New receiver or new power amp?

You are the one with the problem since you think everything has to be proven. But guess what, I don't have to prove anything to you or anyone else! You don't like it too bad! Believe me or not, I couldn't care less. It doesn't mean that you're right or that I'm wrong. My opinion is just a valid as anyone else's. And that is all everyone is spouting OPINIONS.

The only proof I need is my ears! That is all the proof anyone needs. All Scott needs to do is to buy a separate amplifier & prove it to himself!

If you want to spend your entire life analyzing, measuring, comparing & proving every little detail in life, be my guest. But don't demand that everyone else should do the same. Life is too short for that & I intend to enjoy my life and the beautiful music my system brings to it.

mtrycrafts said:

That is your whole problem, no controls, no measurements to support anything you are posting, it seems. And yes, your ears are far from being a trustworthy agent, period. Incontestable. Who knows what is going on with your perceptions and reality? No one under these circumstances.

Since they are rated for a max of 250wpc, I doubt that they will draw more than the 250 except at short intervals when called for. So that is why I wouldn't notice them being any louder going from 200wpc to 400wpc.


Why would they draw that much unless you are trying to drive it hard and loud? At 90dB sensitivity, 100 watts will deliver 110dB spl. Not enough?
And, a 400 watt amp could certainly deliver more than that 250 watt max if you drive it hard enough and fail.

Click to expand...

Nuglets said:

I thought that the dynamic range on CD's has gotten worse as of late. Don't most LP's have more dynamic range than many cd's? I don't know about SACD and DVD but for some reason I thought I remembered reading somewhere about CD's lacking in dynamic range...Is this true?

Click to expand...

A few months ago, I brought out my old Pioneer turn table to do a comparison between a CD and LP. It was Great White's Once Bitten, Twice Shy CD and LP. It's actually a very good recording. I set all levels flat, and switched dozens of times between both sources.

Amazingly, the sound from the LP was at least 3x better than the cd. The dynamics were better, the punch more pronounced, and highs more crisp. Sure, there was snap, crackle, and pop, but the clarity almost brought tears to my eyes (especially looking back on the thousands of cd's I've amassed over the years - thanks to BMG).

One of the most eye opening revelations was seeing the dual 7" drivers in my Polk RTi10 towers actually reaching respectable XMAX levels at moderate volumes with the LP. They never moved like that with HT or CD.

Could it be we're spending way too much cash on our equipment? Is it possible the recordings of late are the real reason we're always striving to get that perfect sound - yet never actually getting there?

Buckeyefan 1 said:

Could it be we're spending way too much cash on our equipment? Is it possible the recordings of late are the real reason we're always striving to get that perfect sound - yet never actually getting there?

Click to expand...

That is the way it looks to me

Buckeyefan 1 said:

Could it be we're spending way too much cash on our equipment? Is it possible the recordings of late are the real reason we're always striving to get that perfect sound - yet never actually getting there?

Click to expand...

I'm definitely disappointed with a great many of my cd's. With a decent system calibrated to be as flat as possible in my room I can really tell the difference between cd's. Many of my rap cd's seem to be made for the typical bass fanatic so they actually have the bass recorded lower than the rest of the frequency band. Example: If I play that cd in a typical car stereo where the subs are turned up far louder than the rest of the speaker's it sounds normal, but when I play it on my system, which has a greater capability of hitting low bass and louder bass than the car system's maximum it sounds weak and lacking bass. But then I play a cd that in my opinion is recorded properly it will not lack bass on my system, but will begin to distort on a typical car stereo before mine does.

It really bothers me because I don't want to mess with an EQ every time I change my cd, and most bass tone control's I've had on my receiver's just give me a boost at and around 60Hz. So basically yeah, buckeye I think you're right. It's hard to get that perfect sound because the damn cd's suck to begin with, but then again there are many that are decent. Movies also seem to be more consistent so if you have a dedicated HT then it's probably worth it to pay more for a system.

zumbo said:

Oops! I think my post was misread or miswrote. Both of my replies were to the quote. Not to my statement. They were both statements in some form of a question. I need to work on my writing skills.

I had to fix this one twice already! Where is Mulester 7 when you need him?

Click to expand...

Let's try this:

If a receiver has a 200W spike, but is not rated @ 200WPC, it would clip @ or before 200W due to it's low power consumption labled on the back. Correct?

A spike is not an RMS signal but a short duration dynamic signal. An amp could reproduce this even if it is not rated to 200watt RMS power, and, it will not be on the back of the receiver, that is not the RMS power rating.



If this statement is true, not saying it isn't, then ALL mid-fi receivers would clip on a regular basis.

Why? Not everyone is driving their speakers to insane levels, even on a spike.

Speakers would fry, and so would the receiver.

I doubt the receiver would fry on a spike, or a speaker.


Also, my 110WPC Yamaha would go into protection mode while trying to drive my inefficient 4ohm MB Quarts. It never, ever did.

Perhaps you are never driving your speaker to insane levels and the 4 ohm power it delivers is satisfying to you. Besides, at 4 ohms, amps usually put out more than at 8 ohms. So, you'd have to clarify your statements to apply to 4 ohms speaker needing 200 watts or an 8 ohm speaker

cfrizz said:

You are the one with the problem since you think everything has to be proven. But guess what, I don't have to prove anything to you or anyone else!

Click to expand...

cfrizz said:

Of course you don't have to prove anything to anyone. You may believe anything you like. I prefer the truth and reality of things , not ones imaginations, or at times, their unreliable perceptions, unless, of course, I am reading or watching a fantasy or some such.


My opinion is just a valid as anyone else's.

Actually, not all opinions are equally valid or are equal, otherwise no opinion would be worth a thing.

And that is all everyone is spouting OPINIONS.

Looked like facts to me in your post, no? Was it an opinion that you turned the volume down by 10 units?

The only proof I need is my ears! That is all the proof anyone needs.

That is not enough as those ears are very prone to falsehoods, misinterpretations and being unreliable.

All Scott needs to do is to buy a separate amplifier & prove it to himself!

Not without proper protocols he would not be able to. He'd fall into the same traps you did. Not very sound thinking. Nor will lead him to discovery.


But don't demand that everyone else should do the same.

Only when they make testable claims I will and when it suits me to do so.

Life is too short for that

Some spend their entire life trying to prove one theory. So, why not?


I intend to enjoy my life and the beautiful music my system brings to it.


Who can disagree with that?

Click to expand...

cfrizz said:

I just know that when I first turned on my receiver with amp attached & started playing a song at -30 which is where I always kept it, I had to scramble for the remote to turn it down to -40 before my neighbors decided to pound on the wall!

Click to expand...

Perhaps that amp has a higher gain in the amp stage and doesn't need the same input voltage to output the same power as the receiver? That is how they do work. So, that is a different issue and comparing apples and oranges.

Yeah I can't disagree with MTRY there. Each time you change a component, especially an amplifier, you must recalibrate the system. You cannot simply connect it and turn your receiver to the same volume(numerically on the receiver) as you had it before the amp was connected and try to do a comparison.

mtrycrafts said:

Let's try this:

Click to expand...

If a receiver has a 200W spike, but is not rated @ 200WPC, it would clip @ or before 200W due to it's low power consumption labled on the back. Correct?

mtrycrafts said:

A spike is not an RMS signal but a short duration dynamic signal. An amp could reproduce this even if it is not rated to 200watt RMS power, and, it will not be on the back of the receiver, that is not the RMS power rating.

Click to expand...

I understand what power consumption is. I was under the impression the lable meant that was the maximum draw. Therefore, if it was not capable of producing 200WPC due to a low power consumption rating, wouldn't it clip?



If this statement is true, not saying it isn't, then ALL mid-fi receivers would clip on a regular basis.

mtrycrafts said:

Why? Not everyone is driving their speakers to insane levels, even on a spike.

Click to expand...

If someone is needing it "louder", don't you think they have driven their unit into clipping?

Speakers would fry, and so would the receiver.

mtrycrafts said:

I doubt the receiver would fry on a spike, or a speaker.

Click to expand...

Again, if it spiked on a regular basis it would. Correct?


Also, my 110WPC Yamaha would go into protection mode while trying to drive my inefficient 4ohm MB Quarts. It never, ever did.

mtrycrafts said:

Perhaps you are never driving your speaker to insane levels and the 4 ohm power it delivers is satisfying to you. Besides, at 4 ohms, amps usually put out more than at 8 ohms. So, you'd have to clarify your statements to apply to 4 ohms speaker needing 200 watts or an 8 ohm speaker

Click to expand...

Perhaps.

mtrycrafts said:

That is not enough as those ears are very prone to falsehoods, misinterpretations and being unreliable.

Click to expand...

Well I know that your senses can "play tricks on you" but I don't think that is the main issue when comparing the amplifier's. In my opinion most of the error comes from the inconsistency of the setup itself like level matching when comparing as well as everything else being equal. Another problem comes from listening at one time then taking a while until you listen to the next, which could be what you mean by saying the ears are unreliable but it's your memory more than your ears that are unreliable in this scenario.

