Why you don't want the cat to sleep on the nice warm hi-fi amplifier:
http://www.microwaves101.com/content/images/vomit%20fried%20amp/VOMIT%20FRIED%20AMPLIFIER.pdf


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 05/04/2014 08:47 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Why you don't want the cat to sleep on the nice warm hi-fi amplifier:
http://www.microwaves101.com/content/images/vomit%20fried%20amp/VOMIT%20FRIED%20AMPLIFIER.pdf



I had a cat spit up a hairball on top of my Technics 1010. I took it out
into the yard and rinsed it carefully, then let it dry in the sun. Good
as new.

"dave" wrote in message
...

I had a cat spit up a hairball on top of my Technics 1010.
I took it into the yard and rinsed it carefully, then let it dry
in the sun. Good as new.

Corrosion is the problem -- not moisture.

Gordon Holt loved cats, but when one of his toms marked his territory by
urinating on a spare Infinity electrostatic panel, he had the cat put to
death.

On Mon, 5 May 2014, William Sommerwerck wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
...

I had a cat spit up a hairball on top of my Technics 1010.
I took it into the yard and rinsed it carefully, then let it dry
in the sun. Good as new.

Corrosion is the problem -- not moisture.

Gordon Holt loved cats, but when one of his toms marked his territory by
urinating on a spare Infinity electrostatic panel, he had the cat put to
death.

Did that mean taking it to the vet, or just exposing the high voltage on
the speakers?

Michael

On Mon, 05 May 2014 05:56:56 -0700, dave
wrote:

On 05/04/2014 08:47 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Why you don't want the cat to sleep on the nice warm hi-fi amplifier:
http://www.microwaves101.com/content/images/vomit%20fried%20amp/VOMIT%20FRIED%20AMPLIFIER.pdf

I had a cat spit up a hairball on top of my Technics 1010. I took it out
into the yard and rinsed it carefully, then let it dry in the sun. Good
as new.

Did the amplifier work after you washed and dried the cat?


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Michael Black" wrote in message
xample.org...
On Mon, 5 May 2014, William Sommerwerck wrote:

Gordon Holt loved cats, but when one of his toms marked his territory
by urinating on a spare Infinity electrostatic panel, he had the cat put
to death.

Did that mean taking it to the vet, or just exposing the high voltage on the
speakers?

Excellent!

The vet. The high-voltage DC bias on an electrostatic driver doesn't deliver
enough current for electrocution. The stepped-up audio AC might be enough,
though.

On Mon, 5 May 2014 08:36:31 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

The vet. The high-voltage DC bias on an electrostatic driver doesn't deliver
enough current for electrocution. The stepped-up audio AC might be enough,
though.

I've gotten zapped by a 70v constant voltage speaker system a few
times. At high audio levels, it delivers ummmm... 70.7v rms across
the line, which is sufficient to get my attention.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant-voltage_speaker_system
I'm not sure what it will do to a cat.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Gordon Holt loved cats, but when one of his toms marked his territory by
urinating on a spare Infinity electrostatic panel, he had the cat put to
death. "

I like cats, but that is too much.

As for the voltge in electrostaatic speakers, I wouldn't use that.

When I was young I did a really stupid thing. (go figure) I had two transformers stepping up the voltage in tandem from the line voltage. This was deadly and any adult who knew anything would have stopped me. They were both pretty much identical with like 350(?) volt secondaries. I hooked one secondary to the primary of the other. What that give, 1100 volts or something ?

It was inductive as well because you know those things they had in the sci-fi and Frnkensein movies with the arc climbing up the electrodes and restarting at the bottom ? Well I made one out of a box and a couple of coathangers. I almost et goosebumps thinking aboput that today. One false move and no more me.

No worries though, back then we rented...

"Did the amplifier work after you washed and dried the cat?"

It will not work unless you use the proper procedure. ?I looked it up on the internet :

1. Thoroughly clean the toilet.

2. Add the required amount of shampoo to the toilet water, and have both lids lifted.

3. Obtain the cat and soothe him while you carry him towards the bathroom.

4. In one smooth movement, put the cat in the toilet and close both lids (you may need to stand on the lid so that he cannot escape).
CAUTION: Do not get any part of your body too close to the edge, as his paws will be reaching out for any purchase they can find.

