Receiver vs. preamp/amp combo

[PENG]

Interestingly enough my 4 year old Harman Kardon is rated for 55*5 or 65*2 and is rated for a maximum consumption of about 550 watts. Twice the 5 channel specced output.

"Interestingly enough"?... I find it even more interestingly that HK would specify that "maximum" thing in their specifications page usually found near the end of the instruction manual but if you take a look at the back of the receiver, you will see a much lower consumption rating. Unlike others, they call it "AC Input" instead of power consumption. It means the same, as long as you compare Watt to Watt not Watt to VA.

Example:

In the Owner's manual for the HKAVR340:

P.64 - Power Consumption:890W maximum,
P.8 - AC Input: 370W
Now, go figure!

 

[mtrycrafts]

Example:

In the Owner's manual for the HKAVR340:

P.64 - Power Consumption:890W maximum,
P.8 - AC Input: 370W
Now, go figure!

Isn't this the audiophile new math?

 

[no. 5]

In the Owner's manual for the HKAVR340:

P.64 - Power Consumption:890W maximum,
P.8 - AC Input: 370W
Now, go figure!

now that is Interesting.

 

[zumbo]

Round and around, round and around.

 

[PENG]

Isn't this the audiophile new math?

Or "conservative" math??

 

[PENG]

now that is Interesting.

Want more? Please download the manual for the 245, read up on it, and tell me why the 245 has the following specs:

Power Consumption: 540W maximum (5 channels driven)...........This one puzzles me more, isn't the 245 a 7 channel receiver?
AC Input: 390W
Weight: 30 lbs

When the 240 has the following:

Power Consumption: 540W maximum (6 channels driven)...........The 240 is also a 7 channel receiver.
AC Input: 350W
Weight: 34.5 lbs

So how accurate are those info in their manuals?

 

[PENG]

Round and around, round and around.

Exactly, that's why I tend to resort to reviews with bench tests instead of relying solely on specifications published in those Owner's manuals. Of course, I do rely on my ears as well, to a point..........

 

[emorphien]

Yeah, I have no real idea how H/K comes up with those numbers. Can't say I care either, the thing works well enough for now!

It's unfortunate that manufacturers seem to come up with these numbers which are hard to decipher.

 

[gene]

Oh Geez here we go again with the ACD nonsense. Why is it that the only people who argue these points are the ones buying receivers from companies whom are so behind the technology curve that they use this marketing term to justify their products as being "better"?

Please refer to our sticky thread on this topic at:
http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14222

As well as the extensive article I wrote on this very topic:
http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/amplifiers/ACDTEST.php

As for power ratings on back panels of receivers, most are NOT max power ratings unless otherwise specified. Most UL certified products (ie. Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer, etc) give a power consumption figure based on 1 or 2 channels driven at full power with the others at 1/8th power. Unless the manual/receiver states max current or max power consumption, DON'T assume the back panel figure is the absolute max power the receiver will consume.

 

[no. 5]

Exactly, that's why I tend to resort to reviews with bench tests instead of relying solely on specifications published in those Owner's manuals. Of course, I do rely on my ears as well, to a point..........

likewise, I always try to find a bench test.
however, it's often hard to find good bench tests of products I want information about.
reviews with specs I can get on the company website, shure! bench tests? not so much.

So how accurate are those info in their manuals?

not very?

 

[emorphien]

The manual specifies for "2 channels driven" it consumes 540 watts maximum.

The back says 320 watts.

So you can use that to continue your argument. I don't care what it actually ends up meaning, I just know it is enough for my small living room for the time being while I focus on my 2 channel setup.

Whatever the case is, I recall the measurements for a similar H/K showing it was putting out a fair bit more power than spec. So... add that to your discussion I'll have no further part in

 

[no. 5]

...companies whom are so behind the technology curve that they use this marketing term to justify their products as being "better"?

like "High Instantaneous Current Capability"?

As for power ratings on back panels of receivers, most are NOT max power ratings unless otherwise specified. Most UL certified products (ie. Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer, etc) give a power consumption figure based on 1 or 2 channels driven at full power with the others at 1/8th power. Unless the manual/receiver states max current or max power consumption, DON'T assume the back panel figure is the absolute max power the receiver will consume.

learnd somthing new today. thanks Gene.

 

[PENG]

The manual specifies for "2 channels driven" it consumes 540 watts maximum.

The back says 320 watts.

So you can use that to continue your argument. I don't care what it actually ends up meaning, I just know it is enough for my small living room for the time being while I focus on my 2 channel setup.

Whatever the case is, I recall the measurements for a similar H/K showing it was putting out a fair bit more power than spec. So... add that to your discussion I'll have no further part in

Are you reading a different manual? I downloaded both the 240 and 245 manual. Both say 540W maximum but the 245 one has, in bracket, (5 channels driven) while the 240 one has, in bracket, (6 channels driven). Which one did you refer to that says 540W, 2 channel driven?

Regardless, I have also read tests that show HK receivers putting out more all channel driven power than their pubished specs, no argument there. This is generally not the case for the popular Denon and Yamaha models.

Problem is, everything else being equal, they typically get you less watts per dollar, especially in 1&2 channels driven. Anyway, enjoy your HK, they do sound, and look great.

 

[PENG]

As for power ratings on back panels of receivers, most are NOT max power ratings unless otherwise specified. Most UL certified products (ie. Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer, etc) give a power consumption figure based on 1 or 2 channels driven at full power with the others at 1/8th power. Unless the manual/receiver states max current or max power consumption, DON'T assume the back panel figure is the absolute max power the receiver will consume.

Thank you Gene, I remember you explained the basis of the power ratings on the back panels before, but I couldn't find the thread.

I knew that was the reason why HK receivers have much lower numbers at the back panel than those "maximum" numbers in the Owner's manuals, but it doesn't explain the apparent discrepancies between the numbers for the 240, 245 and 340. I would have to assume that they made some typo errors.

 

[emorphien]

Are you reading a different manual? I downloaded both the 240 and 245 manual. Both say 540W maximum but the 245 one has, in bracket, (5 channels driven) while the 240 one has, in bracket, (6 channels driven). Which one did you refer to that says 540W, 2 channel driven?

Regardless, I have also read tests that show HK receivers putting out more all channel driven power than their pubished specs, no argument there. This is generally not the case for the popular Denon and Yamaha models.

Problem is, everything else being equal, they typically get you less watts per dollar, especially in 1&2 channels driven. Anyway, enjoy your HK, they do sound, and look great.

No, I'm reading for my H/K, not the 240

They do give you less watts for dollar on the face of it, but compared to other similarly priced receivers they don't seem to perform too differently, and I actually like their sound a bit better. As you step up the money ladder though, I'd probably go with Denon.

 

[no. 5]

They do give you less watts for dollar on the face of it, but compared to other similarly priced receivers they don't seem to perform too differently

I think if they were all tested ACD eek: ), they would all deliever about the same power; my 4 year old 5660's power out-put ACD is 55 watts.

and I actually like their sound a bit better.

and that is indeed more inportant than power out-put.

 

[mike c]

from the sound and vision bench tests:
5 channels driven test for the yammy 657 and HK330 is equal
but in 2 channel mode, the yammy pulls ahead
and in 1 channel mode even further (this is what might be the most important spec of the three because this might be the measurement needed to measure the capacity for peaks)

 

[PENG]

No, I'm reading for my H/K, not the 240

Thank you for answering my question. It seems that this time we all end up saying more or less the same thing in the end.

 

[mtrycrafts]

learnd somthing new today. thanks Gene.

That is what life is supposed to be. When it is over, time to go underground

 

[mtrycrafts]

from the sound and vision bench tests:
5 channels driven test for the yammy 657 and HK330 is equal
but in 2 channel mode, the yammy pulls ahead
and in 1 channel mode even further (this is what might be the most important spec of the three because this might be the measurement needed to measure the capacity for peaks)

Yes, exactly. Besides, it has been stated before that you may never get a need for full power on all channels at the same instant to use that 'all channels' driven spec.

Close doesn't count.