Does your RX-V4600 run hot

[PENG]

Here's some published specs on older Denon units. The 4800 series was a monster, beating out the 5700/5800/5803 series in tests. If the 4806 is anything like it's ancestor, it's also a beast. Also check out the specs on the PIONEER Elite VSX-D49TX . (scroll to the right, the tests are in yellow)

STEREO REVIEW'S / SOUND & VISION TEST REPORTS

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/3401/ratevsac.htm

The geocities one is a little old, here are some more recent ones on the Denon receivers:

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/305denon/index2.html

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/804denon/index2.html

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/cgi-bin/displayreview.php?reviewid=4488

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=470&page_number=2&preview=

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/assets/download/DenonAVR-2805extendedlab.pdf

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/assets/download/DenonAVR-3805lab.pdf

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/assets/download/DenonAVR-5805lab.pdf

Here are some for the Yamaha:

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/104yam/index1.html

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?article_id=863&section_id=3&page_number=1

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/assets/download/yamaharx-z9inthelab.pdf

ht_addict may be right, the Denon's do seem to have better 5,7 channel numbers.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

ht_addict may be right, the Denon's do seem to have better 5,7 channel numbers.

Peng, thanks for the updates. I can't believe how the Yammies peter out with multiple channels driven. To say I'm disappointed in the RXV 2400 is an understatement.

RXV-2400
Here's the straw that broke the camels back:
With seven channels driving 8-ohm loads, the amplifier reaches 0.1% distortion at 32.3 watts and 1% distortion at 36.9 watts.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Peng, thanks for the updates. I can't believe how the Yammies peter out with multiple channels driven. To say I'm disappointed in the RXV 2400 is an understatement.

RXV-2400
Here's the straw that broke the camels back:
With seven channels driving 8-ohm loads, the amplifier reaches 0.1% distortion at 32.3 watts and 1% distortion at 36.9 watts.

I am not sure where those numbers are coming from or how as many other Yams are very good in all ch driven:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/3401/ratevsac.htm


Maybe that is why I question their methods.

 

[PENG]

Peng, thanks for the updates. I can't believe how the Yammies peter out with multiple channels driven. To say I'm disappointed in the RXV 2400 is an understatement.

RXV-2400
Here's the straw that broke the camels back:
With seven channels driving 8-ohm loads, the amplifier reaches 0.1% distortion at 32.3 watts and 1% distortion at 36.9 watts.

You're welcome, hopefully someone will update that geocities list soon. It is nice to see them all in one place.

mtrycrafts: I still wonder if the more recent Yamaha models have a different type of protection circuits that do not allow enough time for those S&V, HTM standard multi-channel tests to get to the output levels the older models were able to achieve before tripping. Having said that, the RX-V657, a lower model, was able to show some nice 5 channel numbers in a recent test, go figure!

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

I am not sure where those numbers are coming from or how as many other Yams are very good in all ch driven:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/3401/ratevsac.htm


Maybe that is why I question their methods.

Even the website you gave show all channels driven to be in the 30's for the two most recent ratings. (RX-V 730 and RX-V 440) Here's the link:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/104yam/index1.html

 

[gene]

Peng, thanks for the updates. I can't believe how the Yammies peter out with multiple channels driven. To say I'm disappointed in the RXV 2400 is an understatement.

RXV-2400
Here's the straw that broke the camels back:
With seven channels driving 8-ohm loads, the amplifier reaches 0.1% distortion at 32.3 watts and 1% distortion at 36.9 watts.

Buckeye it amazes me how such a seasoned member of our forums still doesn't understand why this happens on mid level receivers. I have discussed this topic to death in many other forum threads and even wrote an article on it called: The All Channels Driven Test Controversy.

Its odd how we publish critical data such as SNR, distortion, output impedance and damping factor at 1 watt and full power, yet many folks ignore it and look for instant gratification on an unrealistic and very bogus power test.

