Stacking Winegard HD-6065P antennas
 

gregz wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/7/2014 2:29 AM, gregz wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jan 2014 23:23:56 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

On 1/6/2014 11:04 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014 03:19:54 +0000 (UTC), gregz
wrote:

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/6/2014 1:28 AM, gregz wrote:
wrote:
"only 3 db", but that's twice the signal. I have mine stacked 12 feet,
but I believe Winegard says either 8 or 10 feet. Mine work swell. +:^] I
got mine just after they were discontinued in 2005/6. Had to email a
number of suppliers until I found the second one. I bet there are some
still in storage somewhere, email different places that sell Winegard,
you may still find one.
John K9RZZ

Twice the signal means twice the voltage, for me.
Greg

Twice the voltage is a 6 db gain. Twice the power is a 3db gain.

Exactly. If I got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal.
Greg

Sorta. If you got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal
voltage but only 1.414 times the signal power. That's why we have
units of measure to avoid such ambiguities. Just to be difficult,
working with antennas, the "signal" is the field strength measured in
dBuV/M. If you define what you're measuring and specify your units of
measure, you wouldn't be having such problems.

You've got it backwards, Jeff. Twice the voltage is 4 times the power.
1.414 times the voltage would be twice the power.

Very embarrassing. Temporary loss of IQ from working on my broken car
with a cold or flu this afternoon. It should be:
If you got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal
voltage but 4 times the signal power.

Thanks for the correction (grumble)... Maybe if I go to sleep early,
when I wake up tomorrow, this didn't happen.


I have not really been specifying units. I was just going over the
situation in my mind, and I straightened out in rf terms.

I got this going out terminology. IF, in audio, I got two speakers
transmitting equal energy, with two amps or channels, and I receive that
totally in phase, I got twice the signal or 6 dB power increase. I've
measured it. It's true. Same thing would happen with two antennas with two
transmitters. Two antennas, one transmitter, with one splitter would only
give 3 dB power increase at the receiver. I'm just thinking out loud. I had
to ease my mind. I think I'm ok now. Almost bedtime.

Greg


No, two in-phase speakers provide 3db increase, not 6db.

If you could double the signal and get 4x the power you could make
gazillions! Of course, you'd be creating energy out of nothing, but who
cares about the laws of physics? :)

The reason big speaker systems work in large places is efficiency gain
using multiple arrays, must be in phase. As I was saying, it's a known
fact, which I have measured. You can actually get near 10 dB gain using
several speakers. It's why horn loudspeakers have gain, better impedance
matching to air.

I once believed two in phase speakers provided 3 dB increase also. I then
read a speaker project by the now famous diAppolito configuration designer
in Speaker Builder magazine 80's ?. I can try to find a reference.

Greg

I found a reference by a well known author designer. The other tricky added
to the equation, is using one channel amplifier, and getting twice the
power with lowered Z. It still works for two separate amps. DiAppolito and
linkwitz, two biggies of speaker systems...

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/faq.htm#Q21

Greg

Stacking Winegard HD-6065P antennas
 

In message , Sal
writes

"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 6 Jan 2014 06:28:11 +0000 (UTC), gregz
wrote:

wrote:
"only 3 db", but that's twice the signal. I have mine stacked 12 feet,
but I believe Winegard says either 8 or 10 feet. Mine work swell. +:^] I
got mine just after they were discontinued in 2005/6. Had to email a
number of suppliers until I found the second one. I bet there are some
still in storage somewhere, email different places that sell Winegard,
you may still find one.

John K9RZZ

Twice the signal means twice the voltage, for me.
Greg

Nope. Power is by the square of the voltage:
P = V^2 / R
If you double the voltage, you get 4 times the power.
A 1.414 times increase in voltage will produce twice the power.

I tried to convert the antenna model of the HD-6066P antenna from the
AO .ant format to .nec using 4NEC2 and failed. The plan was to model
the stacked arrangement and see what happens:
http://www.ham-radio.com/k6sti/hd6065p.htm
The .ant file imported without error, the wire tables and images look
correct, but the pattern is more like a point source than a gain
antenna. I'll look at it later to see where I screwed up, but it
would be nice if someone would look at the problem.

