does Sony overadvertise the power of their amps?

[Anarchist420]

or do they really offer more power per dollar?

i am asking because i dont know why the yamaha avrs sell for so much more yet their advertised wattage arent as high.

 

[boomhower]

Look at what ohm they are giving the power ratings in. Sony gives it in 6ohms and Yamaha gives it in 8ohms which is why you get the difference. Yamaha is a better receiver anyhow.

 

[Zivic]

sony isn't what they used to be. you can advertise pretty much anything... much like they do with LCD and the hz ratings.

"It is important when comparing power ratings between receivers to verify they are being measured uniformly. For example, typical mass market receivers rate each amp at 0.7% THD @ 1 KHz as opposed to full bandwidth under acceptable THD audible limits ( < 0.1%) creating the illusion of more power to the unknowing customer. This is why a $300 15lbs mass market receiver appears to deliver as much power or more than a receiver twice the price and weight. In addition some companies take it one step further and rate their amps at 6 ohm loads to give the illusion of more power when compared to similarly priced receivers from other manufacturers rated at 8 ohm loads."

yamaha, pioneer, denon, onkyo are better brands to buy.

 

[Anarchist420]

thanks zivic and boomhower. i guess sony is using .7% THD, 1khz, and/or 6ohms, while yamaha is using .08% THD, 20hz-20khz, and/or 8 ohms.

sony isn't what they used to be. you can advertise pretty much anything... much like they do with LCD and the hz ratings. "It is important when comparing power ratings between receivers to verify they are being measured uniformly. For example, typical mass market receivers rate each amp at 0.7% THD @ 1 KHz as opposed to full bandwidth under acceptable THD audible limits ( < 0.1%) creating the illusion of more power to the unknowing customer. This is why a $300 15lbs mass market receiver appears to deliver as much power or more than a receiver twice the price and weight. In addition some companies take it one step further and rate their amps at 6 ohm loads to give the illusion of more power when compared to similarly priced receivers from other manufacturers rated at 8 ohm loads." yamaha, pioneer, denon, onkyo are better brands to buy.

Look at what ohm they are giving the power ratings in. Sony gives it in 6ohms and Yamaha gives it in 8ohms which is why you get the difference. Yamaha is a better receiver anyhow.

 

[sdifox]

They are not the only ones that provide deceptive description of power output.

 

[LoveMachine]

Another thing to keep in mind; the often quoted power specs on retail sites such as 7x100watts means, there are 7 channels and at any given time, one of those channels can produce up to 100 watts. The midrange brands like Onkyo, Denon, etc. that rating usually means 2 channels at X watts. The higher end brands, like emotiva, will usually produce rated power at all channels.

 

[ElFenix]

Another thing to keep in mind : 1 watt is usually pretty loud even with cheap speakers, and gets louder with more efficient speakers.

 

[s44]

Yes, more than anyone.

But Yamaha overstates significantly too.

Buy Marantz...

 

[sdifox]

Yes, more than anyone.

But Yamaha overstates significantly too.

Buy Marantz...

Marantz has gotten a lot cheaper since the merger with Denon, and I don't mean the price.

 

[alkemyst]

Like many said, Sony uses different specs to test with.

Sony makes a competitive receiver at certain pricepoints with the Yamahas and Denons.

I don't like their aesthetics as much.

 

[alcoholbob]

Sony receivers routinely measure the lowest on test benches on soundandvision, hometheaterreview, etc. in terms of power output, among all the major brands. There's a reason why they are generally avoided.

 

[Pacfanweb]

sony isn't what they used to be.

They never were much of anything in the receiver market.


Today's receivers, the ones you can get at mainstream stores, are ALL overrated to some extent.

Here's what I mean: Unless something's changed in the last few years, when you buy a Yamaha/Denon/Pioneer/Sony/etc. receiver that has a power rating, such as "100 watts x 7 channels".....That means it'll do 100 watts (pick your method of arriving at that wattage) to either 1 or 2 channels AT THE SAME TIME....not all of them.

So 100x7 does NOT mean it'll crank out 100 watts to all 7 channels simultaneously.

THEN you can get down into the "how do they rate it, is it REALLY 100 watts?" discussion.



That's why I have a separate amp.

Anthem MCA 5. They spell it out for you: 170 watts x 5, ALL AT ONCE. Or 200 x 1. That is the 8 ohm rating.

Since I have 4 ohm speakers, it's 250 watts x 5, or 350 x 1.

There's no doubt about my power level. You cannot stand to turn this thing up to wherever it would start clipping.

I recently had to replace my B&K preamp because it started locking up. I bought a Pioneer VSX-1120 receiver off Craigslist to get some HDMI/3D capability, along with some newer codecs, AND preamp outs.

