Amplifier wattage a useless figure in home theatre - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 183 Old 04-09-2014, 11:40 AM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,082
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 371 Post(s)
Liked: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztech View Post

I agree in my house it is about 2.5 and my neighbors 3.5 since she is fully carpeted and bookshelves on opposing walls with beamed and triple crown molds a pretty dead room. That is why I used an average of 3db.

It makes sense to me. Now you just need to convince Hussain.
FMW is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 183 Old 04-09-2014, 11:45 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
hussain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Guys all I am saying is that wattage is not important even if the drop is 6db which all of you are saying is not.

With a drop of 3db wattage becomes completely irrelevant because at 4 meter the drop is just 6db.

To aid my argument I have stated the case of sr609 with 77watts per channel. the integra 60.5 is ultra rated by thx meaning more than 12 feet and 3000 cubic feet and it is 96 watts per channel.

I don't understand which part of my logic you guys are really objecting to.
hussain is offline  
post #93 of 183 Old 04-09-2014, 11:55 AM
FMW
AVS Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,082
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 371 Post(s)
Liked: 765
I don't argue that the audio industry goes out of its way to recommend way more power than most people need. My problem was with your calculation of requiring 400+ watts per channel at a 4 meter listening distance with 90 db speakers. That simply isn't true in a typical home audio environment.
FMW is offline  
post #94 of 183 Old 04-09-2014, 12:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
oztech's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Houston Texas
Posts: 7,661
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

Guys all I am saying is that wattage is not important even if the drop is 6db which all of you are saying is not.

With a drop of 3db wattage becomes completely irrelevant because at 4 meter the drop is just 6db.

To aid my argument I have stated the case of sr609 with 77watts per channel. the integra 60.5 is ultra rated by thx meaning more than 12 feet and 3000 cubic feet and it is 96 watts per channel.

I don't understand which part of my logic you guys are really objecting to.
Where you are not understanding is if a source had an all 5 channel output yours can obtain it easily with 77 watts that will never happen but in movies and music it is possible for the front three channels to ask for a load most of the time just the front L and R in which case yours puts out a clean 128 watts and starts to distort at 153 and then quits gaining after 160 more than enough to qualify for Select .
oztech is offline  
post #95 of 183 Old 04-09-2014, 12:19 PM
Senior Member
 
Farley1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Georgia, United States
Posts: 473
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post


It is actually doubling the distance reduces db by 6. but some times due to reflections from room it 3-4 db.

http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-SoundAndDistance.htm

Exactly correct. :)

 

I knew that, just wanted to see what he came up with to support his incorrect statement.

hussain likes this.

Samsung PN60F5300, Sony PS3

Denon AVR-X1000

SVS PB-2000

Front-Center-Surround, Pioneer: FS52-C22-FS51

Farley1 is offline  
post #96 of 183 Old 04-09-2014, 12:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
oztech's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Houston Texas
Posts: 7,661
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farley1 View Post

Exactly correct. smile.gif

I knew that, just wanted to see what he came up with to support his incorrect statement.







If you are referring to me almost 40 years of installing using various equipment and most importantly a db meter with a calibrated mic and lots of notes besides a nice room acoustic software.
oztech is offline  
post #97 of 183 Old 04-09-2014, 12:49 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
hussain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by oztech View Post

Once there was horse who lived 40 years in library, guess what he did not become a professor, he remained a horse.
hussain is offline  
post #98 of 183 Old 04-09-2014, 05:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,860
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 544
Should have gone to class.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #99 of 183 Old 04-09-2014, 06:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
duc135's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,754
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 48 Post(s)
Liked: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

My point is very well stated.

Actually it isn't. Your opening post has incorrect information and I pointed that out to you already. We all do agree with you that for most people it doesn't take much power, but you are trying to beat us over the head with incorrect data to prove who knows what your point is anymore. In one post you say it doesn't take much power to reach reference then in following posts you state it takes hundreds of watts. How are we to follow what your point is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

It is like knocking my head against a wall.

I'm more than certain that these guys are saying the same things to themselves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

Did you people read my post on 2nd page.

Um.... nope. This thread is only one page for me so I'm unable to read your posts that have yet to occur. You're not the only person who makes this mistake. People should state a post number or link to the post being referenced. Page numbers are all dependent on the readers' font size and screen resolution. Your page 2 is my page 1 and could be the next guys' page 4.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

You people are going in circles. Is it 1 speaker or all speakers. first decide amongst yourself. All I am saying is that 1 speaker needs awful lot of power to reach 105 db and hence thx standard must refer all speakers.

Same could be said of you. In one post you talk about how you don't need much power at all to achieve reference level and in another you state we need hundreds of watts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

All I am saying is that 1 speaker needs awful lot of power to reach 105 db and hence thx standard must refer all speakers.

You can hold your breath for as long as youwant, but just because you say it must be so, doesn't mean it is. THX reference refers to 85dB with 20dB peaks at EACH satellite speaker. The SPL level is not measured with all speaker combined. The reason it doesn't take much power is because THX specifies a crossover of frequencies below 80Hz to an equally capable sub. The sub must be able to play at 85dB with 30dB peaks + all redirected bass from the satellites. As all the learned people on this board know, the bass frequencies are where the lion's share of the power is needed. Remove this requirement from the speakers and your low powered SR2009 receiver you love to talk about is now THX certified.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

I think my point is pretty well established here wattage of an amplifier does not matter pass 100 watts.

I don't think anyone here said anything to the contrary. Most of the people you are arguing with are stating most people use less than 20W under most normal conditions. Then you decide you want to attack us with theoretical setups requiring hundreds of watts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

If we beleive FMW even a single speaker with low wattage amplifier can produce 105 db. So why invest in fancy receiver with 500 watts.

Well, we would do well in believing FMW. Not sure why you are attacking his stance on only needing low amplifier power when you specifically started this thread to set the record that you feel the same way. BTW, yes a low powered amplifier can drive a speaker to well over 105dB if the speaker can handle it. It all depends on the frequency being played. My speakers need less than 20W to exceed reference levels from 9'.

Why do we invest in 500W+ receivers? Well, for me it's not about the power. There are things that come with more power. Things called features, that usually come hand in hand with high powered receivers. Since high powered receivers are usually in the higher end of the model line you get all the features you don't get in low powered receivers like networking capabilities, more advance versions of room correction, longer warranties, etc. There are people who make purchasing decisions based on things other than amplifier power. Just something for you to think about.
duc135 is offline  
post #100 of 183 Old 04-09-2014, 08:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CruelInventions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 4,545
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 40 Post(s)
Liked: 185
Holy dead-on post, duc135. Thanks for spelling out what I suspect at least a few have been thinking.

Mourning the disappearing usage of the -ly suffix. Words being cut-off before they've had a chance to fully form, left incomplete, with their shoelaces untied and their zippers undone. If I quote your post (or post in your thread) without comment, please check your zipper.
CruelInventions is online now  
post #101 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 01:17 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
hussain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post

Yes you are missing something. THX reference is 105dB per speaker, not combined IIRC. .
Riddle me this , Sr609 how did it meet THX requirement of 105 db by a single speaker at 12 feet with Jamo 89db senstive speakers. You have sidestepped the one question you do not have an answer to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post

Actually it isn't. Your opening post has incorrect information and I pointed that out to you already. .


What incorrect data, every data on the first post is 100% correct and unless you bring me evidence otherwise it stays that way. You have not brought forward a single fact which would disprove me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post

The reason it doesn't take much power is because THX specifies a crossover of frequencies below 80Hz to an equally capable sub. The sub must be able to play at 85dB with 30dB peaks + all redirected bass from the satellites. As all the learned people on this board know, the bass frequencies are where the lion's share of the power is needed. Remove this requirement from the speakers and your low powered SR2009 receiver you love to talk about is now THX certified..

So which one, is thx a single speaker test or single speaker +subwoofer test. Now your are negating your earlier post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post


Why do we invest in 500W+ receivers? Well, for me it's not about the power. There are things that come with more power. Things called features, that usually come hand in hand with high powered receivers. .

So you agree that amplification wattage is a completely useless figure. Ok so what we are debating then. Let's put a stop on this discussion by all agreeing that amplification is a completely useless figure and people who invest 600Watt per channel amplifiers are idiots.
hussain is offline  
post #102 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 06:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Zen Traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,261
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 212 Post(s)
Liked: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

Riddle me this , Sr609 how did it meet THX requirement of 105 db by a single speaker at 12 feet with Jamo 89db senstive speakers.....

Because as you insinuate and others state, "Watts" isn't the only thing to consider when (THX certifies) setting up a speaker system. I have not seen the impedance curve of the speakers in question, but my guess is that if you take out the requirement of that speaker to go below 80 Hz, not as much current is needed for what is required to achieve that level given the subwoofer is taking up that extra slack.. IOW, If you ran that speaker as Large or Full range on the SR-609 it would not achieve THX reference level at 12 ft (in a 2,000 cu ft room) because the lower end is what is going to be taxing on the AVR and require more power.
Zen Traveler is online now  
post #103 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 07:10 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,860
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 544
It think the horse in the library knew that too, Zen..

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #104 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 07:43 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,382
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 754 Post(s)
Liked: 1167
Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post


To aid my argument I have stated the case of sr609 with 77watts per channel.

I don't understand which part of my logic you guys are really objecting to.

A few posts back I explained why the 77 wpc number is about half of reality as AVRs are used, and here you are apparently ignoring it.

Is this a reasoned conversation or someone's opportunity to vent?
arnyk is offline  
post #105 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 07:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,382
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 754 Post(s)
Liked: 1167
Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post

Yes you are missing something. THX reference is 105dB per speaker, not combined IIRC. Unless you are listening to the same signal on all channels simultaneously, you will rarely, if ever, get your theoretical 107dB SPL levels from seven speakers when each single one is playing at 99dB. So amplifier power is not a useless figure. It may be over-rated by most, but not useless. Like FMW and Arnyk have stated. Most people will not use more than 20W/CH under the most demanding of situations.

The level of misinformation in this forum is gut wrenching.

Do you have the slightest idea the level of power required to produce 105 db at 12 feet with "one" speaker of 90db senstivity.

Take a guess?

50w? wrong; 100w? wrong; 150w? nahhhh, 200w? wrong again.........


Its 384 watts per channel. Good luck finding an amplifier that big.

More like 200:

arnyk is offline  
post #106 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 08:14 AM
 
GIEGAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked: 322
Fellas, this is a major contributor to the confusion:

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

Hi,

As per my research 105 db is the reference level of sound in home theatres.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

Wattage is a useless figure for any room whose central listening position is less than 4 meters away from speakers. Please refer below for proof.


FACT 1:
Onkyo 609 was certified for thx select 2 plus meaning it can reproduce reference level sound (105db) upto 12 feet in 2000 cubic room.

The receiver produces 77.1 watts all channel driven at .01% THD (reference Sound&vision Review)
......

CONCLUSION:
THX says that 77 watt per channel with all channels driven is enough to produce 105DB and calculations reveal that THX is using all 7 speakers at maximum output to get that result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post

Yes you are missing something. THX reference is 105dB per speaker, not combined IIRC. Unless you are listening to the same signal on all channels simultaneously, you will rarely, if ever, get your theoretical 107dB SPL levels from seven speakers when each single one is playing at 99dB. So amplifier power is not a useless figure. It may be over-rated by most, but not useless. Like FMW and Arnyk have stated. Most people will not use more than 20W/CH under the most demanding of situations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

The level of misinformation in this forum is gut wrenching.

Do you have the slightest idea the level of power required to produce 105 db at 12 feet with "one" speaker of 90db senstivity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post

Yes, there is. Including your first opening post. That was what I was correcting. Reference is not 105dB all speakers combined. Reference is 105dB per satellite speaker. So again, I say yes, amplifier wattage figures do matter, just not as much as most people would think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by oztech View Post

I guess it passed being able to play 85db (ref level) with 105db peaks using THX rated speakers with the crossover set to 80HZ for select size room which is 2000 cubic foot room at 10 to 12 feet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post


It is like knocking my head against a wall. Did you people read my post on 2nd page.

Tell me how jamo with 89 db senstivity (select2 plus certified_ and sr609 which can provide 77 watt(select two certified) can produce 105 db at 12 feet with just 1 channel driven. Let me make it simple so that you can understand even with 3db drop per doubling of distance.

......

