Audio Flynn Posted October 4, 2001 Share Posted October 4, 2001 Doug, Good point! I am in the planning stage of dedicating one circuit to my audio and one circuit to my video. Pulling wire a long way through inaccessable spots. What a pain; but worth it I am sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 5, 2001 Share Posted October 5, 2001 Excuse me if I have to be a bit like TVodquote here... "Are you saying (between the lines) that the Acurus is not a great amp?" NO Charly Acurus and Aragon amps are very high quality amps.Simply if you compare them to a large Brystons the Brystons have more bass punch(even more then some Krell amps!).Many reviewers and and owners noticed this.And I it was obvious to me,I dont just say this to be better then this or that audiophile. Each person favors this or that aspect more,I like when a power amp has this slam.When bass is tight and plenty.And I dont need any tone controls to get the BIG bass(lol no subs are discounted here). TheEAR(s) Now theears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted October 8, 2001 Share Posted October 8, 2001 Hmmmm. Read through most of this thread. Not wholey convinced that a more powerful amp necessarily puts out more bass than one rated at a lower power. My own experience is that a 90 Watt Accuphase "blew the doors" off a 200 Watt Rotel in the bass department but that was with Heresy 2's and their bass is a sod to drive properly IMHO. Then again my 45 Watt tubes are, if anything more bassy (is that a word?) than the Accuphase but not as fast. As for a speaker with 8 inch woofers (the RF3) having more impact than 10 inch woofers - why not? Working on the basis that a smaller woofer is faster than a bigger woofer that speed could easily translate into more impact, expecially when the speaker is not a sealed unit, or not sufficiently far enough into the room. I have always been a fan of the RF3, a much under-rated speaker IMHO (again - so keen to qualify). Several friends have them and they certainly rock. I actually prefer their sound over the KLF 30's but I wont tell you that as it might upset some people..... All a matter of personal taste afterall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 10, 2001 Share Posted October 10, 2001 "Read through most of this thread. Not wholey convinced that a more powerful amp necessarily puts out more bass than one rated at a lower power. My own experience is that a 90 Watt Accuphase "blew the doors" off a 200 Watt Rotel in the bass department but that was with Heresy 2's and their bass is a sod to drive properly IMHO." I never poined the power rating to be the cause,I said many times a 100W RMS rated amp is plenty for the RF-7's.And again I say its the amp itself. Accuphase amps have better bass then Rotel amps,Rotel is a well rounded inexpensive amp.Its far from the Bryston like bass.Try a Bryston 4B VS any Rotel,the Bryston will take care of the Rotel in no time.The bass quality you get from a Bryston surpases much more powerful amps and much more expensive amps.Its not just WATTS here. Same for Krell amps,even a KAS50(rated at 50W RMS into 8 ohms)will "blow the doors" off any Rotel(even the 350W PC jobs)in the bass departament. That is my point since the start,this is why I dont recomend using reciever amps if budget permits. TheEAR(s) Now theears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted October 10, 2001 Share Posted October 10, 2001 Apologies Ear, Misunderstood what you were implying. Remembered the line "I still maintain that a great power amp will do the trick and solve the RF-7 shortcomings you heard" and concentrated on that. THe Rotel I was refering to was a 1080 2*200 wpc power amp which bettered the performance I was getting from an old Yamaha (595?) receiver, but, was so substantially less than the Accuphase that I paid for that within a couple of months of getting the Rotel. Fully agree that 100 wpc should be enough for any Klipsch speaker - if only all watts were created equal!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuel Delaflor Posted October 10, 2001 Share Posted October 10, 2001 quote: Originally posted by TheEAR: That is my point since the start,this is why I dont recomend using reciever amps if budget permits. TheEAR(s) Now theears I know very well the power of Bryston, still, they are expensive. Which would be your choice for a good amp (big power is not an issue, a good 30watts will make my Heresy sound great) at bargain prices? Also, I asked you in another thread, considering my Heresy's which sub would you say will match them best? I currently run them with a ksw12, sounds good, but I want to have deeper bass... In yet another thread you say that the SVS ultras are a real bargain, but I think they offer more than I need?? or if I buy a couple of those and a bigger amp for my Heresy's I will be fine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BobG Posted October 10, 2001 Share Posted October 10, 2001 The Krell amp used by TheEAR is an awesome piece with truly incredible bass. You have to hear it to understand. Years ago, I was having some trouble with an installation using four Krell 100 watt monoblocks. I took the amp suspected of being faulty to my shop and connected it to a really terrible speaker (that I was willing to sacrifice during the test if needed). That cheapie never sounded better. Killer bass, tight control. Turned out that the output connection on the amp was wired out of phase causing oscillation in the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 10, 2001 Share Posted October 10, 2001 Manuel,one SVS Ultra should be plenty.If you feel you need more output you can always add a second sub.The Ultra is clean,goes deep and will never tire you with distortion.Even the Cylinder series from SVS(amplified)could be THE CURE.E-mail TV and he should guide you to the ideal(or closest to)match. Maxg yes I did say... "I still maintain that a great power amp will do the trick and solve the RF-7 shortcomings you heard" By great power amp I did not say OUTPUT POWER OF THE SUN,I meant GOOD QUALITY AMP.Great does not have to have power in kilowatts,and kilowatts dont guarantee greatness. You can use a Musical Fidelity for example,great power amp and does not weigh a tonn and above all will not cost an arm and a leg. BobG thanks for the post,its easy for some to claim or even hint Krell is overrated.The fact is Krell amps will drive almost any load with ease,and have an immense power supply.And the output section is massive. All this translates into power delivery like few other amps can. Next after the KAS(drool drool) MRA(price gives me stomach pains),Krell should redefine quality power SS amps again and built the Krell MRSP(Master Reference Sun Power) This amp would generate as much power as the sun! The MRSP would have a MSRP(or vice versa)of $1000000000 US per amp(monoblocks remember)and Mr TV from SVS would name it the worst value in the known universe. Deang I like living in my room(cave)under the Pont Chanplain bridge!LOL Joking aside POWER IS GOOD TheEAR(s) Now theears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charly Tune A Posted October 18, 2001 Author Share Posted October 18, 2001 Thanks to everyone for all their inputs. I have decided that separates are not for this working stiff yet. The cheater plug was a bad idea that solved several problems. (Thanks Doug) But the viable alternatives needed to correctly solve these problems are somewhat more expensive with NO guarantee of success. (line conditioners, multiple cable ground isolators, etc.) I simply dont feel the benefit gained would be worth my effort. I guess Ive learned that hobbying with stereo components is expensive and somewhat frustrating for me. Ive discovered that Im just a plug in and play type of guy. But what it really boils down to is I just couldnt hear any great improvement between the Acurus and my Sony. At least not enough to warrant the effort or money needed to eliminate the noise from being induced into the amp. A mans got to know his limitations, so I think I have found mine. The Acurus went back to the store. Ive bought 3 RC-7s for my stereo and front theater soundstage. Ive only got 1 so far, the other 2 are back ordered. I hooked it up as the center last night, and saw an immediate improvement in just the TV sound, like night and day. (And I thought the KSF-C5 was pretty good to begin with.) Ill let you know how the whole setup sounds once I get the other 2. I can hardly wait. Thanks again everyone and happy listening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougdrake2 Posted October 18, 2001 Share Posted October 18, 2001 CT-Sorry to hear of your frustration. I empathize with you. I've still got skinned knees from crawling all around my equipment and rack trying different connections. But in my case, it was worth it because I could hear a definite difference betwixt the Denon 3300 and the Acurus, especially in the bass and mid regions. And I'm not one who easily hears these differences (I just returned 20 feet of AudioQuest Slate speaker wire - regulary priced at about $7/foot - for that very reason). I know it may be water over the dam, but did you really give the ol' Acurus a workout against the Sony, using especially strong bass tracks? But, as you say, if it sounds great to you then that's all that matters DD2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 27, 2001 Share Posted October 27, 2001 Well well my RF-7's will be in next week! I will then know if the bass is weak,I have the RF-5's and many other quality speakers to compare to. I will audition the RF-7 with amps ranging from a 50W RMS per channel integrated Celeste to the huge Krell FPB600.Then I will have a very clear picture. I doubt very much the RF-7 is bass deprived,if my large amps fail then I will turn to red and put some gas in my chainsaw. LOL TheEAR(s) Now theears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEAR Posted October 30, 2001 Share Posted October 30, 2001 Have them ! http://216.37.9.58/ubb/Forum4/HTML/002589.html Now I can answer the question clearly. The RF-7 are superior to the RF-5 and the RF-5 are superior to the RF-3's. Not even open for debate,its clear. TheEAR(s) Now theears Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buylow Posted October 30, 2001 Share Posted October 30, 2001 Well then. Problem solved. ------------------ Mains: RF-3 Center: RC-3 Rears: RS-3 Sub: KSW-12 A/V Receiver: Yamaha HTR-5250 DVD Player: Yamaha DV-6280 CD Player: Yamaha CDC-506 VCR: Toshiba TV: Toshiba 55" Projection 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.