Receivers
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2
newbie
|
OP
newbie
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2 |
How much does the wattage actually matter in a receiver. I read that you really never go near the maxium output wattage when your playin your system. I cant decide if I want a cheaper 200 watt 4 channel versus a 6.1 600 watt reviever. Anyone have any ideas on how to help? Also, how are KLH or Sony receivers. Any good suggestions for a decent reviever?
|
|
|
Re: Receivers
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,236
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,236 |
Most people around here prefer Denon, Pioneer and Yamaha. There are also a number of Rotel and NAD owners here. Not much talk about KLH and Sony.
|
|
|
Re: Receivers
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,488
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,488 |
i dont want to sound snobby or harsh but KLH electronics are complete trash. you would be better off with a clock radio. their speakers arent much better.
Stay AWAy from KLH electronics, and low end sony. you get what you pay for. and with stuff like that you can expect it to clip at probbly 30 watts instead of the 200 its rated at.
stay away.
|
|
|
Re: Receivers
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 345
devotee
|
devotee
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 345 |
The difference between 100 watts per channel and 200 watts per channel is 3 dB, or "somewhat noticeable" difference in loudness. It's not really significant unless you're driving inefficent speakers. You can approach the maximum wattage during very dynamic movie passages, depending on how the receiver power ratings are published.
For example, a Rotel receiver will be advertised with a rating of 100 watts x 5, all channels driven, 20 Hz-20 kHz. A Panasonic receiver will be rated as simply "100 watts x 5", which usually only means 100 watts is available to any given channel at any given time...the all-channels driven output will be something like 35 watts, which can cause clipping if you set the volume too loud. I had an el cheapo Technics receiver once upon a time which constantly went into protection mode, despite being advertised as "90 watts x 5".
I'm not sure about KLH, but Sony is notorious for overstating power on their receivers. Spending the extra bucks on a receiver with a more stable power supply (Denon, Onkyo, Yamaha) is well worth the investment.
|
|
|
Re: Receivers
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 359
devotee
|
devotee
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 359 |
harman kardon is also pretty good
what is your budget?
Once You Pop You Can't Stop
|
|
|
Re: Receivers
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,236
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,236 |
Oops..forgot HK. The HK525 is an incredibly popular unit as well.
|
|
|
Re: Receivers
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044 |
Why does everyone always forget the H/K? C'mon, guys... :-)
I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
|
|
|
Re: Receivers
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 175
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 175 |
Denon, Onkyo, and especially Yamaha all 'over state' their rated power. H/K is honest about it. I love my 525.
|
|
|
Re: Receivers
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,488
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,488 |
Dont forget NAD.
They have conservative ratings.
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,964
Posts442,603
Members15,631
|
Most Online2,699 Aug 8th, 2024
|
|
0 members (),
1,030
guests, and
3
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|