Yamaha Receiver Questions
|
New member Username: Shaun6142Post Number: 5 Registered: 12-2003 | Does anyone have faith that the Yamaha RX-V2400 will actually handle the "discrete" rating of 120 wpc into 8 ohms @ all channels driven. Also I have read in previous post that NAD states true discrete ratings so if I was using the T763 @ 100wpc would it better than the Yamaha? Hypothetically speaking ofcourse!!! |
|
New member Username: UnicronwmdPost Number: 23 Registered: 12-2003 | Why is everyone so damn worried about watts? Why don't you guys worry about getting speakers with a higher sensitivity  ? NO, Yamaha will NOT give you 120 watts per channel, and neither wil NAD. Why won't NAD give you 120wpc you might ask. Because NAD at the same price as Yamaha, has a lesser wpc rating. So if I buy a Yamaha 1400 110wpc at $700 at a store near me or order a NAD 65wpc online for $700. Does it really matter if the Yamaha will only produce 60wpc while all 7 channels are running at the same time? I have a 7 year old Yamaha RX-V592 305 watts total and I have NEVER had any problem with it. I have ran this thing with no sub for 6+ years at SPLs above 110+ and higher. I am moving on to a new receiver, more then likely the new RX-V1400. Why, because I like how it sounds and it has everything I need in a receiver. If you want a NAD, get a NAD because you like how it sounds and you like the features. Not just because it might produce a few more watts per channel. Also, most HTs now have powered subs to take the abuse of the bass off the receiver. Get a good sub and some good speakers and match them with the receiver and you should have NO problems with watts from most any receiver above the $700 range. I hope that helps a little. WMD |
|
New member Username: Elitefan1Post Number: 110 Registered: 12-2003 | Shaun, The Yamaha 2400 will only output 43.5 watts into 8 ohms at .1% with 5 channels driven. For a unit billed as 120 x 7 that's poor in my book. In fact it will only reach it's rates 120 watts 2 channel driven until it hits .1%. The difference betwwen Yamaha and NAD is that NAD underates it's power and if they say for instance the 762 says 75 x5 it will surpass that rating with all 5 channels driven. [So do H/K, Rotel, Elite and Marantz] Whether or not this is important is up to each buyer but for me I respect a company that tells the truth, not one who picks a number out of the air for marketing purposes. If you like the Yamaha then buy it but know the truth before you buy. The 2400 would make a great pre/pro by the way. |
|
Lisa France Unregistered guest | I have the 1400, and I can play it in surround much louder than any movie theater and it sounds awesome with all channels going. It is an awesome receiver, the 2400 has even more power. |
|
New member Username: GeekboyPost Number: 79 Registered: 12-2003 | Unicron: Why don't you guys worry about getting speakers with a higher sensitivity? Because we're also worried about clipping! |
|
New member Username: GeekboyPost Number: 80 Registered: 12-2003 | And, generally, WMD is correct. Higher efficient speakers are going to require less "pure" watts than lower efficient speakers. The problem I have is that the REALLY efficient speakers are like the Klipsch speakers (with the Klipschhorns in them). They are too bright and their frequency response is not smooth. That's why you don't find too many 100dB efficient speakers (1W at 1M). Speakers in the 89dB to 92dB efficiency range seem to be a have a nice smooth response. They can be powered well by a 40WPC amplifier (a pure 40W amplifier) -- given room size and distance to listening area... anything else is, well, defeaning. Why have power reserves. I think all this POWER came about due to Home Theater and multi-channel requirements of matrix and discrete audio. This is overtaxing the otherwise "nominal" amplifiers for 2-channel stereo. (Most of the receivers that don't hit their mark in multi-channel mode usually are correctly rated for 2-channel stereo.) So, my only problem with Sony (specifically STR-DE995) is that it was severely underpowered. I think "our collective" -- eCoustics.COM posters -- thought is that manufacturers should tell the whole truth about Watts Per Channel (WPC). That's all we're asking for. If the Sony STR-DE995B is 50WPC x 7... just say it. Apparently NAD and H/K aren't "embarrassed" to say market their receivers as "50W x 7" (all channels driven). H/K and NAD could EASILY advertise their 70W receivers as 140W per channel using the same measurements which "some" of the manufacturers use. I guess I'm not mad that Sony and some other do that. I'm just mad that it's inconsistent. Sony, on the ES line, pretty much meets the specification, but the consumer (non-ES) line... well... I rest my case. |
|
New member Username: UnicronwmdPost Number: 30 Registered: 12-2003 | geekboy, I was trying to be funny I understand that it sucks that Yammy and others Lie about the WPC but I have never had my receiver clipping at all in 6 years. What about all the problems NAD is having. Is thet less of a problem then WPC? |
|
New member Username: GeekboyPost Number: 81 Registered: 12-2003 | WMD: I know where you're going. Like I wrote.... generally, 40WPC is fine for most people. I'm happy with my measily 70WPC from my H/K. I would trade performance over "problems" anyday... hence my recent reservations with NAD.. but... H/K has had some problems too. I only care about the misrepresentation in number is when trying to compare apples to apples. Given my room (great room -- 17' x 30' x 11'4" approx) I needed honest numbers when knowing that my desired SPL levels (110dB) and speaker efficiency (92dB), combined with the distance to my viewing area (12' to a 92" diag 16:9 screen)... Sony saying 110W x 7 and H/K saying 70W x 7 is like totally wrong. Maybe we should blame H/K, NAD, Marantz and Rotel for underestimating power! My speakers aren't the most efficient (89dB), but they certainly take more power (watts) given my ~4M (average) from my listening spot... well... they need more power than the Sony STR-DE995 could deliver to push 100dB (SPL) from my listening position. As a matter of fact, most "action filled" scenes from my DVDs were downright flat, and you could hear the the overall SPL decreased during these full 5 channel modes. Imagine if I had connected the other 2 rear effect channels? That's all I was saying. I just want a level playing ground. |
|
Sarandon Unregistered guest | remember watts really don't mean jack $hit!!! its the amps that really mean something. now i will have to agree with elitefan with the watts being low for the yamaha rx-v2400, but its still has a lower distortion number than anybody else and the receiver got a great review in the jan 04 issue of home theater magazine!! |
|
Unregistered guest | It's exmtremely unlikely that all of the channels will be going at the same time anyway so the comment about 43.5 means by 7 means nothing beside the majority of most amps are putting out 1 watt the rest of the power is just for transients and headroom elite fan reads to many magazines pioneer rates their recievers pretty much the same way "untruthful" almost every manufacturer does this because most consumers think that power is the be all end all and thats not true because many other factors come into play more specifcally the size of your room. |
|
Unregistered guest | One more thing pioneer still rates their power output into six ohms to give the illusion of more power so again every company fudges one way or another,not saying it's not powerfull just stating the facts. |
|
Don Unregistered guest | Chubby, The Elite line does NOT rate their wattage at six ohms to the U.S. market. Thay rate at 8ohms just like everyone else. In regards to the new Yamahas...test them out in the store well! I can't comment on the RX-V1400 during dynamic, loud, multichannel scenes (which are infrequent in movies but getting more common), but comparitively priced Onkyos (also low 'all channels driven' wattage) choke under the pressure and anyone listening for it can note the failure to keep channel separation and integrity. Hopefully, the Yammies don't have this problem, but the low reviewed watts per channel would suggest it. |
|
Unregistered guest | Don sorry to correct you they still rate their receivers into 6 ohms go to the web site ,whats more they dont even have a rating on the lower end recievers. |
|
Unregistered guest | Depending on the size of your room you may never reach those limits without going deaf first. Also if youre running a sub and running your speakers as small it makes even less of a difference. The reviews in the mgazines use dummy loads very different from real world listening and ones particular speakers. |
|
New member Username: GeekboyPost Number: 136 Registered: 12-2003 | chubby: what happened to your username. You were CHUBBY before... now you're just chubby! I agree that every channel isn't going to use all the power all the time (simultaneously)... but with multi-channel audio (movies in particular) you just can't tell these days. One of my facorite test discs (laserdisc/DVD) which I use to test systems is... Contact. The opening credits where they show the earth and as the camera pulls away from earth, past the moon, past Mars, Jupiter, Pluto, Solar system, etc... is the most dynamic all around audio I've ever listened to on any DVD/Laserdisc. Each and every channel is playing music/television audio at the same time... of different types (not the same thing)! This is what multi-channel was meant to do. If you have less than efficient speakers (likely with bookshelves or some higher end speakers) and a large room... you need the power. No doubt about it. And that's just to get to 90dB... not the deafening audio of 110dB. And again, let me qualify that, most "average" home theater setups only need about 40W per channel, so your mileage will vary based on room size, speaker efficiency, and your amplifier/receiver. |
|
Unregistered guest | It's always been chubby lowercase except for the very first post it was an accident. I agree with what you said but you can tell? if youre running subs in the rear and I am.Bass is where the extra power is needed.I did state that it depends on the size of your room. Also let me stress again that most of the time amplifiers are using 1 watt so the addtional power is for transients. On top of that you would have to double the power to get an obvious difference in volume and then it still would not be very much in volume.Again if you are using a subwoofer with speakers set to small the reciever for the most part is on vacation. So let it be said that their are ways to get around power issues as I said earlier, granted all power supplies are not going to be the same at a particular price point (thats a given ,but thats where speaker matching come into play) Amplifier technology hasn't changed very much in the past 30 years. I'm just trying to state that you don't have to spend a lot of money to have a nice sounding system if you know what youre doing? So that said 75 decibles could be to loud for some people and it's enough to cause you to lose some hearing if you were to listen at the volume long enough everyday. but you pretty much said what I was saying in the begining so we agree pretty much . |
