Speaker connection

[Fendrick]

Have yet to see the helpful posts you are speaking of.

A thing learned by many "read the room" Or in this case read the OP.

[cmndr]

OP wants what he wants. Not a problem in and of itself. If things are safely wired and he's happy, that's probably what matters most. 

On a technical basis, it's sub-optimal for many reasons. The information is out there for others who come across it. 

If I feel motivated (requires hooking up my desktop) I might measure my front three speakers with center channel spread enabled vs just the L+R. 

 

5 hours ago, Fendrick said:

A thing learned by many "read the room" Or in this case read the OP.

Speaking in terms of broader themes, there are cases where this is a valid sentiment. This is part of why I mentioned that it's not so bad to have the second set of speakers physically offset by a fair amount. 

That sentiment taken to the extreme (this general thread is NOT nearly as extreme) is Steve Jobs ignoring treatment for his curable cancer and eating fruit instead.
 

5 hours ago, Kamranbites said:

Tested your both YouTube videos the sound looks good when 4 speakers are connected together the left right movement song looks more realistic when 4 speakers are connected audio looks like moving left to right slowly but when only pair is connected it doesn't look relastic 

One thing to be aware of, people generally prefer louder sounds (at least at normalish listening levels) so some of the preference could come from higher sound pressure. Ideally you level-match in a test (which would mean offsetting the output by around 3dB if you have the speakers wired in parallel or at least aiming to get them to sound about as loud)

[Kamranbites]

2 hours ago, cmndr said:

OP wants what he wants. Not a problem in and of itself. If things are safely wired and he's happy, that's probably what matters most. 

On a technical basis, it's sub-optimal for many reasons. The information is out there for others who come across it. 

If I feel motivated (requires hooking up my desktop) I might measure my front three speakers with center channel spread enabled vs just the L+R. 

 

Speaking in terms of broader themes, there are cases where this is a valid sentiment. This is part of why I mentioned that it's not so bad to have the second set of speakers physically offset by a fair amount. 

That sentiment taken to the extreme (this general thread is NOT nearly as extreme) is Steve Jobs ignoring treatment for his curable cancer and eating fruit instead.
 

One thing to be aware of, people generally prefer louder sounds (at least at normalish listening levels) so some of the preference could come from higher sound pressure. Ideally you level-match in a test (which would mean offsetting the output by around 3dB if you have the speakers wired in parallel or at least aiming to get them to sound about as loud)

But what is the best way to wire them series or parallel, parallel bring ohms little closer 3 ohms and the rated capacity is 4 and connecting in series ohms goes to 12 which is far more then rated capacity 8ohms 

[Fendrick]

21 minutes ago, Kamranbites said:

But what is the best way to wire them series or parallel, parallel bring ohms little closer 3 ohms and the rated capacity is 4 and connecting in series ohms goes to 12 which is far more then rated capacity 8ohms 

Just wire them in parallel.

 

You will hear by ear if you play them too loud with distortion anyway.

 

Series makes sound quality worse.

[cmndr]

39 minutes ago, Kamranbites said:

But what is the best way to wire them series or parallel, parallel bring ohms little closer 3 ohms and the rated capacity is 4 and connecting in series ohms goes to 12 which is far more then rated capacity 8ohms 

The best way is to probably only wire one pair of speakers. 

If you were forced for some reason to run both sets off of a single amp, with 0 sound processing it probably won't matter a ton either way unless you're really cranking the volume up past a level that's comfortable to listen to. 

Usually wiring in parallel gets you more volume and in a series gets you less volume.
Running in parallel usually sounds better but it might fry your amplifier. Amps are NOT designed for that low of resistance. 
Running in can screw with the crossovers in your speakers because the capacitors and resistors are NOT designed with having a high resistance current in mind. So you'll have one part of one speaker NOT playing sounds it's supposed to play and a different part playing sounds it's not designed to play. 

The pros and cons are listed here - https://nucoustics.com/speakers/series-or-parallel-speakers-which-is-better/#:~:text=To answer this question%2C parallel,power output will be lower.

