Who uses ONLY Receiver with no amp/preamp? Is good sound possible?

Just wondering who in this forum uses only a receiver to power speakers? I just got 2 Huge Cerwin Vega VS 12 speakers and notice the 2ch music sounds ok but Its missing clarity at higher volumes. The music seems to "blend" together and needs more punch.

Is it possible to have good audio with just a receiver? I also like to watch DVDs in 5.1. Should I just get a nice receiver or purchase a dedicated amp? Is a preamp necessary as well?

Currently I just have a
http://enigmawebdesign.com/epo4.png
- Yamaha HTR-5140 Receiver
- Yamaha self powered subwoofer
- Cerwin Vega VS12 series floor speakers
- Eposome Center speaker
- 2 Cerwin Vega rear speakers

Kind of hard to help without knowing the specs of what you do have, along with what you are looking for.

Here is the specs from the manual for my Yamaha HTR-5140
http://enigmawebdesign.com/yam.png

Full Manual .pdf here http://www.usersmanualguide.com/yama...ivers/htr-5140 The main Cerwin Vega say Velocity Sensitive VS-12 on the back, but I believe they are actually VS-120s. They look just like the pic here. Also specs.
http://www.cerwinvega.com/products/h...ies/vs120.html
http://www.cerwinvega.com/products/i...io/vs-120b.gif
Reviews: http://www.audioreview.com/cat/speak...9_1594crx.aspx

I just don't think that 60 Watts at .04 THD is enough for these speakers. But I am not sure if any receiver with amping capability will be as cost efficient as a stand alone power amp. Also I still don't know if I need a preamp or if my receiver is good enough for a pre amp. I don't even think it has pre-amp outputs.

PS, with your knowledge, What amps do most people pair up with Cerwin Vega floor speakers? I like to listen to music like Enigma with large booms and atmospheric quality.

I can't stop recommending the Behringer EP2500. A large floorstander would just be a match made in heaven for 450 watts of fury. At $300 it greatly enhances sound quality over simple receiver amps. If you have a pre-out for the mains you are set.

Welcome to AR, If your HTR-5140 has a pre amp, add the amp to power the main
speakers. I notice it's set up for surround, so that will "free" up the receiver to power
your surrounds and center. Even an amp in the 100wpc range will make a huge
difference, especially at high volume. Until then, watch clipping issues when cranking
that receiver. Good luck

Yeah... To make Cerwin Vegas really sing at higher volumes, you will definitely need a little more juice. With enough power, you may not impress many audiophiles with the clarity, but you will have fun... LOL

A HT receiver with preamp outs and external amp for the 2 main channels is a great way to go for a decent (and loud) system on a budget. Unfortunately, the lower models of Yamaha receivers usually don't have preamp outputs when most other brands do. One reason I went with Harman Kardon instead. Sorry... As far as two-channel amps... I'd try to look for at least a used Adcom, Acurus, Arcam, NAD, Parasound, Rotel, etc... amp with around 200 WPC or so.... I like the Carver A-500X and A-760X. Most of the other Carver models seem to be either lacking in sound quality or old enough to need restoration to insure optimal performance. If you get something decent, you'll probably use it a long, long time no matter what else you upgrade. The Behringer or one of the more powerful AudioSource amps might be something to consider on a tight budget.

Even though they have 12" drivers, I've noticed Cerwin Vegas seem to be designed more for efficiency than bass extension. The 15" models go pretty low, the 12" models would still sound better with a nice sub IMHO. A sub would also fill out the sound from your smaller surround speakers and make home theater more "enveloping". CV makes subs to match all their speaker lines at reasonable prices.

IMO if you have main pre-outs you should get a dedicated power amp for the VS12's. Your receiver is your pre-amp so you don't need another one for this. In my experience when you drive many speakers with a av/receiver it puts a lot of strain on the power. All of the speakers are working less than optimal and you may not realize this 'til after you lighten the load on your receiver. And driving those VS12's along with the other will definitely strain the receiver

Hold a second here guys! Why's everyone recommending more power and a new amp for this guy? I like better amps when they're needed, but in this case, I think we're creating expecation that won't be met..

There's two things wrong with suggesting a new amp for Mr. Stevef22:

1) Better speakers are going to make a much, much bigger improvement in sound quality, and such an upgrade is only going to cost as much as an upgrade to a better amp/pre-amp or receiver anyway. A newer receiver with more power here really isn't going to do much for sound quality because:

2) These are Cerwin freakin' Vegas. Did anyone look at the specs for them?
Here's one that should jump out - 97 dB - 1w/1m!!!

Let's compare these to the standard 90-91 dB efficiency most speakers today have.
The pic has these set up in a living room I'm guessing (entertainment centrer), so let's assume measurements of about 20 x 20 (large room), listener is 3 meters (10 ft) from the speakers, with 2 speakers in a room, typical placement.

How loud do you listen, Stevef22? This is critical to know...

A set of 91 dB speakers are going to approach Rock concert volumes at 100 dB with 15 watts per channel. We're gonna hear compression, but they'll get there. Even a cheap crappy Sony receiver can do this...I know first hand because I drove the snot out of my old Wharfedales with cheap Technics, H/K, and Sony receivers for years. A 60 watt Yammie shouldn't have too much trouble.

That's not bad...Even a 60 watt receiver leaves about 9 dB dynamic headroom for musical peaks. For rock, blues, metal, etc, this is probably adequate 99% of the time. It'll get loud, but you're entering clip territory now at these volumes. Distortion is bad. I'm going to say right now that in a most living room setups, this combo isn't too bad and is louder than most of us will need - you'll lose some sound quality as you increase the volume for sure. This receiver isn't going to handle those speakers like a quality 60 watt amp would, but it'll drive them adequately. Of course, if the volume is in the 80-90 dB range as I suspect, the sound quality should be higher because the amp and speakers are under much less stress.

Let's look at the CV's now at 97 dB under the same conditions.
100 dB is accomplished at a mere 4 watts! This isn't putting any strain on the PSU or receiver at all - he's got 12-15 dB headroom, which is more than adequate for all but the most demanding piece of classical music (and 15 dB ain't gonna happen much), and that's if the reference level is at 100 dB. At 15 watts, you're pushing the volume up to over 106 dB! If that's your reference volume in your living room you will permanently damage your hearing listening to a CD of 45 minutes or longer. It's safe to say this isn't "typical" listening practices for anyone. Not for very long at least :D

Here's a classic case where more power isn't likely to be very beneficial for the application. Those speakers just don't need it unless you're power a gymnasium with them. How big is your room?

The only other argument for an amp is for "sound quality". Normally, I'd agree, you'll get better bass control, less distorition (at higher volumes) and cleaner sound throughout than provided by the amps in an entry level receiver. But that assumes your basic modern speaker. Let me say from experience, even a $10,000 Krell amp isn't going to make Cerwin Vegas sound like anything but Cerwin Vegas. I like CV, they're fun speakers. But they're designed with a purpose in mind, and super refined sound quality just ain't it. CV's are all about bringing loud, distorted AC-DC rawk to your home. Great for getting charged with disturbing the peace, poor for hearing Wes Montgomery slide his fingers across the strings of his guitar...The clarity you desire isn't going to happen (much) by purchasing a better amp. The punch in bass is likely going to better accomplished by better speaker placement, or augmentation with a subwoofer.

Trust me on this. Those same Sony, H/K, and Technics receivers also powered my CV's in college. I upgraded the stereo receiver everytime looking for better sound (well, the jump from the Technics was necessary after it melted), eventually even using my father's NAD integrated and a 100 watt NAD power amp. I knew a lot less back then...you learn the hard way. Got a bit louder, didn't sound better...not really. The difference on the Wharfedales, much more noticeable.

If you want to improve your current setup, in my honest opinion, the biggest difference in sound is going to come from upgrading the speakers. You'll be trading house shaking volume for better sound quality. After that, look at adding an amp to get back to the loudness you desire. Who knows, you might find you're okay with a 60-watt receiver.

If you want more bass in the meantime, a more capable subwoofer (unfortunately subs have never been Yamaha's strong point) might be worth looking into.

Nothing wrong with CV's, by the way, I really miss mine sometimes. I'd just hate to see someone throw money at a solution that likely isn't going to achieve the desired goals. Spend your money wisely...

I agree kexodusc

I had a pair of Wharfedale Mach 7's back in the day...high efficiency and a great Rock and Roll speaker made a huge difference to my system powered by a pioneer SA8100 Int Amp

Kex to the rescue!

Again.

1) The Yamaha subs most likely can't keep up witt he mains

2) Those are incredibly efficient main speakers. How loud do you listen? Yeah, you can crank it but the sub is gonna run out of steam long before the speakers.

3) While those speakers may be "loud", they really don't go as "low" as you would think. If you try to "force" them to do subsionic by turning it up, you ARE gonna run out of power. ...and don't expect the yammie sub to perform miracles.

4) Sometimes, that "congested" sound you are complaining of comes from inside the ear itself.

5) You CAN play too loudly for a room and that can screw things up. All that SPL has to go somewhere, and it's reflected all around and can cancel itself out.

6) You simply may not like the sound of the speakers.

7) Given the above possibilities, your expectations may be unrealistic.

Here's a little primer on power and how you hear it.

1) A gain 3 decibles is barely noticable.

2) To realize a 3 decible increase in preceived loudness during peaks you need 2x the power. IOW, if you're pushing 60 watts, you need 120 to meet that goal.

3) A gain of 10 decibles results in an apparant doubling of perceived loudness.

4) To realize a 10 decible increase in preceived loudness during peaks, you need 10x the power. IOW, if you're pushing 60 watts, you need 600 to meet that goal.

Where do you want to go from here?

Well said Kex and Mark!

I'm running some CV's (LS-12) in my garage with an old piece of crap panny recv. It's pushing out 70wpc and I can barely turn the volume up 30% without becoming waaay too loud. These speakers are very sensitive.

Sounds like crap, but who cares when you're pumping iron. :prrr:

Ditto Kex.

Speakers are the heart of the system and throwing all kinds of money on components to improve the sound is working backwards.

Spend every available dollar on speakers and some that is not available, and go from there.


To answer your original question directly, yes you can get a good receiver to drive a speaker with plenty of power, if the speaker is efficient and sensitive enough.

It usually aint goin to happen with most direct radiating speakers and that is why horn loaded speakers dominated in the early days. Amps were weak and expensive.

If this is your approach, then I suggest a speaker that is sensitive\efficient. If you do a search, you can find a free calculator to tell you how much power you need for the speaker you consider. To reach reference levels (like those in some movie theaters), you have to hit 117dB!!

Just not a lot of speaker designs that will do that with 100 watts or less! OR EVEN 1000 watts!

Can't agree with you guys on this one. If you have Cerwin Vegas, you might as well have enough amplifier to drive them properly and "aggressively". That's what they're built for guys...

All theoretical science aside... I've never been able to make any set of speakers play loudly and with the proper authority using a 60 WPC HT receiver. Sound turns to mush pretty quickly, which sounds exactly like what this guy's complaining about. If you think that's all there is... you should try an external amp. Expect much clearer, tighter, more detailed, more powerful sound with better bass weight.... and louder... Sounded to me like exactly what this guy was looking for.

I'm not too sure what he has, but a couple of the new CV lines sound pretty good... with the proper amplification...

Thanks for the training in audio 101! Headroom, Ohms, Dbs, etc etc. Im starting to understand that just because I have large bada** old school speakers doesn't mean good sound even when hooked up to amps galore.

So even though these VS-120s are labeled ( Velocity Sensitive loudspeakers has very fast "transient response".) That doesn't mean these Cerwin Vegas are as accurate and responsive as other top brands?

I like to listen to movies loud and clear. Much like a movie theater with accurate bass, Yes my small powered sub doesn't even come close. I need to invest in a nice sub as well. I was hoping that the VS120s would fill in the lower end gap. I guess not.

Thanks Kex, Mark and everyone else for clearing this up for me. Too bad I just dropped my last bills on these darn Cerwin Vegas! I need to go high class. (Even though they are mint condition CV VS-120s)

have you got a real stereo amp there? something not surround... preferably with a little more current than the yamaha

hook that up to the cerwin vegas, see what happens, and don't use your sub with the stereo amp.

if it's sounds really good now, and your problem is solved, it's the receiver, and you might need a power amp, or a more powerful amp.
if it's not solved, there could still be several other things:
what speaker cables are u using? (thickness, I suggest you to at least use 16 gauge...).
and is there a spot in your room where you have a tremendous amount of bass? if so, you might wanna look at acoustic panels, or something else that stops reflections.
if neither of those is the case. you'll need a sub, a big one...

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevef22

. Too bad I just dropped my last bills on these darn Cerwin Vegas! I need to go high class. (Even though they are mint condition CV VS-120s)

---

Don't say that! Those CV's will put a lot of speakers to shame when you crank them up at your next pool party. They do what they were designed to do! It's not like they sound bad, just have to accept what they're best at.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royphil345

All theoretical science aside... I've never been able to make any set of speakers play loudly and with the proper authority using a 60 WPC HT receiver.

---

That's most likely because your speakers require 4 times the power or more to play as loud as these CV's. There's that theory coming back again. Think maybe it's worth learning? Nah...Best to surrender to the marketing machine that tells you to join the horsepower race and get as many watts or as much "current" as you can.

Sensitivity is every bit as important as power. His 60 watt Yamaha receiver gets as much done with the CV's as a 240 watt amp does with today's 90 dB 1w/1m Paradigm/PSB/Athena models....At 5 watts, there's little in the way of "control" or anything like that, certainly nothing close to a night-and-day difference.
Too much power becomes unused.

Ever wonder why some of the most exotic, respected speakers ever made are recommended for use with some of the most coveted SET amps that have 10 watts, 6, watts, even 2 watts of power per channel?

Quote:

---

Sound turns to mush pretty quickly, which sounds exactly like what this guy's complaining about. If you think that's all there is... you should try an external amp. Expect much clearer, tighter, more detailed, more powerful sound with better bass weight.... and louder... Sounded to me like exactly what this guy was looking for.

---

Oh dear. The most discriminating audiophiles I know wouldn't even make that claim - maybe "expect a slightly clearer, tighter, slightly more detailed, somewhat better bass weight, and a few dB's louder"...yeah, that's more like it.

I won't even bring up excursion/distortion properties of the woofers in the speaker, and how the increased power is most likely the cause of the reduction in sound quality...oh wait, I just did...ooops.

Those are old school, big box, floor standing speakers. I've never been totally satisfied when mid/tweeters are aimed to fire below my genitals (JBL L-55's, anyone?) and I've had some luck tilting then slightly upwards. That way some of the mid/highs get a little more chance at dispersion.

hey, it's free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kexodusc

Hold a second here guys! Why's everyone recommending more power and a new amp for this guy? I like better amps when they're needed, but in this case, I think we're creating expecation that won't be met..

There's two things wrong with suggesting a new amp for Mr. Stevef22:

1) Better speakers are going to make a much, much bigger improvement in sound quality, and such an upgrade is only going to cost as much as an upgrade to a better amp/pre-amp or receiver anyway. A newer receiver with more power here really isn't going to do much for sound quality because:

2) These are Cerwin freakin' Vegas. Did anyone look at the specs for them?
Here's one that should jump out - 97 dB - 1w/1m!!!

Let's compare these to the standard 90-91 dB efficiency most speakers today have.
The pic has these set up in a living room I'm guessing (entertainment centrer), so let's assume measurements of about 20 x 20 (large room), listener is 3 meters (10 ft) from the speakers, with 2 speakers in a room, typical placement.

How loud do you listen, Stevef22? This is critical to know...

A set of 91 dB speakers are going to approach Rock concert volumes at 100 dB with 15 watts per channel. We're gonna hear compression, but they'll get there. Even a cheap crappy Sony receiver can do this...I know first hand because I drove the snot out of my old Wharfedales with cheap Technics, H/K, and Sony receivers for years. A 60 watt Yammie shouldn't have too much trouble.

That's not bad...Even a 60 watt receiver leaves about 9 dB dynamic headroom for musical peaks. For rock, blues, metal, etc, this is probably adequate 99% of the time. It'll get loud, but you're entering clip territory now at these volumes. Distortion is bad. I'm going to say right now that in a most living room setups, this combo isn't too bad and is louder than most of us will need - you'll lose some sound quality as you increase the volume for sure. This receiver isn't going to handle those speakers like a quality 60 watt amp would, but it'll drive them adequately. Of course, if the volume is in the 80-90 dB range as I suspect, the sound quality should be higher because the amp and speakers are under much less stress.

Let's look at the CV's now at 97 dB under the same conditions.
100 dB is accomplished at a mere 4 watts! This isn't putting any strain on the PSU or receiver at all - he's got 12-15 dB headroom, which is more than adequate for all but the most demanding piece of classical music (and 15 dB ain't gonna happen much), and that's if the reference level is at 100 dB. At 15 watts, you're pushing the volume up to over 106 dB! If that's your reference volume in your living room you will permanently damage your hearing listening to a CD of 45 minutes or longer. It's safe to say this isn't "typical" listening practices for anyone. Not for very long at least :D

Here's a classic case where more power isn't likely to be very beneficial for the application. Those speakers just don't need it unless you're power a gymnasium with them. How big is your room?

The only other argument for an amp is for "sound quality". Normally, I'd agree, you'll get better bass control, less distorition (at higher volumes) and cleaner sound throughout than provided by the amps in an entry level receiver. But that assumes your basic modern speaker. Let me say from experience, even a $10,000 Krell amp isn't going to make Cerwin Vegas sound like anything but Cerwin Vegas. I like CV, they're fun speakers. But they're designed with a purpose in mind, and super refined sound quality just ain't it. CV's are all about bringing loud, distorted AC-DC rawk to your home. Great for getting charged with disturbing the peace, poor for hearing Wes Montgomery slide his fingers across the strings of his guitar...The clarity you desire isn't going to happen (much) by purchasing a better amp. The punch in bass is likely going to better accomplished by better speaker placement, or augmentation with a subwoofer.

Trust me on this. Those same Sony, H/K, and Technics receivers also powered my CV's in college. I upgraded the stereo receiver everytime looking for better sound (well, the jump from the Technics was necessary after it melted), eventually even using my father's NAD integrated and a 100 watt NAD power amp. I knew a lot less back then...you learn the hard way. Got a bit louder, didn't sound better...not really. The difference on the Wharfedales, much more noticeable.

If you want to improve your current setup, in my honest opinion, the biggest difference in sound is going to come from upgrading the speakers. You'll be trading house shaking volume for better sound quality. After that, look at adding an amp to get back to the loudness you desire. Who knows, you might find you're okay with a 60-watt receiver.

If you want more bass in the meantime, a more capable subwoofer (unfortunately subs have never been Yamaha's strong point) might be worth looking into.

Nothing wrong with CV's, by the way, I really miss mine sometimes. I'd just hate to see someone throw money at a solution that likely isn't going to achieve the desired goals. Spend your money wisely...

---

I hate to disagree with Kex since he has technical knowledge and I don't.
But my argument is that in heavy bass peak music at high volume approx. 95 DB these big effcient floorstanders suck up all the available watts. I had my Bryston 3B-st hooked to my main outs on my Yammie. This amp is rated at 120 watts. So lets say I have 60 watts of clean undistorted power before clipping. Now according to Kex's figure my Studio 100's have a 91 DB effiency, So I should be using somewhere around 15 watts with 9 DB headroom. And guess what my 3B-st will clip, meaning its using at least 60 watts in heavy bass peaks. Steve's Yammie has 40 watts of clean power at best before clipping. So his av/receiver is using the majority of its power when he has 4 other speakers to drive, thus the reason it sounds like crap. Even if you use a better floorstander speaker it'll still sound like crap cause there's not enough power to go around. So an external power amp will take this heavy bass load speaker off his receiver solving his problem.:)

I use the Adcom GFR-700 AV receiver. Sounds great. 4 ohm rating, 145wpc at 8 ohmsx2ch, 226wpc at 4ohms x 2ch, and 125wpc x5ch. If you want to run 7.1 you will need another power amp. It has 7.1 preamp capability. Cost $2,000 but can get B stock from www.onecall.com for $1299. I also like the sound of the Denon 3806.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wireworm5

I hate to disagree with Kex since he has technical knowledge and I don't.
But my argument is that in heavy bass peak music at high volume approx. 95 DB these big effcient floorstanders suck up all the available watts. I had my Bryston 3B-st hooked to my main outs on my Yammie. This amp is rated at 120 watts. So lets say I have 60 watts of clean undistorted power before clipping. Now according to Kex's figure my Studio 100's have a 91 DB effiency, So I should be using somewhere around 15 watts with 9 DB headroom. And guess what my 3B-st will clip, meaning its using at least 60 watts in heavy bass peaks. Steve's Yammie has 40 watts of clean power at best before clipping. So his av/receiver is using the majority of its power when he has 4 other speakers to drive, thus the reason it sounds like crap. Even if you use a better floorstander speaker it'll still sound like crap cause there's not enough power to go around. So an external power amp will take this heavy bass load speaker off his receiver solving his problem.:)

---

A few things going on here...

First, I don't disagree that more power makes the sound cleaner at louder volumes. If you'll all read my original post I asked about room size and desired volume. This is critical. My assumptions used a 20 X 20 room, the figures apply to that scenario.
Also I only included 2 speakers in the assumption. Read the OP...it mentions 5.1 as an afterthought. I assume stereo listening is stereo listening - as in 2 speakers only. If other speakers are added, volume is increased by their output too...depending on the room, this can actually make it easier on the amp. Perhaps worse. No sub considered either, which if used with a crossover, really eliminates any "bass power sucking" problems.

Second. Your Bryston should not be clipping at 60 watts, especially a Bryston rated for 120 watts. There should be ample headroom there. I'm guessing well over 200 watts for bass peaks...How do you know it's clipping? If it's cliipping, I'm guessing your using more power than you think.

I just did a little experiment.

I have a 40 watt NAD integrated that I just ran to my bookshelf speakers - measured 89 dB sensitivity. I get in room bass transients in mid/high 90's on Crystal Method's Vegas CD no problem. The NAD 3140's power meters show mostly above 5 and rarely above 25 watts. When the 50 lights up I know I'm into dynamic power, above it's average rating. This is tops for my ears in my living room, and my SPL measures 89-97 dB, eyeballed. The needle's bouncin'...The bass isn't breaking tectonic plates, but it's plenty loud....That's a 40 watt NAD integrated amp. These are the peaks that are hitinng the 97 dB range...but it happens every second a few times. I hooked up my Adcom GFA-535II...the distortion meters don't light up - I can't see the power usuage, but if there's no LED, I"m good. Now, 97 dB is a long way from 89...

I can't speak to what's going on in your setup without being there, but it could be a number of things.

Again, how loud do you listen, and how large is the room?

I used the 4 watt example in Steve's setup earlier, is near the limits, but it's an average 100 dB volume with 110 + dB peaks...110 is what would show up on the SPL meter...nobody is going sit in a house and listen at that level (I hope).

My intention was to use a ridiculous scenario to point out basic concept. If Steve only needs the odd 100 dB peak, more power isn't going to be demanded by the speaker if this is his listening level...Doesn't matter how big the amp is...it won't be sending the extra power.

Turning the volume up to get more bass or better sound is a common practice, but that's really an indication of a speaker's limits in terms of high-fidelity. And I'm going to argue that the louder his speakers go, they worse they WILL SOUND. Those aren't really long throw woofers. The drivers don't like too much power. These CV's were around $300-$400 (I think they replaced mine) when they came out, and were marketed to sell with Pioneer, Kenwood, Technics gear, etc...$400-$500 receivers back in the day. The likes of NAD, Adcom, Bryston etc are rarely used with CV's :D

I'm not opposed to adding more power - but I'm also thinking of the big picture here. His receiver doesn't have pre-outs, getting another one, or adding an amp is going to be expensive. The most it's going to do is show a tiny bit of improvement at the extreme volumes. I think there's a more effective allocation of his resources to be made addressing the speakers, if improved sound is the goal.

My room is 25'x 11'x 7'. I estimated the Bryston 3B-ST clips at about 60 watts (LED lights turn red) 'cause with my SST which I now use for my 100's at 75 watts of clean power has never clipped at these volumes. Introducing an equalizer into the chain I can now get it to clip at these volumes if I'm not careful with the settings. I generally listen around 92 DB range but sometimes crank it depending on the music. According to your figures its probably using somewhere close to 120 watts which I didn't think was correct.
Using a sub doesn't eliminate upper bass freq. Mine is set at 80 crossover and I still got my ST to clip at my normal listening volumes with heavy bass peaks. It's possible though that I had my main's set to large, I don't recall for sure.

PS: My spec sheet for Bryston 3B-SST has 74 at clipping, which is probably a percentage (133 of 180) which I mistaken for 74 watts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kexodusc

Oh dear. The most discriminating audiophiles I know wouldn't even make that claim - maybe "expect a slightly clearer, tighter, slightly more detailed, somewhat better bass weight, and a few dB's louder"...yeah, that's more like it.

---

The most discriminating audiophiles I know wouldn't smack a rat in the a$$ with that 60 WPC Yamaha HT receiver. You're rude, obviously lack real-world experience regarding this guy's question and you're wrong. I do hope you're not playing audiophile God with a 60 WPC Yamaha HT receiver in your rack.... LOL I''ve been around awhile. I know what similar receivers are capable of doing with Cerwin Vegas... Not much... There is more than efficiency to consider in what kind of load a loudspeaker presents to an amp.

