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
macdadtexas
1,794 posts
 
OK, I'm back on track now: amp power is completely speaker dependant. I have Maggies, and like lots of tordial power from Parasound, Bryston, and currently Cary (there are others). I have not really liked the digital amps I have tried, with the notable exception of the Innersound/Sanders Sound ESL amps. For some reason those sound much less dry to me.

I love tube amps for any speaker, of course depending on the speaker they need more or less power. But, power alone doesn't matter, it's more the load the speaker presents. That said, wow, more power is always better, never worse.
guidocorona
4,298 posts
 
Macrojack, have you ever compared the JRDG 102 with the Wired4Sound? They seem to be in the same price range, although they do not use the same modules. The Wired4Sound seems to be based on the ICEpower 250 ASP which delivers 250W over 8 Ohms; The JRDG 102 is based on the apparently newer ICEpower 200 AS, which delivers a more modest 100W per channel over 8 Ohms and is thought to be a little sweeter in the treble than the 250 ASP. Unfortunately I have no direct experience with either amps, and the sound of an amp is even more the product of its design than its underlying componentry, so I can't even venture to guess which one I would prefer. G.
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,413 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?
guidocorona
4,298 posts
 
Thank you Kijanki, do you mean to say that 200 AS incorporates SMPS on-module, while 250 ASP relies on external PS, which can be traditional as well as switch mode?
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,413 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).
More to discover