Are amplifiers basically just a huge volume button? Is their

Yes, exactly that, congratulations you got it figured.

>>58365516
Not sure if you're ironic. I honestly can't figure out what they're for, never owned one. I mean they clearly have other purposes. But is that where they get their name from? The original purpose? For the life of me, I cannot figure out why do these things cost thousands of dollars.

amplifiers take a weak signal and amplify it, so basically yes, but calling it a volume button is so dumb it makes my head hurt.

>>58365504
What you posted is called an integrated amp, or a receiver. A pre-amp controls the volume, or signal level. The amp only amplifies the incoming signal, usually 28-32x.

>>58365504
They drive your passive speaker i guess

>>58365540
Large speakers require a large amount of power. If the signal that you are trying to power a speaker with isn't powerful enough, the sound will be incredibly faint. An amplifier takes power from the wall (why you have to plug in the amplifier) and boosts the signal that it is receiving from a weak source. This boost allows it to drive inefficient or large speakers. That is the purpose of an amplifier.

>>58365540
You can get a cheap car stereo with an aux and some hand me down or garbage speakers and you might not be able to tell the difference between the $1000 system. If you take a cell phone speaker, then computer desktop speakers, then a car stereo speaker, then a speaker that comes with one of the cheaper home audio systems then the $1000 system, and compare them one by one alone with the same music that presents a wide range of high and low it will be a big change from the cell phone to the $1000 but from car audio to $1000 most likely wont be able to tell the difference unless you are listening for the difference. Its about putting through all the frequencies the recording has to offer, after that it is nitpicking the texture of the speakers and amplifier it's self and it's ability to mimic the source in the recording.

>>58365540
Well they cost a lot because they have specialized electronics, are not generally a mainstream market, and tend to have brand tax.

>>58365543
>>58365558
>>58365562
I still cannot figure out why would somebody want to own this, if they're not in the music industry. Why the fuck would anybody be willing to pay $2k for this, just to get louder music? Can't some $2k speakers do the job themselves?

>>58365602
are you stoned right now?

>>58365562
>>58365588
this. they drive large speakers. Your TV can't do that. Active speakers basically have an amp built into them.

>>58365602
Speakers need power to work. Are you feeling ok?

>>58365602
No, because the 2k speakers will probably be hard to drive with a conventional signal, which means that you need an amplifier to make the signal strong enough to drive them.

>>58365540
They get the name from what they're doing. They're signal amplifiers. They amplify the signal. In this case, an audio one.

It's original purpose did not change since we invented electricity.

Audio signal from a source is weak. It's unable to drive a speaker which requires a significant voltage and current to physically overcome the inertia of a speaker membrane (and it's components) to produce waves.

It needs to be amplified

>I cannot figure out why do these things cost thousands of dollars.
Make one yourself.

>>58365602
Some speakers have amplifiers built in. Others do not.

>>58365602
Someone with house parties all the time.

>>58365602
Try driving a large speaker with your phone audio output.
You can't.
You need an amplifier

>>58365601
They really really really don't. I'm looking into schematics of one at the moment. It's basically diodes, transistors and huge ass caps.

>>58365588
>>58365599
Okay. I get the use if you're throwing a gig, or a concert, or doing a sound system for a club or smth. But why the fuck would anybody pay that much to have this at home? I'm looking at Louis Rossman who said he got one when he didn't have money just because he loved music. What.

>>58365602
>Why the fuck would anybody be willing to pay $2k for this

there are cheaper amps available, and more expensive ones. It's technology, you can go high end, low end, and like anything else, there is a point of diminishing returns that people with more money than sense will have no qualms about going far beyond.

>>58365639
hypex.com
You're welcome.

>>58365639
Disregard this, I was too slow at typing. I got it from this >>58365622 . Didn't get the audio signal is weak and cannot drive speakers properly.

>>58365639
If you have life experiences of being at concerts you could have the same concert experience without the hassle of going to one, much the same that you don't have to go to an arcade to play video games or go to a 5 star restaurant to make a 5 star meal at home.

>>58365651
.nl

fuck me

>>58365504
yeah

>>58365639
Oh my fucking god just kill yourself already, just fucking buy some headphones with a high impedance and connect them to your smartphone, see how that works out for you. You must be retarded to think that a signal coming from an MP3 player or an HDMI port would carry enough energy to power a 1 foot by 1 foot driver. Rip open a speaker at best buy or some shit and try to push on the large driver. Hard to move, isn't it? It's hard for the electro-magnets on the driver too, see why it needs an amplifier? Fuck you, go back to /b/.

>>58365602
lol wtf are you talking in peso or something?

File: expensive.png (89KB, 641x471px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 641x471px

>>58365695
That amplifier is actually 7k on Yamaha's website.

>>58365690
Where do you live where you can blast music so loudly it simulates a concert? Not op btw

>>58365690
Didn't go to /b/ since I realized there are other boards too, which was in 2006 or smth. But thanks for the explanation tho, I honestly never considered that. I thought huge ass speakers have a cable to power directly from a wall, never owned anything bigger than small PC speakers.

>>58365540
they don't. you can build one
http://www.instructables.com/id/DIY-HiFi-Gainclone-Power-Amplifier-2x68w-Class-A/

for next to nothing from digikey

or buy one for $50k from some exotic place

it's like a motor scooter vs a la ferrari

the idea is one thing the implementation and cost is another. what is there to not understand? how old are you? you may have special educational needs if you're old enough to post

>>58365504
Yeah, basically.

The input signal is at "line level". This is a low-power signal that's appropriate for transporting the signal around various components (CD/DVD/TV/mixers/etc.). But "line level" has insufficient power for speakers, so they need to amplify the power in order to drive the speakers. The goal of the amp is to increase the power of the "line level" signal up to "speaker level" without distorting the shape of the waveform.

Actually, there's several levels: microphone and electric-guitar pickup levels are the weakest. Line level has more power. Then headphones require a bit more power, and finally speakers require the most power. The amp will have inputs/outputs for all these, and will convert the power appropriately among them.

>>58365734
Meant for >>58365666

>>58365734
Nigger, you don't need to blast super loudly to listen to music on some nice speakers. Regular bookshelf speakers that would work just like normal desktop speakers require an amplifier. Also, it doesn't need to cost an arm and a leg. Speakers that require a lot of energy to drive are usually nicer quality because of the materials they use to make the membrane. It isn't about volume, it's about different types of speakers and quality of the sound coming out of such speakers.

File: no_plug.png (98KB, 343x432px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 343x432px

>>58365739
You're welcome, here is the back of some speakers that require an amplifer. Note the lack of IEC.

>>58365602
People love their home theaters. You need special receivers to take surround sound from Blu-Ray player and split it up properly. Newer receivers have literally disposable microphones which you place where you'll be seated and the receiver intelligently adjusts audio levels while playing a series of sounds through each speaker. You disconnect the microphone and throw it away or toss it in the closet. It's way more than simply playing records or CD's or whatever. You connect everything including TV to it. They have their own menu overlay on the TV screen.

>>58365746
I'm 24 in 20 days, sadly. I probably do have special educatinal needs, I keep failing my EE faculty.

That being said, it was just mind boggling to me someone would pay 2-7k $ for a thing whose sole pupose is to amplify the signal without distorting it, and there is no, for example, 5k laptop on the market. Amazing.

>>58365747
I'm pretty sure I got it, you guys helped a lot. Thank you!

>>58365763
>Nigger, you don't need to blast super loudly to listen to music on some nice speakers.

Thats probably true. I just live on a street with too many seniors who have nothing to do so theyd complain instantly tbqh

>>58365558
receivers are not intergrated amps.
Receivers have a tuner.

>>58365816
See pic >>58365725
That is an integrated amp.

>>58365504
no that is a intergrated amplifiter its the pre amp stage that does the volume and the power stage does the power amplification

>>58365802
those $10k or higher amps exist so rich people can use their money. just like other brands with overpriced shit.

>>58365802
>I keep failing my EE faculty.
I really hope the Es there don't stand for electrical engineering

there's a thing called distortion and interference. pure power isn't hard, but doing it without having noise isn't

>>58366241
They do. I've been doing my undergraduate studies for 5 years now, and BSc is supposed to take 3. To try to justify my ass here a little bit, I was a shit brat that almost failed math a couple of times in HS, so I had a looooot to catch up on when I decided I wanted to better myself.

And I do understand what you're saying, I just literally never owned an amplifier, and in the last month I ran into the term a lot online, so after 2 minutes of googling, I decided that maybe someone here can tell me what's up with the prices of these things.

>>58365504
Daily reminder: If your computers sound system isn't run off one of these you are a faggot.

File: 1477885958626.jpg (37KB, 467x479px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 467x479px

>>58365601
underrated

>>58365639
>I'm looking into schematics of one
hey guys, the town genius found the plans, and the game is up

>>58365802

There are 25k latops dumbass. 2k will get you a 4000 watt amplifier that can drive 6 15" pa mains. Used to own a qsc 4050HD. Weighed 95lbs. Best sound is from big speakers, big amp, low volume.

>>58366503
The most difficult thing about audio amplifiers is maintaining a perfect bias under all conditions.

Cheap loudspeaker amps basically don't advise using below 8ohms, and performance is usually impacted by using 16ohm speakers. They also tend to only list their specifications at low power draw (1-2w which is enough for bookshelf monitors on your desk, but insufficient for home theater/listening room type stuff) in room temperature conditions.

When you start trying to account for impedance matching to loads from 2-16ohms with many speakers and trying to keep a perfect bias up to the maximum rated output in a passively cooled enclosure, things get much more interesting.

Audio amplifiers are actually a really fun way to learn electronics as they use a lot of different techniques in really interesting ways.

It's arguable the difference between .01%thd and 1%thd is pretty indistinguishable, but high end audio gear generally does meet the advertised specifications provided it's from a real company and not some audiophile jackass on a forum making the products.

>>58365805

You mean your parents? I can blast music in my house pretty much any time I want and nobody is going to hear shit unless they are outside.

>>58365504
I have the A-S1000. I love old and new Yamaha amps.

Mine literally just amplifies sound, I have treble/bass etc in neutral position (and it switches those circuits off completely if you do that).

Thing is, if I use a cheap amp on my speakers (Philips FB825) they sound like horseshit. Only a powerfull yammy can drive them (and other likewise power amps obviously).

And I'm a sucker for the retro looks on the new yammies. I love their no nonsense looks (no flashy buttons or annoying leds).

>>58365540
>I honestly can't figure out what they're for, never owned one. I mean they clearly have other purposes. But is that where they get their name from?
They amplify. Do you understand the definition of the word “amplify”? If not, look it up.

There's literally nothing more to it. I refuse to accept people can be this dumb

>>58365504
>tfw I have that exact amplifier sitting right next to me

>>58365602
>/g/ - Technology
I have no idea what board you managed to accidentally click your way here from, but it's painfully obvious that you're either mentally retarded or severely underaged, so I'll guess >>>/mlp/

How accurate was I?

>>58368869
>and it switches those circuits off completely if you do that
I doubt that somehow

That said, mine comes with a “bypass” switch that you can use to physically disconnect all of the processing circuitry

File: 0928371892872871.jpg (601KB, 1200x1692px) Image search: [Google]

601KB, 1200x1692px

>>58368881
>not opting for Levinson or Rowland

>>58369075
>tfw never heard those names before

>>58368911
It does, you can actually hear it switching away.

Yamaha is not the kind of company that would put in "fake" relais to trick users into thinking the circuit is switched away.

>>58369075
Levinson is overpriced crap. It is literally the Apple of audio. They focus solely on gullible audiophiles who think that cables forged by elves in moonlight makes their sound better.

Audiophiles are cancer. You don't need one unless you're doing home theatre Atmos 7.1 shit. Your ears can't tell the difference for music

>>58365602
hahahaha
what the fuck are you going to drive the speakers with? your phone battery?

>>58369324
i need one to use my speakers

>>58369317
its okay
you don't need them to drive your polk speakers

>>58369294
Oh, okay, must be a significantly different design than mine I suppose.

On mine, the treble etc. dials are smooth/continuous. There's no audible switching or anything, and no extra resistance as you pass the ‘neutral’ position. They're just dials.

And I have an extra button for bypassing the circuitry instead, which is labelled “pure direct”.

>>58369324
>Atmos 7.1
I'm not up to speed with the latest industry trolling memes, but isn't Atmos for object-based audio instead of channel-based?

>>58369394
>There's no audible switching or anything, and no extra resistance as you pass the ‘neutral’ position.
Actually I lied, there is a slight bit of a “ridge” on the neutral position, but it doesn't switch anything

>>58369360
>I need a $7000 amp to drive my $50 speakers
Ok retard

>>58365842
exactly. Its not a receiver. It has no tuner

>>58369401
All Atmos tracks are base 7.1

>>58369532
Huh, I see. Anyway, shame on you for suggesting that Atmos is somehow supposed to be “better” quality than other codecs, it's feeding into the audiophile delusion of believing it's better because it has bigger numbers and costs more.

Most users who want Atmos support pretty much just want the ‘Atmos’ LED to light up on their receiver so they think it's better. It's 100% pure placebo. You can literally send them an identical stream with the LED enabled and it would sound better.

>>58369490
I never said anything about 7000, I just need an amplifier.

>>58369551
I didn't say Atmos was better. I just said it's something you need a receiver for. I don't even have Atmos speakers, just regular 7.2 but I still watch the movies with the Atmos track.

>>58369852
>I just said it's something you need a receiver for.
Not really, you can software decode it and then send normal PCM to your speakers

>>58369578
post your approximate state/city and i'll find something for you on craigslist