|
Post by Dan Laufman on Dec 9, 2016 20:41:42 GMT -5
I have to laugh at AVR power specs... either that or cry. I just read a glowing review of a new 9.2 channel AVR from a big Japanese brand that makes musical instruments too... It received 5 stars for performance! Wow!! This baby is rated for a very respectable 150 watts per channel... two channels driven. Nice. But what happens when you load seven of the available nine channels down for FTC testing like we do on EVERY amplifier we make? Well, if Emotiva sold it, it would be now rated at 7x50 watts per channel. They didn't have the heart to test it with all 9 channels driven, but I have to guess that is would now be somewhere in the mid-40's on a per channel basis. 9x45 WPC... Not exactly a powerhouse anymore is it?? Oops! My point is to not criticize this company specifically, because all of these brands in this category do it. I want to point out that there is no substitute for REAL power. Knowing the REAL specifications when making an informed purchase decision is necessary and it should be made readily available for the asking. Watts are not necessarily watts anymore. Now, for you guys on the forum who dig deeper, you can see past this. But for newbies and casual the enthusiast, these are very deceiving claims. We've gone back to the old horsepower games of the past as it relates to amplifier power ratings. What troubles me more than this is I'm now seeing "respectable" hi-end brands playing with power ratings of very expensive multi-channel amplifiers and it really disturbs me. One company claims 300 watts per channel on their multi-channels amplifier and never discloses how many channels are being driven... which means one is being driven. If all of them were making this power, they would shout it from the rooftops! Also the power specifications and THD never changes from one model to the next.... interesting. Ask for detailed specifications when they are not readily given so you can make an informed decision. And people wonder why "low power" amplifiers like our BasX A-300, 500 and 700 seems to have so much power... it's because they do!! I think a BasX amplifier should be a mandatory accessory for every AVR sold these days!! Peace through strength!! Ha!! Later tater, Big Dan
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Dec 9, 2016 21:28:12 GMT -5
I have to laugh at AVR power specs... either that or cry. I just read a glowing review of a new 9.2 channel AVR from a big Japanese brand that makes musical instruments too... It received 5 stars for performance! Wow!! This baby is rated for a very respectable 150 watts per channel... two channels driven. Nice. But what happens when you load seven of the available nine channels down for FTC testing like we do on EVERY amplifier we make? Well, if Emotiva sold it, it would be now rated at 7x50 watts per channel. They didn't have the heart to test it with all 9 channels driven, but I have to guess that is would now be somewhere in the mid-40's on a per channel basis. 9x45 WPC... Not exactly a powerhouse anymore is it?? Oops! My point is to not criticize this company specifically, because all of these brands in this category do it. I want to point out that there is no substitute for REAL power. Knowing the REAL specifications when making an informed purchase decision is necessary and it should be made readily available for the asking. Watts are not necessarily watts anymore. Now, for you guys on the forum who dig deeper, you can see past this. But for newbies and casual the enthusiast, these are very deceiving claims. We've gone back to the old horsepower games of the past as it relates to amplifier power ratings. What troubles me more than this is I'm now seeing "respectable" hi-end brands playing with power ratings of very expensive multi-channel amplifiers and it really disturbs me. One company claims 300 watts per channel on their multi-channels amplifier and never discloses how many channels are being driven... which means one is being driven. If all of them were making this power, they would shout it from the rooftops! Also the power specifications and THD never changes from one model to the next.... interesting. Ask for detailed specifications when they are not readily given so you can make an informed decision. And people wonder why "low power" amplifiers like our BasX A-300, 500 and 700 seems to have so much power... it's because they do!! I think a BasX amplifier should be a mandatory accessory for every AVR sold these days!! Peace through strength!! Ha!! Later tater, Big Dan Great points all around big guy! I own one of those units by the interment making AVR company. Really is a great product! But yes, we both know they aren't putting out that kind of power all channels driven. It is or should be a crime that the industry (mostly) lies like a dog. Ive paired my unit with a set of your monoblocks and a couple of Sherbourn 2/150's for the hight channels! Boy! OH Boy, thats all she needs! The internal amp handles the center and rears, plenty of power for them. It is almost an all in one box and offers many options no Emotiva product has. Nor should you strive to do so at a cost of ANY SQ! The unmentioned AVR soumds rather nice to me! That said, my mais sytem has an XMC-1 at its ❤️ heart. Its not a Swiss army knife, and I dont want it to be. Would I like a couple of things integrated into the XMC? YES, but that would only drive the cost up! And we don't need/want that! Now do we. On a side note, when I want some really great sound from the TA-100 i use an UPA-500. Unplug that amp and grab the TA-100 and a set of speakers and Im off to a party! No more amp required. Yes Big Dan, newbies just need to educate themselves a little more! And youll get them eventually.