Either way that you hook it up, it's unlikely to be "good" for your amplifier and/or speakers but generally speaking both speakers and amplifiers can handle years or decades or abuse. Just don't be surprised if it takes what would've been a 10-50 year life expectancy amplifier and cuts it down to 1-5 years. 

If you're worried about it... cheapest used AVR you can find. Even if it's "only" rated for 100W, chances are a class AB amp could sustain a 100W load for longer than a cheap class D amp (the numbers they put on the box are bold faced lies) rated for 200W could sustain a 100W load for. 

[Fendrick]

4 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

And you smell by nose if the output transistors catch fire...

 

Amplifiers should never be run below their minimum impedance. The higher current might lead to accelerated ageing or even destruction of the amplifier. And this can happen easily without any distortion.

 

Only identical speakers should be run in series. The differences in the impedance curve of different speakers  will completely screw up the frequency response in series.

 

Since you insist on using both speakers, you could either use one channel for speaker type A in series and the other channel for speaker type B in series.

Or you can just run them in any variation you like with two speakers per channel in parallel, but you have been warned that you might fry you amplifier.

You don't know anything other than what a manual tells you, no point talking to you. Actually dyno an amp and see what numbers it puts out, these small amps deliver their wattage and way more if you use a more powerful power supply, 32v 5 amp is enough to draw around 400w total without blowing anything, the OP is on a 200w total rated amp with a power supply that can give that wattage if it needs it.

Also wattage is never drawn linearly it goes up and down all the time and is far more dynamic in nature.

 

No one is frying any amp since it would require the OP to draw more than the power supply can give, he only has around 20w RMS speakers, no one is drawing a lot of power from the amp.

 

Almost any modern amp can handle lower OHM's than spec'd, it is just what was tested at factory.

[cmndr]

1 minute ago, Fendrick said:

No one is frying any amp since it would require the OP to draw more than the power supply can give, he only has around 20w RMS speakers, no one is drawing a lot of power from the amp.

Class D amps generally struggle with very low Ohm loads. Even not bad ones. 

For a high wattage output some will put themselves into "protection mode" to extend their lives. 

It's very possible it's never an issue, especially if it's only run at low wattages (likely what would happen in OP's case) but it's still not best practice. 

1 minute ago, Fendrick said:

Almost any modern amp can handle lower OHM's than spec'd, it is just what was tested at factory.

You'd be putting a ~1.5 Ohm load on a class D amp. Class D amps designed for 4-8Ohm loads usually struggle with voltage swings under 2Ohm loads.
 

[Fendrick]

Here is a fact for you, the DOUK M1 PRO I used in my bluetooth speaker build is driving a pair of 8 inch woofers at 125 RMS each and these are built for bass and a 4ohm bullet super tweeter the total OHM rating is not within spec.

125w RMS woofers with a 350w RMS tweeter, that's a whole lot more power handling than the amp can give, functionally it works fine because all the power the amp can give out will now be at a lower total volume level suggested by the volume knob due to drawing more power at lower OHM's actual heard volume is no different, the difference is I have the speakers to totally wipe the amp out, I am not stupid though.

You can hear distortion before anything is close to blowing.

 

The tweeter don't need much power, the bass drivers do, most of the amps driving force is through bass and none through tweeter, so you end up with a balanced sound output but also being able to drive the speakers to a louder volume. The decibel level is 129 DB at 2 feet.

 

 

The speakers hit their peak power handling and the tweeter is stupidly efficient.

 

The OP won't have this problem, if his amp delivers rated power they won't be able to run it up anywhere close to as much before the speakers sound like a cat being strangled.

 

I run a 1 OHM mono block bass amp with a Vibe 12inch 700w RMS competition SPL sub on my PC, what are you talking about?

 

 

 

 

[Fendrick]

4 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

What kind of person are you exactly? Is it your hobby to give bad advice to people on the internet which might result in burning down their house? Because that's exactly what you are doing right now and it's infuriating.

