Yamaha RX-A3010 Issue (?) Lower output than RX-V2500 (?!) HDMI related (?) - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 04:40 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Hopefully someone has an answer for a 'potential' issue I recently discovered with my new Yammie receiver....RX-A3010

Last month I upgraded from my 6 year old Yamaha RX-V2500 to the newest, top o' the line Yamaha RX-A3010. I particularly wanted to take advantage of the new HD codecs, HDMI, 9.2 surround capabilities, and minimally better power output (150 wpc vs. 130 wpc...two channels driven).

What puzzles me is that the 3010 volume gain setting has to be set 4 to 5 dB higher than the equivalent 2500 setting to achieve similar spl levels (measured with meter). As an example, I must set the 3010 at -15 on the dB reference setting to hit the same spl at the listening position as the 2500 would do at -20. The same is true for all sources and in 2-channel as well as surround sound engaged. Pure Direct or using a DSP makes no difference.

I, as you'd expect, got nowhere with Yamaha tech support. ("Check all the pins on the HDMI connectors, PCM-not output on the bluray player, etc.")

So I beg you real experts to figure this out for me. Does the HDMI connection require some kind of signal lift to realize similar output from the previous coax audio connection? By the way, no other changes have been made to the system...just the HDMI replacing the coax and the 3010 replacing the 2500. Is it possible Yamaha changed their dBs reference zero point???

I simply cannot figure out why a (slightly) more powerful machine, with supposedly superior connectivity and codecs would require more power to the speakers to generate similar audio amplitude. (Note: All connections and bdp settings are correct, IMO.) The 3010 does have the capability of setting the volume starting point and limiting max volume. It is set to factory defaults. So it's possible....I guess, but doubt...that this could be the boogey. (Perhaps the starting volume setting is affecting the output levels. I dunno. confused.gif) The other possibility that I conjured was that the EQ'ing program, YPAO, is different in the two units and set speaker limits differently. But I again doubt that. The 'relative' levels for speakers and subs remain reasonably the same for both units (but with different absolute settings) and the settings are made at a point at the mic's distance...which also has not changed.)

I'm not exactly sure how to measure the Yammy's amp output with a multimeter. Maybe that would yield additional information. rolleyes.gif

All input is very much appreciated.

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 05:33 PM
Member
 
simps1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Sorry for my english.

What a coincidence. I had the RX-V2500 before, and now I own a RX-A3010.
I never did a side by side test between those two, so I can't be 100% sure, but everything I recall from memory (about the RX-V2500) tells me the RX-A3010 has more powerful amps. The only side by side test I did, was Yamaha RX-A3010 vs Denon 4311ci, and that was when I was deciding which receiver to buy, and the Yamaha has more powerful amps than the Denon. BTW, I wouldn't take the official 'rated RMS' numbers on any receiver very seriously. I doubt those 150 watt per channel on the RX-A3010 within the rated distortion is going to happen in any 'real world' music playing... If you hit play on a hard rock song, and turn the volume up, I doubt you would get anything more than 100 - 110 wpc within the rated distortion.

Anyway, here is one thing you can do:

1) use the coax audio from the RX-A3010 too, so you can compare it more "apple to apple" with the RX-V2500. Also do it with HDMI.
2) make sure to use the same speakers for both receivers (different speakers will have different sensitivity, and that will make a lot of difference)
3) Make sure you disable any YPAO settings
4) make sure the EQ is flat in every channel (0.0dB line)
5) make sure the level of each speaker is set to 0.0db.
6) Make sure every other parameter that can have an impact on audio level / EQ (bass settings / treble settings, etc) (cable lenght LOL, etc) are set to zero or are the same for both receivers.

Then you play your music in both receivers and you will know more about it.

Again, from memory I can tell you that the RX-A3010 is and feel more powerful. I am using HDMI too (audioquest's cables).
My speakers are BIC PL-89, and they are very sensible (98db /w /m I think?), so for music, when I have the receiver at -20dB its already too loud to even stay in the room confortably. At -14dB (thats the max. I have ever gone) the house shakes, and I can tell you both the receiver and speakers could take it very well probably till -5dB or even 0dB, but I never went there. If you have less sensible speakers, its natural that you would need to put more volume (power) in to achieve louder SPL.

I wouldn't put the thread title as "RX-A3010 ISSUE?", when it comes to amp power, because among the "popular" receiver brands (yamaha, denon, onkyo, Marantz, etc) I believe the RX-A3010 is pretty much the most powerful in the $2000 range. (Maybe onkyo has one model at $2000 that might be a little more powerful, but thats it). Other than that, only the top of the line $2800 - $5000 receivers from denon / onkyo would be more powerful than the RX-A3010..

Here is a video of my 3010 running...

Hope it helps,

[]'s
Simps
simps1982 is offline  
post #3 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 05:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ross Ridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,550
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 80
You cannot meaningfully compare the volume levels displayed on two different receivers. They do not use any sort of standardized units nor could they. You cannot assume your new receiver is giving the same power output when used at the same numeric volume level as your old receiver. The fact the your SPL meter measures a lower volume with same volume setting and with the same speakers only proves this.
Ross Ridge is offline  
post #4 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 06:12 PM
Member
 
simps1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Ridge View Post

You cannot meaningfully compare the volume levels displayed on two different receivers. They do not use any sort of standardized units nor could they. You cannot assume your new receiver is giving the same power output when used at the same numeric volume level as your old receiver. The fact the your SPL meter measures a lower volume with same volume setting and with the same speakers only proves this.

Now that I've read your comment, I undertand and I think you are 100% right.
How can we know if Yamaha intended the same SPL for, lets say -10dB on receiver A and -10dB on receiver B?
I have to admit, I thought 0dB was a kinda "standard" or "reference" for SPL too (just as the OP did), but I think I was wrong about that.
simps1982 is offline  
post #5 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 06:22 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Ridge View Post

You cannot meaningfully compare the volume levels displayed on two different receivers. They do not use any sort of standardized units nor could they. You cannot assume your new receiver is giving the same power output when used at the same numeric volume level as your old receiver. The fact the your SPL meter measures a lower volume with same volume setting and with the same speakers only proves this.

This is what I always thought. But recently I read a few posts here on AVS that indicated that there IS an industry standard reference point where power either reaches some insustry standard amp distortion level or calibrates speaker power>spl level.

Your point certainly makes more sense.

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #6 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 06:31 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by simps1982 View Post

Now that I've read your comment, I undertand and I think you are 100% right.
How can we know if Yamaha intended the same SPL for, lets say -10dB on receiver A and -10dB on receiver B?
I have to admit, I thought 0dB was a kinda "standard" or "reference" for SPL too (just as the OP did), but I think I was wrong about that.

But this does lead to another question....

Why has the industry adopted this format? What's the deal with the negative dB numbers ascending to zero, and then into positive numbers? What DOES it mean?? confused.gif

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #7 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 06:35 PM
Member
 
simps1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudslide View Post

But this does lead to another question....
Why has the industry adopted this format? What's the deal with the negative dB numbers ascending to zero, and then into positive numbers? What DOES it mean?? confused.gif

Yes, I wish I had the knowledge to give you the answer, but I am, also, confused about it.
Lets hope some one more experienced can clarify it for us.
simps1982 is offline  
post #8 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 06:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ross Ridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,550
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudslide View Post

This is what I always thought. But recently I read a few posts here on AVS that indicated that there IS an industry standard reference point where power either reaches some insustry standard amp distortion level or calibrates speaker power>spl level.

There are standards for measuring the maxium output power of receivers at a maximum distortion level, and there's standard ways of measuring sound presure levels. There's no standard for volume control displays that I know of, and I can't see how any would be practical or useful. Factors outside the control of the receiver manufacturer, like the efficiency of the speakers and the distance the listener is from them will affect the percieved volume level.

In any case, if you can turn up the volume high enough so that you're getting the same volume level you got before out of your speakers and you aren't getting any more distortion then everything is OK.
Ross Ridge is offline  
post #9 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 06:49 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Ridge View Post

There are standards for measuring the maxium output power of receivers at a maximum distortion level, and there's standard ways of measuring sound presure levels. There's no standard for volume control displays that I know of, and I can't see how any would be practical or useful. Factors outside the control of the receiver manufacturer, like the efficiency of the speakers and the distance the listener is from them will affect the percieved volume level.
In any case, if you can turn up the volume high enough so that you're getting the same volume level you got before out of your speakers and you aren't getting any more distortion then everything is OK.

Once again, Ross, you make sense. What doesn't make sense is the goofy measuring system. What ever happened to the 1-10 volume controls?

