|
|
Post by Andrew Robinson on May 15, 2013 22:10:00 GMT -5
What is the point of throwing massive power at speakers that are incredibly efficient? The real answer is: NONE. A 100 watt/ch. amp would give you way more power than you'll ever use. Horses for courses, son... -RW- Wow, thanks for the vote of confidence. While I don't think RW's reply was aimed specifically at me, I'm appreciative of your thoughts and hopes for keeping the conversation(s) positive. There is no right or wrong, just degrees of understanding and we must all strive to keep moving forward and learning as much as we can whenever and wherever we can. Forums like this represent some of the best opportunities consumers have to do that, though too often they shy away because some take it too far or make it too personal. I don't think that has happened here, but I'm with you -keep it positive. Keep it fun and the rest will follow. |
|
|
|
Post by yeeeha17 on May 15, 2013 22:37:22 GMT -5
Tasdom- why not get a minix A-100 to run your other 2 channels it won't take up much space, cost effective, it won't need all that power, and according to some people it sounds the same as all XPA amps. There's one for sale for $165 on the emporium it's a great price
|
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,273
|
Post by KeithL on May 16, 2013 0:34:30 GMT -5
The answer to that is actually pretty simple...... When designing mechanical devices (like speakers), there is always a compromise between efficiency and other desired characteristics. If you start out designing a speaker with the design constraint that "it has to be high efficiency", then that limits your other options. Compared to other variables, clean amplifier power is "cheap and easy". By having a very powerful amplifier, you then have many more choices of how to design your speaker - or more choices about which speakers you can buy. Put another way, if you have a ten watt amplifier, you have a very SHORT list of speakers that will play reasonably loud with it; with a 350 watt amplifier, you have a much longer list, and many more choices. Even beyond that, most of the speakers on that short list that will play well with ten watts will be victim to other serious compromises - like non-flat frequency response, high distortion, or very large size. Also remember that, if you want 10 dB of headroom, then your 10 watt amplifier is limited to an average level of about 1 watt - which ain't much at all.... while, with an amp like the 7-350, you'll have about fifty times that ;D The simple reality is that the vast majority of modern speakers DO sound better with several hundred watts of amplifier power to drive them (or, at least, in reserve for dynamic peaks). By NOT having that much power, you eliminate most of those speakers from your "constellation of choices"... and who wants to limit their choices? What is the point of throwing massive power at speakers that are incredibly efficient? The real answer is: NONE. A 100 watt/ch. amp would give you way more power than you'll ever use. Horses for courses, son... -RW- |
|
|
|
Post by deltadube on May 16, 2013 5:53:32 GMT -5
is the PA 7-350 really a Porsche thought that was the XPR 1 i would turn down your Porsche for a Bently!!!! cheers.. The XPR-1 is more like a Lambo.. sheer raw power and style too!  did you know the bentley gt has an acousticly design exhaust system!!! trubo v 8 600 hp of sound.. talk about style... |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on May 16, 2013 6:35:07 GMT -5
My speakers are 98dB efficient into 8 Ohms, and the PA 7-350 might seem like too much of a good thing, but I wouldn't outright say it's a bad fit. Not to take anything away from the 150 (I have that amp too), just there are benefits to having more even if your speakers are efficient like mine. Andrew, If one has speakers that are as efficient as yours what are the benefits of having that much power? I mean if a less powerful amp can drive ones speakers easily to volumes one desires and then some why spend the additional money? Bill |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on May 16, 2013 7:00:53 GMT -5
The simple reality is that the vast majority of modern speakers DO sound better with several hundred watts of amplifier power to drive them (or, at least, in reserve for dynamic peaks). By NOT having that much power, you eliminate most of those speakers from your "constellation of choices"... and who wants to limit their choices? Keith, When you say "vast majority of modern speakers DO sound better with several hundred watts of amplifier power to drive them" are you referring to less efficient speakers? In what way will ones speakers sound better with the additional power? There are so many variables such as the efficiency of ones speakers, the size of ones room and the volume one listens at to make such a broad based statement IMO. I've had 200 wpc amps in my system with 4 ohm speakers that weren't the most efficient and then went to a less powerful amp with no loss of overall SQ in my system. Bill |
|
|
|
Post by htinparadise on May 27, 2013 15:21:38 GMT -5
Andrew appears to now have his PA 7-350 review up on his website.
Regards,
HTinP
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Robinson on May 27, 2013 17:05:36 GMT -5
My review of the Sherbourn PA 7-350 is now live on my site. I'm sure it will be on the Sherbourn page here soon enough too. Here is an excerpt as well as my video detailing the amplifier and its performance -hint, it's real good. "Starting with simple two channel music, I cued up Counting Crows’ album, Films About Ghosts (Geffen Records), and the track “Anna Begins.” The first, most noticeable trait of the 7-350 was its rock-solid imaging from the center outward. Every performer was grounded, and occupied their own distinct space, side-to-side and front-to-back. The delineation between each performer, their respective instrument and physical space within the performance space bordered on laser etched, but not in bad or artificial sense. As a direct result the soundstage itself was more an organic “orb” of sound rather than a “T,” whereby the vocalist and guitars rested on a lateral plane with the drums and perhaps other percussion accompaniment falling back of center. Speaking of accompaniments, the track’s piano was more resolved and nuanced via the 7-350 than with prior amplifiers. The piano’s presence improved as did its inner detail, as key strikes and the following reverberation within the body of the piano itself were all the more audible and three-dimensional. The piano, like the rest of the instruments present during the track, was natural in not only its tone, but thanks to the 7-350′s power, it was also true to life in its scale. The same was true of lead singer, Adam Duritz’s vocals. I wrote in my journal that, “the 7-350 unravels and reveals music like peeling back the layers of an onion.” It’s not as if prior amplifiers gloss over or outright “miss” aspects of the incoming musical signal -they don’t -it’s just that the 7-350 seems to have an easier go of things. The resulting sound is one of effortless control and composure that is a touch laid back but not vague. This slight “mellowness” does cost the 7-350 some (emphasis on some) dynamic lag, but nothing that is too distracting or even unpleasant. Explosive? Maybe not dynamite explosive, but still always appropriate, especially with the finer details. The high frequencies are too a bit laid back, but not recessed or rolled off; no they extend fully and with terrific air and decay. The 7-350′s treble performance, even at volume, is the very definition of composure and try as I might, even with Duritz’s sometimes “squeaky” vocals, I couldn’t get it to act up nor become fatiguing." READ THE REST OF MY REVIEW |
|
|
|
Post by tasdom on May 27, 2013 21:28:57 GMT -5
Very nice review Andrew. Thank you for posting.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Mad Norseman on May 27, 2013 21:43:38 GMT -5
I take it you'd turn down a Porsche for a Kia then? I mean there's only so fast you can drive, right?  I'm going to respectfully disagree. The car analogy above is pretty good. Both my Subaru Impreza and my wife's F-150 get to 60 seconds in around 5 seconds, but I'd hardly call the driving experience the same, or even comparable. My 98dB efficient Pendragons sound brilliant via Sherbourn's own PA 7-150, but more so via the 7-350. Both are good, I argue the 7-350, if you can afford it, is better. I gotta agree with Andrew here myself... Because I know that even though my front speakers, the JBL ES100s are fairly efficient at 91db sensitivity, they really only showed what they're truly capable of after I fed them 400 watts+ of power each from the Emo XPR-5! It certainly seemed to make a positive difference, even at moderate listening levels. It grabbed those dual 10" woofers and showed 'em who's boss!  |
|
7887
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 1 
|
Post by 7887 on Jun 3, 2013 13:48:10 GMT -5
i was looking a this amp do any one know if it is able to play hi rez files a 192khz-20hz 24bit
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Robinson on Jun 3, 2013 14:11:14 GMT -5
i was looking a this amp do any one know if it is able to play hi rez files a 192khz-20hz 24bit Amplifiers will play back any signal fed to them as they are not responsible for digital decoding etc. If your CD/DVD/Blu-ray player, DAC or preamp can output 24/192 than the 7-350 will "play it back" so to speak. |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Jun 3, 2013 14:28:46 GMT -5
I take it you'd turn down a Porsche for a Kia then? I mean there's only so fast you can drive, right? Hey now I have a KIA and it has 280hp.....lol I would hope so as the higher damping and control the 7-350 would afford your speakers, it would be a spectacular listen. No such thing as too much of a good thing. Think of all that dynamic headroom you have! Now that is great Audio! |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Jun 3, 2013 14:30:33 GMT -5
Oh by the way there is an Optima or K9 with 470 HP lurking about and it does great. The Perrelli Challenge Optima is 360 HP for the record.
|
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Jun 3, 2013 14:47:20 GMT -5
Or is that the K5?
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Robinson on Jun 4, 2013 18:40:01 GMT -5
Just noticed that this amplifier, the Sherbourn PA 7-350 is now priced below $2,000 during Sherbourn's Summer sale. Just FYI.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 19:46:02 GMT -5
BillMac wondered: "If one has speakers that are as efficient as yours (98db) what are the benefits of having that much power (350 watts/ch.)? I mean if a less powerful amp can drive ones speakers easily to volumes one desires and then some why spend the additional money?" Because, silly boy, that's the way we do things 'round here! If 50 watts thru your speakers will literally drive you out of the room, then you MUST buy a 350 watts/ch. amp because, you know, HEADROOM!! I mean, if 10db of headroom is more than sufficient - and it *is* with most modern recordings - then, surely, 20 or 30 db of headroom MUST be better. The numbers don't lie. Or do they?  ? Let's look at da numbahz: 1 watt = 98db (It's pretty damn loud in here!) 2 watts = 101 db 4 watts = 104 db (Your wife is on the phone upstairs, talking divorce with her lawyer.) 8 watts = 107 db 16 watts = 110 db (It is now, officially, VERY LOUD and your wife has left for her mother's house) 32 watts = 113 db (The kids just called a cab, they're joining their mom.) 64 watts = 116 db (The neighbors, deaf crack dealers, have called the cops.) 128 watts = 119 db (The cops are at the door, pistols drawn. You cannot hear them knocking. Cool.) 256 watts = 122 db (The cops have run away, their ears are bleeding. But they've called in a SWAT team) 350 watts = 123 db (The SWAT team busts down the door and shoot you. The mayor gives them medals of valor and full-time disability pay. A sign language expert conducts the ceremony.) So it's easy to see that you absolutely NEED 350 watts/ch. for those speakers. Anything less proves you don't support our fallen heroes... -RW- PS: Andrew, I'm bored to tears and just having some fun - please don't hate on me <g>. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jun 4, 2013 19:57:49 GMT -5
But that's at 1 meter. Standard setups are not at that distance. But all your descriptors still aptly apply!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2013 20:00:52 GMT -5
I sit that close because I just got a 40" 4k TV and I need to get my money's worth...<g>
-RW-
|
|
|
|
Post by mauriceminor on Jun 4, 2013 20:25:16 GMT -5
What is the point of throwing massive power at speakers that are incredibly efficient? The real answer is: NONE. A 100 watt/ch. amp would give you way more power than you'll ever use. Horses for courses, son... -RW- Hard to be a good guy when it's so easy to be a wise guy. |
|
? Let's look at da numbahz:
