My receiver put out 140 watts per channel can this handle it ?
1412899
The booklet says "Watts/Channel" is 140 with power protection on, and 70 with power protection off. I'm assuming this is "Maximum" watts/channel. However, I'm not sure how meaningful this is, usually the key issue is clean watts, meaning that as long as you run your volume at a decent level, not full blast with lots of clipping, "max watts" doesn't matter very much. Plus most of the time you're going to be running with protection on, which is why you'd buy this switch anyway.
262778
yes, this is the receiver I am using, it sounds great, but you may want to get a powered sub...
378736
Hi, I purchased this amp for a two channel configuration, and I am very happy with the results; it has much more power and more fidelity than an integrated receiver. I think that maybe you only have to configure your system to provide the same power level to all the speakers; if not, the front speakers will sound louder than the rest. Regards.
1280053
"301: Compatable with amplifiers and receivers rated from 10 to 150 watts per channel. Rated 4-8 ohms" quoted from owners manual. My receiver is 8 ohm.
808290
Not really sure, the smallest receiver I've tried has been on a Marantz 2216 which is 16 watts per channel and it sounded very good. The BIC DV62si has some very efficient drivers so I think you would be fine. I'm also guessing this is a tube amp, which has tends to drive speakers much more efficiently than the typical solid state amps.
891288
I am sorry, but the receiver you have doesn't have pre-amp outputs. You can't add any amp to this receiver. Sorry. Some of the higher end receivers have pre-amp outputs that allow you to add external amplification.
1811464
50 watts RMS x 2 @4ohm 75 watts RMS x2 @2ohm 150 watts rms x1 @4ohm It will handle 2ohm but i dnt really recommended it dropping it down to 2ohm when it comes to mono channel
871963
I think that would be enough. The first stereo I had mine hooked up to was 100 watts/channel and they sounded fine. The main thing is to have the tape in/out or equalizer connections for the processor.
87407
I have a Yamaha with 120 watts per channel. That seems like plenty of power.I don't know if I'd use less than 80. Good speakers for the money
1301223
I'm not an expert, but I went off of the 175W per channel rating when I bought this. The speakers I got were Polk Audio TSi 400's that are capable of taking 200W of power so I knew that the receiver couldn't overpower the speakers if I cranked it up.
1799478
I have the Denon AVR-3313ci with 125w per channel...these speakers are working very well. I'm very happy with this purchase.
563134
The specs for this amp indicate 40 watts of power for each channel....so I believe it would be within your speakers' parameter.
871153
it should no problem, it's not a powered device itself. all this does a split the power you currently have coming from your receiver
1365170
it will perform if you bridge it, 1400 watt or rms?check your sub if its near 200 rms it will do.
1945147
I doubt you have 185 watts per channel RMS. These will work fine with your system. You won't over power them unless you over crank the volume. They will take a lot of power. I paired these with a set of the big boys, dual 15 inch woofers, Cerwin Vega, forgot the model number. Those I drive with a separate 700w RMS QSC amp. M base receiver is an 1100 watt Sony. That receiver drives the xls-28's no problems. Nice speakers. The big boys are too big for your setup. Weigh 120 pounds, and probably take 25 watts just to get moving. Hope this helps.
979622
They will handle up to 300 watts input apiece- the Pyle unit produces up to 500 watts per channel-- do the math.
2116137
The answer is yes with no problem. I used a Pyle 50 watts per channel receiver with mine and they worked fine! �