NewbieAudiophileExpert
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2022
- Messages
- 306
- Likes
- 136
So yesterday I'm walking through my neighbourhood and about 800 meters away from my place, I'm walking past an apartment complex/building, where I heard somebody's music playing from the third or fourth floor, and boy did it sound very loud, so loud in fact that I'm surprised that the person was doing it, since I'd think somebody would put int a noise complaint.
Anyway, he must have been pumping at least 30-40 watts into each channel plus there must have been a sub, also.
I guess he had some rather neutral and non-offensive music playing - not techno, rap, or anything, so many people would enjoy it?
He must be an audiophile, because it sounded good, even from a distance.
Then it got me thinking about how many AVRs have all of these crazy output wattages - my own RX-V6A allegedes to have 100 watts per channel into two channels at only 0.06% THD.
Honestly, i keep it at -30 dbs at most, and even then it can be too loud, I'd think that just 6-7 watts into each front tower and 5 watts into the center, plus 2-3 watts into each rear/atmos speaker is completely sufficient for a good movie experience.
So it got me thinking about how important wattage rating actually is.
I've read a few forum posts in the recent days and seen a video or two where the Marantz NR1711 has been discussed, and everybody points to how it has 'only' 50 watts per channel into two channels, whilst realistically if during an action scene in 5.1, the amp is driving the fronts at 30 watts each, with the center having 20 watts and the rears having 10 watts each, this would sound obscene and offensive to many neighbours and family members.
Not even going to into the discussion about how crossing the other speakers over at 80Hz and letting the sub do the heavy lifting would further improve those 50 watts per channel, into 'something more' - we all know this.
In fact, had my V6A not cost me $950 AUD, instead of the NR1711's $1300 (on a good day) price tag, it probably would have been a better option, aesthetics and audio-quality wise - though the MusicCast app is quite good.
Anyway, he must have been pumping at least 30-40 watts into each channel plus there must have been a sub, also.
I guess he had some rather neutral and non-offensive music playing - not techno, rap, or anything, so many people would enjoy it?
He must be an audiophile, because it sounded good, even from a distance.
Then it got me thinking about how many AVRs have all of these crazy output wattages - my own RX-V6A allegedes to have 100 watts per channel into two channels at only 0.06% THD.
Honestly, i keep it at -30 dbs at most, and even then it can be too loud, I'd think that just 6-7 watts into each front tower and 5 watts into the center, plus 2-3 watts into each rear/atmos speaker is completely sufficient for a good movie experience.
So it got me thinking about how important wattage rating actually is.
I've read a few forum posts in the recent days and seen a video or two where the Marantz NR1711 has been discussed, and everybody points to how it has 'only' 50 watts per channel into two channels, whilst realistically if during an action scene in 5.1, the amp is driving the fronts at 30 watts each, with the center having 20 watts and the rears having 10 watts each, this would sound obscene and offensive to many neighbours and family members.
Not even going to into the discussion about how crossing the other speakers over at 80Hz and letting the sub do the heavy lifting would further improve those 50 watts per channel, into 'something more' - we all know this.
In fact, had my V6A not cost me $950 AUD, instead of the NR1711's $1300 (on a good day) price tag, it probably would have been a better option, aesthetics and audio-quality wise - though the MusicCast app is quite good.
Last edited: