Yamaha RX-Z9 - av_phile hijacked thread

[av_phile]

Gene,

I've read your excellent but subjective assessment of the Z1. There's so much in it that I can agree with such as the awesome preamp and digital processing attributes that the Z1 shares with many outstanding receivers in its class. But there is one review I think it missed out that other hardware reviewers have allocated sufficient testing. That is the issue of output power.

I couldn't care less if the power is awesome in itself which I have no reason to doubt it is on its own. But what interests professional hardware reviewers found in most serious magz is whether or not the claimed specifications are correct. Distortion figures, frequency responses, floor noise and those in the tuner sections such as capture ratios, etc are often subjected to independent verification. And you know where I am leading at. The output power specs.

I hope your review of the Z9 will not be just an echo of your review of the Z1. But would include a more thorough analytical and dispassionate review based on lab measurements that will confirm or bellie the claimed technical specifications. Without these, I must say any review will remain in the province of subjective personal opinion. Personally, I wouldn't need another subjective review consisting of ooohs and aaahs about it. With due respect, I can pretty well do that myself. Thanks.

 

[gene]

AV_Phile;

If my lab equipment arrives in time for my Z9 review, I will be doing "real world" power measurements. We shall see.

I think you are way to preoccupied with these measurements. I encourage you to stick watt meter across your speakers at normal listening levels if you can. You will find the average power levels on the order of a few watts (assuming reasonably efficient speakers > 89dB SPL * 1 watt/meter). Thus in order to achieve 20 dB dynamics during peaks to reach 100dB SPL about 100 watts or so should get you there with no problems.

You may also be interested in knowing very few well designed speakers are capable of handling more than 100-200watts continuously without reaching thermal compression and increased distortion.

Our reviews are based on objective facts and subjective opinions as we have stated in the past. If you are looking strictly for a lab report, rather than a critical assessment, then you may be out of luck. My Z9 review will be full of many surprises including the most comprehensive testing of YPAO ever seen. Stay tuned...

 

[av_phile]

AV_Phile;

If my lab equipment arrives in time for my Z9 review, I will be doing "real world" power measurements. We shall see.

I think you are way to preoccupied with these measurements. I encourage you to stick watt meter across your speakers at normal listening levels if you can. You will find the average power levels on the order of a few watts (assuming reasonably efficient speakers > 89dB SPL * 1 watt/meter). Thus in order to achieve 20 dB dynamics during peaks to reach 100dB SPL about 100 watts or so should get you there with no problems.

You may also be interested in knowing very few well designed speakers are capable of handling more than 100-200watts continuously without reaching thermal compression and increased distortion.

Our reviews are based on objective facts and subjective opinions as we have stated in the past. If you are looking strictly for a lab report, rather than a critical assessment, then you may be out of luck. My Z9 review will be full of many surprises including the most comprehensive testing of YPAO ever seen. Stay tuned...

Gene,

I hope you are not missing my point entirely. For all intents and purposes, I can be using only 1 watt out of my 250wpc acurus amp and that would be sufficient to fill my room. Anything above it might very well damage my ears before any of my speakers even start to fry. But that's not my point. And I am not preoccupied with tech specs per se. But in relation to the product it describes.

The onus of my argument is centered on the CREDIBILITY of a manufacturer's technical spec versus what the product can deliver in REAL listening situations. This forum is supposed to be "pursuing the truth in audio." Right? So where is the truth when a tech spec says 100w + 100w DIN at 1 khz into 4 ohms when the amp does not even recommend using less than 8 ohms for its speaker connections? Where is the truth in audio when the same amp consumes only 80watts max of electrical power? And the manufacturer would have us believe it can generate 200 watts of output power? Where is the truth in audio when the manufacturer rates its amps only at 1Khz with only one channel driven, when we all know real listening conditions are anchored on both channels being driven for stereo listening and any program, even a solo voice, contains more than 1 Khz? And you expect the consumer to proudly declare he bought a 100wpc amp as correct? If that isn't misleading the consumer, pls tell me what is.

My early readings of hardware reviews contain both objective lab measurements to confirm or bellie CLAIMED specifications and the reviewer's opinions based on his set of values. I may disregard the latter, but not the former.

And I hope when you say that your review of the Z9 "will be full of many surprises" you have not prejudged the Z9.

 

[Yamahaluver]

Yes Gene,

Dont be making the mistake of praising anything from Yamaha in the near future, they make absolutely the most over rated junk. Just stick to your prasies of high priced euro junk as well as some other hypes.

 

[phara0h]

Tsk... Tsk... Tsk...

"And you expect the consumer to proudly declare he bought a 100wpc amp as correct?" --AV-Phile

AV-Phile... here you go with another rant that detracts from your true charm and appeal. You said all of what you said to then ask the aforementioned question?

You are so consumed with the veracity of the 'horsepower'... so you can walk around braggadociously claiming that your horse is hung better than someone else is horse...and the reason you know yours is hung better is because your tape measure is more accurate than theirs?

That is exactly what this amounts to. I am shocked to see you let all of the steam out of another attempt at a compelling argument by floating such a rudimentary question. A classic blunder in Logic 101.

Your rants on truth in adverstising have proven that you are more qualified to be an Internal Auditor then you all are to be an 'auditory' expert. };-) What is particularly amusing is the fact that your incessant monopoly on technical specifications is the only foundation upon which you have been able to attempt to build an argument--one that is seemingly to attack the viability of non-European audio/video products.

Moreover, I find it abundantly amusing that you have hemorrhged several thousand, carefully chosen, words into an effort to impeach the credibility and opinions of enthusiasts and experts alike--particularly those that are not aligned with your proclivity for numerical values vs. real world performance.

However, I truly encourage you to never give up on your crusade. Without question, being that I am a person inclined to enjoying such dialogue, this has been abundantly amusing.

Now I'm off to listen to some music! Better yet...I don't need the Owner's or Technical Manual to accomplish that.

Best,

Pharaoh

 

[gene]

AV_Phile;

It is obvious we are not seeing eye to eye on things here so I suggest we agree to disagree.

I am very familiar with Acurus amps. I am close friends with the former owner of Acurus. Their multi channel amps are also not rated with all channels driven 8/4 ohm loads at full bandwdith. I know this because the power supply is not capable of delivering that much juice. Even the legendary Aragon 8008 series amps, (which I owned for 3 years until I sold them due to space limitations and no longer needing massive power in a system with 90dB SPL sensitive speakers and over 800 watts of amplified power to dual subwoofers) only delivered full power to all channels driven IF and ONLY IF the line voltage is held constant. They Even state this in their literature. Perhaps you should read up on this.

The Yamaha receiver that you discuss power ratings on never stated all channels driven so how are they being deceiving? The reality which I will prove in a future article is this "all channels driven test at full bandwidth into 8/4 ohm loads" is NOT a realistic real world test.

The reason Receiver companies don't recommend impedances below 6 ohms is so they can receive UL approval with regards to power consumption and heat dissipation. I have never had problems driving all of my 4 ohm speakers at ear bleeding levels in my 3000 cubic foot room with flagship receivers rated similarly to the Yamaha Z9.

I think what you fail to realize is a receiver is a compromise. It has everything in it so obviously they cannot stick the huge power supplies in them that some other dedicated amps have. The question is, do you really need them? I have found most 7CH amps in the price range of $2K DO NOT outperform these flagship receivers. While some are more powerful, they are usually more noisey. So would you rather trade power for noise? I wouldn't.

And I hope when you say that your review of the Z9 "will be full of many surprises" you have not prejudged the Z9.

What have I "prejudged"? I was referring to the types of measurements I will be doing on receivers which will set a standard on this site. I think what I learned from this forum discussion is to limit my discussion on products until I complete the review. With that, I leave you to continue discussions with other forum members and will check back when my analysis is complete.

 

[av_phile]

.

Now I'm off to listen to some music! Better yet...I don't need the Owner's or Technical Manual to accomplish that.

Best,

Pharaoh

Go ahead and enjoy. But i just hope you are getting what the tech specs said you should get as a consumer. Nothing less.

 

[av_phile]

I am very familiar with Acurus amps. I am close friends with the former owner of Acurus. Their multi channel amps are also not rated with all channels driven 8/4 ohm loads at full bandwdith. I know this because the power supply is not capable of delivering that much juice. Even the legendary Aragon 8008 series amps, (which I owned for 3 years until I sold them due to space limitations and no longer needing massive power in a system with 90dB SPL sensitive speakers and over 800 watts of amplified power to dual subwoofers) only delivered full power to all channels driven IF and ONLY IF the line voltage is held constant. They Even state this in their literature. Perhaps you should read up on this.

The scant user's manual on my Acurus amps are very clear: On the A250: BOTH CHANNELS DRIVEN. On my Acurus 200X3: ALL CHANNELS DRIVEN. So what are you talking about? How can they not be capable of delivering all that juice when each of them consume a whopping 1,200 watts of electric power?? Your Aragon 8003 consume more than TWICE that!!!

And ofcourse the line voltage should be held constant. Where's the argument there? I use a a servo automatic voltage regulator and a UPS that makes sure the line voltage is constant at all times. Most audiophiles do.

 

[av_phile]

The Yamaha receiver that you discuss power ratings on never stated all channels driven so how are they being deceiving? The reality which I will prove in a future article is this "all channels driven test at full bandwidth into 8/4 ohm loads" is NOT a realistic real world test.

I find that logic flawed. It is precisely in NOT stating both or all channels driven that they are deceiving the consumer. Precisely because any power measurement that does not drive all channels will yield a HIGHER power rating. And they nicely HIDE that fact to show a higher power figure.

Are you now saying that measuring at 1Khz is more realistic than with full bandwidth? I am shocked.

I think you better review the objective of power measurements in labs. They are meant to confirm the claimed manufacturer specs using CONTROLLABLE TEST CONDITIONS APPROACHING REAL WORLD SITUATIONS. And this involved driving ALL channels simultaneously to simulate REAL listening conditions and use FULL bandwidth to simulate a REAL recording of an orchestral piece. Are you in effect telling the members here that 1Khz is more realistic? And that the power ratings derived at 1Khz is more representative of the real power that can be expected by the consumer in a real-world listening conditions?

WOW. To hear that from a champion of "truth in audio" is really revealing.

 

[gene]

AV_Phile;

I can see this discussion with you is pointless, especially since you are putting words in my mouth about things I haven't said.

If the receiver claimed full power with all channels driven simultaneously into full frequency with specified load impedances, it would be another story and I would see your point.

The Acurus amps I was referring to were the 5CH amps and the new Aragon 3000 series 5CH amps. But thats not the point.

I have nothing left to add to this discussion as it has become nothing more than ranting and restating prior points.

 

[rgriffin25]

Who Cares

Av-phile,

It seems to me that you have endorsed yourself as the Electronics Police! Running around pointing out "flaws" in equipment that you may or may not own. If it really bothers you that much perhaps a letter to your congressman would suffice? Tell them how bad the average consumer is being ripped off by the audio industry. You might also mention how you only get a half bag of potato chips.(after some settling occurs.) Or how the mobile phone industry charges us for a minute of airtime even if the call is only 3 seconds. The list can go on and on.

How can you be such an advocate of accurate and honest and forthcoming specs, when you are smart enough to realize that they should be taken with a grain of salt. Especially when it comes to power ratings. Besides there are several of us here already aware enough to be cautious of reading to much into specifications to begin with, regardless of their validity..

Not only is it important to let your ears be the judge, it is necessary to find equipment that is easy to use and fits into your budget.

Honestly, I can find many other things in life to worry about. I consider my hobby/addiction to be a form of entertainment. Not another way to be critical of meaningless specs.

I personally look forward to the reviews posted at this site. (I think you will be lucky to find a review without any bias anywhere) So don't point fingers here in hopes of changing the world. I think you will be the only one disappointed when nothing is changed on the account of you.

 

[av_phile]

The reason Receiver companies don't recommend impedances below 6 ohms is so they can receive UL approval with regards to power consumption and heat dissipation. I have never had problems driving all of my 4 ohm speakers at ear bleeding levels in my 3000 cubic foot room with flagship receivers rated similarly to the Yamaha Z9.

Now that's very revealing, so they'd raise the impedance just to gain UL SAFETY certification?!? That means, even if it can drive 4ohm loads, the receivers are dangerously close to thermal runaway and exceed UL minimum requirements for heat dissipation to gain the UL mark. Tsk Tsk. Another black eye for them.

Sorry to rain down on your parade, the ROTEL RSX 1067 is a 7.1 receiver rated conservatively at 100wpc with all 7 channels driven simultanously across 20hz - 20khz into 8 ohms at 0.05% THD as inidcated in its specs. And true enough its electric power consumption is a whopping 990 watts, just 10 watts shy of the Z9's. And oh, it states at the back a minimum speaker requirement of 4 ohms, unconditionally.

It has no UL mark but it runs just warm even with 4 ohm loads at higher than normal listening levels for the whole afternoon. My Acurus feeds a 4-ohm Mordaunt-short and never goes beyond warm under neighbor-*****ing levels.

I think what you fail to realize is a receiver is a compromise. It has everything in it so obviously they cannot stick the huge power supplies in them that some other dedicated amps have. The question is, do you really need them? I have found most 7CH amps in the price range of $2K DO NOT outperform these flagship receivers. While some are more powerful, they are usually more noisey. So would you rather trade power for noise? I wouldn't.

Nope, I've never considered receivers on equal footing with separates for the same power. So telling me it is a compromise is not surprising. I have no problem with that. Never did. My problem is when their manufacturers try to con me into thinking their reciever's power is better than or at par with some other receivers that is conservatively rated. Though I could be faulted for unfairly comparing the Z9 with a separates Acurus power amp, I must insist the comparison is not strained as I am comparing it with the amps sections of the reciever. But I guess a more judicious comparison is with another reciever. So I give the 100wpc Rotel RSX 1067.

Whether or not I would need stupendous amounts of power is beside the point. That already impinges on personal subjectivism. Let me repeat for the Nth time, I am questioning the propriety of stating power specs under unrealistic conditions that effectively mislead the consumer for what the product can actually deliver. Is that so hard to understand?

Where in my post did it ever occur to anyone that I would trade power for noise? Just because I am ranting against over-rated or over-hyped products, does that imply I would favour power over sonic quality? Where's the deductive logic in there?

 

[av_phile]

Av-phile,

It seems to me that you have endorsed yourself as the Electronics Police! Running around pointing out "flaws" in equipment that you may or may not own. If it really bothers you that much perhaps a letter to your congressman would suffice? Tell them how bad the average consumer is being ripped off by the audio industry. You might also mention how you only get a half bag of potato chips.(after some settling occurs.) Or how the mobile phone industry charges us for a minute of airtime even if the call is only 3 seconds. The list can go on and on.

How can you be such an advocate of accurate and honest and forthcoming specs, when you are smart enough to realize that they should be taken with a grain of salt. Especially when it comes to power ratings. Besides there are several of us here already aware enough to be cautious of reading to much into specifications to begin with, regardless of their validity..

Not only is it important to let your ears be the judge, it is necessary to find equipment that is easy to use and fits into your budget.

Honestly, I can find many other things in life to worry about. I consider my hobby/addiction to be a form of entertainment. Not another way to be critical of meaningless specs.

I personally look forward to the reviews posted at this site. (I think you will be lucky to find a review without any bias anywhere) So don't point fingers here in hopes of changing the world. I think you will be the only one disappointed when nothing is changed on the account of you.

You're absolutely right. Why should I care? There are really more important things in life, and in this hobby, to even bother aspiring to be policeman in the industry. Nope, I'm not interested in the job.

In the same way I've pointed out how misleading some Pioneer universal players are by their silence in converting SACD bitstreams to PCM prior to analog shaping, I've tried pointing out there are amps out there with misleading power specifications the better to clinch sales from audio enthusiasts and audiophiles who may be after power but do not know any better. My posts aimed to point that out. Nothing more.

I won't be writing to congressmen and senators who, just like you, have more important things to attend to. And they themselves may be enjoying some overstated amps with blithesome abandon, for all I care. But if members of this forum can decry over-hyped cables and congratulate themselves for exposing such marketing hypes, I find the attitude "let the ears be the judge" a little hypocritical when it comes to amplifiers. Did you change the world when you ecposed the questionable claims of cable vendors? Are you also dissapointed that there are still $1,500 cerullean RCA cables out there being enjoyed by audiophiles, inspite of your crusades? Why can't you just leave these audiophiles to enjoy their stratospherically priced cables? But it's ok for you to just enjoy your amps even if the manufacturer ripped you off with bogus power claims, right?

 

[rgriffin25]

All I was trying to say is you are not telling us anything that we have not heard before.

To each his own...

However, I do think that it is funny how some people can spend $300 on a HTIB and be far happier than any Audiophile who has it all!!! So you tell me who the fool is?

 

[av_phile]

AV_Phile;
I can see this discussion with you is pointless, especially since you are putting words in my mouth about things I haven't said.

I don't have to put anything in your mouth as what you were saying is quite clear and their implications unmistakable.

If the receiver claimed full power with all channels driven simultaneously into full frequency with specified load impedances, it would be another story and I would see your point.

That is my point and nothing else.

The Acurus amps I was referring to were the 5CH amps and the new Aragon 3000 series 5CH amps. But thats not the point.

