Before I listen to anything I was wondering in order to give me an idea of choices for picking an amp out is there a way to look at just the numbers to see if it is going to be enough power for the speakers that I have or if it is going to be to powerful enough. Right now I have for fronts definitive technology bp2006tl 19hz -30 khz 92db 250 watts 8 ohms and for my current a/v receiver I have a harman kardon av230 harman kardon stereo mode 65 watts per channel surrond modes 50 watts per channel signal to noise ratio 95db surround system adjacent channel separation analog decoding 40db pro logic,dolby digital 55db dts 55db right now I am not really concerned with the price of the amp I would just like a starting point I have used receivers and I am new to amps and would like to learn more about what to look for. 1. my first question is there a way by looking at these numbers to tell if I am utilizing my fronts to there best potential? 2. I am thinking about buying an amp in order to narrow my search down what should I be looking for in terms of db and watts to use with the 2006tl should I be looking for an amp that has the same specs for example 250watts and 92db? 3. I have also read that some people use there existing recevier and they will add an amp through the pre out on the receiver I was wondering if I went that rout I would just use a power amp and not an integrated amp and if I did go that rout would that change the numbers for the amp that I should be looking at? 4. could any also please explain the difference between a power amp and integrated amp.
2. Speakers don't have watts. And amps don't have db. So no. You can drive those speaks very well with a 50w intergrated or a 380w power amp. Those are efficient enough speakers for almost any unit to drive.
3. Good way to upgrade. I did this with my receiver. Look at power amps from makers like Rotel, NAD, Arcam, Musical Fidelity and others.
4. OK, if you go the route of option #3, your receiver will become your pre-amp with built in tuner. A pre-amp is a switch with a volume control to make it simple. A power amp receives the signal from the pre-amp amd makes it loud. Things are hooked up like this. The CD player, tape deck, turntable or any source are plugged in to the pre-amp. the pre-amp feeds one signal (left and right) to the power amp. The power amps then sends the signal to the speakers. Then you sit and listen with an ice cold beer.
4a. A power amp is just a power amp. A intergrated amp is a pre-amp and a power amp in one unit. If you own a pre-amp and a power amp you have "seperates."
Get a drink,Bob, and have a seat. Please excuse the following typos. Speakers have no watts. The power rating(in watts) is a subjective term to define power handling. db is the rating of how loud(SPL sound pressure level) the speaker will be given a known power input at a given listening distance. 92db is quite high, although not amazingly so.
If a speaker is rated at 92db as opposed to one at 89db, the difference can be dramatic.
Speaker response is rated in db @1watt/1 meter away. To add 3db of volume, typically you must double wattage. If you draw a graph of this, the power requirements double for a 3db gain(not much in 3 db), typically you notice 6 or 7, up to 10, depending.
If you start with a higher efficiency speakr(like yours) the volume comes on like a 89db speaker @250w, when your 91db speaker does it at 125w.
Now the hard part. I think that if you fed those speakers with 250w of clean power, you would set off your smoke detector. Watts are picky and largely undefined.
I am really kind or surprised that it isn't loud enough, but I do not know your room and listening style. Bear in mind, if you double the wattage as everything is right now, the gain will be minimal. That brings around the quality of watts. The quality of power CAN be termed in pounds. Heavier will not(usually) be worse. H/K is good. Your unit is good. A H/K amp with nearly the same power, coupled to your receiver as preamp would be better.Yup. Seperating the power section(amp) from the preamp(receiver will lessen and smooth out the power constraints on the receiver ,because the prepower is more stable without feeding the amp transformer section. The seperate amp is better because all it does is amplify.
Integrated amps(good ones) have dual power supplies and do the same thing, but in one box to save money, and often do not have so many bells,whistles and hockey cards in the spokes, rather the money goes into the power supply.
Your deftec's will not stnd up to a lot of power for long, by reading the figures and 2 reviews. You do not need a lot of power, but adding an amp will give some immediacy to the speakers(as will a good cd player or uni-player, such as the Cambridge dv87 uni). A 100-130wpc Rotel amp(I have H/K receiver Rotel 100w amp) will likely provide some satisfaction, or at least provide some sort of indication of your speakers potential. Get a used Rotel amp for cheap and give it a try.
