Topic: Choosing an AV Receiver

[Signal2Noise]

Ang ibig sabihin ciguro ni signal2noise is matter of sonic performances hindi lang in terms of power, kasi for him he rely on rated power vs. metered ouput watt per watt, For him a pure amplification such as the tube amp is much powerful than ss amp. As you can see he reads it on volume level in terms of power.

Bro signal, we are not new to this area. so we know the technicalities, we do not say your findings and conclusions are wrong, there’s no argument on that. But the reasoning of different “audiophiles” are definitive. So yung test and information mo is correct based on your interpretations. Pero sa iba meron din silang manner of understanding on how to find the comparison of each audio gears.

Ang nagiging loop holes or argument lang naman dito is yung interpretation mo na a “30-50 watts tube amp is much powerful than a thousand mark 100W AVR” actually kung ianalaze mo maige walang argument dahil on the first place your comparing a multichannel amp on a 2 ch amp only. Pero kung pag babasihan mo ay yung stereo mode lang nung avr vs. dun sa integrated or tube amp mo, well theres a different argument. why? Yung AVR and integrated amp in the first place has coloration and processing na nangyayari before goin sa output stage, unlike sa tube na input amplification then output. Walang coloration so thus what you are hearing is pure signal. And the sonics are much better dahil full signal no coloration. But in terms of power output. It’s a different rating. coz if you based it on power rating "not" the sonic performances. watt is watt is watt.

So you see magkakaiba tayo ng manner of understanding, that makes us definitive. Magkakaiba pag dating sa areas. Hindi ko rin naman sinasabi na 100% tama ako. Pero yun ang understanding ko. So by exchanging information and ideas makes us learn and expand more on this area.                     

Correct ka diyan...We all have different understanding & interpretations and thanks for that additional info. 

[av_phile1]

Ito na nga ang sinasabi ko....Sa AVR, sabihin pa natin na 250W/ch x 7.1  pa 'yan.  HINDI mo makukuha iyong full 250W/ch in full frequency-real world condition while driving all 7.1ch.  NO WAY on Earth Man na ma-enjoy mo fullest iyong sinasabi sa specs ng produkto.  Sabi ko nga rin, sa surround channels na lang, even if sabihin pa na 250W pa 'yan, baka 12-20W lang ang makuha mo.  Meron ba na surround channel in home theater application with an output drive of 250W....'dre WALA...Unless may real-size cinema ka sa loob ng bahay mo.  Isa pa, marketing hype iyong 250W surround mode, tingnan nga natin kung maito-todo mo iyong volume nang 250W AVR mo?  Baka hindi ka makatagal sa loob ng listening room mo at hindi na music kundi NOISE na!  Or baka ito iyong power na sinasabi mo sa akin....don't tell me huh, patay tayo dyan, packup na ako pag ganyan.    What I'm saying is Power & Sound, not Power and Noise.

Base doon sa specs na inilagay mo dito sa post, hindi mo ba napansin na puro 250W or 100W per channel?  Pero hindi sinabi na 250W all channels driven?  Bro, magkaiba iyong 250W/ch sa 250Wx7.1 all channels driven simultaneously.   Muli ito iyong sinasabi ko sa iyo na full & honest disclosure ng power output, sa mga manufacturers ng AVR, always play safe sila.  Subukan mong i-drive lahat ng 7.1 channels nito (simultaneously) at i-lab test mo, tingnan natin kung talagang full 250W ang talagang lumalabas each of every channels?  Baka magulat ka kapag nasa +/- 150W ka na lang.  (note: Yamaha iyong 250W/ch, noticed na 170W na lang ito pagdating sa fronts at iyong HK-100W naging 85W/ch na lang pagdating din sa fronts nito.) 

Pag ganito, lalamunin ng 50W tube power iyong 85W HK mo.  Sa Yammy, ang sabi ay 250W Max. Power pero hindi sinabi na continuous. At noticed mo uli sa ibaba, ang nakalagay ay Dynamic range @ 8 ohms ay 210W na lang, kase ibinase ito doon sa fronts @ 8 ohms na 170W.  SO NASAAN IYONG SINASABI MO NA 250W/ch Output?..Sa papel lang 'yon 'dre he-he-he. Ikaw ang nagbigay nitong specs ng Yamaha, hindi ako?

There are no DVD movie materials out there I am aware of that can extract identical current into each of the 5,6 or 7 channels of an AVR.  There's a better chance a multichannel DVD-A or SACD can do that.  If you want to test how well a 5.1 AVR delivers its rated power equally on all channels, I suggest you use a MONO or even stereo CD material played thru the AVR set to 5.1 stereo or multichannel stereo mode.  That way, all the channels would be drawing out the SAME current from its power supply.  And true enough, the Z9 can deliver its equal rating with convincing weight.  It may not necessarily be 250W as claimed by the manufacturer.  In fact, independent lab tests tend to register a mere 160 watts full bandwidth continuous into 8 ohms, all channels driven at the rated THD.  But 160 watts is still 160 watts.  That's a lot more than most push pull tube gears can deliver.  What's the most powerful push pull out there?  70watts rms?

But in a typical listening environ like your home, you really can't listen at 160watts from all channels and expect to remain in the room.     At loud but comfortable listening levels, using typical 8-ohm speakers with  sensitivities of around 90db, you'd usually measure around 5 watts continuous, peaking at around 10 watts.  (Larger rooms defintely will benefit from the large headroom a Z9 can give.)  That is why many audiophiles are quite content with a 2-watt Single Ended Triode (SET) amp in a typical room.   Valve amplification can give the impression they sound louder for the same wattage rating as an SS amp.  That's mainly because of its higher harmonic distortion content.  Harmonic distortion have a way of bloating the signal waveform by as much as 3db so they output a larger waveform which will sound louder.  And because the distortions are well into the even-ordered harmonics, the output waveform can sound pleasant to the ears.  That's why tubes are EUPHONIC.  In contrast, SS gears distort with odd-ordered harmonics and this can be quite harsh to the ears even at 0.5% THD.  (Good thing SS gears have distortion levels in the 0.03% range and lower at their rated power which guarantees virutally no audible annoying distortion at lower comfortable listening levels.)

