Ohms (no, i'm not meditating, though maybe that would help)

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Pondering a new strategy. Surround sound in our little livingroom is probably overkill anyway.

I have a small surround sound system in my living room, around $300 years ago. Have had it in the past few, actually. It's definitely improved movie viewing and missed when I don't have it. You may want to rethink skipping it if the cost is minimal in the overall scheme of things.

[Kevy Baby]

The three ohm thing sounds weird to me too. But apparently

As DPR said, replacing a 3Ω speaker with an 8Ω should not present a problem; it actually lightens the working load on the amplifier. I am not sure if this is what DPR was saying, but with everything else being equal, you will not get the same sound pressure levels (SPLs) with an 8Ω speaker as you would with a 3Ω speaker on a 3Ω amplifier. Amplifiers double their output (in wattage) at half the Ω load: an amp rated at 100 watts @ 8 Ω will output 200 watts with a 4Ω load. Your 3Ω amp power output of 165 watts per channel would only output 82.5 watts at 6Ω: I don't remember the calculation exactly, so I can't tell you what the 8Ω output would be. But, as you mentioned about the marketing hype, a lot depends on the TRUE specifications.

And if you want to get real geeky about it, if you run two speakers in parallel off of one channel, that "sort of" cuts the collective Ω rating in half: two 8Ω speakers connected in parallel creates a 4Ω load on the amp. I say "sort of" because the correct calculation is "the reciprocal of the sum of the reciprocals of the speakers":

1/8 + 1/8 = 1/4: two 8Ω speakers in parallel gives a 4Ω load.

The reason this formula is used is for when you have different rated speakers. If you ran an 8Ω speaker and a 3Ω speaker in parallel:

1/8 + 1/3 = 11/24: a 3Ω and an 8 Ω in parallel gives an approximately 2.18Ω load.

OK: I've gone way to far for this discussion...

[Ghoulish Delight]

I have read that underpowering a speaker can cause issues, not just in terms of lower max volume, but actually damaging the speakers in the long run.

For many reasons, the route of a stand alone receiver (rated at 6-8ohms) has shaped up to be the right choice. Now just gotta pull the trigger (actually, gotta decide on a TV first).

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

I have read that underpowering a speaker can cause issues, not just in terms of lower max volume, but actually damaging the speakers in the long run.

I know that under powering by wattage can cause damage over time: did you see something about too low of resistance (Ohms) affecting the speakers?

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

For many reasons, the route of a stand alone receiver (rated at 6-8ohms) has shaped up to be the right choice. Now just gotta pull the trigger (actually, gotta decide on a TV first).

How about this one? It has a lot of nice features and flexibility












And it costs an arm and a leg

[DreadPirateRoberts]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

I know that under powering by wattage can cause damage over time: did you see something about too low of resistance (Ohms) affecting the speakers?

Too low a resistance (Ohms) may not affect the speakers, but it could blow the amp.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

I know that under powering by wattage can cause damage over time: did you see something about too low of resistance (Ohms) affecting the speakers?

Opposite. Too high resistance = reduced power to the speakers = clipping = damage.

I have a small surround sound system in my living room, around $300 years ago. Have had it in the past few, actually. It's definitely improved movie viewing and missed when I don't have it. You may want to rethink skipping it if the cost is minimal in the overall scheme of things.

Our current tower speakers, while not surround, have an incredible range and truly excellent sound. It's not worth giving those up just for surround. Plus, by holding off on sound we can afford a better quality receiver that will offer more flexibility and higher quality when we do eventually go to surround.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Our current tower speakers, while not surround, have an incredible range and truly excellent sound. It's not worth giving those up just for surround. Plus, by holding off on sound we can afford a better quality receiver that will offer more flexibility and higher quality when we do eventually go to surround.

That makes sense. I was replying to your thoughts that your living room was too small for surround-sound.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Opposite. Too high resistance = reduced power to the speakers = clipping = damage.

As I understand it, the resistance in and of itself usually doesn't cause the problem, it is the resulting wattage that comes from mixing resistance. For example, an amp with a 100 watt per channel based on 8Ω would be putting out 200 watts at 4Ω. If the speaker is rated at 100 watts at 4Ω, you could be overdriving the speaker when playing at full volume which overheats the coil and does the damage (or just blows the whole damned driver). I could be wrong on this, but this is how I understand it.

However, with this configuration (8Ω amp output into 4Ω speaker), if you are keeping the volume level of the amp at 1/3-1/2 capacity maximum, the chances of a problem are greatly diminished. This is not a scientific statement, just a general statement from experience.

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

How about this one? It has a lot of nice features and flexibility

Not even this? Its MSRP is only $5,499.95

[Ghoulish Delight]

Sigh. And a financing snag is probably going to scrap the whole plan.

Nothing to see here folks, move along.

[Morrigoon]

Because someone had to post this