Will I experience any gain by getting separates for my speakers?

[Kain]

The audio side of my home theater consists of the following:



A/V Receiver: Harman Kardon AVR 8500 (named AVR 8000 in the US)

Center: Klipsch RC-7 (98 dB sensitivity)

Mains: Klipsch RF-7 (102 dB sensitivity)

Surrounds: Klipsch RS-7 (98 dB sensitivity)

Subwoofer: None (but working on it)



My Harman Kardon AVR 8500 (or AVR 8000 for the US) outputs 110 watts
into 5 channels while operating at full power. In stereo or 2-channel
mode, it outputs 125 watts to both channels. I've heard that Harman
Kardon is quite conservative with its watts rating and Harman Kardons
usually output more than their advertised specs. This was the last true
high-end Harman Kardon A/V receiver and it sounds great. I heard that
the replacement high-end Harman Kardon is coming soon and is named AVR
7550HD and outputs 110 watts into 7 channels. I have never had any
problems regarding power and no matter how loud I play it (even with
the mains running as Large due to no subwoofer), the A/V receiver never
shows any signs of stress.



I might be upgrading my amplification side of my home theater soon to
incorporate the new Blu-ray audio formats. I can get either the new
upcoming Harman Kardon AVR 7550HD (which is said to retail for about
$2,799) or a Rotel or Parasound 250 watt amplifier + processor combo
for about $6,000 (I can probably get a little discount from $6,000 as
this is the maximum sales retail price).



My question is, will my speakers benefit from 250 watts per channel
separate amplifiers or will I not notice the difference between them
and the upcoming Harman Kardon AVR 7550HD with 110 watts into 7
channels (or even my current A/V receiver with 110 watts into 5
channels)?

[CECAA850]

The best bang for your buck will not come from outboard amplification at this point. You need to get a sub. It will take your HT experience to the next level. At that point you can use your receivers crossover to take a substantial load off of it (the receiver) and allow it to work easier by transferring all the heavy lifting to your sub. The majority of your receivers work is done trying to produce low frequencies. If you give that load to the sub, your receiver should run cooler and well within it's operating range.

EDIT, I had virtually the same setup as yours, only my receiver was a HK AVR-7200. I ran it without the sub for a while and it sounded like a completely different set-up. Even with the RF-7's set to large and receiving all the LFE channel, it wasn't even close to what I experienced with the sub in the system.

[BuyOtherSoundEquipment]

CECAA is absolutely right. I wouldn't even mess with the amplification for the speakers yet, as it sounds like your Harman Kardon can kick some serious butt to begin with.

Take even 1/3 of the potential budget for that Parasound set-up and sink it into a sub, and you will have more slam than you ever thought possible.

Take a few of these as candidates:

http://www.svsound.com/products-sub-box-pb13ultra.cfm

or

http://epiksubwoofers.com/portedconquest.html

or run a couple of my personal favorite:

http://www.edesignaudio.com/product_info.php?cPath=2_41&products_id=640

As an alternative, you could go balls-out and do an Infinite Baffle set-up like CECAA and several others have done. I've never heard one, but I can only imagine what it must sound (feel) like!

[winchester21]

If you are EVEN asking the question- The answer is definitely H--- yes. The notion that receiver power is enough to run high end reference systems is in my opinion- definitely not correct. Particulary with the 7s. The entire reference line of speakers from middle to the top are power hungry racehorses just waiting for the owner to feed them what they deserve to give you your money's worth.

I will definitely agree to buy the sub first- a good one- Epik Conquest -RWS-15 or any of the others mentioned around the forum

Buy the best one(or 2) that you can find. Then the amps. The Emotiva stuff gets good marks on the forum for not a lot of cash. Personally- I went on e-bay and bought some 7 year old stuff-top of the line at that time- Carver and B&K-200-250 WPC for next to nothing. Like 1400.00 1450 Watts of power through 7 channels and it rocked my previous reference system like you would not believe-I watch mostly action movies.With a good top end HT reveiver using pre outs you do not need to speed a fortune on amps. Totally different deal than with 2 channel.Go for the separates.

[InVeNtOr]

all great advice. sounds like you don't need an amp, but want one. i would say that you need a sub more than anything else. the amp should help you out more at low volumes, and should give you more clairity. if you can hear the difference, i don't know. it's up to your ears to tell you that. i'd say follow the advice, and get the sub.