Rule of thumb, iba ang tube power sa AVR power.  Sa mga audiophiles and veterans in electronics....X3 ang tube power.  Ang 10-11 o'clock ng tube amp ay hamak na mas malakas sa -30dB ng AVR, itaga mo sa bato at totoo itong sinasabi ko.  Kung gusto mo, subukan mong pumunta sa mga tube dealers diyan sa Makati or Quezon City at i-audition mo iyong mga EL-34s nila tapos i-compare mo sa sinasabi mong 250W AVR.  Sound quality, sound definition, warmth and sonic impact makikita mo iyong tube amp ay way ahead sa AVR na sinasabi mo.  I will not further explain pa, better to audition head-to-head, and let your ears be the final verdict. (bilihin mo na lang iyong Marantz ko) 

SETs have no SS counterpart.  Their simplicity in true Class A design puts them apart, but the most that I've seen is only 15watts RMS per channel.  Push Pull valve is the answer to the miniscule power that SETs deliver.  If more power is needed, SS is the answer for home listening.  Professional session guitarists prefer TUBE sound because the distortion in their flangers, and effects boxes are smoothed out and made more pleasant to hear by the even-ordered harmonic distortion of valve amplification in many guitar tube amps.  And they are are not full bandwidth as these tube amps have only 150 to 8khz frequency bandwidth, which is sufficient for guitars.  The output transformers in their signal path essentially provides a bandpass filterning at the output.  (Ofcourse there are also OTL tube designs.)

And volume knobs are not the best gauge for power.  Bear in mind that most analog potentiometers do not behave linearly.  Depending on the value used and the circuit design, their 11-12 o'clock position may already be in the max.  It has no positional equivalence in the more linear behaviour of digital AVR volume controls which are often continuously rotatable.

[av_phile1]

Have you ever thought of simplfying your home theater set-up using two-channel system both for video and audio?  An alternative was suggested by Mike Allen ( also of vacuum tube valley) in his website.
You might find the letter also interesting:

Back in the days of Beta Hi-Fi and then VHS Hi-Fi, I listened to music and watch movies on plain stereo on the same gear.  That was in the mid-eighties and onwards. 

Then dolby prologic became the fashion.  It provided a more explicit center channel for movie dialogue (not just a soundstage illusion from a well-imaged stereo L and R speakers) and an appendage 4th surround channel for low powered, limited bandwidth ambiance (2 channels for flagship models)   The rest is history.

A Letter Regarding Home Theater:
Whether one should go for surround sound or a two channel system for their audio/video
1. Why should someone contemplate the purchase of a "high quality" two channel system for $1000, $2000, or $3000 dollars etc. when they can purchase a complete home theater system for the same price?
Assume for a moment the complexity of reproducing a movie. The sound must integrate with the video on an emotional level and the sound itself is a wide range of material from music, to dialogue and ultimately car bombs. To choose a system fully capable of producing the dynamics of planes crashing into the side of mountains as well as the subtle nuances of a woman whispering the language of love into a child’s ear requires a quality system. Given this task, we believe a system needs to play music very well or as someone said, “If the system plays music right, it will play noise”.

Seems like a more thorough explanation for my belief:  "If it's good in music, it's gonna be good in HT.  But not the other way around."

You'd often be impressed when you hear a BOSE lifestyle or accoustimass set of sub-sat speakers perform in HT.  But they start to fall apart when listening to music.  But listen to any audiophile-grade speakers that impress so much in music and they never fail when it comes to HT.

In relating this concept of a high performance system to your question, we believe the goal of a “home theater audio system” is not the issue of whether it is two channel or 5.1, the issue is quality sound reproduction. The 5.1, or 7.1 system is more complex than a 2 channel system. A home theater system is made up of 14 discrete operating units (5 preamplifier/amplifier units, 6 speaker/ subwoofer units and 3 cable units) while a two channel system has 5 discrete operating units (2 preamplifier/amplifier units, 2 speaker units and 1 cable unit). At $1,000, the price invested per unit in a home theater system is $71 per unit while in a stereo system it is $200 per unit. At $3,000, it is $214 versus $600. We are not saying that a two channel is 3 times better than a comparably priced Home Theater System. We are suggesting that the higher investment per unit may yield a better sound. To be sure, the further up the comparable price scale you go, the quality issue between the two different systems diminishes.

Quality cost a lot.  Quality sound and price tags are never commensurate or proportional to each other.  Often, a very subtle improvement in sound can cost 10 times or more.  If stereo addicts can invest the same amount of time and money for their beloved 2-channel systems as they would to a multichannel system, they can reap so much more rewards.  Too bad, many people still consider HT as sub-par with a 2-channel system.  That can be quite understandable.  It's a lot easier to get a 2-channel system set-up correctly than a multichannel system.  So many things can go wrong in a multichannel system - the sonic timbre matching, the crossover points, the individual speaker levels, the individual speaker delays.  None of these are necessary in a 2-channel system. 

