Thank’s a lot for your very detailed answers.
I think there is some misunderstanding due to my weak English.
It’s not an easy job at all writing tech things in a foreign language.
So if some of my words are misleading, I’m sorry.
But all in all we share one view I think.
You are right calculating the dynamic of a signal from peak to peak.
Thus is resulting in a lower amount of dynamic then 10dB.
But I tried to explain something different.
Every signal can be expressed by it’s RMS. Regardless of the signals crest, the RMS is what we can hear as loudness.
If I want to know how loud a signal is audible I need the RMS.
The audible RMS includes everything, from the very first beginning to the steady swinging, until the next initial finger picking attack starts the next attack again, and so on …
If I want to know how loud (how much audible power) is produced I need the average of the signal to be defined. Average can be expressed by RMS.
If I want to know how strong my amplifiers power capacity (or the cabs cone excursion) is forced I need the Peak value to be defined.
Theoretical it should be possible to estimate even for the first initial signal period of attack a RMS value.
I don’t know if anybody ever did this, but I strongly doubt such a RMS value would be very meaningful.
IMHO it it’s even not meaningful to calculate with a sine and try to hook up twice the power for clipped attack transients!
The crest of a steady swinging note is something in the magnitude of 2..3.
Sine =1.41, square =1 (as we all know).
You point out an amps capacity can be twice the rated power.
You are considering a sine wave that’s clipped until the power is twice.
That’s absolutely correct but, I’d do the consideration to a clipped bass signal a little bit different.
I don’t want to complicate this here too much. So I do a simplification, and consider only the steady swinging of string.
Let’s say the crest of the steady signal is 2.5.
I take three different signals and let them clip on a 300 Watt amp:
Nr.1 square, Nr.2 sine, and Nr.3 a steady swinging bass signal with crest 2.5
Nr.1 square:
The square starts at 600 Watt cause the square is at it is. That is 600 Watt and can therefore not be clipped to higher power value as it already is. Cause the crest of the square is 1
Nr.2 sine:
The sine starts at 300 Watt, and above with enough clipping content it ends up at 600 Watt
Nr. 3 steady swinging signal crest 2.5
The signal starts at 100 Watt (theoretical amplifier) or something approximate 150 Watt on a real amplifier.
Why only 100..150 Watt ? The amp is 300 Watt.
It’s cause of the crest 2.5
Never the less I let the signal clip until the power is 600 Watt.
But to reach the 600 Watt with the real signal’s crest of 2.5 a very lot of gain is necessary to achieve the 600 Watt.
Human’s ears are very sensitive whenever steady signals are clipped, even only a little bit.
Maybe it sounds to somebody like square waves whenever only the edge of a steady signal clips.
This behaviour leads sometimes to very misleading interpretations.
There is not a square but it often sounds like there is one.
I’d claim that the RMS of a very well audible clipped steady swinging bass sound is not significant more then 1/2 the rated amps power.
The situation can be translated 1:1 into whenever the attack transients are clipping non audible.
It’s theoretical possible to make a draw for the clipped transients, assuming the power is then twice the rated amp power. But it isn’t.
It is not twice until the gain (or overdrive) is strong enough. It needs a horrible portion of overdrive to make the signal peaks equal to be squares.
Back to Topic:
You did an estimate for the peak that can be twice the rated power and calculated down to 75 Watt rms. I did the calculation in different way, starting at very low, raised up the signal and the result was 100 Watt rms.
I’d say the result is just the same. Some watt more or less it is not a big deal and would therefore never be enough to debate on principles.
Thank you for all your statements to the many questions that I did.
Most of all your statements I agree. Some I don’t. But even that points I disagree is nothing to debate too much on principles. The whole complex of themes we discuss is nothing that can be explained in three or twenty words. Not as easy like Ohm’s low!
The themes are very complicated anyway and give therefore place to hold different interpretations and opinions without being wrong or right I think.
Some words to my own gear and what I prefer, and what I dislike, and why I dislike some modern features.
At first to point out, I dislike limiters. I hate them.
I hate them as I am a bass player but by the other hand, I like them very well in a professional amplifier driving PA loudspeaker systems..
I prefer the smooth rough sounding of conventional amps when played hard at the limit.
I dislike compressors as well. The feel is like touching a cold fish that is dead. That's my opinion, nobody needs to share.
On the other side, I like the endless power and endless dynamik feel of heavily overdriven cab systems. That means twice the rated cab power cabability as a minimum.
That is in general nothing you can buy off the rack. But it makes a very lot of fun. Class D amps can provide this by a very less weight.
That is a feature with modern class D amps I like very well. The question is only:
How much dynamic power?
