#19556 - 06/24/04 04:12 PM
high powered Receiver
|
Deputy Gunslinger
Registered: 06/21/04
Posts: 11
Loc: Peoria,Illinois USA
|
am fairly new with getting fmiliar with Outlaw prod. family,but know they make some excellent "high powered" amps....why not a "high powered" 5 or 7 channel receiver. Power ratings on current receiver offerings seem conservative
------------------ music makes the world go 'round!!!
_________________________
music makes the world go 'round!!!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#19557 - 06/24/04 04:31 PM
Re: high powered Receiver
|
Desperado
Registered: 03/21/01
Posts: 14054
Loc: Memphis, TN USA
|
Logistics and desire to maintain a quality level at the target price point dictate a lot of this, I believe. Tucking an amp the size of a 755 or 770 into a receiver costs both space and money: both of those amps are over seven inches tall by themselves and filled completely with heat sinks, power supply, and amp circuits. Adding the processing and switching components of a receiver to that chassis would be very difficult -- you'd end up with a unit that was easily ten inches tall or taller (making it too large to fit in a lot of entertainment centers), would weigh the better part of 100 pounds, and would cost well over $2000. At that point, it is equally cost effective to buy a pre/pro and amp package like the 950/755 or 950/770. The 1050 was rated for 65W per channel, but those of us who used the amp section of the 1050 found that to be a very conservative rating -- it is not the same as a mass-market receiver like you might find at Best Buy. I replaced a good quality Yamaha receiver (RX-V690) that was rated at 80W/channel for the left and right channels with a 1050 and found that if anything I gained amp headroom. The 1070 appears to be rated at 65W with all seven channels driven, which is extremely unusual (typically, receivers' power ratings are listed as "such and so" watts per channel with only two or three channels driven). What I believe Outlaw is trying to do is provide enough power in their receivers to satisfy most receiver owners' needs while keeping the cost as low as possible. The pre-amp outputs then offer an easy route to additional power for some or all of the channels if circumstances dictate a need for it. ------------------ gonk -- 950 Review | LFM-1 Review | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | Saloon Links
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#19558 - 06/24/04 04:33 PM
Re: high powered Receiver
|
Gunslinger
Registered: 02/04/02
Posts: 274
Loc: Cleveland, Ohio
|
They are RATED conservatively...my 1050, rated at 65 watts, 3 channels driven, wiped the floor with my previous Marantz receiver rated at 110 watts x 3 for front L/C/R, 75 watts x 2 for surround. Outlaw rates their amps much like NAD, Harman Kardon and other mid/hi-fi brands, i.e. Real World power spec's. There's no industry standard for power rating so don't get caught in that "game". The 1070 is supposed to have 65 watts, all 7 channels driven, an improvement over the 1050 which is pretty darn good to begin with.
_________________________
It's all about the hardware!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#19559 - 06/24/04 08:57 PM
Re: high powered Receiver
|
Desperado
Registered: 04/10/02
Posts: 1857
Loc: Gusev Crater, Mars
|
Actually the Federal Trade Commission stepped in and set standards in the 1970s because of wild "peak power" claims by amp manufacturers. The standard was supposed to be both channels driven to a stated distortion level into a stated load and measured under continous conditions across the audio band. This was to be measured after a preconditioning period at 1/3rd power for one hour which is the point of maximum heating for solid state amplifiers. Most amplifier manufacturers complied and stated "100 watts continous (RMS), both channels driven into 8 ohms with no more than .01% distortion from 20Hz to 20kHz". Obviously with the advent of home theater, some manufacturers ( not Outlaw! ) have started to be real scumbags and rate their amplifiers dishonestly. It's probably time for the Federal Trade Commission to step in again and reign in these low lifes and force them to comply.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#19560 - 06/24/04 09:55 PM
Re: high powered Receiver
|
Desperado
Registered: 10/25/02
Posts: 466
Loc: IL
|
Are some of you sure the Outlaws are so underrated or could it be that they do it right and the others are overrated? I want to say I've seen reports of guys who have done tests on their outlaw amps (may have been just the 1050) and they came out right about where Outlaw lists them.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#19561 - 06/24/04 11:36 PM
Re: high powered Receiver
|
Desperado
Registered: 11/15/03
Posts: 1012
Loc: Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
|
id agree that the others are overrated not outlaw underrated.
------------------ This post has been brought to you by curegeorg, thanks for reading.
_________________________
This post has been brought to you by curegeorg, thanks for reading.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#19562 - 06/25/04 12:24 AM
Re: high powered Receiver
|
Deputy Gunslinger
Registered: 06/21/04
Posts: 11
Loc: Peoria,Illinois USA
|
Thank you all for responses....I understand about the shortage of "truth in advertising" in this world,and commend those that play no games. Obbviously, Outlaw Audio is one of the good guys. I personaly know no one who owns Outlaw epuipment,so am getting educated through this very cool web site. My gratitude to all who hae responded!
------------------ music makes the world go 'round!!!
_________________________
music makes the world go 'round!!!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 registered (),
653
Guests and
1
Spider online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
8,717 Registered Members
88 Forums
11,331 Topics
98,708 Posts
Most users ever online: 900 @ Today at 03:23 PM
|
|
|
|