I just set up an experiment. I connected my roof antenna to my signal
level meter and read the signal strength of my Channel 10. It was 10 dBmV,
the unit typically used for TV signal strength work.

Next, I connected the same roof antenna to the inport port of one of a pair
of passive splitters connected back-to-back with equal short lengths of the
same 75-ohm cable.

Finally, I connected the output port of this network to the signal level
meter and observed a signal that was approximately 1.25 dBmV less. (A
quarter of a dBmV is about as close as I can reliably read; individual whole
number marks are only a few mm apart.)

Thus, I conclude that the 1 dB nominal loss for a passive splitter -- either
combining or splitting -- is confirmed. Combining two identical suignals
does get you something more than one, alone.

RELATED: When I used identical twin UHF antennas side-by-side, separated by
a free-space half-wave distance to cancel interference from one side, it
worked nicely and showed about the same loss figures as above. That is, my
reading for two antennas combined was about 2 dBmV higher than for either of
the twin antennas alone, thus reflecting the 1dB loss in the combiner.

Combining antennas can be an uncertain business because the phase
relationships change with wavelength; the arrangement that strengthens one
channel may weaken another channel if the respective signals come from
different directions and/or the cable lengths are not matched. It's a
matter of reinforcement or cancellation, depending on phase relationships.

You missed out step #2, which was to measure the output level of the
splitter alone.

Using your figures, this would have shown a signal loss of 3.625dB (3dB
power split loss and 0.625dB of circuit loss).

When you then added the combiner, you would have 3dB power split loss
and 0.625dB of circuit loss, followed by 3db power combine gain and
0.625dB of circuit loss - so as you measured, a total loss of only
1.25dB.

Despite working in the cable TV industry for 43 years, for some reason
this is an experiment I don't recall ever performing!
--
Ian

Stacking Winegard HD-6065P antennas
 

On 1/7/2014 11:17 PM, gregz wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/7/2014 2:29 AM, gregz wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jan 2014 23:23:56 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

On 1/6/2014 11:04 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014 03:19:54 +0000 (UTC), gregz
wrote:

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/6/2014 1:28 AM, gregz wrote:
wrote:
"only 3 db", but that's twice the signal. I have mine stacked 12 feet,
but I believe Winegard says either 8 or 10 feet. Mine work swell. +:^] I
got mine just after they were discontinued in 2005/6. Had to email a
number of suppliers until I found the second one. I bet there are some
still in storage somewhere, email different places that sell Winegard,
you may still find one.
John K9RZZ

Twice the signal means twice the voltage, for me.
Greg

Twice the voltage is a 6 db gain. Twice the power is a 3db gain.

Exactly. If I got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal.
Greg

Sorta. If you got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal
voltage but only 1.414 times the signal power. That's why we have
units of measure to avoid such ambiguities. Just to be difficult,
working with antennas, the "signal" is the field strength measured in
dBuV/M. If you define what you're measuring and specify your units of
measure, you wouldn't be having such problems.

You've got it backwards, Jeff. Twice the voltage is 4 times the power.
1.414 times the voltage would be twice the power.

Very embarrassing. Temporary loss of IQ from working on my broken car
with a cold or flu this afternoon. It should be:
If you got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal
voltage but 4 times the signal power.

Thanks for the correction (grumble)... Maybe if I go to sleep early,
when I wake up tomorrow, this didn't happen.


I have not really been specifying units. I was just going over the
situation in my mind, and I straightened out in rf terms.

I got this going out terminology. IF, in audio, I got two speakers
transmitting equal energy, with two amps or channels, and I receive that
totally in phase, I got twice the signal or 6 dB power increase. I've
measured it. It's true. Same thing would happen with two antennas with two
transmitters. Two antennas, one transmitter, with one splitter would only
give 3 dB power increase at the receiver. I'm just thinking out loud. I had
to ease my mind. I think I'm ok now. Almost bedtime.

