Receiver vs. receiver with amp

[JetSnake]

I have a set of Klipsch Chorus ll's that I'm using in a 5.1 set-up. I use this system for both music and movies, but way more particular to music, thats's where I really let'er rip! So I'm looking at updating my 10 year old receiver to something that'll do 4K and other more modern benefits. But I'm trying to figure out, do I just go with a stand alone receiver to power everything like the Denon AVR-X6300? Or get a little cheaper receiver like the Denon AVR-X4300 and add a 2 channel amp to run the Chorus ll?

 

[PENG]

I have a set of Klipsch Chorus ll's that I'm using in a 5.1 set-up. I use this system for both music and movies, but way more particular to music, thats's where I really let'er rip! So I'm looking at updating my 10 year old receiver to something that'll do 4K and other more modern benefits. But I'm trying to figure out, do I just go with a stand alone receiver to power everything like the Denon AVR-X6300? Or get a little cheaper receiver like the Denon AVR-X4300 and add a 2 channel amp to run the Chorus ll?

Depending on your room dimensions, sitting distance and how loud you listen, the 4300 may be fine on it's own.

 

[lovinthehd]

There's a very slight difference in amp sections between the 4300 and 6300, on the order of less than 1dB....if you're going to need an external amp you'll need it with both units.

ps The Klipsch Chorus II is rated at 101dB sensitivity, doubtful you'll need more than the avr.

 

[JetSnake]

Yeah, you guys are probably right. Some times I get an idea in my head and it turns into a mess from there, lol. I currently have a Denon AVR 3808, and according to the specs, it's at 140 watts with 2 channels driven, and even though somewhere around a 20 watt difference in specs is probably undetectable by ear, I don't want to down grade from what I have.

 

[lovinthehd]

Yeah, you guys are probably right. Some times I get an idea in my head and it turns into a mess from there, lol. I currently have a Denon AVR 3808, and according to the specs, it's at 140 watts with 2 channels driven, and even though somewhere around a 20 watt difference in specs is probably undetectable by ear, I don't want to down grade from what I have.

I have a 3808 too and a 4520...and wouldn't have any issues with either the 4300 or 6300 fwiw.

 

[GlocksRock]

Just get the 4300 and if it's not enough then add an amp.

 

[PENG]

Yeah, you guys are probably right. Some times I get an idea in my head and it turns into a mess from there, lol. I currently have a Denon AVR 3808, and according to the specs, it's at 140 watts with 2 channels driven, and even though somewhere around a 20 watt difference in specs is probably undetectable by ear, I don't want to down grade from what I have.

To match the output of the 3808 you need to upgrade to the X7200WA but that model will be superseded soon. The X4300H will get you the new features that the 3808 lacks, not more power.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The Klipsch Chorus II is rated at 101dB sensitivity

If that's close to being accurate, I bet the Denon 3300 would work just fine too.

 

[Stebono]

I was in the same spot as you are. Only I had a Yamaha RX-2400, which is less rated wattage then your Denon choice and Yamaha's really don't hold up to their rated wattage, unlike Denon. I was needing more amplifier even with my La Scala's up front and the KLF-20's in the rear so I first upgraded to Crown XLS 2500's and then 2502's. That made all the difference in the world for power and I wasn't pushing my Yamy too hard, plus I didn't need to worry about clipping over driving my speakers hard. Then I upgraded my receiver to a Pro-Pre the CX-A5100 which I just love and now I can run XLR's out to my amps. I did consider the Marantz AV8802 but there were two things that made me stay with Yamaha, I didn't like the Opera Window and you can't totally control your sound environment like you can with the Yamy. The Marantz is better though for room correction as the Yamaha lacks accurate LFE correction. Either choice would have worked great and I did look at Denon too as they are superb but had nothing in Pro-Pre's which is why I looked at the Marantz.

 

[PENG]

I was in the same spot as you are. Only I had a Yamaha RX-2400, which is less rated wattage then your Denon choice and Yamaha's really don't hold up to their rated wattage, unlike Denon. I was needing more amplifier even with my La Scala's up front and the KLF-20's in the rear so I first upgraded to Crown XLS 2500's and then 2502's. That made all the difference in the world for power and I wasn't pushing my Yamy too hard, plus I didn't need to worry about clipping over driving my speakers hard. Then I upgraded my receiver to a Pro-Pre the CX-A5100 which I just love and now I can run XLR's out to my amps. I did consider the Marantz AV8802 but there were two things that made me stay with Yamaha, I didn't like the Opera Window and you can't totally control your sound environment like you can with the Yamy. The Marantz is better though for room correction as the Yamaha lacks accurate LFE correction. Either choice would have worked great and I did look at Denon too as they are superb but had nothing in Pro-Pre's which is why I looked at the Marantz.

After read an interesting article, I wonder why you need so much power for the La Scalas,

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/trends/ta10_3.html

To be clear though, I only read those stuff for fun.

 

[Stebono]

After read an interesting article, I wonder why you need so much power for the La Scalas,

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/trends/ta10_3.html

To be clear though, I only read those stuff for fun.