You want a night and day difference? Run just about any pair of full sized floorstanders with the 60 WPC Yamaha receiver and then with a quality 200 WPC amp (or even a QUALITY 60 WPC amp). Try to play 'em loud... Night and day? YES!!!

This guy's issue is with the sound turning to mush at significantly lower volume levels than he thinks the CVs should be capable of. He's absolutely right. They are capable of more. A quality amplifier is the cure. Yep...

The specs on the CVs are likely exaggerated. The specs on the Yamaha are likely exaggerated. CVs have been well known to require decent amplification for best results, possibly something about the load they present... This guy came here with a specific issue he did an excellent job of describing. An issue that just screams insufficiant amplification is the cause. Are you telling him it isn't really happening because theoretically it shouldn't be? Your textbook knowledge is quite impressive. But, using it to confuse this guy when the solution to his problem is very simple and contrary to what you're telling him??? Trying to make people look foolish because they just can't agree with you due to what they've seen in real-life experience??? I don't know...

The CVs may lack some refinement, but I think you greatly underestimate what they're capable of. This poster's only complaint about his system was reduced performance at higher volumes. His system's weakness is actually what should be it's best attribute. CVs can do loud if nothing else... That's a well-known fact. Better amplification is the key here.

The guy didn't ask what kind of speakers you would have bought. He basically asked if he was getting the most out of his speakers by driving them with the 60 WPC Yamaha receiver. The answer is definitely not.


If he took your advice and bought "audiophile" speakers... I think he'd still find the receiver a substantial bottleneck in the system and eventually replace it. To tell you the truth... I wouldn't even bother with anything that said Yamaha on it and claimed a power output of anything less than 100 WPC .... for driving ANY loudspeaker with a reasonable amount of authority. This receiver is not capable of bringing out the best in ANY loudspeaker. Money spent on better speakers would be wasted without replacing the Yamaha. Money spent replacing the Yamaha would unquestionably acheive better performance from the CVs. So... Which is the better upgrade path???

Still say a decent HT receiver with preamp outputs and a quality amplifier for the mains (or just a very high-quality receiver with more power) would be the best way to get the most out of these CVs on a budget while retaining HT capabilities. Unfortunately, that Yamaha doesn't have preamp outputs...

A sub capable of playing low, loud and clean enough to properly compliment the CVs at higher volumes wouldn't hurt.

About the power meters on amps... I think they're often just too slow to show peak power output. I use mine as guage of average power output and estimate the peak power output to be significantly higher.

Ladies and Gents it looks like we got a real duel going on here. I'd prefer to say out of this battle, but I did want to chime in just a few things. I wanted to point out that essentially here we have a few different thoughts on the matter. We have 3 components that we are talking about: amp, receiver, and speakers. In my mind they are all 3 essential. At one point I thought that a good receiver was the way to go, which is only partially true. Once I started getting better speakers I realized that I also needed better amplification, so It would seem that these are dependant on one another. Of course that is the way with this entire hobby. Incremental upgrades in 1 area, requires equal upgrades in other areas in order to bring everything in sync. I can say for certain that by adding 2 amps to my receiver I was able to greatly lighten the load of my receiver. Now it only has to handle the center channel and the sub, which will change in the future, but for now is good. Eventually I would like to have a separate amp dedicated for each speaker, but that is way down the road once I actually have 5 matching speakers.

I can honestly say that I agree with a little bit of what everyone has said on some level or another and I don't necessarily think that one party is right or the other is wrong, it's more a matter of preference and circumstantial in many respects.


Ok, let the battle resume....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeruvianSkies

I can honestly say that I agree with a little bit of what everyone has said on some level or another and I don't necessarily think that one party is right or the other is wrong, it's more a matter of preference and circumstantial in many respects.


Ok, let the battle resume....

---

No more battle... I'm done.

I elect you as official judge and being half right is good enough for me. I think that's the best I could expect since it's common knowledge I'm half crazy...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wireworm5

My room is 25'x 11'x 7'. I estimated the Bryston 3B-ST clips at about 60 watts (LED lights turn red) 'cause with my SST which I now use for my 100's at 75 watts of clean power has never clipped at these volumes. Introducing an equalizer into the chain I can now get it to clip at these volumes if I'm not careful with the settings. I generally listen around 92 DB range but sometimes crank it depending on the music. According to your figures its probably using somewhere close to 120 watts which I didn't think was correct.

---

I'm not familiar with your amp so I'll trust you know it better than I do.; Only thing I can add is a bit about the power usage. Music is literally demanding a large range of power every second, while your SPL meter might read 90 dB or higher, the actual power consumption is all over the map. Anywhere from below 1 watt to over 50. The peaks are near instantaneous usually (think loud cymbal crashes, etc). Even a cheapo Yammie receiver with it's 300 watt power supply, isn't going to struggle putting out well above it's "rated power" during these peaks. Is it going to have as much current and reserve power as your Bryston, hell no, not even close. But with a reasonably efficient speaker above 90 dB or something approaching 100 dB, you've compensated for this quite a bit. Not to say they won't sound better as the electronics improve, as I believe this is the case.

For the record, I run my Yamaha receiver as a pre-pro with 3 power amps attached. My room is over 22 X 20, I had the extra gear, I use it. I feel it sounds better. I'm not opposed to this.

What I am opposed to is a everyone rushing out and giving advice to add a power amp to a receiver with no pre-outs, or to buy a new amplifier when we first haven't even established that more power is going to be beneficial in this application. If Steve comes back and says he never listens above 90 dB, he's going to get an incremental performance increase at best for his money adding a new amp.

Quote:

---

Using a sub doesn't eliminate upper bass freq. Mine is set at 80 crossover and I still got my ST to clip at my normal listening volumes with heavy bass peaks. It's possible though that I had my main's set to large, I don't recall for sure.

---

No, it doesn't eliminate them, though they aren't as demanding as the frequencies below 100 Hz, typically.

Quote:

---

PS: My spec sheet for Bryston 3B-SST has 74 at clipping, which is probably a percentage (133 of 180) which I mistaken for 74 watts

---

.
That's cool. Bryston makes serious amps - I've never heard one that couldn't perform beyond it's cautious rating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royphil345

The most discriminating audiophiles I know wouldn't smack a rat in the a$$ with that 60 WPC Yamaha HT receiver.

---

They wouldn't be caught dead with CV's, either, but that doesn't contribute anything to the discussion.

Quote:

---

You're rude, obviously lack real-world experience regarding this guy's question and you're wrong. I do hope you're not playing audiophile with a 60 WPC Yamaha HT receiver in your rack.... .

---

What's in my rack has nothing to do with the facts and opinion in this discussion so far. What, are you going to insult my boombox?

As for being rude, well, I can be, as required. Not my goal here though. I have enough experience to back up what I'm talking about with substance, facts, and reasoning and not just happy-feel-good rhetoric that can't be explained by anything other than blind faith. My answer to problems is not to throw money at them hoping it'll solve it. How long did people spend on this thread before recommending the amp upgrade? 30 seconds? Without even asking for all the details on his setup? Especially when it's someone else's. Look, I'm not attacking you personally, if my tone came across as doing such, I apologize.

Quote:

---

LOL I''ve been around awhile. I know what similar receivers are capable of doing with Cerwin Vegas... Not much... There is more than efficiency to consider in what kind of load a loudspeaker presents to an amp

---

No doubt, hence the questions re: loudness and room size. I didn't ever say adding power wouldn't improve things at all. I've only question whether it was the most effective allocation of resources for generating sound improvements in this scenario. If Steve doesn't exceed 90 dB for music EVER, more power isn't going to do anything for him. Even a crappy 300 watt receiver is going to be able to handle the load for those speakers unless they have a ridiculously low impedance profile well below 4 ohms. These do claim to be compatible with 8 ohm units though, that's all I can go by. I'm not saying an amp won't make it sound a bit better, I am saying for the cost, it isn't likely to meet the expectations some responses are likely to have created.

Quote:

---

You want a night and day difference? Run just about any pair of full sized floorstanders with the 60 WPC Yamaha receiver and then with a quality 200 WPC amp (or even a QUALITY 60 WPC amp). Try to play 'em loud... Night and day? YES!!!

---

I see you avoided the comment I made earlier? Why then are so many audiophiles spending soo much time investing in low watt SET amps that only deliver a mere fraction of the power we're talking about here? Power and sound quality are not directly proportional. Ever wonder why a 40 watt NAD will sound better than a 100 watt Denon?

Quote:

---

This guy's issue is with the sound turning to mush at significantly lower volume levels than he thinks the CVs should be capable of. He's absolutely right. They are capable of more. A quality amplifier is the cure. Yep...

---

We haven't even established at what levels this is occuring at. We don't know how he has the speakers set up in his room. They could right beside walls, his room untreated. Forget seeing if we can help him properly place his speakers and get the most out of his system as is before dropping money. No, let's just encourage him to spend money on amplification and promise him tremendous gains. Ain't gonna happen! Amps make differences, not huge night and day differences. The speakers will be the limiting factor.

Quote:

---

The specs on the CVs are likely exaggerated. The specs on the Yamaha are likely exaggerated.

---

A receiver, crappy as they are, will deliver it's rated power into two channels. As for the CV spec exaggeration, could be. That number is high enough to allow plenty of comfort room though.

Quote:

---

CVs have been well known to require decent amplification for best results, possibly something about the load they present... This guy came here with a specific issue he did an excellent job of describing. An issue that just screams insufficiant amplification. Are you telling him it isn't really happening because theoretically it shouldn't be? Your textbook knowledge is quite impressive. But, using it to confuse this guy when the solution to his problem is very simple and contrary to what you're telling him???

---

CV's are well known for having mediocre sound quality at high levels, and terrible quality at lower levels. They're not made for hi-fidelity. Dumping hundred on power amplification isn't going to clean up a somewhat muddy sound. That's just how CV's sound.

Quote:

---

Trying to make people look foolish because they just can't agree with you due to what they've seen in real-life experience??? I don't know...

---

Now you're on to me.

Quote:

---

The CVs may lack some refinement, but I think you greatly underestimate what they're capable of. This poster's only complaint about his system was reduced performance at higher volumes. His system's weakness is actually what should be it's best attribute. CVs can do loud if nothing else... That's a well-known fact. Better amplification is the key here

---

.
Ever consider for a second that maybe, just maybe, adding power to this setup is only going to add loudness, and not do a thing for the muddy sound? Or is this impossible, in your experience?

Quote:

---

The guy didn't ask what kind of speakers you would have bought. He basically asked if he was getting the most out of his speakers by driving them with the 60 WPC Yamaha receiver. The answer is definitely not.

---

We've established and agree his receiver isn't the greatest. Great, so everyone says, yeah more power is better. He runs out, drops $400 on a new integrated, and finds his speakers can play louder, a few minor subtleties have been improved, but for the most part the muddy sound remains. Except now he's out a wad of cash. Is everyone here going to refund him his money?

Quote:

---

About the power meters on amps... I think they're often just too slow to show peak power output. I use mine as guage of average power output and estimate the peak power output to be significantly higher

---

.

Generally instantaneous readings, so peak power is triggering the highest readings.
In music, peak and average power are hard differentiate. When amps are tested, they use sign waves, so you get a true, constant power signal of say, 60 watts...But with a music signal, you're all over the map. The higher number is the one you need to be concerned with though, that's what'll cause damage or distortion. The power ratings on even the crappiest Kenwood receiver will tell what the receiver can do with a sign wave in unrealistic conditions. Even those will have some headroom above and beyond the rated power for musical peaks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeruvianSkies

Ok, let the battle resume....

---

Now, if you really want me to stir the pot, I will tell you that even though you have a separate amp, if it only has one plug for the wall, it is only putting out a max of around 800 watts. No matter what the mfg says or how many "300 watt channels" you bought.

Why? Because most people have a 15 or maybe a 20 amp circuit that it is plugged into. VERY few exceptions unless your amp acutally has two heavy duty plugs and they are connected to two DEDICATED circuits. NOT just two plugs.

The following is an exerpt from Audioholics. I will provide a link to the whole article for those who want more details. But, as you will see, a good receiver is already hitting the limits of what you can pull from the wall under present UL and CSA approval.

References:

Household Line: 120V, 15A can deliver max continuous power of (120 x 15) = 1800 watts (assuming no derating as per UL)


Amplifier Efficiency:

Typical Linear (A/B) Amplifier is between 40-50%.

Rail switching amps such as Class G/H can be as high as 65%

Switching amps (Class D) can see up to 90% real world efficiency assuming a properly designed power supply is utilized.


Note: These estimates assume the amp is under full load and that the power supply transformer doesn't overload, operates in the linear VA curve, and maintains regulation.


Let's focus on linear amps for the moment, since these are currently the most popular type tested and purchased by home theater consumer folks.


