Lsi9s w/ Parasound Halo A23: sub needed/desirable?

Norm Apter

Hello All:

A few days ago I initiated a thread on the issue of deciding between bi-amping or adding a subwoofer to my current set up, which consists of a Yamaha RX-797 integrated receiver/amp (100 wpc @ 8 ohms, but with 4-ohm capability), Marantz CD-5001 Cd player, and one pair of Polk Lsi9s, all of which is used exclusively for 2 channel Audio (no HT application). The Yammie has both a place to hook up a powered sub as well as "Pre Out/Main In Loops: The left and right preamp outputs are connected to left and right main amp inputs, respectively, with "U" shaped metal jumpers. The jumpers may be removed to facilitate the connection of an equalizer or external amplifier."

Each of these three items were purchased within the last two months and might be still in the "breaking in period" and while I am very pleased with the sound and have plenty of power for the medium-sized room in our apartment complex (with a concern about neighbors), I still want to think about what I might do down the road to really let the Lsi9s shine. In the previous thread, I put out hypothetical budget of about $600 (with a willingness to go higher but no more than 1k).

The concensus in the responses was that (passive) bi-amping with another mediocre-good amp would bring only marginal benefits at best and that I ought to look at subs instead (espcially Velodyne and HSU in that $600 price range and set at a crossover at 80HZ). But some others also made some very good suggestions, perhaps going with a high-quality dedicated amp (and I could still use the Yammie as tuner/pre-amp I believe). Among others, the Parasound Halo A23 ($850 at Audio Advisor) was recommended.

After mulling this over for a few days, I'm trying to develop a long-term game plan (as I will mostly likely be moving out of the apartment and into a house where I can turn it up the volume, in about 15 months) and am wondering if any others are using the Parasound A23 with Lsi9s and, if so, whether a sub is still needed/a good idea with this combination. Again, this is for a MUSIC only set-up. The reason I ask is because even if I were to go to an audio shop that sells Lsi9s, I think it would be pretty unlikely that they would be able to let me listen to how it sounds with a specific amp, such as the A23.

Thanks for any feedback,

Norm

Gaara

Norm,

As I stated in your previous thread it will depend on your musical taste. I ran a pair of LSi9s off of a A23 for about 2 months or so and was very happy with the sound without a sub. Recently I got a sub for my PC rig that uses speakers that dig about as deep as the 9s. It didn't make enough of a improvement to justify the price and I sold it.

As for the Halo, have you ever considered buying used? I was hesitant to do it when I first got my system, but now I wouldn't even consider buying new unless I can't get a item used. You should be able to get a used A23 for less then $600 in pristine condition.

If you are not adverse to buying used you may consider eventually selling the yamaha and getting a separate pre. You should be able to get one for the same price that you sell the Yamaha for, that will perform better. For example there is a nice B&K 2ch pre on Audiogon right now for $250.

dorokusai

I think they stand on their own just fine and the subwoofer is up to you. Gaara's suggestions are solid and I'd look into the gear side before the subwoofer.

Norm Apter

Gaara, two questions to your follow-up.

First, regarding buying the Parasound used. I wouldn't have thought of this if you hadn't mentioned it. I haven't bought used in the past for the simply safety feeling of having a warranty (for example, my CD player has a 3-year warranty and Yamaha a 2 year warranty). I suppose that as you only buy used these days, you're very confident that a used item will continue to work for some time, even without the warranty. $600 is definately cheaper than $850, but I'm just wondering about how you would determine that you are buying from a "reliable buyer"

Second, regarding pre-amps, I thought that the key to the set-up in adding an amp would really be the amp, as the pre-amp is used basically just as a "control station" and tuner. I am very happy with the controls and the FM reception of the Yamaha (much better than my old Sony Receiver), so I am still curious what serves as the advantage for swapping it, so to speak, for something like the B&K 2ch you mentioned. Would it be an advantage in sound or some other advantage and, in the whole scheme of things, do you feel it would make a big difference?

Thanks, and sorry for all of the new questions. Appreciate it.

By the way, my music tastes consist largely of 1950s and 1960s jazz (i.e. Miles, Coltrane, Grant Green, Hank Mobley, Herbie Hancock, etc), with a limited amount of classic and college rock, but no rap.

MillerLiteScott

I would sell the Yamaha and get a better pre amp. I had one of theose Yamaha 2 channel receivers and could never get it to sound good enough to keep.

pearsall001

Here's my take on the matter. Without a doubt the LSi9's are fine without a sub. In fact they sound darn fine if you ask me. Now my AAD 2001 monitors dig a whole lot deeper than the LSi9's & I too thought they sounded superb all by themselves. Any one who heard them were taken back by their bottom end & how musical they sounded. That's why for two years I was dead set against a sub. Thinking changes over time.

Then I got the itch to try a sub. It's the best damn thing I did to add to my listening pleasure. The first thing you have to get over is that there are few speakers that are truly "full range" & if they are...we could never afford them or have a room big enough for them. That point took me two years to get over. A lot of guys here swear that they have full range speakers...yeah, OK!!

Now, for what the sub does. It opens up a whole new window to the music presentation. There is a new found sense of soundstage depth, width & the music has much more body to it. Your amp is now not working as hard because it doesn't have to supply power to the speakers that are choking at trying to produce bass. If you think your speakers sound superb now, just add a sub (seemless integration is key for this to work) & you will be truly amazed. I like it so much, I'm thinking of adding another Velo SPL-1200R. Then look out!!!

Ern Dog

I second the idea of purchasing a used pre-amp. I was using my HK as a pre and it did great, but when I added a tube pre-amp- it was a whole different experience. My tube pre made the music sound less clinical and smoother.

As far as gettting a sub, I highly recommend it.

mightymouse

A good quality preamp is not cheap.

I would just purchase a good amp first. Then later on, when the funds permit, get a preamp. And then later on when the funds permit, get a sub.

Parasound makes a matching preamp to the Parasound Halo A21/A23 amp.

Gaara

Norm,

First, I use sites like Audiogon where the site is all private parties buying/selling audio gear. You can see members feedback rating as well as what people say about them. Polk has it's own for sale section with a similar rating system, just look below a member's username and you can see their sales rating.

As for warranty, I have been buying used gear for about 4 years now and have probably purchased ~30 pieces in that time. I have never had a issue with a single piece. Amps are generally the safest of purchases to buy used.

Second, I felt the same way about pre-amps before I really dove into this hobby. A little background, when I first got the LSis I had a Yamaha receiver, one of their midline surround ones. It didn't have pre outs so I actually purchased a B&K surround pre before a amp. I wasn't expecting much of a difference, but was pleasantly surprised. After that I got my Halo A23 and later a Halo A52, things improved much more then changing the pre.

Moral of the story is that a pre shouldn't affect the sound that much, but it does. My point in mentioning the B&K is that you could sell the Yammie get the B&K and not be out any $ but have better sound quality.

heiney9

I had 9's and never felt they needed a sub to round out the bottom end. I suppose if you were listening to some dynamic HT type stuff a lot a sub might reinforce the bottom end, but for music I never ever felt them lacking in bass.

The Parasound would be a nice choice. I ran my 9's with a 100 wpc Adcom without issue.

Good luck

Face

How big is your room?

In a small room, 9's can work without a sub.

daboyz

I heard those 9's heiney is talking about and I was wondering where the sub was. There wasn't one. In a small to midsize room I wouldn't worry about a sub.

pearsall001

heiney9 wrote: »

I had 9's and never felt they needed a sub to round out the bottom end. I suppose if you were listening to some dynamic HT type stuff a lot a sub might reinforce the bottom end, but for music I never ever felt them lacking in bass.

The Parasound would be a nice choice. I ran my 9's with a 100 wpc Adcom without issue.

Good luck

Add a quality sub & you'll exactly what's "lacking" in the bass department. This goes for pretty much all speakers. The sub opens the window on the entire music presentation. You don't realize what you're missing. Adding a new amp, preamp, yadda, yadda, yadda won't get you where you want to go. Because in the end...it all comes out of the speaker. That's where the bottleneck lies. The sub opens up the music pipeline.

Hi-Buy

Sell the yammie, buy a pre with that money. Then buy a sub with the $600.00.

Norm Apter

Thanks for everybody's feedback. I think each respondent has made a valid point, and now its just about priorities. I might very well go with a plan resembling what mightmouse suggested -- first good amp, then switch out my current receiver for a good preamp, then subwoofer. This will be a long term plan with gradual, rather than sudden, improvements. Though it will be a little while before I put the "plan" into action, I thought I would go ahead and ask the following question about cables now, rather than later.

The part that is labeled PRE OUT on the back of my receiver has a jumper which would need to be removed to bypass the internal amp. Beneath the jumper is a red and a white post. (I assume that it would be the same for all preamps). I am assuming thus that my receiver/future preamp would be connected to the amp via RCA cables. Thus, I'm wondering if people had any suggestions for good RCA cables. I've seen the brand BLUE JEANS thrown around in other threads, but when I tried to conduct a search for a specific thread that dealt with RCA cables, I didn't get any results. Any opinions on decent RCA cables?

TroyD

I would persue the better electronics end first THEN pursue the sub idea.

(still not sold on integrating subs in 2ch rigs. Not saying it can't be done and done well, just not something I'm horny about)

BDT

fossy

pearsall001 wrote: »

Add a quality sub & you'll exactly what's "lacking" in the bass department. This goes for pretty much all speakers. The sub opens the window on the entire music presentation. You don't realize what you're missing. Adding a new amp, preamp, yadda, yadda, yadda won't get you where you want to go. Because in the end...it all comes out of the speaker. That's where the bottleneck lies. The sub opens up the music pipeline.

ditto

heiney9

pearsall001 wrote: »

Add a quality sub & you'll exactly what's "lacking" in the bass department. This goes for pretty much all speakers. The sub opens the window on the entire music presentation. You don't realize what you're missing. Adding a new amp, preamp, yadda, yadda, yadda won't get you where you want to go. Because in the end...it all comes out of the speaker. That's where the bottleneck lies. The sub opens up the music pipeline.

I respectfully stand by my original post. I've never felt the 9's need a sub unless they get mostly HT duty and even then it's not absolutely necessary. I certainly would never taint my SDA's with a sub. The bass on the SDA's is superb and the cleanest I've heard.

Troy sorta hit the nail on the head; explore better electronics especially the source then perhaps a sub if a person feels it's necessary.

H9

pearsall001

heiney9 wrote: »

I respectfully stand by my original post. I've never felt the 9's need a sub unless they get mostly HT duty and even then it's not absolutely necessary. I certainly would never taint my SDA's with a sub. The bass on the SDA's is superb and the cleanest I've heard.

Troy sorta hit the nail on the head; explore better electronics especially the source then perhaps a sub if a person feels it's necessary.

H9

I totally understand your stance on using a sub with the LSi9's. I felt exactly the same way about my AAD 2001 monitors, which also dig a whole lot deeper than the LSi9's. I never felt the need either as you say. However after I took the plunge & picked up the velo sub...my stance changed completely. I was short changing myself with my initial pre conceived notions about what a sub actually does. Boy am I glad I took the plunge.

You have no idea what your missing. To experience true deep bass you have to augment your existing speakers. Your new found musical experience is to revel in. I also doubt that a quality sub would taint your SDA's, but rather enhance them.

I've been thru a CJ tube preamp, a Krell SS preamp & they both were wonderful. Sure they added a bit of their own character to the music but they both paled in comparison to what the velo has done to the musical experience. Electronics offer a mere smidgen of improvement to your existing system. Where as a sub opens the window to the whole musical soundstage.

mightymouse

Take a look at your receiver's manual, that should explain how to connect the preouts to an external amp.

The preouts are just a pair of RCA audio outs, they should be labeled as such on the back of the receiver.

As to RCA audio cables, Blue Jeans is a good choice. Also take a look at monoprice.

Norm Apter wrote: »

The part that is labeled PRE OUT on the back of my receiver has a jumper which would need to be removed to bypass the internal amp. Beneath the jumper is a red and a white post. (I assume that it would be the same for all preamps). I am assuming thus that my receiver/future preamp would be connected to the amp via RCA cables. Thus, I'm wondering if people had any suggestions for good RCA cables. I've seen the brand BLUE JEANS thrown around in other threads, but when I tried to conduct a search for a specific thread that dealt with RCA cables, I didn't get any results. Any opinions on decent RCA cables?

WilliamM2

You have no idea what your missing. To experience true deep bass you have to augment your existing speakers. Your new found musical experience is to revel in. I also doubt that a quality sub would taint your SDA's, but rather enhance them.

I agree. I never thought my SDA-1C's needed a sub, and they go much lower than the 9's. But after adding one, I will never go back.

fossy

I run a very low-fi system with the 9's & a HK 3485 --- i bought the 9's last year in dec & got a free bottom of the line Polk sub with the purchase -- for 3 months i did not use the sub cause of the reputation of the sub from what ppl said about it on this forum -- & i agree with what is said about it -- it's the bottom of the line & that's what it is--- that being said - desperate for an upgrade & on a tight budget - i hooked the sub up & it added a low end that cannot be achieved by the 9's standing alone-- I have a small space to fill & volume, once past -20, is pretty much useless in my space so the sub never gets to the point of distorting or bad noises coming from it --But at lower to mid volumes , the richness that is added--even with the bottom of the line sub-- cannot be ignored...........I will never go back :cool:

pearsall001

fossy wrote: »

I run a very low-fi system with the 9's & a HK 3485 --- i bought the 9's last year in dec & got a free bottom of the line Polk sub with the purchase -- for 3 months i did not use the sub cause of the reputation of the sub from what ppl said about it on this forum -- & i agree with what is said about it -- it's the bottom of the line & that's what it is--- that being said - desperate for an upgrade & on a tight budget - i hooked the sub up & it added a low end that cannot be achieved by the 9's standing alone-- I have a small space to fill & volume, once past -20, is pretty much useless in my space so the sub never gets to the point of distorting or bad noises coming from it --But at lower to mid volumes , the richness that is added--even with the bottom of the line sub-- cannot be ignored...........I will never go back :cool:

Isn't it a very rewarding experience when you hear how a sub brings out the best in your speakers. I think a lot of guys have a preconceived attitude towards a sub. That attitude is well founded by the way...subs weren't very good years ago & the mind set continues today. Well they've gotten a whole lot better & just aren't about bringing the boom for HT.

The other hurdle is for guys to realize that very few speakers (we're talking $$$$ here) are actually "full range" as they like to think. A one box speaker simply can't reproduce music in it's entirety. Without the true bottom end (and I'm not just talking pipe organs here) one is missing out on the total experience. Now granted most speakers sound pretty darn good all by themselves but are limited in their ability to give it their all. Add a sub & you'll hear what you've been missing. The funny part is that you don't even know what's missing till you don't hear it.

Gaara

pearsall001 wrote: »

The other hurdle is for guys to realize that very few speakers (we're talking $$$$ here) are actually "full range" as they like to think. A one box speaker simply can't reproduce music in it's entirety. Without the true bottom end (and I'm not just talking pipe organs here) one is missing out on the total experience. Now granted most speakers sound pretty darn good all by themselves but are limited in their ability to give it their all. Add a sub & you'll hear what you've been missing. The funny part is that you don't even know what's missing till you don't hear it.

You have said this before, can you please explain what you would consider "full range"? My Gallos sell for about what your speakers do, and they are strong down to ~25hz, is that not full range? I bi-amped them for a while and they were only 3db down at 18hz.

I already stated my opinion on subs in this situation, it will make a improvement but a separate amp will make a much bigger one for less $. This is speaking from actual experience with LSi9s, various separate amps, and a few separate subs. Just curious, what your rig was like wen you had LSi9s pearsall?

heiney9

pearsall001 wrote: »

The other hurdle is for guys to realize that very few speakers (we're talking $$$$ here) are actually "full range" as they like to think. A one box speaker simply can't reproduce music in it's entirety. Without the true bottom end (and I'm not just talking pipe organs here) one is missing out on the total experience. Now granted most speakers sound pretty darn good all by themselves but are limited in their ability to give it their all. Add a sub & you'll hear what you've been missing. The funny part is that you don't even know what's missing till you don't hear it.

Regular music is mastered in such a way that there is very little true information below ~30-35Hz. Sure the example of organ music in one exception and I'm sure there are others, but not a whole lot. I would add a sub if it was something along the lines of a Velodyne DD15 or another of that stature. That would cost me about 1/2 of what my entire system is worth, not a great ROI IMO.

Most subs add a very unnatural mid bass that clouds the music and causes the bass to sound unnatural, loose and muddy. The weakest point seems to be the built in amplifiers in most cheaper to midrange subs. For HT there is much more information present because the formats (DTS, DD, etc) are specifically mastered to take advantage of the separate LFE output and a sub is almost always preferred.

I would entertain a sub, but the units I've researched as musical are very expensive and frankly, like I've said before, my 1C's put out the cleanest most natural bass I've heard. They may only go down to ~35Hz audibly but so far there are very few recordings I have that go that low or lower.

YMMV

H9

pearsall001

Gaara wrote: »

I already stated my opinion on subs in this situation, it will make a improvement but a separate amp will make a much bigger one for less $. This is speaking from actual experience with LSi9s, various separate amps, and a few separate subs. Just curious, what your rig was like wen you had LSi9s pearsall?

I think you answewred your own question. With the addition of a powered sub you are now bi-amping your system. In my case, now my two channel amp is only suppling power for the mids & highs (80Hz & up). The velo (1000w / 2000w dynamic) is producing the music from 80Hz & down. It makes a world of difference in bass authority, deep punch when called for & a much fuller all around sound.

I tried other subs as well & my experience was...yuck!! to put it mildly. I didn't the combo at all. It wasn't until I tried the velo that things clicked.

I never owned a pair of 9's. I had them for a home audition for awhile though. They sounded great but I preferred my AAD 2001 monitors (they hit low down to 25HZ) but can't compete with my new found sound when running the velo. It's a matter of physics, power, cabinet resonance, air movement & a lot of other factors. The all in one box just can't cut the mustard.

Gaara

Pear, I guess I just don't see the cost/benefit working out for the OP. When I bi-amped or added a sub it was a nice improvement, but only when I ran things hot. When I ran it relatively flat with a slight house curve the improvement was small, not worth the cost. I understand the physics behind why a sub would perform better, I just don't see it as a necessity for a 2ch rig.

So I think a sub will make a improvement, i just think for the OP the same amount of $ spent on a amp will make a much larger impact. Like H9 points out most music has very little info below ~35hz, I know from personal measurements that 90% + of my music has nothing below 40hz.

dacoupedeville

Amp first. Listen. A good amp and speaks will set you up for a long time. The difference will be dramatic. Then debate subs and pre.

pearsall001

I bought into that amp, preamp stuff for awhile myself. Yes, there might be an improvement (iffy at best) but it will probably be very small vs the $$$$ outlay.

Now after hearing how a good sub adds to the overall system performance, it's not even close as compared to adding an amp or preamp. Winner by a knockout in the first round...the sub. Get your learn on fellows.

reeltrouble1

indeed an amplifier capable of supplying the required current is essential, receivers and subs being true musical audio compromises to cost effeciency over effective signal engineering. but whatta I know. I do however enjoy a hot hero sandwich.

RT1

cfrizz

Now here I have to disagree with you just a little Phil. I had a sub with my system before I got the amp. And to this day, getting my Parasound was/is still the biggest overall improvement that I made to my system.

I got a very nice boost to the bass my RTA's put out once I hooked it up. I was even able to turn down the sub a notch because my drivers were performing better.

So all in all, I would say having the combo of the 2 is the best of all worlds, and if I had to knowing what I know now, I would get the amp first & the sub 2nd.