Most underrated 3ch or 5ch Power Amp? (NOT Emotiva please)

[bizmord]

I am pretty happy with my sound, but a power amp may produce better sound than the amps I get in my Denon 4311. I usually run my system at -10 and that is no where close to reference.

My speakers are not too sensitive (Ascend Sierra-1NrT) and will definitely benefit from an Amp. They are rated 87db in room sensitivity.

Now, here is the question. I know that Emotiva is a very well known and loved brand, thus, you also pay for their branding. What I am trying to find is an Amp that will do better than a Denon 4311 Receiver and costs less because it's either an older amp or a not so well know brand that I can find on Ebay. I am OK with 3 channels to drive my front stage or 5ch for all my speakers.

I've looked at Rotel RB-985 and Anthem PVA-5 and those look pretty nice but maybe there are better deals out there.

I know very little about amps as I always used a Receiver and hope you guys can shed some light on this.

Thank you.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The answer is....... The $2,000 Denon AVR-4311.

8 ohms: 179 watts x 2Ch or 131 watts x 5Ch
4 ohms: 259 watts x 2Ch

SNR: 112 dBA

Read more at https://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-4310ci-av-receiver-ht-labs-measures#gMxRicA5j1iGSX1D.99

 

[Pogre]

The answer is....... The Denon AVR-4311.

8 ohms: 179 watts x 2Ch or 131 watts x 5Ch
4 ohms: 259 watts x 2Ch

SNR: 112 dBA

Read more at https://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-4310ci-av-receiver-ht-labs-measures#gMxRicA5j1iGSX1D.99

Almost as powerful as my Monolith in 2 channel. That should be plenty of power for 87db speakers.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If you must have external amps for cheap, I would get the Crown XLi800 200W/8 ohms, 300W/4 ohms Stereo Amp for $229 each.

https://www.amazon.com/Crown-XLi800-Two-channel-Power-Amplifier/dp/B00AR0A3V4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1506876572&sr=8-2&keywords=Crown+amps

So 4Ch = $458, 6Ch = $687.

 

[MrBoat]

Are you sure you're not just being persuaded by the numbers and perhaps aesthetics? When you say you are listening at -10, and is nowhere close to reference, the obvious answer is to turn it up.

The other thing that comes to mind is to ask, how large/what type of a room is this and what is your system EQ inflicting on your setup?

ETA: Upon further research of those speakers, something rings odd about their history. First being, Ascend claims to have spent 4.5 years developing V.1 of this speaker. Secondly, it has gone through some upgrades. That always causes me to ask why. I mean, if you spend 4-1/2 years developing a 2 way speaker, it should be exceptional or, someone is being really stubborn with choice of drivers in the first place. Not that this is right, or abnormal I guess, but as a casual listening, non-engineer type, that would cause me to ask why and then, why should I trust the upgrade?

 

[ski2xblack]

That Denon is pretty powerful. >250@4ohms should suffice for 99% of real life scenarios. In terms of dbW, not a heck of a lot of difference between the Denon and a 300w@4 external amp. An appreciable difference in subjective loudness would require considerably more power than that, and more than you should flog your Sierras with unless you're curious about their thermal and mechanical limits.

Not to change the subject, but as far as scratching that upgraditis itch, a second sub >> brutishly powerful amp. Big tangible results, vs no audible difference and unnecessary (or risky to actually use) power. Unused power just goes unused.

 

[agarwalro]

ETA: Upon further research of those speakers, something rings odd about their history. First being, Ascend claims to have spent 4.5 years developing V.1 of this speaker. Secondly, it has gone through some upgrades. That always causes me to ask why. I mean, if you spend 4-1/2 years developing a 2 way speaker, it should be exceptional or, someone is being really stubborn with choice of drivers in the first place. Not that this is right, or abnormal I guess, but as a casual listening, non-engineer type, that would cause me to ask why and then, why should I trust the upgrade?

I don't understand your comment about a competent speaker once designed remaining unchanged. Every speaker design has limitations. A designer may find new or previously unavailable ways to improve a design. Wouldn't not changing cause the slow death of a design from simply becoming outdated? What is your opinion of speaker designs from main stream companies like Paradigm or B&W which change annually or biennially?

 

[MrBoat]

I don't understand your comment about a competent speaker once designed remaining unchanged. Every speaker design has limitations. A designer may find new or previously unavailable ways to improve a design. Wouldn't not changing cause the slow death of a design from simply becoming outdated? What is your opinion of speaker designs from main stream companies like Paradigm or B&W which change annually or biennially?

Because, once designed, the glowing reviews and purple prose typically applied to such things define them as. . . . complete. And then, the human ear yet again, evolves beyond that?

Above what was known 10 years ago, what has really significantly improved since? My current favorite description revolves around tweeters, with a penchant for. . . ."sparkle." Well, tweeters have been able to portray accurate and audible, tweetery sensations for decades. For one, we heard it sound exactly what we were hearing live, and for another, we have been told by the manufacturers that they have, through each and every revision of that technology, perfected it. Or is it more a case of, "Forget all we have said, we have it figured out. . . 'this' time."?

Sorry but, technology, at least with regard to music anyway, has had to have surpassed the ability of the instruments actually being played by now.

Designs should not become outdated by now or even from 10 years ago. The most they should become is mechanically worn out from heavy, continuous use. A decade is a good mark for service expectations, unless of course you happen to spend $10k on it. Then, it should be at least continuously serviceable and future proof for the rest of one's life. At least if we are to take verbatim, what we are being told.

 

[agarwalro]

Because, once designed, the glowing reviews and purple prose typically applied to such things define them as. . . . complete. And then, the human ear yet again, evolves beyond that?

Above what was known 10 years ago, what has really significantly improved since? My current favorite description revolves around tweeters, with a penchant for. . . ."sparkle." Well, tweeters have been able to portray accurate and audible, tweetery sensations for decades. For one, we heard it sound exactly what we were hearing live, and for another, we have been told by the manufacturers that they have, through each and every revision of that technology, perfected it. Or is it more a case of, "Forget all we have said, we have it figured out. . . 'this' time."?

Sorry but, technology, at least with regard to music anyway, has had to have surpassed the ability of the instruments actually being played by now.

Designs should not become outdated by now or even from 10 years ago. The most they should become is mechanically worn out from heavy, continuous use. A decade is a good mark for service expectations, unless of course you happen to spend $10k on it. Then, it should be at least continuously serviceable and future proof for the rest of one's life. At least if we are to take verbatim, what we are being told.

So, the designer must maintain a growing list of incremental improvements. These stay on the back burner, until a completely new design is warranted. Thus, the new design, being vastly superior, replaces the previous generation?

 

[lovinthehd]

I am pretty happy with my sound, but a power amp may produce better sound than the amps I get in my Denon 4311. I usually run my system at -10 and that is no where close to reference.

My speakers are not too sensitive (Ascend Sierra-1NrT) and will definitely benefit from an Amp. They are rated 87db in room sensitivity.

Now, here is the question. I know that Emotiva is a very well known and loved brand, thus, you also pay for their branding. What I am trying to find is an Amp that will do better than a Denon 4311 Receiver and costs less because it's either an older amp or a not so well know brand that I can find on Ebay. I am OK with 3 channels to drive my front stage or 5ch for all my speakers.

I've looked at Rotel RB-985 and Anthem PVA-5 and those look pretty nice but maybe there are better deals out there.

I know very little about amps as I always used a Receiver and hope you guys can shed some light on this.

Thank you.

As an owner of those speakers, and very similar amps in my Denon 4520, and have used them with power amps as well, I don't think you're going to get what you think with the addition of a power amp.

 

[gene]

I am pretty happy with my sound, but a power amp may produce better sound than the amps I get in my Denon 4311. I usually run my system at -10 and that is no where close to reference.

My speakers are not too sensitive (Ascend Sierra-1NrT) and will definitely benefit from an Amp. They are rated 87db in room sensitivity.

Now, here is the question. I know that Emotiva is a very well known and loved brand, thus, you also pay for their branding. What I am trying to find is an Amp that will do better than a Denon 4311 Receiver and costs less because it's either an older amp or a not so well know brand that I can find on Ebay. I am OK with 3 channels to drive my front stage or 5ch for all my speakers.

