The Ultimate Battle : Stereo Performance of AVRs ?

[lovinthehd]

Thank you all for your answers. I dare say I understand better where you're going with your pursuit.

I did hear a good multichannel, but even so, I'm not stopping there, of course, as I'm not one of those "it's gotta be stereo", I'll always give it a chance and listen to it. Who knows, maybe one day I'll find something I like.

A common feature in your answers is this "like being there" and that's exactly the thing I don't like. For me, and please don't get offended, that's exactly what is gimmicky and silly about it. Being fooled into believing I'm there, again; for me, has nothing to do with art unless we're talking David Copperfield. And the better the illusion is, the more gimmicky for me it is.

That's why @sterling shoote 's post got me interested when he said it's not about surround. Since I try not to be closed-minded, I am always thinking about using multichannel just to "enhance" stereo so to speak. That's why I asked is it merely to do better 3D imaging.

Thank you @Jon AA and @sterling shoote (and I didn't want to correct you, English being my 2nd I was checking myself more than correcting you)


I don't know what that is. But my question was serious and I believe well founded since in these same forums very often we have recomms for adding an amp and very often it is 2ch for L/R. Although it may be clear at the surface, it is our very memebers who don't always hold onto this "AVR is just as good". It does get complicated. I remember once a newb came here asking the same question for millionth time so I offered the first few tips on how an honestly rated Marantz with 110 or 115Wpch/8ohms should drive her speakers with no trouble, but then came an older member and said, no, she should add a stereo power amp.

How, I asked? And it was because of Ohm dipps bellow 4. Then I said my speakers dipp bellow 4Ohms, should I look for more power? Are my speakers "power-hungry", but no was the answer. So, with all our numbers, tests and meassures, you obviously have dipps and dipps.

And really, I'm not stiring the pot. I'm looking for rules to help in simmilar situations. I'm not even a stereo-phile. I couldn't care less is it AVR or 2ch amp. At this time I have a 5.1 AVR that I'm using, but for stereo. But, unless I'm very much mistaking, there should be a simple law-based rule to explain why I don't need more than 75Wpch/8 and that lady did need more than 110, right?

If I can continue with car-analogies; rally cars and formula does outperform your cars even though they don't have Wireless, BT, active suspenssion control, automatic gear shifts, cosy seats, heaters and the rest.

That's what I wanted to hear about; an amp that is merely an amp, nothing more, no gadgets, but you couldn't burden it no matter what you do, at least for home audio. An amp that sees all your need as child's play and could easily outlive you as well.

As oppose to always hearing same ol' talk about honestly rated Marantz AVR that can do everything as good as any amp, but as soon as I recommend it for the first time, and for some ladies living rome, no less, it's a no go! And you have to resort to extra muscle from 2ch.

So, do you know any amps out there that have so much headroom in all divisions that reference level SPL in let's say medium rooms never even brake a sweat and without serious THD raise?

Without a discussion of the speakers being used, and at what levels at what distance, discussion of the amp needed is somewhat moot.

 

[killdozzer]

In my opinion those who limit themselves to two speakers are trying to get there with one arm tied behind their back, but they're still trying to get to the same place I am.

You may be right about that. Most 2ch purists indeed claim they're the ones on the right path and that multi ch. spoils the music and has no place in music listening.

 

[killdozzer]

Without a discussion of the speakers being used, and at what levels at what distance, discussion of the amp needed is somewhat moot.

I sort of did with "medium room, reference levels", but avoided mentioning speakers on purpose. I'm asking about an amp that is such an opposite to the bottle neck, that nothing you'd need in medium rooms would be difficult for it. For the medium room I'm taking AH standard - it was mentioned in articles a couple of times.

In other words; name the most difficult speaker you'd need to fill a medium room and then name an amp that nails it with no hum, buzz, clip or anything in between. For example, would it be this Bryston:

• 135W into 8 Ohms (180W into 4 Ohms)
• Over 30,000 MFD of filter capacitance per channel
• Three ultra-low-noise power transformers
• Separate ground paths for Digital and Analog
• Gold plated switch, contacts, and connectors
• Pre-out/main in connectors
• Convection cooled and housed in a fully aluminum chassis
• RS-232 serial data port for remote control via Crestron, AMX or similar control system

Do you think there's a speaker that would find this lacking in a medium room (1500-3000ft^3 )?

 

[lovinthehd]

I sort of did with "medium room, reference levels", but avoided mentioning speakers on purpose. I'm asking about an amp that is such an opposite to the bottle neck, that nothing you'd need in medium rooms would be difficult for it. For the medium room I'm taking AH standard - it was mentioned in articles a couple of times.

In other words; name the most difficult speaker you'd need to fill a medium room and then name an amp that nails it with no hum, buzz, clip or anything in between. For example, would it be this Bryston:

• 135W into 8 Ohms (180W into 4 Ohms)
• Over 30,000 MFD of filter capacitance per channel
• Three ultra-low-noise power transformers
• Separate ground paths for Digital and Analog
• Gold plated switch, contacts, and connectors
• Pre-out/main in connectors
• Convection cooled and housed in a fully aluminum chassis
• RS-232 serial data port for remote control via Crestron, AMX or similar control system

Do you think there's a speaker that would find this lacking in a medium room (1500-3000ft^3 )?

Why go about it in this manner, tho? What bottleneck?

 

[sterling shoote]

It's a nit, but I'm going to pick it- the title is 'Kind of Blue'.

That was originally recorded in mono and three channel "stereo", so what you heard was a remaster. Listen to it in mono, to get an idea of the original sound. Even multi-speaker mono is interesting.

https://www.analogplanet.com/content/miles-davis-kind-blue-monophonic-reissue-sonylegacy-analog-planet-exclusive

My multi-channel SACD was remixed on an all tube three-track machine, an old Presto much like the one use for the original recording according to jewel case notes about the recording. Also, the album is presented at correct pitch.

 

[lovinthehd]

My multi-channel SACD was remixed on an all tube three-track machine, an old Presto much like the one use for the original recording according to jewel case notes about the recording. Also, the album is presented at correct pitch.

Wonder what that new Atmos remix might sound like....

 

[highfigh]

I don't know what that is. But my question was serious and I believe well founded since in these same forums very often we have recomms for adding an amp and very often it is 2ch for L/R. Although it may be clear at the surface, it is our very memebers who don't always hold onto this "AVR is just as good". It does get complicated. I remember once a newb came here asking the same question for millionth time so I offered the first few tips on how an honestly rated Marantz with 110 or 115Wpch/8ohms should drive her speakers with no trouble, but then came an older member and said, no, she should add a stereo power amp.

How, I asked? And it was because of Ohm dipps bellow 4. Then I said my speakers dipp bellow 4Ohms, should I look for more power? Are my speakers "power-hungry", but no was the answer. So, with all our numbers, tests and meassures, you obviously have dipps and dipps.

And really, I'm not stiring the pot. I'm looking for rules to help in simmilar situations. I'm not even a stereo-phile. I couldn't care less is it AVR or 2ch amp. At this time I have a 5.1 AVR that I'm using, but for stereo. But, unless I'm very much mistaking, there should be a simple law-based rule to explain why I don't need more than 75Wpch/8 and that lady did need more than 110, right?

If I can continue with car-analogies; rally cars and formula does outperform your cars even though they don't have Wireless, BT, active suspenssion control, automatic gear shifts, cosy seats, heaters and the rest.

That's what I wanted to hear about; an amp that is merely an amp, nothing more, no gadgets, but you couldn't burden it no matter what you do, at least for home audio. An amp that sees all your need as child's play and could easily outlive you as well.

As oppose to always hearing same ol' talk about honestly rated Marantz AVR that can do everything as good as any amp, but as soon as I recommend it for the first time, and for some ladies living rome, no less, it's a no go! And you have to resort to extra muscle from 2ch.

So, do you know any amps out there that have so much headroom in all divisions that reference level SPL in let's say medium rooms never even brake a sweat and without serious THD raise?

The photo I posted was supposed to be a joke- it has all kinds of knobs, tubes, etc, so it MUST be good, right?

I have heard that Crown started out as a manufacturer of welding equipment- if you can weld with an amp, which is seeing a dead short at that point, it should be able to handle just about anything. It might not sound good, but....

I think the origin of stereo sound was an attempt to recreate the spread of sound from the musicians playing during a performance. One speaker certainly can't provide that, so two or three were used, each with their own separate main sounds and a bit of the adjacent channel to make the presentation more or less continuous from side to side. Surround, as in Quadraphonic, was a failure because they used swirling instruments, rather than trying to capture the illusion of the ambiance in a performance space. The problem is that it can only be an approximation because the room or space where the recording takes place will be different from the room where it will be heard. It'shard to make 73mS of delay mixed with the other delays that make up the reverberation in a large hall sound correct in a room that's 8' high, 12' wide and 19' long. The number of speakers needed for that would be incredible because of the many reflection points and paths in a larger room.

 

[Verdinut]

I have heard that Crown started out as a manufacturer of welding equipment- if you can weld with an amp, which is seeing a dead short at that point, it should be able to handle just about anything. It might not sound good, but....

You may not be old enough, but the BGW power amps which were built by Brian Gary Wachner in the 1970's were built like tanks. In the Hi-Fi circles, those amps were sometimes called arc welders. Universal Studios selected BGW to supply thousands of Model 750 and 750A amps for its Sensurround cinema subwoofer sound effects.
They were not as acoustically transparent as the best available then but you couldn't kill them.

 

[killdozzer]

Why go about it in this manner, tho? What bottleneck?

Well, in my mind it makes sense. Since I do think amps should be neutral and most good ones are, my next amp will be the one I'm taking to my grave, so obviouslly I'd like it to be strong enough to comfortably push any type of speakers, as I mentioned before, to reference levels in a medium room. To my scarce knowledge this doesn't look like big of a problem, since you don't really have the need to go for a speaker that dipps bellow 3 Ohms, right? Why should you have the need for such a speaker in today's world?

Because that way I'd be done with buying amps. Speakers are more difficult and I'm expecting improvement here so there may come a time when some new model hits me the way my KEF's did. And since I don't see features as improvement but sales pitches, I'd go for a bare-bone amp. (Personally, I think a lot of DSP software will be PC compatible in no time, so craming it in AVR's just to lead buyers through the entire chain of buying each little increment of "developing new technologies" is not something I'd be proud of if I ever went for it.)

When listening loud you may expect clipping, cone brake-up, nasty reflections, over heating, safety mode engaging etc. But imagine you try to remove the amp out of that equation; imagine finding an amp that simply pushes all of speakers to reference level in a medium room before it shows ANY of its weaknesses.

That's why I wanted to learn first what are the most difficult challenges for an audio amp.

 

[killdozzer]

The photo I posted was supposed to be a joke- it has all kinds of knobs, tubes, etc, so it MUST be good, right?

I have heard that Crown started out as a manufacturer of welding equipment- if you can weld with an amp, which is seeing a dead short at that point, it should be able to handle just about anything. It might not sound good, but....

I think the origin of stereo sound was an attempt to recreate the spread of sound from the musicians playing during a performance. One speaker certainly can't provide that, so two or three were used, each with their own separate main sounds and a bit of the adjacent channel to make the presentation more or less continuous from side to side. Surround, as in Quadraphonic, was a failure because they used swirling instruments, rather than trying to capture the illusion of the ambiance in a performance space. The problem is that it can only be an approximation because the room or space where the recording takes place will be different from the room where it will be heard. It'shard to make 73mS of delay mixed with the other delays that make up the reverberation in a large hall sound correct in a room that's 8' high, 12' wide and 19' long. The number of speakers needed for that would be incredible because of the many reflection points and paths in a larger room.

I didn't get the joke. Sorry.

You were half way there; Crown you've mentioned might find all loads presented by a speaker to be something to sneaze at, but you're missing the other half - it should remain perfectly neutral while doing the job.

 

[lovinthehd]

Well, in my mind it makes sense. Since I do think amps should be neutral and most good ones are, my next amp will be the one I'm taking to my grave, so obviouslly I'd like it to be strong enough to comfortably push any type of speakers, as I mentioned before, to reference levels in a medium room. To my scarce knowledge this doesn't look like big of a problem, since you don't really have the need to go for a speaker that dipps bellow 3 Ohms, right? Why should you have the need for such a speaker in today's world?

Because that way I'd be done with buying amps. Speakers are more difficult and I'm expecting improvement here so there may come a time when some new model hits me the way my KEF's did. And since I don't see features as improvement but sales pitches, I'd go for a bare-bone amp. (Personally, I think a lot of DSP software will be PC compatible in no time, so craming it in AVR's just to lead buyers through the entire chain of buying each little increment of "developing new technologies" is not something I'd be proud of if I ever went for it.)

When listening loud you may expect clipping, cone brake-up, nasty reflections, over heating, safety mode engaging etc. But imagine you try to remove the amp out of that equation; imagine finding an amp that simply pushes all of speakers to reference level in a medium room before it shows ANY of its weaknesses.

That's why I wanted to learn first what are the most difficult challenges for an audio amp.

That's one approach altho I'd worry more about getting the speakers I want first these days as long as I had something to drive them with (don't you already?). I have a couple 2ch preamps and power amps on hand so don't need to shop for that myself....barely even use it.

 

[killdozzer]

Entirely dependent upon the recording.

So, I take it you don't think multi channel is really needed for POP or EDM. I'm not much in these genres, but I'm asking out of curiosity. Take this song for example:

This would be an exception, and I actually like it because of the lady's singing and all the drama created with such a simple tune. It is intensly dramatic, sinister and ominous but with just a few sounds. But, from what I read in your comments, something this simple wouldn't really profit from multichannel equipment, right? Or have I missed your point entirely?

 

[killdozzer]

That's one approach altho I'd worry more about getting the speakers I want first these days as long as I had something to drive them with (don't you already?). I have a couple 2ch preamps and power amps on hand so don't need to shop for that myself....barely even use it.

Yes, yes, all fine and it makes sense. I think by now I really understand the logic behind how most of people here choose to go about acquiring new equipment. But I was thinking about dealing with the amp in a long run, you know, like having enough clean power to surpass the speakers needs (in my listening environment)by a long run, so that you can simply stop buying or changing amps.

Since most of us don't have any expectations from amp's sound other than being clean, stable, as low in all distortions as possible and neutral, it would make sense (to me) to find an amp that has enough power for your listening room and just forget about it. Very similar to power grid itself, you put your limit high in order to make it ready for all appliances, once you set it, you don't change it, at least that's how it operates in my country.

I do have an amp, but it is hardly it. This one is to keep me while I get the chance to buy the last one.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I have heard that Crown started out as a manufacturer of welding equipment- if you can weld with an amp, which is seeing a dead short at that point, it should be able to handle just about anything. It might not sound good, but....

This isn't even vaguely true. Crown was founded in 1947 as International Radio and Electronics Corporation to build tape recorders. The founder, Clarence Moore, was an Indiana minister whose first target market was rugged portable tape recorders for missionaries. As part of the portability value proposition Crown got into integrated solid state amplifiers that fit into the tape recorder chassis. Later on amplifiers became a separate product line. By the mid 1970s Crown exited the tape recorder business and focused solely on amplifiers. No welders. Interestingly, the current Crown history on the Harman website is incorrect, implying that Crown moved away from tape recorders in the 1960s, and that the Crown brand name wasn't chosen until the 1970s. Very odd indeed, since even the simplest internet search shows Crown branded tape recorders from 1968 using the Crown brand, a year I just randomly picked.

https://www.radiomuseum.org/r/crowninter_2_track_stereo_tape_recorder_cx822.html

I used to own a Crown CX822, so I can vouch for the authenticity of the ad.

Harman's Crown story on their web site:

https://www.crownaudio.com/en/ourstory

 

[sterling shoote]

So, I take it you don't think multi channel is really needed for POP or EDM. I'm not much in these genres, but I'm asking out of curiosity. Take this song for example:

This would be an exception, and I actually like it because of the lady's singing and all the drama created with such a simple tune. It is intensly dramatic, sinister and ominous but with just a few sounds. But, from what I read in your comments, something this simple wouldn't really profit from multichannel equipment, right? Or have I missed your point entirely?

I love dance music, stuff I can shuffle dance to; but, I have not seen or heard any of it in multi-channel. Have you?

 

[highfigh]

I didn't get the joke. Sorry.

You were half way there; Crown you've mentioned might find all loads presented by a speaker to be something to sneaze at, but you're missing the other half - it should remain perfectly neutral while doing the job.

I didn't miss that but it's difficult to be neutral with a reactive load.

Nothing is perfect.

 

[highfigh]

You may not be old enough, but the BGW power amps which were built by Brian Gary Wachner in the 1970's were built like tanks. In the Hi-Fi circles, those amps were sometimes called arc welders. Universal Studios selected BGW to supply thousands of Model 750 and 750A amps for its Sensurround cinema subwoofer sound effects.
They were not as acoustically transparent as the best available then but you couldn't kill them.

Oh, I'm old enough. Now, get off my lawn!

I had a girlfriend who worked at a theater and they had Sensurround for Earthquake and Rollercoaster- since I had more access to the place than the general audience (we would hang out after the place closed), I got to see the equipment- I don't remember seeing BGW amps, though. I had already gotten interested in audio and was aware of many commercial/pro brands. Long time ago- some details have been replaced by others.

 

[killdozzer]

I love dance music, stuff I can shuffle dance to; but, I have not seen or heard any of it in multi-channel. Have you?

No. I was trying to come to a conclusion from what you and Jon AA said about what you like in multi channel (lovintheHD had a slightly different answer). I'm not sayin it is so, just asking for your perspective. (I mean, we've already hijacked the hell out of the "Ultimate battle" thread )

 

[killdozzer]

I didn't miss that but it's difficult to be neutral with a reactive load.

Nothing is perfect.

Still. As neutral as possible. Say you have a 250 sq. feet room and you want stereo (for some bizzare reason), I'm sure it would be possible to find an amp that can push any type of decently built speaker to 103db peak and still have a negligible distortion.

 

[ryanosaur]

I love dance music, stuff I can shuffle dance to; but, I have not seen or heard any of it in multi-channel. Have you?

The stuff I’m familiar with is in the ambient/IDM category... dunno about other stuff out there. As manufactured music, this presumably created for the DTS 5.1 protocol, it is fun to listen to as you really are in a bubble of sound. Unlike my limited SACD collection where they remixed and created the environment as an effect.
Yes, Dark Side and Wish Wish You Were Here do it well enough, and I have little complaint in that regard, but there’s an uneven quality to them too.