AudioRoundTable.com: General » What happened to standards for advertised power?

Home » Audio » General » What happened to standards for advertised power?

Show: Today's Messages :: Navigator :: Polls
E-mail to friend

Re: What happened to standards for advertised power? [message #75816 is a reply to message #75815]

Fri, 15 March 2013 17:25

gofar99
Messages: 1955
Registered: May 2010
Location: Southern Arizona

Illuminati (5th Degree)

Hi, Yes the Martin Logans are electrostatics and they do exceptionally well with tube amps. If you can (1) afford the costs (2) have a room large enough ( not less than 10 feet wide, 8 tall and say 12-15 deep with about 20wide, 10 tall and 25-30 deep being much better) and (3) are willing to spend a good deal of time finding the perfect locations for them (not easy in many cases) you will be rewarded with a stunning sonic experience. I have been ruined for life by them. The general effects can be reproduced with high quality open back systems, but then you are still faced with at least two of the same problems (room size and finding the correct locations). An unfortunate consequence of the correct locations for the panels is that it can conflict with the best place for bass response. This is indeed the case in my listening room. Room treatments did not resolve the problem. I had a significant drop in response at the listening area from about 65HZ and down. Right now a pair of Martin Logan powered subs sit right next to my chair. They are set for 40HZ crossover and the 12 db/ octave slope is just about right to fill in the bottom end. It is also true if you wander around the room there are a few locations (not good listening ones fortunately) that now have bass bumps because of the subs. I figure that since I don't listen there it is of little consequence. My preferred subs (temporarily in storage are 7.5 cubic foot vented ones with highly sensitive 15 inch drivers. They easily reach to 22HZ. I power them with 25 watt tube amps via a 24 db/octave electronic crossover set for 50 HZ(see everyone I actually admit to having some SS gear available). BTW back to the main topic.... Martin Logan recommends no less than 100 watts RMS for the electrostatics. With only 25 it gets uncomfortably loud before I can cause the amps to audibly distort. So much for ratings. The big subs are rated for up to 300 watts rms...they would be a lot like earth movers at that level. Shocked

Good Listening
Bruce

Report message to a moderator

Re: What happened to standards for advertised power? [message #75818 is a reply to message #75815]

Sat, 16 March 2013 01:51

FloydV
Messages: 124
Registered: November 2011
Location: Boise, ID

Master

That's a funny story about the TTL tube. Someone out there would probably buy it and swear it made a big difference. Laughing

I'm not sure if I had heard 1 db would require doubling the watts, or I just plain remembered wrong. Now days that is a common event for me. But, the numbers you list still require a big increase in power for 3db.

I think that transient 100 + db listening is probably OK, but I like to keep it around 90 max for general listening. I'm living with the effects of ear damage from firearms. It's funny that I did the damage when I was about 16, but I didn't really notice the loss until I was about 35. I kept wondering why the right channel was louder and was investigating all my equipment, except for my ears.

My wife and I are still in love with your 3 pi speakers, btw. There was a post in an AV forum about JBL coming out with a speaker that is balanced in the vertical as well as the horizontal plane. It uses two compression drivers for one wave guide.

They also need matching 1000 watt amps. So, 5000 watts for 5.1 surround. I won't be buying any in this life time Shocked

Floyd

He who joyfully marches to music rank and file, has already earned my contempt. -- Albert Einstein

Report message to a moderator