|
|
|
Post by urwi on Dec 10, 2016 2:54:07 GMT -5
The typical audiophool discussion. No or irrelevant facts but many opinions. First you would need to know the efficiency of your speakers, speaker and listening location in the room, room acoustics and the required sound pressure level. Then and only then one can determine how much power is needed. Here's an online calculator that can give you an idea how much power is needed: www.mh-audio.nl/AmpPowerRequired.aspFor a very small 3dB increase you need twice the power. 200W instead of 100W. For 10dB you already need 10 times the power. 1000W instead of 100W. Also please consider that you will never ever listen to anything asking for full power on all channels. Burst power is important though. A lot of AVRs can deliver. Another important topic is: how loud can your speakers go? When do they start to compress due to heating of the voice coil? How much distortion do they generate at the desired sound pressure level? No manufacturer will tell you those numbers although these are basic parameters -besides frequency response on and off axis- that need to be know to purchase speakers that fit your room and purpose. Instead they keep you guessing and buying and guessing and... Anyway, isn't this thread about the MC-700? No answer from Keith yet...
|
|
|
Post by creimes on Dec 10, 2016 3:29:01 GMT -5
Seems like a really nice processor for the cost, I will say one thing though, why is there no Zone 2, an extra zone(at least one) is a must IMO, I called in to pre purchase one since the EMP-1 I was waiting for has taken a hiatus to receive Atmos which doesn't interest me and when I was told no Zone 2 outs for my UOM 6.2 speakers on my patio that axed it for me.
Chad
|
|
cawgijoe
Emo VIPs
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it." - Yogi Berra
Posts: 5,033
|
Post by cawgijoe on Dec 10, 2016 8:05:18 GMT -5
Seems like a really nice processor for the cost, I will say one thing though, why is there no Zone 2, an extra zone(at least one) is a must IMO, I called in to pre purchase one since the EMP-1 I was waiting for has taken a hiatus to receive Atmos which doesn't interest me and when I was told no Zone 2 outs for my UOM 6.2 speakers on my patio that axed it for me. Chad It depends on what you want/need. I never use a second zone. Are there any workarounds?
|
|
|
Post by leefdalucky on Dec 10, 2016 8:38:56 GMT -5
No interest in second zone here, either. and it's not a must have. Bottom line is: if I have second zone speakers? I'd probably want a second zone stereo. I'm glad this unit is simplified and not trying to over reach it's usefulness.
On another topic, since the MC-700 is about to be born, would the mods consider making a dedicated forum for it? and consolidate the other threads in it?
I see the big brother XMC-1 has one...
|
|
|
Post by creimes on Dec 10, 2016 11:51:36 GMT -5
Seems like a really nice processor for the cost, I will say one thing though, why is there no Zone 2, an extra zone(at least one) is a must IMO, I called in to pre purchase one since the EMP-1 I was waiting for has taken a hiatus to receive Atmos which doesn't interest me and when I was told no Zone 2 outs for my UOM 6.2 speakers on my patio that axed it for me. Chad It depends on what you want/need. I never use a second zone. Are there any workarounds? My workaround was selling my 7020C4 for a nice profit and getting a good deal on a Marantz 7702 with zone 2 and 3 capability and I will able to use the app on my phone/tablet while sitting outside to control the volume and also Tidal streaming playback through my Oppo, the convenience is beautiful thing, I did own the XMC-1 which had the same functionality though for some reason the Emotiva app at the time would max my zone volume if i tried adjusting it haha, I'm sure that's been fixed. The MC-700 is basically the new updated UMC-200 which did have zone 2 and a zone 3 so it's sad to see them both gone, I know not everyone cares but I would guarantee the percentage of people wanting/needing it is high, I know many of us just have a second system for other ares/zones in their house but that is a much more costly thing to do and for the many of us that don't have the funds for multiple setups we tend to have the more affordable gear like the MC-700, but of course to each his own I say Chad
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Dec 10, 2016 12:10:14 GMT -5
I have been using a UMC-1 for many years in my bedroom 5.1 system. I ordered a MC-700 to replace it, although I really didn't need to. Just would like the possibility of 4k and the off video pass through feature that the UMC-1 does not have. I had a UMC-200 there for a while, but I gave that processor to my son.
|
|
|
Post by niuguy on Dec 10, 2016 12:19:07 GMT -5
No interest in second zone here, either. and it's not a must have. Bottom line is: if I have second zone speakers? I'd probably want a second zone stereo. I'm glad this unit is simplified and not trying to over reach it's usefulness. On another topic, since the MC-700 is about to be born, would the mods consider making a dedicated forum for it? and consolidate the other threads in it? I see the big brother XMC-1 has one... I'm rather new to the forums but I feel like they are way over organized as it is. Personally I'd probably have a much more simplified system: Speakers and Subs Amp Pre/Pro Headphones Might be a few other random ones, but you get the point. More segmentation helps when there are hundreds of new threads a day and it's impossible to keep up. Over segmentation makes the forum look dead.
|
|
|
Post by gzubeck on Dec 10, 2016 12:24:40 GMT -5
The typical audiophool discussion. No or irrelevant facts but many opinions. First you would need to know the efficiency of your speakers, speaker and listening location in the room, room acoustics and the required sound pressure level. Then and only then one can determine how much power is needed. Here's an online calculator that can give you an idea how much power is needed: www.mh-audio.nl/AmpPowerRequired.aspFor a very small 3dB increase you need twice the power. 200W instead of 100W. For 10dB you already need 10 times the power. 1000W instead of 100W. Also please consider that you will never ever listen to anything asking for full power on all channels. Burst power is important though. A lot of AVRs can deliver. Another important topic is: how loud can your speakers go? When do they start to compress due to heating of the voice coil? How much distortion do they generate at the desired sound pressure level? No manufacturer will tell you those numbers although these are basic parameters -besides frequency response on and off axis- that need to be know to purchase speakers that fit your room and purpose. Instead they keep you guessing and buying and guessing and... Anyway, isn't this thread about the MC-700? No answer from Keith yet... The real question is do you trust their specs or emotivas. Yes, you are correct that you don't need a super powerful amplifier to power your speakers or even monoblocks For most speakers out there but you need at least something that is not wanting for power while playing the entire frequency range. If your playing only two channel material then get a two channel amp. If your playing back surround sound with multi channel most likely surround sound receivers will not do the job. I would say one of the best surround sound receivers ive heard amplifier wise is Marantz. But guess what I bought a refurb receiver for $500 and 30 days later it had to be returned because it went defective. If for example you bought the emotiva amp and preamp for $1100 you would have a much greater chance of it lasting much longer than that receiver. When it comes down to it they just cram too much stuff into one box. The last really great receiver I bought was about 15 years ago when Sony es meant something. Now all I see are expensive underperforming claptraps for $1000. If you have money try the more expensive Marantz receivers with the full warranty. They put out too much heat to have to worry about returns and defects.
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Dec 10, 2016 12:39:22 GMT -5
The typical audiophool discussion. Awesome, not only are you doubling down on the dumb, you're insulting others. Hmmm, now how did you put it again - oh yeah: Is this how you would like to be remembered by others? Does insulting other members make you feel better? So be it.
|
|
|
Post by creimes on Dec 10, 2016 12:55:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by millst on Dec 10, 2016 12:59:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gzubeck on Dec 10, 2016 13:00:33 GMT -5
Buy it for $3500 this year and 5 years from now it's worth $500 because its missing a crucial feature like 4k pass through or such. Go look around eBay for anthems and when you see a bunch of upgrades you can buy their processors for $600 bucks. Ouch.
