Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

Power consumption of av receivers

25098 Views 34 Replies 5 Participants Last post by  Lordoftherings
I have seen this on another forum and no one answered the question it goes as follows

Pioneer Vsx-21txh power consumption 400 watts with 110wpc

Denon 2310ci power consumption 708 watts with 105wpc

Onkyo TX-SR707 power consumption 720 watts with 100wpc

now my question is it seems as power consumption goes up watts per channel go down, pioneer seems to get more wpc with less power consumption are the pioneer numbers possible or are the other 2 just inefficient. any thoughts on this.
1 - 8 of 35 Posts
Some Pioneer receivers are using a new amplifier called ICE basically they use a digital amp. Some like the sound some do not. The others are still fairly close in power usage/watts.
There can be some more efficient designs but I would say that the receiver simply does not have as much omph as the others. The power has to come from somewhere.
The best thing to do is check out a good review site on the receivers, some will do bench tests to see what they really output all channels driven. Most only put out half of what they are rated for with all 7 channels going Onkyo is an exception. There mid to upper end receivers are able to do much better.
This is one reason some receiver manufacturers dont even bother getting THX certification as there seems to be a very wide margin of certified ratings given to some models that should not get them. The Onkyo 806 was a perfect example of "how could it have gotten a THX ultra 2 rating" when it could not even drive a 4 ohm load without distortion. The 805 was a solid receiver and even surprised many reviewers who did very in depth bench tests. the 806 its replacement failed very badly yet still got the certification. Maybe someone just assumed that it was the same as the 805 and turned there head or some under the table cash was exchanged who knows.
HK under rates there receivers and shows real numbers under load Sony on the other hand over rates what they can actually do. Its really a buyer beware and do your homework before you buy.
This is most unfortunate because there a lot of newcomers to HT who won't do their homework and get burned in the process because there isn't a clear standard.
Exactly, This is too bad and that is why Sonnie and a few other individuals created the Shack so that we could give out the proper information its just a shame that more people dont use the internet to their advantage before making a purchase.
Here is another way to look at it.
Think of the output power as being stored in batteries (capacitors) most of the time the caps are almost fully charged its when the big explosion happens thats when your receiver is drained of the power it has stored. So in reality it can output more for a very short duration than its intake power rating but when I say short I mean less than 2 seconds before distortion will happen.
Generally a receiver over the $1000 range will do a much better job of output with all channels driven than a receiver below $800. If it only weighs 30lbs or less dont expect much. The best thing to do when shopping for a receiver is get the very best one you can afford even if it means going over budget. You get what you pay for.
The one thing I learned most of all is to look at the power consumption to see if it is possible in regards to the watts per channel.
The weight of a receiver is a real tell tale sign of how good it will do even more than the power consumption. If its less than 40lbs and your looking at at receiver with a rating of more than 100watts per ch walk away.
Class A/B is the kind of amp most receivers in the low to medium price range use. Not the most efficient design but its the least expensive to make. A/B amps simply dont use the power very well and alot of it is given off as heat.
You can look here if your intrested in learning some more about the different kinds of amplifiers.
1 - 8 of 35 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.