RF-3s sound better than RF-7s

[Charly Tune A]

Currently, I'm A-B testing the RF-3s with the Flagship RF-7s and am having a sound problem. Musically, the 7s have it all over the 3s in the upper sound department. The cymbals are accurate and dissipate, or trail off, very gracefully. (On AC/DCs Hells Bells you can hear the complete tonal ringing of the bell as if you were actually there, very impressive) The vocals and midrange are simply out of the box and more natural than any previous speaker I've auditioned including Martin Logans. The trouble is in the bass punch. The RF-3s have a more articulate mid-bass thump that reaches out and grabs you, involving you more in the music emotionally. The RF-7s, with those 2 big ten inch gold hummers sitting there, just won't do it. The lack of low end presence and feel from the RF-7s is a disappointment. They are smooth enough but they don't attack when they need too like the RF-3s.

My question is, while the Klipsch are very efficient, would a larger power amplifier to make these RF-7s rock and roll deeper than the RF-3s? Will the available power reserve allow the flagship puppies to breathe and place me in total audio nirvana? Or am I kidding myself and are the efficient Klipsch already singing the tune they were designed for and I just don't approve of the new bass approach? I'm using a Sony DB-930 receiver (110 watts per channel X5,discrete). I'm looking at adding the Outlaw 750 amplifier (165 X5) and using the Sony as the head unit. I'm thinking this could turn the RF-7s into my launching pad to the upper stratosphere of music reproduction. Will it?

Two more things real quick.

I know the Sony gets slammed when being paired with Klipsch. I've heard it all before but I don't agree. I tried the new Denon 4802 and it sucked in every way for a "high end" receiver as far as I was concerned. I prefer the sound shaping capability on the Sony versus the lame nasty sounding blah and trible control on the Denon. But thats another story for another day.

Also the LFE with movies on the RF-7s sounded really deep as opposed to the low end on music. I have a KSW-15 which is turned off for my evaluation period. It handles the movies effects quite nicely. And yes, my speakers are set to "Large" on the receiver.

Would the RF-5s be a good choice or a compromise? I haven't tried them yet, but they do have the 8 inch drivers (maybe for the kick I'm looking for) and the newer 8 inch square horn design. But will the smaller 1 inch horn driver provide the more open mids and refined highs of the RF-7s?

Any help or opinions on my dilemma will be mucho appreciado.

Thanks.

[Mike Lindsey]

Well...I was loving your story until you got to the point where you ragged on the 4802 (I have the 4800). I listened to the RF-7's at the local Sound Advice, using a 4800 to drive them. I was playing the Diana Krall DVD in DTS and it sounded magnificent. The bass in my opinion was astounding. Very accurate, tight, smooth and punchy. I listened for about 30 minutes and walked away very impressed.

As for whether or not a different amp can bring a little more punch out of the RF-7's, I would have to say "yes". I have no experience with your Sony receiver but my 4800 was driving my Chorus' and I had no complaint with the bass. When it was time to get another amp for 6.1, I opted for the Acurus A200X3 to drive my front soundstage, and the improvements were very noticeable. Especially with the low-end. The Chorus' can only extend to 45 hz but they do a wonderful job with SPL all the way there. The Acurus just seemed to make them do it with little effort. The bass seems to be more fuller and more musical now. I love the combination.

My advice would be to find a showroom somewhere that carries the RF-7's (I'm sure you have already found one) and experiment with different (150w - 200w/ch) amps and see if you notice a difference. My guess would be if you notice a difference in the showroom, you will definitely notice a difference in your own room.

Mike

------------------

Family Room

-----------

Hitachi 43UWX10B HDTV (16:9)

Denon AVR-4800

Acurus A200X3

Panasonic DVD-RP91K (Progressive Scan & DVD-Audio)

Dual CS-5000 Turntable w/Shure V15V-MR

DBX 3bx Series III Range Expander

Klipsch Chorus (mains - Acurus Amp)

Klipsch KLF-C7 (center - Acurus Amp)

Klipsch Epic CF-2's (rears)

Klipsch RS-3's (rear surrounds)

SVS 20-39CS Sub w/Samson S700 Amp

Monster HTS-3500 Line Conditioner

Scientific Atlanta Explorer 2100 Digital Cable box

Monster M-500 Component Video cables

Monster Datalink 100 Digital Coaxial cables

Radio Shack Gold Series & AR for all other audio interconnects

Bedroom

-------

Mitsubishi 31" TV

Yamaha M-4 Amp

Yamaha C-4 Preamp

Yamaha T-7 Tuner

Teac DVD Player

Dual CS-721 Turntable w/B&O MMC2

Looking for a pair of Heresy's

[t-man]

Charly,

I can sort of relate. I used to have Sony, and when I first hooked up my Denon I was very dissapointed. The two styles of power are very different. Once I got used to the Denon, I realized that it was a more "transparent" style that takes getting used to. The coloration of the Sony can be very pleasant, as it makes most of your music sound great. With the Denon, crappy CDs sound real crappy, and good CDs sound wonderful. The Sony had much, much better bass, but the highs were a bit harsh when played loud.

Another note, I had to use my EQ to get the Sony to sound good. When flat, sounded well...flat. The denon remains flat at my home. Those bass and treble controls are worthless. The denon sounds great all cranked up (with a sub, of course).

These are my opinions and observations. I don't think there is anything wrong with Sony necessarily. I really enjoyed mine. The Denon certainly isn't complete as it is now, and neither was the Sony. An argument for seperates? Yes, probably.

T-man

------------------

KG 5.5 (mains)

KG 2.2v (center)

KLF-C7 (center in storage)

KG 1 (rears)

KSW-12 (sub)

Denon AVR 681/1601

Toshiba SD-3109 DVD

Kenwood LVD700 LD

Sony CD changer

Sony 27" Trinitron

Sony PLX I

[cbr600]

With my current setup, I have not noticed any bass problem for RF-7. I definitely like RF-7 over RF-3 because highs are more refined.

------------------

Klipsch RF7

Klipsch RC7

Klipsch RS7

Denon 3802

Acurus A200x3

AQ Slate Spr cables

[cbr600]

My media room is about 14 by 20. Those speakers sure look big in the room but sound good to me.

------------------

Klipsch RF7

Klipsch RC7

Klipsch RS7

Denon 3802

Acurus A200x3

AQ Slate Spr cables

[TheEAR]

Charly a speaker of the caliber of the RF-7's deservers much better amp then a weakling Sony reciever amp.Even a Denon(even my BIG 5800)is just up to the task,just.

When you have large speakers and these speakers have quite large mid-bass drivers you need a serious amp to take charge.

I had similar experience when I hooked up the RF-5's directly to the Denon 3801.The sound was nice but lacked the punch,the speakers were not driven,they were hauling the reciever..LOL

After I switched to the Denon 5800,now the bass and overall sound improved.Not a huge plus,just better overall.Bass had more impact.

After I used a Carver TFM-75(750W RMS per channel @8 ohms)dual mono amp.WOW now the RF-5's were alive,and I say ALIVE.The bass had real punch and the sound was more smooth,much more smooth.No sign of strain,just pure power.And no need to have any putzy EQ to compensate for a weak amp.

And as the two last tests I tried a Celeste 4250SE and my pride N joy(LOL) Krell FPB600.

With the Celeste bass gained even more power,fast,fast bass.The Celeste is very smooth,but BRUTAL when needs to be.rated at "only" 250W RMS into 8 ohms(doubles into 4)the sound was huge,expansive.A real pleasure to listen.

And now to the FPB600.This amp is simply a superamp.The bass quality and quantity is awesome,the RF-5's had now real deep bass and again like with the large Celeste the sound was BIG,not a trace of strain.

Even on peaks(probably below true RMS continous)the sound was not agressive.

So the RF-7's with even more cone surface and a better tweeter should sound great(even better).

Just try to use Dynaudio Contour 3.3's on a Sony(or any)reciever and see how long before the fuse pops.And the Dynes are incredible speakers,quality amplification is NOT an option.Some on AudioReview said Dynes had poor bass...LOL what a bunch of tarts,the Dynes have mountains of bass if driven by a REAL amp.

So the conclusion here is you need a serious power amp to get the most out of the RF-7's.

No matter what some think,a great power amp is the key to get the most out of great speakers.When the chain has weak links its only as stron as its weakes link.

To end your problems I would get a Bryston 4B power amp.With this amp you will NEVER complain about a lack of bass punch or quality.

The Bryston 4B puts all recievers amp six feet under.

TheEAR(s) Now theears

[TheEAR]

LOL

Deang did you ever try a Bryston 4B or on any large Klipsch speakers? I did and its night and day for me,

just the RF-5's get a real boost from switching,Denon 3801(put even a 5800)to a Celeste 4250SE.

The bass is tigt,hits hard and the upper range is smooth and detailed.With the Denons the bass was lacking when compared to the big Celeste.And the Bryston is the champ if amps when it comes to bass.

Its not a question of wattage,I know the RF-7 probably work off a few watts.Often under 10W and under 50W even on some rare peaks.

The problem is the SONY amp in the reciever has poor damping,cant supply the current like a Bryston or other serious power amps can.The Sony simply cant deliver the goods,no matter how high its rated at.

I saw and heard many Sony recievers and they have anemic bass.And please dont talk to me about the EQ,EQ's on recievers are there to boost the weak spots,masking bass weakness to a point.

The RF-7 dont even need a sub with a Bryston!

I will no longer discuss this,its a known fact to those who tried(or own)Bryston.

Thank you,

TheEAR(s) Now theears

[TheEAR]

Deang you marked a point,I will not say otherwise.

Still the Bryston will bring the largest(quality and bass)gain on the RF-7's.Yes the RF-3's will improve,no doubt they will.

TheEAR(s) Now theears

[Guest BobG]

There are at least a couple of factors at work here. One is room acoustics. Because the bass character of the RF-3 and RF-7 is different, they will interact very differently with your room. Try listening from the next room and compare the bass. This will give you a tip if it's a room interaction problem. The bass will sound better outside the listening room than inside. (The highs will be a lot worse ). Obviously you cannot do your listening from another room so you need to experiment with placement in the room. Distance to the rear and side walls will make a big difference as will your listening position. It is completely possible that the RF-3's have flat or boosted bass as those 'juicy' frequencies while the RF-7's have as much as a 12 dB dip at those same bass notes. This is all due to placement and the room acousitics. Try some experimentation and see.

There are big differnces between amps rated at the same power and distortion. Current for one thing - that's one reason the big beefy amps sound so much more in control of the bottom end than do the less expensive amps and receivers. Remember is called an AMPlifier not a VOLTifier. Amperage is an important factor but also very expensive, so few moderate budget amp offer high current.

The RF-5 has received lots of positive comment, but the high frequency performance of the RF-7 is in a different league. It's a much more expensive driver that delivers superb detail and dynamics. I suggest trying different placement for the RF-7's before landing on the RF-5's. It is possible your room won't be a happy home for the 7's but it's worth some effort.

[TheEAR]

Thank you BobG,you just said what I wanted to explain to some here.

Most(if not ALL) recievers have amps based on compromise,the reciever with 5 or even 7 channels weighs under 50lbs.So the amplifier(s) and its power supply are on a diet,even my Denon 5800 amp(most beefy amp of ANY reciever)pales in comparison to just a ATI 1505 amp!And the ATI is not at all at the level of a Celeste or Bryston amp!And agian these are not up to Krell level.

The Krell amps are known for immense power supplies and able to double the output to 2 or even 1 Ohm!And the Master Reference can do this all the way to 0.5 Ohm!Talk about AMPlifier,AMP is the key here.

Thanks again BobG,good to see some Klipschers step in.

Now I in no way say Krell is a must and all else are cheap.Simply that a good amp can help,and help alot.

Not only in bass but the detail,clarity and freedom from listener fatigue.This is why things like damping factor,raise time,being able to reproduce a perfect square wave down low and low distortion are all part part of a great amp.And yes some amps are faster then others,Spectral and Goldmund are two of the fastest in the world(with a few others).

TheEAR(s) Now theears

[Charly Tune A]

Thanks everyone for your responses, my computer has been down for a couple of days so I'm just now back on. I did take Mike's advice and try another more powerful amp. I tried the Acurus 200X5 with my Sony as the head unit. (Point of fact, I was disappointed entirely with the whole Acurus experience which Ill discuss in a moment.)

The bottom line, a new amp simply didn't help the bass output at all. In fact, at normal listening levels I couldn't find a discernable difference in high, mid, or bass output at all. Maybe at ear bleed levels there may be a difference, but I tested it pretty loud. Im not sure if it is the crossover network with that big tweet just sucking the bass out of the woof or what. The 2 10s had no thump, no impact, no depth. Its hard to explain, but the mid bass kick drum and bass guitar runs that I consider important detail to involve me into the whole musical experience just wasnt there on the RF-7s. The highs and mids imaged fantastic and the accuracy and detail are all there, better than I have ever heard. But the mid bass rolled off and low bass disappeared entirely on many of the tracks I listened too.

Deang, I heartily agree with your assessment of towers and 2 tens. I also liked your idea with the 2 centers and swirled horns. Do you get mid bass impact and lower end detail AND get the out of the box highs and imaging with that set up? Mmm, I may have to think seriously about that one. :

BobG thanks for weighing in. I did try different speaker positions, closer to the wall, etc. but I could not convince the 7s to capture the visceral impact that I was looking for. Those 2 lonely 10s just sat there like they had nothing to do sometimes. Other times the bass was there, but more muted and smooth, and very understated compared to the crisp highs and mids. Tone Locs Break it down bass section on Funky Cold Medina wouldnt hurt a fly with the RF-7s, Im sorry to say.

BobG, is it possible that when Klipsch designed these behemoths, they may have had more classical tastes in mind? I listened to a lot of jazz and acoustical and the RF-7s sound pretty darn good on some of these more mellow tracks. But when I want to rock and roll, they just missed the boat for me in the deep and rapid bass department. They sounded to me like they were not interested in giving it up for some reason. Could the refinement team have concentrated on one area a music and left us old time rock and rollers behind?

And for TheEAR. As for the Sony not putting out the bass, I proved that wrong by hooking up some of my old, old Infinity 12 inch slop jobs I had in my garage. They shook the walls. (Of course that about all they did sound wise, thats why theyre in the garage) You are right, the bass control needs adjusting up a bit, but the Sony DB930 allows you to adjust the lower frequency midpoint that you can adjust up or down from 100hz to 1Khz. I know to the purest like yourself, this means absolutely nothing to you, as everything should be played flat on a good amp like a Bryston. I would probably agree if I could afford a Bryston. But I guess Im just another uncouth audiophile wannabe that likes to fiddle with the controls and try and get more sound out of my toys than they can probably supply. I do occasionally like to revisit my childhood and press the infamous bass boost button to wake up the neighbors cat.

That being said, music and sound is a very personal decision, and Im finding out, a tougher one than I had anticipated. Basically I want it all: detail, accuracy, involvement, soundstage, imaging, bass impact, feeling and overall balance. I want to feel like I am there in the room while Eric Clapton plays. Klipsch RF-7s get me halfway there (the top half) but just not down to the bottom half. I dont have real deep pockets but I have a extra few dollars, and my wifes approval, to upgrade my Klipsch bookshelf and sub system and I must get the most bang for my buck. The RF-7s struck me as a fine bookshelf disguised at a tower. If Klipsch would put one fast 8 inch woofer setup in a bookshelf with that fantastic 1.7 inch tweeter, there is no one in the industry that could touch it. It would blow the doors off of everything from planers to ribbons. Im still thinking about the center setup that Deang mentioned, I wonder if this is the panacea that I am looking for.

As for the Acurus 200X5 amp, the two page pamphlet that was the owners manual suggests plugging it into the wall directly to get the most direct power draw for the amp. Unfortunately a loud, noisy A/C hum was transferred to the RF-7 speakers. It subsided to a slight buzz/hum after plugging it into a good power strip instead. I know a good line conditioner is a must for good equipment and I planned on getting one. But I would expect better filtration from this, or any other amplifier right out of the box. I dont want to get a line conditioner to correct a problem with the amp to begin with. I want it to improve an already excellent performer. There was an advert in the box for an add-on A/C filter and remote power on box for an additional $199, I dont think so. I leaped before I looked on this one and its going back. (It doesnt even have a 12v input for remote turn on from another receiver, I should have checked into it first) Anyway, it didnt bring out any more musical detail in either the RF-3s or the RF-7, none whatsoever. I thought there may have been a slight, and I mean very slight, increase in authority to its presentation over the Sony. But after factoring in the human factor, I dismissed this as merely perception (Hey I know that big box has 200 watts and the little box has 110 watts, it must be more muscular, right?)

I will upgrade to a better, cleaner, stronger amp to get the most out of my speaker upgrade. Maybe Ill go with 4 vertical RC-7s and 1 horizontal. After all I still have stands for the front bookshelfs. (you cant say that wouldnt be timbre matched huh) If anyone has any suggestions for amplifiers, Id love to hear them. Thanks

[T2K]

I have an opinion,and I'll offer it here.There is absolutely no comparision power wise Sony vs Acurus.Try

a pair of KLF30's or KSP400's with the Sony/Acurus pair and you'll get the low end you're looking for.The Acurus is probably not the best amp match for the 7's.

Sorry Charlie.

Keith

[jeffgeorge]

Charly,

I picked up an older used Onkyo amp on e-bay for my two-channel set-up. It may not be the best amp out there, but it made my Denon amp sound anemic when listening to my RB-5's.

------------------

RF-3's : mains

RC-3 : center

RS-3's : surrounds

KSW-12: subwoofer

Receiver: Denon 2801

DVD: Panasonic DVD-A120

CD: Yamaha CDC-765

Cables: Tributaries

Sat Receiver: Hughes Direct-TV DD5.1

-------------------------

Family room:

RB-5's (Mahogony)

Receiver: Denon AVR-2000 (2ch.)

Amp: Onkyo M-5000 (2ch.)

CD Player: Yamaha

[TheEAR]

I still maintain that a great power amp will do the trick and solve the RF-7 shortcomings you heard.

I will get my RF-7's shortly and audition the large Klipsches with many amps(after I break them in for at least 100-150 hours,a must to soften up the woofer sourrounds).

I want to try the RF-7's with...

Denon 3801(two channel mode)

Denon 5800(two channel mode)

Celeste 4050(small integrated,50W RMS per channel)

Celeste 4070(power amp,70W RMS per channel)

Celeste 4150(power amp,150W RMS per channel)

Celeste 4250(...250W RMS per ch.)

Carver TFM-75(...750W RMS per channel)

Krell FPB600(...600 RMS per channel...rated at,in reality more,way more)

Then I will be able to say if I was right(of course I am ).Untill then the RF-5's remain as mains.

TheEAR(s) Now theears

[Guest BobG]

The Acurus power amp did not create the hum, it is a ground loop problem which results from the overall Combination of components. I bet if you hook up the Acurus, your CD player directly into it (really loud unless your CD has variable output level) and the RF-7's, you'll get no hum. Probably sound a lot better too because there's no preamp like no preamp.

As far as the bass goes, RF-7's were not designed with any particular type of music in mind, but rather to accurately reproduce any kind of source. Your preference may run to greater bass than we have designed the RF-7 to deliver. It is intended to be really neutral rather than pumped up in the 80 Hz region where that Tone Loc would prefer. Can't please them all I guess. You could win the lottery and get the RSW-15, that would solve it all.

[TheEAR]

RF-7's will be in my HT room this week!

Then we will see(HEAR) how bass deprived these beasts are when the heavyweight champ Krell FPB600 drives them. LOL

And then I will switch to the Celeste W5 and Carver TFM-75 just to hear if they are as revealing as my Contour 3.3's.Well DUH the 3.3's cost three times as much.Still it will be interesting to compare them.

Live levels will be in full effect.

TheEAR(s) Now theears

[Ray Garrison]

RF7s with a Krell FPB600.

Hummm...

Could you let me know when you're going to be hooking all that up this weekend? I'd like to open the windows here so I can see how it sounds. Please be sure to put some Floyd on for me, okay?

...come to think of it, why do we "see" how something sounds? Why don't we "hear" how something sounds? Jeez, now I'm not gonna get any sleep tonight...

------------------

Music is art

Audio is engineering

[TheEAR]

Well Ray my Ear(s) "see" the sound !

Still no Klipsch RF-7's at dealer today(I bug them every day!)

You should hear the upgrade a great power amp makes to some large bass deprived speakers!Those who complain about the bass lacking often use recievers.

I was amazed how even the SB-2's sound with a large power amp!The transformation is marked and the speakers are reborn.

TheEAR(s) Now theears

[Charly Tune A]

Everyone, thanks for all the input.

BobG, sorry for railing on your new company partner Mondial, Im just a newbie when is comes to separates and failed to peruse the forums before my knee jerk reaction. Yes sir, you were absolutely right about the ground loop hum or buzz, I found that out on the Mondial forum shortly after my last post. (So much good info out there, so little time) While a good line conditioner may correct the hum, I bought a 63 cent cheater plug at Lowes that solved two problems. One, the ground loop noise path is broken and the hum is gone completely. Two, I can now plug the amps 3 prong plug directly into the Sony receivers 2 prong switched outlet, allowing for remote on/off operation. While Im thinking this may not be the best solution if I were to drive the amp hard to reach painful sound levels, I think this might work well with the very efficient Klipsch. In other words, I really dont think the power draw will ever be that significant requiring a direct wall connection as suggested in the owners pamphlet. What do you think, am I really limiting the amp?

I will admit that with my old KSB 3.1s, the amps overall sound seemed somewhat cleaner than with the receiver alone now that I have listened to them a while. Again, this may be more psychological than anything. I know there is 90 more watts of dynamic power available if extra current is ever needed for certain passages. The high end distortion of my 3.1s is still there as it has always been. It sounds like a high quiet ssshhh whereas the tweet may be struggling to reproduce more than it is capable. This ssshhh translated into incredible detail with the new RF-7s. The 3.1s have been great speakers overall and have served me well, but that new super tweeter of the RF line is more accurate and open than anything I have heard to date. The B&W Nautilus 803s and 804s that I listened too in the local audiophile store were open but I also found them very bright, fatiguing, and makes your teeth grind after a few minutes. (Tested with a 200 watt Rotel amp) They were so in your face and up front sounding, that they were almost behind you! Overall, I think Klipsch gets a bum rap for making bright speakers. I think the accuracy and clarity translates to brightness for some people who own even cheaper electronics than me. My so-called bright Sony receiver matched up pretty well with the KSB 3.1s and I have been very happy overall. But now I want that extra definition that creates a sense of being there and the amazing out of the box ambiance that the RF-7s produced (and have now spoiled me on). Its just time to move up to the next level.

Dean, thanks for your input guy, Ive decided to try your setup with the RC-7s as mains. But I have a question. According to the Klipsch info site, the RC-7s have a 2.5-way crossover with a tapered-array configuration. It sends some of the midrange info to one of its 8 drivers for smoother transitioning and improved dialog. Which one is it, the left or the right? (facing the front) I would assume that placing the dedicated woofer on the bottom and the mid/woof on top with be preferable to the reverse. Is the difference in sound obvious enough to hear when listening? And did you have any problems removing the tweeter from the front and swirling it? Any more info on this front would be greatly appreciated.

Mike, Im sorry about the earlier criticism about Denon as I was rather harsh. The receiver really sounded just fine, but personally not that much better than the Sony for me to justify the cost. Also I was demoing the 4802 which has 2 more amps crammed into the same basic case, so it may be somewhat lacking compared to the 4800 according to some of the forums Ive read. Also, the addition of another Pronto type remote which comes with the receiver, was overkill for me since Ive already got one.

TheEAR, in your last post, you said, You should hear the upgrade a great power amp makes to some large bass deprived speakers! Those who complain about the bass lacking often use receivers. Are you saying (between the lines) that the Acurus is not a great amp? I found no noticeable difference in the bass dynamics with the 200W Acurus and the 110W Sony receiver with the RF-7s at normal listening levels in my average size living room. The bass deprived beasts were not bass absent by the way, and I may have given that impression. Its just the presentation of the bass was smooth and surprisingly understated compared to the RF-3s, and KSB 3.1s. A bad analogy would be like eating fried chicken vs. buffalo wings. While they both taste good, I could eat the wings everyday, whereas the fried chicken would get old fast to me. If I could never eat hot buffalo wings again and had to settle for KFC original recipe, I would be bummed. Thats how I feel about the RF-7s, they are really good listening, but dont have the lower end slap of the 8 drivers to my ear. I have a KSW-15 that handles the much lower end music stuff and movie effects very well. I just want that mid-bass speed and punch that seems to break through in spades in my 3.1s and the RF-3s. To me, the RF-7s are not as interesting in the low end for whatever aural reason my ears have come up with. But personal preference is what its all about.

Isnt it great to live in a free country and have the freedom to choose little things like speakers that can make our existence here on earth a bit happier. Its no wonder that other people are jealous of what we have here in America. Its just really sad that evil hatred is sometimes born of this jealousy. We are truly a blessed society, and I thank God every day for having been born in a free country rather than Afghanistan, or even Russia.

Thanks again.

[dougdrake2]

Hi Charly - I feel honor-bound to give this public service announcement, paraphrased from Adam at Mondial. You're playing with fire using the cheater plug -- the 3-prong plug is an integral design of the amp for safety purposes. But I assume you read that part already

Also, most switched outlets at the back of receivers are rated for only 1-3 amps, at best, and the Acurus (if memory is right) "could" pull 6-10 amps under a good load. Inadequate power to the amp can diminish its ability to perform, and you may not get the bang for the bucks you spent.

There are some switched devices you can buy that will turn on anything plugged into them when they, themselves, see power. You could plug one of them into the Sony and draw milliamps, but it would also be plugged into the wall for full power to the devices plugged in to it when the Sony came on. You can also build one pretty cheap ($20-30). I think there is a link to a recipe for that somewhere on this board if you search for it. http://www.remotecentral.com/cgi-bin/mboard/rc-x10/thread.cgi?753

Also, see this thread:

http://216.37.9.58/ubb/Forum4/HTML/002329.html

I hope some of this is useful.

DD2

------------------

Denon AVR-3300

Acurus A200x3

NAD 7155 Receiver

Pioneer PD-F19 CD Changer

Sony CDP-C8ESD CD Changer

Denon 3000 DVD

Toshiba M784 VCR

B&O Beogram 1800 TT

Klipsch Chorus

Klipsch KV-3 Center

Klipsch SS-1 Surround

Klipsch KG4

Klipsch KG3

Klipsch Forte (2pr)

Velodyne CT120 Sub

Sony KP-43T75 RPTV

Monster HTS2000

AudioQuest Copperhead Interconnects

AudioQuest Slate Speaker Wire

Various other interconnects/cables