All channels driven ratings

P

PENG

Audioholic Overlord
Power consumption specs are a good indicator, however note that UL/CS/CE have changed how they spec it over the last 10 years so comparing older vintage products may vary... In later year teh engineers would decide to the amount peak power vs continuous power.. To have a higher peak power they would use high voltage transformer windings and smaller caps.. Like wise for continuous power they would use bigger caps and lower transformer windings...

Just my $0.02... ;)
It is sort of a balancing act.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Overlord
How is it calculated then? What voltage and current used, RMS or peak? Since sine wave is used, we know what the RMs values are for E and I.
RMS is derived from peak of a sine wave, no?
For sine wave, sure, Vrms = Vpk/sqrt2 or approx 0.707xVpk

For any periodic wave, Vrms = the square root of the average of the square of the voltage values at each time interval within the cycle.

RMS voltage x RMS current x power factor = Average power

There is no such thing as RMS power in watts in EE, as it would be meaningless in practical term, but over time, it has been miss used so often that it has long become an accepted term in the audio world. In EE, V rms X I rms is still correctly referred to as average power. I am sure you know all these already..
 
GrimSurfer

GrimSurfer

Senior Audioholic
I sense a lot of defensiveness here. FWIW, I have a late 80s high current amp. Today's *high current* amps would crush it, not only in specs but in SQ. To say otherwise would be stupid.

Now turning to AVRs...
 
<eargiant

<eargiant

Senior Audioholic
It is sort of a balancing act.
Everything is a balancing act. I'd go one step further and say that the "balance" is greatly tipped depending on the intended use of the product. I think it's safe to say that the typical quality integrated that is designed to address the "continuous" needs of complex music will have the construction type M Code eluded to that is able to provide more joules vs. the other construction type found in a comparable AVR that is primarily designed to address the "peaks" found in movies.
 
Last edited:
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Audioholic Slumlord
...

There is no such thing as RMS power in watts in EE, as it would be meaningless in practical term, but over time, it has been miss used so often that it has long become an accepted term in the audio world. In EE, V rms X I rms is still correctly referred to as average power. I am sure you know all these already..
Yes, thanks for the confirmation for the nth time;)
I just wanted to know from grim surfer how he gets WRMS power as that is what he insists is real.;)
 
GrimSurfer

GrimSurfer

Senior Audioholic
Everything is a balancing act. I'd go one step further and say that the "balance" is greatly tipped depending on the intended use of the product. I think it's safe to say that the typical quality integrated that is designed to address the "continuous" needs of complex music will have the construction type M Code eluded to that is able to provide more joules vs. the other construction type found in a comparable AVR that is primarily designed to address the "peaks" found in movies.
Agree <eargiant. People seem to have a hard time understanding that extra channels, video boards, equalization, on board DACs cost money, which requires compromises to be made elsewhere.

Yes, thanks for the confirmation for the nth time;)
I just wanted to know from grim surfer how he gets WRMS power as that is what he insists is real.;)
Nah... Use whatever nonsense manufacturers feed consumers to get them to buy the cheap crap they sell.

Cause reality isn't what ppl want.
 
Last edited:
Trell

Trell

Senior Audioholic
Agree <eargiant. People seem to have a hard time understanding that extra channels, video boards, equalization, on board DACs cost money, which requires compromises to be made elsewhere.



Nah... Use whatever nonsense manufacturers feed consumers to get them to buy the cheap crap they sell.

Cause reality isn't what ppl want.
Indeed. One trend for some time is to put more and more output stages in the AVR while still keeping the same physical size of the chassis, and that certainly makes cooling an even bigger issue even if their selection of components are more efficient (for AB amplifiers). I do not know anyone that has even a 5.1, much less full Atmos, but what some of them have is pretty good 2 channel setups, though.

I'm still using a 2015 model Denon AVR-X4200W 7.2 receiver (measured nice on two channels continuous into 4 Ohm) that works very well for me in my 5.2 setup of 4 Ohm speakers, and it is placed in my small living room so more speakers are not really an option.

