superman180

superman180

Audioholic
Finally got a chance to read the supplement review, great information, it leaves me with one question. I plan on driving seven 8 ohm speakers with a sensitivity of 86db in very small room probably under 1200 cubic foot. Will I be ok? :confused:

MY MISTAKE.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Is that 700sq ft or cuft? 700sqft with 8 ft ceilings is 5600 cuft and is a very large room.
 
V

vermintrex

Enthusiast
superman180 said:
Finally got a chance to read the supplement review, great information, it leaves me with one question. I plan on driving seven 8 ohm speakers with a sensitivity of 86db in very small room probably under 700 square feet. Will I be ok? :confused:

I'd also like to thank the reviewers for the additional info.

Unfortunately for superman180, I think this site has made it abundantley clear they do not think an all-channels driven spec is important and in keeping with that theme an all-channels driven test has not been provided in their supplemental info.

I find it somewhat perplexing that the reviewers are unwilling to provide an all-channels driven rating even if they find it a spec of questionable value. I, for one, still want to know what an amp can do driving 5 or 7 channels simultaneously. I don't care if it's un-realistic or rarely occurs. It's a spec that I believe can help determine how robust the power supply/capacitor/amp combination is and I want to know what it is. It's up to me to do my research and decide if it's important or not.

vermin
 
Last edited by a moderator:
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
The all channels driven test has very little real world application, especially in ordinary households where the consumers don't utilize a variac to hold the line voltage constant. All you’re testing in this case is the limitation of the Mains if the amp is powerful enough to suck most of the power out of it. Very few amps will deliver full rated power into 8/4 ohm loads simultaneously, despite when they claim it. One example is the Parasound A51 which will do it in 8 ohms, but NOT 4ohms. The power supply simply isn't big enough. Yet they claim it will deliver 400wpc- All channels driven. Does this make it a bad amp or bad manufacturer? Absolutely NOT. This is a great amp, it does deliver rated power to more than 3 channels driven into 4 ohms, again assuming sufficient line voltage. Some of the amps that will deliver - all channels driven, are mono block designs, utilizing a single smaller power supply per channel. There are disadvantages to this approach, since in 2CH mode you cannot tap off one larger supply for added headroom. Again there are trade off's in amp design, and power is only one issue of concern.

However, there are far more important things in amplifiers to be concerned with, and unfortunately when consumers and manufacturers become obsessed with power, especially in unrealistic test conditions, we fear other quality issues may be sacrificed such as noise control, output impedance, sufficient slew rate, etc. If a consumer is on a power surge, simply buy a digital pro amp. If they can supply it with 3 phase power, they can get over 1kwatt per channel - all channels driven! But I bet it won't sound to great, and will be very noisy.

We devise practical test scenarios that reflect real world conditions. Other publications test the misconceived - all channels driven - and one can surely get that information there.
 
S

Seabear

Enthusiast
OK Guys,
I got started here because I was looking for a replacement for my Yamaha RXV 2092.
I love this reciever. It was the first piece of really higher end (for me, anyway!) gear that i bought, and I still love the sound and the features.
The reason for looking to replace it was that I had heard, and fell in love with, the new SACD / DVDA audio that i heard at a friend's house. The 2092 does not have SACD inputs.
My Question;
Without upgrading to an entirely new reciever, is there a stand-alone product that i can use to send SACD signals into one of the unused digital inputs in my 2092, and use one of the unused outputs to send it to my speakers?
Or to achieve SACD, am I now looking at a new reciever?
Based on some of the things that I have read here, I am leaning towards a 2400 instead of the 2500. Reason being, I am shocked at what these recievers are going for these days. A 2400 for $700??? For a reciever that i assume to be several generations removed from my old 2092? I paid $1100 for my 2092 about 6 months after it came out, and thought that i got a great deal. I am going to have to find a serious rube to sell it to to get even half of what I paid for it, less than 5 (has it really been that long?) out of the gate.
Also, I was completly shocked at what the new 2500 weighs. 30 lbs??? My 2092 weighs in at 65 lbs EASY! Have power supplies and amps really gotten THAT much lighter in the past several years?!?!?!?!
Well,
Thanks again for the input, and all of the great info on this site.
TjB
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
No you cannot send multi channel SACD or DVD-A signals to your 2092. The only option would be to have your 2092 modified to have 6CH inputs added, but care must be taken that the person doing it doesn't mess things up or make your receiver noisey.