Again for the 1000th time, THE ALL CHANNELS DRIVEN TEST SIMULATES A BEST CASE TEST LOAD IN A WORST CASE TEST ENVIRONMENT. What is more important is how linear the amp is when driven a low and near maximum power levels, as well as how much headroom the power supply / amp design has to hit musical peaks undistorted.

Amps in the price range such as the Yammie are designed to give dynamic performance, NOT to deliver continuous power into a sine wave sweep with all channels driven. Imagine how large the power supply, and heat sinks would have to be. Even if you did design a linear amp to deliver say 130wpc x 7 all channels driven, it would consume over 2200 watts to achieve it. Considering that your wall outlet is limited to 120X15 = 1800 watts and the IEC mandate to limit power recepticles to under 15A for saftey, you would require 2 power cords run on two separate dedicated circuits in your home. Does this seem reasonable?

What people fail to realize is many of these publications are regulating the line voltage and sometimes even swapping out the rail fuses on the amps to even hit these ridiculous figures. What's even more bogus is some are using a sweep tone in their Audio Precision analyzers to plot power vs distortion which is an instantaneous NOT a continuous test!

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

Amps in the price range such as the Yammie are designed to give dynamic performance, NOT to deliver continuous power into a sine wave sweep with all channels driven. Imagine how large the power supply, and heat sinks would have to be. Even if you did design a linear amp to deliver say 130wpc x 7 all channels driven, it would consume over 2200 watts to achieve it. Considering that your wall outlet is limited to 120X15 = 1800 watts and the IEC mandate to limit power recepticles to under 15A for saftey, you would require 2 power cords run on two separate dedicated circuits in your home. Does this seem reasonable?

I understand, and agree with you. My point is that these tests, while being unrealistic, do show sizeable differences in similarly priced receivers. Why would one unit rate out at 32 watts, while another comes in at 87? Are we talking current limiting?

I don't own one of these lower rated receivers, and have not tried driving them to reach an audible distortion level. But if they are truely pushing less than half the rated power as some others are, I'd think distortion would rear it's ugly head quite a bit earlier than those tested with more than double the output.

I think it could play a role if you are using some extremely insensitive, low resistance speakers in a 7 channel setup. But at that point, you probalby have the cash to afford a nice multi-channel separate amp to drive them.

Purchasing receivers, or amps, is not a black and white issue. Even if all amps sounded the same, how can we rely on power specs when the manufacturers can't nail it down. Remember the MPS-1 review? They stated wattage well over what Audioholics felt should be stated.
"...maximum power ratings should be specified as unclipped (usually 0.1% THD or less) not 1% which can clearly be audible and seen on an oscilloscope as a clipped waveform" (I agree 100% - even if mfg's don't)

 

[MacManNM]

If an amp is rated at 110x7 then it should put out 110 into all the channels all the time. 2 chan amps have always been rated correctly. Do amps need to put out full power at full bandwidth? Absolutely. Today’s movies are extremely dynamic and need adequate power to play them back. Can this be achieved from one receiver plugged into one wall outlet? No. It is false advertising. Multi channel tests are of value. These tests give you a good idea of how much dynamic range your amp actually has. There are plenty of instances where you are playing the front 3 channels at close to full power; these tests reveal what is truly left over. So in the Yamaha’s case, it is pathetic. This is why separates are a much better option. They give you more even if they are plugged into the same outlet. Of course this is the reason I have 5-15A outlets wired behind my equipment rack.

 

[ht_addict]

If an amp is rated at 110x7 then it should put out 110 into all the channels all the time. 2 chan amps have always been rated correctly. Do amps need to put out full power at full bandwidth? Absolutely. Today’s movies are extremely dynamic and need adequate power to play them back. Can this be achieved from one receiver plugged into one wall outlet? No. It is false advertising. Multi channel tests are of value. These tests give you a good idea of how much dynamic range your amp actually has. There are plenty of instances where you are playing the front 3 channels at close to full power; these tests reveal what is truly left over. So in the Yamaha’s case, it is pathetic. This is why separates are a much better option. They give you more even if they are plugged into the same outlet. Of course this is the reason I have 5-15A outlets wired behind my equipment rack.

Have you ever sat down with a SPL meter at the seating position and watched a movie at ear blistering levels? Trust me you are using no more that 10watts. I'll give you an example. Last weekend I took my NAD T773 over to a prospective buyers for him too demo. His speakers consisted of PSB Stratus Gold, Silvers and C6 center which are 90-93db sensistivity. We sat in a room that was probably 8x12x8(w/d/h), about 8ft from front soundstage. Speakers were calibrated to 75db. Watching Fifth Element, at insane levels we got a reading of 90-97db at the seating position. At this reading your talking 1-8watts at most.

Do amps need to put out full power at full bandwidth? Absolutely.

NOT

 

[jaxvon]

Did you take your Monster power stuff over there to get amp readings, or are you just pulling numbers out of your a$$? I've listened to my BIC bookshelves on an old Yamaha receiver putting a consistent 7W in with 70+ watt peaks into them. I know this because I was watching the VU meters.

 

[PENG]

Did you take your Monster power stuff over there to get amp readings, or are you just pulling numbers out of your a$$? I've listened to my BIC bookshelves on an old Yamaha receiver putting a consistent 7W in with 70+ watt peaks into them. I know this because I was watching the VU meters.

"peak", that's the key word. If you are watching one of those older analog VU meters, it may seem like those peaks lasting longer than they actually did. Still, those peaks didn't stay up that long, right?

 

[jaxvon]

No, but notice I said a consistent 7W, and with some music 10W. That was the SUSTAINED power level on the meter, as in where it was at when there weren't musical peaks. Of course the peaks weren't there for long...they're "peaks".

 

[gene]

I understand, and agree with you. My point is that these tests, while being unrealistic, do show sizeable differences in similarly priced receivers. Why would one unit rate out at 32 watts, while another comes in at 87? Are we talking current limiting?

Yes we are talking current limiting. Please read the article I referenced in my last post. If you compare the 1 and 2 channel power specs of competitor receivers in the same price class that deliver more power with all channels driven, you will note in most cases they actually deliver less power than the current limiting receivers do with 1 or 2 channels driven. Personally I would pick the receiver that can deliver as much power with 1 or 2 channels driven over one that has the edge in an unrealistic test case.

See post #16 here where I go into more detail:
http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=102255#post102255

These tests give you a good idea of how much dynamic range your amp actually has.

Uh no they don't. Running a continuous sine wave into all channels does NOT give you an idea on dynamic range of an amp. It gives you a CONTINUOUS power rating at least until the line voltage sags or the transformer core saturates or the current limiting (on many sub $2k receivers kick in). IHF dynamic power tests, similar to THX testing do tell you the true dynamic range of an amp and they are useful. As others have pointed out in this thread, you are likely only using a few watts per channel continously even when playing 80-90dB level assuming reasonably efficient speakers and room dynamics. In addition, as you add more speakers to the room, the overall SPL goes up (about 3dB for each added speaker) and thus requiring less power per channel to hit reference levels. Here is a chart that calculates SPL courtesy of Yamahaluver.

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

What you need is an amp that has plenty of headroom to hit those peaks 20dB hotter undistorted. So if you are running say 2 watts continous, the amp should be able to put out 200watt peaks (10-20 msec) without hiccuping. Considering most of the energy is in bass and most people run subs while crossing over their other channels, this isn't an issue for any reasonably designed mid priced receiver. Will it sound as good as a separates amp? That depends on the load, and how the receiver can handle complex load impedances at various power levels.

