A question about amplifier power and sound

admin_exported

New member
Aug 10, 2019
2,556
4
0
Visit site
Hi,

just shopping around at the moment for a new amp, and looking at the Cambridge Audio Azur range. I was wondering what the advantages of getting the more powerful (and expensive) 640A would be over the 340A.

I understand that the number refers to the wattage, so the 640A is twice as powerful at 600 watts than than the 300 watt 340A. However, my current amp is rated at 250W, and I never take the volume knob about half way up.

In fact, thinking about it, thats always been the case with any reasonaly rated hi-fi I have had. Surely within the home setting (which is where I'm sure the majority of Azur amplifiers are used), taking the volume beyond halfway on the 640A would result in the noise pollution poilce coming round or speakers being broken!

Is it the case that a more powerful amp is able to produce better quality sound? So an audiophile would select a 600W amp over a 300W amp not because of the higher voume attainable, but the better quality tone and depth of sound than a higher watt amp is able to attain, even with the volume knob at say a quarter way up?

If anyone knows the Azur range well, is the 640A a better sounding amp at a typical home listening level than the 340A?

Thanks for any advice!
 

kusum65

New member
Aug 8, 2007
68
0
0
Visit site
Im no expert but the more watts the better the dynamic
response .The more powerful azur should be able to control your
speakers better and get the most out of them,especially noticable in
larger rooms .
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
600w ? 300w? i wish pal!!! sorry mate but the 640 only kicks out 75w i know as i have one and im selling it as its not powerfull enough for me but that being sayd its a lovely amp and it sounds very good just dont push it hard as it will over heat and it will automaticaly cut off .
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Gus_P"]Is it the case that a more powerful amp is able to produce better quality sound?[/quote]
yes thats because it will use less power and it will make it easy for the amp to give you dinamics sound stage and all that but to make a bald example if u had to move a 20kg stone who could do the job better and with less strain, the hulk or Betty Boo ?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
But remember it isn't all about power - finesse is required too. My old cyrus1 was a corking little amp that only put out 25 official watts per channel. Pushed hard with a poor source it was very harsh and unpleasant, but treated more moderately with a high quality source and efficient speakers (as it is now in my brothers flat) it produces a really really marvellous sound, especially for something so modest.
 

Tesler

New member
Oct 2, 2007
38
0
0
Visit site
600W ? I think I know where you got that figure from. If you look at the plate on the back of the Amp it says something like 220/240v 600w. The 600w figure relates to the amount of current the amp draws from the mains and has nothing to do with the actual audio output you get from the amp.

For example 600w means that if you leave leave the amp on for 1 hour, it draws the same amount of current from the mains as if you left six 100w bulbs on for an hour!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Not quite that bad I hope!

The 600W on the back will most likely be the peak power draw for the amp, probably in the couple of seconds after you turn it on and the power supply "charges up". Class AB amplifiers are in principle pretty efficient (in theory up to 98% IFRC, although the bias into Class A will reduce this), so if you allow for more than 75W per channel as a real ouput to the amp, the full load draw probably averages out at a couple of hundred watts max, with an idle draw of quite a lot less. Still enough to keep it all warm though. Think how hot the top of the amp gets when it's idle and that's represents the amount of power it's drawing and therefore disipating.

Still probably worth turning it off if you're feeling green though.
 

Anton90125

New member
Sep 1, 2007
18
0
0
Visit site
[quote user="sex"][quote user="Gus_P"]Is it the case that a more powerful amp is able to produce better quality sound?[/quote]
yes thats because it will use less power and it will make it easy for the amp to give you dinamics sound stage and all that but to make a bald example if u had to move a 20kg stone who could do the job better and with less strain, the hulk or Betty Boo ?[/quote]

Power doesn't automatically mean a superior sound. Some of the very best sounding amps (valve 300B single ended) only put out a few Watts max. Because of the low wattage they have to be paired with very efficient speakers like Lowthers. For those of you who remember the hifi of the eighties will remember the classic NAD 3020 (£89) which was only 20 watts which was the budget amp of choice. This comfortably beat amps costing 2 or 3 times as much and with 2 or 3 times the power. Power is important but is not the finial arbitor.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I appreciate that the 600W (or 615 to be exact) stated on the back is the power draw rather than the power output. However, I've always used the draw figure on the back as a basis to compare the power of different amps. The power output figure is difficult to find if there's no manual or information on the internet! Should I be doing this? I mean, an amp drawing 250W as stated on the back wouldn't have a larger power output than a 600W amp would it?

Sex - when you say the Azur 640 is 75W, is that per channel? Also, in relation to it not being powerful enough for you, how far up do you have the voume when listening to a CD? On testing one in the shop, anything over halfway up on the volume knob was painfully loud!

Going back to the original question, is it a rough rule of thumb then that the more watts an amp has, the better it's dynamic response? Obviously it depends on the amp and other factors, but more expensive amps (and better sounding amps according to press reviews) always seem to be more powerful. Surely this isnt just about people wanting more volume, but a better overall sound?

That being the case, I guess I'd go for the Azur 640A over the 340A.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Anton90125"]
[quote user="sex"][quote user="Gus_P"]Is it the case that a more powerful amp is able to produce better quality sound?[/quote] yes thats because it will use less power and it will make it easy for the amp to give you dinamics sound stage and all that but to make a bald example if u had to move a 20kg stone who could do the job better and with less strain, the hulk or Betty Boo ?[/quote]

Power doesn't automatically mean a superior sound. Some of the very best sounding amps (valve 300B single ended) only put out a few Watts max. Because of the low wattage they have to be paired with very efficient speakers like Lowthers. For those of you who remember the hifi of the eighties will remember the classic NAD 3020 (£89) which was only 20 watts which was the budget amp of choice. This comfortably beat amps costing 2 or 3 times as much and with 2 or 3 times the power. Power is important but is not the finial arbitor.

[/quote] all true and i know i was just answering a question
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Gus_P"]Sex - when you say the Azur 640 is 75W, is that per channel? Also, in relation
to it not being powerful enough for you, how far up do you have the voume when
listening to a CD? On testing one in the shop, anything over halfway up on the
volume knob was painfully loud[/quote] thats 75w alltogether so divide by to and u have not much left per chanel
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[ [quote user="Gus_P"] how far up do you have the voume when listening to a CD? On testing one in the
shop, anything over halfway up on the volume knob was painfully loud![/quote]

very very loud i now have 300w and im just about happy mate but then i listen mainly to heavy metal and if i listen to classical i want to me gut shake
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
2
0
Visit site
[quote user="sex"]thats 75w alltogether so divide by to and u have not much left per chanel[/quote]

No, it's 75W per channel into 8ohms, 120W a side into 4ohms
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Based on anybody's experiences, any recommendations for a short-list of suitable, good sounding (efficient ?) speakers to match the 640A output ??
Thanks.
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
2
0
Visit site
[quote user="Gus_P"]
However, my current amp is rated at 250W, and I never take the volume knob about half way up.

[/quote]

What is your current amp? Would make it simpler to advise if I knew...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Its a Technics SA160-L, about 15 years old I think.

I should also point out that its the version 1 Azur 640A I'm looking at, which has a power output of 65-100W (depending on speaker ohm) according to the Cambridge Audio website. My speakers are rated at 6ohm so I guess that would give me about 80W per channel? Seems plenty to me!
 

Andrew Everard

New member
May 30, 2007
1,878
2
0
Visit site
Impedances are only nominal, and vary with frequency, so there's no simple relationship between the quoted speaker impedance and how much power the amp will deliver.

But yes, I think the Mk1 640A will suit you very well indeed, and has plenty of power for most sensible people's needs.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hi, to ask a previous question again (if I may), any recommendations for a short-list of suitable, good sounding (efficient ?) speakers to match the 640A output ?? Thanks.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
[quote user="Andrew Everard"]
[quote user="sex"]thats 75w alltogether so divide by to and u have not much left per chanel[/quote]

No, it's 75W per channel into 8ohms, 120W a side into 4ohms
[/quote]

mea culpa Andrea
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts