Which Amp to pick for these speakers
March 28, 2006 12:33 PM Subscribe
Audio Amplifier selection: I have an older (90s) Sony Amp driving two much older Boston acoustic 150 watt - 8 ohm rated speakers (A150s, series II, 1985). The speakers just had the woofers placed by BA, and now it's time to move the amp up into the new century. How Audiophile do I have to go to get decent sound?
The guy at the audio store reccomended a Cambridge Audio amp in the $600-700 range, and wanted to know these things:
* How big is the room? A: Big: 800+ sq ft
* What do you listen to? A: Music and videos, 50/50
* Do you care about surround sound? A: I'm not missing it yet, so no.
* What goes into your amp?: A: 5 CD changer, DVD player, no tape, no phono, some day music from a computer
My question is: given that I'm unlikey to upgrade my upstream components enough to get audiophile quality in, how much of an amp upgrade do I need to get reasonable quality sound out? I hear the A150s are good speakers, but given the high wattage rating I think I need a biggie-sized amp to really drive them. I've been looking at the Teac AG 790, cause there's a good deal on a used one locally.
I'd be interested in the smaller Cambridge Audio 340a but I think it's not got enough umph to work my biggie speakers. Not really excited about spending more than $400.
Will I regret not getting a X.Y (5.1, 7.1) compatible amp?
Any features I absolutely gotta have?
Suggestions in this range?
The guy at the audio store reccomended a Cambridge Audio amp in the $600-700 range, and wanted to know these things:
* How big is the room? A: Big: 800+ sq ft
* What do you listen to? A: Music and videos, 50/50
* Do you care about surround sound? A: I'm not missing it yet, so no.
* What goes into your amp?: A: 5 CD changer, DVD player, no tape, no phono, some day music from a computer
My question is: given that I'm unlikey to upgrade my upstream components enough to get audiophile quality in, how much of an amp upgrade do I need to get reasonable quality sound out? I hear the A150s are good speakers, but given the high wattage rating I think I need a biggie-sized amp to really drive them. I've been looking at the Teac AG 790, cause there's a good deal on a used one locally.
I'd be interested in the smaller Cambridge Audio 340a but I think it's not got enough umph to work my biggie speakers. Not really excited about spending more than $400.
Will I regret not getting a X.Y (5.1, 7.1) compatible amp?
Any features I absolutely gotta have?
Suggestions in this range?
the wattage rating is how much they'll take without melting. it's got nothing to do with how much they need - that depends on the efficiency and how loud you like your music.
i'm confused by the rest of your question, though. you seem to be saying that you don't have audiophile components and are looking at a pretty low price receiver. which is fine, but then if you're not bothered about sound quality so much, what's wrong with what you've got? if it's just old age - noisy volume controls, loose connections, etc, then i'd say go with the teac. but if you really do care about sound quality then you need to listen to the options yourself - i'd guess that the 40W cambridge audio might be loud enough and sound noticeably better than the teac, but don't know for sure.
the 2/5/N speaker thing is personal preference - check out a friend's 5 channel setup and see what you think. if you already have and don't like it, no worries. i just spent too much money on 2 channels, if that's any help.
and i'd like to assure you that i cannot hear the difference between different power cables.
posted by andrew cooke at 1:20 PM on March 28, 2006
i'm confused by the rest of your question, though. you seem to be saying that you don't have audiophile components and are looking at a pretty low price receiver. which is fine, but then if you're not bothered about sound quality so much, what's wrong with what you've got? if it's just old age - noisy volume controls, loose connections, etc, then i'd say go with the teac. but if you really do care about sound quality then you need to listen to the options yourself - i'd guess that the 40W cambridge audio might be loud enough and sound noticeably better than the teac, but don't know for sure.
the 2/5/N speaker thing is personal preference - check out a friend's 5 channel setup and see what you think. if you already have and don't like it, no worries. i just spent too much money on 2 channels, if that's any help.
and i'd like to assure you that i cannot hear the difference between different power cables.
posted by andrew cooke at 1:20 PM on March 28, 2006
I'll second parallax7d --- for straight stereo, pick up something even older, back in the days before x.y home theater setups. I've bought used gear from these folks in Mpls a number of times. They don't sell junk, and all their used gear is tested and refurbed.
Also for speaker ratings, what does Boston Acoustics recommend as the minimum watt power amp for those speakers? I doubt it's 150w... unless you usually listen to everything REALLY LOUD the Cambridge Audio may be just fine. The Teac is likely lower quality. It's not just a wattage numbers game.
posted by omnidrew at 1:20 PM on March 28, 2006
Also for speaker ratings, what does Boston Acoustics recommend as the minimum watt power amp for those speakers? I doubt it's 150w... unless you usually listen to everything REALLY LOUD the Cambridge Audio may be just fine. The Teac is likely lower quality. It's not just a wattage numbers game.
posted by omnidrew at 1:20 PM on March 28, 2006
Response by poster: Ok, thanks for the comments so far. Allow me to refine my question, add a bit more data, and confess:
Refine my question: What stereo reciever can I get that will both improve sound quality from my crappy amp I've got now, and give me a remote for less than $300.
More data: The BA A-150s have a reccomended amp wattage of 100 according to the BA website.
I like the music to get loud some times, but I never turn my amp up past 1/2 way on the volume nob now (probably almost never than 1/4).
Confess: My real, true, totally 100% embarrasing reason for wanting a new amp is simple: remote control. That's it. Nothing else.
posted by daver at 2:34 PM on March 28, 2006
Refine my question: What stereo reciever can I get that will both improve sound quality from my crappy amp I've got now, and give me a remote for less than $300.
More data: The BA A-150s have a reccomended amp wattage of 100 according to the BA website.
I like the music to get loud some times, but I never turn my amp up past 1/2 way on the volume nob now (probably almost never than 1/4).
Confess: My real, true, totally 100% embarrasing reason for wanting a new amp is simple: remote control. That's it. Nothing else.
posted by daver at 2:34 PM on March 28, 2006
Best answer: if that's it, go with the cheapest option (which is the teac, right, so you have no worries about power). if you end up not liking the sound - which i doubt - persuade the shop to sell you the cheaper cambridge audio on the condition that you can part-exchange it for the more expensive model within a week or so, and sell the teac on ebay. or try the second-hand market as others suggested, making sure you check the remote works (the ca you linked to is just an amp, not a receiver).
start with the lowest price.
posted by andrew cooke at 3:11 PM on March 28, 2006
start with the lowest price.
posted by andrew cooke at 3:11 PM on March 28, 2006
Even cheapo receivers sound pretty darn good today, a cheap Pioneer/JVC/Sherwood would probably do you fine, just take a listen in store first.
Or do what I would do and find an older NAD integrated amp on ebay, should be in the price range you stated and will sound completely and utterly amazing, ignore the lower power ratings in the NAD stuff... I have heard a 25w NAD blow a "150w" Sony out the door...
And as for you PARALLAX7D... if you honestly, truely believe that you can tell the difference between two power cords consistantly in a double-blind test... you can win the Randi $1,000,000 challenge.... and I have a bridge to sell ya...
posted by Cosine at 3:34 PM on March 28, 2006
Or do what I would do and find an older NAD integrated amp on ebay, should be in the price range you stated and will sound completely and utterly amazing, ignore the lower power ratings in the NAD stuff... I have heard a 25w NAD blow a "150w" Sony out the door...
And as for you PARALLAX7D... if you honestly, truely believe that you can tell the difference between two power cords consistantly in a double-blind test... you can win the Randi $1,000,000 challenge.... and I have a bridge to sell ya...
posted by Cosine at 3:34 PM on March 28, 2006
alright, first thing...copper is copper, the only difference in cables is shielding and guage (IE there is no difference in signal from one brand to another...yes, ive scoped it)
Also, Sony is notorious for making absolute crap when it comes to anything audio. SO just about anything will be an upgrade.
I would look at Yamaha recivers as well, the surround sound reciever im using currently using is a Yamaha and i love it. For a solid state stereo receivers teac is a good name, but i would also look at denon.
Also, power ratings are way out of hand these days, My speakers (home built) are also rated at 150w but i dont think i have ever pushed them with more than perhaps 20-25 wRMS, and that will shake much of the apartment complex. What i mean is that you will most likely never need anything more than 65-75w...dont let sales people fool you with the "bigger number is better" game.
to summarize....my personal brand loyalties (in your price range) are Yamaha and Denon. Both will come with a remote.
enjoy :)
posted by I_am_jesus at 3:35 PM on March 28, 2006
Also, Sony is notorious for making absolute crap when it comes to anything audio. SO just about anything will be an upgrade.
I would look at Yamaha recivers as well, the surround sound reciever im using currently using is a Yamaha and i love it. For a solid state stereo receivers teac is a good name, but i would also look at denon.
Also, power ratings are way out of hand these days, My speakers (home built) are also rated at 150w but i dont think i have ever pushed them with more than perhaps 20-25 wRMS, and that will shake much of the apartment complex. What i mean is that you will most likely never need anything more than 65-75w...dont let sales people fool you with the "bigger number is better" game.
to summarize....my personal brand loyalties (in your price range) are Yamaha and Denon. Both will come with a remote.
enjoy :)
posted by I_am_jesus at 3:35 PM on March 28, 2006
oh, also...since your speakers are from 1985 they are most likely intended to be driven by a lower power amplifier (they have high sensitivity)....up until the 90's you (more or less) only saw 100w+ ratings on PA equipment and very very high end home equipment.
posted by I_am_jesus at 3:41 PM on March 28, 2006
posted by I_am_jesus at 3:41 PM on March 28, 2006
I was wondering if you wanted remote control...that's a compelling reason not to go old school audio.
posted by omnidrew at 4:16 PM on March 28, 2006
posted by omnidrew at 4:16 PM on March 28, 2006
Best answer: I had a very nice Proton 50W amp, until I came over all Buddhist one year and gave it away. Proton was formed by ex-NAD engineers, and they made good stuff.
I can't hear any difference between power cables either, but I could certainly hear the difference between the Proton amp I ended up buying and everything else I tried in the same shop through the same speakers. I could easily perceive and describe things about the way the other amps sounded (this one was a bit tinny, this one bit scratchy, that one a bit boomy, the other a bit muddy, whatever) but the Proton just didn't seem to have any characteristics of its own at all. I just heard music. On live acoustic recordings, I could shut my eyes and point to where the players were sitting, and they didn't wander all over the place chord by chord :)
So: go around your local audio dealers and listen to things. Then buy whatever you both like and can afford.
posted by flabdablet at 5:50 PM on March 28, 2006
I can't hear any difference between power cables either, but I could certainly hear the difference between the Proton amp I ended up buying and everything else I tried in the same shop through the same speakers. I could easily perceive and describe things about the way the other amps sounded (this one was a bit tinny, this one bit scratchy, that one a bit boomy, the other a bit muddy, whatever) but the Proton just didn't seem to have any characteristics of its own at all. I just heard music. On live acoustic recordings, I could shut my eyes and point to where the players were sitting, and they didn't wander all over the place chord by chord :)
So: go around your local audio dealers and listen to things. Then buy whatever you both like and can afford.
posted by flabdablet at 5:50 PM on March 28, 2006
Response by poster: Thanks for the great answers all, I appreciate it!
posted by daver at 9:11 AM on March 29, 2006
posted by daver at 9:11 AM on March 29, 2006
This thread is closed to new comments.
Get the reliable and great sounding Sansui 9090db off of ebay. They don't make receivers like that any more. I've had one for years and it still sounds great. I do consider myself an audiophile (can tell the sonic differences in cables, tubes, even power cables etc..).
posted by parallax7d at 12:48 PM on March 28, 2006