[Arky]

The best bang for your buck will not come from outboard amplification at this point. You need to get a sub.

Agreed.

I had virtually the same setup as yours, only my receiver was a HK AVR-7200

Me too. The 7200 is the best receiver i've ever heard. Your 8500 should be just as good. However, when I added the QSC amp I definately heard the difference on the 7's.

[winchester21]

1st order of business- killer sub - 40-50% improvement over without one- dont even consider doing HT without one- a good one

My expierence- so I have my former reference system running on my Sony ES Ht flagship receiver and one separate HK 870 running the fronts and it is p r e t t y good- but just a hint of doubt.. So I am uppacking the B&K separate and hooking up the rear Rb81s and the HK 870 to the surrounds-RB61s and I am unpacking the Carver A753 3 channel 250 WPC and this thing is some ugly @ssed monster with 3 half moon shaped meters on the front and D handles and it weighs like 75 pounds running the fronts and the RC64 center and just looks freaking evil. I have like 4 of my buddies over and one of them says -"that looks like Dracula's amp- it better sound good for the 500 bucks that you paid on e-bay". So we hook up all this sutff and pop in a Transformer blue ray DVD and OMG!!!! What a difference!!!!!!! This is bad @ssed!!!!! Everybody was wowed....

Bottom line - good clean separates- at least 25% improvement over receiver HT amplification- Dont let any body talk you out of it.

[Kain]

I also asked this question on the AVS Forum too and they stated that I would not notice the difference between my A/V receiver and a high powered amplifier (250 watts) unless I was at extreamly high volumes. Considering how efficient the Reference Series 7 speakers are, why do people state that they require powerful amplifiers to "open up?" Even without a subwoofer, I hit 122 dB in Transformers when the Transformer hops over the girl with the mains running as Large with no signs of stress from the A/V receiver.

Here is the thread on the AVS Forum: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1129298

[Arky]

They're wrong. Can you borrow an outboard from somewhere to test for yourself?

[Kain]

They're wrong. Can you borrow an outboard from somewhere to test for yourself?

Unfortunately I won't be able to borrow an separate amplifier but I have a question. Since the RF-7s are rated at 102 dB sensitivity, that means I will rarely be using more than 8 watts of power as I will be hitting 111 dB with 8 watts. Now, 8 watts is very far from the rated 110 watts per channel rating of my A/V receiver and even more far from the 250 watts per channel rating of a separate amplifier. How will the 8 watts from the separate amplifier be "better" than the 8 watts from the A/V receiver? Why would there be a difference in sound quality as I am very far from the limits of both forms of amplification?

[tommyboy]

To answer your initial question...... Yes, you will notice a difference. But like already suggested, and what I would personally do, is get a sub before an amp........

[winchester21]

Six months ago I had a HT receiver failure. Let's just say that I have got a little carried away in the last six months with equipment. I borrowed- and bought/or owned- and tried a total of 7 different power amp sources and 8 different front speaker combos. in my various observation- blind and otherwise- one thing was constant. The separate power sources were very noticeably better that the receiver amps. The receivers were popular brands- flagship models. The power amplifiers were B&K -Bob Carver- HK-Mcintosh-Rotel-Cary

I will not pretend to be able to explain why these were better with a calculator or a slide rule. First of all it is a pretty popular opinion that receiver amps are the weakest link of the HT receivers. The power ratings are in many cases grossly overstated. Even with that stated I think that it goes beyond wattage vs wattage. I personally think that the separates sound cleaner across the board even at low and medium volume. The receiver amps -particluary with quality speakers- sound- IMHO- muddy and lacking in the misrange and particulary the bass which was apparent in the fronts. Wth the centers and rears set to small-(with a sub) it was not as apparent.This "difference" was explained to me by a highly regarded local technician as follows. A higher powered separate will produce a faster reaction time within the speaker component to produce a program note- particulary a bass note as more is required to do this than a high range note. The Reciever amps are too often overtaxed with multitasking functions in this type of enviornment. Someone with a more technical background could add to this discussion. I only know what my ears tell me.

The 7 series are very nice popular speakers. Ther are plenty of people on the forum who are using them both with and without separates. if you are not in a position to borrow separates check some of the profiles.This stuff is highly subjective and there are many factors to consider when spending this kind of money.

[wuzzzer]

RF-7s have an impedence dip to 2.8 ohms. Very, very few receivers can handle impedence drops that low. Because of that, it causes the amplifiers within a receiver to attempt to drive an ohm load they weren't intended do, resulting in them running out of headroom pretty quickly.

Using an extremely general statement, a much higher percentage of separate amps versus receivers are better built and better suited to handle lower ohm loads and as a result they are able to handle speakers like RF-7s much better.

[Kain]

My A/V receiver goes from -75 dB (if I remember correctly) all the way to +18 dB on the volume nob. I was watching Transformers

at around -5 dB to 0 dB and I hit 122 dB on a certain scene (with the

mains running as Large since I have no subwoofer). Just for "kicks," I

increased the volume to somewhere between +5 dB and +10 dB and played

the same *short* scene again expecting more bass. For some reason, the

bass response/loudness was actually lower with the higher volume but I

could not hear any sort of distortion. Was my amplifier clipping or did

I simply reach the limits of my speakers?

[carbon summit]

They're wrong. Can you borrow an outboard from somewhere to test for yourself?

Unfortunately I won't be able to borrow an separate amplifier but I have a question. Since the RF-7s are rated at 102 dB sensitivity, that means I will rarely be using more than 8 watts of power as I will be hitting 111 dB with 8 watts. Now, 8 watts is very far from the rated 110 watts per channel rating of my A/V receiver and even more far from the 250 watts per channel rating of a separate amplifier. How will the 8 watts from the separate amplifier be "better" than the 8 watts from the A/V receiver? Why would there be a difference in sound quality as I am very far from the limits of both forms of amplification?

I struggled with buying an amp because of this same question. I read that my Yamaha 663 which is rated at 95x7 really puts out more like 45x7 with all channels driven. But wait my Forte IIs are 99 dB with one watt so even 45 watts should be way more than I need. On paper you should never need an amp but my ears could hear the difference. I don't pretend to know exactly why it is but I now accept it.

Emotiva has a 30 day money back deal that would only cost you return shipping to try an amp out. Granted shipping an amp would cost probably $60+ but really whats your time and peace of mind worth? Meaning if you're like me you have probably put a lot of thought and second guessing in to this amp/ subwoofer thing and thinking doesn't really tell you anything. Only hearing the difference a sub and/or amp makes is the only way you'll know for yourself. Emo gives you an easy way to try an amp and if you have a Best Buy in your area go pick up a Sub 12 (not an endorsement that that is the sub to go with) and see what you think. BB also has a 30 day return policy and no shipping there so nothing lost there. If you decide the sub didn't help bring it back. If you decide it did make a difference, then decide if thats sub for you or return it and buy a better one.

I think once you try both in your system you'll be sold on both ideas.

[carbon summit]

My A/V receiver goes from -75 dB (if I remember correctly) all the way to +18 dB on the volume nob. I was watching Transformers at around -5 dB to 0 dB and I hit 122 dB on a certain scene (with the mains running as Large since I have no subwoofer). Just for "kicks," I increased the volume to somewhere between +5 dB and +10 dB and played the same *short* scene again expecting more bass. For some reason, the bass response/loudness was actually lower with the higher volume but I could not hear any sort of distortion. Was my amplifier clipping or did I simply reach the limits of my speakers?

I don't have an answer for you but I wanted to mention that I didn't add an amp because my system wasn't loud enough. I bought it looking for sound quality not quantity. I think I've got a clear sound now and the sound stage and separation of the vocals and interments is surprisingly better.

[carbon summit]

They're wrong. Can you borrow an outboard from somewhere to test for yourself?

Unfortunately I won't be able to borrow an separate amplifier but I have a question. Since the RF-7s are rated at 102 dB sensitivity, that means I will rarely be using more than 8 watts of power as I will be hitting 111 dB with 8 watts. Now, 8 watts is very far from the rated 110 watts per channel rating of my A/V receiver and even more far from the 250 watts per channel rating of a separate amplifier. How will the 8 watts from the separate amplifier be "better" than the 8 watts from the A/V receiver? Why would there be a difference in sound quality as I am very far from the limits of both forms of amplification?

I struggled with buying an amp because of this same question. I read that my Yamaha 663 which is rated at 95x7 really puts out more like 45x7 with all channels driven. But wait my Forte IIs are 99 dB with one watt so even 45 watts should be way more than I need. On paper you should never need an amp but my ears could hear the difference. I don't pretend to know exactly why it is but I now accept it.

Emotiva has a 30 day money back deal that would only cost you return shipping to try an amp out. Granted shipping an amp would cost probably $60+ but really whats your time and peace of mind worth? Meaning if you're like me you have probably put a lot of thought and second guessing in to this amp/ subwoofer thing and thinking doesn't really tell you anything. Only hearing the difference a sub and/or amp makes is the only way you'll know for yourself. Emo gives you an easy way to try an amp and if you have a Best Buy in your area go pick up a Sub 12 (not an endorsement that that is the sub to go with) and see what you think. BB also has a 30 day return policy and no shipping there so nothing lost there. If you decide the sub didn't help bring it back. If you decide it did make a difference, then decide if thats sub for you or return it and buy a better one.

I think once you try both in your system you'll be sold on both ideas.

I just noticed your location is Dubai, UAE so I'm not sure what your options are but I'm guessing my Emo/BB ideas aren't going to work!!!

[tommyboy]

I was blown away by the difference when I got my HK amp hooked up. With both music and HT!

[winchester21]

You can drive yourself to drink trying to figure this amp stuff out. I can tell you that there a gazillion complaints filed with the Fedaral trade comission concerning false claims of amplifier power ratings. The Mac dealer told me that if you take the power consumption rating from the plate on the back of the amp- multiply X 70%( to allow for waste in terms of heat-ect) and divide that number by the number of channels being used- this is your true power. An amp cannot produce more power than it is can consume. Don't know if that is correct- Just what i heard- tend to believe it based on the source- very knowledgable guy.I had a 100 WPC x 5 Sony flagship model bought back when they first came out with dvd players- pre HDMI. Really thought I had something- But- the whole time i owned it- I felt that my RF3s needed more(or better). The thing finally died and I started tyring all the different stuff and - WOW- what an eye opener. No way- that that old Sony had any where NEAR 100 WPC.My 7 Heritage speakers will all run on 3 watts. Eventually I would like to have a 300 WPC monoblock for each speaker for HT duty. But my -in the planning stages near future- 2 channel tube setup will have maybe 8-25 WPC. Big SS separate amplifiers just seem to work better with Dolby Digital HT applications. What works on paper never seems to play out in the listening room- for me anyway.

Interesting reading on this subject-google-Power Amplifier Specs Demystified- look for link to Joe Roberts 2007 essay on this subject

[Kain]

You can drive yourself to drink trying to figure this amp stuff out. I can tell you that there a gazillion complaints filed with the Fedaral trade comission concerning false claims of amplifier power ratings. The Mac dealer told me that if you take the power consumption rating from the plate on the back of the amp- multiply X 70%( to allow for waste in terms of heat-ect) and divide that number by the number of channels being used- this is your true power. An amp cannot produce more power than it is can consume. Don't know if that is correct- Just what i heard- tend to believe it based on the source- very knowledgable guy.I had a 100 WPC x 5 Sony flagship model bought back when they first came out with dvd players- pre HDMI. Really thought I had something- But- the whole time i owned it- I felt that my RF3s needed more(or better). The thing finally died and I started tyring all the different stuff and - WOW- what an eye opener. No way- that that old Sony had any where NEAR 100 WPC.My 7 Heritage speakers will all run on 3 watts. Eventually I would like to have a 300 WPC monoblock for each speaker for HT duty. But my -in the planning stages near future- 2 channel tube setup will have maybe 8-25 WPC. Big SS separate amplifiers just seem to work better with Dolby Digital HT applications. What works on paper never seems to play out in the listening room- for me anyway.

Interesting reading on this subject-google-Power Amplifier Specs Demystified- look for link to Joe Roberts 2007 essay on this subject

I've heard many people state that Harman Kardon if one of the few manufacturers that underrates their A/V receivers. I got the following response from someone on the AVS Forum regarding A/V receiver watts ratings:

Harman/Kardon - Underrate or are right on the money

Marantz - Usually right on the money, but sometimes underrate

Denon - Usually right on the money

Onkyo - Typically hits close to 70-80% so 100wpc usually pumps out 70-80wpc

Pioneer - Generally overrates

Yamaha - Generally overrates Sony - Really overrates