I will be out of action for about a week moving but look forward to picking up this discussion when I get settled in. Wish me luck. I need it

 

[ht_addict]

Did you take your Monster power stuff over there to get amp readings, or are you just pulling numbers out of your a$$? I've listened to my BIC bookshelves on an old Yamaha receiver putting a consistent 7W in with 70+ watt peaks into them. I know this because I was watching the VU meters.

As I said, SPL meter sitting 8ft from the front soundstage. Then I used what I learnt here and there.

Speakers 91db sensitive:

1watt/1meter =91db
2watt/1meter = 94db

Now your in university I think you can figure out the rest off the math If you have problems you can always use the SPL calculator . Should give an idea on how much watts your actually using on a consistant basis.

 

[MacManNM]

As I said, SPL meter sitting 8ft from the front soundstage. Then I used what I learnt here and there.

Speakers 91db sensitive:

1watt/1meter =91db
2watt/1meter = 94db

Now your in university I think you can figure out the rest off the math If you have problems you can always use the SPL calculator . Should give an idea on how much watts your actually using on a consistant basis.

Who sits 8ft away from the speakers? Ever hear of 1/r>2 falloff? With my xr16's in my 25x30 listening room it is not uncommon for me to put 75w RMS into the speakers. In my room with those speakers, it is a loud level, but not insane. A typical HT receiver cant drive to those levels with more than 2 speakers on.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

His speakers consisted of PSB Stratus Gold, Silvers and C6 center which are 90-93db sensistivity. We sat in a room that was probably 8x12x8(w/d/h), about 8ft from front soundstage.

That's a heck of a receiver, with some monster speakers in a shoebox.

Put those in a room that measures 16' x 24' (4 times the square footage), with vaulted ceilings (adding even more sq ft), room treatments etc..., and you'll notice a substantial need for more power.

 

[mtrycrafts]

If an amp is rated at 110x7 then it should put out 110 into all the channels all the time.

Why??? That is not what is stated. Only that each channels will deliver 110
watts.

2 chan amps have always been rated correctly.

2ch amps have been rated both channels driven, or 1 ch driven.


Do amps need to put out full power at full bandwidth? Absolutely. Today’s movies are extremely dynamic and need adequate power to play them back.


Yes, dynamic, meaning quick peaks here and there, not full spectrum peaks. But, amps are rated 20-20khz, unless otherwise specified.


Can this be achieved from one receiver plugged into one wall outlet? No.

An opinion.


It is false advertising. Multi channel tests are of value.

Maybe.


These tests give you a good idea of how much dynamic range your amp actually has.

BS. Dynamic headroom is usually given.

There are plenty of instances where you are playing the front 3 channels at close to full power;

Put some scopes on all three channels and superimpose them.

these tests reveal what is truly left over.

No, only what it will do simultaneously with limitations. Not designed for all channels driven for a good reason.


So in the Yamaha’s case, it is pathetic.

An opinion.

This is why separates are a much better option.

Another opinion.

They give you more even if they are plugged into the same outlet.

Then why do you have 5 circuits?

 

[mtrycrafts]

In addition, as you add more speakers to the room, the overall SPL goes up (about 3dB for each added speaker)

It would if you double the speaker size or double the power into one speaker. But you are doubling power AND doubling the speaker area being driven, so, the total is 6dB spl

 

[mtrycrafts]

Who sits 8ft away from the speakers? Ever hear of 1/r>2 falloff? With my xr16's in my 25x30 listening room it is not uncommon for me to put 75w RMS into the speakers. In my room with those speakers, it is a loud level, but not insane. A typical HT receiver cant drive to those levels with more than 2 speakers on.

Yes, but that 6dB roll off per distance doubled are made up when you add a second speaker and amp. After all, you are driving them both equally, right???

 

[MacManNM]

Yes, but that 6dB roll off per distance doubled are made up when you add a second speaker and amp. After all, you are driving them both equally, right???

It's still a 1/r>2 falloff. Unless you are in the extreme near field where some weird things happen. So nothing is made up.