Give me an Amp Crash Course

[killdozzer]

This will be my other “equipment acquiring” thread. Since I’m looking for a pair of speakers and an amplifier I’ll separate threads thus.

As Alex2507 said, it is easier to find speakers you like and then match an amp that can successfully drive them. This, however, doesn’t affect my wish/need to know and understand a little bit more about the amps in general. And it will most definitely help me to get the job done and buy one, once I reach that point.

So, here are a couple of questions:

Is it significantly better to have a sub out on an amp that will play in a 2.1 system? If I have a sub that has adjustable crossover frequency do I really need the sub out? Can I, for example, connect my main speakers with banana plugins and then have an additional set of cables with spades from both left and right speaker out going into my sub?

What are todays “two cents” on digital amplification/Class D amps? Is it still a big NO? Are there some improvements? They are a lot cheaper and if there are any good ones I would really like to know. (Good ones being the ones where there is no audible flaw due to the way it works) I read something about different classes, but the article, here on Audioholics, didn’t say the definite “no” to Class D amps. (How much sense does this Lyngdorf’s statement makes: The TDAI-2170 is 100% digital, without sound-deteriorating digital-to-analogue conversions. The digital signal drives the speakers directly, with no translation and no middleman. This unique and technically demanding solution offers noiseless and crystal clear replay at all sound levels. It will deliver the most enjoyable and uncoloured sound you have ever experienced.) Can digital signal drive the speakers directly?

What numbers should I look for when I’m reading the specs on total harmonic distortions, is 0.03% too much, will I hear the difference?

I know this will shake no one’s ground, but there’s a quite large magnet inside the sub. Would this affect the amp if you were to mount the amp on top of the sub?

Why do people get off so much on the weight of the amp?

Why balanced outs and unbalanced ones? How will I know which to use? (Boy, will the herbu cross me off the potential friend list after this!! He’ll almost think I’m trying!
)

This and much more in the “Amp Crash Course” thread!!

 

[Steve81]

Is it significantly better to have a sub out on an amp that will play in a 2.1 system? If I have a sub that has adjustable crossover frequency do I really need the sub out?

Performing bass management on the receiver or pre/pro is preferable as it means you'll get a filtered signal to the speakers. Just setting a low pass filter on a subwoofer doesn't accomplish this. A few subs can do the total deal, i.e. set their own low pass filter, and send a high passed signal back to your receiver, but it's more of a PITA.

What are todays “two cents” on digital amplification/Class D amps? Is it still a big NO?

It's not a big no, but one should bear in mind that not all implementations are equal. As far as advantages go, the only tangible benefit over a typical Class A/B amplifier is efficiency.

Can digital signal drive the speakers directly?

Negative.

What numbers should I look for when I’m reading the specs on total harmonic distortions, is 0.03% too much, will I hear the difference?

There's no significant difference in the numbers usually posted, i.e. 0.1%, 0.05%, 0.03%, etc.

I know this will shake no one’s ground, but there’s a quite large magnet inside the sub. Would this affect the amp if you were to mount the amp on top of the sub?

It's probably not the first place I'd think to pop down an AVR, but amps of all shades appear to function properly despite being mounted to subwoofer enclosures.

Why do people get off so much on the weight of the amp?

With your typical Class A/B amp, more weight tends to mean things like more heat sinking and a larger power supply, which is beneficial for dealing with low impedance loads that generate higher current demand and therefore more heat.

Why balanced outs and unbalanced ones?

In the average home environment, the biggest practical benefit of balanced XLR cables is probably the locking connector.

 

[PENG]

So, here are a couple of questions:

Is it significantly better to have a sub out on an amp that will play in a 2.1 system? If I have a sub that has adjustable crossover frequency do I really need the sub out? Can I, for example, connect my main speakers with banana plugins and then have an additional set of cables with spades from both left and right speaker out going into my sub?

A sub out without any active crossover capability is just a convenient feature, and yes, you can run another pair of cables to an active sub but not a passive one.

What are todays “two cents” on digital amplification/Class D amps? Is it still a big NO? Are there some improvements? They are a lot cheaper and if there are any good ones I would really like to know. (Good ones being the ones where there is no audible flaw due to the way it works) I read something about different classes, but the article, here on Audioholics, didn’t say the definite “no” to Class D amps. (How much sense does this Lyngdorf’s statement makes: The TDAI-2170 is 100% digital, without sound-deteriorating digital-to-analogue conversions. The digital signal drives the speakers directly, with no translation and no middleman. This unique and technically demanding solution offers noiseless and crystal clear replay at all sound levels. It will deliver the most enjoyable and uncoloured sound you have ever experienced.)

There are no shortages of very competent class D amps, so it depends, the TDAI-2710 does not use DACs so I guess they can claim 100% digital, but while they can say "without sound deteriorating DAC", that may not mean a whole lot because good DACs shouldn't result in audible sound deterioration. Something has to be there in the output stage (filtering etc.?) between the amplified digital signal and the speakers.

Can digital signal drive the speakers directly?

Sort of yes and no, at least not directly in the amplified pulse form. Instead of me trying to explain it in a simple way I suggest you read up on PWM (pulse width modulation) and pick the ones that you can understand.

What numbers should I look for when I’m reading the specs on total harmonic distortions, is 0.03% too much, will I hear the difference?

To certain extent it depends on the frequency of the harmonic, but if you are talking about total harmonic distortions, 0.03% is not too much at all. I doubt most people could even hear 0.1% THD.

I know this will shake no one’s ground, but there’s a quite large magnet inside the sub. Would this affect the amp if you were to mount the amp on top of the sub?

I would worry more about the heat from the sub.

Why do people get off so much on the weight of the amp?

I think it is mostly the hearsay or group think effect etc. Though everything being equal, heavier amp could imply beefier power supply, better heat sinks, stronger chassis. The fact is, everything are not always equal.

Why balanced outs and unbalanced ones? How will I know which to use? (Boy, will the herbu cross me off the potential friend list after this!! He’ll almost think I’m trying!
)

I am sure herbu can explain better but for now let's just say balanced output is a good feature if you have to run long interconnects between your gear as they offer "common mode" noise rejection.[/QUOTE]

 

[fuzz092888]

Is it significantly better to have a sub out on an amp that will play in a 2.1 system?

Just a small thing here. A processor does just that. Processes the A/V signals routing them to the appropriate spots and doing some other fancy stuff. An amplifier amplifies the audio signal to then drive the speakers subwoofer. A receiver combines the two.

What are todays “two cents” on digital amplification/Class D amps? Is it still a big NO? Are there some improvements? They are a lot cheaper and if there are any good ones I would really like to know. (Good ones being the ones where there is no audible flaw due to the way it works) I read something about different classes, but the article, here on Audioholics, didn’t say the definite “no” to Class D amps. (How much sense does this Lyngdorf’s statement makes: The TDAI-2170 is 100% digital, without sound-deteriorating digital-to-analogue conversions. The digital signal drives the speakers directly, with no translation and no middleman. This unique and technically demanding solution offers noiseless and crystal clear replay at all sound levels. It will deliver the most enjoyable and uncoloured sound you have ever experienced.) Can digital signal drive the speakers directly?

My own personal experience has led me to the conclusion that a well designed class D amp can be just as good as many class A/B amps. YMMV

Why do people get off so much on the weight of the amp?

In addition to what Steve said about the heatsinking, it can also mean larger power supply, more capacitors, and just an overall more robust amplifier. While this isn't always true, there does seem to be at least a loose correlation with the weight and how good a class A/B amp will perform.

Why balanced outs and unbalanced ones? How will I know which to use? (Boy, will the herbu cross me off the potential friend list after this!! He’ll almost think I’m trying!
)

Very few things at moderate price ranges have balanced outputs because it's just not really needed in most situations. Balanced is generally for longer runs because it has superior noise rejection, but most household runs are well under the lengths you'd need to really make use of this.

http://thehub.musiciansfriend.com/tech-tips/unbalanced-versus-balanced-i-o-and-how-to-work-with-them

 

[killdozzer]

Hey @PENG , long time no read! Thank you for the info.

Just a small thing here. A processor does just that. Processes the A/V signals routing them to the appropriate spots and doing some other fancy stuff. An amplifier amplifies the audio signal to then drive the speakers subwoofer. A receiver combines the two.

@fuzz092888 so does the integrated amp if it's equiped with it, right? You're not saying I need a processor? And I'm really not fond of receivers. There's something karaokesque about them!

Thank you all. On with the questions if you still have energy;

I found that English brand Quad made a very interesting combo - it is an CD/preamp/DAC Now this is something I appreciate, but it's expensive. the question is; can you plug any CD player into a power amp without preamp? If the CD player converts digital to audio, can a power amp amplify it? Preamp is usually about 'gain' is it not? Also, is any preamp sufficient to drive any speakers even if it's the smallest and most sensitive without the power amp?

You've probably noticed the pattern now; I lean towards compact, but don't want to sacrifice quality in sound or build. At the same time, I'm not much of a receiver guy, nor am I into network streamers/players. Although among the two I would choose a network player if I had to. Products like Lyric are being produced more these days, but this particular unit cost almost half of my years salary. I'm looking for an all-rounder in the 600-800$ price range.

If you think of a model worth attention give me a heads up, please!

Thanks
killdozzer

 

[PENG]

the question is; can you plug any CD player into a power amp without preamp? If the CD player converts digital to audio, can a power amp amplify it?

Some CD and universal players (e.g. Oppo's) have volume control capability so you can in fact plug them into a power amp directly. You would eliminate the preamp but then you would be adding a volume control circuitry/part. So depending on the quality of this circuitry/part you may or may not gain any theoretical advantage other than cost.

Preamp is usually about 'gain' is it not? Also, is any preamp sufficient to drive any speakers even if it's the smallest and most sensitive without the power amp?

In theory yes, but in the practical world you are basically talking about headphones.

You've probably noticed the pattern now; I lean towards compact, but don't want to sacrifice quality in sound or build. At the same time, I'm not much of a receiver guy, nor am I into network streamers/players. Although among the two I would choose a network player if I had to. Products like Lyric are being produced more these days, but this particular unit cost almost half of my years salary. I'm looking for an all-rounder in the 600-800$ price range.

You are not alone on this. I used to think sort of like that too, but eventually realized there wasn't any point because even on money no object basis, I just can't tell the difference offered by those technical/theoretical advantages on the electronics side of the equation. I am not totally focused on the quality of source media, speakers and room acoustics. I do highly recommend a combo of Oppo's HA-1 and a good power amp

 

[fuzz092888]

@fuzz092888 so does the integrated amp if it's equiped with it, right? You're not saying I need a processor? And I'm really not fond of receivers. There's something karaokesque about them!

The integrated amp does to an extent, mostly I was just correcting you calling an integrated or a receiver an amp. IMO, there's hardly anything karaokesque about receivers from the major brands. I mean my Marantz 7009 looks pretty darn similar to my Marantz 8801 and there definitly ain't anything karaokesque about that, but to each his own.

I found that English brand Quad made a very interesting combo - it is an CD/preamp/DAC Now this is something I appreciate, but it's expensive. the question is; can you plug any CD player into a power amp without preamp? If the CD player converts digital to audio, can a power amp amplify it? Preamp is usually about 'gain' is it not? Also, is any preamp sufficient to drive any speakers even if it's the smallest and most sensitive without the power amp?

What Peng said. Only if the CD player has its own volume control or the amplifier must have a gain knob.

TLSguy is pretty familiar with quad stuff. You may want to ask him.

You've probably noticed the pattern now; I lean towards compact, but don't want to sacrifice quality in sound or build. At the same time, I'm not much of a receiver guy, nor am I into network streamers/players. Although among the two I would choose a network player if I had to. Products like Lyric are being produced more these days, but this particular unit cost almost half of my years salary. I'm looking for an all-rounder in the 600-800$ price range.

If you think of a model worth attention give me a heads up, please!

Thanks
killdozzer

Depending on your aesthetics. Marantz has some good integrateds and Outlaw has a nice stereo integrated.

http://www.us.marantz.com/us/Products/Pages/ProductListing.aspx?CatId=HiFiComponents

https://www.outlawaudio.com/products/rr2150.html

http://www.us.marantz.com/us/Products/Pages/ProductListing.aspx?CatId=ReferenceSeries

 

[KenM10759]

The NAD C326BEE DAC is also a very good integrated for your application, as long as you have fairly local support. The brand seems to have a lot of good reliable ones, but perhaps a higher instance of individual "warranty claims" here & there than some others. I've never seen a whole line of failures akin to the Onkyo receivers thing where a whole generation of receivers start failing.

That unit has all the features you need, built into one piece.

 

[killdozzer]

In theory yes, but in the practical world you are basically talking about headphones.

My brother is a guitar player. Perhaps things are a bit different in performers part of the world, he said his amp merely amplifies what preamp shapes/moulds. So this is not the case in hi fi?

You are not alone on this. I used to think sort of like that too, but eventually realized there wasn't any point because even on money no object basis, I just can't tell the difference offered by those technical/theoretical advantages on the electronics side of the equation. I am not totally focused on the quality of source media, speakers and room acoustics. I do highly recommend a combo of Oppo's HA-1 and a good power amp

I think here you got me wrong. I'm not expecting much more quality from electronics and THIS is precisely why I don't chase 1000$ stand alone DAC. I think it's a small chip you can build in your amp. I'm expecting to lower the price. And this is the way I'm planing to go about it; I won't be buying phono amplifier, DAC, preamp, I could even avoid CD player in a unit like the Lyric which I linked in my earlier post, but if I find a cheaper version. And it would have a sub out.

It is not about technical/theoretical advantages, it is about as all-in-one as it gets, as cheap as it gets and as good sounding as it gets.

Thank you for your recommendations and help! Much appreciated!

 

[killdozzer]

The integrated amp does to an extent, mostly I was just correcting you calling an integrated or a receiver an amp. IMO, there's hardly anything karaokesque about receivers from the major brands. I mean my Marantz 7009 looks pretty darn similar to my Marantz 8801 and there definitly ain't anything karaokesque about that, but to each his own.

*why shouldn't I refer to an integrated as an amp? What do you use instead of writing integrated every time?

I'm sorry if I provoked you, I had no intention. When it is an -esque, then it contains only a certain amount of the property and I find all receivers to have this. I don't know why I have such a strong lower-middle class mentality, but I don't like buying a pot just for boiling eggs. Buying a receiver and not using all or most what it's meant for goes against my worldview. I'm trying to buy only what I need/will use.

TLSguy is pretty familiar with quad stuff. You may want to ask him.

I already contacted him about QUAD bookshelves. He is very savvy on the brand. But QUAD Artera is expensive. So no need to bother anyone with what I'm not buying anyway.

Depending on your aesthetics. Marantz has some good integrateds and Outlaw has a nice stereo integrated.

I now see this as a general rule. A lot of people here who have really first class equipment will buy Marantz. I guess this means it is very good. I have it in mind and if I don't find anything more satisfying I'll consider it.

Thanks!

 

[Swerd]

My brother is a guitar player. Perhaps things are a bit different in performers part of the world, he said his amp merely amplifies what preamp shapes/moulds. So this is not the case in hi fi?

Yes. Guitar players consider their electronics as part of their instrument. They want to be able to change the tone as they choose. In hi fi, we want to play the music as it was recorded. The electronics and the speakers should reproduce the sound without altering it.

 

[killdozzer]

The NAD C326BEE DAC is also a very good integrated for your application, as long as you have fairly local support. The brand seems to have a lot of good reliable ones, but perhaps a higher instance of individual "warranty claims" here & there than some others. I've never seen a whole line of failures akin to the Onkyo receivers thing where a whole generation of receivers start failing.

That unit has all the features you need, built into one piece.

NAD is always a consideration and at the same time ugly as hell. It is definitely one of possibilities if I don't find anything else.

A VERY important next question: if the manufacturer doesn't clearly state this, how will I know which class is a certain amp? You all seem to know this from specs alone.

 

[Swerd]

A VERY important next question: if the manufacturer doesn't clearly state this, how will I know which class is a certain amp? You all seem to know this from specs alone.

Nearly all commercially sold amps and receivers use class AB amplifiers. If it has class D amplifiers, it usually is advertised as an advantage. Many, if not all class D amps are smaller in size and weight, and may not have visible heat sinks.

I think too much is said about the 'sound' from different amplifier classes. I know I do not hear a difference between class A, AB, or D.

The most important features of any amplifier are that it must have enough power to drive the speakers you choose, and that it be reliable. All else is appearance and convenience. You know better than us what looks good to you.

 

[ski2xblack]

If you're looking for a strictly two channel integrated w/ sub out and on-board DAC, and want something prettier than the NAD, check out the Yamaha lineup, both integrated amps and stereo receivers. They offer several within your budget.

 

[fuzz092888]

*why shouldn't I refer to an integrated as an amp? What do you use instead of writing integrated every time?

Write integrated every time. Because an amp and and integrated amp are two different things.

I'm sorry if I provoked you, I had no intention. When it is an -esque, then it contains only a certain amount of the property and I find all receivers to have this. I don't know why I have such a strong lower-middle class mentality, but I don't like buying a pot just for boiling eggs. Buying a receiver and not using all or most what it's meant for goes against my worldview. I'm trying to buy only what I need/will use.

No provocation taken. Remember, this is the internet and any intonation you hear, you've added yourself An alternate view is that you've gone completely against a lower-middle class mentality and not purchased something for less money that can do what you need it to do and more, thereby future proofing youself against future needs. IMO, buying only what you need without thought to the future, when you can afford to, isn't lower-middle class per se.

I now see this as a general rule. A lot of people here who have really first class equipment will buy Marantz. I guess this means it is very good. I have it in mind and if I don't find anything more satisfying I'll consider it.

Thanks!

IMO, it's wrong to discount receivers from any of the major brands (except maybe Onkyo), but it's your dollar.

 

[killdozzer]

Write integrated every time. Because an amp and and integrated amp are two different things.

A, hell no! Come on, give me a break. Imagine you're writing a post about the integrated itself and need to mention it a dozen of times. Maaan... icould go with a intgr. as long as no one think I am talking about a number.

No provocation taken. Remember, this is the internet and any intonation you hear, you've added yourself An alternate view is that you've gone completely against a lower-middle class mentality and not purchased something for less money that can do what you need it to do and more, thereby future proofing youself against future needs. IMO, buying only what you need without thought to the future, when you can afford to, isn't lower-middle class per se.

Not really the case. Buying what you need was a centuries long tradition of lower middle class. Whatever you don't need is surplus and thus bourgeoisie. Here comes the Marxist theory of hi-hi. But all things said and done, you were a bit defensive about your Marantz, eh? Come on, admit it. It's not entirely Internet to blame.

And if you hoard options you're just a doomsday prepper! Technical options that help push the idea of always replacing old with new even if you'll never actually use the options is entirely consumerist. Like comparing iPhone 6 to 5.

IMO, it's wrong to discount receivers from any of the major brands (except maybe Onkyo), but it's your dollar.