Greg


No, two in-phase speakers provide 3db increase, not 6db.

If you could double the signal and get 4x the power you could make
gazillions! Of course, you'd be creating energy out of nothing, but who
cares about the laws of physics? :)

The reason big speaker systems work in large places is efficiency gain
using multiple arrays, must be in phase. As I was saying, it's a known
fact, which I have measured. You can actually get near 10 dB gain using
several speakers. It's why horn loudspeakers have gain, better impedance
matching to air.

I once believed two in phase speakers provided 3 dB increase also. I then
read a speaker project by the now famous diAppolito configuration designer
in Speaker Builder magazine 80's ?. I can try to find a reference.

Greg


We aren't talking multiple arrays in large places. Of course multiple
speakers will provide more gain than one speaker. And horn speakers get
their "gain" by directing more energy in one direction; there is a loss
of signal in other directions. It has nothing to do with "impedance
matching to the air" (there is no such thing).

The laws of physics say it is impossible to create energy out of
nothing, which is what you would be doing if you quadrupled the power
(6db gain) by placing two speakers in phase. If you "measured" this,
you need a new meter.

I would love to tear apart your "reference".

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

Stacking Winegard HD-6065P antennas
 

On 1/7/2014 10:55 PM, Sal wrote:
"Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 6 Jan 2014 06:28:11 +0000 (UTC), gregz
wrote:

wrote:
"only 3 db", but that's twice the signal. I have mine stacked 12 feet,
but I believe Winegard says either 8 or 10 feet. Mine work swell. +:^] I
got mine just after they were discontinued in 2005/6. Had to email a
number of suppliers until I found the second one. I bet there are some
still in storage somewhere, email different places that sell Winegard,
you may still find one.

John K9RZZ

Twice the signal means twice the voltage, for me.
Greg

Nope. Power is by the square of the voltage:
P = V^2 / R
If you double the voltage, you get 4 times the power.
A 1.414 times increase in voltage will produce twice the power.

I tried to convert the antenna model of the HD-6066P antenna from the
AO .ant format to .nec using 4NEC2 and failed. The plan was to model
the stacked arrangement and see what happens:
http://www.ham-radio.com/k6sti/hd6065p.htm
The .ant file imported without error, the wire tables and images look
correct, but the pattern is more like a point source than a gain
antenna. I'll look at it later to see where I screwed up, but it
would be nice if someone would look at the problem.

I just set up an experiment. I connected my roof antenna to my signal
level meter and read the signal strength of my Channel 10. It was 10 dBmV,
the unit typically used for TV signal strength work.

Next, I connected the same roof antenna to the inport port of one of a pair
of passive splitters connected back-to-back with equal short lengths of the
same 75-ohm cable.

Finally, I connected the output port of this network to the signal level
meter and observed a signal that was approximately 1.25 dBmV less. (A
quarter of a dBmV is about as close as I can reliably read; individual whole
number marks are only a few mm apart.)

Thus, I conclude that the 1 dB nominal loss for a passive splitter -- either
combining or splitting -- is confirmed. Combining two identical suignals
does get you something more than one, alone.

RELATED: When I used identical twin UHF antennas side-by-side, separated by
a free-space half-wave distance to cancel interference from one side, it
worked nicely and showed about the same loss figures as above. That is, my
reading for two antennas combined was about 2 dBmV higher than for either of
the twin antennas alone, thus reflecting the 1dB loss in the combiner.

Combining antennas can be an uncertain business because the phase
relationships change with wavelength; the arrangement that strengthens one
channel may weaken another channel if the respective signals come from
different directions and/or the cable lengths are not matched. It's a
matter of reinforcement or cancellation, depending on phase relationships.

"Sal"
(KD6VKW)



In addition to the splitter losses, you have coax and connector loss.
Coax loss probably isn't too bad, but unless you use a high quality
crimping tool, connector loss can easily approach 0.25 to 0.5 db. Even
with a high quality crimping tool, you can get around 0.1 db per connector.