You don't even grasp the basic concepts of electronics. A lower load impedance means higher current flowing through the transistors resulting in higher losses and more heating. It's laughable that you think this anything to do with the power supply.

Please stop spreading this BS; you're doing the opposite of helping.

 

If your amp even has an over current and over temperature protection (most inexpensive models don't have that).

I have practical experience and some theory, common sense and intelligence in practice. Your theory don't work for the vast majority of users since you base your theory off of rigid rules which amps all functionally function differently and have different use case scenarios.

 

You are ignorant to this because you only live in a land of theories.

 

I am the stupid one apparently.

 

https://www.diymobileaudio.com/threads/for-the-weirdos-who-use-car-audio-amps-in-a-house-like-me-guide.454574/

 

 

[cmndr]

8 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

If your amp even has an over current and over temperature protection (most inexpensive models don't have that).

I'm doing a quick check on my own amps (Aiyima a07, Fosi BT30d) and it looks like they have some mix of OCP/Over voltage protection/thermal protection. They're "cheap" amps at only $70 when I bought it. If I had to guess it's probably under $1 to implement and is likely bundled with the some of the more recent DSPs from Texas Instruments. Pure speculation though. Both the Aiyima and Fosi have TI DSPs though. 

I wouldn't be surprised if a $30-50 amp completely skips on OCP though. 

 

3 minutes ago, Fendrick said:

I have practical experience and some theory, common sense and intelligence in practice. Your theory don't work for the vast majority of users since you base your theory off of rigid rules which amps all functionally function differently and have different use case scenarios.

 

You are ignorant to this because you only live in a land of theories.

 

I am the stupid one apparently.

 

https://www.diymobileaudio.com/threads/for-the-weirdos-who-use-car-audio-amps-in-a-house-like-me-guide.454574/

 

 

It's possible to do things that don't immediately seem awful but which are counter productive or are otherwise sub-optimal.

Think eating lead paint and bragging about it. It won't kill you. It won't help either. Heck you might even get a mild high from it, which seems nice. 

[Fendrick]

5 minutes ago, cmndr said:

I'm doing a quick check on my own amps (Aiyima a07, Fosi BT30d) and it looks like they have some mix of OCP/Over voltage protection/thermal protection. They're "cheap" amps at only $70 when I bought it. If I had to guess it's probably under $1 to implement and is likely bundled with the some of the more recent DSPs from Texas Instruments. Pure speculation though. Both the Aiyima and Fosi have TI DSPs though. 

I wouldn't be surprised if a $30-50 amp completely skips on OCP though. 

 

It's possible to do things that don't immediately seem awful but which are counter productive or are otherwise sub-optimal.

Think eating lead paint and bragging about it. It won't kill you. It won't help either. Heck you might even get a mild high from it, which seems nice. 

Puffing up your chest is not saying much.

[Fendrick]

7 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

Mate, why would anyone write 150W @ 4 Ohm on their data sheet if they could write 250 W @ 2 Ohm? And please explain why all these theories electrical engineers use to design circuits magically don't apply "in your reality"? Seriously? 

We are talking about fundamental and basic principles of electronics not quantum mechanics. URI and Kirchhoff are super-basic stuff.

 

In the past 15 years I have probably seen more amplifiers go up in flames because some idiot thought minimum impedance is just a suggestion than you have ever touched.

I have only found a lack thereof so far but feel free to amaze me.

Good to point that out, nobody would have guessed.

Let us know why my stuff has not blown yet.

700w RMS competition SQL/SPL sub ported.

Bluetooth build sharp and clear, very crisp sound. Hits hard and low too. DOUK M1 PRO amp.

Noise floor at work is 67 decibels.

 

 

I know why... because theory don't match practical application.

You think you know best, well tell that to us who have functioning systems now after months of use, the bluetooth speaker gets thrashed at work pushing volume way louder than in the video.

 

 

https://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2014/09/26/why-study-game-theory-when-it-has-limited-practical-applications-in-real-life/

 

 

[cmndr]

@HenrySalayne Try to be nicer and focus on the ideas moreso than the person. I'm generally in alignment with your thoughts but it still matters to be somewhat hospitable.

