Will an external amp boost just volume, or improve overall sound quality?

[mtrycrafts]

no offense to anybody but this is stupid.

all the guys who preach that a difference cant be heard running external amps kill me,every last post i have ever seen from the nay sayers is without merit because it is NEVER based on experience but they all cling to the google linked dbt tests like they are the holy grail of hifi & quote terms like "emperical evidince" or "testing protocol" or even "quantifiable",who is trying to prove what here, the guys who have tried it both ways & heard a difference or the guys who have never tried anything & desperately cling to google links to reinforce their position ?

.

Experience? You mean your experience is accurate, not subject to bias and perception errors? Just curious. Oh, by the way, published reports are also based on experience, not pulled from thin air and usually better controlled for bias than what I read here from many. I think I will accept those experiences over yours?

 

[mtrycrafts]

You have two speakers in two totally different spots. Even if your only sitting 1M away you still have room accoustics that will affect the sound. This is why speaker manufacturers do their testing in such rooms.

Try to convince some others who are doing this kind of comparisons here One listens to the front channels with one amp, then the back channels with the other amp. LOL
Don't know

 

[mtrycrafts]

I thought I posted that I brought my RS meter out with me, but I might have forgotten to say: sorry. I would sit on the sofa, same location for both setups, and bump the volume with the remote to 75 dB. For the record, it didn't take much bumping between the two setups, a couple of taps on the volume key, and I had the SPL set to slow "C".

Bryan...hope this makes it a bit clearer, still...

Well, we're getting there To check these levels, did you use music or test tones? Music is too variable, and that analog meter may not be interpolated accurately enough for some testing.

 

[MacManNM]

But unless your clipping the receivers ampstage it isn't going to make a bit off difference and thats the point I'm trying to get across. Again, unless the OP is using very inefficient speakers in a large room the addition of an amp will not make a difference unless he's clipping the ampstage of the receiver.

The point is, that listening at 1 watt, and having a 20dB peak, the receiver is clipping.

 

[MacManNM]

Any of you guys that thinks adding a good external amp to today’s receivers wont improve the sound are nuts. I have a Proton amp (my wimpiest lowest watt unit, AA1150) that will blow the doors off of any of today’s receivers in 2ch mode. It is rated at 50W/ch! Today’s receivers drive many channels, and they need a little help for the workhorse channels. Having an amp for at least the front 2 if not the front 3 is not bad. My Yammie 2500 runs for cover when I drive it hard, it shuts down and prays for a break but my poweramps, just keep-a-rockin. Today’s receivers are great for the average Joe, who likes to watch a movie, but to get real fidelity and dynamic range you need an amp, or several. I would put my AA1150 and C-28 pre, up against ANY of the flagship receivers in 2ch mode any day of the week. My combo would:
a. Look better and
b. Sound better

So get off of the “good enough” bandwagon. Nothing is good enough.

 

[highfihoney]

Well, you may have real time power meters, but it isn't instantaneous response capable. I am sure that they are needle based? Lots of lag and then you look at the spl meter, more time lag. Not very accurate.

not accurate? wrong, highly accurate

you are correct that the amps metering system is needle based but thats where your assumptions stop being correct,not only will they show instantanious response but they will show instantanious response up to 4,800 watts into any ohm & do it as accurately as any laboratory grade measuring device.

 

[highfihoney]

Experience? You mean your experience is accurate, not subject to bias and perception errors? Just curious. Oh, by the way, published reports are also based on experience, not pulled from thin air and usually better controlled for bias than what I read here from many. I think I will accept those experiences over yours?

you say my methods of testing are flawed & biased & subject to perception, lets see here, i send a full range signal to both speakers, i monitor real time & instantanious peak wattage from the amp,i use digital accoustic analyzers to measure room response,i use both digital & analog spl meters to measure the db level at the listening position,all pulled from thin air huh,nice try but no cigar my friend

my methods are 1,000 times more accurate over the method of (let me look at the volume control knob on my reciever) that was used in this thread that you posted your agreement with

once again i wonder who is taking a stance that is self serving

 

[ht_addict]

The point is, that listening at 1 watt, and having a 20dB peak, the receiver is clipping.

I've had many receivers in my setup and never once heard one clip, even during these sudden transients. Your 20db peak you talk about would be mostly from the front left/right speakers in a 5.1 setup. So you'd be asking the receiver to produce 64watts per channel for the fronts. A demand that mid to high end receivers would have no problem producing. Checkout the benchmarks here on audioholics.(eg: Yamaha 2600: 122w 2ch/8ohm)

 

[mulester7]

all the guys who preach that a difference can't be heard running external amps kill me,every last post i have ever seen from the nay sayers is without merit because it is NEVER based on experience but they all cling to the google linked dbt tests like they are the holy grail of hifi & quote terms like "emperical evidince" or "testing protocol" or even "quantifiable",who is trying to prove what here, the guys who have tried it both ways & heard a difference or the guys who have never tried anything & desperately cling to google links to reinforce their position?

who's position on this subject is more self serving i wonder ?

one thing i know for sure is that people who are willing to try new things within their own systems will benifit by gaining personal experience & better sounding rigs & those who read everything in sight trying to convince themselves & others that the gear they own can't be bested will never gain one ounce of knowledge (other than quoting specs) nor will they achieve the next level of performance.

.....now there it is, it could not have been said better, and some used pieces of equipment are built to stay out of the shop for literally decades.....

 

[ht_addict]

....THERE WAS NO DIFFERENCE COMPARING MY RECEIVER TO SEPERATES BECAUSE MY SPL METER TOLD ME SO!!....

.....this is what I'm hearing....whoever it was that said the "most" noticable difference in the sound quality they heard was attained at the pre-amp level, made the statement of the thread in my view....guys, listen up, I wouldn't lie to you for anything nor try to impress....I've been a practicing musician both instrumentally and vocally since early grade school, no big deal since that's the doors that opened for me, and I gladly went through those doors with the chill bumps I've experienced a bazillion times telling me I was on the road I was supposed to be on....I've been right in the middle of top-flight band and orchestra programs, was a voice major in college, and have been in professional Gospel quartets after college, singing the baritone harmony part which is the part that makes a chord "lock" by sometimes having to bend it's pitch a little....I don't think I have a trained ear for music combined with a very good God given sense of pitch, I know I do....maybe some here have had more equipment through the years than me, but I have owned receiver after receiver until 1986, and the purchase of a McIntosh solid-state pre-amp "ended" the search for sound quality at pre-amp level....to build a system around that piece of equipment is the best thing I ever did, and I would strongly advise that to you Gentlemen....

.....receivers have "always" been a choice for economy, and they "always" will be a combined choice for economy, period, close the book, we're done....sure, you can drop a ton on some flagship receivers and things may get a bit better over mid-level, but anyone dropping multiple thousands on a receiver with used McIntosh pre-amps and quality inexpensive dedicated slave power readily available, warrants an extended stay at, here it is again, the local drooling academy....

....."BUT MY RECEIVER HAS PROCESSING!!".....call the different modes of processing what you will, but all I've ever heard of processing brought me quickly back to the fullness of all-channels-stereo, even with multiple speakers around the room....cost factors of the industry warrant the inputs from our sources having only left and right stereo signals anyway....anything after that I've ever heard, is at best smoke-and-mirrors matrixing....I suspect there will be rebuttal posts over this paragraph, go ahead and give it your best shot, I won't be swayed, others might, who cares, I'll most likely never hear their systems.....oh well....on to tuners.....

....."BUT MY RECEIVER HAS A GREAT TUNER SECTION INCLUDED!!"....well, at the point you're at with "any" receiver, you may think it's a great tuner section....try a used McIntosh tuner with your used McIntosh solid-state pre-amp, you can pick up both for about 800-1200, and you'll find out what good AM or FM through your system actually is....I have what is considered to be "not" the most expensive used Mac tuner, the MR 75, and the lows and highs of even the AM band are crisp and well defined through my main's regiment, "and" my subs....yes, there's a good deal of content comes through my subs with AM....I had a Kenwood seperates tuner one time that had a capture ratio of 1.0, and the MR 75 literally destroys the Kenwood at every level......

.....good grief, there's a lot of comments made here by those who ain't got a clue, but evidently don't care, and just want to post their reasonings derived from comments from those who desperately try to defend their receivers....subs have done more for the receiver market than any other factor....I'll admit, the sub taking over at 80 hz down, takes a huge load off the current flow needed at the amp section level for the mains and surround speakers, whatever the application, be it receiver, or main's/surrounds slave power....but current flow at a comfortable rate is only one contributing factor to the kind of sound quality I'm talking about.....

.....sooooo, take that, ya' buncha' TIN-EARED NEANDERTHALS!!!!!.....

Having a rough night mulester7 It was a beautiful rant but didn't answer the OP question. So I'll say it again. Unless your pushing the ampstage off a receiver beyond its capability adding and external amp won't make a difference. A 100watts is a 100watts.

 

[The Numenorian]

my god what have i done; i have created a monster thread!

i anticipated that this might happen...oh well. at least i have TONS of opinions from which to collate my own!

keep up the great speculation...i'm lovin the education

 

[ht_addict]

.....ridiculous response from start to finish....a meter to measure wattage output has nothing to do with what we're talking about, nothing....those with clean, quality, added slave power complimenting their receiver or being used with a pre-amp are laughing at you....but hey, did you really think it was a beautiful rant?....by the way, what does OP stand for?....outboard power?....

.....("Your Honor, when my hands reached around this person's neck, I blacked out and should not be held responsible").....

OP stands for obnoxious prick Just kidding actually it stands for original poster. It if we look back at the original poster question:

Let's say that I am currently using a Yamaha RX-V2500.

Let's also say that I am using some Axioms in 5.1:

M60 for mains
M3ti for surrounds
VP100 center
EP350 sub

Now then, will adding an external amp at about 150 wpc/constant improve sound quality, or just volume? I am using a pretty large space, about 2200ft^3, and the 2500 can only do about 60-70 wpc/all 5 driven.

Now, if I added an amp just for the main speakers, would that make my sound lopsided? Or could I utilize the receiver's equalizing (auto and manual) to take care of any such side effects? Thanks.

*btw, awesome forum...my new favorite*

The OP has some very nice, very efficient(92-93db) speakers complimented by a sub in his 5.1setup. Again I will say an amp will not make the difference he's looking for. I suggest the OP read the review off the 2500 here on audioholics. Here's a quote I took from the benchmark section.

The Yamaha RX-V2500 does a bang up job in power delivery into 8 ohms. While it is specified to deliver 130wpc into 8 ohms, I actually measured a whopping 148wpc with one channel driven and 135wpc into 8 ohms with 2 channels driven unclipped! What’s even more impressive is that it did so with only 0.05dB additional attenuation at 20kHz when compared to the 1 watt frequency response test. What this demonstrates is excellent frequency response uniformity at all power levels. Kudos to a receiver that delivers all the latest bells and whistle with a free 7CH amp thrown in!

 

[ht_addict]

.....and that would be your biggest mistake concerning the issue of slave-power....don't accept as Gospel ANYTHING that has been said here, and let them things on the sides of your head make the call......

So all your ranting and raving and name calling was a waste off time

 

[tbewick]

I was looking at a Quad 405 on ebay and happened to come across this quote, which I hadn't heard before:

"All amplifiers sound the same" - Peter Walker

- http://www.quadesl.org/Amplifiers/amplifiers.html.

Wikipedia expands on this:

'It is worth noting that Quad always had a very straight forward engineering view of their products and insisted that all amplifiers sound the same when used within their capabilities, and that speaker cable has no sound at all (unless ludicrously long and thin wire is used).'

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quad_(audio)

 

[PENG]

Since this is a old question, and has been repeated over and over again on the msgboards. I'll post a link to 1 of the threads.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15256

Since I read and posted to the thread I linked above, I have also tested this using a 75wpc external amp vs receivers 110wpc amps. Right channel using the pre+amp, the Left channel using receivers powered connection. I put the receiver in stereo 2channel mode, and listened from about 1m away from each speaker. After going back in forth multiple times, and having my wife listen. The 75wpc amp was noticebly cleaner.

In conclusion: Yes a decent external amp will boost the volume, as well as improve the overall sound quality.

Reorx

That's interesting, I did a similar test recently, except that I compared my two amps, then my two speakers. The difference between the two amps was very difficult to notice. The difference between the two different speakers was much more noticeable. In both cases, I had the mono button on the preamp pushed in. I also did the 3805 vs 3805/amp combo. The combo seemed better but as flyv65 said, could not rule out that "C" (see his post).

 

[PENG]

no offense to anybody but this is stupid.

all the guys who preach that a difference cant be heard running external amps kill me,every last post i have ever seen from the nay sayers is without merit because it is NEVER based on experience

Are you sure none of them based their preach on experience? I remember reading some that were in fact based on experience. Also, I thought not every one say difference can't be heard, just that the difference are not so noticeable.

As to those who really mean to say that difference can't be heard, I think they should speak for themselves only, because it is possible that some people could hear those difference. I am talking in general term only so please do not attack..

 

[highfihoney]

Are you sure none of them based their preach on experience? I remember reading some that were in fact based on experience. Also, I thought not every one say difference can't be heard, just that the difference are not so noticeable.

As to those who really mean to say that difference can't be heard, I think they should speak for themselves only, because it is possible that some people could hear those difference. I am talking in general term only so please do not attack..

good morning,when i wrote nay sayers i meant those who say that a difference "cant" or "wont" be heard.

my fault is not with guys who try new things then report their own experiences weather they be pro or con "anything" its with the guys who base their recomendations on google science, this type of posting & recomending is helpful to no one especially the guys who are truly looking to get their systems to perform/sound better.

 

[PENG]

good morning,when i wrote nay sayers i meant those who say that a difference "cant" or "wont" be heard.

my fault is not with guys who try new things then report their own experiences weather they be pro or con "anything" its with the guys who base their recomendations on google science, this type of posting & recomending is helpful to no one especially the guys who are truly looking to get their systems to perform/sound better.

Good morning to you too, thanks for clarifying it. So I take it you don't have issue with those who based on their own listening experience, reporting that they could not hear much difference between certain gear. I share your view about the google thing, most people know how to do it. People come here to hear others "experience". Other than that, they can google on their own. I do appreciate those who provide interesting links though, especial the ones that are hard to google up. It saves me time.

 

[flyv65]

Well, we're getting there To check these levels, did you use music or test tones? Music is too variable, and that analog meter may not be interpolated accurately enough for some testing.

Yeah, I didn't even *think* about grabbing the Rives disc untill I was halfway to the shop, and I wasn't about to turn around for it at that time. To be honest, I didn't expect to cover all the variables, but I *did* think I'd cover the big ones, and that that would give me a pretty fair idea of whether or not there would be a difference. don't forget my biased expectation was that I *wouldn't* hear a difference: the results threw a monkeywrench into my plans for spending that money on a new TV, or at least a cheap track bike . I suppose I can set up a test here at home, using family and friends under more rigourously controlled circumstances, but I'm not sure they'd co-operate...they already think I'm a little strange for not owning an iPod.

Bryan...carry on, men...

 

[ScottMayo]

I was looking at a Quad 405 on ebay and happened to come across this quote, which I hadn't heard before:

"All amplifiers sound the same" - Peter Walker

- http://www.quadesl.org/Amplifiers/amplifiers.html.

Wikipedia expands on this:

'It is worth noting that Quad always had a very straight forward engineering view of their products and insisted that all amplifiers sound the same when used within their capabilities, and that speaker cable has no sound at all (unless ludicrously long and thin wire is used).'

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quad_(audio)

Well, I agree about the cable. If a speaker cable changes the sound, it's either doing something very odd (and arguably wrong), or the amp is being driven past the limit of stability, and is oversensitive to very minute changes (and should be replaced in that case.)

Don't agree about amps, though. With decently resolving speakers, they do sound different. I did a blinded trial with 3 quality amps from different, well known high end manufacturers, all with roughly the same wattage and damping specs, and all 3 people involved in the test could unfailingly identify which amp I was using, each time.

Electronics aren't the end all and be all of good sound, as some seem to think, but they do matter.