Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Digital Pianos - Electronic Pianos - Synths & Keyboards Is PioneerVSX-329 good amp for Focusrite and hi-fi speakers?

Hello,

After reading several topis about amplifiers - here, here and here I understood that the following are key requirements for choosing an amplifier:

1. Must have Pure or Direct mode
2. at least 100W per channel
3. Digital inputs are desirable
4. "at least" a bass and treble knob on the front

Many times Onkyo was suggested, and I understand that this Pineer might be overkill for the purpose. But currently I don't have Onkyo for reasonable price in local stores but there is option to buy this Pioneer for $200 and I consider all those extra features as a bonus - may be I'll use it also as av receiver for home theater later.

So I want to ask if anyone here has experience with Pioneer amplifiers and may be this particular model. My main goal is what I wrote in question title - I am connecting my DP to Focusrite, connected to AUX (analog) input of another amp which I need to return to its owner, so I am looking for replacement for that amp.

Any inputs will be highly appreciated!
Thank you!

Is there really any difference between Onkyo and Pioneer (and Yamaha and Denon and Kenwood)?

To tell you the truth I am asking this question myself and I really don't know the answer. The only HI-FI amp I ever had experience with was Sherwood that I bought 23 years ago and I was very happy with it listenning CDs. But that amp is now dead and also don't know if it could be good for DP playing... I still have speakers from that set, ISP 2000, 100w each, which I plan to use with my new amp...

There is an old rule:

. . . The distortion of any decent amplifier is negligible,

. . . compared to the distortion of a very good loudspeaker.

I think it's still true.

I wouldn't worry about the sound quality of any modern transistorized amp.

I _would_ worry about the power rating, since many manufacturers have been using "music power" ratings that are exaggerated (IMHO).

. . . How many "watts RMS, continuous" will the amps deliver?

"Instrument amplifiers" (and loudspeakers) are designed for handling sustained, loud sounds. "Home music systems" are designed for handling recorded music in a living room.

PS -- I am out-of-touch with recent developments in home audio systems. When a maker rates an amp at '100 watts', he might mean "100 watts RMS, continuous". But read the specs carefully.

Thank you Charles for answer!
Sorry, what does "RMS" stand for?

And can you give me some exmples of those "Instrument amplifiers"? Sounds like they are better sutable for this purpose?

I know very little about audio equipment as well. When my father passed away a couple of years ago, he was an audiophile and left behind tons of audio equipment that no one knew what to do with. My husband did research enough to find out what things were worth, thinking that since some of it was very old it wouldn't be worth much. However, there really have been very few advances in technology with regards to audio stuff, and so much of it is sought after, even if it's no longer being manufactured.

So I think a $200 Pioneer would be just fine for these purposes. I've used even cheaper equipment ($50 new?) hooked up to a DP with decent results, so this should work. It does also depend upon the monitors you're using, and if you have a subwoofer. I think these things would probably be more of a concern than the amp itself, but I know very little in this regard.

Root mean square : you multiply the signal by itself (square), take the mean, then the square root. It is the main mode of measuring an alternative intensity or voltage. Your 220V voltage is RMS. (You have also an other mode : peek voltage).

The power is already a square (P=UxU/R), then the power RMS is simply the mean power of the signal.

Thank you Frederic, I also found this info already and I found here that Pioneer is know to talk about RMS power in the official specs. So this one has 100W per channnel RMS, if I understood that right.
Now, my old (and I believe very good!) Sherwood ISP 2000 speakers are also 100W each (in spec). Will that match? I also read somewhere that amp should be 40-50% more than speakers, but on other hand, I don't think I will ever use this setup at full power in 20m living room. Or should I really look for an amp with 150-200 W per channel (RMS)?

Thank you Morodiene, I also was thinking this way, but I am bothering people with this question because currently I have TEAC (not mine - one that I need to return), an amp from the same range approx., and unfortunatelly I cannot say that I am fully satisfied with it when it is connected to my speakers. Headphones are fine, but sound it produces through speakers is very far from being acceptable... A lot of distortions... So I trying to make a carefull research before investing to a new amp... (But maybe it is just bad speakers placement, and if I'll reposition them carefully than with any good amp sound will be good enough)

Are you sure it's not the speakers? That makes a huge difference depending on what their intended primary function. They may be great for listening to music, but not ideal for a DP. The same holds true for headphones.

This is why so many people prefer powered monitors for DPs rather than AMP/Speaker hook up. Monitors seem to perform better in this instance.

It's a mistake to buy an amp based on your ISP speakers. Get the Pioneer and a new set of speakers to suit if you want your setup to perform both for your dp and your home stereo or get a pair of powered speakers like the JBL 305s for your dp.
Your speakers have rot.

Hmm.. It is not first time that I hear this... Interesting... If that's really a reason than I need to drop the idea of this Pioneer (and any other amp for my Sherwood speakers) and look for a power monitors instead?...

Thanks emenelton! And I guess you will also say that 2nd option (JBL 305) is better for DP than Pioneer with suitable speakers?

Sorry emenelton, what do you mean by that?

I think that this is probably going to be a better fit for your purposes. I currently own a pair of JBL LSR305's that are hooked up directly to my DP via line out, but I have also used them with an interface hooked up to my computer as well. Either one performs very well, although the addition of a subwoofer for these smaller monitors might be needed. You can look into the 308s which I understand don't need the sub, but you may find the 305s to suffice as I did.

Another contender in this price range is the PreSonus Eris E5, and KRK Rokit 5. These are the 3 most popular ones spoken about on this forum as DP monitors. Perhaps you can arrange to test drive them at home to see which you like in your setup the best?

I am really curious about what are a reasons for such difference. In one setup a CD player de-digitizes CD audio stream and sends analog waveform to amp's input. In the second setup Focusrite de-digitizes audio stream produced by a DAW and sends analog waveform to amp's input (or even digital signal to amp's digital input and amp de-digitizes it). What is a difference? (aside quality of my piano playing and that of a professional pianist who recorded CD)

Thank you Morodiene for suggestions. I'll look for these monitors in my local market... I see that on sweetwater.com the price is $149.99, i.e. $300 for pair...

I'm not saying the second option is better or worse, just that basing the wattage rating of a new receiver to suit your existing speakers that are defective, that is a mistake.
If your goal is to get speakers for your dp, go powered monitors, if your goal is to have a system that works for both your dp and home theatre, than go for a receiver with speakers.

Thank you emenelton, but why do you think that my speakers are defective???

Again, I'm by no means an expert here. But the first set up is designed for sounding "good" playing a wide variety of sounds. Could be pop or rock where there is less dynamic contrast, where as piano will generally have a lot more variation.

Also, certain equipment is meant to sound impressive - maybe by boosting highs or lows - rather than going for realism. With monitors, they are intended for use in mixing and so you may get a more realistic/flat representation. It may not sound the same as your speakers, or it might - I don't know.

If you could do a side-by-side comparison with your current set up and a couple of different monitors, I think you'd be able to see what works best with your particular DP.

A case in point are Beats headphones. Compared with other headphones in that price range, they come nowhere near as close in fidelity. But they do "tricks" to make things sound impressive - in a pop/hip-hop/R&B genre, but they don't really represent the sound accurately.

I'm not saying that the Pioneer amp and your speakers would sound worse than the aforementioned monitors, of course, just mentioning it as a possible reason why monitors would be better.