the significance of 15 watts (1 Viewer)

[Daniel THB]

I might be "upgrading" my old yamaha rx-v795 to a used yamaha rx-v1000, in which case I'd be going from 85 watts/channel to 100 watts/channel. Assuming I stick with my satellite/sub speaker setup and don't listen to movies any louder, will I notice any difference? Will it sound any fuller or am I setting myself up for dissapointment in that regard? FYI, I'm changing receivers for reasons other than the extra power.

 

[ChrisLazarko]

Well in terms of it being louder I seriously doubt anything noticeable. There might be a small increase but nothing to the noticeable side..

 

[Daniel THB]

I don't mean in terms of being louder. What I want to know is this -- if listening to the same movie or music, at the same volume, will you be able to tell the difference between the 100 watt and 85 watt receiver?

 

[RichardH]

I seriously doubt you'll hear any difference between those two receivers, especially since they are the same brand. If you're looking for higher quality sound at the same volume, updgrading the speakers is your best bet by far.

 

[Jason.Soko]

The first 15 watts make a hell of a lot more difference then the last 15.

 

[Kevin. W]

Got to double the wattage to get a 3db increase in sound. What you should be looking at is the internals. What is the size of the storage capacitors, size and type of output devices. These are things that will do more for the sound, especially at levels where you are driving the speakers hard. Other that that if your not driving the speakers you'll hear minimal difference, unless each is sonically different. If your 795 has the bells and whistles you need look at a used 3channel amp to power the fronts/center.

Kevin

 

[Daniel THB]

my old 795 has all the power i need, but unfortunately doesn't do component video switching, which i need now that hd cable has arrived in my neighborhood.

 

[ChrisAG]

I've heart the RXV-1000 and wasn't impressed by it. Apparently the newer 1400 sounds a lot smoother.

 

[Yogi]

The first 15 watts make a hell of a lot more difference then the last 15.

Exactly! There is negligible difference between 85 and 100W (0.7 db), OTOH my 15W single ended Class A tube amp plays pretty loud with 90db speakers.

 

[John Garcia]

I went from a Marantz SR6200 rated at 105/ch to an 8300 rated at 120/ch. There is a SIGNIFICANT difference between the two, but that seems to come into play mostly when I am listening very loud. I'd say the 15w is worth it, but in reality, the difference will not be night and day at the same (average) listening level. If you aren't getting better DACs or processing, then I would not consider this an upgrade, though the extra headroom is always a good thing to have. If you are happy with the 795, then you will probably not be disappointed with the 1000.

 

[Paul Simmons]

I hooked up a pair of bookshelf speakers that were running at 30W to a new amp that now runs at 50watts, and with the 20W increase, the difference isn't really noticeble.

 

[Daniel THB]

I guess I was thinking that the extra power might make for greater clarity at lower volumes. how would a 120 (or 150 or even greater) watt receiver sound versus a 75 watt receiver, using the same speakers, and playing the same movie/song at the same moderate volume? you'd notice something there i assume, right?

 

[John Garcia]

Really, it depends on how much current, not rated wattage, the receiver is actually putting out. If the manufacturer is fudging the numbers to get a rating, but it can't actually deliver a true extra 15wpc, then you will not hear a difference. In my case, my new receiver has a much larger power supply and caps, so it sure seems to deliver much more than 15w additional power.

With the same speakers, going from a 75w amp to a 150w amp (lets assume same design) will yeild a theoretical +3dB increase in SPL, which is much larger than it would seem. Will it sound better? That's impossible to say.

I hate to say it, but the only way to find out in this particular case, will be to see if you can get it, hook it up, and try it out. I say, if you are not pushing the limits of the receiver you have, you are not going to gain much.

 

[MichaelDDD]

15 watts isn't much...but IMO you will have slightly better headroom.

I.E. when you have it cranked up and a big transient comes along (explosion, big kettle drum hit, cymbal crash, etc) it may seem smoother up at the top of the perceived volume. Less chance for clipping, etc.

Congrats on your new toy. I just bought a new toy too. I be a happy man today!

 

[Rachael B]

Why even worry about the piddlin' 15 watts? Just make sure that the 1000 has preamp outputs so you can add a brute-ish amp later if you desire...? Best wishes!

 

[MichaelDDD]

"Brute-ish Amp"....LOL! You're my kind of gal, Rachael. I hope my new neighbors will be as understanding as you.

 

[LanceJ]

As other old people here know, until the late 80s just about every receiver came with power meters. They weren't always ultra-accurate but they did give the user a roundabout idea of what was being sent to the speakers.

Using my Pioneer SX-6 as an example (45W/ch; 20Hz-20kHz; .01%THD), the large majority of my listening to Rush, The Cars, or Thomas Dolby :b was done at........10 watts! Yes, that is T-E-N. This level was enough to vibrate the walls & if I wanted my buddy sitting at the other end of the couch to hear me I had to almost shout. This was with my old RadShak 3-way kit speakers with 12" woofers, my "Baby" Advents and my present Boston CR9s, all set up in house and apartment living rooms and more recently in dorm rooms. And when I was just reading a book with music in the background or watching the news on TV? The meters barely registered: the ".1" (tenth of a watt) LEDs would flicker and that's it. And the "1" LED would glow when a commercial came on. When I really cranked it (no conversation of any kind possible) then the rest of the LEDs would come on, the output power bouncing around the "20" and "60" lamps. Human hearing is an exponential thing so Pioneer leaving out the 30W/40W/50W LEDs is no big deal--but power requirements do have to shoot up quickly, i.e. exponentially to make sure us humans hear a linear increase in sound. That is why if you shop for potentiometers (variable resistors) the store clerk will ask you if you want a linear type or an audio volume type.

So anyway, 15 extra watts on top of the 85 already there isn't going to do much of anything in the real world.

BTW: So who else thinks five analog meters with their needles moving around would be ultra-kewl on an HT receiver?

LJ

 

[Jason.Soko]

My fathers old school onkyo amplifier had a watt meter on the front. At MOST it rarely reached 10watts. At average listening volumes it was around 1-4watts if that.

 

[Iver]

Just to get a general idea of the actual power available per channel, take the rated amperage consumption from the back plate (as voltage of U.S. consumer electronics is a constant 110, amperage gives you a relative way to compare power; power consumption in watts equals volts times amps) and divide by number of final amplifier channels.

This is not a spot on way to figure, as it assumes all of that power is consumed by the final amp stages. However, the other stages, LED's, etc., do consume a very small share as opposed to what the final output transistors burn as the amp approaches its power output limit. Also, the proportion of power consumed by the final stages to the amount consumed by all the other circuitry should be similar from the 795 to the 1000.

If the number (# channels/amps consumed) you get with the new receiver is quite a bit higher, than it would have real capacity to play louder. That's assuming Yamaha was consistent in the way it measured the current consumption (amps) on both receivers.

Whether your neighbors will put up with that is another story altogether.

My neighbor has specifically complained about the bass coming through his wall, inadvertently making me very smug.