Whether 2 ch or 5 ch the Acurus measures their power with the same conditions. I also have the multi-channel A200X5 and the A125X5 manuals downloaded from their site. The Aragon 3005 is also quite clear in saying "3 channels driven." when indicating the power (definitely candid rather than not saying anything.) Oh, I disagree, they're not beside the point. These are prime examples of how to properly rate an amp's power. Whether in receivers or in separates.

I have nothing left to add to this discussion as it has become nothing more than ranting and restating prior points

LOL The rantings of a mad man, yeah right. Is that the typical response when cornered or exposed???

 

[Yamahaluver]

av_phille,

Maybe you should seriously consider joining Ralph Nader, you are truly in the wrong forum. You should also start a campaign to actively ban these deceiving Japanese imports particularly the ones from the motorcycle maker Yamaha, they are the biggest crook and your congressman should really get to hear about this.

Meanwhile leave us fools and our crappy amps and let us listen to music and enjoy, after all that is what we fools do anyways, dont have the IQ or the acumen to go into the technical details.

 

[av_phile]

All I was trying to say is you are not telling us anything that we have not heard before.

Oh I see. So all you folks have heard and known about this all along. Nothing new. My bad. Ok, just enjoy your gears.

Likewise, I've known all along that there are $300/meter cables out there being enjoyed by audiophools. Nothing new there, too. Next time you question these audiophools who enjoy listening with these cables, I'd say the same "you are not telling us anything that we have not heard before."

However, I do think that it is funny how some people can spend $300 on a HTIB and be far happier than any Audiophile who has it all!!! So you tell me who the fool is?

Should I have to call any of the two a fool? Like you said, to each his own. Right?

 

[av_phile]

av_phille,

Meanwhile leave us fools and our crappy amps and let us listen to music and enjoy, after all that is what we fools do anyways, dont have the IQ or the acumen to go into the technical details.

Nothing would please me more. I think that's the problem, I must have misjudged you and some members here to have the right IQ to make the proper discernment. And that I have been duped into thinking this is a forum about "pursuing the truth in audio." I think you should lobby to have this motto changed to "pursuing sonic nirvana." Plain and simple. Forget about the truth. That's a lot of nonsense that gets in the way of enjoying your music.

 

[Pop]

About Aragon Amps

As an owner and avid fan of Aragon amps, I think it is interesting to note that their latest 3005 series amp power ratings are somewhat ambigious just like AV_Phile complains about Yamaha.

3005 is their 5CH 300wpc power amp:
http://www.klipsch.com/product/product.aspx?cid=427

Note they state 300wpc x 3 channels driven = 900 watts total for a 1200 watt power consumption = 75% efficiency, seems reasonable. BTW the 1200 watt power consumption to me implies a 1200VA Xformer which is the same size in the Z9. So basically the Z9 has similar power capabilities (900 watts but must deliver it to 7 main channels and 2 front channels as opposed to 5 channels in the Aragon).

Yet when they rate it in 4 ohms, they say 500 watts, but guess what??, they don't specify # of channels driven! Thus if the max power consumption is 1200 watts and we hold the 75% efficiency, they can only drive one channel at 500watts continuously into 4 ohms.

So I would assume their ability to drive all channels into 8 ohms would be 180wpc and into 4 ohms would be even less. In fact SoundandVison did a 7CH power test on the Z9 and found it to be 140wpc, only 40 watts shy of the Aragon. Meanwhile the Aragon says 300wpc. Why not send the radar police to Aragon?

I own this amp and love it. I don't care that it can't deliver 300wpc to all channels driven. I don't need that much power nor do most home theater systems.

Again here is another example, their 2007 which claims 200wpc in 8 ohms, 300wpc in 4 ohms.
http://www.klipsch.com/product/product.aspx?cid=424
This amp also consumes 1200watts. So it would be logical to conclude a similar sized power supply of the 3005 is used in the 2007 to drive 7 amps instead of 5. Thus this amp should deliver about the same power of the Z9, yet it states 200wpc. Look closer and they rate 200wpc in 3 channels 8 ohms, and 300wpc, 4 ohms (no channel #'s specified!) Call the power police?

I think what we can learn here is there really are no uniform standards for rating multi channel power amps. You have to be aware of how manufacturers are rating them to compare apples to apples.

No way am I discrediting the Aragon amps, just pointing out they also dont deliver or state all channels driven.

 

[Audioholics]

Despite the obvious baiting I'm not going to close this thread - though it is going nowhere. av_phile, you appear (to me) to be your own worst enemy: unproductive and full of unwavering agenda. Your points are well taken for the third or fourth time.

Thank you, drive through.