Why Don't We See More High Current Electronics?

Ooooo . . . I've been summoned, like Notorious B.I.G.!
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/155324/the-ghost-of-biggie
Actually Al, you're correct save a small arithmetic error. A "pure voltage source" amplifier that clips at 100W into 8 ohms of course puts out a maximum of approximately 40 volts peak-to-peak before clipping, regardless of the input waveform or load impedance. So for the combination of two equal-amplitude sine waves at 4KC and 40C, that's 20V peak-to-peak for each before clipping, or 14.14VRMS each . . . corresponding to about 12.5 watts RMS at 16 ohms, and 25 watts RMS at 8 ohms, or each at 1/4 the rated power like you said. To some, these numbers might seem like a large amount of "loss", but this waveform into even a low-sensitivity domestic loudspeaker would be absolutely ear-splitting (and probably tweeter-frying in short order).

interesting, but unfortunately, simplified theoretical scenarios are not very enlightening regarding what really matters playing real music.

Having a well made amp that is in no risk of breaking a sweat in practice is simply one of the best and simplest strategies to pursue in putting together a system. The actual benefits may vary, but it is an insurance policy at worst.

Few other decisions in audio can be made this easily, so doing it provides a firm playing field for mucking with all the rest as needed.

Thanks Kirk. But note that Irv specified a 40Hz impedance of 4 ohms, so I believe that my indication of 50W (rms of course) at 40Hz was correct.

Also, I think that when you referred to 40V and 20V "peak-to-peak," you meant to say "peak." The 100W figure, presumably rms, corresponds to 28.28Vrms into 8 ohms, which would be 40V peak, or 80V peak-to-peak.

Dividing by two, to reflect each of the two frequency components of equal amplitude, whose peaks will add in phase at some instants of time, we have 14.14Vrms (equivalent to 20Vpeak or 40Vpeak-to-peak), which equates to the 12.5Wrms into 16 ohms and 50W into 4 ohms that I stated.

Best regards, and thanks for spotting the "summons." :-)

-- Al

I was listening to a nuclear "expert" from a well recognized American University explain on CNN a few days ago early on in the Japan nuclear fiasco why theoretically there was nothing to really be worried about with the troubled reactors in Japan.

These reactors had containment structures, no problem!

So much for that theory.......