Denon 4810 with Emotiva

[Affejunge]

You're just buying into marketing hype. Your very efficient, 8-Ohm speakers will play at 92dB with a single watt. That'd be like a jackhammer in your living room. You will NEVER play your system that loud. If you do, you'll suffer permanent hearing loss after a couple of movies. Very rarely does any home system use an entire watt of power driving speakers to normal listening levels.

Further, the XPA-3 pushes 200-watts into 8 Ohms (which again: is IMPOSSIBLE to actually realize). Assuming this were actually possible to use, 200-watts into those speakers represents a volume level 2dB louder than the 130-watt Pioneer. Sound has to be 3dB louder before you can actually tell that it got louder.

Save your money!

Let me guess you are one of those people who say separates are a waste. I suppose vinyl is also ridiculous as Nyquist's theorem clearly states that a sample rate double the frequency can recover the entire signal....

I AM NOT trying to flame and honestly I am not diss'ing you, edmcanuck, but I do know, for my very modest system, separates made a HUGE improvement, even though the external amp had a lower power rating. Do not dismiss something just on wpc and "you will never play it that loud"
If separates sound the same to you as integrated, cool. But for me, and I think for some others, there is a big difference. Not that either of us is "right", but if you can hear it (in your head or not) then it is important. If not, cool for you, seriously, you can save some serious bucks! I am jealous (seriously!) !

(btw, sorry about the analog comment, you may be an analog lover for all I know. I again, I am NOT attacking you nor trying to start a flame war, just the general idea that "watts are watts" drives me nuts.)

 

[JJMP50]

Verdict coming soon

According the the FEDEX tracker my UPA5 will be here today. I guess I'll find out then (actually in a couple of days) if I notice any difference. I'll try not to let my desire influence my opinion and post the results. I have to say this thread has deluted my anticipation on receiving new audio gear which is half the fun.

 

[TheFactor]

According the the FEDEX tracker my UPA5 will be here today. I guess I'll find out then (actually in a couple of days) if I notice any difference. I'll try not to let my desire influence my opinion and post the results. I have to say this thread has deluted my anticipation on receiving new audio gear which is half the fun.

I am anxiously awaiting your op , look at it this way its not going to hurt your performance and if anything add some deph and headroom also they look sweet!!!

 

[Affejunge]

According the the FEDEX tracker my UPA5 will be here today. I guess I'll find out then (actually in a couple of days) if I notice any difference. I'll try not to let my desire influence my opinion and post the results. I have to say this thread has deluted my anticipation on receiving new audio gear which is half the fun.

Not to influence your opinion...but.. the biggest difference I noticed with separates is that the bass will be MUCH tighter and there will be less "smearing". Music will just sound more real and you will find yourself cranking it louder with no ear fatigue... so, look forward to it!

What you stumbled onto with this thread was the old war between separates and integrated. As I said before, all that matters is what you think. Do you think you sounds better? If you do, then you are right and it's the way to go. If you don't, then you are right, and you saved yourself some money by sending it back, money that could be used on speakers.

 

[j_garcia]

Here's the way I see it: 130w from a receiver, where all of the real estate and electronics inside are NOT dedicated to producing power is NOT equal to that of the typical external amp. The XPA-3 weighs more than TWICE the typical receiver and as mentioned in their literature, it puts out a MINIMUM of the rated power. As noted by Joshua, it is during the peaks when that extra power will be appreciated, but not necessarily noticed. It is hard to notice that there is improvement when it sounds correct unless it was really bad before, meaning the system was underpowered. I don't think that is the case here, but that doesn't mean the amp won't be a benefit. A buddy has 60s powered by a 140w Marantz in a large room and it does quite well actually, so I wouldn't say they are the most demanding, but they aren't something I would want to drive with a 100W Sony receiver.

Note also that 92dB sensitivity is measured at 1m. Nobody sits at 1m in a home theater, so the actual needed power to achieve the same SPL at the listening position is higher, though still likely in the 10-15w range. During a large peak, that could easily mean 100W of real demand from more than one speaker. Though it may be brief, that exceeds the actual power the receiver can deliver unclipped and that is where you will notice the difference between the receiver's amp section and a big external amp like the XPA-3. If you are listening at levels above "average", then those power requirements are even higher obviously.

Testing has shown that most people can actually detect differences of about 1dB, however what most are referring to is the fact that what is actually perceived as "louder" is at least +3dB. In other words, +3dB is easily noticeable, but that does not mean that +2dB isn't going to be audible.

Theoretically nobody needs a car that can go faster than the maximum speed limit. Aside from the fact that people wouldn't buy a car that did this, why is it that they make cars that are capable of high top speeds and quick 0-60 times and plenty of horsepower and torque?

