or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Heinrich S

I understood what you were getting at. It seems ridiculous to spend so much more money for such little return, relatively speaking. Many people think that upgrading their receivers will give them more output, but if they really need more power than they have, then they need A LOT more than they think!
You would probably be better off with more efficient speakers than quadrupling the power. Plus, with power compression, the chances of a typical speaker handling 4 times the power without damage is probably very slim. If I am going to spend money for more clean sound I would rather ensure I have enough power without experiencing thermal compression, and more sensitive speakers typically is the easiest way to achieve this. And a capable subwoofer.
JHAZ, so when people say "this amp has high volts but low current (analogous to balls, as it were) they are talking nonsense?
Well, some people I know claim that an amp can have high wattage but low current. Now what I've understood about power, is that you can't have a high wattage without a high current. Both fit hand in hand.And then I find that you *can* indeed have amps that have a high wattage but low current as you yourself stated at top of the page. Hence the confusion. If a high wattage necessarily means a high current, but you claim that it does not have to be so, then you can probably...
Why?
Ok, but I know people on here were beating me over the head that high wattage means high current. So you can't have a high wattage without high current. The claim being that an amp is low on current but has a high wattage. But now, that's not true. So you can have a high wattage, but a low current. Hence the confusion.
I don't see how. NAD claims all channels driven, so their high current claims appear to play into that. Their power supplies have enough juice to supply power into all channels, so they claim all channels driven and people buy them because they deliver 'real' power. But in reality, on the test bench over at S&V, NAD and Arcam don't show 'high current' potential over the likes of Onkyo or Denon. When the rubber meets the road, they all seem to offer comparable performance...
How does the amp deliver more voltage and less current? So when you say less current, you mean not being able to drive all channels simultaneously at high power? I thought power was power. So there is such a thing as high power that is a high voltage and a low current and vice-versa, high current but low voltage? I'm confused.
But on the test bench at SoundAndVision, NAD and Arcam don't offer 'higher current' compared to the likes of Denon, Onkyo, Marantz. Their power output is on par with everyone else and in some cases, perform worse than an equivalent Denon, Onkyo etc.But Denon, Onkyo claim power into 1 ch, 6 ohms whereas NAD and ARcam claim all channels driven on the spec sheet. So the claim of 'high current' is really just unsupported and based on a reshuffling of numbers. They could claim...
Because I want to understand this. So NAD and Arcam derate the power of their amps, claim a lower figure, and then meet or exceed their claims on the test bench? People often claim they are high current designs, but if it's all just a reshuffling of numbers, then it's all a lie.
New Posts  All Forums: