bertsummerkids Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 I am currently using RF7 series speakers, denon 3802 AVR and a B&K 200.2 to run my mains. RC7 center, RF3 surrounds, RS3 backs. I wanted to upgrade to a preamp and another amp for the center and surrounds, but was wondering if the cost to do this would justify the improvment in sound. the 3 options are as follows: 1. leave system as is with the denon and the 2 channel amp(running the mains). the denon used to power the other 5 speakers 2. get additional B&K 200.3 to run the center and surrounds and use the denon to run the backs 3. ditch the denon and get B&K 200.5 and a B&K 50 preamp. obviously the last option would be best but also a lot more cash. would the cost of #2 or #3 justify the improvment in sound. any input would be great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frzninvt Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 The jump to the B&K Ref 50 will make a large noticeable difference in sound quality and the sound steering in a multi-channel environment. I would keep the 2 channel amp and add a three channel amp, that route while maybe more costly will be better than the single 5 channel amp since each amp will have there own dedicated power supplies. Look at it this way, no matter what option you choose it is still going to sound real good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ric Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 hmmm just a thought, you'd might want to check out the new Outlaw 990 pre. give it a test drive and I think youll be rewarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 My vote is for the 200.5 amp. Use it for the center and surrounds.Use the 200.2 for the mains. You can always add a preamp later. Preamps go obsolete very rapidly. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickB Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 ---------------- On 5/23/2005 10:22:44 PM MrMcGoo wrote: My vote is for the 200.5 amp. Use it for the center and surrounds.Use the 200.2 for the mains. You can always add a preamp later. Preamps go obsolete very rapidly. Bill ---------------- That would get my vote too. Thats pretty much what I do except with Parasound amps and a Denon 3803. The next generation of pre-pros will probably have to address the higher rez. DD+ and DTS HD sound from HD DVDs. From what I've read current optical and digital coax will not be able to handle it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frzninvt Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 "Preamps go obsolete very rapidly." You must not own one because most if not all are software upgradeable very easily. If some new format comes out you simply download the update to a laptop or PC connect it to the preamp's RS232 port and install the upgrade. You should not give misguided information. The Outlaw 990 does not come close to the quality and performance of the B&K Ref 50, sorry. The addition of the B&K 200.5 would be great if he is shooting for a 7.1 system but the way he explained it he is going for a 5.1 in which case the 200.3 would be the choice but having the 200.5 allows for the future jump to 7.1 so perhaps it is the better choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverSport Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 Frzn...are you thinking of the Outlaw 950 or have you seen or heard the new 990? I'm no longer in the market but am hearing good things about the new 990...that B&K must be something...enjoy the search...it is aggravating and rewarding all at the same time... Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frzninvt Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 You're right Silver I was thinking of the 950, I have seen the 990 but I cannot imagine it is that much better, alhtough it certainly looks better. The B&K Ref 50 S2 is a $3K preamp while the 990 is less than half that. I owned a B&K Ref 50 briefly and can attest to it's sonic performance. I went with the NAD T163 because it had features that the Ref 50 didn't and the sonic performance that it did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverSport Posted May 24, 2005 Share Posted May 24, 2005 Frzn...cool...good to know... Bill 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.