mhk87

Help with a 2 channel receiver

I know you guys are all experts on home theaters, but I have a question about my two channel stereo setup... I have a pair of cerwin vega e-712 floor speakers that have been on a pioneer 100w/channel surround receiver since I purchased them. The speakers can handle up to 300watts peak and could definitely use a little more power. The question is, how am I even supposed to go about finding a stereo receiver with more than 100 watts a channel? All I can find online with more power are really expensive and cheesy looking 80's receivers. Im looking for something around 150 watts a channel, is this even possible? Are there other factors too (ie a "better" 100 watt per channel stereo receiver of some kind would give me the boost Im looking for)? Help appreciated! thanks

JohnRice

Re: Help with a 2 channel receiver

Sorry to respond to your questions with more questions, but why do you feel the speakers could definitely use more power, and what are you hoping to gain with more power? Whatever it is, going from a highly unreliable 100 watt rating to another highly unreliable 150 watt rating won't make any difference. Watt ratings in receivers and particularly in speakers actually mean very little. That is why I ask what your goal is.

That is from Amazon, and taking it as accurate, you don't need any more power.

They flutter behind you, your possible pasts.
Some bright-eyed and crazy, some frightened and lost.

mhk87

Re: Help with a 2 channel receiver

I was beginning to gather that after having NO success finding anything over 100 watts a channel. All the audiophiles here will hate it but I just want to drive some deeper more powerful bass, something these speakers are renowned for. This cheap pioneer receiver isn't doing it for me anymore. I really dont know what to look for in a receiver if wattage isn't a good indication, besides a good name. Anybody heard of the Onkyo TX8522? That is supposed to be a solid receiver, "built like they used to be."

JohnRice

Re: Help with a 2 channel receiver

If remote control isn't a must, you might look to ebay for a good, solid used one. Harman/Kardon made some great stuff in the 80s. The problem is there is always a risk.

Still, it is doubtful you will gain a noticeable bass, regardless of what power you add. It just doesn't have that big an influence, particularly as sensitive as those speakers are suppoeed to be. A good sub (a real sub) will do much more.

They flutter behind you, your possible pasts.
Some bright-eyed and crazy, some frightened and lost.

mhk87

Re: Help with a 2 channel receiver

Could you fill me in on what factors I should be looking at? Surely there has to be some range in how these speakers will sound/how well they reproduce bass depending on the receiver Im running. If I had an "Insignia" 75 watt per channel home theater amp I am doubtful they would sound the same as they do now. The only NEW receiver I've seen that has anything over 100 watts is a sony at my bestbuy, not even listed on their site, rated at 125 watts per channel (2 channels). If that won't do it for me, maybe I will start looking at the older stuff like you suggested. My dad has a 70's pioneer receiver that looks amazing, so who knows, maybe I would go down that road. Would an old but quality receiver have the same clarity as a new receiver, at least as heard on a pair of floor speakers like mine? Thanks again on getting me up to speed.

JohnRice

Re: Help with a 2 channel receiver

Pioneer made some truly awesome stuff back in the 70s. That is definitely a route to consider, but it can also be pretty expensive. I like the Harman/Kardon from the early/mid 80s. A few years ago I got a 590i on ebay for about $80. I think they had a more powerful model at the time as well. don't get too wrapped up in power ratings. The old receivers used plain old brute force where the new ones kind of use smoke annd mirrors to achieve power. A good old receiver will almost certainly reproduce at least as good if not better sound than a cheap new one.

Just to parse the numbers a bit. If your speakers actually have sensitivity of 98dB it basically means this. A more common sensitivity measurement is something like 88dB. Many speakers are lower than that. My main speakers are about 84dB. What that means is, due to the high sensitivity, your speakers with a 100 watt amp is essentially the same as a more standard speaker (88 dB) with a 1000 watt amp. That is why I doubt more power will have much effect, and no, I don't think it will have any noticeable improvement in bass.

Having said that, better electronics will always have some benefit, but it can be so subtle that you can't even hear it. If deep, powerful bass is what you are looking for, a good sub is almost always your best investment. My main speakers have are real-world flat down to 30 Hz and I power them with about 600 wpc, but I still use a good sub.

They flutter behind you, your possible pasts.
Some bright-eyed and crazy, some frightened and lost.

LanceJ

Re: Help with a 2 channel receiver

If these are the same E Series Cerwins that were on Cerwin-Vega's site until a year ago, that "8 ohm" impedance rating listed on other sites isn't exactly correct.

Because on CV's site it was written something to the effect of "8 ohm compatible"........which translates to giving the speaker wiggle room as far as that eight ohm rating is concerned. I believe this because many CV's over the years, particularly their larger models like this one have been rated at 4 ohms (when I used to sell them, we unfortunately had quite a few returns on them when they were used with lower-power receivers because the receiver would go into its protect mode at higher volume levels).

And while the manuals for many receivers warn about using speakers rated below say 6 ohms, based on many users' first-hand reports (including my own) they actually can handle many speakers like that.* But that warning spooks a lot of people so I'm not surprised to see more and more speaker companies revising the way in which they state their speakers' impedance ratings. FYI: if this specification paranoia doesn't make sense, check out the number of frivilous product lawsuits that are filed each year.

Anyhoo.....back to mhk87's specific problem: as far as bass is concerned with speakers with lower impedance ratings, it can be negatively affected with certain receivers. That's because many receivers include a built-in current limiting protection circuit that automatically cuts back on the amount of power going to such speakers. This is a compromise solution though: while the receiver will not shut down, something had to be sacrificed and that is bass response. And good solid bass requires lots of current - that is not an audio myth. There's a good reason large amplifiers use massive power transformers & such large heat sinks and/or cooling fans for their power amp's output transistors!

As far as gutsy stereo receivers that have real world 100 watt/channel ratings, these are the only ones I know of without doing additional research:

> Harmon/Kardon HK 3485 (IMO there are too many reliablity issues with H/K stuff, so personally I would choose something else)

> Denon DRA-697CI, a brute of a 2.0 receiver.

> Outlaw Audio RR2150

> Rotel also usually has one but I'm too lazy to look it up


* the impedance of a speaker isn't always all nice-n-stable i.e. depending on the design of the speaker it can pretty much stay at X ohms from 20Hz to 20kHz....but it can also (like with larger Infinitys sold back in the 80s) vary wildly and go from 6 ohms & quickly drop down to 2 ohms or even less during certain parts of a musical waveform (for the other speaker nerds out there: this is mostly due to crossover phase issues that help the speaker to generate loads of bass). Certain Advents, like the Smaller Advent I own myself, are rated at 4 ohms but in daily use they actually almost never get that low and pretty much hover around 5-6 ohms instead.

LanceJ

Re: Help with a 2 channel receiver

As far as power specs are concerned, you really have to read the fine print these days:

Here's the Denon's: 100W + 100W at 8ohms, 20Hz to 20kHz, .08%THD

That's a "real" 100 watts to me: a typical impedance rating (amps produce less power with higher ohms ratings); the full music frequency spectrum; totally inaudible total harmonic distortion.

Here's a $200 Pioneer's power rating: 110 watts x 2 (8 ohms, from 20Hz to 20kHz, 0.7% THD (I own several pieces of Pioneer gear, so am not singling them out).

The difference here is the THD rating - you still can't really hear the distortion, but now you're probably getting close to the amp's power generation limit and like with a car's upper speed limit, it can start getting rather unstable at that point. FYI: this doesn't perfectly apply to amps that use vacuum tubes, since these behave differently than solid-state electronics i.e. transistors.

Specs for really lightweight receivers (HTiBs are notorious for doing this) commonly state their power output starting at 40Hz instead of 20Hz and/or they only list a 1kHz frequency spec at their rated power instead of XXHz-XXkHz (reproducing a 20Hz note requires a lot more power than a 40Hz note). I mean really, who listens to 1kHz test tones on a regular basis?

FYI: power output specs are legal as long as the

* XXhz to XXkHz frequency spectrum
* % of THD
* impedance rating

......are all stated. This law was finally put into place sometime around 1977 as I recall because of all the complaints about wacky/misleading power claims being made up to that time by certain unscrupulous manufacturers.