But it seems like they would invent this negative system for some reason. Maybe too much funny weed for the EE designers. smile.gif

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #10 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 07:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,593
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 66
I seem to remember that Yamaha 'changed' their volume control 'philosophy' a few years ago (probably just after the 2500 model was released???) Yamaha used to have an FAQ on their website with "something like" the following text (which I located 'elsewhere' using a Google search):
Quote:
"The primary differences between previous and current volume control knobs are as follows: With the "conventional" Volume Control, the volume control knob allows you to receive full amplifier output with volume knob at 50%, or 12 O'clock. This method gives you less control range, but a stronger signal level at an earlier point on the volume knob. With the "new" Volume Control, the volume control knob is an attenuator circuit, which regulates the amount of resistance in the signal. The greater the resistance, the lower the signal level output will be, which is displayed in negative decibel's (-dB) from -99dB to 0dB."

[Home Office system schematic]
"My AV systems were created by man. They evolved. They rebelled. There are many speakers. And they have . . . A PLAN."

SoundChex is offline  
post #11 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 07:09 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
I'm going to start a new thread, with a more appropriate title, that hopefully will answer the question of ... WHY this system?

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #12 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 07:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ross Ridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,550
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudslide View Post

Why has the industry adopted this format? What's the deal with the negative dB numbers ascending to zero, and then into positive numbers? What DOES it mean??

Well, dB sounds more fancy I suppose, but without a defined reference value it's just as arbitrary using 0-10 (or 0-11).

Your sound pressure meter probably uses a reference value of 20 micropascals, considered the threshold of human hearing. That's what 0 dB (SPL) means on your meter. Every increase of 10 dB means a ten-fold increase in the sound presure. That means 10 dB is 200 micropascals, 20 dB is 2000 micropascals, and 100 dB is 200,000 pascals (200,000,000,000 micropascals).

Why does your sound pressure meter use db (SPL) instead of (micro)pascals? Because the dB logorithmic scale better represents how human hearing works. A 100 dB jack hammer sounds a lot louder than a 20 dB whisper, but not 100,000,000 times as loud.

With your two receivers each has some arbitrary 0 dB reference output level for their volume control. At -10 dB the output power is 1/10th that level, at -20 dB the output power is 1/100th, at -30 dB it's 1/1000th, and so on. What output level in watts these numbers actually represent is anyone's guess.
Ross Ridge is offline  
post #13 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 07:22 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post

I seem to remember that Yamaha 'changed' their volume control 'philosophy' a few years ago (probably just after the 2500 model was released???) Yamaha used to have an FAQ on their website with "something like" the following text (which I located 'elsewhere' using a Google search):
Quote:
"The primary differences between previous and current volume control knobs are as follows: With the "conventional" Volume Control, the volume control knob allows you to receive full amplifier output with volume knob at 50%, or 12 O'clock. This method gives you less control range, but a stronger signal level at an earlier point on the volume knob. With the "new" Volume Control, the volume control knob is an attenuator circuit, which regulates the amount of resistance in the signal. The greater the resistance, the lower the signal level output will be, which is displayed in negative decibel's (-dB) from -99dB to 0dB."

Our posts came out at the same time. Ignore my last one about the new thread.

This seems to be the definitive answer. I thank you very much. (Though note: my unit's default setting runs from -80 dB to +17 dB. And the format used is used by other avr manufacturers.) I wonder where the resistance is measured. Is it internal? Is there some feedback that measures the cabling and speaker resistance? Or is there some other resistance needing regulation and control?

I guess I still need some educating here.

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #14 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 07:25 PM
Member
 
simps1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Ridge View Post

Well, dB sounds more fancy I suppose, but without a defined reference value it's just as arbitrary using 0-10 (or 0-11).
Your sound pressure meter probably uses a reference value of 20 micropascals, considered the threshold of human hearing. That's what 0 dB (SPL) means on your meter. Every increase of 10 dB means a ten-fold increase in the sound presure. That means 10 dB is 200 micropascals, 20 dB is 2000 micropascals, and 100 dB is 200,000 pascals (200,000,000,000 micropascals).
Why does your sound pressure meter use db (SPL) instead of (micro)pascals? Because the dB logorithmic scale better represents how human hearing works. A 100 dB jack hammer sounds a lot louder than a 20 dB whisper, but not 100,000,000 times as loud.
With your two receivers each has some arbitrary 0 dB reference output level for their volume control. At -10 dB the output power is 1/10th that level, at -20 dB the output power is 1/100th, at -30 dB it's 1/1000th, and so on. What output level in watts these numbers actually represent is anyone's guess.