Now take our 1800 watt max power from the wall and multiply it by our amp efficiency (let's choose 45%) and we get: 1800 x .45 = 810 watts . This is the max power a typical linear A/B amp can deliver on a continuous basis from a 120V, 15A household line - assuming, of course, the amplifier's power supply can consume the entire 1800 watts of power from the line without causing the power transformer to overheat or go into thermal meltdown and likely trip the breaker.


By now folks from the ACD camp are saying, - well let's use a 20A line instead! That only gets the designer 4 more amps - or 2.6A with a normal power amp! What they fail to realize is most UL compliant consumer electrical devices utilizing the IEC320 receptacle, limit the max current consumption to less than 15A to prevent arcing which can cause a fire, death or serious injury (not to mention voiding your liability insurance). Unless the amp has a specialized connector on the back, or two independent power cords, it is likely it will be limited to 15A continuous consumption for safety's sake. We shall consider those type of devices as an outlier (not typical) and continue on with the more typical consumer devices reviewed and purchased for our home theater systems.


As a side note, other limitations include the AC wall outlet and breaker in the fuse box as well as the potential for 14GA wire run to the AC socket - 12GA wire has to be used for a legitimate 20A breaker.


As we already established, our linear amp best case continuous power delivery is limited to around 810 watts.


What does this give us under the ACD test?


5 Channels Driven: 810 / 5 = 162 watts per channel

7 Channels Driven: 810 / 7 = 116 watts per channel


Note: This doesn't factor in any additional losses due to processing, and other active devices in a receiver.





Here is the link that reduces the power capabilities even further but I thought this would get everyone mad enough at me!!!! Now, I will say that separate amps can produce a cleaner sound and provide more available power to respond to large dynamic swings, but it usually robs Paul to pay Peter, to do so since rarely is the demand on all the channels being asked to drive being used at the same time.

All Chanels Driven Falacy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kexodusc

We've established and agree his receiver isn't the greatest. Great, so everyone says, yeah more power is better. He runs out, drops $400 on a new integrated, and finds his speakers can play louder, a few minor subtleties have been improved, but for the most part the muddy sound remains. Except now he's out a wad of cash. Is everyone here going to refund him his money?

---

Your arguments are getting very weak. It's obvious you just want to be right and you'll wriggle around all day trying to prove it.

Unfortunately, You're ignoring the most basic fact here. THIS GUY IS HAPPY THE SOUND OF HIS CERWIN VEGAS. HE WANT'S BETTER PERFORMANCE AT HIGHER VOLUME!!! That's what this thread is about!!!

When he buys fancy "audiophile" speakers and they sound like crap powered by his weak receiver (and you know darn well they would) will you refund his money?

THAT RECEIVER SIMPLY DOES NOT HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO DRIVE ANY LOUDSPEAKER WITH AUTHORITY AT HIGHER VOLUME LEVELS!!!

THERE ARE FACTORS THAT MAKE CERTAIN SPEAKERS MORE DIFFICULT TO DRIVE BY CHEAP AMPS EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE EFFICIENT. The room etc... has NOTHING to do with this.

This guy obviously wants good sound at higher volume levels. Changing speakers will not get him there. Changing out the Yamaha would be an absolutely necessary step towards that goal. Considering that he sounds pretty happy with the CVs besides the sound turning to mush at higher volume levels... More power is simply the most logical first upgrade.

Have you even heard the new CV lines? Calling them terrible and muddy-sounding is just ridiculous if you haven't... There's a difference between offering helpful advice or just regurgitating stuff you've heard and facts that can be effected by many factors you haven't taken into consideration.

You yourself said "Ever wonder why a 40 watt NAD will sound better than a 100 watt Denon?". That's EXACTLY what I'm saying here. The specs don't always tell the whole story. This guy could do with a better amplifier. Take a deep breath and admit it... LOL


Wriggle out of that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by westcott

Now, if you really want me to stir the pot, I will tell you that even though you have a separate amp, if it only has one plug for the wall, it is only putting out a max of around 800 watts. No matter what the mfg says or how many "300 watt channels" you bought.

Why? Because most people have a 15 or maybe a 20 amp circuit that it is plugged into. VERY few exceptions unless your amp acutally has two heavy duty plugs and they are connected to two DEDICATED circuits. NOT just two plugs.

The following is an exerpt from Audioholics. I will provide a link to the whole article for those who want more details. But, as you will see, a good receiver is already hitting the limits of what you can pull from the wall under present UL and CSA approval.

References:

Household Line: 120V, 15A can deliver max continuous power of (120 x 15) = 1800 watts (assuming no derating as per UL)

---

Another case of using scientific facts without considering all the factors...

An amplifier stores the line current in capacitors. The line current comes in at 60HZ (here anyway). Much power draw from the capacitors can be for bass frequencies below 60HZ which take the most power to reproduce. The line current can charge the capacitors faster than they are drained by low frequencies. More wattage is actually available at lower frequencies than the line current needs to produce.

TAA DAA!!!

what that's got to do with this thread I don't know...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royphil345

Another case of using scientific facts without considering all the factors...

An amplifier stores the line current in capacitors. The line current comes in at 60HZ (here anyway). Much power draw from the capacitors can be for bass frequencies below 60HZ which take the most power to reproduce. The line current can charge the capacitors faster than it is drained by low frequencies. More wattage is actually available at lower frequencies than the line current needs to produce.

TAA DAA!!!

what that's got to do with this thread I don't know...

---

I suggest you go back and read the ENTIRE article. Line choke prevents this and causes high frequency distortion, tricking the mind that the low frequencies are cleaner and tighter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royphil345

Your arguments are getting very weak. It's obvious you just want to be right and you'll wriggle around all day trying to prove it

---

On the contrary. You continue to avoid them, calling them weak without explaining why they are weak. For the 3rd time, I'd like you to explain why some of the best performing amplifiers ever designed are in fact extremely low power - lower than even this receiver.
C'mon...Yeah, I'm calling you out - that very fact flies in the face of you assertions about high power always leading to better sound.

There's 2 sides to this debate:
You: "More power will give you exactly what you want, always, because I say so"
and
Me: "More power might not be the best solution for your particular needs, depending on your volume preferences, room size, etc because of the following considerations..."

Again, I never once said power won't help here, I only question, in all fairness to Steve, whether it's the most effective upgrade path in this instance. In this case based on experience and some knowledge, I think there may be a better option (again, pending the loudness requirements of Steve).