You people are going in circles. Is it 1 speaker or all speakers. first decide amongst yourself. All I am saying is that 1 speaker needs awful lot of power to reach 105 db and hence thx standard must refer all speakers. With all speakers you don't need that power at all. Hence amp power in home theatre is completely irrelevant in home theatre.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

My point is very well stated. to reach 105 db with all speakers at 12 feet you don't need much amplification. hence the topic of my thread. I don't know what your point is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hussain View Post

Riddle me this , Sr609 how did it meet THX requirement of 105 db by a single speaker at 12 feet with Jamo 89db senstive speakers. You have sidestepped the one question you do not have an answer to.

The notion that "reference" is defined by particular playback SPL's is incorrect. This inaccuracy is probably fuelled by the "lay-person friendly" descriptions on various websites and (I'm afraid to say) the authoritative sounding, but incorrect posts of some senior, well-respected forum members. SMPTE/THX/Dolby reference calibration is really just a simple, reproducible method of setting up the total gain structure of the system [system = source > processor > amp > speakers > receptor (ears/meter)].

The accurate definition of "reference" calibration is one most are probably all to familiar with: It is the input voltage required such that the total electro-accoustic gain of the playback (or production) chain, when fed a -20dBFS band limited (500Hz - 2000Hz) pink noise signal, produces 85dBSPL (C-weighted, slow reading) from each main channel, when measured at the listening position. This is a good discussion by the pros: Blue Sky Calibration Test Files. You will note that they mention 20dB of headroom, but nowhere do they mention 105dBSPL as a maximum output level.

What's important to realise is that this gain matches reference level only for that particular test signal and measurement method. Beyond that, all bets are off! Extrapolating this to specific playback SPL's (eg 105dBSPL mains; 115dBSPL LFE) of program material (i.e. movies) is drawing too long a bow because the SPL of any other signal will be effected by various other equipment and room factors that haven't been (can't be) taken into account in the calibration. For example, frequencies outside the bandwidth of the test signal will interact with room modes and will cause differences in actual playback SPL's between properly calibrated systems. In addition, even within the bandwidth of the test signal there will be differences in playback SPL due to the measurement method. The slow setting on the meter averages SPL's over a one (I think?) second period, so if program peaks significantly less than one second in duration are reinforced by a room mode, they will not have been accounted for in the calibration process either!

Those interested just need to remember the theory of reference level calibration and not extrapolate conclusions about precise program playback SPL's. In other words, if your system is properly calibrated to reference, the best you could say is that your favourite Blu-ray movie will play at roughly the same SPL at a given master volume setting as the next blokes properly calibrated system.

Another aspect to all this is the presumption that every last drop of (digital) headroom is utilised by the movie's soundtrack creators during loud program peaks. That is, use of 0dBFS signals. As far as I'm aware they don't... peak signals of -4dBFS in the main and LFE channels are more typical in Dolby Digital soundtracks. I did read an AVS thread (can find it now) where a member related that when THX are supervising a soundtrack (see a pattern here?), they generally don't like to see signals hotter than -6dBFS, and anything hotter than -4dBFS is a definite no-no. So again, the often quoted "105dB for mains; 115dB for LFE at reference" is looking a bit arbitrary.


I hope this goes some way to clearing up some of your questions @hussain. This is only one aspect of it though. It's late here now, so I'll follow up later with a bit about what I understand about THX certification etc etc, and (hopefully) that will complete the puzzle... or answer your riddle.
CruelInventions and mtbdudex like this.
GIEGAR is offline  
post #107 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 08:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Zen Traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,261
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 212 Post(s)
Liked: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

It think the horse in the library knew that too, Zen..

Yep...I think that is where this discussion is stalled and once Hussain realizes it we can put this thread to pasture.
Zen Traveler is online now  
post #108 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 08:52 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
hussain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIEGAR View Post

Fellas, this is a major contributor to the confusion:








The notion that "reference" is defined by particular playback SPL's is incorrect. This inaccuracy is probably fuelled by the "lay-person friendly" descriptions on various websites and (I'm afraid to say) the authoritative sounding, but incorrect posts of some senior, well-respected forum members. SMPTE/THX/Dolby reference calibration is really just a simple, reproducible method of setting up the total gain structure of the system [system = source > processor > amp > speakers > receptor (ears/meter)].

The accurate definition of "reference" calibration is one most are probably all to familiar with: It is the input voltage required such that the total electro-accoustic gain of the playback (or production) chain, when fed a -20dBFS band limited (500Hz - 2000Hz) pink noise signal, produces 85dBSPL (C-weighted, slow reading) from each main channel, when measured at the listening position. This is a good discussion by the pros: Blue Sky Calibration Test Files. You will note that they mention 20dB of headroom, but nowhere do they mention 105dBSPL as a maximum output level.

What's important to realise is that this gain matches reference level only for that particular test signal and measurement method. Beyond that, all bets are off! Extrapolating this to specific playback SPL's (eg 105dBSPL mains; 115dBSPL LFE) of program material (i.e. movies) is drawing too long a bow because the SPL of any other signal will be effected by various other equipment and room factors that haven't been (can't be) taken into account in the calibration. For example, frequencies outside the bandwidth of the test signal will interact with room modes and will cause differences in actual playback SPL's between properly calibrated systems. In addition, even within the bandwidth of the test signal there will be differences in playback SPL due to the measurement method. The slow setting on the meter averages SPL's over a one (I think?) second period, so if program peaks significantly less than one second in duration are reinforced by a room mode, they will not have been accounted for in the calibration process either!

Those interested just need to remember the theory of reference level calibration and not extrapolate conclusions about precise program playback SPL's. In other words, if your system is properly calibrated to reference, the best you could say is that your favourite Blu-ray movie will play at roughly the same SPL at a given master volume setting as the next blokes properly calibrated system.

Another aspect to all this is the presumption that every last drop of (digital) headroom is utilised by the movie's soundtrack creators during loud program peaks. That is, use of 0dBFS signals. As far as I'm aware they don't... peak signals of -4dBFS in the main and LFE channels are more typical in Dolby Digital soundtracks. I did read an AVS thread (can find it now) where a member related that when THX are supervising a soundtrack (see a pattern here?), they generally don't like to see signals hotter than -6dBFS, and anything hotter than -4dBFS is a definite no-no. So again, the often quoted "105dB for mains; 115dB for LFE at reference" is looking a bit arbitrary.


I hope this goes some way to clearing up some of your questions @hussain. This is only one aspect of it though. It's late here now, so I'll follow up later with a bit about what I understand about THX certification etc etc, and (hopefully) that will complete the puzzle... or answer your riddle.

Great informative reply. Thankyou very much, this explains everything.

To everyone else please stop wasting your intellect on poor old me because what your are saying till now was just garbage
hussain is offline  
post #109 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 09:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Zen Traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,261
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 212 Post(s)
Liked: 358
Well...I agree it was a good post and confirmed everything I wrote in this thread. cool.gif That said, it shows you can lead a horse to the library but it doesn't mean he knows how to read. biggrin.gif
Zen Traveler is online now  
post #110 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 11:50 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
hussain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 319
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

Well...I agree it was a good post and confirmed everything I wrote in this thread. cool.gif That said, it shows you can lead a horse to the library but it doesn't mean he knows how to read. biggrin.gif

It confirmed nothing you said in the post. My god!!!!
hussain is offline  
post #111 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 10:27 PM
 
Heinrich S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Can anyone explain why Yamaha receivers perform so poorly on the test bench when all channels are used? I thought receivers were designed according to FTC regulation, so they should be robust enough to handle ACD testing. But if you take a look at some of the mid-range Yamaha models, the power is a fraction of what you find in a similarly priced Onkyo/Denon/Marantz.
Heinrich S is offline  
post #112 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 10:36 PM
 
Heinrich S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Yamaha RXV-775 ($850)

2 Channels Continuously Driven, 8 ohm loads 122.8 watts 147.5 watts (1% THD)
2 Channels Continuously Driven, 4 ohm loads 149.7 watts 181.9 watts
5 Channels Continuously Driven, 8 ohm loads 38.2 watts 55.2 watts
7 Channels Continuously Driven, 8 ohm loads 32.2 watts 41.3 watts

Yamaha RXV-A730 : ($700)

Two channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 115.5 watts
1% distortion at 134.7 watts

Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 32.4 watts
1% distortion at 67.2 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 27.1 watts
1% distortion at 33.3 watts

Denon AVR-E400 ($599)

2 Channels, 8 Ohms 103.0 watts 116.5 watts
2 Channels, 4 Ohms 93.3 watts 166.4 watts
5 Channels, 8 Ohms 70.0 watts 84.7 watts
7 Channels, 8 Ohms 62.3 watts 69.5 watts

Sony STR-1040 :