The amp section in the 2092 is better than that of the 2500. The power supply is more robust for sure. However, if you are using 8ohm speakers all set to small, you may never notice.
 
S

Seabear

Enthusiast
"The amp section in the 2092 is better than that of the 2500. The power supply is more robust for sure. However, if you are using 8ohm speakers all set to small, you may never notice."

OK, now you really have me going...
I am using 8 ohm speakers, but I have the mains and the surrounds set to large.
Are you telling me that I will be trading DOWN in some respects from my 2092 to get the SACD/DVDA cpabilities?
ARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!
TjB
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Of course there are always compromises. The 2092 was a flagship product several years ago, so obviously Yamaha put forth their best effort and biggest amp section, second only to the DSP A1. First off, I recommend setting your rears to small regardless. Without knowing your room size, listening preferences and speakers, I cannot make an educated guess if the 2500 amp section will serve your purposes. Worst case however, is go with the 2500 and later add a 2CH amp for your mains if you feel its underpowered for your application.
 
D

Dan Banquer

Full Audioholic
Multi Channel Power Amps

However, there are far more important things in amplifiers to be concerned with, and unfortunately when consumers and manufacturers become obsessed with power, especially in unrealistic test conditions, we fear other quality issues may be sacrificed such as noise control, output impedance, sufficient slew rate, etc. If a consumer is on a power surge, simply buy a digital pro amp. If they can supply it with 3 phase power, they can get over 1kwatt per channel - all channels driven! But I bet it won't sound to great, and will be very noisy.

We devise practical test scenarios that reflect real world conditions. Other publications test the misconceived - all channels driven - and one can surely get that information there.
RIGHT ON!!!!!!

If you have a 20 Amp dedicated Line feeding a multi channel amp you have about 2200 watts available to the power amp. The great bulk of linear design is about 30% efficent so 30% of 2200 is about 6600 watts. Divide that up into 5 channels you get a maximum of about 130 watts per channel. As all of you power freaks can see linear design is not that efficent, and since the great bulk of power amps have unregulated supplies the 130 watts times 5 channels is a bit optimistic.

If most of you power freaks take a close listen to whats happening with your speakers during a movie you will find the great bulk of the energy, not including the subwoofer, is used on the front three speakers. Very little energy is used on the rears, which is why many of you have noticed that they are smaller than the three front speakers.

If any realistic test is to be done the three front channels are to be driven at near full power with about 10 watts or less for the two rear channels. That sounds more realistic to me.

But what do I know; I'm just another idiot with a small audio manufacturing company.
Dan Banquer
www.redesignsaudio.com

P.S. BTW: JUst so you guys know this: About all the power amp measurements done in consumer audio have a variac on the AC line to deliberately hold the AC line at 120 Volts. Now I'll bet dollars to donuts all of you power freaks sit there listening to music and watch movies with one hand on the remote and the other hand moving the Variac. Right?
 
superman180

superman180

Audioholic
Well with what has been said I will stop worrying about having enough power. I must say that debates like this one is most interesting and some very good information comes from it. :D
 

plhart

Audioholic
If you only have one set of extra speakers, which would you setup...the SB or Presence and why?

The second part is: do any/all DVD's have the extra SB and/or Presence channels and is there a place to look up which titles?

Any help would be appreciated as I do have one set of speakers and only require wire...(how long will be answered by you


The only true, discrete, surround back information on a DVD is the 6.1 soundtrack available on Dolby EX or DTS Neo6 on a few movies. In a theater this single channel is usually reproduced by several monopole speakers at the rear of the theater. This is because the human ear is pretty good at detecting placement directly behind. But the intent of the film’s director is to simply add a greater sense of immersion . The intent is NOT to be able to pinpoint the sound source which would happen if a single speaker was mounted directly behind.

This several-rear-spread-speakers-producing-one-channel is helpful for us in home theater because we can then always recommend 2 rear surround speakers separated at least 1 meter (but preferably more). Now we’ll have a speaker system which will work with either a 6-channel receiver or 7-channel receiver and provide the intended immersion or “spread-surround-sound” effect which is the intention in the movies recorded with a separate rear channel.

But what is 7.1 then? 7.1 is taking the standard, discrete, surround left and surround right 5.1 signal and matrixing these channels through a proprietary algorithm such as Dolby Pro Logic IIx or Harman’s Logic 7. Remember these last two channels are Not recorded on any DVD-Video, DVD-Audio or SACD. They are derived From the discrete left and right surround channels.

So what are the two front Presence channels on Yamaha receivers? Simply put, Yamaha’s Presence channels feature is their attempt at DSPing-to-a-particular-hall-effect the information available on the discrete, front left and front right channels. And depending on the algorithm, some ambience or hall effect may be sampled from the discrete center channel also.

What to choose? Well, your ears are definitely more sensitive to an effect in front of you than from behind. AND the rest of the receiver world has more readily adopted the 7.1 concept for, I believe, the increased sense of immersion it can provide on most sources. Personally, I’ve found listening to Yamaha’s Presence speakers to be variable depending on the source material. And I always prize vocal intelligibility and articulation over an effect which can sometimes hurt the articulation. Your choice.


Finally got a chance to read the supplement review, great information, it leaves me with one question. I plan on driving seven 8 ohm speakers with a sensitivity of 86db in very small room probably under 1200 cubic foot. Will I be ok?

Absolutely no problem. You’ll have power to spare.

Unfortunately for superman180, I think this site has made it abundantley clear they do not think an all-channels driven spec is important and in keeping with that theme an all-channels driven test has not been provided in their supplemental info.

I find it somewhat perplexing that the reviewers are unwilling to provide an all-channels driven rating even if they find it a spec of questionable value. I, for one, still want to know what an amp can do driving 5 or 7 channels simultaneously. I don't care if it's un-realistic or rarely occurs. It's a spec that I believe can help determine how robust the power supply/capacitor/amp combination is and I want to know what it is. It's up to me to do my research and decide if it's important or not.


Speaking as Audioholic’s Product Evaluation Manager and a former Product Manager for Yamaha I would side with Gene and NOT publish a spec of such dubious merit. As an analogy, if you loaded up a half-ton pickup with three and a half tons and then tested its performance, what would be proven? Probably only that you need a pick-up that can handle a bigger load. And that bigger truck would probably cost twice as much and be very inefficient for hauling only ½ ton loads 364 ½ days of the year.

When going from a two-channel system to a five or seven channel system (that costs the same) you do not need to reproduce 2 ½ or 3 ½ times the sound just because you’ve got the speakers. You strive to produce (relatively) the same maximum SPLs from the front 3 channels (as with the old two) with some reserve left over for the rears. The simple fact is the general public gets confused (as they did in the nineties) when the front three channels have different power ratings than the rears.

The real reason the rears do sometimes need the same 100 watts of power is that the sensitivities of smaller surround speakers are usually lower and thus require more power to be driven to the same SPL as (often larger) left-center-rights.

The test for “robustness of power supply” is and always has been the relative differences in power output between 8 ohm loads and 4 ohm loads, 20Hz – 20KHz, with 2 channels driven at a specified distortion level. The translation of “robustness of power supply” for 5 or 7 channels can be interpolated fairly accurately from this information given that the real life demands for 5 or 7 channels are, practically speaking, about the same as 2 channels as outlined above.

The only option would be to have your 2092 modified to have 6CH inputs added, but care must be taken that the person doing it doesn't mess things up or make your receiver noisy.

And if you do find someone nutty enough And qualified to do such a mod let us know how much it costs!
 
Last edited:
surveyor

surveyor

Audioholic Chief
Dan Banquer said:
RIGHT ON!!!!!!

If you have a 20 Amp dedicated Line feeding a multi channel amp you have about 2200 watts available to the power amp. The great bulk of linear design is about 30% efficent so 30% of 2200 is about 6600 watts. Divide that up into 5 channels you get a maximum of about 130 watts per channel. As all of you power freaks can see linear design is not that efficent, and since the great bulk of power amps have unregulated supplies the 130 watts times 5 channels is a bit optimistic.

If most of you power freaks take a close listen to whats happening with your speakers during a movie you will find the great bulk of the energy, not including the subwoofer, is used on the front three speakers. Very little energy is used on the rears, which is why many of you have noticed that they are smaller than the three front speakers.

If any realistic test is to be done the three front channels are to be driven at near full power with about 10 watts or less for the two rear channels. That sounds more realistic to me.

But what do I know; I'm just another idiot with a small audio manufacturing company.
Dan Banquer
www.redesignsaudio.com

P.S. BTW: JUst so you guys know this: About all the power amp measurements done in consumer audio have a variac on the AC line to deliberately hold the AC line at 120 Volts. Now I'll bet dollars to donuts all of you power freaks sit there listening to music and watch movies with one hand on the remote and the other hand moving the Variac. Right?
Come on Dan and Gene your just confusing them with the facts!
I work in industrial electronics field and have done some amplifier design back in college (long time ago). I have not worked in that field, but I know that Gene and Dan are telling you true facts. I don't remember everything there is to know, but to drive all channels at 130 Watts per channel simultaneously will cost a lot of money. I can't think of a source that will require your reciever to do that in the real world? I have a Yamaha RX-V2200 three generations older that the RX-V2500. It too, does not state all channels driven simultaneously. I can't find any where that Yamaha says that it does. The amp in the 2500 is a very decent one, but it was not designed to put out 130 watts to all channels simultaneously.
So why are some of these folks criticizing Yamaha or any other reciever maker. If Yamaha had stated in their specs. all channels driven then they might have a bone to pick. :confused:
 
J

JJNab

Audioholic Intern
QUOTE:
"The test for “robustness of power supply” is and always has been the relative differences in power output between 8 ohm loads and 4 ohm loads, 20Hz – 20KHz, with 2 channels driven at a specified distortion level."

Hi all,

I've also read in some of these threads that the relative difference for a "robust" amp should be about a factor of two; i.e., if it's 100 watts into 8 ohms, it should be about 200 into 4. Is that true? I ask because my HK 3480, which seems to me to be a very powerful stereo receiver, is rated at 120x2 at 8 ohms and 150x2 at 4 ohms. Does that mean it lacks "head room" or "robustness"?

Thanks,

JJ
 
G

Grubert

Audioholic Intern
Hi, I'm new here.

I have a Denon AVC-A10SE (Euro version of the Denon 4800, minus tuner) and I'm seriously thinking of migrating to the Yamaha 2500.

The features I'm interested in include auto-calibration, lipsync delay adjust, video upconversion and Silent Cinema (nice to have with a baby at home). Other features, such as DPLII and IIx, DTS 24/96 or the tuner, are not so critical.

Sheer amplifying power would be undoubtedly inferior, but my speakers are not that demanding (JM Lab Chorus).

Actually, I read the following on another forum:

Yamaha is impressive, both in quality -and- price. I actually "downgraded" from a Denon 5800 to the Yammy and find the 2400 better in all respects except for maybe dynamic range. (This makes sense, comparing the two amplifier sections.)
Does my idea make any sense or not?
 
K

kaptnk

Audiophyte
Yamaha and their presence speakers

I have a working Pioneer Elite that I can use as an amp. If I purchase the RXV 1500, and patch out from the pre amp zone 2 with front presence speakers, AND connect speakers to the back surround will this work to give us 9.1 with the Yammy's DSP's? : :confused: Just trying to get all my apples in order prior to purchase. Thanks a lot.
 
A

aarond

Full Audioholic
Is there a reason that this is the first piece of equipment reviewed by Audioholics with no pictures of whats inside? Or did I just miss them?
 
A

aarond

Full Audioholic
I guess the Yamaha product manager didn't want us to see how undersized the power supply is
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Clint forgot to snap a pic, but its essentially its the same as the 2400 which I did take pics of and NO the Yamaha product manager has no influence on the pictures we take but thanks for asking :rolleyes:
 
T

threewheel42

Audioholic Intern
I have a Yamaha rx-v2500...(replacing my Denon 3300)...it has no problem driving my Inifinty IL40 fronts and matching CC, as well as Def Tech BP2x and UIW 94 surround and back surrounds at higher volumes than I find necessary. ( I dont count the Velodyne sub since it is powered). I am set for large front and center, small rear ...used YPAO to set it up and it worked great.

Sounds great by the way. Just tried out the Superbit version of The Fifth Element.

the room is 1500c.f. approx. dimensions.

jim
 
I

IXO

Audiophyte
THX Selected Processing

Yamaha RXV2500 has THX Selected processing. Do you think this is a big edge over Denon 3805? Thanks...
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top