Adding amp to current reciever

DURRDURR Posts: 3
Currently have RT1000front,cs400 center, and RT55 rear on HK AVR 500. Wanted to add Hk 5-channel amp and if possible bi-wire using existing reciever. Any suggestions?
Post edited by DURR on
«1

Comments

  • AaronAaron Posts: 1,853
    edited May 2002
    What's your budget for a 5-channel amp?

    Aaron
  • TroyDTroyD Posts: 12,638
    edited May 2002
    Another ghetto bi-amp situation??

    Adding the amp is a great idea, however, bi-amping with the receiver? I dunno about that. IMO I think you would have better results with just the amp.

    Big Dumb Troy
    I plan for the future. - F1Nut
  • mantismantis Posts: 15,197
    edited May 2002
    I will 2nd that, the ghetto bi wiring trick just isn't the way to go.
    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.
  • RuSsMaNRuSsMaN Posts: 17,995
    edited May 2002
    Originally posted by mantis
    I will 2nd that, the ghetto bi wiring trick just isn't the way to go.

    Right, especially since he has rt1000's eh? ;)

    Cheers,
    Russ
    Check your lips at the door woman. Shake your hips like battleships. Yeah, all the white girls trip when I sing at Sunday service.
  • mantismantis Posts: 15,197
    edited May 2002
    Russman,
    Yes since he has rt1000's you can't bi amp this speaker,then again you can bi amp the speaker, but with no gain.
    I don't get why so many people want to use a receiver and a amp for bi amping.
    If you want seperates,buy seperates, if you want a receiver,buy a receiver.
    You know with the level of performance you can gain with bi amping,you could in fact buy a better single amp and most likley gin better performance for a dollar to dollar.
    I will say this, I like that fact everyone in this ghetto bi wiring deal at least there on the quest for better sound.

    If he had rt800's I still wouldn't go the ghetto bi wiring.
    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.
  • RuSsMaNRuSsMaN Posts: 17,995
    edited May 2002
    Yeah, I see it both ways. I understand everyone's quest to tweek, just a little more. But with mediocre (not said in a BAD way, I have some mediocre gear too) gear, you reach a point of diminishing return very rapidly. If that makes any sense.

    Cheers,
    Russ
    Check your lips at the door woman. Shake your hips like battleships. Yeah, all the white girls trip when I sing at Sunday service.
  • hlalannehlalanne Posts: 183
    edited May 2002
    I'm a little confussed. are you tring to increase your power out put ? then what you need to do is get a speaker to line conventor.
    then your reciver would act like a pre-amp and run your new 5 channel amp as your main amp.:rolleyes:
    Wooden Delight Theater


    9/11
    NEVER Forget !!!
  • nascarmannnascarmann Posts: 1,464
    edited May 2002
    I'm a little confussed. are you tring to increase your power out put ? then what you need to do is get a speaker to line conventor.

    Why do that? Just use pre's!
    Oh, the bottle has been to me, my closes friend, my worse enemy!
  • mantismantis Posts: 15,197
    edited May 2002
    Russman,
    you hit my underline point exaclty.You own what you own.I feel that what you own, you should match everything so every peice of your system works in harmony with each other.
    Seperates with Polk's is a stretch.Some of the older Polk are much better and higher level than what the currently make...let me take that back...........the rt line up to the rt800i's,with a high end receiver can just about MAX those speakers out.As well as the rt1000,2000's.
    Rotel, B&K Adcom all make very good seperates to name a few, but that this level is where now your amp is exceeding the quality of your speakers and better speaker's ...ok like the LSI line would be better suited for this system.Not that you can't run it with seperates, but you need to draw a line where you start exceeding the limits of your speakers.
    Polk makes nice speaker dollar to dollar...no arguement there....but the are just a nice entry level speaker that seperates mid and high end or mid to high end.Look at it as you will.
    I know what the capabilities of seperates,the quality they bring,but I fail to see why you would go this extreme on a speaker system that works great with lets say 1000.00 dollar receivers to 3500.00 dollar receivers maxed out.There is a ton of good quality receiver's in that range that would make any Polk speaker sing(with proper matching that is).
    So Russ I do here you.
    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.
  • TroyDTroyD Posts: 12,638
    edited May 2002
    No disrespect to anyones opinion but I am just going to flat out disagree with that line of reasoning...

