NewB asking Separate Amp vs. Receiver

Hi, I'm an audio novice who has this current set up. Yammy Rxv730 AV receiver (75W pc) plus Paradigm studio 80 and studio 20 as my surround set up. My audiophile friend tells me that I'm underdriving my speakers with my receiver and recommends a separate amplifier. He thinks the current receiver brings out only 50% of what my speakers (6 ohm) are capable of playing. I'm no audiophile and don't have much to spend (maybe $500) but if a decent "used" amplifier can bring my speaker sound to another level I am willing to drop some dough.. So will $500 budget amp bring that much of an improvement over my receiver -- that is...an improvemnt that even a novice can hear? Also, if so what amps "used" under $500 do you recommend? Thanks in advance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by agidol

Hi, I'm an audio novice who has this current set up. Yammy Rxv730 AV receiver (75W pc) plus Paradigm studio 80 and studio 20 as my surround set up. ... He thinks the current receiver brings out only 50% of what my speakers (6 ohm) are capable of playing. I'm no audiophile and don't have much to spend (maybe $500)...
.

---

The Paradigms are reasonably efficient speaker and don't require huge power unless played very loud; 75 wt/ch will be adequate from most people in most listening rooms.

But there are differences in the sound of amplifiers that aren't related to just power. Unfortunately, IMO, if you expect improvement in sound in the order of "50%", which is "huge", you are going to have to go beyond "entry level" equipment and that means looking at amps in the range of $1200+ new. You might able to get something used for as little as $500. Something like an Odessy Stratos maybe??? Unfortunately I haven't looked at the used market recently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feanor

The Paradigms are reasonably efficient speaker and don't require huge power unless played very loud; 75 wt/ch will be adequate from most people in most listening rooms.

But there are differences in the sound of amplifiers that aren't related to just power. Unfortunately, IMO, if you expect improvement in sound in the order of "50%", which is "huge", you are going to have to go beyond "entry level" equipment and that means looking at amps in the range of $1200+ new. You might able to get something used for as little as $500. Something like an Odessy Stratos maybe??? Unfortunately I haven't looked at the used market recently.

---

I use to own Studio 20's and still have my Studio 40's. I can drive them bleeding loud with a cheap old H/K receiver I have. No problem at all there.

I run them occassionally with a much nicer sounding classic NAD 3020 (40 watts/channel) amp that makes them sound maybe 5-10% better. In my old setup, I used an Adcom power amp, 60 watt/channel to take over from my Yamaha RX-V1400 receiver. I got maybe a 5-10% improvement in sound quality there too, tops, unless the music was really cranked.

When I connect them to my (ironically enough) $1200 Rotel amp, they do sound better still. However, even then the improvement isn't anywhere near 50%. I'd say maybe 15% tops. That's being generous, because at lower volumes there's not much difference from the other amps at all, the resolution is a bit better, and I swear the soundstage is deeper and wider, but it's not a massive improvement. The Rotel doesn't pull ahead until it starts getting loud, over 85 dB in room, and then it leaves the receivers and my cheap amps behind. I probably only push it that loud 50% of the time though.

Way back I borrowed some Bryston gear that would have cost me over $4200 (amp and pre-amp) the improvement still wouldn't have been 50% in my opinion. Maybe 20-25%, but probably not even that. But again, it would play cleaner when louder, and had tons more power.

All this just to say you might NEVER be able to spend enough to get a 50% improvement out of those speakers. I don't think I'm out of line saying your Yamaha is capturing at least 80% of what they can do. Possibly more. The law of diminishing returns applies harshly in the world of audio.

If you had to spend $2000 to get better sound, you'd be better off selling the Studio 80's and getting better speakers while keeping the current receiver to power them. That would yield more noticeable improvement than switching amps, IMO.

If your receiver has pre-outs, I would highly recommend buying a used power amplifier. NAD, Rotel, Adcom, PS Audio etc...you can find a lot of good, quality used amps on ebay or audiogon. I've bought two Adcom GFA-535II amps for under $120 off ebay. I see NAD's listed cheaply all the time as well. These have the real guts to drive your 6 ohm speakers, and their 60 watts is much beefier than my RX-V1400's 110 watts was.

I think you could get some improvement for not alot of money going that route. If you want more power, you there's a lot of options below $500 from those brands as well.

I think could probably swing a nice new integrated amp from NAD or Cambridge Audio for $500 that would probably improve the pre-amp side of things as well. Again, the money goes further in the used market. Receivers don't usually have great analog stages at the pre-amp level. Some of us run outputs from receivers into the AUX of integrated amps, to get the best of both worlds, using integrateds as power amps for home theater, and as full amp/pre-amp combos for 2-channel listening. Might be another option for you.

Good luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kexodusc

I use to own Studio 20's and still have my Studio 40's. I can drive them bleeding loud with a cheap old H/K receiver I have. No problem at all there.
...
Way back I borrowed some Bryston gear that would have cost me over $4200 (amp and pre-amp) the improvement still wouldn't have been 50% in my opinion. Maybe 20-25%, but probably not even that. But again, it would play cleaner when louder, and had tons more power.

All this just to say you might NEVER be able to spend enough to get a 50% improvement out of those speakers. I don't think I'm out of line saying your Yamaha is capturing at least 80% of what they can do. Possibly more. The law of diminishing returns applies harshly in the world of audio.
...
Good luck.

---

With given speakers, a "50%" improvement is essentially impossible (assuming you have enough power). Of course, these percentage improvements are entirely subjective, so anyone could disagree.

Still, my advice to the New B, is to bypass the likes of NAD, Rotel, and Adcom to get a "really significant", (20-25% :confused5: ) improvement. Granted, these will sound a bit different than the Yamaha probably not really better. Instead, a PS Audio (used) might be the sort of thing that would do it.

go for an additional amp. your yammy's 75wpc is insufficient. rotel stereo power amps are cool. give them a listen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feanor

With given speakers, a "50%" improvement is essentially impossible (assuming you have enough power). Of course, these percentage improvements are entirely subjective, so anyone could disagree.

Still, my advice to the New B, is to bypass the likes of NAD, Rotel, and Adcom to get a "really significant", (20-25% :confused5: ) improvement. Granted, these will sound a bit different than the Yamaha probably not really better. Instead, a PS Audio (used) might be the sort of thing that would do it.

---

I really like PS Audio, they were the runner up when I bought my Rotel (mostly because of price/performance considerations). I like their amps, but in my experience (albeit limited) their thing is really pre-amps. I think they're really a standout from the pack in that area.
I own power amps of all 3 of those other brands, each one sounds noticeably better than any receiver I've owned, H/K, Marantz, last 3 Yamahas etc. As good as a PS Audio or Bryston or something? Probably not quite, but their also much cheaper, which was why I suggested them. $500 isn't a lot to play with, and I have a strong feeling that receiver doesn't have pre-outs so a pre-amp or integrated migth be required? Or a new inexpensive receiver.
If it does, then yeah, PS Audio or something would be great. Though my experience with my Paradigm Studio's and PS Audio and Bryston leads me to believe those speakers would be the limiting factor with such equipment.
Maybe he'd be better off keeping the reciever and upgrading speakers before jumping that high up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kexodusc

II run them occassionally with a much nicer sounding classic NAD 3020 (40 watts/channel) amp that makes them sound maybe 5-10% better.

When I connect them to my (ironically enough) $1200 Rotel amp, they do sound better still... I'd say maybe 15% tops.

Maybe 20-25%, but probably not even that. But again, it would play cleaner when louder, and had tons more power.

I don't think I'm out of line saying your Yamaha is capturing at least 80% of what they can do....

---

I don't think I've ever read a post with more percent based comparisions before! As a point of reference, how do you assign such determinations?

rw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by E-Stat

I don't think I've ever read a post with more percent based comparisions before! As a point of reference, how do you assign such determinations?

rw

---

(This is why I hate posts with questions about percentages :( )

100% subjectively, and for comparative/illustrative purposes only, hence all the blatantly obvious "maybes" used to indicate a best guess. I have no idea how much better it actually is beyond "a tiny bit", "a bit", and "a bit more" etc.

In all honesty, I suspect if we were to employ known measurement techniques, the differences would be much, much smaller.

Do you have a tested, proven scale of reference you use when making such comparisons?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kexodusc

In all honesty, I suspect if we were to employ known measurement techniques, the differences would be much, much smaller.

---

Indeed. Similarly, we share 98% of the same DNA as the chimpanze. That last 2%, however, does make quite a difference!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kexodusc

Do you have a tested, proven scale of reference you use when making such comparisons?

---

Certainly not as none exists. Conventional audio metrics exhibit very poor correlation to perceived performance. Also, what's important to me may not be important to you. I think the only current basis for comparison is for one to identify their preferences and point(s) of reference as best as they can to put their comments into perspective.

rw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by agidol

My audiophile friend tells me that I'm underdriving my speakers with my receiver and recommends a separate amplifier. He thinks the current receiver brings out only 50% of what my speakers (6 ohm) are capable of playing

---

Underdriving? 50% of what? Do your regularly clip (overdrive) your amplifiers in order to achieve a desirable listening level? If not, then "underdriving" is probably not a problem. Headroom is a good thing, but it isn't everything. In my vintage system, I use a Threshold Stasis 3 amp capable of 200 watts / channel. At what power level do I usually listen with my Double Advents? 1 to 4 pure class A watts / channel according to the LED output ladders.

There is, however, an altogether different discussion about audio quality as opposed to quantity. I would recommend auditioning some more powerful and/or better sounding amps to help put your question into perspective. If you do enjoy very high levels, then you may need more power. For $500, you can buy a pro amp that offers more power, but not necessarily better power. See if perhaps your friend could bring over his receiver/power amp and see how it works in your system.

rw

my receiver can be used as a preamp so that will save money on having to buy another preamp. as for the volume output my paradigms are pretty efficient (sensitivity of 92db) so it's plenty loud and I never go below -36db so it's not that big of a deal. What I'm interested in gaining by a separate amp is a sound quality, not quantity. I'm seeing many audio enthusiasts here have separate preamp and amps and I was curious as to how much do you really gain in quality by investing in another amp instead of one single receiver. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by agidol

my receiver can be used as a preamp so that will save money on having to buy another preamp. as for the volume output my paradigms are pretty efficient (sensitivity of 92db) so it's plenty loud and I never go below -36db so it's not that big of a deal. What I'm interested in gaining by a separate amp is a sound quality, not quantity. I'm seeing many audio enthusiasts here have separate preamp and amps and I was curious as to how much do you really gain in quality by investing in another amp instead of one single receiver. Thanks.

---

Paradigms are quite efficient, and if you don't have the money to throw away right now, ignore your friend. In fact, drag his ass down to a high end audio shop and compare for yourself what those speakers sound like from a decent receiver vs. separates and I defy your friend to articulate the difference that justifies YOUR money.

I have significantly improved the power from my Pioneer receiver by adding a NAD C372 amp for my surrounds and Parasound Halo for my towers. Both are near $500 if you search around long enough. I don't think you HAVE to upgrade or add-on anything at this point, but you will notice a difference (even if it is marginal). Happy listening.