|
New member Username: GeekboyPost Number: 139 Registered: 12-2003 | chubby: the reall "chubby"! My speakers are set to "LARGE" and the front three are large indeed. They are Paradigm Reference Eclipse/BPs with a Paradigm Reference CC-450. They need power. I have a large room (17' x 30' or so) with 11'4" ceilings. By all means, not your average room. I couldn't imagine setting them to small -- okay, I did that once and it wasn't pleasant. If you have good speakers which are really efficient, it should be of no concern. I probably listen at 70dB to 75dB (around double normal conversation). But that's because the distance from my front speaker array to my seated position is between 3M - 4M. Do I need 200W... no. Do I need 100W... not really. I'm pretty happy with my 70W receiver which is only (probably) driven to 35W most of the time (that's for a 75dB SPL measurement at my listening position some 12' away from the front speaker array -- if you're wondering why I sit so far back... it's the 92" Diag 16:9 screen!). I am, however, looking at separates including a 100W-125W multi-channel amplifier for my system. |
|
New member Username: UnicronwmdPost Number: 58 Registered: 12-2003 | Chubby, you are so wrong. 75db is not loud enough to cause hearing loss. Well, unless you listen to it 24/7 for the rest of your life. It takes 8 hours of 90db to damage your ears, 4 hours of 95db, 2 hours of 100, 1 hour at 105db and so on. |
|
Unregistered guest | I always have to double post because I forget somethings so bear with me. I'm not one those guys who pretends to know everything, but manufacturers have a pretty good idea about what kind of speakers are going to be used with a particular receiver at a certain price point, I also won't sit here and pretend that I don't know a pretty good bit But realistically it's pretty tough to tell what an amp or reciever can do (realistically) without knowing about the transformer ,output devices and the rail voltage. I just think that people read to much into reviews (I was one of them ) until I realized that they have to make a living as I do" hint, hint" not saying that their all like that. I've worked in several audio stores for the past seven years (so I have hands on experience). Let me tell you what I've learned. Most people are happy with basic gear Thats reliable and when they get it their eyes are lit up and their like man I've got a home theater system! It's wonderfull until a Knucklehead ruins it for them by claiming to have so much knowledge from reading reviews or what someone says to make them second guess their decision . everyones hearing is not the same ,everyones room is not the same. things happen. some people prefer a different sound than others does it make that particlar component the best sounding one ,to that person yes but not everyone . For people that read reviews in magazines the best reviewers in my opinion are the ones that tell you to listen for your self and yes their still out there.Most people don't trust their own judgement when it comes to these things . This is something along those lines. I knew what I was looking for but anyway I saw a Yamaha rx-v1 open box for$625 so I asked my sales person about it"It's the second best reciever in hear it's awsome!" I came back in there he forgot who I was and I asked him about the rx-v1 he said"I don't like yamaha recievers they suck." I laughed and continued to look around I bought it anyway,because I thought it sounded good.I guess what I'm trying to say is that opinions are like *&%holes everyones got one ,however their are people that can really be helpful and they know who they are. I had one Krell rep tell me to turn up the rear channels when I demo the hts preamp, So it would stand out from the recievers (this was in one of the stores I had worked in 'after that I quit). Money is not always a barometer of performance Most of the time it's about bragging rights and pride of ownership and thats the truth. In all honesty your room and your speakers are the most important factors. |
|
New member Username: GeekboyPost Number: 141 Registered: 12-2003 | chubby: well said. Do you know IAmCanadian? Just kidding. I use to read the trade magazines, but, now I put that little E.E. minor to use. (I'm a CSEE major.) I want to read the actual specs myself. I still read HT Magazine and Audiophile, on ocassion, but I take what I read with a grain of salt. They never say something's bad. I use those trade rags as a reference point for what's out there and to compare feature to feature, but not for whether I'll like them sonically (or visually for video). So, I never heard of the "turn up the rear surround channels" during a demo trick. I did, when I was trying to buy some B&W 601 speakers, have the salesman turn DOWN the volume. I wanted to hear their bass extension -- which he claimed was awesome -- while playing 1:30 - 1:58 into FourPlay's "Between the Sheets" CDs first song (Interlude). The speakers were fine and the volume was okay, until that segment. |
