>Somewhere in your cluster of links, I'm sure it states that
>an underpowered amp can't control the cone correctly, right?
> That was your orignal argument wasn't it?

Yep, I gave it a good go.

"There is a fallacy that a heavy cone will produce better bass. WRONG! There is also the fallacy that a stiff cone suspension means higher power handling. WRONG AGAIN! The truth is that if the cone is heavy, it will not react quickly to the input signal. Hence without the application of considerable wattage, the signal will be gone from the line before the cone can move and thereby causing an undesirable noise, kind of a flopping honk sound. Not to mention the other restrictions placed on a speaker with a heavy cone. The same thing can happen with a suspension that is too stiff." (Thomas P. Colvin -- Musicians Hotline)
http://www.musicianshotline.com/archive/tech/reconing.htm

 

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 01-13-03 AT 02:03 AM (EST)]Every one of those quotes you have posted (twice now) indicate CLIPPING! Understand what your reading. Every time you post them you are actually DISPROVING yourself! All of those quotes agree with what we are saying. dnewma04 in reply 211 and geolemon in reply 219 have the correct analysis of your quotes. It all goes back to quoting out of context.

If I said:

"Ive shot men before. They were only stuffed dummies though."

But you only quoted:

"Ive shot men before."

As you can see, these 2 statements have DRASTICLLY different meanings. You are merely manipulating words to seem correct, a trait many tabloid journalists excel at, mabie you should consider a career change? I'm sure you'd do well at a tabloid.

 

>Every one of those quotes you have posted (twice now)
>indicate CLIPPING! Understand what your reading. Every time
>you post them you are actually DISPROVING yourself! All of
>those quotes agree with what we are saying.

No, I have allowed for the possibility of clipping. Didn't you read it? I posted it twice on page 9. Even though I set the gains perfectly, I cannot be sure they still will not see clipping with a different cd on a different day. Therefore, my best insurance against clipping is a larger amp.

 

>>Somewhere in your cluster of links, I'm sure it states that
>>an underpowered amp can't control the cone correctly, right?
>> That was your orignal argument wasn't it?
>
>Yep, I gave it a good go.
>
>"There is a fallacy that a heavy cone will produce better
>bass. WRONG! There is also the fallacy that a stiff cone
>suspension means higher power handling. WRONG AGAIN! The
>truth is that if the cone is heavy, it will not react
>quickly to the input signal. Hence without the application
>of considerable wattage, the signal will be gone from the
>line before the cone can move and thereby causing an
>undesirable noise, kind of a flopping honk sound. Not to
>mention the other restrictions placed on a speaker with a
>heavy cone. The same thing can happen with a suspension that
>is too stiff." (Thomas P. Colvin -- Musicians Hotline)
>http://www.musicianshotline.com/archive/tech/reconing.htm

I read it. It says it leads to an undesireable noise, not speaker failure.

 

>I read it. It says it leads to an undesireable noise, not
>speaker failure.

Well, that sounds like speaker failure to me

I'd rather have a speaker/amp combo that didn't sound like *****, don't know about you.

 

>Therefore, my best insurance against clipping is a larger amp.

Correct, but a bigger amp does the same thing clipping a smaller amp does. Both will give more power than the sub can take, both resulting in failure of the sub. Even though this is COMPLETELY off topic. You have repeatedly stated that its not clipping that blew your speakers, it was "under powering" I want your to give me some PROOF and FACTS to back this up. I want to know how LESS power can damage a speaker.

I say it again, ANWSER my posts, stop changing the topic and give some proof and facts that less power blows speakers.

 

>
>>I read it. It says it leads to an undesireable noise, not
>>speaker failure.
>
>Well, that sounds like speaker failure to me
>
>I'd rather have a speaker/amp combo that didn't sound like
>*****, don't know about you.

When a sub makes an undersireable noise (tinsel slap, bottoming out, etc) does that mean that the sub is blown?

 

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 01-13-03 AT 02:18 AM (EST)]>>I read it. It says it leads to an undesireable noise, not
>>speaker failure.

>Well, that sounds like speaker failure to me
>I'd rather have a speaker/amp combo that didn't sound like *****,
>don't know about you.

My god, you totally missed that one too. He states it will cause undesireable noise because the speaker has a highly massive cone, not because it has less power or a clipped signal going through it. He states a speaker with an excessively high mass cone will sound bad because of the heavy cone, not because of the signal going to it. It has nothing to do with any kind of failure, it will sound bad even if the speaker is functioning PERFECTLY. UNDERSTAND BEFORE YOU POST.

 

>>Therefore, my best insurance against clipping is a larger amp.
>
>Correct, but a bigger amp does the same thing clipping a
>smaller amp does.

Not as likely to clip it with a bigger amp. Just turn down the gains if you're worried, it will still be loud.

>Both will give more power than the sub
>can take, both resulting in failure of the sub. Even though
>this is COMPLETELY off topic.