5. Flush the toilet three or four times. This provides a 'power wash and rinse' which I have found to be quite effective.

6. Have someone open the door to the outside and ensure that there are no people between the toilet and the outside door.

7. Stand behind the toilet as far as you can, and quickly lift both lids.

8. The now-clean cat will rocket out of the toilet, and run outside where he will dry himself.

Sincerely,

The Dog

Apparently the dog doesn't like cats as much as I.

wrote:

"Gordon Holt loved cats, but when one of his toms marked his territory by
urinating on a spare Infinity electrostatic panel, he had the cat put to
death. "

I like cats, but that is too much.

As for the voltge in electrostaatic speakers, I wouldn't use that.

When I was young I did a really stupid thing. (go figure) I had two transformers stepping up the voltage in tandem from the line voltage. This was deadly and any adult who knew anything would have stopped me. They were both pretty much identical with like 350(?) volt secondaries. I hooked one secondary to the primary of the other. What that give, 1100 volts or something ?



The second transformer would go into saturation, with three times the
rated input.

--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Mon, 5 May 2014 12:42:43 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

"Gordon Holt loved cats, but when one of his toms marked his territory by
urinating on a spare Infinity electrostatic panel, he had the cat put to
death. "

I like cats, but that is too much.

As for the voltge in electrostaatic speakers, I wouldn't use that.

When I was young I did a really stupid thing. (go figure) I had two transformers stepping up the voltage in tandem from the line voltage. This was deadly and any adult who knew anything would have stopped me. They were both pretty much identical with like 350(?) volt secondaries. I hooked one secondary to the primary of the other. What that give, 1100 volts or something ?

It was inductive as well because you know those things they had in the sci-fi and Frnkensein movies with the arc climbing up the electrodes and restarting at the bottom ? Well I made one out of a box and a couple of coathangers. I almost et goosebumps thinking aboput that today. One false move and no more me.

No worries though, back then we rented...
One of the things I used to do as a kid was to make carbon arc lights.
I would get a lamp cord, strip the ends, wrap one wire
around the carbon rod from a D battery and the other wire would go
into a large peanut butter jar with water in it. Then another wire
would be stripped at both ends with one end around another battery
carbon and the other end would also go into the water. Then I would
add just a little salt to the water and try to strike an arc between
the carbon rods. I usually added salt a couple times to get the best
arc without popping a breaker. I couldn't use soft water because it
conducted too well before any salt was added. I looked at the arc
through stacks of negatives that were all black. I found that if one
carbon rod was held in a vise I could strike an arc with the other
carbon which I held with pliers and this left me with a free hand to
use to introduce different things into the arc. I could cut through
sheet metal with the arc by passing the sheet metal between the arcing
carbons. The wires that were in the water would get eaten up pretty
fast so I couldn't have too much fun before the wires would be
completely eaten up. I can still remember the crackling hum that came
from the arc. And the light! It was so bright it was almost like
x-rays. I'm lucky that I never burned my eyeballs. I guess the
negatives blocked enough of the UV.
Eric

En el artículo ,
escribió:

you know those things they had in the sci-fi
and Frnkensein movies with the arc climbing up the electrodes and restarting at
the bottom ?

Jacob's Ladder.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

The second transformer would go into saturation,
with three times the rated input.

I thought saturation occurred at a particular current level.

On Mon, 5 May 2014 12:42:43 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

"Gordon Holt loved cats, but when one of his toms marked his territory by
urinating on a spare Infinity electrostatic panel, he had the cat put to
death. "

I like cats, but that is too much.

As for the voltge in electrostaatic speakers, I wouldn't use that.

When I was young I did a really stupid thing. (go figure) I had two transformers stepping up the voltage in tandem from the line voltage. This was deadly and any adult who knew anything would have stopped me. They were both pretty much identical with like 350(?) volt secondaries. I hooked one secondary to the primary of the other. What that give, 1100 volts or something ?

It was inductive as well because you know those things they had in the sci-fi and Frnkensein movies with the arc climbing up the electrodes and restarting at the bottom ? Well I made one out of a box and a couple of coathangers. I almost et goosebumps thinking aboput that today. One false move and no more me.

No worries though, back then we rented...

Back around 1970 we acquired a WW2 tank transmitter. Adding
additional wire to the coils, we were able to transmit on the high
end of the AM band. I designed a 1000 volt power supply for the final
plates. Unfortunately I was really careless and got shocked across my
chest more than once. I should have been electrocuted but lucked out.
The station was short lived. The range (20 miles plus) put us in the
FCC's sights. Chuck

"dave" wrote in message ...
On 05/04/2014 08:47 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Why you don't want the cat to sleep on the nice warm hi-fi amplifier:
http://www.microwaves101.com/content/images/vomit%20fried%20amp/VOMIT%20FRIED%20AMPLIFIER.pdf



I had a cat spit up a hairball on top of my Technics 1010. I took it out
into the yard and rinsed it carefully, then let it dry in the sun. Good
as new.

That's good to know, but how did you clean the Technics?

To quote the lovely wife.... shut up, Bob...

William Sommerwerck wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
m...

The second transformer would go into saturation,
with three times the rated input.

I thought saturation occurred at a particular current level.


The input voltage and the transformer's primary winding's inductance
determines the magnetizing current. If you have a variac that will give
140V output, put a 120V bulb in series with the primary of a cheap,
unloaded transformer and slowly raise the variac past 120V. The lamp
will light when the core saturates, and then get brighter as you go past
that point. You've used a 'dim bulb tester', to troubleshoot a power
supply haven't you?

Once you pass that point, the core is saturated and appears to be a
shorted winding.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On 05/05/2014 06:46 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"dave" wrote in message
...

I had a cat spit up a hairball on top of my Technics 1010.
I took it into the yard and rinsed it carefully, then let it dry
in the sun. Good as new.

Corrosion is the problem -- not moisture.

Gordon Holt loved cats, but when one of his toms marked his territory by
urinating on a spare Infinity electrostatic panel, he had the cat put to
death.



I use the hose, then distilled water, then 99% alcohol, actually. Same
as a toilet phone.

On 05/05/2014 08:35 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2014 05:56:56 -0700, dave
wrote:

On 05/04/2014 08:47 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Why you don't want the cat to sleep on the nice warm hi-fi amplifier:
http://www.microwaves101.com/content/images/vomit%20fried%20amp/VOMIT%20FRIED%20AMPLIFIER.pdf

I had a cat spit up a hairball on top of my Technics 1010. I took it out
into the yard and rinsed it carefully, then let it dry in the sun. Good
as new.

Did the amplifier work after you washed and dried the cat?


I was talking about the hairball ;-)

On 05/05/2014 11:06 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2014 08:36:31 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

The vet. The high-voltage DC bias on an electrostatic driver doesn't deliver
enough current for electrocution. The stepped-up audio AC might be enough,
though.

I've gotten zapped by a 70v constant voltage speaker system a few
times. At high audio levels, it delivers ummmm... 70.7v rms across
the line, which is sufficient to get my attention.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant-voltage_speaker_system
I'm not sure what it will do to a cat.


Aren't 70 Volt systems under 50 Vrms?

On 05/07/2014 07:29 AM, dave wrote:
On 05/05/2014 11:06 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2014 08:36:31 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

The vet. The high-voltage DC bias on an electrostatic driver doesn't
deliver
enough current for electrocution. The stepped-up audio AC might be
enough,
though.

I've gotten zapped by a 70v constant voltage speaker system a few
times. At high audio levels, it delivers ummmm... 70.7v rms across
the line, which is sufficient to get my attention.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant-voltage_speaker_system
I'm not sure what it will do to a cat.


Aren't 70 Volt systems under 50 Vrms?

Class 2 wiring?

On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:29:26 -0700, dave
wrote:

On 05/05/2014 11:06 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2014 08:36:31 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

The vet. The high-voltage DC bias on an electrostatic driver doesn't deliver
enough current for electrocution. The stepped-up audio AC might be enough,
though.

I've gotten zapped by a 70v constant voltage speaker system a few
times. At high audio levels, it delivers ummmm... 70.7v rms across
the line, which is sufficient to get my attention.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant-voltage_speaker_system
I'm not sure what it will do to a cat.

Aren't 70 Volt systems under 50 Vrms?

