damacman
Resident Psycho
It's true. My speakers are rated at 250W RMS. I connected them to my amplifiers and increased the volume setting to the point at which I was peaking .12wpc. Then, get this, I reduced the volume to the point at which I was peaking .012wpc. Fearing the worst, I was surprised to hear that my tweeters lived.
Audio Myth - It's easier to damage speakers with too little power than too much power.
Now, if that were true, it must be true in all cases. Not some cases. Not cases where alcohol was involved. Not cases where the amplifier in question was tube or solid state. Not cases where the tweeters were soft domes. Not cases where the power was clean, dirty, not washed with warm soapy water for 20 seconds . . . Well, you get the point.
Really, the message that the above Audio Myth is designed to convey is that there is danger when driving speakers to their maximum levels with an amplifier which does not have enough power to drive them correctly. IE - connecting my 250W RMS speakers to a flea market receiver of a mere 20wpc
Unfortunately, as the laws of physics are in fact laws (and not just really good ideas), this is also false. Easily proved / disproved by using the scientific method we all learned in 7th grade physical science.
Hmmm . . .
Fact 1 - Said 20wpc amplifier can make up to twice as much power when driven into hard clipping.
Fact 2 - 40W is still not nearly enough power to destroy (23) tweeters, the sum of which are rated to handle 250W of continuous power at all frequencies within their bandwidth.
Fact 3 - Clipping contains harmonics which can in fact be harmful to tweeters when the net result of such is overpowering.
Herein lies the problem. Lack of understanding of the power rating of one's loudspeakers. For example, you've got a 3-way speaker with 200W printed on the rear. A look into the manual reveals that this 200W speaker can handle 100W continuously and . . . nope . . . not 200W on peaks . . . as 100W RMS and 200W PEAK are merely the same thing stated differently. What? Yep. I promise.
You see, RMS is an abbreviation for Root Mean Square which is a conversion factor designed to provide the equivalent DC energy of a sine wave (AC in nature). Specifically, that conversion factor states that Vrms = Vp * .707
So, 20V into an 8 Ohm load = 50 Watts PEAK - [20^2/8]
And . . .
20V into an 8 Ohm load = 25 Watts RMS [(20*.707)^2/8]
Same thing. Same sine wave with the same 20V Peak. But, who wants 100 Watt speakers when 200 Watt speakers are 2X as good? I mean come on. Marketing 101.
So . . . what this rating doesn't tell you . . . and this is the big one . . . is the actual power handling capability of that pretty little silk dome tweeter that conveys female vocals like no other. In most cases, it's about 10W.
So, here you go with your 20wpc flea market amplifier and clip the **** outta it and all those nasty harmonics as a result of doing so end up being dissipated across the coil of the tweeter. [Of course, no DC got there as the capacitor in series with the tweeter prevents that (also a law) and . . . amplifiers don't make DC when they clip.] Toasted tweeters. Gone to meet their maker.
Well, then isn't it true? Only if the above example meets the criteria spelled out in Fact 3.
Now, let's take some Benny Benassi (Satisfaction is a good track to destroy perfectly good loudspeakers . . . if that's your thang . . . ) and let's play that song at party approved levels on your 200wpc audiophile power amplifier at like half its rated power. Yep, smoked tweeters too. Huh? How is that possible. Simple - those tweeters got overpowered as well. But this time with clean power.
Most enthusiasts believe the following:
1 - Speakers rated at 100W RMS and 200W Peak will handle 100W all day long and 200W on peaks.
2 - Amplifiers create DC when clipping which is harmful to your speakers.
3 - Clipping destroys tweeters.
4 - It's better to use too big of an amplifier versus too small of an amplifier.
Each is patently false with exception of #3 as it pertains to Fact 3 above. In addition, each "theory" has been disproven by science a million times over. However, as the truth is really quite unpopular and does require a bit of understanding to grasp, it's just easier to ignore it and parrot the above endlessly. I mean after all, each does sound plausible.
Myth debunked.
Audio Myth - It's easier to damage speakers with too little power than too much power.
Now, if that were true, it must be true in all cases. Not some cases. Not cases where alcohol was involved. Not cases where the amplifier in question was tube or solid state. Not cases where the tweeters were soft domes. Not cases where the power was clean, dirty, not washed with warm soapy water for 20 seconds . . . Well, you get the point.
Really, the message that the above Audio Myth is designed to convey is that there is danger when driving speakers to their maximum levels with an amplifier which does not have enough power to drive them correctly. IE - connecting my 250W RMS speakers to a flea market receiver of a mere 20wpc
Unfortunately, as the laws of physics are in fact laws (and not just really good ideas), this is also false. Easily proved / disproved by using the scientific method we all learned in 7th grade physical science.
Hmmm . . .
Fact 1 - Said 20wpc amplifier can make up to twice as much power when driven into hard clipping.
Fact 2 - 40W is still not nearly enough power to destroy (23) tweeters, the sum of which are rated to handle 250W of continuous power at all frequencies within their bandwidth.
Fact 3 - Clipping contains harmonics which can in fact be harmful to tweeters when the net result of such is overpowering.
Herein lies the problem. Lack of understanding of the power rating of one's loudspeakers. For example, you've got a 3-way speaker with 200W printed on the rear. A look into the manual reveals that this 200W speaker can handle 100W continuously and . . . nope . . . not 200W on peaks . . . as 100W RMS and 200W PEAK are merely the same thing stated differently. What? Yep. I promise.
You see, RMS is an abbreviation for Root Mean Square which is a conversion factor designed to provide the equivalent DC energy of a sine wave (AC in nature). Specifically, that conversion factor states that Vrms = Vp * .707
So, 20V into an 8 Ohm load = 50 Watts PEAK - [20^2/8]
And . . .
20V into an 8 Ohm load = 25 Watts RMS [(20*.707)^2/8]
Same thing. Same sine wave with the same 20V Peak. But, who wants 100 Watt speakers when 200 Watt speakers are 2X as good? I mean come on. Marketing 101.
So . . . what this rating doesn't tell you . . . and this is the big one . . . is the actual power handling capability of that pretty little silk dome tweeter that conveys female vocals like no other. In most cases, it's about 10W.
So, here you go with your 20wpc flea market amplifier and clip the **** outta it and all those nasty harmonics as a result of doing so end up being dissipated across the coil of the tweeter. [Of course, no DC got there as the capacitor in series with the tweeter prevents that (also a law) and . . . amplifiers don't make DC when they clip.] Toasted tweeters. Gone to meet their maker.
Well, then isn't it true? Only if the above example meets the criteria spelled out in Fact 3.
Now, let's take some Benny Benassi (Satisfaction is a good track to destroy perfectly good loudspeakers . . . if that's your thang . . . ) and let's play that song at party approved levels on your 200wpc audiophile power amplifier at like half its rated power. Yep, smoked tweeters too. Huh? How is that possible. Simple - those tweeters got overpowered as well. But this time with clean power.
Most enthusiasts believe the following:
1 - Speakers rated at 100W RMS and 200W Peak will handle 100W all day long and 200W on peaks.
2 - Amplifiers create DC when clipping which is harmful to your speakers.
3 - Clipping destroys tweeters.
4 - It's better to use too big of an amplifier versus too small of an amplifier.
Each is patently false with exception of #3 as it pertains to Fact 3 above. In addition, each "theory" has been disproven by science a million times over. However, as the truth is really quite unpopular and does require a bit of understanding to grasp, it's just easier to ignore it and parrot the above endlessly. I mean after all, each does sound plausible.
Myth debunked.
Last edited:
