High Efficiency Speaker Asylum

Need speakers that can rock with just one watt? You found da place.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: exponential power ratings

Posted by thump on February 21, 2017 at 23:07:39:
no, i'm not familiar with any specific formula that relates to power and frequency, but i always believed that bass requires more power, until i "unlearned it" in some article, possibly about bi-amping that DEMANDED tweeters get the same wattage as woofers assuming the same efficiency.
since then, i've treated THAT as "gospel".
looking at the same issue from a different perspective, i agree that seems bunk as woofers not only have to move a much larger surface area, but also at much greater excursions which clearly requires much more energy where tweeters move tiny amounts of air at imperceptible excursions... the physics behind the math you quote so to speak. (pun intended)
i should have trusted my intuition and NOT the magazine author that polluted my head with bad info. i've seen authors talk idiotic junk before. one, complaining about some issue regarding electrostats, thought it would be "a good idea" to put mids on both sides of a tweeter to improve imaging like an MTM, but the idiot didn't take into account that the only reason MTMs work is because they equally divide the planes of the ears which are on the same horizontal plane & NOT on the same vertical plane as would be needed to time align horizontally.
don't get me started on the popular science EDITOR who couldn't figure out why shower curtains bow inwards against the force of the water. apparently, he never heard of convection. LOL
anyways, thanks for breaking this bad bit of misinformation i got suckered into adopting for so many years even though it sounded wrong. the greater the mass moved and distance covered, the more ergs are needed. DUH! although... higher frequencies must get credited for their "extra reps" in the whole "conservation of energy" thing.
let's see... 40,000 (forwards AND backwards) x .000001mm x .05g = i'm not running the numbers