Help understanding Harman/Kardon AVR power ratings

[smihalik]

Harmon/Kardon AVR's always seem underpowered compared to the competition. I've heard every manufacturer uses different standards for rating the power of their devices.

What I want to know is, has anyone ever gathered a group of receivers to verify their true power ratings? Is there such a thing as a true power rating? Like strapping a car to a dyno?

 

[j_garcia]

The best way to find out is to actually listen to them with speakers to see what a given receiver is capable of. The power ratings that H/K uses are "honest" compared to many others, so when they say it is 70W, you can trust that is close to what it is actually capable of continuously.

Personally, I prefer Marantz to H/K, and since you already have a Marantz don't worry about it

 

[smihalik]

Well the Marantz 5003 is actually on hold for me at a local dealer at a price of $850 Cd tax in. I'm supposed to pick it up this weekend. I've found that I can get a H/K AVR 254 for $550 Cd tax in.

Both receivers have almost exactly the same features, same HDMI in/out, both decode HD master TrueHD etc. The only difference as far a specs are concerned is that the Marantz is rated at 90 watts per chanel, while the H/K is rated at 50. BAsically my question is, is 90watts from Marantz comparable to 50 Watts from H/K?

Id love to save $300 and put it towards at better sub.

 

[Hicks]

H/Ks are high current, right?

 

[j_garcia]

"High current" is little more than a marketing term.

I would say Marantz 90W is not equal to H/K 50w, since Marantz is pretty honest too. You'd have to step up to the 354 in the H/K line to get comparable power to the 5003, but it is better not to skimp on the receiver up front even if it is to get a better sub.

 

[Hicks]

"High current" is little more than a marketing term.

So the amount of current that you get from a watt does not vary from receiver to receiver?

Honest question, thanks.

 

[MDS]

The majority of manufacturers rate their receivers using the FTC standard which is 2 channels driven simultaneously. There is a multi-channel standard too and I believe it specifies 2 channels driven at full power and each of the others driven at 1/8 power. Manufacturers never state the result of the latter type of test.

H/K rates their receivers with all channels driven simultaneously to full power. IMO it is a marketing maneuver because many people are hung up on 'all channels driven' as the honest or 'true' power.

You cannot compare HK ratings to other manufacturers and conclude X Marantz wattts are equal to Y HK watts (although many people do). A watt is a watt. In the extremely rare case (basically never) that real source material will drive all channels simultaneously to full power for more than a fraction of a second, you can be assured that the HK is putting out what it says. Receviers rated to the FTC standard will put out less than their 'headline' number because that number was obtained with only 2 channels driven - BUT in many cases even that ACD number will be equal to or greater than the comparable HK.

Long story short...it doesn't matter. They all have sufficient power, they all sound roughly the same if driven within their limits, and they differ only slightly in terms of features, convenience, and price point. Pick the one you like the best and is within your price range.

 

[PENG]

http://www.hometheatermag.com/receivers/marantz_sr5003_av_receiver/index3.html

I am sure if you bench test the HK AVR254 you will be able to verify its specified output of 7X50W into an 8 ohm load. That does not mean it equates to the Marantz's 90WPC. The SR5003 bench test results seem to indicate that it is more powerful than the AVR254.

I also have little doubt that the Marantz can handle 4 ohm load better.

 

[PENG]

So the amount of current that you get from a watt does not vary from receiver to receiver?

Honest question, thanks.

It varies with the load impedance according to the formula:

Power=VoltageXCurrentXPower Factor, or
Power=CurrentXCurrentXImpedanceXPower Factor.

Power factor is given by the cosine of the phase angle between the Voltage and Current phasors (commonly call vector).

One may interpret high current amp as one that is capable of driving low impedance load when it has to deliver higher current in order to produce the same "watts" that a higher impedance load would yield at a lower current. Based on historic HT mag, S&V, and HCC bench tests, HK AVRs did not do better than comparable (price wise) Marantz, Denon, or recent Onkyo models.

 

[highfigh]

It varies with the load impedance according to the formula:

Power=VoltageXCurrentXPower Factor, or
Power=CurrentXCurrentXImpedanceXPower Factor.

Power factor is given by the cosine of the phase angle between the Voltage and Current phasors (commonly call vector).

One may interpret high current amp as one that is capable of driving low impedance load when it has to deliver higher current in order to produce the same "watts" that a higher impedance load would yield at a lower current. Based on historic HT mag, S&V, and HCC bench tests, HK AVRs did not do better than comparable (price wise) Marantz, Denon, or recent Onkyo models.

Have you ever used the Character Map? This formula could show 'Power=(Current²)(Impedance)(Power Factor).

All PCs have the character map and it has all kinds of fonts and symbols.

 

[PENG]

Have you ever used the Character Map? This formula could show 'Power=(Current²)(Impedance)(Power Factor).

All PCs have the character map and it has all kinds of fonts and symbols.

Yes, I had, just a little laze tonight
Thank you for doing it for me.

 

[mnatiq]

Harmon/Kardon AVR's always seem underpowered compared to the competition. I've heard every manufacturer uses different standards for rating the power of their devices.

What I want to know is, has anyone ever gathered a group of receivers to verify their true power ratings? Is there such a thing as a true power rating? Like strapping a car to a dyno?

if u go see my earlier posts u will know that i have had the same problem as u. i do know that HK tests there AVRS with all channels driven not 1 or 2 channels like pioneer or yamaha. imo the best way 2 go is by testing it out. i have had a 110 WPC pioneer and a 140 WPC onkyo 806 and my 75 WPC hk 354 sounds the best and most powerful (dont kill me for saying that, lol).

also i dont think that the HK avr 254 can compete vs the marantz 5003. if you wanna compete and maybe even win then go with the hk avr 354, u can get that at the local future shop, well now they have the hk 3550 HD's which is the same thing with a better look and some retarded multi zone features. you can always ask for them 2 find u a avr 354 at a different store, thats how i got mine. the only thing with the hk 354 is that there were some video problems with it, however when u get it from futureshop they will/should show u how 2 upgrade it via the internet, new firmware fixes it. btw i bought the 354 about 8 months ago from futureshop for 1399 and returned it after 25 days cuz it was tooo expensive, i then went with the pioneer (stanks) and onkyo (decent with the most features imo) and now after 8 months i sold my onkyo and saved up some money and finally bought a HK 354.

also the hk has a 0.07% THD and the 5003 has 0.08% THD, so in that aspect hk is better. the hks is about 4 lbs heavier, dont know if that matters 2 u but i think it should.

trust me HK's watts are just as good as any other brands watts if not better then most. i was just like u.

 

[Hicks]

It varies with the load impedance according to the formula:

Power=VoltageXCurrentXPower Factor, or
Power=CurrentXCurrentXImpedanceXPower Factor.

Power factor is given by the cosine of the phase angle between the Voltage and Current phasors (commonly call vector).

One may interpret high current amp as one that is capable of driving low impedance load when it has to deliver higher current in order to produce the same "watts" that a higher impedance load would yield at a lower current. Based on historic HT mag, S&V, and HCC bench tests, HK AVRs did not do better than comparable (price wise) Marantz, Denon, or recent Onkyo models.

Cool, thanks for the detailed response!

 

[lsiberian]

Go with what Peng says.

HK's have more HDMI handshake issues than other brands. But they are cheap. So if you don't mind the risk go for it. Plus you can always get an external amp with the savings.

 

[rnatalli]

The following is my very gross generalization of current model receivers under $800:

Yamaha - Very overrated amp sections.

Pioneer - Same as Yamaha. The 1019 recently benched at 28wpc into 5 channels.

Onkyo - Usually come up a little short, however, Onkyo has underrated a few receivers before.

HK - Always underrated. If HK says 50wpc, you'll get at least that much.

Marantz - Usually hit the mark.

Denon - Usually hit the mark, but sometimes come up a little short.

 

[smihalik]

Go with what Peng says.

HK's have more HDMI handshake issues than other brands. But they are cheap. So if you don't mind the risk go for it. Plus you can always get an external amp with the savings.

I've heard about the "handshake" issue. Seems like a firmware update has fixed it.

Another option I have is to get a refurbed Marantz through Accessories4less. That way I could get an SR5003 for about the same price as the HK. Only its refurbed.

What is the general consensus on refurbished AVR's? Am I asking for trouble.

 

[Seth=L]

The following is my very gross generalization of current model receivers under $800:

Yamaha - Very overrated amp sections.

Pioneer - Same as Yamaha. The 1019 recently benched at 28wpc into 5 channels.

Onkyo - Usually come up a little short, however, Onkyo has underrated a few receivers before.

HK - Always underrated. If HK says 50wpc, you'll get at least that much.

Marantz - Usually hit the mark.

Denon - Usually hit the mark, but sometimes come up a little short.

It's hit and miss for manufacturers other than H/K and a few others. Sometimes Yamaha will pull great ones out, other times they won't. The same could be said of almost all mass market AVRs. I would never presume to state that company A almost always does one thing, while company B does this other thing especially when their product lines aren't very consistant. Onkyo had a blunder with the TX-SR805, and Yamaha had a recent blunder with the RX-659.

It's no offense toward you (I usually find your posts to be quite knowleageble, helpful, and you are definitely one of my favorite posters), I just don't buy your blanket statement regarding specific AVR companies.

All that said, it appears the SR5003 is a pretty clear choice.

 

[smihalik]

All that said, it appears the SR5003 is a pretty clear choice.

Would you suggest I go with the refurbed unit from acc4less at $675 or go with a new one at $850?

Looking at my budget now, $850 is really more than I want to spend. $675 would be fine. However, I don't want to make a mistake. If you guys tell me refurbed is a bad idea I'll wait a while longer and save up some more cash.

 

[PENG]

If it is refurbished by Marantz and comes with a full warranty then I think it is fine.

 

[rnatalli]

It's hit and miss for manufacturers other than H/K and a few others. Sometimes Yamaha will pull great ones out, other times they won't. The same could be said of almost all mass market AVRs. I would never presume to state that company A almost always does one thing, while company B does this other thing especially when their product lines aren't very consistant. Onkyo had a blunder with the TX-SR805, and Yamaha had a recent blunder with the RX-659.

It's no offense toward you (I usually find your posts to be quite knowleageble, helpful, and you are definitely one of my favorite posters), I just don't buy your blanket statement regarding specific AVR companies.

All that said, it appears the SR5003 is a pretty clear choice.

I agree, but I believe in this case I believe my analysis is accurate as I specified my generalization is limited to current year models only and a specific price range. Let's look at the evidence. The entire non-Elite line of Pioneer (xx19) and the Yamaha x65 are all underpowered. HK is HK and has always underrated their amps. Marantz x003 models have been benched and do well. The Onkyo x07 results likely won't differ much from x06 which benched at about 80-100% of their stated power on average. I haven't seen bench tests for the xx10 series of Denon, but they'll likely test similar to last year's models. Of course, when you move to older models and/or up the price range to exceed $800, these statements don't hold.

I also think the Marantz SR5003 refurb is a good bet