• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Are vintage watts the same as modern watts

Status
Not open for further replies.
arcorob

arcorob

Addicted Member
I know, silly question right ? But my example is this

Marantz 2265B vs Marantz SR-4023

The 2265B is 65watts per channel
The SR-4023 is 75 watts per channel

The thing is the vintage Marantz (even a 2220B) seems to have more power...Am I wrong ? Is it a difference in how watts were measured (I know there was a change at some point in time)

I ask because I would like to get a HIGH power vintage receiver but want to be sure I am trading UP :-) in power ..thanks
 
Register to hide this ad
The FTC was more strict in the old days and WPC was specified for continuous output. Todays "peak" numbers are inflated in a sense. It's arguable that music only requires bursts of power but there's no replacement for displacement!
 
Power, in watts, is equal to the current times the voltage. This hasn't changed. What changed was how amplifiers measurements are interpreted. Previously, power ratings were measured in RMS, which usually meant about two thirds to three quarters of the peak power, continuously. Now, if your amp can hit 800 watts for .0002 seconds during a peak without going into protection mode, you can claim an 800 watt output, even if it only measures 150watts RMS.
 
Last edited:
arcorob said:
The thing is the vintage Marantz (even a 2220B) seems to have more power...
Click to expand...
What do you mean by this statement? Don't compare positions of the volume control; those are completely unrelated to output power. In fact, older receivers had a tendency to have more aggressive volume controls, so that by the time the knob was at the 9:00 position, it was already sometimes too loud. Newer receivers have volume controls that are more closely related to the apparent volume.

The SR4023 is a modern receiver, but it's also a stereo receiver, not an AVR, so its ratings should be pretty accurate. It's rated at 80WPC into 8Ω from 20hz-20khz (in the manual the distortion rating is 0.08%, and it's listed separately from the power output, but I'm going to assume that that number is accurate). Now, in the old days (e.g. 1980s and earlier), in magazine reviews/test reports, it wasn't uncommon for an amplifier to exceed its power output by 25% or so. These days, the numbers are pretty close to what the manufacturer published (if you can even find a review that does instrumented testing). There can also be other issues such as speaker/amp compatibility (although most speakers are an easy load for most amplifiers).

Having said that, there is really no audible improvement from a 25% increase in output power; you need to at least double the power for it to be somewhat significant. But other than measuring the output level, you really can't tall which is more powerful.
 
I am not confused on volume control..I just know that NO WAY is my 4023 3X the wattage of my 2220B. I take that yes, by volume control but I am literally at 3/4 volume or more on the 4023 to reach the same volume (undistorted) as the 2220B at 1/3 volume ..there just seems to be more PUSH on vintage - same with my Pioneers. I think the Marantz 2220B and the Pioneers are more of the control and the SR4023 is way overrated ..just a thought ..I am only asking this to see if driving the particular system with more watts will make it different or just try on of my vintage on it to see if it sounds different. I will do that first so It mght be an easy task before I go spending more $$$$ :-)
 
Using position of volume control as a way to compare power output just doesn't work.

As for using an amp with more power; keep in mind that it takes double the power to get a 3dB change in perceived loudness.

3dB is considered to be the smallest change in loudness to be distinctly noticeable to a person with average hearing.
 
during the early days of audio there was what I'd call a "watts war". more was better, Now watts= power, and the only true measure of power is RMS volts x rms amps. Anything else is not a measure of power. Now if something can put out short burst of higher voltage for short term higher power, fine, but then it is peak power not continous power. . For DC resistive load it Voltsxamps. For AC sine wave resistive load it volts rms x amps rms. or .707 peak volts x .707 peak amps

But then the wars started. first was peak watts. not even a true measure of power but just peak volts x peak amps. but that wasn't enough so it was IPP watts. Instantaneous peak to peak" watts" . so peak to peak volatage x peak to peak amps. that is noi a power measurement just marketing BS. So as an example a 7V rms sine wave into a 10 ohm load = 7 watts. (V2/r) now "peak" watts = 10 watts, (100/10) IPP watts= 40 watts. (400/10) so the "40 watt" unit is really only capable of putting out 7 watts by the definition of power.
 
avionic said:
Math hasn´t changed

P = I X E
Click to expand...
not quite. Power = Irms x E rms x phase angle between them. For DC the DC voltage and current are the RMS voltage and current and since it is DC there is no phase issue, it's scalar math.

