Fred,

Excellent post.  I spent the good part of today in an airport with the other cattle, so forgive me if I'm cranky.  I've had great success with Yamaha products, and my 1 year old RX-V1800 is no exception.  But I certainly feel mislead.  Naive me, when I originally investigated AVRs last year, I thought all WPC were created equal.  Cross manufacturer comparisons are obviously meaningless, but I surely thought if a receiver provided X number of WPC, I would get consistent ample amplification across all channels.  Personally, I wish Yamaha (as well as the other top brands) would clearly detail this fact in the manuals. 

It wasn't until I went from 5 channels to 7 channels that I noticed a sharp decrease in power.  For kicks, I would even turn off my rear surrounds to convince myself I wasn't imagining things.  Then I read the S&V article, and I was at least relieved that I didn't get a lemon or my system wasn't configured properly.  Still, I'm still stuck wanting more juice. 

This is where Emotiva fits the bill for me.  I'm extremely happy with my Yamaha AVR, Yamaha BD player and Aperions (of course).  I'm only lacking in power, specifically dynamic range.  For an additional $599, I will hopefully get the power promised when I originally invested $900 in my receiver.  When all is said and done (and paid for), I'll should have an awesome $1499 pre/pro/AVR.

Let me end with this comment.  I believe Dan (?) mentioned 11.1 potentially on the horizon, good luck with that.  Tough finding 7.1 content, and what is availabe, is usually underwhelming (except 3:10 to Yuma).  Curious, how is Yamaha going to spin that one

---

Speakers: Aperion 6T, 6C, 5DB, 6IC, Bravus 10Dx2
Monitor: JVC RS20U front projector with Stewart Velux 100" screen
Receiver: Yamaha RX-V1800
Blu-ray: Yamaha BD-S2900
Amplifier: Emotiva UPA-7
Conditioner: Panamax M5300PM

Hi Jason,

Give me a day or so and I'll see what I can find.  I'm trying to remember the address of a website that collects data for vintage audio equipment and it's a doozie!  I'll share with you once I find it.  In the meantime, hold on to that old Pioneer...if it's 30 yrs old and rated at 120 WPC, you've got a reliable stovebolt that's honestly rated!

There's a super-knowledgeable guy on this forum who's very experienced in measuring and testing audio stuff and who just happens to own an 805.  He's getting pretty old and prone to napping from time to time but, when he wakes up, I'm confident he can supply you with some accurate info regarding your 805.

Fred 

 

Hi Jason and Fred,

 

While we wait for the Super-Knowledgeable guy to check in I will offer this.

 

I did find a Bench Test on the 875 that has 10 more WPC than the 805.

The 875 tested at 128WPC with 7 channels driven. So if you calculate the Onkyo specs using the 875 as reference, the 805 should be about 119WPC with 7 channels driven.

 

If a person finds more clarity from one amp to another I will offer an opinion.

 

Some are rating their AVR’s for 2-channel and probably meet specs. However when you start to bring in the other channels, the size of the Power Supply (transformer and associated components) will definitely make a difference in order to supply sufficient rail-voltage to the amplifier section and support more speakers at rated specs.

 

I have a Sony AVR rated at 110 WPC so they say. It has a 400-Watt Power Supply that at best could only supply 55 Watts to 7 channels simultaneously. This may not be a large consideration if you are producing most of the sound with the front 3. But if you balance your 7.1-setup with an SPL meter, some AVR’s just do not have the headroom.

 

My Sony did not have the headroom to drive 5 Aperions at even 80WPC but that is because of the size of the Power Supply. I can easily drive 10 Aperions with the 805 at levels I can’t endure for very long and the sound is clear but way to loud except for a test.

My 805 has an 1140 Watt Power Supply and I know that is the difference.

 

Good clean power with a High Current Amp means more Watts since power is measured in Watts. Someone posted here that “Super High Current means more than Watts anyways”. You need higher voltage to draw more current through a specific load and that produces more Watts.

 

I also believe the Emotiva line is really conservatively rated.

 

This may have required a new thread but since the 805 Shut-Off thread turned into a Beer thread, I figured it to be fair game.

 

Jack

Good info Jack and Fred....