 

[TheFactor]

Im thinking of instead of a xpa-3 maybe I should go with a xpa-1 with 500watts on tap going to my cc-690 center since 70% or so is threw the center in moves maybe i'll notice a sizable difference. What you guys think xpa-3 vs XPA-1 ?

 

[Josuah]

More power == more better (all other things being equal).

That being said, from just the specs it seems as though the XPA-3 would have slightly better signal-to-noise when at typical output levels. And I'm assuming they meant to use the > symbol instead of the < symbol. The higher input impedance on the XPA-3 versus the XPA-1 may also be nice in some situations.

This isn't atypical. Lower power amps sometimes have better low-output characteristics than higher power amps of the same design.

 

[PENG]

I again, I am NOT attacking you nor trying to start a flame war, just the general idea that "watts are watts" drives me nuts.)

Good to know that people are not attacking each other based on different opinions and beliefs. Back to facts, watts are watts so no need to be driven nuts. I mean as long as you are comparing watts at defined conditions such as distortions, impedance, phase angles and frequency range/response.

I have taken real measurements and I am pretty sure that for 2 channel listening in many popular sized living rooms, speakers such as the Paradigm Studio 60 in fact do not need any more than a few watts to get you 80 to 85 dB SPL from 2 to 3 meters away and peak to probably 30 to 50W depending on the kind of music you play. Watts you don't use are watts you don't need but always good to have on hand.

Just a cautionary note (your probably know it), weight is not always a good indicator though it often is. I used to have a 92 Sonata that weighed a little more than an 88 Volvo 740 station wagon yet everyone know that Volvo gave people the feeling that it was built like a tank and the Sonata felt flimsy and squeaky.

 

[Affejunge]

Im thinking of instead of a xpa-3 maybe I should go with a xpa-1 with 500watts on tap going to my cc-690 center since 70% or so is threw the center in moves maybe i'll notice a sizable difference. What you guys think xpa-3 vs XPA-1 ?

I have heard this argument before and there may be some merit to it, but remember, the is very little low frequency going to your center channel. Low frequencies are what eats up all your power...too many beers to remember the equation off the top of my head, but the lower the frequency the exponential the power requirement.

Human speech is 1-3khz, way above the power-hungry 100hz and below.

 

[TheFactor]

So if I understand correctly all around the better of the two evils as far as if I would benefit at all the xpa-3 might be better for my application then the xpa-1 ?

 

[edmcanuck]

...wont it give me the same effect of running separates, better clarity ext. or is that not necessarily true either

Why would separates give you "better clarity?" That implies that the receiver is muffling things, and that's nonsense. All an amplifier does is take a small electrical signal and turns it into a larger electrical current. If it adds, subtracts, changes, alters, influences, or does anything to the sound, then it's broken. The many pundits that insist that separates "improve" sound somehow never seem to explain why it's okay to alter the sound in any fashion. The "sound" of your system is going to be determined at the pre-processing stage which is handled by the Denon in both of your scenarios.

It's also important to note that you're not talking about upgrading a 50-year-old piece of equipment your found in somebody's garbage. The Denon 4810 is one of the highest quality AV receivers ever built. Its amp section is constructed with better and more substantial components than many separates. The mythical belief that separates must be superior to all AV receivers everywhere in every way for no better reason than "they're separates" is a pretty small and limited worldview. I really don't believe that you're going to improve on the performance of your system in any way over the 4810. You can spend all the money you like enhancing components that don't require enhancing, but the only difference will be the one that your brain insists must be there because you spent a lot of money.

Also, just because you have 92dB/1W efficiency speakers doesn't mean you can't use more power. My speakers are conservatively 89dB/1W efficiency and playing movies at reference level requires me to hit peaks that are about 300W (which is a lower wattage RMS).

You run a line-current monitor between your equipment and your speakers do you? If you were actually pushing 300 watts out to each of your speakers (for any length of time), they'd be powered to produce 121dB each at 1 meter, which would be 124dB in your room. That's past instant hearing damage and into the range of causing physical pain. Unless your speakers are providing audio to a gymnasium, you don't feed them that kind of power; nobody does.

Yes, my power RMS is probably around 1-2W during the majority of a movie, but the headroom is necessary. Sometimes the movie will have 100dB for a second, although this is rare. But that is long enough for the clean power to matter to your ears.

And on the OP's system, 100dB at 1m will require a little under 4 watts. 8 watts at 12 feet. You're asserting that a Denon 4810 cannot produce 8 watts per channel for "a second?"

You also seem to think that the RMS rating for an amp or a receiver represents its maximum peak output which is not true. Depending on the size of the capacitors, peak output power is usually three or four times the RMS rating.

To the OP, if you want to beef up your system, go for it - it's fun and the lights are often very pretty. But don't do it because you think there will be any measurable differences in your system's performance. You've got a pretty great setup as is. Give it a chance to please you. If you really want to pool money together and improve the sound of things, consider visiting some higher-end speaker manufacturers. The speakers are what determine the largest perceptible quality of your system.

 

[AVRat]

TheFactor, go ahead buy the the XPA-3. You know you want it, you can't help yourself. It's only $624. The 3 over the 1 will provide equal amplification across the front.

 

[j_garcia]

It's also important to note that you're not talking about upgrading a 50-year-old piece of equipment your found in somebody's garbage. The Denon 4810 is one of the highest quality AV receivers ever built. Its amp section is constructed with better and more substantial components than many separates. The mythical belief that separates must be superior to all AV receivers everywhere in every way for no better reason than "they're separates" is a pretty small and limited worldview. I really don't believe that you're going to improve on the performance of your system in any way over the 4810. You can spend all the money you like enhancing components that don't require enhancing, but the only difference will be the one that your brain insists must be there because you spent a lot of money.

Then why does Denon now make separates? Because they know some sucker will buy them at a premium over a receiver that can do the same thing? Yes it is a great receiver but one of the best ever made? Come on It is a receiver and it isn't even their top of the line.

Your opinion is noted and appreciated, but ultimately it isn't your money or your decision.

 

[TheFactor]

TheFactor, go ahead buy the the XPA-3. You know you want it, you can't help yourself. It's only $624. The 3 over the 1 will provide equal amplification across the front.

LOL You know me pretty well and i've been fighting the impulse buy lol I almost bought it friday night for 599 shipped had it in my cart and everything until you guys educated me but im grateful you did because now im not expecting much out of if I do get one so maybe just maybe i'll like it lol . Im actually going to price some rotel amps just for kicks or maybe another Ultra pb 13 or the new pb12.5 plus might be a good match even that New Epic Empire has peaked my intersest but I really like SVS and my pb13 . Was checking out the elementa Model : A7 - 350 Subwoofer but its a beast weighing 250 pounds I dont know though when the smoke clears The XPA-3 MIGHT BE THE WINNER

 

[PENG]

Then why does Denon now make separates? Because they know some sucker will buy them at a premium over a receiver that can do the same thing?

I would say that is likely partially the true but no one at Denon would admit it.

Yes it is a great receiver but one of the best ever made? Come on It is a receiver and it isn't even their top of the line.

Agree, the 5805 or even the lesser 5308 MAY be ONE of the best ever made but definitely not the 4810.

Your opinion is noted and appreciated, but ultimately it isn't your money or your decision.

Agree, but then you are stating the obvious, and that applies to you as well as anyone else.

 

[PENG]

So if I understand correctly all around the better of the two evils as far as if I would benefit at all the xpa-3 might be better for my application then the xpa-1 ?

Yes, the xpa3 makes more sense than the 1 in your case. I don't know about the V4 but I had A/B the V3 Studio 100 once in a roughly 15X18 room using a RX-V2400 and Anthem separates. I was with others with critical and young ears and all agreed there was no discernible/audible difference listening to some jazz and classical music CDs in Stereo.

People often claims how inefficient and difficult to drive their speakers are and how they hear day and night kind of difference with the muscle amps. This is not unlike those who claim day and night or huge difference between DTS and DTS-HD and DTSHD-MA. It is almost like if I have difficult to drive speakers I have the bragging right. I am not saying those claims are not valid, many of them are, but you really have to know the characteristics of your speakers and room acoustics before you jump to the conclusion that you should hear improved SQ with more powerful amplifiers. People also exaggerate the head room thing to the nth degree. I know so because I have taken measurements myself in addition to reading about others. The odd articles do tell you how high peaks can do but they typically cite some extreme and rare cases that you won't find in most people's CD library. Even in those rare case, you will notice the difference in those peaky moments only.

The bottom line is, you can't go wrong with the added power offered by a 300X2amplifier, as you may hear better SQ if your speakers, room, your listening habits require more power. If your room is not big enough, the speakers are not really hard to drive (I believe the 60's are not) and you don't listen at harmful SPL leve,l then any SQ gain may not be audible to you but then placebo will likely kick in anyway to still make you feel good. You could do much worse if you opt for mid range to high end amp. For the price of the EMO, go for it! After all, it is not a bad thing to have power on hand that you may never use.

 

[TheFactor]

Yes, the xpa3 makes more sense than the 1 in your case. I don't know about the V4 but I had A/B the V3 Studio 100 once in a roughly 15X18 room using a RX-V2400 and Anthem separates. I was with others with critical and young ears and all agreed there was no discernible/audible difference listening to some jazz and classical music CDs in Stereo.

People often claims how inefficient and difficult to drive their speakers are and how they hear day and night kind of difference with the muscle amps. This is not unlike those who claim day and night or huge difference between DTS and DTS-HD and DTSHD-MA. It is almost like if I have difficult to drive speakers I have the bragging right. I am not saying those claims are not valid, many of them are, but you really have to know the characteristics of your speakers and room acoustics before you jump to the conclusion that you should hear improved SQ with more powerful amplifiers. People also exaggerate the head room thing to the nth degree. I know so because I have taken measurements myself in addition to reading about others. The odd articles do tell you how high peaks can do but they typically cite some extreme and rare cases that you won't find in most people's CD library. Even in those rare case, you will notice the difference in those peaky moments only.

The bottom line is, you can't go wrong with the added power offered by a 300X2amplifier, as you may hear better SQ if your speakers, room, your listening habits require more power. If your room is not big enough, the speakers are not really hard to drive (I believe the 60's are not) and you don't listen at harmful SPL leve,l then any SQ gain may not be audible to you but then placebo will likely kick in anyway to still make you feel good. You could do much worse if you opt for mid range to high end amp. For the price of the EMO, go for it! After all, it is not a bad thing to have power on hand that you may never use.

Thanks Peng I appreciate you taking the time to break it down for me and I also know your giving me the thumbs up only because I want it lol I've got a few things on the back burner now instead like maybe another sub but The emo is a much more affordable impulse buy with pretty blue lights

 

[Josuah]

Human speech is 1-3khz, way above the power-hungry 100hz and below.

Bass voices start around 55-60Hz, IIRC. And soprano stops around 260-300Hz, IIRC.

If you were actually pushing 300 watts out to each of your speakers (for any length of time), they'd be powered to produce 121dB each at 1 meter, which would be 124dB in your room. That's past instant hearing damage and into the range of causing physical pain. Unless your speakers are providing audio to a gymnasium, you don't feed them that kind of power; nobody does.

You also seem to think that the RMS rating for an amp or a receiver represents its maximum peak output which is not true. Depending on the size of the capacitors, peak output power is usually three or four times the RMS rating.

Peak power output for amps is usually for exceedingly short time periods. Much shorter than 1 second. And also usually heavy with distortion. Which is why I was referring to the RMS power rating in my example. I do not want to be entering my amp's peak power output range.

300W to 89dB efficient speakers gives about 115dB @ 1m. I sit about 10 feet away from my speakers, which drops it to about 104dB. Which matches reference level peaks in movie theaters where dialog is ~85dB and max is ~105dB. (LFE is expected to go +10dB over that, hitting 115dB peak at your seat if your speakers will hit 105dB peak at your seat.)

My Emotiva MPS-1 home theater amp is advertised at 300W RMS for 4 ohm speakers (which is what my speakers are). However it's distortion as measured by Audioholics begins to rise around 270W RMS, IIRC. If I want to maintain ~250W for 1 second, I prefer basing my decision on the RMS measurements. And I also need to keep in mind that these measurements were done with sine waves whereas music or movies is going to have much more energy for the same peak voltage in a given time frame than the sine wave.

 

[PENG]

Thanks Peng I appreciate you taking the time to break it down for me and I also know your giving me the thumbs up only because I want it lol I've got a few things on the back burner now instead like maybe another sub but The emo is a much more affordable impulse buy with pretty blue lights

Not really Mr. Factor, I actually do believe it is good to have more than enough power on hand but I don't believe you need to spend a fortune on high end amps. My lengthy response was meant to prepare you for the unpredicable outcome, not knowing your specific situations. Even placebo effect is quite real and it can affect each individual to different extent. It is true that part of it is due to the fact that I spent a lot of money on amps (relative to my income) so I felt I have no right to tell others not to. You would be correct though if you guessed that I may have trouble hearing differences between my AVR and amps. The truth is, in my own system, the source discs/vinyl albums, players, and speakers have much greater effect on SQ than my amps.

By the way I made a typo in the first sentence of the last paragraph in my last post. I meant 300WX3, not X2.

 

[PENG]

I sit about 10 feet away from my speakers, which drops it to about 104dB.

Depending on your particular room reinforcement effect it could easily reduce your estimated drop by a few dB so if you need 300W others may only need 150W or less.

And I also need to keep in mind that these measurements were done with sine waves whereas music or movies is going to have much more energy for the same peak voltage in a given time frame than the sine wave.

I would worry more about the phase angles and impedance dips. I know you may have trouble accepting watts are watts. In facts watts are watts based on P=VI (or its variations) as long as power factor (phase angle), distortion/displacemnet factor,frequency response etc. are considered in the comparisons. As to waveforms, any waveforms can be broken down into harmonics of sine waves. I don't know how familiar you are with Fourier analysis. Regardless, your statement "wherea music or movies .....much more energy for the same peak........." does not make sense may be you can show the math that supports the claim.