|
|
|
Post by creimes on Dec 10, 2016 13:02:59 GMT -5
Buy it for $3500 this year and 5 years from now it's worth $500 because its missing a crucial feature like 4k pass through or such. Go look around eBay for anthems and when you see a bunch of upgrades you can buy their processors for $600 bucks. Ouch. I hear ya, though I have never owned an Anthem product I have heard a MRX510 at a local dealer and it seemed alright, they seem to get great reviews but for the cost ouch is right lol
|
|
|
Post by gzubeck on Dec 10, 2016 13:08:07 GMT -5
Buy it for $3500 this year and 5 years from now it's worth $500 because its missing a crucial feature like 4k pass through or such. Go look around eBay for anthems and when you see a bunch of upgrades you can buy their processors for $600 bucks. Ouch. I hear ya, though I have never owned an Anthem product I have heard a MRX510 at a local dealer and it seemed alright, they seem to get great reviews but for the cost ouch is right lol I owned one of their two channel mca amps about 10 years ago. My a300 easily equals it sound quality and may be better as it breaks in. I haven't owned one of their killobuck amplifiers.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Dec 10, 2016 17:57:39 GMT -5
That said I am totally confident that the MC-700 will be a big seller, to mostly first time processor buyers looking for better sound quality than their previous AVR's. Many I suspect will have already upgraded to separate power amps to overcome the power deficiencies in their AVR's so a separate processor is the next step. What makes you think that "many" experience "power deficiencies in their AVR's"? You would need very inefficient speakers for this to be a real world problem. I suggest you read the power amplifier threads, there are plenty of them each containing plenty of examples of people who have experienced the same I have. Moving from a quality $A2K AVR with supposedly 110 WPC to an XPA-5 with 200 WPC. Shouldn't be that much difference based on the numbers? Except the XPA-5 really is 200 WPC with all channels driven (275 WPC with 2 channels driven) whilst the AVR was lucky to be 80 WPC. WPC is of course not the full story, there's much more to a quality power amplifier than simple watts. Adding the power amplifier made a huge difference for 5.1 movies and 2.1 music. There's that experience thing again, don't you hate it when the real world sound quality conflicts with the theoretical? First I added the XPA-5, huge improvement, refer above, still using the AVR as the pre pro. Then I swapped the AVR for a UMC-1, again a huge difference, both for 5.1 movies and 2.1 music. I then moved to a UMC-200 for the lower profile and the UMC-1 resides in my uncles system. Not so much of a sound quality improvement, but that wasn't the reason for the change. For me I replaced a $A2K AVR with a $US699 Processor and a $US899 power amplifier, so lower cost (at the exchange rate at the time) and far superior sound quality. Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Dec 10, 2016 18:01:44 GMT -5
The typical audiophool discussion. No or irrelevant facts but many opinions. First you would need to know the efficiency of your speakers, speaker and listening location in the room, room acoustics and the required sound pressure level. Then and only then one can determine how much power is needed.. 92 db Read my signature Small listing area in a huge room with cathedral ceilings and no parallel rear wall. It's not just about the watts themselves, but how the power is delivered and the effect it has. An example at the same average SPL, hence the same average watts, when measured the XPA-5 delivered higher (than the AVR) peaks by around 5 db. I call that slam, impact, speaker cone speed, response etc with an effect on the listener more like what the sound mixer intended it to sound like. Some people would put that down to the reserve power, available to be used when needed. Keeping in mind that the XPA-5 delivers 200 WPC with all 5 channels driven and 275 WPC for 2 channels driven and the AVR was rated at 110 WPC (unspecified number of channels) was probably around 90 WPC with 2 channels driven. So for a starter it's not 110 WPC versus 200 WPC, it's more like 90 WPC versus 275 WPC. You may sneeze at a 5 db effect but it's real and it makes a lot of difference. Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by creimes on Dec 11, 2016 1:37:20 GMT -5
The typical audiophool discussion. No or irrelevant facts but many opinions. First you would need to know the efficiency of your speakers, speaker and listening location in the room, room acoustics and the required sound pressure level. Then and only then one can determine how much power is needed.. 92 db Read my signature Small listing area in a huge room with cathedral ceilings and no parallel rear wall. It's not just about the watts themselves, but how the power is delivered and the effect it has. An example at the same average SPL, hence the same average watts, when measured the XPA-5 delivered higher (than the AVR) peaks by around 5 db. I call that slam, impact, speaker cone speed, response etc with an effect on the listener more like what the sound mixer intended it to sound like. Some people would put that down to the reserve power, available to be used when needed. Keeping in mind that the XPA-5 delivers 200 WPC with all 5 channels driven and 275 WPC for 2 channels driven and the AVR was rated at 110 WPC (unspecified number of channels) was probably around 90 WPC with 2 channels driven. So for a starter it's not 110 WPC versus 200 WPC, it's more like 90 WPC versus 275 WPC. You may sneeze at a 5 db effect but it's real and it makes a lot of difference. Cheers Gary Having gone from a Yamaha receiver to separate power amps I have no intention of owning an AVR ever again, just my experience but the sound is so much better and the first power amps I had were UPA-1's connected to that Yamaha receiver and I couldn't believe the change, now I'm hooked for life, hence the 99lb PA 7-350, overkill maybe, but I don't care because it just sounds so good. Chad
|
|
|
Post by urwi on Dec 11, 2016 10:37:48 GMT -5
Re "Mo Watts is mo better" - Still only a lot of opinions stated as facts and no real data to backup any of the claims. If you have data then post it and also please post how that data was captured in case someone wants to verify the results.
On topic - Still no answer from Keith. Maybe tomorrow when he's back in the office?
|
|