There is also the possibility of a slight phase difference of the
signals coming out of the combiner, which would also affect the output
(splitters/combiners aren't perfect, either). But I wouldn't think this
would show up at such low frequencies unless you have lab-grade test
equipment (microwave frequencies and above are a different story).

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

Stacking Winegard HD-6065P antennas
 

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/7/2014 11:17 PM, gregz wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/7/2014 2:29 AM, gregz wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jan 2014 23:23:56 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

On 1/6/2014 11:04 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014 03:19:54 +0000 (UTC), gregz
wrote:

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/6/2014 1:28 AM, gregz wrote:
wrote:
"only 3 db", but that's twice the signal. I have mine stacked 12 feet,
but I believe Winegard says either 8 or 10 feet. Mine work swell. +:^] I
got mine just after they were discontinued in 2005/6. Had to email a
number of suppliers until I found the second one. I bet there are some
still in storage somewhere, email different places that sell Winegard,
you may still find one.
John K9RZZ

Twice the signal means twice the voltage, for me.
Greg

Twice the voltage is a 6 db gain. Twice the power is a 3db gain.

Exactly. If I got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal.
Greg

Sorta. If you got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal
voltage but only 1.414 times the signal power. That's why we have
units of measure to avoid such ambiguities. Just to be difficult,
working with antennas, the "signal" is the field strength measured in
dBuV/M. If you define what you're measuring and specify your units of
measure, you wouldn't be having such problems.

You've got it backwards, Jeff. Twice the voltage is 4 times the power.
1.414 times the voltage would be twice the power.

Very embarrassing. Temporary loss of IQ from working on my broken car
with a cold or flu this afternoon. It should be:
If you got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal
voltage but 4 times the signal power.

Thanks for the correction (grumble)... Maybe if I go to sleep early,
when I wake up tomorrow, this didn't happen.


I have not really been specifying units. I was just going over the
situation in my mind, and I straightened out in rf terms.

I got this going out terminology. IF, in audio, I got two speakers
transmitting equal energy, with two amps or channels, and I receive that
totally in phase, I got twice the signal or 6 dB power increase. I've
measured it. It's true. Same thing would happen with two antennas with two
transmitters. Two antennas, one transmitter, with one splitter would only
give 3 dB power increase at the receiver. I'm just thinking out loud. I had
to ease my mind. I think I'm ok now. Almost bedtime.

Greg


No, two in-phase speakers provide 3db increase, not 6db.

If you could double the signal and get 4x the power you could make
gazillions! Of course, you'd be creating energy out of nothing, but who
cares about the laws of physics? :)

The reason big speaker systems work in large places is efficiency gain
using multiple arrays, must be in phase. As I was saying, it's a known
fact, which I have measured. You can actually get near 10 dB gain using
several speakers. It's why horn loudspeakers have gain, better impedance
matching to air.

I once believed two in phase speakers provided 3 dB increase also. I then
read a speaker project by the now famous diAppolito configuration designer
in Speaker Builder magazine 80's ?. I can try to find a reference.

Greg


We aren't talking multiple arrays in large places. Of course multiple
speakers will provide more gain than one speaker. And horn speakers get
their "gain" by directing more energy in one direction; there is a loss
of signal in other directions. It has nothing to do with "impedance
matching to the air" (there is no such thing).

The laws of physics say it is impossible to create energy out of nothing,
which is what you would be doing if you quadrupled the power (6db gain)
by placing two speakers in phase. If you "measured" this, you need a new meter.

I would love to tear apart your "reference".

Non believer in facts. If you don't believe you should do tests, like me.

I'll skip the horn for now..

If you can't believe two speakers will move TWICE the air doubling
intensity, I don't know what else to say, except test yourself.