Ross,

Maybe the reason for the dB scale, is to make the 0dB a reference for what the rated power output and distortion are measured?
So when they say 150 watts per channel @ 0.6, maybe thats what 0dB refers too? So, to reach the rated power you would need to set volume at 0dB?
Maybe thats the reference?

So with:

Receiver A (rated 150 watt per channel) -> 0dB would mean that you are outputing 150 watts per channel
Receiver B (rated 125 watt per channel) -> 0dB would mean that you are outputing 125 watts per channel

Do you think thats the reason for the dB scale?
simps1982 is offline  
post #15 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 07:27 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Ridge View Post

Well, dB sounds more fancy I suppose, but without a defined reference value it's just as arbitrary using 0-10 (or 0-11).
Your sound pressure meter probably uses a reference value of 20 micropascals, considered the threshold of human hearing. That's what 0 dB (SPL) means on your meter. Every increase of 10 dB means a ten-fold increase in the sound presure. That means 10 dB is 200 micropascals, 20 dB is 2000 micropascals, and 100 dB is 200,000 pascals (200,000,000,000 micropascals).
Why does your sound pressure meter use db (SPL) instead of (micro)pascals? Because the dB logorithmic scale better represents how human hearing works. A 100 dB jack hammer sounds a lot louder than a 20 dB whisper, but not 100,000,000 times as loud.
With your two receivers each has some arbitrary 0 dB reference output level for their volume control. At -10 dB the output power is 1/10th that level, at -20 dB the output power is 1/100th, at -30 dB it's 1/1000th, and so on. What output level in watts these numbers actually represent is anyone's guess.

Man, you guys are posting faster than I can reply. eek.gif

Thanks again, Ross. Any idea why the current Arbitrary Zero model was adopted by the industry rather than a more straightforward system (such as Zero dB to XXX dB)?

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #16 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 07:29 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by simps1982 View Post

Ross,
Maybe the reason for the dB scale, is to make the 0dB a reference for what the rated power output and distortion are measured?
So when they say 150 watts per channel @ 0.6, maybe thats what 0dB refers too? So, to reach the rated power you would need to set volume at 0dB?
Maybe thats the reference?

This is what I thought...and why I started the thread. It would have indicated that the 3010 is less capable than the 2500.

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #17 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 07:32 PM
Member
 
simps1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudslide View Post

This is what I thought...and why I started the thread. It would have indicated that the 3010 is less capable than the 2500.

Yes, this is also the way I have always thought about it, but maybe thats not the case.
Lets see what Ross has to say about it, he knows this stuff way more than us.
simps1982 is offline  
post #18 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 07:56 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
I did find this in the 3010 FAQ section...the only reference to the scale. It's about as helpful as the tech support guy was.....

"The negative number scale is a more accurate way to indicate the volume output."

Okay.....rolleyes.gif

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #19 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 08:17 PM
Member
 
simps1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Mudslide,

I found this table, on a professional review of a Denon receiver that is rated 150 watts / channel (8-ohm).

sy45c6.jpg

You can see the entire review here:

http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/amplifiers/denon-poa-a1hdci/pao-a1hdci-setup

Now... That would suggest that our assumption was right, and 0dB really means the rated power output and distortion.
And if that is correct, you are right to compare the two receivers, if you are using the same set of cables / speakers and the same listening position. It would be possible to do it that way, but you really must set all parameters that can affect sound level equal in both receivers (like DSP's, EQ, YPAO settings, individual speaker level, bass / trebble level, etc, etc)... There are many parameters that would have an effect on your comparison. So, if you could really find equal paramenters for both receivers, I think you can compare their amp power, YES, if using the same speakers and cables, and listening position. You would be able to measure SPL and compare them.

NOW, there is something I didn't expect here. Look at the -10dB wattage in that table (8-ohm speaker). Thats 15 Watts. LOL
It just can't be, something is wrong. There is absolute NO WAY, that if I set my stereo towers at -10dB on this receiver, it would only be using 15 + 15 watts. NO WAY.
-10dB is house shaking LOUD, it can't be 30 Watts only. Just think about a 30watt lamp LOL... NO WAY.

I hope someone can explain that smile.gif I would expect much more than 30 watts at -10dB in a 150 watt per channel receiver. Of course the math is correct, since -10dB is 10 times less than 0dB, so 15 watts is 10 times less than 150 watts (rated power). In math terms, yes, it should be 15W ONLY @ -10dB, but I DOUBT this is real, it just can't be... Like I said, -10dB is LOUD AS ****, no way its 15 + 15 watts only.

