Looking for a good amp under $700 for my Quad 12L2 and sub setup

What makes you say that? Are they clipping badly? Are you unable to play them as loud as you want to? If not, then you are not underdriving them.
I'm afraid this makes no sense. What are you trying to say?
First of all, 10 watts is nothing. You need double the power to get a meaningful increase in loudness. Second, price has nothing to do with the quality of an amp. I could point you to a $100 receiver that could drive your speakers cleanly to ear-splitting volumes.
Fair enough, but one of the upside-down aspects of audio is that amps with tuners in them cost less than amps without tuners in them—and the latter are not necessarily any better in other ways. It mostly has to do with manufacturing economies of scale.

But if you want an integrated amp (and I like them, myself), NAD certainly makes them in your price range. Rotel used to, but I don't know what they offer these days.

Hi Fi fuse upgrade? LOL!

The Quad 12L2 are actually pretty efficient at 88 dB/W

How do you know that this is true given that the speakers are reasonably efficient?

Lots of receivers have this feature, and for those that don't' "Vee haff a vayy".;-)

Probably more to the point would be to obtain a good powered subwoofer and take a load off of that 6 1/2" l woofer in the Quads.

What is an "ayudiophile type amp" other than something that is being hyped beyond belief and wildly overpriced (like Hi Fi fuses)?

So check the manufacturer's web sites, check out the features, download the user manuals...

That is hornswoggle. I love the First Amendment, but it does lead to quality control issues.
55 wpc will not underdrive those Quads.That doesn't mean you shouldn't replace the Onkyo, but insufficient power is probably not your problem.
Oh, powered sub. Now it makes sense.

If you have a powered sub, the right tool for the job is an AV receiver. Forget all the audiophool stuff about dedicated amps sounding better. AVRs give you two things that really do improve the sound of your system: Room treatment and bass management. And yes, you're "buying" a lot of other features you don't need (at least right now). But you're not really paying anything extra for them.

What he said...

A medium level AVR can be had with around 90-100 watts for about 500 bucks or less. Room correction and bass management are nice tools to have.

What a bunch of hoohey!

There was actually an AES article or three that were written about fuses and audio. No audible effects were ever found.

Only a problem if you need more than 55 watts to play your speakers the way you like them.

The most likely source of this situation is that the Quads themselves are compressing the signal.

Here's the theoretical maximum undistorted SPL you can get out of a 6 1/2 inch driver: Every real world 6 1/2" driver can be reasonbably expected to do worse:

F,Hz Max SPL, dB

10 69
20 81
30 88
40 93
50 97
60 100
70 103
80 105
90 107
100 109
130 114

At 80 Hz you are limited by the theoretical maximum capabilities of your speakers to a mere 105 dB which corresponds to a mere 50 watts given the rated sensitivity of the speakers.

You already have enough receiver to overpower the speakers.

Remember that the estimate above gives the speakers every possible break, while our receiver numbers are likely to be far more accurate.

IOW you are probably already overpowering your speakers with 55 wpc.

Remember that to get twice as loud you need 10 times the power. In your case this would be 550 wpc, and you don't have the speakers to handle such an amp!

Going to 85 wpc or 125 wpc is like a drop in the bucket, and just so you don't forget, you don't have the speakers to handle such an amp! You really don't have the speakers to handle the amp you got.

You would be in far deeper hot water if you didn't have the sub. You might want to experiment with a higher subwoofer crossover frequency.

The more you say the more I feel that you are definitely asking too much of those little quads.

Probably. The cracking is of course dirt in the volume control which is endemic in old analog volume controls and happens too quckly with the really cheap ones. Sometimes a spray-in control cleaner (e.g. Cramolin) can help. You often have to dissasemble the AVR to apply it and then the results are often temporary.

I can suggest to you that if you think that you have to spend the big bucks to have a high quality amp, be prepared to have your feelings hurt!


If it is in Stereophile and not written by Kal Robinson....

If It is in Stereophile and not an equipment test by John Atkinson...



In this day and age expensive DACs are right up there with expensive cables as being good places to avoid spending the big bucks on.

Unless you already have a big LP collection that isn't really an investment. It's mad money! ;-)

It's not quite as simple as "an amp is an amp." You need enough power under the right circumstances to drive whatever you are trying to drive. Beyond that, however, amps themselves are pretty much indistinguishable.

But that doesn't mean you should keep what you have. It's old, and the volume pot problem is the first sign of that.
$700 would be a lot to spend for a new volume pot.

A new AVR would be a better investment.

Hey Yusoslo - my suggestion would be to graduate from the bass and treble control and go with a modern audiophile amp. My suggestion would be Emotiva. Super value and great sound, also tons of power. I'm sure you could find something there, but I love the XPA-2. It drives my mmg's (86db) quite nicely!

That is stated so broadly that I don't know what it means.

Been there done that. The audible differences between speakers are huge compared to what can be heard among good amplifiers. But, your particular amp seems a bit doubtful.

What I say is be purposeful, and have logical reasons.

If I'm reading this thread right, you've got a receiver with a noisy volume control pot and its pretty old tech. It seems to be lacking in things like modern automated system optimization facilities like YPAO, MCACC or Audyssey. I suspect it has other issues as well. It may be time for being pruned at the tap root, if you catch my drift. ;-)

Depends on how you spend that $700!...

I doubt exactly how modern a XPA2 really is. It looks to me like something that could have easily been built almost identically as it is today back in the 1980s, 1990s at the latest.

I agree with the idea of leaving bass and treble controls behind. This far into the second decade of the new millenium, even $29.95 portable music players have credible six band graphic equalizers. That is head and shoulders above bass and treble controls. Even better than that are the automatic system optimization facilities such as YPAO, MCACC and Audyssey. They come with their own measurement mic that you put where your listening chair is and the system optimizes itself for that.

I'm not sure that Emotiva has anything like that anywhere in their entire current catalog! It looks like for a high price about 2-3 times that of a good AVR, they will provide some kind of a "TACT® Dynamic Room Correction™" in the yet-to-be-sold XMC-1. Good. Gonna buy one?

Hey Arnie - Knowing Emotiva, they probably copy popular amp design from Bryston etc. They are quite modern in terms of the overbuilt power supply etc, yet simplicity of circuitry. Much has been learned in class A/B design.

Copyright protection in the USA lasts for 19 years for most inventions. That means any amp design from 20 years ago could be reproduced without violating copyright laws. I doubt Emotiva is doing anything different than a dozen other amp designers are doing. If you are going to copy an amp design why not copy a great design?

And if those copyright laws never expired we'd all be paying homage - and a royalty - to Sir John Ambrose Fleming's descendent's.

The Music Hall A15.2 is a very good-sounding amplifier. I recommend it. IMO it will sound much better than your old amplifier.

It is available for $499, and IMO is the best you will get for under $800.

You really do not need more power, but better amplifiers have better power supplies that can deliver more peak current and lower distortion. A simple power rating is not going to fully describe how well an amplifier performs or sounds; there is a lot more to it than that.

I believe that the above comment distracts its readers from the best possible sound quality in their system a number of different of easily quantifiable ways. However, the claim that "better amplifiers have better power supplies that can deliver more peak current and lower distortion" ignores the fact that this benefit is only obtained if compared to equipment that is actually running out of power in actual use. Merely having the improved power supplies has zero audible benefits unless the power is actually needed. It is my experience that it is the speakers and not the power amplfiers in most modern systems that are running out of dynamic range. In either case, adding a competent subwoofer is superior solution for any such problems.

First off I don't deny that it is a good sounding integrated amplifier as far as it goes. Rather, I feel that it lacks important features that just about anybody assembling a modern system needs.

(1) The recommended equipment lacks digital inputs. I've found that just about everybody who is bulding a modern music system today is going to be wanting to get involved with music sources that have digital outputs.

(2) The recommended equipment lacks bass management. I've found that a great many people have music systems with speakers that have significant limitations in bass dynamic range.

(3) The recommended equipment lacks an automated facility for system optimization. I've found that a great many people have music systems with speakers and other components that would benefit from an automated facility for system optimization (YPAO, MCACC, Audyssey).

(4) The recommended equipment lacks the ability to be upgraded to an effective multichannel system.

What it is really all about is a traditional approach to sound quality versus a modern approach to sound quality.