No, this is the original topic.

In the very beginning, I had stated, "remember, your amp should always be able to put out more than your drivers are rated at, never the other way around."

Then Tempe said, "And why do you recommend AGAINST an amp that is rated for less than what the sub is rated for?"

I said, "Well, its not a hard n fast rule, but basically, an amp should be able to put out more watts than the sub can take."

>You have repeatedly stated
>that its not clipping that blew your speakers, it was "under
>powering"

I cannot for sure make this claim as I had thought. I was misguided into thinking that since I had set my gains properly with a setup disc and an o-scope, that I would never clip with another cd on another day.

I want your to give me some PROOF and FACTS to
>back this up. I want to know how LESS power can damage a
>speaker.

I think geolemon put it best when he said clipping overdrives the underpowered amp into putting out like twice the power or something like that. So, you end with with more power than if you had had a bigger amp that was not clipping to start with. I think that's right, I could look it up on a previous page.

>
>I say it again, ANWSER my posts, stop changing the topic and
>give some proof and facts that less power blows speakers.

I'm not changing topics

 

>When a sub makes an undersireable noise (tinsel slap,
>bottoming out, etc) does that mean that the sub is blown?

No, but at least ten of those posts in that mess I posted say distortion leads to complete failure. Take it up with them if want. Anyway, I would rather have an amp that could make my sub sound good, not tinsel slap, bottoming out, etc

 

>I think geolemon put it best when he said clipping
>overdrives the underpowered amp into putting out like twice
>the power or something like that. So, you end with with
>more power than if you had had a bigger amp that was not
>clipping to start with. I think that's right, I could look
>it up on a previous page.

So now is this a case of underpowering or overpowering?
alos.. Heres youre guru David stating:

The Truth? Hey, this is audio and we're divided into the BS and the truth. (The BS stands for Before Science.)

Anyway in the real world, too little power is just fine and will not harm your speakers.

If anyone doubts this statement (I'm sure that some amplifier salespersons will beg to differ.), why would we have volume controls on our decks?

Heck, we'd have to have disclaimers on the volume controls that say, "Warning, do not minimize this control or severe low-power damage will occur to your speakers!!"

We should discuss the REAL vs. BS power ratings of decks, amplifiers, speakers, etc., but let's save that for another post.

http://www.carsound.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=002557

 

>
>>When a sub makes an undersireable noise (tinsel slap,
>>bottoming out, etc) does that mean that the sub is blown?
>
>No, but at least ten of those posts in that mess I posted
>say distortion leads to complete failure. Take it up with
>them if want. Anyway, I would rather have an amp that could
>make my sub sound good, not tinsel slap, bottoming out, etc

Ok and distortion is only found in underpowered amps?
Also, distortion won't be found in a clean signal.
So if there is no distortion coming from that underpowered amp, how does it blow the speaker?

 

YEAH, UNDERSTAND BEFORE YOU POST.

"The truth is that if the cone is heavy, it will not react quickly to the input signal. Hence without the application of **considerable wattage**, the signal will be gone from the line before the cone can move"

 

>Ok and distortion is only found in underpowered amps?

No, but if you turn your gains down in the bigger amp when compared to the smaller on, you will decrease your chance of clipping considerably.

>Also, distortion won't be found in a clean signal.
>So if there is no distortion coming from that underpowered
>amp, how does it blow the speaker?

I guess it can't, atleast I'm not proving it will, but a bigger amp will sound just as good if not better and your risk for damage will go down greatly.

 

>>>Therefore, my best insurance against clipping is a larger amp.
>>
>>Correct, but a bigger amp does the same thing clipping a
>>smaller amp does.
>Not as likely to clip it with a bigger amp. Just turn down the gains if you're worried, it will still be loud.

You dont need to clip the bigger amp to overpower the speaker. 300watt RMS amp heavily clipped can put out 600watt RMS, but a 600watt RMS amp can also put out 600W RMS, both of which are enough to blow a 500watt RMS speaker. My point is you dont have to clip the amp to blow the sub, BOTH situations will result in too much power, so MORE power is not nescesarily good.

>I think geolemon put it best when he said clipping overdrives the
>underpowered amp into putting out like twice the power or something
>like that. So, you end with with more power than if you had had a
>bigger amp that was not clipping to start with. I think that's
>right, I could look it up on a previous page

That's not underpowering, its overpowering. Ive already said that, as has geolemon has too. What I want to know is how LESS power hurts speakers, not how a clipped amp can put out more power than its rated for.

>>Both will give more power than the sub
>>can take, both resulting in failure of the sub. Even though
>>this is COMPLETELY off topic.

>No, this is the original topic.

Not what I meant but I'll give you this one. I should have stated what I meant more clearly. I wanted you to stay on topic when replying to people. you keep quoting something, and then talking about something totally different and irrelevant to the quote.