# So Which Way Would YOU Go? Multichannel Amp Upgrade Query...



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Okay, fellow 'Shacksters. Here's the situation: My parents went away on a week's vacation and...they left the keys to the brand new Porsche....

OH WAIT -- those are lyrics to Will Smith's "Parents Just Don't Understand"...sorry...my bad....:rolleyesno:

Okay, seriously. As I come to the realization that my system could use some more juice -- not that my Onkyo 605 isn't doing perfectly fine as-is right now, but I feel like I could use some more dynamic headroom, you know -- I have been considering my "amp upgrade" options based on my personal needs; I'd like to lay these out for all of you and get your valued feedback for an honest approach...

I realize the first thing that would have to be upgraded would be my receiver, because my current 605 doesn't have preamp outs to support the outboard power amp; but I am uncertain if I want to go with a (preferably Onkyo) brand-new separate pre/pro and amp combo, or if I should buy a new AVR (again, preferably Onk) with preamp outs and go from there...

Here are my concerns/thoughts: If I go with a new AVR, I was planning on perhaps using its rear channel amps to power the surround channels of my system (right now, only two as I'm running a 5.1 configuration) as it would be far less taxing of an AVR to do so, while using a multichannel amp to power the three main front channels -- but I am unsure of how to go about this for the best performance. My Polk RTi12 mains can handle a max of 500 watts IIRC, so I'd like to get some additional juice to them but I also realize that a center channel is one of the most vital elements in the front soundstage, carrying the majority of the action cues as well as main dialogue. So, here is how I broke down my possibilities:

*1. A Three-Channel Amp, like Emotiva's XPA-3, to power the two front mains and the center (with the new receiver powering the surrounds)

2. A Five-Channel Amp, like Emotiva's XPA-5, to power all the speakers of the system (in this case I could go with either a new AVR for processing or a new pre/pro) 

3. Three Separate Monoblocks to power, individually, the front mains and the center (using a new AVR for surround duties here as well)*

Now, I eliminated the "two channel amp" route being that I wouldn't want to simply power the RTi12s with a two channel amp while leaving the also-vital center channel to be powered by the AVR; but if there are other configurations I am forgetting somehow somewhere, please chime in...

What do you guys think? Which route would make most sense based on my gear and its performance capabilities (namely the speakers)? I don't, realistically, think I could actually afford to go down the separate monoblock route -- buying three separate monoblocks for each of the front stage speakers -- but I was throwing it out there as a possible option; would it make sense to get a three-channel model like the Emotiva XPA-3 so the three front channels are "equally high powered" in the system, leaving the surrounds to be powered by a new AVR? If I do this, would a three-channel amp make an audible difference in that front soundstage as compared to what I'm hearing now with my Onkyo 605's (rated) 90 watts per channel? 

I welcome all and any input; thank you!! :T


----------



## Sabby (Nov 10, 2008)

If I were you I would do this in stages. You know you need/want a new receiver. Get one that has the pre outs and is fairly well powered. See how it does in your room with your speakers. If you find you need more I would go with the 3 channel Emotiva. The surrounds in general do not have much deep bass that requires huge power reserves.

One other thought concerns your subwoofer. I wonder if more subwoofer would give you some additional impact and remove some burden from your mains. Do you run your mains as large? If not where do you have them crossed?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Agreed, I would upgrade the receiver first and see how that does. Ive been recommending the Onkyo 8098 for over a year now as its just the best bang for buck available right now. 
Accessories4less has them here
You just cant get anything for the price that will do true 100watts per channels all channels driven, HQV Vida video processing and so much more.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Thank you very much for your reply and input, Sabby; let me reply to each of your sentiments separately...



Sabby said:


> If I were you I would do this in stages.


Indeed; I think this would be the only affordable route to take anyway -- starting with the processor, which would more than likely be a new AVR...



> You know you need/want a new receiver. Get one that has the pre outs and is fairly well powered. See how it does in your room with your speakers. If you find you need more I would go with the 3 channel Emotiva. The surrounds in general do not have much deep bass that requires huge power reserves.


Okay, that's what I suspected in terms of which model amp to go with -- the three-channel variant; I agree that the surround channels don't require that much juice and therefore can easily be driven by the surround amp channels of an AVR...

The thing is, I am not sure if a new receiver would make all that much of an audible dynamic impact difference over the receiver I'm using now...at least enough to warrant a new purchase. I understand that stepping up to something like a Pioneer Elite with ICE amps would make an improvement off the bat, but being that those are probably out of my budget coupled with the fact that I'm a bit of an Onkyo fan boy, my concerns linger in the realm of wondering if a new AVR is going to really "seem" that much more powerful and impactful as compared to the 605 I'm running now...

To be honest with you, it's really not that I necessarily "need" or "want" a new AVR when looking at it from the "it's time to upgrade no matter what!" angle; it's the fact that in order to step up to external power amplification, my system requires preouts which my current AVR does not have.

So let me make this clear: *If my current Onkyo 605 had preamp outputs, I would not consider replacing it at all*...it does everything I need including decoding of all the lossless codecs while boasting enough HDMI inputs/outputs for my personal needs. I am looking to simply upgrade the receiver's power supply section, which can't be done without replacing this one with a new one, or considering those "preamp level converter" devices -- used so much in car stereo -- which I have been told are spotty at best in terms of sound quality...



> One other thought concerns your subwoofer. I wonder if more subwoofer would give you some additional impact and remove some burden from your mains. Do you run your mains as large? If not where do you have them crossed?


Indeed, my sub is in desperate need of upgrading but as always, the budget for the SVS I want just hasn't been there (also considering the fact that my wife already thinks our 10 inch Polk shakes the walls plenty enough :rolleyesno: :blink: :coocoo: :sarcastic -- however, to answer your question about crossover and such, my Polk RTi12's are not being run as LARGE, but rather crossed over at 60Hz as recommended to me so they can flex their muscles a bit WHILE giving my sub a good workout with all frequencies 60Hz and under; this also reduces, big time, the strain on my 605's internal amps and the configuration has been working absolutely fine thus far. Again, my only goal here is sheer, raw power to the front stage, primarily those giant RTi12s...:hsd: :hsd: :hsd: :T :clap:


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> Agreed, I would upgrade the receiver first and see how that does. Ive been recommending the Onkyo 8098 for over a year now as its just the best bang for buck available right now.
> Accessories4less has them here
> You just cant get anything for the price that will do true 100watts per channels all channels driven, HQV Vida video processing and so much more.


Thanks Tony...

I will consider the 8090 model; but do you think this would feed my RTi12 mains "well enough" while also delivering a considerable, discernable difference over my current 605?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

(Onkyo 809) typo LOL
Yes I think it would be a big enough difference you may not even need to get an external amp or at least only a two channel amp.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> (Onkyo 809) typo LOL


Oh...the 809...so this was one of their now-discontinued models, right? Only available in refurbished or used form? If so, I'd just prefer to stay with something new; would there be a new (though I hate their current design trend on their faceplates) comparable model I could look into?

EDIT: I see the 809 is from the current "new look" generation based on the picture via Accessoriesforless...

Does this thing put out its rated 135 watts per channel even if that's at two channels driven...or is it closer to a genuine 100, as you stated?



> Yes I think it would be a big enough difference you may not even need to get an external amp or at least only a two channel amp.


A couple of things: Do you really think the jump from 90 to 100 (rated) watts per channel is going to make a big enough difference? Just asking because most say you need a tremendously larger jump in power to even sense a difference...

And, if I did the two-channel amp thing, wouldn't that throw the whole front stage balance off whereby the center would be powered by the 809 while the RTi12's would be getting the amplification from the stereo amp?

Also -- is there another brand outside of the much coveted Emotiva I could consider in amplifiers for home cinema use?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Your 605 would not likely do better than 75Watts so the 15 Watts more plus headroom wold be much better. The 809 would easily do 100watts per channel all driven and even more two channels driven.
The big plus with the 809 is that it uses Multi EQ XT and has the HQV Vida processor something that you would have to pay through the nose to get in a new model It also has the pre outs so adding an amp is a piece of cake.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> Your 605 would not likely do better than 75Watts so the 15 Watts more plus headroom wold be much better. The 809 would easily do 100watts per channel all driven and even more two channels driven.
> The big plus with the 809 is that it uses Multi EQ XT and has the HQV Vida processor something that you would have to pay through the nose to get in a new model It also has the pre outs so adding an amp is a piece of cake.


I believe, though, that the 605 performed on the bench a bit better than that if I'm not mistaken...with two channels driven, it achieved close to its rating or maybe over (unless I am confusing this with its replacement 608 model which shared the same amp again if I'm not mistaken) and while, of course, five-channel performance was a totally other story, it "seems" like my 605 is doing a little better than 75 watts at least into those RTi12s...

At any rate, I would definitely have to upgrade the AVR -- unless you can recommend going with those aforementioned "line level converter" devices so an amp could be hooked up to this receiver via its speaker level outputs -- in order to add an amp, and the question I suppose, based on our discussions here, becomes whether a new Onkyo is going to power at least the front stage "in a superior enough" fashion or if something like a three-channel Emotiva is better...


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Im not a big fan of the line level converters, I would not go that route unless absolutely necessary. How much are you looking at spending?


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

That's a good question; didn't really come up with a specific budget yet...:spend:


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Well, if you went with this Onkyo 3009 you would never need an external amp and you get Multi EQ XT32 and Sub EQ along with THX Ultra 2plus certification.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Yeah, that thing is a sure beast...however, I'm not sure if these AVRs -- even in "flagship" variants -- stand up to the muscle that external amplification can provide; plus, I'm not really going to utilize the advanced calibration features these top-tier models boast, so would it make more sense for me to go with, say, Onkyo's "most affordable" AVR with preouts (normally found in the "700" series) and mate that with a good three-channel amp?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Well, the video processing is important particularly if you use a cable box, satt receiver or any non HD source. So the HQV chip is something i would look for. I would not go with anything less than the Onkyo 709 as it has pre outs but you dont get the HQV processor with that but its still quite decent.


----------



## koyaan (Mar 2, 2010)

Osage_Winter said:


> Oh...the 809...so this was one of their now-discontinued models, right? Only available in refurbished or used form? If so, I'd just prefer to stay with something new; would there be a new (though I hate their current design trend on their faceplates) comparable model I could look into?
> 
> EDIT: I see the 809 is from the current "new look" generation based on the picture via Accessoriesforless...
> 
> ...


You should also check out Outlaw as an alternative to Emotiva. They make very serious amps at a competitve price. I run a 7 channel Outlaw 770 to drive my Polks. It produces 200 watts per channel, all channels driven, and weighs in at 90 lbs.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> Well, the video processing is important particularly if you use a cable box, satt receiver or any non HD source. So the HQV chip is something i would look for. I would not go with anything less than the Onkyo 709 as it has pre outs but you dont get the HQV processor with that but its still quite decent.


The cable box integration is a non-issue in my particular case as we don't run our set top box through an AVR, nor do we have any satellite sources. As for non-HD factors, standard DVDs are upconverted very well via my OPPO BDP-93 Blu-ray player, with all signals passing straight through the AVR to the display via HDMI. 

I agree about not going with anything less than the 709 -- is this the model, in their current lineup, that begins the integration of preamp outs?


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

koyaan said:


> You should also check out Outlaw as an alternative to Emotiva. They make very serious amps at a competitve price. I run a 7 channel Outlaw 770 to drive my Polks. It produces 200 watts per channel, all channels driven, and weighs in at 90 lbs.


Thank you, koy! I will definitely put the Outlaw on my list of brands to consider -- but they don't make a three-channel model, huh?

What kind of Polks are you runnin'?


----------



## koyaan (Mar 2, 2010)

Osage_Winter said:


> Thank you, koy! I will definitely put the Outlaw on my list of brands to consider -- but they don't make a three-channel model, huh?
> 
> What kind of Polks are you runnin'?


No, Outlaw makes monoblocks, but their smallest multi-channel is 5 channel.
I'm running old Polk towers in the front (RT2000's) with CS650 center, FX650 surrounds , and RT800's in the rear.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Osage_Winter said:


> I agree about not going with anything less than the 709 -- is this the model, in their current lineup, that begins the integration of preamp outs?


Yes and it is rated very high on the features list as it still offers Multi EQ XT and THX certification.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

koyaan said:


> No, Outlaw makes monoblocks, but their smallest multi-channel is 5 channel.
> I'm running old Polk towers in the front (RT2000's) with CS650 center, FX650 surrounds , and RT800's in the rear.


I see; would you recommend their monoblocks?


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> Yes and it is rated very high on the features list as it still offers Multi EQ XT and THX certification.


...but the 609 offers THX calibration now as well, too, right? I know it doesn't have preamp outs but...


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

the 609 does not have pre outs and also steps down one level of Audyssey to 2EQ It also has about 10 watts less per channel but thats really not a huge deal.


----------



## B- one (Jan 13, 2013)

Osage_Winter said:


> That's a good question; didn't really come up with a specific budget yet...:spend:


A member just listed an Onkyo 3010 in the classifieds around a thousand it looked like. Might be worth checking out.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

B- one said:


> A member just listed an Onkyo 3010 in the classifieds around a thousand it looked like. Might be worth checking out.


Agreed, thats a very very good receiver.


----------



## B- one (Jan 13, 2013)

tonyvdb said:


> Agreed, thats a very very good receiver.


To bad it already sold.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> the 609 does not have pre outs and also steps down one level of Audyssey to 2EQ It also has about 10 watts less per channel but thats really not a huge deal.


Well, for the sake of no preouts this model would be off my list off the bat, but I was just askin' for sheer curiosity because I know it's the first time the "600" series was offered with some kind of THX certification, as well as a power boost to 100 watts per channel...

Something I wanted to ask you: You mentioned above that the "10 watts per channel isn't a huge deal" but earlier in the thread I believe you said something to the effect of the extra "15 or so watts of headroom" in the larger, more expensive Onkyo AVR we were discussing would be of benefit right from the start -- do you or do you not feel some extra 10 to 15 watts would make an audible difference in a system at average listening levels, just for clarification?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

with the extra "watts" you get extra headroom. Dont read too much in to the numbers but more what the amps have on reserve when its needed. in most cases 75watts (actual not whats on the specifications) is enough to power speakers to good listening levels if you have alot of dynamics this is where the reserve come in and if there is none you will hear distortion.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

I understand; it's just that I wanted clarification because you stated this:



> It also has about 10 watts less per channel but thats really not a huge deal


But earlier stated this:



tonyvdb said:


> Your 605 would not likely do better than 75Watts so the 15 Watts more plus headroom wold be much better.


...unless I am mistaken? :huh:


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

10watts is very little difference unless they are very efficient speakers (better than 90db). 15watts + I meant 15 watts and higheras the 709 gets you about 90watts and the 809 gets you about 100watts just poor wording.


----------



## NBPk402 (Feb 21, 2012)

Osage_Winter said:


> Thanks Tony...
> 
> I will consider the 8090 model; but do you think this would feed my RTi12 mains "well enough" while also delivering a considerable, discernable difference over my current 605?


Don't forget that to raise your SPL 3db it takes double the power... 100 wpch to go 3db louder would be 200wpch and to go 3 db more would be 400 wpch.

The only thing I would think you will hear a dif in is how it handles the dynamics. Just make sure that if you always keep your amp from clipping or you will see how fast you fry your speakers especially with more power.