And yeah, I get it. A lot of this stuff is taught to 16-18 year olds in high school (or at the very least is approachable by a VERY motivated 14 year old who took physics in the 8th grade) - https://apstudents.collegeboard.org/courses/ap-physics-2-algebra-based

I'll fully admit I did NOT take that class and most of my exposure has been autodidactic (did a math-heavy degree during undergrad but no physics - it's been on my infinite to do list do jump through calc based physics and more or less superficially skim a physics degree)

Running in parallel PROBABLY won't do anything awful. I'd guess it's like using toothpaste instead of thermal paste on a heatsink and only lightly tightening 2 screws instead of applying solid tension to 4 on a mounting bracket. Not recommended. You might run into some heat problems. You're HOPING that there's a safety in there somewhere that automatically throttles down load if things go a bit far. Worst case scenario something fries up. 
 

Quote

You think you know best, well tell that to us who have functioning systems now after months of use, the bluetooth speaker gets thrashed at work pushing volume way louder than in the video.

So THAT is actually something of my specialty. One project that I worked on was estimating the lifespan of something like $50 million worth of high power amplifiers (HPA) based on historical data. Mostly because some executive wanted to CYA and certain parts were no longer in production. (energy efficiency ended up being the deciding factor, not lifespan - if you're beaming a signal to a satellite across an array of 50 antennas this matters. )

If you're doing survival analysis you'd actually want to look at more than one unit (looking at only one thing is called anecdotal evidence) over an extended period of time. 

Saying a part, that could realistically last 50 years, hasn't failed after 6 months is basically non-informative. You would expect that to be the case.

This is based on real world experience where millions of dollars were being thrown at a problem. Not a hypothesis that a single, partial observation, is sufficient. 

[Fendrick]

I am not self promoting, I am trying to use practical knowledge rather than reading theory which in 99% of cases never matches the real world.

Using rules against people won't help you come across more "Right"

 

Fear mongering tactics don't work on me either Mr so called "ethical". You keep bolstering yourself lol.

 

If your theory works none of my setups would or should work at all, and definitley not with the sound they are putting out either.

 

I do await your theory on that one on top of all the other theory you theoretically think about, I guess life is just theory too? Life is not predictable and neither are amps lol.

 

You say a lot but give no defined reasoning to the counter argument, it has all fallen into personal attacks which means you have nothing left.

 

Ethics don't complete the lack of a good answer.

Being more right means you only care about your side of the argument.

 

I said you lean way too heavily into theory for the OP's application. Ignoring the fact the amp will drive those speakers completely fine, they are not power hungry.

[cmndr]

24 minutes ago, Fendrick said:

I am trying to use practical knowledge rather than reading theory which in 99% of cases never matches the real world.

Using rules against people won't help you come across more "Right"

This is getting into semantics but... 
Most of what you're critiquing as theory falls under "laws of physics" or manufacturer's specs. 
Most of what you're citing as "practical experience" is itself theory backed by partial anecdotal observances (you don't have a full lifespan's worth of data on multiple devices in multiple environments). 

 

Also as far as theory is concerned, in the audio world most of what I'd think of as theory would fall more along the lines of modeling fluid mechanics (usually first order equations or simulations), circuit routing, crossover design, etc.
 

This stuff actually works by the way. How do you think a modern speaker is designed and manufactured? How do you think an amplifier is designed and manufactured? How do you think a DAC is designed?
70 years ago it was "brute force application". These days it's theory backed computer simulations and equation modeling. It cuts out the brute force trial and error by many orders of magnitude. It's why a $500 speaker today can outperform a $20,000 speaker from 70 years ago on a wide range of characteristics. 

How do you think an IC is made? Trial and error by some dude on a forum? No. There's a boatload of math equations, simulations and SOME tinkering at a foundry. There's profoundly more ways to get something wrong than to get it right. Many of these "wrongs" are seemingly correct if you only have a narrow snapshot in time. 

 

[Fendrick]

4 minutes ago, cmndr said:

This is getting into semantics but... 
Most of what you're critiquing as theory falls under "laws of physics". 
Most of what you're citing as "practical experience" is itself theory backed by partial anecdotal observances (you don't have a full lifespan's worth of data on multiple devices in multiple environments). 

 

Also as far as theory is concerned, in the audio world most of what I'd think of as theory would fall more along the lines of modeling fluid mechanics (usually first order equations or simulations), circuit routing, crossover design, etc.
 

This stuff actually works by the way. How do you think a modern speaker is designed and manufactured? How do you think an amplifier is designed and manufactured? How do you think a DAC is designed?
70 years ago it was "brute force application". These days it's theory backed computer simulations and equation modeling. It cuts out the brute force trial and error by many orders of magnitude. It's why a $500 speaker today can outperform a $20,000 speaker from 70 years ago on a wide range of characteristics. 

How do you think an IC is made? Trial and error by some dude on a forum? No. There's a boatload of math equations, simulations and SOME tinkering at a foundry. There's profoundly more ways to get something wrong than to get it right. Many of these "wrongs" are seemingly correct if you only have a narrow snapshot in time. 

 

Except only the things tested were run through that data, what the OP has never was.

 

Things like stereo imaging etc are common sense values...

 

Noisy sound? Well buy a better amp with a lower THD rating and read what wattage makes it go above 1% THD.

 

With what the OP has? It will likely work fine, highly doubtful to blow any amp using parellel wiring and landing at 2 OHM load, unless it is from the 1990's or before.

 

[cmndr]

For what it's worth, chat GPT has more or less mirrored what I've said. I aimed to ask the question in a neutral manner. 

[Fendrick]

Also mirrors what I said, you will hear distortion and you will be limited to a lower level of volume suggested by the volume knob.

Series wiring causes audio quality issues.

 

The OP should just do it TBH, nothing to lose. 200w amp is never going to blow powering 4 20w RMS speakers.

[cmndr]

47 minutes ago, Fendrick said:

Also mirrors what I said, you will hear distortion and you will be limited to a lower level of volume suggested by the volume knob.

Series wiring causes audio quality issues.

 

The OP should just do it TBH, nothing to lose. 200w amp is never going to blow powering 4 20w RMS speakers.

Chat GPT didn't give a single "pro" to hacking multiple speakers together...

If you run in parallel, you're wearing down the amp, risking potentially damaging them. In OP's case he has 180W worth of speakers on an amp that's best case scenario rated for 200W (probably more like 60-70W sustained) so this IS an actual risk if OP is careless about turning up the sound.
If you run in series, you're risk underpowering the speakers (and potentially damaging them).
If the speakers are physically close to each other (e.g. within ~5-10 feet) there's comb filtering which makes the sound muddy/distorted. 



I'm generally AGAINST running all of the devices together in a way that they were NOT designed to be used in. I did suggest one use case (trying to fill a large room and spacing the speakers VERY far apart).  Ideally there'd either be two amps or a proper AVR - even a budget AVR that costs less than the amp being used. 

[Fendrick]

Chat GPT is a learning algorythm that learns from humans, humans are flawed, this is not the win you think it is.

 

https://medium.com/yardcouch-com/chatgpts-fatal-flaw-why-we-shouldn-t-trust-it-blindly-82c7868cabd2

 

"

What Exactly is ChatGPT Doing?

He believes that ChatGPT’s current operating model is flawed and relies too heavily on past texts without genuinely understanding the context and relationships between them.

To understand how ChatGPT works, Marcus compares it to the artistic technique of pastiche, combining various materials to imitate a particular style.

In this case, ChatGPT synthesizes existing texts written by humans, trying to mimic their style and respond to new prompts. This approach can sometimes result in an excellent reader, but sometimes it can get things wrong, like when it suggested that “churros are useful for surgery.”

ChatGPT is essentially just converting all the text it has read in the past into a computable vector based on word-to-word similarities.