My receiver supports the current audio/video technology but at some stage I'll probably will have to upgrade (features and/or failing receiver) and then the option is to buy something that will make even my toaster shed bitter tears of envy?
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Overlord
Agree <eargiant. People seem to have a hard time understanding that extra channels, video boards, equalization, on board DACs cost money, which requires compromises to be made elsewhere.
I think most people understand that very well.
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Overlord
Trell said:
I'm still using a 2015 model Denon AVR-X4200W 7.2 receiver (measured nice on two channels continuous into 4 Ohm) that works very well for me in my 5.2 setup of 4 Ohm speakers, and it is placed in my small living room so more speakers are not really an option.

My receiver supports the current audio/video technology but at some stage I'll probably will have to upgrade (features and/or failing receiver) and then the option is to buy something that will make even my toaster shed bitter tears of envy?
Huh!!!!! You think your AVR is old!!!!! Take a look at my signature.
:p My next AVR upgrade will be to replace the RX-V1500 with an RX-A20XX model . I dont need atmos but would like to be able to feed HDMI through the AVR to the TV without turning on the AVR and support 4K
 
D

demoncamber

Audioholic Intern
Until one tries to drive a difficult set of speaker. Then the method that is used takes on a great deal of meaning.
So my Denon X2400h is rated at:
Number of power amps 7
Power output
175 watts per channel (6 ohms, 1 kHz, THD 10%, 1ch driven)
125 watts per channel (6 ohms, 1 kHz, THD 0.7%, 2ch driven)
95 watts per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, THD 0.08%, 2ch driven)
Power Consumption in 500w
Power Consumption No-Sound (ECO Off) 75 W

It's an A/B class, so what am I getting all 7 channels driven at 8ohms? Like 35w?

Is there any way to guess the amp efficiency going by the max power consumption and power consumption with no sound @ idle numbers? And would adding a fan to the heatsink (doesn't run really that hot at all) increase my amps efficiency?

Full specs:
 
Last edited:
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Slumlord
So my Denon X2400h is rated at:
Number of power amps 7
Power output
175 watts per channel (6 ohms, 1 kHz, THD 10%, 1ch driven)
125 watts per channel (6 ohms, 1 kHz, THD 0.7%, 2ch driven)
95 watts per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, THD 0.08%, 2ch driven)
Power Consumption in 500w
Power Consumption No-Sound (ECO Off) 75 W

It's an A/B class, so what am I getting all 7 channels driven at 8ohms? Like 35w?

Is there any way to guess the amp efficiency going by the max power consumption and power consumption with no sound @ idle numbers? And would adding a fan to the heatsink (doesn't run really that hot at all) increase my amps efficiency?

Full specs:
I don't find a bench test for your model, but you might consider the 1200 model's to get an idea https://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-x1200w-av-receiver-review-test-bench

It says power consumption, not max power consumption, not sure what basis that spec is....adding active cooling (easier than messing with heatsinks) might extend life but doubtful any meaningful efficiency change.
 
Verdinut

Verdinut

Audioholic Samurai
So my Denon X2400h is rated at:
Number of power amps 7
Power output
175 watts per channel (6 ohms, 1 kHz, THD 10%, 1ch driven)
125 watts per channel (6 ohms, 1 kHz, THD 0.7%, 2ch driven)
95 watts per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, THD 0.08%, 2ch driven)
Power Consumption in 500w
Power Consumption No-Sound (ECO Off) 75 W

It's an A/B class, so what am I getting all 7 channels driven at 8ohms? Like 35w?

Is there any way to guess the amp efficiency going by the max power consumption and power consumption with no sound @ idle numbers? And would adding a fan to the heatsink (doesn't run really that hot at all) increase my amps efficiency?

Full specs:
Looking at the S & V review of the Model 1200, extrapolating the figures for your 1400 which is approximately 20% more powerful, the ACD figures would be about 55 Watts for a 0.1% THD which is not so bad.
Keep in mind that the power required to drive surround speakers is far less than that required to drive any of the front speakers. Unless you are driving speakers having rather low sensitivity, that shouldn't be of any concern. Note that 55 watts is less than 3 dB inferior to the 95 watts with only 2 channels driven.
 
