matching amp rms w/ speakers

[Aris]

if i have a speaker with a power handling range of like 25-125watts. should i get an A/V receiver with an RMS of 125watts? or would that be too much since the max output could possibly exceed the max power handling of the speaker?

how exactly should i match up the power rateings of receiver and speaker?

[Geoffcin]

if i have a speaker with a power handling range of like 25-125watts. should i get an A/V receiver with an RMS of 125watts? or would that be too much since the max output could possibly exceed the max power handling of the speaker?

how exactly should i match up the power rateings of receiver and speaker?

Forget about the speaker wattage ratings. The common problem with speaker ratings is that nobody listens at 125 watt RMS, EVER! Even if you have an amp capable of much higher power, your never going to play it like that. Get a receiver with the features that you like. I would also argue that you should get as good a receiver as you can, as your going to have it for many years. There's several companies making good receivers, and I'm sure that you'll get a lot of suggestions of which is best.

[jbangelfish]

If you underpower your speakers, they will sound like crap. Plain and simple. If you must buy a receiver, then buy one with 100wpc or more and you will like what you hear. I have proven this by demonstration to a good number of people over about a 30 year period. If you don't believe it, demonstrate it for yourself by trying two different amps or receivers with your speakers. One with a modest amount of power, say 30 to 60wpc and then one with over 100wpc. Tell me you don't hear a difference and an improvement and we'll all go out and buy 50wpc receivers because it's all we need and we can save thousands of dollars.
Bill

[Beckman]

If you underpower your speakers, they will sound like crap. Plain and simple. If you must buy a receiver, then buy one with 100wpc or more and you will like what you hear. I have proven this by demonstration to a good number of people over about a 30 year period.
Bill

How have you proven this to a number of people over a thirty year period?


If you don't believe it, demonstrate it for yourself by trying two different amps or receivers with your speakers. One with a modest amount of power, say 30 to 60wpc and then one with over 100wpc. Tell me you don't hear a difference and an improvement and we'll all go out and buy 50wpc receivers because it's all we need and we can save thousands of dollars.
Bill

Ok.
After listening to my Onkyo TX-8511(100x2) and comparing it to my Myriad Z-140(50x2) I discovered that the Myryad has much much better dynamics. I also find that my ears really start to hurt with the volume about half way up with both recievers.

Now before you call me a liar let me explain why power ratings are pointless.

1. Decibals=10*log(Pout/Pin), This means that if you double the power the output of the spekaers in dB's goes up by 3 dB's. That is a 100 W amp has a gain of 20dB and a 50 W amp has a gain of 17 dB.

2. Pioneer, sony, kenwood recievers with 100x2 power might sound better than there 50x2 counterparts. This has more to do with their power supplies and nothing to do with their power ratings.


Tell me you don't hear a difference and an improvement and we'll all go out and buy 50wpc receivers because it's all we need and we can save thousands of dollars.
Bill

Thousands of dollars? The cost difference between a 50x2 amp and a 100x2 amp from the same manufacturer is usually not very much at all. ($50-$100)


When purchasing an amp for speakers rated 25W to 125W I would go with someting that has good reviews(good reliability), sounds good with your speakers and has the features you want. About the only amps I would stay away from are low power flea type tube amps (less than 10 or 15 watts).

DON'T LIMIT YOUSELF TO 100WX2 RECIEVERS OR WHAT IS SOLD AT YOUR LOCAL ELECTRONICS STORE.

[This Guy]

if i have a speaker with a power handling range of like 25-125watts. should i get an A/V receiver with an RMS of 125watts? or would that be too much since the max output could possibly exceed the max power handling of the speaker?

how exactly should i match up the power rateings of receiver and speaker?

There's no way you're going to be listening at 125 watts. Most of the time you're watching TV with your receiver, you're using about 1/4 to 1/2 of a watt. Plus as you add up the channels the power output WILL drop unless you have a receiver or power amp is thousands of dollars. For example, There is a Sony receiver (forget model #) that was rated at 100 watts for 6 channels, when they tested all channels from 20-20khz it was only putting out 25 watts a channel. Also I bought a Marantz receiver knowing that the power output dropped to about 35 watts a channel, but in 2 channel mode it puts out 120 watts a channel, the thing is rated at 85 for 6 channels. i bought this receiver knowing of it's power, I bought it for it's Name, customer service, and many good reviews. I never really noticed much difference when playing all channels at the same time and from stereo mode, I just noticed a little extra ummph for stereo for the extra headroom. and JBangelfish, I could NOT tell the differnce between my fathers home made 35 watt or so a channel from 50 years ago to my audiosource amp that puts out 150 watts a channel, except ofcourse the audiosource letting my speakers go a little louder and cleaner at the higher volumes.