2 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 122.6 watts
1% distortion at 135.9 watts

5 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 76.3 watts
1% distortion at 89.3 watts

7 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 65.3 watts
1% distortion at 82.9 watts

In most cases the competition is well over double and in some cases almost three times as powerful running all channels. Why do Yamaha receivers perform so poorly? If amps are designed and built to be more powerful than they need to be due to regulations, then Yamaha is just ignoring regulation or is just a highly compromised design?
Heinrich S is offline  
post #113 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 11:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 6,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 314 Post(s)
Liked: 855
Source(s)?

lovinthehd is online now  
post #114 of 183 Old 04-10-2014, 11:28 PM
Newbie
 
fatroli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

Can anyone explain why Yamaha receivers perform so poorly on the test bench when all channels are used? I thought receivers were designed according to FTC regulation, so they should be robust enough to handle ACD testing. But if you take a look at some of the mid-range Yamaha models, the power is a fraction of what you find in a similarly priced Onkyo/Denon/Marantz.

Same question?

 

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1512604/wattage-and-db-scale#post_24233505

fatroli is offline  
post #115 of 183 Old 04-11-2014, 05:02 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,382
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 754 Post(s)
Liked: 1167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

Can anyone explain why Yamaha receivers perform so poorly on the test bench when all channels are used? I thought receivers were designed according to FTC regulation, so they should be robust enough to handle ACD testing. But if you take a look at some of the mid-range Yamaha models, the power is a fraction of what you find in a similarly priced Onkyo/Denon/Marantz.

ACD is an invalid measure of amplifier power if you are playing music through speakers. We've had this discussion before, I think. Short term memory failing? ;-)
arnyk is offline  
post #116 of 183 Old 04-11-2014, 05:46 AM
 
Heinrich S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

ACD is an invalid measure of amplifier power if you are playing music through speakers. We've had this discussion before, I think. Short term memory failing? ;-)

I never got a satisfactory answer. If you keep claiming that amps are designed to be bigger and heavier than is needed because of FTC regulations, then why aren't Yamaha conforming to those regulations?

Why are Yamaha receivers so poor on the test bench in terms of ACD testing? I just want an answer to this. In my experience sometimes asking the same questions several times eventually leads to a satisfactory answer.
Heinrich S is offline  
post #117 of 183 Old 04-11-2014, 05:48 AM
 
Heinrich S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovinthehd View Post

Source(s)?

Go to the SoundandVisionmag website. You'll find a ton of test bench results of AVRs .
Heinrich S is offline  
post #118 of 183 Old 04-11-2014, 05:49 AM
 
Heinrich S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:

Are you a librarian by night? Or just have no life?
hussain likes this.
Heinrich S is offline  
post #119 of 183 Old 04-11-2014, 06:23 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,382
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 754 Post(s)
Liked: 1167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

ACD is an invalid measure of amplifier power if you are playing music through speakers. We've had this discussion before, I think. Short term memory failing? ;-)

I never got a satisfactory answer.

People who ask questions that they lack the background to understand even the most patiently crafted answers may not be able to reasonably expect anything better.
Quote:
If you keep claiming that amps are designed to be bigger and heavier than is needed because of FTC regulations, then why aren't Yamaha conforming to those regulations?

I see no evidence supporting the relevance of that question.
Quote:
Why are Yamaha receivers so poor on the test bench in terms of ACD testing?

They appear to slice the margins closer. It may be no coincidence that it has been alleged that among the mainstream manufacturers only Yamaha is currently making money selling AVRs.
Quote:
I just want an answer to this. In my experience sometimes asking the same questions several times eventually leads to a satisfactory answer.

You may be able to take this situation as support for my many comments about many AVRs that are critiized for being underbuilt actually being overbuilt.
arnyk is offline  
post #120 of 183 Old 04-11-2014, 06:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
oztech's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Houston Texas
Posts: 7,661
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 93
Simple answer is they must be using some current limiting design for both lowering heat and making the amp last longer at the expense of output whether that is audible in your system is up to the listener for my own needs it would not work.
We are all aware or most of us that the ACD tests are harder on the amps than real world but until another type of test is provided by mags and testers this is what we got to compare units for output.
Most that have efficient speakers in small rooms that play low to moderate levels will probably be happy the rest will not.
hussain and Theresa like this.
oztech is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

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