Shiu

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/ass...verlab0804.pdf

In the current S&V issue, the JVC, Yamaha, and the often bashed Sony (a DE model) entry level receivers all tested with reasonable 5 channel driven outputs. Among the 3, the Sony appears to have the best results in output at 4 ohms and its list price is the lowest.

It may be time these receivers can be compared to HKAVR130/230 etc., in terms of output power.

gene c

In terms of output, maybe. But in terms of honesty, not quite yet. With 5 channels driven at 8 ohms, the Sony was measured at 76% of it's advertised output. The Yamaha 61% and the JVC only 48%. H/K regularly exceeds it's advertised output (100%+). Sure, all three will put out a few more watts than the H/K 130/230, but looking at the advertised power they should be 2-3 times more powerful. But it doesn't really matter as all three would be perfectly fine 90% of the time for 90% of those who bought them. Numbers are numbers and specs are specs. What really matters is how you feel after you turn the large knob on the front panel to the right .

Drew_W

Is wattage all that really matters? I have a feeling an Arcam A65+ which is 40 watts per channel will sonically eclipse all of those receivers.

I gave up on tracking my collection and actually started watching what I have.

Wayne Ernst

Not really. I'd still prefer the Yamaha RX-V750 reviewed over the Sony DE-895.

\"My reality check ... just bounced\"

John Garcia

TRUE wattage, not just wattage, and current is also a small detail. The ability to deliver plenty of current means an amp can deliver more than it's rated power without choking. The A65+ is an integrated and does not include any processing or video, so it is less complicated and focuses on the things it is meant to do, not to mention it is 2ch only. Arcam is not building these integrateds to compete with the $300 receiver market either (my friend's A80 cost almost as much as my Marantz 8300). I would take the A65 over most receivers in it's price range There are tube amps that deliver only 8wpc that will likely perform as well as the A65+.

My Marantz PM7000 is rated at 95x2, but a review showed it to actually deliver 115wpc.

"The trouble with the world is not that people know too little, but that they know so many things that ain't so." - Mark Twain

HT: Marantz SR-8300, MA500 monoblocks x 2, 5X GR Research A/V-2s, Adire Audio Tempest sub, Denon 2900, Oppo 980H, Toshiba HD-A2, RC2000MkII remote, Panamax 5100, Panamax Max2 sub, Slim PS2, PS3 60G + 320G USB

Bedroom: Marantz PM-7200 Integrated, GR Research A/V-1s, Sony 222ES SACD, RC3200 remote, Panamax M8EX

Audio: Audioquest * Video: Bluejeans

My DVDs My HT

gene c

Yes, Marantz also seems to give accurate power ratings. In the 1/04 issue of S/V, the SR5400, rated at 90 X 6 showed to give 103 X 5. Close enough to me .

Charlie C

"Is wattage all that really matters?"

shiat! lets not go here again!