    To clarify, I think what Russ is trying to say is that if you have an amp running through a receiver that you are going to get better results just running the speaks through the amp. If you try to bi-amp with the receiver AND the amp. You quite possibly are actually hurting your cause rather than helping it in your quest to tweak.

    What I disagree with is that saying that a Polk speaker (or any speaker for that matter) will not benefit from a separates environment. NOPE, NOT BUYING. I believe firmly that any speaker can benefit. Case in point, my RT7's sound very nice hooked up to my Denon receiver. They sound MUCH better hooked up to my to my separates rig. I would agree that a 10K dollar Krell system might be overkill but if you are buying an amp like that I doubt you are looking at Polks anyway. See what I am driving at here? I'm just saying if a salesman tells me that I am wasting my time with separates that a receiver sounds just as good, well, let's just say I wouldn't agree.

    Troy
    I plan for the future. - F1Nut
  • AaronAaron Posts: 1,853
    edited May 2002
    Agreed. When I hooked my RT800's up to a 425W Carver, the difference was very apparent. Carver isn't what I would call high end, but neither is Rotel. I don't think it would be out of line to spend $1000-1500 on an amp for a pair of RT speakers.

    Aaron
  • RuSsMaNRuSsMaN Posts: 17,995
    edited May 2002
    Troy AND AARON you read me loud and clear. A nice dollar-per-watt Carver or some such makes a HUGE difference in the RT line, and other manufacturers.....

    Heck, remember the $450 B&W bookshelf pair on the receiver, then on the m400a? Like I have to remind you....heck, even the lowly R10's really opened up on a DECENT amp....sounded like a totally different speaker, in the highs especially...

    Cheers,
    Russ
    Check your lips at the door woman. Shake your hips like battleships. Yeah, all the white girls trip when I sing at Sunday service.
  • TroyDTroyD Posts: 12,638
    edited May 2002
    Amen, brotha, amen....

    BDT
    I plan for the future. - F1Nut
  • AaronAaron Posts: 1,853
    edited May 2002
    Man, I feel left out.... :(

    Aaron
  • RuSsMaNRuSsMaN Posts: 17,995
    edited May 2002
    Better?

    R
    Check your lips at the door woman. Shake your hips like battleships. Yeah, all the white girls trip when I sing at Sunday service.
  • AaronAaron Posts: 1,853
    edited May 2002
    Heck, remember the $450 B&W bookshelf pair on the receiver, then on the m400a? Like I have to remind you....heck, even the lowly R10's really opened up on a DECENT amp....sounded like a totally different speaker, in the highs especially...
    This is what I was feeling left out about, the pow-wow at Rancher Russ's sans me.

    Aaron
  • RuSsMaNRuSsMaN Posts: 17,995
    edited May 2002
    ahh, oh well, there will be other times, I'm sure....

    I wish the shin-dig last year at the rancho-de-no-concerno could have panned out....

    Cheers,
    Lonely Russ
    Check your lips at the door woman. Shake your hips like battleships. Yeah, all the white girls trip when I sing at Sunday service.
  • mantismantis Posts: 15,197
    edited May 2002
    So let me get this straight without upsetting anyone.
    Running seperates on Polk's is a good match.Ok I see the benifits as I run a B&K st140 with my rt1000p's when I listen to music,I like the benifits.But thats for music.Not theater.Buying a five channel or mono's or a couple of 2 and 3 channel amps,Preamp or in here the ghetto way use a receiver for the whole thing.
    I don't get it.I really try to understand where you guys come from.
    I don't agree with owning low end to mid fi speakers with good quality amps.I feel it's a waste.You guys can spend all the money you want but guess what ...you still own mid fi speakers.

    Look I'm not trying to piss anyone off, you do what you want with your system.I'm not here to judge it.I just commented on what I read in here.I wouldn't wastew my hard earned money on my Polk system over and above what I currently own.
    I will get all my Polk's out before I upgrade my receiver/amps.Not worth it,your choking that amp or I should say im choking my amp's.
    This is my only point and I don't want to argue this point...feel as you will.
    YOU SHOULD MATCH EVERY COMPONENT IN YOUR SYSTEM.
    Like one guy said up a couple, 10k Krells don't go with Polk's.I feel this way all the way down to B&K and Rotel.I know what both companies sound like on much BETTER speaker's than Polk's.Leaving out the LSI line of course.But come on guy's, the rt line sells at CC.I don't like it but thats the way it is.No LSI line in CC is there??
    Again run what you want have a ball doing it,Don't get offended but I think Polk's sound great on good quality receiver's over a grand.even receiver about 600.00 and up sound good.
    Remember I'm, looking at it in a Theater and music world.
    Now for just 2 channel music thing's change a bit.I would run rt speakers with lower end B&K like my st140.I would run them with a low end Rotel.Of course seperates are better,But think about the rt800's.They are 800.00 speakers.When you build a 2 channel set up, you need a amp......around a 6 hundered to a grand.A preamp....400.00 to 800.00, not really more......Wire for the interconnect's.......for the preamp to amp lets say 100.00.Now you need speaker wire for the rt800's........anywhere from 100.00 to 300.00 no more.I cd player for a source.............say a nice one for 500.00 single disc.Then interconnects another 100.00.
    Now a voltage regulator.........600.00 to 1400.00.Clean 20 amp power.This is the making of a good mid line 2 channel system.Take the Polk's out and shop for 1500.00 to 2500.00 speakers and wake up the rest of the system.
    The same experience you woke up you nice Polks with better seperates will wake up your seperates with better speakers.
    But hey thats just me.I like to match my system's to work there best without overkilling any area of the system.
    From Krell and Martin Logan,Wilson Audio and Audio Research, to B&K and Rotel, Dynaudio and B&W's.Transparent and monstercable.There is somethign to be said about matching a system.
    After you put together thousands of system's, spend countless hours tweaking,then come talk to me about matching......do you know what matching means????
    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.
  • AaronAaron Posts: 1,853
    edited May 2002
    I read your post three times and I have a question: why do you make a distinction between buying an amplifier for a 2-channel system versus a surround system? I mean, the sonic benefits of moving to a separate amp are apparent in 2-channel, why wouldn't this apply to surround sound? Just curious.

    While I agree with a lot of what you say, you have a circular reasoning problem. For example, say you have a $1000 receiver and RT800 main speakers. Now, let's say you have a maximum of $1000 to spend on an upgrade. Does it make sense to buy new speakers and drive them with your $1000 receiver? Probably not. Does it make sense to buy $2000 speakers and drive them with your $1000 receiver? Definitely not. The amp upgrade makes the most sense (assuming you have reasonable source components, etc.). An amp will significantly improve your sound now plus it will enable you to realize the benefits of better speakers in the future. My point is, you can't really upgrade to fancy speakers without first upgrading your other components (the whole matching thing). So now instead of a $1000 outlay, you might be talking $3000. That's a significant difference. Most people upgrade in stages rather than all at once. The result is that components aren't matched during these stages.

    Aaron
  • TroyDTroyD Posts: 12,638
    edited May 2002
    Added to that, I will again flat out disagree (again, if you don't agree with me, no sweat) that amps are not beneficial in HT. When I was running my carver m1.5t (351wpc) to my mains and my carver m0.5t (140wpc) to the center, there was a VAST improvement over just using a (albeit decent) Denon receiver at 70wpc. I'm not talking placebo effect here either, even the lovely Wendi can tell the difference.

    Again, I still invoke the common sense rule, I wouldn't run a 10K Krell through my Polks....but a good 5ch amp through a Polk HT system is a GOOD thing.

    As a wise man once told me, there is NO substitute for good clean power. The more the better.

    Big Dumb Troy
    I plan for the future. - F1Nut
  • mantismantis Posts: 15,197
    edited May 2002
    Ok, i think you guys are following me on this with the exception of the theater.Yes theater seperates make a difference.
    Before I continue with this...I have alot to say on this matter,I need to ask you guys some question so I can understand where your comming from
    1)What are you doing with your system?
    2)Do you know what matching is?
    3)At what point is the amp exceeding your speakers?
    4)Is the amp performing at it's best with your speakers?
    5) Do you have the sources to support the new amp or amp's?
    6)What about cables and speaker wire?
    7)The room your gear is in can that be improved to gain sonic difference?
    8)Do I really like/love my speakers?
    9)what made you buy them in the first place?
    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.
  • sgtgtosgtgto Posts: 310
    edited May 2002
    Hi:

    I think a good amp is one of the most important purchases you can make for your system. You can't have too much power and you will always get an improvement in sound. I use a B&K three channel for the front at 340W L & R 200W C. I have a Denon 4802 also. Awesome sound.

    Fronts=2 RT2000s and 2 Rt800s, Center=CS400i, Rear=FX300i. Sub=Infinity BU2.

    Gary
  • TroyDTroyD Posts: 12,638
    edited May 2002
    Mantis,

    Your reasoning in this instance is, objectively, holding less water. The simple down and dirty answer to the original question is, yes, separate amps are better than a receiver, almost every time and, yes, Polk speakers will have a noticeably improved sound. Period. End of discussion

    Now, to the latest quiz, The answers to questions 1-9 are too subjective and personal to answer and anyone's opinions can't change that. At what point does overkill come in to play? Who can say, is there a manual or publication defining the line? Nope.

    Having said that, and this is the last thing I will say here, is your last post has a VERY condescending tone to it. Intentional or not, it has the "What are you, stupid?" tone. In my mind, yes, I can answer 1-9 to my own satisfaction and in the end that is what is important. With my gear and my money, I am the ONLY person qualified to answer them.

    It's been said a lot and bears repeating, subjective hobby here fellas, few absolutes.

    Big Dumb Troy
    I plan for the future. - F1Nut
  • mantismantis Posts: 15,197
    edited May 2002
    TroyD,
    why are you getting mad.My question's if you read correctly, I stated I wanted to understand where you/anyone else is going with this whole add a amp to a receiver thing.I think it's pointless to add a amp to a receiver.Why buy the receiver if you don't like the amps built in?Buy seperates.Perod.
    I was asking ........better put.....If there is a level of performance that your trying to achive and aren't getting it out of your Polk's.Thats the bottom line.
    My questions weren't to call anyone stupid.......I DON'T DO THAT.
    If you took it that way...well thats your own insecurity.I can't help you with that.
    You do what you want with your system.I wouldn't do it with mine.
    I feel Polk's have there limitations.I know this because I have ran them on many different kinds of amp's/receiver's.Can you claim that?I feel that better amps go with better speakers.Thats how I FEEL and you don't have to agree.Take my post's for what they are, if you don't like what I write, thats ok.I don't agree with what other people write, but thats why this furom if fun.
    You know I think everybody in here would like to improve there system in some way or another.And yes there is no written book.
    I will also be a man and say this...sorry if my post offended you or anyone else.I have alot of experience in theis field as a professional Installer and a hobbiest.If I can help you, great,If you don't agree with me, thats ok 2.
    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.
  • TroyDTroyD Posts: 12,638
    edited May 2002
    I'm certainly not mad or offended and I certainly don't take it personal...I think debate is a good thing. Please don't misconstue that.

    I still however, respectfully disagree about adding the amp either using a preamp/processor or (albeit a less attractive but cheaper option) receiver. I agree that you gain less adding the amp to a receiver rather than pre/pro but the benefit is there and is worthwhile. . I also believe that the vast majority of people would tend to agree with me. I think if you had a budget of 1000 dollars to spend on upgrades, an amp would be a wise investment. What you originally said and what I diasgreed with originally was that using Polks with separates is a stretch.

    I certainly don't want to get personal but it SEEMED to me that at least in my case, that you were quizzing as if to say, if we couldn't answer those questions to your satisfaction than we didn't know what we are talking about. I certainly am not ashamed or insecure about my system because it's mine.

    Anyway, no hard feelings or anything like that. I just happen to disagree with you in this instance.

    Troy
    I plan for the future. - F1Nut
  • mantismantis Posts: 15,197
    edited May 2002
    Thats cool Troy,
    I can live with that.A thousand dollar upgrade in a amp is nice.You could find some nice ones on audiogon or ebay used.
    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.
  • DevildogDevildog Posts: 68
    edited May 2002
    Since this thread has been discussing adding amps to receivers, I'll post my question here. I have learned a great deal from all of you just reading your posts as well as having posted a couple of my own questions. I'm at the stage (finally, having strung the wires for the surrounds and rears, to where all the leads are hanging in front of the rack with all the components. Forgive me the length of the post, but I want to state the facts so you can tell me what's next. The setup is: Fronts, 2 RT2000i's; Center, CS1000p; Surrounds, f/x 1000's; Rear wall, f/x 500i's; subwoofers, PSW 650 and HSU VTF-2. Monster cable throughout (M series). Receiver, Denon AVR-4800; Amp, Denon POA-5200; DVD, DVM-4800, LaserDisc, Pioneer CLD-D770; VCR, Sony SLV-R1000; Games, Sony Playstation 2; and my old Sony rear projection KP-53XBR25. I won't be able to afford to upgrade to HDTV for a year to two years. Should I use the POA-5200 for the fronts? I have never heard this system yet, so please lend me the wisdom from all of you who have performed many mods and tweaks. I appreciate all your advice very much. I'm almost afraid to turn it on for the first time. I hope to make all the interconnects and other connections this coming weekend. Rick:D
    The Revolution will not be televised.
  • mantismantis Posts: 15,197
    edited May 2002
    No, the amp matches the receiver's tonal quality exactly.Use it for surround back.Thats what that receiver is missing built in.
    You could do a pair of speaker's in another room with it and use the speaker b for the surround back you wired up, this spplits the signal between the 2 set's of rears,I nice Denon feature.
    I personally love your receiver.It has great power and is dynamic.
    It mates with your Polk system perfectly.Nice job man.

    My question back is how are you going to position the sub's.Very difficult task owning 2 sub's, but when you get it right, it's nice.
    Dan
    My personal quest is to save to world of bad audio, one thread at a time.
  • DevildogDevildog Posts: 68
    edited May 2002
    I Have the PSW650 in the front right now, just to the right of the TV and a little back (it's between the RT2000i's). The HSU is on the right wall, behind the listening position (couch)(about 28' from the TV, angled right).
    I have the AVIA DVD, a SPL from Radio Shack and the CD that came with the HSU. I also have a Lucas Film THX Surround EX Demo Disc. Once the wires are hooked up, I guess I'll start with the AVIA. To start with, I am plugging the subs into a "Y" splitter from the Receiver Sub Line- out. Thanks for the advice on the POA-5200. If I run wires upstairs maybe a couple of old JBL L-65 Jubal's can provide some background music off the second set setting you suggested. I'm really looking forward to powering this thing up next weekend and hope the smoke detector isn't what I hear instead. Rick
    The Revolution will not be televised.
  • nascarmannnascarmann Posts: 1,464
    edited May 2002
    I'm really looking forward to powering this thing up next weekend and hope the smoke detector isn't what I hear instead. Rick

    LOL:lol:
    Oh, the bottle has been to me, my closes friend, my worse enemy!
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!