It is rated at 110 x 7. It's a good receiver, but there's not even a bit of comparison between its amplifier section's power vs. the Anthem.

Sure is nice to have the HDMI's, though.

This is why I say buy a good, older 5 channel amp for HT used. You can keep it for years and years....amps haven't gotten any better or worse in decades.
Then buy the least expensive receiver that has preamp out jacks. Don't spend a ton of money on a receiver.

I believe I paid about 500 bucks or so for my Anthem amp about 9 years ago off Audiogon. You'd have to pay $2000 for a receiver with an amplifier section even close to it, and even then it still wouldn't be as good.....and then you have to worry about the receiver becoming outdated in 5 years.

I did that with my B&K preamp. Reference 50, Series II. A little over $2k in 2004. HDMI came out not too long after.

I kept it until this year, because it sounded so damn good, but I was pissed that I couldn't run it as a "true" HT centerpiece, due to no HDMI.

Decided I would never pay that much for a pre-pro that will certainly become outdated again. If you have a separate amp, you find the least expensive receiver with pre-outs, and roll......if you get a good one (Pioneer/Yamaha) your sound is going to be the same if you're not using their internal amps. Everyone uses the same surround hardware.

My current VSX-1120 was the top of the line Pioneer receiver 3 years ago. To get any better, you had to go to the Elite series.
Craigslist: $175. It is in perfect shape. That was a $750 unit new. Dude never even took the plastic off the top of the face plate.
I'd much rather have the top-line unit from 3 years ago vs a $300 new one now.

 

[s44]

Unless something's changed in the last few years, when you buy a Yamaha/Denon/Pioneer/Sony/etc. receiver that has a power rating, such as "100 watts x 7 channels".....That means it'll do 100 watts (pick your method of arriving at that wattage) to either 1 or 2 channels AT THE SAME TIME....not all of them.

I know they've started inflating on the low end of late, but an Onkyo or Marantz rated at 100w used to flat out do 100w with full multichannel load.

Denon was never as hardcore, but they're still pretty good. The E400 measures 70w on 5 channels, (62 on 7).

Yamaha, Pioneer, and Sony have traditionally been the worst, pretty much optimizing for two channels, using 1% or higher distortion limits, and having crap for all-channel output. The Yamaha A730 distorts out above 32w with 5 channels.

But wait... I'm shocked to see the current Sony actually testing well! So does the Pioneer 1123 (again, shocked). I'd still stick to one of the Audyssey manufacturers though (Denon, Marantz, Onkyo).

 

[sdifox]

They never were much of anything in the receiver market.


Today's receivers, the ones you can get at mainstream stores, are ALL overrated to some extent.

Here's what I mean: Unless something's changed in the last few years, when you buy a Yamaha/Denon/Pioneer/Sony/etc. receiver that has a power rating, such as "100 watts x 7 channels".....That means it'll do 100 watts (pick your method of arriving at that wattage) to either 1 or 2 channels AT THE SAME TIME....not all of them.

So 100x7 does NOT mean it'll crank out 100 watts to all 7 channels simultaneously.

THEN you can get down into the "how do they rate it, is it REALLY 100 watts?" discussion.



That's why I have a separate amp.

Anthem MCA 5. They spell it out for you: 170 watts x 5, ALL AT ONCE. Or 200 x 1. That is the 8 ohm rating.

Since I have 4 ohm speakers, it's 250 watts x 5, or 350 x 1.

There's no doubt about my power level. You cannot stand to turn this thing up to wherever it would start clipping.

I recently had to replace my B&K preamp because it started locking up. I bought a Pioneer VSX-1120 receiver off Craigslist to get some HDMI/3D capability, along with some newer codecs, AND preamp outs.

It is rated at 110 x 7. It's a good receiver, but there's not even a bit of comparison between its amplifier section's power vs. the Anthem.

Sure is nice to have the HDMI's, though.

This is why I say buy a good, older 5 channel amp for HT used. You can keep it for years and years....amps haven't gotten any better or worse in decades.
Then buy the least expensive receiver that has preamp out jacks. Don't spend a ton of money on a receiver.

I believe I paid about 500 bucks or so for my Anthem amp about 9 years ago off Audiogon. You'd have to pay $2000 for a receiver with an amplifier section even close to it, and even then it still wouldn't be as good.....and then you have to worry about the receiver becoming outdated in 5 years.

I did that with my B&K preamp. Reference 50, Series II. A little over $2k in 2004. HDMI came out not too long after.

I kept it until this year, because it sounded so damn good, but I was pissed that I couldn't run it as a "true" HT centerpiece, due to no HDMI.

