Help me Understand Rated Output Power

[Winestone]

Hello,

 

Below I have included my amplifiers rated power specs. I was wondering if anyone can help me understand which of these rated output numbers is most important to me in deciding if my receiver is good enough to power my home theatre setup.  I have the following speakers 2 RP-280F, RP-450C, 2 R-28F(used as rears) and 2 R-115SW.

 

Currently own:

Yamaha Aventage RX-A 1060 7.2 channel

Rated Output Power (1kHz, 2ch driven)  120 W (8 ohms, 0.9% THD)

Rated Output Power (20Hz-20kHz, 2ch driven)  110 W (8 ohms, 0.06% THD)

Maximum Effective Output Power (1kHz, 1ch driven) (JEITA)  165 W (8 ohms, 10% THD)

Dynamic Power per Channel (8/6/4/2 ohms)  135 / 165 / 210 / 280 W

 

I could upgrade to the following receiver but i'm not sure its necessary. I was hoping you guys can help guide me.

 

Yamaha Aventage RX-A 2060 9.2 channel

Rated Output Power (1kHz, 2ch driven)  155 W (8 ohms, 0.9% THD)

Rated Output Power (20Hz-20kHz, 2ch driven)  140 W (8 ohms, 0.06% THD)

Maximum Effective Output Power (1kHz, 1ch driven) (JEITA)  220 W (8 ohms, 10% THD)

Dynamic Power per Channel (8/6/4/2 ohms)  165 / 210 / 285 / 405 W

 

 

Any help is appreciated!! Thanks so much.

 

[Youthman]

Your receiver is capable of providing 110 watts each to 2 speakers.  What you have to realize is the more speakers you add, the lower the number goes. I once had a receiver that started out at 140 W x 2 but by the time I added seven speakers to the receiver it was down to only 55 W per channel

[derrickdj1]

Since you have two subwoofers, running the speakers set to Small will dramatically increase your headroom.  It takes double to power to get 3 db. more output.  Switching avrs won't help much unless it is an avr with multiple amps.  An avr with preouts allows for adding an external amp down the road if more power is needed.

[Winestone]

So, If I buy the 2060 receiver I would also have 140 W x 2, and then I could try to add more speakers and get down to 55 W per channel like Youthman. Sounds like a plan  

[Zen Traveler]

As Derrick said above, if you set your speakers to small and apply a crossover it will take considerable strain off the AVR and run your HT more efficiently. The next thing to consider is how loud you listen to material...If you start to hear distortion then you may need to consider external amplification.

2 hours ago, Winestone said:

So, If I buy the 2060 receiver I would also have 140 W x 2, and then I could try to add more speakers and get down to 55 W per channel like Youthman. Sounds like a plan  

Fwiw, it's not about adding more speakers "to get down to 55W per channel," it actually about how much power is required to drive your system and realize that you aren't going to have all channels being driven to the max all (read, none) of the time.

[derrickdj1]

13 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

 

Fwiw, it's not about adding more speakers "to get down to 55W per channel," it actually about how much power is required to drive your system and realize that you aren't going to have all channels being driven to the max all (read, none) of the time.

That was great info ZT.  Most people with HT's have similar avr's do just fine.  I've run a 5.1 off a 110 watt avr and still have that Sony avr.

[willland]

2 hours ago, Winestone said:

Rated Output Power (20Hz-20kHz, 2ch driven)  110 W (8 ohms, 0.06% THD)

This is the standard at which honest specs are quoted.  Full band, 8ohms, at .1% THD or less.

 

Bill

[willland]

2 hours ago, Winestone said:

Dynamic Power per Channel (8/6/4/2 ohms)  165 / 210 / 285 / 405 W

This specs can also have some significance with movie playback and multichannel music.

 

Bill

[Youthman]

2 hours ago, Winestone said:

So, If I buy the 2060 receiver I would also have 140 W x 2, and then I could try to add more speakers and get down to 55 W per channel like Youthman. Sounds like a plan  

My point was that the more speakers you add to your current receiver, the less power you will have to effectively drive each of them.  In my case, it was a Yamaha RX-V1800.  Looking at the specs....I was incorrect....it is a 130x7 (or so they claimed).  It sounded fantastic driving 5 speakers but after I added surround backs, I noticed I had to crank the receiver up quite a bit more and even increasing the volume, there wasn't the same dynamics that I heard with only the 5 speakers.  It wasn't until someone directed me to Sound and Vision's bench test of that receiver that I found out when you add all 7 speakers, you are no longer getting 130w per channel, but it dropped to merely 55wpc.  IMO, that's just not enough to power a full 7.1 surround system. 

[Winestone]

Thanks for the quick responses guys, it is very helpful.

 

My current receiver is still in the box and remains unopened as I wait for my speakers to arrive (subs are on back order). So, in the meantime I'm trying to make some decisions without even hearing what these speakers even sound like.  Having a more powerful receiver is never a bad thing and now is the time to make that decision before I open it.  So, if I were to go up a model it would be helpful, but with the understanding that as I add speakers it may affect the receiver performance.

 

The only other speakers I want to add at this point would be the atmos elevation speakers that would sit on top of my rear speakers. Just waiting for a price reduction.

[willland]

5 minutes ago, Winestone said:

So, if I were to go up a model it would be helpful, but with the understanding that as I add speakers it may affect the receiver performance.

Unless the DACs, power supply, etc. are much better with the 2060, then I would go with the one you can more afford.  The only real differences I can find when doing a side by comparison is 9.2 channels(2060) vs 7.2 channels(1060) and 140w/ch(2060) vs 110w/ch(1060).  My opinion will always be if you need(want) more power, just add an outboard amp. The 1060 has multichannel preouts so you are good there.  If channel expansion is in your future, then get the 2060.

 

Bill

[JohnA]

9 hours ago, Winestone said:

Hello,

 

Below I have included my amplifiers rated power specs. I was wondering if anyone can help me understand which of these rated output numbers is most important to me in deciding if my receiver is good enough to power my home theatre setup.  I have the following speakers 2 RP-280F, RP-450C, 2 R-28F(used as rears) and 2 R-115SW.

 

Currently own:

Yamaha Aventage RX-A 1060 7.2 channel

Rated Output Power (1kHz, 2ch driven)  120 W (8 ohms, 0.9% THD)

Rated Output Power (20Hz-20kHz, 2ch driven)  110 W (8 ohms, 0.06% THD)

Maximum Effective Output Power (1kHz, 1ch driven) (JEITA)  165 W (8 ohms, 10% THD)

Dynamic Power per Channel (8/6/4/2 ohms)  135 / 165 / 210 / 280 W

 

I could upgrade to the following receiver but i'm not sure its necessary. I was hoping you guys can help guide me.

 

Yamaha Aventage RX-A 2060 9.2 channel

Rated Output Power (1kHz, 2ch driven)  155 W (8 ohms, 0.9% THD)

Rated Output Power (20Hz-20kHz, 2ch driven)  140 W (8 ohms, 0.06% THD)

Maximum Effective Output Power (1kHz, 1ch driven) (JEITA)  220 W (8 ohms, 10% THD)

Dynamic Power per Channel (8/6/4/2 ohms)  165 / 210 / 285 / 405 W

 

 

Any help is appreciated!! Thanks so much.

 

 

Oh, how the mighty have fallen! 

 

The difference between 120 & 155 watts is inaudible. 

 

The IHF standard of x watts at y% THD from 20 to 20,000 Hz, ALL channels driven, into 8 ohms are the real and meaningful ratings.   

 

Your AVR has a severely limited power supply.  lt is capable of only supplying enough energy to power 2 of its channels at full power. The Yamaha of old would never have produced such a product.  You can expect the LCR channels to demand relatively long duration high power demand during most action movies (and then there is Transformers).  Though it is unwise the run your system close to max power during a movie.  Loud peaks could damage your speakers. 

 

A theoretically perfect amp rated at 100 watts into 8 ohms would deliver 200 watts into 4 ohms and 400 watts into 2 ohms, provided it could cool itself.  No amp is quite that perfect, but that rule is responsible for the multiple power ratings into to various impedances. 

[wvu80]

1 hour ago, John Albright said:

The difference between 120 & 155 watts is inaudible. 

 

Agree.  Strongly agree. 

 

If you start with your current AVR at 110 wpc, you would need 220 wpc to get a 3 db increase in SPL.

 

The only "upgrade" that I see is if you went from 7.2 to 9.2.  If you don't plan to do that then keep your current AVR, 110 wpc is plenty for nearly all Klipsch speakers.

 

My Onkyo 717 7.2 AVR is rated at 110 wpc.  I typically run a 3.1 setup, 5.1 at the most.  I can easily drive my 3.1 to ear bleed levels CLEANLY with a lot of dynamic headroom left over.

 

The Onk also has pre-outs to add external amps.  Don't need them, as I already can drive my system louder than I can stand it.

+++

 

Quote

The only other speakers I want to add at this point would be the atmos elevation speakers that would sit on top of my rear speakers. Just waiting for a price reduction.

 

I am not an Atmos person, but a lot of people are, so you are on solid ground.  It's personal preference and I am more of a minimalist.

 

I agree with your idea waiting for a good Atmos receiver to come within your budget range.  When it does, pull the trigger on your Atmos AVR and pick up the Atmos modules that fit your needs at that time.

 

 

[Youthman]

25 minutes ago, wvu80 said:

The only "upgrade" that I see is if you went from 7.2 to 9.2.  If you don't plan to do that then keep your current AVR, 110 wpc is plenty for nearly all Klipsch speakers.

All I know is what my ears heard.  When I had the Yamaha RX-V1800, 5.1 sounded amazing.  When I added two more speakers to make it a 7.1, even increasing the volume did not sound as good as when I had it as a 5.1. 

[wvu80]

3 minutes ago, Youthman said:

All I know is what my ears heard.  When I had the Yamaha RX-V1800, 5.1 sounded amazing.  When I added two more speakers to make it a 7.1, even increasing the volume did not sound as good as when I had it as a 5.1. 

Oh, I totally agree.  That's why I max out at 5.1 instead of my AVR's 7.2 max.  I like the dynamics and live! sound that additional head room brings.

 

And 3.1 is even better. 

[garyrc]

• How big is your room?
• How loud do you like it?  Reference level, giving you the sound pressure level the mixing engineers and filmmakers heard, is 105 dB for occasional loud peaks through each main speaker, from the Main Llistening Position (and 115 dB through the subwoofer, but your AVR doesn't feed that).  Most people listen at 5 to 10 dB below Reference, or 100 or 95 dB on those occasional peaks.  Some people would argue that extra headroom would be a good idea, and so would go with 105 dB capacity, just in case.
• How far away from the speakers do you sit?  The efficiency of your speakers is 98 dB (counting 3 dB room gain) for 1 watt input (2.83 Volts @ 8 Ohm @ 1 meter).   To adjust for your listening distance in a typical 3,000 cu. ft. room (not outside), subtract 3 dB SPL available for each doubling of distance, i.e., for  2 meters, subtract 3dB, for 4 meters, subtract 6 dB, etc.  So, at 4 meters, you would get 92 dB at 1 watt.  But you need 105 dB if you want the extra headroom.  If you sit at 4 meters away,  to get the 105 dB at the Main Listening Position mentioned above, you would need about 20 to 25 watts, or so, if my calculations are correct.  This would be 20 or 25 watts per channel, 20 to 20,000 Hz, at below 0.1% THD, with all channels operating at once. 

 

[wvu80]

1 minute ago, wdecho said:

I have not read the entire thread closely but I notice one said his receiver did not sound as good 7.1 vs 5.1. Probably because of an inadequate power supply section running out of juice. 

 

That was me and although I am not an expert in electronics, I strongly suspect you are correct sir. 

 

 

[Youthman]

7 hours ago, wdecho said:

I notice one said his receiver did not sound as good 7.1 vs 5.1. Probably because of an inadequate power supply section running out of juice. 

I said that as well.  Yes, very well could have been the power supply running short on gas.

[Winestone]

Once again thanks for all the infomation everyone. You guys seem to really no your stuff.

 

I have an L-shaped room with the main listening area being 15 x 21 feet. I would probably be sitting 12-15 feet away from the speakers. Overall, I will probably tend to baby the speakers a bit and not try to blow the windows out of the house. Also, the wife does not care for extreme volumes. Based on the feedback that I have received it seems

like my current receiver is a little underpowered but capable of handling 5.1.

 

Maybe I just sit tight and wait to see how things sound once I get it all setup and go from there. Hard to make decisions on something I have not heard. On the other hand, it would be nice to cover all the bases from the get go and be set for the future. Maybe I look into the RX-A 3060.........when does it end  

 

 

[wvu80]

I love my Onk 717 as the SQ is great, but it's a $500 AVR.  It's limited in all the ways you guys describe in terms of how it distributes power to the speakers.

 

Because I am in experimental mode with the newly upgraded Khorns this morning I played the same high quality 5.1 source material with which I am very familiar starting with 2.1, then 3.1, then 5.1.  I then listened in reverse order from 5.1 back to 2.1

 

Running from low to high my system sounded really good in 2.1, a little degradation in 3.1, and very smooth in 5.1.  I was listening to dynamic LOUD horns and drums.  Smooth isn't good in that case and the side speakers added little to nothing in terms of audio content.

 

I prefer 3.1 most of the time because the Center channel anchors the sound to the TV and there is very little drop off in dynamics, but the Khorns are sounding REALLY good in Stereo Mode these days.  Dynamics are fantastic and horn impacts hit you like live!, and since I saw the performance live, I remember what that sounds like.