Underpowering a sub WILL NOT blow it. Clipping and distortion from an amp rated to put out under what a sub is rated to handle will blow it. A 400 watt sub will not blow with a 200 watt amp. You can preach till you're blue in the face but it won't happen. Unless you crank the gain on the amp, the bass on the headunit, or the volume way up to the point where the signal is trash it won't blow. We'll do a simple test. I have a 9515 in my truck. You hook any up any amp 1000 watts or less to it and it won't blow. I would bet my life on it. We've runa memphis 1000d on it with good voltage, cranked the gain wide open and turn the bass gain on the headunit all the way up and played it for hours at a time. We were even playing below tuning frequency and still nothing. On another token you say too much power won't blow a sub. You bring your JL whatever to my house and I'll hook a 4000X up to it with gains set so it won't clip and turn the volume up and once again I put my life on the line that says it will blow.

 

>You will have to define what you mean by having an amp
>operating at a level that is "at or near it's max
>capabilities", to a degree that could damage your speakers,
>while "not clipping at all."

Sure, the amp cannot supply enough current without a voltage change. Or, the amp does not posses enough 'power' to pull the cone back after a push before the next signal says push again. Either because the moving mass was too great, the driver is too inefficient, or a combination of both.

>After all, it's either clean power coming out of the amp or
>not.

Clean doesn't seem to have much to do with it, does it?

>Reaching the limits, in that capacity, simply means you have
>reached the limits of the clean power.
>Running the amp beyond those points, IS clipping the amp.

Most times that is true, which is a very good arguement for using a strong amp. However, you have requested I suggest another possiblity and I have done it. Since this is the only possibility I can see in the case in question.

>After all, if you have your gains set to max crank, but have
>your volume turned low on the deck, you won't have a blip of
>clipping...

Maybe, but that's not very good to do.

>UNTIL you turn it up to the point where your line voltage
>exceeds your expected input voltage, given your gain
>settings.
>
>With your gains set correctly, you cannot push an amp to
>it's limits.

Your are discounting various voltage spikes presented by a vary sharp attacks presented by some music. Furthermore, often one medium is not recorded at the same level as another; therefore, you must account for the recording level when you are setting gains. You cannot trust broadcast signals either. They can vary as well.

>In fact, even if you do have it set to clip a bit, that
>won't hurt anything.
>Large amounts of clippnig, that's another story.

I can agree with that.

>And because you took your O-scope and measured a signal at
>some volume level and didn't see clipping..
>That doesn't mean anything, unless your testing variables
>were set correctly.
>Unless you followed a process that was correct for setting
>your gains, your O-scope measurements are invalid.

I trust my process was correct. Or, atleast, if you can't believe that, good enough according to you. Remember? Moderate clipping don't matter?

 

>
>
>Underpowering a sub WILL NOT blow it.

It may or may not. Depending on certain things I have outlined here before.

>Clipping and
>distortion from an amp rated to put out under what a sub is
>rated to handle will blow it.

Remember, "CAN", not "WILL" or else go argue with geo about it.

>A 400 watt sub will not blow
>with a 200 watt amp.

"CAN" not "WILL"

>You can preach till you're blue in the
>face but it won't happen.

I'm not the one preaching, I'm all done as a matter of fact. I stand no benefit from correcting your misgivens. I'm merely answering your questions.

>Unless you crank the gain on the
>amp, the bass on the headunit, or the volume way up to the
>point where the signal is trash it won't blow.

I don't believe in bass boost, my gain rarely exceeds 25%-40%. I have stated this weeks ago in another thread here. I worry if I find I have to set a gain near 50% and look for a problem somewhere.

>We'll do a
>simple test. I have a 9515 in my truck. You hook any up
>any amp 1000 watts or less to it and it won't blow. I would
>bet my life on it.

All you have to do is run the test, then you will know for sure, like I do. Won't cost much. Not in terms of time. I have already used enough time value discussing this to have run this experiment myself.

>We've runa memphis 1000d on it with good
>voltage, cranked the gain wide open and turn the bass gain
>on the headunit all the way up and played it for hours at a
>time.

You have plenty of power, not applicable in this case.

>We were even playing below tuning frequency and still
>nothing. On another token you say too much power won't blow
>a sub.

I never said that! Don't put words in my mouth! I said I have never seen a sub (unintentionally) killed by too much power.

