Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'AV Receivers' started by SummyD, Jul 20, 2005.
Pioneer 1015's THD is listed as 0.2 on their website. Wasn't this
The 1015 is rated at 120x7 with .2 THD. The 1015 when driven at 110x7 will have .09 THD. Basically, power wise, the 1015 and 1014 are the same. Pioneer is just fudging numbers to make consumers believe it to be more powerful.
The 1014TX is believed to be a rebadged Pioneer Elite VSX-52TX, with all the build quality that the Elite badge implies.
Here is a review of the VSX-52TX. The reviewers concluded that the receiver was capable of "0.1% distortion at 115.3 watts; 1% distortion at 129.7 watts, five channels driven, 8-ohm loads."
Look at the graph. You'll notice that the distortion is less than 0.01% up to 100 watts. At 100 watts, however, the derivative increases quite a bit (though one must remember that the log(THD) is plotted, which exaggerates things.)
If one is willing to accept 1.5% THD, then 140 Watts are possible. If 1%, 129 W; if 0.1% THD, 115 W. If 0.05%, 110W. And so on.
Perhaps some persons with access to good quality measurement tools should review the 1015, and replace all these assumptions with a nice measurement.
It makes more sense now. Thanks!
I call BS on all of this, I got to looking at the back panel of the 1015TX.
and I noticed that it is only pulling 480 watts from the outlet so unless this thing has a gasoline generator in there there is NO way it is putting out more that 68 watts per channel assumming its 100% effecient, and I can assure you that it is not. anyone care to clarify?
There's more to it than just the power supply. Some receivers rated at 100wpc at 8 ohms can send 200wpc at 4 ohms, does that mean it has to have a 700watt ps or a 1400watt ps? Two 9 volt batteries can send 10,000 volts into a person with a stun gun.
yes that is the point, these receivers are rated at that but unless they are pulling that much power plus the lost power they arent actually putting that out per channel.
just a for instance the outlaw 770 pulls 1800 watts from the wall.
thats 15 amps at 120 volts! which is enough to overload most circuits....the point is in order to make the power you have to pull it.
IIRC, some of that wall power is used to charge up capacitors, which provides extra voltage if needed. The Class A design, on the other hand, is spectacularly inefficient, and power consumption is constant. But perhaps I'm getting out of my league, here.
Manipulating power ratings by specifying THD (audioholics)
If you are sure that the power consumption stated at the back of a receiver is the consumption under all channel driven simultaneously and continuously at rated output then it may be fair to call it BS. Otherwise you may be jumping to conclusion. We really don't know enough about how different manufacturers specify that mysterious power consumption figure.
Some receivers, such as HK's, do tell you that figure is "maximum" consumption in the instruction manual(e.g. AVR235) but even then we do not know what exactly it means neither. Does maximum means all 7 channel driven to rated output continuously? It does not say that, so could it be just for 5 minutes. What you do see is that at the back of them they also give you a much lower "power input" number. HK's higher models such as the HKAVR630's manual actually states, again in its instruction manual, that its power consumption of 1000W is at rated output all 7 channels driven. Yet at the back of the unit, it also say power input 120V 60 HZ 550W. So do they BS too, I mean output > input? I don't think so. I think it depends on what they realy mean by those seemingly conflicting number. I am using HK models as examples because they generally rate their outputs more specifically and conservatively.
I don't think we can read too much into those power consumption numbers until we know more about them. Hopefully new regulations will be in place soon to encourage manufacturers to report those numbers under the same set of rules.
One last point, please keep in mind that good quality power transformers do have very good short time overload capability.
The power consumption figure written on the back panel might just be the average wattage the receiver consumes. Maybe just to give the owner an idea of what type of circuit breaker that receiver's outlet might require? Actually I have never heard of any standard way to specify this figure so I am just guessing here.
As far as THD is concerned: for years I've heard anything under 3% (three percent) is inaudible to the average person. So I wouldn't worry about that .2% figure.
Also for the people that didn't grow up with receivers that included power meters, trust me, 100 watts of power with inaudible distortion is friggin' LOUD. Unless you have a humongous living room and/or really inefficient speakers, IMO an amp that can generate that much power into five channels at the same time will easily take care of the needs of the majority of movie fans.
And don't forget not every movie uses ALL the channels at the same time.
If you do a search for old receivers from the 60s until the late 80s, you will see that a large portion of them had ratings from 15 to 50 watts per channel. And this was even during a time when many of the most popular speakers used acoustic suspension designs i.e. sealed, known for their appetite for power (though smoooooth and deep bass out of a relatively small enclosure was the reward).
When I am freaking SLAMMING my speakers with my Harman Kardon 635 AND have my subwoofer going, my Belkin power center BARELY goes over 4 amps (it refreshes a few times a second I think).
I have never seen 8 amps.
I hope this has been somewhat clarified by now. It would have been nice if we could in fact use those power consumption numbers as reliable indicators, but it does not seem we could do it with enough certainty (IMO).
things are somewhat clearer now if there are capacitors being used then it could put on that max 120 watts per channel for like a second or 2 but under continuious load im going to have to say it cant go over 68 watts. unless the 480 watts on the back panel is just a "average" but there again...that should be illegal....what if you over load a circuit because of that number being to low and burn your house down or something like that.
sorry I havnt gotten back to post sooner have been out of town all weekend.
Kenneth, could you provide a link for that power center? that would be interesting to know....also 8 amps x 120 volts = 960 watts....
8 amps X 120 Volts = 960 VA, not 960 watts. Power in watts = Current in amps X Voltage in volts X Power factor. Power factor is the cosine of the phase angle between the voltage phasor and the current phaser. I would guess for audio amplifiers, P.F. probably average at around 0.8 or lower. You see, this is another problem, some manufacturers give you volts and amps(e.g. Denon), some give watts(e.g. pioneer), some give "AC Input watts" & "maximum" watts(Harman Kardon), and Sony Canada uses VA while Sony in Europe uses watts.
In my last example, you can read the HKAVR630 instruction manual and look at the picture of its back panel on page 8 and you will see that it says "AC Input 120V 60 Hz 550W". Then go to the technical specifications on page 51 and it says "59W idle, 1000W at rated output (7 channels driven), but it does not say for how long. Go figure!
When it comes to power consumptions, your guess is as good as anyone's.
The key to this review is this paragraph;
"This graph shows that the VSX-52TX's left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1% distortion at 121.2 watts and 1% distortion at 143.1 watts Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1% distortion at 197.0 watts and 1% distortion at 231.4 watts."
We have been here before. . . To receive their UL listing the receiver must have it's maximum power consumption listed on the rear.
The sentence where the review says "All channels driven" is misleading and wrong. . .
No majic here. . . I cant understand why people keep using the power numbers to mean whatever they want them to mean. . .
The fact is that the 1014/1015/52TX draws a MAXIMUM of 480watts at FULL power. . . 7x115 = 805 = BS
This means that at the receiver's rated output it will draw this amount of power. . .Trouble is knowing just what "Rated output" is. . . However the maximum power draw will be what is stated on the rear of the unit.
It is that simple. . . The complicated part is understanding how they get their output numbers. . .
Guy, it is not that simple.
As I mentioned in my previous post, there is a diagram that shows the back of the 630 on page 8 or the 235 on page 7. The 630 shows 550W, and the 235 350W. Neither one says "maximum" at rated power. If you read the technical specifications section it tells you the maximum which is much higher, 1000W for the 630 and 890W for the 235. And on idling the 235 uses double the power of the 630. Some of the H.K. models do not have the AC power input at the back shown in the manuals. At least H.K. provides more information to confuse you. Denon will only give you something like 120V 60Hz 7.1A, period.
If you are still sure that the number at the back is for "maximum", i.e. at rated output (continuou or not?), I have nothing else to say to convince you to believe otherwise.
And those numbers are garbage. I know that pioneer can't put out over 100watts. Maybe at 1khz but theres no way that number represents say 20hz - 20khz. Pioneers especially lower end ones like the 1014 are way overated on wattage.