Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 7 of 10 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10
Re: B&K Receiver for M80's
JohnK #275205 10/16/09 05:04 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,361
connoisseur
Offline
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,361
 Originally Posted By: JohnK
The irony relating to published official power ratings is that this is the only area in audio which is governed by relatively strict regulations and where we can be confident of getting what's claimed, yet it's an area where many suspect "exaggeration" "inflation", etc. , which no manufacturer would risk. Some of those voicing such suspicions are also the same individuals who have no problem with believing in magical sound properties in various items, even pieces of wire, despite the lack of solid evidence.


Since I resemble that remark I'll respond for all the popcorn fans: I love irony, but really don’t see it in your example. I'm reading test reports from an AV magazine where someone was put in charge of running test in their "lab". They routinely show amps clipping the signal - to some extent - before the rated power. As Chris mentions, perhaps that is because the FTC does not require it to be run 20 to 20, I don't know?

But it seems consistent to believe the better components and better designs lead to better sound. And thus, that a $329 dollar 105 wpc amp is not telling the truth, or the whole story perhaps, about the fidelity of their amps as compared to 105 wpc McIntosh.

And don't be so naive as to think all companies comply with the FTC rule just because it is there. I have spent my entire career litigating antitrust claims (the FTC's primary charge) and I can assure you companies often calculate that violation of the law is much more profitable than compliance, because enforcement is weak, and fines are a small fraction of the profits earned. I presume that is even more true in this area since the FTC is not known for its strong hand in the areas of wpc.

Finally, I'll note that a search for irony is not fruitless. I find it very ironic that some here demand that emotional responses and perception are worthless as compared to science and math. Yet, when presented with lab tests that do not conform to their view, they cite the well accepted theory of poppy-cock and biased journalism. Pretty hard to test those.

I don't know who is right, but frankly I find it less likely that every HT magazine could slander the likes of Denon, Sony, Yamaha, etc., etc., etc., year after year with crazy test results claiming they are violating a federal law, than the likely hood that there might not be as much uniformity in products across the price scale as some assume.

Now where is the damn popcorn!
;\)


Panny 3000 PJ, 118" Carada, Denon 3300, PS3, Axiom QS8, PSB 5T, B&W sub, levitating speaker wire
Re: B&K Receiver for M80's
Zimm #275210 10/16/09 05:33 PM
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 10,420
J
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
J
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 10,420
I'll get you some, would you like it hot buttered? \:\)


Jason
M80 v2
VP160 v3
QS8 v2
PB13 Ultra
Denon 3808
Samsung 85" Q70
Re: B&K Receiver for M80's
jakewash #275215 10/16/09 05:40 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,361
connoisseur
Offline
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,361
That would be good. I'll need a distraction for the scientific ass-whipping I just begged for.


Panny 3000 PJ, 118" Carada, Denon 3300, PS3, Axiom QS8, PSB 5T, B&W sub, levitating speaker wire
Re: B&K Receiver for M80's
Zimm #275220 10/16/09 06:07 PM
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 10,420
J
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
J
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 10,420
I can say that I have found there to be a difference in my experiences with variuos brands, some have better power and sound quality than others, ie, the Sony $400 avr I purchased had a stated output of 100W/ch yet it did not produce the same sound, ie. bass was next to non-existent, compared to the Denon I had purchased because it had better features. Both were 2004 products and the Denon was my venerable 1804, a midline avr. The lack of bass from the Sony I attributed to a weak amp section, whether that be from a lack of capacitors or weak P/S or both I don't know. The Sony might have been able to maintain the power to satisfy the FTC rating to achieve it's 100W rating but it certainly couldn't keep up to the Denon.


Jason
M80 v2
VP160 v3
QS8 v2
PB13 Ultra
Denon 3808
Samsung 85" Q70
Re: B&K Receiver for M80's
jakewash #275223 10/16/09 06:29 PM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
Well, I think part of the problem is that that 100WPC rating is shown in a vacuum. If THD is part of that rating, well... one has to take that into account when you mention the rating.

In any case, sorry Charles, it's kind of silly to complain about distortion of .016% and say that the receiver isn't delivering at 84W.


Also: John, with that post, he's got you there.

Last edited by kcarlile; 10/16/09 06:32 PM.

I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
Re: B&K Receiver for M80's
Ken.C #275224 10/16/09 06:43 PM
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,466
connoisseur
Offline
connoisseur
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,466
I appreciated my Pioneer's manual. It shows Watts, channels, Ohms, %THD, and bandwidth (20 to 20k). That's what you really need to know to make a proper judgment. It even says "FTC" at the end of the line.


Pioneer PDP-5020FD, Marantz SR6011
Axiom M5HP, VP160HP, QS8
Sony PS4, surround backs
-Chris
Re: B&K Receiver for M80's
Ken.C #275225 10/16/09 07:03 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,361
connoisseur
Offline
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,361
 Originally Posted By: kcarlile
In any case, sorry Charles, it's kind of silly to complain about distortion of .016% and say that the receiver isn't delivering at 84W.


To be clear, I'm not saying I can hear the distortion at .016%. My point is that my Denon is harsh on high frequencies spikes, and my separate amp is not. Assuming those spikes are hitting when 100 or more watts are being pushed (or 100+ db), then that % climbs above .016 (seed the red 45 degree line on the chart above).

At 108 wpc you get 0.1%, at 135 watts you have 1% distortion. [Not really, because my PSBs are 4ohm, so it is more like 174 wpc at 1%.] At 50 hz, 1% is imperceptible. [See Alan's article.] But at 12,000 hz, from what I have read (which is preschool compared to JohnK's reading) you can hear such inaccuracies - and they are annoying and cause listening fatigue in my brain. See, "The LED begins to become visible at 0.1% distortion, and reaches fairly full brightness at 1-10% distortion, which is clearly audible." QSC Technical FAQs; see also, "In general, the more complex the sound, the less audible the clipping. Light clipping of transients will in fact increase the apparent high-frequency content and give the sound a little more edge." Peavey Support - Clipping Revisited.

With my new amp, which does not come close to clipping at 135 watts or 175 watts, I don't hear those harsh peaks anymore. Or, I should say, I hear the peak now, not the distortion of the peak being clipped.

But, if I switch to 5ch stereo, I can hear the harshness on the center channel - although much less often or pronounced. I assumed that is because there is more power to go around before clipping when ch 1 and ch2 are not being handled by the Denon.

Or, maybe it is all the same no matter what you buy. If so, I still needed to trick my brain to find more enjoyment, and I did. (But now I know I tricked myself, so...crap, I bet I can hear the harshness again. Damn. Time for new speakers.)


Panny 3000 PJ, 118" Carada, Denon 3300, PS3, Axiom QS8, PSB 5T, B&W sub, levitating speaker wire
Re: B&K Receiver for M80's
Zimm #275226 10/16/09 07:06 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,786
axiomite
Offline
axiomite
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,786
OK, it seems that at best the magazine in question used the term clipping completely out of context and that is what I originally questioned.

 Quote:
But it seems consistent to believe the better components and better designs lead to better sound.

Yes, but better measured performance is not always audible (eg: .01% vs .001%).

It seems that companies like Denon often exceed their rated specs, so that supports your argument about better components/design. I suspect that manufacturers like Krell are the same.

So, when you are buying a 105wpc Denon, you are getting at least 105wpc, but if you are buying a 105wpc Yamaha, you are getting barely or not quite 105wpc.

All that said, I am looking forward to the day when I can point to a sub in the corner of my room and casually mention its being driven by a pro amp in bridged mono mode delivering 2400 watts. If I can afford a big 21" monster driver, even better!


Fred

-------
Blujays1: Spending Fred's money one bottle at a time, no two... Oh crap!
Re: B&K Receiver for M80's
fredk #275228 10/16/09 07:14 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,361
connoisseur
Offline
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,361
 Originally Posted By: fredk

All that said, I am looking forward to the day when I can point to a sub in the corner of my room and casually mention its being driven by a pro amp in bridged mono mode delivering 2400 watts. If I can afford a big 21" monster driver, even better!


No, no, no. When you get that 21" monster sub, I want to see you run it with a 10 watt amp, not a 2400 watt amp. That's like Ralph Nader retiring to his non-biodegradable plastic house, with gas burning everything, situated on top of a coal factory.

Don't sell out damn it, too many are counting on you to resist upgraditis! \:\)


Panny 3000 PJ, 118" Carada, Denon 3300, PS3, Axiom QS8, PSB 5T, B&W sub, levitating speaker wire
Re: B&K Receiver for M80's
Zimm #275278 10/16/09 10:38 PM
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,488
T
axiomite
Offline
axiomite
T
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 8,488
 Quote:
the scientific ass-whipping I just begged for


That's funny.

I refuse to be a slave to "science" or to allow it to impede my joy or invalidate my experience.

Holding Science as sacred implies to me intrinsically that we have already discovered everything that we ever will. And I just don't buy that.

So, despite all evidence to the contrary, I'm going to support Charles' enjoyment of his new amp.


bibere usque ad hilaritatem
Page 7 of 10 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10

Moderated by  alan, Amie, Andrew, axiomadmin, Brent, Debbie, Ian, Jc 

Link Copied to Clipboard

Need Help Graphic

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics24,939
Posts442,452
Members15,615
Most Online2,082
Jan 22nd, 2020
Top Posters
Ken.C 18,044
pmbuko 16,441
SirQuack 13,840
CV 12,077
MarkSJohnson 11,458
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 221 guests, and 0 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newsletter Signup
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4