New housing move and rethought my priorities -- had been listening to a JVC receiver and excellent Energy Bookshelf speakers for 10 years and this meager setup gave me much pleasure.... decided MUSIC should be my main distraction (never cared much for TV). Spent four months educating myself and auditioning equip. and trusted my ears. Didn't make a move until got the speakers. I've had my new system up for a while and I believe -- considering my Audio Experience -- got really lucky, and didn't spend a fortune. Initially was put off by the weirdness of it all....and still am to a degree, first convinced myself of 2 channel, then full range speakers (no sub), then an Integrated Amp (didn't want to spring for separates). The toughest part was SS vs Tubes -- Liked em both. I listen to everything. Got off on detail and base more than liquid mids, so looked hard at hybrids but couldn't pull the trigger>>> $$$$. I'm also hung up on purity of execution and simplicity (No gimmicks and no microprocessor controls, these were deal breakers for me).
Ended up with Audio Physic Tempo IV speakers, Arcam CD73 & ProJect Turntable for source, Musical Fidelity A3.5 Integrated, MF X-10v3 tube passive pre, and MF PSUv3 preamp power supply.
Originally liked the setup with the X-10v3 tube buffer in place between my CD and Amp, however, when friends showed up with their I-Pods and old vinyl, they were lacking. Bought another interconnect and placed the X-10 in the tape monitor loop so all source signal paths would go thru those tubes. At that point (A/B) I could tell most of the magic was coming from the X-10. Looked at that damn wall-wart transformer, and decided to upgrade the power supply for the X-10, and that put the whole system over the top -- warm and it slams hard... anything you plug into the A3.5 sound great. The Audio Physics leave no stone unturned!! Only problem is I don't know what to do with my CD's that were mastered with the music industry in mind (lacking dynamic range) guess I'll wait for the high res remasters.
Don't feel qualified to comment on the Pro-Ject Debut 3 cuz I haven't heard a lot of analogue sources in quite a few years, mainly got the turntable for when friends bring over their LP's -- they love the thing.
The Arcam CD73 is a no brainer, Go, Listen, Compare, Look at Price, Buy... Done.
As for the MF X-10v3 - it was a strange experience. I was kickin back w my gear and lovin it. Then I placed the X-10 in the Monitor Loop and realized what it was doing, my stomach kind of sank because I had not auditioned more Traditional Tube Preamps with SS Power (at the time this combo was not on my radar and thought it was out of my league...still is .... again>>>>$$$$). You know, if this is what tubes sound like in the line stage -- then damn it's good. However it's a tricky balance to find out where resources are best spent. I fell for the Audio Physics and had to find a way to keep them happy with high quality juice...and lots of it (4 ohm load) with limited cash. The most striking effect of the X-10 is an immediate 1or 2db gain and a huge increase in depth, let me be clear, it's not subtle change. It's like the system is behind glass and then, the glass is gone. Beyond that, natural instruments sound more organic and electronic generated stuff sounds more individual or layered.
I like hangin out, and none of my friends are into Audiophile Equipment (you ask them what stereo they have at home and they say "it's black, and still sounds great" ...good for them It's not always about getting the absolute best possible Sonics. I always ask, "so whats new on the I-Pod, at least 160 kbps -- please". The last time this happened, my friend says " wow my I-Pod sounds a lot better than the last time I was over". The X-10 makes the most of low powered devices.
I feel tube buffers are probably dependent on overall system synergies, and the results of adding it would be specific in nature. One reason it works in my setup is that the Audio Physics lean towards the bright and lower bass and the tubes tame the upper end and help the mids with their presence.
Thanks Bryce!! My dealer has offered to me to take the MF buffer home for the weekend and listen to it. I keep turing him down cuz if it sounds nice I'll have to part with another $500.
Ive been looking for a way to bring up the quality of my analog sources (ipod, satellite radio, etc). Does the X10 really make a noticble improvment when hooked up to the take loop (even on a a/v reciever)?
