"headroom" for LSiM?

I didn't discover until yesterday that a co-worker of mine actually scooped up on that adorama deal that I had e-mailed to him after seeing it on this forum.

If I had known, I'd have recommended an emotiva instead of the Marantz MM 7055 that he got instead. Right now he just has the 705 up front bi-amped.

So, I was over at his place auditioning it last night when we noticed the receiver has to be cranked quite a ways just to get to reasonable listening levels.

It's a denon avr. Can't recall the model#. But, the volume has to hover in the -30 range, which was much higher than he's accustomed to.

I'm like look the LSiM are a power-hungry speaker...shoulda got the emo. He goes well the audyssey set the chann level to +0.5 and 0. He said that means output is adequate.

I told him if he turns it up to, say, -20 range, he's eventually gonna clip the amp. Am I right?

Also, could this just be a problem with weak pre-outs from the avr? Audiocontrol makes a home audio line driver, the BLD-10. That's cheaper than buying a pre with balanced outs just for the extra line voltage. That's figuring it's a voltage issue in the first place, which it might not be.

Any thoughts appreciated. Thanks.
Denon X7200WA
LSiM 705 703 704c
Denon DP 400
Yamaha CDC 775
«134

Comments

  • tonyb
    tonyb Posts: 32,902
    Too many variables to say. The LSIM's are not power hungry speakers to begin with and his amp should drive them to reasonably loud levels. It is a tad on the light side for power though, but the LSIM's are 8ohm speakers so he should be just fine.

    Could also be his interconnect cables he's using between the pre/receiver and amp. Impedance mismatches happens in cables too.

    -20 is not in my view clipping material as far as volume dials go. Especially with an amp in the mix. Right around -10 you have to start listening for the music to start sounding shrill, congested, then you need to back off.
    HT SYSTEM-
    Sony 850c 4k
    Pioneer elite vhx 21
    Sony 4k BRP
    SVS SB-2000
    Polk Sig. 20's
    Polk FX500 surrounds

    Cables-
    Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
    Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
    Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
    Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable

    Kitchen

    Sonos zp90
    Grant Fidelity tube dac
    B&k 1420
    lsi 9's
  • Clipdat
    Clipdat Posts: 12,560
    edited December 2017
    140wpc should be enough, so I would suspect that it is something to do with the output voltage of the Denon's preamp out (or a software/menu setting to adjust this if possible) or a lower than normal input gain on the Marantz amp. Unfortunately it looks like the Marantz does not have potentiometers to manually adjust input gain.

    Also I would try standard wiring versus bi-amping to see if that makes a difference for some reason.
  • tonyb
    tonyb Posts: 32,902
    Yes, take it out of bi-amping mode. The Marantz has an input impedance of 1.2 volts, for the analog connections which should align well with most receivers output impedance.
    HT SYSTEM-
    Sony 850c 4k
    Pioneer elite vhx 21
    Sony 4k BRP
    SVS SB-2000
    Polk Sig. 20's
    Polk FX500 surrounds

    Cables-
    Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
    Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
    Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
    Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable

    Kitchen

    Sonos zp90
    Grant Fidelity tube dac
    B&k 1420
    lsi 9's
  • monepolk
    monepolk Posts: 1,140
    I have a couple of Denon AVRs and -30 isn't bad. I have a 5 channel Parasound powering one and a 5 channel Sunfire powering the other. Neither one is using the internal amps.
  • You probably meant "input sensitivity" as opposed to "input impedance", right?
  • cfrizz
    cfrizz Posts: 13,415
    First thing he should do is get rid of the biamping since it is probably doing more harm then good.

    My brother has a Denon 3803 receiver with a Parasound 1500A 2 channel 205wpc amp powering a set of LSi 7 bookies. Now most on here say that they aren't a hard load to drive either, but the fact of the matter is, when they are on, the volume has to be around the -15-20 mark to get the LSi's to sound great. Fortunately, the Parasound barely gets warm and handles the demand with ease.