>You bring your JL whatever to my house and I'll hook
>a 4000X up to it with gains set so it won't clip and turn
>the volume up and once again I put my life on the line that
>says it will blow.

That would be intentional, the goal is not to blow the subs. You must have a death wish. Shouldn't put your life on so many things.

 

I have yet to see a point worth more consideration. All of you can post the same nonsense here and it will not magically become sense. I am very satisfied with my arguement thus far. Not to mention I have sided with the accepted engineering establishment. First go preach your agenda to blaupunkt, JBL, mbquart, kicker, and crutchfield. Then, when they have conceded to you, let me know so I can review the arguement. Consequently, you are wasting my time.

http://www.blaupunktusa.com/speakers/speakers_faqs.html
http://www.jblpro.com/pub/technote/lowpower.pdf
http://www.mbquart.com/ha-techpapers.htm
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-h9PZf3vjdml/tech/kb303.html
http://www.caraudiogalaxy.com/caraudio_rmspower.htm

 

Geo, you have had 40 minutes to formulate a response. This IS your intention isn't it? Or can I go now?

 

I imagine right about now you are frantically searching the web for more propaganda, but I assure you, you have run the gammet of most popular arguements. I'm off.

 

>I have yet to see a point worth more consideration. All of
>you can post the same nonsense here and it will not
>magically become sense. I am very satisfied with my
>arguement thus far. Not to mention I have sided with the
>accepted engineering establishment. First go preach your
>agenda to blaupunkt, JBL, mbquart, kicker, and crutchfield.
>Then, when they have conceded to you, let me know so I can
>review the arguement. Consequently, you are wasting my
>time.
>
>http://www.blaupunktusa.com/speakers/speakers_faqs.html
>http://www.jblpro.com/pub/technote/lowpower.pdf
>http://www.mbquart.com/ha-techpapers.htm
>http://www.crutchfield.com/S-h9PZf3vjdml/tech/kb303.html
>http://www.caraudiogalaxy.com/caraudio_rmspower.htm


I can, and will, same the same thing about your posts. I (and I'm pretty sure I can speak for Geo too) havent seen an argument come outa you that is worthy of any respect.

Now, by nature I'm a nice guy, but if I come across as something other than respectfully diasagreeing, I apoligize. THat is all that I intend.

As for your links above (which I can confess, I have not read), I am assuming they all basically say what you have been saying. Summed up as low power can and often does damage woofers. Is that correct? If not, let me know. I just dont feel like loading up a bunch of pages (slow connection).

Well, if you think about it, their arguments is a laymans way of dealing with the problem we are discussing. That being subs being blown by dumb people cranking gains and bass boosts in attempts to be loud. Can we agree there? Well, you must understand that the average buyer can not (nor probably cares enough) understand what we have all been saying here. Right? We have gotten more technical than your avereage consumer does. Again, can we agree there? The truth about why an low powered amp blows a high powered sub is simply beyond the average persons radar. So, the companies see this, and say a broad statement that "low power kills subs". This blanket statement is not quite accurate, (I feel Geo and I explained why) but, even though it is not accurate, it, for the most part, has the same result: Warn buyers about the pitfall of buying to small of an amp.

I don't think I worded that especially well, but I think you get what I am saying.

Again, i am replying with respect, not maliciousness.

Mike

 

Just a quick question.

Say a head unit has a built in amp. It's small but an amp nonetheless, so if this head unit was to power a sub, it'd effectively be underpowering it. And that would be an extreme case of underpowering it, right?

By RanDawg's conclusions, this head unit shouldn't be able to control the sub and it'd blow real fast right?

Anyone seriously think a head unit can blow a sub? It does have an amp in it, so there's really no difference between a powered head unit or a real small amp. I'd love to see someone try and blow a sub like that. It just won't happen. Wanna know why? Because underpowering a sub won't blow it. But that's been covered already.

The real question was put to you by Richard Clark.

IS RANDAWG TECHNICALLY UNINFORMED or TOTALLY IGNORANT?

 

>I can, and will, same the same thing about your posts. I
>(and I'm pretty sure I can speak for Geo too) havent seen an
>argument come outa you that is worthy of any respect.
>
I don't know how this can be said. I have presented atleast 2 ways in which subs may be damaged by underpowering, and they have yet to be logically refuted. Rather, I get repetitions of the same ole illogical notions such as turning the volume down constitutes an underpowering condition. Anyone who reads my replies to this notion should agree to its absurdity. The problems both I and the manufacturers have, is people turning the volume up, not down. Makes me wonder if my replys are indeed read.

>Now, by nature I'm a nice guy, but if I come across as
>something other than respectfully diasagreeing, I apoligize.
>THat is all that I intend.

Very well regarded.

>As for your links above (which I can confess, I have not
>read), I am assuming they all basically say what you have
>been saying. Summed up as low power can and often does
>damage woofers. Is that correct? If not, let me know. I just
>dont feel like loading up a bunch of pages (slow
>connection).

If you can wait for FTE to load, you should have no trouble with the above links. However, those links are saying more speaker damage results from an underpowering condition rather than overpowering; which has been my arguement from the beginning. Remember, I did not start this debate. Furthermore, I insist if someone wants to change the world, they not start with me, but go to the manufacturers that make these claims and then debunk them. At that time I may concede as well.

>Well, if you think about it, their arguments is a laymans
>way of dealing with the problem we are discussing.

I can agree with that.

>That
>being subs being blown by dumb people cranking gains and
>bass boosts in attempts to be loud. Can we agree there?
>Well, you must understand that the average buyer can not
>(nor probably cares enough) understand what we have all been
>saying here. Right?

I prefer the word uninformed rather than dumb, but yes, MOST of the time I would have to agree. Which backs up my arguement. One should have as a rule-of-thumb, a bigger amp than is rated by the speaker. This is all they need to know until they decide to understand the physics behind it. And up to this point, that was all I tried to convey.

>We have gotten more technical than your
>avereage consumer does. Again, can we agree there?

Yes.

>The truth
>about why an low powered amp blows a high powered sub is
>simply beyond the average persons radar. So, the companies
>see this, and say a broad statement that "low power kills
>subs".

I don't know what the marketing departments decide, but the phrase "low power kills subs" is misleading. Underpowering CAN kill subs, not WILL. Now, we can take 2 sides of a coin here. 1) A manufacturer makes this claim in order to sell bigger amps. 2) A manufacturer does not make this claim in order to sell more replacement speakers. Either way, it could be taken as monetarily driven. However, I would tend to think that speakers blowing would make people think they are crap and not buy that brand again. So, we come back to point #1. The manufacturer makes this claim in order to keep people from thinking they make crap. Therefore, I put my faith in the claim, even w/o technical analysis.

>This blanket statement is not quite accurate, (I feel
>Geo and I explained why) but, even though it is not
>accurate, it, for the most part, has the same result: Warn
>buyers about the pitfall of buying to small of an amp.

I think the above paragraph dealt with this.

>I don't think I worded that especially well, but I think you
>get what I am saying.

I think so.

>Again, i am replying with respect, not maliciousness.

Likewise.

 

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 10-Jan-03 AT 06:24 AM (EST)]RanDawg,

I have one problem with your argument here. One very simple, yet very important (I think at least, some may call it irrelevant) problem. You keep saying an amp shouldn't power a sub less than what that sub is rated for. Am I correct? You also say that you have never blown a sub by overpowering it, (distortion obviously not included)Am I also correct on this? Then by your statements, I should be able to run whatever power I can throw at my sub of choice, (albeit unclipped, undistorted power)which in this case I will say is a Pyramid "750 watt rms" subwoofer, and as long as that amp,(let's say a Zapco AG1000 for the sake of converstaion)doesn't give it "clipped" power? Yes, I realize that sentence may be a little redundant, but never the less, you see my point. I mean, the sub is "rated" by the manufacturer itself as being able to hold 750 watts rms, so as long as I provide that much power or even more of unclipped wattage, I should be fine, right? Put it in whatever enclosure you want, I don't care, that beast is gonna burn! You keep using the term "rated," but what does that mean anyway? So because JL Audio decided to rate the W6 at 300rms, which is very conservative if you ask me, then this is now the "magic" number in which to match or even eclipse, when mating it with an amp. These are simply numbers. I think they should be used as no more then guidlines when building a system. Or in the case of many "low-end" companies (go on Ebay, type in "subwoofers" and you'll see what I am referring to) they are a number used to "lure" in potential customers. Because if I am a customer who doesn't know anything about audio, and I JUST want loud, I would choose a sub that says it can handle 1000 watts rms and yet only costs $79. Because who wants a 300 watt rms sub anyway, especially if it cost 2 or 3 times more? Even if I had the "cleanest" amp in the world, pushing a 1000 watts into one of these "gimmick" subwoofers, isn't gonna be a pretty sight! A rating is a guideline. You seem to think this rated number represents something special, where at that exact wattage level, the sub is going to be fine, free of the thermal and mechanical limits it has. I would love for you to prove to me that a Pyramid, Pyle, Thump etc. subwoofer will be fine in taking it's rated rms power, SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS RATED AT THAT NUMBER. Get a Zapco amp and run a $19 Thump sub on it, run it at its rated 200 watts rms, put it in its optimum enclosure, and lets see what that rating really means.

Yes, I realize that a lot of the sentences in this reply are redundant, but it's 3:30 and I can't sleep!

 

>Just a quick question.
>
>Say a head unit has a built in amp. It's small but an amp
>nonetheless, so if this head unit was to power a sub, it'd
>effectively be underpowering it. And that would be an
>extreme case of underpowering it, right?

Yes.

>
>By RanDawg's conclusions, this head unit shouldn't be able
>to control the sub and it'd blow real fast right?

NO.

>Anyone seriously think a head unit can blow a sub? It does
>have an amp in it, so there's really no difference between a
>powered head unit or a real small amp. I'd love to see
>someone try and blow a sub like that. It just won't happen.
>Wanna know why? Because underpowering a sub won't blow it.
>But that's been covered already.

If you have read my rebuttal to RC's comments, you will see that the power from a head unit is not sufficient to blow a sub. You have stuck your foot in your mouth, just like those that came before you. Everything is written here in plain english, why is no one reading it?

>
>The real question was put to you by Richard Clark.

If Richard Clark would like to use his time being entertained by the likes of me, I guess I would be somewhat flattered. However, if his analogies are similar to the ones he has already proposed, I will be less than impressed.

>
>IS RANDAWG TECHNICALLY UNINFORMED or TOTALLY IGNORANT?

I think I have covered this as well.

 

>RanDawg,
>
> I have one problem with your argument here. One very
>simple, yet very important (I think at least, some may call
>it irrelevant) problem. You keep saying an amp shouldn't
>power a sub less than what that sub is rated for. Am I
>correct?

This is not a hard-n-fast rule; however, one optimally should have an amp that is capable of exceeding the rated power of the sub in most instances.

>You also say that you have never blown a sub by
>overpowering it, (distortion obviously not included)Am I
>also correct on this?

When you learn to read, you will find I said I have never seen a sub blow (unintentioanlly) by overpowering it. I have however seen large amounts of smoke emitted upon doubling (atleast) the rated power handling. Even so, the sub would still play.

>Then by your statements, I should be
>able to run whatever power I can throw at my sub of choice,
>(albeit unclipped, undistorted power)which in this case I
>will say is a Pyramid "750 watt rms" subwoofer, and as long
>as that amp,(let's say a Zapco AG1000 for the sake of
>converstaion)doesn't give it "clipped" power?

You need to reread my statements before we can go further with this.

>Yes, I realize
>that sentence may be a little redundant, but never the less,
>you see my point.

Yeah, I see you are desperately trying to find something somewhere to discredit me, but I highly dount you will succeed.

>I mean, the sub is "rated" by the
>manufacturer itself as being able to hold 750 watts rms, so
>as long as I provide that much power or even more of
>unclipped wattage, I should be fine, right?

Not necessarily so. However, as power rating goes up, the efficiency is likely to go down and as spl capabilities go up, the moving mass is likely to go up. How can you have a large cone that produces high spl w/o deforming that is extremely light in weight? They have tried aluminum, kevlar, etc in an effort to find this 'holy grail'.

>Put it in
>whatever enclosure you want, I don't care, that beast is
>gonna burn! You keep using the term "rated," but what does
>that mean anyway?

Rated power is manufacutrer specific. However the manufacturer chooses to place wattage constrainst on the driver. JBL happens to define it this way, "Crest factor is related to peak factor and is a precise measure of the peak noise value as related to the average heating capability of the signal in the voice coil. A crest factor of 6 dB means that a given loudspeaker or transducer is being stressed by signals with four-times the power of the average signal. For instance, a loudspeaker rated at 150 watts by this testing method would have been stressed during its 8-hour test period by instantaneous power input of 600 watts. The test method relates so well to real-world conditions that JBL has adopted it for loudspeaker systems to the exclusion of all previous power ratings. say, 300 watts of undistorted sinewave output is driven
well into clipping, its output power can approach 600 watts! So, Berating the system to one-half its IEC power will result in safe operation of the loudspeaker. For a more detailed discussion of these topics, see JBL Technical Notes, Volume 1, Number 16."

>So because JL Audio decided to rate the W6
>at 300rms, which is very conservative if you ask me, then
>this is now the "magic" number in which to match or even
>eclipse, when mating it with an amp.

I would definitely try to eclipse that, as I have done by 200wrms for the last nearly 6yrs.

>These are simply
>numbers. I think they should be used as no more then
>guidlines when building a system. Or in the case of many
>"low-end" companies (go on Ebay, type in "subwoofers" and
>you'll see what I am referring to) they are a number used to
>"lure" in potential customers. Because if I am a customer
>who doesn't know anything about audio, and I JUST want loud,
>I would choose a sub that says it can handle 1000 watts rms
>and yet only costs $79.

Well, if I remember correctly, it was RC himself that said just because a sub can take a lot power, doesn't mean it will make a lot of noise with it. I agree with him. I believe he used the car analogy again, which applied more specifically in that case. It's easy to make a car use more fuel w/o making it go faster, just pull a couple plug wires I think he said. I remember. There is more to it than just power handling.

>Because who wants a 300 watt rms sub
>anyway, especially if it cost 2 or 3 times more? Even if I
>had the "cleanest" amp in the world, pushing a 1000 watts
>into one of these "gimmick" subwoofers, isn't gonna be a
>pretty sight!

The 12w6 is a decent sub, I don't see to many 300wrms subs that can play louder per watt. Especially in the enclosure range. Jl hit on something good there. I agree a cast basket would be an improvement, but a thicker, heavier cone will take away from its efficiency.

>A rating is a guideline. You seem to think
>this rated number represents something special, where at
>that exact wattage level, the sub is going to be fine, free
>of the thermal and mechanical limits it has.

I never said you'd suffer 12 plagues if you broke the rule. This is not a hard-n-fast rule, but it is worth consideration. Furthermore, I always follow it in any application and have had no troubles since.

>I would love
>for you to prove to me that a Pyramid, Pyle, Thump etc.
>subwoofer will be fine in taking it's rated rms power,
>SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS RATED AT THAT NUMBER.

If you'd love it so much, get a job, work for some money, buy some subs and amps and run the tests. That way, you will be absolutely sure. Do this instead of wasting our time. Time is money you know.

>Get a Zapco amp
>and run a $19 Thump sub on it, run it at its rated 200 watts
>rms, put it in its optimum enclosure, and lets see what that
>rating really means.
>
>Yes, I realize that a lot of the sentences in this reply are
>redundant, but it's 3:30 and I can't sleep!

I'm sorry to hear that, I slept blissfully.

 

Great website guys.

Okay, I'll throw my .02 in. Nope underpowering subs will not kill subs. I had a pair of Goldsound 400rms subs that I owned for a good 5 years, sold to a friend and they're still around and working - about 12 years now - of those 12 years they've spent about 11 of them underpowered and they still work just fine. 150rms and then 350rms to an old school MTX Black Gold sub for years - no problems. 350rms to a MTX7000 for years and no problems. 350rms to my Brahma, no problems. Currently running "only" 990rms my Brahma, which is rated at 1600rms - still no problem. As a matter of fact if you check www.ampman.com in the Adire Audio forum, you'll find most people are using the JBL1200.1 (1350rms amp) with the 1600rms Brahma.

As Geolemon pointed out, RanDawg's creditials are questionable. Why would somebody use WinISD (a great Freeware program),when they have LEAP, the best speaker modeling program available? LEAP runs ~$1000 if I remember correctly and you're using freeware... come on.

Certainly some "qualified" people have claimed that you can kill subs by underpowering them, and in some cases you can, but the sub didn't fail due to lack of power. A sub can exceed it's mechanical limits with less than it's rated power under some conditions and that would lead to mechanical failure. A few conditions that might lead to your sub exceeding mechanical limits with less than rated power would be: Too high of a tuing frequency in a ported box (or lack of a subsonic filter). The sub was being used in a Inifinite Baffle or Aperiodic Enclosure application, which reduces power handling. Running the sub in low QTC applications - this is why I only run 1000rms to my Brahma, it would blow if I send it 1600rms! And one of the most common reason for subs failing - a leaky box.

Lastly if you clip your amp, because the signal gets squared off you're actually sending the sub more power than the amp is rated at. This can lead to failure in one of two ways. One, you can exceed the subs power rating, even though your amp's power rating is below the sub's power rating. Two, because the signal is clipped the sub isn't moving at the top and bottom of the signal and thus the voice coil may not cool properly.

Given RanDawg's senario (blew 12w6 w/200rms), I'd guess he either miscalculated his tuning frequency or his box was leaky and that caused the sub to experience a mechanical failure. Such a failure has nothing to do with fact that the sub was underpowered; the sub would have experienced the same failure with 300rms. Either that or maybe he was using a very low end amp with an extremely low DF, but I seriously doubt that. Or lastly perhaps it was a defective driver.

Just wanted to throw my .02 in. I've been doing this for a good 13-14years now and I've underpowered dozens of subs and I've seen literally hundreds of subs underpowered and not blown. Go to your local Best Buy, Circuit City, Car Toys, Tweeter, etc today and fire up one their 300rms subs with a 200rms amp and see if it blows. Just didn't want people misled into thinking you must have a 300rms amp for 300rms sub. Hope that helps.

 

--The #1 reason for speaker failure is due to underpowering. This is
--well documented at the links I posted above and in my own
--experience.

I read the whole thread and unfortunetly RanDawg hasn't
explained his thoughts well. I'm trying to figure out
if I can explain what is being said, but I'm not a great
writer. So I will try to explain the confusion in simple
terms.

I'm not going to factor in "mechanical" factors than cause
speaker failure, only electrical.

1. AC signal driving a speaker. Underpowering will not electrically
blow up a speaker. If it does, then the ratings on the amplifier
and/or speaker are WRONG.

2. DC voltage (pulsed or constant) driving a speaker. Underpowering CAN cause speaker failure. Example below.

Take a high powered home amplifier with +90v/-90v rails,
this amplifier is probably rated for 500w per channel into
8 ohms, realistically, probably only 300w but lets use 500w
for this example because that is what calculation shows.

90 volt rails = ~63v rms = ~500w rms max

I buy a 500w rated woofer and drive this woofer with
the said amplifier. If I run the amplifier without clipping,
the speaker should be able to handle the 500w that the amplifier
is sending if I push the amplifier to it's limits without
clipping.

Everything is good.

BUT, if I clip the amplifier, the power I send to the speaker
is much higher. For this example, lets clip the audio
signal so much that is resembles a "pulsed DC train", or
better yet, lets overdrive the amplifier so much that is
resembles a constant 90v DC at the output. How much
power am I sending to the speaker?

90v ^2 / 8 ohms = ~1000w.

Under this extreme situation, I can send 1000w to the 500w
rated speaker, I do expect it to blow up.

If the DC signal is pulsed, the duration of the pulse
and the duty cycle will affect the power you send to the
speaker. Example, a short duration burst of 90v DC will not
toast the speaker.
*************************

This extreme example shows that a 200w rms rated amplifier
can actually output ~400w of power (peak) which could
blow up a 300w speaker.

The statement "underpowering a speaker can cause it to blow
up" is bad phrasing because technically, you are not
underpowering the speaker, the 200w rated amplifier
that blew up the 300 watt speaker actually put out
400w peak to blow up the speaker.

The question you need to ask yourself is. Do I drive my
amplifier beyond it's performance envelope ? If so, then
you can have problems.

 

>HonkeytonkMonkey, that's pretty good.
>
>So, I guess when I have a question on what impedence your
> sees when it cycles up your , you'll be the one
>to ask.
>
>But you got it, things new to you, are old to me.

You don't seem to realise something here RanDawg, I was ridiculing you.

All those books and papers on your wall and you can't figure out something that obvious... tsk tsk...

:+