For AC I and E must be the rms value, not the peak value or peak to peak value or whatever. For a sine wave I and E rms values are 0.707 x peak value. If I and E are in phase ( resistive load) then Irms x Erms= power. If they are not in phase (not a resistive load) then the one needs to know the phase angle between them to determine power. It can be anywhere from Irms x E rms. for a resistive load to ZERO for a pure inductive or capacitive load.
 
TapeForever said:
not quite. Power = Irms x E rms x phase angle between them. For DC the DC voltage and current are the RMS voltage and current and since it is DC there is no phase issue, it's scalar math.

For AC I and E must be the rms value, not the peak value or peak to peak value or whatever. For a sine wave I and E rms values are 0.707 x peak value. If I and E are in phase ( resistive load) then Irms x Erms= power. If they are not in phase (not a resistive load) then the one needs to know the phase angle between them to determine power. It can be anywhere from Irms x E rms. for a resistive load to ZERO for a pure inductive or capacitive load.
Click to expand...
You prove my point.. Math hasn't change !
 
well in the old days there were average watts, peak to peak watts, watts with only one channel operating, RMS watts, Watts where separate external power supplies were used watts. Some watts Back in the 60's some amps were rated at 0.5 % watts at 1000 HZ. some from 20 to 20,000 HZ. some were rated at published specification 1 % for example at 1000 HZ. Some at 2 % some at 5 % some at 10 percent. No wonder the FTC came along and changed the rules in the 70's. But today they are relaxing the rules for multi-channel amps. Allow the Manufacturers to publish the 2 channel rating and not all the channels simultaneous capability ratings.

Its a shame the FTC never came up with specs for speakers. Over half of the speakers couldn't or wouldn't be sold if people new the truth about how bad the speakers they buy are.

Would you buy speakers that had 10 % distortion at 90 db or maybe 1 watt input when the speakers are rated and demand in some cases 150 watts to reach 100 db at 10 feet. Remember no one listens at 1 meter.
 
arcorob said:
The 2265B is 65watts per channel
The SR-4023 is 75 watts per channel
Click to expand...
The difference between 65 watts and 75 watts is less than 1dB, ie practically nothing.

swechsler said:
Don't compare positions of the volume control; those are completely unrelated to output power.
Click to expand...
Absolutely correct.

arcorob said:
I am not confused on volume control..I just know that NO WAY is my 4023 3X the wattage of my 2220B. I take that yes, by volume control but I am literally at 3/4 volume or more on the 4023 to reach the same volume (undistorted) as the 2220B at 1/3 volume ..there just seems to be more PUSH on vintage - same with my Pioneers.
Click to expand...
The position of the volume control is a red herring, totally.
The difference you're hearing is due to other things, maybe damping factor or whatever. It's definitely nothing to do with a few watts.
 
Amplifiers are measured into dummy loads, almost always pure resistance, so the phase thing doesn't apply here. You can measure the voltage and calc power with V^2/R. Depending on the era, manufacturers might have fed you a 1 kHz single channel measurement taken over a short time. They might, before the FTC got involved, have fed you "peak music power while falling off a cliff with the wind to its back" number. They might have added the two channel numbers together. Or, they might have done it right, 20-20000 Hz, both channels driven, below a certain THD and with a preconditioning period. As an example of the difference, in a recent post on manufacturers ads, a Sansui 2000x was listed at 140 watts, 20-40000 Hz and < 0.8% THD. But not at the same time or using any reasonable method! They later listed it at 39 watts/ch. Measured properly a good 2000x will just barely do 32 W/ch. Note that it's critical to maintain exact line voltage when measuring power. If it drops a couple volts that will cause a measurable power loss.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom