Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Technical Questions Rec Spec Check

Hello!

I've used this setup for the past ~10 year with no issues for ~95% home theater use:

M80s v2 x2
VP150 v2 x1
QS8 v2 x2
EP500 v2 x1

With a receiver rated for:

"...
Continuous Power Output:
(20 Hz to 20 kHz, 8 Ohms, 0.08%)
Fronts: 110W + 110W
Center: 110W
Surround: 110W + 110W
Surround back (Front Height/wide): 110W + 110W

Continuous Power Output:
(1 Khz, 6 Ohms, 1.0%)
Fronts: 150W + 150W
Center: 150W
Surround: 150W + 150W
Surround back (Front Height/wide): 150W + 150W

Total Harmonic distortion: 0.06%
(20 Hz - 20 kHz, 100W + 100W, 8 Ohms)

120V 570W Power Supply
Canada Class B Digital Device
..."




1. Is this receiver properly driving my speakers to the best of their performance? or even near "average" performance?

2. If I buy a "better" receiver and listen at the same volumes I'm accustomed to, what will I notice in terms of improvements/differences in the audio experience, if any?

Thank you.

1. No. Yes.

2. Sounds like a mid tier receiver. A higher end receiver is capable of higher peak volumes before distortion. Good newer receivers employ sophisticated setup routines such as Dirac or Arc Genesis and modern sound formats like Dolby Atmos. Good examples are NAD and Anthem products. Denon also offers fantastic products with featuresets packed with value.

Apparently Onkyo now also carries Dirac, but not a fan.

I’d stay away from Sony for AVRs. Toooo basic in terms of setup flexibility.

Hi SCGM

I'm pretty sure that that first spec is a bit of an over statement the way it's being presented ... 570 Watts in ... yielding 950W out (if all channels are driven). More likely it's 2 channels driven ... that would be in line: 570W in giving 300W out ... it's about the right efficiency . Note that it's 1% distortion because they are driving it into clip to get it. BTW 1% distortion is almost impossible to hear but it's probably higher at other frequencies other than 1Khz.

Engineers and Marketers what to put their best spec's forward ... based on that I can make some assumptions:

using the 0.06% THD for 100W at 8 ohms to calculate the peek voltage (right at clip is most likely the place they'd get the best number). That gives me about 28.3 V rms ... which puts the rails at 40V.

Now how many speakers it can drive and how does it perform with a 4 ohm load (the M80s) depends on how much current it can supply. The best they could do THD wise is 133Watts at 6 ohms but, as I said above, they drove it into clip to get 150W. I'll assume that they picked 6 ohms (and not 4 ohms) because that was the best they could to current wise. Something between 4.7 and 5.3 amps ... call it 5 Amps/Speaker or 10Amps total.

with only the two M80's driven you'd get around 100W each but in reality
you have to share the 10 amps with the other 5 speakers.

I'd allocate 3 amps continuous to each M80's and split 4 amps between the other speakers ...
So my best guess is the M80s will get around 36W continuous with 113W for dynamic peeks ... once beyond that you'll be getting into distortion. BTW with highly dynamic music/sounds you'd only have 3.5W continuous as your limitation would be the 113W peeks ... But since you watch mainly movies and have a kick ass sub I would not sweat that ...

If that doesn't help I could put it into real world terms if you tell me how far you sit from the front speakers.



P.S. someone else might chime in if I missed something

My 5.1 setup is in a small room and seating is about 8.5' from the speakers

Since the receiver has met my needs, when I buy a replacement I'll look for one that meets/exceeds these specs but lists them properly for all channels driven so consumers don't have to guess.

Am I correct in thinking that if all else remains the same, the only thing more power does is let you go to higher volumes of sound?

Thank you for the feedback, greatly appreciated.

Doubling your amplifiers power (for ex. going from 100 watt to 200 watts) will only give you an additional 3dB of acoustic power.

dB Change Power change
+3 x 2
+6 x 4
+10 x 10
+20 x 100
+40 x 10,000

Let's look at a few numbers ... if your amp delivered equal power to all speakers ... each would get about 23.5 watts. More realistic, IMO, is 0.5Amps (2W) to each QS10 and distributing the rest to the front 3. Then the M80's and VP150 would get about 44.2Watts each. This is about as far as you can crank you system ... and the sound won't be overly great at this level (as we will explore below).

Let's look at the M80's in your system for three cases: 3.5W, 23.5W and 44.2W

M80 SPL = 94db 1W/1m (in room)
1W SPL at 8.5' or 2.58 meters = 94 - 20 log( 2.58 ) or 85.7 db
SPL at w = 85.7 + 10 log( w)
or for:

Now you’re probably sayin' "Wait a second" 44.2W v.s. 23.5W and it's about the same loudness? Yup, 3db is below most people's threshold to perceive a change in loudness.

Now here's the interesting part ... you're not going to perceive the difference in loudness but you probably perceive more harshness because you don’t have a lot of head room (about 6.5 db) and pulling more current will reduce even that.

On the other side 3.5W is plenty loud at your seat and your pretty safe from clipping. I can see questions coming:
Why? 3.5W seems like so little. Well, 1W is about where most listen to their music ... not loud but a decent level depending on your speakers and taste. 3.5W is a definite increase in loudness although you'd need 10W of power to double the perceived loudness (from 1W) ... i.e. 10x the power doubles the the perceived loudness.

To make maters worse you need 32x the continuous power you set to be fairly safe on clipping. So, 3.5 watts can reach 112W peaks. 10 watts 320W peeks. And ... that's one speaker .... Now start adding on more and you can see why some go nutzoid on power. Have fun.

I should add a couple of notes to the above …
I’m assuming your in a typically sized room … if your in a great room take off 3db or so

Movie theaters aim for around 80 to 100 SPL … that’s a range which balances hearing safety (keeping it under 85db) and emotional impact.
At 1W at 8.5ft your getting 85db (which is higher than I typically listen)

Live music is around 100-115db and rock concerts can hit 120

Thought of one more thing ... you might want to adjust the above numbers by +3db because the M80's are mostly playing the same content (i.e. you are doubling the power being poured into the room 100W+100W = 200W). I'd assume the VP150 is playing somewhat different content so I'd stick with +3db (but if all three were playing the same thing you'd adjust by +4.8db).

So, at 8.5 ft at

1 watt you'd get 88db and at
3.5 watts ... 94db ... which is in the jazz club level but to add more real world flavor ...
it's about how loud people crank their headphones or nightclub levels if you were sitting at the bar.

One more point with movies and hitting movie theater levels ...you're probably fine movie wise since
I'd bet you could get away with 10 watts continuous and hit the 98db level with tolerable distortion on the peaks ... plus depending on where (and how) you crossover to the sub you can gain significant power for the other speakers.

The real reason to upgrade is the point Trevor made ... technology moves on and upgrading your receiver gets you into the latest formats and room correction.

loads of number and an awful lot to digest.

But the other factor that i have yet to wrap my head around is the processor or pre-amp side of things. Let me explain what i mean by that.

you are buying an intergrated receiver in it combines both the pre-amp side that lets you select the source, control the volume and sends the sounds out the amplifier circuits inside the box. What everyone else has pointed out is the amplifier end of the equation that drives the speakers. How well they can drive the speakers and how much power realistically you are getting.

I have been in the music loving game for many years. I'm an old opinionated fart who cares more about the sound that I can hear rather than the theoretical math that backs it up. Experience has told me that all things being equal on paper doesn't translate to what you get and can actually hear. When you compare two different receivers to each other there are far too many variable things changing that you cant take at face value. I had a Nakamichi AV receiver that played wonderfully. The sound it produced was simply divine. Now on paper it had far worse specs that any of the more modern receivers that were built to work with modern equipment. The Nak didn't even have a digital decoder inside of it much less support of HDMI, so for a HT setup it was useless. So I bought other brands to try and replace what i liked and felt that they never quite sounded as good even though technically they had better specs.

