Give me an Amp Crash Course

[lovinthehd]

Not mine. I don't have anything at the moment. That's the place I'm going. A performer and a looker. A deadly combination.

AV-atar. Did you change yours?

Yes, it looks like a boom box. I am going for something closer to this:

BUT, less electronics. Cheaper electronics. A lot more books and movies. Only one pair of headphones (top left ones, have them). Central unit that does everything so no other gadgets. Turntable would arrive in time. There's a sub (bottom right). This is also not my picture (I wouldn't reflect myself in Mc') but a setup I have in mind.

I added an avatar, one I've used on another forum or two. I change them occasionally if they start to annoy me.

Ah, am used to people posting their own gear. Just a looky-loo for now, eh? Don't get too hung up on the amp and I'd recommend bass management if you're going to use a sub. FWIW.

 

[lovinthehd]

So this is as good as nothing (or not really nothing but all it does is tidy up a little bit)?
View attachment 17825

Just a pre-out, leaving any bass management up to your sub. Some subs can accommodate bass management but usually quite limited. Just looked at one of those units....ouch expensive for a 35w/ch simple int amp. Not even pretty (that porthole look sucks IMO).

 

[herbu]

killdozzer,
First, I applaud your curiosity and questions. My comment about "best friend" was due to your denial of sarcasm. Looks like that's improving.

Now, you're struggling a bit with the suggestions here, but your struggle is of your own making. You can't seem to decide what you want. Sometimes it's separates. Sometimes it's all-in-one and least expensive. So you're getting answers about both.

If you want a 2.1 ONLY system, quit asking about a "central unit that does everything" and "least expensive".

If you want a central unit and best performance for the money, quit asking about 2.1 separates.

Let me remind you, you're the new guy to audio. Nice, but new. You're getting advice from people who were immersed in audio before you were born, and have spent many thousands of $ on the hobby. When they keep saying you will get better performance for less money with a receiver, you should listen. But if that's not what you want, understand the attributes a receiver brings, (even to a 2.1 system), and quit expecting them in separates.

 

[killdozzer]

Just a pre-out, leaving any bass management up to your sub. Some subs can accommodate bass management but usually quite limited. Just looked at one of those units....ouch expensive for a 35w/ch simple int amp. Not even pretty (that porthole look sucks IMO).

You're talking about Marantz? Don't let @fuzz092888 hear you I like that one, but it's out because of power (or rather a lack there of) and now because of sub out being just a pre-out.

A stereo amp without this feature usually isn't performing any filtering. In that case, your speakers are fed a full range signal, and you would use the crossover knob on your subwoofer to achieve a good blend.

Does a regular bass knob on the front help to lower the feed to mains? Is this what it does? If you happen to have a pre-out, should you lower the bass on the front of the amp (you know the treble/bass knobs). Or would this affect the sub pre-out too. Would there be less bass for all units? Probably yes, eh?

killdozzer

 

[Steve81]

So this is as good as nothing (or not really nothing but all it does is tidy up a little bit)?

Pretty much. Now if you find something like this, the options open up a little bit:

Normally a jumper would connect the preout to the main in to complete the loop. However, one can remove the jumper and send the preout to a subwoofer like the SVS SB2000:

Here you would set the low pass filter, and connect the outputs back to the "main in" jacks on the receiver/integrated. In the SB2000's case, the outputs have a fixed filter at 80Hz, so your speakers would consequently receive a high passed feed. The more expensive SB13U one ups that with a variable high pass filter for the outputs for added flexibility/improved integration.

 

[Steve81]

Does a regular bass knob on the front help to lower the feed to mains? Is this what it does?

Correct; it's most commonly a bit of PEQ around 50Hz. Not sure what impact (if any) it has on a sub-out; it may vary by manufacturer in any case.

 

[killdozzer]

killdozzer,
First, I applaud your curiosity and questions. My comment about "best friend" was due to your denial of sarcasm. Looks like that's improving.

Now, you're struggling a bit with the suggestions here, but your struggle is of your own making. You can't seem to decide what you want. Sometimes it's separates. Sometimes it's all-in-one and least expensive. So you're getting answers about both.

If you want a 2.1 ONLY system, quit asking about a "central unit that does everything" and "least expensive".

If you want a central unit and best performance for the money, quit asking about 2.1 separates.

Let me remind you, you're the new guy to audio. Nice, but new. You're getting advice from people who were immersed in audio before you were born, and have spent many thousands of $ on the hobby. When they keep saying you will get better performance for less money with a receiver, you should listen. But if that's not what you want, understand the attributes a receiver brings, (even to a 2.1 system), and quit expecting them in separates.

Well, not before I was born, I'm quite old, but I get what you're trying to say. I'm not undecidable. It is just my English. I always meant all-in-one. I never wanted separates (well, a turntable has to be, obviously), but as little separates as possible/needed.

What I meant with 2.1 (and now I see my fallacy) is an all-in-one intgr.amp that is stereo with a sub out. Just like that Peachtree Audio pic I posted. It is a stereo integ. amp that has DAC built in, it has USB in for your laptop, (some even have phone docking), it has a sub out (although it is just pre-out) it can house a Sonos ZP80. So it is a center unit that does it all. But no tuner, no 7.2 outs, no video etc.

Sorry if this is annoying.

killdozzer

Oh, and one more edit; I do think they're helping me, I'm just trying to get the help I want rather than the one I need, if I'm explaining it properly. I would just like them to use their knowledge to recommend something other than receivers, since I don't really care for them much.

 

[KenM10759]

It seems to me that ideally you want a simple integrated amp with a DAC, a couple digital inputs, a analog input or two, perhaps a built in phono amp stage, a subwoofer output with crossover control and between 50 and 200 watts per channel.

There are a good number of them out there of varying styles, feature lists, options, and price. If you have LS50's the one caution I have is that they are capable of revealing any shortcomings in the head end.

 

[PENG]

This is one thing I wanted to ask you about, I was finally starting to realize that well constructed amplifiers shouldn't affect sound a great deal. And you even say decent integrated. Why would it sound better?

killdozzer

That's why I used the word "could", because it depends on how much power you need. For example, a Denon AVR-3808 has impressive power output specs if you compared to integrated amps in the $1K range, including NADs.

According to HTMag:

"This graph shows that the AVR-3808CI’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 186.7 watts and 1 percent distortion at 210.9 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 238.9 watts and 1 percent distortion at 277.3 watts."

Aside from power output, they also have ability to drive low impedance load (when used in 2 channel applications), they also typically have bass management features, and, depending on their vintage, they may come with decent Room EQ system. They also have all sorts of digital inputs, allowing for more choices of source media. At first I thought you were a purist, then I realized you were aiming for simplicity and that's why I brought up the AVR option.

I also wish there are good two channel integrated amps that offer effective bass management and/or REQ systems but I haven't found one that I can afford. That's why I offer the option of a pretend 2.1 system.

Now that I am also clear you do NOT want AVR at all, I won't bring it up again.

 

[Swerd]

KD – I think your questions are very good, as is your English. They deserve good answers. Some of our answers have been complex, and you seem to understand them quite well. However there may be another source of confusion. There probably is a large difference in what products and what prices are available to you in Europe, compared to what we know in the USA and Canada. That does affect our assumptions and our advice.

Herbu gave some good answers in an above post (#43) where he told you why we prefer audio video receivers (AVR) to integrated stereo amps. I'd like to add a bit of history to that. Until recently, in the USA, all the new product development was in AVRs. The stereo products (receivers and integrated amps) were essentially the same as they were 25 years ago. Until very recently, this didn't change.

The major differences in AVRs are digital processing and what we refer to as "bass management". This signal processing takes place in the digital realm, not the analog, where the bass tone controls are in old stereo-only systems. It provides the best and most flexible solution to the difficult task of integrating a separate powered subwoofer with other speakers. When I first started using an AVR, I didn't understand how much better this was compared to the older stereo receivers I had known. It took me some time to appreciate the benefits. And these benefits are the same if you use 2 speakers instead of 5 or 7 speakers. Most, if not all the integrated stereo amps I see provide, at best, minimal (and probably less than adequate) bass management. I can see you may not understand this now, but please understand that we do.

The other major difference between AVRs and stereo-only systems is economic. Many more AVRs get made and sold than stereo systems. Manufacturing many more AVRs allows them to be sold at less relative cost than the stereos, despite the fact that AVRs are more complex. However, I don't know if these costs are reflected at the prices available to you.

What I meant with 2.1 (and now I see my fallacy) is an all-in-one intgr.amp that is stereo with a sub out. Just like that Peachtree Audio pic I posted. It is a stereo integ. amp that has DAC built in, it has USB in for your laptop, (some even have phone docking), it has a sub out (although it is just pre-out) it can house a Sonos ZP80. So it is a center unit that does it all. But no tuner, no 7.2 outs, no video etc.

The Peachtree Audio nova65SE you mentioned sells for $800 in the US. It is a rather minimal product with little or no digital processing, and what looks like no bass management. The amp section is small, a 65 watt/channel class D amp. In my honest opinion, this should sell for much less than $800.

You may like the Peachtree's size, but I think you can do much better with one of those Yamaha products such as the A-S701. I admit, I didn't read about them in enough depth to know for sure if it offers similar bass management as most AVRs have. Does anyone else know?

 

[lovinthehd]

You may like the Peachtree's size, but I think you can do much better with one of those Yamaha products such as the A-S701. I admit, I didn't read about them in enough depth to know for sure if it offers similar bass management as most AVRs have. Does anyone else know?

No bass management per the A-S301/501/701 manual I'm just looking at. Says it begins to attenuate signal on the pre-out at 90hz and cutoff at 100hz which is odd sounding. No mention of anything else...

