Slim AV amps

Soldato
Joined
6 Jan 2006
Posts
3,404
Location
Newcastle upon Tyne
Any major drawbacks from the slim AV amps? Other than price being slightly higher it would seem?

Been looking on Richer Sounds and the 2 in my price range are Pioneer VSX-S300 and the Marantz NR1402.

Only got some entry level Yahama speakers so not expecting the world from the system but it's replacing an ageing Thompson amp and the wife wants to change the unit to one with lower height shelves!

Will be connecting Sky HD, BR player and Apple TV, possibly Xbox too but not essential.
 
The big draw back is cooling a lot of these units will have small fans which can be annoying to some people in some circumstances. You also tend to get slightly lower power outputs and the sound is often slightly compromised by the forced lose layouts.

In real world usage for your situation I would say you'll be fine provided you don't get annoyed with any active cooling.
 
Thanks for the info. I cant see there being any problems if the unit has a fan on it as I imagine the sound of the fan will not be heard over the volume of whatever the amp is outputting. Not that I have things playing exceptionally loud living in a semi but if its just watching something "normal" on sky then I don't usually bother with the amp.
 
I don't think it's just the cooling. I believed they also contained smaller components which also reduced the quality, the cooling is an issue though as they were more likely to overheat due to the compact space in which the parts were packed in, which causes its own problems.

I've always been told that an amp should have quite a large amount of clearance on top for heat dispersion, and usually it would sit on top of any furniture unit, not within it, which would surely negate your issue here, unless you plan on having the amp inside the unit?
 
Yeah it's a corner unit so has to go in the unit sadly. The new unit she is looking at is about 1cm too small for the full size AV amps but there is little chance the amp will take priority!!
 
If space is that much of an issue, I would flog the speakers, get a 2 channel amp and 2 speakers. You'll get a much better sound for the money.

Lucid will probably pop up later with better advice though ;)
 
Well the NR1602 (NR1402 just has less features I believe) gets very good reviews so ignore comments about component quality. It just has less clout and features than the bigger ones :)
 
I've been looking at the slim Pioneer s300. I personally think it's a great spec for such a small unit and made by a top brand. I could see cooling being a issue if you plan on doing rave parties all night long.
 
You know all of those all-in-one home cinema kits, you know the ones...they claim to output a million watts from a box the size of a postage stamp and that weighs about as much too....well, they all use Class D amps.

Class D is a cheap way to produce a reasonable amount of power cheaply. You don't need big expensive transformers; or large power reserve capacitors; or great big heatsinks.

Compare and contrast with all those big AV receivers and 2-channel Hi-Fi amps. They use Class AB amplifier design so they need big heavy transformers, huge capacitors and transistors strapped to massive heatsinks. But the payoff is in the sound quality.

Guess what the Pioneer and (I strongly suspect) the Marantz use for power amps?


But lets not get carried away bashing Class D. There are a few well respected brands using Class D and making some damned fine noises with them. Most subwoofer amps are Class D. HI-Fi brands Bel Canto and Rotel both make Class D amps that sound good. They're expensive though, and there's the rub. Overcoming some of the problems of Class D means either designing a completely closed system (as in the subwoofer) or spending big chunks of cash to make something that works well in the real world.

Both the Pioneer and the Marantz are relatively heavy for slim amps. That could be a good sign.
 
Also OP don't forget the amount of rubish and snobbery spouted on the internet the chances are if you by the Marantz or Pioneer models in this thread you will be very happy, you post doesn't sound like that of an overly obsessive audiofile. For 99% of people this class of equipment is more than enough but then I'm sat here happily listening to music via a T-amp and loving it so I'm hardly snobbey enough to comment!
 
Completely agree with those sentiments!

A mate of mine uses a slim Yamaha unit that happily powers a full Wharfedale Pacific surround system to reasonable volumes without issue.

Like a1ex says - you'll more than likely be perfectly happy... plus it'll look tidy and discrete too! :)

gt

EDIT: Think this is it...

RXSL100.png
 
Last edited:
So if they added a lump of lead in to make it heavier you'd be happy ;)

The lead probably costs more than the heatsinks would in the first place :p

The slim Marantz was always favourably reviewed. As always, try to get a demo if possible, preferably with the same (or same brand equivalent) speakers you use.
 
Well, we are dealing with broad strokes here. Do you own the exception that proves the rule?

I was actually hoping you would provide me with one example....:p

I know of very few class d av recievers, especially low end consumer gear. I know of a slim line panasonic, and i know the early sony ES recievers were class d...before sony eventually caved and went back to class AB and such so yes they do exist but that is worlds away from say all home cinema in-a-box's that claim high power are class D. I just wasn't aware that Class D was that widespread, that's all :)
 
Last edited:
Well, we know for sure that the Pioneer slimline amp is Class D. That is stated in the specs.

If you have a look at Samsung's range of home cinema kits then you'll find some giveaways for their use of Class D. These are "Crystal Amp"/"Crystal Amp Pro" and "Eco Power System"

Of "Crystal Amp Pro" Samsung themselves write:
While typical home theater systems rely on digital amps and tend to churn out mediocre sound, the HT-C5500 utilizes its own unique, patented, high-performance Crystal Amp Pro technology to create a world of unbelievable sonic clarity.

Describing Class D as 'Digital' is inaccurate of course. But they wouldn't be the first nor the last to make that mistake or stretch a point.

Sharp quote "Digital Amplifier" in the specs of their HT-SL75, HT-SL75, HT-SL50 products.

Sony talks about its S-Master Digital amps needing "no big heat syncs (sic)" which feature in several products LINK

Other manufacturers are cagey about using the description "Class D" or Digital w.r.t. their amp designs, but when you see a Philips or an LG or some other brand DVD/Blu-ray AV receiver main unit weighing 2-3 or 4 kg and outputting a total of 1000Watts in to 6 speakers including a passive sub then it is self evident that this isn't a traditional AB amp design. Compare and contrast this or this with a C.A. Topaz hi-fi amp weighing in at 5.1kg and outputting just 2x20W.
 
Compare and contrast this or this with a C.A. Topaz hi-fi amp weighing in at 5.1kg and outputting just 2x20W.

Well, they are both examples of massively over stated figures, I'll give you that lol. RMS isn't quoted throughout on either unit. The samsung doesnt quote rms anywhere and the panasonic quotes 1kw RMS total output at a monsterous 30% distortion! In the user manual, that drops to 800w RMS at 10% distortion for the american model (no idea why), still way above anything meaningful and still nearly 8 times the quoted power consumption of that unit. The amplifiers output rating can not be higher than the ac input requirements, as you know. if it were then class d has solved the energy crisis :p

I will happily accept that class D is a lot more widespread that I'd realised, but I cannot accept that the inflated ratings of cheap all-in-one boxes are connected with CLass D in any way, as ratings are inflated with all kinds of cheap amplifiers. Class D is a means to achieve large amounts of power with output quality taking the back seat, but it doesnt suddenly allow cheap HT gear to output 1000w RMS with any useful distortion figure :)
 
Last edited:
For most of this above you're preaching to the converted.

I do think you need to go back though and study Class D in a bit more detail. All of us with knowledge of amps recognise the tricks manufacturers play with output specs. One channel driven at 1kHz in to a low ohms load for a fraction of a second, then multiplying the result for the number of speakers is no way to generate real world power figures. But then again if you tell most consumers that they're listening to less than 10 watts most of the time they don't believe it. Willy waving rules. I the absence of anything meaningful then big numbers on a spec sheet sells AV kits. It's dumb, but there you have it.

I'm generalising here but Class D means spending less on really expensive components of a traditional amp. It means using the mains grid as the power reserve. It means converting power with greater efficiency than Class AB...and all that means producing more apparent power than a traditionally designed Class AB amp.

Please note, Wattage isn't everything. Class D amps have rather poor damping factor characteristics and quite a few other issues. But if one is simply looking at a single facet of the Class D design i.e. only the Wattage, then Class D offers a great way to get bigger numbers.
 
Back
Top Bottom