Real RMS clean power vs. total Bull$hit

[kexodusc]

I think you'll see more manufacturers follow Yamaha's experiment and use the slacker power rating just to compete in stores like Best Buy. I think this is to the greater good of mankind, myself, but I have mixed feelings too. On one hand, people will better understand why Yamaha, Denon, Harman Kardon, Marantz etc are more expensive than the typical Sony, Pioneer, Kenwood, etc...on the other it will prevent people from thinking a bit more, wondering why a 45 watt Harman Kardon receiver can smoke a 100 watt Sony.

This is a really old debate that doesn't seem to be any closer to resolution. At least Yamaha's HTR line often publishes both specs...I had a discussion today with a kid at a local shop who swore a Panasonic Boombox that was "Bi-amped" would smoke and NAD out there because it had 300 wpc and boomboxes were the wave of the future. You can't blame a manufacturer from trying to market itself...blame the masses of idiots who spend too much time looking at numbers and statistics and accepting them as truth without qualification.

People don't realize how much (how little) power they are actually using most of the time either. The modern consumer is born believing more = better.

[skeptic]

With the disappearance of the all in one EIA rated furniture console stereos of the 60s and 70s and the greying of the baby boom generation, I think the market has become a little more sophisticated than it once was. I don't think people are as easily taken in by ads. At the low end of the market, and that for me includes all HT receivers under say about $500 to $1000, they are usually adequate to drive typical HT speakers especially since a lot of the work once done by receivers or amplifiers is now done by powered subwoofers with internally dedicated power amplifiers. As for the much more expensive $1000 and up dedicated power amplifiers, the market is pretty savvy knowing full well that an 8wpc SET won't be able to drive a pair of Magnepans. Usually, in that price bracket, people have researched what is available in their price range and narrowed their choices to one of several comparable models.

I don't think you'll fool most people past their teens into believing that a boom box will outperform a high quality sound system. On the other hand, you'd look pretty funny walking around the streets with a NAD receiver and a pair of B&W speakers over your shoulder, especially given that long power cord you'd be dragging.

[kexodusc]

On the other hand, you'd look pretty funny walking around the streets with a NAD receiver and a pair of B&W speakers over your shoulder, especially given that long power cord you'd be dragging.

Ha...especially carting around an old turntable for source...

Point taken...alot of people do start to do more research when they get close to buying, especially newbies, this site is proof of that. The ones that don't, probably don't care.

[E-Stat]

I don't think you'll fool most people past their teens into believing that a boom box will outperform a high quality sound system.

Excepting, of course, one particularly frequent poster here.

rw