New receiver or new power amp?

[zumbo]

again? it was my first post on this thread.

LOL! Just a saying I have.

 

[highfihoney]

or in sound quality; I have never heard of a reciver that that had better SQ than a equal, or even lesser priced power amp.

You shouldnt sell all recievers short,ive heard some wonderfull sounding recievers that sound as good & in some cases better than gear costing several thousand dollars,case in point,i have a 30 yr old marantz reciever that when ran strictly as a preamp sounds better than any other preamp ive owned.

The main fault that i find in most recievers is their low wattage,in most ht applications where the mains are efficient & the sub is capable of meeting all the low end needs most decent recievers do a fine job its when most recievers are asked to produce a full range signal with speakers that dig deep in the bass is where they fall flat on their face when driven hard.

 

[zumbo]

You'd have to clip it pretty good and then depending on each driver's power capability, the tweeters would go firstly as they are the lowest power rated drivers.

Yep! I have been through some tweeters in my younger years. But, once I found MB Quart tweets, no more problem. The ears will be the first to go.

 

[no. 5]

You shouldnt sell all recievers short,ive heard some wonderfull sounding recievers that sound as good & in some cases better than gear costing several thousand dollars,case in point,i have a 30 yr old marantz reciever that when ran strictly as a preamp sounds better than any other preamp ive owned.

I was'nt realy tring to, just saing that I had not heard of a case where a Reciever alone outperformd a seprets system, untill now.
I totaly agrie with highfihoney and zumbo, that a reciever used as a preamp often will be better (or at least as good as) a stand alone preamp, however, I don't belive all amplifiers are created equal, or at lest not all the same.
in the end I think an amplifier will contribute a small portion of the sound that is heard. (Rod Elliott, Amplifier Sound - What Are The Influences?)

 

[Seth=L]

No dispute that receivers sometimes beat out seperates, SOMETIMES.

The dispute is difference in amplifiers. Speakers can handle more power that you think. Can most speakers handle 200 watts RMS from 20hz-20Khz? Probably not. But they can handle this power for short periods of time. My Carver amplifier is extremely dynamic in comparison to the Onkyo TX-DS787 I used to have. And guess what I connected that Carver to the pre-outs of the Onkyo. And before you second guess the Carver Tube sounding thing, forget it. They did not employ it in the AV series.

Was there a noticable difference in SQ at lower volumes? No. Was there a difference in dynamics? Yes. Was there a difference in cleaner sound at higher volumes? Yes. And lastly was it louder? Hell YES, much louder over 105 Db and uncomfortable for enduring sessions. Could the Onkyo do this before noticably clipping, HELL NO, not even close.

Now you guys go on with your "biased because you have eyes" thing, but dang it you have to draw the line somewhere. If you listen to it, blind or not, you will definitely notice, unless you are a "RAYTARD".

 

[zumbo]

No dispute that receivers sometimes beat out seperates, SOMETIMES.

The dispute is difference in amplifiers. Speakers can handle more power that you think. Can most speakers handle 200 watts RMS from 20hz-20Khz? Probably not. But they can handle this power for short periods of time. My Carver amplifier is extremely dynamic in comparison to the Onkyo TX-DS787 I used to have. And guess what I connected that Carver to the pre-outs of the Onkyo. And before you second guess the Carver Tube sounding thing, forget it. They did not employ it in the AV series.

Was there a noticable difference in SQ at lower volumes? No. Was there a difference in dynamics? Yes. Was there a difference in cleaner sound at higher volumes? Yes. And lastly was it louder? Hell YES, much louder over 105 Db and uncomfortable for enduring sessions. Could the Onkyo do this before noticably clipping, HELL NO, not even close.

Now you guys go on with your "biased because you have eyes" thing, but dang it you have to draw the line somewhere. If you listen to it, blind or not, you will definitely notice, unless you are a "RAYTARD".

Thanks for letting us know speakers can handle more than we think.

The only reason it was louder, would be, you cut it up to a higher level. At the same level, it would be the same. Period.

I can go along with that Onkyo running out of gas. Heck, it's an Onkyo!

If this Carver you have is sooooo awesome, why are you listing a Fisher?

Seth=L
yettitheman must die!
Integrated amplifier: Fisher CA-885 ,Toshiba SD-9000 DVD player, NHT 1.5 Fronts, RCA/Radioshack 12" sub, M&K MX-100 (currently out of order ) JVC 27" Flat tube TV, Magnavox CDB 650 CD player

 

[highfihoney]

No dispute that receivers sometimes beat out seperates, SOMETIMES.

The dispute is difference in amplifiers. Speakers can handle more power that you think. Can most speakers handle 200 watts RMS from 20hz-20Khz? Probably not.

YUP couldnt have said it better if i tried,its not power that blows speakers its distortion,what seperates an underpowered pos amp from a great amp is its ability to provide clean undistorted power while being driven hard,on a weekly basis i run well over 1,000 watts into speakers that have a maximum rating of only 250 watts continuous with zero problems.

 

[Seth=L]

Thanks for letting us know speakers can handle more than we think.

The only reason it was louder, would be, you cut it up to a higher level. At the same level, it would be the same. Period.

I can go along with that Onkyo running out of gas. Heck, it's an Onkyo!

If this Carver you have is sooooo awesome, why are you listing a Fisher?

Seth=L
yettitheman must die!
Integrated amplifier: Fisher CA-885 ,Toshiba SD-9000 DVD player, NHT 1.5 Fronts, RCA/Radioshack 12" sub, M&K MX-100 (currently out of order ) JVC 27" Flat tube TV, Magnavox CDB 650 CD player

First you are mocking me, please do not do that.

Second. I am a college student. I needed money and I sold the carver amp for more than what I paid for it.

Third, Have you seen my Fisher integrated amplifier thread? This amp is a force to be reckoned with. It has got some serious juice, and it is dynamic as hell.

My point I was making is that most well made speakers can handle surprising amounts of power. When an amplifier is demanded of large amounts of power many times, like during intense action sequences most receivers internal ampliers fall short, and just the same for music.

Even if what you say is right, about it not being louder, more powerful amplifiers will sound better at high volumes. Receivers will start to compress the sound, the tweeters will get bright, and bass will lose impact without a sub.

 

[PENG]

One more thing. It sounds really silly to say a receiver could match a powerful amplifier on output. Wait it doesn't just sound silly, because that is just plain wrong.

Did anyone say that?

 

[mtrycrafts]

or in sound quality; I have never heard of a reciver that that had better SQ than a equal, or even lesser priced power amp.

Perhaps they have the same sound quality. Perhaps you didn't do a fair, unbiased comparison?

 

[mtrycrafts]

LOL! Just a saying I have.

And others

 

[mtrycrafts]

Yep! I have been through some tweeters in my younger years. But, once I found MB Quart tweets, no more problem. The ears will be the first to go.

Why not? Their tweeters are probably designed for high power handling? I don't know, but it has to be for this, and I have been shown tweeters with high power ratings, so they do exist.

 

[PENG]

Zumbo, why waste your time? I respect those who trust their ears because at least perception is real, but it is pointless in trying to convince someone who thinks he understands the theory behind his claims.

 

[PENG]

YUP couldnt have said it better if i tried,its not power that blows speakers its distortion,what seperates an underpowered pos amp from a great amp is its ability to provide clean undistorted power while being driven hard,on a weekly basis i run well over 1,000 watts into speakers that have a maximum rating of only 250 watts continuous with zero problems.

Most of that 1000W went to the bass drivers, right?

 

[highfihoney]

Most of that 1000W went to the bass drivers, right?

I dont have a clue as to the exact breakdown but i think that about 800 watts goes to feeding the woofers & the other 200 plus watts feeds the tweets & mids.

 

[Rob Babcock]

I'm definitely disappointed with a great many of my cd's. With a decent system calibrated to be as flat as possible in my room I can really tell the difference between cd's. Many of my rap cd's seem to be made for the typical bass fanatic so they actually have the bass recorded lower than the rest of the frequency band. Example: If I play that cd in a typical car stereo where the subs are turned up far louder than the rest of the speaker's it sounds normal, but when I play it on my system, which has a greater capability of hitting low bass and louder bass than the car system's maximum it sounds weak and lacking bass. But then I play a cd that in my opinion is recorded properly it will not lack bass on my system, but will begin to distort on a typical car stereo before mine does.

Stop listening to rap! Problem solved.

 

[zumbo]

First you are mocking me, please do not do that.

Not trying to offend. But when you state that most speakers can't handle 200W, I had to say something

The dispute is difference in amplifiers. Speakers can handle more power that you think. Can most speakers handle 200 watts RMS from 20hz-20Khz? Probably not.

Second. I am a college student. I needed money and I sold the carver amp for more than what I paid for it.

I can understand that. I spent all of my 20's, and most of my 30's buying and selling my audio equipment.

Third, Have you seen my Fisher integrated amplifier thread? This amp is a force to be reckoned with. It has got some serious juice, and it is dynamic as hell.

Fisher was never cutting edge. Not saying you don't have a fine hunk of equipment, but I'm just saying....

My point I was making is that most well made speakers can handle surprising amounts of power. When an amplifier is demanded of large amounts of power many times, like during intense action sequences most receivers internal ampliers fall short, and just the same for music.

Again, thanks for the audio education. I had no idea speakers demanded power. I have found nothing more demanding than a well mastered concert dvd. Also, this has nothing to do with adding an amp to a current receiver in use to make it louder.

Even if what you say is right, about it not being louder, more powerful amplifiers will sound better at high volumes. Receivers will start to compress the sound, the tweeters will get bright, and bass will lose impact without a sub.

I said that in this thread. Several times. High volume is the key word. At the same volume, it would be the same.

 

[zumbo]

Stop listening to rap! Problem solved.

ROTFLMFAO!

 

[no. 5]

Perhaps they have the same sound quality. Perhaps you didn't do a fair, unbiased comparison?

I said "heard of a reciever..." not "heard a reciever...", as in;

'in all my years of reading reviews and testimonials, and listining to people talk about of audio equipment, no one to my knowledge had said, or wrote that a reciever sounded better than a stand alone power amp'

however, in post #82, highfihoney gave there own expearinces of recievers sounding better than stand alone sepreats, so in post #84 I aknowledged that 'now I have heard an example'.

 

[PENG]

I dont have a clue as to the exact breakdown but i think that about 800 watts goes to feeding the woofers & the other 200 plus watts feeds the tweets & mids.

So at 200WPC, about 50W goes to the mid/high. At 50W continuous and 200W peak into a typical 89 dB sensitivity speaker would sound pretty loud for most people. I can't see why a $10,000 Krell amp would sound much different than a $6,000 McIntosh driving a pair of say Paradigm S8 or a pair of B&W803.

On the other hand, last weekend I listened to a little live brass band playing Christmas songs and I definitely didn't need any blind test to know it sounded very different than the best and most expensive hi fi system I have ever heard. So I wonder if your goal is to upgrade your 2 channel system in order to get it as close to "live" quality as possible, but you only have $10,000 to spend, would you spend it on speakers, amps, or source equipment/media, aside from the room acoustic stuff. I know this is off the topic but I am too lazy to start a new thread. The OP doesn't seem to mind anyway, assuming he is still watching.