power for RTi 150

2»

Comments

  • danger boy
    danger boy Posts: 15,722
    edited October 2003
    Originally posted by Joel McIntosh
    My Marantz 7300 with (105 watts per channel - 8 ohms) was too underpowered to handle my RTi150s. So I bought a separate amp (NAD 218THX -- stereo output, 225 watts with 280 dynamic power - 8 ohms). Right now, I have the RTi150s speakers wired exclusively to the NAD; however, I am wondering if I could get a more full, realistic sound by bi-amping the speakers (i.e., running the mid-range and tweeter off of the Marantz and the woofers off of the NAD). What do you guys think? Is this a good idea? Is there any reason not to do this (i.e., will using two different brands/types of amplification create some kind of sound disharmony?).

    Ummmm... i wouldn't do it that way.. if the 150's sound good now.. mixing amps I doubt will yield any upgrade in performance. To get a boost in performance i would suggest a second 2 channel amp. run the current one you have for the subs in the 150's. then a second amp for the tweets.. and keep your NAD to run the rest of the speakers.. ie.. center and surrounds.

    I would say if it's keeping you up and night wondering if it will work or not.. i say give it a try.. you may really dig it. ;)
    PolkFest 2012, who's going>?
    Vancouver, Canada Sept 30th, 2012 - Madonna concert :cheesygrin:
  • walk
    walk Posts: 178
    edited October 2003
    Depends on how loud you will be listening doesn't it?

    I have an older Onkyo (TX-DS-575) rated at 70wpc and it's more than enough for 80-100db playback. More than that I dunno, but I'm sure the cops would be busting down my door, I live in an apartment building... I do also have a 50w powered sub though.

    Onkyo's are famous for rating "honest" watts. Whereas a HK or Denon rated at 100wpc would barely push 35w into 5 or 6 channels, the Onkyos rated at 85-100wpc will happily pump out 70-80w times 6 channels before clipping.


    When I get some more money I do plan to upgrade to the Onkyo 701 or 800, mostly for the ProLogicII/DTS-ES etc but also for more power, and to a bigger sub.

    Speaking of which, Circuit City has a special on the Polk PSW202 subwoofer ($189) is that a good sub?
    - Sony 50"A3000 SXRD; Onkyo TX-SR 805
    - Polk RTi150 mains; CSi30 center; FXi3 surrounds, R15 backs
    - Velodyne CHT-12 subwoofer
  • danielyu
    danielyu Posts: 10
    edited October 2003
    how do you guys determine whether a Receiver has sufficient power for RTi 150s? I have a HK 7200 receiver and the 150 sounds fine for me, loud and clear. So how does a power Amp, say 200w/channel, make it sound better? or how does a 300w/channel Amp make the 150 sound better than powered by a 200w/ch Amp?
  • Tour2ma
    Tour2ma Posts: 10,177
    edited October 2003
    daniel,
    Basically the thread(s) on the 150's power requirements have included several owners reporting amps overheating and/or shutting down, the sure sign of being underpowered. Otherwise it's a more difficult call.

    As much as folks talk about power, i.e., wpc, an amp's or an amp section's current capacity is just as important of a specification. Lack of high current capacity (HCC) leads to difficulites when presented with low (<8 ohm) speaker loads. That said, your post indicates you are happy with your match and that's what really matters.

    walk,
    Yes, how loud, but also in what space and to what material. Room size is a big factor as is how far your listening position is from the speakers nd how "live" your room is. And of course, if you a re talking HT, which you seem to be, five or more channels will fill a given room with sound at a lower wpc demand than 2 ch's will. Assigning some of the bass duties to a sub also helps.

    As for your sub questions... One of the reasons to buy the 150's vs. other models is their bass capability. If you're using 150's as mains, I don't believe your present sub or the 202 would be a meaningful addition to the system.
    More later,
    Tour...
    Vox Copuli
    Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. - Old English Proverb

    "Death doesn't come with a Uhaul." - Dennis Gardner

    "It's easy to get lost in price vs performance vs ego vs illusion." - doro
    "There is a certain entertainment value in ripping the occaisonal (sic) buttmunch..." - TroyD
  • faster100
    faster100 Posts: 6,124
    edited October 2003
    Originally posted by Tour2ma
    .

    As for your sub questions... One of the reasons to buy the 150's vs. other models is their bass capability. If you're using 150's as mains, I don't believe your present sub or the 202 would be a meaningful addition to the system.

    Agreed, The 150's had almost as much bass as my SVS dare i say, on some music at very high volumes, without the impact though unfortunatly.. The svs slams the 150's.. and it should. BUT the 150's put some bass out no doubt, and is best suited IMO for 2 channel without a sub, the combo of 150's/with a sub just doesnt mesh as well as i first thought.. It will take a pretty powerful sub to surpass the bass at high volumes of the 150's.. and sound correctly, again IMO
    MY HT RIG:
    Sherwood p-965
    Sherwood sd871 dvd
    Rotel 1075 amp x5
    LSI15 mains
    LsiC center
    LSIfx surround backs
    Lsi7 side surrounds
    SVS pb12/plus2


    2 Channel Rig:

    nad 1020 Pre-amp
    Rotel 1080 stereo amp
    Polk sda 2B
    kenwood grunt Tuner
    realistic lab 450 TT
    Signal cable IC