Nuglets said:

Well I know that your senses can "play tricks on you" but I don't think that is the main issue when comparing the amplifier's. In my opinion most of the error comes from the inconsistency of the setup itself like level matching when comparing as well as everything else being equal. Another problem comes from listening at one time then taking a while until you listen to the next, which could be what you mean by saying the ears are unreliable but it's your memory more than your ears that are unreliable in this scenario.

Click to expand...

Yes, all those causes the senses to play tricks Especially the biasing factor from sighted comparisons.
Level mismatch will manifest as a quality difference, not a volume difference, for instance.
Time lag between signal comparison causes memory to fail and the brain to trick you.
It is more the brain that is doing the tricking not the ears though. The ear mechanism converts the acoustical signal to electric impulses but the brain will analyze it, or not, correctly and introduce whatever it wants at times

This is why we need to do a careful comparison if one is seeking real information.

zumbo said:

"If a receiver has a 200W spike, but is not rated @ 200WPC, it would clip @ or before 200W due to it's low power consumption labled on the back. Correct?"
I understand what power consumption is. I was under the impression the lable meant that was the maximum draw. Therefore, if it was not capable of producing 200WPC due to a low power consumption rating, wouldn't it clip?

Click to expand...

zumbo said:

No, that is not what the label on the back is saying at all. It is a duty cycle label of sorts. that is why one needs to know the actual RMS power rating of that component.



If this statement is true, not saying it isn't, then ALL mid-fi receivers would clip on a regular basis.
zumbo-"If someone is needing it "louder", don't you think they have driven their unit into clipping?"

Depends on the amps capability, including its dynamic capability. Cannot be assumed that is the case automatically.

Speakers would fry, and so would the receiver.
zunbo-"Again, if it spiked on a regular basis it would. Correct? "

You'd have to clip it pretty good and then depending on each driver's power capability, the tweeters would go firstly as they are the lowest power rated drivers.

Click to expand...

So what is the point here? Are we saying that it will not go louder? Or are we saying that it may go louder without as much distortion?

One more thing. It sounds really silly to say a receiver could match a powerful amplifier on output. Wait it doesn't just sound silly, because that is just plain wrong.

cfrizz said:

Thank you Wire! I did luck out with this used purchase since I would never have bought it new! I was simply hoping to find a 200wpc 5 channel amp that I could lift, & this pretty much fell into my lap instead.

Click to expand...

NP cfrizz
Let these guys bla bla all they want . You have the The amp to prove them wrong .
Its to bad one of those couldnt fall in my lap (used) .
I cant complain , had a SP3 fall into my lap brand new .

Thanks Wire. LOL I agree with you & congrats on the SP3! See it all works out in the end!

wire said:

NP cfrizz
Let these guys bla bla all they want . You have the The amp to prove them wrong .
Its to bad one of those couldnt fall in my lap (used) .
I cant complain , had a SP3 fall into my lap brand new .

Click to expand...

Seth=L said:

It sounds really silly to say a receiver could match a powerful amplifier on output. Wait it doesn't just sound silly, because that is just plain wrong.

Click to expand...

or in sound quality; I have never heard of a reciver that that had better SQ than a equal, or even lesser priced power amp.

Seth=L said:

One more thing. It sounds really silly to say a receiver could match a powerful amplifier on output. Wait it doesn't just sound silly, because that is just plain wrong.

Click to expand...

So you are saying that a 200 x 7 watt per channel amp has more output than a 125 x 7 watt per channel receiver. Thanks for clearing up that thorny issue. Back on point though, if your speakers never require more than 50 watts, they could care less where those 50 watts came from.

Nick

no. 5 said:

or in sound quality; I have never heard of a reciver that that had better SQ than a equal, or even lesser priced power amp.

Click to expand...

Wrong again!

Sound quality is in the pre-amp section of the receiver. If the same receiver in question is used as the pre-amp for the added amp, it will sound exactly the same.

Seth=L said:

So what is the point here? Are we saying that it will not go louder? Or are we saying that it may go louder without as much distortion?

Click to expand...

Not going to be louder.

Seth=L said:

One more thing. It sounds really silly to say a receiver could match a powerful amplifier on output. Wait it doesn't just sound silly, because that is just plain wrong.

Click to expand...

While it may sound silly, there are many receivers on the market that can match, or even beat, the SQ of seperates. The pre-amp section in many receivers is just as good as a stand alone pre-amp. That is one reason so many people are using them as pre-amps. Myself included.

zumbo said:

Wrong again!

Click to expand...

again? it was my first post on this thread.