# Love sound



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

I have 7500watts in my HT. (Yamaha and Klipsch and JBL) And the funny thing is I am still looking for more?  I my truck I have 3500watts. (JL Audio and Focal and Pioneer) and always looking for more?


----------



## alm001 (Feb 13, 2010)

Links to pics and build thread of 7500w home setup, pls.


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

What links???


----------



## RedMed427 (Feb 9, 2007)

He's assuming you have pictures of your hometheater posted online....


----------



## wheelieking71 (Dec 20, 2006)

7500 watts? do you have a 50amp service to your living room?! holy dupa!


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

Image hosting, free photo sharing & video sharing at Photobucket

This what I do for fun. These are my fronts and center.


And yes I have two 50's on my HT room.


----------



## wheelieking71 (Dec 20, 2006)

okay, thats badass!!! very nice craftsmanship!!! very very nice indeed


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

I'm surprised that by this point, you're not building your own speakers.


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I'm surprised that by this point, you're not building your own speakers.


What did you think the link to photobucket was? I build all my speakers and crossovers. That set would sell for 12000.00 and the center speaker for 4000.00. How many do you want?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

wrench722 said:


> What did you think the link to photobucket was? I build all my speakers and crossovers. That set would sell for 12000.00 and the center speaker for 4000.00. How many do you want?


Couldn't click on the link (blocked at work), so I figured that with you mentioning Yamaha and Klipsch and JBL, that they were all store bought or premanufactured. 

Nice to know you build your own; I do as well. How exactly are you producing 7500W and keeping your hearing though? I'm currently building the Statement Monitors (among many other projects), and even giving them 200W RMS a pair would be pushing the limits of what I can tolerate comfortably at non-bass frequencies. I'll be sending the sub 500W RMS. I can see the need for more bass, but 7500W? What subs are you using?


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

I am pushing the system with a Yamaha RX-z9 with nine channels at 170w and subs are two Klipsch RWS-15 that are rated at 2400w and two JBL ES- 150P at 500w. 
You may think that is a lot of power but you dont listen all the way up. I use the power for head room. 
When you get a chance click on the link and check it out.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

wrench722 said:


> I am pushing the system with a Yamaha RX-z9 with nine channels at 170w and subs are two Klipsch RWS-15 that are rated at 2400w and two JBL ES- 150P at 500w.
> You may think that is a lot of power but you dont listen all the way up. I use the power for head room.
> When you get a chance click on the link and check it out.


The Klipsch RSW-15 is a 1000W RMS amp. 2400W is the peak rating, and the JBL ES-150P is rated for 300W RMS. 

Also, those ratings on the receiver aren't for all channels driven simultaneously, and even the" all channels driven" tests will not bench the channels simultaneously. I fell into the same mentality with my Yamaha receiver, a 6.1 with an advertised 105W RMS at 1khz or 85W RMS per channel at 20hz-20khz, and that's at 4 ohms, not 8ohms. Then I got to thinking, how the hell does a Class AB amplifier with a typical 50% efficiency, with a maximum power draw rating of 300W on the back, pull the advertised 630W RMS? Then I realized, nowhere in their documentation do they state it can deliver that power with _all channels driven_ simultaneously. I then realized the actual output was 85W x 2. I found out the hard way after arguing with someone on techtalk.parts-express.com that he was right. 

The back of the Z9 rates it at 1000W max power draw, so being a Class AB amplifier, you're looking at ~500W RMS all channels driven. That's actually quite accurate as the amplifier was bench tested at 256W with 2 channels driven at 4 ohms and 172W per channel at 8 ohms. Funny, that 172W per channel at 8ohms is damn close to the 170W per channel advertised at 8 ohms by Yamaha. Considering its all coming from the same power supply and it has a 50% efficiency, its safe to assume you have 500W RMS to work with. Not that it really matters, since 256W into two channels is more than anything can sustain. That's still 73W RMS into 7 channels, which is more than enough to make your ears bleed and put you in excruciating pain when all of your bass frequencies are crossed over to the subs. 

Here's the test by the way:
http://balancedaudio.co.za/reviews/AH_YamahaRXZ11_Review.pdf

I'm not trying to be an ass or anything, but around here, peak ratings are useless. RMS ratings are the only ones that actually matter, and very few people know what their amplifiers can actually deliver from 20hz to 20khz as a sustained volume. That being said, that is one hell of a very nice amp. Makes mine look like a child's toy. 

