Good deal over at Crutchfield

MacLeod · May 2005

Thats true but most people would be very interested to learn the ratings are far overstated.

It would also probably bump up the sales of seperates quite a bit.

For my meager budget and considering I live in an apartment, a receiver is all I need. Anything more would be wasted as Id never use it. But once I get a house! Its on!

VR3 · May 2005

You'd be surprised at how much the general public does -not- care. If they did, they wouldnt be buying Bose.

MacLeod · May 2005

Ah, Bose isnt that bad. They just price their stuff too high for what its worth.

If they would knock their prices down a bracket or two they would be quite good.

VR3 · May 2005

Eh, They'd have to knock it down more than that...

With a 20hz gap between the cubes and BM, and a 45hz roll off matched by a 14khz roll off, with shoddy amps, and pos parts... they are worth as much as your compu spooks.

MacLeod · May 2005

Rolls off at 45 and 14K Hz? Yikes!

Like Cody said,"no highs, no lows, must be bose"!

VR3 · May 2005

And to think, I am talking about their 3,000 dollar package...I hate to imagine the cheaper ones...:o

audiobliss · May 2005

Hey, Sid. Could you, just for the heck of it, do some math and figure out what my RX-V1400 is really putting out? I'd be interested to know. It's rated at 110x7, but alas, I know it won't do that.

VR3 · May 2005

I dont -know- the math behind multi-channel receivers, or receivers for that matter, I only know the formula for 2 channel amps as per Russ...

But just figure... 50-60 watts max draw from the processer/tuner...

Tax the max consumption take 50-60 watts from it, divide it by the number of channels, then divide that number 2, and that would be the 8 ohm load, I imagine.

audiobliss · May 2005

Hmm...here's a lesson for ya, Mac. I have a $800 Yamaha RX-V1400 receiver I was tickled pink to be able to get. It is a 7.1 channel receiver, physically large (and awesome looking!). It's rated at 110 watts by 7 channels 20Hz-20kHz @ .04 (I think) THD.

On the back it says that max consumption is 500 watts. So, we make Sid happy and subtract 30 watts (let's be optimistic) for the tuner/preamp section. That leaves us with 470 watts. Then, let's divide that among the 7 channels: 67.14 watts. That ain't too bad. Oh, whoops; that's probably max output at, like, 4 ohms. Now we gotta divide that by 2 to get the max output at 8 ohms. That leaves us at 33.57 watts. Dang. 33.57 watts. Bummer. Oh, whoops. We forgot that's at max output turned all the way up, and with max distortion. Let's figure that it's maybe putting out about 25 clean watts per channel. DANG. Man, I don't even like this thing anymore. I wish I'd never found this forum! LOL

I guess I'll hafta look into separates here, one day. But, statistics and such aside, I can't complain with the sound. Driving very sensitive speakers in a small bedroom to not-very-loud levels, I can't really complain. I'm sure a *good* receiver would suit you pretty well, too, in an ampartment.

VR3 · May 2005

Considering the fact you could power a pair of Klipsch with a AAA battery...what does it matter?

audiobliss · May 2005

MY PRIDE!!!! LOOOL

MacLeod · May 2005

OK. Im back to this again.

Ive been looking around and I just cant accept it.

This JVC is a $400 receiver and rated at 110x7. The back claims 150 watts max consumption. Now that adds up to about 14 watts per channel max which would be 7x7 RMS!

And this Onkyo has a rating of 120 watts. This comes up to about 5 watts per channel!

Thats less than a car CD player!!! This just cant be right. I cant believe something this big only makes 150 watts! Hell my old Alpine 2 channel makes an honest 140 RMS all day long and is a third the size!

Moving up to the high end this Rotel rates 450 watts which is a little more at 30 watts but far from the 75 that Rotel claims (thats with all channels driven at no more thasn .05% THD).

I have a theory that these consumption ratings on the back are a general rating and not accurate. Kind of like how competition level car amps can be rated at 50 watts and yet put out nearly 100. They just stick a general number on there in order to classify it in a certain league.

Thats got to be it! I just cannot accept that you would spend $400 on a recveiver only to power your speakers with 7 watts! Your TV's speakers get more power than this!

neomagus00 · May 2005

correct me if i'm wrong, cause i probably am, but shouldn't you simply say "the amp is 70% efficient, so 75% of 500 watts maximum consumption is 375 watts across 6 channels", and be done with it? if a reciever makes only 10 watts per channel over 6 channels when it's drawing 500 watts, where's the extra 440 watts go?

MacLeod · May 2005

I highly doubt the amp in a receiver is 70% effecient. Im guessing more like 60%.

Take the Onkyo. 120 watts. Figure 50 for the processor and youve got 70. Figure 60% effeciency and youve got 42. 42 for 6 channels comes up to 7 watts!

Figuring the Denon like that (120 volts and 4 amps) you come up with 42 watts per channel (although its rated at 75x6) which is more believable.

But its the ones that come out to 7 watts per channel that makes me think there is more to it.

audiobliss · May 2005

As for the size aspect of things, receivers use totally different technology for amps than the amps in HUs.

Sid - a while back there was a link on CP to a page of where a guy actually tested quite a few receivers to see what they REALLY put out; would you happen to have it?

MacLeod · May 2005

That would be what Id love to see, an actual measurement.

You can test them yourself with the proper equipment like test tones, multimeters and the like but I have none of those, nor do I have a receiver. Just my 100x2 Sony mini system.

VR3 · May 2005

The actual measurements are exactly what your finding. Lower than 20 watts...

The max consumption is the max consumption, period and end.

And nope, I don't have the link. And no, your not insane, they really are that bad.

And...you got to forget, there is quite a bit of difference between YOUR amp and a receiver. Your amp dosnt have a tuner or a processor in it. Which is pretty big.

MacLeod · May 2005

So that Onkyo is only putting out 5 watts per channel yet still costs $300??? That is insane! I dont understand how they could get away with such false advertising.

Math doesnt lie and if those are the actual numbers, and not a general measurent thrown on there, then it must be so but I am just having a hard time accepting it.

VR3 · May 2005

They cant lie about how much power it consumes, I don't think. And why would they want to? Not like people actually think about it...

300 dollars dosnt buy anything...

You figure a manufacture sells its product to the store for double what it costs to make it...

So they would sell it to CC for 150, so it cost them 75 (if that) to make it, and CC would turn around and sell it.

MacLeod · May 2005

Ah bull! I can take $300 and get a car amp with 500 TRUE watts from a quality manufacturer.

I realize a receiver is more than just an amplifier and the processor costs money as well but if you cant get more than 5 watts per channel for $300 in home audio then why bother?

Man, I need to figure a way to hook up an Xtant to my home system!

VR3 · May 2005

Hmm, thats why you buy seperates...

MacLeod · May 2005

Originally posted by Vr3MxStyler2k3
Hmm, thats why you buy seperates...

Hmmm, so you cant get a decent system without spending $1000 on effing seperates.

It aint worth it.

Oh well, look to the bright side I guess. Since they all put out 5-7 watts per channel there is no reason for me to get an expensive receiver. Ill just stick with the $200 Sony 5.1 at Circuit City and think to myself how much of a rip off home audio is compared to car audio.

VR3 · May 2005

not really...

You only need alot of power in your mains and center..

You could pick up a receiver with preouts (even though I dont particularly like the combo), atleast you can get real power...

And then get like the Adcom GFA-545 the mains (200 or so shipped) that is an HONEST 100x2 at 8 ohms...serious power.

And get maybe the Adcom GFA-535 for the center (60 honest watts) and use the receiver to power the rears.

MacLeod · May 2005

Now that aint a bad price. Where can a brutha find Adcom online and authorized?

VR3 · May 2005

hehehehe...your funny...

Adcom is expensive (new)

The amps I am talking about were made in the 80's, and sell on Ebay for those prices. They also pop up in the FM here...

MacLeod · May 2005

:rolleyes:

OK then, so its back to the cheap **** then.

It sucks to be poor and want electronic toys all the time.

MacLeod · May 2005

Ooh!

I goofed.

That Onkyo I talked about earlier (SR502) is not 120 watts. Its 120 volts and 5.1 amps! I didnt see the amp rating before (dunno why)! Now we're talking!

That comes out to 612 watts and figuring 50 for the processors and 65% effeciency youre talking 73 watts x5 (but its rated at 75x6 so youd get 61x6 actual)!!

Woohoo! Im impressed! Onk comes thru. Im sold!

VR3 · May 2005

eh, your forgetting 4 ohm load, divide it by 2...

30 some odd watts...

Anyways...

HK has pretty honest ratings.

And you will absolutely kill yourself buying new in HA...stuff is expensive.

audiobliss · May 2005

You can say that again!! lol

EDIT: Oooooh!! Look at my post counter! What a great number. Phooey....now I can't make anymore posts!!

MacLeod · May 2005

Originally posted by Vr3MxStyler2k3
eh, your forgetting 4 ohm load, divide it by 2...

Nah. Most amps dont double their power with a decreased load. High end amp tend to add a bunch but still usually not double. Either way these receivers are so worthless I doubt they would increase much at all.

I dont like buying used. Ya never know what youre going to get. Home audio is so ridiculously overpriced that you almost have no other option. This is why HITAB systems are so appealing. Yeah it may not sound as good as a high end system but then again you dont have to spend $5000 either.

Good deal over at Crutchfield

Comments