Amp/Reciever to Power Monitor 70s?

xmarc303

Hey all,

New to the forum, but i thought i would sign up because i just put on order some Monitor 70s. Right now I have a HK AVR 1700 which is powering 2 "vintage" American Acoustic speakers. The HK powers the dinky AAs just fine, but i'm woundering if it will be able to do justice to the 70s.

I've gone through alot of threads about the 70s, and most people seem to have much more powerful AVRs, such as Onkyo 8050s which leads me to believe my little HK might be too underpowered.

I will want the best music quility i can get (why i bought the speakers). I have a vast library of .flac albums and a Schiit Modi DAC which i use for my headphone amp and headphones (AKG 701) so i dont need one with an internal DAC becasue i like the Modi's sound signiture.

If i were to have ot get a new amp, my budget would be ~$200. I'm open to vintage or new. Whatever get the job done the best

Let me know what you guys have and/or what you recommend.

Thanks!

tonyb

Your receiver should be fine. Besides, 200 bucks isn't going to get you anything better, even used. Use your HK for now and save your birthday money for something worth it.

xmarc303

Thanks!

Yeah that was kinda my instinct. what would be a decent 2 channel amp if i was to get my budget up to ~300 or so?

Polkie2009

Welcome to the forum Xmarc! Does your HK have pre-outs? You can probably find a decent Adcom 555, Parasound HCA-1200 ,1500, Carver TFM-35 or another model?, Rotel , not sure of their model numbers. Some will want to add Emotiva to the list. Once you hit 100 posts you can buy from the flea market here.

nguyendot

Yes that HK is not high current. It will power your speakers but you will be lacking.

xmarc303

Rick88 wrote: »

I was recently at my local Best Buy looking for a couple of CD's, and while I was there I looked at the latest receivers. I saw your HK, and I must say (no offense meant) I was quite shocked at how light weight it was (12.8 lbs.), and when I looked through the top cover I could not even see the transformer, let alone the caps. I would not attempt to run Monitor 70's with that unit.

Edit: Also, no pre-outs to add an outboard amp.

I beleive it is so light becasuse it uses a Switch Mode Power Supply (SMPS)?

I will try and get a decent 2 channel amp to power them. FRom what people are saying, it seems that the 1700 will power the speakers, but do just a moderate job.

Edit:
Im looking at getting a Onkyo 8050, HK 3490, or, if i can find a cheap price, a Marantz SR4023.

ratster

Check Accesories4less for the 8050.I just bought the g/f one and she said it's sweet.I have'nt got to hear it yet.
The HK 3490 is a great receiver and powers my Monitor 70's just fine.When I had the the 555 hooked up it was even better :biggrin:

Edit:I should mention that the g/f has Monitor 60's and not 70's.

xmarc303

ratster wrote: »

The HK 3490 is a great receiver and powers my Monitor 70's just fine.When I had the the 555 hooked up it was even better :biggrin:
.

Yeah i was leaning to getting the Hk instead of the Onkyo simply because the 8050 only puts out 80W vs the 3490's 120W.

I have also been reading into Bi-Amping and Bi-wiring and am also woundering if i can get a little more juice by Bi-wiring. My idea is to have the 1700 set to 5 Channel, and then turn the rear surrounds up, and bi-wire them into the 70s. Not sure if this would have any real effect, but i thought i'd ask!

Polkie2009

I'm kinda confused on what exactly you're wanting to do here XMarc. You want to run a 2 channel stereo rig but possible bi wire the 70's? Your budget is $200-$300 right? Honestly, you'd probably be best off to scratch up about $600 bucks or so and buy a used stereo preamp (or used AVR with pre-outs) and a power amp. There are some decent ones that come along in the flea market. Sell the HK if you have to. Also, anyway you can edit the poll to include buy used?:cheesygrin:

xmarc303

Polkie2009 wrote: »

I'm kinda confused on what exactly you're wanting to do here XMarc. You want to run a 2 channel stereo rig but possible bi wire the 70's? Your budget is $200-$300 right? Honestly, you'd probably be best off to scratch up about $600 bucks or so and buy a used stereo preamp (or used AVR with pre-outs) and a power amp. There are some decent ones that come along in the flea market. Sell the HK if you have to. Also, anyway you can edit the poll to include buy used?:cheesygrin:

I will deffinitly look into stero per-amps then.

On an off note, I have a friend who offered to sell his vintage Heathkit 1640 to me for like $90. He got it at a yard sale and was going to fix it up but never got around to it. He says it pumps out 200W per channel which seems insane for a vintage amp. Was woundering if anyone knows if this is a good deal?

200W would deffinitly be enough to power the 70s

Geoff4rfc

xmarc303 wrote: »

200W would deffinitly be enough to power the 70s

70's on 300w is even better......by far

mrbigbluelight

Like all things vintage, the Heathkit 1640 your friend is offering for $90 may be in mint shape or it may be half a step away from turning into a toaster. You mentioned your friend got it at a yard sale which can also either be awesome or welcome to Hades.

Capacitors, output transistors, etc may or may not need work. Quick check of the internet shows that that the replacement transistors (originals are unobtainable) are also hard to get. Don't know how accurate that is, but it looks like you'd be heading for a long learning curve going that route.

Did you friend happen to mention the 1640 was manufactured ? Just curious, it'll be on a label on the back.

mhardy would be the guy to come up with the vitals on that unit, but it looks like the advice you've received so far is on the mark.

Yahzi

nguyendot wrote:

Yes that HK is not high current. It will power your speakers but you will be lacking.

Claims based on zero evidence. FYI, no amplifier is "high current". Current isn't "high" by default.

Some amplifiers are capable of delivering high-er current assuming the demand is there. If the OP's listening levels don't require high wattage then it's immaterial how much "high current" he needs because his amplifier will never deliver it under those circumstances.

If the OP is up to date with modern technology and is using a subwoofer then it's reasonable to assume he is also using bass management - both will significantly curtail power demands and therefore the need for a so-called "high current" amplifier is moot.

Yahzi

Geoff4rfc wrote:

70's on 300w is even better......by far

I assume you're joking. 200-300 watts is 1.5 dB assuming the speaker can handle it - actually, assuming your ears can handle it which is unlikely given the 90 dB sensitivity. You would be well over 108 dB at a 3 meter distance. Even if you could, indeed, handle the stupendous SPL in-room for more than few seconds before the onset of permanent hearing damage, the difference in power is like spitting in the wind.

This all assumes the OP actually needs 200-300 watts which is highly unlikely unless he is sitting VERY far away from his speakers (6-7 meters), or requires VERY high SPL (well in excess of 100 dB at the seats).

cnh

Yahzi wrote: »

I assume you're joking. 200-300 watts is 1.5 dB assuming the speaker can handle it - actually, assuming your ears can handle it which is unlikely given the 90 dB sensitivity. You would be well over 108 dB at a 3 meter distance. Even if you could, indeed, handle the stupendous SPL in-room for more than few seconds before the onset of permanent hearing damage, the difference in power is like spitting in the wind.

This all assumes the OP actually needs 200-300 watts which is highly unlikely unless he is sitting VERY far away from his speakers (6-7 meters), or requires VERY high SPL (well in excess of 100 dB at the seats).

Stick around and read some older threads on this site, perhaps?

Enjoy!

cnh

Yahzi

cnh wrote:

Stick around and read some older threads on this site, perhaps?

Why? How would it invalidate anything I just said? People can't go around making silly claims like you NEED (x) power. It's a baseless claim that means nothing.

How much power you need is dependent on your requirements. Even 50 watts with those Monitor 70's could drive you out the room, assuming a reasonable seated distance. The amount of power used on average would likely be 1-2 watts, but since most people I know don't listen between 82-85 dB continuously on average, those estimations are way higher than normal, so figure several hundred milliwatts.

You guys are seriously overestimating how much power you THINK you need. Not to be pedantic or anything, but how much power is actually used depends on LISTENING LEVELS, you know, how loud you typically listen to your source material, your seated distance, the content itself, the speaker impedance and whether or not you're using a subwoofer and/or bass management.

Many different variables influence how much you really need, so nonchalantly saying you need "200 watts" to get them to sound good is just a poorly thought out claim based on this misguided view that high power somehow equates to better sound in all circumstances.

cnh

The simple question most would ask you, here, is: have you ever heard Monitor 70s on a 100 watt per channel receiver and on a 200+ per channel power amp? And have you noticed a "difference" in your sound "quality". It's never simply a question of how much wattage are you drawing.

If you don't believe that then roll over to Nelson Pass's discussion of "first watt". And see why a premier amp designer is so concerned about the delivery of those first few watts.

cnh

Yahzi

The simple question most would ask you, here, is: have you ever heard Monitor 70s on a 100 watt per channel receiver and on a 200+ per channel power amp? And have you noticed a "difference" in your sound "quality". It's never simply a question of how much wattage are you drawing.

Quite frankly it's a ridiculous question. The quality can't change whether you add another 100 watts or another 1000 watts. If the amplifier only demands 30 watts at your preferred listening levels then adding more will do exactly this : squat.

If you have ever heard of bass management you'll realise that it can significantly reduce your power requirements and it's something that well informed people use nowadays.

If you don't believe that then roll over to Nelson Pass's discussion of "first watt". And see why a premier amp designer is so concerned about the delivery of those first few watts.

I will. Two solid-state amplifiers delivering 100 watts at a low enough distortion will be indistinguishable. It's only if distortion is high or if an amplifier is clipping - ie not working within its normal operating abilities, that the sound may change. That is NOT what we are discussing here.

You guys are saying that 200 watts will sound better than 100 watts. That's a load of bullocks - it's the kind of thing that ignorant audiophiles promote and it has no basis. I don't need to listen to a speaker to know that doubling the power will not necessarily improve the sound quality - assuming the amplifier was not clipping.

You guys are jumping to conclusions and making ASSUMPTIONS. Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps, just perhaps the OP does not need 200 watts to get the full benefit out of these speakers? Goodness, this place is fill of misinformation.

cnh

Yahzi wrote: »

Quite frankly it's a ridiculous question. The quality can't change whether you add another 100 watts or another 1000 watts. If the amplifier only demands 30 watts at your preferred listening levels then adding more will do exactly this : squat.

If you have ever heard of bass management you'll realise that it can significantly reduce your power requirements and it's something that well informed people use nowadays.



I will. Two solid-state amplifiers delivering 100 watts at a low enough distortion will be indistinguishable. It's only if distortion is high or if an amplifier is clipping - ie not working within its normal operating abilities, that the sound may change. That is NOT what we are discussing here.

You guys are saying that 200 watts will sound better than 100 watts. That's a load of bullocks - it's the kind of thing that ignorant audiophiles promote and it has no basis. I don't need to listen to a speaker to know that doubling the power will not necessarily improve the sound quality - assuming the amplifier was not clipping.

You guys are jumping to conclusions and making ASSUMPTIONS. Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps, just perhaps the OP does not need 200 watts to get the full benefit out of these speakers? Goodness, this place is fill of misinformation.

We're so happy that such a knowledgeable person has showed up on this site to correct us. Obviously this has NEVER happened before.

Perhaps you'd also like to post a "cable thread" debate. We haven't had "many" of those here either. Do you have any idea of how many times we've seen the kind of debate you are trying to generate? A simple search will show that "everything" you've posted has been discussed ad nauseum on this forum.

My advice. Read Pass! Or do you KNOW more than he does, too? And BTW. No one is saying that it's a simple matter of just increasing the wattage if the power is not quality power.

But, most of all enjoy, your tunes!

cnh

Yahzi

Forget Pass for a moment. We are not talking about amplifiers sounding different. We are talking about amplifier POWER. You need to focus on what is being discussed.

cnh

Yahzi wrote: »

Forget Pass for a moment. We are not talking about amplifiers sounding different. We are talking about amplifier POWER. You need to focus on what is being discussed.

You are misreading the suggestions above. It goes without saying that the quality and the amount of power are implicit (taken together) in ALL suggestions given above. If you read between the lines or spent more time on this site you would be familiar with this. People on a forum speak in a short hand. The statements made have a subtext and a history that relates them to "previous" discussions on this site which all members are "familiar" with. So there is NO simple subject to stick to here.

Simple power? Where does such a "thing" exist? In the imagination? On a Physics Blackboard?

cnh

Yahzi

Well in audiophile LA LA land everything makes an audible difference. My suggestion : read up on expectation bias/confirmation bias - falling under the delusion that you have different quality power is absurd. Best part is that you can't prove it.

Try a double blind test between amplifiers. Actually don't, because it would save you money.

ZLTFUL

Oh yeah...I remember this guy...he is the same person who claims that amplifiers only amplify signal and have absolutely no bearing on sound quality. That there is "no such thing as tube sound or solid state sound".


Clearly a genius of ignorant proportions.Yep...that guy... :rolleyes: Idiot savant sans savant

Geoff4rfc

Yahzi wrote: »

I assume you're joking.

You assume too much, as well as incorrectly oh hostile one.

One thing is obvious without the need to assume, you haven't listened to a Monitor70 in 2ch mode with different amounts of power. Even the difference between 200w and 300w create a sonic difference. Of course, if you're not in the room to listen, then you're left to assume.

What I would assume, is that you're wrapped up and self absorbed in too much "reading" to actually "experience" anything. The assumption comes from your bloated responses with an attacking attitude.

Good day Mr. Wizzard

Yahzi

Geoff4rfc wrote:

One thing is obvious without the need to assume, you haven't listened to a Monitor70 in 2ch mode with different amounts of power. Even the difference between 200w and 300w create a sonic difference.

One thing is certain, you're terribly misinformed. First of all, the difference between 200w and 300w is 1.5 dB, - it's a drop in the bucket - ie hardly noticeable. If you actually decide to learn more about how amplifiers work, you'll find out that amplifiers don't deliver full rated power at all times.

You could go from a 100w amp to an arc-welding 5000w amp and due to listening habits and source material, never exceed more than 50 watts, even on dynamic peaks. Anything more would not serve a logical purpose because guess what Einstein, the amplifier will never deliver more!

I mean, with your logic, why stop at 300w? Surely it would sound much better with 400w? Or 500w? 1000w??? Heck, skies the limit. Who are you trying to fool here? Not for one second do I believe you could detect an audible difference between 200-300 watts. You can sell that idea on this forum, but no one would take you seriously as a source.

If you could detect a difference, any difference, it would have everything to do with a botched comparison and nothing to do with an extra 1.5 dB. Given how inconsistent comparisons are done nowadays, you could convince yourself of all kinds of audible differences that are really false positives.

Here is an exercise for you. Take out your SPL meter, assuming you have one, and turn the volume up until it registers 1.5 dB extra. Then tell me how significant that was. You need a reality check.

Geoff4rfc

Yahzi wrote: »

Sorry, but you need to actually do some research before you mouth off at me.

This kind of attitude reminds of the squids that used to come the track I raced at. Spouting everything from the action they read, once they finally got on the race track, they disappeared to the rear of the pack, no experience to get them anywhere else.

Yahzi

Geoff4rfc wrote:

This kind of attitude reminds of the squids that used to come the track I raced at. Spouting everything from the action they read, once they finally got on the race track, they disappeared to the rear of the pack, no experience to get them anywhere else.

Audiophiles will believe things which have no basis in reality. My advice would be to start thinking and stop promoting voodoo.

Polkie2009

Now where did that 1.5 db go? Sometimes it's nice just to have that extra headroom right? Can I have a little more cowbell???

Yahzi

Headroom is a good thing assuming you might need it. If you are nowhere close to needing it then by definition it's redundant.

Polkie2009

Redundant___ is my middle name, yeah baby!

F1nut

Yahzi wrote: »

Blah, blah, blah

It appears your level of ignorance related to all things audio is beyond astounding, congrats!