RTi-A9 hook up

michael1947

Thank you tonyb. I didn't want to buy a 500 wpc amp and if my scheme with my Kenwoods does not work out I'll be looking at a newer 2 channel starting with an Emotiva. Any recommendations. will post how my test work with my dual kenwoods.

tonyb

Look for a used Parasound, B&K, Rotel, even Carver, there are certainly many more options but these seem to match up well with RTI speakers with alot of members being very happy with those combo's.

evhudsons

I use small for my ht as you mention here, but for two channel I have a "pure direct" on my avr that then bypasses (supposedly) all adjustments and sends the signal directly to my speakers. So that way my speakers do play bass, and my sub is not used. I'm assuming it's similar then to selecting large for my speakers. I think it's the right idea, I'm just not sure how it really works. When I hooked up my Marantz directly to the speakers, it really shined in it's own right.

So for convenience I just select pure direct for 2 channel, but for music marathons I plug my speaker wires into the Marantz.

Tour2ma

michael1947 wrote: »

Is it possible to hook up two auxiliary amps. Maybe use a Y splitter on the pre-out and then one set to one of my Kenwood 208's and one set to my other identical amp.

Yes... that is bi-amping, and a Y-splitter is exactly what would be called for...

michael1947 wrote:

I have about 4 of them, not sure why.

LOL... I know that feeling...

michael1947 wrote:

Then from say amp number 1 I run the left channel to speaker 1 and the right speaker 2 both in the high position of the speaker. From amp number 2 I run the right channel to speaker 1 and the left channel to speaker 2 both in the low base section.

That would be one way and it is called horizontal bi-amping. Since most of the power requirement is in the low frequency info, this method puts significantly more load on one amp than the amp that was assigned the high frequency duty.

The other way, vertical bi-amping, assigns each amp to one speaker:
- One of Amp #1's channels supplies Speaker 1's highs while Amp 1's other channel supplies Speaker 1's lows.
- Amp #2 similarly supplies Speaker 2.
Here both amps duty will be essentially equal.

Some prefer the horizontal route as they feel that keeping the low and high frequencies separate produce "cleaner" highs. Others, including me, prefer the vertical method's more balanced approach as it is a better use of their total power potential. I urge you to try both ways and decide for yourself.

michael1947 wrote:

Will the onkyo txnr 708 have enough pre-amp capability to run both.

Yes... without a doubt...

michael1947 wrote:

I believe I am attempting to run with the gear that I already own and not make another purchase. Thanks

Always the smartest path to start down... but somewhere in your audio future there's always another damn fork in the road lurking...

Enjoy the journey...

evhudsons

Great information and explanation! I can't biamp but I understand what that is now. Cool. I love learning on this forum thanks again for the crossover info, I set it up again with a better understanding was able to pinpoint my happiness level on the sub. I have it at between 80 with a higher gain, or 90 with a lower gain. I'm experimenting between music and movies now to see which I prefer.

Tour2ma

Igoggsy wrote: »

Hi Everyone,
I have an Arcam fmjA18 integrated amp rated at 50wpc running into KEF q50's from about 20 years ago. The KEF's are being replaced by the A9's and I am worried about power. The room is 10x24 so not huge by any stretch and I listen at low to moderate levels due to napping kids and the fact that I like my neighbors. Will the Arcam suffice? If not, I have an old nakamichi av receiver with main in's that I am pretty sure I cold hook up and use the Arcam as a pre amp.

Igoggsy,
First, let me add my welcome to the one you received above.

Second, are these your KEF's from the 80's?
Q50 Specifications
System type: 2?-way, floor standing Enclosure type: Reflex
Dimensions (H x W x D): 800 x 190 x 301mm (31.5 x 7.5 x 11.85 inches) Weight: 11kg (24.3 lbs)
Nominal impedance: 6 ohms Amplifier requirements: 10-125W
Frequency response: 45Hz to 20kHz +/-3.0dB Sensitivity: 89dB at 1m for 2.83V

If, yes, as I expect you will answer, then it is interesting to note that your KEF's are both lower in nominal impedance and slightly less sensitive than your new 9's. So if your Arcam/KEF combo floated your boat, it would seem that for your listening reality so should your Arcam/RTi A9 combo.

Also noteworthy is that while rigorously accurate, KEF's use of the 2.83V input for the sensitivity measurement means that the Q50's SPL was actually produced by a 1.33 W. While Polk's web-page for the A9's do not specify an input, it is moot since application of a 2.83 V potential to an 8-ohm load equals 1 W. It's this "equivalence" for 8-ohm designs, which came to dominate the industry, that led to the "relaxation" of the sensitivity test's input parameter.
===> Bottom line: At their stated output your KEF's are already 33% deeper into your amp than the A9's will be... and the A9's are 1 dB louder.

The only way the 9's potentially offer a bigger challenge to your Arcam is that they dig a bit deeper than your KEF's (30 vs. 45 Hz). I do not see this being determinate as there is not that much music in that additional 15 Hz. But ultimately it depends upon what you listen to... if you're strictly a Bach Organwerke kinda guy... you just might be S-O-L... :cheesygrin:

But by now you may well have your new 9's and this exercise is no longer a theoretical one. Give us an update on your experience, when you get a chance...

Oh, and I can't remember the last time I came across a "2?-way" speaker...

62caddy,
I dig your math efforts, but you should also know it's a lot easier, and I mean a lot easier, to gather a little product research when facing "experience"... not that it'll make a lick of difference, but it's easier.

You should also know that SPL falls with the square of distance, i.e., double the distance drops the dB by 6. I'm betting Iggy's not within 2 M of his front stage. So it's likely he's down 10 - 12 dB from the figures you're citing. Then again with stereo there are two sources... and on and on... Never a bad thing to exercise the grey matter...

Hope you stick around...

Tour2ma

evhudsons wrote: »

I have it at between 80 with a higher gain, or 90 with a lower gain. I'm experimenting between music and movies now to see which I prefer.

Assuming the sub(s) are capable it's fairly typical to increase a sub's gain some for movies. Some will run theirs as much as 5 dB "hot" (higher vs. the calibrated levels for the other speakers) for HT. But approach with caution... the sub you save may be your own...

For 2-ch music most will seek seamless blending of their sub, but if your tastes run a bit toward heavier bass... hey, they're your tastes...

evhudsons

I found I can run the bass setting gain while listening to music, so I have a perfect setting there where it blends in nicely. I start fully low, then increase just enough until it sounds like a natural full speaker.

I have saved two settings, one for music, and one for HT. It's easy now to switch back and forth. Even for movies I don't have it too loud, because it would rattle my beer too much possibly foaming it too much.

I like the low hardly audible but you can feel it bass for movies. Like a thunderstorm that you can't see but sort of hear it's coming. When the movie puts out a deep rumble, it is clean an pure and not too loud. I don't like thump bass at all.

Thanks again for the explanations, it really did help me setting it correctly.

62caddy

62caddy,
I dig your math efforts, but you should also know it's a lot easier, and I mean a lot easier, to gather a little product research when facing "experience"... not that it'll make a lick of difference, but it's easier.

You should also know that SPL falls with the square of distance, i.e., double the distance drops the dB by 6. I'm betting Iggy's not within 2 M of his front stage. So it's likely he's down 10 - 12 dB from the figures you're citing. Then again with stereo there are two sources... and on and on... Never a bad thing to exercise the grey matter...

Hope you stick around...[/QUOTE]

I understand what you're saying here and my advice to Iggy was based upon both the numbers as well as my own direct experience. The data was to clarify the relationship between loudness and power; subsequently address the issue of current when that got introduced to the discussion. Again, I never specifically directed our friend not to upgrade his amp; rather to first try his A9s with his present unit before making that committment. That in itself would provide even more experience.

Thanks, and glad to be here. Always enjoy diversity of opinions.

Tour2ma

^Excellent... Let's hope Iggy feels the same way...

ev,
Great that your AVR saves multiple set-ups. Prolly more common now, but a few years ago, when i was last really active 'round here, it was a relatively new feature just coming to TOTL AVP's and AVR's.

Tour2ma wrote: »

Oh, and I can't remember the last time I came across a "2?-way" speaker...

Supposed to have been "2-1/2 way", but ran afoul of the site's character protocol.. or some such... Same deal in the Q50's spec exerpt...

tonyb

[QUOTE=Tour2ma;1706721 but a few years ago, when i was last really active 'round here,
QUOTE]

You mean waaay back, when you were skinney and somewhat good lookin' ? :biggrin:

I just posts pics of the kid that came with the wallet, what are the chances anyway ?

Tour2ma

LOL... and had hair in the vicinity of my forehead...

Igoggsy

Hi all- so checking in after a couple weeks with the new speakers and they sound great with the Arcam, but I did add a power amp just in case. Incidentally, the only time so far that I have noticed a remarkable difference was when my wife cranked them to enjoy a fave song on a playlist I was running. These things are beasts (in size and sound). Ultimately I added the amp just in case I wanted to unleash them as I was nervous pushing the Arcam. They seemed to have warmed up in the last week and I am loving the new toys. Perhaps the best thing is that it has got me digging through old tunes to listen to all over again. And yes, they are the old q50's from the 80's...still trying to decide what to do with them.

