jeff spicoli Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I posted a question a few weeks ago on my AR10pi's Im currently restoring and have a line on a one owner Pioneer SX1010. The Pioneer is rated at 105 watts per channel at 4 ohms. Will this be enough? I've read that i might need more and it seems that if i ask 10 different people i get 10 different answers? What did they AR owners use when you really didn't have all that much power to choose from? I'd like to get something that is from the same time that my speakers came...hence the Pioneer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryM Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I ran my 3a's off of a vintage technics 60 watts per channel receiver. They sounded very good. Low distortion is much more important then watts perchannel. I also used to run my 91's off of a vintage Marantz 2252b which is around 70 watts per channel into 4 ohms. Sounded great. There was not a lotof difference between that and the Hafler dh200 that I ran them off later. Just some more volume and the bass had more authority. The Hafler dh200 isover 200 watts per channel into 4 ohms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyC Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 The amount of power required from an amplifier is entirely dependent on the listening space and how loudly you want the speakers to play. Higher power ratings do not mean better sound at lower volume levels. Your speakers can sound excellent with as little as 25 watts/channel, depending on the quality of the amp and listening level requirements.If the Pioneer is functioning properly it will be a good match for your speakers, and provide plenty of power.Roy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff spicoli Posted January 31, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Thank you HarryM and RoyC. I always wondered what people did back in the early days of stereo and hi-fi when the amount of power wasn't as prevalent. I guess it depends on the quality and not quantity when it comes to watts per channel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobHolt Posted February 1, 2014 Report Share Posted February 1, 2014 Agree with Roy. That series of Pioneer receivers are superb - powerful, high spec and wonderful sound. Oh and cool looks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfmisso Posted February 28, 2014 Report Share Posted February 28, 2014 For a given relatively low listening level, one thing that some people notice between different amplifiers is the dampening they provide to bass response of the speaker that is not in the music signal. Higher powered amplifiers usually have lower output impedance (higher damping factors), and thus the bemf generated by the moving speaker decays faster - the circuit is closer to a short. To me; amplifiers with lower output impedance sound noticeably better, especially at low listening levels that amplifiers with higher output impedance.Putting it a different way, the lower the output impedance of the amplifier, the more closely the audio output of the speaker will follow the electrical input provided by the amplifier to the speaker. This is more noticeable to me at lower sound levels, and in the bass frequencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ar_pro Posted February 28, 2014 Report Share Posted February 28, 2014 It's "damping"."Dampening" is when something gets moistened.How do you feel about amplifiers with output autoformers, like those used by McIntosh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.