I've always wondered if it is better to leave an amp powered on when you're not using it or put it in Standby. The power consumption difference between the modes is pretty significant if I remember correctly from the manual, but what is better for the unit? Better to keep more juice running through it and keep things warm or is Standby just as good?

Good question from squebel.

Here's another: How about totally powering it down?
Problems?
Better?
Worse?

Long-term?

I don’t know what type of capacitors are used in Outlaw amplifier power supplies, but there is a known, slow deterioration of the dielectric in wet electrolytic capacitors when they spend long periods of time (read months) in a discharged state. Having the capacitor charged on a regular basis prevents this particular deterioration, it doesn't have to be continuously on. Conservative power supply design takes into account that capacitors will not always perform to their maximum capability and that some small current leakage and temperature build-up will occur. When the design allows for this, then the rated performance of the power supply will still be available even if some aging occurs. Basically, don’t worry, trust the very capable amplifier designers.

Stand-by versus total shut down: usually a stand-by mode allows a monitoring/switching circuit to remain normally powered while the rest of the unit is fully powered down. When a trigger voltage or command from a remote is received, then the rest of the unit is powered up. Usually the higher-power portion of the unit is fully shut down even in stand by, so, for these power circuits, there is no difference between being in ‘stand-by’ or having the unit fully shut off. Two questions: for regular use, do you want the unit to respond to an external command, or do you want to physically turn it on? If all users are going to be absent for many days, on a trip for instance, do you wish to physically disconnect your system from the electrical system and from any other external wiring, such as satellite, cable, or telephone lines, so that in the event of some freakish power event or lightning strike your system components are isolated (unless they are directly hit)?

In response
bestbang4thebuck
wrote

Two questions: for regular use, do you want the unit to respond to an external command, or do you want to physically turn it on? If all users are going to be absent for many days, on a trip for instance, do you wish to physically disconnect your system from the electrical system and from any other external wiring, such as satellite, cable, or telephone lines, so that in the event of some freakish power event or lightning strike your system components are isolated (unless they are directly hit)?

Of course when we are away I disconnect everything from the mains, including all electronic equipment , TVs etc.

I was specifically asking about overnight. For example when we hit the hay I have been powering down the entire rack of equipment (via the Monster Conditioner button) and powering it on in the morning. Thoughts? I'm not sure it matters, just wondering.

Standby!

From the amplifier's perspective, it does not really mattter since the standby and main amplifier electronics are independent, with the standby portion only controlling the main power to the amplifier section. You won't hurt anything by powering down completely, the only downside being having to turn the main power back on.

I shut down everything in my apartment except the furnace, stove, and refrigerator except when I use them. Most devices are on power conditioners or surge protectors and the others I just unplug. I've been doing this for about 6 months and the difference in utility bills is substantial.

Check the last issue of Good magazine for a chart of average electricity use for various appliances.

I went through this also...after a lot of research I did...I leave them on!!

Not to mention the difference it contributes to the environment!

I think firing up your car impacts the environment far more than leaving on an amplifier.

Agreed! We need mre people riding bikes -- I need the exercise anyway!

Thanks, curriergroh and podboy. I think the phrase "carbon footprint" is going to be more and more part of our thinking. If that eventually means that, to look at it coldly, all the lovely experiences we write about here become unaffordable, well, nothing lasts forever. Supposedly.

This interesting article popped up in my e-mail this morning. (It was particularly fitting since I'm spending my morning staring at a building energy model for a LEED project...) Seems that San Francisco is considering an ordinance to mandate "green" design (specifically USGBC's LEED program) for commercial construction and residential high-rise construction. Hybrid cars, mass transit/carpooling, alternate energy sources, manufacturing techniques, construction and building design - it all ends up playing some sort of role in environmental awareness.

Does anyone make a relatively low cost device that can be used to power off systems using an IR remote? I have seen devices like the Monster and Tripp Lite, but they are very expensive. I live in an area that is not subject to power surges nor brown-outs so its hard to make a case for anything except a very basic surge protecter.

I would use a trigger type device outside of my SMS-1 none of my equipment has a trigger switch.

I know that x10 equipment might work but am not familar with x10 equipment and have no idea as to how appropriate that might be in an HT or audio circuit.

I think firing up your car impacts the environment far more than leaving on an amplifier. [Wink]

Altec, I've enjoyed most of what you've written but I need to have the sense of this comment explained to me - unless you're suggesting that the time we spend playing audio or HD is time we don't spend driving and so we reduce our carbon footprint! Was that it, or am I just being over-literal?

Oops - I meant HT, not HD.

Cars are something like 25% efficient.

The most inefficient audio component is the power amplifier at a bit over 60% efficient. Assuming a person uses their system as much as they spend in a car (commuting in LA is insanely time consuming), the audio/video side would involve less overall energy consumption.

Also, electricity is more likely to be made from "greener" sources like wind, hydro etc than using oil in a car. Also, electricity can be generated at home using solar energy.

in that line of thought...
I guess we should consider... consuming goods that haven't traveled halfway across the globe...or more...
be it food, electronics or other....

X10 might be a candidate, but I haven't looked at their product line in a while (don't know if they can integrate with IR, as the old X10 module I have is RF-based) and don't know how good they'd be for a home theater application. Are you planning to do this with an RR2150 or something similar that includes a trigger output?

There is an IR x10 command console that can control up to 16 x10 devices for $29.9. A 3 pin appliance plug-in module capable of supporting 400 watts for TV and audio devices is 18.99. A 3 pin wall receptacle with a 20a rating is $56.

My primary concern (for these type devices) was the potential impact it would have on my old parasound 1200 amp and velodyne sub. Currently I leave the 1050 on standby and leave my parasound and velodyne on all of the time. Introducing the x10 or any other system would seem to bypass the standard power startup protection circuits I believe both the parasound and velodyne have. As a secondary concern, I don't know if the x10 system via it powerline commands introduces noise into a system connected to it.