-Joey

[jbangelfish]

You could find an amp or receiver that has half the power of another but still sounds better. This will depend on build quality and power supplies.
Typically however, this should not be the case as running out of power sounds alot worse than not running out of power. It's not about how loud it goes, it's about how well it goes loud.
Yes, I have demonstrated this to many people as I said. I did so by carrying my old Crown DC300A from house to house and stereo to stereo. What inspired me to do this was when I would listen to other people's stereos and left with the feeling that they were missing something. This usually was when they were using receivers or integrated amps of 100wpc or less. The old Crown is only 188wpc (at last bench test anyway) so it's not a tremendous increase of power but it is quality power. Distortion is inaudible and the little added kick of 188wpc was enough to make many people run out and buy a 200wpc separate power amp. I don't know how many times I have to say that we're not going for louder, we're going for better sound.
Someone said they couldn't tell the difference in 35, 50 or 150 wpc amps or receivers. When this stuff is all mixed into HT systems, I'm not surprised. You're limiting yourself to whatever this system can do and from what I've heard, that isn't very good. I am always referring to two channel systems with no HT, 5.1 or any other gimmick in the fray. From what I have heard, HT has done for home audio what two cans and a waxed string did for the human voice.
Bill

[RGA]

if i have a speaker with a power handling range of like 25-125watts. should i get an A/V receiver with an RMS of 125watts? or would that be too much since the max output could possibly exceed the max power handling of the speaker?

how exactly should i match up the power rateings of receiver and speaker?

Without knowing the speaker...or the amp you're looking at the numbers are meaningless.

My Audio Note speakers would be happy probably with 8 watts. Another speaker with the identical sensitivity rating may need 50 because they may be inneficient and have difficult impedence dips. Sensitivity ratings are meaningless without knowing how difficult the speaker is to actually drive. And even then it says nothing about how the amp actually sounds.

But looking at many speakers that require a lot of power tend to be speakers that try and damp resonances. So they weigh a lot, they use ferro-fluid cooling on the tweeter to cool the tweeter(but really to damp resonances). Audio Note among others uses a lot of internal bracing and use the box itself to create the sound. Instead of trying to damp a lousy quality box they use a high quality box to create the sound...and thus don't use ferro-fluid because they don't have to reduce a ring or resonance because there is none or very little to start with. All of that means they're easier to drive without a lot of power sucking dmaping to wade through.

Then there is very cheap speakers that don't have a good box and don't damp them very well - which is why you read a lot of stuff about cheap floorstanders that tend to exhibit a lot of box resonances. Even the B&W 600 line you'll find many like me who like the 602S3 stand mount over the more expensive 603S3 floorstander...the latter is still good but has a slightly smeared midrange and a fair bit of bass boom.

Generally floorstanders are easier to drive and subjectively SOUND louder with less power in a lot of cases and part of that is a box resonance that ADDS to the sound.

BTW there are very good speakers that are highly damped speakers - it's partly a taste issue. I would personally rather put more money to the speaker so that I don't need to spend thousands and thousands on Krell amps to get the speaker going properly.

If your speakers are relatively easy to drive and you want a home theater receiver I would be looking at Yamaha. I was looking inside the 5660B and it looked straightforward inside, well wired with a pretty big power supply for the money. I have not heard it yet, but generally Yamaha has always been well thought of as is Onkyo. Denon is more hit and miss, with the rviewers and with me, and HK has had their share of detractors and supporters - but they and Marantz have had Quality Control Issues. Onkyo seems to get good reviews and you don't hear many complaints...which is always pretty good sign. NAD is a little overpriced.

[Aris]

RGA: alrighty then i'll give you some more meaningfull numbers

im looking at the yamaha 1400 or 2400 receiver, and the B&W 602 s3 w/ the LCR60 and ASW650sub. i went and listened to a 2400 with B&W 602 s3's today. the highs were right on. and it had more bass than i was expecting from a main speaker. the mids however im sorta mixed with. it just wasnt exactly what i was looking for. but it didnt sound bad by any means. unfortunatly i wasnt able to compare it to anything because the place i went to didnt have it set up to compare speakers/receivers to each other. they couldnt even get the ASW650 sub to work at all.

i wasnt very impressed by the store's knoledge base at all. it took him over 5min just to set up the 2400 to play music properly, then he didnt even have the 650 in the same room, and it was hooked up to a pioneer amp, which he couldnt get the sub to play on anyhow.

i think im pretty set on the yamaha receiver just on its abilities with home theatre setups and all the good reveiws ive seen on it. also the price is alot better than the denon 3803 and HK 630, which were the other 2 receivers i was looking at.

i would however like to find a better place to hear some different speakers with the yamah receiver. definatly the different 600 sereies speakers w/ sub, along with some others in that performance/pricerange.

[RGA]

If the store is a high end dealer always phone ahead and give them notice as to what you want to listen to. Setting up systems take them time and if they feel rushed their bound to do something stupid and won't be able to figure out what went wrong.

I would also listen in 2 channel audio without the sub. You are after all trying to find out if the front left and right speakers are good enough for you...if the front left and right are not up to snuff the rest of game is over before it has even begun. The dealer may not have set this up properly by the sounds of it. You want to make suer there are no surround modes on. Dealers OFTEN tend to crank the treble and the bass to show off what the speaker can do...doing that leaves the midrange screwed.

If the Yamaha has a direct button you want it pushed in so that it bypasses completely the Surround and bass treble nobs.

Listen to all your speakers this way so that it is a fair cmparison...preferably in the same room with the same amps.

B&W's midrange is the speaker's best attribute in fact. The speakers should be about 2-3 feet from a rear wall closer than that the bass is increased but it smudges the midrange. I cannot emphasize enough the improtance of speaker placement. Liking the highs and the lows is good because that is where speakers in this price range have the most troubles. It sounds to me like a set-up and amplifier setting issue.

I was not impressed by the 3803 and I think generally that Denon is grossly overpriced on every single thing they make. They have a following but for the money of that receiver it's average build and mediocre sound IMO ranks it well down on the list.

I'm no fan of receivers generally but Yamaha seems to have a good processor, less frills and better build construction than most. Arguably they have the best record for build and customer service of any going. Two things Marantz falls down on horribly and Denon - well they own Marantz.

The 602S3 is going to have a slightly fatter warmer presentation and won't be as punchy as other speakers. You could try the Energy C3...I would listen very long though as their highs to my ear a little wearing...not nearly as bad as the Paradigm Monitor 5, or JBL offerrings. Then again many like the 5 and JBL so it's a matter of taste.

[Geoffcin]

RGA: alrighty then i'll give you some more meaningfull numbers

im looking at the yamaha 1400 or 2400 receiver, and the B&W 602 s3 w/ the LCR60 and ASW650sub. i went and listened to a 2400 with B&W 602 s3's today. the highs were right on. and it had more bass than i was expecting from a main speaker. the mids however im sorta mixed with. it just wasnt exactly what i was looking for. but it didnt sound bad by any means. unfortunatly i wasnt able to compare it to anything because the place i went to didnt have it set up to compare speakers/receivers to each other. they couldnt even get the ASW650 sub to work at all.

i wasnt very impressed by the store's knoledge base at all. it took him over 5min just to set up the 2400 to play music properly, then he didnt even have the 650 in the same room, and it was hooked up to a pioneer amp, which he couldnt get the sub to play on anyhow.

i think im pretty set on the yamaha receiver just on its abilities with home theatre setups and all the good reveiws ive seen on it. also the price is alot better than the denon 3803 and HK 630, which were the other 2 receivers i was looking at.

i would however like to find a better place to hear some different speakers with the yamah receiver. definatly the different 600 sereies speakers w/ sub, along with some others in that performance/pricerange.

Don't make decisions on speakers without having something to compare with. It sounds like the poor salesman was unfamiliar with the gear, and/or the soundroom was setup wrong.

Do look for another B&W dealer if there is one in your area. Don't worry if he doesn't carry the yammy receiver to drive the speakers with. As long as the SAME gear is driving the speakers your demoing you'll have a good idea of what each speaker sounds like in comparison to each other.

Always use the SAME piece of music to demo with. Make sure it's something that you've listened to a lot. I don't recommend demoing more than three speakers at any one time. Your ears will get fatigued, and you won't be able to pick up the subtle difference that your looking for. This is especially true if you looking at just one brand, as the voicing tends to be similar.

Good luck!

[bturk667]

[QUOTE=Geoffcin]Forget about the speaker wattage ratings. The common problem with speaker ratings is that nobody listens at 125 watt RMS, EVER!

Bull****e, I bet I can! Ever listen to, say, Apogee Scintillas? One could very easily clip a weak ass 125 wpc amp with them, EASY! Remember, some people like to listen to music really loud, well over 100 db.

[RGA]

[QUOTE=Geoffcin]Forget about the speaker wattage ratings. The common problem with speaker ratings is that nobody listens at 125 watt RMS, EVER!

Bull****e, I bet I can! Ever listen to, say, Apogee Scintillas? One could very easily clip a weak ass 125 wpc amp with them, EASY! Remember, some people like to listen to music really loud, well over 100 db.

There is no question that a lot of amplifier power is required for some speakers. However, to be fair. 90% of all speakers on the market are likely more than happy with a 50 watt "QUALITY" amp and can play loud. There is that 10% however that will require significant power.

What I tend to see is that people will pay a lot for say the Bryston 3B. A 150 Watt amp that, volume wise, will marginally out do a 50watt amp. I see a lot of people with this kind of Bryston amp for speakers that really don't need more than 50 quality watts or they have speakers that would need 500watts.

Receivers...my rule of thumb is to divide whatever figure they provide by 5...because that's generally the way it sounds. My old Pioneer Elite was 125 watts RMS impressive specs 4 ohm rated and the store I listened to Martin Logan at distorted the amp(it literally stopped working) and not at particurlarly loud levels. My Arcam at 75 watts had no trouble.

There is a need for a LOT of watts however with some speakers hence all those monoblocks. I would rather buy a speaker that don't need a lot of power so that the money for power amps can be put elsewhere.

[Aris]

RGA:

ive heard the B&W 602's are a power hungry speaker. would i be better off getting a lower power rating a/v receiver and getting a quality amp for these speakers? i prolly wont listen to them very loud very often, but i want them to sound good even at lower volumes.

cause i originally was looking at the yamaha 2400. so would getting the 1400 with a quality power amp be better?

what amps would you suggest for these speakers. i would want somthing to power a 7.1 system. or would i want to get a quality amp for the two main speakers and then just run the surrounds off the A/V receiver?

[Geoffcin]

[QUOTE=Geoffcin]Forget about the speaker wattage ratings. The common problem with speaker ratings is that nobody listens at 125 watt RMS, EVER!

Bull****e, I bet I can! Ever listen to, say, Apogee Scintillas? One could very easily clip a weak ass 125 wpc amp with them, EASY! Remember, some people like to listen to music really loud, well over 100 db.

Why stop there, why not big Martin Logans, Magnepan 20.1s, ect?

Give me a break.

This guy is looking to hook up consumer grade box speakers to a reciever. You ever see anyone hook up Scintillas to a reciever?! I think not. The people who buy speakers like that know what they need to drive them.

[bturk667]

Why stop there, why not big Martin Logans, Magnepan 20.1s, ect?

Give me a break.

This guy is looking to hook up consumer grade box speakers to a reciever. You ever see anyone hook up Scintillas to a reciever?! I think not. The people who buy speakers like that know what they need to drive them.

I thought you said "The common problem with speaker ratings is that nobody listens at 125 watt RMS,EVER." Must have been someone else.

[RGA]

RGA:

ive heard the B&W 602's are a power hungry speaker. would i be better off getting a lower power rating a/v receiver and getting a quality amp for these speakers? i prolly wont listen to them very loud very often, but i want them to sound good even at lower volumes.

cause i originally was looking at the yamaha 2400. so would getting the 1400 with a quality power amp be better?

what amps would you suggest for these speakers. i would want somthing to power a 7.1 system. or would i want to get a quality amp for the two main speakers and then just run the surrounds off the A/V receiver?

I am always for using a lower end receiver and a power amp add on. Most upper receivers at a few watts and features and inputs - most of which are not used or noticed...unless there is something specific you absolutely MUST have higher end receivers are compromised. The 5660B I looked at because it was $499.00Cdn on boxing day and had preouts. In the end I decided against multi-channel for now. I simply don't care enough about movie surround sound. I would rather not compromise my front speakers to buy 5,6 or 7 lesser ones.

A receiver is less compromised if it has preouts and you can add on a used Rotel Power amp for relatively cheap. The 602S3 is not totally brutal to drive...but a tight power amp with exceptional control over the woofers is better than a sluggy receiver amp. But certainly try it out before you buy the power amp.

7.1? There is diddly recorded in 7.1. Off hand I can't think of one...but I don't follow surround too closely anymore.

BTW, make damn sure you like those B&Ws! There is no crime in not liking them ---I dislike a LOT of speakers that reviewers fall all over themselves with high praise.

Remember a reviewer is not a buyer. They are trying to determine the good points of the speaker that they THINK people might like. Most review publications never rip a product apart...Hi-fi Choice, UHF magazine and What Hi Fi will from time to time and make no bones about their views.

I point out that my perception of the 602S3 is that the midband should be a strength andpresume it to be a set up issue. But make sure you do a lot of listening when it is well set up. The speaker does have a slightly warmer presentation...a room filling bass over a tight punchy bass. ---This affects the mid range of course. The B&W may have a slightly less detailed soundig midrange but in my opinion is more musical than many others. But this is the point...since there are MANY others then obviously SOME people prefer those.

Rotel is typically partnered with B&W in shows and they share distribution. Rotel is typically an excellent match for B&W.(at least at the lower levels)...and Rotel is in many quarters preferred to Bryston at far cheaper prices.

You should get a good Rotel Power amp on the used market for $350-$700.00 depending. If the price difference of the 1400 and 2400 is the same or more than this and the 2400 doesn't offer MUST HAVE features. I take the 1400 and the power amp. hell even new Rotel Power amps are not exhorbitant.

[thepogue]

without getting lost of fluff...sorry to say...

I'll second Geoffcin's post...

"Forget about the speaker wattage ratings. The common problem with speaker ratings is that nobody listens at 125 watt RMS, EVER! Even if you have an amp capable of much higher power, your never going to play it like that. Get a receiver with the features that you like. I would also argue that you should get as good a receiver as you can, as your going to have it for many years. There's several companies making good receivers, and I'm sure that you'll get a lot of suggestions of which is best."

also someone (maybe RGA) stated that 75 wpc (plus or minus) from a quailty amp for the most part will work well for most home applications. Good luck!

[spacedeckman]

Watt ratings on speakers are a bunch of crap. Now a "recommended amplifier size" can be a bit telling, but as far as an absolute rating, it is nothing but BS. You will never be there, especially for any length of time.

Next: At Yammy 1400 or 2400 will drive all but a handfull of speakers out there to any sane persons level of expectation. The "handfull" will be hideously expensive and not in your consideration anyway. Watt ratings on receivers are best taken with a grain of salt, especially with the "mass market" brands. On a brand like Yamaha, Denon, h/k, Marantz, etc it will have some meaning. What exactly it is, I'm not sure, but it is more than the mass market crap.

Most speakers today that exist in the entry and middle price ranges where you will do your looking, have more than reasonable sensitivity, no wierd impedance stuff going on, and will present a fairly benign load to a competently designed receiver.

If you want to know a deep dark manufacturing secret, here is how speaker ratings are generally derived. The marketing department calls the engineering department and asks them if it would be okay to label speaker "x" as a "150 watt speaker". The engineer knows the speaker and its heat dissipation characteristics, and the equipment it will likely be used with, then says "I would feel more comfortable at 100". The marketing guy counters with 125, the engineer thinks a bit, then goes "okay, I can live with that". Then they go to the next biggest in the line, and the next. However, anything over 100 watts is really pretty pointless in the big picture since most people will never hook them up to a receiver that could deliver 100 watts into a real speaker load anyway. It all depends on heat dissipation at most frequencies and excursion on others. Excursion problems either take hellacious power or very poor speaker design.

BTW, most of your listening will be below 1 watt. 1 watt is REALLY LOUD on a modern dynamic speaker. On top of that, trying to match numbers that don't mean much doesn't make much sense. Those who tell you it is really important don't have a reason why...there isn't one to have.

[thepogue]

Watt ratings on speakers are a bunch of crap. Now a "recommended amplifier size" can be a bit telling, but as far as an absolute rating, it is nothing but BS. You will never be there, especially for any length of time.


Most speakers today that exist in the entry and middle price ranges where you will do your looking, have more than reasonable sensitivity, no wierd impedance stuff going on, and will present a fairly benign load to a competently designed receiver.

.

BTW, most of your listening will be below 1 watt. 1 watt is REALLY LOUD on a modern dynamic speaker. On top of that, trying to match numbers that don't mean much doesn't make much sense. Those who tell you it is really important don't have a reason why...there isn't one to have.

I bet yer mama is soooooo proud of you!!! ;) good post spaceman

[Beckman]

I thought you said "The common problem with speaker ratings is that nobody listens at 125 watt RMS,EVER." Must have been someone else.

The original question was about matching amplifier output to speaker ratings. I appologize on behalf of bturk667 if your ego was hurt. bturk667 was just trying to make a point that most sane people listen to music at levels that will allow them to still have some hearing past age 25.

[spacedeckman]

I try to cut through the crap. I can't believe how many times someone asks a legit question (Usually an audio "wives tale") which starts something that gets the original poster nowhere closer to the information they need.

I try not to post anything stupid...well, an occasional "one liner" or tongue in cheek response to someone elses dumb comment...but not when there is a real question being asked. There is way too much disinformation being bantered about by people without a clue, or with an agenda.

My agenda is simple. Buy good hi-fi, don't regret your life afterwards. I fight against bad speakers, IC output devices, teeny tiny power supplies, inflated specifications, using numbers from questionable manufacturers as gospel, using numbers as gospel, and audio ignorance. Less is more. More is not always better, better is always better.

I haven't heard the "matching amp and speaker watts" thing for quite a few years. Thought it had gone the way of .000000X THD. Pockets of resistance remain.

Have a good one. Bedtime for me.

[halyn]

Hello, thanks all for sharing your opinions. However after reading the above I still don't know what to do. For an upcoming (hopefully soon) HDTV and home theater purchase, I was looking at Yamaha's RXA-710, a nice, easy to use receiver. I was hoping I could hook it up to existing speakers.. Cerwin Vega D9 being the best among what I own. I don't get a good feeling that the 90 wpc for the 7 channel receiver can handle moving the D9s?

[thepogue]

Make sure the amp has an output so you can use an external amp....run it out of the box and if you still need power grab a used Adcom or Parasound, NAD poower amp and you'd be straight.

[blackraven]

Hello, thanks all for sharing your opinions. However after reading the above I still don't know what to do. For an upcoming (hopefully soon) HDTV and home theater purchase, I was looking at Yamaha's RXA-710, a nice, easy to use receiver. I was hoping I could hook it up to existing speakers.. Cerwin Vega D9 being the best among what I own. I don't get a good feeling that the 90 wpc for the 7 channel receiver can handle moving the D9s?

The D9's have a sensitivity of 101dB and impedance of 4 ohm's, 90wpc will blow out the windows in your house with the D9's. The speaker is rated for 5-350watts. You could use a 5 wpc amp and play it very loud. Just make sure the amp can handle 4 ohm speakers otherwise you are set to go!

[StevenSurprenant]

The D9's have a sensitivity of 101dB and impedance of 4 ohm's, 90wpc will blow out the windows in your house with the D9's. The speaker is rated for 5-350watts. You could use a 5 wpc amp and play it very loud. Just make sure the amp can handle 4 ohm speakers otherwise you are set to go!

Best answer... blackraven

I use a 5 watt amp on my main system and it plays loud, but not as loud as your system would play with the same power.

[woggysworld]

this post helped me greatly. thanks and props to all

[ArKay QAtech]

Nothing can make a bad speaker sound good. On the other hand, with a good signal source, a (good) efficient speaker can make a lower powered, less expensive system sound great. There isn't even a need to spend hundreds on cords and massive speaker cables. Your'e putting 100 or so, (maybe), watts into a speaker. Your'e not drawing hundreds of Amps starting your car or Arc welding. How big do you think the wires are inside the amplifier feeding the speaker terminals.(or the output of the curcuit board) What about the wires inside the speakers thenselves? I won't get into the technicle jargon( It would matter more if you were running hundreds of feet of cable) but just think about it. Oh....But It Looks So Cool.

[pammyJ]

Good Question, I'm a noob and I'm learning quite a lot from this forum.

I came originally with this question in mind for the experts out there.

I just came across some old speakers Signet SL-260/II which seem promising (haven't tested them out with an amp/receiver yet) and I've been looking for a decent used receiver to match.

Came home for Christmas, and my dad had a still working Pioneer SX-7 (circa 1982) still in the house that he's willing to donate to me. Seeing how it brings back fond memories of my childhood, I would love to take it with me, but I want to make sure they match given that it's ~ 20lbs.

The signets recommend 25-150 Watts of power and the pioneer has a 60W power. According to the previous posts in this thread, it seems sufficient....

would love some more confirmation before a petite little asian hand carries this hefty machine on a plane.

Thanks so much and Merry Christmas!!