In practice, the cheaper a unit, the lower the real wattage and the ability to handle a wide frequency range. I think most people would believe that you can get more speaker quality for $1200 a pair than $418 a pair in today’s market. One point most home theater people would make is the lack of a center channel and a subwoofer in a two channel system. A center channel is not necessarily required in a system that has a strong soundstage. One system that we use in house is a $580 JD 102A with a pair of $560 Mirage 590i’s and some cheap cable. With the speaker face positioned two inches beyond the TV front, many people believe there is a center channel operating. As for the subwoofer, a $200 subwoofer has its drawbacks. Given the drawbacks, are you enhancing sound or just giving the system a series of indiscriminate thumps and bumps? In the long run, are you better off with two speakers that provide a clear and fast but lighter bottom end? If the low extension is wanted, hook up a subwoofer to the two channel system. In the end, it is a matter of choices. There are people who find the $1,000 surround system acceptable where others want a sound alternative.

These days, modestly powered amplifiers have become a commodity that their design and construction is almost identical and unifromly priced across so many HT receivers and integrated.  There are ubiquitous IC or chip amps that are so easy and cheap to put inside receivers.   HT receivers are essentially preamp/processor/decoders with computer-like behaviour with radio tuners and modest chip-based amplfiers thrown in almost like freebies to make them more acceptable to the mass market segments that put convenience and cost at a premium.   And because many mid-priced HT receivers have such great processor decoder functions, they are often used as preamps mated to more powerful amplifiers with better designs and more robust qualities.

HT systems have center channels that can be phantomed in a 2-channel set-up that can image the center well.  Many set-ups on the net are just 4 speaker systems without the center channel.   Especially in a small room and a well-imaged L and R speakers.

People tend to prefer 5.1 for HT because the commercial world was quite successull in marketing the idea that you need a center and a set of ambiance channels when watching movies.  The DVD software has it encoded, so why not make use of it?
It's perfectly ok to watch a movie in stereo.  For speakers with 10-12inch woofers, a subwoofer may not be necessary.  But I still say a good subwoofer can spell the difference between a convincing HT and one that is so-so.  That makes a 2.1 my minimum for HT.  Subwoofers may not always be needed in music.  In fact, the subwoofer that can make a movie experience at home quite entertaining can be too overwhelming in music.  Gun shots, rockets and exloding bombs require so much more dynamic energy relative to the dialogue levels and background music on an HT material.  No such demands exist in music.  The loudest kick drums and bass guitars in music have lesser dynamics relative to the softest musical note.  So a subwoofer than can reproduce an explosion realistically can be overwhelming when reproducing a musical bass line.  Unless you have 2 settings for your subwoofer - one emphasized for HT and another for music. 

[Signal2Noise]

There are no DVD movie materials out there I am aware of that can extract identical current into each of the 5,6 or 7 channels of an AVR.  There's a better chance a multichannel DVD-A or SACD can do that.  If you want to test how well a 5.1 AVR delivers its rated power equally on all channels, I suggest you use a MONO or even stereo CD material played thru the AVR set to 5.1 stereo or multichannel stereo mode.  That way, all the channels would be drawing out the SAME current from its power supply.  And true enough, the Z9 can deliver its equal rating with convincing weight.  It may not necessarily be 250W as claimed by the manufacturer.  In fact, independent lab tests tend to register a mere 160 watts full bandwidth continuous into 8 ohms, all channels driven at the rated THD.  But 160 watts is still 160 watts.  That's a lot more than most push pull tube gears can deliver.  What's the most powerful push pull out there?  70watts rms?

But in a typical listening environ like your home, you really can't listen at 160watts from all channels and expect to remain in the room.     At loud but comfortable listening levels, using typical 8-ohm speakers with  sensitivities of around 90db, you'd usually measure around 5 watts continuous, peaking at around 10 watts.  (Larger rooms defintely will benefit from the large headroom a Z9 can give.)  That is why many audiophiles are quite content with a 2-watt Single Ended Triode (SET) amp in a typical room.   Valve amplification can give the impression they sound louder for the same wattage rating as an SS amp.  That's mainly because of its higher harmonic distortion content.  Harmonic distortion have a way of bloating the signal waveform by as much as 3db so they output a larger waveform which will sound louder.  And because the distortions are well into the even-ordered harmonics, the output waveform can sound pleasant to the ears.  That's why tubes are EUPHONIC.  In contrast, SS gears distort with odd-ordered harmonics and this can be quite harsh to the ears even at 0.5% THD.  (Good thing SS gears have distortion levels in the 0.03% range and lower at their rated power which guarantees virutally no audible annoying distortion at lower comfortable listening levels.)


SETs have no SS counterpart.  Their simplicity in true Class A design puts them apart, but the most that I've seen is only 15watts RMS per channel.  Push Pull valve is the answer to the miniscule power that SETs deliver.  If more power is needed, SS is the answer for home listening.  Professional session guitarists prefer TUBE sound because the distortion in their flangers, and effects boxes are smoothed out and made more pleasant to hear by the even-ordered harmonic distortion of valve amplification in many guitar tube amps.  And they are are not full bandwidth as these tube amps have only 150 to 8khz frequency bandwidth, which is sufficient for guitars.  The output transformers in their signal path essentially provides a bandpass filterning at the output.  (Ofcourse there are also OTL tube designs.)

And volume knobs are not the best gauge for power.  Bear in mind that most analog potentiometers do not behave linearly.  Depending on the value used and the circuit design, their 11-12 o'clock position may already be in the max.  It has no positional equivalence in the more linear behaviour of digital AVR volume controls which are often continuously rotatable.

YES, I agree on your explanations and you're definitely right on that.  But I think I've heard a dual mono-block - push/pull tube amplifier rated 200W / ch @ 8 Ohms, and again, it's a tube power...what can you say about that?  If you want, I will ask a somebody here to allow us to have a listening session over his friend's place to see and hear the product...and it's also for sale. 