I had to look that up before I posted it. I don't have an active 70
volt system with which to measure. It's my understanding that it's
70.7 Vrms and 100v peak. However, when Googling for 70 volt
rms/average/peak, I found that most references don't bother to make
the distinction and simply call it 70 volt. For example, the
Wikipedia article doesn't mention rms/avg/pk at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_voltage_speaker_system
So, I did a quick skim of the available articles, tried to jog my
memory of measurements I did maybe 30 years ago, and made a guess(tm)
that it was 70.7v rms because the math works out so neatly for 100v
peak. I have some books which might have the answer, but I don't have
time to dig through them right now. Does anyone know if it's rms,
average, or peak?

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Once you pass that point, the core is saturated and appears to be a
shorted winding. "

Actually more like as if it was air core, or close. Pretty much the same thing.

I would guess that a good part of the voltage I was geting was because of the inductance of the second secondary.

This Rane article says RMS.

http://www.rane.com/note136.html

dave wrote:

On 05/05/2014 11:06 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2014 08:36:31 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

The vet. The high-voltage DC bias on an electrostatic driver doesn't deliver
enough current for electrocution. The stepped-up audio AC might be enough,
though.

I've gotten zapped by a 70v constant voltage speaker system a few
times. At high audio levels, it delivers ummmm... 70.7v rms across
the line, which is sufficient to get my attention.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant-voltage_speaker_system
I'm not sure what it will do to a cat.


Aren't 70 Volt systems under 50 Vrms?


NO. If they were, why would they be called 70.7 V? 70.7 is the RMS
voltage when the amplifier is at full rated output.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

I kinda thought that but never really looked into it. Had no call to.

So it is 100 volts peak. Makes sense, and it makes sense that the taps on the transformers all over the place are marked in RMS watts.

It could have just as easily been done the other way, it just wasn't. Unless you know specifically, which most people have no reason to, it would seem just as logical for it to be 70.7 peak, which would be 50 RMS.

Maybe you should update that WIKI page.

wrote in message ...

So it is 100 volts peak. Makes sense, and it makes sense that the taps
on the transformers all over the place are marked in RMS watts.

No, they're marked in continuous average watts. Watts are not RMS. Amps and
volts are.

Every stereo amp worth a **** is rated in watts RMS.

(V*.707)^2/R

Of course the current goes down with the voltage but that's a given. Maybe the world is using the wrong word, but it certainly wouldn't be the first time.

On Thu, 8 May 2014 00:05:40 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Every stereo amp worth a **** is rated in watts RMS.

(V*.707)^2/R

Of course the current goes down with the voltage but that's a given. Maybe the world is using the wrong word, but it certainly wouldn't be the first time.

Most if not quite all rms watt ratings are based on single frequency or
two frequency sine wave test measurements. Not all that realistic for
actual output in normal operating signals. Use for comparison purposes
only.

?-)

All the talk about cats reminded me of this story I found somewhe

*Your Duck is Dead--*

A woman brought a very limp duck in to a veterinary*surgeon. As she laid her pet on the table, the vet pulled out his stethoscope and listened to the bird's
chest.*

After a moment or two, the vet shook his head and sadly said, "I'm sorry, your duck, Cuddles, has passed away."*

The distressed woman wailed, "Are you sure?"* Yes, I am sure. Your duck is dead," replied the*vet..*

"How can you be so sure?" she protested. "I mean you haven't done any testing on him or anything. He might just be in a coma or something."*

The vet rolled his eyes, turned around and left the*room.***He returned a few minutes later with a black Labrador Retriever. As the duck's owner looked on
in amazement, the dog stood on his hind legs, put his front paws on the examination table and sniffed the duck from top to bottom. He then looked up at the vet with sad eyes and shook his head.*

The vet patted the dog on the head and took it out of the room. A few minutes later he returned with a cat. The cat jumped on the table and also delicately
sniffed the bird from head to foot. The cat sat back on its haunches, shook its head, meowed softly and strolled out of the room.*

The vet looked at the woman and said, "I'm sorry, but as I said, this is most definitely, 100% certifiably, a dead duck."*

The vet turned to his computer terminal, hit a few keys*and produced a bill, which he handed to the woman..* The duck's owner, still in shock, took the bill. "$150!" she cried, "$150 just to tell me my duck is dead!"

The vet shrugged, "I'm sorry. If you had just taken my word for it, the bill would have been $20, but with the Lab Report and the Cat Scan, it's now $150."*

"josephkk" wrote in message
...

Most if not quite all rms watt ratings are based on single frequency
or two frequency sine wave test measurements. Not all that realistic
for actual output in normal operating signals. Use for comparison
purposes only.

First, there's no such thing as an RMS wattage rating. The correct term is
"average" or "continuous average". RMS applies only to voltage and current.

Second, if an amplifier can put out a peak voltage of (say) 50 volts, then
that voltage applies to any waveform within the amplifier's bandwidth, be it
sine wave or music. There is nothing "unrealistic" about expecting the
amplifier to produce an output of 50 volts peak, and deliver the corresponding
power into a non-pathological load.

This discussion could easily veer into claims about "instantaneous peak power"
or gasp! music power. Let's avoid that.

I think this is getting into the realm of splitting hairs about terminology.. You know words are fluid in meaning, otherwise the Constitution would still be in effect. It is not. (emergency powers, Admiralty, let's not go there right now) As a lawyer said, it doesn't matter what it says, it mattwers what the court says it says.

When I have an amplifier and pput a scope on it and crank ity all the way up, where the waveform flattens at the top and bottom (clipping) occurs at a certain voltage. I take that voltage's peak value and multiply it by 0.707, then square it and divide by 8. I then declare that number to be how many watts it puts out.

This differs from certain other figures that have been used. Like PIP. Peak instantaneous power. They forgot the "ILS". Peak instantaneous power if lightning strikes.

My amplifier clips at about 82 volts,plus as well as minus. Ergo, 80 * 0.707 = 56.56. Squared that is 3199.0336. Dividing that by 8 yields a figure of 399.87, give or take.

That is the peak value of the biggest reasonable facsimile of a sine wave it will be able to reproduce. If that is not RMS power, I really do not care.. Whatever it is, there is a 0.707 in there. Simply taking the peak power would yield a figure of 840.5 watts.

It's rated about 210 watts per channel - "minimum RMS". Talk to BOb Carver about that. If the term is not technically correct, fine. If I tried just for a few minutes I could find alot more wrong than just that.

Here's one : 180 degrees out of phase. I cringe, almost lock and load when I read about the output of a common emitter, source or cathode amplifier is 180 degrees out of phase with the input. That is ALOT wronger than RMS power.

If you want to shift the phase of a 1,000 Hz signal by 180 degrees what you must do is to delay that signal by a half a millisecond. It IS NOT the same thing as inverting it as any non symmetrical waveform will easily show.

That bull**** bothered me when I was 12 years old and I am glad that people don't say dumb crap like that today. I heard it too many times and electronics teacehrs who taught it like that should not be allowed to fix a toaster.

There is too much damn stuff to unlearn in life already, the last thing anyone needs is more.

"Simply taking the peak power would yield a figure of 840.5 watts. "

OOPS ! Peak VOLTAGE.

On Sun, 11 May 2014 13:42:30 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

I think this is getting into the realm of splitting hairs about terminology.

Yep. Perhaps it would be helpful if we got away from the audio stuff
and took a look at what the RF sector is doing:
http://preciserf.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Appnote-4-Power-tests1.pdf
Summary: RMS = average and there's no such thing as RMS power.

Mo
http://www.eznec.com/Amateur/RMS_Power.pdf

If you search the FCC web pile for "rms power", you'll find that they
use average power. There are references to using an "RMS detector"
setting on spectrum analyzers and power meters, which they equate to
reading the average power.

Rhetorical question: If there's such a thing as "true RMS", is there
also a "false RMS"?

Gone to clean up the workbench. I haven't seen the table top in
months.



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"Rhetorical question: If there's such a thing as "true RMS", is there
also a "false RMS"? "

Answering rhetorical questions is my middle name ! lol

One of my favorites is "What mode is Windows in when it is NOT in safe mode ?".

Anyway, since you use the sine of 45 deg before squaring the voltage, the answer comes out to less than .707 of the - I guess - peak power. If you took the peak voltage squared and then apply that 0.707 to it, what do you have ?

Technically if all amps are measured the same who cares ? There is alot of terminology that is incorrect, and when correct they want to change it anyway.

Like not so long ago, macula. WTF is macula ? So I figure out what they mean. They mean fovea. Well why the hell didn't they just say so ?

Another thing is that I doubt the claim could actually be made that there is no such thing as RMS watts. Watts are a product of voltage and current. This is a number. It varies. If you took and sampled it at a bunch of points of the waveform, and literally root mean squared it, what would that be ?

You've 16 and 25. The square roots are 4 and 5 respecrtively. the mean between them is 4.5. The square of 4.5 is 20.25. It is a number. Maybe I am stupid or something but I do not understand why RMS cannot apply to it.

Of ocurse maybe thaatt's not what we're measuring here but then it's not like AGW where there is money involved. Well maybe...

Money can be involved in the strangest things. Getting ten percent more (of whatever variety) watts out of an amp might make it sell better. People do not realize that to get it any louder you generally need to about double the power. And then distortion. Say you have an ampt that puts out 150 watts per channel with less than 0.05% distortion.

I'd like to see the speaker that plays at 150 watts input with distortion even below 1%. Find one and it is going to cost a ****load of money. It's not likely to come from Best Buy. (culd though, but don't hold your breath)

So if you really can't stand the term RMS applied to power, I'll just use watts period. You can assume that it means (Vp*0.707)^2/R.

Hmmm. "V P point seven oh seven sqared over R"

Sounds better than "average". that's probably why the audio industry decided to use RMS, average just sounds so... ... ... average.

wrote in message ...

I'd like to see the speaker that plays at 150 watts input
with distortion even below 1%.

I love speaker power ratings. What they really refer to (or are supposed to
refer to) is the biggest amplifier you can use without driving the speaker
into audible distortion (below clipping).

" I had never heard of Atkins either"

Actually I probably did hear of it but did not buy the book so it had nothing to do with my decisions.

On Sun, 11 May 2014 04:47:15 -0700, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

"josephkk" wrote in message
.. .

Most if not quite all rms watt ratings are based on single frequency
or two frequency sine wave test measurements. Not all that realistic
for actual output in normal operating signals. Use for comparison
purposes only.

First, there's no such thing as an RMS wattage rating. The correct term is
"average" or "continuous average". RMS applies only to voltage and current.

Second, if an amplifier can put out a peak voltage of (say) 50 volts, then
that voltage applies to any waveform within the amplifier's bandwidth, be it
sine wave or music. There is nothing "unrealistic" about expecting the
amplifier to produce an output of 50 volts peak, and deliver the corresponding
power into a non-pathological load.

This discussion could easily veer into claims about "instantaneous peak power"
or gasp! music power. Let's avoid that.

Root-mean-square is a calculation method based on the mathematical
characteristics of a sine wave. It is thus valid for _any_ unit of
measure. Your persistent argument is about different suppositions from
the start. I was only a teen and laughed at PMPO the very first time i
saw it.

?-)

"josephkk" wrote in message
...

Root-mean-square is a calculation method based on the mathematical
characteristics of a sine wave.

No, it is not. The RMS value of any repetitive waveform can be calculated. It
is not valid for "any" unit of measure. It refers to the heating effect of
voltage or current -- and nothing else.

I lov this place. There's a name up there somewherer about "sci" and "electronics" etc., so naturally we are dicussiong cat hair which of course must bring up rthe Pythagorean theorum, at leas once anyway.

I'm not buitching, far from it. I like the diversity of topics, I am just noting however, that maybe this should be named "What some guys fix and design **** want to talk about, no matter what it is".

Anyway, without delving into the thermal characteristics of cat hair,k or vomit for that matter, just whay IS RMS ? OK, I guess we know what it is, but which brainiac figured out that this "RMS power", whether oit exists or not, was goiulg to beecome the defacto standard for poqwer amp ratings, favored ove PMP or PIP or PIPILS (Peak Instantaneous Poower If Lightnong Strikes) or evdn volts fro that matter ?

Why not say "this baby can put out 80 volts peak into an eight ohm (or lower) load" ?

What's more (Watts more ?) - we know the meaning means little at best. SO it means heating power right ? As in heating up your voice coils until they burn up. People ask me how come I need so much power (Phase Linear 400-2). The speakerds can't tsake it, I have to be alone in the house to use it all because, well, it IS loud. But it's, it's just because it is there. Of ocurse I am having a hell of a time finding fuses for the thing, it calls for eights, I keep finding 7½s, and then the next one is ten. I could probably get away with tens in there...

But I digress, and gigress, and digress...

SO if we took a sine wave, chopped it into say a thousand pieces time wise, sampled, held and averaged all the instantaneous vaoltages, what owuld we come up with ?

But see I just valled it volts. Why not amps ? The fact is, the egg came first. Not to go into the surrounding issues concerning puultry at the moment, the volts are what push the amps. Since one is depenednt on the other, then if you got "RMS" volts, you aslready go "RMS" amps, whether it averages out or not. But it should. Sine means roundness, or something like that.

All these secantary issues aside (YUK YUK YUK), it seems more and more that this is just somehting someone decided would be the fair way to measure these electrons. Why not PIP or PMP or whatever ? (as long as the rules are the same for everyone). Other countries MUST have had something to do with this, because in the US I KNOW you can convuince people that a "power booster" for your car radio can put out 200 watts per channel, all on a 4 amp fuse to boot !

Now that is soem kickass Yankee engineerin what !

That, umm digression, I feel it comong on again !

I have a JBL powered subwoofer that is no longer powered. I got the power for it. The class D amp within is fried, well doesn't work, so I just hooked it up to a corssover and let er rip[. Well not rip.

At any rate, it is a {SW-D112, 12" with a 250 watt amp. The manual is available on the net for proof, but the thing claims 102 % efficiency. I **** you not. If you cannot find a manual on the net I will put the one I got in dropbox, but that's what it says.

Watt's up with that ?

I jst had to slip that in in memorandium or whatever of my good old dead friend Jim Watt. A Scotsman e was, a tall, very likable sociopath with whom I spent many a day discussion all kinds of groovy things like the revolution and ****. He and his cerowd taught me how to gamble. you know how expensive gambling lessons are ? Damn. And see, he taught me the best thing of all - when to get out of the game. you see people sit at those slot machines for example, until all their money's gone. that is the formula for constant loss. So, I was pretty much in grad school of poker, and I was starting to get my money back. (that's like thre duiploma). I started taking his money, OOOOOO, opne time I had three of sa kind in the hole in seven card stud, and a mate showing. I took about $200 from him with that. Of ocurse everyone else's money was in there as well :-)

Now, what were we talking about ?

Oh yeah, the layman, really, has usually not heard of root, or mean or square since school, unless he is one who works on scinetific of other cool ****. I guess osmneonbe had to blow a whistle or someting because it's damn hard to get anything that resembles 200 watts out of a device the size of a ciugarette pack.

Which brings us to the next, regularly scheduled dogression - the "single ended push pull" output stage. I wanted to call it class T but I found, I guess that was taken already. ****ers. Anyway, yup, the dealio with the 70 Khz power oscilllator feeding a four quadrant thrysisting typo device, and the the usuaal filter like a class D amp would have. Noting in the linear except in the input stage.

Think we can fir a 200 model of that in a cigarette pack ?

If we did, no cat hair or vomit would be able to get in, which how, in the end, miraculously and for no particular reason, this post is actually on topic.

Whatever that is...

wrote in message ...

which brainiac figured out that this "RMS power", whether it
exists or not, was goiulg to beecome the defacto standard
for poqwer amp ratings, favored over PMP or PIP or PIPILS
(Peak Instantaneous Power If Lightnong Strikes) or even volts
for that matter?

An idiot brainiac, who doesn't understand what RMS means (in both the
mathematical and practical senses).


Why not say "this baby can put out 80 volts peak into an eight
ohm (or lower) load" ?

Why not? Perfectly reasonable.


To (not) answer your many reasonable questions... There seems to have been a
time when the heating effect of AC voltage was important. Conventional meters
are respond to the average value of the current fed them, but this doesn't
correspond to the amount of energy the AC power can deliver.

So, it was decided that the RMS value of the power voltage would be measured.
Once obtained, the voltage need only be squared and divided by the load
resistance to get the power.

RMS measurements are explained in any good book on electronics. I'm not going
to waste my time explaining to people who should have learned this stuff
decades ago.