Re: John, what do you mean by not using it's......
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,424
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,424 |
True but like I posted before, a lot of peeps like 2 channel as 2 channel. Meaning no sub. I know that as far as I go, I only use my sub about 50% of the time when I sit down and listen to tunes.
|
|
|
Re: John, what do you mean by not using it's......
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,444 Likes: 16
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,444 Likes: 16 |
Seems to me that he is already running a good receiver - a NAD at 80 watts per channel. I would think that’s plenty of power to drive his speakers. If he were running a $100 POS amp, then I’d be taking your side as well, because when I upgraded my AVR, I experienced a night and day difference. But, again, that was going from a POS to a decent AVR.
I noticed a big difference in sound with the sub, and I use it strictly for music. Just for reference, I bought a radio shack digital sound meter and played with it the other day. Was just a bit hung over, so I didn’t get too carried away. At +10 db on the H/K (and it’s range is +/-80 db), 15’ away from the M80’s, the meter was reading 104 – 107 db’s playing Audioslave. If I turn off the sub, the db’s dropped to 102 – 105. The H/K is rated at 100 watts per channel, just slightly more than his NAD.
|
|
|
Re: John, what do you mean by not using it's......
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,424
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,424 |
In reply to:
playing Audioslave
I love cranking Like A Stone. I'm going to blow something up playing that song! lol You picked one song that I always make sure the sub is on!
|
|
|
Re: John, what do you mean by not using it's......
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044 |
I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
|
|
|
Re: John, what do you mean by not using it's..........
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654 |
Todd what was meant is that your NAD probably has more power capacity than you can use and that there's no need to "increase power".
-----------------------------------
Enjoy the music, not the equipment.
|
|
|
Thanks John for clarifying.........
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 86
old hand
|
OP
old hand
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 86 |
Thanks everyone for their responses. I just wanted to make sure I was getting the most out of my 60's. I've heard all of the bi-amping and bi-wiring and other stuff. Or is that another thread.........
|
|
|
Amps
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,424
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,424 |
If your ready to invest in stand alone cross-overs, bi-amping does wonders. Bi-wiring on the other hand is a debate. Some think it does wonders, others don't. I bi-wire my fronts only because I can.
I do agree with JohnK however with respect to your current amp. NAD's stuff puts out plenty of power for most applications. If you went with a big-ass amp you would notice a change in overall DB and depending on what kind of amp you went with, the amp itself may bring a few of it's own characteristics to the table.
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,945
Posts442,484
Members15,617
|
Most Online2,082 Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
0 members (),
700
guests, and
3
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|