Amplifier FAQ - Page 10 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 32Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #271 of 303 Old 09-22-2015, 12:37 AM
 
fatbottom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1420 Post(s)
Liked: 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post
Good point.



Yes. I ran it with one speaker for the reason you cited. I get 99 dB with 250w that way, when not located near a wall. Basically they give you a +6 dB bonus for being in a baffle wall, which is what I heard previously (actually I heard +3 dB to +6 dB benefit from baffle wall).

So yes, at just 250 watts I can hit 105 dB reference. However my concern is that if I don't go with something higher, like at least 300 or 350w, then there may not be any (or enough) headroom as needed. For example, as pointed out here, speakers can change their impedance at different frequencies. So if the KEFs drop to a 2 Ohm or whatever load then all of the sudden the 250 watts is no longer enough. Maybe it delivers 125 watts for those times which then drops things by 3 dB. So its nice to have at least the piece of mind that there is extra watts available as needed.

That said, even if it drops to a 2 ohm load with 250 watts then becomes 125 watts and the loss is only 3 dB. So essentially - if I have this straight - if I am OK with knowing that I can always play movies just fine at 3 dB below reference, that's acceptable to me. Realistically I won't listen at reference anyway - to my aging ears its painful and makes them ring. I like the idea of knowing I can play perfectly fine at reference because it then means I can play perfectly fine at any level below reference. But if I can be 100% confident that with 250w of power I can play with no problems at -3 dB or -5 dB below reference, I think I'm good to go. I really can't imagine watching a full movie any louder than that anyway.



It would be great to know what numbers they have for power compression as well, which Mike Garret says can account for 3 dB to as much as 9 dB of loss depending on the speaker.
What about a ATI 6012 for all surround channels, with a ATI 6003 for L/C/R.
fatbottom is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #272 of 303 Old 09-22-2015, 08:28 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
lovingdvd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 12,094
Mentioned: 51 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2860 Post(s)
Liked: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigguyca View Post
When compared in dB's, and that seems the relevant comparison, the output of all these ATI amplifiers is similar. It's hard to get excited about a dB or two from an engineering standpoint.
Agreed, from a dB output standpoint when the impedance is around 4 ohms. My concern is about having the headroom and trying to figure out how much is enough. For instance in this case its not so much about "my speakers can play 2 dB louder if I have that extra 200 watts" but more like "for passages where the impedance is lower, and/or for reduced efficiency at the speaker when the coils are hot (power compression), having that extra 200 watts should help me be able to MAINTAIN the same loud listening level".

So IOW its not so much the extra watts for being able to pick up an extra 2 dB, but more about the extra watts to be able to properly maintain loud levels when conditions exist the require more power from the amp, such as peaks or dips in impedance or power compression etc. Does this make sense?

Quote:
That said, my personal choice is for big amplifiers. I don't think I ever use their full capability, but I get satisfaction in owning them; who knows why. I don't own a Corvette, but I doubt most owners drive 150 mph very often, if ever, but they like owning the beasts.
The car - that's a great analogy. In my case I'd prefer to have the exact amount of power that I'd ever need, without having wattage in reserve that is wasted. That's the challenging part, because without specific tests and data from the manufacturers (or others that have tested) its very difficult to know. So what I think I've learned in this process is that a) its very hard to predict exactly how much you many watts you may ever need beyond what a SPL calculator tells you, and b) to cover all bases people recommend 1.5-2x the speaker max wattage is to account for this overhead and "unknown" amount of watts really needed - and perhaps a fair or large amount of that 1.5-2x winds up never being used but is there for those times (perhaps very short or specific passages etc) when needed.