Still, 2600W of subwoofer power is a lot no matter how you look at it. 

I checked the link on my phone. Nice design on the center channel.


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> The Klipsch RSW-15 is a 1000W RMS amp. 2400W is the peak rating, and the JBL ES-150P is rated for 300W RMS.
> 
> Also, those ratings on the receiver aren't for all channels driven simultaneously, and even the" all channels driven" tests will not bench the channels simultaneously. I fell into the same mentality with my Yamaha receiver, a 6.1 with an advertised 105W RMS at 1khz or 85W RMS per channel at 20hz-20khz, and that's at 4 ohms, not 8ohms. Then I got to thinking, how the hell does a Class AB amplifier with a typical 50% efficiency, with a maximum power draw rating of 300W on the back, pull the advertised 630W RMS? Then I realized, nowhere in their documentation do they state it can deliver that power with _all channels driven_ simultaneously. I then realized the actual output was 85W x 2. I found out the hard way after arguing with someone on techtalk.parts-express.com that he was right.
> 
> ...


I see you are still learing. RMS is B/S. There is no such thing as RMS! Where you got your number are way off base. But anyway I am not going sit here and teach you about sound you can go to school and learn it like I did.
Have good day!


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

wrench722 said:


> I see you are still learing. RMS is B/S. There is no such thing as RMS! Where you got your number are way off base. But anyway I am not going sit here and teach you about sound you can go to school and learn it like I did.
> Have good day!


Wow. That's quite bold. You probably didn't like hearing that peak values aren't what actually matter or the fact that your multi thousand dollar receiver doesn't actually produce more than 500W RMS. Don't like taking it from me? Join diyaudio.com, techtalk.parts-express.com, avsforum.com, and a plethora of other home theater forums and tell them the same thing. Go ahead, tell them that RMS is ******** and see what they have to say. Ask them how much your amplifier also delivers while you're at it, unless you'd like to explain to me how an amplifier rated for a max draw of 1000W can magically produce 1290W of power while losing absolutely no electricity as heat due to the efficiency of Class AB amplifier architecture. 

Sorry, you won't get anywhere coming in here and telling people they're absolutely wrong when the facts are staring you in the face. Nobody gives a cares about peak power ratings because they are worthless.


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

You dont even know what RMS means??
rms power - No such thing. A misnomer, or application of a wrong name. There is no such thing as "rms power." Average or apparent power is calculated using rms values but that does not equal "rms power;" it equals continuous sine wave power output into a resistive load.

Power calculations



A graph of instantaneous power over time for a waveform, with peak power labeled P0 and average power labeled Pavg
Since the instantaneous power of an AC waveform varies over time, AC power, which includes audio power, is typically measured as an average over time. It is based on this formula:[1]


For a purely resistive load, a simpler equation can be used, based on the root mean square (RMS) values of the voltage and current waveforms:


In the case of a steady sinusoidal tone (not music) into a purely resistive load, this can be calculated from the peak amplitude of the voltage waveform (which is easier to measure with an oscilloscope) and the load's resistance:


Though a speaker is not purely resistive, these equations are often used to approximate power measurements for such a system.

Example
An ideal (100% efficient) push-pull amplifier with a 12-volt supply can drive a sinusoidal signal with a peak amplitude of 6 V. When connected to an 8 ohm loudspeaker this would deliver:


Thus the output of an inexpensive car audio amplifier is limited by the voltage of the alternator. In most actual car systems, the amplifiers are connected in a bridge-tied load configuration, and speaker impedances are no higher than 4 Ω. High-power car amplifiers use a DC-to-DC converter to generate a higher supply voltage.

Sine wave power

The term sine power is used in the specification and measurement of audio power. A meaningful and reliable measure of the maximum power output of an audio amplifier – or the power handling of a loudspeaker – is continuous average sine wave power. The peak power of a sine wave of RMS value X is √2*X; conversely, the RMS value of a sine wave of peak X is (1/√2)*X. For a resistive load, the average power is the product of the RMS current and RMS voltage.

