Holy Crap!

[greggle31]

I just got my speakers! The 170 se is soooo much bigger than I thought! Im starting to question using it as a rear lol Do these omnimounts really hold them??? :confused:

[Kingrsl]

LOL-I know the feeling. I made some mockups from the specs listed. I think my wife is in for quite a shock moving up from the **** cubes we had on the walls. 340's up front and 170's in the rear. My speakers arrive tomorrow! Let me know how the mounting goes. I take it that finding a stud and using wood screws would be better for drywall? I purchased the Omnimounts as well.

[greggle31]

I may return the mounts and make some shelves, they are really big lol Definitly need a stud no matter what in my opinion, these things are beefy. Everything is at least 50 percent heavier than i was thinking. Very well made very solid. The UPS guy was throwing thr boxes around and i got upset, but now that i see what was inside i realize he'd need a sledgehammer to do any damage. lol Im in the middle of setting them up now, everything is really insane so far. Center is also wayyyy big and heavy lol may need a wall mount for that too. :rolleyes:

[leon55]

I have the 170's mounted in rear with the omnimounts. You have to hit a stud and is very hard to tighten the allen screw, not much room. Good luck, but worth the effort.

[audibleconnoisseur]

If the 170's don't work with your setup and WAF, consider the HTM200's. They are a sealed box design so they need no clearance and are about 1/2 the size of the CBM's @ ~ 11" x 6.5" x 6.5". Also, something I am going to do b/c of WAF and so it looks better, is to actually cut a hole in the wall and place the speakers inside of that hole, where they are near flush with the wall. This will allow a better, cleaner look and will not degrade the sound (as agreed by James @ Ascend) as they are enclosed structure. I will let you know how it goes. I may have to use the mounts though b/c I have to tilt them down and in to have them sound the best for my LP (corner to corner). Hope this suggestion helps if WAF is 'unacceptable' with them. DON'T attempt this with the 170's or 340's though... they need 3"/8" minimum, respectively!

What's up Leon55!? I get them in Friday and am ready to set them up. I have since installed nice AR threaded banana plugs (very nice set for money) and cleaned up the wires even more, drilling holes and wiring them through my EU so you can't see them now. Sub wire and telephone wires are gone visually and b/t the baseboard and the carpet! Anyway, will have you over again if you can come back down and we can run another few tests with yours v/s mine, once broken in, on the Pio-81, Den-2807, HK 645 & my Den-1905! What do you think?

[BradJudy]

The Omnimounts do indeed hold the 170s, but make sure you mount them correctly (there is a top and bottom to the Omnimount) and tighten them good. I've been using the Omnis with 170 rears for years.

[leon55]

God, how do you get all this equipment? The cc or bb people see you coming and they start running. lol. I would like to hear the new Denon and Pio-81, I'm trying to decide if I want to try the Emotiva or Outlaw amp with my setup. Maybe you can snag an amp with the other equipment, ha. Yeah, we can do that sometime. Let me know.

[audibleconnoisseur]

Leon55,

If you can find me a location that has both of these and is willing to provide a 30 days, no questions asked return policy... I might go pick them up for you to hear! Certain won't hurt me to hear them either I suppose. I have two buyers for my Denon 1905 at $300-$350 so I will sell if I am satisfied with what I hear enough to make the change. I don't have a need to and according to Dave F., we are not necessarily near the "referenc level" of the Denon just b/c the volume is at +/- 0! This being said, he says I have more than enough power to push the 340's and 200's with so I really have no need to change. He explained certain reasons why or why not so I am listening to him about this. I am sure I am bugging the $hi_ out him but I need to know so I can and will never say "What IF!?"

Thanks again Dave for the time last night, I DO value your input. ;) For others out there, do you have anything or can you post anything about the receivers and power and current, etc that would best explain what we talked about last night? I think it would help a lot of people who are not thinking to ask, or who won't ask to discuss the issue of 80W/ch v/s 100 or 100 or 125W/ch debate that continues to thrive out there. Also, you were telling me that the difference in the two was not as substantial for the purposes of cleaner and clearer sound (if I am recalling correctly) as much as one would think. I know that hearing and sound is subjective to our personal taste and preference but shedding light on the why to get a bigger amp for headroom v/s why we may not need bigger amp or more W/ch when our 80W/ch like my Denon 1905 is capable of outputting. Also the best way to tell if we are getting too close to the clipping arena or about to push the speakers to their limits. I feel with what I have I can't do this but I just want others to know as well that we are safe if we do not do "X."

[Gov]

Yes, I would love to hear more from others in reference to what Audible Con posted about.