Quote:
To be clear: I have no experience with high-end Class D amplifiers. Likely my iPhone, and the audio system in my car use them, but that's my limit of experience. I've read about Class D amplifiers and have a basic idea of how they work...
Thanks. It would be really interesting to audition both types of amps in my room. I am almost tempting to get the speakers in place and try a two channel class D and class A/B rated at the same watts in the room to see if I could hear any differences (beyond would could be EQ'ed) and if one seemed to run out of power before the other... I wonder if others have done so. I have to image they have...
lovingdvd is online now  
post #273 of 303 Old 09-22-2015, 08:32 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
lovingdvd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 12,094
Mentioned: 51 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2860 Post(s)
Liked: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatbottom View Post
What about a ATI 6012 for all surround channels, with a ATI 6003 for L/C/R.
Only 90 watts per channel.
lovingdvd is online now  
 
post #274 of 303 Old 09-22-2015, 08:39 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Stereojeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Whittier, CA USA
Posts: 1,602
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Liked: 63
How about the BGW VXi8.8. Fully balanced, 200W RMS at 8 ohms and here's the big one----16 channels. Or the VXi8.4. 200W x 8 plus 400W x 4 at 8 ohms.

www.bgw.com

Jeff

Last edited by Stereojeff; 09-22-2015 at 10:24 AM.
Stereojeff is offline  
post #275 of 303 Old 09-22-2015, 08:40 AM
 
fatbottom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1420 Post(s)
Liked: 520
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post
Only 90 watts per channel.
Which is plenty for side/surrounds/ceiling. Saying that, I have a 2004 for side/rears which is a bit stupid.

Still if I was going atmos (I'm not) I'd probably get the 6012 for side x2, rears x2, ceiling x 4 maybe front effects, VOG channel, with a decent 3 channel.
fatbottom is offline  
post #276 of 303 Old 09-22-2015, 10:12 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
lovingdvd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 12,094
Mentioned: 51 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2860 Post(s)
Liked: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereojeff View Post
How about the BGW VXi8.8. Fully balanced, 200W RMS at 8 ohms and here's the big one----16 channels. of the VXi8.4. 200W x 8 plus 400W x 4 at 8 ohms.

www.bgw.com

Jeff
Looks like a great amp - they are owned by ATI. It would be nice to have 16 channels of power all in a compact chassis (probably around a 6U) like this. However the VXi is really intended more as a commercial cinema amp and as such it has fans which are rather loud. The AT2000 series puts out similar power and 16 channels of that would cost less than the VXi so I'd prefer the 2000 series.
lovingdvd is online now  
post #277 of 303 Old 09-22-2015, 10:58 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
JHAz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,587
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 307 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post
Agreed, from a dB output standpoint when the impedance is around 4 ohms. My concern is about having the headroom and trying to figure out how much is enough. For instance in this case its not so much about "my speakers can play 2 dB louder if I have that extra 200 watts" but more like "for passages where the impedance is lower, and/or for reduced efficiency at the speaker when the coils are hot (power compression), having that extra 200 watts should help me be able to MAINTAIN the same loud listening level".

So IOW its not so much the extra watts for being able to pick up an extra 2 dB, but more about the extra watts to be able to properly maintain loud levels when conditions exist the require more power from the amp, such as peaks or dips in impedance or power compression etc. Does this make sense?



The car - that's a great analogy. In my case I'd prefer to have the exact amount of power that I'd ever need, without having wattage in reserve that is wasted. That's the challenging part, because without specific tests and data from the manufacturers (or others that have tested) its very difficult to know. So what I think I've learned in this process is that a) its very hard to predict exactly how much you many watts you may ever need beyond what a SPL calculator tells you, and b) to cover all bases people recommend 1.5-2x the speaker max wattage is to account for this overhead and "unknown" amount of watts really needed - and perhaps a fair or large amount of that 1.5-2x winds up never being used but is there for those times (perhaps very short or specific passages etc) when needed.



Thanks. It would be really interesting to audition both types of amps in my room. I am almost tempting to get the speakers in place and try a two channel class D and class A/B rated at the same watts in the room to see if I could hear any differences (beyond would could be EQ'ed) and if one seemed to run out of power before the other... I wonder if others have done so. I have to image they have...
in real content, afaik, there is no passage where the total impedance is significantly lower. There are frequencies at which the impedance is lower. So for a millisecond to (let's imagine) a second, if 20 perceent of the total power requirement is at 2 ohms and the rest is at an average of 6 ohms or more, you'e likely in no trouble. The amp has to push the total impedance, and never, unless you are sitting around listening to sine wave test tones, is anywhere like the majority of the power requirement going to be at the speaker's impedance minimum . . . . onaccounta that's not how sound works.
JHAz is offline  
post #278 of 303 Old 09-23-2015, 03:55 PM
Advanced Member
 
garygarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 627 Post(s)
Liked: 751
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post
in real content, afaik, there is no passage where the total impedance is significantly lower. There are frequencies at which the impedance is lower. So for a millisecond to (let's imagine) a second, if 20 perceent of the total power requirement is at 2 ohms and the rest is at an average of 6 ohms or more, you'e likely in no trouble. The amp has to push the total impedance, and never, unless you are sitting around listening to sine wave test tones, is anywhere like the majority of the power requirement going to be at the speaker's impedance minimum . . . . onaccounta that's not how sound works.
Although your post makes perfect sense to me, I'm still wondering why reviews in Stereophile and elsewhere sometimes say "this amplifier may have difficulty in driving a low impedance load." Why would those of us who listen to music care about that? I tend to see these comments in Atkinson's technical section of a review. I've also heard that some speakers that are rather efficient may still not deliver much "umph" (usually in the mid bass, for some reason) because of "impedance problems."

Of course, maybe that's for the benefit of people who do sit around and listen to sine waves, instead of music.
garygarrison is online now  
post #279 of 303 Old 09-23-2015, 09:06 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
lovingdvd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 12,094
Mentioned: 51 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2860 Post(s)
Liked: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by garygarrison View Post
Although your post makes perfect sense to me, I'm still wondering why reviews in Stereophile and elsewhere sometimes say "this amplifier may have difficulty in driving a low impedance load." Why would those of us who listen to music care about that?...
I am not sure, but I think the answer is that speakers have different levels of impedance at various frequencies. Take for example the KEF R700 - specs here: http://kef.com/html/en/showroom/hi-f...700/index.html . Its nominal impedance is 8 ohms, but it also says minimum 3.2 ohms. I'm still pretty new to this, but I *think* this means that the speaker can dip down to those lower ohms, and that is where amp performance at lower impedance lows can come into play. Perhaps 3.2 ohms can be handled by most quality amps but some speakers can go even lower to 2 ohms or even less which could be problematic for some amps.
lovingdvd is online now  
post #280 of 303 Old 09-24-2015, 06:00 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 10,411
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2205 Post(s)
Liked: 1804
Most speakers have peaks and valleys in their impedance and "nominal" impedance may mean very little. If there is a broad dip in impedance in the midbass, say to 3 or 4 ohms, and your amplifier has fairly high output impedance and/or limited current capability and you listen loudly, you may notice the lack of bass. Similarly, a lot or planar dynamic and ribbon speakers drop to 3 ohms or lower in impedance at high frequencies, and many ESLs drop below 1 ohm at 20 kHz, so with some amps you might notice the drop in HF energy. I would guess the majority of us would never tell in a blind test using most source material, but there are certainly real cases out there.

Tube amps generally have high output impedance and thus the overall system response depends upon the speaker's impedance.

And the amp and speaker do not care if it is music or movies. If your cymbals or kettle drum are lacking it is just as vexing as when a big explosion fizzles out or car chase sounds wimpy.

Over on WBF I wrote a little article showing how amplifier and speaker impedances interact.

IMO - Don

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is online now  
post #281 of 303 Old 09-24-2015, 03:58 PM
Advanced Member
 
garygarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 627 Post(s)
Liked: 751
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post
I am not sure, but I think the answer is that speakers have different levels of impedance at various frequencies. Take for example the KEF R700 - specs here: http://kef.com/html/en/showroom/hi-f...700/index.html . Its nominal impedance is 8 ohms, but it also says minimum 3.2 ohms. I'm still pretty new to this, but I *think* this means that the speaker can dip down to those lower ohms, and that is where amp performance at lower impedance lows can come into play. Perhaps 3.2 ohms can be handled by most quality amps but some speakers can go even lower to 2 ohms or even less which could be problematic for some amps.
I agree that they may point it out for exactly the reasons you stated, but I infer from the post by JHAz that, even though at a certain frequency the speaker impedance may be quite low, in music ("real content," as he said), because more than one frequency is presented at once, i.e., one or more (usually more) fundamental, as well as all of the overtones of such fundamentals, the amplifier would only "see" a speaker load as low as 2 Ohms quite rarely, perhaps only for a few milliseconds, and would recover before it knew what hit it. Also, I would think that big climaxes that tax amplifiers are composed (pardon the pun) of quite a gaggle of fundamentals and overtones, therefore a more normal (higher) impedance would be presented, more like the speaker's "nominal" impedance, or many times higher, in some cases.

That being said, I still wouldn't want an amp that would freak out while sending a high intensity sine test tone to a speaker that happened to have a low impedance at the particular frequency of a test tone.

Some people have accused several popular speakers (no names please) of not delivering "punch" with small amplifiers because of impedance problems. Whether this a bald guess, a respectable hypothesis, or a confirmed result, using music as a source, I don't know.

Last edited by garygarrison; 09-24-2015 at 04:11 PM.
garygarrison is online now  
post #282 of 303 Old 09-24-2015, 04:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
garygarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 627 Post(s)
Liked: 751
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

Over on WBF I wrote a little article showing how amplifier and speaker impedances interact.

IMO - Don
Can you give us a linc to that article? Thanks.
garygarrison is online now  
post #283 of 303 Old 09-24-2015, 05:27 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 10,411
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2205 Post(s)
Liked: 1804
No, the last time I posted a link to another forum I received a warning from an AVS Moderator. Google What's Best Forum then look in the technical section. There is, or was (haven't been there in a while), a sticky at the top with links to all my little babbles. I think you have to join to see the pictures, however.

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is online now  
post #284 of 303 Old 10-10-2015, 07:18 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post
No, the last time I posted a link to another forum I received a warning from an AVS Moderator. Google What's Best Forum then look in the technical section. There is, or was (haven't been there in a while), a sticky at the top with links to all my little babbles. I think you have to join to see the pictures, however.
I'm not sure where to post this.... but does anybody have a recommendation for a dedicated Audio 5.1 or 6.1 Amplifier ?

I use a video processor and don't need any Video capabilities that come with A/V Receivers.
garygarrison likes this.
surfin is offline  
post #285 of 303 Old 10-14-2015, 05:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
garygarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 627 Post(s)
Liked: 751
Quote:
Originally Posted by surfin View Post
I'm not sure where to post this.... but does anybody have a recommendation for a dedicated Audio 5.1 or 6.1 Amplifier ?

I use a video processor and don't need any Video capabilities that come with A/V Receivers.
Search for info on whatever NAD has in multichannel amps. I've had good luck with their amps.

What kind of speakers do you have, what is their sensitivity rating, and how big is your room? How far will you sit from your main front speakers?
garygarrison is online now  
post #286 of 303 Old 12-15-2015, 05:27 PM
Newbie
 
Geek_Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bidniz View Post
Just wanted to say thanks for taking the time to write all that up. It was a great read for me and very interesting!
Ditto...

That was a really good ....

I learned from it
Geek_Monkey is offline  
post #287 of 303 Old 08-07-2016, 10:03 AM
Member
 
rajdori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Hi, An owner of Energy RC30 and RC70, but using Mirage speakers in main HT.

I was considering to setup stereo pair in bedroom. I was going through portable stereo Amps.. like SMSL SA50, or Topping vx3, or Topping TP22 etc. These are rated approx 35-50w per channel at 8ohm. Would they have enough juice to a pair of RC30s or RC70s? Both are 8ohm, recommended power approx 200w RMS.

Also, most of these AMPs come with only L and R output posts.. Any way to connect a powered subwoofer, like Mirage 8"...?

These amps are very portable, well-reviewed, and under $75. Or any other suggestions?

thanks in advance...
rajdori is offline  
post #288 of 303 Old 08-07-2016, 10:52 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 10,411
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2205 Post(s)
Liked: 1804
You should create a separate thread for those questions; this one is focused on explaining how they work and what they do.

You could buy a passive summer/attenuator to change the L/R outputs into a line-level signal for your sub, but you'll lose the benefits of rolling off the mains.

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is online now  
post #289 of 303 Old 11-23-2016, 08:30 AM
Member
 
1_1_1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 98
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Still reading the thread so if someone has mentioned this sorry.

How about a section on RMS vs Max as it relates to amps and speakers.

I know I was told long ago that exceeding the RMS would cause there to be distortion (might be wrong but that's what i was told) so I've so far always wanted to be able to (in a desecrate setup) set the amp to just below it's RMS and for that to also be somewhere below the speaker's RMS and then use the preamp to adjust the volume.