[Signal2Noise]

Oooppss, pa-OT muna ako kung puwede (Mod maikli lang ito).   Mga kapatid sa musika...Baka may alam kayo na puwedeng mabilihan ng good recording CDs ng mga Kundiman, Mambo Music, Latin Jazz (bossanova) & brass bands lalo na iyong mga piyesa ng Tango Pilipino?  Iyong hindi ni-record galing sa old LPs, original analog recording from reels ang gusto ko.

Many thanks....

 

[hattori_hanzo]

Oooppss, pa-OT muna ako kung puwede (Mod maikli lang ito).   Mga kapatid sa musika...Baka may alam kayo na puwedeng mabilihan ng good recording CDs ng mga Kundiman, Mambo Music, Latin Jazz (bossanova) & brass bands lalo na iyong mga piyesa ng Tango Pilipino?  Iyong hindi ni-record galing sa old LPs, original analog recording from reels ang gusto ko.

Many thanks....

 

bro meron ako makukunan PM me for details, I have kundiman classics (eg. ruben tagalog, diomedes maturan etc.) sa mambo music (perez prado mambo king etc.) latin jazz (eg. stan getz, charlie byrd etc.) sa brass bands (phil brass band etc.) and many more selections, just PM me for the price but I tell you its really cheap...

[aHobbit]

With regards to your questions?  When I said a 50W integrated amp is distinctively powerful than 80 or 90W receiver is because, an integrated amp is only driving 2 channel output  compared to an 80-90W receiver which is driving a 5 or 7.1 load.  The more speakers being connected, the higher the capacitance. We're talking about here MUSIC/Audio only, not home cinema application in my post.  In most 5 or 7.1 receivers, the output power were being desipitated into several channels.  No way on earth you can find an honest receiver driving 5 or 7.1 load  (all channels simultaneously driven) @ full declared power output in real-world condition.  Normally happens, it goes down to 70% of the declared output power.  Do you think the surround channel of your receiver for instance still producing an 80-90W output drive....No way man!  In most surround channels, it only has around 12-20W maximum output power, again in real-world condition / full frequency range.  Unlike in 2ch int. amp, it can drive both channels simultaneously...Kase nga Stereo di ba?

About the dynamic drive, in receiver configuration.  It actually designate those sudden burst of sounds to its surround, center & sub channels and some to the fronts.  While in stereo amp dynamic range, it has a higher dynamic output  because it caters music not home cinema straight directly to the front speakers.  Your asking about measurement?  Parehong measurement in W, nagkaiba lang sa application.

Hindi ka kasi nag-compare on equal ground eh! kapag 2-channel ang usapan ng comparison, then make it 2-channels. So if you compare your receiver to a 2-channel integrated, operate your receiver in 2-channel (not in multi-channel), then make your power comparison. In this way, baseless ang power comparison mo.

Otherwise, your integrated will also loose in the comparison kung pinipilit mong gawing 5-channel HT ang integrated amp mo.

An 5- or even 7-channel HT receiver can compete on power and dynamism of an integrated provided you operate your HT in stereo mode. It can even outperform your integrated in power and dynamics alone.

Power Drive....?  In comparison between AV receivers versus int. amps I said power drive because try to notice the volume (dB) indicator of your receiver.  Before you playloud nasaan iyong dial?  -20 or -10dB? (max. +18), while in stereo amp, from 8 o'clock as point of origin....@ 10-11 o'clock lang ay malakas na, but you can still go way up 'till 4 o'clock, basta capable iyong speakers na gamit mo and Party Time na 'yon.

Bro, you can not make use of the dB indicator of receivers as point of comparisons, as against the dial, unless your dial is marked what dB it is now. And the dB in HT receiver is being referred to its rated power, and it can turn continuously until 0dB (probably, +18dB is heavily distorted na, typically it should be 0dB – or its rated output). This is a wrong point of comparison – very subjective to merit technical attention.

You mentioned about the built-in pre-amp....Again Bro, we're talking here about integrated amp as a whole kaya nga integrated di ba?  If you give emphasis only on the pre-amp section, then you're talking here pre-amp....Right?   I mentioned in my post the comparison of AV receiver versus Integrated Amp (2ch) not the AV receiver versus pre-amp.

"HT-designed receiver that can topple integrateds if sonic performance is the issue"   YES correct ka doon kung ang pag-uusapan natin ay HT application but not pure stereo music?  Dahil lalamunin ng 2ch amp iyong HT receiver mo kapag music alone lang ang pinag-usapan....Maniwala ka sa akin, kahit i-audition mo pa sa mga audio showrooms.  Have you ever heard of Roksan Kandy MK-III/L.III or Jolida (EL34 50W) integrated tube amp? (Attn: Volt & Krug...what's the model of that mini-Jolida)?

To make it short, try to compare say any thousand dollar mark AV receiver (ex. Denon AVR-3805) versus Marantz PM7200, NAD C352 or Rotel RA-03 without mentioning tube integrateds baka mas lalong ma-outperform ng 30-50W EL-34 iyong 100W AVR in terms of music.  Again its  up to you to determine kung totoo ang sinasabi ko.  Good Luck

Will answer this in 1 lot.

Paragraph 1:
Even if it is integrated, like in HT, integrateds have their own sonic equalizations (signature) – so what makes them pure (unaltered) audio reproduction.

There are HT receiver in stereo mode (again) that can topple integrateds – depending on the price level you want to pay for. And be sure you indicate which speakers you are talking about – or your missing the matching issue – when you are comparing. Tube will not be able to drive all kinds of speakers, so does solid states.

