Need to replace your A/V receiver?

hopjohn · Mar 22, 2004

pds : An amp is one of the last places to upgrade for quality sound. The order is: Audio Source, Speakers, and last of all amp.

I guess the sound of the room has nothing to do with it then. Gee.... I guess I'll have to question everything I've ever learned from now on. Anyway...

jds, while I do agree with you in a very general way about more power not improving sound quality so long as you don't clip, the idea isn't very practical for everyday use.

I think your disagreement with zumbo is akin to me trying to argue with you that I could take a 10wpc car head unit, hook it up to a 12 volt power supply, and have the same quality of sound that a 10w tube amp could deliver so long as it didn't clip. The argument overlooks so many other variables that it's not worth arguing.

And while zumbo may be exaggerating about the vast improvement, all things being equal an amp with a greater wattage output will deliver improved sound quality because it's difficult NOT to clip a low wattage amp (I think it was determined zumbo's Yamaha RX-V1400 delivered around 35wpc in full surround mode) for short moments at typical listening levels. So in his case, and because of the way he intends to use it, the increase in power is a tremendous improvement in sound quality for him. Try listening to a 10w tube amp at near reference HT levels then you'll understand why he is arguing more power is better.

Just keep it in context, is all I'm saying.

zumbo · Mar 22, 2004

But, I must add that the Yo-mama-ha is 110 x 2 in two-channel mode. My new amp is 175 x 2 in two-channel mode. In this case, it is a LARGE improvement also. Once you look at the size of this monster-of-an-amp, you will know someone is fos!

The whole point of this is, I doubt any receiver can fit the real amount of equipment inside to produce their claimed power. If pds does not want to believe this, that is his loss. I also tried to argue that my receiver had enough power, & I lost. Now I know. And I am certain there is NO receiver that can produce this kind of power. It would have to weigh in at about 80 or 90 lbs. If there is one that is this large, then it might have the b@ll$ to produce some real power!

I must say that if the smallest amp sounds as good as the top-of-the-line, then why don't we all have receivers pushing 10wpc?

Rob Babcock · Mar 22, 2004

I was really surprised how much difference there was with an outboard amp vs the center amp channel of my Denon.  I do sometimes watch my action movies at about -5 dB from reference levels, which is pretty loud on peaks.  Driving only the Center & 2 surrounds, the receiver may be able to hit rated output for those 3 channels, I'm not sure.

As far as whether or how much amps sound different, I don't even plan to go there right now!

  Several widely known 2 X blind tests have demonstrated no one could tell one amp from another (under controlled conditions)- I've thought I could hear differences myself but I've never participated in a blind test.  I don't know if I'd want to, either.  I believe I can tell CD players, etc. apart by their sound, but it would be pretty embarrassing if it turns out I can't!

zumbo · Mar 22, 2004

Those blind test were of two of the same power, just different brands, correct? It does not take a blind fold test to feel the difference. I can feel the vocals in my chest at low volumes. I can feel it vibrate the sofa from vocals. The music seems to be in the room, not at the speaker. If receivers could compete with seperates, there would be no need for seperates. I was under the assumption that receivers could now keep up with seperates. Whomever wrote that, was FOS!

zipper · Mar 22, 2004

I'll stand by what I said earlier. My rx-v620(5x100wpc) sounded ok. However,when the same set of speakers are hooked to the rx-v3300(6x130wpc),the detail in the music & effects in movies are much improved at similar volumes.Also,when I want it louder I do not sacrifice sound quality at all. This is fact,not speculation.This is what I hear.I'm not relating this falsely so I can feel good about my purchase.
 Tell you what. Anyone who doesn't believe this,go find a pair of Vienna Beethovens & try to drive them with a Yamaha rx-v1400. Then add a quality outboard amp/monoblocks.No need to crank it,just compare @ say -40db per the receiver.Then tell me what you think.

Guest · Mar 22, 2004

You must also remember that loudness and equipment bias play some of the largest roles in our determining of what sounds "best" to us.  What someone expects a piece of equipment to sound like, and the volume of the source being played back are HUGE factors in this equation.  

