Too much mid bass with LSi 9

EndersShadow

LuSh wrote: »

heiney9 - Have you bi-amped a HT receiver before? If so which models? If not then I'm not interested

I personally have with an Integra DTR 5.9, and it didnt make too much/any difference with my 8 ohm speakers. I would never bi-amp with a 4 ohm receiver. I wouldnt even do it with my Harman Kardon 3490 which is rated for 4 ohms....

LuSh

Why wouldn't you bi-amp a 4ohm load? I've done it many times on friends systems...bass has always become tighter and mid-range has always opened up.

EndersShadow

LuSh wrote: »

Why wouldn't you bi-amp a 4ohm load? I've done it many times on friends systems...bass has always become tighter and mid-range has always opened up.

Most receivers are not setup to handle a regular 4 ohm load, let alone 4 channels of one.

I personally wouldn't drive LSi speakers on any receiver with the exception being one of the Pioneer SC receivers with the ICE amps. I drive my LSi front 3 with a Carver amp, I plan to get a dedicated amp if I run LSi's in my office....

tonyb

LuSh wrote: »

heiney9 - Have you bi-amped a HT receiver before? If so which models? If not then I'm not interested.

TonyB = You make it sound as if LSi's hang around 2-4ohms all day....they don't. A top of the range receiver bi-amped (easing the load on individual output transistors) should be enough for a second system. How anybody could offer advice of upgrading an amplifier instead of speaker/room interaction - I don't wanna sound like a jerk but really he said 1 ft from the back wall...that will muddy things up quickly. I suspect a Krell KSA series would make an LSi sound muddy if the speaker is simply a foot away from the wall. A Krell 400xi did, I know because I ran it on LSi's.

Lush buddy...relax man, I was just questioning your statement on the LSI's being easy to drive. Of coarse the room has everything to do with it, nobody is saying otherwise. Sure, you can drive a 4 ohm speaker with an 8ohm receiver and sound will come out, but good sound is debateable. Imho anyway, one has to properly power a speaker before looking at the room. Both are important of coarse but also both work together. To do one and not the other is doing no good for speaker reviews/complaints.

Like I said, in the end the 9's may not be his cup of tea and thats OK too, no biggie, but all I am saying is give them the proper shot.

nhhiep

all the talk about ohms and Lsi9. Just to let you guys know that I am bridging my amp for the Lsi9. The Citation 5.1 only lists the spec for 8ohms in bridge mode. one would assume that they don't suggest you to bridge with 4 ohms speakers. Have been breaking in my Lsi9 for 2 week straight now and no issue so far. Yes, I run it 24 hrs everyday just to break in the lsi9 fast.

by the way, it sounds better in bridge mode. maybe power has something to do with it.

LuSh

Endersshadow- ICE amps have notoriously measured poorly for 4ohm loads. bi-amping halfs the load of the the four output transistors...a higher end receiver should make do...most higher end receivers are rated for 4ohms with two channels driven, non bi-amped. Bi-amping would simply aid in delivering headroom as most single output transistors are limited. I'm surprised you heard little difference. I have always found this cheap tweak a substantial improvement.

Also - bi-amping isn't four channels...it's still two channels you're simply using 4 output transistors (or 8 for both positive and negative) for two channels. The amplifier still only delivers the load swings of two speakers not four (which would be much tougher I agree)

FTGV

LuSh wrote: »

Endersshadow- ICE amps have notoriously measured poorly for 4ohm loads.

Poorly as in higher THD/IMD into 4 ohms vs 8?That is generally the case with most any amplifier.

bi-amping halfs the load of the the four output transistors...

Since the demanding part of the load is the paralleled bass / mid bass section below 250hz merely removing the easy tweeter load via passive bi amping probably isn't going to gain you much except perhaps a smig more headroom.

FTGV

nhhiep wrote: »

ave been breaking in my Lsi9 for 2 week straight now and no issue so far. .

Interesting! I would expect there to be some thermal issues since the amp will effectively be seeing a 2 ohm or less load at some frequencies in the low bass range.

LuSh

FTGV - no as in clipping immediately on bench.

Have you tried bi-amping? It's not the removing of the easy tweeter load...it's the two dedicated outputs that go solely to the lower frequency swings...And how the crossover is designed...hey man. Just try it...I use to argue years ago on this forum about cables and CD players sounding different...people started experimenting and hearing is believing.

FTGV

LuSh wrote: »

FTGV - no as in clipping immediately on bench.

OK so not achieving it's rated 4 ohm power?

Have you tried bi-amping?

Yes I have tried both active and passive biamping.

It's not the removing of the easy tweeter load...it's the two dedicated outputs that go solely to the lower frequency swings...hey man.

The tweeter will be driven from a separate amplifier section than the bass/mid bass drivers.My point was that since the latter represents by far the more demanding part of the load simply removing the tweeters load from that amp section(and moving it to another which is what your doing with passive biamping) will not significantly lighten the demands placed upon woofers amp section.

nhhiep

FTGV wrote: »

Interesting! I would expect there to be some thermal issues since the amp will effectively be seeing a 2 ohm or less load at some frequencies in the low bass range.

I thought so too. vol is normal, around -35 on the Denon AVR. the weird thing that i am still confused about is why the Denon is warmer than the amp? all it does is DACing music from a computer via optical cable.

brianle

Here is the placement for the LSi9 in my room

brianle

Moving to this room, the bass gets much tighter but it's not an option

Erik Tracy

At some point the effort to *force* a speaker to work is like putting a blonde wig on a brunette, putting in blue colored contacts, contour shaping girdle, voice lessons to lose her southern drawl, and teaching her to juggle.... it ain't the same woman anymore and not worth the effort.

Sometimes its time to say 'this one ain't for me' and move on.

brianle

Erik Tracy wrote: »

At some point the effort to *force* a speaker to work is like putting a blonde wig on a brunette, putting in blue colored contacts, contour shaping girdle, voice lessons to lose her southern drawl, and teaching her to juggle.... it ain't the same woman anymore and not worth the effort.

Sometimes its time to say 'this one ain't for me' and move on.

lol ... I'm thinking the same

steveinaz

True...time for a candidate that will fit that room better, of course I believe the plastic car next to the right speaker may be introducing some vibrational nodes....LOL

pyrocyborg

Erik Tracy wrote: »

At some point the effort to *force* a speaker to work is like putting a blonde wig on a brunette, putting in blue colored contacts, contour shaping girdle, voice lessons to lose her southern drawl, and teaching her to juggle.... it ain't the same woman anymore and not worth the effort.

What? But I do that all the time! :eek:

heiney9

Except I'm not sure a lot of effort was put into making them sound good. A lot of tried and true suggestions were met with excuses why that couldn't be done. In the end you do what ya gotta do.

H9

tonyb

Pretty reflective room, but I can see now why the mid bass hump. Regardless, you have some fantastic gear there my friend, if room treatments aren't up your alley, move on to another speaker. I'm guessing Sonus faber may work better in that room.

LuSh

If possible bring the speakers out another 6 - 12 inches, even if you can't always place them there...just to test. Then toe the speakers in further so the inside angles of the stands are angled back another inch. Let use know what you hear.

steveinaz

^Exactly, and hopefully the sub (if being used) is properly integrated.

brianle

Not sub when listening to music. That's one of the reasons I bought the LSi9 Will try with speakers placement a bit more.

brianle

Dont know how it happened but the Lsi 9 sounds much better today so I'm keeping them

nhhiep

Nothing happened. it's just your ears getting used to the sound. Speakers are like wives...Your ears just have to adapt by force

Erik Tracy

So the blonde wig worked, eh? Cool. :cheesygrin:

hertz9753

brianle wrote: »

Dont know how it happened but the Lsi 9 sounds much better today so I'm keeping them

Good to hear that you are past the burn-in stage.:cool:

nhhiep

does anyone what the jumpers are the back of the Lsi9s are made out of? pure copper or copper coated? The thing is I am deciding should I replace it with a 14awg monoprice speaker cable that I am also using from the AMP=>speakers.

heiney9

Most likely made from brass or cheap alloy.

Try it and see

H9

tonyb

nhhiep wrote: »

does anyone what the jumpers are the back of the Lsi9s are made out of? pure copper or copper coated? The thing is I am deciding should I replace it with a 14awg monoprice speaker cable that I am also using from the AMP=>speakers.

Made of brass....change them out to any good quality copper wire. Though if I were you, I would ditch the monoprice for something of better SQ for that gear and speakers.

nhhiep

The thing is I have many monoprice 12/14AWG cables here. The Lsi9s is only $500, I rather not spend another 50+ on cables. 12AWG should be good right? Plus the distance from my AMP=>Speakers is only 3-5fts.