Lets talk about power and reference levels

2»

Comments

  • motorstereo
    motorstereo Posts: 2,032
    kevhed72 wrote: »
    [
    Nice rig. What are the things on top of the amps, and it that a TV in the back?

    Thanks; they're glass faces from Mcintosh car amps with the original handles from the 1201 amps. They light up and I made them as a way to hide the ugly looking MIT and Furutech wiring going to the amps. No it's not a tv in the back. It's a throw blanket covering some butt ugly room treatments. The pic is one I took of a sunset while on a cruise boat in Tampa Bay a couple years ago. I found someone on the bay that can make a throw blanket from any pic that you send them. I actually had a clearer pic of the sunset but it didn't have the shot of old glory in the upper right this one does so this shot got the nod.
  • daddyjt
    daddyjt Posts: 2,290
    mantis wrote: »
    105 watts in a AVR is what it comes out to be. I don't find anything wrong with that. That's the power output that's that power output.
    105 watts seems to be a good amount of power, at least in my room and in many rooms I have setup 105 watts AVR's in.

    With very few exceptions, AVRs run all their amplifier channels off of a single power supply. As such, you might get the advertised "105 watts" driving 2 of the 5(7?) channels. However, once you start driving 5 or 7 of the channels, it's going to take a toll on the power supply.

    To this day, other than different speakers, nothing has made a more substantial difference in the sound of my system(s) than moving away from relying on an AVR for amplification, and moving to separate amplifiers.
    "Conservative Libertarians love the country, progressive leftists love the government." - Andrew Wilkow


    “Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.”
    ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

  • invalid
    invalid Posts: 1,247
    edited February 2023
    daddyjt wrote: »
    mantis wrote: »
    105 watts in a AVR is what it comes out to be. I don't find anything wrong with that. That's the power output that's that power output.
    105 watts seems to be a good amount of power, at least in my room and in many rooms I have setup 105 watts AVR's in.

    With very few exceptions, AVRs run all their amplifier channels off of a single power supply. As such, you might get the advertised "105 watts" driving 2 of the 5(7?) channels. However, once you start driving 5 or 7 of the channels, it's going to take a toll on the power supply.

    To this day, other than different speakers, nothing has made a more substantial difference in the sound of my system(s) than moving away from relying on an AVR for amplification, and moving to separate amplifiers.

    That goes for even low volume SPL's. I could maybe see using an AVR if they used a power supply like a vintage krell amp, but their power supply is usually smaller than a decent 100 watt amp to drive multiple channels.
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 24,366
    It's too bad the audio mags do not do all channel power testing on receivers anymore. The whole reason I bought my Denon 3805 back in the day was because during all channel testing it still would put out 95wpc x 5, it was rated at 125wpc. Many back in the day and most today will drastically drop in their rated power with more that two channels, some as low as 40-50 wpc with a higher amount of distortion.
    I remember when I bought my Yamaha RX-v992 and it was only rated at 85wpc x 5, the salesperson mentioned that it was a true rating for the 5 channels and the 2ch performance was much more than the 85 watts.

    They were correct and the only reason for the Denon purchase was to get better codacs (DTS) and room correction.
  • rooftop59
    rooftop59 Posts: 7,931
    pitdogg2 wrote: »
    It's too bad the audio mags do not do all channel power testing on receivers anymore. The whole reason I bought my Denon 3805 back in the day was because during all channel testing it still would put out 95wpc x 5, it was rated at 125wpc. Many back in the day and most today will drastically drop in their rated power with more that two channels, some as low as 40-50 wpc with a higher amount of distortion.
    I remember when I bought my Yamaha RX-v992 and it was only rated at 85wpc x 5, the salesperson mentioned that it was a true rating for the 5 channels and the 2ch performance was much more than the 85 watts.

    They were correct and the only reason for the Denon purchase was to get better codacs (DTS) and room correction.

    have they stooped this?
    https://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-x3400h-av-receiver-review-test-bench
    Living Room 2.2: Usher BE-718 "tiny dancers"; Dual DIY Dayton audio RSS210HF-4 Subs with Dayton SPA-250 amps; Arcam SA30; Musical Fidelity A308; Sony UBP-x1000es; Squeezebox Touch with Bolder Power Supply
    Game Room 5.1.4:
    Denon AVR-X4200w; Sony UBP-x700; Definitive Technology Power Monitor 900 mains, CLR-3000 center, StudioMonitor 350 surrounds, ProMonitor 800 atmos x4; Sub - Monoprice Monolith 15in THX Ultra

    Bedroom 2.1
    Cambridge Azur 551r; Polk RT25i; ACI Titan Subwoofer
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 24,366
    rooftop59 wrote: »
    pitdogg2 wrote: »
    It's too bad the audio mags do not do all channel power testing on receivers anymore. The whole reason I bought my Denon 3805 back in the day was because during all channel testing it still would put out 95wpc x 5, it was rated at 125wpc. Many back in the day and most today will drastically drop in their rated power with more that two channels, some as low as 40-50 wpc with a higher amount of distortion.
    I remember when I bought my Yamaha RX-v992 and it was only rated at 85wpc x 5, the salesperson mentioned that it was a true rating for the 5 channels and the 2ch performance was much more than the 85 watts.

    They were correct and the only reason for the Denon purchase was to get better codacs (DTS) and room correction.

    have they stooped this?
    https://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-x3400h-av-receiver-review-test-bench

    I do not remember seeing that in the mag itself, I'm going to check, I'll report back.
  • mantis
    mantis Posts: 16,997
    daddyjt wrote: »
    mantis wrote: »
    105 watts in a AVR is what it comes out to be. I don't find anything wrong with that. That's the power output that's that power output.
    105 watts seems to be a good amount of power, at least in my room and in many rooms I have setup 105 watts AVR's in.

    With very few exceptions, AVRs run all their amplifier channels off of a single power supply. As such, you might get the advertised "105 watts" driving 2 of the 5(7?) channels. However, once you start driving 5 or 7 of the channels, it's going to take a toll on the power supply.

    To this day, other than different speakers, nothing has made a more substantial difference in the sound of my system(s) than moving away from relying on an AVR for amplification, and moving to separate amplifiers.
    Just about all AVR's are rated at 2 channels driven and lost about 20-30% of thier power when running multiple channels. BUT that doesn't mean a 105-130 or even 150 was rated AVR can't run a small medium or large Room. Most movies don't require full bandwidth full channels all driven at the same time at reference levels just about never. So This is why AVR's work very well in most rooms in most systems no issues. As long as you spec the correct amount of power, you're completely fine. Most people never listen at reference level anyway, it's usually to loud for most people.

    I don't listen at reference levels. I'd like to keep my hearing for the rest of my life.

    I do however agree with you about adding power amps, in many rooms with many speakers for many people can benefit from more power.

    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.
  • invalid
    invalid Posts: 1,247
    I'm using a Denon AVR until my krell amp gets back from krell, I can tell you that the AVR is not even close in sound quality even at low volumes. My marantz sr7007 doesn't even come close either.
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 24,366
    edited February 2023
    rooftop59 wrote: »
    pitdogg2 wrote: »
    It's too bad the audio mags do not do all channel power testing on receivers anymore. The whole reason I bought my Denon 3805 back in the day was because during all channel testing it still would put out 95wpc x 5, it was rated at 125wpc. Many back in the day and most today will drastically drop in their rated power with more that two channels, some as low as 40-50 wpc with a higher amount of distortion.
    I remember when I bought my Yamaha RX-v992 and it was only rated at 85wpc x 5, the salesperson mentioned that it was a true rating for the 5 channels and the 2ch performance was much more than the 85 watts.

    They were correct and the only reason for the Denon purchase was to get better codacs (DTS) and room correction.

    have they stooped this?
    https://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-x3400h-av-receiver-review-test-bench

    5m6yqwnvlx7u.jpg
    onid11y6g9h2.jpg

    Nope the box is all you get in the magazine. Those specs are for the pioneer elite vsx-lx505. No 5,7 or 9 ch specs at all. Those boxes are what I've been seeing the last few years, just 2ch specs and all the connectivity. Not even the article mentions anything for multiple channels driven.

  • rooftop59
    rooftop59 Posts: 7,931
    edited February 2023
    Yep @pitdogg2 I just looked at all the recent reviews...Page 1, page 2, specs, and that's it...I guess maybe they figure with 9-15 channel ARVs they can't do measurements anymore?

    Even with my Denon that measures 95 WPC 5 channels driven, in a pretty small room a little Audiosource amp 200 is better for the mains or center than the AVR. especially when I had it bridged to the center, the center sounded so clear...I blew out one of the LR channels and had to move it there. But power/amperage equals clarity, nuance, taut bass, so many things even at lower volumes.
    Living Room 2.2: Usher BE-718 "tiny dancers"; Dual DIY Dayton audio RSS210HF-4 Subs with Dayton SPA-250 amps; Arcam SA30; Musical Fidelity A308; Sony UBP-x1000es; Squeezebox Touch with Bolder Power Supply
    Game Room 5.1.4:
    Denon AVR-X4200w; Sony UBP-x700; Definitive Technology Power Monitor 900 mains, CLR-3000 center, StudioMonitor 350 surrounds, ProMonitor 800 atmos x4; Sub - Monoprice Monolith 15in THX Ultra

    Bedroom 2.1
    Cambridge Azur 551r; Polk RT25i; ACI Titan Subwoofer
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 24,366
    Maybe they do not want to embarrass their paying advertisers with how little power is left :smile:
  • VR3
    VR3 Posts: 27,900
    On my aventage 3070, I have had the front porch, back porch and the home theater going pretty loud for hours and hours with no hiccups, knock on wood!

    Very happy with the unit and the price I paid (free) 😁😁😁😁

    - Not Tom ::::::: Any system can play Diana Krall. Only the best can play Limp Bizkit.
  • rooftop59
    rooftop59 Posts: 7,931
    VR3 wrote: »
    On my aventage 3070, I have had the front porch, back porch and the home theater going pretty loud for hours and hours with no hiccups, knock on wood!

    Very happy with the unit and the price I paid (free) 😁😁😁😁

    I'm still kicking myself for not doing the same thing on the adorama deal that you did (I thought about it hard at the time), but I was SO busy at that point in my life that it just wasn't worth it...

    I also have Yamaha RX-A820 sitting outside in a plastic cabinet 24/7. Runs two pairs of speakers and a patio TV via ARC. Bought it used for cheap, and it has been out there for around 2 years and I haven't had any issues...
    Living Room 2.2: Usher BE-718 "tiny dancers"; Dual DIY Dayton audio RSS210HF-4 Subs with Dayton SPA-250 amps; Arcam SA30; Musical Fidelity A308; Sony UBP-x1000es; Squeezebox Touch with Bolder Power Supply
    Game Room 5.1.4:
    Denon AVR-X4200w; Sony UBP-x700; Definitive Technology Power Monitor 900 mains, CLR-3000 center, StudioMonitor 350 surrounds, ProMonitor 800 atmos x4; Sub - Monoprice Monolith 15in THX Ultra

    Bedroom 2.1
    Cambridge Azur 551r; Polk RT25i; ACI Titan Subwoofer
  • mikejedi0619
    mikejedi0619 Posts: 94
    edited February 2023
    Yamaha receivers are pretty powerful , even by receiver standards imo. All the ones i have owned didn’t have that typical receiver sound. Sounded more like a good separate amp :)
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 32,790
    I kinda like Yamaha stuff.
  • ALL212
    ALL212 Posts: 1,551
    Sittin on the porch, corncob pipe and whiskey in hand….puff…pufff

    You younguns ain’t memberin when they made real amps and published real specs.

    Then them uppity marketing folk got involved and dummied it all down to jiberish…

    Don get me wrong - there’s good stuff out there.

    Back in the day…

    50 lbs of kick @ss

    Type Pre-main amplifier
    Rated output Music Power (IHF) : 260W (4 Ω, 1 kHz)
    Effective output (single-channel operation) : 85W/85W (8 Ω, 1 kHz)
    Effective output (both channel operation) : 80W + 80W (8 Ω, 1 kHz)
    Continuous effective output (both channel operation, rated distortion factor 8 Ω, 20 Hz to 20 kHz) : 75W + 75W
    Total harmonic distortion factor (rated output) Not more than 0.1%
    Cross modulation distortion factor 0.1% or Less (Rated Output, 70 Hz : 7 kHz = 4 : 1, SMPTE)
    Power Band With (IHF) 5 Hz to 40 kHz
    Frequency characteristic 3 Hz ~ 80 kHz, + 0 -1dB (Main Amplifier, 1W Output)
    Damping factor 50 (8 Ω)

    hws7ashuy3f9.jpeg
    ammzwbe2oe7w.jpeg



    Aaron
    Enabler Extraordinaire
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 32,790
    I dunno, that katakana is gibberish to me -- which, I grant you, isn't Sansui's fault!
  • invalid
    invalid Posts: 1,247
    ALL212 wrote: »
    Sittin on the porch, corncob pipe and whiskey in hand….puff…pufff

    You younguns ain’t memberin when they made real amps and published real specs.

    Then them uppity marketing folk got involved and dummied it all down to jiberish…

    Don get me wrong - there’s good stuff out there.

    Back in the day…

    50 lbs of kick @ss

    Type Pre-main amplifier
    Rated output Music Power (IHF) : 260W (4 Ω, 1 kHz)
    Effective output (single-channel operation) : 85W/85W (8 Ω, 1 kHz)
    Effective output (both channel operation) : 80W + 80W (8 Ω, 1 kHz)
    Continuous effective output (both channel operation, rated distortion factor 8 Ω, 20 Hz to 20 kHz) : 75W + 75W
    Total harmonic distortion factor (rated output) Not more than 0.1%
    Cross modulation distortion factor 0.1% or Less (Rated Output, 70 Hz : 7 kHz = 4 : 1, SMPTE)
    Power Band With (IHF) 5 Hz to 40 kHz
    Frequency characteristic 3 Hz ~ 80 kHz, + 0 -1dB (Main Amplifier, 1W Output)
    Damping factor 50 (8 Ω)

    hws7ashuy3f9.jpeg
    ammzwbe2oe7w.jpeg



    What about TIM distortion and slew rate?
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 32,790
    edited February 2023
    tx19mj8hrwji.png
    source: https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/harman-kardon/700-series.shtml

    I happen to have an hk770. It is kind of a cool piece.

    14035850202_25f3bf7bac_b.jpg

    Not that this has anything to do with the thread topic, though :#
  • ALL212
    ALL212 Posts: 1,551

    What about TIM distortion and slew rate?

    I don't think this amp had op-amps. Can't measure TIM or slew rates without op-amps.

    Aaron
    Enabler Extraordinaire
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 32,790
    edited February 2023
    I don't think Otala had described TIM yet when that Sansui was a current model :#
    Looks like it was (ca.) 1976.
    https://hifisonix.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/The-Theory-of-TIM-Matti-Otala.pdf
    Looks like the Sansui AU-9500 shown above is from 1972, per
    https://audio-heritage.jp/SANSUI/amp/au-9500.html
    https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/sansui/au-9500.shtml sez 1974-75.
    I don't remember exactly, any more. :(
    but...
    Hard to measure (or at least to report) stuff that you don't know about... ;)

    hyd1z7z5cfv6.png
  • motorstereo
    motorstereo Posts: 2,032
    I had 2 Sui 9500's back in the day. I liked their look, build quality and their sound at very low levels. But the volume control was not linear and anything over 1/4 volume distortion was audible and unpleasant to listen to. Perhaps if I had my khorns when either of them were here one of them just might've made the grade.
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 32,790
    musta been that TIM...

    B)
  • motorstereo
    motorstereo Posts: 2,032
    edited February 2023
    mhardy6647 wrote: »
    musta been that TIM...

    Yep, either that or something else B)
  • ken brydson
    ken brydson Posts: 8,632
    mhardy6647 wrote: »
    musta been that TIM...

    B)

    Tim is a busy man...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTbrIo1p-So