Harmonic distortion increases with power output; the maximum continuous power output of an amplifier is always stated at a given percentage of distortion, say 1% THD+N at 1 kHz. Considerably more power can be delivered if distortion is allowed to increase; some manufacturers quote maximum power at a higher distortion, like 10%, making their equipment appear more powerful than if measured at an acceptable distortion level.

In the US on May 3, 1974, the Amplifier Rule CFR 16 Part 432 (39 FR 15387) was instated by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) requiring audio power and distortion ratings for home entertainment equipment to be measured in a defined manner with power stated in RMS terms. (See more in the section Standards at the end of this article). The erroneous term "watts RMS" is actually used in CE regulations.[1]

PMPO



Peak Music Power Output (PMPO), sometimes misused in advertising as Peak momentary performance output, is a much more dubious figure of merit, of interest more to advertising copy-writers than to consumers. The term PMPO has never been defined in any standard, but it is often taken to be the sum of some sort of peak power for each amplifier in a system. Different manufacturers use different definitions, so that the ratio of PMPO to continuous power output varies widely; it is not possible to convert from one to the other. Most amplifiers can sustain their PMPO for only a very short time; loudspeakers are not designed to withstand their stated PMPO for anything but a momentary peak without serious damage.

Peak momentary power output and peak music power output are two different measurements with different specifications and should not be used interchangeably. Manufacturers who use different words such as pulse or performance may be reflecting their own non-standard system of measurement, with an unknown meaning. The Federal Trade Commission is putting an end to this with Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Rule 46 CFR 432 (1974), affecting Power Output Claims for Amplifiers Utilized in Home Entertainment Products.

Remembering that neither specification is universally standardized and different companies use different definitions, the typically understood differences between Peak Momentary and Peak Music Power Output are as follows. Peak Momentary Power Output is measured by the components ability to pass a single peak or a short train of peaks, usually fewer than ten contiguous wave cycles, without distortion or loss in power output. Peak Music Power Output, in contrast, is measured by the components' ability to pass at least ten contiguous wave cycles without distortion or loss in power output.

Power and loudness in the real world

Perceived "loudness" varies logarithmically with output power (other inversely proportionate factors are; frequency, number and material of objects through which the sound waves must travel, as well as distance between source and receiver) a given change in output power produces a much smaller change in perceived loudness. Consequently it is useful and accurate to express perceived loudness in the logarithmic decibel (dB) scale.

An increase/decrease of 3 dB corresponds to a doubling/halving of power. The sensitivity of loudspeakers,rather than merely the often-quoted power-handling capacity, is important. Many high quality domestic speakers have a sensitivity of 84 dB for 1 W at 1 meter, but professional speakers can have a figure of 90 dB for 1 W or even 100 dB (especially for some large-coned woofers). I.E., An '84 dB' source "speaker" would require a 400-watt amplifier to produce the same audio energy as a '90 dB' source being driven by a 100-watt amplifier, or a '100 dB' source being driven by a 9.92 watt amplifier. This does not mean a bigger speaker can produce more sound with less overall power. Just that a larger speaker can typically handle more initial power and so requires less amplification to achieve the same high level of output. This means using a speaker with a higher dB rating can be more advantageous as very high power amplifiers become impractical.

A better measure of the 'power' of a system is therefore a plot of maximum loudness before clipping of the amplifier and loudspeaker combined, in dB SPL, at the listening position intended, over the audible frequency spectrum. A good system should be capable of generating higher sound levels below 100 Hz before clipping, as the human ear is less sensitive to low frequencies, as indicated by Equal-loudness contours.

'Music power' — the real issues

The term "Music Power" has been used in relation to both amplifiers and loudspeakers with some validity. When live music is recorded without amplitude compression or limiting, the resulting signal contains brief peaks of very much higher amplitude (20 dB or more) than the mean, and since power is proportional to the square of signal voltage their reproduction would require an amplifier capable of providing brief peaks of power around a hundred times greater than the average level. Thus the ideal 100-watt audio system would need to be capable of handling brief peaks of 10,000 watts in order to avoid clipping[citation needed] (see Programme levels). Most loudspeakers are in fact capable of withstanding peaks of several times their continuous rating (though not a hundred times), since thermal inertia prevents the voice coils from burning out on short bursts. It is therefore acceptable, and desirable, to drive a loudspeaker from a power amplifier with a higher continuous rating several times the steady power that the speaker can withstand, but only if care is taken not to overheat it; this is difficult, especially on modern recordings which tend to be heavily compressed and so can be played at high levels without the obvious distortion that would result from an uncompressed recording when the amplifier started clipping.

An amplifier can be designed with an audio output circuitry capable of generating a certain power level, but with a power supply unable to supply sufficient power for more than a very short time, and with heat sinking that will overheat dangerously if full output power is maintained for long. This makes good technical and commercial sense, as the amplifier can handle music with a relatively low mean power, but with brief peaks; a high 'music power' output can be advertised (and delivered), and money saved on the power supply and heat sink. Program sources that are significantly compressed are more likely to cause trouble, as the mean power can be much higher for the same peak power. Circuitry which protects the amplifier and power supply can prevent equipment damage in the case of sustained high power operation.

More sophisticated equipment usually used in a professional context has advanced circuitry which can handle high peak power levels without delivering more average power to the speakers than they and the amplifier can handle safely. 

Power handling in 'active' speakers

Active speakers comprise two or three speakers per channel, each fitted with its own amplifier, and preceded by an electronic crossover filter to separate the low-level audio signal into the frequency bands to be handled by each speaker. This approach enables complex active filters to be used on the low level signal, without the need to use passive crossovers of high power handling capability but limited rolloff and with large and expensive inductors and capacitors. An additional advantage is that peak power handling is greater if the signal has simultaneous peaks in two different frequency bands. A single amplifier has to handle the peak power when both signal voltages are at their crest; as power is proportional to the square of voltage, the peak power when both signals are at the same peak voltage is proportional to the square of the sum of the voltages. If separate amplifiers are used, each must handle the square of the peak voltage in its own band. For example, if bass and midrange each has a signal corresponding to 10 W of output, a single amplifier capable of handling a 40 W peak would be needed, but a bass and a treble amplifier each capable of handling 10 W would be sufficient. This is relevant when peaks of comparable amplitude occur in different frequency bands, as with wideband percussion and high-amplitude bass notes.

For most audio applications more power is needed at low frequencies. This requires a high-power amplifier for low freqencies (e.g., 200 watts for 20–200 Hz band), lower power amplifier for the midrange (e.g., 50 watts for 200 to 1000 Hz), and even less the high end (e.g. 5 watts for 1000–20000 Hz). Proper design of a bi/tri amplifier system requires a study of driver (speaker) frequency response and sensitivities to determine optimal crossover frequencies and power amplifier powers.

Standards

In response to a Federal Trade Commission order, the Consumer Electronics Association has established a clear and concise measure of audio power for consumer electronics. They have posted an FTC approved product marking template on their web site and the full standard is available for a fee. Many believe this will resolve much of the ambiguity and confusion in amplifier ratings. There will be ratings for speaker and powered speaker system too. This specification only applies to audio amplifiers. A UE counterpart is expected and all equipment sold in the US and Europe will be identically tested and rated. [2]
CEA-490-A Title: Test Methods of Measurement for Audio Amplifiers
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Rule, Power Output Claims for Amplifiers Utilized in Home Entertainment Products, 46 CFR 432 (1974).

In the US on May 3, 1974, the Amplifier Rule CFR 16 Part 432 (39 FR 15387) [3] was instated by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) requiring audio power and distortion ratings for home entertainment equipment to be measured in a defined manner with power stated in RMS terms. This rule was amended in 1998 to cover self-powered speakers such as are commonly used with personal computers (see examples below).

This regulation did not cover automobile entertainment systems, which consequently still suffer from power ratings confusion. However, a new Approved American National Standard ANSI/CEA-2006-B which includes testing & measurement methods for mobile audio amplifiers is being slowly phased into the market 

This lesson is free.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

Funny, thanks for the "free" lesson. Actually, its not a lesson is it, but you using someone else's work as your own. I can copy and paste too.

Audio power - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Perhaps next time, you should cite your sources instead of copying someone's work. 

Go ahead, tell everyone around here peak power is what matters most. I'm sure they'll take you really seriously. 

No professional reviewing or testing entity goes based on peak power. Nobody chooses their equipment around here based on peak power. Peak power is entirely ignored. Nobody models sub or speaker boxes based on peak power. Its RMS power that's relevant. 

Stop being an ass. I provided proof of what your receiver can deliver, and if you found someone with a bench testing gig, those results would be validated time and time again. Go show off your expensive equipment elsewhere if that's all you're here to do; its not impressing anyone. 

For the record, I do know what RMS means. Root mean squared. Average power. 

But since you've taken this so far, here's a lesson for you.



> In the engineering community, the accepted method of generating a rating of the audio power produced by an amplifier is to connect it to a known load, apply a continuous sine wave signal to its inputs, and monitor its output behavior into the load. This is important to keep in mind as we examine the definition and measurement of “power.”
> 
> The definition of instantaneous electrical power is quite simple: P = EI, where P = instantaneous power in watts, E = potential difference in volts, and I = current in amperes. *However, this definition is minimally useful to us in an audio application because audio sources are not instantaneous pulses, nor are audio loads purely resistive*.
> 
> A sine wave is the building block from which real-world audio signals are built, making it a more appropriate source signal for measurement of an audio system. For a sinusoidal voltage source, power, while still measured in watts, is defined as“average power.” RMS (root mean square) is a method of calculating the voltage and current to obtain the average power.





> So what about peak power? Peak power is a special case where Ppeak = Epeak * I peak. For a sine wave, this is always twice the average power. *A major problem with using this rating, however, is that many power amplifiers cannot maintain peak power for more than a few milliseconds.*
> 
> The standard method of testing a power amplifier to see if the power supply can maintain continuous peak power is to connect all channels of the amplifier into load resistors, drive the amplifier’s input with a square wave and monitor the peak voltage at the outputs. Almost all power amplifiers will ‘sag’ in output power under this drive condition.


Source:
Making Sense of Amplifier Power Ratings

You would stand to gain a lot by dismounting your high horse. Peak power ratings are useless. Sony rates their subwoofers with a peak power of 1200W. By that notion, I could outperform your subwoofers using 5 of them for only $300! 

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Sony-Xplo...src=14110944&ci_sku=12016333#Item+Description

All I'd need is an amplifier. Oh wait, Pyle makes those too. 

http://www.amazon.com/Pyle-PPA450-C...AJKU/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1312577487&sr=8-5

Imagine that, I can have 9000W of amplifier power for my subs for only $350!!! 

Problem is, those Pyle amps are only actually rated for a maximum of 130W x 2 @ 4 ohms, not 4500W total.

We go by the RMS or continuous ratings because that's all we have. We have the peak power, and the RMS/continuous power rating, and then we have manufacturers who fiddle their numbers to try to make it look like their receivers produce more than they do. When we make decisions here on recommendations, we never list peak power. 

Your receiver will not produce more than 500W because
A. it is a Class AB receiver that's 40-60% efficient (more likely 55%)
B. you cannot output more power than the unit's power supply is rated for, which in this case is 1000W, written in plain English on the back of your unit. 

Therefore, I don't care what the numbers are, you're not pulling more than 550-600W out of that amplifier divided up among all the channels.


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

Man I am in my place now!


----------



## dodgerblue (Jul 14, 2005)

wrench722 said:


> I have 7500watts in my HT. (Yamaha and Klipsch and JBL) And the funny thing is I am still looking for more?  I my truck I have 3500watts. (JL Audio and Focal and Pioneer) and always looking for more?


Bummer thread Yo .

On the one hand Wrench has some interesting home built enclosures he can start a nice informative discussion about .

On the other hand he fronts and boasts with his sinewave lovin maxxed out on the brink of destruction powa numbers with terminology fitting for the Dumb Q sub-forum and then gets nutty when Xtreme mentions the RMS power numbers on his peticular amplifiers.

I dont get it , There are plenty of 'I have Mega-Tron Watts Yo' threads to choose from nowadays . If your offering a sensible discussion on your enclosure -speaker build with a stated eye popping worth of 16,000 -very cool. If your offering to be a complete Nob while boasting and arguing about meaningless Max power ratings -good luck .

Xtreme offers something here , he spends the time and effort to do so while recieving little or nothing in return .

FYI 
Xtreme did not Steal the watts out of your amps - with music some of them never existed .


