"OHMAGE" is not a word!
Someone better let Merriam know about this...Webster too.
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
"OHMAGE" is not a word!
The reason ohmage is not a word, at least not one used by anyone who knows better, is that it's not a unit of electrical resistance. Resistance is measured in ohms, but so is impedance, inductive reactance and capacitive reactance. If you say such and such has an ohmage of 8 which is it? Resistance, impedance, inductive reactance or capacitive reactance? It would be like asking what's the degreeage. That depends:"OHMAGE" is not a word! An ohm is a unit of measurement, literally a unit of lectrical resistance.
The reason ohmage is not a word...
Nah, some usage is still wrong until overwhelmed by popularity. I don't think we are there yet with ohmage. We the enlightened fight the good fight in keeping it that way.It is not possible that there is a reason that ohmage is not a word because ohmage is a word.
Pick up a dictionary; it's a word
![]()
Search "define ohmage" online; it's a word
![]()
![]()
Make whatever arguments you want, but I find it incredible how some, simply because they are ignorant of some fact, will declare that it is not so.
Edit: Maybe "incredible" isn't the right word...this is the tb forum, afterall.
Is dickage a word? How about snackage?
The dictionary is wrong. Read my post again, this time with an eye to understanding what it says. Then for argument's sake let's say it's right, that it refers to electrical resistance. That means it would have no meaning with respect to impedance, inductive reactance or capacitive reactance. And that's why amps and speakers are designed by engineers, not lexicographers.It is not possible that there is a reason that ohmage is not a word because ohmage is a word.
Pick up a dictionary; it's a word
![]()
The dictionary is wrong. Read my post again, this time with an eye to understanding what it says. Then for argument's sake let's say it's right, that it refers to electrical resistance. That means it would have no meaning with respect to impedance, inductive reactance or capacitive reactance. And that's why amps and speakers are designed by engineers, not lexicographers.
Is dickage a word? How about snackage?
I beg to differ. As casual as we all are, the Amps etc forum is foremost a technical forum where correct terminology matters. As soon as what you think you mean is not what you are saying it gets far too messy.Let it go man. Just let it go. This is not an academic environment. It is a place for casual conversation. The OP has been adequately educated on what the "proper" term is...and we all know what he meant by ohm-age.
I beg to differ. As casual as we all are, the Amps etc forum is foremost a technical forum where correct terminology matters. As soon as what you think you mean is not what you are saying it gets far too messy.
Nobody is going to give up trying to put a stake in ohmage.
fun fact, if it wasn't for ohmage I may yet to have heard of inductive reactance or capacitive reactance. Probably Agedhorse who gave me a serve a few years back.There is nothing useful or interesting going on in this thread,
fun fact, if it wasn't for ohmage I may yet to have heard of inductive reactance or capacitive reactance. Probably Agedhorse who gave me a serve a few years back.
I wouldn't bet on it. Likely very similar minus the angst over the mislabeling of impedance.I am sure that was a more interesting and informative discussion
And yet both inductive and capacitive reactance are primary contributors to how speakers sound, while cone size isn't.fun fact, if it wasn't for ohmage I may yet to have heard of inductive reactance or capacitive reactance.
