Does Onkyo TX-SR600 really Output Only 35 Watts per channel (ALL channels together)??
Eric
came across this post (see below) regarding severe problems with this
receiver when outputting ALL channels:
Now, is this still true re: the SR600? If this problem exists, will this
(other than new features), really not be an upgrade in overall
power/performance from my current Home Theater in a Box Sony receiver (note
I already upgraded to Paradigm speakers):
http://www.sel.sony.com/SEL/consumer/ss5/home/homeentertainment/hometheaterp
ackages/htd-dw820_specs.shtml
I am concerned that the Onkyo will be alot less power (in reality), than my
current Sony when running in DTS or Dolby Digital. Is this concern valid?
Note that it looks like the Onkyo (according to the below post),
automatically drops to 35 watts per channel, as soon as you select either
Dolby Digital or DTS.
Most users have not mentioned a noticeable power issue with the Onkyo, but I
have seen users mention having to turn the volume almost all the way to the
max to get sufficient volume. This could indicate lack of power or just a
volume knob that is more sensitive at the lower ends.
Does anyone have any more info. on the real deal with the Onkyo power when
ALL 5 channels are operating? Is this a major issue, or just something that
is seen in most receivers at this price point?
-----------------------------------------
OK, it was in another forum, post 349 in this thread:
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=62657&hig
hlight=TXSR600
Here is a quote"
[Post 349]
Author : Norman L
Date : May 18th, 2002 10:07 AM
ONYKO REPORT
In 1998, 1999, 2000 Onkyo receivers had power supplies to output the rated
watts to run all channels. In 2001 and 2002 the power supplies had been
changed and the volts going into all channels are reduced which means much
less watts.
I had been using an ONKYO 727 (80 watts) for the past 8 to 10 years powering
my B & W ( DM2000) speakers , which require a minimum of 50 watts to drive,
and was happy with my receiver. I decide to upgrade from Prologic to 6.1 and
bought the Onyko 600.
I adjusted all channels with the pink noise based on Avia, (85db) and played
at
10db below. A few days after listing and enjoying I played a few DVD's that
have intense DTS or Dolby sound effects, my volume control was set at 10 db
below reference of 85db. When the sound effects in the movie kicked in, the
db's raised 20 to 30 higher without me touching the volume control. My B & W
speakers both blew by being clipped by the Onyko.
At first I had no idea why, after talking to B & W, they explained what
could happen if the receiver can't deliver the watts need to drive a speaker
when the source material is loud and strong. If the receiver's volts to
drive a speaker are lowered the speaker cannot move fast enough when the
source material is loud and strong to cool itself. This would melt the wires
or loosen the glue going to the voice coil. The speakers could not handle
the drop in power when the source was loud and strong to drive the speakers.
??? But why were the volts lowered if the Onkyo 600 is rated at 80w
x6???????
I called Onkyo USA they insisted that the receivers output was 80x6, so I
called the Onyko distributor in Canada and was connected to their chief
technical engineer.
He had a 500, 600 and 700 in his lab. I told him my story about the B & W
speakers and he offered to test the 600 and the 700. His report to me was
that the 600 tested at 26 or 27 volts - 2 channels or 81watts. But when set
to 5-channel stereo the receiver drop the volts immediately to 30W. The 700
dropped to 38W. He also told me the power supply couldn't handle 26 volts to
all channels. I have our 30-minute conversation transcribed.
I then brought my 600 to a NJ authorized technical repair lab to test the
600 and receive in writing a report on the output. The 600 running 2
channels tested at 26.5 volts or 81 watts. In 5-channel stereo the volts
dropped to 16.5 or 34w per channel.
The result is the POWER SUPPLY is not capable of giving the necessary volts
to all amplifiers at the same time to maintain an 80 or even 65 watts.
Previous models like the 555,575,575x, 777, and the high-end units like the
989, 797 have stronger power supplies to maintain their rated power. It
appears that the 494, 595, 696, 500, 600, 700 have less powerful power
supplies than in the past and should be a concern for some of you.
