known standard there is nothing in the world less meaningful than the volume control setting on the preamp, or preamp section of a receiver. Depends on the gain design of the amp, on the gain design of the preamp, on the gain design and nominal output of source devices . . . and in the analog world, whether the volume control is attached to a log pot or a linear pot. The linear pot at 10 percent "volume" should be exatly equal to a log pot in the same circuit at half volume. See? volume ontrol setting is meaningless.

FWIW< at least as of a few years ago, Aram was plugging the fact that it set up all the input gains on all its amps so that they would put out equal power for any given input. Thus, you could biamp using two separate amps, one for the highs and one for the lows, and the tweeters and woofers would stanyin proper balance. Not all manufacturers do that . . . . And it means that if you replace one Arcam amp with a twice as powerful Arcam amp. at any given volume control setting, the new amp will put out exactly as much power as the old one, thus being exactly the same loudness. But it will stay cleaner louder if you, uh, turn up the volume control . . .
post #238 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

In a non-calibrated system? NO, because I don't see a sensitivity spec for the Yamaha. Of course, as long as your preamp can deliver enough voltage to drive the amp to the power desired, sensitivity is essentially meaningless. At the exact same volume, each amp will be putting out the exact same power. Exact same. Rule of the universe. If it's really really important to you for that power to come at some particular setting on a particular volume control, you have all the ability in the world to make it so. Calibrating speaker levels, adjusting input levels for specific sources, etc. All to chase something that is meaningless.

Unless the system as a whole has been calibrated to a known standard there is nothing in the world less meaningful than the volume control setting on the preamp, or preamp section of a receiver. Depends on the gain design of the amp, on the gain design of the preamp, on the gain design and nominal output of source devices . . . and in the analog world, whether the volume control is attached to a log pot or a linear pot. The linear pot at 10 percent "volume" should be exatly equal to a log pot in the same circuit at half volume. See? volume ontrol setting is meaningless.

FWIW< at least as of a few years ago, Aram was plugging the fact that it set up all the input gains on all its amps so that they would put out equal power for any given input. Thus, you could biamp using two separate amps, one for the highs and one for the lows, and the tweeters and woofers would stanyin proper balance. Not all manufacturers do that . . . . And it means that if you replace one Arcam amp with a twice as powerful Arcam amp. at any given volume control setting, the new amp will put out exactly as much power as the old one, thus being exactly the same loudness. But it will stay cleaner louder if you, uh, turn up the volume control . . .

I'm referring to integrated amps, not receivers. Nothing has been calibrated. I'm talking about using 1/4 of the volume knob on one amp, while 1/4 of the volume knob on another amp - the one amp (Arcam) has the higher output power but sounds softer and almost anemic compared to the Yamaha at a similar position despite the lower output power. So I assumed that perhaps it could have been the volume pot was somehow designed to be more sensitive or louder. I'm not the technical one here, so I'm just thinking out aloud.
post #239 of 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

In a non-calibrated system? NO, because I don't see a sensitivity spec for the Yamaha. Of course, as long as your preamp can deliver enough voltage to drive the amp to the power desired, sensitivity is essentially meaningless. At the exact same volume, each amp will be putting out the exact same power. Exact same. Rule of the universe. If it's really really important to you for that power to come at some particular setting on a particular volume control, you have all the ability in the world to make it so. Calibrating speaker levels, adjusting input levels for specific sources, etc. All to chase something that is meaningless.

Unless the system as a whole has been calibrated to a known standard there is nothing in the world less meaningful than the volume control setting on the preamp, or preamp section of a receiver. Depends on the gain design of the amp, on the gain design of the preamp, on the gain design and nominal output of source devices . . . and in the analog world, whether the volume control is attached to a log pot or a linear pot. The linear pot at 10 percent "volume" should be exatly equal to a log pot in the same circuit at half volume. See? volume ontrol setting is meaningless

So correct me if I'm wrong here, but the volume pot on one amp could be more sensitive than another and could be supplying more power to another over a wider window period. Another amp could have a higher gain structure and applied power could be over a more narrow window on the volume pot. So the rated power on one amp like the Yamaha could be reached at 1/2 volume, while the Arcam may require 3/4 to reach similar output due to the sensitivity or whatever technical spec is responsible for this.

Do I have this correct?
post #240 of 267
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Audio theory, Setup and Chat
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Audio theory, Setup and Chat › External DAC Questions