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

Answering my own Q as the result of all the input here and elsewhere, I have to say "No. Probably not, if within a reasonable context given system parameters or at least, speaker requirements."

Having some more horse power on tap is a good thing when it comes to the subject of amps, usually. Be it simply plain old watts, or immediately available responsiveness … ala current.

I feel enormous power isn't the primary, ‘end all be all’, consideration. Neither do I don’t feel it’s a bad thing what so ever. I believe it comes down to correctness more than anything else.

Watts, after all, do cost money. Some watts cost a lot more money than some others. Why then over spend, seems to arise as a significant factor in choosing the amp (s) for the speaker nearly as much as the quality of all them watts. Being sought does.

Consequently, IMO, it is as much a question of quality, as it is one of quantity.

The numeric values sort themselves out with respect to speaker needs and amp characteristics and their outputs if both speaker maker and amp maker have been forthright in assigning each their proper specifications.

The qualitative side of the amplifier coin is far, far more vague.

In seeking out a solution for my HT desires/needs (For me, it’s awful hard to see the difference between those two concerns at times), I felt perhaps a digital solution might be best after all.

In pursuing accounts from owners, and online editorials I ran across some interesting new topologies in that area aside from digital (ICE) amps. Keeping in mind availability on the new, and pre-owned front, tried and true designs as well and my own preferences, I’ve decided to give BK Butler a shot at satisfying the multi channel amplification duties for now. Naturally, this might well change but on paper, the TDB 5150 looks like the choice that interests me most and does appear to satisfy my system needs.

The digital amps pointed me towards some new thoughts in multi ch amptechnology, no transformers to speak of, going greener, operational temps, and overall size, which normally aren’t Audio Nut concerns as a rule, but they certainly do apply more and more lately.

Admittedly, I did pursue in spite of these newer notions in amplification some more venerable and proven themes from ATI, Anthem, Parasound, Wyred 4, Rowland, and Odyssey. Choosing to pull the trigger on this ASAP, provided limitations as to choice, so did the actual age of some amp selections, prices too caused some to be disallowed. Integration too was an issue… space too was a concern. Seeking to stay as current as possible brought me to pick between another likewise 3 ch newe, Odyssey amp and an available butler 5150.

Several other aspects of the design are very similar between these two ideas on amplification, and the tube facet of the butler configuration set it on top of the field.

I very much like the Odyssey amp I own, for it’s sound versus it’s price. It does indeed overachieve sonically. The butler and Odyssey use the same Sanken bi polar devices in their output stages, have similar power ratings, operational values, and accordingly run reasonably cool to warm at most…. Add the ‘tube’ element the TDB 5150 design contains and at an attractibve price point, my decision was about made for me… try the tubed gizmo from BK.

So the choice has been made and the unit will begin it’s undertaking in due time. It will also be a single bullet for all five channels rather than splitting up the duties between other amps, thus hopefully adding some greater cohesiveness and tonal symmetry across the sound field. I suppose that counts for something too.

Thanks for all the input, and thoughtful responses posted herein. By the end of the month I should be able to say how well it handles HT amplification responsibilities in my configuration. Hopefully this will become a more than satisfactory addition…. I’ll let you all know for sure.
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

yep. Like myself and near everyone else has said at some point... There's watts... and then there's watts!

Hoepfully, Watt this new amp will do will be good enough.

If not I'll do Watt everyone else does that doesn't have either a decent outlet nearby from which to do business and hear things... '.... the Audiogone Shuffle'

Perhaps in the interim, I'll hit that red neck retirement jackpot and get a handful of those Pass xa amps or Rowlands, or such!
Blindjim:

You have asked a couple of times for impressions of the sound of an ICE amp. Here goes; my Wyred-4-Sound with everything listed in my system, sounds CLEAN. I do not hear the amp as a separate component.

Prior to the W4S I was running the Emerald Physics (must be bi-amped) with a Sunfire Cinema Grand and I could hear its' effect (using either current or voltage taps) and I did not like it. It was not bad, it was just not to my liking. Prior to that the Sunfire was driving a pair of Talon Audio Khites and it was vary pleasing to my ear. All other components in my system were the same as listed including the Levinson 380-S pre-amp with its' 0.1 db gain control.

Listening volume level with all of the speakers and amps has remained virtually the same (+/- a couple of db).

My best guess as to why the W4S sounds better to my ears (and better means that I don't hear it), is probably due to the W4S multi-channels being constructed as multiple mono blocks in one container. I could be wrong, as I have made mistakes before. Once I even moved away from Analysis Plus cables, thinking greater cost must mean better sound. Wrong, wrong, wrong! As with the W4S, I do not hear the AP cables, just the recording.

This spring, I had the opportunity to listen to the top of the line offerings from B&W (driven by MacIntosh) and TAD (driven by Bel Canto) resulting in my being very happy with my system. For +/- 25% of the cost of the above speakers, electronics, and cables, I don't have to try to listen "around" or "through" the system to hear the music.

Yesterday I started with Beethoven Piano Concertos, moved to The Beach Boy's Pet Sounds, the Significant Other voted for Rod Stewart, I got a reprieve with a mix of early 70's R&B, and finished with SRV Blues at Sunrise. All of it was clean, clear, and in my living room. Over all, a very nice day with no thoughts of "If I changed amps...."

Best regards,

Dave

Consttraveler

Thanks. that is interesting. The butler is likewise a nulti ch mono setup in one box... using also leading edge technologies.

Setup and matching is certainly key to getting sound you can truly enjoy... in your room... with your tastes and ears.