In other words, it doesn’t understand the text itself."

 

 

 

"

The Worse Case Scenario

While the technology is impressive, Klein worries that the cost of generating false information will become zero. In contrast, the cost of obtaining truthful and accurate information remains the same.

In other words, the risk of disinformation is getting higher.

This is where the “Jurassic Park Moment” comes in. Remember the scene in the movie where the Tyrannosaurus Rex makes its first appearance? That’s the moment when a terrifying being suddenly appears, and in the context of AI, it’s the moment when the cost of producing disinformation is reduced to zero."

[Fendrick]

4 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

Oof, you can see ChatGPT learned from the worst.  That's really bad and just shows you how deep false information regarding audio is rooted within the depth of the internet.

The "too high impedance" is from a time when amplifiers had transformers (tube amps). There is no "too high" impedance for transistor amps*.

And the "If the amplifier's power rating is lower than the combined power rating of the speakers, it can result in clipping or distortion, which can damage the speakers" is a blatant lie.It has been told so many times, even ChatGPT takes it as a fact and turns it into bad advice.

 

(* class D amplifiers are a notable exception because of the low-pass filter in their output)

The OP uses class D, topic closed?

[cmndr]

22 minutes ago, Fendrick said:

The OP uses class D, topic closed?

You'd still get clipping, it just is limited to a point where it's less bad. 

You also run into cases where the capacitors in the crossover networks of the speakers act a bit wonky if you're running in a series. 

[Kamranbites]

5 hours ago, cmndr said:

This is getting into semantics but... 
Most of what you're critiquing as theory falls under "laws of physics" or manufacturer's specs. 
Most of what you're citing as "practical experience" is itself theory backed by partial anecdotal observances (you don't have a full lifespan's worth of data on multiple devices in multiple environments). 

 

Also as far as theory is concerned, in the audio world most of what I'd think of as theory would fall more along the lines of modeling fluid mechanics (usually first order equations or simulations), circuit routing, crossover design, etc.
 

This stuff actually works by the way. How do you think a modern speaker is designed and manufactured? How do you think an amplifier is designed and manufactured? How do you think a DAC is designed?
70 years ago it was "brute force application". These days it's theory backed computer simulations and equation modeling. It cuts out the brute force trial and error by many orders of magnitude. It's why a $500 speaker today can outperform a $20,000 speaker from 70 years ago on a wide range of characteristics. 

How do you think an IC is made? Trial and error by some dude on a forum? No. There's a boatload of math equations, simulations and SOME tinkering at a foundry. There's profoundly more ways to get something wrong than to get it right. Many of these "wrongs" are seemingly correct if you only have a narrow snapshot in time. 

 

Ok I get it lowering the ohms may have effect on  my speaker or amp yes may be it will be not fast but slowly it might damage the circuit what about i add resistance and make it 4 ohms just need to step up 1 ohms .

[Kamranbites]

8 hours ago, TechlessBro said:

I’m lost where this topic has gone.
 

There is no correct answer here.

2 speaker better than 4 if mismatched 

space channels apart

Series wiring would be better for the amp longevity,  but since speakers are different the reactive load won’t match so you’ll have 2 different points where the load jumps up. Likely with low power speakers and big amp it won’t make any difference as the power the speaker distort at is way below the amp would.

Be happy and play around with your options.

Does speaker gauge effect ohms ? 

[Kamranbites]

1 hour ago, HenrySalayne said:

You would need a 50W class non-inductive resistors, probably with a heatsink. You can spend your money on so much better things.

This thread has become more and more how somebody could hammer a square peg into a round hole.

If you want to use both sets of speakers because you are missing some 'oomph' in the low end, I understand. Then it's time to get a subwoofer, which will sound drastically better than wild mix of fullrange speakers.

Every solution with this one amplifier and both sets of loudspeakers connected has at least one big flaw.

 

Ok just two speakers might be enough 6 ohms. I had one question i have. 50ft Amazon basic speaker wire 16 awg  what will be it's resistance 0.5 ohms or less then that