Greg

Stacking Winegard HD-6065P antennas
 

On 1/8/2014 10:22 PM, gregz wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/7/2014 11:17 PM, gregz wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/7/2014 2:29 AM, gregz wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jan 2014 23:23:56 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
wrote:

On 1/6/2014 11:04 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014 03:19:54 +0000 (UTC), gregz
wrote:

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/6/2014 1:28 AM, gregz wrote:
wrote:
"only 3 db", but that's twice the signal. I have mine stacked 12 feet,
but I believe Winegard says either 8 or 10 feet. Mine work swell. +:^] I
got mine just after they were discontinued in 2005/6. Had to email a
number of suppliers until I found the second one. I bet there are some
still in storage somewhere, email different places that sell Winegard,
you may still find one.
John K9RZZ

Twice the signal means twice the voltage, for me.
Greg

Twice the voltage is a 6 db gain. Twice the power is a 3db gain.

Exactly. If I got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal.
Greg

Sorta. If you got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal
voltage but only 1.414 times the signal power. That's why we have
units of measure to avoid such ambiguities. Just to be difficult,
working with antennas, the "signal" is the field strength measured in
dBuV/M. If you define what you're measuring and specify your units of
measure, you wouldn't be having such problems.

You've got it backwards, Jeff. Twice the voltage is 4 times the power.
1.414 times the voltage would be twice the power.

Very embarrassing. Temporary loss of IQ from working on my broken car
with a cold or flu this afternoon. It should be:
If you got 1 microvolt, 2 microvolts will be twice the signal
voltage but 4 times the signal power.

Thanks for the correction (grumble)... Maybe if I go to sleep early,
when I wake up tomorrow, this didn't happen.


I have not really been specifying units. I was just going over the
situation in my mind, and I straightened out in rf terms.

I got this going out terminology. IF, in audio, I got two speakers
transmitting equal energy, with two amps or channels, and I receive that
totally in phase, I got twice the signal or 6 dB power increase. I've
measured it. It's true. Same thing would happen with two antennas with two
transmitters. Two antennas, one transmitter, with one splitter would only
give 3 dB power increase at the receiver. I'm just thinking out loud. I had
to ease my mind. I think I'm ok now. Almost bedtime.

Greg


No, two in-phase speakers provide 3db increase, not 6db.

If you could double the signal and get 4x the power you could make
gazillions! Of course, you'd be creating energy out of nothing, but who
cares about the laws of physics? :)

The reason big speaker systems work in large places is efficiency gain
using multiple arrays, must be in phase. As I was saying, it's a known
fact, which I have measured. You can actually get near 10 dB gain using
several speakers. It's why horn loudspeakers have gain, better impedance
matching to air.

I once believed two in phase speakers provided 3 dB increase also. I then
read a speaker project by the now famous diAppolito configuration designer
in Speaker Builder magazine 80's ?. I can try to find a reference.

Greg


We aren't talking multiple arrays in large places. Of course multiple
speakers will provide more gain than one speaker. And horn speakers get
their "gain" by directing more energy in one direction; there is a loss
of signal in other directions. It has nothing to do with "impedance
matching to the air" (there is no such thing).

The laws of physics say it is impossible to create energy out of nothing,
which is what you would be doing if you quadrupled the power (6db gain)
by placing two speakers in phase. If you "measured" this, you need a new meter.

I would love to tear apart your "reference".

Non believer in facts. If you don't believe you should do tests, like me.

I'll skip the horn for now..

If you can't believe two speakers will move TWICE the air doubling
intensity, I don't know what else to say, except test yourself.

Greg


I have (I was an EE major). You can't create energy from nothing. The
laws of physics don't allow it. And I currently have a business which
deals with home entertainment systems.

At MOST, two speakers in phase can move twice the air. No more, and in
reality, because of inefficiencies, it will be less.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

Stacking Winegard HD-6065P antennas
 

We aren't talking multiple arrays in large places. Of course multiple
speakers will provide more gain than one speaker. And horn speakers get
their "gain" by directing more energy in one direction; there is a loss
of signal in other directions. It has nothing to do with "impedance
matching to the air" (there is no such thing).

The laws of physics say it is impossible to create energy out of
nothing,
which is what you would be doing if you quadrupled the power (6db gain)
by placing two speakers in phase. If you "measured" this, you need a
new meter.

I would love to tear apart your "reference".

Non believer in facts. If you don't believe you should do tests, like me.

I'll skip the horn for now..

If you can't believe two speakers will move TWICE the air doubling
intensity, I don't know what else to say, except test yourself.

Greg


I have (I was an EE major). You can't create energy from nothing. The
laws of physics don't allow it. And I currently have a business which
deals with home entertainment systems.

At MOST, two speakers in phase can move twice the air. No more, and in
reality, because of inefficiencies, it will be less.

I hate to question the law of conservation of energy at all, but I must
say that there could be more energy delivered from two 8 ohm speakers in
parallel than a single speaker powered by the same amplifier. Many
amplifiers have 4 ohm outputs. So, you see the possibility. You would be
delivering the same energy to both speakers as was delivered to one.

Of course for those who believe in magical energy production, no
reasoning will help.

I personally have a Crown 810 powering a couple of AR SRT380s. The
amplifier has 4 ohm outputs and the speakers are 4 ohms. There is
nothing to be done to increase sound power except buy more efficient
folded horn types. I have neither the space nor money to do so. However,
at 420 watts rms per channel as it is now, I really don't require more
power. Jimmy Hendrix sounds just fine to me. :-)

So, matching output impedance of amplifier to speaker will result in
maximum energy transfer and using the most efficient speakers will
result in of course more acoustic energy produced. All we are talking
about here is not wasting energy in poor efficiency systems.

Stacking Winegard HD-6065P antennas
 

On 1/9/2014 10:53 AM, boomer wrote:


We aren't talking multiple arrays in large places. Of course multiple
speakers will provide more gain than one speaker. And horn speakers
get
their "gain" by directing more energy in one direction; there is a loss
of signal in other directions. It has nothing to do with "impedance
matching to the air" (there is no such thing).

The laws of physics say it is impossible to create energy out of
nothing,
which is what you would be doing if you quadrupled the power (6db gain)
by placing two speakers in phase. If you "measured" this, you need a
new meter.

I would love to tear apart your "reference".

Non believer in facts. If you don't believe you should do tests, like
me.

I'll skip the horn for now..

If you can't believe two speakers will move TWICE the air doubling
intensity, I don't know what else to say, except test yourself.

Greg


I have (I was an EE major). You can't create energy from nothing. The
laws of physics don't allow it. And I currently have a business which
deals with home entertainment systems.

At MOST, two speakers in phase can move twice the air. No more, and in
reality, because of inefficiencies, it will be less.

I hate to question the law of conservation of energy at all, but I must
say that there could be more energy delivered from two 8 ohm speakers in
parallel than a single speaker powered by the same amplifier. Many
amplifiers have 4 ohm outputs. So, you see the possibility. You would be
delivering the same energy to both speakers as was delivered to one.

Of course for those who believe in magical energy production, no
reasoning will help.

I personally have a Crown 810 powering a couple of AR SRT380s. The
amplifier has 4 ohm outputs and the speakers are 4 ohms. There is
nothing to be done to increase sound power except buy more efficient
folded horn types. I have neither the space nor money to do so. However,
at 420 watts rms per channel as it is now, I really don't require more
power. Jimmy Hendrix sounds just fine to me. :-)


I would hate to have you as my neighbor. I would have to call the police
on you.

Stacking Winegard HD-6065P antennas
 

On 1/9/2014 11:53 AM, boomer wrote:


We aren't talking multiple arrays in large places. Of course multiple
speakers will provide more gain than one speaker. And horn speakers
get
their "gain" by directing more energy in one direction; there is a loss
of signal in other directions. It has nothing to do with "impedance
matching to the air" (there is no such thing).

The laws of physics say it is impossible to create energy out of
nothing,
which is what you would be doing if you quadrupled the power (6db gain)
by placing two speakers in phase. If you "measured" this, you need a
new meter.

I would love to tear apart your "reference".

Non believer in facts. If you don't believe you should do tests, like
me.

I'll skip the horn for now..

If you can't believe two speakers will move TWICE the air doubling
intensity, I don't know what else to say, except test yourself.

Greg


I have (I was an EE major). You can't create energy from nothing. The
laws of physics don't allow it. And I currently have a business which
deals with home entertainment systems.

At MOST, two speakers in phase can move twice the air. No more, and in
reality, because of inefficiencies, it will be less.

I hate to question the law of conservation of energy at all, but I must
say that there could be more energy delivered from two 8 ohm speakers in
parallel than a single speaker powered by the same amplifier. Many
amplifiers have 4 ohm outputs. So, you see the possibility. You would be
delivering the same energy to both speakers as was delivered to one.

Of course for those who believe in magical energy production, no
reasoning will help.

I personally have a Crown 810 powering a couple of AR SRT380s. The
amplifier has 4 ohm outputs and the speakers are 4 ohms. There is
nothing to be done to increase sound power except buy more efficient
folded horn types. I have neither the space nor money to do so. However,
at 420 watts rms per channel as it is now, I really don't require more
power. Jimmy Hendrix sounds just fine to me. :-)

So, matching output impedance of amplifier to speaker will result in
maximum energy transfer and using the most efficient speakers will
result in of course more acoustic energy produced. All we are talking
about here is not wasting energy in poor efficiency systems.



OK, so instead of putting out 100W to one eight-ohm speaker, you're
putting out 100W to two eight ohm speakers. So you have a 3db gain,
assuming the speakers are in phase.

It is no different than feeding two eight-ohm speakers from separate
100W amplifiers, and the results are the same.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.

==================

Stacking Winegard HD-6065P antennas
 

On 1/9/2014 11:06 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 1/9/2014 11:53 AM, boomer wrote:


We aren't talking multiple arrays in large places. Of course multiple
speakers will provide more gain than one speaker. And horn speakers
get
their "gain" by directing more energy in one direction; there is a
loss
of signal in other directions. It has nothing to do with "impedance
matching to the air" (there is no such thing).

The laws of physics say it is impossible to create energy out of
nothing,
which is what you would be doing if you quadrupled the power (6db
gain)
by placing two speakers in phase. If you "measured" this, you need a
new meter.

I would love to tear apart your "reference".

Non believer in facts. If you don't believe you should do tests, like
me.

I'll skip the horn for now..

If you can't believe two speakers will move TWICE the air doubling
intensity, I don't know what else to say, except test yourself.

Greg


I have (I was an EE major). You can't create energy from nothing. The
laws of physics don't allow it. And I currently have a business which
deals with home entertainment systems.

At MOST, two speakers in phase can move twice the air. No more, and in
reality, because of inefficiencies, it will be less.

I hate to question the law of conservation of energy at all, but I must
say that there could be more energy delivered from two 8 ohm speakers in
parallel than a single speaker powered by the same amplifier. Many
amplifiers have 4 ohm outputs. So, you see the possibility. You would be
delivering the same energy to both speakers as was delivered to one.

Of course for those who believe in magical energy production, no
reasoning will help.

I personally have a Crown 810 powering a couple of AR SRT380s. The
amplifier has 4 ohm outputs and the speakers are 4 ohms. There is
nothing to be done to increase sound power except buy more efficient
folded horn types. I have neither the space nor money to do so. However,
at 420 watts rms per channel as it is now, I really don't require more
power. Jimmy Hendrix sounds just fine to me. :-)

So, matching output impedance of amplifier to speaker will result in
maximum energy transfer and using the most efficient speakers will
result in of course more acoustic energy produced. All we are talking
about here is not wasting energy in poor efficiency systems.



OK, so instead of putting out 100W to one eight-ohm speaker, you're
putting out 100W to two eight ohm speakers. So you have a 3db gain,
assuming the speakers are in phase.

It is no different than feeding two eight-ohm speakers from separate
100W amplifiers, and the results are the same.


exactly