I would say get a good amp and then maybe look for a speaker that has a higher spl


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

I'm definitely NOT in the market for new (main) speakers, as I spent quite a good deal on the RTi12's and find them to be fine for our applications -- I would just like to get more power to them. With regard to the CENTER channel, the CSi30, being that this isn't an exact match for the 12s (though confirmed by Polk that it is a good-enough, reasonable match because it's from a previous generation of "RT" speakers), at some point I'd like to replace it with the mate for the RTi12s, the CSi5 (if I can still find it at that point)...

So, ultimately, what's the best way to go power amp wise? Should I go with a three-channel model for just the front soundstage or should I let a new high-powered AVR power everything? Or, should I go full-tilt and get a five-channel amp (which doesn't really make sense to me, being that an AVR's surround channel amps seem plenty up to the job for powering surrounds)?


----------



## green giant (May 24, 2013)

Unless you need multi room capability and all sorts of wireless built in.

I'd get an emotiva umc 200 or outlaw 975, and purchase a nice used multichannel amp.

Could get a nice combo for under 1k.

Then you can upgrade more down the road. Get a nice used amp and that combo will sound much better than any receiver you can get for sub 2k.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

green giant said:


> Unless you need multi room capability and all sorts of wireless built in.
> 
> I'd get an emotiva umc 200 or outlaw 975, and purchase a nice used multichannel amp.
> 
> ...


Thanks Giant.

The UMC 200 and 975 are pre/pros?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Although the Emotiva umc 200 or Outlaw 975 are good minimalist processors There are far better receivers out there with way more options for the same money that also have pre outs. 
What is your goal Osage? is a good room EQ important to you?


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

tonyvdb said:


> What is your goal Osage?


Raw, sheer power at this point. As I stated, if I could, I would add an amp (or amps) to the 605 I have now; I have no isses with its sound quality or processing abilities and it does not lack anything I would want feature or connection wise.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

I still think your best option is to go with the Onkyo 709 or 809 and attach an Emotiva XPA3 or XPA200. You simply cant do any better than that for the price and you wont ever have any issues with not enough headroom.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

I'll definitely consider those two; thanks. Didn't you once say, though, that upgrading to one of those may yield enough of a power increase perception that an outboard amp may not be necessary?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

With the 809 yes, I think you would be pleased with its own built in amps.
But for peace of mind adding the 2 ch amp would not hurt. Thats how I have my system running.
My main speakers can handle 500watts 93db efficient each and Im only running 300 per side and never push more than half of the amps available output to get reference levels. The Onkyo 805 I have is capable of more then 110watts all channels driven and my surrounds are almost full range speakers (38Hz-20kHz) And it never breaks a sweat.


----------



## green giant (May 24, 2013)

I'd still go with the emotiva UMC200 (if you don't need legacy inputs for video) - that is if you are going all HDMI. Or the Outlaw 975 if you do need legacy.

Then for 600 dollars or less you can easily pick up an outstanding amplifier used. 

A receiver is fine also, but you just won't get the same quality power to control the low end on your speakers like a separate amp.

TONS of great used amps out on ebay. Rotel, Harman Kardon Signature 2.1's can be had, Adcom, NAD etc. 

The flip side is a receiver to drive your rears and a nice 3 channel for the fronts.

Bottom line I'd get at least a nice 3 channel for the fronts. Personally, I like a separate amp for all 5.

With a receiver (even a moderately priced one) you will get extras like basic room correction (though the emotiva emo-q works well) and could use the internal amps to run the rears. 

The outlaw does not have room correction. The outlaw has a mellower sound also. The emotiva is crisper.

Really either way you will have an upgrade. I tend to lean towards the emotiva or outlaw and a bigger amp because I'm confident for sub 1200 bucks you can crush a receiver from a quality power standpoint if you are willing to go used on the amp.

That said, you could go with a 800 dollar or so receiver and pick up extras (internet access etc...) but many DVD players can do that for you.

Or if you want all new... Emotiva and Outlaw both offer 30 day trials and have some really nice combo deals on a pre-amp and amp.

Personally I'm currently using an emotiva umc200 and a used Harman Kardon amp. I'm replacing the amp soon, but it's been a stellar performer I picked up used. The Emotiva is a pretty nice piece for 600 bucks.

I'll likely sell it sometime soon also, but only to upgrade. I have less than 1k in my electronics driving 9k of speakers. Though the H/K amp originally was a 1700 dollar or so amp.

Also consider your space etc. Receivers now really do a nice job also and are the most user friendly.

Do you have a big room and hard to drive speakers? - get more power.

Do you mainly listen to movies in a moderate sized room? - a higher end receiver may do the trick.

Are you a music lover and listen to a lot of 2 channel - then make sure to get the juice to your main speakers.

Lots to consider. No right answer.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Thank you, Tony and Giant; let me chew on your suggestions and get back to the thread by some point tomorrow...:T


----------



## asarose247 (Jan 8, 2013)

All very interesting informative views and solutions proposed.
My Onkyo 818 currently drives a 7.2 system but I wanted my front highs to be available all the time.
In the separate amp choice, I got from ebay an Emo UPA7 @ 125 per channel.
The pre-outs on the 818 will let me run my mains with the 818 and all other thru the upa seven.
AS was said earlier in this thread, I can run just the fronts and subs for 2 channel or
light it all up and have 9.2, as the Emo will run the surrounds, rears surrounds, the front highs and the center.
I still have to see if my shelf will hold it but the job is lifting it and then a lot of re-connecting,AND
then rerunning audyssey.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Thanks asa...

I'm actually still struggling with trying to figure out the best way to configure this...

Wouldn't it make more sense to either get a two channel amp for my RTi12 mains plus a one channel monoblock for the center or perhaps a three channel Emotiva to power the whole front stage while a new receiver powers the surrounds?


----------



## asarose247 (Jan 8, 2013)

Sorry for a delayed response but I wanted to do a little homework . . .
I looked through several reviews and user threads about your fronts and possible amps . . .
My F3's are a good bit more efficient so using my 818 for fronts only is enuf @ 135/ch
The Emotiva UPA 7 for center (klipsch g 28) the FH and 4 surrounds is plenty for me about 125+/ ch but,
as your space may be bigger, most folks using your front set up wanted to go with 200w/ch at least.
of course I'm pretty sure my set up leaves some power on the table but there's plenty of discussion about what real power is . . .
in my 15 x 18 listening space along with my 2 BF THTLP's I know I've created an attention getting presence of balanced , deep, well nuanced and inclusive audio immersion.
I went for some overkill and don't regret a single dime. 
Then again , my WAF is ZERO!


----------



## beyond 1000 (Aug 28, 2008)

I had an Onkyo 600 and it would choke when I cranked it up. I went to a 906 and it was much better BUT it would choke when I cranked it up hard. I now use the 906 as a pre/pro and bought an Outlaw 7500 multichannel amp. It barely gets warm to the touch when I crank it up. Conclusion? Ditch the anemic AVRs and a good power amp of your choice. Now I can keep up with my PB 13 Ultra. Well almost.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

beyond 1000 said:


> I had an Onkyo 600 and it would choke when I cranked it up. I went to a 906 and it was much better BUT it would choke when I cranked it up hard. I now use the 906 as a pre/pro and bought an Outlaw 7500 multichannel amp. It barely gets warm to the touch when I crank it up. Conclusion? Ditch the anemic AVRs and a good power amp of your choice. Now I can keep up with my PB 13 Ultra. Well almost.


I had an Onkyo TX-SR600 as my very first surround receiver -- and I still have it all these years later, powering a gym system now with two Polk R15s. The thing never shut down on me and it survived a cross-country move and all sorts of physical damage; it's still pumping fine. The 600 was one of the company's most popular-selling products to this day and one of the most formidable AVRs to do Dolby EX 6.1.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

As for ditching the AVRs and going to a power amp setup, I'm tempted, but I still don't know the best way to configure the upgrade layout...


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

Hello Osage,

I've read this thread a couple of times and never chimed in since things were pretty well covered. Seems like your still on the preverbial fence though. Which is OK, yet still can be a frustrating feeling. From what I garner, you've got those big, power hungry Polks just sitting there staring you down. If I'm right, you are starring back feeling they can give so much more if fed properly. I know this is what I'd be feeling.

I would say you are probably correct. With that said, you *must* consider room correction. It has been said by multiple professional reviewers: "I would rather listen to lesser speakers properly set up that expensive ones poorly set up." In your situation, I think you need to consider both avenues. To accomplish this, you should get a new AVR with pre-outs & Audussey multi EQ XT & a 3 channel amp for your center & mains. The difference will be in the dynamics. AVR's will power them plenty loud enough, but the fine detail in the explosive moments is where they will shine. And you will be able to sit back in your chair, enjoying the show, knowing they are happy now...cause they will be. 

It is no small thing to enjoy/appreciate your system. It is a wonderful hobby. Sitting back with doubt is a killjoy. So go for it! You won't regret it.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Thanks very much Tonto...

So your suggestion would be the THREE CHANNEL Emotiva?


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

I think the quality of amps nowdays makes one brand over another less important. I like the Emo quality, & definantly their price. If I were buying an amp right now it would probably be an Emo ( I think the Sherbourne close out specials are gone now--but worth a check). Oops, looked & they are gone, those were some sweet deals.

The XPA-3 is $719 now during their Holiday sale.

So yes, a new AVR with pre-outs & Audessey multi XT 32. Something like

http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/ONKTXNR929/ONKYO-TX-NR929-9.2-Ch-Network-A/V-Receiver/1.html.

I don't think I ever heard you give a $ amount, these are pushing 2K which is a lot of coin.

I know it's a refub, but with it being factory reconditioned & a 5 year warranty for $50, that is better than a new one.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Tonto said:


> In your situation, I think you need to consider both avenues. To accomplish this, you should get a new AVR with pre-outs & Audussey multi EQ XT & a 3 channel amp for your center & mains. The difference will be in the dynamics. AVR's will power them plenty loud enough, but the fine detail in the explosive moments is where they will shine. And you will be able to sit back in your chair, enjoying the show, knowing they are happy now...cause they will be.
> 
> It is no small thing to enjoy/appreciate your system. It is a wonderful hobby. Sitting back with doubt is a killjoy. So go for it! You won't regret it.


Good advice, I think. I went a similar route and have been thoroughly satisfied, that is, until realizing my tv was the overshadowed by the audio, 'forcing' me to pick up a projector :innocent:


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

But would you fellas go with a THREE CHANNEL amp over, say, perhaps monoblocking the front three channels or perhaps doing just a stereo amp on the RTi12 mains?


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Depends on the center channel, in my opinion. If you have, or will have a complementary center to those mains, then either a three channel or triple monoblock amp will drive those as intended. Typically, the savings in a single chassis will afford you a better price with a three channel vs the monoblock route, so it rather depends on looks or price which one you prefer. If you do not have such a center, you might consider one if you really want that level of sound as movies are center channel rich and your mains play an secondary role.

All of this comes with a price tag. I have a spacious/open room, and I am glad that I picked up a multichannel separate amp which I use with a pre/pro. The amp covers all channels, but I feel that it only improved the front three dynamics. With that said, the largest impact from an audio perspective occurred from subwoofer additions that allowed the effortless dynamics that transformed my viewing experience. If you have a deficiency there, I recommend saving up and get it right, then perhaps upgrade your center and/or add an amp to improve the front three dynamics to complete it.


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

Hello Osage,

The sub upgrade path is one that I agree made the biggest difference to me as well. But, I think I remember you saying some time ago that upgrading the sub was not an option (WAF if I remember correctly). That is partly why I suggested the AVR/amp route. It is the next best in my humble opinion. 

I don't see any benefit to monoblocks over a good 3 channel amp. And another option is: Sonnie was advertizing his Denon the other day for an excellant price...don't know if it sold yet. It's a year old & if I remember correctly, has 2 years of warranty on it (you could see his thread or PM him if a consideration).


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Thank you, gentlemen, both...:T

Yes, the WAF is definitely a concern with a sub upgrade -- but I DO want to make that a priority as far as an upgrade because my Polk 10" definitely has to go (especially with the additional media reviewing I will be conducting); I definitely want an SVS but have to start saving up for it (as well as a new bigger display; working on a freelance writer's budget is beyond stressful and difficult). 

So, I want to look at a new sub plus going with a separate power amp to drive at least the mains or the mains and center...


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Tonto said:


> I don't see any benefit to monoblocks over a good 3 channel amp.


Hello, Tonto:

Can you give me some insight as to why you feel this way about three monoblocks over a three-channel amp? 



> And another option is: Sonnie was advertizing his Denon the other day for an excellant price...don't know if it sold yet. It's a year old & if I remember correctly, has 2 years of warranty on it (you could see his thread or PM him if a consideration).


When you say he had a "Denon," do you mean an AVR, processor or amp?


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Osage_Winter said:


> Hello, Tonto:
> 
> Can you give me some insight as to why you feel this way about three monoblocks over a three-channel amp?


I think a well designed three channel amp will have the same benefits, those being adequate power supply circuitry, crosstalk elimination, and POWER! It may take less space than three monoblocks. The single chassis is heavier to handle, yet it reduces manufacturing cost vs three separates. On the other hand, you could buy two separates and another later as funds allow, if that were an issue. Just two different ways to get that clean sound.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

ironglen said:


> I think a well designed three channel amp will have the same benefits, those being adequate power supply circuitry, crosstalk elimination, and POWER! It may take less space than three monoblocks. The single chassis is heavier to handle, yet it reduces manufacturing cost vs three separates. On the other hand, you could buy two separates and another later as funds allow, if that were an issue. Just two different ways to get that clean sound.


Gotcha, Glen, thanks for your thoughts...

The three amps and their glowing lights -- plus that of the AVR/processor -- would look uber-cool behind a cabinet's glass though, wouldn't it? :T :T :clap: :clap: :spend: :spend:


----------



## Savjac (Apr 17, 2008)

Pardon my intrusion here but it looks like the answer you seek may still be on the horizon. So I will throw in my road weary opinion..and please note, it is merely my opinion. 
It would appear that to go the separate pre amp/processor route you will need all new electronics and that would, frankly most probably be a bit expensive and may significantly delay your upgrade to the path you seek. Like many others here, I would suggest a new and more powerful receiver that will serve your needs now, until you are financially in a place to add separates, again if needed. Most modern AVR's have pre amp out jacks and will do you well. No need to worry about matching center with mains and surrounds that way as the AVR will power everything. 
Will that be enough may be asking ? Yes I may be answering, the Polks are large and willing to drink up power, but if you listen in 2 channel to your music, then the AVR should be able to provide exactly the power quoted in the manual. Yes there may be some strain with all channels driven, but in the moderate price range, I doubt it would matter all that much. Also like the others mention, a more substantive sub would do wonders and not in the boom realm, but in the real world of what a subwoofer is supposed to do, that is to say, provide serious tuneful bass and relieve the AVR and mains of having to reproduce low frequency information. 

I have found that I needed separates because I have some power hungry speakers and in order to reproduce the dynamics I so love. My AVR (Denon) works well and would do well if I could not have enhanced it with the addition of separate power amps.

Again, just my humble opinion so please take the above thoughts in that light


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Savjac said:


> Pardon my intrusion here but it looks like the answer you seek may still be on the horizon. So I will throw in my road weary opinion..and please note, it is merely my opinion.


Hello Jack and thank you very much for contributing to the thread -- you in no way have to state "pardon my intrusion" because all are welcome here...and all comments are greatly appreciated and considered! Your opinion -- like everyone else's -- is valid, important and totally taken to heart. :T



> It would appear that to go the separate pre amp/processor route you will need all new electronics and that would, frankly most probably be a bit expensive and may significantly delay your upgrade to the path you seek.


Indeed; because I have no choice but to replace my AVR due to its lack of preouts (unless I go down the road of doing those "speaker-to-line-level converter" devices which aren't recommended from what I've been told and which I used years ago in car audio systems) with another AVR or pre/pro, I am forced to buy yet another AVR or pre/pro and amp(s) combo...to be honest, just getting a new AVR would probably wipe me out financially right now, so I'd have to consider the best way to go (that is, a separate preamp/processor and power amp or a new higher-powered receiver)...



> Like many others here, I would suggest a new and more powerful receiver that will serve your needs now, until you are financially in a place to add separates, again if needed. Most modern AVR's have pre amp out jacks and will do you well. No need to worry about matching center with mains and surrounds that way as the AVR will power everything.


I understand; as you stated, that seems to be a major concensus in the thread...begin with a new and more powerful receiver -- which will have the preouts anyway -- and then go from there... 



> Will that be enough may be asking ? Yes I may be answering, the Polks are large and willing to drink up power, but if you listen in 2 channel to your music, then the AVR should be able to provide exactly the power quoted in the manual.


Here's the thing -- the system in question _isn't_ used for two channel music (perhaps rarely) and instead does surround duty on a nearly nightly basis...therefore, I need to take into consideration the "all channels driven" ratings of gear in this situation (not normally stated by Onkyo, who rates their stuff as of late with two channels driven for more realistic numbers). That being said, while the Polks I use as mains can handle 500 watts max, I realize that doesn't mean I necessarily _have_ to drive them to their absolute peak performance -- to be honest, I am getting sufficient volume levels now with my Onkyo 605's internal amps (most of the time the audio is TOO loud for my wife who continuously tells me to turn it down) with NO distortion, clipping or fatiguing elements which would be the telltale sign I'm truly "running out of steam" and that a power amp is needed...

The thing is, I just wanted to experience what these RTi12's are capable of based on feedback from other owners and Polk seminars I have been invited to -- the best way to do this, in all honesty, is to feed them raw unadultarated power from a muscle amp. But getting back to what you were saying about "power quoted in the manual"...indeed, these power ratings made by companies need to be taken with massive grains of salt, I know that...I mean, what exactly IS "90" or "100 watts per channel" anyway? Can we SENSE that? And being that there are only brief bursts of maximum dynamic explosion through all channels anyway, the chances that all five or more channels will HAVE to deliver these "rated" watts at the same time virtually doesn't exist -- and so the so-called "90 watts per channel" my current AVR is supposed to deliver should, in all likelyhood, provide plenty of juice through the channels that require it the most (the main three). Couple that with the fact that I am offsetting the internal amps' burden with a powered sub, and the receiver I'm using is even LESS strained to drive the system...:rubeyes: :coocoo: 



> Yes there may be some strain with all channels driven, but in the moderate price range, I doubt it would matter all that much. Also like the others mention, a more substantive sub would do wonders and not in the boom realm, but in the real world of what a subwoofer is supposed to do, that is to say, provide serious tuneful bass and relieve the AVR and mains of having to reproduce low frequency information.


Good points -- and as I was stating above, the fact that I'm already using a powered sub and NONE of the speakers in my setup are running full range, the receiver's amp is strained even less in my scenario...but I DEFINITELY want to upgrade my sub at some point because it is an obvious weak link in my setup (incapable of TRULY epic, walloping, deep LFE, etc.). 



> I have found that I needed separates because I have some power hungry speakers and in order to reproduce the dynamics I so love. My AVR (Denon) works well and would do well if I could not have enhanced it with the addition of separate power amps.
> 
> Again, just my humble opinion so please take the above thoughts in that light


I totally respect and thank you for your opinions -- they all made sense. Indeed, even Polk themselves ensured me that my receiver is "just fine" for the RTi12 speakers because this line is of neither low sensitivity or low impedance, making them quite easy to drive regardless of their "max power handling"...


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

After following all of the posts, I have come to think that...you would best be served by a subwoofer upgrade. Perhaps we can figure out a stealth sub of some design that will be environment friendly and will revamp your dynamics that you desire? Is there any possibility of this, that we should consider all of your options? Even if you were opposed to a diy build, I'm sure a person of basic carpentry skills could be found to carry out all, if not the major construction. There are so many designs that I am willing to bet we could find one that would be satisfactory from an aesthetic standpoint, or excellent from a sonic one. From infinite baffle to small equalized sealed to a horn based riser, I think this component may be what you really are after. There are other options as well that I missed. Some are more complex, while others more costly, however, all will achieve excellent dynamics and response. What do you think?


----------



## Owen Bartley (Oct 18, 2006)

Osage, I'll chime in as well to support the main group consensus: 1) new receiver, and then 2) power amp.

Here's my reasoning. Your 605 is a few years old, and can be improved with newer, better versions of Audyssey than the 2EQ that you have now. This might give you a good improvement in sound alone. Other new features like upscaling, internet radio, etc. you may or may not use, so I think they can be considered bonus material. 90w/ch should be pretty adequate, but you could pick up something with a little more power to give you a small amount more headroom and put you at ease until you really want to push those Polks. But you should be in good shape to enjoy the nightly movies/TV with just this first stage.

In Stage 2, you can pick up a nice 3ch power amp for the main L/C/R channels, and let the receiver do surround duty. This will give the amp a bit of a break (meaning less heat and theoretically longer life) and it will give you some good clean power to crank up the Polks to see what they can do. Also, if you do decide to upgrade the receiver again down the road, you'll still have the amp to use on the next generation. Go for something like a 3 x 200 amp, because you really need to double your input power to get another 3dB from a speaker.

Subwoofer upgrade is another great way to get some impact and add to the theatrical experience, but to me it sounds like you really want to get your Polks singing, and that's why I prioritized the receiver/amp scenario.

EDIT: I forgot to add that you may decite you want to try out something with front height/wide channels which a new receiver would let you do.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

ironglen said:


> After following all of the posts, I have come to think that...you would best be served by a subwoofer upgrade. Perhaps we can figure out a stealth sub of some design that will be environment friendly and will revamp your dynamics that you desire? Is there any possibility of this, that we should consider all of your options? Even if you were opposed to a diy build, I'm sure a person of basic carpentry skills could be found to carry out all, if not the major construction. There are so many designs that I am willing to bet we could find one that would be satisfactory from an aesthetic standpoint, or excellent from a sonic one. From infinite baffle to small equalized sealed to a horn based riser, I think this component may be what you really are after. There are other options as well that I missed. Some are more complex, while others more costly, however, all will achieve excellent dynamics and response. What do you think?


Thanks for your heartfelt input, Glen; you really think a sub before a power upgrade, huh?


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Owen Bartley said:


> Osage, I'll chime in as well to support the main group consensus: 1) new receiver, and then 2) power amp.
> 
> Here's my reasoning. Your 605 is a few years old, and can be improved with newer, better versions of Audyssey than the 2EQ that you have now. This might give you a good improvement in sound alone. Other new features like upscaling, internet radio, etc. you may or may not use, so I think they can be considered bonus material. 90w/ch should be pretty adequate, but you could pick up something with a little more power to give you a small amount more headroom and put you at ease until you really want to push those Polks. But you should be in good shape to enjoy the nightly movies/TV with just this first stage.
> 
> ...


Thanks a lot Owen -- I shall take this into serious consideration...:T


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

Osage_Winter said:


> Thanks for your heartfelt input, Glen; you really think a sub before a power upgrade, huh?


I think so. At the lower registers, amplifier reserves become more of an issue pushing the voice coil gap while also controlling larger cone movement, and since you're running a sub, the amplifier for the mains (receiver in this case) and speakers are relieved to a large extent. I think that is why your modest receiver can handle it successfully. Unless your speakers are inefficient and/or have a fairly large space, I think a quality receiver will handle it pretty effectively for a 5.1 system if crossed around 80hz.

A relatively easy test to see where your next audio investment would be best spent would be temporarily swapping out the sub with one that has a lower bottom end, along with greater output as well. Hopefully you can do that with a local store that has a return policy? Or perhaps a nearby member can help? In this way, you don't change any aesthetics permanently, yet see if an improvement in the bass region accomplishes your desire for improved dynamics. 

If swapping subs is possible, I suggest listening with your wife, so she can experience the difference as well, as my wife was skeptical while I was building my subs ,but has been thoroughly pleased with the experience the sub woofers have afforded. That is, of course, if there are any possibilities to incorporate a design that could fit the room: compromises always have to be made for subs, but perhaps we can find a compromise or design that acceptably fits your room.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

I was looking up those mains: wow, those are beauties! I can see why the interest in ensuring they are properly driven.

I looked up your sub too, and it is similar to a friend's Sony sub that I was trying to convince to upgrade to an SVS at one point. I asked Jack Gilvey at SVS how the SVS NSD12 would compare with the 12" ported Sony and he said the sound quality and output wasn't even close, and that the SVS would 'smack the Sony silly'. My friend gets a little miffed sometimes when he's not right, and he simply shut down when I suggested he upgrade. My point is that was the near-entry level SVS, so I think it gives a little perspective on the potential to improve the subwoofer dynamics of your system.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

ironglen said:


> I was looking up those mains: wow, those are beauties! I can see why the interest in ensuring they are properly driven.


Indeed; they look monstrous in person too...though Polk _continues_ to assure me via email correspondence that my current receiver is "absolutely fine" for powering them...










I wish I could have gotten the cherry finish but when I bought these as a model closeout at Fry's, they only had a pair of black oak left if I recall properly...:foottap:



> I looked up your sub too, and it is similar to a friend's Sony sub that I was trying to convince to upgrade to an SVS at one point. I asked Jack Gilvey at SVS how the SVS NSD12 would compare with the 12" ported Sony and he said the sound quality and output wasn't even close, and that the SVS would 'smack the Sony silly'. My friend gets a little miffed sometimes when he's not right, and he simply shut down when I suggested he upgrade. My point is that was the near-entry level SVS, so I think it gives a little perspective on the potential to improve the subwoofer dynamics of your system.


Yeah, the PSW350 has often been called a "bass module" -- not SUBWOOFER -- because of its lack of delving deep into the subterranean LFE caverns, so I'm thinking even that an "entry level" SVS would blow it out of the water?


----------



## Savjac (Apr 17, 2008)

OK, one last thought, I promise.
It would appear that you are forcing yourself to consider too many things at once to reach a certain goal or goals. I know, I have been there and now I am learning to do one at a time and more than before, as cheaply as possible. Having thought on this and looking at the speakers you intend to keep now and for the immediate and foreseeable future.
I see that your speakers can be bi amped by removing the jumper between HF and LF sections of the speaker. I am not sure if your present AVR will allow you to have the surround back channels act as a separate power amp or not, but most newer AVRs will allow that. What you may wish to do is get a decent AVR and use the front channels and the back surround channels to bi amp your mains. This will easily increase your power to the speakers by half again. I think that Polk may be somewhat over enthusiastic when they agree that the present AVR will be enough to drive them properly, especially when in home theater mode. However, once driven properly they appear to be able to move enough air so as to preclude a large expenditure on subwoofers...or at least delay the inevitable for a short period of time. 

Now, please note I tried this on my B&W's and it did not really make much of a difference to be honest, but its worth a try. A good number of speakers seem to respond better to a good bit of current flowing their way. On the other hand, some of the newer class "D" power amps in receivers seem to be able to provide a good bit of power and control without wasting the current as heat. I dunno, just some thoughts from an old try this and try that kind of guy. lddude:


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Jack,

I was assured by several members of Polk's technical assistance team -- via email and telephone conversations -- that the "power ratings" of these electronics, their speakers included, HAVE to be taken with grains of salt...and that unless I like to REALLY really play the system ear bleedingly loud, normally 100 watts per channel is more than enough to satisfy most people in most average-sized rooms (we don't have a large room). Further, one of the engineers who WORKED on building the RTi line of the previous generation series advised me that because the RTi12's are of an above-average sensitivity and require/carry nominal 8 ohm impedance loads, they are NOT especially hard to drive even with an AVR such as mine. They do LOOK imposing, he agreed, but they're not difficult speakers to drive. 

All that being said, I do understand the virtues of heavy muscle amplification especially with towers such as these, thus why I'm considering a power upgrade somewhere; as for the bi-amping issue: I've been down this winding road almost as long as I've been running this current system...:coocoo: Yes, my current AVR has the ability to reassign the back surrounds (which I'm not using) to bi-amp the mains but there are a couple of hiccups here...first, I was advised by many people, including industry insiders I have personally spoken with via my line of work, that most of the time, these tricks are just gimmicks...that is, they yield no substantial improvement and merely take more time and energy not to mention speaker cable than the effort is worth...also, I was told, the way in which I would hook it all up (that is, simply removing the jumpers from the RTi12's and running the two sets of inputs to both the main and back surround receiver terminals) isn't really "amping" anything at all, and in order to gain ANY benefit, TRUE bi-wire procedures dictate actually running different amps to both the high and low sections of a speaker (something too complicated and not what I want to get into).

Further, it is believed that by leaving the back surround channels dormant (nothing hooked up), this allows the listener to better enjoy the "added dynamics" of the 5.1 experience because, in theory, the receiver's amp doesn't have to work as hard being that there's two less speakers to "worry about" (albeit not called on that often in terms of surround information)...:huh:


----------



## B- one (Jan 13, 2013)

Maybe you could talk a dealer around you into letting you try some gear out at home. That is if you can find one.


----------



## Savjac (Apr 17, 2008)

Understood, like you I have been all over the map in these matters. No easy answers exist beyond giving things a try. One of the things I have learned over the years is that there is almost never too much power, but oft times there is a problem with too little power. The result of too little power can be fried voice coils, believe me I found the hard way....ouch. Be careful and enjoy, reading your posts and reviews tells me you have a good bit of what you are looking for already. 

:T



Osage_Winter said:


> Jack,
> 
> I was assured by several members of Polk's technical assistance team -- via email and telephone conversations -- that the "power ratings" of these electronics, their speakers included, HAVE to be taken with grains of salt...and that unless I like to REALLY really play the system ear bleedingly loud, normally 100 watts per channel is more than enough to satisfy most people in most average-sized rooms (we don't have a large room). Further, one of the engineers who WORKED on building the RTi line of the previous generation series advised me that because the RTi12's are of an above-average sensitivity and require/carry nominal 8 ohm impedance loads, they are NOT especially hard to drive even with an AVR such as mine. They do LOOK imposing, he agreed, but they're not difficult speakers to drive.
> 
> ...


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Savjac said:


> Understood, like you I have been all over the map in these matters. No easy answers exist beyond giving things a try. One of the things I have learned over the years is that there is almost never too much power, but oft times there is a problem with too little power. The result of too little power can be fried voice coils, believe me I found the hard way....ouch. Be careful and enjoy, .
> 
> :T


Indeed, Jack -- what a lot of novices in two channel and home theater don't realize from the get-go is that too LITTLE power is MUCH more dangerous to a system and speakers than feeding speakers clean dollops of high power...running an amp into distortion by trying to squeeze power out of it that just doesn't exist is a recipe for disaster...



> reading your posts and reviews tells me you have a good bit of what you are looking for already


In what way do you mean?


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

B- one said:


> Maybe you could talk a dealer around you into letting you try some gear out at home. That is if you can find one.


I wish, Brandon; nothing anywhere remotely around my area other than Best Buys and Fry's...:sarcastic:


----------



## B- one (Jan 13, 2013)

Osage_Winter said:


> I wish, Brandon; nothing anywhere remotely around my area other than Best Buys and Fry's...:sarcastic:


That's sad there are three decent places around me. I try to buy from them so they stay around buried can't keep them all in business.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

B- one said:


> That's sad there are three decent places around me. I try to buy from them so they stay around buried can't keep them all in business.


I envy you, my friend. 

What do these specialty shops sell? Emotiva? Krell? Higher end than that?


----------



## B- one (Jan 13, 2013)

Osage_Winter said:


> I envy you, my friend.
> 
> What do these specialty shops sell? Emotiva? Krell? Higher end than that?


I bought my AVR from Northwoods A/V. They sell many brands including Integra. The owner worked at a high end place that went under,maybe they gave me to good a deal on some of my speakers. Then there's Bekin's they sell high end kitchen stuff like custom $30,000 stoves it's crazy they carry Paradigm,Klipsch reference line,among others I cannot remember. I think they had a $20,000+ pair of speakers last time I was there. I bought a pair of surround speakers there and am thinking about a pair of Klipsch Rb-81's for front wides if I ever bother with it. A small shop opened recently they sell used stuff and Focal. I think there's another shop that has Psb speakers and some others. And AVI they have JL Audio, B&W among others. Now that I think about it I have it pretty good, I just need more $$$$$.


----------



## Savjac (Apr 17, 2008)

Osage_Winter said:


> Indeed,
> In what way do you mean?


Ahh good question kind sir...

In your reviews of movies, you call it like you see it and hear it without really dwelling on your equipment, and you make a judgement accordingly. I think that is good frankly and we all know where you are coming from based on that fact. So what I guess I am trying to say is, your system works, and seems to give you great pleasure, maybe there is no need to feel an upgrade is necessary. This is a compliment not a criticism although maybe it is not coming out right. 

An example, about a year ago I listened to the reviewers and critics and bought a Macbook Pro. It is a wonderful work of art and a tremendous machine. But...there is always a but, I am so used to a PC and the PC fit my needs completely work of art or not, I am not getting any additional satisfaction from the Mac. So in my case, it was not fiscally advantageous to spend the money at the time and especially now as I review the less than wise things I have done in the past. Moral....enjoy what you have and when the time comes and the money is burning a hole in your bank, try out your options and decide what lifts your roof.

Does that make sense ?? Oh and wanna buy a Mac ?? :whistling:


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

B- one said:


> I bought my AVR from Northwoods A/V. They sell many brands including Integra. The owner worked at a high end place that went under,maybe they gave me to good a deal on some of my speakers. Then there's Bekin's they sell high end kitchen stuff like custom $30,000 stoves it's crazy they carry Paradigm,Klipsch reference line,among others I cannot remember. I think they had a $20,000+ pair of speakers last time I was there. I bought a pair of surround speakers there and am thinking about a pair of Klipsch Rb-81's for front wides if I ever bother with it. A small shop opened recently they sell used stuff and Focal. I think there's another shop that has Psb speakers and some others. And AVI they have JL Audio, B&W among others. Now that I think about it I have it pretty good, I just need more $$$$$.


Awesome. 

What Integra AVR do you have again?


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Savjac said:


> Ahh good question kind sir...
> 
> In your reviews of movies, you call it like you see it and hear it without really dwelling on your equipment, and you make a judgement accordingly. I think that is good frankly and we all know where you are coming from based on that fact. So what I guess I am trying to say is, your system works, and seems to give you great pleasure, maybe there is no need to feel an upgrade is necessary. This is a compliment not a criticism although maybe it is not coming out right.


I believe I understand where you're coming from...though it does make me feel as if my gear is _far_ from up to snuff according to most of you, because I have received this kind of sentiment before in review threads (in which a certain member would "question" my sub's abilities to really dig into the lower octaves or even question my intentions by not running the system at full reference blast for each title I review; the way I see it, a system shouldn't _have_ to be driven to reference levels if a soundtrack is mastered sufficiently...but this is really going off the rails here...).

At any rate, I apologize for my lack of uber-prominent, stratospherically coveted gear...the paychecks for a freelancer writer (even one seasoned in a plethora of genres and writing for a multitude of publications at once) redefine "pathetic at best"...:crying: :crying:


----------



## B- one (Jan 13, 2013)

Osage_Winter said:


> Awesome.
> 
> What Integra AVR do you have again?


40.3


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

B- one said:


> 40.3





















:T


----------



## B- one (Jan 13, 2013)

I do wish it was all black,but what can you do.


----------



## Savjac (Apr 17, 2008)

I am indeed sorry that I wrote anything as nothing was meant to be negative. There is no reason on earth to believe or feel your electronics are not up to snuff...NONE. There is no bar to reach here, like life, the audio journey is one that we all collectively walk down and the paths are all different. You know, I am not even sure what reference level is, I listen to what pleases me and I trust everyone will do the same in way of what pleases them. I cannot criticize ones system in the same way someone with as you suggest, more gear than I own should criticize me. I have found this site to be the most kind and gentle of any other I have visited to date and that is a joy in and of itself, but truly becomes an island oasis after putting up with the news of the day, so please please please do not take anything suggested as negative. The posts are suggestions based on everyone's collective experiences to date based upon the questions posed. Accordingly they are all valid.
I wish I could write well, something you as a freelance writer do as second nature. I write legalese all day and have become too...shall we say straight from what I used to write years ago, I lost the touch of proper fluid writing in favor of being sure I don't get sued. So, from that point of view, I am jealous of your ability. 

Walk lightly in the publication world and know that you will have readers, not all will agree or be kind, so be sure of your convictions as that is where the true happiness comes from. Don't be swayed by the likes of me as I have an opinion no greater than yours. 




Osage_Winter said:


> I believe I understand where you're coming from...though it does make me feel as if my gear is _far_ from up to snuff according to most of you, because I have received this kind of sentiment before in review threads (in which a certain member would "question" my sub's abilities to really dig into the lower octaves or even question my intentions by not running the system at full reference blast for each title I review; the way I see it, a system shouldn't _have_ to be driven to reference levels if a soundtrack is mastered sufficiently...but this is really going off the rails here...).
> 
> At any rate, I apologize for my lack of uber-prominent, stratospherically coveted gear...the paychecks for a freelancer writer (even one seasoned in a plethora of genres and writing for a multitude of publications at once) redefine "pathetic at best"...:crying: :crying:


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

B- one said:


> I do wish it was all black,but what can you do.


That's one thing I don't like about the Integra units compared to their Onkyo bretheren -- the offputting silver touches...:rolleyesno:


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Savjac said:


> I am indeed sorry that I wrote anything as nothing was meant to be negative. There is no reason on earth to believe or feel your electronics are not up to snuff...NONE. There is no bar to reach here, like life, the audio journey is one that we all collectively walk down and the paths are all different. You know, I am not even sure what reference level is, I listen to what pleases me and I trust everyone will do the same in way of what pleases them. I cannot criticize ones system in the same way someone with as you suggest, more gear than I own should criticize me. I have found this site to be the most kind and gentle of any other I have visited to date and that is a joy in and of itself, but truly becomes an island oasis after putting up with the news of the day, so please please please do not take anything suggested as negative. The posts are suggestions based on everyone's collective experiences to date based upon the questions posed. Accordingly they are all valid.
> I wish I could write well, something you as a freelance writer do as second nature. I write legalese all day and have become too...shall we say straight from what I used to write years ago, I lost the touch of proper fluid writing in favor of being sure I don't get sued. So, from that point of view, I am jealous of your ability.
> 
> Walk lightly in the publication world and know that you will have readers, not all will agree or be kind, so be sure of your convictions as that is where the true happiness comes from. Don't be swayed by the likes of me as I have an opinion no greater than yours.


Thank you, Jack; and I do not feel your writing is "not up to snuff" either...:T


----------



## Owen Bartley (Oct 18, 2006)

Osage_Winter said:


> I believe I understand where you're coming from...though it does make me feel as if my gear is _far_ from up to snuff according to most of you, because I have received this kind of sentiment before in review threads (in which a certain member would "question" my sub's abilities to really dig into the lower octaves or even question my intentions by not running the system at full reference blast for each title I review; the way I see it, a system shouldn't _have_ to be driven to reference levels if a soundtrack is mastered sufficiently...but this is really going off the rails here...).
> 
> At any rate, I apologize for my lack of uber-prominent, stratospherically coveted gear...the paychecks for a freelancer writer (even one seasoned in a plethora of genres and writing for a multitude of publications at once) redefine "pathetic at best"...:crying: :crying:


"Your equipment's bad and you should FEEL bad!"









Sorry, I couldn't resist the slightly obscure reference. Seriously, you have a great setup, and even if you were using a bargain store HTIB, as long as you enjoy it it doesn't matter what others have to compare it to. And as you said, if a disc is mastered well, it should sound good on any setup. you shouldn't _need _dual 18" subs in every corner of the room to enjoy a movie. But you certainly have the right to, if you have the means!


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Thanks Owen.


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

I agree also, ones' equipment should preform as well as we expect it too. This is most apparent in subs. Do you want to hear good 35 hz material as opposed to feeling the all too rare 16 Hz stuff? It's all about what sounds good to you.

I personally love the feely stuff. When it's really cranking, my wife yells to turn it down (she hates it). What's one to do?


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Tonto said:


> I agree also, one equipment should preform as well as we expect it too.


:scratch:



> When it's really cranking, my wife yells to turn it down (she hates it).


So does mine.


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

I do crank it when she is not home! LFE just adds so much to the show. Right now my PB13u is in my living room which is open to the whole house (3500 sq ft). Can't wait to hear it in my HT room when I get it finished.

My plan is to finish it early 2014. I spoke with Jon Lane & leaning towards giving an Arx package a shot. Sounding like A5's mains, A2rx-c center, A6's for surrounds & A4's (or another set of A6's) for rears.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Tonto,

Do you have any pics of your system to show?


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

No Pics yet, I started a build thread, but when my wife got sick, had to put it on hold. My room is built & wired & my riser is almost finished. Will have to finish that, paint & carpet, build the screen & get the equipment & I'll be done.  Looking at 1st qtr 2014. Right now, just a TV in the living room with an AVR. We'll see how the Arx's play out with those new models. Designed more for near boundry preformace such as HT. If they preform like the A5's in the 1st shootout, I'll be tickled Garnet & Gold!


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Tonto said:


> No Pics yet, I started a build thread, but when my wife got sick, had to put it on hold. My room is built & wired & my riser is almost finished. Will have to finish that, paint & carpet, build the screen & get the equipment & I'll be done. Looking at 1st qtr 2014. Right now, just a TV in the living room with an AVR. We'll see how the Arx's play out with those new models. Designed more for near boundry preformace such as HT. If they preform like the A5's in the 1st shootout, I'll be tickled Garnet & Gold!


I'm very sorry to hear about your wife; I hope things have gotten better...

What kind of TV are you running right now? Are you still using the Klipsch speakers listed in your profile?


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

Thanks for the kind words Osage. She was very sick & has been so for several years now. Almost lost her twice, but she is a true fighter. With the latest foray, she has lost part of both feet (last partial amputaion about 4 weeks ago & looking like it might not be healing well currently.

I recently bought a new TV (will have to update my equipment list). I'm at work now, can't remember the model #. It's the 32" Samsung 1080p Smart TV. Got it at Walmart, cheaper then other dumb TV's! Seems to have a good picture. That is the largest size my entertainment center will accomodate, not gonna replace that, so that's why I chose that size. And yes, still using the horns. They were on sale @ Sound Advice here in Tallahassee like 20 years ago. They got me into HT and have served me well all this time. They don't even compare to current technology though. Really looking forward to finishing my room. I have really grown to appreciate better sound in my journey.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

My thoughts and prayers are with you, Tonto...

How do you like watching films on the 32 inch...is it okay?


----------



## Owen Bartley (Oct 18, 2006)

Really sorry to hear that Tonto. I hope things take a turn for the better for you and your wife. Of course everything takes a back seat to the health of your family.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

You know, it's disheartening and odd...but it seems like so many people I chat with on this particular site have been telling me about their ill spouses in some way or another; not just Tonto but a few others I've chatted with in private too. I would like to send my prayers and get well wishes to everyone that seems to be unfortunately part of this situation; I ask for nothing but the speedy, healthy recovery of them all. :wave: :T


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

You guys are the best, I really appreciate the heart felt words. And I know you mean them. This forum is truely like a second family. We are children in Christ so we are happy knowing everything is for his glory. So how can life be bad, I mean some people really do have it bad. God blesses us every day.

As far as that 32" behemoth, when you consider it replaced a 27" Sony Trinitron (Flat screen that was almost square), it is definantly an upgrade. It is nice to game in 1080p. There is a lot of detail that I don't miss now. My main game is MW2, seeing people across the map got a lot easier. In the meantime, I'm just biding my time for better things.

Thanks again for the kind words fellas (don't mean to hijack this thread).


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

You in NO WAY hijacked this thread, Tonto...I continue to wish you and your wife the healthiest of futures...:wave:


----------



## Tonto (Jun 30, 2007)

Thanks Osage, but getting back to business...are you leaning any paritcular direction with your set up?


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Not yet, Tonto...but I will most likely go with the new AVR first...:huh:


----------



## phreak (Aug 16, 2010)

I just found and read through this thread, and it was a pretty good read. Of course I couldn't help but have a few questions, comments and reflections. 
With your system, as is, what is the loudest volume at which you are completely happy with the sound quality for that volume? What volume is the loudest you do listen at, where I am assuming you do have quality complaints otherwise you would not have started the thread? And what volume would you ultimately like to crank it to with pure sonic bliss? I'm just curious because of the observation in one of the early post about doubling power per 3 dB increase in clean output. 
I'm also an Onkyo fan. I've had a 703 and 576, currently have the 3008, and am somewhat familiar with the 307. If you need more power, I concur with the majority of responses that step 1 needs to be a AVR with preouts, meaning 700 level. I'm not a great critical listener or a master wordsmith, so it's difficult for me to express effectively the value of MultEQ32, though I believe there are several threads that discuss it in depth. I believe that starts at the 800 level.
I am thrilled with my 3008. If I had to replace it tomorrow for whatever reason, I would personally grab a 800 series. For the reasons above, combined with a wallet crunch of my own. I would also be 100% willing to go with a Reconditioned from Accessories4Less for the savings, though it is a little more tricky for me being north of the 49th. 
After the AVR upgrade, as pointed out earlier in the thread, you may feel that the 5.0 is sufficiently powered. If so, deal with the .1. If not, I would suggest that a 2ch amp would more than suffice. For example, the 828 just tested at 2x147W, 5x109W, 7x78W. It's spec'd at 7x130W. Here is a little conjecture. Since the 5x and 7x test are so different, but both total around the 545W mark, I'm guessing that is the limit of the power supply. But the amp channels are good for 147W, as shown on the 2ch test. The receiver would probably handle 3x147W, or some thing real close to that, if it were powering the centre and 2 rears. With most program material, you would be looking at 147W centre, 2x 100W rear, and still almost 100W reserve on the power supply. And all these #'s are still 8 ohm and 0.1% THD. The 2ch 1% 4 ohm test hit 246W. Remember, my conjecture based on HTLabs test as reported on http://www.soundandvision.com/content/onkyo-tx-nr828-av-receiver-test-bench
If you have any doubts, add a 2 ch amp to that and blow your eardrums.


----------



## Osage_Winter (Apr 8, 2010)

Thanks phreak; will take what you suggested into consideration and get back to you with some answers to your queries...


----------

