Avr input watts lower than rated output

larry777

How can an AVR put out much higher wattage then the advertised input Watts. As an example the Pioneer Elite SC Receivers show aprox 350 input watts but are rated at 140 watts X 7 which is 980 watts ! From the reviews,they are supposed to put out very close to its rated power for all 7 channels. Even some of the lower end VSX Elites show 400 input watts,which is higher than these SC AVR's and their rated output is only 110 watts X 7 in comparison.

nguyendot

Remember there are capacitors that store energy in these receivers that allow them to output power significantly higher than their input for a short period of time. Also, the input wattage can spike as well.

tonyb

....and the learning process begins,grasshopper.:biggrin:

larry777

I checked out the back of a Denon AVR 4311Ci and it is listing Power Consumption at 875 Watts. That seems more like it compared to the Pioneer SC 300 + Watts. Can the Capacitors make up this large difference and does the SC Models and other Pioneer AVR's have enough Capacitor storage ? Wouldn't Denon and others also have Capacitor storage in addition to Consumption watts, allowing them increased Wattage Output ? One surprise I got when I opened up my SC-35 yesterday was how thin the Power Cord was.....which seems consistent with the low power consumption ( not a good sign if you ask me ).

mantis

ICE amps don't waste power , the Denon amps do like almost 40% in heat energy is wasted.
Never does a receiver use all 140 watts all channels driven from 20 to 20 for any long period of time. Most of the time it's using about 30% of it's total power during a movie.

The Elite receivers are on of the only receivers that retain it's rated power no matter how many channels are driven. The ICE amps are very efficient. Go check the Denon avr4311 and watch how it's power falls the more channels driven.

Here's how the Pioneer Elite SC-37 performs under load.
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 135.7 watts
1% distortion at 171.9 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 125.4 watts
1% distortion at 164.7 watts

Here is how the Denon AVR4810ci performs under load.
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1 percent distortion at 123.5 watts
1 percent distortion at 148.2 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1 percent distortion at 30.9 watts
1 percent distortion at 36.0 watts (Protection Engages)

Just as a comparsion to another ICE power receiver , the Mighty Rotel RSX1560.
Here is how it performs under load. This receiver is rated at 100 watts.Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 86.4 watts
1% distortion at 109.5 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 86.1 watts
1% distortion at 109.0 watts

So you can see ICE power retains it's power under more channels then receivers like Denon.

One last compare is the Marantz SR7005 which is suppose to put out 125 watts per channel,
Here is how it did,
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 91.2 watts
1% distortion at 112.1 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 74.6 watts
1% distortion at 89.6 watts

larry777

Thanks for the update Mantis as it explains the expected output of the Pioneer SC AVR's. The Consumption/Output Wattage is confusing but as long as the performance is there, I will be happy. I am hooking up my SC-35 right now and getting ready to run the automatic calibration. From what I can tell from these forums, you seem to be recognized as the Pioneer Ice Amp expert. I understand you have an Ice Club going also,so I will have to find out how to join.

mantis

larry777 wrote: »

Thanks for the update Mantis as it explains the expected output of the Pioneer SC AVR's. The Consumption/Output Wattage is confusing but as long as the performance is there, I will be happy. I am hooking up my SC-35 right now and getting ready to run the automatic calibration. From what I can tell from these forums, you seem to be recognized as the Pioneer Ice Amp expert. I understand you have an Ice Club going also,so I will have to find out how to join.

Cool , once you get everything setup ,let here your impressions.

cnh

Dan is the man when it comes to ICE amps. Class D amplification, in general puts out, wastes little power as HEAT. Even the early Ds like the Panasonic AVRs put out more power than equivalently rated Yamahas and Onkyos in bench tests. I used to have one and was surprised at how this 9 lb AVR less than 3" high could put out a decent volume to a 6.1 set up? And only drew 135 watts of power from their wall socket?

The Pioneer ICE amps have improved on the problems that early Panny amps had, of course. It's been a while since then.

Enjoy the ICE!

cnh

LuSh

Mantis,

You know I love you bro, but those ACD tests are meaningless. I totally agree with you about efficiently and the most A/B amplifiers waste 40 sometimes as high as 50 percent of energy but using an ACD test is misleading. If it was to illustrate how they cope with a number of channels then absolutely it's a good thing to bring up but that's where it ends. Those channel tests suggest or imply other things as well that aren't good variables in determining an amplifiers power output.

The Elites are nice sounding units (my friend owns one and its fantastic) but they aren't as uber powerful as some reviews would lead you to believe. In fact their power supplies in some cases are much smaller then other manufactures. And while in real world application they'll handle lower impedance loads it can clip and enter thermal protection long before some manufactures will with difficult loads.

rubin

My amp shows 120 volts x 6a = 720 watts input, the rated output is 150 watts x 3 ch. = 450 watts output.

larry777

Thats more in line with what I expected to see. My review is on the way of my first impressions of the SC-35. It is impressive to say the least.

larry777

Well I finally got my Pioneer SC-35 up and running. Overall it did to my sound/speakers what I would have expected from a power amplifier. The overall sound was full and had a richness and quickness about it that i didn't get from my Denon 888. The dynamics were opened up and were crystal clear....it seemed like the sound was pushed out or forced out of the speakers rather than seeping out. I only watched 1 movie...The Golden Compass as my 3 Daughters like this....and the sound was outstanding. I couldn't believe the difference in the Bass output...it was very full,low and accurate on my SVS Sub. Max volume was -18 db and I know this Receiver had a lot more to put out if called upon. The Bass shook my whole room and the vibration came up from the floor and through you....what a blast. The sound was very accurate also. I had to fine tune the auto setup though by going back in and setting my speakers back to 0 db's as they were reduced way down into the - db range. I also moved my Sub setting to + 2 db with the crossover set to 80Hz. These Pioneer SC models are really that good. My front 3 are RTi10's and CSiA6. I am using RTi4's for L & R Surrounds so far for 5.1 setup. I have another 2 RTi4's for rear surrounds but didn't hook them up yet until I build stands. Yes the overall soundfield is more full and powerfull with this AVR and it responds very quickly to an input signal. It goes from very high and powerful dynamics to lower dynamics in an instant....and still seems to have reserve power to call upon. Never strained. I am starting to seriously wonder if I should or need to hook up a power amp to this Receiver. I am satisfied for now thats for sure.

cnh

I understand LuSh's misgivings about those tests, it's well-documented on this site. And I agree, in general.

But another thing to think about is such things as Capacitors and Transformers. I have an Onkyo that weighs 51lbs. A lot of that weight is in its transformer which is massive for an AVR. The unit also have about 30,000 microfarards in Caps and draws 9.5 amps in current. With High current capacity. Although this is not that final word. If you don't want to rely on such tests consider other factors such as the above. Quality of construction, weight, transformers, capacitance, High Current design, and so on.

It is also, however, quite true that you will NEVER really use all the power you have for any real continuous period of time in a HT set up. In fact, most of the time you'll be feeding peaks for seconds or micro-seconds.

This is one reason why a DYNAMIC amp section like a Yamaha is sometimes rated quite LOW in all channels tests but is in fact, often as capable as an AVR of similar size and weight?

cnh

larry777

All good points cnh....their is a lot more going on to produce quality sound " than the obvious " So many variables and Quality of components. I guess thats where " Price for New " comes in to play. Hopefully it can give a person some idea of what they are getting. Then for second hand units, original suggested retail can still be used as a guide at least.

renowilliams

One of the main things to consider,is what sounds good to your ears. I have owned a Yamaha AVR before and it was fine for H/T but I never liked it with music (and my speakers). I now have an old Pioneer Elite reciever (2002 model) and find myself happy with both. I'm sure your going to like your new avr.

mantis

LuSh wrote: »

Mantis,

You know I love you bro, but those ACD tests are meaningless. I totally agree with you about efficiently and the most A/B amplifiers waste 40 sometimes as high as 50 percent of energy but using an ACD test is misleading. If it was to illustrate how they cope with a number of channels then absolutely it's a good thing to bring up but that's where it ends. Those channel tests suggest or imply other things as well that aren't good variables in determining an amplifiers power output.

The Elites are nice sounding units (my friend owns one and its fantastic) but they aren't as uber powerful as some reviews would lead you to believe. In fact their power supplies in some cases are much smaller then other manufactures. And while in real world application they'll handle lower impedance loads it can clip and enter thermal protection long before some manufactures will with difficult loads.

The ACD tests just shows how receivers compare to each other. The ICE amps under load still produce very close to rated spec. it's still impressive.
On the other hand what you are saying I agree. With real world performance tests with multible speakers loads is the true test of any receiver. This is where I feel the Elite ICE receivers shine. I have run them with Definitive Technology , Paradigm , Polk , Klipsch (not fair) , Mirage , Focal , Martin Logan , Boston Acoustics , Triad , I probably forgot a few but the bottom line is this , every single system that has been installed with a ICE powered Elite has performed very well with incredible dynamics. Some of these systems have had big dog Denon Avr4805's and such replaced by ICE and customers rave about them.
I feel very strongly about the Elite ICE receivers as they really impress for both movies and music. Honestly they are the closet receivers I have ever Installed that can rival offerings from B&K , Rotel , Cambridge Audio and NAD. This level of receivers are the Elite class of the market. I don't get to VS Sunfire , Arcam or McIntosh so I have no idea how ti would fair against such offerings . But Yamaha , Denon , Sony and Onkyo/ Integra all fall short compared to the Elites for overall sound quality , dynamics and musical abilities.
I think Cambridge and NAD and even B&K are all more musical then the Elite for just about all speakers I have tested but theater dynamics it's damn close and in some cases I like the Elite more.
Overall the Elite offers more all around then all other high end receivers we carry.
On last note is I have driven 4 ohm load speakers off the internal amps with nervous nerves. Funny I had no idea the ICE amps would shine under pressure and drive an entire 8 ohm load 86 to 88 db speaker package. Honestly I was sweating the entire time waiting for the protection circuit to kick in but the Elite came through. That was a very impressive moment for me.

John K.

Larry, the answer is that in most cases the rated power consumption isn't at full power, but is instead at an average output level. Unless the power consumption is specifically stated as "maximum", "full power" or similar language, this is the case. A common average is at 1/8th of full power, which is considered to be roughly the average use while playing a disc.

To give an example, say a 7x100 rated unit has a 400 watt consumption shown on the back. At 1/8th power, AB amplifiers typically are around 20% efficient(50% efficiency is at full power, but efficiency drops at lower outputs). 1/8th of the 700 being about 88 watts, at 20% efficiency this takes about 440 watts of input to be consumed. So, there's no inconsistency when the power consumption mumber shown is less than the full power output.

larry777

This makes it even easier to understand John K. thanks. I guess thats why it dosn't say Maximum or Full Power for this rating. Makes more sence now.

TroyD

Who gives a faak? I mean, there is no way, and I mean no FRIGGING way, that anyone is ever going to actually require 100wpc all channels driven. If you did that in your living room, you'd be deaf. It's just insane.

So, why don't we talk about how a unit sounds?

BDT

LuSh

Hey Mantis,

I agree the Pioneers have a nice sound, I think they offer real value. But I disagree about the power and specifically the ACD tests used. I'll show you why...below are four links. In the first two links you'll see the ACD tests which put the Pioneer in a great shining light, one reviewer proclaims that the ICE amplifier is powerful if you read further into the review. The second link is of a Yamaha (I don't care about subjective sound quality) which rates poorly in an ACD test and would lead one to think it is in fact less powerful. The current ACD tests put the receivers in the worst possible scenerio's and look for best possible outcomes. Self limiters are usually at play, as ACD tests are not dynamic in nature, their static (the opposite of music and movies)

http://www.hometheater.com/content/pioneer-elite-sc-07-av-receiver-ht-labs-measures
http://www.hometheater.com/content/yamaha-rx-z7-av-receiver-ht-labs-measures

However in links 3 and 4 you'll notice the same amplifiers are compared again, this time using more real world full load tests 20-20 in 1 or two channels driven at 4 and 8ohm loads.

http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/receivers/pioneer-sc-07/sc-07-measurements-and-analysis
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/receivers/rx-z7-7.1/rx-z7-measurements

Gene couldn't run full cycle 20-20 4ohm tests with Pioneer Ice amplifier without gross distortion and shutting down the units. He goes onto say that the smaller powersupply and smaller caps were likely at play. The Z7 passed all his full load tests and did very well in full load 4ohm tests. I believe the uF capacitor value of the Z7 is 18,000 vs the uF value of 10,000 in the Pioneer, I could be wrong. I also believe and have heard SC-07's drive 4ohm speakers with no problems.

This is in no way citing that the Pioneer is inferior in sound quality as I think there are many other factors, but having said that ACD can introduce a lot of confusion as to whats more powerful. I believe power is within dynamics and current swings among 1 or 2 channels over an entire frequency range at various impedance values. ACD tests let you see which product won't employee self limiters when listening to 1khz test tones in 7 Channel Stereo modes.

larry777

The Yamaha Z7 was listed at a $500 higher price than the Pioneer, was it not ? Fair comparison ? These points are well taken however.

LuSh

Hey Larry,

I'm not knocking or comparing, I'm simply trying to illustrate how some tests draw inaccurate conclusions.

larry777

Thats right LuSh,thanks. They were actually very good illustrations that got the point across very clearly. This is the kind of information people need to know.