Quote:

---

Unfortunately, You're ignoring the most basic fact here. THIS GUY IS HAPPY THE SOUND OF HIS CERWIN VEGAS. HE WANT'S BETTER PERFORMANCE AT HIGHER VOLUME!!! That's what this thread is about!!!

---

Yes, and I see you failed to guarantee that more power won't just make the muddy sound louder, you didn't even accept that this is a great possibility. Again, my point all along has been to question which path leads to the most effective allocation of resources to achieve the desired sound. We still haven't established how loud he listens to his current speakers. For all we know, loud to him might be 80 dB.

I know damn thing or two about earlier model CV's...I was a long time proud owner (did you miss that) of a set of VS120's way back when, the same exact f'n brand!

I'm not totally ignorant to their sound. And I'm not BS-ing this, do a search on the forum here and you'll find more than a few threads where I discuss "my ol' CV's)...Here's the first one I found:

http://forums.audioreview.com/showth...hlight=college

Quote:

---

THAT RECEIVER SIMPLY DOES NOT HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO DRIVE ANY LOUDSPEAKER WITH AUTHORITY AT HIGHER VOLUME LEVELS!!!

---

It's not going to top 115 dB optimally, no, but what's the need of the listener? What is loud? How many times do I have to say this to you - you are using absolutes, and universal arguments to support your positing, I'm merely trying to demonstrate that there's far more to consider beyond the ol "receivers suck, get a big amp" arguement.

Quote:

---

This guy obviously wants good sound at higher volume levels. Changing speakers will not get him there. Changing out the Yamaha would be an absolutely necessary step towards that goal. Considering that he sounds pretty happy with the CVs besides the sound turning to mush at higher volume levels... More power is simply the most logical first upgrade.

Wriggle out of that...

---

Well, in light of overwhelming superior arguements, I change my mind. I am wrong.

Quote:

---

Have you even heard the new CV lines? Calling them terrible and muddy-sounding is just ridiculous if you haven't... There's a difference between offering helpful advice or just regurgitating stuff you've heard and facts that can be effected by many factors you haven't taken into consideration.

---

Not sure what new CV's have to do with the sound of 13 year old model? Wiggle out of that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royphil345

You yourself said "Ever wonder why a 40 watt NAD will sound better than a 100 watt Denon?". That's EXACTLY what I'm saying here. The specs don't always tell the whole story. This guy could do with a better amplifier. Take a deep breath and admit it... LOL

---

You didn't reply to that one...

...and he wishes he had a 100 watt Denon over a 60 watt Yamaha...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royphil345

You didn't reply to that one...

---

Not sure what your point was, elaborate, and I'll gladly reply...
If you're referring to superior fidelity from higher grade electronics, I agree , though I question,again, whether that is the best use of his money. I maintain that sound quality improvements from a speaker upgrade likely will outweigh the sound quality improvements from an amp upgrade.

If you're complaining about the accuracy of the specs - that's a whole other discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kexodusc

C'mon...Yeah, I'm calling you out - that very fact flies in the face of you assertions about high power always leading to better sound.

---

Yeah... You are calling me out for sure.

Problem is... This thread was never about higher power always leading to better sound. I never said that at all. That may be what you're trying to twist this argument into, but it's not happening.

This thread was about the poster's system where I can guarantee you his particular amp is a huge bottleneck in performance. I posted about the dramatic improvements he would indeed realize at higher volume levels through higher quality amplification. I didn't come right out and say it at the beginning before I needed to defend myself, but the fact is there is not much that 60 WPC Yamaha will ever drive with authority at higher volume levels. Your speaker upgrade would be wasted on it. If he likes it loud, it needs to go. SIMPLE FACT.

That's what this guy wanted to know. Was the receiver a bottleneck? How do you get CVs to sing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royphil345

Another case of using scientific facts without considering all the factors...

An amplifier stores the line current in capacitors. The line current comes in at 60HZ (here anyway). Much power draw from the capacitors can be for bass frequencies below 60HZ which take the most power to reproduce. The line current can charge the capacitors faster than they are drained by low frequencies. More wattage is actually available at lower frequencies than the line current needs to produce.

TAA DAA!!!

what that's got to do with this thread I don't know...

---

...WTF does line frequency have to do with AC line current or bass response at or below 60Hz?

BTW, caps filter/store rectified DC which is what the PS changes the AC (regardless of line frequency) into...

BTW revisited and FWIW, the old Advent 300 only had 15Wpc and could kick the proverbial...

jimHJJ(...now for my impression of a ground loop...HHHMMMmmmmm...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by westcott

I suggest you go back and read the ENTIRE article. Line choke prevents this and causes high frequency distortion, tricking the mind that the low frequencies are cleaner and tighter.

---

You ain't trickin' my mind. There is nothing to prevent an amp from using all the energy stored in the capacitors. They sometimes do and start to clip in fact. They are charged at 60HZ. They can be drained at a lower rate depending on the frequency of the sound being reproduced. They can supply more wattage than the line input for short periods or at lower frequencies. FACT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by royphil345

This guy could do with a better amplifier. Take a deep breath and admit it... LOL

---

LOL...Okay, I promise to admit that a better amplifier will offer some improvement, if you promise to go back, read all my threads, and admit that I've already said that several times from the start!

My point all along hasn't been whether a better amp can make it sound better - can u understand this?
It's about whether it's the best path to achieving the desired sound? We can't know this until he answers a few more questions.

Quote:

---

This thread was about the poster's system where I can guarantee you his particular amp is a huge bottleneck in performance. I posted about the dramatic improvements he would indeed realize at higher volume levels through higher quality amplification. I didn't come right out and say it at the beginning before I needed to defend myself, but the fact is there is not much that 60 WPC Yamaha will ever drive with authority at higher volume levels. Your speaker upgrade would be wasted on it. If he likes it loud, it needs to go. SIMPLE FACT.

---

You cannot say for certain that the 60 WPC Yamaha is a bottleneck because you cannot demonstrate whether it's being pushed to its limits or not. If we're talking in the 80 - 90 dB range, that receiver isn't working hard at all. Adding more power in this case is going to be a waste.
How much demand is he placing on it? Tell me, how many watts? How many dB's is he talking about when he says "loud"? Do you know? Can you quantify this?
If not, you cannot make your absolute statements, no matter how many times you keep repeating yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Resident Loser

jimHJJ(...now for my impression of a ground loop...HHHMMMmmmmm...)

---

ROFLMAO!!!!
You're a little off-key, that 60 Hz should be about B, you're giving us a D.