    When I had a Denon 3802 pushing my RTA-8Ts, having the volume at -30 was plenty loud, (but until I got the Parasound I didn't know how much I was missing) so the LSi7's are much harder to push.

    When your friend is running them for a while, tell him to put his hand on top of the amp and see how warm it is. If it is very warm, that will give you a good indication of just how hard the amp is working to push his speakers.
    Marantz AV-7705 PrePro, Classé 5 channel 200wpc Amp, Oppo 103 BluRay, Rotel RCD-1072 CDP, Sony XBR-49X800E TV, Polk S60 Main Speakers, Polk ES30 Center Channel, Polk S15 Surround Speakers SVS SB12-NSD x2
  • tonyb
    tonyb Posts: 32,902
    edited December 2017
    You probably meant "input sensitivity" as opposed to "input impedance", right?

    Indeed Ken.

    Cath,

    Sometimes it's a bit misguided to believe a speaker is hard to push without looking first at any impedance mismatches that may or may not be taking place. Like I stated, some cables, either IC's or speaker, by design can be limiting or free flowing also, depending.

    Also, if one was to start off with a low powered receiver, they might be sold than xyz speaker is hard to push when they never really had power to begin with. Different scenarios, different solutions, never a one size fits all.

    As it appears though, his amp is easy to get to full power with a 1.2 volt input sensitivity. The majority of receivers have a 1.0 volt output on the line levels. What we don't know is, how he has it all hooked up either. Could be a setup issue, settings issue in the receiver, connections/cables. Too many variables to explain it away with one answer.

    BTW, how was your Christmas girl ? Santa nice to you or did you get your usual lump of coal ? :)
    HT SYSTEM-
    Sony 850c 4k
    Pioneer elite vhx 21
    Sony 4k BRP
    SVS SB-2000
    Polk Sig. 20's
    Polk FX500 surrounds

    Cables-
    Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
    Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
    Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
    Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable

    Kitchen

    Sonos zp90
    Grant Fidelity tube dac
    B&k 1420
    lsi 9's
  • hochpt21
    hochpt21 Posts: 5,423
    edited December 2017
    I ran my old Marantz AVR at around -15, -20 when I was watching a movie at full volume, and I had an external amp powering the front 3 speakers.
    2 ChannelTurntable - VPI Classic 2/Ortofon 2M BlueAmplification - Rogue Audio Cronus Magnum II, Parks Audio Budgie PhonoSpeakers - GoldenEar Triton 17.2 Home TheaterDenon AVR-X3300W; Rotel RMB-1066; Klipsch RP-280F's, Klipsch RP-450C, Polk FXi3's, Polk RC60i; Dual SVS PB 2000's; BenQ HT2050; Elite Screens 120"Man CaveTurntable - Pro-Ject 2.9 Wood/Grado GoldAmplification - Dared SL2000a, McCormack DNA 0.5 DeluxeCD: Cambridge AudioSpeakers - Wharfedale Linton 85th Anniversary; LSiM 703; SDA 2A
  • Emlyn
    Emlyn Posts: 4,346
    What is the volume control range on the receiver? I vaguely recall Denon receivers can go up to +10 but check the manual on that. If it is the case, pushing the volume to an adjusted +0 should not be a problem as it would be the preamp section of the receiver drivng the Marantz amp. The Marantz would have plenty of power. No need to “biamp” from a single amp since that does nothing good. Actually, pushing to +0 may sound too loud!
  • hochpt21 wrote: »
    I ran my old Marantz AVR at around -15, -20 when I was watching a movie at full volume, and I had an external amp powering the front 3 speakers.

    I have a 100 watt 2 channel powering my 3.1 system on my Marantz Sr7000 and I have to turn it up between -20 and -10 depending on the movie for it to be satisfactory for me.
    Just a dude doing dude-ly things

    "Temptation is the manifestation of desire which equals necessity." - Mikey081057
    " I have always had a champange taste with a beer budget" - Rick88
    "Just because the thread is getting views don't mean much .. I like a good train wreck doesn't mean i want to be in one..." - pitdogg2
    "Those that don't know, don't know that they don't know." - heiney9
    "Audiophiles are the male equivalent of cat ladies." - Audiokarma Member
  • Emlyn
    Emlyn Posts: 4,346
    There may be an alternate volume display mode that would show 0 to 98. That is often easier for people new to the hobby to understand than -78dB to +whatever.
  • tonyb
    tonyb Posts: 32,902
    I want to hear about how he has this bi-amp configuration set up. Is he using an RCA splitter ? Is he just running one set of rca's to the amp and using 2 outputs to bi-amp ? How is he hooking this up ? I think we may find the answer there.
    HT SYSTEM-
    Sony 850c 4k
    Pioneer elite vhx 21
    Sony 4k BRP
    SVS SB-2000
    Polk Sig. 20's
    Polk FX500 surrounds

    Cables-
    Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
    Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
    Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
    Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable

    Kitchen

    Sonos zp90
    Grant Fidelity tube dac
    B&k 1420
    lsi 9's
  • sponger
    sponger Posts: 325
    Lots of angles neither of us had thought of, and it's appreciated.

    I brought up the bi-amping thing, and he pointed out that the LSiM manual says that "bi-wiring can provide noticeable improvements in transparency." Also, he's stuck on the idea of using 4 channs for bi-amping and eventually the 5th for the center, with the avr running the rears in a 5.1. Of course, the manual did not say the same about bi-amping. But he didn't see why one configuration would provide "improvements in transparency" and not the other.

    He's using the avr's bi-amping configuration with one of the surrounds since he's only planning to do 5.1 anyway. We double-checked the line and speaker level polarities. No issues there. Also, he had the same configuration using the avr's amp for the budget Infinity towers he had previously. The difference now is he's using an outboard amp. I tactfully pointed out his cheapo RCA cables, but he basically accused me of preaching a "cable religion." I didn't argue with him.

    On my way over there again last night I was thinking maybe they need more break-in time. I had brought a good reference disc with me this time, which is Dave Matthews and Tim Meadows live at Radio City. But, his wife was like "it's my turn right now" and we watched Adele live at Royal Albert instead.

    Needless to say, Adele never sounded so good. Barring the concerns about "headroom," I can't say he's having any problems with his new toys. We briefly turned it to -25 and that was much louder than any of us cared to hear it. So, after a whole Adele show in the -30s range, the amp never got warmer than slightly warm.

    Thanks again.
    Denon X7200WA
    LSiM 705 703 704c
    Denon DP 400
    Yamaha CDC 775
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 24,477
    An avr cannot biamp anything
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 49,708
    pitdogg2 wrote: »
    An avr cannot biamp anything

    This cannot be repeated enough and I'll add, PERIOD.
    Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • Toolfan66
    Toolfan66 Posts: 16,834
    pitdogg2 wrote: »
    An avr cannot biamp anything
    F1nut wrote: »
    pitdogg2 wrote: »
    An avr cannot biamp anything

    This cannot be repeated enough and I'll add, PERIOD.


    We will repeat it again, ( an AVR cannot biamp anything!!! )

  • sponger
    sponger Posts: 325
    OK roger that on the bi-amping thing. Going back to the LSiM manual, it describes bi-amping as a process involving multiple amps and gain matching. Neither is the case with an avr. I could tell him that, but I'm anticipating he'll say something like "but denons says it's bi-amping." Also, he's reminded me that it's the way he's had it with his previous towers without any problems.

    Also, the LSiM manual says that bi-wiring can "improve transparency," and yet that does not involve separate amps or gain matching. In which case, should he bi-wire 2 channels from the MM 7055?

    Any advice on explaining in layman's terms why "bi-amping" from an avr is purely marketing speak, and why it could actually be doing more harm than good?

    Thanks.
    Denon X7200WA
    LSiM 705 703 704c
    Denon DP 400
    Yamaha CDC 775
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 49,708
    edited December 2017
    Bi-amping in the simplest term means using two amplifiers, which means two separate power supplies. He has a single power supply in his AVR, so bi-amping is impossible. It's marketing hype.

    What he is doing by using those extra channels is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Say the AVR is rated at 100 wpc, 2 channels driven. Each extra channel used sucks up power from that single power supply, so with 4 channels driven it might be down to 75 wpc. But wait, that doesn't mean each speaker is using 150 wpc. No, the tweeter only uses 5 or 10 watts of the 75 it's tapping off, the rest is wasted. The other drivers are tapping off the other 75 when they could be tapping 90 or 95.

    True bi-amping also requires external active crossovers.
    Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • sponger
    sponger Posts: 325
    edited December 2017
    That's a readily digestible take on the redundancy of avr "bi-amping." But that leaves the question of the "improved transparency" benefits of bi-wiring despite the absence of a separate power supply, crossovers, etc. If I get asked why one works and not the other despite both relying on the same power supply, crossover, etc, I won't know how to respond. I'm trying to convince him to act in his own best interests based on what is being discussed in this thread, so all the input is appreciated. I'm over there at least a couple of times a month, so I want to hear those LSiMs sound their best as well. I guess the biggest hurdle is deprogramming all that marketing lingo that otherwise credible brands have been pushing onto him all these years. I have to admit that I bought it into myself until I began perusing this forum.
    Denon X7200WA
    LSiM 705 703 704c
    Denon DP 400
    Yamaha CDC 775
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 24,477
    edited December 2017
    Bi-wiring is where the speaker cable has two bananas/spades on the amp end and 4 bananas/spades on the speaker end. you are forgoing the brass jumper strip and directly feeding into the crossover. Many will make better jumpers from quality speaker cable and throw the brass jumpers in the trash if they do not want to bi-wire.

  • sponger
    sponger Posts: 325
    OK yes that is a correct description of bi-wiring. But, that process does not rely on separate power supplies or active crossovers. So, the question I guess is how does it "improve transparency" regardless? Also, why does it "improve transparency" while avr "bi-amping" does not even though both exclude the use of separate power supplies and active crossovers? thank you.
    Denon X7200WA
    LSiM 705 703 704c
    Denon DP 400
    Yamaha CDC 775
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 24,477
    no brass jumpers
  • sponger
    sponger Posts: 325
    Both bi-wiring and avr "bi-amping" forgo the use of brass jumpers. As F1 stated, what makes true bi-amping effective is the use of separate amps and active crossovers. So, I guess my question is if bi-wiring "improves transparency" without separate power supplies and active crossovers, then why does avr "bi-amping" not do the same? Thank you.
    Denon X7200WA
    LSiM 705 703 704c
    Denon DP 400
    Yamaha CDC 775
  • rpf65
    rpf65 Posts: 2,127
    One theory that bi-wiring improves transparency is that the two separate signal paths reduce interference between the lower freq range and the mid/high freq range. The counter argument is if the cross overs seperate the electrical signal, and direct that to the appropriate speakers, how is the interference possible in the first place.

    Those that lean more toward the latter argument will say that using a single pair of good quality speaker wire, with equally good quality jumpers is the best wiring option. In other words they heard no difference between conventional wiring and bi-wiring.

    There are other arguments for and against bi-wiring speakers, this just happens to be one of the more common.


  • sponger
    sponger Posts: 325
    That is a very helpful elaboration on why bi-wiring may or may not "improve transparency," which the LSiM manual states it does. But, I think the question is why would bi-wiring be effective in theory while avr "bi-amping" is not, when both operate under the same principles in the sense that they both rely on one amp and no active crossovers. So, when I say "bi-wiring may improve transparency while avr 'bi-amping' does not," I might get asked why one works and the other doesn't. I'm not sure if I have an answer to that question yet. That is, why is one bad and the other at least in theory good? Thanks again.
    Denon X7200WA
    LSiM 705 703 704c
    Denon DP 400
    Yamaha CDC 775
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 49,708
    edited December 2017
    But, I think the question is why would bi-wiring be effective in theory while avr "bi-amping" is not, when both operate under the same principles in the sense that they both rely on one amp and no active crossovers.

    Because you can bi-wire with an AVR, but you cannot bi-amp.

    Bi-wiring has nothing to do with how many amps are used or the use of active crossovers.

    True bi-amping will improve transparency, much more so than may be possible with bi-wiring.
    Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • rpf65
    rpf65 Posts: 2,127
    sponger wrote: »
    That is a very helpful elaboration on why bi-wiring may or may not "improve transparency," which the LSiM manual states it does. But, I think the question is why would bi-wiring be effective in theory while avr "bi-amping" is not, when both operate under the same principles in the sense that they both rely on one amp and no active crossovers. So, when I say "bi-wiring may improve transparency while avr 'bi-amping' does not," I might get asked why one works and the other doesn't. I'm not sure if I have an answer to that question yet. That is, why is one bad and the other at least in theory good? Thanks again.

    Maybe I can make this a little clearer.

    An AVR has one power supply, doesn't matter how many channels you run, they run off the same power supply. As you add more channels, the available power to each channel must decrease, there is no other choice.

    By using 2 of your AVR's outputs to one speaker, each output, channel, has less available power. Won't be exactly half, AVR's are a little funny here, but 80 watts available per channel, 4 channels driven, is realistic.

    There is no way you can use all available power to drive any speaker, with out taking the risk of setting off smoke alarms, so you'll be using some portion of it.

    I don't know this as fact, but it wouldn't surprise me if the woofers, low freq section, of the 705's consume 70 percent of the power, if wired conventionally. So if wired conventionally, you need a total of 30 watts sent to the speaker to achieve the sound level you like, 21 watts are going to the woofers, and 9 watts to the rest of the individual speakers.

    Going back to two outputs to drive each speaker, even though the available power is there, your still sending 21 watts out of each speaker terminal. Half of the speaker is only using 9 of those 21 watts, so 12 watts is wasted.

    Like it a little louder, you may begin to begin under powering the low freq portion of your speakers, causing all kinds of distortion. At the same time your wasting even more power by sending it to where it isn't needed.

    This is one reason why I, and many others advise against this form of bi-wiring.
  • sponger
    sponger Posts: 325
    edited December 2017
    It sounds like avr "bi-amping" wastes available power while bi-wiring does not. But, based on the example scenario, that's assuming that the highs channel is pulling more power than it needs. Can we be sure of that? That is, in the example scenario, the highs channel is pulling 21 watts while using only 9 of them. Is that what happens in an avr "bi-amping" configuration?
    Denon X7200WA
    LSiM 705 703 704c
    Denon DP 400
    Yamaha CDC 775
  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 49,708
    sponger wrote: »
    It sounds like avr "bi-amping" wastes available power while bi-wiring does not. But, based on the example scenario, that's assuming that the highs channel is pulling more power than it needs. Can we be sure of that? That is, in the example scenario, the highs channel is pulling 21 watts while using only 9 of them. Is that what happens in an avr "bi-amping" configuration?

    It's a fact.
    Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • sponger
    sponger Posts: 325
    By that rationale, channels will pull the same amount of wattage regardless of being set to "small" or "large." While that might be true, that seems to conflict with what most would say based on reading these threads.
    Denon X7200WA
    LSiM 705 703 704c
    Denon DP 400
    Yamaha CDC 775
This discussion has been closed.