I'm not quite sure what that article has to do with your question but what I can tell you is that you need more clean power to reach your max SPL, I think for the Klipsch it is only around 124dB if I recall correctly, if you have an under rated amp that can't get there cleanly. For every 3dB you need to double your power so it starts adding up rather quickly when you get into high wattage systems, its not always Sensitivity of your speakers or lack there of that determines that. In my case it kept me from clipping as stated and shutting down my Receiver on occasion. In fact I use to keep extra muffin fans, not load ones, running on top of my Receiver just to keep it from thermal clipping, an old school trick. It's a good practice to drive your system with an amp that is double your RMS power so if you have 200w RMS speaker system you would want a system that would rate around 400 watts. My La Scala's are from the 80's they are not the II's.

I can't say that article was impressive but then I'm old school.

 

[Irvrobinson]

It consistently surprises me how many people believe that they need more watts per channel than they really do. It takes a large room volume, inefficient speakers, speakers with strong sub-50Hz capabilities, and wide-range recordings with a wide dynamic range to get even peak power consumption per channel above 100 watts (where peaks are measured in milliseconds). If you use a sub with a high-pass filter on your main speakers, needing big watts is even more unlikely. When I show people peak-hold results with OmniMic at their listening seat and do some simple mathematics for them, and reveal that they peak at less than 32 watts per channel, I've had two people I remember tell that my measurements or my math must be flawed. Lots of people seem to want to believe that they need monster amps.

 

[PENG]

I'm not quite sure what that article has to do with your question but what I can tell you is that you need more clean power to reach your max SPL, I think for the Klipsch it is only around 124dB if I recall correctly, if you have an under rated amp that can't get there cleanly.

In that article, if you believe them, they used a little class T amp (TA-10) with 2X15W to drive those big Klipsch. That could in theory be fine, considering the La Scala's sensitivity is 104 dB/1W/1meter, nom impedance 8 ohms. If their specs are believable, to reach ref level you need only 0.13W (less for stereo) and can hit 110 dB or more with the 15 WPC amps from a 10 ft away. That is 5 dB higher than THX standard. So even if the Klipsch inflated their sensitivity spec by 5 dB or more, your RX-V2400 should have no trouble in a medium size room driving a pair of those speakers.

So my question is, how big is your room, sitting distance and how loud you listen, like above the THX's 85 dB average with 105 dB peak SPL?

http://myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.html

In any case, I don't think people should listen at the maximum rated spl of 124 dB, that's harmfully loud.

 

[Pogre]

In that article, if you believe them, they used a little class T amp (TA-10) with 2X15W to drive those big Klipsch. That could in theory be fine, considering the La Scala's sensitivity is 104 dB/1W/1meter, nom impedance 8 ohms. If their specs are believable, to reach ref level you need only 0.13W (less for stereo) and can hit 110 dB or more with the 15 WPC amps from a 10 ft away. That is 5 dB higher than THX standard. So even if the Klipsch inflated their sensitivity spec by 5 dB or more, your RX-V2400 should have no trouble in a medium size room driving a pair of those speakers.

So my question is, how big is your room, sitting distance and how loud you listen, like above the THX's 85 dB average with 105 dB peak SPL?

http://myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.html

In any case, I don't think people should listen at the maximum rated spl of 124 dB, that's harmfully loud.

I was just gonna link that spl calculator. 112 db at 10' with 15 watts. I don't think I would ever listen to anything at that volume. 120db being the threshold of pain, who would want to?

 

[Stebono]

In that article, if you believe them, they used a little class T amp (TA-10) with 2X15W to drive those big Klipsch. That could in theory be fine, considering the La Scala's sensitivity is 104 dB/1W/1meter, nom impedance 8 ohms. If their specs are believable, to reach ref level you need only 0.13W (less for stereo) and can hit 110 dB or more with the 15 WPC amps from a 10 ft away. That is 5 dB higher than THX standard. So even if the Klipsch inflated their sensitivity spec by 5 dB or more, your RX-V2400 should have no trouble in a medium size room driving a pair of those speakers.

So my question is, how big is your room, sitting distance and how loud you listen, like above the THX's 85 dB average with 105 dB peak SPL?

http://myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.html

In any case, I don't think people should listen at the maximum rated spl of 124 dB, that's harmfully loud.

Well it did and it wasn't enough, the dynamics were not there, the distortion was high and wearing at volume. Specs are a good tool of basis but they are not the whole story, especially in the audio world, and as eluded in that article you pointed out, they can be down right misleading. So when it comes to specs and math you may not get the true story and I can tell the difference otherwise I wouldn't have wasted the money, I'm a bang for the buck guy and not somebody that needs to get an extravagant outrageously priced system for bragging rights. People I've setup or helped upgrade, the ones that love music, see the difference I present them.

"In any case, I don't think people should listen at the maximum rated spl of 124 dB, that's harmfully loud."
True it is but that's your call, for you, not others. Hopefully its still a free world, wait a minute maybe not?

Some of the sub's I like are SPL Max of 134 dB, just saying.

If you guys are happy with a tri-path 15 watts system power then good for you, it's much cheaper as long as your sound floor isn't too high. 104 dB @ 1 watt is very nice comfortable listening level but when I'm jamming with friends sometimes we want a little more, to each his own. Heck most people today listen to their phones or car stereos for their primary listening environment neither are ideal especially automotive with its extremely noisy environment.


Good discussion though.

 

[PENG]

Well it did and it wasn't enough, the dynamics were not there, the distortion was high and wearing at volume. Specs are a good tool of basis but they are not the whole story, especially in the audio world, and as eluded in that article you pointed out, they can be down right misleading. So when it comes to specs and math you may not get the true story and I can tell the difference otherwise I wouldn't have wasted the money, I'm a bang for the buck guy and not somebody that needs to get an extravagant outrageously priced system for bragging rights. People I've setup or helped upgrade, the ones that love music, see the difference I present them.

"In any case, I don't think people should listen at the maximum rated spl of 124 dB, that's harmfully loud."
True it is but that's your call, for you, not others. Hopefully its still a free world, wait a minute maybe not?

Some of the sub's I like are SPL Max of 134 dB, just saying.

If you guys are happy with a tri-path 15 watts system power then good for you, it's much cheaper as long as your sound floor isn't too high. 104 dB @ 1 watt is very nice comfortable listening level but when I'm jamming with friends sometimes we want a little more, to each his own. Heck most people today listen to their phones or car stereos for their primary listening environment neither are ideal especially automotive with its extremely noisy environment.


Good discussion though.

The RX-V2400 was bench tested to their rated 2 channel output at very low distortion, but not when 5 or more channels were driven. If you actually need the additional power then naturally more power will make a difference for you. Just keep in mind those speakers are only rated 100W max continuous and 400W peak, according to the published specs.

 

[Irvrobinson]

"In any case, I don't think people should listen at the maximum rated spl of 124 dB, that's harmfully loud."
True it is but that's your call, for you, not others. Hopefully its still a free world, wait a minute maybe not?

Some of the sub's I like are SPL Max of 134 dB, just saying.

If you guys are happy with a tri-path 15 watts system power then good for you, it's much cheaper as long as your sound floor isn't too high. 104 dB @ 1 watt is very nice comfortable listening level but when I'm jamming with friends sometimes we want a little more, to each his own. Heck most people today listen to their phones or car stereos for their primary listening environment neither are ideal especially automotive with its extremely noisy environment.


Good discussion though.

Just out of idle curiosity, have you ever measured the peak and average SPLs (C-weighted and unweighted) at your loudest "normal" listening level at your listening seat?

 

[Mikado463]

It consistently surprises me how many people believe that they need more watts per channel than they really do. It takes a large room volume, inefficient speakers, speakers with strong sub-50Hz capabilities, and wide-range recordings with a wide dynamic range to get even peak power consumption per channel above 100 watts (where peaks are measured in milliseconds). If you use a sub with a high-pass filter on your main speakers, needing big watts is even more unlikely. When I show people peak-hold results with OmniMic at their listening seat and do some simple mathematics for them, and reveal that they peak at less than 32 watts per channel, I've had two people I remember tell that my measurements or my math must be flawed. Lots of people seem to want to believe that they need monster amps.

Irv, I doubt you ever tried your test with a pair of Martin Logan CLS's !

 

[Stebono]

Just out of idle curiosity, have you ever measured the peak and average SPLs (C-weighted and unweighted) at your loudest "normal" listening level at your listening seat?

It's been a long time since I've done that, but yes I have. Is it required before I can enjoy a system? Or can I use my own judgement on what I need and why? People get way to worked up on specs, it becomes a religion of sorts, now don't take me wrong specs are a important basis, but that's all they are, and they are abused, misused, exaggerated much like statistics are. Of course don't tell a statics major that or they blow a gasket or I guess in this case a driver. LOL

In woofers the harder you can drive them the better they perform at low frequencies, within reason, and if they have a high BL they can image very well at close to peak Xmax. Your weighted-not-weighted averaging isn't going to tell the difference between noise and a nice tight clean imaging, nothing is perfect especially measuring unless you go to great extremes and have a anechoic chamber for testing. And no I didn't test my system in a controlled environment either.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Irv, I doubt you ever tried your test with a pair of Martin Logan CLS's !

No. I haven't. I have heard them though. As I've posted elsewhere I'm tempted to have an affair with full-range 'stats. I'm just not sure I want to spend what it takes to marry a pair though.

I have run some measurements on ML hybrids, and I didn't find them to be all that different from cone speakers.

And remember, I'm just doing simple math; I'm not measuring voltage at the speaker terminals. (Too risky with other people's speakers.) I'm just taking the manufacturers claim for loudness at 2.83v at one meter, adjusting for the claimed impedance, adjusting for two speakers, and then using the distance from the speakers to the listen seat and the formula for the fall-off of loudness for distance, measuring the loudness at the listening seat, and calculating an estimation of the amplifier output power to achieve it. I also measure at one meter to check my work, and what that says is that I'm over-estimating by at least 1db due to room gain. But if I told some folks what I really think, that they're peaking at maybe 16 watts when it is very loud at the listening seat, and the average is less than 2 watts, at least for any music I'll test with, I'd have no credibility at all.