A more informed bit on info on the topic would be great.
1_1_1 is offline  
post #290 of 303 Old 11-23-2016, 09:55 AM
Member
 
1_1_1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 98
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovingdvd View Post
Thanks. It would be really interesting to audition both types of amps in my room. I am almost tempting to get the speakers in place and try a two channel class D and class A/B rated at the same watts in the room to see if I could hear any differences (beyond would could be EQ'ed) and if one seemed to run out of power before the other... I wonder if others have done so. I have to image they have...
based on what I've read I wouldn't aim for them to be rated at the same power output since most Class-D AFAIK are based on the tripath chip which due to patent issues and the original patent holder going out of business is limited in availability other than from china.

If you're trying to compare the QUALITY then use a sound level meter and match them to the same level, as the D-class will likely have a lower max rating I'd aim for just under the RMS of the lowest amp and match the sound level on all to that level.

If you just want to see which will be loudest then AB for sure.

Personally I have a TP-60 2ch 60wpc amp and I've very happy with it, since for me I'm not trying to go deaf just have good quality and 60wpc is plenty for me even with my KF-28's (actually on switching from KB-15's to KF-28's I had to turn the volume on the pro-pre down for most things.
1_1_1 is offline  
post #291 of 303 Old 04-14-2017, 10:02 AM
Senior Member
 
Gonzilla13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 58
When running an amp, do I receive the power from the amp per channel on top of what my AVR puts out? Or does the amp over ride the receiver's output and take over the duty of powering my drivers?


So If I have 125wpc from my receiver and I run a 200wpc amp will I be sending 325wpc out to my speaker?
Gonzilla13 is offline  
post #292 of 303 Old 04-14-2017, 10:57 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
phantom52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southeast TX.
Posts: 7,555
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gonzilla13 View Post
When running an amp, do I receive the power from the amp per channel on top of what my AVR puts out? Or does the amp over ride the receiver's output and take over the duty of powering my drivers?


So If I have 125wpc from my receiver and I run a 200wpc amp will I be sending 325wpc out to my speaker?
The amp will supply all the power to your speakers. No there will not be additional power from the AVR. After connecting your speakers to the amp re-run whatever room EQ you have. I also doubt that you would notice the difference between the 125wpc and the 200wpc amp.
phantom52 is offline  
post #293 of 303 Old 04-14-2017, 11:03 AM
Senior Member
 
Gonzilla13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by phantom52 View Post
The amp will supply all the power to your speakers. No there will not be additional power from the AVR. After connecting your speakers to the amp re-run whatever room EQ you have. I also doubt that you would notice the difference between the 125wpc and the 200wpc amp.


Noted. My FL/FR towers will have 4 x 6.5" drivers each...Would you suggest more power or should I just let my AVR do the work at its rated 125wpc? Its just for movies/occasional gaming.
Gonzilla13 is offline  
post #294 of 303 Old 04-14-2017, 11:07 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
phantom52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southeast TX.
Posts: 7,555
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gonzilla13 View Post
Noted. My FL/FR towers will have 4 x 6.5" drivers each...Would you suggest more power or should I just let my AVR do the work at its rated 125wpc? Its just for movies/occasional gaming.
Let the Avr do the work. It should have the power you need as long as you don't drive it to where you hear distortion or clipping from your speakers. Depending on what speakers you are using the AVR should be able to drive them to ear bleeding levels. Too loud anyway.
phantom52 is offline  
post #295 of 303 Old 04-14-2017, 11:09 AM
Senior Member
 
Gonzilla13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by phantom52 View Post
Let the Avr do the work. It should have the power you need as long as you don't drive it to where you hear distortion or clipping from your speakers. Depending on what speakers you are using the AVR should be able to drive them to ear bleeding levels. Too loud anyway.


Denon x4300 driving DT BP-20's. I was just debating if I should throw am amp into the mix or not.
Gonzilla13 is offline  
post #296 of 303 Old 04-14-2017, 11:24 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
phantom52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southeast TX.
Posts: 7,555
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gonzilla13 View Post
Denon x4300 driving DT BP-20's. I was just debating if I should throw am amp into the mix or not.
That X4300 has enough power those speakers without any problem. As I stated before I doubt that you would notice a difference with the addition of a 200wpc amp.
phantom52 is offline  
post #297 of 303 Old 09-10-2017, 08:53 PM
Senior Member
 
Gonzilla13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 342
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by phantom52 View Post
That X4300 has enough power those speakers without any problem. As I stated before I doubt that you would notice a difference with the addition of a 200wpc amp.