Decided I would never pay that much for a pre-pro that will certainly become outdated again. If you have a separate amp, you find the least expensive receiver with pre-outs, and roll......if you get a good one (Pioneer/Yamaha) your sound is going to be the same if you're not using their internal amps. Everyone uses the same surround hardware.

My current VSX-1120 was the top of the line Pioneer receiver 3 years ago. To get any better, you had to go to the Elite series.
Craigslist: $175. It is in perfect shape. That was a $750 unit new. Dude never even took the plastic off the top of the face plate.
I'd much rather have the top-line unit from 3 years ago vs a $300 new one now.

could have just gotten a hdmi switch that also outputs dts/dd

http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=101&cp_id=10110&cs_id=1011002&p_id=5557&seq=1&format=2

 

[Pacfanweb]

^You missed the part about how the B&K started acting up, I guess?

I locks up. Has to be unplugged and rebooted....pretty frequently.

And I bought a 3D TV, and wanted to just have one HDMI running to it, so that was that.

 

[sdifox]

^You missed the part about how the B&K started acting up, I guess?

I locks up. Has to be unplugged and rebooted....pretty frequently.

And I bought a 3D TV, and wanted to just have one HDMI running to it, so that was that.

you expect me to read? :awe:

 

[Pacfanweb]

you expect me to read? :awe:

lol

I will say this: It still sounds DAMN good.

The "locking up" part....you can turn it on, start watching a movie/playing a game. Works fine....then, let's say you want to change the volume, or you're done with the movie and want to game so you go to change the input....and it's frozen. Still working on whatever you initially had it set on just fine, you simply can't change it. So you hit the master power switch (just like unplugging it), leave it off for a few seconds, turn it back on and it'll be fine again for awhile....until like mid-movie when you again want to change the volume or something and it's locked up again.

So combine that with the lack of HDMI, 3D pass through and ten year old codecs, and I bought the Pioneer. Doubtful I could fix the B&K for much less than the $175 that I paid for the Pioneer.

 

[alcoholbob]

They never were much of anything in the receiver market.


Today's receivers, the ones you can get at mainstream stores, are ALL overrated to some extent.

Here's what I mean: Unless something's changed in the last few years, when you buy a Yamaha/Denon/Pioneer/Sony/etc. receiver that has a power rating, such as "100 watts x 7 channels".....That means it'll do 100 watts (pick your method of arriving at that wattage) to either 1 or 2 channels AT THE SAME TIME....not all of them.

So 100x7 does NOT mean it'll crank out 100 watts to all 7 channels simultaneously.

THEN you can get down into the "how do they rate it, is it REALLY 100 watts?" discussion.

Generally only the flagship receivers will hit close to their stated power levels.

Flagship Yamaha and Denons tend to get within 80% of their stated rating into 7 channels, and the top end 5xxxx and 3xxx Onkyos will hit their stated power level at 1% THD ACD, and are just a few watts short at 0.1% THD.

 

[alkemyst]

lol

I will say this: It still sounds DAMN good.

The "locking up" part....you can turn it on, start watching a movie/playing a game. Works fine....then, let's say you want to change the volume, or you're done with the movie and want to game so you go to change the input....and it's frozen. Still working on whatever you initially had it set on just fine, you simply can't change it. So you hit the master power switch (just like unplugging it), leave it off for a few seconds, turn it back on and it'll be fine again for awhile....until like mid-movie when you again want to change the volume or something and it's locked up again.

So combine that with the lack of HDMI, 3D pass through and ten year old codecs, and I bought the Pioneer. Doubtful I could fix the B&K for much less than the $175 that I paid for the Pioneer.

The main problem with older great receivers is the codec change. As long as they can do the DD/DTS modes you need, it's ok.

 

[alkemyst]

That Anthem MCA 5 is actually a 190/170/190/170/170 rating at ACD @ 8 ohms. It's a great amp, but saying you'd need to spend $2k to touch it when it was bought used is pushing it.

Adding Sony into the mix the STR-DA7100ES was rated at 170x5, it actually put out 200+ at 8ohms and 270 at 4ohms.

ACD it hit 160wpc @ 8 ohms 20HZ and 125wpc @ 8 ohms 1kHz. At 4ohms it was at 125wpc across the board.

These can be picked up for under $500 used and can do almost all Dolby/DTS AFAIK.

I was just looking at one for $400, but it's silver.

 

[alcoholbob]

That Anthem MCA 5 is actually a 190/170/190/170/170 rating at ACD @ 8 ohms. It's a great amp, but saying you'd need to spend $2k to touch it when it was bought used is pushing it.

Adding Sony into the mix the STR-DA7100ES was rated at 170x5, it actually put out 200+ at 8ohms and 270 at 4ohms.

ACD it hit 160wpc @ 8 ohms 20HZ and 125wpc @ 8 ohms 1kHz. At 4ohms it was at 125wpc across the board.

