Quote:
Originally Posted by ozcot 
Looking at a few recievers to replace my B&K to get the new codecs and TrueHD. Was all set between the Pioneer 1018 and the Denon 1909. Heard the Harman Kardon had good SQ but saw the specs 350 watts total power: 50W x 7, 20Hz - 20kHz?? How on earth can this high end of a an AVR has such little power? Most have 90 watts X7 min Pioneer has 130 X7 and this has 50? How could this even push higher end speakers my Energy Speakers recomend 100 watts. Would this even be able to run with my speakers let alone produce any punch? Not meaning to bash have not heard one just was floored by seeing 50 watts per channel...

Looking at a few recievers to replace my B&K to get the new codecs and TrueHD. Was all set between the Pioneer 1018 and the Denon 1909. Heard the Harman Kardon had good SQ but saw the specs 350 watts total power: 50W x 7, 20Hz - 20kHz?? How on earth can this high end of a an AVR has such little power? Most have 90 watts X7 min Pioneer has 130 X7 and this has 50? How could this even push higher end speakers my Energy Speakers recomend 100 watts. Would this even be able to run with my speakers let alone produce any punch? Not meaning to bash have not heard one just was floored by seeing 50 watts per channel...
Search. Please. Harman/Kardon's are notorious for under-RATING their receivers. A Pioneer 1018 is only capable of doing 110 watts when you measure it from 20 Hz to 20 kHz, and thats only one channel driven, too.
An H/K's specs are always 20 to 20, all channels driven. It would be nice if every electronics company did that, instead of burying their specs on page 97 of their user manual.












.