I ended up going a completely different route. I have a Denon 7200 AVR and DefTech BP7000 towers.


Im looking into a pair of XPR-1s to power my FL/FR channels. Would those run as well off my Denon as they would off separates? Ive heard a few people speak of input gain factors....
Gonzilla13 is offline  
post #298 of 303 Old 09-20-2017, 01:20 PM
Senior Member
 
DragonSarc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Leandro, CA
Posts: 235
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Hi all!!! quick question I also have the Denon X4300H which upgraded from 3808Ci and have a high sensitive speaker system (DT BP7000, clr3000 and BPVX/P x4 surrounds) it sounds great, so what is the advantage of getting a more powerfull amp (ive been thinking of getting the Monolith 7x200 watts input sensitivity 1.6v ) rather using just the receiver? thanks
garygarrison likes this.
DragonSarc is offline  
post #299 of 303 Old 09-20-2017, 02:25 PM
Senior Member
 
DragonSarc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Leandro, CA
Posts: 235
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gonzilla13 View Post
I ended up going a completely different route. I have a Denon 7200 AVR and DefTech BP7000 towers.


Im looking into a pair of XPR-1s to power my FL/FR channels. Would those run as well off my Denon as they would off separates? Ive heard a few people speak of input gain factors....
If you get the XPR let me know how it sounds, got the same towers
DragonSarc is offline  
post #300 of 303 Old 09-20-2017, 03:22 PM
Advanced Member
 
garygarrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: The Milky Way
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 627 Post(s)
Liked: 751
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonSarc View Post
Hi all!!! quick question I also have the Denon X4300H which upgraded from 3808Ci and have a high sensitive speaker system (DT BP7000, clr3000 and BPVX/P x4 surrounds) it sounds great, so what is the advantage of getting a more powerfull amp (ive been thinking of getting the Monolith 7x200 watts input sensitivity 1.6v ) rather using just the receiver? thanks
Well, your speakers have an interesting design, and I'm not surprised that they sound great! Most of the power demands are in the bass, where I think you have a built-in amplifier in the DT BP7000s -- do you? I assume it is sufficient. I'm curious about the crossover point to the built in sub, and the slope. Also, how big is your room, how close do you sit, and how loud do you like it?

As you may know, AVR specs are not held to as high a standard as separates, in most cases. So, your AVR amps are rated at 125 watts per channel into 8 Ohms with just two channels operating. With all channels operating at the same time, you will get less power for each channel. A rule of the thumb used to be approx. 80%, but I don't know if that is still true, or is true with Denon. 80% would be 100 watts, so, in reality, if rated the same way separates are, you may have 100 watts per channel. On the one hand, a reduction of 20 % almost certainly won't make an audible difference. On the other hand, if the Monolith is rated at 200 w.p.c. with all channels operating [and the Monoprice ad says it is] that would be 3 dB more than the probable 100 watts of the Denon. Hopefully the Denon has pre-outs? While the powered sub in the DTs does the heavy lifting, some of the bass impact (the "smack" of a beater) can be as high as 100 to even 200 Hz, above the typical sub crossover. IMO, you should be able to reach the 105 dB full scale of Reference level for movies, for your "above sub" frequencies with either the Denon or the Monolith, with a 92 dB (moderately high) sensitive speaker. The sub needs to put out 115 dB, so I hope DT has allowed for that. If you are rolling in money, I'd get the Monolith (or equivalent) for the probable extra 3 dB, just for the psychological benefit.

Before you run Audyssey, see the Audyssey FAQ "Audyssey FAQ Linked Here"in this AVS Forum's Official Audyssey Thread, Part II, and raise any questions there. It is a great help. I love what Audyssey does, but most people turn up their sub a bit after Audyssey calibration. This is to conform to the average preference curve that Harman and others have found.

Best of luck!
Madmax67 likes this.

Last edited by garygarrison; 09-20-2017 at 03:26 PM.
garygarrison is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off