Anyone tried ATI amps with LSI line?

Lietuvis91

Now that I got lsi/fx surrounds I am itching for a 5ch amp, and these ATI 1805 for $1100 seem like a killer deal for a 5x180w @ 8ohms and 270w @4ohms, which btw they claim is a very conservative rating. These are also made in the USA and carry a 7yr warranty, so I am having serious trouble finding a reason NOT to go with ATI.

The only question is: is it a good sonic match for lsi?! So if anyone has tried ATI with LSI, please chime in.

Marty913

I used to own a 5-channel ATI amp about (5 years ago) and liked it a lot. At the time, Outlaw Audio amps were re-branded ATI's so that should give you an idea of the sonic signatures. Far as I know, ATI & Outlaw still have the "partner" relationship. Things I do remember was that it was built like a tank, was completely silent, and was barely warm to the touch after hours of use. I was driving a 5.1 NHT system so can't help you with the LSI thing.

Lietuvis91

Very good info, appreciate it! I did not know there was a pratnership with outlaw. From the few available reviews I have found peoples responses are pretty good (like yours). So I will probably do some more lurking around, but i'm having a hard time finding a better option than this a brand new 5 ch amp for $1100 bucks.

PSOVLSK

Can't comment on the ATI, but I can provide another option.

http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=nad+t955

Not saying it's better, just throwing something out there. The ATI does seem like a nice find.

Lietuvis91

PSOVLSK wrote: »

Can't comment on the ATI, but I can provide another option.

http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=nad+t955

Not saying it's better, just throwing something out there. The ATI does seem like a nice find.

Hmmm... that actually is a real interesting option. I have been pretty impressed by NAD gear on a few occassions. I just don't know if 200w/ch @4ohms is going to cut it for my lsi setup. That $800 price is DARN attractive for new gear!

PSOVLSK

I use the NAD in my HT (LSi15's, LSiC, LSi7's). It runs a little warmer than I'd like, but it sounds great.

BlueFox

Lietuvis91 wrote: »

Hmmm... that actually is a real interesting option. I have been pretty impressed by NAD gear on a few occassions. I just don't know if 200w/ch @4ohms is going to cut it for my lsi setup. That $800 price is DARN attractive for new gear!

That 200W/ch @ 4 ohms is dynamic power.
IHF dynamic power: 8 ohms, 150 W (24 dBW); 4 ohm, 200 W (26 dBW); 2 ohm, 260 W (26.5 dBW)

http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=NAT955

Lietuvis91

PSOVLSK wrote: »

I use the NAD in my HT (LSi15's, LSiC, LSi7's). It runs a little warmer than I'd like, but it sounds great.

You know... I think I'm pretty much sold in your idea. I did a good bit of searching on the t955 last night and most responses were excellent. People do mention that the amp gets toasty, but i have not had one that wasn't class d that didn't. My "heaviest" speaker will be an lsi9, so not as power hungry as a 15, which I am hoping means the speaker will make better use of the available power.

Also, I have been wanting to try a NAD amp anyway, because I have heard several with different speakers and I really like the low distortion and open top end that NAD amps seem to be known for. I will check if the local hi-fi store in town has one and if they will price match AA. If not I will just get one online.

Lietuvis91

BlueFox wrote: »

That 200W/ch @ 4 ohms is dynamic power.
IHF dynamic power: 8 ohms, 150 W (24 dBW); 4 ohm, 200 W (26 dBW); 2 ohm, 260 W (26.5 dBW)

http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=NAT955

Yes, that is right, so who knows what the actual 4ohm power rating is. Are you meaning to say this isn't enough juice?! I thought that too, but then again, it's just LSI9s, c, lsi/fx surrounds. So shouldn't be overly cumbersome for the amp to handle... hopefully?!

People who have compared the t955 to the emo xpa3 (200w/ch @8ohms) acutally note an improvment in sound when using the t955. So maybe it's not all about the watts?! I'm sure this also depend on the speakers used... I'm just not sure I will get that much better sound quality by paying double for a slightly more powerful amp...

PSOVLSK: Do you feel this amp drives your lsi setup adequately loud for HT?! This is my main concern with this amp.

PSOVLSK

I'm happy with the amp and feel it does a good job in my system. It replaced an Emotiva XPA-5 and I think they are comparable with the NAD having a little more bass and a lower noise floor. I don't listened at reference levels, but I think my system would allow me to if I chose to do so. My HT is about 12' x 13' with 10' ceiling, so not too big.

I've actually listened to more music than movies since I got the amp and I've been pleased with it in that regard as well.

Lietuvis91

PSOVLSK wrote: »

I'm happy with the amp and feel it does a good job in my system. It replaced an Emotiva XPA-5 and I think they are comparable with the NAD having a little more bass and a lower noise floor. I don't listened at reference levels, but I think my system would allow me to if I chose to do so. My HT is about 12' x 13' with 10' ceiling, so not too big.

I've actually listened to more music than movies since I got the amp and I've been pleased with it in that regard as well.

Appreciate your input, it's definitely helpful.

So I had 2 interesting conversation about this today.

1) Called NAD tech support, just for kicks. Told the guy I would be runing 4ohm speakers. His first question was: what's the power rating. I say 200w (lsi9). He says the t955 will work, but you really should be getting a 200w amp. This proves my own prior thinking, that the max wattage speaker rating is actually the wattage where the speaker will function 100%, and not 80%, 50% or so on. The tech guy saw nothing wrong with using the amp, he just said that I may not get the volume I want if I try to really crak it up LOUD!

2) Called my one and only local hifi shop. They don't carry the t955 and told me they just switched from NAD to Anthem and Cambridge. They said NAD amps are great, and for HT will be perfect. The reason they made the swap was because NAD pres apparently are having electonics issues, but nothing at all wrong with the amps. The guy laughed and said that t955 will be just right to run those lsis, especially for HT purposes.

So the sense I am getting is that this t955 should be just fine to power a bunch of "high maintenance" bookshelves. Sure, extra power is great. If you can double it you will get some notable improvment. But ultimately, the quality of the amp is the most important thing, and when it comes to NAD, they are pretty much top notch in their respective price range.

heiney9

Lietuvis91 wrote: »

Appreciate your input, it's definitely helpful.

So I had 2 interesting conversation about this today.

1) Called NAD tech support, just for kicks. Told the guy I would be runing 4ohm speakers. His first question was: what's the power rating. I say 200w (lsi9). He says the t955 will work, but you really should be getting a 200w amp. This proves my own prior thinking, that the max wattage speaker rating is actually the wattage where the speaker will function 100%, and not 80%, 50% or so on. The tech guy saw nothing wrong with using the amp, he just said that I may not get the volume I want if I try to really crak it up LOUD!.

Pretty silly advice, IMO, unless you are trying to achieve insane SPL's. I guess my rig must really suck since I am using 30wpc when the rated max for the 1C's is 500wpc by his advice.

H9

Lietuvis91

heiney9 wrote: »

Pretty silly advice, IMO, unless you are trying to achieve insane SPL's. I guess my rig must really suck since I am using 30wpc when the rated max for the 1C's is 500wpc by his advice.
H9

Interesting, that is similar to what my Hifi shop guy said. He was telling me how he ran the biggest, hardest to power speakers off of NAD integrated amps rated at 45w/ch to loud volumes without issues. He told me not to worry and go with the NAD t955 because it's quality that counts here, not the watts.

I'm sold on the T955, gonna order it tonight.

tonyb

Lietuvis91 wrote: »

it's quality that counts here, not the watts.
I'm sold on the T955, gonna order it tonight.

Atta Boy, when you have that baby all hooked up, changed your shorts a few times, washed your hands, let us know your thoughts.
Good decision I might add.

Lietuvis91

tonyb wrote: »

Atta Boy, when you have that baby all hooked up, changed your shorts a few times, washed your hands, let us know your thoughts.
Good decision I might add.

LOL! Thanks! That was really funny
I wish this amp turned out to be THAT much better, that it would cause me to have to change my pants! That would be one heck of a story!

I ordered it last night, so I guess sometime mid of next week it'll be here. Can't wait. This should be interesting for sure. :cheesygrin:

DSkip wrote: »

Could've been that the NAD rep deals with a plethora of people who like to push their speakers to their limits? Or he was simply trying to upsell to a bigger amp?

I think this guy was just your first tier sales rep, not exactly a hardcore tech guy, it seemed like his knowledge was more general and a bit textbook. Nothing wrong with that, just you can tell when a person speaks from experience vs making a judgement call just by looking at specs. This is why we go to hifi shops and the forums first.

Lietuvis91

So....

I've had this amp for 2 days now, spent 2 hours each night listening to various concert and music media (cds and blurays).

First, and most important observation I have to make is the control that this amp has of the speakers. At any volume the sound is crisp, tight, punchy, and precise. My Parasound amps hca1000 and 1500a seemed to be a little softer and not as "crisp", for a lack of a better word, while I have to note that the 1500a commands the speakers better than the hca1000(naturally). The NAD also seems to have a dead silent background, which I only noticed because I couldn't tell if the amp was on. The Parasounds do have a very minor, although overall negligible hiss, which might have something to do with their age and not the brand.

About the only concern I have is that I have to turn the volume dial higher vs my parasound amps to get the volume where I like it. This is understandable given 100w/ch rating on the NAD vs 125w & 200w for my Parasounds. With the parasounds I watch movies at -25 and concerts at around -20. The NAD had to go to almost -10 to get me the concert volume I wanted. I have not watched a movie yet, so not sure where I will need the dial for that purpose. Should I be worried or is this negligible?

Going to watch a movie tonight, so I?m very curious to see how this experience goes.

Lietuvis91

PSOVLSK wrote: »

I'm happy with the amp and feel it does a good job in my system. It replaced an Emotiva XPA-5 and I think they are comparable with the NAD having a little more bass and a lower noise floor. I don't listened at reference levels, but I think my system would allow me to if I chose to do so. My HT is about 12' x 13' with 10' ceiling, so not too big.

I've actually listened to more music than movies since I got the amp and I've been pleased with it in that regard as well.

I have to thank PSOVLSK for bringing to my attention the NAD deal on AA. I really love this the way this amp makes those lsis sound. I mean, the dynamics of the speakers and realism is just stunning, relative to what I heard before. I am finally at the point in my audio journey where I really don't feel the need for anything better. I'm sure with time I'll try to get an av7005 instead of my sr7002 reveiver, but for now I just really don't feel like my system lacks anything that would need immediate attention.

Thanks again to PSOVLSK and everyone else who helped me with making this great decision :cheesygrin:

PSOVLSK

I personally think it's one of the better deals out there for those in need of a 5-channel amp. I looked at both new and used, but I always kept coming back to the T-955.

I also have to say that I'm enjoying mine more now that I've been able to listen longer. I don't know if it's a break in period or just me getting used to it, but it seems even better now than when I first put it in my system.

CoolJazz

Lietuvis91 wrote: »

About the only concern I have is that I have to turn the volume dial higher vs my parasound amps to get the volume where I like it. This is understandable given 100w/ch rating on the NAD vs 125w & 200w for my Parasounds. With the parasounds I watch movies at -25 and concerts at around -20. The NAD had to go to almost -10 to get me the concert volume I wanted. I have not watched a movie yet, so not sure where I will need the dial for that purpose. Should I be worried or is this negligible?

Going to watch a movie tonight, so I?m very curious to see how this experience goes.

How high you turn the volume knob is not reflective of the ultimate quality or power of an preamp/amp. It simply reflects the gain designed into a preamp or power amp section. Actually better quality is achieved when you have the knob higher as this actually means less attenuation is being used and higher signal to noise is likely.

The best gain between amp and preamp actually is if at the loudest you ever want to listen, the knob is then just maxed. Or said another way, if you never raise the knob past some portion of it's travel, then you have actually probably cost yourself to at least some degree in quality.

It is very easy to confuse gain in a system and how much power your amp puts out.

CJ

Lietuvis91

You are right, I might be confusing the two. I am not sure that I understood what you said entirely, but the gist of what you're saying seems to be that having to use more gain really doesn't mean the amp is underpowered?! If that's your main point, then that makes sense, because it doesn't seem like the amp is straining at the higher gain and i still get beautiful crystal clear sound.

I guess my main worry was that I might be pushing the amp too much since I had to run it at higher gain, but that may be just en error in my thinking. After all, it does have all those protection mechanisms from overdriving it, so it would tell me if I really did push it more than it was designed for. So far, not the slightest indications of that.