 

[PENG]

It is somewhere very close to this, or at least along those lines:
View attachment 17822

I only have to place it better and I WILL be using stands. (Do my pictures show when I put them in a reply??)

You may know that I also have a pair of LS50. I have driven it with my AVR3805 (again, I know that won't work for you) and my separate preamp/amp system. I prefer the AVR's sound only because of it's subout. The Cambridge audio preamp's preout has a toggle switch to select either full range or 200 Hz LP, ridiculously useless.

By the way, I tried the LS50 without stand for a while. My suggestion, get the stands. For me, it was $300 well spent.

 

[Swerd]

No bass management per the A-S301/501/701 manual I'm just looking at. Says it begins to attenuate signal on the pre-out at 90hz and cutoff at 100hz which is odd sounding. No mention of anything else...

Thanks!

 

[killdozzer]

Again some killing good answers. Thank you all. After what you @Swerd and @PENG said about the actual benefit of the receivers, I might even check if there's one for me out there. No one mentioned processing and those low distortions.

I thought most of it is the same but with video and tuner (and 5.2, 7.2 outs). OK, you gave me another assignment; I have to rummage through what's available to me in the receiver section. (But I promise nothing, NOTHING!!!)

Funny thing, Japanese Yamaha is cheaper here, but Japanese Teac (well now it's Gibson's) is cheaper in America. I still have to see when I name everything I wish for will it still be cheaper. I might get back with a model or two.

Soon enough I'll have a chance to hear LS50's and then I start looking for electronics. @PENG yes, stands are a must.

THX! killdozzer

 

[lovinthehd]

If you want just a 2ch receiver with bass management see if Outlaw has anything where you are?

 

[Swerd]

If you want just a 2ch receiver with bass management see if Outlaw has anything where you are?

The Outlaw RR2150 is a very good stereo receiver that has a powerful amplifier section. But it is an example of what I mean as a non-digital stereo that adds some features of the digital AVRs as an afterthought.

It's bass management is analog, not digital. Does it work as well as in most AVRs? Perhaps.

And while Outlaw's webpage says it has a USB input that allows streaming audio from a computer, it never directly says that it has a DAC. There are no other digital inputs, such as optical or coaxial. This leaves me wondering what they really mean.

It is possible that Outlaw does not ship to Europe.

 

[lovinthehd]

The Outlaw RR2150 is a very good stereo receiver that has a powerful amplifier section. But it is an example of what I mean as a non-digital stereo that adds some features of the digital AVRs as an afterthought.

It's bass management is analog, not digital. Does it work as well as in most AVRs? Perhaps.

And while Outlaw's webpage says it has a USB input that allows streaming audio from a computer, it never directly says that it has a DAC. There are no other digital inputs, such as optical or coaxial. This leaves me wondering what they really mean.

It is possible that Outlaw does not ship to Europe.

Yeah it seems to be popular with those that insist on getting a 2ch unit because they don't want to leave unused all the features in an avr that's better suited to the job....

 

[Steve81]

It's bass management is analog, not digital. Does it work as well as in most AVRs? Perhaps.

It's 12dB/octave high and low pass, so not the exact same in most AVRs, and you only get 3 XO points to choose from. Still better than nothing though.

And while Outlaw's webpage says it has a USB input that allows streaming audio from a computer, it never directly says that it has a DAC. There are no other digital inputs, such as optical or coaxial. This leaves me wondering what they really mean.

From the AH review of the unit:

The first jump ahead is the inclusion of a USB-B port on the rear of the unit. This allows for the connection of a computer directly to the RR2150 using a USB-A to USB-B cable. With this setup, the computer decodes the audio and sends a hopefully bit-for-bit perfect PCM signal to the receiver (The RR2150 will not accept DSD). One of the main advantages of having a computer do all of the processing is that a computer is able to decode any file format in existence. This configuration also allows a user to bypass the likely crap-tacular DAC (digital to analog converter) in the computer, and use the RR2150’s superior DAC. In a world of computer audio, this is an invaluable feature and one that we used quite often during listening tests.

It is possible that Outlaw does not ship to Europe.

I tried it out earlier, and shipping only appeared to be available to North America. Still doesn't hurt to shoot them an e-mail.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Do not get too caught up with the labeling or stereotyping, pun intended.

Don't think that an "AVR" is somehow inherently inferior to an "Integrated Amp" or "Stereo Preamp" or "2Ch Receiver" or "Pre-pro".

I've done many measurement comparisons with AVR vs pre-pros, IA and preamps in terms of THD, Crosstalk, SNR and FR. They ALL MEASURE very similarly and the differences are NOT AUDIBLE.

If you want good quality sound at a good price, just buy a good AVR. I've probably mentioned this a thousand times everywhere, but just get a $1,000 AVR on sale for $500 on Amazon.

 

[KenM10759]

ADTG...If they all sound the same, why are manufacturers all putting different components, cabinets, and prices on them? Are all who buy anything above the most basic feature list they need just wasting money? Why not just buy all our components from Parts Express or Monoprice?