Outlaw 5000 or 2200 Advice
mtheeb
Posts: 5
I am currently running an Onkyo 818 with older RTI12's and matching Polk Center (can't remember model number). I've been thinking of upgrading to the RZ840 and then instituting a separate power amp to open up my RTI12's.
My question, I was thinking about getting two or three of the Outlaw 2200's for my LCR, but was curious that since the RZ840 and the RTI12's have bi-amping ability, if I shouldn't get the 5000 and use four channels to power the mains. Since the 5000 only puts out 120 per channel, would I be driving them at 240 watts vs. the 200 the 2200's would put out? That would leave one more channel for the center which would be getting more than AVR ever put out.
Curious if anyone has any thoughts about this.
Appreciate it in advance.
My question, I was thinking about getting two or three of the Outlaw 2200's for my LCR, but was curious that since the RZ840 and the RTI12's have bi-amping ability, if I shouldn't get the 5000 and use four channels to power the mains. Since the 5000 only puts out 120 per channel, would I be driving them at 240 watts vs. the 200 the 2200's would put out? That would leave one more channel for the center which would be getting more than AVR ever put out.
Curious if anyone has any thoughts about this.
Appreciate it in advance.
Comments
-
Go with the 2200.
Bi-amping does not get you an available 240 watts to the speaker. That would be "bridging", combining the power of two channels into one. I do not see anywhere that the Outlaw 5000 can bridge any channels.
Bi-amping will only have 120W available to the low end,and 120W available for the midrange and tweeter, or maybe just the tweeter. It is unlikely the midrange/tweeter combo would need that much power. In theory if the receiver has an active crossover for the main pre-outs for bi-amping (which I doubt), this will make both amps per speaker a little more efficient since they are not powering the full range. If the receiver does not have an active crossover both amps will only be negligibly more efficient because the load on each amp will be barely less.
If you search this forum on bi-amping you will find many posts that explain why it often is of no real value especially for AVR receivers when using the internal amps. -
I vote 2200's as well. Outlaw's BF sale may be of interest to you.
https://outlawaudio.com/mofcart/blackfriday2019.html
3 of them for $777 shipped! -
Blue Jeans LC-1 cable is a solid choice at an attractive price point. Also check out Signal Cable and Douglass Connection.
-
Outlaw 2200 is definitely the better option in your situation.
-
Budget RCA; SVS Soundpath, I don't know about the newer Monoprice cables, they have stepped up a bit.
I like Audioquest for RCA cables, a little costly but it's a one time investment.When I was a kid my parents told me to turn it down. Now I'm an adult and my kids tell me to turn it down.
Family Room:LG QNED80 75", Onkyo RZ50 Emotiva XPA3 GEN3 Oppo BDP-93,Sony UBP-X800BM. Main: Polk LsiM 705Center: Polk LSiM 704CFront High/Rear High In-Ceiling Polk 80F/X RT Surrounds: Polk S15 Sub: HSU VTF3-MK5
Bed Room; Marantz SR5010, BDP-S270Main: Polk Signature S20Center: Polk Signature S35Rear: Polk R15 Sub: SVS SB2000
Working Warehouse; Yamaha A-S301, Sony DVP-NS3100ES for disc Plok TSX550T SVS PB2000 Mini tower PC with 400GB of music -
Concur.Blue Jeans LC-1 cable is a solid choice at an attractive price point. Also check out Signal Cable and Douglass Connection.
I know nothing of Signal cable, but I use BJ LC-1 & Doug's lovely, quality IC's in a couple of places.
Very much a "Set it, forget it & don't fret it" experience.
YMMV