If you are talking technical comparisons here, tube will, in its majority can loose to a pure solid state – with all data that can be made available. If you are talking listening impressions (subjective, taste buds, personal preferences), everybody is free to declare his conclusions. But since you mention 100W (which is a technical measurement), your conclusions in technical terms are wrong! But if you take 100W subjectively (as if it has no real standard of measuring what a 100Watt is), then perhaps you are right. But a 100W is a technical measurement, so you are still wrong.

[aHobbit]

I am not familiar with the Yammy or HK AVR that you mentioned.  Pero sonic performance hindi ka naging specific doon sa anong klaseng EL34 ba ang iko-compare mo doon sa 2. Meron mga El-34 tube amps na below $K mark na kayang i-out perform iyong mga sinasabi mong receivers.  Like those entry-level from Sophia Electric, Cary Audio & Jolida.  Actually itong Sophia & Cary nasa $1.5K MSRP pero pagdating na sa market medyo magiging less pa.    Meron din iyong mga gawang China at iyong mga locally manufactured dito sa atin worth Php25-45K per unit. 

A tube amplification is far more sonic and powerful (iyong mga detalye na hindi mo marinig sa AVR mo, ay maririnig mo using tube or hybrid SS int.).  Bakit kamo, sa receiver iisa lang ang transformer tapos may distribution ng power nito sa mga output channels.  Whereas in int. tube amps, always 2 ang output transformers dedicated for each channel nito (bukod pa doon sa power transformer nito), lalo na kung ang ginamit ay iyong the same standards as TO300 transformers.  Sa AVR 12Vdc lang ang dumadaloy na kuryente whereas sa tube I think 450-550Vdc.  Actually old technology na itong TO300, may mga later produced pa like TO350 and others from different models & brands.  Lalo pa siguro kung iyong mga KT-88/90 tubes (from brands like Pathos Logos & Audio Research-I've heard of these tandemed with Sonus Faber "Concerto" nung nasa Mid-East pa ako, near actual live performance na, parang kaharap mo lang si Dave Gruisin & Lee Ritenour habang nagja-jamming sa piano & guitar), kaya lang ang pinag-uusapan natin dito ay below $K mark amp kaya balik tayo sa El-34s.

But then again, saan mo ba iko-compare iyong Yammy & HK against the EL-34 configuration tube amp?  Pure audio lang ba or multi-channel home cinema application?  Kapag sinabi mong HT application, very obvious na Yams or HK pero uulitin ko, PURE AUDIO lang ba?  Baka magulat ka kung maging day & night ang difference nila.  Actually kung brand lang ang pag-uusapan, hindi Yams or HK ang prestigious name pagdating sa AVRs, kundi DENON.  Check mo sa mga different audio mags & reviews like What HiFi UK, Home Theater Mag, Stereophile, Audioholics.Com, HiFi Choice...Denon is the name.   Try to audition and ikaw na rin ang makakasagot sa tanong mo....   (Binebenta ko iyong Marantz AVR ko para pandagdag sa pambili ko nang Jolida, baka may alam ka na gustong bumili) Thanks.....

This is an old manuscripts! already discussed in audio lies and Myths. The output transformer of tube is different from the power transformers (of both tube and solid state). Output xf is needed in the tube because it needs to step up the miniscule power a tube amp can produce. whereas solid state do not need such xf in the signal output path! The day and night difference is very subjective, and is dependent on ones taste, preferences, and others. Many amps now, and very cheap at that have made tube competition very difficult. Many hard core audiophile - in the high end tube - are now restudying their paradigm. When others are now leaving, the other new (uninformed) is now entering. Good luck to your pocket then! 

[aHobbit]

Ito na nga ang sinasabi ko....Sa AVR, sabihin pa natin na 250W/ch x 7.1  pa 'yan.  HINDI mo makukuha iyong full 250W/ch in full frequency-real world condition while driving all 7.1ch.  NO WAY on Earth Man na ma-enjoy mo fullest iyong sinasabi sa specs ng produkto.  Sabi ko nga rin, sa surround channels na lang, even if sabihin pa na 250W pa 'yan, baka 12-20W lang ang makuha mo.  Meron ba na surround channel in home theater application with an output drive of 250W....'dre WALA...Unless may real-size cinema ka sa loob ng bahay mo.  Isa pa, marketing hype iyong 250W surround mode, tingnan nga natin kung maito-todo mo iyong volume nang 250W AVR mo?  Baka hindi ka makatagal sa loob ng listening room mo at hindi na music kundi NOISE na!  Or baka ito iyong power na sinasabi mo sa akin....don't tell me huh, patay tayo dyan, packup na ako pag ganyan.    What I'm saying is Power & Sound, not Power and Noise.

Base doon sa specs na inilagay mo dito sa post, hindi mo ba napansin na puro 250W or 100W per channel?  Pero hindi sinabi na 250W all channels driven?  Bro, magkaiba iyong 250W/ch sa 250Wx7.1 all channels driven simultaneously.   Muli ito iyong sinasabi ko sa iyo na full & honest disclosure ng power output, sa mga manufacturers ng AVR, always play safe sila.  Subukan mong i-drive lahat ng 7.1 channels nito (simultaneously) at i-lab test mo, tingnan natin kung talagang full 250W ang talagang lumalabas each of every channels?  Baka magulat ka kapag nasa +/- 150W ka na lang.  (note: Yamaha iyong 250W/ch, noticed na 170W na lang ito pagdating sa fronts at iyong HK-100W naging 85W/ch na lang pagdating din sa fronts nito.) 

Pag ganito, lalamunin ng 50W tube power iyong 85W HK mo.  Sa Yammy, ang sabi ay 250W Max. Power pero hindi sinabi na continuous. At noticed mo uli sa ibaba, ang nakalagay ay Dynamic range @ 8 ohms ay 210W na lang, kase ibinase ito doon sa fronts @ 8 ohms na 170W.  SO NASAAN IYONG SINASABI MO NA 250W/ch Output?..Sa papel lang 'yon 'dre he-he-he. Ikaw ang nagbigay nitong specs ng Yamaha, hindi ako?

Rule of thumb, iba ang tube power sa AVR power.  Sa mga audiophiles and veterans in electronics....X3 ang tube power.  Ang 10-11 o'clock ng tube amp ay hamak na mas malakas sa -30dB ng AVR, itaga mo sa bato at totoo itong sinasabi ko.  Kung gusto mo, subukan mong pumunta sa mga tube dealers diyan sa Makati or Quezon City at i-audition mo iyong mga EL-34s nila tapos i-compare mo sa sinasabi mong 250W AVR.  Sound quality, sound definition, warmth and sonic impact makikita mo iyong tube amp ay way ahead sa AVR na sinasabi mo.  I will not further explain pa, better to audition head-to-head, and let your ears be the final verdict. (bilihin mo na lang iyong Marantz ko) 

Bro, an AVR can reach 0db level. yung tube na sinasabi mo, baka di umabot ng 0-db yan kung -30db pa lang, sabi mo malakas na - I assume you are using same loudspeakers in the test. I think you are refering to amp sensitivity, rather than power - this is not a measurement of amps power. Mahirap pagsamahain ang subjectivism and objectivism. Objectively, it is easy to judge - walang guess work (as in, listen and let your ears decide  ). Subjectively, let's rumble      !

[av_phile1]

YES, I agree on your explanations and you're definitely right on that.  But I think I've heard a dual mono-block - push/pull tube amplifier rated 200W / ch @ 8 Ohms, and again, it's a tube power...what can you say about that?  If you want, I will ask a somebody here to allow us to have a listening session over his friend's place to see and hear the product...and it's also for sale. 

I would hate to see my electric bill for a 200wpc tube amp.   Especially if it's class A.    The heat generated by a 5-watt SET is already considerable.   How many cascaded tubes are we looking at here?

[hattori_hanzo]

a new topic has arise....

"CLASHES OF THE AUDIOPHILES"
 

[john5479]

In perspective a 200w class A solid state amp generates comparable heat as well, along with the power consumption. Pass Labs anyone? Then again a 200wpc tube amp occupies a lot of real estate (i.e. jadis ja200)

[Signal2Noise]

bro meron ako makukunan PM me for details, I have kundiman classics (eg. ruben tagalog, diomedes maturan etc.) sa mambo music (perez prado mambo king etc.) latin jazz (eg. stan getz, charlie byrd etc.) sa brass bands (phil brass band etc.) and many more selections, just PM me for the price but I tell you its really cheap...

Bro', salamat basta hindi tulad ng recordings na gawa ng isang zodiac sign record company.

PM kita later.......

[Signal2Noise]

Hindi ka kasi nag-compare on equal ground eh! kapag 2-channel ang usapan ng comparison, then make it 2-channels. So if you compare your receiver to a 2-channel integrated, operate your receiver in 2-channel (not in multi-channel), then make your power comparison. In this way, baseless ang power comparison mo.

Otherwise, your integrated will also loose in the comparison kung pinipilit mong gawing 5-channel HT ang integrated amp mo.

An 5- or even 7-channel HT receiver can compete on power and dynamism of an integrated provided you operate your HT in stereo mode. It can even outperform your integrated in power and dynamics alone.


Bro, you can not make use of the dB indicator of receivers as point of comparisons, as against the dial, unless your dial is marked what dB it is now. And the dB in HT receiver is being referred to its rated power, and it can turn continuously until 0dB (probably, +18dB is heavily distorted na, typically it should be 0dB – or its rated output). This is a wrong point of comparison – very subjective to merit technical attention.


Will answer this in 1 lot.

Paragraph 1:
Even if it is integrated, like in HT, integrateds have their own sonic equalizations (signature) – so what makes them pure (unaltered) audio reproduction.

There are HT receiver in stereo mode (again) that can topple integrateds – depending on the price level you want to pay for. And be sure you indicate which speakers you are talking about – or your missing the matching issue – when you are comparing. Tube will not be able to drive all kinds of speakers, so does solid states.

If you are talking technical comparisons here, tube will, in its majority can loose to a pure solid state – with all data that can be made available. If you are talking listening impressions (subjective, taste buds, personal preferences), everybody is free to declare his conclusions. But since you mention 100W (which is a technical measurement), your conclusions in technical terms are wrong! But if you take 100W subjectively (as if it has no real standard of measuring what a 100Watt is), then perhaps you are right. But a 100W is a technical measurement, so you are still wrong.

Most int. amps don't have a dB dial kase nga base sila sa audophile designs....Which are simple and no fancy whatsoever.  Most int. amps doesn't claimed digital as what other receiver manufacturers do (BTW, there's no such thing as digital sound, lahat 'yan analog from the time of recording hanggang sa paglabas ng sound sa loudspeakers).  Kaya sa mga int. amps, by o'clock tinitingnan at hindi kung ilang dB kase nga wala naman LCD, siguro iyong iba meron na.

Stereo mode in receivers is still different to the full stereo mode ng isang highly engineered  int. amp.  Very rare na magkapareho ito, kase magkaiba ang design at configuration ng bawat isa.  Maliban na lang kung nag-compare ka sa mga Jap-Made int. amp.  Bro' try to compare int. amps like Roksan Kandy MK-III, Exposure 2010S, Marantz PM7200, NAD C320CT, Rotel RA-03, Audiolab..etc to your preferred receiver and ikaw nang humusga.  Kaya nung nasa Mid-East ako, ay bibihira sa tropa namin including those other audiofools ang bumili ng receivers kase nai-compare na namin ito side-by-side, kaya alam ko kung ano ang claim ko with regards to amplifiers/receivers except kung ang gustong setup ay HT.

Basta ang alam ko, wala akong nakita or nalaman na individual na nasa tube amplifications na lumipat sa SS or receivers, pero marami akong alam na nasa SS or receivers  na nag-switched sa tube...'yon lang kapatid and I will never argue with you kase ang sa akin ay personal experience...."Como estas senhor hobbit"

[hattori_hanzo]

Bro', salamat basta hindi tulad ng recordings na gawa ng isang zodiac sign record company.

PM kita later.......

bro hindi galing yung recording dun ha? files came from original cd's. tranfered nga lang to CDR. sige if your interested just PM me... just try kahit isa then pag nagustuhan mo lets have a good deal... 

[oweidah]

sirs,
choosing a receiver...if it means strictly just a receiver not an audio video receiver,
i believe vintage receivers are best. compared with new ss integrated amps, baka mapahiya even mid to totl models sa mga vintage rcvrs (ss and/or tubes; stereo o quadrasonic)circa 60s to 80s-sansui marantz pioneer harman kardon, hk citation, nikko, luxman to name a few

[hattori_hanzo]

sirs,
choosing a receiver...if it means strictly just a receiver not an audio video receiver,
i believe vintage receivers are best. compared with new ss integrated amps, baka mapahiya even mid to totl models sa mga vintage rcvrs (ss and/or tubes; stereo o quadrasonic)circa 60s to 80s-sansui marantz pioneer harman kardon, hk citation, nikko, luxman to name a few

Korek! lalo na yung mga vintage na Vfets model...

[bumblebee]

S2N,

Are you comparing int amps and receivers subjectively? Tube and SS subjectively? Para malinaw.

[b0ss_sa_b0ss]

a new topic has arise....

"CLASHES OF THE AUDIOPHILES"
 

dito kayo wuhuuuuu 

[Dracula]

What is the advantage of having a receiver which is 7.1?  DTS and DDEX only do 6.1 anyway... Enlighten me thanks

[aHobbit]

S2N,

Are you comparing int amps and receivers subjectively? Tube and SS subjectively? Para malinaw.

'yan nga ang hirap kapag pinaghalo mo ang subjectivity and objectivity eh! Kahit vintage audio amp pa yan o contemporary amp pa yan, if they are measured to be of the same specification, will be on the same rating. Kahit bakal pa ang parts ng vintage mo (I have dual mono blocks, 26kg total weight, with 8 big power caps, 4 for each channel) - configurable separate or integrated - 60 watts per ch. If I have receiver at 60wpc, preho lang power specs nila.

with regards to other specs e.g. sensitivity, dynamic headroom, loading, etc - magkakaiba talaga 'yan.

Ngayon, kung ang pangsukat e tenga lang - naku po - 'wag namang lagyan ng technical measurement kasi subjective lang yan at walang basis ng technical comparison. Mas maganda sa tenga mo, mas malakas sa pandinig mo kasi magkaiba ng ikot ng dial - shallow technicals! 

[aHobbit]

Stereo mode in receivers is still different to the full stereo mode ng isang highly engineered  int. amp.  Very rare na magkapareho ito, kase magkaiba ang design at configuration ng bawat isa.  Maliban na lang kung nag-compare ka sa mga Jap-Made int. amp.  Bro' try to compare int. amps like Roksan Kandy MK-III, Exposure 2010S, Marantz PM7200, NAD C320CT, Rotel RA-03, Audiolab..etc to your preferred receiver and ikaw nang humusga.  Kaya nung nasa Mid-East ako, ay bibihira sa tropa namin including those other audiofools ang bumili ng receivers kase nai-compare na namin ito side-by-side, kaya alam ko kung ano ang claim ko with regards to amplifiers/receivers except kung ang gustong setup ay HT.

Basta ang alam ko, wala akong nakita or nalaman na individual na nasa tube amplifications na lumipat sa SS or receivers, pero marami akong alam na nasa SS or receivers  na nag-switched sa tube...'yon lang kapatid and I will never argue with you kase ang sa akin ay personal experience...."Como estas senhor hobbit"[/b]

Muy bien, gracias, senor! 

I don't know what you mean highly engineered amplifier (highly hyped, overkill price parts, gold laminated connector, silver etching, low demand hi-end glorified signature amp, hand-made/crafted, with special woods on the side, oversized heatsinks, overweight torroidals, 5mm aluminum faceplates, the pride of owning the name brand).

If highly engineered - then it is technicals (objective). and many integrated (then and now) and receivers can compete in the technical (engineering), this is not ROCKET science. what dictate the price is the demand and supply law (economics) - but if you want more fancy in the amp, you pay more. gold plateds, alps logarhytmic pots, silver and monster cable inside, dual torroids for your peace of mind and good sleep. If it is 20W at ,01THD, no matter waht you oversize in the amp, it will be 20W .01THD, and a receiver withthese rating will just be the same even if it did not use heat sink and other fancy boutique parts.

Those high end hold their respective sonic signature (equalizations in the pre-amp) that makes them sound different. IF it is tube, then their corresponding characteristics makes the difference - this is dependent on ones taste, and it is not applicable for all (being subjective in nature). But just the same, the 20W .01THD is the same between SS and tube.

I do not questions the preference of M/E OFWs, some of them attracted to buy based on their peers' suggestion, but I dont insinuate whether their purchases are based on sound technical comparisons or not. But even if it is a group buy of what they think they like, I will not conclude (technically) that since they bought the range of so so names, what they bought are whats best in terms of stereo reproductions (just because they are majority who did so) - very weak basis IMHO.