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

Ok in my truck I have three HD-600 and two HD-750. So can I say I have 3300 watts?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

wrench722 said:


> Ok in my truck I have three HD-600 and two HD-750. So can I say I have 3300 watts?


Yeah, you can definitely say you have an even 3300W there, which is a freakin lot, lol.


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

But all the amp's dont RMS 3300watts???? LOL!!!!!


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

wrench722 said:


> But all the amp's dont RMS 3300watts???? LOL!!!!!


Uh, yes they do?

The HD-600 produces 300W x 2 as the maximum RMS output, so 600 total, by 3 amps, is 1800W. The HD-750s produce 1500W total. Last I checked 1800 + 1500 = 3300.

http://mobile.jlaudio.com/products_amps.php?amp_id=483
http://mobile.jlaudio.com/products_amps.php?amp_id=482

Also, you don't need an apostrophe when referring to a plural noun. "One amp, two amps", not "one amp, two amp's."


----------



## Complacent_One (Jul 2, 2009)

Well if you want to get technical, the HD amplifiers have a highly regulated power supply. So the amplifier will not produce much more power at 14.4VDC compared to 12.6VDC, so assuming that is correct and ClassD nature of the amp, with the recommended fuse value of 50AMPS the amplifier could produce in the area of 630Watts x .85 for efficiency loss. That more realistic value would be a total of approximately 535Watts Dynamic, Maximum, Peak...but not Maximum RMS. RMS is derived from measuring the sine wave over a given time Root Mean Square.....so non-technically a "measured average". 

Either way....OP, your Fab skills are killer and whether you are produce 10KW or 100Watts, I am sure that setup sounds killer @ just 1 WATT, especially with what I assume is some seriously efficient horn loads!! Last time I tuned horns like that, they were producing about a Quarter Million watts, but were Klystron and Magnetron based.

OP and Xtreme, it is clear that both of you have more than your fair share of a grasp on the fundamentals of Audio....at least the electronics side of things. Pissing contests are good for one thing....getting wet!!


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

View attachment 29191


View attachment 29192


wrench722 said:


> Ok in my truck I have three HD-600 and two HD-750. So can I say I have 3300 watts?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

wrench722 said:


> View attachment 29191
> 
> 
> View attachment 29192


Got enough power there?


----------



## its_bacon12 (Aug 16, 2007)

If those high-efficiency speakers aren't enough, I'm not quite sure what will satisfy you...

But honestly, nobody gives a flying hoot about how much power you have. As long as it sounds good to you, that's it. I would MUCH rather get away with less power though, since power is pretty expensive in home environment. Less so in car, but still. Why use ridiculous power when you can use 1/5 and still achieve the same outcome? Less expensive, less stress on electrical, etc..


----------



## wrench722 (Apr 3, 2011)

its_bacon12 said:


> If those high-efficiency speakers aren't enough, I'm not quite sure what will satisfy you...
> 
> But honestly, nobody gives a flying hoot about how much power you have. As long as it sounds good to you, that's it. I would MUCH rather get away with less power though, since power is pretty expensive in home environment. Less so in car, but still. Why use ridiculous power when you can use 1/5 and still achieve the same outcome? Less expensive, less stress on electrical, etc..



Its not who has the most power. Its more like headroom.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

wrench722 said:


> Its not who has the most power. Its more like headroom.


Headroom for dynamic peaks is a good way to look at it. Your receiver is expensive not for the output it provides. I already demonstrated the power isn't as high as it sounds. What's great about it is the technology. I'll bet it sounds nothing short of amazing. The ability to switch multiple inputs and outputs of both video and audio. That unit brings your whole theater together. 

The rest of the power is for bass, because bass needs a good amount of power. You need it to hit the lowest notes in movies, such as the helicopter blades in Black Hawk Down, which hit down into the single digit frequencies. You need big subs that can support that kind of power, and when an explosion does happen, its nice to be able to feel it, provided your paintings are riveted to the wall and your decorations are duct taped to their surfaces. 

That being said, he's right about the efficiency. When you can produce 91db with only 1W of power, and a 3db gain for every 2x increase in power, you can make your ears bleed before you hit 40W. How do you think people back in the day ran gigantic monkey coffin speakers with 18" woofers off of 40W RMS per channel and still got plenty loud?


----------

