OK im thinking about adding an 2channel amp for my fronts, I want something in the 300-400watt area. What is the deal with amps like Crown that are $300 and amps like Outlaw an Adcom that are alot more per channel? Im thinking of maybe even a 5 channel or 7. Im really confused about the whole thing. My avr has 130 per channel and I know thats not the real wattage, will I hear a big change by going to 300-400 watts?
There is and has been lots of discussion about the amp subject on this board.
I'm not sure that there is a good or easy answer to your question.
At the risk of being crass, "it all depends."
I think asking if you will hear a big change is a very subjective question, you may or may not. In my setup I have noticed improvement using an amp, especially at higher listening levels.
If you go with a 2 channel amp 200wpc at 8ohms will probably translate to 300wpc at 4ohms.
If you do decide to buy an amp, Imho I would go with Outlaw, Adcom or one of the other quality amps to match the quality of your equipment.
You could use the Outlaw 7500 for your 2 or 3 channel. The unused channels mean more available for 2 or 3 channel use.
There will be a change if you use a more powerful amplifier. But it is a controversial topic around here! :-)
For my two front M80s, I use a QSC SRA 3622 amplifier (1100 watts x 2 @4ohm). More info here:
http://www.qscaudio.com/pdfs/sraspec.pdf
For my two rear M80s, I use a Carvin 1800HD (600 watts x 2 @4ohm). More info here:
http://www.carvin.com/products/single.php?ItemNumber=HD1800&CID=PWA
The QSC amp's fan is silent. The Carvin amp's fan is just barely audible if you stand within a few feet of the amp.
I am using the Denon 3805 for the VP150 center speaker. But I might get a separate amp for that one too!
Using separate amps has made an audible difference when I listen to music or watch movies. The headroom provided by the amps makes a significant difference to sound effects in movies. YMMV.
Amp power will only make a difference at very high sound levels assuming the speakers you are using even require more power (driver size, frequencies played and impedance being the major factors). The difference really only applies to distortion.
Otherwise the power simply goes unused.
Anyone who has utilized a switcher to test sonic character between 2 solid state amps of similar design type (e.g. Class A/A/B) will know just how impossible delineating any difference in sound quality really is. The only variable is whether an engineer specifically designed an amp to filter or enhance certain frequencies through the use of various components. Most engineers strive for a flat response curve as it related to the most accurate sound reproduction a vendor can provide.
An amp of Richie's size will only drive the speakers into a physical excursion limit if the volume is turned up too far (the cones will sound like they are slapping). More power does not equate to an infinity of SPL increases.
I have maxed out my M60s with a 225w Anthem amp which is not of a dual mono design. However my much larger Tannoys can take more power as that same amp will run these speakers into distortion at elevated levels.
My opinion (not experience
) is that the Denon 4306 is a pretty high-quality piece of equipment that does likely produce close to its rated power with very little distortion.
The Crown amps (and some other "pro", instrument or PA amps) have higher wattage ratings, but can sometimes run loudly (apparently the QSC and Carvin are not in this category). Generally, they also tend to generate somewhat higher rates of distortion. I was unaware of QSC, but am now quite fascinated with their products.
There is a decent short article
here that talks about the importance of not only power, but also distortion and signal-to-noise ratio. Axioms are already very efficient speakers. Remember that to get a volume twice as loud, you need TEN times as much power. If you do not already own a SPL meter, I strongly urge you to get one (like the analog Radio Shack version) and quantify just how loud "loud" is to you. Listening for long periods above 110db can cause permanent hearing damage, and I suspect that your Denon is capable of generating 100db with your speakers without too much sweat unless you are listening in a cathedral.
To echo The Rat, it definitely depends. If you listen at very high volumes AND in a very large room, the extra headroom might be useful to you. I do not assert that employing separate amplifiers makes no difference. However, I continue to believe that it is also important to ascertain whether or not you REALLY can discern a difference, whether the difference is preferable, and whether you find that the investment required justifies the incremental difference.
.One really does not know if you would benefit form an external amp or not. I haven't had a receiver in my music system in so long I really can't make a fair judgment. One thing I do know is the only times I have ever had a speaker fail on me when I was using a receiver. It was from pushing the receiver into clipping. One thing I don't think there can be much arguing over is you are more likely to damage a speaker when playing your music to high levels with not enough power.
I have even had a power amp (215 @ 8ohm) go into protect mode when listening at high levels. Since going with the Rotel, Axiom combo I have not experienced any problems what so ever. I do at times really push it too, well over 100 db.
Give it a try and see if you would indeed see an improvement.
Thanks for creating the links!
Skip, the 130 watt rating on your 4306 is in fact the "real wattage", as required by law(FTC)for advertising of amplifier power. Except in the highly unlikely circumstance that you're exceeding its limits and the 4306 is now audibly distorting or even shutting down, going to 300-400 watts can make no change at all, since unused headroom is simply that, i.e. unused.
Alan's take on separates
Link
Thanks everyone for your feedback, I do like to listen loud but have not checked with a meter. My room is not that big so I think the Denon I have might be all I need for now.I do not get any clipping, it sounds very good at the volume I listen to it. Thanks Again!
Unless you're throwing a loud block party, most amps put out enough power to permit listening to music or movies at pretty high volumes. As I've said many times, I have a Kenwood KA9100, rated at 95 wpc (x2), which has power meters. The KA9100 drives a pair of 87db Dahlquist DQM905s (spectacularly good speakers). This is part of my garage system, and I crank it up pretty good so I have tunes by which to wash my car. At almost painful volumes, the meters indicate 0.5-3 watts output. For the most part, unless you drive your solid state amps to clipping, any amp out there is sufficiently powerful to drive our efficient Axioms to earsplitting SPLs.
For those who believe that all solid state amps with similar architecture, output and specs sound the same, all I can say is, not mine.
Now, it isn't price dependent, in my case, even less so, because I buy a lot of used audio equipment.
Now, it takes living with an amp for a bit to discern its peculiar sound qualities. I rate them on the basis of the frequency of golden musical events an amp will put out.
"Golden musical events"? the objectivist/positivists mumble. Yes, wall of sound, soundstaging, air, decay, attack, slam, delicacy, detail, all the subtle qualities which really distinguish one amp from another.
For those who believe that everything they need to know about an amp is to be found in its Underwriters Laboratory tag, or published spec sheet, I know I will hear a chorus of mocking denial. That's fine.
None of my amps match my Antique Sound Labs MG SI 15DT (5wpc in SET mode). Next best is the antique Kenwood KA9100, then, not so easy to pick between the Integra M-504 and the Yamaha M-80s. I had a THX rated Kenwood KMX 1000, I thought it would be great because the old KA 9100 is so good. Hated it. Great specs though for those who think all you need to know about an amp can be found on a piece of paper.
Anyway, since your amp will probably spend most of its time putting out less than 1 watt per channel, if the first watt is no good, who cares how many more like it stand behind it.
In reply to:
Yes, wall of sound, soundstaging, air, decay, attack, slam, delicacy, detail, all the subtle qualities which really distinguish one amp from another.
You forgot blatt and bloom.
Yes, blatt is actually one of my favorite tests. No blatt? Out goes the amp.
Yes, Peter, and those listed qualities are so subtle and delicate that all it takes to make them disappear is covering up the nameplate and pricetag.
JohnK, of course, I left out one of my favorite amps, the $20 T-Amp. Big price tag-very imposing name-tag. You can buy a minty Kenwood KA9100 for $250-350 on ebay. Yamaha M-80s for about the same. You may have to pay a few more dollars (US) for the Integra M-504. Are these big ticket items for you? "Name-plates" with too much cachet to handle?
I also left out the Canadian made Anthem PVA 5, which I would have to rate just behind the Kenwood KA9100 in my list.
If you can't hear the difference between amps, perhaps the rest of your system lacks the resolving power for a meaningful test. I know your speakers are good enough. I figure you are so committed to your theory that you wouldn't even put the matter to the test. Anyway, those who know from experience know that your theory is inadequate.
In any case, music is better than theory, the better the amp, the better the music. Price is not necessarily a factor, neither is brand label potency.
You constantly gloss over the meat of JohnK's argument. If you subjected all your own equipment to the type of blind test linked in that Stereophile article -- which uses only human ears as to gatehr data) -- your claims of differences would vaporize, or so the evidence overwhelmingly suggests.
In reply to:
Anyway, those who know from experience know that your theory is inadequate.
Let's forget about theories for a second and refer back to the article. Can you explain the results?
I believe Johnk's point isn't that you have a preference for some amps that are less expensive and well known, but that if you were listening to several well-designed amps regardless of price with no clue of which was which, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I tend to agree.
However, I have to admit I'm still attracted to the idea that it's possible. If I can be shown any independent testing similar to the Stereo Review article posted by JohnK that shows different results (in the 'how much power do I need' thread, pg 2), I'll be ready and willing to reconsider this issue. Testing in this way, to me, seems to be the only truly objective procedure to help point me toward a conclusion in this highly subjective matter.
I started to not make another post on this thread, but, once again, we have someone confusing opinion with physics.
That is a terrible mistake to make over and over and over again!!!!!!!!!!
Fact not Opinion.
Well ratpack, you are correct. I listen to different amps in a given system, I use my mark-1 stereo aural receiver system hooked to a 1300 cc wetwork mushware computer (version 4.5 billion) with 50 squintillion possible non-binary neuronal connections and built in processing, rely on first hand experience of the audio output from systems with variables limited to different amps, and ... out comes an opinion. Wait ... here it is ... amps make an audible difference.
Now, true, I don't close both my eyes when I switch amps, so, I guess my tests are not of the double blind variety.
If you believe that all solid state amps of similar output are the same, you should buy the cheapest amp you can find. Interesting that the reductionist/positivist outlook impels the conclusion that of a population of amps with similar specs price (and perhaps warranty, cosmetics, or brand-name impact) is the only basis for distinguishing between them.
Now, I don't believe that more money necessarily gets you a better component, how could any Axiom fan believe such a proposition?
On a more serious note, I've been thinking about PMB's "blatt" comment. Now, I do believe that a system's ability to reproduce "blatt" is a major indicator of its sound quality. I have heard a major difference between systems' abilities to reproduce blatt, but the variable I was listening for was speaker choice, not amps. I think it would make an interesting test to see if different amps have any effect on a given system's ability to blatt well.
Funny thing about physics and opinions ... ratpack you are correct. I base my opinions on output rather than theory. How does it sound, rather than how does the spec sheet look. Thanks for the clarification.
OK! I am sure Jimmie is thoroughly confused by now! :-)
If he's not, I am
In reply to:
"but that if you were listening to several well-designed amps regardless of price with no clue of which was which, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference."
I think for a lot of people this is true, but not
all people. As a general statement you are probably correct. One of my friends buys the more expensive models simply because they look nice and sometimes because "they have the cool blue LEDs". He can hardly tell the difference between a lot of speakers, but he does know aesthetics.
I once had an Adcom GFA-535II stereo amp (55 W/channel) and eventually replaced it with one of Yamaha's top of the line Prologic receivers (that is, it was the top of the line model when it came out - 90W/channel).
Both were expensive, both had great numbers on paper but with the same speakers, components, cables, etc. the Yamaha sounded dull compared to the Adcom. I eventually sold the Yamaha to pick up a Hamon Kardon which sounded better. I had both the Adcom and Yamaha for about three years each so I became very familiar with their sound.
In this case, it supports Alan's article. Due to the space being dedicated to the components rather than the components being dedicated to the space, the separate amp outperformed the receiver. That being said, receivers have come a long way since then.
Sound quality issues aside, the OP, I believe was simply looking for "more sound". In his case, going to a QSC amp and looking for something in the 1200+ watt range would make a difference, although I doubt he "needs" it. For my needs at the time, the 55W/channel was plenty and I never listened to it maxed out. Junping to 90W/channel
made no difference. The speakers I used were Mirage's M3-si which were very inefficient at 83dB@2.83V/1m.
At 130W/channel, unless the original user has a HUGE space, that should be plenty of power for most situations.