Thanks everyone! Hope others are discovering their libraries on these too!

tonyb

Congrats man, the amp will help thats for sure, glad your diggin' them. Try not to smile so much.:biggrin:

michael1947

A week ago we had some conversations on this thread as to power for the RTI A9's. I experimented with several combinations and the best one I could come up was powering them with 2 old Kenwoods (150) wpc and was using an old Kenwood Pre. It worked, lots of base, lots of volume and they sounded pretty good but then someone mentioned that one of my 25 year old Kenwoods could take a dump and ruin some of my new speakers. Next week I expect my Emotiva XPA-5 will be here and my new plan is to run my front 3 with the 5 channel amp and use 2 of the 5 channels to bi-amp each of the A9's, 200watts for the highs and 200 watts for the lows. That would leave me with one 200 watts for my center. I will use the Onkyo for the backs and sides. I may have some more pointed/technical questions when I actually wire things up. For now I plan on the Onkyo txnr 708 to operate the Emotiva 5 channel amp as stated above...do you think I'm on the right course.

mdaudioguy

Yeah, you'll do fine with that. Personally, I'd forget the bi-amp and just run single channels to single speakers, but give it a shot. Try it both ways. It'll sound good either way.

Inspector 24

I've got a Parasound HCA-1206 135x6 amp running the A9's and CSi6. When running un-bridged, 135wpc the A9's sound fine, very crisp, defined and clear, and much better than the Yamaha HTR-5990 @ 120wpc. But to really make them rock, this amp is bridgeable to 350wpc, which wakes them up like poking a sleeping bear. Suddenly a sub woofer is no longer required to feel the music, and even at lower volumes it has a depth and a richness that was lacking in un-bridged mode, and if you should desire the volume will easily go past comfortable listening levels before it starts to sound strained.

As others have said before the A9's need a lot of current to drive all six of those speakers, and I'm definitely a believer.

I'll play with this sweetheart of an amp for now but am keeping a lookout for something 4-500wpc for a good deal. Too bad the HCA-3500 currently on sale here is just a tad out of my pricerange at the moment, still 350wpc, but a whole bunch more current!

Long story short, in my limited experience with the A9's, give them all the power you can!!

btrots

Hi all,

I got the same deal on some A9's at Futureshop during the Boxing week sale. Crazy deal. I spent a lot of time online researching different opinions on types of amps and the possible benefits of bi-amping (I had my A7's biwired before, realized that was a complete waste of time....those are now powered by a Carver TMF15 and that's plenty for them, much better than anything I ever got out of my receiver). I read all about the now infamous blinded study of different power amps that revealed that even audiophile reviewers could not tell the difference between the least and most expensive amps out there (ie speakers are faaaaar more important than the type of power amp used). As for bi-amping, the best article I came across on the subject is linked below. It's pretty technical, but probably the most convincing of any pro/con argument I've read thus far.

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

Ended up bi-amping with a couple of Crown XLS 1000 pro power amps. They're rugged as hell, they have build-in electronic crossovers, lots of power, and I haven't once heard the fans come on (one of the major draw-backs to using pro amps, as per multiple discussions online). Initially there was a bit of a ground loop hum, but I upped the output to the R/L pre-outs as much as I possibly could via the receiver settings/volume control, got a well-shielded RCA cable to run from my receiver, and got a couple of short balanced 1/4" cables as interconnects between the two Crowns. Sounds absolutely amazing now, tons of room to play with. Once the speakers have had some time to break in I'll really open them up to see what they can do. Maybe sometime I'll try running the Crowns bridged, just out of curiosity.

Anyways, curious what the rest of you think about that setup.....I know many are still not convinced about using pro amps for this purpose.

tonyb

Nope, can't convince me, and I've heard alot of pro amps on home speakers. Harsh to say the least. Also if you think an amp doesn't change the sound then you haven't had enough experience under your belt. I know of nobody personally that thinks amps don't matter for SQ....nobody. Of coarse, your entitled to your opinion, but instead of baseing your opinion on an article you read on the internet, opinions hold more water coming from experience in my book.

Tour2ma

+1 tb....

btrots,
First, welcome...

Second, yes, while speakers certainly are the majority determinant of the sound you hear, amps do have different sounds. Whether or not your Crowns could float my audio boat, I have no idea. But I would wager my B&K ST-140 that I could tell when it was at work vs. your Crowns. I know I could tell it from my old DC-300... But what matters is that you are happy... Enjoy...

As for the ESP link on the merits of passive x-overs... seen it. It's flawed pseudo-science at best.

michael1947 wrote: »

... the best one I could come up was powering them with 2 old Kenwoods (150) wpc and was using an old Kenwood Pre. It worked, lots of base, lots of volume and they sounded pretty good but then someone mentioned that one of my 25 year old Kenwoods could take a dump and ruin some of my new speakers.

So what's the plan for the Kenwoods??? Retire them? In-line speaker fuses are one way you could continue their use with confidence. Something like a 1.5 A fast-blow would be a good starting point. Beats putting them in a closet...

Just my $0.02...

btrots

*shrug* I'm a scientifically minded guy, people's perception of which amp sounds better is colored significantly when they can see which is which. This was a well designed study, not just some random article on the net. Made me think twice about what is probably the opinion held by most....I'm quite sure that the people that took part in it had much better ears than I do. Afterall, in the purest sense an amp is supposed to amplify, not color the sound. Whether or not "coloring" from certain types of amps is pleasing is I suppose of matter of taste.

btrots

sorry, and just to clarify, I didn't mean to imply that all amps sound the same...just to challenge the belief that expensive audiophile amps can easily be picked out from lower end counterparts based on sound "quality" alone...personal sound preference is a different matter, and will of course vary....i'll have to compare the crown's to my carver sometime to see for myself

knew it would be a controversial idea, but it's an idea that does seem to be gaining some support in some forums...=p

Worth a read, may generate some heated discussion. It's difficult to find to original article since it's now 15 yrs old, but it's referenced all over the net. http://www.hometheaterfocus.com/receivers/amplifier-sound-quality.aspx

Inspector 24

FWIW, I noticed a very large difference going from the Yamaha HTR5990's amp to the Parasound HCA-1206. Not only did I no longer need a sub for music, the sound was significantly warmer which was very apparent because they no longer hurt my ears to listen to at reference volumes. Previously I had everything above 1kHz turned down anywhere from -1-3db to mellow the speakers and make them tolerable. Now I have the 1kHz turned up .5db and they are sweet and full sounding without the harshness they had before, double confirmed by the S.O. who now enjoys full volume listening.

YMMV.

What did you set the active crossover at? Also, have you by-passed the A9's internal crossover?

tonyb

See, we told ya that parasound would tame the upper end of those speakers and give better dynamics and clearity. Glad your diggin' that amp bro, now you can never go back.

Inspector 24

You said it, I am in the rabbit hole for sure.

Next up, updated pre-amp. Thinking Marantz 6006, better cables and. Better blu ray player. Apparently Oppo is a popular brand?

Back on topic, while the a9's are awesome with 350w bridged I've given some thought to bi-amping them, 135w to the mid/high and woofer section separately might reveal more detail and clarity??

btrots

I'm also wondering what's best to set the active crossover at. The curve on the RTI A9's is quite a bit shallower than that on the electronic crossover I'm using. For lack of a better idea, I've padded the low and high-pass crossover point a bit to avoid a loss in frequency response. I guess worst case I'm losing a bit of efficiency to the passive internal crossovers in the speakers, but otherwise can't think of a significant downside

Let me know what you think of the audible difference between bi-amp wiring and bridging, if there is one with the RTIs

btrots

Please correct me if I'm wrong, those that have been at this much longer than me....but it seems like the theoretical benefit of bypassing the internal high/mid crossover is much lower than anything you might get out of bi-amping as per factory specs (ie high/mid & lows)...seems like it'd be a huge hassle for not a lot of gain

tonyb

True bi-amping is done with external crossovers. The benefit comes in at the quality of the amps used and the quality of the external crossover. Gives you more options in a way, but one can always mod an internal crossover too. Then again, if your going through that much hassle, why not just buy better speakers ?

btrots

Agreed, for sure. The crossovers in the amps I'm using are active. So while they aren't technically external to the other components, they filter the signal before the amplification stage like any typical external electronic crossover would. The thought of trying to bust into the cabinet to try and bypass the passive crossover components of my speaker makes me shudder.

tonyb

So what your saying is your using 2 crossovers, one in the pro amps and the ones in the receiver ?

Let me see if I follow your audio path, correct me if I'm wrong.
You send a signal from whatever source, bdp, cdp, to the receiver which uses it's own crossover to filter the signal and send x to the sub, and x to the amp, where it is filtered again, to the speakers. Of coarse I don't know how you have your sub set up so you may be using that crossover too.
You don't see a problem with double filtering of the signal ? Just my .02 from what I can see so far, I could be wrong though. It's been known to happen a time or two.:cheesygrin: