RTI10's and HK AVR 247?
I recall seeing someone posting a link to home theatre mag, where he said that the HK AVR 247 can perform slightly better than the onkyo 605's, and plus drive the RTI10's better due to its circuitry- is that true?
I am debating whether to upgrade from the onkyo 605 to 705 or get the HK AVR 247 for now and get an amp later on...
I am debating whether to upgrade from the onkyo 605 to 705 or get the HK AVR 247 for now and get an amp later on...
Post edited by Mauskar on
Comments
-
Anyone?
-
Whatever you get, make sure it has pre-outs."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche
-
thanks,
but just want to know if i go the HK route, if the HK 247 would be enough to power the RTI's... -
Any receiver can power the RTI's. They simply won't be performing to full capacity until they have separate amplification.
Just make sure that whatever receiver you get has preamp outputs.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 -
The modest h/k 147, which I have, and which claims to output 50w/ch stereo or "40w/ch all channels driven", was recently reviewed and bench tested to actually output 90w/ch stereo and close to 70w/ch "all channels driven". Those results beat the same test performed on a $1,000 Sony claiming 100w/ch and a $1,700 Yamaha claiming 140w/ch!
I would expect the 247 to be pretty convincing as an AVR but it is not without its issues (mostly to do with upscaling video and LFE output levels I think). If you do not need HDMI audio or upscaling, you may want to consider a refurbished 245 (HDMI video switching only) or 235 (no HDMI) from the official Harman Audio store on e-Bay to get the same power on the cheap ... or Ron-P's 635 that is for sale in the Flea Market.
If you go the separate amplification route, I would recommend trying the cfrizz theorem of good sound: "thou shalt use a minimum of 200w per channel in thy external amplifier to drive thy speakers". I "ignored" it and tried the Emotiva rated 125w/ch and got sorely disappointed as far as raw power was concerned.Alea jacta est! -
Sorry you learned that lesson the hard way Kex! Are you going to take another shot at it?If you go the separate amplification route, I would recommend trying the cfrizz theorem of good sound: "thou shalt use a minimum of 200w per channel in thy external amplifier to drive thy speakers". I "ignored" it and tried the Emotiva rated 125w/ch and got sorely disappointed as far as raw power was concerned.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 -
I was in the same boat. I picked the 10's on sale and couldn't resist. My old Pioneer couldn't handle the load and didn't have front channel pre outs. I picked up a H/K 235 refurb, which is the older version of the 240/247 and ran them that way. Personally, I thought it was a little strained. I ended running my Nakamichi PA-5 on the fronts. Audio Nirvana!
-
I don't particularly like your screen name, but welcome to Club Polk!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
-
The modest h/k 147, which I have, and which claims to output 50w/ch stereo or "40w/ch all channels driven", was recently reviewed and bench tested to actually output 90w/ch stereo and close to 70w/ch "all channels driven". Those results beat the same test performed on a $1,000 Sony claiming 100w/ch and a $1,700 Yamaha claiming 140w/ch!
I would expect the 247 to be pretty convincing as an AVR but it is not without its issues (mostly to do with upscaling video and LFE output levels I think). If you do not need HDMI audio or upscaling, you may want to consider a refurbished 245 (HDMI video switching only) or 235 (no HDMI) from the official Harman Audio store on e-Bay to get the same power on the cheap ... or Ron-P's 635 that is for sale in the Flea Market.
If you go the separate amplification route, I would recommend trying the cfrizz theorem of good sound: "thou shalt use a minimum of 200w per channel in thy external amplifier to drive thy speakers". I "ignored" it and tried the Emotiva rated 125w/ch and got sorely disappointed as far as raw power was concerned.
Do you have a link to this supposed report that measured the power outputs of different AVRs? I'd be interested in reading it and knowing which Yamaha they 'reviewed'. The implication being that your amp pumps out more than rated and 'beat' the other amps (which presumably output less than what they are rated for?).
Thanks,
Erik
H9: If you don't trust what you are hearing, then maybe you need to be less invested in a hobby which all the pleasure comes from listening to music. -
Its a character from one of my favorite books.
-
Erik, this is a topic that you will see mentioned frequently here. The two most famous brands for measuring their power "all channels driven" are very probably NAD, and, to a lesser extent perhaps, harman/kardon. Onkyo clearly state they measure "two channels driven", so they are very honest about it. Most others imply they put out a certain amount of power "per channel", but are only measuring one or two channels simultaneously, and at a specific frequency, so it has nothing to do with real life performance (where frequencies will vary tremendously, and all channels will be driven at once). Here is a link to that review, and to an article regarding power ratings:Erik Tracy wrote: »Do you have a link to this supposed report that measured the power outputs of different AVRs? I'd be interested in reading it and knowing which Yamaha they 'reviewed'. The implication being that your amp pumps out more than rated and 'beat' the other amps (which presumably output less than what they are rated for?).
Thanks,
Erik
h/k 147 power measurements: http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/1107rack/index5.html
Sony STR-DA3300ES measurements: http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/1107rack/index7.html
Yamaha RX-V2700 measurements: http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/1107rack/index9.html
Power ratings article: http://www.soundstage.com/gettingtechnical/gettingtechnical200503.htm
Other than the review, I can personally vouch for the fact that the modest 147 I own impressed me tremendously when compared to an entry level pre-pro and external amplifier rated at 125w/ch (blind testing in stereo mode).Alea jacta est! -
I'm not quite sure yet, Cathy. I don't really have more than $1,000 to spend on amplification right now, which is probably what I would need for a decent pre/pro and amp, since we still need a new player (probably Oppo, for SACD and DVD-A), as well as a new TV (probably 42-46" LCD). The poor wifey is being very helpful and supportive of my addiction for the moment. I am currently thinking about a used NAD (again, sorry!), or millerman's h/k 635 (but it sounds as though it's a bit bashed up, and most/all of my stuff is minty/like new). Sorry you learned that lesson the hard way Kex! Are you going to take another shot at it?Alea jacta est! -
Erik, this is a topic that you will see mentioned frequently here. The two most famous brands for measuring their power "all channels driven" are very probably NAD, and, to a lesser extent perhaps, harman/kardon. Onkyo clearly state they measure "two channels driven", so they are very honest about it. Most others imply they put out a certain amount of power "per channel", but are only measuring one or two channels simultaneously, and at a specific frequency, so it has nothing to do with real life performance (where frequencies will vary tremendously, and all channels will be driven at once). Here is a link to that review, and to an article regarding power ratings:
h/k 147 power measurements: http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/1107rack/index5.html
Sony STR-DA3300ES measurements: http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/1107rack/index7.html
Yamaha RX-V2700 measurements: http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/1107rack/index9.html
Power ratings article: http://www.soundstage.com/gettingtechnical/gettingtechnical200503.htm
Other than the review, I can personally vouch for the fact that the modest 147 I own impressed me tremendously when compared to an entry level pre-pro and external amplifier rated at 125w/ch (blind testing in stereo mode).
Got it, thanks.
I have the Yamaha RX-V1800...seems like this year's models do better at achieving rated power for all 5 channels driven:
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/receivers/2590/yamaha-rx-v1800-av-receiver-specifications-page2.html
Sound is great and it kicks! Still...I'm going to re-integrate my Carver M-1.0t power amp into my HT setup to drive my fronts.
Always good to have plenty of 'headroom' eh?
Cheers,
Erik
H9: If you don't trust what you are hearing, then maybe you need to be less invested in a hobby which all the pleasure comes from listening to music. -
Erik, this is a topic that you will see mentioned frequently here. The two most famous brands for measuring their power "all channels driven" are very probably NAD, and, to a lesser extent perhaps, harman/kardon. Onkyo clearly state they measure "two channels driven", so they are very honest about it. Most others imply they put out a certain amount of power "per channel", but are only measuring one or two channels simultaneously, and at a specific frequency, so it has nothing to do with real life performance (where frequencies will vary tremendously, and all channels will be driven at once). Here is a link to that review, and to an article regarding power ratings:
h/k 147 power measurements: http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/1107rack/index5.html
Sony STR-DA3300ES measurements: http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/1107rack/index7.html
Yamaha RX-V2700 measurements: http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/1107rack/index9.html
Power ratings article: http://www.soundstage.com/gettingtechnical/gettingtechnical200503.htm
Other than the review, I can personally vouch for the fact that the modest 147 I own impressed me tremendously when compared to an entry level pre-pro and external amplifier rated at 125w/ch (blind testing in stereo mode).
So in the first link for Harmon Kardon, if i am reading this right, all channels driven at 8ohms yielded 66.7 watts/ channel @ 0.1 distortion but in driving 2 channels it yielded 89.5 watts/ channel @ 0.1 distortion for 8ohms.
With that in mind, something like the 247 or 347 should be able to power a set of RTI8's w/o an amp, correct?
Sag -
So in the first link for Harmon Kardon, if i am reading this right, all channels driven at 8ohms yielded 66.7 watts/ channel @ 0.1 distortion but in driving 2 channels it yielded 89.5 watts/ channel @ 0.1 distortion for 8ohms.
With that in mind, something like the 247 or 347 should be able to power a set of RTI8's w/o an amp, correct?
Sag
H/K makes a good unit but a stand alone amp will give you the high current that really drives a speaker to it's full potential. 200 watt rating usually insures that other key specs for the amp are up to proper levels. As far as what those specs are, other members on here would know better then I.Michael
Samsung 50" HD DLP
Yamaha RX-V2500
(2) Outlaw 200
Adcom GFA 555
Sony BDP300
Denon 2900 DVD
Lsi9's mains
Lsi7's rear
Lsic center
12.1 SVS driver in 4.53 cuft. tube
Harmony 880 -
Yes, you read that right. Since h/k claim 50w x2 ch. or 40w x5 ch. for the 147, those values are significantly better than that. There are plenty of Club Polk members using 2xx and 3xx series h/k AVRs with good results, but as MSALLA points out, the RTi8 are a bit like my RT55 in that they are at the point where you should be able to get a significant benefit from better amplification, hence the preferred goal of 200w/ch external amplifier power, not receiver power.So in the first link for Harmon Kardon, if i am reading this right, all channels driven at 8ohms yielded 66.7 watts/ channel @ 0.1 distortion but in driving 2 channels it yielded 89.5 watts/ channel @ 0.1 distortion for 8ohms.
With that in mind, something like the 247 or 347 should be able to power a set of RTI8's w/o an amp, correct?
Sag
If your question is will the 247 be sufficient compared with a 100w/ch or more x-brand, the answer would be yes. If your question is will it be sufficient in an ideal world where money is no object, the answer would be yes, when used with a 200w/ch or better external amplifier also.
On the theoretical benefits of external amplification: http://www.hometheatersound.com/features/cinemacynergy/cc_20010901.htm. My experience with the 125w/ch LPA-1 leads me to add that not all external amplifiers will yield the intended results, hence the cfrizz 200w rule (I had been expecting that 91dB sensitivity 8 ohm speakers would not have been so problematic).Alea jacta est! -
Thank you.H/K makes a good unit but a stand alone amp will give you the high current that really drives a speaker to it's full potential. 200 watt rating usually insures that other key specs for the amp are up to proper levels.
As for the EMO amp, I believe the jury is still out on that one."He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche -
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
-
Well keep saving Kex, and don't forget to watch Audiogon for a good deal. That is where I got my Sunfire Prepro. It looks brand new & does a great job & I got it for less than half of the MSRP!:DI'm not quite sure yet, Cathy. I don't really have more than $1,000 to spend on amplification right now, which is probably what I would need for a decent pre/pro and amp, since we still need a new player (probably Oppo, for SACD and DVD-A), as well as a new TV (probably 42-46" LCD). The poor wifey is being very helpful and supportive of my addiction for the moment. I am currently thinking about a used NAD (again, sorry!), or Ron-P's h/k 635 (but it sounds as though it's a bit bashed up, and most/all of my stuff is minty/like new).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
-
I'm not quite sure yet, Cathy. I don't really have more than $1,000 to spend on amplification right now, which is probably what I would need for a decent pre/pro and amp, since we still need a new player (probably Oppo, for SACD and DVD-A), as well as a new TV (probably 42-46" LCD).
$1,000? You might want to consider something similar to what I've been doing with my RTi12s - pick up a factory-refurbed HK 347 on EBay for about $280, a used Carver M-500 for about $250, and a Carver M-500t for about $320 or so. Bi-amp the Carvers, using the M-500 for the bass and the M-500t for the mids and tweets. That leaves about a hundred and fifty bucks to take that wonderful wife out to dinner, and you won't find a sweeter sounding setup anywhere for under a grand. -
Thanks for the support Atomic Turtle (are you a cousin of the Atomic Kittens?!) and cfrizz. I have been hesitant to get a more powerful h/k, since I am not sure how much of a difference it would make compared to the, apparently (according to that Home Theater Mag review in December 2007), very capable 147. I really feel that these speakers need something to make them "explode" the soundstage, as mhartman says the Emotiva combo did for his RT5000 system. I want to double, or triple the power, rather than just turn it up a little. Not for loudness, of course, as you all understand, but for control, detail, precision and soundstage. Maybe I'm an idiot (very probably, in fact), but we shall see ...Atomic Turtle wrote: »$1,000? You might want to consider something similar to what I've been doing with my RTi12s - pick up a factory-refurbed HK 347 on EBay for about $280, a used Carver M-500 for about $250, and a Carver M-500t for about $320 or so. Bi-amp the Carvers, using the M-500 for the bass and the M-500t for the mids and tweets. That leaves about a hundred and fifty bucks to take that wonderful wife out to dinner, and you won't find a sweeter sounding setup anywhere for under a grand.
P.S. I didn't forget the Carvers you mentioned, nor the Sunfire, Cathy.Alea jacta est! -
Don't forget DECENT interconnects.
"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche -
Ugh! Don't remind me! I still think I should have heard a difference between a h/k 147 and an Emotiva separates combo though, which is why I am "ignoring" that aspect until I find something that works for me. Unless the RT55 and CS400 just won't do what I expect.Don't forget DECENT interconnects.Alea jacta est! -
Kex, the article you linked to drove the amps to .1% vs .07% that's written into their specs. As you go up the distortion curve you're going to get more output. That being said they did the same thing to all the other gear too.
If it were me and of course, I've already done it,, I'd go with ATs suggestion. The pre section on the HK 2 & 3xx series AVRs will be at least as good as the 147...you're already familiar and like the SQ...all you need is some vintage, affordable power...and a player...some ICs...room treatments...golden ear school...and a magic green marker 
Combo rig:
Onkyo NR1007 pre-pro, Carver TFM 45(fronts), Carver TFM 35 (surrounds)
SDA 1C, CS400i, SDA 2B
PB13Ultra RO
BW Silvers
Oppo BDP-83SE -
Thanks for the support Atomic Turtle (are you a cousin of the Atomic Kittens?!) and cfrizz.
Nope! Don't know nothin' 'bout no Atomic Kittens! Sounds like a recipe for major mischief, though - I don't even want to think about how much trouble nuclear-powered kittens could instigate in the average household.I have been hesitant to get a more powerful h/k, since I am not sure how much of a difference it would make compared to the, apparently (according to that Home Theater Mag review in December 2007), very capable 147. I really feel that these speakers need something to make them "explode" the soundstage, as mhartman says the Emotiva combo did for his RT5000 system. I want to double, or triple the power, rather than just turn it up a little. Not for loudness, of course, as you all understand, but for control, detail, precision and soundstage.
You're right - you definitely need more muscle to get the most out of those speakers. The difference between my old 100-WPC Panasonic receiver and my 250-WPC M-500 is orders of magnitude better. I don't know how much you spent on the speakers, but if you're only feeding them 100 watts or thereabouts you're only going to be hearing about 20 cents out of every dollar you spent. Once you get around 200 or 250 watts, you'll hear every penny. Throw another amp in the mix, and feed 'em 500 watts per channel, and you'll never leave the house again. The clarity, the detail, the soundstage... the depth, the texture... you'll find yourself listening to CDs you've heard hundreds of times, and saying to yourself, "Damn! I never dreamed it was supposed to sound like this!" Seriously. The only thing youl regret about the decision is that you didn't make it earlier. -
Ron Temple wrote: »all you need is some vintage, affordable power...and a player...some ICs...room treatments...golden ear school...and a magic green marker
I'm embarrassed to admit that I've still got some old CDs with green edges.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_KittenAtomic Turtle wrote: »Nope! Don't know nothin' 'bout no Atomic Kittens! Sounds like a recipe for major mischief, ...
http://www.atomickitten.com/
Maybe they're girlie Beatles ...Alea jacta est!
