Power output meter amp schematic.

DVD-Software.info
Your one stop source for DVD Software

Profile

Power output meter amp schematic. Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

DVD-Software.info Forum Index -> Tubes

Author

Message

Phil Allison
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 8:25 am Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

"Stewart Pinkerton"
"Phil Allison"

Quote:

ESLs are actually mostly resistive when they're being driven, they
just measure capacitive when at rest.

** The only way for an ESL to be "at rest" when testing its impedance is
for there to be no EHT voltage.

Removing the EHT voltage has the same effect as removing the magnet from
a
cone driver - ie no sound - which would also have a major effect on
the
impedance curve.

No, I'm talking about the fact that it's not working against a
resistive air load - which is significant for large-diaphragm
speakers. Most cone speakers are principally loaded by their
suspensions, and give quite different results.

** Purest gobbledegook.

Quote:

Impedance maxima and minima are ALL resistive.

Huh? In every case?

Yes, no exceptions.

** The only resistive parts of an impedance curve are the places where it
is horizontal.

Which occurs at maxima and minima! DUHHH....

** Which was *my* original comment.

But horizontal areas may not be associated with such.

Quote:

So a Quad ESL isn't reactive?

Not when it's putting out significant SPLs.

** Gobbledegook.

No, physics - go learn some.

** Bullshit - go get stuffed.

Quote:

That doesn't mean that it
doesn't have nasty phase angles at various frequencies, of course!

** The ESL63/988 has a similar impedance curve to a nominal 6 ohm cone
speaker mounted in a small sealed box - ie basically a 6 ohms load
with
a single, broad, impedance peak at 90 Hz.

Actually, the ESL63 has a massive sharp peak at about 120

** More of Pinko's smelly Bullshit.

The peak is just as I said - goes to 24 ohms max and is several octaves
wide.

Quote:

and is otherwise mostly resistive, but peaks up inductively in the high
treble,

** So do cone speakers.

Quote:

Remember the basic rule - if it's purely reactive, then it can't be
delivering power to the room!

** Purest Pinko pedantry.

No, physics - go learn some

** Pure fucking pedantry - the sign of an autistic brain.

............... Phil

Phil Allison
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 8:25 am Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

"Stewart Pinkerton"
"Pat Turner"

Quote:

** Large magnetic planers sound just awful and their resistive nature is
not of any benefit.

The Pink Peril can be trusted to NEVER get anything right.

............ Phil

Patrick Turner
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 3:36 pm Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

Phil Allison wrote:

Quote:

"Patrick Turner"
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

So a Quad ESL isn't reactive?

Not when it's putting out significant SPLs. That doesn't mean that it
doesn't have nasty phase angles at various frequencies, of course!

You are implying that a Quad's reactance depends on SPL.

** No - it implies the diaphragms need to be charged for the resistive
component to exist.

The ESL57 is the equivalent
of a 1.6 ohm R in series with a parallel network of 16 ohms and 2 uF, is
it not?

** Nope - the C is more like 4 uF.

Plus a parallel L of about 55mH.

What does Quad say?

Quote:

At 5 kHz, the Zc = 16 ohms, and the impedance of the C and 16 ohms
in parallel is 11.3 ohms.
So this 2 uF and 16 ohms is partially reactive, and mostly reactive above
5kHz,
but
mostly resistive below 5 kHz.
But then you have 1.6 ohms in series, so the reactance never dominates the
impedance character at any F.

** Pure drivel.

Not pure drivel.

At 10 kHz, the 4 uF would be 4 ohms of reactance, and if there was any
16 ohms R in parallel, it would have little effect, since the 4 uF reactance has
by far more current in it
than the 16 ohms.
And if there was 1.6 ohms in series, then you have effectively 1.6 ohms in
series with 4 uF,
and the 1.6 ohms isn't large enough to cause the load to be mainly resistive.

So I would agree, the Quad speaker would have a mainly C type load above 5 kHz.

The model using 2 uF, 16 ohms and 1.6 ohms was described to be as a simple
test loadwhich could be used to test if an amp would be stable with an ESL57
speaker.