BTW Audible, your choice in font and color is killin my eyes!!!!!! :D

[davef]

Hi Audible,

In reference to some of your questions:

* Power has nothing to do with sound quality within the limits of the amplifier's capability.

* More power = greater headroom at loud volumes. At normal listening levels, provided everything else is the same, a 50 watt/ch denon will sound the same as a 1000 watt/ch denon -- provided they use the same amplification and pre-amplification circuitry.

* It requires twice the power for each 3dB more of output. The 340SE has a sensitivity rating of 92dB per 1 watt at 1 meter in a typical room. This means, at only watt of power, a single 340SE will deliver 92dB of output if you are seated 1 meter back (subtract 6dB for 2 meters back) 92dB is LOUD.

2w = 95dB
4w = 98dB
8w = 101dB
16w = 104dB
32w = 107dB
64w = 110dB
128w = 113dB
256w = 116dB

As you can see, at even a clean 64 watts, the 340SE is capable of 110dB output -- that is a single speaker and this is far louder than I would recommend anyone to listen at.

What is more realistic, at normal to loud listening levels, your amplifier will be producing an average of about 1-2 watts of power. Music typically has 12dB peaks (sometimes higher) and it is these peaks in the source material that demand power capability. If you are listening at 2 watts, a 12dB peak will instantaneously demand 32 watts. If the receiver does not have the capability to handle this peak, the peak will either be slightly compressed or clipped (which will sound distorted).

The problem with most receivers today is that many exaggerate their power ratings, wattage is the # 1 marketing gimmick for audio electronics. The difference in capability between an 80 watt receiver and 100 watt is about 1dB of additional headroom -- that is not audible yet they will charge a nice premium for that extra 20 watts. Even worse, I have personally seen receivers that use the exact same power supply and output transistors but 1 might be rated at 80w and the other rated at 100w, even though they both deliver the same power. One is conservatively rated while the other is rated optimistically.

In my opinion, provided the receiver has a minimum wattage rating of 50 watts RMS per channel, features and sound quality should be the deciding factor when choosing a receiver -- not the power rating.

Hope this helps

[audibleconnoisseur]

yes, but you know it is from me!

how is this instead? better?

[audibleconnoisseur]

I love this man - in a non plutonic cool sort of way! Thanks Dave... your help and professionalism is appreciated by more than I, I am sure. I will try to remember and recall this to help others.

Regards and best wishes. I eagerly await the speakers and hope to put your advice and expertise to work in setting up my system :rolleyes:

[Gov]

Thanks for the informative past Dave!! I greatly appreciate it as well.

[audibleconnoisseur]

BTW, Dave, that was very well written and enlightning which is why I strongly dislike a lot of the salesmen out there right now. So here is the question, I heard a Denon 1907 (85W/ch) and 2807 (110W/ch) in the same room at the same -15dB level with all other things being equal (same speakers, same treb/bass, 2ch stereo, etc.). The 2807 sounded a lot louder than the 1907. Was this b/c of the better circuitry do you think, or was it that the extra power in the 2807 allowed the 2807 to sound louder at the same -15 on the dial? This is one of the larger reasons that brought me to the line of questioning above. I thought with the +25W more of power in the 2807 was the main reason and would better help the speakers to perform with less effort!?

[leon55]

Well, with Dave'a explanation, I don't think I will look any further, I've wondered if it might sound better if I had more power. I don't know why we're never satisfied with great sound.

[audibleconnoisseur]

leon, after a long talk with dave and james at ascend, as well as in reading and thinking logically and technically/engineering like that i have come to the conclusion that power is great for hauling boats and trailers and good current and quality circuitry coupled with excellent speakers able to reproduce the audible spectrum is best for music. whether it is hk, denon, pani, yami, onkyo, pio, etc., it is all about what we like and what needs and desires we have for our receivers that is important to us. don't get me wrong, get good quality materials to produce great quality sound!

i will let you all know my thoughts when i get the speakers broken in later this weekend or next week.

[davef]

I should probably elaborate on this more before I give people the wrong impression.

My discussion about power should be limited to the same line of receivers or even the same price point receivers.

For example, if someone were to ask me "I have a 200 watt/channel HK receiver but I am thinking of going separates and I have my eyes on a Bryston amp but it is only 100 watts, what should I do?"

In a heartbeat, go with the Bryston. Besides having better sound quality, the amp itself is capable of delivering far more current. If you ask me, receivers and amps should be rated in current capability.

Here is an example.

Amp X has the ability to deliver 20 amps
Amp Y has the ability to deliver 5 amps

Both amps have the same gain settings (how much voltage they will deliver at a specific volume setting)

Let us assume at max volume level, they both deliver a clean 28 volts to the speaker. The nominal impedance of the speakers is 8 ohm.

Power (watts) = voltage squared / impedance. In this scenario, both amps are delivering 98 watts to the speaker. And, as an example, are equally loud.

Current = watts / volts so both amps are delivering 3.5 amps, well within the capability of both amps and both amps could be rated at 100 watts into 8 ohms.

However, speaker impedance varies dramatically and it is common for an 8 ohm speaker to have significant impedance dips into the 4 ohm range.

What happens at 4 ohms?

The power demand at 4 ohms now becomes 28v squared / 4 ohms = 196 watts.

The current requirement to deliver 196 watts into 4 ohms = 7 amps (square root of (watts/impedance))

Amp Y can't do it -- not even close, so at high volume levels, the frequency range of the loudspeaker that has lower impedance will be compromised (either compressed or clipped).

For Amp X, it is no problem at all, well within the amp's capability.

Let’s look at an example:

The Denon 1907 is rated at 85 watts / channel. Denon does not indicate whether this is peak or continuous wattage, or into what resistive load it will deliver this power. I am a firm believer that any manufacturer will make their wattage rating look as good as possible. So, let's assume that it is 85 watts peak power into 8 ohms. 85 watts peak power into 8 ohms = peak current capability of 3.26 amperes (and I doubt this rating is with all channels driven)

Harman Kardon rates their AVR-245 receiver at 50 watts per channel, all channels driven into 8 ohms. However, they also rate the maximum current capability at 35 amps. 35 amps divided by 7 channels = 5 amps per channel.

Care to guess which receiver really has more "power"? For typical class A/B amplifiers like these, current capability is mostly determined by the power supply -- and the larger the transformer, the more capability. The bulk of the weight in class A/B amps or receivers are in the transformer... Care to guess which receiver weighs more? The "85 watt rated Denon" or the "50 watt rated HK"?

Just a disclaimer here, I have absolutely nothing against Denon products -- in fact, just the opposite. This is just one example to show how meaningless "wattage" ratings have become in the industry.

If you really want loads of power, purchase a separate power amp or use Ohm's law and some basic math to determine current capability. It can be tricky as most manufacturers don't want you to know this.

Here is something to test your new knowledge. The Bryston 2B http://www.bryston.ca/2bsst_m.html is rated at 100 watts into 8 ohms and also rated at 180 watts into 4 ohms of one channel. What is its max current capability for one output channel?

As a favor, please don't link to this thread in any of the more public audio forums. I don't want or need any bad blood and this could get nasty.

Thanks in advance!

[Jonnyozero3]

Ah! A penguin just fell off my iceberg!

(I ran out of room to learn new things...)

[audibleconnoisseur]

I have... current envy! Dave, this is why we are your customers. Not one time has any of the five companies I spoke with layed it out like this in writing for us and you are doing this knowing you are not going to make money on the receivers (unless we get the HK of course)! :cool:

I will do some math on a few receivers that I have been looking at and go from there. Of course I will still go with my ears as they are really what I am trying to please here. It is good to get this kind of knowlege of what to expect and what we 'should' be looking for when we are doing research or buying a system. I wish everyone did this and there would be much less returns and much more happy purchases. I will make sure I focus on the sound and on the current instead of the watts/ch.

FYI, Denon said their 80W/ch is a "true" rating/ch and not inflated but then... they WERE Denon! Still their receivers sound really good and are quality units that I have found.

Have a great night Dave and thanks for your continued time and input :D

[greggle31]

got all the speakers setup, they sound great! im havign trouble finding a good spot for the sub. It sounds kinda funny in the two ideal spots i have it. UPS didnt come with the omni mounts and then said they tried to deliver them later in the day. I didnt hear them, but it may have been the master and commander lol Now theyre gonna come back tommorow and i have work. So far everythign sounds good, but i def have playing around to do. Thanks to everyone for the help in choosing ascend. :D

[davef]

I heard a Denon 1907 (85W/ch) and 2807 (110W/ch) in the same room at the same -15dB level with all other things being equal (same speakers, same treb/bass, 2ch stereo, etc.). The 2807 sounded a lot louder than the 1907. Was this b/c of the better circuitry do you think, or was it that the extra power in the 2807 allowed the 2807 to sound louder at the same -15 on the dial? This is one of the larger reasons that brought me to the line of questioning above. I thought with the +25W more of power in the 2807 was the main reason and would better help the speakers to perform with less effort!?

What you heard has nothing to do with power, has to do with gain. Gain is the amount of voltage being delivered. Here is a good way to think about it. I have two water pipes, one is 1 inch in diameter and the other is 2 inches in diameter. The water in both pipes is moving at 30mph. The volume control can be though of as regulating the speed of the water and the speed of the water can be thought of as SPL. The actual force of the water moving (which would be determined by both the speed of the water and the volume of the moving water (volume as in liters) could be considered as the power. The 2 inch diameter pipe has much more power, or force, but the water is moving at the same speed (same SPL) between both.

A 50 watt receiver could have its gain set so that its volume control position at halfway equals 20 volts output. A 500 watt receiver can have its gain set so that it is delivering 10 volts at the 1/2 position of the volume control. Which receiver is going to sound louder with the volume control at halfway? The 50watt unit will. The volume control position when comparing one receiver to another is mostly meaningless.

In addition, most manufacturers use the same gain settings throughout a line of receivers... You should have heard absolutely no volume level difference between the two receivers if both controls were set at the same position, provided one was not delivering full power (which it wasn't). What you head is typical salesperson trickery to up sell you, he/she probably set the gain higher for the higher power receiver in the speaker configuration menu. You know, exactly as I explained to you before -- rather than set at 0db, probably set the speaker levels to +6dB so that you would hear a very noticeable difference between an 85 watt receiver and 100 watt receiver. Honestly, the max SPL difference between 85 watts and 100 watts is less than 1dB. Nearly impossible to hear.

Go back to the store, take the same demo, and then when the salesperson is not around, go through the setup menu of each receiver and see what the setting is for the speaker levels ;)

[audibleconnoisseur]

If they did that... I will flog them into submission! Actually, I don't know that is what he did and they don't work on commission but still I saw the levels, saw -15 on both dials, checked the trb/bass @ 0 and thougth I saw the computer that showed no difference. He did say there was better circuity in the 2807 but I heard the difference. This is why I have three units at my home awaiting your speakers so I can test myself with one receiver and another pushing the same speakers! I am going to commit these things to memory and when I am out, help those that need it even if the salesperson is trying to upsell them. I get a few looks when I deny their sub tests telling them I have one at home that will kick their subs ass up and down for 1/4 the price - I always get questions from others then! :D Some of the subs they were trying to sell me don't even drop to 20Hz and were nearing $1,000-$2K! Rookies. Ok, really, bed time for me. Thanks again and chat tomorrow if you are online with support. Much respect! :)

[audibleconnoisseur]

Professor Dave, is the answer 6.71A/ch @ 4 ohm & 3.56A/ch @ 8 Ohm?

[Kingrsl]

Interesting read! I think my local A/V specialist store may be guilty of that. I've certainly heard a difference between their "budget" line and high-end line of Yamaha. I couldn't afford to hold onto multiple receivers to test side-by-side at home and the BB & CC stores here don't carry anything with decent features.

[audibleconnoisseur]

"Harman Kardon rates their AVR-245 receiver at 50 watts per channel, all channels driven into 8 ohms. However, they also rate the maximum current capability at 35 amps. 35 amps divided by 7 channels = 5 amps per channel."

Since I have read and digested your information last night and this morning, and with some quick math...

Current (Amps) = sq.rt.[Watts/Ohms]
5a = sq.rt.[W/8ohm]
(5a)(5a) = W/8ohm
8ohm(5a)(5a) = W/channel
200 = W/channel

...are you saying above that the equivelant W/ch in the HK example above would be equal to 200W/ch? :eek:

I hope I didn't do the math wrong here...

[audibleconnoisseur]

Dave, others,

Ok, spoke with Denon about their systems, 1905, 1907, 2307 & 2807. They were very friendly and took the time to discuss, as Dave does, some technology. I will break it down from the 15 minutes we talked:

-1905 = 80W rms
-std testing for denon units is 6ohm - 16ohm
-"typical spkrs installed are 4ohm - 8ohm"
-it is considered and is published as a "high current amp" but he did not know or could not tell me how high in total b/c denon does not test for that such as HK does. he did say it would be more of a comparison if the current that is rated had a qualifer of time (this makes sense as a pico second is not a long time in electrical time - i can curl 125-130lbs, but not more than 1 or 2 times... i am with Dave and say this with respect to HK or others that rate using current/amps and their equipment!!), i have respect for all of them!
-also said that at all 5,6,or 7 channels running full out, which almost never happens, you might could assume a 10dB drop/ch. mainly your sound comes from the front three channels anyway unless you are listening to 5/6/7 ch stereo.
-said if you are listening to SACD's via analog discrete, it would jump to 90W/ch!
-compared to the 2307 and 2807, the 1905 does not have the same higher quality and newer components and as well, it has a weaker power supply as the 2807 so there would be a difference in the sound and quality of sound at the same level from the 1905 to the 2807, even from the newer 1907 to the 2807. "technology and power and internal parts are simply better but to truly know, use the voltometer at the speaker connection to agree that BOTH systems are producing the same volts to compare apples to apples (adjust the gain to match the output of course)."

