or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Very unhappy with Denon 3313
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Very unhappy with Denon 3313 - Page 2

post #31 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

must get away with it cause avr are not amps eh.. they only rate 2 channels mostly and use deceptive statements for the rest ...

the specs on amps are very clear everytime ive good to look up an amp... 200 into 8 ohm 400 into 4ohm all channels driven all the time... etc.. not avrs..

great thing about the 3313 you can add an external amp via its pre outs.. its the lowest model with pre outs...

cheers..

Actually no. IN case it is important to somebody (clealy you're just having fun, which is fine)

The FTC rule is "Rule Relating to Power Output Claims for Amplifiers Utilized in Home Entertainment Products - the 'Amplifier Rule.' "

The FTC rule covers all amplifiers utilized in home entertainment products. That includes, in case it's hard to wrap your head around, standalone mono,, stereo and multichannel "amplifiers" and AVR receivers, because both contain "amplifiers" for home use.

Like I said, most standalone amps don't bother to take advantage of the "associated channels" provision of the FTC rule. But it's not illegal to specify more stringently than the rule requires.

So, the amps in receivers MUST be "amplifiers" because if they're not "amplifiers" the "amplifier rule" doesn't apply to them, right? And they don't even need to worry about interpreting the "associated channels" provision favorably to themselves if the rule simply does not apply to them, right?

dont tell me tell denon ...

there the ones that are deceptive... only 2 channels are 125 wpc the other five only bring down the total.... like by 33% as shown before

cheers..
post #32 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

dont tell me tell denon ...

there the ones that are deceptive... only 2 channels are 125 wpc the other five only bring down the total.... like by 33% as shown before

cheers..

Sorry, no. Any two of the channels in the receiver will put out 125 watts. Every channel is capable of putting out 125 watts. They just cannot all do it at once. ANd nothing in the spec actually says they can.

While Denon may be aware that people will read into their specs things that are not there, what they do is legal and the way they describe it is at least a little more comprehensible to the average literate English speaker than the circular gibberish in ther user manuals. Thank God for Batpig's Denon-to-English translator.

MOST advertising contains some element of exaggeration that is implied, not stated directly, and the person who doesn't take such claims with a grain of salt is in for a long life of misery and purchasing of many things that aren't what the person thought they would be, because they are what the manufacturer's description actually says, not what the person chose to read into the description
post #33 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

dont tell me tell denon ...

there the ones that are deceptive... only 2 channels are 125 wpc the other five only bring down the total.... like by 33% as shown before

cheers..

Sorry, no. Any two of the channels in the receiver will put out 125 watts. Every channel is capable of putting out 125 watts. They just cannot all do it at once. ANd nothing in the spec actually says they can.

While Denon may be aware that people will read into their specs things that are not there, what they do is legal and the way they describe it is at least a little more comprehensible to the average literate English speaker than the circular gibberish in ther user manuals. Thank God for Batpig's Denon-to-English translator.

MOST advertising contains some element of exaggeration that is implied, not stated directly, and the person who doesn't take such claims with a grain of salt is in for a long life of misery and purchasing of many things that aren't what the person thought they would be, because they are what the manufacturer's description actually says, not what the person chose to read into the description

deceptive 7 discrete channels 125w / c

pretty much a lie...

so go tell denon about the ftc rules... all channels driven is like 79 watts per channel...

cheers..
post #34 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Sorry, no. Any two of the channels in the receiver will put out 125 watts.

Guys, why all this anger against the makers on output Wattage when Wattage itself doesn't thell the full story, as many of us know already. It should always be in par with the sensitivity of the speakers hooked up to the output, shouldn't it?.

Here are to extreme cases for you to digest:

1. A JBL 5732 rated @ 115 dB will need only a mere 1 Watt (repeat: one Watt) to deliver 105 dB SPL.

2. An Aerial Acoustics 7T rated @ 83.6 dB [89] will need an abnormal amount of 1,847 Watts to deliver the same 105 dB SPL.

Check out (bookmark, save, download) this this table for your future reference, please.
post #35 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

deceptive 7 discrete channels 125w / c

pretty much a lie...

so go tell denon about the ftc rules... all channels driven is like 79 watts per channel...

cheers..

It doesn't say that. You ASSUMED that's what it meant. I don't honestly think a reasonably aware (cynical if you want) consumer with no knowledge of electronics would be fooled into thinking that is that the Denon specs necessarily mean. "Huh, 2 channels at 125, one channel at 125, 2 channels at 125 and 2 channels at 125. That seems to be 7 chabnels at 125"

The awake consumer thinks, "why didn't they just say 7 channels at 125?"

On ce you've identified the rather obvious question, one of the potential answers HAS TO BE, "I bet they can't."

Luckily in the current age, a person could jump on the internet and see what the oddly broken up power ratings might really mean.

To my mind its a WHOLE LOT more obvious that something may not add up than with speaker specs. An uneducated speaker consumer might look at a spec that says "20 Hz to 20 KHZ" and think it means something. It means nothing. If the speaker has a whizzer cone instead of a tweeter it's likely down by 10 dB at 20 KHz. And honestly, there's no real quewtion whether a woofer can move as "slowly" as 20 HZ. Heck I can't wave my hand twenty times per second. It's not THAT slow. But without plus or minus dB range, that spec may just mean it's down 20 dB at 20 Hz with one watt and begins compressing from there so that in louder passages it's down 30 dB or more It requires, IMO, some knowledge of speakers and what the specs actually mean to even begin to formulate the question "what does that mean, really?"

Denon's amp spec SREAMS the question at anybody who's seen an article from consumer reports about anything from cars to dishwashers, and likely to anybody who takes two minutes to think about it.
post #36 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

deceptive 7 discrete channels 125w / c

pretty much a lie...

so go tell denon about the ftc rules... all channels driven is like 79 watts per channel...

cheers..

It doesn't say that. You ASSUMED that's what it meant. I don't honestly think a reasonably aware (cynical if you want) consumer with no knowledge of electronics would be fooled into thinking that is that the Denon specs necessarily mean. "Huh, 2 channels at 125, one channel at 125, 2 channels at 125 and 2 channels at 125. That seems to be 7 chabnels at 125"

The awake consumer thinks, "why didn't they just say 7 channels at 125?"

On ce you've identified the rather obvious question, one of the potential answers HAS TO BE, "I bet they can't."

Luckily in the current age, a person could jump on the internet and see what the oddly broken up power ratings might really mean.

To my mind its a WHOLE LOT more obvious that something may not add up than with speaker specs. An uneducated speaker consumer might look at a spec that says "20 Hz to 20 KHZ" and think it means something. It means nothing. If the speaker has a whizzer cone instead of a tweeter it's likely down by 10 dB at 20 KHz. And honestly, there's no real quewtion whether a woofer can move as "slowly" as 20 HZ. Heck I can't wave my hand twenty times per second. It's not THAT slow. But without plus or minus dB range, that spec may just mean it's down 20 dB at 20 Hz with one watt and begins compressing from there so that in louder passages it's down 30 dB or more It requires, IMO, some knowledge of speakers and what the specs actually mean to even begin to formulate the question "what does that mean, really?"

Denon's amp spec SREAMS the question at anybody who's seen an article from consumer reports about anything from cars to dishwashers, and likely to anybody who takes two minutes to think about it.

what are you yaking about...

they are deceptive practices period.. very very deceptive...

cheers..
post #37 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogorf View Post

Guys, why all this anger against the makers on output Wattage when Wattage itself doesn't thell the full story, as many of us know already. It should always be in par with the sensitivity of the speakers hooked up to the output, shouldn't it?.

Here are to extreme cases for you to digest:

1. A JBL 5732 rated @ 115 dB will need only a mere 1 Watt (repeat: one Watt) to deliver 105 dB SPL.

2. An Aerial Acoustics 7T rated @ 83.6 dB [89] will need an abnormal amount of 1,847 Watts to deliver the same 105 dB SPL.

Check out (bookmark, save, download) this this table for your future reference, please.

Yep. I already suggested it's unlikely that any of the people complaining ever need 125 watts in one channel. Moreover, since the surrounds are lower in SPL than the mains, they probably never need as much as half the power that the front three may require. So to the extent somebody misled themselves by reading something extra into the specs, there is zero practical effect on them (or at lest most of them). If you have inefficient speakers with low impedance and a large heavily damped room where you sit far from the speakers and you listen at reference levels you may actually need 125 watts or even much more to cleanly reproduce the peaks, and you'll still potentially be short on dynamics if, like most, your speakers are compressing at those levels . . . .

I see how people mislead themselves looking at the Denon specs. But the sad truth is they are misleading themselves. I've done it too. The thing is, if you vent your spleen against the manufacturer and move on, you are fair game, ripe for the picking, just another one of the suckers born every minuet and you will buy something, maybe a lot of somethings, maybe at a lot of cost, that isn't what you made yourself imagine it might be.

We can be better.
post #38 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Yep. I already suggested it's unlikely that any of the people complaining ever need 125 watts in one channel. Moreover, since the surrounds are lower in SPL than the mains, they probably never need as much as half the power that the front three may require. So to the extent somebody misled themselves by reading something extra into the specs, there is zero practical effect on them (or at lest most of them). If you have inefficient speakers with low impedance and a large heavily damped room where you sit far from the speakers and you listen at reference levels you may actually need 125 watts or even much more to cleanly reproduce the peaks, and you'll still potentially be short on dynamics if, like most, your speakers are compressing at those levels . . . .

I see how people mislead themselves looking at the Denon specs. But the sad truth is they are misleading themselves. I've done it too. The thing is, if you vent your spleen against the manufacturer and move on, you are fair game, ripe for the picking, just another one of the suckers born every minuet and you will buy something, maybe a lot of somethings, maybe at a lot of cost, that isn't what you made yourself imagine it might be.

We can be better.

You said it all JHAz, ...you said it all...Thanks. smile.gif Time to move on, eh? smile.gif
post #39 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

what are you yaking about...

they are deceptive practices period.. very very deceptive...

cheers..


Enjoy being "Decieved" the rest of your life. Better for most folks to develop a little rational skepticism, learn to see where you are filling in blanks that aren't actually filled in (liek the Denon spec doesn't say LEft and righta 125 watts WHILE center at 125 WHILE surround at 125 . . .=, so that you don't feel ripped off all the time.
Unless that's your thang.
post #40 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Assuming your response was to me, I’m just entirely lost, Clearly you did not click on the link, but made an assumption because the number 2000 appears in there. The FTC blurb I linked is related to 2012 changes to the regulation, which were made in 2012 not 2000.

That page (http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2000/12/amprule.shtm) is in fact from 2000. It shows the amendments made then to the original 1974 Amplifer Rule. However as there have been no further amendments and no repeal of this regulation, this describes the law in the US as it is currently now in effect.
Quote:
The EIA is not the government, and in the end you have to meet the government’s interpretation regardless of where they get the meat of their regs from. Unless adopted by a governmental agency, none of the industry group standards are law. That includes ANSI etc. They’re voluntary organizations developing voluntary standards (although most manufacturers follow them for a variety of good reasons).

Yup. In fact not only is EIA/CEA-490-A not the law in the US, the FTC specifically rejected it in 2007 because never gained widespread adoption. The FTC did at that time temporarily suspend enforcement of the association requirement of the Amplifer Rule with regards to multichannel amplifers until it was able to provide further guidance on which channels need to be associated.

In 2010, they ended they resumed full enforcement of the Amplifer Rule and provided the following guidance:
Quote:
Specifically, at a minimum, the left front and right front channels of multichannel amplifiers are associated under the Rule. It, therefore, would be a violation of the Rule to make power output claims for multichannel amplifiers utilized in home entertainment products unless those representations are substantiated by measurements made with, at a minimum, the left front and right front channels driven to full rated power.

They also once again specifically rejected adopting EIA/CEA-490-A.

So the 2000 version of Amplifer Rule you quoted remains in effect, with the above guidance showing how the FTC currently intends to enforce it with modern AV receviers.
post #41 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by hargutierrez View Post

I just bought a Denon 3313 and sad to say I'm very dissatisfied with it. My old amp was an Onkyo 606, unfortunately the hdmi board got busted so I decided to get a new receiver. I chose the Denon 3313 as I read a lot of positive reviews about it, but when I hooked it up to my unit I felt really sad because Im not happy with the sound quality as well as the picture quality. Here are my concerns, maybe users of the same unit can help me.

1. It sounded thin and bright (hollow sounding). I chose this as I thought it would be an upgrade from my previous amp, however it seems that I've downgraded my old receiver mad.gif

2. The sound is not as loud as I expected, to get an acceptable sound level I have to crank it up to 80db (max is 100) and it's still not as loud compared to my previous receiver; at 50db my old receiver is able to shake the room. Is that normal? My room is very small 4 x 4 meters

3. Picture quallity is bad when hdmi is passed through the amp instead of directly to the tv. I'm using a media player and prior to buying the amp, it was connected directly to my plasma tv and picture quality was nice, but with the 3313; it's pixelated and lacked vibrance. even after disabling the upconcersion, it still looks the same. I was under the impression that without upconversion it's just passthrough but it appears it's still being processed by the receiver.

Im using an Mission M70 series speakers (M74 as fronts) and it seems that the Denon 3313 is a very bad match with it, SQ is terrible. I already ran the Audessy setup and tried manual configuration but it's the same. I have a very small room but I would have to crank the volume of the amp close to its peak but still it seems that it can't really fill my room. I chose this model as I know it's already top of the line, but I think I made a very wrong decision.

I hope someone can help me as I feel down and sad right now frown.gif
First why wasn't this questioned posted in the The **OFFICIAL** Denon AVR-XX13 Model Owner's Thread & FAQ? If the sound is not right, yes as people said it could be the MultiEQ XT has not been setup right.

As for powering 91 db/1 meter speakers for front, barely takes a watt, to play loud. Comparing a Onkyo 606 which is actually less power to the Denon 3313 with your statements says you have not hooked up or done something right. I would check out the quick setup guide and make sure you have the proper connections and playback modes. As people have said volume control adjustments aren't all the same, very true, they are based on different amplitude steps by vendor.

Your comment about the Video processing can be investigated if you just make the AVR a pass through, by disabling QDEO video processing and then turning on parts of it to see what is causing pixelation or artifacts.

I listened to AVR-3313 in several showrooms, not heard real differences between various Onkyo''s and Denons that are roughly equivalent. Hope your able to figure out your issues. cool.gif

Against this off topic amp spec debate, your not helping the OP.
Edited by JohnAV - 4/9/13 at 5:25pm
post #42 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by hargutierrez View Post

I just bought a Denon 3313 and sad to say I'm very dissatisfied with it. My old amp was an Onkyo 606, unfortunately the hdmi board got busted so I decided to get a new receiver. I chose the Denon 3313 as I read a lot of positive reviews about it, but when I hooked it up to my unit I felt really sad because Im not happy with the sound quality as well as the picture quality. Here are my concerns, maybe users of the same unit can help me.

