Amplifier Damping Factor - From EAW
- Thread starter GYMusic
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
nj pheonix
Lunatic Member
I've always bought into this article
http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/damptoole.htm
http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/damptoole.htm
arts
Addicted Member
Excellent article,and it certainly debunks the DF silliness. I think I have most of the AudioScene Canada magazines stashed away somewhere....I also might have subscribed at one time,right at the end of publication,1979-1980?
Ditto
Good articles, particularly by Dr Toole. (Rather a shock to some to find that a practical electrical d.f. cannot be more than about 1,3.)
I read that the originator (man who coined the phrase), Fritz Langford-Smith of R.D.H. IV fame, later tried himself to alter his definition to be more practical; without result.
Good articles, particularly by Dr Toole. (Rather a shock to some to find that a practical electrical d.f. cannot be more than about 1,3.)
I read that the originator (man who coined the phrase), Fritz Langford-Smith of R.D.H. IV fame, later tried himself to alter his definition to be more practical; without result.
twiiii
Lunatic Member
If you take the point of view its up to the speaker manufacturer then I agree with Roger. Though having been in the professional business a lot longer than consumer, I have to also agree with the gents from EAW. But personally if your system was designed in a time of the past before Theil or your speakers aren't critically damped then making some changes can improve things a bit. Bi-amping where the woofers are connected directly to the amp by passing the passive crossover always improves things for me using an electronic crossover. Now if you own AR, or early KLH or Mac ML or XR series with tight sealed boxes, the answer is no. But if you own Altec, JBL, Bozak, EV, C V and others that are using large infinite baffles or other large enclosures bi-amping with the passive crossover to the woofers and the LF section to the midrange bypassed will make for improvements.
Klipsch will be on a case by case issue. I have heard Crowns help Cornwalls. But the Heresy and La Scala are not affected at all it seems. Belles, Corner horns, and La Scalas are affected in the mids and highs with changes of amps like any other speaker. As is the mid range down to 150 HZ. But the bass below 80 Hz doesn't always change, but I'm not sure if its the damping factor or the topology of the amplifiers that makes the difference. I use to be able to hear the difference between a Krell, Mac, or Accuphase in an instant back in the 80's but by 2000 the differences were becoming less. And in the last 10 years as Mac has improved with its Quad balanced amps and newer out put devices, I find no reason to look any further.
The issue today is so many speaker systems have impedance correction net works, frequency shaping, and circuits to correct for anomalies created by physical displacement of drivers, that bi-amping does not offer the huge gains of the past and in fact can destroy all the careful engineering in the original design. JBL owners in particular. Now if you want a tube sound on the midrange and the drivers extend low enough to really add to the sound every one is looking for then go for it. But if you are using two way speakers where the crossover point is above 1000 hz you might as well just stick with tubes all the way or use a SS amp with a tube pre-amp.
But I have heard the improvements so many times when removing early Mac tube amps or early 2105 , 250, or 2300 and replacing them with 7100's, 7200's , and amps from Crown, Krell, Marantz, and B&H in the bass, that I know a change to a higher ratio is a good thing with some speakers. Bozak, B&O, early 801's, 808's, and 800's from B&W all improved with the change. Personally I still prefer Tannoy with tubes and some Snell models with tubes to calm them down bit. But thats in the highs and has nothing to do with speaker gauge or direct coupling when bi amping. Oh when I say again, bi-amping, I mean using a electronic crossover.
Klipsch will be on a case by case issue. I have heard Crowns help Cornwalls. But the Heresy and La Scala are not affected at all it seems. Belles, Corner horns, and La Scalas are affected in the mids and highs with changes of amps like any other speaker. As is the mid range down to 150 HZ. But the bass below 80 Hz doesn't always change, but I'm not sure if its the damping factor or the topology of the amplifiers that makes the difference. I use to be able to hear the difference between a Krell, Mac, or Accuphase in an instant back in the 80's but by 2000 the differences were becoming less. And in the last 10 years as Mac has improved with its Quad balanced amps and newer out put devices, I find no reason to look any further.
The issue today is so many speaker systems have impedance correction net works, frequency shaping, and circuits to correct for anomalies created by physical displacement of drivers, that bi-amping does not offer the huge gains of the past and in fact can destroy all the careful engineering in the original design. JBL owners in particular. Now if you want a tube sound on the midrange and the drivers extend low enough to really add to the sound every one is looking for then go for it. But if you are using two way speakers where the crossover point is above 1000 hz you might as well just stick with tubes all the way or use a SS amp with a tube pre-amp.
But I have heard the improvements so many times when removing early Mac tube amps or early 2105 , 250, or 2300 and replacing them with 7100's, 7200's , and amps from Crown, Krell, Marantz, and B&H in the bass, that I know a change to a higher ratio is a good thing with some speakers. Bozak, B&O, early 801's, 808's, and 800's from B&W all improved with the change. Personally I still prefer Tannoy with tubes and some Snell models with tubes to calm them down bit. But thats in the highs and has nothing to do with speaker gauge or direct coupling when bi amping. Oh when I say again, bi-amping, I mean using a electronic crossover.
Last edited:
