View Single Post
  #2   Report Post  
DaveW
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Inexpensive receivers use higher voltage to control the movement of the
cones in the speakers. This approach requires much less expensive
electrical hardware in the receiver, but also has less ability to TIGHTLY
control the cones' motions, thus leading to cone overshoot on demanding
notes, which gives bass it's bad flabby sound and midrange a bloated sound,
at louder volumes.
Expensive separate amplifiers use high current circuitry which is much more
expensive to produce, but which gives the ultimate in control and authoity
over the cones' movements and leads to the the most lifelike CLEAN sounding
music.

--
DaveW



"theOutdoorMonkey" wrote in message
om...
Hi:


I have started shopping for a good quality receiver for my home
theater/ home audio needs. I have a multi room speaker setup so I am
looking at receiver that can handle my multi-room setup without having
to buy an additional amp.

I am trying to make sense out of the High Current Vs High Voltage
theory that I have been geting from high end stero sales stores. The
argument is that basically the high current system works better even
if its output per channel may be 75w/ch compared to low current high
power receiver that can put-out 120w/ch.
I have read an article on how stuff works that tends to suggest the
opposite and that really threw me off. please see this link.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/question501.htm
The article suggests that it is more efficient to generate power from
high voltage and lower current than the other way around.
The argument is that power generated from high current tends to be
consumed by the wires during transmission. I do not know if this
argument affects sound differently but i would appreciate anyone who
can shade some light on this.