|
Unregistered guest | Unicron wmd good grief if you were paying attention to what I wrote you wouldn't have to get so defensive,so please go back and read. and geekboy I wasn't speaking to you specifically so I wasn't trying to offend you so theres know need to explain to me what you own or how far you sit as I said before it's room dependent. |
|
Unregistered guest | Geekboy You sound like a pretty good guy so please don't be offended .sorry if I did offend you I'm new to these parts |
|
New member Username: GeekboyPost Number: 142 Registered: 12-2003 | chubby: understood. Just trying to put it into perspective. |
|
Unregistered guest | I'll tell you though you would be pretty surprised about the things they'll put you up to when you're selling equipment I had to sit there and think for $4500.00 I should'nt have to do anything of the sort ,so after that common sense started to kick in for me and I started to realize that I could not help people the way I wanted to and make my sales goal so thats why I quit ,but that incident was it for me I'm just now finally starting to enjoy my equipment again because I fell into that trap of If I buy this or Buy that I'tll make my system tons better .In reality I knew it would'nt, when you start to go down that road it's almost like a desease. One day a customer had come in a store I was working in and we talked for a couple hours and he told me how much he enjoyed a $1000.00 system I sold him ,How he and his family would watch movies every night when they had time. Heck I couldn't enjoy a movie because I was to buzy tweaking my system to sit down and enjoy it, so I was like I spent over $13'000 on this equipment and for what, he's happier than I am. Imagine that. |
|
New member Username: UnicronwmdPost Number: 59 Registered: 12-2003 | "So that said 75 decibles could be to loud for some people and it's enough to cause you to lose some hearing if you were to listen at the volume long enough everyday" I think I read it right. I was just trying to help you out with my hoenest opinion and help you with what I have learned. |
|
Unregistered guest | I understand Unicron-wmd .The point I was trying to make is that people have different thresholds of hearing and that it is a proven fact that if you listen at levels of 73dbs or more for 8 hrs a day ,although it would take sometime you could lose up to 5dbs of hearing although thats considered negligable but it is a hearing loss none the less, and not to mention the peaks of over a 100dbs in most soundtracks But I do appreiciate what you said , Transformers fan me too! |
|
New member Username: UnicronwmdPost Number: 60 Registered: 12-2003 | Honestly man, I never heard of that before. Where did you hear that from? Yea I am a TFs fan. If I am not buying home theater stuff, I am buying collectible TFs. If you like TFs, check this out for a sec. I just started building this site so it looks like crap right now. I have also done a few things for HASBRO too. http://www.freewebs.com/unicron_wmd/coloredart.htm |
|
New member Username: Project6Post Number: 162 Registered: 12-2003 | hello shaun... did you ever put your system together? Fill us in! cheers |
|
New member Username: Shaun6142Post Number: 6 Registered: 12-2003 | Well the speakers were already here, B&W 603s in front, LCR600 center, DS6 surrounds....But I just now 2 weeks later am getting the chance to get the receiver. Really having doubts because I had my heart set on seperates like the Rotel RMB1066 and RSP1075 amp or Outlaw Combo. But I have the chance to get a new Yamaha RX-V2400 for just under $900. Trying to decide if the Yamaha is a good match for the B&Ws and if it is a good receiver for the $$$, and if the Yamaha will have adequate enough power for the system. I'd hate to get it and be disappointed. Can anyone help, I'll probably pick it up this weekend or next. Thanks |
|
New member Username: UnicronwmdPost Number: 61 Registered: 12-2003 | Shaun, $900 is not a good enogh deal for the 2400 to skip over the Rotel seperates. Get the Rotel seperates and I am sure you will be very happy. I honestly don't see why people are buying the 2400 over the 1400. It is not worth $200 more. I am getting the 1400 for $670 here in town and I think it is well worth it. Then I will start saving up for a amp |
|
Unregistered guest | Unicron wmd I had actually read a few exerpts from different articles sometimes in health books (I like to read). You can go to the NPC WEBSITE (NOISE POLLUTION CLEARINGHOUSE)or to the OSHA WEBSITE. I found out about this a couple of years ago. Extremely impressive Soundwave,Blaster,Unicron and starscream nice work ,really nice! |
|
New member Username: UnicronwmdPost Number: 66 Registered: 12-2003 | Thanks Chubby, whenever I am done with the whole site, it sould have 50-60+ pics on it. It will be a week or so but thanks again!!! |
|
Unregistered guest | Man , I certanly hope so U should have seen my son's face when he saw the pictures.I've gotten him into transformers as well, totally impressed! |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics