2. amps-preamps
  3. 1244027822

Is too much power in an amp really a problem?

As recently as 8-10 yrs. ago, I maintained my card carrying residence in the ‘lots o’ watts’ camp’ regularly. I’ve since held only a casual attendance to that group, and since departed with the acquisition of higher eff speakers, and lower powered tube amps.

Now I’m debating the future and appropriateness, of that perception and considering another SS, or a non tube amp. This time a digital amp… such as a class D or ICE configuration… as in a Bel Canto, PS Audio, Spectron, Wyred 4 S, etc., to use for both music and HT with my current Silverline speakers.

Several of these amps profess IMO rather high ratings for output power. 250, 300, and 500 wpc into 8 ohms, as your ‘oh by the way’ choices, and then doubling up should the impedance drop off to 4 ohms!

1000 wats per!

E frekin' Gad!

Truth be told, I’ve never put together a high eff speaker & high powered amp combo, nor felt the need, so I’m in a whole new ball game now, or am I?

I understand immense power reservoirs on tap, (like with my former BAT vk500) is a good thing, as well as are other attributes like a good input impedance, and control or damping figures. that amp ran VR4 JRs though, and both have since departed la casa Sunburn.

Additionally, my current tube mono blocks (120wpc) handle my 93db Sonata IIIs quite well IMO. My Odyssey Stratos SE also does a good enough job too rated at about 160 wpc. Between the two amps, the Dodds are the better sounding, and appear to have better control and more ease with the Silverliness.

In making a choice on one of these Digital or ICE amps, should the power numbers be regarded as something other than what they are? I mean more likely, do 250 wpc into 8 ohm rated ICE amps provide likewise results or the same feel, of an SS amp having the same output? Ie., control, power reserves, etc?

I do feel a good match between the speakers and amp is a prime consideration now, and do not wish to buy far too much or too little an amp, given these thoughts.

There too is the thought of the amps actual 'voice' itself to consider.

I sure wouldn’t want to smoke the speaks with too little or too much power on tap. Or have the amp ()s) always loafing. Or is that loafing bit just nonsense?

Any experiences and insights here on the digi power front is more than appreciated as I'm trying to get a 'feel' for this 'new to me' amp topology and not over or under buy.

Thanks much.
blindjim

Showing 10 responses by kijanki

kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,448 posts
 
Dodgealum - it is complicated. 60A peak current but at what output voltage? for how long? Why do you need 60A? Even on 1 ohm load it would deliver 3600W.

1000W Icepower (1000ASP) can deliver 40A for about 0.5s. Minimum load is specified as 2 ohm. I wouldn't pay too much attention to specifications but more to reviews or auditions.

Can amp like that blow your speakers - sure, but if you undersize you'll get into risk of cliping and damaging tweeters (high frequency content). Icepowers have even soft clipping built in to prevent it (and all other protections).

Icepower has incredible damping factor at low frequencies DF=4000 but it is pretty much useless since inductor inside of the speaker box, in series with the woofer, limits df to about 100 (80 mohms typical resistance).
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,448 posts
 
"Perhaps it is time we cleaned up this website and eliminated all the product favoritism displayed by regulars on this website"

I second that - we should not express any negative or positive opinions about anything since

"Arguments are extremely vulgar, for everyone in good society holds exactly the same opinion." - Oscar Wild
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,448 posts
 
Raquel - I read review and could not find any reference to $9800. It states clearly in product description that it is v1.5 and MSRP is $12800. Are you saying that reviewers have to mention MSRPs of previous versions. For what purpose? Am I missing something?
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,448 posts
 
Guido - 250ASP uses traditional power supply while 200ASC has SMPS. 250ASP delivers 250W at 1% THD while 200ASC is 230W at the same 1% distortion level. Bel Canto specifies S300 and M300 amps as 300W (200ASC) because it is at 10% THD. I concluded that Rowland is a little bit more mature.

250ASP is still a little stronger where it counts - it can drive 2 Ohm impedance while 200ASC needs 3 Ohms minimum.

I would not pay so much attention to power. In order to listen twice louder one needs 10x more power but changing listening distance by 2 is equal to changing power 4x.
It is therefore very difficult to say how much power is needed. Room size and absorption also plays big role.

Macrojack - do you have PC-1? If so, how did it affect the sound?
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,448 posts
 
Guido - Both have power supply built-in and connect to mains. 200ASC has switcher while 250ASP has traditional power supply. The strange thing is that there is no large transformer on the module - only something that looks like big choke on EI type square core. I checked block diagram and it shows that they rectify and filter mains and feed it to DC/DC converter. DC/DC converter is a switcher so no matter how you slice it both use switchers. Judging by size 250ASP is a little more robust and it shows in ability to drive lower impedance than 200ASC.

I had opportunity to buy cheap REF1000 from the dealer who was loosing Bel Canto line but was afraid of 1000W with my modest size speakers. On the other hand I don't listen very loud. 200ASC is described as sweeter but 1000ASP is praised to be a little more coherent and focused. The difference is very very small and the main thing is raw power that they deliver. Stronger Mosfets are always slower therefore switching frequency has to be adjusted to avoid losses and bandwidth has to follow. 1000ASP has -3dB bandwidth of 38kHz (8 Ohm load) while 200ASC is rated 60kHz (same load).
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,448 posts
 
Macrojack - strange coincidence, I just finished cooking shiitaki mushrooms with beans in sesame oil with ginger and toasted sesame seeds. Can you make it here in next 5-10 min. I will wait.
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,448 posts
 
Blindjim - I have similar problem. My 100W/8 ohm amp is driven by the Benchmark DAC1 used as line stage (volume control). Benchmark allows to adjust gain (jumpers inside) in 10dB steps but for some reason, I can't explain, it affects the sound. The best sound is at 0dB position (loudest - equivalent to nominal 26dB gain) what gives me full power at around 11 o'clock (89dB speakers).

Output/input impedance ratio have nothing to do with the power (very small division). Rowland uses instrumentation amp at the input (THAT1200) providing 40k input impedance, at least on my amp.
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,448 posts
 
Blindjim - I'm sure there are preamps that won't drive well low input impedance (like 10k) of the power amp but it should be rather sound quality than its level. Assuming high output impedance - let say 1k and input impedance of 10k it will divide signal very little, 0.8dB to be exact.

I tried different jumper position on my Benchmark and the next one (-10dB) gives me best volume knob range but the worst sound (not as crisp and vivid). I checked Benchmarks manual and found that output impedance is the highest at this jumper setting = 1.6k. It should not make any difference with my 0.5m IC since it has only 5pF per foot but it does. I cannot explain it. Amp has 40k input impedance.

I've read reviews of 501 including some of the people who bought it after 201. Sound is pretty much the same but 501 is less congested at higher levels. Hearing scale is logarithmic so there is not much difference for us between 200W and 500W but a lot of difference for the speakers. I remember old concerts when bands used standard 100W Marshall amps and it was pretty loud. Now band like Rolling Stones count power in tens of kilowatts. For their concert in Chicago city had to update stadium electrical grid to provide necessary current.

A lot of power is good for one event but I listen at relatively low volumes most of the time. Lower volume makes for the better sound, at least in my room. My room is acoustically bright and has very tall ceiling. At low volumes I have good imaging and tone balance but at higher volume I start hearing more of an echo (multiple reflections) that before was to low to hear. In addition sound becomes brighter - not good thing in my setup.

Class D has this peculiar thing about listening at low levels that it keeps good sound/composure even at very low levels. My previous class AB amp was loosing highs and bass plus resolution was getting worse. I found this also mentioned in one of class D reviews.
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,448 posts
 
Blindjim - watts cost money, you're absolutely right. 100W amp is better than 200W because sound level is about the same and for the same money one can get much better 100W than 200W amp. Power in class D is cheap but not everybody likes the sound.
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,448 posts
 
"Mr. Corona's writings about Rowland on this forum, and his review of the revised Vienna Acoustics Mahler for TAS, are indeed curious"

Raquel - Beauty is in the eye of beerholder. If Mr. Corona likes Rowland's gear let him write about it. I hope you don't suspect some conspiracy here.

Myself, I bought Rowland class D amp based partially on reputation of the company that did not release any other than great products for almost 30 years. I'm writing as well a lot of positives on this forum about Rowland and amp that I enjoy a lot.
More to discover