Onkyo RZ Series Atmos A/V Receivers Inflated Power Ratings

[yepimonfire]

The really helpfull information would be, the specs with all channels driven into 6 & 8 ohms, does anyone have information about this.
Thank you

AFAIK the only manufacturer that still measures ACD rms 20hz-20khz is Marantz. As you'll notice they don't rate smaller receivers at something crazy like 120w. More often than not it's 50wpc acd. The ones they do rate 100+ wpc are massive, weigh 40-50lbs, and cost a grand or two.

I seriously disagree that all 7 channels won't ever be called on to produce full bw content at loud volumes. Just watched Interstellar at reference volume the other day and several scenes had all 5 speakers blaring enough content to visibly observe woofer excursion.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[vsound5150]

My Marantz SR7010 notes at the bottom of the power amp specs "70% Guarantee". That's enough honesty for me. If not, I just throw an external amp at it or replace it no big deal.

My first Onkyo had issues making loud poping and crackling sounds out of the subs and other issues it was part of a large recall. The replacement unit sounded ok but no chance against the Marantz, at least for my listening.

 

[yepimonfire]

My Marantz SR7010 notes at the bottom of the power amp specs "70% Guarantee". That's enough honesty for me. If not, I just throw an external amp at it or replace it no big deal.

My first Onkyo had issues making loud poping and crackling sounds out of the subs and other issues it was part of a large recall. The replacement unit sounded ok but no chance against the Marantz, at least for my listening.

If I could afford one I'd certainly have one. Had an old SR7400 rated at 110wpc. I ran a pair of floor standing speakers with no sub and lfe sent through the mains, watched inception at reference level and it didn't even break a sweat. Sucker had a huge toroidal transformer in it the took up about 1/3th of the chassis.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[vsound5150]

I only had my SR7010 less than a month, now I'm curious to peek inside to see the transformer. It's a heavy unit I didn't feel comfortable the shelf it was initially on so I removed the shelf and let it sit on the floor of the cabinet, it's just a small 3 ft. high sliding door cabinet. My wife is amazed now how music is beautifully filling our home.

 

[Pace]

Just wanted to leave these here to show that while onkyos power ratings are inflated (as with majority of receivers), the thing does output some serious power; and beating out even marantzs av8802/mm8077 combo, atleast based on this data measured by audiovision.de.

And to point out, I've never owned nor do I own a Onkyo receiver, but the TX-RZ1100 is definately tempting as my next update.

 

[yepimonfire]

Just wanted to leave these here to show that while onkyos power ratings are inflated (as with majority of receivers), the thing does output some serious power; and beating out even marantzs av8802/mm8077 combo, atleast based on this data measured by audiovision.de.

And to point out, I've never owned nor do I own a Onkyo receiver, but the TX-RZ1100 is definately tempting as my next update.

At 1khz and 6ohm load you're getting a massively inflated rating. Most speakers are 8 ohms, and full bandwidth is much more taxing. I don't have the information handy to do a conversion but I'd bet at 7ch driven full bandwidth into 8 ohms you're likely going to get much less. My old htib receiver is rated for 110wpc at 6 ohms 1khz but I promise you it's probably only going to give me maybe 50wpc acd full bandwidth when the wind is blowing the right direction and the stars are aligned in my favor.

Just wanted to leave these here to show that while onkyos power ratings are inflated (as with majority of receivers), the thing does output some serious power; and beating out even marantzs av8802/mm8077 combo, atleast based on this data measured by audiovision.de.

And to point out, I've never owned nor do I own a Onkyo receiver, but the TX-RZ1100 is definately tempting as my next update.

 

[Pace]

At 1khz and 6ohm load you're getting a massively inflated rating. Most speakers are 8 ohms, and full bandwidth is much more taxing. I don't have the information handy to do a conversion but I'd bet at 7ch driven full bandwidth into 8 ohms you're likely going to get much less. My old htib receiver is rated for 110wpc at 6 ohms 1khz but I promise you it's probably only going to give me maybe 50wpc acd full bandwidth when the wind is blowing the right direction and the stars are aligned in my favor.

I gave you that marantz combos measurement as reference; it is rated at 8 ohm, full bw at 150W per channel... so, if the 1khz at 6 ohm load would be much less taxing, the marantz should have given way more output. But it doesn't.

From what I understand, while full bw is more taxing, the difference isn't huge by any means. The impedance naturally affects the output, but given that the 7-channel load is basically limited by the power supply, I'd be surprised if it actually differs a lot from that 6 ohm figure. As you can see, the 4ohm and 6ohm figures with 7 channels driven are basically the same due to this.

The reason why your receiver is unable to give you more than 50w per channel all channels driven is either the fact that it is rated at 110w with only TWO channels driven, the power supply is underrated or it is just poor design and bs marketing. But you can't really generalize based on that.

My point is that unfortunately you cannot really trust any of the figures provided by the manufacturers with these receivers... I much prefer to see some actual measurements done by someone else before making a decision.

I feel like this discussion should be in a separate article rather than linked to onkyos receiver preview as majority of manufacturers are to blame... and I don't consider these onkyos to be even close to the worst offenders. Even in the video (as the guy talking is talking about 200W rating) the card below them clearly states them as 140W/channel receivers. The 200W rating is just one extra line of spec, similar to the ones on marantzs website; with ridiculous ratings with 10% THD...

And if someone purchases these based on that 200W figure (which already tells me that they don't actually know what to look for), I'm pretty confident that they'll be more than happy with the actual power output...

 

[yepimonfire]

I gave you that marantz combos measurement as reference; it is rated at 8 ohm, full bw at 150W per channel... so, if the 1khz at 6 ohm load would be much less taxing, the marantz should have given way more output. But it doesn't.

From what I understand, while full bw is more taxing, the difference isn't huge by any means. The impedance naturally affects the output, but given that the 7-channel load is basically limited by the power supply, I'd be surprised if it actually differs a lot from that 6 ohm figure. As you can see, the 4ohm and 6ohm figures with 7 channels driven are basically the same due to this.

The reason why your receiver is unable to give you more than 50w per channel all channels driven is either the fact that it is rated at 110w with only TWO channels driven, the power supply is underrated or it is just poor design and bs marketing. But you can't really generalize based on that.

My point is that unfortunately you cannot really trust any of the figures provided by the manufacturers with these receivers... I much prefer to see some actual measurements done by someone else before making a decision.

I feel like this discussion should be in a separate article rather than linked to onkyos receiver preview as majority of manufacturers are to blame... and I don't consider these onkyos to be even close to the worst offenders. Even in the video (as the guy talking is talking about 200W rating) the card below them clearly states them as 140W/channel receivers. The 200W rating is just one extra line of spec, similar to the ones on marantzs website; with ridiculous ratings with 10% THD...

And if someone purchases these based on that 200W figure (which already tells me that they don't actually know what to look for), I'm pretty confident that they'll be more than happy with the actual power output...

http://www.audioholics.com/audio-amplifier/the-all-channels-driven-acd-amplifier-test

It's the difference between audible distortion and inaudible distortion.

Either way the difference in output between 100w and 150w is so small it's inaudible. You would need to go from 100w to something like 600w for it to sound noticeably louder. If you need 20dB in headroom and you're 6dB short at 100wpc you'd need more power than you could even draw from a 20 amp circuit 110v circuit.

 

[3db]

My Marantz SR7010 notes at the bottom of the power amp specs "70% Guarantee". That's enough honesty for me. If not, I just throw an external amp at it or replace it no big deal.

My first Onkyo had issues making loud poping and crackling sounds out of the subs and other issues it was part of a large recall. The replacement unit sounded ok but no chance against the Marantz, at least for my listening.

All the ACD test measures is the sensitivity of the protection circuit which begins to limit output power based on a threshold set by the manufacturer, nothing more. It's an invalid test for measuring an Ava's power capabilities.

 

[Verdinut]

In the summary, you indicate that the manufacturer is ONKRO.

I thought I would mention it so that this little mistake be corrected.

Cheers,

 

[RuiSilva]

Interestingly the RZ1100 can drive seven channels continuously into 8-ohm loads with 0.1% distortion at 103.2 watts and 1% distortion at 126.5 watts.
The Marantz SR7011 can drive seven channels continuously into 8-ohm loads with 0.1% distortion at 75.1 watts and 1% distortion at 90.4 watts.
If one performs the analysis of the power delivery to 2/5/7 channels for each AVR one can assume the SR7011 will have issues handling 9 channels continuously on higher power consumptions (see image below).

Buy using a simple linear regression for both AVR's (although the SR seems more like a polynomial then linear, this is only to prove a point!) class D of the RZ can "easily" handle the higher demand of channels when compared to the AB amps of the SR counterpart. RZ1100 could handle 9 channels @ near 90W/channel with 0.1% distortion while the SR7011 can "only" handle near 50W/channel with 0.1% distortion.
It is my opinion that these new Monster AVR's with 11/13 channels must be tested in their full capacity. After all, people that buy these AVR's intend to use them in their full capacity either immediately or in a not so distant future upgrade.
It is my belief that class D amplification is the way of the future when we start talking about Receivers with 9/11/13/(and above!) channels. In both terms of power delivery (power efficiency) and thermal management of the receivers internals.