I'd say the room, volume level(s), bias, and speakers are some of the more dominant factors in play during the evaluation of our listening experiences.

I do stand behind d-blind testing also.  Even though most of us here don't want to admit it, telling the supposed "differences" and "improvements" of one amp or speakers over the other isn't as cut n' dry as we'd like to think.  Depending on the amount of money we've spent, these predetermined expectations will vary.  I've participated in some controlled listening sessions where I could not see what amp(s) or speaker(s) where being used, and a good number of those supposed "differences" seemed to melt away...

The results from speakers that were "bi-wired" and those run normally surprised those with "golden ears" even more so!!!  Furthermore, those "golden ears" that were participating seemed to forge into fools gold quicker than you'd think!!!

best,

zumbo · Mar 23, 2004

Actually, now that I have heard all this, my system does sound the same as it did. You know, I think it sounds worse!

Look, Ross & pds, take a RXV-1400 home & hook it up to your speakers. Listen.... Then add a massive five-channel amp, one that does not lie about it's power output, and tell me you can't tell a difference. Until you do this, you have NO grounds to back-up what you are saying. As I said, I can see if you were comparing two receivers of different power. You would not be able to tell a difference. That is what this thread is about. But, if you put some REAL power on it, it makes a HUGE difference.......

Guest · Mar 23, 2004

Z,
No need to get defensive... If you have read any of my prior posts in relation to your new amp purchase, you'd know how I feel about it.  No one here is saying that you've been taken to the cleaners and wasted a bunch of money.  Furthermore, I have paired my past units and my current one, among many other I've auditioned, (out of the store environment) with much more expensive means of external amplification.  My point is that the clear cut lines between our expectations and reality are sorta blurry.  The law of diminishing returns kicks in sooner than most of us would like to think.  That doesn't mean we should never upgrade, it just means that we should try to keep things into perspective relative to the true benefits we are receiving from the equipment we buy...and how much $$$ we spend in the process!

best,

zipper · Mar 24, 2004

Ross,
 I understand what you're saying. When I get my new speakers,then add an amp(if) later,do I expect it to sound twice as good as what I have? NO! But I'm sure it will sound better. I'll bet I could spend $50k on a setup & never REALLY be happy. Your point is well taken.Amount of money spent is not directly proportionate to the quality of sound received. I think understanding where the weaknesses are in a persons' system & choosing to upgrade accordingly is where money is best spent.

rgriffin25 · Mar 26, 2004

Zumbo,

Or anyone else for that matter.. Buying Audio equipment should be done for fun and entertainment. Please do not feel the need to justify your expenses. Who cares what Ross or anyone else has to say about a stereo that they will never hear. All that matters is that you are happy!

Do us all a favor and spend less time typing and more time listening.

 What your ears hear is all that matters.

Keep your Head UP! Your HT is better than most people out there!!

jeffsg4mac · Mar 26, 2004

Zumbo, I don't know if someone had pointed this out yet, but the reason your new Adcom amp sounds better than the Yammy amp is because it is a better amp by design It does not sound better because it has more power. Even a lesser powered Adcom will sound better than the yammy, because they are better amps. I have a 60 wattx2 Adcom and it sounds better than any yamaha amp that I have listened to. But, I have never been a fan of the sound of yamaha amps and I think that is what you just found out for yourself. The Denon's, to me, sound much more like The NAD, Adcoms and Rotel stuff, Which is why I chose the Denon. One of the best sounding amps I ever heard was only rated at 50 watts per channel of course it was a mark levinson. It also had more nuts than any thing I have heard since.

RX-V2400 · Mar 26, 2004

Jeff what you say is true but you have missed Zumbos point.
The point is the Yamah preamp and souround controls are good but need a power boost to be top-notch. ANY amp will satisfy Zumbos argument. That Adcom is better than whatever is not the an issue here.

zumbo · Mar 26, 2004

Thank you.

I did not start this thread to defend my system. I started it to help others NOT waste their money thinking one receiver of the same grade would SOUND better than another.

I started it to tell people to add an amp to their current receiver IF it was up-to-date.

A great amp on a great receiver is far better than a new receiver of the same or slightly better quality. THIS IS THE POINT!

Ross · Mar 26, 2004

I don't get it...

jeffsg4mac · Mar 27, 2004

RX, No man you missed my point, Zumbo did not need a power boost he needed a BETTER AMP, His Adcom sounds better because it is, not because it has more power. There are some amps he could have added that would be more powerful but not sound as good as the yammy. Like I said, even a 60 watt adcom, NAD or Rotel would sound better then the more powerful yamaha, power it not the issue, amp design is the issue and his ears prefer the Adcom over the yammy, and so do mine

I do agree though that top notch receivers make great and flexible pre-amp/processors. It almost seems a waste to buy just a pre/pro only design. You could always use the other amps for a second room or outside on the deck. I would love to see some reviews done of some top receivers vs some top pre/pro units connected to a common amp. I bet the results would surprise some of the audio snobs.

pds · Mar 27, 2004

"Adcom amp sounds better than the Yammy "

I hate to burst your bubble Jeff but basically all amps sound the same.  On a double blind comparison your Adcom would sound neither better nor worse than any other amp of equal power.  This has been proven by the Hirsh/Houck labs some time ago.  At this time all name brand amps are performing with distortion levels well below that of human hearing.

As far as better circuitry in the Adcom goes, are you an electronics engineer or are you simply going for the hype in the ads.

Also, you would do well not to slam other peoples equipment, no matter what the brand name.

jeffsg4mac · Mar 27, 2004

pds, First, I am not SLAMMING anybody's equipment at all, just discussing here

I only agree with that up to a point. Different amp designs can and do have different sound and tonal qualities. They also behave different under various load conditions which have an affect on the sound. If what you say is true then we should all be buying JVC and Sanyo stuff because they sound just as good as a equivalent Rotel and Adcom and they cost 1/4 less. That is absolutely not correct. I have a 100x5 JVC receiver that is in my boys room. It cost me $215, when I bought it I compared to my 60x5 Adcom GFA 7300 and my Marantz Pre/Pro that I had at the time. 100x5 or 60x5 the JVC should have beat up on the puny 60 watt adcom. However, there was just no comparison at all. The JVC sounded dull, no authority in the low end, no sound-stage, in general sounded like you had cotton balls in your ears, it sucks!. The Adcom was better in every way including sheer volume levels. Why was that if they should sound the same according your logic? Because the Adcom is a better built and designed amp then what was in the JVC thats why: Same with Zumbo. His new amp is superior to any amp that yamaha currently has in a receiver at any price. I am not saying receivers don't sound good, I have one for petes sake and it sounds better then the adcom it replaced. But in zumbo's case he is hearing how much better the adcom sounds and performs then his yammy. The amp section in the yamaha is just not as good or as robust as any of Adcoms current line up of Multi/channel amps. They are better sounding because of design not because of power. However, I think there is a point where the line starts to blur, and with the current crop of receivers and amps like the one Zumbo got the line gets really blurry, there just seems to be no reason to spend the money on a KRELL or Levinson, unless you win the lottery

And in answer to your question, yes I know a little about electronics.

pds · Mar 27, 2004

I didn't ask if you knew a little about electronics, just about everyone here would fit that bill.  I asked if you were an electronics engineer.  Someone who would be qualified to address the so called better circuitry issue that you claim for your amp. (for all you know they could be buying their electronic chips form Yamaha)

In a DOUBLE BLIND test your Adcom would be indistinguishable from any other amp. of the same power.

Incidentally, amps don't create a soundstage your speakers do.  Amplifiers only take a signal and make it louder.  If your amplifiers are changing the audio signal in any way other than amplitude you should be searching for another amp.

