two or three channel?

NewHTguy

I'm thinking of adding a two-channel amp to my 5.1 set-up. Right now I am bi-amping the fronts and, frankly, it sounds pretty good. But I have this problem with buying electronics... My question is simple: If I go with two channels, will that cause my center to sound out of wack, or be overpowered? I believe my AVR (Onk 875) has plenty of power for my surrounds.

ben62670

I had an HK AVR 235 which was 50wpc all channels driven. My mains were silly over sized, and had more than enough power. I set my center to +5db, and my surrounds to +3db. It worked well. The best solution would be to add a 5 channel amp, but with the center, and the surrounds set to 80hz the current not used by the fronts alleviated the AVR from having to carry the full electrical load of all the channels. YMMV
Ben

leroyjr1

That onkyo has more than enough power for your center, and after you run audessey all your speakers will sound even. I would look into a five channel.

NewHTguy

Ben/Leroy,
Thanks for the feedback. I just want to make sure I understand. If I were to go with a 5-channel amp, would I bi-amp the fronts, and use a single amp channel for the Center? Or are you guys suggesting using one channel for each of the five speakers? Sorry if this is a newbie question, I am still learning.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

curved

5-channel is probably your best bet here. Although a 3-channel would be safe as well. With the 3, there will probably be more adjustments/calibrating then there would if you went with the 5.


I wouldn't bi-amp as I feel there is no need to with a good amp.

Ron Temple

I've kind of changed my tune on the RTis. I think the 10s represent a borderline speaker load. Yeah, they dip below 8ohms and aren't the most sensitive, but they aren't that hard to drive. An amp should offer subtle improvements at moderate levels and play louder, but the 875 isn't underpowering them. I'm just not sure you'll get a ton of improvement with these speakers. If you want to experiment, then a nice used 2 channel amp would get your toes in the water. If you want to futureproof then go 5 channel.

NewHTguy

Ron Temple wrote: »

An amp should offer subtle improvements at moderate levels and play louder, but the 875 isn't underpowering them. I'm just not sure you'll get a ton of improvement with these speakers. If you want to experiment, then a nice used 2 channel amp would get your toes in the water.

Ron,
That's kind of what I was thinking to start. I understand more power is better. However, going with a 5 channel amp to power all five seems to "waste" the power of the Onk. At least with a two- or three-channel amp, I'm adding power where I need it most, the fronts.

NewHTguy

Kex wrote: »

Bi-amping by just using two spare speaker channels on a receiver is not really bi-amping anyway IMO, since the receiver still only has the same amount of total power capability. It might make some feel better, like bi-wiring, but I would not expect any performance benefit from it. YMMV.

Kex,
I understand it is not true "bi-amping" but that is what the Onk manual calls it so I just used their term. As I mentioned in my reply to Ron, the approach you suggest just seems to waste the power that the Onk can provide, I still appreciate our input. The oNk 875 is a fairly powerful AVR and does a decent job without an amp. That is why I thought I might be able to use two-channels for each front, and possibly one for the center.