This is where marketing fools you. And thank goodness for places like Sound a Vision...It wasn't until I started noticing differences in my AVR's that I started researching why...That's when i found places like sound and vision.

That's where I saw stuff like this:

Yamaha RX-V661: Rated at 90WPC
Output at clipping (1 kHz into 8/4 ohms)
1 channel driven: 151/224 watts* (21.8/23.5 dBW)*
5 channels driven (8 ohms): 56 watts (17.5 dBW)
6 channels driven (8 ohms): 53 watts (17.2 dBW)

Denon AVR_3805: Rated at 120WPC
1 channel driven..................151 W (21.75 dBW)
2 channels driven..................139 W (21.5 dBW)
5 channels driven.....................107 W (20 dBW)
7 channels driven..................93 W (19.75 dBW)

They say you need to practically double your wattage to hear an audible difference (3db or so) and comparing these two you will see that at 5 channels driven the output is doubled.  I noticed that the Denon weighs about 13 lbs more than the Yamaha and taking a look under the hood the powersupply of the Denon is almost double the size of the Yamaha, the Caps are bigger and a more elaborate Heat sink is used.  To take a stab at Freds question I would say it's simple.  More power, less stuff to do, less heat = more amperage avaiable. That's what the amp gives you, no?

 All this adds up to more usuable stable power when driving multichannel loads.  I think this would come in handy for HT applications.  As JoeZ pointed out he didn't hear that much of a difference in 2 channel tests at normal listening levels.  Which i would expect seeing as how AVR's of this calibur put out around 140 good watts at two channels.  When he bumped up to 7 channels his output went significantly down , whereas the Emotiva was probably still hitting it's specs...

But, getting back to the marketing thing.  You'll see WPC ratings from manufacturers mean nothing. AVR's almost always meet their ratings in 1 or 2 channel tests, it's when you multichannel it that you find out it's true capabilities.  Since I'm not going the amp route, i make sure to get an AVR that has enough juice on the mutlichannel performance.  And you can't do that just by reading the manufacturer's specs.  You have to do the research.  But in terms of a 6T and 6C and their high sensitivitiest and good AVR should be enough to make you happy, no?  I guess the thing to determine here, is when one would need an amp?  I'm sure there are applications where adding an amp might not makes as big a difference as in other applications.  This is where knowledge may save you some bucks, no?  Thoughts?

I wouldn't put all my eggs into the All Channel Driven test though.  Here's a good article to read up what the All Channel Driven test means in terms of real world performacne:

http://www.audioholics.com/education/amplifier-technology/the-all-channels-driven-acd-amplifier-test

Maybe someone could take a stab at translating just what this article means to us?

Did somebody say Beer?  Sorry, nevermind.

 

Cheers 

---

Russ

Joined you!

Beer?

Beer?

Heck, Russ, don't apologize...just tell us where!

More seriously, I hope this thread stays on topic becuase it has the potential to be informative for all of us.

Fred

PS - I DO like beer!

Dan,

That's one very interesting article you found...outstanding research!

Gonna' take me a while to read that fella' but I know I'll find it interesting and informative.

Well done...and keep practicing the patience thing.

Fred

Working on finishing a case of PBR...I heard the Denons were rated pretty hi as far as WPC running 5 even 7 speakers especially the 3000 models on up.  Could never find any data on the 3808 though.  Fred maybe you have some WPC on the 3808 you could post, would be very much appreciated.  That is another reason I upgraded "subby" instead of buying the 3 channel amp.  Probably never will purchase a amp, but then again you should never ever say never.  

---

24 hours in a day ... 24 beers in a case ... coincidence?

Fred Swearingen:

Beer?

Beer?

Heck, Russ, don't apologize...just tell us where!

More seriously, I hope this thread stays on topic becuase it has the potential to be informative for all of us.

Fred

PS - I DO like beer!

I know, I just could not resist.  I have noticed that when threads go off topic in these forums it is not a hijack, rather because the thread has ended it's useful life.  This one is still going strong and producing good info so a little levity should not derail it.

I have posted alot here over the last 8 or 9 months, many times giving advice or answering questions.  I also often try to learn more about the other members because we have things in common.  

