RT1000is line level hook up (Mantis)

BBUBBA
BBUBBA Posts: 66
I am going to be hooking up my RT1000is with rca line level inputs to the sub amps . What is best using sub woofer cable, or using regular full range cable.:confused:
Post edited by BBUBBA on

Comments

  • Aaron
    Aaron Posts: 1,853
    edited April 2002
    I am going to be hooking up my RT1000is with rca line level inputs to the sub amps.
    Why? Speaker-level connections are best.
    What is best using sub woofer cable, or using regular full range cable.:confused:
    If you still want to use line-level connections, I recommend the MIT Terminator 6. It's a killer cable for subwoofers and it's very inexpensive (< $50).

    Aaron
  • johnnyamerika
    johnnyamerika Posts: 382
    edited April 2002
    Definatley a sub cable...do you have seperate subs, or are these rt1000i's you're only sub units?
  • Aaron
    Aaron Posts: 1,853
    edited April 2002
    Definatley a sub cable...
    Why? There's absolutely no reason to use this hookup method under remotely normal conditions.
    do you have seperate subs, or are these rt1000i's you're only sub units?
    This is irrelevant.

    Aaron
  • johnnyamerika
    johnnyamerika Posts: 382
    edited April 2002
    I ask about seperate subs because if he does have seperates, he can hook those up via the LFE, and use sub cables to hook the 1000i's to the front channel pre-outs. Remove the, quit lossy frankly, gold plate front the RT1000i's terminals, and use line level from the main pre-outs. No crossover loss, better seperation.
  • RuSsMaN
    RuSsMaN Posts: 17,988
    edited April 2002
    No crossover loss? Better seperation?

    You gots some splainin' to do Lucy.....

    Cheers,
    R. Ricardo
    Check your lips at the door woman. Shake your hips like battleships. Yeah, all the white girls trip when I sing at Sunday service.
  • TroyD
    TroyD Posts: 13,022
    edited April 2002
    This is getting more entertaining by the minute...

    Ed Norton
    I plan for the future. - F1Nut
  • Aaron
    Aaron Posts: 1,853
    edited April 2002
    I ask about seperate subs because if he does have seperates, he can hook those up via the LFE, and use sub cables to hook the 1000i's to the front channel pre-outs.
    Like I said, it's irrelevant. If he doesn't have a subwoofer, he should set his bass management to Subwoofer=OFF/NONE and Mains=LARGE. That will redirect the LFE channel to the mains.
    Remove the, quit lossy frankly, gold plate front the RT1000i's terminals, and use line level from the main pre-outs. No crossover loss, better seperation.
    Umm, right. I'm with Russ on this one; you have some explaining to do. Using the line-level input for the sub doesn't use a crossover; it uses a low pass filter. And guess what your receiver uses on the LFE outputs? A low pass filter. Oh, and guess what happens when that low pass filtered line-level signal gets to your speakers? It gets low pass filtered for a second time. Regarding the "lossy jumper," you can replace it with a short piece of high-quality speaker wire. This is reported to be a subtle improvement.

    Aaron
  • johnnyamerika
    johnnyamerika Posts: 382
    edited April 2002
    The crossover I'm refering to is the 80Hz-120Hz crossover that comes generally as standard on the reciever via the subwoofer output. By using the 'main' preouts, the line level on the RTs will recieve full range singals, allowing the low pass filter on the RT1000is to do their job. This signal, then, has not been filtered twice.

    This offers more seperation, since the signal is not being fed via a lossy, copper plate on the terminal, but a direct input from the source. The tweeter and mid/bass driver gain the full benefit of the speaker level connection, without having to send the signal through another mix. While the practice is actually different, this theory is similar to bi-wiring. Seperate as many levels of sound as possible using parallel sources.

    He could, using this method, hook up a regular sub using speaker level connections through the wire that routes to the rt1000i's. The benefit would be non-filtered signal to every bass source.

    I've had the RT1000i's in the past, and have tested a setup using this method. In my opinion, it delivers the cleanest signal, resulting in cleaner sound.
  • Aaron
    Aaron Posts: 1,853
    edited April 2002
    The crossover I'm refering to is the 80Hz-120Hz crossover that comes generally as standard on the reciever via the subwoofer output. By using the 'main' preouts, the line level on the RTs will recieve full range singals, allowing the low pass filter on the RT1000is to do their job. This signal, then, has not been filtered twice.
    Yup, that's right.
    This offers more seperation, since the signal is not being fed via a lossy, copper plate on the terminal, but a direct input from the source.
    So you think a 2 inch gold-plated jumper (or speaker wire) is more lossy than an 8 foot copper interconnect??? Come on. Also don't forget that IC's are more susceptible to interference since they're a low-power signal.

    Aaron
  • johnnyamerika
    johnnyamerika Posts: 382
    edited April 2002

    So you think a 2 inch gold-plated jumper (or speaker wire) is more lossy than an 8 foot copper interconnect??? Come on. Also don't forget that IC's are more susceptible to interference since they're a low-power signal.

    Yeah, I think so. A quality interconnect, with oxygen free, high-quality copper wire, intertwined, and designed for this application, will conduct just as good, if not better, than the plate. The plate is a poor design, as it's broad, flat, and thick, so there's more chance of 'skinning'. I'd say if you wanted to use this method, I'd agree with what you said before and replace the plate with a short cut of high quality wire.

    The main purpose I offer this method is because of the seperate, parellel signals. Using the plate method, or attaching wire between the binding post, is fine, but still means that the same signal has to travel through both the high and low pass.

    I choose this method because I think seperating the signals as much as possible, is the best method. I choose to bi-wire my RT800i's and cs400i because of this..I like how the added seperation of signals sounds. Some people don't like the bi-wire method, and we've heard their arguments before. That said, BBUBBA could even hook these up via a parallel, bi-wire method. But why do that when you can use a pure unpowered signal via line-level to deliver raw info to the sub, and focus the speaker level power of the reciever into one terminal only. As I mentioned before, when using this method in conjunction with another sub you get unfiltered bass into each sub. Bonus :D
  • Aaron
    Aaron Posts: 1,853
    edited April 2002
    I'm not really buying all that. I question how much truth there is to it. But hey, if it works for you, good. Perhaps Mantis will shed some more light on the subject.

    Aaron
  • BBUBBA
    BBUBBA Posts: 66
    edited April 2002
    Originally posted by johnnyamerika
    I ask about seperate subs because if he does have seperates, he can hook those up via the LFE, and use sub cables to hook the 1000i's to the front channel pre-outs. Remove the, quit lossy frankly, gold plate front the RT1000i's terminals, and use line level from the main pre-outs. No crossover loss, better seperation.

    I thought also the loss going into the crossover would be eliminated and ALL my power would be driven into the nonpowered section of the speaker
  • mantis
    mantis Posts: 16,542
    edited April 2002
    BUBBA,
    To answer your question,use good quality line level cable.Audio cable's make fine line level cables, can can also use a sub cable if you choose.I didn't find better performance when I tried this, but your system it might.
    My rt1000i's have been bi wired for years.And yes I can do it because I said so:p
    I will tell you this with the 1000's,try all of the different ways to wire them.If you have cables you can test with, do it up.I had my 1000's hooked up every possible way.These are very fun tests.
    I had aat first Monster old xp 12 guage wire with jumper's in.At that time I didn't believe in bi wiring them as for it had a built in sub.The I researched bi wiring further and desided to "what the hell i will try it".I bought more of the same cable and make equal runs and sat and listened.WOW it make a difference,how can that be, it's amp is built in.....weird.
    So with that in mind,I wanted premade wire to clean up the look and uprage the cable.I entered the Monstercable mcx bi wires.Those cables woke up my system's midrange and for some reason woke up the sub.I loved them for about a year.Changes were going on in the system and I was back to the mains again.I wanted the Monstercable M1.4s as I demoed them against the newer mcx wire and found a new meaning in realism.I bought the m1.4's and again WOW my speakers sound better again.
    I was mad at monstercable for not making a biwire centerchannel wire to match my system.I'm torn between music and movies on my system.I still was running a single mcx non bi wire to my centrer channel.
    I make some changes in the system and moved my gear into the corner of my room.The m1.4s didn't reach well to where I wanted to set up my system.I hated the miss match front array wiring and decided to make my own wires for the front.
    I bought Monstercable THX RATED 14x4 bulk wire and equal distanced, and bi wired the system,crimped on all new banana end's and dressed up the end's with colored shrink wrap.
    That was a while ago.Now I have found a new wire to drool over,I entered Transparent.
    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.
  • BBUBBA
    BBUBBA Posts: 66
    edited April 2002
    I had the same results as previously . Using L + R preamp outputs had the same result as before very little output . I wonder what the input sensitivity is on the sub amp? I hooked theRT1000is back up ( binding plates ) I get about four times the bass out of them. I was hoping it would sound better...........and it sort of did the upper drivers sounded better!! I may hook it up biwired even though the mannaul states not to. I know Mantis has already been running them that way. I guess the main thing is that with them hooked the way they know ( binding plates) I can get a full signal to them , through the awesome bass management in the B+K AVR307.

    I am getting alot of bass out of my polks . I have the PSW650 up in the front corner of the room running it out of phase 180 degrees. along with my RT1000is(in phase) for front channel speakers. And a CS400i (in phase) center on top of my TV.
    I havent hooked up rear speakers yet. I am running FX500i (in phase) for my side speakers. Behind the couch I am running a PSW350 in phase. I thought it seemed wrong to run my bass that way but it gave me the deepest response with the lest distortion.
    I started tearing out my old stuff at about 7:30p.m. saturday I went to bed 5:00am sunday morning LOL!!!!!:p
  • mantis
    mantis Posts: 16,542
    edited April 2002
    The 307 has the best bass management in a receiver.You have a notch filter.You can test the system for peeks and dips.The notch filter can smooth out the worst one.Also you have a LFE crossover adjustemnt,you can set it where it works best in your room.
    Becarefull with running 2 subs.This can cause cancelation.If you must run 2 subs, there are ways to get it to sound good.There are good rules to follow(not live by)to get them to work together.It will take some testing,but the 2nd sub can be a support sub for the dips in your room where you other sub falls off.Side placement of the second sub can help.
    Cut your room into 3rd's in front and 4ths down the sides, these are good starting points for the 2 subs.
    Play with it youll get it.
    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.