| Author |
Thread: Oops |
    
Gold Member Username: Arande2
Rattle your ...
Missouri
Post Number: 2910
Registered: Dec-06
|
| Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2008 - 03:21 pm: |
|
Yeah I accidentally dropped a couple paperclips into my second-oldest receiver..
I am going to open it up (warranty is over) and get them out.
I can see them and they are in a place where I can easily get to them. While I'm at it, I'll take a look at the internals of the thing. |
|
|
|
Gold Member Username: Arande2
Rattle your ...
Missouri
Post Number: 2911
Registered: Dec-06
|
| Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2008 - 04:04 pm: |
|
Ahh it's out now.
For my receiver's power output rating, the absolute minimum transformer rating would be 600VA. Yamaha seems to have decided that .7 the total output power would be sufficient (like some transformer manufacturers suggest), and so it is 440VA. If the amp were designed to run at full power from all channels (at 6-ohms, the limit of the transistors I bet) at once, it would need a 3200VA transformer to handle it.
The main filter caps are 8200uf 71v caps, one for each supply rail. For full power (6-ohms), an ideal amount would be 40,000uf for each supply rail.
I guess since the receiver was only $240 new, they didn't have much room in the budget. |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 10597
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2008 - 08:21 pm: |
|
The advertising dept. got the real money, LOL! |
Gold Member Username: Arande2
Rattle your ...
Missouri
Post Number: 2912
Registered: Dec-06
|
| Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 12:17 am: |
|
 |
Gold Member Username: Frank_abela
Berkshire
UK
Post Number: 3117
Registered: Sep-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 07:23 am: |
|
Hmmm, my 2-channel amp is only rated at 80wpc. It has a 1050VA transformer in it... double oops! |
Gold Member Username: Arande2
Rattle your ...
Missouri
Post Number: 2916
Registered: Dec-06
|
| Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 07:27 am: |
|
Quite a stiff power supply indeed  |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 10605
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Friday, August 01, 2008 - 08:17 am: |
|
My 2 channel amp has a 1650, and is rated at 300.
I think Frank wins... |
Platinum Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 10606
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Friday, August 01, 2008 - 08:17 am: |
|
Think..'punches above it's weight'
No wonder the Naim is so goooood. |
Gold Member Username: Frank_abela
Berkshire
UK
Post Number: 3122
Registered: Sep-04
|
| Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2008 - 10:02 am: |
|
No wonder the Naim is so damn heavy...
...and hums! |
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10
Post Number: 1727
Registered: Jun-07
|
| Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2008 - 11:05 am: |
|
Hows the NAIM working out for you Frank? Is it walking all over the Arcam stuff? |
Gold Member Username: Frank_abela
Berkshire
UK
Post Number: 3126
Registered: Sep-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, August 07, 2008 - 11:02 am: |
|
Yes it does, emphatically. There I am driving the Mani-2s with a single 80wpc amp and it positively obliterates the Arcam even though I was driving it biamped with 120w per drive unit! That said, considering the Naim is more expensive than the Arcam and only does 2-channel, it damn well should!
The odd thing is it actually sounds better than expected! maybe it's because I ahve a smaller room than the shop and so it doesn't need to drive the speakers so hard, or maybe I'm just lucky, but the thing sounds positively wonderful and certainly shows the Arcam where it's at. Now the Arcam's no slouch and would be many a man's perfect solution, but the Naim just drives music along with pathos and depth and transparency and...it's really re-ignited my interest in music which had been waning with the Arcam. |