I find these Aperion forums to be an enjoyable place to learn, teach and to joke around.  It is a community!

Ok guys and gals, get back to the serious stuff.

 

Cheers 

---

Russ

Joined you!

Since I own a Yamaha V1800 I was interested in what else the report said.

Yamaha's RX-V1800 yielded the fine technical performance usual from the firm's A/V receivers. Power exceeded its specs by a good margin and bettered 100 watts all around, even with 5 channels driven. The unit's power supply appeared to run out of current when 2 more channels were added, however, since the 7-channel result dropped by nearly 3 dB, to 55 watts—a non-issue in the real world., where program signals never demand this level of stability. Yamaha equips its receiver with a software setup switch for speakers of 6-ohms or lower, which effectively limits power to about two thirds.

So what's the deal?

---

Joe
If you can't have fun doing it, it's probably not worth doing.

Yamaha's RX-V1800 yielded the fine technical performance usual from the firm's A/V receivers. Power exceeded its specs by a good margin and bettered 100 watts all around, even with 5 channels driven. The unit's power supply appeared to run out of current when 2 more channels were added, however, since the 7-channel result dropped by nearly 3 dB, to 55 watts—a non-issue in the real world., where program signals never demand this level of stability. Yamaha equips its receiver with a software setup switch for speakers of 6-ohms or lower, which effectively limits power to about two thirds.

I just thought you should put the numbers into context - and please don't kill the messenger, I just did a copy/paste.

Joetag,

I read the same thing you did but didn’t include it simply because it didn’t address the point I was trying to make in the first place, and that JoeZ implied (or I inferred) in his original post when he said: “Funny thing, marketing.”  The point I’m trying to make is that the power capabilities prominently displayed in manufacturers’ ads and sales literature are, IMO, misleading.  And, it didn’t used to be this way.

 

I’ll readily admit I’m a dinosaur (nearly sixty) but I cut my teeth in this hobby (as a teenager) by reading reviews and test reports, and relied on these reports to verify the claims of manufacturers such that, if I bought a piece of equipment advertised at X watts, I could be reasonably assured that I was getting what I was paying for.  I do not believe that’s the case today, and have felt this way since the early’80s.

 

In the “good old days” reputable mfgs (Marantz, Heath, Dyna, McIntosh, Hafler, Phase Linear, SAE and Soundcraftsmen to name a few) would rate their amps in watts but always list the conditions and rating methods used to support their claims.  For example: 250 watts RMS per channel into 8 ohms from 20Hz - 20kHz @ 0.05% THD.  Instead of the RMS designation, they might substitute continuous average power or maybe even something like continuous sine wave power.  If you bought a stereo amplifier you could be reasonably assured that both channels would deliver this simultaneously.  Today we’re not seeing much (if any) of this from the mainstream AVR mfgs.

 

I don’t know the feelings or knowledge of potential customers but I suspect when they’re purchasing a 7-channel amp rated at 100 watts/channel they’re actually expecting this is what they’ll be getting (and paying for): 700 watts.  Sadly, this doesn’t appear to be the case.

 

Let me add that I’ve been reading Daniel Kumin’s reports for many years and have always found them informative and helpful.  However, I’m curious about a couple of things in his review:

• Wattage numbers are based on a 1 kHz signal which isn’t as demanding as a swept 20 - 20kHz measurement.  What would the numbers be with the latter signal?
• “Yamaha equips its receiver with a software setup switch for speakers of 6-ohms or lower, which effectively limits power to about two thirds.”  At 8 ohms his 7-channel measurements were 55 watts, which is only 39% of the advertized 980 watts (7 x 140).  What will these numbers be when running 6 ohm or lower speakers?  Is he saying it’ll put out more at 6 ohms, or am I missing something here?  Entirely possible I’m missing something…old age has some drawbacks.
• “since the 7-channel result dropped by nearly 3 dB, to 55 watts—a non-issue in the real world., where program signals never demand this level of stability.”  Well, JoeZ noticed a difference so I’ll just conclude he’s living in another world.