Marami rin akong encounter with M/E filipinos - typically bass-inclined. Pag HT inclined, typically they are for BOSE 

Medyo lawakan mo ang surfing mo ng audio forum - at hwag magkulong sa mga kapwa mo tube lovers, then you will be able to encounter them. Some tube audiophiles just can not give up their gears for sheer cost that they have invested, though some dont mind it. Whether you believe the truth on the technical specifications or not, does not alter the truth of tech specs. My reading of your comparisons are purely subjective - based on your personal preference and inclinations & some notions not supported by any technical basis, and as such - debatable thing, and does not hold any ground.

Technically, w/o any standards, it will be futile to compare, or even attempt to compare as if you sound technical, can easily be detected to be guessing only.

Subjectively, we should not debate but honor our respective taste. Otherwise, let's rumble (aka wrestling!)        

[aHobbit]

sirs,
choosing a receiver...if it means strictly just a receiver not an audio video receiver,
i believe vintage receivers are best. compared with new ss integrated amps, baka mapahiya even mid to totl models sa mga vintage rcvrs (ss and/or tubes; stereo o quadrasonic)circa 60s to 80s-sansui marantz pioneer harman kardon, hk citation, nikko, luxman to name a few

I consider vintage receivers (and not only them but the rest of vintage electronics, speakers) - they are built like tanks, for lifetime use. Audio engineering wise, new integ amp and receivers are better today but will not really last like the vintage material-wise. Price level, vintage cost as brand new then can compete with low-cost integ amp of today in design. It is good we can enjoy them at very small fraction of their original price.

[john5479]

well...i know some people that switched from tubes to ss, me included its just a matter of preference.

[Voltraizer]

well...i know some people that switched from tubes to ss, me included its just a matter of preference.

John you are 100% correct. With the wide variety of taste and available product, everybody has the right to
make their choice in accordance to their musical taste and preference and I find it weird if somebody will criticize your chosen path whether tubes or solid state...... Price has nothing to do with it. Budget-constraint is also a factor but it doesn't mean that you can't get quality sound kung pipiliin mo reasonably priced na  match-up.
For my part, Since "value for money" ang philosophy sa pagpili ng audio product.....Price per performance factor ang tinitingnan ko ...hindi "pride and prestige".

[arthurallanj]

What is the advantage of having a receiver which is 7.1?  DTS and DDEX only do 6.1 anyway... Enlighten me thanks

FUTURE-PROOFING. Some few years ago there was only 5.1 with Dolby Digital and DTS, then both came up with 6.1 channel formats. Can you really say that there won't be a 7.1 channel format in the future? It may come, it may not, but this may be the most common reason why 7.1 receiver-buyers get such receivers, like myself. Most of them don't want to buy another receiver just to keep up with the latest format, so instead of being just up-to-date, they decided to be advanced in that aspect, so when the time does come that a 7.1 channel format is available, they're ready for it. Besides, I kinda like having as many as 9 sattelite speakers in my HT area.  Hope I helped.

[Voltraizer]

There is no such thing as "future proofing" lalo na sa bilis ng technology. I bought Prologic receiver nuon na-obsolete nung nagkaroon ng Dolby Digital 5.1 or DTS etc etc....  In the same manner, with computers yun XT naging AT naging Pentium III, Iv etc.etc We just have to buy what's available and enjoy it hanggang ma-obsolete.
Just my mamera.

[aHobbit]

There is no such thing as "future proofing" lalo na sa bilis ng technology. I bought Prologic receiver nuon na-obsolete nung nagkaroon ng Dolby Digital 5.1 or DTS etc etc....  In the same manner, with computers yun XT naging AT naging Pentium III, Iv etc.etc We just have to buy what's available and enjoy it hanggang ma-obsolete.
Just my mamera.

I beg to disagree ... you can ... but not on the area of pre-processing. In the amp area, you can.

Only with the likes of HT that has 7.1/9.1 external input - thus, you may stay with the amp as long as you like and just buy upgrades in players with updated DSP which has n.1 output.

Another way is invest in power amp, 5? 7? 9? 11? to your heart's content. Provided of course, that your purchase standard are those HT with pre-outs. So you just continue to upgrade the HT side, and make use of pre-outs to feed your invested amps. Marantz, being low-cost with pre-outs are good candidates for this strategy. So buy every year, and sell after 1 year - high resale value pa rin, and invest a little to keep your HT preamp updated. You can maintain your ol' good amp for the rest of your life! 

Investing in just HT equipment now because of 7.1 output implementation is not really future proofing - the DSP inside is the single point of issue.

[ATJr.]

"100W/ch @ 8 ohms, with no more than 0.1% THD, from 20-20,000 Hz, all channels driven."

exactly to the 1975 FTC specifications! anything not like this you can not use, specially when you want to compare recievers of different makes and models.

[aHobbit]

well...i know some people that switched from tubes to ss, me included its just a matter of preference.

  . It's good you exemplify your self ... I also have encounter, unusual at that, who made his mind up to give up more than $ 10,000 tube investment in favor of a small LM3886 chip - not because of cost - but because of sonic differences he experienced with the 2 amps - take note, this is highly subjective, depending on your speakers and sources. I can dig the info sources, but will not post it anymore as there are lots of them in the internet, only if you are serious to read them.

Of course, there are those from SS to tube. But switching alone is not a technical basis to conclude one is better than the other. It still boils down to preference. Technical specs can be used to determine the amps' performance. However, good tech specs will not always guarantee outstanding sonic performance - take the speaker / sources / listening environment into equation.