So, Dave, he agrees with you fully and used a lot of the same terminology and ideas that you did and I didn't feel he was hiding anything which was refreshing. Even said to reset the system in the comparison as you mentioned to me in your example while at the store, testing the 2807 v/s 1907.

anway, you weren't sure about the above in relation to denon so there are the answers. glad to do the research for you and the others if they are in the same boat. fyi, he really likes the bryston amp as well... :)

[Kingrsl]

The 170s are pretty big for surrounds! It really doesn't kick in until you unpack one. I have all my speakers mounted now and the Omnimounts seem sturdy. The only thing is you can't turn the speakers inward 90 degrees. I have mine turned in as far as I can and they still "intersect" about 2 feet in front of the LP. I really haven't had the chance to do a proper calibration (it was already 9:30pm when I finally had them wired up) but it doesn't seem to affect it TOO much. Does anyone have any ideas? My LP on the couch is about 1 foot in front of the wall and I can't really move it up in my living room. Tomorrow is movie testing day! I played a few favorite scenes with the volume turned down low and I'm amazed how many sounds I had never heard before! I get to play with the new receiver and set my levels correctly tomorrow. Pics to follow.

[audibleconnoisseur]

You can try to cut a piece of 2x4 at a sturdy 45deg angle and use that for the extra angle that you can't seem to get from your brackets. just make sure to use drill holes and screws that are appropriate length. The cut piece of 2x4 needs to be solid so everything will hold. Oh, I would pait it the color of your walls as well!

[HP666]

Hey guys, I was hoping I can get some input on a mounting dilemma I have run into. Please look at the attached sketch. This is a top view of my listening area. The small boxes marked 1 and 2 represent where I would like to place my 2nd set of surrounds. I would like to use 170SE's but I'm concerned about # 1 due to location in the corner. The thicker black line behind speaker 1 is a louver door so an omnimount can't be put there. I was hoping to mount # 1 on the wall it's next to in the picture, but if it can't be turned at 90 degrees toward the listening area then that kind of defeats the purpose. I will be placing my speaker order shortly and I'm trying to plan ahead. I really would rather not go with the 200's. My fronts are 340's my 1st set of side surrounds will be 170's. Any suggestions or ideas??
http://dsbl.baseball.sportsline.com/images/news/rear2.jpg

[Kingrsl]

You can try to cut a piece of 2x4 at a sturdy 45deg angle and use that for the extra angle that you can't seem to get from your brackets. just make sure to use drill holes and screws that are appropriate length. The cut piece of 2x4 needs to be solid so everything will hold. Oh, I would pait it the color of your walls as well!


Good idea. I'd definately need to paint them. My wife already isn't happy about the size of the 170s. I think being able to turn them in 90 degrees might actually look better as they wouldn't stick out quite so far. I'm sure she'll get used to it though....she once thought the 61" DLP was too big when we bought it. :D

[audibleconnoisseur]

are they able to be listened to while firing 90deg forward (mounted directly on the wall) and still sound good?

i made a mock-up cardboard box and that is why i have the HTM200's coming and not the 170's.

[HP666]

are they able to be listened to while firing 90deg forward (mounted directly on the wall) and still sound good?

i made a mock-up cardboard box and that is why i have the HTM200's coming and not the 170's.

My problem is that, if you look at my sketch, # 1 couldn't be mounted directly on the wall even if I wanted to. It would be facing parallel to the back wall, as opposed to forward like it's supposed to. If the omnimount was big enough I could mount it that way, then turn the speaker 90 degrees to face front.
I suppose I could build a shelf.(??)

[audibleconnoisseur]

what about putting it on wall facing the screen that is nearer the screen ( to the left, nearest your seat 1). you could do one of two things, bring it up there and hang the other one from the ceiling with a simple u mount and they would both be closer and same distance, or i had thought about the HTM200's and mounting them flush in the wall since they are closed box design. Also they would be able to get 90deg b/c they are not as large. They are still very good , especially for surround duty.

[HP666]

what about putting it on wall facing the screen that is nearer the screen ( to the left, nearest your seat 1). you could do one of two things, bring it up there and hang the other one from the ceiling with a simple u mount and they would both be closer and same distance, or i had thought about the HTM200's and mounting them flush in the wall since they are closed box design. Also they would be able to get 90deg b/c they are not as large. They are still very good , especially for surround duty.

I thought about that wall, but the problem is people will be walking through there and the ceiling is only barely 7' high, and even there the speaker will basically be right above the viewer/listerners head, maybe a foot or two behind. I think that's too close, no? The pic is not to scale. Although you mentioned a u-mount from the ceiling. I may be able to mount both of them like that, then # 1 could just go in front of those doors. That could possibly work. The problem is also that I want to keep those two speakers the same distance from the seats to keep the sound good, I don't want it thrown off.

I would rather stick with the 170's rather than the 200's. With the 340's up front if I do want to hear 5.1 or 7.1 music I think the 170's would be better off, no?

[AleksB]

(Going back a few days in this thread) One trick for comparing receivers in a store and making sure you are comparing apples to apples is to get a $30 Radio Shack SPL meter and take it into the store with you.

With the receivers hooked up to identical speakers run each one through its speaker level calibration. In general, you set the SPL meter to Slow/C Weighting and hold it with you at the listening position. The receiver will go through each speaker, with it's internal level set at 0dB, and you adjust the fine tuning so that your meter reads 75dB.

After you've done this, setting the levels on the different receivers to the same volume (-15dB in your case) should produce the same overall volume (within reason) and you can compare other qualities of the sound.

[curtis]

(Going back a few days in this thread) One trick for comparing receivers in a store and making sure you are comparing apples to apples is to get a $30 Radio Shack SPL meter and take it into the store with you.

With the receivers hooked up to identical speakers run each one through its speaker level calibration. In general, you set the SPL meter to Slow/C Weighting and hold it with you at the listening position. The receiver will go through each speaker, with it's internal level set at 0dB, and you adjust the fine tuning so that your meter reads 75dB.

After you've done this, setting the levels on the different receivers to the same volume (-15dB in your case) should produce the same overall volume (within reason) and you can compare other qualities of the sound.
You also have to have the same source, and not many stores nowadays have that kind of flexibility.

[audibleconnoisseur]

Yes, I know about the SPL, etc. What I was getting at is that the 2807 was able to play louder at the -15dB than the 1907. This, to me, said the parts/circuitry/audessy system insides were better or the amps were higher or both. this to me meant that you could technically play them louder with more headroom! that was all but I wasn't sure at the time.

[AleksB]

Yes, I know about the SPL, etc. What I was getting at is that the 2807 was able to play louder at the -15dB than the 1907. This, to me, said the parts/circuitry/audessy system insides were better or the amps were higher or both. this to me meant that you could technically play them louder with more headroom! that was all but I wasn't sure at the time.

Right - but as was said elsewhere in this thread that the volume difference you heard is due to gain mismatch, likely a sales tactic to make the more expensive one sound better at similar looking volumes. What I am suggesting is to calibrate each of the models being demonstrated to the standard (75dB @ 0dB is what the system tuning disks describe when playing back true white noise) so that this sort of power misconception can be eliminated. This way, at -15db those receivers would be putting out identical volumes (assuming identical sources as was mentioned in reply to my original post).

[audibleconnoisseur]

i checked everything that i saw and it was all equal. they told me the 2807 had newer, better parts, circuitry, audessy system, larger amps, etc. i can't say for certain that all was = but from what i saw it was. i didn't delve into the digital system they were changing the receivers with. it could have been something in there but i don't know. that is why i bought the 2807 and pio 81 and hk645 and will test them at my home on my own this weekend and next week! i'll show them all :cool:

[Jonnyozero3]

that should be a fun comparison - let us know how it goes...

[davef]

Yes, I know about the SPL, etc. What I was getting at is that the 2807 was able to play louder at the -15dB than the 1907. This, to me, said the parts/circuitry/audessy system insides were better or the amps were higher or both. this to me meant that you could technically play them louder with more headroom! that was all but I wasn't sure at the time.

Hi Audible,

I think you are missing the point I have been trying to make... If the 2807 sounded better, that is one thing. The fact that it played "louder" at -15dB on the volume contol means absolutely nothing. Current (amperes) is a function of voltage and impedance. If neither receiver was approaching the limits of their current capabilities (and I am sure they were not) -- if they were both delivering the same amount of voltage into the same loudspeakers, they were both producing the same amount of current (for ANY amp / receiver). If one receiver was louder than another at the same volume control level, that receiver was delivering higher voltage, meaning that receiver has higher gain and because of the higher voltages, would be producing more current.

Voltage = how loud it is.
Current = how load it CAN get and how much headroom.

You can not audibly determine how much headroom an amplifier has unless you are listening at a loud enough level where there is audible clipping or compression. At the same output level (not volume control setting) into the exact same loudspeakers (must be the same impedance) if one amp begins to distort and sound compressed while the other still sounds clean, the cleaner sounding amp has more headroom === more current capability === more "power". This procedure is the only possible way to make this generalization without taking measurements.

I believe you are confusing gain (voltage) with power... Please read my examples again.. I have explained the concept as clearly as I am able -- difficult for me to put concepts to words sometimes..

I think perhaps you are assuming that the overall volume of the system will keep increasing as the volume control knob gets higher and higher... It won't, you will hit the maximum current capability of your receiver well before you "turn it all the way up"---- Think of the accelerator pedal on a car example.... the speed of the car in reference to the position of the accelerator pedal = gain (amount of voltage being delivered). It is completely unrelated to what the top speed of the car is or how fast the car can accelerate (power).

If you test drove 2 cars -- car 1, you pushed the accelerator down 1/4 and went 50mph -- car 2, you pushed the accelerator down 1/4 and went 30mph... In your example, you would be assuming car 1 has a faster top end speed. You can't draw that conclusion from this premise... At least in an older car, all I would need is a wrench and pliers to make car 2 go 80mph or 10mph at ¼ pedal position. In a receiver, a soldering iron and a few resistor changes – in a car, my “modification” has no affect on the capability of the engine -- in a receiver, my modification has no affect on the capability of the power supply. Hey – this is a good example, I think?

Perhaps someone else can explain it better? Where is LeeBailey when you need him :o

AleksB - you get it :)

[audibleconnoisseur]

Yes, I get it and I think I provided an incorrect argument but your message a few posts back about this and via the phone the other night were CLEAR and I know something was incorrect. Please don't think me slow or incapable of comprehending what you are saying, as I do :)

I know that what I heard and saw were different and I will get to the bottom of it when I can return there to retest the same speakers, as well as test on my own. Not to rehash or ask for another explanation (btw, all of your explanations were VERY clear to me, especially the water in the pipes as I used to be a loss prevention consultant with FM GLOBAL) but my arguement and comments were that @ -15dB on both, I heard much louder sound coming from the same speakers with the 2807. That led me to the questions prior about why and how so I was trying to educate myself as to why or how. I first thought that with this test, if I pushed the 2807 to -5 or 0, it would have been MUCH louder still than the 1907 at the same level so there must have been more power/current/amps. I now know that there is a fallicy in the thought process but it was a good thing to happen b/c now I know MUCH more about this than I did a week ago, thanks to you and the others on here offering their input.

I did consider the 2807 b/c it could play louder at the same perceived volume level on the dial but now I know better what to look for when I test this weekend and next week. I will use the SPL and the volt meter as you suggested, hopefully without having to call you, and put some thoughts down when I am comfortable with them.

Thanks Dave, for your CONTINIED and PROFESSIONAL support. I really am not unintelligent, quite the opposite with IQ above MENSA level - however, ignorance will kill you and this is why I ask so many questions! Thanks again to all for your input!

[BradJudy]

That is a pretty good analogy.

Here's a break-down of how it works:

Lets start by assuming you have a separate amplifier and pre-amplifier (if you decided to use an external amp with your Denon, this would be your situation), and you're using the analog outputs of a CD player as your source (to keep it simple). Our speakers are 8ohm.

In both of these cases, gain is literally a multiplier - it increases the voltage by a certain factor (like 6 times).

An amplifier has a few properties: gain, max power output, max current output (there are more, but we'll stick to these). All three of these items have exact values that you can measure and are always the same for a given amp - lets say our amp has a gain of 7x (usually measured in db, but that's more confusing for our discussion), a max power output of 60W per channel into an 8ohm speaker and a max current output of 3A per channel.

A pre-amplifier also has a couple of properties: gain and attenuation (volume control). Lets say our pre-amp has a gain of 3x. The attenuation is variable since it's the volume knob.

A CD player basically has a fixed output of so many volts, we'll assume 1V for this example. (Obviously the voltage is lower during quiet passages of music and higher during loud ones, but we'll just pick one level for the example).

So, what happens when you play music??

A CD player is kicking out a 1V signal to the pre-amp.

The preamp does two things, it reduces the level through attenuation and increases it through gain. This seems very strange, but think of it like an engine that is always going at the same speed and the only way to slow the car down is to use the brakes. For this example, we'll assume our volume knob brings the level down to 0.7V, then the gain brings it back up to 2.1V and passes this to the amp.

The amp also has a gain and increases the 2.1v to 14.7V which it passes on to the speaker. An amp applies the same multiplier to all incoming signals, it's just a voltage increasing box. With an 8ohm speaker applying 14.7V requires 27W of power per channel, meaning that the amp has to be able to put out 1.8A per channel. Our amp can pull this off (our amp hits its limits right around an 8ohm speaker at max volume with this pre-amp and CD player).

If we hooked this same combination to a 4ohm speaker, reaching 14.7V would require 54W and 3.7A per channel, exceeding the current capabilities of our amp. For this reason, high current output amps are most important when you have speakers that have a lower impedance.

How 'loud' things get at a particular voltage is determined by the sensitivity of the speaker. In the example above, if both speakers had the same sensitivity, they would be equally loud at the same volume knob setting, but the 4ohm one would be eating up twice the power.

In short, 'loudness' is only a factor of voltages (output of source, attenuation and gain of pre-amp, gain of amp and sensitivity of speakers) and the back end requirements to meet those demands are met by the power and current capabilities of the amp.

[audibleconnoisseur]

Hey, they sound damn good! They are build well and solid! They were very reasonably priced for my needs! Dave and the crew are top notch at support and helping the "little guy" know more! They could use a refresher look sitting on the bookshelfs, but the sound is what is important!

I also know that I am getting mine in about 2-3 hours and will be leaving work early to bring them in from the cold and set them up properly to break them in well. I know I can't wait so I am taking a 1/2 day! I know that I have researched what I can and past what I needed to for the best I could find in my price range and know that I have compared them to $500, $600, $800, $900 and $2100 sets of both floor and bookshelf speakers and also that they outperform all of them. Are they the best out there? This depends on who you ask. For me, my needs and wants and budget, they are and I came to this conclusion from MUCH research given to many sets of speakers (10+ sets) and time spent talking with Dave, James, and all of you out here with your collective knowlege. Only thing left to do is break them in, test them with different receivers to find the best sound and features for my ears and our needs and hook everything up and enjoy! :rolleyes:

You guys out here are awesome and I appreciate all of you that have provided your input for my/our benefit. Much respect to you all - I will still be around often though since I work on a computer much of the day! Cheers and Ciao ~

[Quinn]

I don't know if your receiver has pre-outs, if it does and you like its' feature set; you might give the idea of buying an amp and using your receiver as a pre/pro instead of another receiver some thought.

[leon55]

Would it be safe to say that most receivers would be high current.

[BradJudy]

Would it be safe to say that most receivers would be high current.

No, that isn't a safe statement. The best way to see if they are higher current is to see if they officially support 4ohm speakers (for example, H/K says their receivers are fine with 4ohm speakers).

Another popular method is the pure weight of an amp/receiver. Since the largest single source of weight in an amp/receiver is the transformer(s), it is an indicator of current capacity. This measurement isn't exact because other things add weight (heat sinks, chassis, etc) and it doesn't work well with class-D options that are much more efficient, requiring smaller transformers and heatsinks.

[bri1270]

It still seems as though there is some confusion as to the "overall volume level," in this case -15 (from reference, because I'm sure the store properly calibrated) and indivudual gain settings for each channel. I'll take a more simplistic approach and see if this helps (and I do apologize if you understand).

Both receivers were set to -15 at the main volume setting. In the set up menu for each receiver there will be additional "volume" (actually referred to as gain) settings for each individual channel (or speaker and typically referred to as "channel level"). The 1907 may have had the individual channel settings at "0" where as the 2807 had it's individual channel settings to +6, thus the 2807 sounded louder and more powerful. What everyone has been trying to say is to look into the setup menus of both receivers and see what the "channel level" is set to for both...chances are the 2807's will be higher than the 1907. This is where Dave's pipe analogy comes into play (the 2807 would be using the 2" pipe, and the 1907, has been restricted to a 1" pipe).

Not trying to beat a dead horse and again I apologize if I'm oversimplifying.

[audibleconnoisseur]

i did this and i am telling you that all things were equal except what i didn't see on the computer screen he was controlling. this is why i have the 2807 in my home to test b/c i won't lie or cheat myself! i appreciate your input but the test has to be performed by me to know for sure! i will let you all know this or next week when i have the guys back over to test them...