No disrespect to Mr. Kumin but I take his (and others’) comments with a slight grain of skepticism.  He’s paid by S&V who, in turn, receive unknown amounts of advertising $$ from the manufacturers.  I do believe his reports are entirely honest but I also think he’s not going to be as candid in his statements as someone with no financial incentive.

 

As a side note, this whole numbers thing really came to the forefront more than 30 years ago when, if I remember correctly, the legit mfgs were up in arms about the inconsistency in test methods and reporting, and the wildly inflated numbers advertised by less-than-honest mfgs.  Congress eventually got involved and handed the whole thing to the FTC with the understanding that they’d develop a set of standards that couldn’t be compromised.  Given the current state of affairs, I’m thinking the FTC wasn’t very successful.

 

I don’t know how others in this forum feel, but I certainly take issue with the ratings of mainstream mfgs and their current method of presenting the facts.  Like I say, I own a 705 which, I’m thinking, is pretty much the same as the 706 which I referred to in my earlier post.  Like I also said, I’m happy with it.  I was also pretty sure that my 705 would not generate 100 WPC in 5.0 or 7.0 but this isn’t a huge concern to me since my room isn’t that large (< 3K cu ft), my main speakers are 94 dB @ 6 ohms, and while I’m still in a 2.0 configuration, I hope to be 5.0 by the end of this month.  But I am (or was) expecting it to give me around 75 WPC for more than half a second without shutting down. 

 

I am NOT saying this stuff is junk…it isn’t, and it brings all of us tons of enjoyment and satisfaction.  Heck, this is our hobby.  But what I am saying is…something’s changed.

 

Finally, to your statement about context (and I’m not offended by that), I’m going to disagree and suggest that we, as consumers, should expect the manufacturers to begin presenting their sales pitch and promotion in a manner more consistent to what they’re actually able to deliver.

 

I stand by my statement caveat emptor.

 

Fred

 

Geeze…I could REALLY use a beer (or three) now!

Fred,

Thanks. You may have misundertood. I'm not suggesting that Yamaha's numbers are correct. For that matter, who knows if any of the numbers in any of the reviews is correct including the numbers that you posted. If there's a bias in the text wouldn't that bias carry over to the measurements?

My point is that if the numbers (whatever they may be) don't match what the manufacturer says they are (although I suspect they can provide a supporting argument) and if it doesn't really matter, then so what? 

I'm older than you are (61 in July) so I'll ignore the "dinasaur" remark :-).  I spent my entire career in marketing computer software (not sales and not advertising). In the computer industry we'd always say, "the nice thing about this business is that there are so many standards to choose from you can always find one that you like".  Then there's my favorite Microsoft joke - how many Microsoft engineers does it take to change a lightbulb? None, they just declare darkness the new standard. 

As consumers we're inundated daily with fabricated claims and most of them don't much matter.  Do you have to have the "whitest smile"?  Compared to what and who in the world judged that?  I worked for a networking company and we claimed that our product allowed you to connect up to 255 PC's to the network.  Could you? Absolutely, the software allowed you to address all of them.  Should you? Absolutely not, the performance went down the tubes at about 150.  Were we telling the truth?

As long as you know they're stretching the truth then fine, but the real question remains, does that affect me?

 

---

Joe
If you can't have fun doing it, it's probably not worth doing.

I finally found some numbers on the Denon 3808ci and it holds it own at the WPC.  One more reason though a Amp could be used is to let the receiver work less and in turn that would have it run cooler, maybe even extending the life of your receiver.  Something else to consider in purchasing a seperate amp.

Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1 percent distortion at 118.9 watts
1 percent distortion at 138.0 watts

All channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1 percent distortion at 113.5 watts
1 percent distortion at 130.7 watts

---

24 hours in a day ... 24 beers in a case ... coincidence?

Brown,

Those numbers look awfully similar to the 3805....Nice to see much hasn't changed

Fred and others...Regarding the 6ohm thing.  I have read, and don't remember where so you'll have to take my word on it, that on most AVR's the 6 ohm setting activates some protections circuitry and lessens total output even more.  So for the Yamaha example, if 7 channels driven is 53 watts, then with the 6ohm protection circuit activated your going to get down into the 30-40 watt range.

Most people will just tell you stay away from the 6ohm setting, but the MFG's can't becuase they know if you run your AVR full blast, low impedance speakers for hours on end then something bad could happen. Anyway, hope that adds any valuable info.

I would like to continue this discussion as there is a key question I am looking to get an anwer to.  When does one need an amp?  I extracted this from my old Yamaha RX-V661 owners manual and it made me think  "

Connecting an external amplifier
This unit has more than enough power for any home use. However, if you want to add more power to the speaker output
or if you want to use another amplifier, connect an external amplifier to the PRE OUT jacks.

Connecting an external amplifier
This unit has more than enough power for any home use. However, if you want to add more power to the speaker output
or if you want to use another amplifier, connect an external amplifier to the PRE OUT jacks.

I think there's a lot of useful information in that article I provided, information that may help us all understand what we need....Maybe it's not the wattage that's making the difference maybe its just the way the combined components present the material.  I mean, every AVR I've had gets real loud, just some seem to present it in a more spacious manner.  In any event, iI thought it was interesting to note the limiting factor was the amperage coming off our wall outlet and the efficiency of the transformers. But, as i think about it more, do we really need 100 wpc??Hmm...Can you do me a favor and point me to the thread with the SPL vs Speaker sensitvity chart that you or Jack provided some time ago.  I can't seem to find it?  Oh, and are you happy with your 705?

joetag,

 

You make some interesting observations in your post.

 

It’s evident you’re a satisfied customer and I’m sincerely happy for you.  Whether your satisfaction stems from the fact that you thoroughly researched your purchase and knew of it’s (potential) strengths/weaknesses, or the product fit within your budget and met the myriad needs of you and your system, or you just plain got lucky isn’t really the issue here…you’re satisfied and that’s all that should matter to you.  It’s not my intention to try to persuade you (or others) that you should somehow feel dissatisfied.

 

However, satisfied or not, the question all of us might ask ourselves is: did we get what we paid for in terms of advertized specifications?  After all, I suspect specifications are the most relevant criteria that most of us use when comparing components from various manufacturers, and specifications are the metric most loudly/visibly touted when trying to convince us that we should be buying their product.

 

Does the AVR you mention meet its advertized spec in terms of power (140 WPC)?  According to S&V, yes, and handily: 158 watts, one channel driven.  However, in no other reported format (5.0 or 7.0) did it meet its advertized spec, and in 7.0 it didn’t even come close.  My question is: did the manufacturer advertize this AVR as monophonic, or 7.0?

 

To your question: “If there’s bias in the text wouldn’t that bias carry over to the measurements?”  The comments mentioned in the text are the reviewer’s opinions based on his observations so, yes, they’re obviously (though not necessarily) open to bias (one way or the other).  The measurements quoted by S&V were specified in watts, clearly defined by the variables (voltage, current, resistance, impedance, frequency, etc.) expressed in the mathematical equations of Ohm’s Law: if the measurements recorded are accurate, I would expect the result (watts) to show no bias.

 

To your statement: “My point is that if the numbers (whatever they may be) don't match what the manufacturer says they are (although I suspect they can provide a supporting argument) and if it doesn't really matter, then so what?”  If you’re satisfied with your purchase then there’s no argument to be made!  However, if you may not be satisfied, or have discovered issues that lead you to question your initial purchase (as in the cases of JoeZ and Dan), then the “so what” portion becomes more relevant and I would ask…then what does matter?

 

“I worked for a networking company and we claimed that our product allowed you to connect up to 255 PC's to the network.  Could you? Absolutely, the software allowed you to address all of them.  Should you? Absolutely not, the performance went down the tubes at about 150.  Were we telling the truth?”   I’m confused…are we discussing facts, or ethics?

 

“As long as you know they're stretching the truth then fine, but the real question remains, does that affect me?”  In your situation, it obviously has not affected you.  But, if we don’t know they’re “stretching the truth”…then what about the rest of us?

 

If we’re armed with verifiable facts, then doesn’t it seem logical that we, as consumers, will likely make more informed decisions and be more satisfied with our purchases?

 

That’s my point!

 

Fred

 

PS – wanna’ have a beer?