And yes, you certainly were slamming Yamaha equipment.  There are many people here that have spent  hard earned dollars on their equipment, are very happy with it and don't appreciate you calling it substandard.

jeffsg4mac · Mar 27, 2004

pds : In a DOUBLE BLIND test your Adcom would be indistinguishable from any other amp. of the same power.

Incidentally, amps don't create a soundstage your speakers do. Amplifiers only take a signal and make it louder. If your amplifiers are changing the audio signal in any way other than amplitude you should be searching for another amp.

And yes, you certainly were slamming Yamaha equipment. There are many people here that have spent hard earned dollars on their equipment, are very happy with it and don't appreciate you calling it substandard.

pds, first I could and have heard a difference between a 60 watt adcom and a 100 watt jvc, why was that? That statement is not true at all.

Second, an amp does have an affect on sound stage, as the amp approaches it limits in current, the soundstage will start to collapse. That is due to the amp no longer being able to control the cone movement and that has to due with the design and type of amp that it is.

Third, I NEVER called yamaha substandard not one time. Yamaha makes some quality stuff, I have just never liked their amps. I have one of their older prologic receivers, RXV 595 or something. While it was good at the time and price I paid,  it does not sound as good ar have the balls of my Denon. Not even close. It is better than the JVC I bought for my boys though.

If what you say is correct then my Denon sounds just as good as anything that I could buy at any price. I am no audio snob, but that is just not reality.

jeffsg4mac · Mar 27, 2004

Look here, here are the specs for both of Zumbo's amps. From what PDS says they should both sound the same, Power wise they are very close. But according to Zumbo they sound very different. Why is that PDS? it is not power I can tell you that. Is it that Zumbo is making all this up? I don't believe that either. Why does the adcom weigh 10lbs more if it is the same?

RXV1400
Specifications for this Yamaha AV receiver:
7.1 Channels (THX EX®, DTS ES®).
Surround Decoder: Dolby Prologic II, THX EX®, DTS ES®, DTS®, Dolby Digital®.
Remote Control: Learning, Keypad with Display.
Main Speakers Power 110 x 2 Watts.
Max Surround Power 20Hz - 20kHz: Main - 0.04% THD, 110W. Center - 0.04% THD, 110W. Surround - 0.04% THD, 110W. Surround Back - 0.04% THD, 110W.
Harmonic Distortion 0.04%.
Analog Inputs 5.1 Channels.
Rear Audio Inputs Coaxial: 3, Optical: 5.
Rear Video Inputs Composite: 7, S-Video: 6, Component: 2.
Rear Audio Outputs Optical: 2.
Rear Video Outputs S-Video: 3.
Tuner Presets 40 Channels.
Tone Controls Bass & Treble.
THX Certification Select.
DSP Modes: Concert Hall, Jazz Club, Rock Concert, Disco, 7ch Stereo, Game, Music Video, Mono Movie, Variety/Sports, Spectacle, Sci-Fi, Adventure, General, Enhanced.
Dimensions: Depth 17.06 in. x Height 6.75 in. x Width 17.13 in.
Weighs 34.2 lb

GFA-7605
Defining high performance and high value!
125 watts x 5 channels into 8 ohms all channels driven
Gold plated RCA inputs
Gold Plated 5 way binding post speaker terminals
Huge torriodial transformers
Mono block power supply design for all channels
100,000 micro Farads of power supply capacitance.
Power bandwidth 10 Hz –100kHz
12 volt trigger on circuit
Dimensions 5.25x17x15
Unit weight: 42lbs.

Need to replace your A/V receiver?

hopjohn

Full Audioholic

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan

Rob Babcock

Moderator

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan

zipper

Full Audioholic

Guest

Guest

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan

Guest

Guest

zipper

Full Audioholic

rgriffin25

Moderator

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy

RX-V2400

Audioholic

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan

Ross

Junior Audioholic

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy

pds

Enthusiast

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy

pds

Enthusiast

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy

Latest posts

Sitemap

Sitemap

Site Information

Site Information

HTML