robbiey60 Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 I guess I got lucky. I got my amp and pre for around the same of the cost of a Marantz 7009. . . .actually less. People always pay attention to how many watts a sub amp has (usually the more the better) ......speaker amps not so much it seems.Oops, seems I was too late lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronH Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Why does no-one debate that a 100w subwoofer amp is enough and a 600w subwoofer amp is not needed? I asked that same question......nobody has tackled it yet lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronH Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 I guess I got lucky. I got my amp and pre for around the same of the cost of a Marantz 7009 I got my truck and jeep for the same price as a Mercedes too. good job.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paducah Home Theater Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Why does no-one debate that a 100w subwoofer amp is enough and a 600w subwoofer amp is not needed? Depends on what you're running. I've hit 134 db with two 12's in a car with a 40 watt amp. Watts alone isn't the whole story. Typically at normal listening levels we are all only sending a fraction of a watt to our mains. It's mostly only during peaks/transients/dynamics where it really makes much difference. Everybody likes watts though, nobody talks about large capacitors or a toroidal transformer that is big enough to power Ironman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbiey60 Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Why does no-one debate that a 100w subwoofer amp is enough and a 600w subwoofer amp is not needed?Depends on what you're running. I've hit 134 db with two 12's in a car with a 40 watt amp. Watts alone isn't the whole story. Typically at normal listening levels we are all only sending a fraction of a watt to our mains. It's mostly only during peaks/transients/dynamics where it really makes much difference. Everybody likes watts though, nobody talks about large capacitors or a toroidal transformer that is big enough to power Ironman. My amps are 'only' 150wpc. They are over twice as heavy as my receiver and all have substantial sized toroidal transformers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Why does no-one debate that a 100w subwoofer amp is enough and a 600w subwoofer amp is not needed? That's easy. Most 100w subwoofer amps are mated to very inefficient drivers attached to inexpensive(cheap) cabinets. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronH Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 I agree, watts alone is not the whole story Metro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappydue Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Just my findings/suggestions on the amp topic. Take subs out of the equation, strictly 2 ch. Play some dubstep(I know it wont appeal to everyone but show me something with more bass). Raise the tone control or eq around the 40-60hz range around 2-4db. Crank it to reference and above. That right there will show the difference between a low to mid receiver and a good power amp. Now do you NEED that or WANT that? I personally am happy I have that.funny you say this. Because this is the kind of stuff an amp isn't needed. Avr's put out great numbers at 2 channels driven. It's when 7 channels are going when it's tough. I have not problem telling the story of when I decided to take my RF-63's to a friends house and run them full range with an xpa-3 at 200 per channel and full range on a 20 watt per channel lepai amp. When level matched we listened at crazy volumes to all kinds of music and no one in the room could pick the emotiva and the lepai apart. Take it for what's it's worth. I'll spend the extra money on MORE BASS!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Lmao. Nothing like an amp vs no amp debate to get an old thread some traffic. Took me forever to catch up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappydue Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Why does no-one debate that a 100w subwoofer amp is enough and a 600w subwoofer amp is not needed?because your talking 80hz and below and that is where all the power goes. No need to argue. My 4 18's will suck up everything my inuke 6000 has to offer. But some rf-7's would maybe light up two of the lights when cut off at 80 hz. But it would take a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronH Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Full range 2 channel music in pure direct is where most large speakers can benefit from more power I think. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Full range 2 channel music in pure direct is where most large speakers can benefit from more power I think. Absolutely correct. Of course room size/acoustics also play a role. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derrickdj1 Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Why use pure? It has the least bass and no room correction. Some you must have perfect rooms, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Why use pure? It has the least bass and no room correction. Some you must have perfect rooms, lol. Agreed. Pure to me sounds horrible in my experience (at least vs some room eq). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 When I added my first amp to my RF-63 rig, I exhaustively AB tested in 2-channel with just my Onkyo TX-SR705 and then with the Onkyo and 200w/ch B&K together. It was no contest at all. The Onkyo/B&K combo slaughtered just the Onkyo in every category. Bass drive, midrange resolution, extended highs, soundstage were all improved considerably. My family room is pushing 6000ft3 so the headroom was needed for full coverage anywhere in the room. Bill 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Why use pure? It has the least bass and no room correction. Some you must have perfect rooms, lol. Agreed. Pure to me sounds horrible in my experience (at least vs some room eq). So there is no artificial boost to the low bass and midbass frequencies would be my take. I have to agree about pure direct sounding not so good. Kind of too flat and lifeless. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Im sure pure direct would sound a lot better in the same studio it was recorded (with all the same gear and room). Plus taste of what a person thinks sounds good is a huge part of good sound. And considering are ears are different just like the rooms and set ups we all have makes it ever more complex. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MercedesBerater Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Just my findings/suggestions on the amp topic. Take subs out of the equation, strictly 2 ch. Play some dubstep(I know it wont appeal to everyone but show me something with more bass). Raise the tone control or eq around the 40-60hz range around 2-4db. Crank it to reference and above. That right there will show the difference between a low to mid receiver and a good power amp. Now do you NEED that or WANT that? I personally am happy I have that. Instead of dub step- this has more bass, and the low rumble visceral stuff: Pete Belasco - Deeper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbiey60 Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Just my findings/suggestions on the amp topic. Take subs out of the equation, strictly 2 ch. Play some dubstep(I know it wont appeal to everyone but show me something with more bass). Raise the tone control or eq around the 40-60hz range around 2-4db. Crank it to reference and above. That right there will show the difference between a low to mid receiver and a good power amp. Now do you NEED that or WANT that? I personally am happy I have that. Instead of dub step- this has more bass, and the low rumble visceral stuff: Pete Belasco - Deeper Have no idea wha that is lol will check it out when I get home, 2.0 then 2.1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappydue Posted April 27, 2015 Share Posted April 27, 2015 Full range 2 channel music in pure direct is where most large speakers can benefit from more power I think. not when we tried with the 63's. and that was 2 very respected avs members and myself. trust me i was about half *** embarrassed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.