amp or sub?

dougr

ok... been looking at amps for a while now until I got the new receiver in place (HK 340), and am happier than I thought I'd be with it. It vastly improved the sound for my RT5s and sounds very good with the RT16s I just got up and running today. So, having listened to the RT16s for a while now, I am happy with the sound, and am questioning if amplification or a sub will improve the sound of the system more. The 16s sound wonderful with the HK from upper bass through higher frequencies and vocals, imaging and soudstage are more than I had hoped. The low end reach is pretty good on its own, but I do notice it having trouble keeping up with some of the lowest freqs in some classical music... if I had to guess based on the instruements that sound great, I'd say it is very nice down to 40Hz. The difference in sound between a crappy receiver and the HK is substantial... so now I'm wondering if a good amp will produce the same kind of difference (have heard here that the 16s crave power), or if I should go with the a sub to clean up the low end and set the crossover around 60Hz.

So... amp or sub?

cfrizz

I say BOTH are important to have. So start saving more money & flip a coin.

Early B.

Get a sub.

G-2

Early B. wrote: »

Get a sub.

yea, and start saving for additional WPC!!

venomclan

Both are important but the sub will be an immediate improvement. No amp will make the bass go lower than the RT16 can go which I beleive is 37hz. A more powerful amp will tighten up the bass and make them less muddy.
Get a sub that will mate well with the RT16. I had a PSW150 (10", 200 watt) I used with the RT16 and it was very good. The Outlaw subs or SVS are probably your best bang for the buck.
V

G-2

You're on a budget, SVS B-stock are some great deals, and good for folks on a budget...

I am not associated with SVS other than owning one of their subs (which I LOVE)