1. It sounded thin and bright (hollow sounding). I chose this as I thought it would be an upgrade from my previous amp, however it seems that I've downgraded my old receiver mad.gif

2. The sound is not as loud as I expected, to get an acceptable sound level I have to crank it up to 80db (max is 100) and it's still not as loud compared to my previous receiver; at 50db my old receiver is able to shake the room. Is that normal? My room is very small 4 x 4 meters

3. Picture quallity is bad when hdmi is passed through the amp instead of directly to the tv. I'm using a media player and prior to buying the amp, it was connected directly to my plasma tv and picture quality was nice, but with the 3313; it's pixelated and lacked vibrance. even after disabling the upconcersion, it still looks the same. I was under the impression that without upconversion it's just passthrough but it appears it's still being processed by the receiver.

Im using an Mission M70 series speakers (M74 as fronts) and it seems that the Denon 3313 is a very bad match with it, SQ is terrible. I already ran the Audessy setup and tried manual configuration but it's the same. I have a very small room but I would have to crank the volume of the amp close to its peak but still it seems that it can't really fill my room. I chose this model as I know it's already top of the line, but I think I made a very wrong decision.

I hope someone can help me as I feel down and sad right now frown.gif
Dump the Denon. I had the same experience of having to crank it to get decent sound, and it still wasn't really loud. Tinkering with Audessey didn't help. There is an odd obsession with not a few people on this forum that needs to be examined by a psycologist. I didn't notice any video oddities probably because I was too distracted from the poor sound quality.
post #43 of 88
^^ What do you replace the Denon with?
post #44 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

what are you yaking about...

they are deceptive practices period.. very very deceptive...

cheers..


Enjoy being "Decieved" the rest of your life. Better for most folks to develop a little rational skepticism, learn to see where you are filling in blanks that aren't actually filled in (liek the Denon spec doesn't say LEft and righta 125 watts WHILE center at 125 WHILE surround at 125 . . .=, so that you don't feel ripped off all the time.
Unless that's your thang.

are you taking drugs?
post #45 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboys View Post

^^ What do you replace the Denon with?

separates.. emotiva good prices...

cheers..
post #46 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross Ridge View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Assuming your response was to me, I’m just entirely lost, Clearly you did not click on the link, but made an assumption because the number 2000 appears in there. The FTC blurb I linked is related to 2012 changes to the regulation, which were made in 2012 not 2000.

That page (http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2000/12/amprule.shtm) is in fact from 2000. It shows the amendments made then to the original 1974 Amplifer Rule. However as there have been no further amendments and no repeal of this regulation, this describes the law in the US as it is currently now in effect.
Quote:
The EIA is not the government, and in the end you have to meet the government’s interpretation regardless of where they get the meat of their regs from. Unless adopted by a governmental agency, none of the industry group standards are law. That includes ANSI etc. They’re voluntary organizations developing voluntary standards (although most manufacturers follow them for a variety of good reasons).

Yup. In fact not only is EIA/CEA-490-A not the law in the US, the FTC specifically rejected it in 2007 because never gained widespread adoption. The FTC did at that time temporarily suspend enforcement of the association requirement of the Amplifer Rule with regards to multichannel amplifers until it was able to provide further guidance on which channels need to be associated.

In 2010, they ended they resumed full enforcement of the Amplifer Rule and provided the following guidance:
Quote:
Specifically, at a minimum, the left front and right front channels of multichannel amplifiers are associated under the Rule. It, therefore, would be a violation of the Rule to make power output claims for multichannel amplifiers utilized in home entertainment products unless those representations are substantiated by measurements made with, at a minimum, the left front and right front channels driven to full rated power.

They also once again specifically rejected adopting EIA/CEA-490-A.

So the 2000 version of Amplifer Rule you quoted remains in effect, with the above guidance showing how the FTC currently intends to enforce it with modern AV receviers.

FTC dont me jack to me.. i live in Canada..

cheers..
post #47 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by spacecowboy View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by hargutierrez View Post

I just bought a Denon 3313 and sad to say I'm very dissatisfied with it. My old amp was an Onkyo 606, unfortunately the hdmi board got busted so I decided to get a new receiver. I chose the Denon 3313 as I read a lot of positive reviews about it, but when I hooked it up to my unit I felt really sad because Im not happy with the sound quality as well as the picture quality. Here are my concerns, maybe users of the same unit can help me.

1. It sounded thin and bright (hollow sounding). I chose this as I thought it would be an upgrade from my previous amp, however it seems that I've downgraded my old receiver mad.gif

2. The sound is not as loud as I expected, to get an acceptable sound level I have to crank it up to 80db (max is 100) and it's still not as loud compared to my previous receiver; at 50db my old receiver is able to shake the room. Is that normal? My room is very small 4 x 4 meters

3. Picture quallity is bad when hdmi is passed through the amp instead of directly to the tv. I'm using a media player and prior to buying the amp, it was connected directly to my plasma tv and picture quality was nice, but with the 3313; it's pixelated and lacked vibrance. even after disabling the upconcersion, it still looks the same. I was under the impression that without upconversion it's just passthrough but it appears it's still being processed by the receiver.

Im using an Mission M70 series speakers (M74 as fronts) and it seems that the Denon 3313 is a very bad match with it, SQ is terrible. I already ran the Audessy setup and tried manual configuration but it's the same. I have a very small room but I would have to crank the volume of the amp close to its peak but still it seems that it can't really fill my room. I chose this model as I know it's already top of the line, but I think I made a very wrong decision.

I hope someone can help me as I feel down and sad right now frown.gif
Dump the Denon. I had the same experience of having to crank it to get decent sound, and it still wasn't really loud. Tinkering with Audessey didn't help. There is an odd obsession with not a few people on this forum that needs to be examined by a psycologist. I didn't notice any video oddities probably because I was too distracted from the poor sound quality.

what speakers and how many where you running on your denon?

cheers
post #48 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

denon amps sound great if you add some power via an external amp.. as the processor dose a fine job.. for ht or stereo play back..

its the power that gives you the sound quality the more power and head room you got for music dynamics the better...

cheers..

you think more power = better sound quality? so I guess the Cambridge 551R at 60watts or the Arcam 360 at 75 watts or Anthem MRX 300 at 60 watts lack sound quality? I really disagree with your statement, if that's the case.
post #49 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

FTC dont me jack to me.. i live in Canada..

Yah, I wasn't talking to you.
post #50 of 88
Whoa. Huge derailment.
post #51 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryder125 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

denon amps sound great if you add some power via an external amp.. as the processor dose a fine job.. for ht or stereo play back..

its the power that gives you the sound quality the more power and head room you got for music dynamics the better...

cheers..

you think more power = better sound quality? so I guess the Cambridge 551R at 60watts or the Arcam 360 at 75 watts or Anthem MRX 300 at 60 watts lack sound quality? I really disagree with your statement, if that's the case.

for sure they would suck at higher volumes... you got to have power for the music dynamics...

the power to control da woofers ..

300 to 500 watts atleast 1000 even better eh..
post #52 of 88
Just for giggles---
Denon has a new E400 receiver that they advertise as 185 watts max per channel. For $500!!!
Then further reading is 90 watts per channel at 8 ohms but no claim of 2 channels driven.
Owners manual says 90 watts per channel at 8 ohms, 2 channels driven but total draw is 460 watts so divided by 7 = ~66 watts assuming absolutely no losses.
More likely less than 45 watts at 8 ohms.
Sadly this is the current trend in advertising and won't change unless there are regulations setting specific standards. Joe6pac only sees what is on the box at the store so we will always see misleading claims just like the 6.5 horsepower shop vacs!!! ;-)
post #53 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterK View Post

Just for giggles---
Denon has a new E400 receiver that they advertise as 185 watts max per channel. For $500!!!
Then further reading is 90 watts per channel at 8 ohms but no claim of 2 channels driven.
Owners manual says 90 watts per channel at 8 ohms, 2 channels driven but total draw is 460 watts so divided by 7 = ~66 watts assuming absolutely no losses.
More likely less than 45 watts at 8 ohms.
Sadly this is the current trend in advertising and won't change unless there are regulations setting specific standards. Joe6pac only sees what is on the box at the store so we will always see misleading claims just like the 6.5 horsepower shop vacs!!! ;-)

Please don't forget to compare AVR wattage to the efficiency rate of your speakers. Those two belong together when it comes to reaching certain SPLs. smile.gif
post #54 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

for sure they would suck at higher volumes... you got to have power for the music dynamics...

the power to control da woofers ..

300 to 500 watts atleast 1000 even better eh..

All completely dependent on speaker efficiency. More power is only of value if you actually use it and given the efficiencies of modern speakers, the vast majority never use 100 watts, let alone 1000.
post #55 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltadube View Post

what speakers and how many where you running on your denon?

cheers
Klipsch 7.1 configuration. I upgraded Denon to Onkyo 809 to Pioneer 1222k to Pioneer 1522k, which is where I will stay for a while.
post #56 of 88
Not sure if this has been addressed but HT Labs rated both the op's Onkyo TX-SR606 and the Denon AVR-3312ci, which has an identical power supply as the 3313ci.

Onkyo TX-SR606
Quote:
Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1 percent distortion at 73.2 watts
1 percent distortion at 87.4 watts

Denon AVR-3312ci
Quote:
Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 79.5 watts
1% distortion at 96.8 watts

Practically identical. Onkyo is known to have a slightly " warmer " sound than Denon, which is neutral

As far as how Denon rated their past receiver, that depends on whether that unit was a flagship unit or not. I'd say they quit rating " all channels driven " entirely 4-5 years ago. My Denon AVR-5308ci was rated by Denon at 150w x 7 but it was actually 141w x 7. The 2-channel rating was measured over 200w x 2 but Denon only rated 2-channel at 150w a piece.

At any rate, a 5-channel Emotiva XPA-5 is only $900 and will provide a significant boost over any modern AVR driving all channels. It would make a 7-channel setup much more balanced as well with the 5-channels getting 200 watts a piece and the AVR powering the other two channels at 125 watts each.

The HTiB specs from the likes of Pioneer, Sony, Panasonic are REALLY bad. They rate their crap ONE channel driven at 10% THD!!!! Onkyo and Denon at least use their low-end receivers as a base for their HTiB's.
Edited by jevans64 - 4/10/13 at 5:06pm
post #57 of 88
Where are You getting the relationship between wattage used and wattage put out from?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PterK View Post

Just for giggles---
Denon has a new E400 receiver that they advertise as 185 watts max per channel. For $500!!!
Then further reading is 90 watts per channel at 8 ohms but no claim of 2 channels driven.
Owners manual says 90 watts per channel at 8 ohms, 2 channels driven but total draw is 460 watts so divided by 7 = ~66 watts assuming absolutely no losses.
More likely less than 45 watts at 8 ohms.
Sadly this is the current trend in advertising and won't change unless there are regulations setting specific standards. Joe6pac only sees what is on the box at the store so we will always see misleading claims just like the 6.5 horsepower shop vacs!!! ;-)
post #58 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray587 View Post

Where are You getting the relationship between wattage used and wattage put out from?

We are just doing 2+2+2 = 6. wink.gif

The Amps x Volts ( VA ) or Watt rating on the back of the receiver is a good indication of the MAXIMUM watt output that AVR will provide. We know that Class A/B is roughly 50% efficient and Class D is more than 80% efficient. The E400 states that it draws 460 watts at full power. Just divide that by the number of channels ( 7 ) and you get the theoretical MAXIMUM output per channel. Take THAT value and multiply by .5 or .85 depending on Class type. A lot of Denon receivers use that 460w power supply and HT Labs rates those at around 46 watts x 5.
post #59 of 88
jevans64
Thank you for clarifying for me! ;-)
post #60 of 88
So how does a Sunfire Cinema do 400 watts x 5 all channels driven with a 540 watt power supply? Just wondering.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Very unhappy with Denon 3313