The simple RC load isn't the real story though, and I have not ever seen
what an exact L+C+R circuit equivalent is for Quad ESL57, or any other
ESL speakers.
There seems to be a conspiracy of silence amoungst makers of ESL speakers,
including
Martin Logan, perhaps because they don't wanna frighten people into not
buying their products because they may seem difficult to drive.

Quote:

The load is highly capacitive from 5 kHz to 16 kHz and highly inductive
from 1 Hz to 100Hz.

The measure of this is in the phase angle.

However, the 1.6ohms + 2 uF + 16 ohms cannot be the real equivalant
of the Quad ESL if we are to look at the graph I have of the measured Z
of these ESL.

** Nope - the C is more like 4 uF.

Plus a parallel L of about 55mH.

That would give a parallel resonance at 340 Hz.

My graph for ESL57 shows a peak Z of 32 ohms occuring at about 60 Hz.

There is a lot about ESL57 that doesn't add up.

Quote:

55 mH is a high amount of impedance at all audio F.
Its 16 ohms of reactance at 46 Hz.

What is the equivalent R in parallel with the L?

Quote:

IMHO,

** Yawn - no-one gives a shit.

I think quite a few do give a shit.

I searched 5 pages at Google, 'ESL 57 impedance curve'
and I drew a blank.
I don't know what the exact equivalent LCR model would be.

But my own dynamic speakers, like some others I have tested have a flatter Z
curve than Quad ESL57
and presumably are lot more resistive in their nature, judging from
the phase angles and measurements.

Patrick Turner

Quote:

............. Phil

Patrick Turner
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 3:45 pm Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

Phil Allison wrote:

Quote:

"Stewart Pinkerton"
"Phil Allison"

ESLs are actually mostly resistive when they're being driven, they
just measure capacitive when at rest.

** The only way for an ESL to be "at rest" when testing its impedance is
for there to be no EHT voltage.

Removing the EHT voltage has the same effect as removing the magnet from
a
cone driver - ie no sound - which would also have a major effect on
the
impedance curve.

No, I'm talking about the fact that it's not working against a
resistive air load - which is significant for large-diaphragm
speakers. Most cone speakers are principally loaded by their
suspensions, and give quite different results.

** Purest gobbledegook.

Impedance maxima and minima are ALL resistive.

Huh? In every case?

Yes, no exceptions.

** The only resistive parts of an impedance curve are the places where it
is horizontal.

Which occurs at maxima and minima! DUHHH....

** Which was *my* original comment.

But horizontal areas may not be associated with such.

So a Quad ESL isn't reactive?

Not when it's putting out significant SPLs.

** Gobbledegook.

No, physics - go learn some.

** Bullshit - go get stuffed.

That doesn't mean that it
doesn't have nasty phase angles at various frequencies, of course!

** The ESL63/988 has a similar impedance curve to a nominal 6 ohm cone
speaker mounted in a small sealed box - ie basically a 6 ohms load
with
a single, broad, impedance peak at 90 Hz.

Actually, the ESL63 has a massive sharp peak at about 120

** More of Pinko's smelly Bullshit.

The peak is just as I said - goes to 24 ohms max and is several octaves
wide.

and is otherwise mostly resistive, but peaks up inductively in the high
treble,

** So do cone speakers.

Remember the basic rule - if it's purely reactive, then it can't be
delivering power to the room!

** Purest Pinko pedantry.

No, physics - go learn some

** Pure fucking pedantry - the sign of an autistic brain.

.............. Phil

Copulatory pedantry asside, would it not
pay to be able to refer to the known accurate LCR models
of the speakers concerned?

Surely models of ESL 57 and 63 have been created by someone,
and surely the test curves aleady exist someplace.

No need to argue if the true information is already established beyond
doubt.

Patrick Turner.

Patrick Turner
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 3:56 pm Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

Phil Allison wrote:

Quote:

"Stewart Pinkerton"
"Pat Turner"

..... the speaker that is designed to appear mainly resistive from the
amplifiers point of view
is a better designed speaker,

I'd agree with that, and I suspect that it's one reason why large
planars mostly sound very good.

** Large magnetic planers sound just awful and their resistive nature is
not of any benefit.

I have to say I was not impressed with the last pair of magneplaner speakers
I compared with a pair of reasonable dynamics, same CD, same two evenings,
same levels, A-B.
The dynamics used were later swapped with a better pair using SEAS drive units
instead
of the cheap asian made drivers, and there was a significant improvement in
clarity,
so they would have made the magneplanars sound even worse
in an AB test.
The speakers with SEAS drivers all have impedance eq across the 3 drivers
to make the driver Z resistive at the top end of their bandwidth.

A speaker's impedance has little correlation to the "goodness" of the sound
heard
if we were to agree some ESL sound very good indeed.

Quote:

The Pink Peril can be trusted to NEVER get anything right.

Its only his opinion you think isn't right.
So what.

Patrick Turner.

Quote:

........... Phil

Phil Allison
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 4:52 pm Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

"Patrick Turner"
Phil Allison

Quote:

At 5 kHz, the Zc = 16 ohms, and the impedance of the C and 16 ohms
in parallel is 11.3 ohms.
So this 2 uF and 16 ohms is partially reactive, and mostly reactive
above
5kHz, but mostly resistive below 5 kHz.
But then you have 1.6 ohms in series, so the reactance never dominates
the
impedance character at any F.

** Pure drivel.

Not pure drivel.

So I would agree, the Quad speaker would have a mainly C type load above 5
kHz.

** Anyone see an arse about going on here ????????????????

The Turneroid has no idea which way his is facing.

Quote:

I would suggest that many dynamic speakers are less reactive then the
Quad
ESL57, but not all, and many dynamic speakers have both C and L
reactiveness in their impedance profile depending what F the
measurement is taken.

** You forgot about the parallel L of 55mH - bird brain.

55 mH is a high amount of impedance at all audio F.
Its 16 ohms of reactance at 46 Hz.

** And completely FUCKING inductive - you asinine shithead !!!

Now, as an exercise fo the mind, work out what a 55mH *saturable*
inductor ( R = 0.3 ) across the output of a direct coupled SS amp means in
practice.

Then imagine a TT is in use.

Pleasant dreams.

.................. Phil

Stewart Pinkerton
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 5:18 pm Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 19:01:29 +1100, "Phil Allison"
<philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote:

Quote:

So, you're deaf as well as stupid and ignorant?

What a surprise.............................

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Stewart Pinkerton
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 5:27 pm Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

Phil Allison wrote:

Quote:

Bullshit (as usual for this ignorant twat) - it's around 110-130 Hz
(varies quite a bit due to varying skin tension with humidity and
temperature), and it isn't above 8 ohms for more than an octave or so
either side, which is about as sharp as it gets for decent speakers.
You really do know fuck all about audio, don't you?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Stewart Pinkerton
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 9:22 pm Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 05:03:05 +1100, Patrick Turner
<info@turneraudio.com.au> wrote:

Quote:

Neither Pinky or Phil can quote the official Quad test figures and Quad's
official equivalant LCR models for the speakers being discussed.

That's because they don't exist.

Quote:

Maybe neither man is aware of what Mr Walker did all those years ago.

I'm very well aware of what he did - do you actually have a point to
make?

Quote:

I suggest somebody provide them with a URL for the inspection of the
necessary info to avoid further stupid conflict.

There is no such URL, so why provoke an even more stupid conflict?

Quote:

If I had the info, I would have posted it, but a search for
1/2 an hour at Google revealed nothing.

The origin of this thread was about whether speakers are resistive or not
for amps, and some are, and some ain't, and some are mainly
reactive, some are mainly resistive.

No Sher, shitlock!

Quote:

It appears at least that Quad ESL57 are mainly reactive.

And has a horrifying impedance curve, well known as a bitch to drive,
both for this and for its very low sensitivity, around 82dB/w/m,
combined with low power handling.

Quote:

Where a speaker is mainly reactive at a given frequency then over 1/2 the amp
current
flows in the reactance, and contributes nothing to the sound.
It may follow that the greater the reactive current flow the less sensitive a
speaker is
at some F.

As I said before, its possible to equalise dynamic speakers
with RC zobels to make them look resistive at their upper region of bandwidths.
Then 3 drivers can together be made to look resistive over a wide portion of
bandwidth,
but never completely or purely resistive.

And it's utterly unnecessary with decent solid state amplifiers, which
provide a good voltage source.

Quote:

Its not always easy to do this, and many dynamic speakers have wild impedance
character,
but that doesn't mean they sound crook .

But it often does mean just that if they're driven from low-powered
valve amps with high Ro.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Patrick Turner
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 10:47 pm Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

Phil Allison wrote:

Quote:

"Patrick Turner"
Phil Allison

At 5 kHz, the Zc = 16 ohms, and the impedance of the C and 16 ohms
in parallel is 11.3 ohms.
So this 2 uF and 16 ohms is partially reactive, and mostly reactive
above
5kHz, but mostly resistive below 5 kHz.
But then you have 1.6 ohms in series, so the reactance never dominates
the
impedance character at any F.

** Pure drivel.

Not pure drivel.

So I would agree, the Quad speaker would have a mainly C type load above 5
kHz.

** Anyone see an arse about going on here ????????????????

The Turneroid has no idea which way his is facing.

Do I worry?
The thread was about whther speakers present an R load to the amp or not.
Clearly dynamics which are the vast majority of speakers are more likely
to be resistive compared to ESL57, but only if they have been deliberately
designed to be that way, and quite a few have.

As I said, its not a black or white issue.

Quote:

At 46 Hz, the load seen by the amp is **not** completely inductive.
If the R component is 16 ohms the load is 1/2 resistive and 1/2 inductive at 46
Hz.

But as F goes lower, the reactance of the L goes lower, so more current flows in
the L
so the L dominates the impedance.
At 23 Hz, Z ( R + L ) = 7.1 ohms, and at 11.5 Hz its 3.9 ohms

but at 92 Hz, the Z ( R + L ) = 14.3 ohms and the L's impedance has risen
to allow the R to dominate the impedance.

Series leakage inductance also is in the picture someplace...

Quote:

Now, as an exercise fo the mind, work out what a 55mH *saturable*
inductor ( R = 0.3 ) across the output of a direct coupled SS amp means in
practice.

It means that if the inductance saturates, the 0.3 ohms of DCR is the load for
that part
of the wave where there is saturation.

Bad news for the amp if it can't handle the current peaks.
But i would think that an input CR filter with a pole at 20 Hz at the amp input
would stop the LF which may embarass an amp.

But then if the Quad ESL57 can only handle 15 watts before arcing,
then the voltage applied to the transformer primary isn't a high voltage,
about 15 vrms for 15 watts into 16 ohms.
The maximum voltage from Quad II amps with no load is only about 25 vrms,
and 20 watts into 16 ohms is about 18 vrms.
I would think that Mr Walker would have designed his speakers
to have the transformers of his ESL57 saturate at a lower F than
the amp's OPTs, which is at about 35 Hz+ as I recall.

But its not likely 15 vrms of signal appears at the output at 35 Hz, ever, with
music,
so saturation wouldn't be a problem.
This is because there has to be plenty of headroom for the rest of the band's
frequencies.

Quote:

Then imagine a TT is in use.

Pleasant dreams.

We realise the L you are talking about is the primary inductance of the
transformer of the ESL57.

I have no idea at what F the '57 transformer saturates.

The series R comes from the winding resistances.

Still, we would like a full eqivalent LCR model of the Quad ESL57.

If the '57 have the equivalent R of say 16 ohms as the R element that produces
the sound,
then the 55 mH of Lp becomes 16 ohms reactance at 46 Hz.
The 55 mH reactance would be 4 ohms at 11.6 Hz, and sure, the load is mainly
inductive
but then there isn't much audio energy at 11.6 Hz or below.
Mr Walker seems to have got the values about right.
But whatever Fsat is for 15 vrms applied input, the voltage at which Fsat/4
occurs
at is about 4 vrms.

Patrick Turner.