These can be picked up for under $500 used and can do almost all Dolby/DTS AFAIK.

I was just looking at one for $400, but it's silver.

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/sony-str-da7100es-av-receiver-measurements

Sound&Vision has the STR-DA7100ES doing 123W x 7 into 8 ohms at 1% THD, and 127W x 7 into 4 ohms at 1% THD.

Where are you getting your numbers?

 

[alkemyst]

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/sony-str-da7100es-av-receiver-measurements

Sound&Vision has the STR-DA7100ES doing 123W x 7 into 8 ohms at 1% THD, and 127W x 7 into 4 ohms at 1% THD.

Where are you getting your numbers?

That matches what I said at the 1kHz rating.

ACD is not standardized.

 

[Anarchist420]

Yes, more than anyone. But Yamaha overstates significantly too. Buy Marantz...

the brand on the receiver isnt the only company that is responsible for the unit though. and any brand can change at any minute.

Then buy the least expensive receiver that has preamp out jacks. Don't spend a ton of money on a receiver.

getting a good dac/spdif receiver with balanced out to the amp is a lot of money. then i dont think the balanced out cables themselves are cheap.

could have just gotten a hdmi switch that also outputs dts/dd

DD sucked, always did... i cant believe it was used for so long.

Generally only the flagship receivers will hit close to their stated power levels. Flagship Yamaha and Denons tend to get within 80% of their stated rating into 7 channels, and the top end 5xxxx and 3xxx Onkyos will hit their stated power level at 1% THD ACD, and are just a few watts short at 0.1% THD.

my hk 3490 could blow my speakers before the amp even got hot. it is a crying shame that so many think that more than stereo is the only way to get positional audio.

The main problem with older great receivers is the codec change. As long as they can do the DD/DTS modes you need, it's ok.

if it werent for ip propping HDMI and DRM up, we could still be using pcm/toslink which wouldve been a lot better. and then we could also have something that did something new (in addition to s/pdif for existing apps).

 

[Pacfanweb]

That Anthem MCA 5 is actually a 190/170/190/170/170 rating at ACD @ 8 ohms. It's a great amp, but saying you'd need to spend $2k to touch it when it was bought used is pushing it.

Adding Sony into the mix the STR-DA7100ES was rated at 170x5, it actually put out 200+ at 8ohms and 270 at 4ohms.

ACD it hit 160wpc @ 8 ohms 20HZ and 125wpc @ 8 ohms 1kHz. At 4ohms it was at 125wpc across the board.

These can be picked up for under $500 used and can do almost all Dolby/DTS AFAIK.

I was just looking at one for $400, but it's silver.

MCA 5 Series II, sorry. The specs are what I said they are. It was a $1400 amp when it was new, and it WAS pretty much untouchable that that price back then.

POWER OUTPUT
(Continuous RMS, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, <1.0% THD, AC line voltage held constant at full load)
........................................8&#937; ............................ 4&#937;....................... 2&#937;
# of Channels Driven..........One......All......One.......All......One.......All
.....MCA 2 Series II ......... 200 W 185 W 350 W 270 W 500 W 400 W
.....MCA 3 Series II ..........200 W 170 W 350 W 250 W 500 W 325 W
.....MCA 5 Series II ..........200 W 170 W 350 W 250 W 500 W 325 W

http://archive.anthemav.com/oldsitev1/pdf/mcalit.pdf

In summary, the Anthem MCA-5 is a very good amplifier regardless of the criteria for comparison, but at $1,399 for 170 watts x 5, it is a remarkable one. Sonic Frontiers set out to deliver high quality at an affordable price, and they certainly have succeeded.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_6_4/anthem-mca-5-amplifier.html


Regardless, it's a damn good amp, and you aren't touching it with a receiver unless you spend $2k, like I said. I'll put it up against any receiver under that price point. And even if there is one that equals it, you still spent $2k, as you proved with that Sony receiver, and it'll be obsolete in 5-10 years (even less with one from 2005) and my amp will still be just as relevant as it was ten years ago and all I'll have to do is connect a newer receiver with whatever the latest whiz-bang codecs and connections are in style at the time.

Definitely, I recommend anyone who wants to get serious about HT to get a nice amp, then buy a 2-3 year old top-line receiver with pre-outs....you'll be way ahead of the game vs. buying a new, lesser receiver. JMHO.

edit: Did what I could to try and get those wattage ratings lined up.

 

[Pacfanweb]

The main problem with older great receivers is the codec change. As long as they can do the DD/DTS modes you need, it's ok.

My B&K still sounded great.

But I wanted HDMI and 3D, not to mention something that didn't lock up all the damn time.

Plus, now I can get the lossless sound from Blu Rays, so win/win.