I've looked at Rotel RB-985 and Anthem PVA-5 and those look pretty nice but maybe there are better deals out there.

I know very little about amps as I always used a Receiver and hope you guys can shed some light on this.

Thank you.

Monoprice Monolith-3 is a significant step up in amplification to your Denon receiver. Rotel and Anthem are also very solid choices in terms of quality and affordability.
http://www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/monoprice-monolith-7-channel-amplifier-review

 

[PENG]

Monoprice Monolith-3 is a significant step up in amplification to your Denon receiver. Rotel and Anthem are also very solid choices in terms of quality and affordability.
http://www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/monoprice-monolith-7-channel-amplifier-review

Thanks to you Gene, this time we can really try to quantify things a little as you tested both the Monolith and a slightly less powerful Denon, the AVR-X5200W. The X5200W is one notch lower than the OP's 4311 but it is still a reasonable reference point.
http://www.audioholics.com/av-receiver-reviews/denon-avr-x5200w/measurements

CFP-BW test, 2 channel, 0.1% THD+N

AVR-X5200W------------------------------------------------Monolith-7, 200 W per channel

8 ohms: 140W -----------------------------------------------212W
4 ohms: 193W----------------------------------------------- 335.4W

Dynamic power, 2 channel, 1%

8 ohms: 200W----------------------------------------------284.6
4 ohms: 300W----------------------------------------------528.2

So the Monolith would be about 1.5 dB more powerful in SPL terms for an 8-ohm load and about 1.75 dB better for 4-ohm load, same kind of proportion in terms of dynamic headroom.

The Monolith will make a more significant difference in the all channel driven scenario for sure, but then the AVR-4311CI is beefier than the AVR-X5200W. Going by S&V's measurements on the AVR-4500CI (similar to the 4311), the Monolith would probably do 1.2 to 1.15 to 1.2 dB better in 2 channel driven and around 1.5 dB better in 5 channel driven.
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-4520ci-av-receiver-test-bench

So while the Monolith is indeed a significant step up to the AVR-4311, in terms of SPL, the OP should only expect a gain of around 1.2 dB to 1.5 dB and probably double that to 3 dB under extreme conditions such as all channel driven into 4 ohms, all in practical terms.

 

[lovinthehd]

Are you sure you're not just being persuaded by the numbers and perhaps aesthetics? When you say you are listening at -10, and is nowhere close to reference, the obvious answer is to turn it up.

The other thing that comes to mind is to ask, how large/what type of a room is this and what is your system EQ inflicting on your setup?

ETA: Upon further research of those speakers, something rings odd about their history. First being, Ascend claims to have spent 4.5 years developing V.1 of this speaker. Secondly, it has gone through some upgrades. That always causes me to ask why. I mean, if you spend 4-1/2 years developing a 2 way speaker, it should be exceptional or, someone is being really stubborn with choice of drivers in the first place. Not that this is right, or abnormal I guess, but as a casual listening, non-engineer type, that would cause me to ask why and then, why should I trust the upgrade?

I think you'd like the original Sierra-1 or the NrT version. The cabinets are excellent, too.

 

[lovinthehd]

Monoprice Monolith-3 is a significant step up in amplification to your Denon receiver. Rotel and Anthem are also very solid choices in terms of quality and affordability.
http://www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/monoprice-monolith-7-channel-amplifier-review

If one did get the Monolith, for the extra four channels of amps in the same box with the 7ch version for a mere $ 400 to me is a no-brainer. IIRC you also get the second transformer beyond the 3ch version?

 

[MrBoat]

I think you'd like the original Sierra-1 or the NrT version. The cabinets are excellent, too.

There's really not too many speakers I don't like. I can usually find something good in most, if I am not subjected to constant, side-by-side comparisons. As long as there is no distortion at the levels I listen at, it's usually just a matter of a day or two of listener break in before I warm up to them. Everything else, I can pretty much EQ my way around.

Still, it seems much easier to get more power for the dollar choosing higher sensitivity speakers. The Tempests (rated 10-500W), for example, can get stupid loud even with the older H-K 35 watt receiver, while other speakers I have just get by on it. The Denon AVR at 120w/ch, is extreme overkill in this house, or even outdoors.

I suppose that's the difference. I'm not used to speakers rated at 100-250 watts not being loud enough with average power say, from 60-150W. After that it seems like the speakers must be a mismatch with the room or something.

 

[lovinthehd]

There's really not too many speakers I don't like. I can usually find something good in most, if I am not subjected to constant, side-by-side comparisons. As long as there is no distortion at the levels I listen at, it's usually just a matter of a day or two of listener break in before I warm up to them. Everything else, I can pretty much EQ my way around.

Still, it seems much easier to get more power for the dollar choosing higher sensitivity speakers. The Tempests (rated 10-500W), for example, can get stupid loud even with the older H-K 35 watt receiver, while other speakers I have just get by on it. The Denon AVR at 120w/ch, is extreme overkill in this house, or even outdoors.

I suppose that's the difference. I'm not used to speakers rated at 100-250 watts not being loud enough with average power say, from 60-150W. After that it seems like the speakers must be a mismatch with the room or something.

The Ascends aren't spl monsters nor particularly sensitive for sure....might not meet your spl demands, who knows but I think in your room they'd still do quite well. Partially why I went JBL in the big room and went Ascend in the bedroom system, tho.

 

[MrBoat]

The Ascends aren't spl monsters nor particularly sensitive for sure....might not meet your spl demands, who knows but I think in your room they'd still do quite well. Partially why I went JBL in the big room and went Ascend in the bedroom system, tho.

I'm speaker'd to the hilt and more on the build bench. The only reason I don't stick the little JBLs in the bedroom is because I am afraid I would linger in there a bit too much.

I have all my speakers out here except for the big JBLs. Even if I had a WAF to worry about, she'd still never tolerate how much I listen to any one pair, regardless of how well they went with the décor. So I aim to use them all while I can, before some honey comes along and inflicts domesticitus on me again at a weak moment.

Still, the old Denon manages to push anything I hook to it really well. Is why I try to imagine what someone has hooked to one that it isn't enough in most settings and why I questioned room size.

 

[slipperybidness]

There's really not too many speakers I don't like. I can usually find something good in most, if I am not subjected to constant, side-by-side comparisons. As long as there is no distortion at the levels I listen at, it's usually just a matter of a day or two of listener break in before I warm up to them. Everything else, I can pretty much EQ my way around.

Still, it seems much easier to get more power for the dollar choosing higher sensitivity speakers. The Tempests (rated 10-500W), for example, can get stupid loud even with the older H-K 35 watt receiver, while other speakers I have just get by on it. The Denon AVR at 120w/ch, is extreme overkill in this house, or even outdoors.

I suppose that's the difference. I'm not used to speakers rated at 100-250 watts not being loud enough with average power say, from 60-150W. After that it seems like the speakers must be a mismatch with the room or something.

Old-school, we needed sensitive speakers b/c the amps were not high powered (tubes), or a little later, high power amps were expensive.

Today, power is cheap! In relative terms at least. So, sensitive speakers don't really matter as much when you can get a Crown XLS in the $400 range!

A good time for music lovers!

 

[PENG]

Old-school, we needed sensitive speakers b/c the amps were not high powered (tubes), or a little later, high power amps were expensive.

Today, power is cheap! In relative terms at least. So, sensitive speakers don't really matter as much when you can get a Crown XLS in the $400 range!

A good time for music lovers!

That is true to a point but if you are comparing speakers with sensitivity of low 80's and low 90's, then you could be looking at power requirement difference of 100W and 1000W, the cost difference for amp power could then be an issue for a lot of people. IMO, everything else being equal, higher sensitivity is still an important advantage, but I do get your point.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

It's not just about the price of power, but how much power your speakers can handle.

For example, the 83.5dB/2.83v/m-4ohm Magnepan model 3.6 is rated for only 250W of power.

The nominal impedance is 4 ohms. So I'm not sure if the rated power is 250W/4 ohms or 250W/8 ohms.

But either way, even if amp power were cheap, I wouldn't use a 1kW-8ohm/1.75kW-4ohm amp on a speaker rated for 250W.

Now it would be a different story if the speaker were 83dB/2.83v/m and can handle 2,500 watts into 4 ohms.