5.2 AVR

[KenM10759]

IMO, most Denon and Marantz AVRs can outperform your NAD percentagewise with all channels driven.

Perhaps, but if so why don't they publish it while NAD is honest about it? (It's actually tested to be 66.3 watts @ 0.1% THD and 7 channels driven, and 77.8 watts @ 1% THD.)

I've never run my 5.1.2 system off it at more than -20db, and believe me I can't do that for very long before I bow out and turn it down.

 

[ryanosaur]

Perhaps, but if so why don't they publish it

The unfortunate advertising monsters that have a way to dodge it... Silly, Stupid, Pointless, Dumb, Lame... As has been lamented before, Big numbers sell... and when you have a product that most seem unwilling to learn about, well, Wool+Eyes=Pulled *shrugs

 

[Verdinut]

Perhaps, but if so why don't they publish it while NAD is honest about it? (It's actually tested to be 66.3 watts @ 0.1% THD and 7 channels driven, and 77.8 watts @ 1% THD.)

I've never run my 5.1.2 system off it at more than -20db, and believe me I can't do that for very long before I bow out and turn it down.

They don't openly publish it because program material for music or movies does not require surround speakers to output as much SPL as the front channel speakers.

If surround amplifiers can produce 3 or 4dB less power than that of the front channels, it can be considered as amply acceptable for all practical purposes.

 

[lovinthehd]

May as well ask why watts are the cornerstone of many audio amp/speaker advertising specs when it really isn't all that meaningful. Advertising is mostly about the lowest common denominator, eh?

 

[Old Onkyo]

Setting up to buy a new receiver or amp. I would like to have a frame of reference for what I currently have. Like everyone I would like to get The cleanest, quietest, powerful sound for my $$$ Budget $700-1000 USD.