 

[PENG]

Interestingly the RZ1100 can drive seven channels continuously into 8-ohm loads with 0.1% distortion at 103.2 watts and 1% distortion at 126.5 watts.
The Marantz SR7011 can drive seven channels continuously into 8-ohm loads with 0.1% distortion at 75.1 watts and 1% distortion at 90.4 watts.
If one performs the analysis of the power delivery to 2/5/7 channels for each AVR one can assume the SR7011 will have issues handling 9 channels continuously on higher power consumptions (see image below).
View attachment 26457
Buy using a simple linear regression for both AVR's (although the SR seems more like a polynomial then linear, this is only to prove a point!) class D of the RZ can "easily" handle the higher demand of channels when compared to the AB amps of the SR counterpart. RZ1100 could handle 9 channels @ near 90W/channel with 0.1% distortion while the SR7011 can "only" handle near 50W/channel with 0.1% distortion.
It is my opinion that these new Monster AVR's with 11/13 channels must be tested in their full capacity. After all, people that buy these AVR's intend to use them in their full capacity either immediately or in a not so distant future upgrade.
It is my belief that class D amplification is the way of the future when we start talking about Receivers with 9/11/13/(and above!) channels. In both terms of power delivery (power efficiency) and thermal management of the receivers internals.

Obviously class D makes sense for the much better efficiency but between the two I would take the Marantz for the better distortion figures and the better 2 channel driven into 4 ohms performance. You are right about the marginally better 5/7 channel driven output figures but those have low to zero practically value for real world applications.

 

[DarthNooR]

My $0.02, years after all of this and only trying to find out the true output of the RZ-1100, I find it indeed disappointing that the power rating of this amp is ambiguous at most. Somewhat more disappointing however is seeing Gene write a (fortunately rare) less than useful review that leaves one even more confused. How did that German site get those measurements and why was the power of this amp not measured properly if they were in doubt? If Audioholics is so keen on being a reference site, it behooves them to do the harder work and present proper measurements of the units they review.

 

[Gmoney]

My $0.02, years after all of this and only trying to find out the true output of the RZ-1100, I find it indeed disappointing that the power rating of this amp is ambiguous at most. Somewhat more disappointing however is seeing Gene write a (fortunately rare) less than useful review that leaves one even more confused. How did that German site get those measurements and why was the power of this amp not measured properly if they were in doubt? If Audioholics is so keen on being a reference site, it behooves them to do the harder work and present proper measurements of the units they review.

Oh Ouch!!! @gene, Your being Challenged Gene!.. On a side note I have noticed a up tick of new members, Channeling their inner thoughts of Gene and his staff's Abilities or lack of.

 

[PENG]

The really helpfull information would be, the specs with all channels driven into 6 & 8 ohms, does anyone have information about this.
Thank you

It may useful for some applications that few people actually use, otherwise the two channel driven ratings, or may be up to 5 channels driven rating are more practical.

Consider the following facts:
-There may be some short duration peaks in movies that call for 5, or more channels to peak at the same time, but it would be rare.
- For such applications, there will usually be at least one subwoofers that will take the blunt of those high peaks often caused by contents in the LFE channel, so unless passive subwoofers are used, the AVR won't be taxed as much as one would think even during those max. 20 dB peak that THX allowed for.
- Surround speakers are usually closer to the listener, so all else being equal (such as sensitivity specs), they require less power for the same spl. One can check their level trims after running auto setup and would likely find the surround channels were set lower by a couple dB or more, due to the shorter distance.

Even for mch music mode lovers, if you have 7 or more speakers playing at the same level, the overall level would increase by probably 7 to 10 dB compared to just one speaker, so the listener would not likely dial back the volume by a few db accordingly.

Obviously it would be great if all AVRs are designed and build to have all channel driven max output rating approach that of their two channel driven ratings, but then price will go up significantly because of the required larger power supplies and higher packaging/shipping costs. So there is a balance to hit, otherwise the consumer would be forced to pay for things they may not likely need for their real world use. HK used to design their AVRs that could output almost the same whether it is two channel or all channel driven, but in order to remain price competitive, the likes of their HK AVR525, 635 etc., actually measured to output less in two and all channel driven than comparable (price) Denon AVRs. That is, again, a fact and can be easily checked by anyone by googling the S&V measurements.