If you believe you need headroom or use low efficient speakers and/or
speaker with high minimum watts consider other manufactures. Also if you are
happy with 30w to 38w enjoy your 600 or 700. My opinion is that that is not
what home theater is about.
Laws should be changed to require consistent reporting of watts running 5
channels.
Eric
A/V Receiver STR-SE501
Stereo Mode Power Output, both channels driven into 8 ohms, 20 -- 20,000 Hz:
100 w x 2
THD at rated output: 0.0009
Surround Mode Power Output, all channels driven, 8 ohms, 1000 Hz, 0.7% THD:
100 w x 5
Audio Inputs/Outputs (excluding Tuner): 3/1
A/V Inputs/Outputs: 3/1
S-Video Input: 1
Optical Digital Input: 2
Coaxial Digital Input: 1
Dolby Digital/dts decoding: Yes/Yes
5.1-Channel Input
Dolby Pro Logic decoding
Control A1 II
Sound Field Link
Subwoofer Out/Mix Out: Yes/1
DSP: 24-bit (Full)
Remote Commander® unit: Pre-programmed
Digital Satellite System/DVD Control: Yes (on RM)
DSP Programs: Cinema/Virtual 3D/Music/AFD: 4/2/4/1
Cinema Studio modes: A/B/C
Virtual 3D Modes
Effect Level
Balance (Front/Rear): Yes/Yes
Level (Center/Rear/Woofer): Y/Y/Y
Virtual Surround: DCS
Rear Channel Stereo
Headphone Out
Speaker Selector: A,B,A+B
Tuner: STR-SE501
Station Presets: 30
Station MemoTM Display
Auto Tuning
Direct Tuning
"Eric" <er...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:-kednZRkgaB...@speakeasy.net...
Eric
"Eric" <er...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:-kednZRkgaB...@speakeasy.net...
Ransack The Elder
Ransack The Elder
for any reciever. You'll probably never use over 15 watt per channel at full
volume...a common misconception about power. But I do know this:
The Onkyo will have about 2-3 times the output power of the Sony.
"Eric" <er...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:-kednZRkgaB...@speakeasy.net...
Eric
channels running), and the Onky at 80 watts. So why do you say that there
will be a 2-3 times greater ouput with the Onkyo?
"Ransack The Elder" <no...@noneya.com> wrote in message
news:6QB0a.2881$tO2.3...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
BDarnell1966
I own the Onkyo 600 and have been totally satisfied with it in every way
possible. Do not pay much attention to this claim on the watts I suspect its
someone who is very loyal to another brand trying to ditch the Onkyo.
Bradd
Ransack The Elder
> The Sony is rated at 100 watts per channel (although probably not with all
> channels running), and the Onky at 80 watts. So why do you say that there
> will be a 2-3 times greater ouput with the Onkyo?
Honestly? Because Sony is shit. Sony pads their wattage ratings just to make
the uninformed consumer think they produce more power. If the Sony was
measured the same way the Onkyo was, it would probably boast about 40 watts
per channel as opposed to 80 watts per channel on the Onkyo. Look at the
fine print.
COneilliv
think that this is padded as well?
CJ
Auto Cat
But I feel the 3-way (0.5" 1.5" 4.5") speakers are 35W each.
"Ransack The Elder" <no...@noneya.com> 撰寫於郵件新聞
:i3G0a.3225$tO2.3...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Eric
knob almost at the max?
What kind of speakers do you have?
Do you feel that the Onkyo is reaching its maximum power at a loud -- yet
listening level -- for DVDs, without enough head-room for more?
"BDarnell1966" <bdarne...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030206223152...@mb-cb.aol.com...
Shrivel
speakers simultaneously in a surround setup is to use separate amplifiers
for each channel, each with their own power supply. Receivers have a single
power supply for all channels and therefore simply CAN'T produce full power
in all channels at the same time - it either has sacrifice power to all
channels during peaks or some of the more "intelligent" receivers use
steering to send the power to the channels that need it at the time.
All this is pretty irrelevant though - as RTE said you're not gonna be using
anywhere near 100 watts, much less 35 watts during normal listening. That
amount of power is only used during extreme peaks that last a few
milliseconds normally.
And I'd take 35 watts of Onkyo power over 100 watts of Sony any day ;-)
"Eric" <er...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:-kednZRkgaB...@speakeasy.net...
BDarnell1966
Infinity Interlude speakers with the 36c front and the IL 40's around the horn.
The dial has a db measurment and a typical movie sounds good in the 55 range
however it is different for all movies as some are dts and others not. Also I
use the smaller 25 for the rear speaker (6.1). For money invested to quality I
think its fantastic set up.
Brad
Neil
I looked at the Onkyo web site and it does look like they promise
80wpc in Dolby mode, while what you post below contradicts that. After
some abuses in home audio claims roughly 30 years ago, the US FTC
stepped in and regulated these claims, so misstatements in home audio
gear on watts are unusual now. I have no explanation for the
contradiction you found. Perhaps you might want to look for published
reviews in magazines like Sound & Vision and if the Onkyo was reviewed
there, you could read their technical comments?
BTW, IMHO watts are something that it's only too easy to focus on.
Most home gear runs at only a few watts most of the time anyway, and
more watts are only needed for loud dynamic peaks. The difference
between 35 and 80 watts, partly because of the way hearing works,
probably isn't noticeable. Room acoustics, speaker sensitivity, and
how the gear is used also are very important things to consider, yet
many people tend to focus on watts instead. In a home HT system,
there's usually a powered sub, and that sub's amp has to do plenty of
work, often more than any one channel of a home receiver.
So what am I getting at? For me, if I liked the receiver and wasn't
planning to fill a huge room with very loud sound (in which case 80wpc
would probably be inadequate too), a 35wpc receiver might be fine for
home use.
> After much research I was just about to purchase the Onkyo TX-SR600, when I
> came across this post (see below) regarding severe problems with this
> receiver when outputting ALL channels:
>
> Now, is this still true re: the SR600? If this problem exists, will this
> (other than new features), really not be an upgrade in overall
> power/performance from my current Home Theater in a Box Sony receiver (note
> I already upgraded to Paradigm speakers):
Your Sony is already putting out plenty of watts for any typical home
user, so if you hear a difference with another home receiver, it's
extremely unlikely (IMHO) that any differences would be attributable
to having more or less watts in a new receiver. If a new receiver
sounds better to you, go for it, but I doubt you'll hear any
difference related to watts.
(snip)
> Most users have not mentioned a noticeable power issue with the Onkyo, but I
> have seen users mention having to turn the volume almost all the way to the
> max to get sufficient volume. This could indicate lack of power or just a
> volume knob that is more sensitive at the lower ends.
Or lots of other things, such as trying to fill a huge room with loud
sound and/or wanting to listen so loud that hearing might be damaged.
If you're not comfortable buying the Onkyo, then don't--there's tons
of competition. Also, look at magazine reviews that include technical
test results so you can learn more about specs of different gear, if
the specs are important to you.
(snip)
Eric
Thanks for the very informative reply. Most likely I will try the Onkyo (30
day return policy at Circuit City).
I think the problem is I read too many audiophile forums
(hometheaterforum.com etc.) where pure wattage is discussed as gospel. And
people sniff at anything below 100 watts. I sort of think you are right,
that wattage is overrated and very few people need the full 100 watts (or 35
watts for that matter).
Many home users have reported being satisfied with the Onkyo 600 -- so
perhaps I'll give it a spin.
For the money, there is no receiver right now that has the features of the
Onkyo 600. It can be had for about $400.00 right now.
The Denon 1803 is close, but doesn't have the extra componenet video
bandwidth necesary for High Definition quality and the Denon's remote is an
issue.
The Onkyo definitely has what I need as far as features (I don't have
prologic II right now, or component video switching or DD 5.1 - EX, or DTS -
ES). I don't have the 6 (or 7) speakers for the EX or ES mode now, but this
will give me future upgradeability.
Neil
> My Marantz receiver is rated at 110 watts per channel into 6 channels. Do you
> think that this is padded as well?
Part of what the wpc rating means depends on the other figures that go
with the rating. The other figures include THD and frequency range.
(Another dimension would be how long can the amp produce that wpc
rating and if all the other amps on the chassis could do that
simultaneously. That would be interesting to know, although almost
completely irrelevant to listening to audio and video at home.)
But it's all too easy to focus on wpc with home gear, and if things
sound good to you, I wouldn't worry about it. BTW, the wpc standards
for home audio gear are set by the FTC and any maker that doesn't live
up to those standards risks possible trouble with the FTC. Another
BTW: Some makers occasionally conservatively underrate the wpc figures
(IOW, they claim less watts than their amps can deliver), which is
fine by the FTC and can make an amp rated at "only 15 wpc" (or some
other low figure) seem like it's quite powerful. It'll seem that way
if the maker only claims 15wpc, but the amp can produce 50wpc.
Ransack The Elder
"COneilliv" <cone...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030206225829...@mb-fc.aol.com...
> My Marantz receiver is rated at 110 watts per channel into 6 channels. Do
you
> think that this is padded as well?
It's not as padded as Sony. Even though it will never ever come close to 110
watts out of each channel all at the same time, it's way better than a Sony.
tnfkajs
> Do you play the Onkyo very loud on DVDs?
"Very" is subjective - but yeah I can make the walls shake.
> If so, do you have to have volume knob almost at the max?
Nope. The Volume knob on the 600 is an oddity to begin with. Some sort of
pseudo-logrithmic algorithm. Very little increase from 0-45, then it takes
off. When I want to impress someone I have the volume at about 65ish.
> What kind of speakers do you have?
Infinities...
> Do you feel that the Onkyo is reaching its maximum power at a loud -- yet
> listening level -- for DVDs, without enough head-room for more?
nope.
Auto Cat
If your amplifier is 100W, 12 o'clock is not 50W.
So 9 o'clock may be only 2.5W.
P.S. Do NOT connect a 2.5W speaker to your 100W amplifier.
"tnfkajs" <som...@microsoft.com> 撰寫於郵件新聞
:3e4447e4$0$5...@news.denver1.Level3.net...
AM Dragon
That is exactly what I did. I read everything I could find. Then I
started to get worried that the SR600 would not be enough for me. The
more I read the more confusing it got. I decided to forget what
everyone else said and just go listen. I am very happy with the
SR600. Worst case, you listen to it for a month and decide you don't
like it and take it back.
Adam M
normanstrong
> But it's all too easy to focus on wpc with home gear, and if things
> sound good to you, I wouldn't worry about it. BTW, the wpc standards
> for home audio gear are set by the FTC and any maker that doesn't
live
> up to those standards risks possible trouble with the FTC. Another
> BTW: Some makers occasionally conservatively underrate the wpc
figures
> (IOW, they claim less watts than their amps can deliver), which is
> fine by the FTC and can make an amp rated at "only 15 wpc" (or some
> other low figure) seem like it's quite powerful. It'll seem that way
> if the maker only claims 15wpc, but the amp can produce 50wpc.
There's something to keep in mind when you buy a "conservatively
rated" component: It's also conservatively warranted!
I once asked the theoretical question, If 2 amps both put out a
measured power of 120W, but one of them was advertised as 100W and the
other a 'conservative' 50W, which one would you buy? I was surprised
at the number of responders choosing the latter.
In the case above, remember that the manufacturer only guarantees 15W,
no matter what it used to put out.
Norm Strong
normanstrong
> > news:I6idnY6iP9t...@speakeasy.net...
> > > Do you play the Onkyo very loud on DVDs?
> >
> > "Very" is subjective - but yeah I can make the walls shake.
> >
Yeah. I know what you mean. I used to live in a house like that.
:-)
Norm Strong
normanstrong
"normanstrong" <norman...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:GVa1a.35995$vm2.17265@rwcrnsc54...
Let's change that last number to 50W
Norm
B. Earp
> measured power of 120W, but one of them was advertised as 100W and the
> other a 'conservative' 50W, which one would you buy? I was surprised
> at the number of responders choosing the latter.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way it appears, more, not less, than you
expected chose the latter. On average, amps advertised as 50W cost less
than amps that are advertised as 100W. Since this is a very plain everyday
fact, it's implied in your theoretical question unless you specify other
conditions.
Who's the dummy that would pay a 100W price when the same thing could be had
for a 50W price?
> In the case above, remember that the manufacturer only guarantees 15W,
> no matter what it used to put out.
> Let's change that last number to 50W
It normally takes many years or even decades before output transistors go
into half-break mode. 100W at a 50W price is a bonus as long it lasts, no?
Greg Lee
>> I once asked the theoretical question, If 2 amps both put out a
>> measured power of 120W, but one of them was advertised as 100W and the
>> other a 'conservative' 50W, which one would you buy? I was surprised
>> at the number of responders choosing the latter.
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way it appears, more, not less, than you
> expected chose the latter. On average, amps advertised as 50W cost less
> than amps that are advertised as 100W. Since this is a very plain everyday
> fact, it's implied in your theoretical question unless you specify other
> conditions.
> Who's the dummy that would pay a 100W price when the same thing could be had
> for a 50W price?
I don't think you understand true audiophiles. Seeing that price and wattage
are both measures of quality and that, watts being equal, some amps cost a
lot more, they conclude that the watts of the more expensive ones are
better than the watts of the cheaper ones. The good watts are called
real watts, or honest watts, or whatever. Then, when you're shopping for
an amp, of course you want to get one that has the good watts, and you
can very easily tell which ones have good watts, because they're the
most expensive. Quality costs, and you get what you pay for.
...
--
Greg Lee <gr...@ling.lll.hawaii.edu>
Eric
So tell me about your set -up -- speakers, etc.
Also, have you had to almost MAX out the SR600 to get very loud volume on
DVDs? Or do you find enough head-room left on the Onkyo volume control,
even with a very very loud (near reference level) movie playing?
Have you experienced ANY issues with power or volume or loudness?
Finally, what size room are you using the SR600 in.
Thanks,
Eric
"AM Dragon" <adamalan(at)newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:oi3a4vgabvavgha2s...@4ax.com...
Neil
(snip)
> There's something to keep in mind when you buy a "conservatively
> rated" component: It's also conservatively warranted!
>
> I once asked the theoretical question, If 2 amps both put out a
> measured power of 120W, but one of them was advertised as 100W and the
> other a 'conservative' 50W, which one would you buy? I was surprised
> at the number of responders choosing the latter.
I think there's sometimes a mystique or attractive to consumers about
gear that has low-watt wpc ratings, but is somehow said to be more
powerful. That seems to be some of the mystique of some NAD and tube
gear.
Personally, it makes more sense to me to buy the 100wpc, if wpc is
what I'm after. But it is kinda fun to try some really small amps and
see if there's a giant killer among them.
An example of a small product with very limited performance and
features, yet somehow seems to hold enormous appeal to audiophiles is
the Tivoli radio that's been available for a year or two. And the
Tivoli has a nostalgia angle going for it also. But in terms of
features and bang for the buck, any Japaneses minisytem or boombox
offers much more than the Tivoli, yet the Tivoli wins the attention of
the audiophile press.
(BTW, I'm the sort of person who's attracted to small, miniaturized,
efficient things in general--small houses, small cars, small bicycles,
etc. However, I've been around long enough to realize that some things
get so small that they don't do the job adequately because there's too
much compromise involved in making some things smaller.)
(snip)
Neil
> Neil:
>
> Thanks for the very informative reply. Most likely I will try the Onkyo (30
> day return policy at Circuit City).
I think you'll be OK.
> I think the problem is I read too many audiophile forums
> (hometheaterforum.com etc.) where pure wattage is discussed as gospel. And
> people sniff at anything below 100 watts. I sort of think you are right,
> that wattage is overrated and very few people need the full 100 watts (or 35
> watts for that matter).
Watts is just one of those figures that's easy for people to latch
onto, like horsepower, interest rates, salaries, or certain dimensions
of the human anatomy, when watts are really only a small part of the
whole picture. You have to look at the whole context.
One other thing that I try to keep in mind is that in HT, even if the
figure is 35 wpc, that's 5 x 35 wpc, plus (often) a powered sub that
will really do more heavy lifting (in power output) than the
receiver's channels probably ever will.
OTOH, there's nothing wrong with having more watts, horsepower, money,
or whatever. They're just not always needed. If you needed to fill an
auditorium with sound, or had very inefficient speakers at home, or
wanted to deafen yourself, a huge amp would be most desirable. But
most people don't need have those goals at home.
Also, while it seems illogical, because of the way human hearing works
the difference between 35wpc and 100wpc probably isn't going to be
noticeable to many people. Over several decades, I've owned tons of
audio gear, and the wpc figure is no longer something I even pay much
attention to. It's only a small part of the whole picture, and even if
wpc are an issue, there are ways to compensate, such as using more
sensitive speakers that require fewer wpc to drive. In effect, that's
the same as having more wpc.
And these days amp power is very cheap anyway. I think most any
receiver made these days will have plenty of power for almost any home
consumer, unless there are some unusual circumstances. BTW, back in
the '70's there was a big hype over having the most powerful amps--it
was a real horsepower war among amp makers. But that passed and people
began to realize wpc just weren't all that important. When you look at
the covers of audio magazines on newsstands, you'll notice that you
almost never see pictures of big amps anymore, whereas 25 years ago
there was big focus on powerful amps.
> Many home users have reported being satisfied with the Onkyo 600 -- so
> perhaps I'll give it a spin.
I think that's what I'd do.
> For the money, there is no receiver right now that has the features of the
> Onkyo 600. It can be had for about $400.00 right now.
If it's got the features you want at the right price, go for it!
> The Denon 1803 is close, but doesn't have the extra componenet video
> bandwidth necesary for High Definition quality and the Denon's remote is an
> issue.
HT gear is so complex to use that I think have good ergonomics that
suit you (in this case, a remote you like) that it makes sense to me
to buy the receiver that has the best remote. There's a receiver I
looked at recently and might've bought, but the remote is an issue--I
need gear that my whole family can operate easily, so remotes that are
unnecessarily complicated and/or awkward make a difference to me.
> The Onkyo definitely has what I need as far as features (I don't have
> prologic II right now, or component video switching or DD 5.1 - EX, or DTS -
> ES). I don't have the 6 (or 7) speakers for the EX or ES mode now, but this
> will give me future upgradeability.
Makes sense to me! Enjoy your new receiver. I think Dolby Pro Logic II
is definitely worth having, especially given that so much of what we
listen to is stereo, not Dolby Digital or DTS sound. BTW, there was a
good article on DPL II recently in Sound & Vision (US) magazine.
AM Dragon
>Adam:
>
>So tell me about your set -up -- speakers, etc.
>
>Also, have you had to almost MAX out the SR600 to get very loud volume on
>DVDs? Or do you find enough head-room left on the Onkyo volume control,
>even with a very very loud (near reference level) movie playing?
>
>Have you experienced ANY issues with power or volume or loudness?
>
>Finally, what size room are you using the SR600 in.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Eric
I have the Onkyo TX SR600, an Onkyo DV CP500 - 5 disc DVD changer. I
have Polk audio speakers. RTi70's for front, CSi40 Center, RTi30's
rear, and a Optimus center channel speaker from my old system for the
rear center surround. I also have a Polk PSW404 powered sub. All
channels are set to small per Polk's recommendation and crossed over
at 100Hz. I've used the Sound and Vision Home theater set up DVD and
a Radio Shack analog SPL meter.
Yes, there is virtually no sound untill I hit 40 on the volume. Onkyo
said this is normal. I set it between 58 and 62 for movies, and if
I'm trying to impress 62 to 65. The amp has plenty of power you just
have to twist the knob more to get there.
The listening area is 19 x 12 but it, aside from the breakfast bar, is
open into the kitchen. You could add another 19 x 9 for the kitchen
dining area.
I had a budget of $1500. I looked at Denon, Yamaha and Harmon Kardon
for receivers. I listened to Boston Acoustic, Mirage, Polk and
Klipsch. I went with Onkyo because I liked the included features and
the price. Plus I've owned Onkyo and never had a problem. I decided
on Polk because I like the way the sound. I've always like Polk
Speakers. I really liked the Mirage package but for 2x the price of
the Polks I coudn't swing it. I bought everything as a package and
ended up paying $1800 + Tax.
I'm very happy with my system. People in this group may tell you not
to buy brands that Best Buy and Circuit City sell. Don't worry about
that, buy what you like. I'd say I have a system that is capable of
the same quality sound as any local theater except maybe the IMAX.
Hope that helps.
Adam M
Eric
"Neil" <neilk...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:daa8d05c.03020...@posting.google.com...
> "Eric" <er...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:<5qWdnRyyHPD...@speakeasy.net>...
> > Neil:
> >
BTW, there was a
Mikko Rantalainen
> cone...@aol.com (COneilliv) wrote in message news:<20030206225829...@mb-fc.aol.com>...
>
>>My Marantz receiver is rated at 110 watts per channel into 6 channels. Do you
>>think that this is padded as well?
>
> Part of what the wpc rating means depends on the other figures that go
> with the rating. The other figures include THD and frequency range.
> BTW: Some makers occasionally conservatively underrate the wpc figures
> (IOW, they claim less watts than their amps can deliver), which is
> fine by the FTC and can make an amp rated at "only 15 wpc" (or some
> other low figure) seem like it's quite powerful. It'll seem that way
> if the maker only claims 15wpc, but the amp can produce 50wpc.
Yeah, check out some Harman/Kardon receivers or amplifiers. Some of
their stuff is rated to something like 25 or 35 wpc and still they get
pretty much the same volume out of the speakers as Onkyo models with 100
wpc or some lesser stuff with 150 wpc.
Back to the topic. I've Onkyo TX-SR600E (which is probably the same
thing for the Europe market) and I've no problems with the output power,
DD/DTS or not. There're some things to note though: I usually get about
8 dB quieter volume when using DD and 4-6 dB quieter volume with DTS
than with PCM sources. It's a bit annoying, but I guess it's more like
those multi-channel sources have more headroom for dynamics and output
dialog and stuff at quieter volume. High volume scenes sound as loud as
with PCM sources.
That being said, I do find two problems with the TX-SR600E: there's no
lighting in the remote (you need to get 700E for that, but it's much
more expensive) and the speaker outputs are rated for minimum of 6 ohms
speakers. I'm running with 4 ohms mains regardless of that, but my other
speakers are 8 ohms.
As others have already, the volume control is logaritmic and, in
addition, the volume knob is dynamic; the faster you turn it, the more
the effect. It depends on your taste whether you like it or not, but I
really like to be able to accurately adjust the volume by turning the
knob really slow. And if you don't like the logaritmic volume display,
just use OSD where there's linear display in addition to logaritmic
numeric display. If I could choose, I'd take similar volume control as
in my previous entry-level Kenwood receiver: it went from -infitity to
zero dB. The idea was to display how many dBs you were from the maximum
volume. Unfortunately, the amplifier part of that receiver really sucked.
As for the volume, I usually view movies at about 46 (out of 100) and
listen music at 32 at nights. Considering that every six points on that
scale (I guess those are dBs even though nowhere is said so) double the
wattage outputted to the speakers, I think I've pretty much headroom.
--
Mikko
Eric
with the topic. Less wattage when ALL channels in operaton.
Have you tried the intellivolume thingie to correct this when changing
inputs?
"Mikko Rantalainen" <mi...@st.jyu.fi> wrote in message
news:b26ktu$em4$1...@mordred.cc.jyu.fi...
Neil
> Do you have a link to that article in sound and vision -- I can't find it?
Here's the web site:
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com
I don't know if the article's there. That web site is poorly organized
and finding anything there is difficult. The search function doesn't
work well.
I suggest you call your local libraries and find out who has the
magazine. Then go and look at recent back issues.
> "Neil" wrote in message
Mikko Rantalainen
[>Mikko Rantalainen wrote:]
>> Back to the topic. I've Onkyo TX-SR600E (which is probably the same
>> thing for the Europe market) and I've no problems with the output power,
>> DD/DTS or not. There're some things to note though: I usually get about
>> 8 dB quieter volume when using DD and 4-6 dB quieter volume with DTS
>> than with PCM sources. It's a bit annoying, but I guess it's more like
>> those multi-channel sources have more headroom for dynamics and output
>> dialog and stuff at quieter volume. High volume scenes sound as loud as
>> with PCM sources.
> Well PCM is 2 channel, while dTS and dd are 5 channels, so this goes along
> with the topic. Less wattage when ALL channels in operaton.
>
> Have you tried the intellivolume thingie to correct this when changing
> inputs?
Yes, of course. The problem is that I sometimes have only 2 channel PCM
and sometimes full multichannel data coming to the same connector and
AFAIK intellivolume cannot be adjusted according to digital signal type
instead of simply between inputs.
I still think this thing outputs much more than 35 wpc while using DD or
DTS input but I cannot really test that because I have no proper
hardware to measure it. This receiver can output all the power *I* need.
--
Mikko
Neil
Getting back to the watts issue, the 11/2002 of Consumer Reports shows
the following for the Onkyo:
8 ohms: 109
6 ohms: 127
4 ohms: -
Here's what they say about wpc: "Watts per channel is our measure of
power when the receiver is used with 8-ohm, 6-ohm, and 4-ohm speakers
(a dash means the manufacturer does not recommend use with such
speakers)." There's no comment on total harmonic distortion or
frequency range, but I assume CR is going by reasonable figures there
when it lists the wpc.
You can see all the reviews at consumerreports.org, but you'll have to
subscribe. They reviewed many receivers, so the comments are brief.
Here they are for the Onkyo:
"Very good performer, though pricey. Extra back-center channel for 6.1
surround. Mediocre AM performance."
CR ranked the Onkyo 2nd, after the $300 Panasonic SA-HE100, which they
named their "Best Buy."
Also, for online subscribers, the CR reviewers have an A/V discussion
forum until 14-Feb-03, where the CR folks will answer questions.
BTW, mediocre AM performance is common for most receivers these days.
Dennis' Newsgroups
> Neil:
>
> Thanks for the very informative reply. Most likely I will try the Onkyo
(30
> day return policy at Circuit City).
>
> I think the problem is I read too many audiophile forums
> (hometheaterforum.com etc.) where pure wattage is discussed as gospel.
And
> people sniff at anything below 100 watts. I sort of think you are right,
> that wattage is overrated and very few people need the full 100 watts (or
35
> watts for that matter).
>
That is funny because alot of audiophiles will only get tube amps (most are
under 10 watts per channel), turntable, and very efficient esoteric
speakers. Ones that use harder to drive speakers will balk at anything that
is less than 100 watts though - 2 schools of thought.
Dennis
Neil
(snip)
> > I think the problem is I read too many audiophile forums
> > (hometheaterforum.com etc.) where pure wattage is discussed as gospel.
> And
> > people sniff at anything below 100 watts. I sort of think you are right,
> > that wattage is overrated and very few people need the full 100 watts (or
> 35
> > watts for that matter).
> >
>
>
> That is funny because alot of audiophiles will only get tube amps (most are
> under 10 watts per channel), turntable, and very efficient esoteric
> speakers.
The above crossed my mind also; look at Sam Tellig's column in
Stereophile, for example, where he almost seems to think that the
fewer the watts, the better, as long as there's a rare and pricey tube
amp involved. And I'll add that in the world of the high-end,
low-powered esoteric amps, as you've probably noticed the 10wpc you
refer to often comes with poor specs, such as high THD and poor
frequency response, when those specs are given at all. And to get
these weak amps, you often have to pay an arm and a leg!
>Ones that use harder to drive speakers will balk at anything that
> is less than 100 watts though - 2 schools of thought.
I think that sometimes the preference for puny tube amps vs. powerful
SS amps has got little to do with sound and performance; instead, it's
really about embracing different beliefs. Anyway, as I've pointed out
elsewhere, in most home situations most amps only need to output a few
watts at a time. In the case of the Onkyo, the Consumer Reports tests
show that the Onkyo is putting out more like 100wpc.