I think there is some misunderstanding due to my weak English.
It’s not an easy job at all writing tech things in a foreign language.
So if some of my words are misleading, I’m sorry.
But all in all we share one view I think.
You are right calculating the dynamic of a signal from peak to peak.
Thus is resulting in a lower amount of dynamic then 10dB.
But I tried to explain something different.
Every signal can be expressed by it’s RMS. Regardless of the signals crest, the RMS is what we can hear as loudness.
If I want to know how loud a signal is audible I need the RMS.
The audible RMS includes everything, from the very first beginning to the steady swinging, until the next initial finger picking attack starts the next attack again, and so on …
If I want to know how loud (how much audible power) is produced I need the average of the signal to be defined. Average can be expressed by RMS.
If I want to know how strong my amplifiers power capacity (or the cabs cone excursion) is forced I need the Peak value to be defined.
Theoretical it should be possible to estimate even for the first initial signal period of attack a RMS value.
I don’t know if anybody ever did this, but I strongly doubt such a RMS value would be very meaningful.
IMHO it it’s even not meaningful to calculate with a sine and try to hook up twice the power for clipped attack transients!
The crest of a steady swinging note is something in the magnitude of 2..3.
Sine =1.41, square =1 (as we all know).
You point out an amps capacity can be twice the rated power.
You are considering a sine wave that’s clipped until the power is twice.
That’s absolutely correct but, I’d do the consideration to a clipped bass signal a little bit different.
I don’t want to complicate this here too much. So I do a simplification, and consider only the steady swinging of string.
Let’s say the crest of the steady signal is 2.5.
I take three different signals and let them clip on a 300 Watt amp:
Nr.1 square, Nr.2 sine, and Nr.3 a steady swinging bass signal with crest 2.5
Nr.1 square:
The square starts at 600 Watt cause the square is at it is. That is 600 Watt and can therefore not be clipped to higher power value as it already is. Cause the crest of the square is 1
Nr.2 sine:
The sine starts at 300 Watt, and above with enough clipping content it ends up at 600 Watt
Nr. 3 steady swinging signal crest 2.5
The signal starts at 100 Watt (theoretical amplifier) or something approximate 150 Watt on a real amplifier.
Why only 100..150 Watt ? The amp is 300 Watt.
It’s cause of the crest 2.5
Never the less I let the signal clip until the power is 600 Watt.
But to reach the 600 Watt with the real signal’s crest of 2.5 a very lot of gain is necessary to achieve the 600 Watt.
Human’s ears are very sensitive whenever steady signals are clipped, even only a little bit.
Maybe it sounds to somebody like square waves whenever only the edge of a steady signal clips.
This behaviour leads sometimes to very misleading interpretations.
There is not a square but it often sounds like there is one.
I’d claim that the RMS of a very well audible clipped steady swinging bass sound is not significant more then 1/2 the rated amps power.
The situation can be translated 1:1 into whenever the attack transients are clipping non audible.
It’s theoretical possible to make a draw for the clipped transients, assuming the power is then twice the rated amp power. But it isn’t.
It is not twice until the gain (or overdrive) is strong enough. It needs a horrible portion of overdrive to make the signal peaks equal to be squares.
Back to Topic:
You did an estimate for the peak that can be twice the rated power and calculated down to 75 Watt rms. I did the calculation in different way, starting at very low, raised up the signal and the result was 100 Watt rms.
I’d say the result is just the same. Some watt more or less it is not a big deal and would therefore never be enough to debate on principles.
Thank you for all your statements to the many questions that I did.
Most of all your statements I agree. Some I don’t. But even that points I disagree is nothing to debate too much on principles. The whole complex of themes we discuss is nothing that can be explained in three or twenty words. Not as easy like Ohm’s low!
The themes are very complicated anyway and give therefore place to hold different interpretations and opinions without being wrong or right I think.
Some words to my own gear and what I prefer, and what I dislike, and why I dislike some modern features.
At first to point out, I dislike limiters. I hate them.
I hate them as I am a bass player but by the other hand, I like them very well in a professional amplifier driving PA loudspeaker systems..
I prefer the smooth rough sounding of conventional amps when played hard at the limit.
I dislike compressors as well. The feel is like touching a cold fish that is dead. That's my opinion, nobody needs to share.
On the other side, I like the endless power and endless dynamik feel of heavily overdriven cab systems. That means twice the rated cab power cabability as a minimum.
That is in general nothing you can buy off the rack. But it makes a very lot of fun. Class D amps can provide this by a very less weight.
That is a feature with modern class D amps I like very well. The question is only:
How much dynamic power?