I moved from relying on an integrated receiver to do everything for me. By pulling the amplifier out of the equation I removed just one more variable so i could decide what worked. I started with a Pioneer as they were relatively cheep and had the pre-outs I needed (some 8-10 years ago for a timeline). I was using at the time an Anthem MCA5 amp. it was a killer amp, but it never sounded all that good with the Pioneer plugged in. If I hooked up my speakers with the Nak using the tape outs to the MCA5 it sang. so i knew it was capable of giving the sound I needed.

I tried Sony, Merantz, Denon, Yamaha and each time I was not getting the same richness and sound that I wanted. Each sounded different from each other. But non sounded as good as what i had with the Nak. Eventually i bought an Anthem AVM60 pre-amp and just like that the sound i was wanting came through. A bit of a long winded story, but something to consider. if the pre-amp side of whatever you get just isn't outputting the signal in the manner and level needed, it doesn't matter the power and what dynamic range is available in the amp. CRAP IN - CRAP OUT!

Specs very often do not tell a full story. Actually, most times IMO specs are deceptive. You really have to be a fairly knowable to understand what’s being presented and more importantly what’s being left out. How many times have you seen a devices frequency response quoted as 20Hz to 20kHz. Well, that spec is meaningless without additional information. If they forgot to tell you its +/- 10db well some frequency’s may sound 4 times louder then others. Not quite what most would assume.

Even if they give you a complete quote it might not match the device you bought. This maybe from forgetting to update the manual/web page after a revision to just outright lying (think Chinese knockoff).

So when someone says X is better then Y because they read the spec … I take it with a grain of salt. That doesn’t mean specs are useless it just means you need to make sure they make sense, are interpreted correctly, and not take them as gospel.

In any case, putting specs aside, I can not tell you what your hearing. There are a lot of factors which can create poor sound … sometimes it’s exactly what you think it is … sometimes it’s not.

Since I joined this board in 2002, I have espoused that the source is the most important device in the audio chain. It was not popular then, probably not now - especially on a speaker mfg'er board. I will expand it a bit - An exceptional source needs good pre/amp and then speakers. A great source feeding cheap speakers sounds better than a cheap source feeding great speakers.

I could explain with examples for days, but I think MatMan has the example above, without mentioning the source. :-)

Are you suggesting a pair of Realistic speakers with top of the line source equipment would sound better than active LFR1100s with "low end" source equipment like an integrated Onk fed by a Firestick 4K?

I think he means source as the content. Great in this case being dynamic range.

Maybe he can clarify.

If the OP hasn't been clipping and is happy with the sound I'd say he doesn't need a new receiver.
And it's probably not clipping if it lasted 10 years. I'd guess that some of that luck is because the sub has been doing the heavy lifting; but part of it might be that the common (mass-market) manufacturers used to over-design, but now I think they come right up to the spec line.

With that in mind scgm, if you do wind up getting a receiver I'd look for one rated at 4 ohm (if doesn't seem like your current receiver is). It worked out the last time, but you may not be as lucky the next time.

BBIBH and MattMan, in some respects I agree with you. In other respects, it’s not that cut and dry. So first let’s get Mattman’s point out of the way. Lousy sound in gets you lousy sound out no matter how good the components are which follow … no argument. But in general, IMO, the source is not usually the weakest link till you are far down the upgrade path.

I think the argument being made from the other side is more about money: starting and upgrading on a limited budget. Most don’t have $5k, $10k or more to start off with a system that benefits from subtle upgrades. So upgrading a budget system the most likely path is cost driven. So what gets you the most bang for the buck when it comes time to upgrade.

First let’s define a typical budget system. Todays low end devices (I.e. receivers, cd/dvd players, etc…) are less expensive and produce better quality sound then ever before. This is because more and more functionality is being packed into inexpensive chips saving design time and manufacturing costs. Speaker components and speaker design on the other hand have not changed that much. Making it, IMO, the limiting factor in a budget system. I’d bet that a $300 receiver with $700 speakers would sound better at medium volume than a $700 receiver with $300 speakers. So, if I had to guess at the weakest link in the average budget system I’d generalize it’s the speakers.

From there figuring out the weakest link will depend on the problem you’re trying to solve. So, if the sound is being distort because you like listening at higher volume than your receiver is capable of, my first suspect would be your clipping the amp (but not necessarily the only suspect). If it’s a high noise floor you’d need to work your way backwards though the chain as it can be a lot of things (and not necessarily the device with the worst noise spec)

That said, If I had to guess at the next weakest link, after getting decent full range speaker (or adding a sub to a decent bookshelf speaker), it would be to get a decent amp to improve dynamics at volume. The reason is that an ampifier cost increases significantly with the power it can deliver. Budget is a key factor preventing most people from doing this and, IMO, it’s the first cost trade off most people make even though they might not know it (I.e. the power difference between that $300 receiver and $700 receiver, call it 75 vs 110watts, would not make a perceivable volume difference). Note the $700 receiver might be justified if it has pre-outs in anticipation of adding a future amp.

So, to sum it up in a different way … the user determines the problem to solve and the best solution may or may not be what you think it obviously is. It may not even be a component upgrade … and of course the solution is always limited by budget.

Without a good front end the speakers dont matter.

Power on hand is always bottleneck in installs.

Trevor, not sure your referring to what I wrote … the point I’m trying to make is that it’s hard to buy a terrible ‘front end” these day.

Most use their phones and are very happy. Even over Bluetooth which definitely is limiting … it’s listenable.
All preamp and receivers that I’ve heard to date are good enough to be listenable.

Think as a group we often confuse a listenable system with a top notch audiophile one.
Some talk like only a top notch one is any good.


Now, there is an other kind of sound … just bad … it’s not subtle….

Clipping more then lightly Is not, IMO, listenable. Bad speakers can also produce very poor quality sound.
The difference between bad & listenable is a bigger gap in my mind than listenable & audiophile quality.

The audiophile sound is what we are striving for. The degrees of listenable is what we get till we achieve it.

Agreed. Was not about what anyone wrote. Just a general mutter like an old man on a park bench. Lol.

rrlev: My point about crap in crap out can be taken in so many ways.

I can't speak for every system out there. I have been on CanuckAudioMart for many years and have seen more brands named that I even knew existed. So clearly there are many companies that manufacture for the audio market. I would hazard to guess that some cater towards the budget end of the listeners, and others cater towards the money is no object. And there are a whole lot that fall in between


For example. If you went and look at Pioneer. They generally sell at the big box type stores like BestBuy and 2001 Audio. They offer quite a range of product prices, but are more marketed towards the lower end listener rather than a high end Hifi audio person. You can get receivers with quite impressive looking specs on paper but as your prior posts have shown, they really don't deliver.

Compare a $400 Pioneer with say a $400 Cambridge Audio for playing stereo. The pioneer has on paper 300 watts and all the bells, where the Cambridge is 80 watts, no fancy but a big ass toroidal transformer. Who will sound better? Sadly this seems to also hold true for many Yamaha, Sony, Onkio, Marantz, Denon. All were at one point a great name but have fallen victim to the mass manufacturing, spec driven and not sound and quality black hole. Sure they do have some good systems but as you have said they are priced well above what most people would be wanting to be paying.

If we look to the OP, he is running a set of Axiom M80 and an EP500. I would not put them under the cheapest set of speaker category. I bought my first pair of Axiom M80v4 speakers in 2014 and they were $1300. (now they are over $2600). I don't know what the v2 sold for, but I would tend to bet they were not a $300 pair of speakers. So your comment about a $700 receiver and $300 speakers seems a bit of a puzzler. There is a price point that you simply cannot drop below without having to take a serious sacrifice in quality and or functionality. Sorry, but a new $300 speaker that sounds good doesn't exist. Even the M2 speaker is $600.

So it comes back to my crap in crap out. In my case, the Pre-Amps that I had tried were not living up to the capable performance of the rest of my system, so it really didn't matter that I had a wonderful amp and perfect cross over cables and #10 speaker wire with Axioms top of the line speakers. it didn't sound its best or even all that great as the start of the line in my case, the not up to the task pre-amp caused everything after it to sound sub par.

At no point is that saying your example of you should have a $700 receiver with $300 speakers, but more to the point that perhaps the $300 receiver just isn't up to the task of driving the $700 speaker you have and maybe it's not the speakers that are letting you down, but choosing the right $400 or $500 receiver as the price tag (or spec given by the manufacturer) doesn't mean its going to be better than the one you currently have.

</rant off>

...and then you get the people who say that they have a great audio system at home, who when you turn yours on and play a few tracks look at you with that dumbfounded and somewhat confused look and say "WOW, that sounds amazing" as they suddenly realize the difference between good enough, listenable and when something can be truly great. You don't know what you are missing until you hear what you are missing and then you understand.

I have a factory stereo inside my car. it plays music via bluetooth out through factory speakers in the doors and front dash. It sounds ok and I enjoy listening to some music while i drive. Do I purposefully go sit inside my car to listen to music? No. Have I ever thought that I feel like relaxing an lets put on some Debussy, or Dvorak and sit in my car? No.

To me that is the difference between listenable and great.

True enough. Ignorance is bliss when it comes to what is “good”.

Its not a competition either though. Some get carried away with that. It never stops if perfection is the goal.

Being able to measure coherence with an FFT plot allows you to measure electrical input vs acoustical output. Pretty useful to define “good” in objective terms I think. Stops you wondering!

Think we are in agreement on the speaker part of this example (at least for new speakers).
The example is making a few points:
1) someone starting this hobby with a $1000 in their pocket needs to make compromises.
2) that at this price point the receiver will sound fine, maybe not up to your standards, but very listenable.
3) that the difference sound wise between a $300 receiver and a $700 receiver is most likely very small (at least for anything halfway main-stream).
4) that the difference sound wise between a $300 speakers and a well selected $700 speakers is probably large.

Now think about someone starting out and how they might distribute their funds. Many will fall into buying the “better” 110 watt receiver. That’s the way marketing works … for only $50 more I can get X and for only $50 more than that I’d get X+. Leaving less for what matters. Either way, $700 speakers or $300 speakers, the speakers are most likely, IMO, the main limitation in a $1000 system.

Your point about front ends being the main place to upgrade comes much later down the upgrade path. The people who get there spent time and energy listening for the differences and care enough to spend money to get there. This is a much smaller group then the average person who feels they have a great stereo. You made that point above: your freind who thought he had a great system really wasn’t listening … he was just enjoying till you opened up his eyes (ears?) … definitely a thanks a lot moment

Sorry MatManhasgone,
Have to answer stuff in in bits & prices as the internet access is very spotty where I am currently.

The OP’s system seems to be well positioned on the upgrade path (a good compromise between budget and sound). I agree with you, that his speakers are most likely not the weakest link in this system. The power calculations tell me that unless he wants to play his music loud he’s fine … at least from a spec point of view. So, his next upgrade step is dependent on what he feels his system needs and of course his budget. It may very well be getting a great prepro/amp combo. It could be spending more time perfecting his setup or room … to know what I would do, would require me to play with his system for bit.

That said, if it had to be a piece of equipment and with out hearing or playing with his system myself what you’re proposing would also be my best guess.