Matching speakers to receivers

[ATP]

I am in the process of purchasing some new speakers and a receiver for home stereo listening. While shopping at a local custom audion store I was looking at purchasing a Denon DRA-697CI receiver and Klipsch RF-52 floor speakers. The salesman encouraged me to consider the Denon AVR-1907 Surround Receiver (for expansion capabilities) and the Klipsch RF-62's (a step up in power and sound). My room size is 17X30 feet with 8 foot ceilings.

While checking out the Klipsch web site I read an article about selecting speakers and it advised pairing speakers up with an amplifier with at least as much power as the speaker is rated to handle in order to avoid clipping or cutting, where the the amplifier is expected to deliver more current to a speaker than it's capable of doing and therefore sends distortion into the speakers.

After looking over the specs on the above mentioned components I noticed that the Denon AVR-1907 receiver is rated at 85 watts per channel and the Denon DRA-697CI receiver is rated at 100 watts per channel while the Klipsch RF-62 speakers are rated at 125 w and the Klipsch RF-52 speakers are rated 100w.

If I take the Klipsch web site article literally, it seems that the Denon DRA-697CI receiver and the Klipsch RF-52 speakers would be the best matched components of the ones we discussed.

Do you have any thoughts on this? Also, any thought on speaker size for my room dimensions?

Thanks for any input.

[colterphoto1]

How loud do you listen? Take the efficiency of the Klipsch speaker you are considering. That is at one watt. It takes DOUBLE the wattage to gain 3 more db. So if you know the general loudness you are trying to achieve this can be calculated. Here's the tricky part- you want more than enough power to adequately handle peaks in the music/soundtrack without distortion. I think a lot of guys here try for another 10 db or so of what is called HEADROOM. Add that on, and see if you have power enough. Many of us don't or can't due to economics or the simple power handling of our speakers. Like my good friend Dr Who says 'It's about compromise'.

Welcome to the Forum and Welcome to the Madness!

Michael

[Jay481985]

first 17X30 is a big room, 17X30X8 = 4080 cubic feet which is a bit more then what thx Ultra II uses which is a 3000 cubic feet room. To be honest the speakers still might be to little to fill the room efficently. Try looking at the rf 82,63, or 83. Is the room just the room or is this big room actually two that are not separated?

Also what the website is true to a degree but there is rarely times that you really need to match reciever to reciever. Its sorta like matching tires to your car, you wouldn't want near race spec tires on a pick up truck nor would you want a tire truck on a race car. But its a good start to match the speaker and reciever together like starting to look at all season tires for your car/truck. Then you narrow it down. Another analogy, just because your car has a rev meter that can hit 7 thousand and has a speedometer or 130 does not actually mean you ever go there or constantly get there (unless you are a reckless driver bent on racing everyone []) but just because it can does not mean you will ever need it. The power rating is near nil, just as colter said before to raise 3 db louder you need to double the power.

The rf 52 is 96 db per watts. So:

96 db 1 watt
99 db 2
102 db 4
105 db 8
108 db 16
111 db 32
114 db 64
117 db 128
120 db 256

note the speaker is 100 watts rms meaning around 115 db is the max it will do before it will melt. and going from 114 db LOUD to 117 db LOUDER is really negliable.

The rf62 is 97 db per watt and 125 rms

97 db 1 watt
100 db 2 watts
103 db 4 watts
106 db 8 watts
109 db 16 watts
112 db 32 watts
115 db 64
118 db 128
121 db 256

I have a pair of rf-83 that are 100 db per watt and that is when it starts to really shine with low watts (though it needs high current)

100 db 1 watts
103 db 2 watts
106 db 4
109 db 8
112 db 16
115 32 so at 32 watts i reach about the max spl the rf52 can do and my speakers are rated to 250 rms watts
118 64
121 128
124 256

its really 120 spl limited and all of these numbers are anechoic meaning that it was in a perfect reflectionless room. Think it was hoisted on a crane say 500 feet in the middle of the air. Adding about 8 db is what you will get in room response to every db stated. Room gain is the fact the walls act as like reflectors of sound to increase spl.

[Frak601]

I am new, and do not understand alot of the terms and numbers in HT....but jay and colter, you really shed alot of light on things in your two posts....thank you.......... a Marantz SR7001 (110W X 7).......It looks like I would have more headroom with the RF-62's, less work on the speaker?? If I did the math right, the RF-62's would give me 115db -64watts, where the RF-63 would give me 117db-64 watts, so my receiver would never really be turned up over halfway?? Am I correct or way off base?? ........maybe it would be simpler if you could just clear up your opinions on a speaker match with the Marantz receiver I mentioned, and I thought I was getting somewhere and now I have confused myself again!! lol..........Also, any opinions on the marantz receiver or another option? Thanks

[hondajake]

I am new too! And I have seen similar posts to this in this forum. In my experience, high quality power is better than low quality power. I have a Jolida Hybrid rated at 50wpc and it seems more than enough for my RF-25s. Room is 20X15X8. Although I use this system for mostly music listening and sometimes DVDs in 2 channel.

It would seem to me that if you need power equal to your RMS rating then how would people use Klipsch with 1 or 2 wpc SET tube amps? The reason high quality high current power plus the sensitivity of the Klipsch. Do you really need 300HP in your car? You never use it.

[ATP]

Thanks for your response. Good question about the room. Actually it is a combination living room/dining room. The primay listening space (livingroom portion) is about 16X17 feet and I will have the speakers placed at the livingroom end. Does this make a difference concerning optimal speaker size?

The other part of the equation in this mix is my wife and how much she is willing to let our stereo take over the livingroom and drain our bank account - I guess there are always trade offs. I think I have pushed things about as far as I can at this point in time with the purchase of the RF-62's. Do you have any good reading recommendations for a novice audiofile who wants to get a little more educated on the technical aspects of home stereo equipment?

Again, thanks for the helpful response.

[Jay481985]

I figured your home theater room was not the super size that you said before. I thought it was a living/diningroom as like my old house was. The doesn't help though as the speakers will see the full size of the room as there is no walls that prevent the sound from escaping? Am I correct? Speakers will seem weak if they are put into bigger spaces than normal, like stadium speakers are created differently based on the fact there are no walls. I will try and find some websites that can help you on the step to audio nirvana.

Also the difference between 2 db from the 52 and 62 is mute at best. db is a system that on paper is interpreted alot different then actual hearing. Its like horsepower and torque. Torque is actual circular force while horsepower is a mathematical equation of the ability of the torque to do work. Are you lost? put it this way, horsepower is a good idea but not absolute in power, a f1 race car has some 800 hp but around 300 lb of torque, if you tried and actually towed something, I doubt it would tow. But then you have a low revving diesel that can tow 10000 + pounds but has less horsepower than torque. horsepower mathematically is torque X rpm divided by 5280. getting back, sorries. db is interpretted every 3 decibels is double the volume but to the ear 3 db sounds more like when you ask someone to turn it up a bit. the human ear usually associates 10 db as double the sound. So a 2-3 db is not much difference, btw 110 db is rock concert levels and is also dangerous. Oh I forgot to tell you a decibel is the smallest amount of volume difference a human can hear (average)

What everyone here tells you to do is try and match reciever to the speaker in terms of watts is a good start. But that is not always absolute. The heritage people (the heritage speaker line) tend to like tube amps or set amps which produce in comparison to today's recievers around 4-16 watts. But the fact that they are clean watts from the lowest amount is what is important to the heritage people. They rarely listen to rock level spl, and the heritage have even higher efficency then my 100 db per watt rf-83, they are 102-104 db per watt. What the heritage guys do is pretty good also for any speakers in general as most people do not listen to music over 110 db anyways, the first watt is the most important and the fact that it is a high current amp is more important also. What high current means is that during critical times of music like the cannon on 1812, the speakers are not taxing the reciever to hard. A high current amp can supply the momentary extra energy to supply the speakers when the music dictates. That is why even though many people look over harmon kardon as they are around 20 watts less than the competition, they are still liked within the community of the people who know.

As stated before with the watts, 110 watts v. a 120 watt reciever is nearly undistinguishable with the spl. But the fact many people go with is that amp tend to sound different when pushed. The general consensus is the more high current watts a system has the less distortion it will have because the system can supply the momentary gust of power. That is also why many people choose klipsch, the low distortion of the horn, a horn is an amplifer in its own so the tweeter (compression driver technically called) does not have to work as hard to get as loud meaning less distortion.

And another note, recievers though they might look the same on paper, each company tends to have their own way of getting their sound in. There are stereotypes that have some basis on the company. Yamaha's tend to be brighter and more with the treble, some have stated that yamaha are bright on klipsch speakers which are known already as bright speakers. There is Pioneer, Denon, and Harmon Kardon that tend to be neutral to flat. Some have stated it is boring on klipsch and some love it. I have a harmon kardon 3480 stereo reciever and I think its fine for what it is but I look around to see better things. Denon has what DrWho loves, the burr-brown dac which are a very good way to listen to music that have been digitally stored (cds, mp3,etc non digital is cassette and lp) Colter has the yamaha and loves it. Pioneer is a love hate, where the people hate the lower end but the pioneer elite brand is liked well (also the pioneer 1015 and 1016 which is around 360 dollars and is an actual pioneer elite rebadged) Onkyo is a love hate where there have been people questioning the reliability of it. Sony recievers are generally hated on the cheaper models as sony tries to push the whole watts game but they lack musical clarity (except the es which is their expensive line) Another love or I got it because it fit my budget is the new panasonic digital recievers, many in the audio world disregard digital because the first models lack everything, it was due to the early products and the fact that digital actually had terrible highs, but now companies are putting out reputable amps that are digitally powers, I believe DeanG (correct me if I am wrong) said the super T was one of the best sounding amps that he owns (it is only 140 dollars on partsexpress)

I hope this helped

[Jay481985]

I am new, and do not understand alot of the terms and numbers in HT....but jay and colter, you really shed alot of light on things in your two posts....thank you.......... a Marantz SR7001 (110W X 7).......It looks like I would have more headroom with the RF-62's, less work on the speaker?? If I did the math right, the RF-62's would give me 115db -64watts, where the RF-63 would give me 117db-64 watts, so my receiver would never really be turned up over halfway?? Am I correct or way off base?? ........maybe it would be simpler if you could just clear up your opinions on a speaker match with the Marantz receiver I mentioned, and I thought I was getting somewhere and now I have confused myself again!! lol..........Also, any opinions on the marantz receiver or another option? Thanks

ah I forgot to answer this. yes you are technically right, but did you read my reflections comment prior to this? the db per watt that is stated on the website is done in a anechoic chamber or a wallless room, something with no boundaries to reflect. Add around 8-10 db to that number and that will give you about how loud it will be inside your house which has walls and ceilings and floors.

[Islander]

If you're just starting to build a system, you might want to think about whether you may upgrade in the future. In that case it could make sense to get one component that's a step or two above the rest of the system in sound quality (and price, too, unfortunately), so that in a year or two, you can bring the other parts of the system up to that level.

However, if you just want a system to enjoy and don't want to get on the upgrade ride, get a system that works in harmony (that's that synergy thing you sometimes hear about) and fits your budget. Happy listening!

Oh, and contrary to what some people think, some Heritage owners do like to listen loud at times and like powerful amps (well, over 50 wpc anyway).

Pat on the Island

[tommyboy]

Jay, you said that the Pioneer 1016 is actually an Elite, rebadged. Is there an article or anything regarding this? I have the 2016, one step up fromthe 1016. I appreciate any input on this matter Jay.

[Jay481985]

???........ you have the wrong model confused.