Now I am even more confused! HAHA!
simps1982 is offline  
post #20 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 08:37 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by simps1982 View Post

Mudslide,
I found this table, on a professional review of a Denon receiver that is rated 150 watts / channel (8-ohm).
sy45c6.jpg
You can see the entire review here:
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/amplifiers/denon-poa-a1hdci/pao-a1hdci-setup
Now... That would suggest that our assumption was right, and 0dB really means the rated power output and distortion.
And if that is correct, you are right to compare the two receivers, if you are using the same set of cables / speakers and the same listening position. It would be possible to do it that way, but you really must set all parameters that can affect sound level equal in both receivers (like DSP's, EQ, YPAO settings, individual speaker level, bass / trebble level, etc, etc)... There are many parameters that would have an effect on your comparison. So, if you could really find equal paramenters for both receivers, I think you can compare their amp power, YES, if using the same speakers and cables, and listening position. You would be able to measure SPL and compare them.
NOW, there is something I didn't expect here. Look at the -10dB wattage in that table (8-ohm speaker). Thats 15 Watts. LOL
It just can't be, something is wrong. There is absolute NO WAY, that if I set my stereo towers at -10dB on this receiver, it would only be using 15 + 15 watts. NO WAY.
-10dB is house shaking LOUD, it can't be 30 Watts only. Just think about a 30watt lamp LOL... NO WAY.
I hope someone can explain that smile.gif I would expect much more than 30 watts at -10dB in a 150 watt per channel receiver. Of course the math is correct, since -10dB is 10 times less than 0dB, so 15 watts is 10 times less than 150 watts (rated power). In math terms, yes, it should be 15W ONLY @ -10dB, but I DOUBT this is real, it just can't be... Like I said, -10dB is LOUD AS ****, no way its 15 + 15 watts only.
Now I am even more confused! HAHA!

Simps....Indeed! This is most interesting. If 0 dB is the rated power output limit, that scale makes sense to me.

Yes, I kept ALL parameters identical with the two units. As I mentioned, the only changes were the avr and the HDMI cable vs. the coax cable. So...it seems I'm back to my original proposition. Is the HDMI protocol somehow affecting the power output or is the 3010 faulty (or not as powerful as the 130 wpc 2500)? By the way, Audioholics measured the 3010 at ~165 wpc, 2 channels driven into 8 ohms. Yep, I'm cornfused, too.

Ross, I really appreciate your input. If you come up with some other rational reason for this negative-based scale, we'd appreciate it.

The wattage use is roughly correct, Simps. Audio output is logarithmic. Power requirements for increased spl's increase exponentially. Surprising, isn't it?! biggrin.gif

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #21 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 09:03 PM
Member
 
simps1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudslide View Post

Simps....Indeed! This is most interesting. If 0 dB is the rated power output limit, that scale makes sense to me.
Yes, I kept ALL parameters identical with the two units. As I mentioned, the only changes were the avr and the HDMI cable vs. the coax cable. So...it seems I'm back to my original proposition. Is the HDMI protocol somehow affecting the power output or is the 3010 faulty (or not as powerful as the 130 wpc 2500)? By the way, Audioholics measured the 3010 at ~165 wpc, 2 channels driven into 8 ohms. Yep, I'm cornfused, too.

What is the equipment decoding the audio and sending it to the receiver via HDMI? I could be that there is a volume in that equipment, and its not turned 100%.
The best way (to use HDMI and be sure the equipment decoding it is not doing anything with the audio) would be to bitstream the audio to the receiver via HDMI.

Try to bitstream, and see if the level changes. Also, try to use the coax audio with your RX-A3010 too, and than you will have a more 'apple to apple' comparison.
simps1982 is offline  
post #22 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 09:30 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by simps1982 View Post

What is the equipment decoding the audio and sending it to the receiver via HDMI? I could be that there is a volume in that equipment, and its not turned 100%.
The best way (to use HDMI and be sure the equipment decoding it is not doing anything with the audio) would be to bitstream the audio to the receiver via HDMI.
Try to bitstream, and see if the level changes. Also, try to use the coax audio with your RX-A3010 too, and than you will have a more 'apple to apple' comparison.

Yep...all done. No changes of anything. No PCM...just bitstream from the BR player. I WILL try the 3010-coax idea later. Good suggestion. Maybe there IS a difference in HDMI cables, as I don't have a very expensive one from BDP to Yamaha.

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #23 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 10:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ross Ridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,550
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudslide View Post

Ross, I really appreciate your input. If you come up with some other rational reason for this negative-based scale, we'd appreciate it.

A value measured in dB needs a reference, so I guess the "maximum output power before things start sounding bad" is a good a reference as anything. Using a reference value at the other end, say "the minimum you could possibly hear" like your sound meter, is more tricky to define since your speakers will a have significant effect on how low of power output you can hear.

Even if a receiver manufacturer decided to go with that maximum output power reference, it's still pretty arbitrary. There's lots of different way to determine a receiver's output power, depending on how much distortion considered acceptable, the sort of input signal, and how the testing is actually done. Since this reference level isn't actually disclosed anywhere, it doesn't need to be accurate. So it might not be determined by any sort of real world testing but simply by what some engineer thought the maximum output power would end up being..

Note that volume is actually controlled at in the pre-amp stage of the receiver. On the RX-A1010, RX-A2010 and RX-A3010 the pre-amp section is all the same, the difference in output power comes from progressively higher bias voltage applied to otherwise identical power amps. It's possible that Yamaha didn't calibrate the volume level differently across these receivers. If so using the same dB volume level would result in the same pre-out level, which would result in a progressively louder output depending on the model. The reference level for the volume control on your receiver could be based on some engineer's guess on what would work well across all three of these receivers.

Anyways, I don't think you have anything to worry about. My previous receiver had a scale of something like 0-30. It didn't take me long to figure out where I liked to have volume on my new receiver's dB scale.
Ross Ridge is offline  
post #24 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 10:55 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Mudslide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Thanks again, Ross. I'll just go with it. It sounds good. It is just a strange thing I noted between the units AND the scaling system seems kinda hokey in these avr's.

FYI, for fun I did try compacting the (manually adjustable) scale from -80 dB (mute) to +17.5 dB...to -40 dB to 0 dB. No change in spl's were noted at given amplitudes with the different settings (such as -20 dB using both scale settings). It just excludes the min and max audio output limits....leaving the volume within the ranges the same.

MARGARITAS,
they're not just for breakfast anymore.
Mudslide is offline  
post #25 of 26 Old 06-09-2012, 11:03 PM
Member
 
simps1982's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mudslide View Post

FYI, for fun I did try compacting the (manually adjustable) scale from -80 dB (mute) to +17.5 dB...to -40 dB to 0 dB. No change in spl's were noted at given amplitudes with the different settings (such as -20 dB using both scale settings). It just excludes the min and max audio output limits....leaving the volume within the ranges the same.

hahaha!
That's not compacting the scale!

- The "INITIAL VOLUME" setting in your A3010 means that when you turn on your receiver, thats the volume it will start with. Even if you set it to -40dB, you will still be able to lower it to -50dB or whatever.

- The "MAX VOLUME" setting in your A3010 means you will only be able to raise the volume up to the value you specify. Its just a safety thingy, so no one raise the volume up to +10dB lets say, and blow your speakers.

Thats just it, its not a new scale, or a compacted scale at all!
simps1982 is offline  
post #26 of 26 Old 10-04-2012, 04:59 AM
Newbie
 
Mollekanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi

I will try to clear up things here. Just bear with me on the language if i write in a stupid way. My native language is not english..

The reason to why reciever x does not sound louder than reciever y after calibration is simple. Most manufacturers produce their recievers to THX spesifications and when you calibrate them that is also to THX specs. This means that you are adjusting the power it will deliver to your speakers.

If you want a test that is not colored you should reset both units to factory settings or disable all of the equalizers that can alter the sound. You also have to use the same set of cables on both devices so you are sure that this is not the problem.

When you calibrate the sound the recievers will try to have all speakers at 85dB SPL as an average and 105dB SPL at the maximum while the subwoofer is calibrated 10dB SPL higher than this allowing it an average of 95dB SPL and a max of 115dB SPL at peaks.

One of the reasons you might experience the differences are different approaches internally for the calibrationing and different mics for the recievers. I believe both units have the same plug so you should be able to test both mic's on the recievers and see what happens. Could be interesting..

Links to THX and a blog further explaining this. I can especially recommend the blog I will link to..
THX homepage for THX reference levels.
Blog page with useful reading about THX..

I hope this can be useful for you guys and good luck with your calibrationing!
Mollekanin is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Yamaha Rx A3010 Receiver , Yamaha Rx V2500 Home Theater Receiver Black
Gear in this thread

User Tag List

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