Considering a new amp, how many watts?

13»

Comments

  • cfrizz
    cfrizz Posts: 13,415
    edited May 2010
    Litz wrote: »
    IIRC there were plenty of recievers that were rated as high as 170 wpc/5 channel...but there was always an asterisk. Either the TRUE rating was posted much lower in the fine print, measured deceptively (not 20hz-20khz but 1khz tone) or these receivers would test for a fraction of the output. I refuse to buy any product from a company that would have a deceptive practice like that.

    :D Well that takes out almost every receiver on the market!:eek::D

    Hence my preference for seperates.
    Marantz AV-7705 PrePro, Classé 5 channel 200wpc Amp, Oppo 103 BluRay, Rotel RCD-1072 CDP, Sony XBR-49X800E TV, Polk S60 Main Speakers, Polk ES30 Center Channel, Polk S15 Surround Speakers SVS SB12-NSD x2
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • reeltrouble1
    reeltrouble1 Posts: 9,312
    edited May 2010
    FTGV wrote: »
    But how iz I knowed if my amp are clipping?:confused:

    you will see fine hairs on the floor.

    RT1
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Kex
    Kex Posts: 5,194
    edited May 2010
    IIRC there were plenty of recievers that were rated as high as 170 wpc/5 channel...but there was always an asterisk. Either the TRUE rating was posted much lower in the fine print, measured deceptively (not 20hz-20khz but 1khz tone) or these receivers would test for a fraction of the output. I refuse to buy any product from a company that would have a deceptive practice like that.
    Most of the time, the true ratings were not even posted, and still aren't, even if the practice is fading out of fashion to some extent: a lot of more recent receivers seem to be able to deliver close to their stated ratings on the test bench ... and some receivers have always delivered more than their stated ratings, BTW.

    I'm not convinced that separates deserve to get a free ride though. Perhaps because they were always relatively expensive until recently, there has always been less temptation to cut corners to meet a certain (lower) price target while maintaining big numbers claims, but I'm not aware of any regulations that currently make the power claims of separates more trustworthy than those of receivers (or integrated units).
    Alea jacta est!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • heiney9
    heiney9 Posts: 25,165
    edited May 2010
    Lasareath wrote: »
    Considering a new amp, how many watts?





    As much as you can afford!

    But I could buy $5000 30wpc amp or a $5000 200wpc amp so affordability really isn't an indicator. Of th two I'm thinking of I'd choose the 30wpc amp

    To the OP, there is no one single criteria. All the suggestions are valid somewhere along the line. It takes some education and experience to come to the answer for your situation. That education and experience has to come from you.

    Look at well regarded names of products and evaluate your listening habits, other associated gear, budget, types of amp, etc, etc........and choose. The in a few months if you are still into the hobby move on to something else, etc., etc.

    H9
    "Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • madmax
    madmax Posts: 12,434
    edited May 2010
    reeltrouble1 wrote: »
    you will see fine hairs on the floor.

    RT1

    Or, you could set the amp next to the bushes.
    Vinyl, the final frontier...

    Avantgarde horns, 300b tubes, thats the kinda crap I want... :D
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • sucks2beme
    sucks2beme Posts: 5,601
    edited May 2010
    Litz wrote: »
    IIRC there were plenty of recievers that were rated as high as 170 wpc/5 channel...but there was always an asterisk. Either the TRUE rating was posted much lower in the fine print, measured deceptively (not 20hz-20khz but 1khz tone) or these receivers would test for a fraction of the output. I refuse to buy any product from a company that would have a deceptive practice like that.

    Wow. Short lived member. Not even here a week!
    "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." --Thomas Jefferson
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • reeltrouble1
    reeltrouble1 Posts: 9,312
    edited May 2010
    madmax wrote: »
    Or, you could set the amp next to the bushes.

    waaaaaaaaaaa, we will be here all week......

    RT1
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • FTGV
    FTGV Posts: 3,649
    edited May 2010
    reeltrouble1 wrote: »
    , we will be here all week......

    RT1
    And be sure to tip your waitress.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter