Re: [Harp-L] Watts Up With That?
- To: Harp- L <Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Watts Up With That?
- From: Rick Davis <bluesharpamps@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 10:52:36 -0700
- Cc:
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=u0CQedaM8UApxATg25UJdHFM6UcNh63gpI37Rf36jTs=; b=Q0CGTNwcxdljsKsGb6vPLIi8Sq88v+NrN9d7FyGlej//zuDX4LY7Sg2n8G+E2FTI2P ixhqqXwA/QqBTpqsXpERTckHwPb/R5hK6ScdnRVvk/30xmXS1eG7fqtnj+MHVt7tiX4C NudJiobVkjTdg8+4W0aEgWuLkeNEhlKPwR/I4=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=EJ3hAfCc3YMk3OpcJfDCg1nzsETuqXQyR5fRTv3MTKGL2pDtLtXphYhRKevccg+lbN XS3modz7j0qg9BRvqx1UntZvV9tVxfiuvhSRlwHcIWMy/pwgt/kVukxzAa1Kx7braOR1 kvQikphaLkQffkUdxZVrxvK0a0T7s5/KiAGEk=
- In-reply-to: <26C998BEBD8E4DADA25E65F87F170FDD@blacky>
- References: <200912040347.nB43lPfn017961@harp-l.com> <406482CE-6CFA-4997-A7D4-4F52948F4FA9@heumann.com> <fac5da300912040747s3b742ea3l4ff565c5abaa8f7d@mail.gmail.com> <26C998BEBD8E4DADA25E65F87F170FDD@blacky>
Jim, good points.
The goal of a standardized wattage rating is NOT to indicate exactly
how loud an amp is. We all know there are other determinants. Just as with
a car, the horsepower figure does not indicate how fast it may go, since
weight and aerodynamics play a roll as well. Still, buyers have a right to
know the exact horsepower.
The goal is to provide buyers an honest, measurable, and repeatable number
for comparison between and among different amplifiers. The way it is now
with the cottage industry of harp amp builders the wattage numbers are often
arbitrary, rendering them meaningless.
Buyers often focus on watts: It's one of those easy things to grasp.
A bigger number always seems better. But, is the number valid and
testable? Does the watt number from one amp even relate to the watt number
from another? If the answer to those questions is "No" then the numbers are
worthless; nothing more than marketing froth.
Evan a loose "standard" would be better than what exists (or does not exist)
now. That is what I am proposing, Jim. I'll have more details later.
--
-Rick Davis
The Blues Harp Amps Blog
http://www.bluesharpamps.blogspot.com/
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Jim Rumbaugh <jrumbaug@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I doubt if you will get a "standard" for amp watts. I went through this in
> the 60's and 70's with guitar amps. For example, 70 watts RMS(ROOT MEAN
> SQUARE) is the same as 100 watts, PEAK and is the same as 200 watts PEP
> (PEAK ENVELOPE POWER ). Then someone came up with a standard called Peak
> Music Power (w.t.f. is that??) Then you have to figure out if that's watts
> at how much distortion, because a square wave has more power than a sine
> wave. But if you list the wattage of a clean signal, how does many harp
> players use the amp, .... at full power, with lots of distortion, no where
> near a clean signal. What you probably want for a standard is peak watts
> before clipping, that's where the rating of watts with distortion comes in
> handy with "stereo amps". But since harp amps are used for sound
> "production" rather than reproduction, the idea of attaching a distortion
> number could be misleading. I do not see a simple answer.
>
> So Rick. What "standard" would you propose to use?
>
> Jim Rumbaugh
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rick Davis" <bluesharpamps@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Greg Heumann" <greg@xxxxxxxxxxx>; "Harp- L" <Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 10:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Watts Up With That?
>
>
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and
MHonArc 2.6.8.