D

demoncamber

Audioholic Intern
Looking at the S & V review of the Model 1200, extrapolating the figures for your 1400 which is approximately 20% more powerful, the ACD figures would be about 55 Watts for a 0.1% THD which is not so bad.
Keep in mind that the power required to drive surround speakers is far less than that required to drive any of the front speakers. Unless you are driving speakers having rather low sensitivity, that shouldn't be of any concern. Note that 55 watts is less than 3 dB inferior to the 95 watts with only 2 channels driven.
I have the 2400 not the 1400, but that's cool to know. I want to eventually go separate amps once I find a decent deal. I will have to nix the x2400 though and get something with preamp outputs.

But here is my setup, Paradigm Monitor 9 v5 & CC-290 v5 (96dB & 94dB), Klipsch R-15m (94 dB), B&W DM602 S3 (90dB ) surrounds. All are somewhat decent sensitivity:
edited-49.jpg
2019-12-21 15.17.42.jpg
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Slumlord
I have the 2400 not the 1400, but that's cool to know. I want to eventually go separate amps once I find a decent deal. I will have to nix the x2400 though and get something with preamp outputs.

But here is my setup, Paradigm Monitor 9 v5 & CC-290 v5 (96dB), Klipsch R-15m (94 dB), B&W DM602 S3 (90dB ) surrounds. All are somewhat decent sensitivity:
View attachment 33703View attachment 33704
What do the Klipsch do?
 
E

EBN

Audioholic Intern
So my Denon X2400h is rated at:
Number of power amps 7
Power output
175 watts per channel (6 ohms, 1 kHz, THD 10%, 1ch driven)
125 watts per channel (6 ohms, 1 kHz, THD 0.7%, 2ch driven)
95 watts per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, THD 0.08%, 2ch driven)
Power Consumption in 500w
Power Consumption No-Sound (ECO Off) 75 W

It's an A/B class, so what am I getting all 7 channels driven at 8ohms? Like 35w?

Is there any way to guess the amp efficiency going by the max power consumption and power consumption with no sound @ idle numbers? And would adding a fan to the heatsink (doesn't run really that hot at all) increase my amps efficiency?

Full specs:
1kHz power sweep vs. distortion most likely and i assume the person who runs these measurements get the receivers from dealer and is afraid to run the 4ohm tests in 8ohm default impedance switch mode which would show more power as the 4ohm setting is known to shrink it.

X2400H

Denon announces 2 x 95 W at 8 Ω, in fact we get more - 2 x 121 W; in five-channel mode, of course, the power drops, but 5 x 65 W and 7 x 44 W are good for the power supply.

The AVR-X2400H gets very hot, which had to be taken into account when calibrating the system to work at 4 Ω. After simultaneous switching of the impedance selector in such modes and connecting a load of 4 Ω, the power is clearly lower, 2 x 75 W or 5 x 58 W, and during the 7-channel measurement the protection systems worked.

The noise level is typical for an AV receiver (-80 dB), the dynamics reached round 100 dB. The frequency response (Fig. 1) looks very good, in the woofer range it is perfectly linear, and at 100 kHz the drop does not exceed -1.7 dB for 8 Ω and -2.3 dB for 4 Ω.

None of the harmonics (Fig. 2) passes the -90 dB limit. The diagram in Fig. 3 confirms good condition, to achieve THD + N distortion below 0.1%, an output power above 3 W for 8 Ω and 6 W for 4 Ω is needed.



https://audio.com.pl/testy/kino-domowe/amplitunery-av/2822-denon-avr-x2400h
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Overlord
1kHz power sweep vs. distortion most likely and i assume the person who runs these measurements get the receivers from dealer and is afraid to run the 4ohm tests in 8ohm default impedance switch mode which would show more power as the 4ohm setting is known to shrink it.
My guess is that the dealer, or the tester himself/herself don't want to take of risk of damaging the unit. I don't blame them, because I wouldn't want to torture test my own gear so I would not do it to other people's.

I don't trust that site though, the way they showed the results do not inspire confidence. For more reliable results, I would stick with Audioholics.com and Audiosciencereview.com.
 

newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top