I'm trying to put together an approximate budget for a sound system and need a little help deciding on an appropriate amp.

At the moment I am looking at M60s mostly for music with HT down the road. The room is 20 x 12 x 8.

I've decided I don't need most of the bells and whistles as I will be delivering music and movies from a pc and don't plan on other external hd sources.

One thing I am not entirely clear on is power requirements to deliver full dynamic range in music. I hear people mentioning big power demands at times. Is the power demand for short peaks such as drum beats or is it for shifts from quiet to louder segmets in a piece?

The other thing I am not sure on is how much power the satelite speakers in a 5.1 system will draw during movies. If I decide I want to be able to deliver 100w per channel to the mains, do I really need this much power for the center and surrounds?

The final decision on exactly how much power I need will come when I audition speakers at Axiom. This will tell me how loud I like to listen to my speakers and what my power demands are.

For some reason I am locked in on 100w per channel for the M60s. I could look at a receiver that delivers this with all channels driven, or I could start off with a stereo integrated amp and pick up a lower powered 5.1 reciever with pre-outs later.

What are all you M60 owners using to drive your systems?

FWIW, for now I am in the "s long as it dosn't clip they all sound the same" amp camp and I am a value for money guy so I hate both wasted $$ and watts.

Oh yea, one last question. Are most of the amps out there still analog, or should I also be looking at analog vs digital (also hate wasted power)?

Fred

Fred,

If budget is a concern, then you should look at one of the great AVR's on the market. Any of the decent brand names often mentioned on here (Denon,HK,Yamaha,Onkyo,etc.) are all solid state receivers and will drive your 60's with no problem. If you start looking at seperates, you will also get great performance, but will pay a lot more money. Possibly, not noticing any difference.

My guess is that for your room size, any 100-120 receiver will be more than adequate.

The m60's are easy to drive 8ohm speakers. Just one m60 will give you 93dB's while only using "1" watt at 3 feet away(1 meter). 93dB's is very loud. As you double the power, the dB's go up by 3.

So:
1 watt 93dB
2 watts 96dB
4 watts 99dB
8 watts 102dB
16 watts 105dB
32 watts 108db
64 watts 111dB
128 watts 114dB

Just to give you an idea what these levels mean in real world situations and to show where damage starts.

Environmental Noise

Weakest sound heard 0dB
Whisper Quiet Library 30dB
Normal conversation (3-5') 60-70dB
Telephone dial tone 80dB
City Traffic (inside car) 85dB
Train whistle at 500', Truck Traffic 90dB
Subway train at 200' 95dB

Level at which sustained exposure may result in hearing loss 90 - 95dB

Power mower at 3' 107dB
Snowmobile, Motorcycle 100dB
Power saw at 3' 110dB
Sandblasting, Loud Rock Concert 115dB
Pain begins 125dB
Pneumatic riveter at 4' 125dB

Even short term exposure can cause permanent damage - Loudest recommended exposure WITH hearing protection 140dB

I use an Onkyo receiver but will soon be moving my Anthem MCA20 downstairs to power my M60s.
I like to turn up the volume occasionally in the media room and often when i'm in the pool room over 18' away.
More power is required.

Interesting you should mention Yamaha in your list of decent avr's as they tend to get a rough ride on this forum.

I recently read a review of the RX-V659 on Audioholics where it received a glowing review. If Audioholics is to be believed, this receiver has lots of oompf and can put out more than the rated 100wpc nice and clean. The kicker is that it is listed at $399 msrp, which is a lot less than anything else I have seen in this performance category.

At this price, should I look at anything else??

As for budget, why buy a Ferrari when a Subaru wrx will give you all the ieeeeee!!! at 1/3 the price.

Fred

Fred, obviously situations vary, but at a comfortably loud average listening level with speakers of average sensitivity at a typical listening location about 1 watt is used. Much more can be used on brief peaks, depending on the dynamic range of the material being played. A frequently suggested rule of thumb to allow for peaks on material of very wide dynamic range is to provide for 20dB higher than the average listening level. 20dB higher than 1 watt would require 100 watts. Some material(e.g. some almost uniformly loud pop material)is dynamically compressed and requires far less in the way of maximum power capacity. For example, it can be noted that the distortion audibility tests that Axiom conducted some time ago used pop material with a dynamic range of only about +/- 5dB, for simplicity.

An "all channels driven" power rating isn't realistic for home use and speakers never simultaneously have to use full power on program material. The typical 2-channels driven rating required as a minimum by the FTC amplifier regulations and used on most units is more in line with reality.

The Yamaha 659 which you mention should indeed have sufficient power in the vast majority of setups and would be an excellent choice if the features are suitable. Incidentally, don't fall into the trap of using irrelevant analogies relating to cars or anything else. This is the sort of argument that those pushing high-priced stuff sometimes resort to, because they have no justification in audio terms.

Hey Fred,

The only negative take I recall about Yammy's was in the past and their ability to drive the 4ohm m80's. Newer models have been more successful, but Axiom still likes to promote Denon, HK, NAD, etc. for driving m80's.

Thanks John, thats the info I was looking for. I have probably run across all the bits at some point or other, but its hard not to get lost in all the tech talk about massive torroidal (sp) power supplies etc...

At 120w two channels driven the Yamaha or similar receiver should be good for my application. Unfortunately the review I read was recently recycled by audioholics and this model is now discontinued. I should keep an eye out for it used though.

Actually, I think the car analogy is quite apt. Folks don't buy a Ferrari for its performance, they buy it to make a statement. You can't (legally) drive a Ferrari, or any other performance car for that matter, to its potential on this continent. On top of that, from a performance perspective, there are a number of other vehicles, like the Subaru that will give you the same performance at much higher reliability and lower cost.

To carry the analogy one step further, I drive a Mazda in sheeps clothing (Ford Escort) 'cause zoom zoom is all I need to get me to work and back with a minimum use of fuel.

I am looking for a similar experience with my sterio system and the Yamaha 659 or similar sounds like it would fit the bill nicely.

OK, enough of being pedantic.

Sirquack, thanks for the info on Yamaha. I guess I forgot some of the details.

I should probably build myself a list of similar receivers I can watch for used. I guess its also time to visit a few websites to see what currently available receivers meet my needs.

Thanks for the help.

Fred

Hey Fred,

I've got a pair of M60s that I bought primarily for 2.1 channel, stereo use. I'm a music nut first! I also have your goal of getting into HT down the line. I've been researching that off and on for a couple of years. Right now I have my $6 TV hooked to my stereo set up, and that is totally fine with me.

I must weigh in to say that if you are interested in stereo sound right now, you should really look into some used sleeper budget integrated amps - Nad 3020, Creek 5350SE, McIntosh MAC1700, etc. Look for names like Rotel, Luxman (like my L210), Carver, Marantz, vintage Sherwood or Harman Kardon, etc.

Regarding power, you don't need a lot of power for stereo or to run M60s. According to Axiom they only need 10 watts minimum, 250 watts max. My Luxman L210 is only 45 wpc but has wonderfully full dynamic range. I use a Scott 222c tube amp with only 20 watts per channel with the M60s, and the sound is out of this world!

I'm really just piping in because I've read a lot about small amounts of power versus larger power loads and it's mighty confusing when it comes to stereo applications. For HT, I agree that more power is better for louder scenes, etc.

But if all you need right now is something really amazing sounding to hook to your M60s, you really don't need to look for large power loads. And, from everything that I've read about Yamahas, this is not my opinion because I've never really heard Yamahas, they are fine enough, but not detailed and lively for music.

Let your ears be the judge. I spent $1000 on an Adcom separates stereo system only to be blown away by a $150 Luxman integrated amp - the one I'm listening to right now!

Again, this is all based on my personal experience and my audio journey.

Good luck!

Zoë

That was me until two months ago. I must say, I am enjoying the step up from a 19" screen to a 50" screen.

I am a little hesitant to pick up 20 or 30 year old equipment. My understanding is that electronics degrade over time. Something less than 5 years old on the other hand...


I have yet to hear of any sort of explanation for what in the electronics would 'remove' detail from a signal. I suppose an amp that has a flat frequency response at 85db may not at 30db and so you may lose some of the quieter sounds in material and so, loose detail. As far as I know, nowbody has shown this to be true(backed up by measurements or controlled listening tests).

I tend to go with people like Alan Loft who have been listening for years as part of their job. ...and after all, Alan must have good ears. He hooked up with Axiom didn't he?

I've been doing a little more digging on Yamaha and it seems that they have a proliferation of receivers but as a rule they seem to deliver more watts per $$ at reasonable specs (on paper at least).

The RX-V659 seems to be the real deal. Is it reasonable to assume the same build quality accross the entire Yamaha line? Need to find some more reviews I guess.

Fred

OK, too funny!! Found this line in a review:

Rythm??? I gotta check receivers for rythm???

Fred

Some receivers dance better than others. I thought everyone knew that?

That's a shame. I use an amp that is 50 years old - still running wonderfully fine. There are some that would argue that newer amps are far too complicated, which in turn muddies the sound. Think crossovers.



Well, it's often as simple as the sum of its parts. Take just about anything that has a competitor making a similar product and you'll find that one manufacturer will have used inferior parts somewhere down the line.



Well, you did post questions here, right? So, I'm giving you my very humble opinion. Take it or leave it, it's mine. "Who the heck is she?" Someone who listens to music for a living.



My recommendation: Stop reading and get out there and hear the darn thing!

Zoë

Yeah Fred, don't take subjective impressions about mysterious qualities of certain units seriously. Amplifiers just amplify, and if they cover the 20-20KHz audible range with audibly flat frequency response and with inaudibly low noise and distortion(which is the norm these days, available at quite low cost), that's all that can be done. Of course terms such as "rhythm", "pace", "detail", "imaging", "soundstage", etc., which have nothing to do with amplification, pop up in some reviews when there's really nothing to say. You can be confident that the Yamahas and similar units from the other manufacturers amplify transparently without adding or subtracting anything of audible significance.

Dance!! Now I gotta watch my receiver dance?? I hate dancing.


Now you have me intregued. Not a lot of occupations require you to listen to music.

Just to make it clear, I do appreciate you giving me your opinion, just stating which camp I rest in.

I hear you on the quality of components, and that is one of the things I wonder about the different Yamaha lines. Its hard to evaluate whats under the hood without specific electronics knowledge. Thats where a good review is useful. For instance, I have read a couple of Yamaha reviews now where the reviewer took the time to look under the hood and note that used bigger caps than required etc.

One component that will make a difference and should be easier to figure out is the DAC. I don't know how many manufacturers list the dacs in their different receivers.

I also agree about the level of complication of some/many of the newer receivers. Way too many connectors to plug stuff into.

I spent a lot of time looking at how to minimize the number of devices and connections needed to read/play/display all the various discs I have.

Anyway, looking around, now that I have some idea of what I need, I think I can pick up a good not-so-old receiver at a very reasonable price. Some of the less feature laden Yamahas are also very reasonably priced for what they offer.

Thanks John. I've seen your opinion on the subject in a number of other posts.


Actaully, for a man of my age, 20-14KHz is probably just fine.

I was at my brothers place today and he still has the first integated amp I bought. For giggles I decided to look it up on the internet to see how good my taste was back then. Seems I paid around $300 for it in 1978 and it was a good quality amp delivering 40watts/channel. Thats around a grand in today's $$.

Considering I can pick up an amp that delivers 5x100w, probably at much lower distortion levels, thats a heck of a bang for the buck!

But can it dance

....and do the moon walk....

And does it like children?

One a day, no dancing. Helps keep the current up, so I hear...

Fred

I used to work in the music industry and now I write about music and technology for a living.

Hey, there are some great smaller companies making really good integrated amps for reasonable prices. Look at NAD for instance. Their C325BEE has been getting some attention of late (someone else on this board asked for advice on it).

I guess I'm just biased against big companies like Yahama. They are such a mass production company that somewhere down the line they have skimped on something in order to make money and keep the price low.

I hope you find an amp that fits your budget and your listening needs. Oh, and if you get it to dance, take pictures!

Zoë

If you want separates, Outlaw is a very similar company to Axiom in that they are a high quality boutique shop. I have the 970 with the 7075 amp and run M60's for my mains and although I have had some issues with the pre-pro, they make the 60's rock with DVD audio loud and clear. If I had to do it again, I would go with the 990 and maybe a 7125 for a little more power, but they all deliver very clean wattage and don't distort either literally or figuratively.

Sounds even more intreguing now Zoe.

We all have out biases. Mine is very much towards price/performance. The risk is trading off too much quality.

I happen to have a very nice Yamaha guitar (FG360 12 string) sitting in the corner of my room which I really love so maybe I have a bias towards them as well.

Dave. I looked at companies like Outlaw and Emotiva. In the end, buying separates puts a fairly large premium on the components even for productslike the above. Heck, the new Axiom amp is considered a real bargoon at $500/channel, yet I am looking at a $300 receiver that will deliver all the power I will need for a pair of M60s and is unlikely to colour the sound. Thats $60 per channel for 5.1.

Its not really fair to compare the two as the Axiom amp delivers a LOT more for that $500/channel. Its just not stuff I need. If I were looking at the M80 it would be a different story.

Yet another factor I forgot is that this is to be part of a long term solution for HD movie viewing and as such I need to be able to decode HD audio formats like True-HD. That probably eliminates a lot of current receivers and most certainly anything used.

Another option has occured to me. The Pioneer sterio amp at my brothers is not currently being used. At 40w/channel its probably enough to drive the M60 at reasonable volumes. I happen to have good audio on my pc so I could send analog out from it to the amp.

Not an ideal solution I admit, but would get me listening to music a little sooner. It would also buy me a little time to better sort out exactly what I want/need in a receiver.

[quote=fredk]Interesting you should mention Yamaha in your list of decent avr's as they tend to get a rough ride on this forum.

I recently read a review of the RX-V659 on Audioholics where it received a glowing review. If Audioholics is to be believed, this receiver has lots of oompf and can put out more than the rated 100wpc nice and clean. The kicker is that it is listed at $399 msrp, which is a lot less than anything else I have seen in this performance category.


You can slip this in the For What It's Worth file, but I was having trouble with my refurbed HK, so I picked up the Yamaha RXV-659 thinking this will hold me until something better comes along, but I don't think I'll be looking for something else. I am quite impressed with this extremely affordable receiver.

Thanks Littleb. If this is the one with the full review, I read it last night as well. Sounds like a very impressive receiver.

I finally got my head around power requirements and the 659 delivers what I need at a very attractive price. The only thing it dosn't do is decode the two new Bluray HD audio formats, something I want my receiver to do.

If I really want this feature I am very limited in which receivers I look at. From what I have read on Audioholics, the soon to be released RX-V663 probably has the same amp/power supply as the 659, but it decodes the two new formats. I have this receiver on my shortlist.

I hope Audioholics looks under the hood of the 663 as soon as it is released.