All joking aside, I meant that Marantz in general gets highly valued here. CD's, amps, integr. - everything. This Marantz HD-AMP1 is almost all there. A looker that has it all.

 

[killdozzer]

All joking aside, I meant that Marantz in general gets highly valued here. CD's, amps, integr. - everything. This Marantz HD-AMP1 is almost all there. A looker that has it all.

A bit weak... Leading to my next question; is there such a thing as Class A watts? Another suspicious concept. Many claim that 50W from Class A is stronger than form Class D. Now, I would never trust this, but I want to check out is there a difference in the way they're rated and perhaps this causes the misunderstanding. Same goes for tube amps, often you see them rated as 2x17W or something low like that, but they're used to drive speakers that by the producer's opinion require 50 - 250W.

Why is this?

 

[ski2xblack]

Ridiculous claims, perhaps with exception of the "tube watts" thing, and even that is based on a misinterpretation of what they're actually doing (soft clipping that acts very much like a compressor, resulting in higher subjective loudness than an un-distorted signal).

I think you're getting it. View any pseudoscientific audio marketing claims the same way you would those coming from a homeopath or other snake oil salesman.

HERE is the nitty gritty on amp classes for your edification.

 

[fuzz092888]

A, hell no! Come on, give me a break. Imagine you're writing a post about the integrated itself and need to mention it a dozen of times. Maaan... icould go with a intgr. as long as no one think I am talking about a number.

Given the context of audio equipment, I don't think you need to worry about intgr meaning integer. It ain't like you're writing

Not really the case. Buying what you need was a centuries long tradition of lower middle class. Whatever you don't need is surplus and thus bourgeoisie. Here comes the Marxist theory of hi-hi. But all things said and done, you were a bit defensive about your Marantz, eh? Come on, admit it. It's not entirely Internet to blame.

As someone who's been lower middle, middle class and who can add and subtract, planning for the future saves a lot more money than it wastes

Nope, I could care less if anyone buys Marantz. Heck, I don't buy Marantz because I think it's objectively head and shoulders above the other comparable receivers and processors available from the major brands. I freely admit it's more of an aesthetic choice than anything, well that and I find their menu layout more straight forward than some others. You're right it's not the internet. It's the people who visit the internet

And if you hoard options you're just a doomsday prepper! Technical options that help push the idea of always replacing old with new even if you'll never actually use the options is entirely consumerist. Like comparing iPhone 6 to 5.

I'm not sure how buying an integrated amp or two channel processor, finding out you want a streaming option and having to buy that, then finding out you want something to also run a BD player via lossless HDMI through, DAC etc is different from buying a mid-tier receiver that will do all that.....except that the receiver is one purchase for the same price as the integrated (then you still have to buy the other stuff. That being said, if this is only ever going to be a 2 channel system and you're never going to add a sub or more than one sub or need bass management, then it makes sense.

I admit to not reading all your threads, but you're trying to do a 2.1 music system. I'm not sure if this is your only system or what sources you're going to be connecting to this, or what all of your needs are, or how class came into this, but all I was trying to point out is that a receiver will do everything you want, for the same money, and do more, and is a viable option, especially if there is any question about wanting to expand the system in the future.

All joking aside, I meant that Marantz in general gets highly valued here. CD's, amps, integr. - everything. This Marantz HD-AMP1 is almost all there. A looker that has it all.

Isn't that out of your price range? I thought you were looking $600-$800?

 

[killdozzer]

Isn't that out of your price range? I thought you were looking $600-$800?

Yes, yes. It is. But since it offers everything I want (minus the power unfortunately), I could work extra hard and save twice as much! Since it has low power, no bother.

My first post in the Speakers Q&A thread says everything about my wishes.

And all the Marx, class and doomsday preppers are just to lighten up the conversation. And while we're on the subject of lightening up, are there any female members here?

Yesterday a guy told me a girl bought the LS50's and a 3000$ Gryphon audio to drive them. And I thought to myself; I don't know any girls like that.

killdozzer