Quote:

................. Phil

Patrick Turner
Guest

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2004 11:03 pm Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

Quote:

Phil Allison wrote:

** The ESL63/988 has a similar impedance curve to a nominal 6 ohm cone
speaker mounted in a small sealed box - ie basically a 6 ohms load with
a single, broad, impedance peak at 90 Hz.

Actually, the ESL63 has a massive sharp peak at about 120

** More of Pinko's smelly Bullshit.

The peak is just as I said - goes to 24 ohms max and is several octaves
wide.

Bullshit (as usual for this ignorant twat) - it's around 110-130 Hz
(varies quite a bit due to varying skin tension with humidity and
temperature), and it isn't above 8 ohms for more than an octave or so
either side, which is about as sharp as it gets for decent speakers.
You really do know fuck all about audio, don't you?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Neither Pinky or Phil can quote the official Quad test figures and Quad's
official equivalant LCR models for the speakers being discussed.

Maybe neither man is aware of what Mr Walker did all those years ago.

I suggest somebody provide them with a URL for the inspection of the
necessary info to avoid further stupid conflict.

If I had the info, I would have posted it, but a search for
1/2 an hour at Google revealed nothing.

The origin of this thread was about whether speakers are resistive or not
for amps, and some are, and some ain't, and some are mainly
reactive, some are mainly resistive.

It appears at least that Quad ESL57 are mainly reactive.

Where a speaker is mainly reactive at a given frequency then over 1/2 the amp
current
flows in the reactance, and contributes nothing to the sound.
It may follow that the greater the reactive current flow the less sensitive a
speaker is
at some F.

As I said before, its possible to equalise dynamic speakers
with RC zobels to make them look resistive at their upper region of bandwidths.
Then 3 drivers can together be made to look resistive over a wide portion of
bandwidth,
but never completely or purely resistive.

Its not always easy to do this, and many dynamic speakers have wild impedance
character,
but that doesn't mean they sound crook .

Patrick Turner.

Phil Allison
Guest

Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:30 am Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

"Stewart Pinkerton"

Quote:

** The peak is just as I said - goes to 24 ohms max and is several
octaves
wide. It is certainly not "massive" or "sharp" .

It is like that of my example 6 ohm woofer.

Pinko the Pommy Prick is the worst twat on the planet.

Quote:

- it's around 110-130 Hz
(varies quite a bit due to varying skin tension with humidity and
temperature), and it isn't above 8 ohms for more than an octave or so
either side, which is about as sharp as it gets for decent speakers.

** The 8 ohm points are at 50 Hz and 1 kHz - makes it over 4 octaves
wide.

It is certainly not "massive" or "sharp" .

Quote:

You really do know fuck all about audio, don't you?

** Pinko has been proving just how "fuck all" his understanding is for
years.

The inevitable result of having a defective pommy brain.

............. Phil

Phil Allison
Guest

Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 4:03 am Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

"Patrick Turner"

Quote:

Phil Allison wrote:

But then you have 1.6 ohms in series, so the reactance never
dominates
the impedance character at any F.

** Pure drivel.

Not pure drivel.

So I would agree, the Quad speaker would have a mainly C type load
above 5
kHz.

** Anyone see an arse about going on here ????????????????

The Turneroid has no idea which way his is facing.

Do I worry?

** The Turneroid autodidact moron is such a blatant fucking liar he worries
about nothing.

Not need to make sense nor avoid self contradictions a few lines apart
for him.

Quote:

The thread was about whther speakers present an R load to the amp or not.

** Which there is simply no debate about - in general the answer is NO.

The issue is the definition of "resistive" in relation to a speaker load.

The Turneroid has invented his own asinine one which keeps changing to suit
whatever lie he is posting.

Quote:

** You forgot about the parallel L of 55mH - bird brain.

55 mH is a high amount of impedance at all audio F.
Its 16 ohms of reactance at 46 Hz.

** And completely FUCKING inductive - you asinine shithead !!!

At 46 Hz, the load seen by the amp is **not** completely inductive.

** Fraid it is - where are your measurements ???

Quote:

If the R component is 16 ohms...

** Pure fiction - not a measurement.

The Turneroid has no facts at all.

The inductive or capacitive nature of a load is defined by the phase
angle - which must be measured on areal loudspeaker.

For The ESL57, below 100 Hz the phase angle is 80 to 85 degrees and the
impedance falls to 1.3 ohms at 5 Hz.

That is VERY inductive.

Quote:

Now, as an exercise for the mind, work out what a 55mH *saturable*
inductor ( R = 0.3 ) across the output of a direct coupled SS amp means
in
practice.

It means that if the inductance saturates, the 0.3 ohms of DCR is the load
for
that part of the wave where there is saturation.

Bad news for the amp if it can't handle the current peaks.
But i would think that an input CR filter with a pole at 20 Hz at the amp
input
would stop the LF which may embarass an amp.

** The Turneroid does not think at all.

The filter must be steeper than single pole and start higher.

What about switch on thumps ????

Quote:

But then if the Quad ESL57 can only handle 15 watts before arcing,

** More invented Turneroid garbage.

The ESL57 is rated to take +/- 33 volts peak safely.

Quote:

But its not likely 15 vrms of signal appears at the output at 35 Hz, ever,
with
music, so saturation wouldn't be a problem.

Then imagine a TT is in use.

** The Turneroid will never get near it.

What happens when a stylus is dropped onto a disk ??

Could there be a subsonic transient ?

Only pumps the cone of a woofer.

The ESL57s input tranny saturates at a few volts at a few Hz.

??????

................ Phil

Phil Allison
Guest

Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 4:06 am Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

"Stewart Pinkerton"
"Phil Allison"

Quote:

..... the speaker that is designed to appear mainly resistive from the
amplifiers point of view
is a better designed speaker,

I'd agree with that, and I suspect that it's one reason why large
planars mostly sound very good.

** Large magnetic planers sound just awful and their resistive nature is
not of any benefit.

So, you're deaf as well as stupid and ignorant?

** As usual, Pinko the Pommy Prick substitutes abuse for facts and
reasoning.

What a surprise.............................

Stewart Pinkerton | Is a Fart - Audio is his Victim

............. Phil

Phil Allison
Guest

Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2004 5:53 am Post subject: Re: More Turneroid Bull

"Patrick Turner"
Phil Allison wrote:

Quote:

** The ESL63/988 has a similar impedance curve to a nominal 6 ohm
cone
speaker mounted in a small sealed box - ie basically a 6 ohms
load with
a single, broad, impedance peak at 90 Hz.

Actually, the ESL63 has a massive sharp peak at about 120

** More of Pinko's smelly Bullshit.

The peak is just as I said - goes to 24 ohms max and is several
octaves
wide.

Bullshit (as usual for this ignorant twat) - it's around 110-130 Hz
(varies quite a bit due to varying skin tension with humidity and
temperature), and it isn't above 8 ohms for more than an octave or so
either side, which is about as sharp as it gets for decent speakers.
You really do know fuck all about audio, don't you?
--

Neither Pinky or Phil can quote the official Quad test figures and Quad's
official equivalant LCR models for the speakers being discussed.

** Non existent data is hard to produce.

But the impedance curves for both have been published.

Quote:

Maybe neither man is aware of what Mr Walker did all those years ago.

** How asinine - the speakers are here, right now and are easily tested.

Quote:

I suggest somebody provide them with a URL for the inspection of the
necessary info to avoid further stupid conflict.

If I had the info, I would have posted it, but a search for
1/2 an hour at Google revealed nothing.

http://user.tninet.se/~vhw129w/mt_audio_design/esl_review_2.htm

Quote:

It appears at least that Quad ESL57 are mainly reactive.

** Define "mainly" properly and stick to one definition - arsehole !!!!

A *mainly resistive speaker* is one where the impedance does not vary much
( +/- 20%) over the audio band - and hence has a small phase angle ( +/- 15
degrees) across the same band.

All other speakers are reactive loads with varying impedance with
frequency.

Quote:

Where a speaker is mainly reactive at a given frequency then over 1/2 the
amp
current
flows in the reactance, and contributes nothing to the sound.

** Not with the reactance in series with resistance as for all woofers.

................ Phil

	DVD-Software.info Forum Index -> Tubes	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
Page 5 of 7

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum