Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Thinking about getting amp for fronts

Alright heres my problem. I am wondering if i should get an amp to power my fronts. I have m60s vp150 center and 4 qs4s. They are all being powered by a yamaha rx-v1400 receiver. I ran into a little money and have been thinking of getting an amp to power the fronts. I was looking at mostly getting 2 outlaw m200 amps. I am 50/50 with 2 channel audio and watching movies in surround sound. Will there actually be a difference in sound if i go to those amps. I know there will probably be a difference but is the difference worth the money. The room size is 11x13 if that helps at all. I am not a psycho diehard audio fanatic. If anyone is into car audio would the difference be like going from having good speakers being ran off a head unit to them being ran off a good amp that has more power.

hey man, I’m car audio (phoenix gold amps, Boston pro’s, and JL’s....) and home audio...


Honestly I don’t think there would be a huge difference, with what you are planning on doing. I think a possible better idea would be to save up your money, and get a good 7 channel amp, that way you can power everything from separate amp with less distortion..


The amps in the home theater receivers, you cant even compare to in dash amps for cars.. Just about every head unit manufacture puts crap amps in the head units, due to limited space, and power constraints.. with the home theater the manufactures have a larger amount of power at their disposal. So the quality of amps they can put in the receivers is surprisingly good. I would think you would either get no positive results, or possibly negative results, because the outlaw amps are not the cleanest amps, from what I remember…

Save, your cash, and get a nice 5-7 channel amp, if you want to go separates route…

Oach, especially in your rather small listening room, it's highly likely that your 1400 has more than enough power for your setup. Adding even more headroom with separate amps would make no improvement at all; unused headroom is simply wasted. If you have some money that you'd like to spend on AV rather than investing it, why not buy something that'll make a real difference, such as more CDs and DVDs?

In reply to:

---

why not buy something that'll make a real difference, such as more CDs and DVDs?

---

Or room treatments.

I agree that your Yammie has enough power to push your M60's especially considering the smallish room size; however, if you want a cleaner more open and unconfined sound that plagues all but the absolute best receivers, then get an external amp. Since I actually own an M200, I can honestly say that it is an excellent little amp. I use one for my center channel speaker and plan on replacing the B&K Reference 2220 that I use to drive my mains with two more M200's soon. Give the M200's a shot and be sure to let us know how it turns out.

alright everyone thanks a lot i will probably not get an amp. Yeah my dvd collection has been getting bigger fast lately. Im up to about buying 2 movies a week which is a lot for me. You guys are a great help I will just keep the setup the same.

oachalon, The RX-V1400 has plenty of power for your speakers. M60s are very efficient. If you had watt meters, you'd see 0.1 watts (yes 0.1) is pleasantly loud, and 1 watt is very loud. That sounds impossible, but it's true.

You'll get vastly more audible difference by getting a subwoofer, or a multichannel SACD/DVD-A player and some multichannel high-res discs.

As a side benefit a powered subwoofer will further offload your receiver, as most power is spent on bass frequencies.

agree on the sub,i didnt see one on your list do you have one?if not and you have some cash burning a hole in your pocket consider one for your room and one for mine, if there is any money left over....

oh i forgot to mention my sub is an adire audio tempest i built seeing 7.8cubes tuned to 15.4hz. Its getting about 300watts so the bass department is pretty much covered.

Reply:
I would think you would either get no positive results, or possibly negative results, because the outlaw amps are not the cleanest amps, from what I remember…

This would be an excellent opportunity for you to go listen to an Outlaw amp. It may jog your memory
BTW, they are very clean.

Specs for the Outlaw 755.

Model 755 Technical Specifications
Power output: 200 watts RMS x 5 (all channels driven simultaneously into 8 ohms from 20 Hz to 20 kHz with less than 0.05% total harmonic distortion). 300 watts RMS x 5 @ 4 ohms

S/N: 119 dB "A" weighted

Power Bandwidth: 5 Hz - over 100 kHz (+0/-3 dB)

Damping factor: 850 (10 Hz - 400 Hz)

Input sensitivity/Impedance: 1.43 volts for full output/28 k ohms

Crosstalk: Greater than -90 dB from 20 Hz to 20 KHz

Gain: Voltage gain of 28 dB

Slew rate: 50 Volts/microsecond

Remote Trigger voltage: 3 - 32 volts DC

Power requirements: 115 V 50-60 Hz

Power consumption: 1,800 watts (maximum)

Dimensions (W x H x D): 17.2 x 7.75 with feet x 18 (inches)

Weight: 78 (lbs)

Not too bad.... The Krell amps are very similar and cost 5X as much

oachalon, since you have a powered sub, assuming your RX-V1400 is properly configured (LFE=SWFR, crossover=80hz, all speakers=small), your receiver is probably using only about 1 watt/channel to achieve extremely loud levels.

Reason is most of amp power goes to bass frequencies, and you've already off loaded that. Since you're probably only using 1/80th the capability of your amp, increasing your headroom from 80x to 200x is unlikely to make an audible difference.

I'd suggest you get an SACD/DVD-A player and some discrete surround discs. You will really enjoy those. You already have the surround receiver and speakers.

Whether changing amps makes an audible difference is debatable. Whether the multichannel SACD version of Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon is audibly different (most would say better) than the stereo version is not debatable. Anyone with ears can hear the difference.

Go to http://store.acousticsounds.com/, query on SACD and DVD-A, and see if your favorite artists have any discs out.

My receiver is setup correctly. I have been looking into SACD and dvd audio. My magnavox 5 disc cd player is about 10 years old and it still works good but it is getting close to upgrading time. I just dont know if sacd is really going to catch on. There are some good titles that i like on sacd and dvd-a but im not sure enough to buy a new player.

I agree, not too bad at all. An ext. amp like that would totally let the warm midrange shine through, and it would tame those harsh highs most common with Yammies (RXV-2095, RX-V3000, RX-V740 for example). It would be cool if Outlaw made two and 3ch amps too.

I would love to see Outlaw put out a two or three channel amp.

the newer yamahas seem to be pretty neutral in sound. I completely forgot that my rp82 plays dvd audio. Maybe ill buy a dvd audio disc and see how everything sounds.

You never really realize how harsh on the top end the Yamaha amps are until you add an ext. amp. Same thing with Denon; you never realize how bright their amps are until you add an ext. amp; still, Yamaha makes an excellent product, and your 1400 is more than enough to "power" the M60's, but if you want refinement, get an ext. amp.

Good luck.

"Maybe ill buy a dvd audio disc and see how everything sounds."

Try Eagles - Hotel California (DVD-A), Fleetwood Mac - Rumours (DVD-A), Elton John - Goodbye Yellow Brick Road (DVD-A), Mike Oldfield - Tubular Bells (DVD-A) All are well engineered surround mixes.

There are some poorly engineered surround mixes out there. Not every surround album sounds good (from a technical, not artistic standpoint).

Be very careful as some are available in CD, SACD and DVD-A versions. Don't accidentally get the wrong version.

And, just so you don't make the same mistake I did...

If you don't have a 6-RCA cable running from player to receiver then you are probably not hearing DVD-A, but rather the DVD-V compatibility tracks which are included on most DVD-A's. Same goes for SACD (6 RCA) but usually no DVD-V fallback.

In reply to:

---

if you want a cleaner more open and unconfined sound that plagues all but the absolute best receivers

---

Ummm... methinks thou hath read too much marketing material. I have never found my Onkyo to be lacking or underpowered, regardless of how loud I play music or movies. Granted, my M22s are an easy load, but still. Generalizations like that don't help anyone.

I've used many receivers for Home Theater - a Harman Kardon AVR 65, an Onkyo TS DX797 THX for 7.1 channel HT and DVD Audio, a Sony STRDB1070 for 5.1. I've also used the big Onkyo and Sony as processors with outboard amplification. I heard a big difference. The issue is not whether an Onkyo 797 or Sony STRDB 1070 will push Axioms to high SPLs, the issue is how good does it sound. My Onkyo 797 sounded better with outboard amplification than it did using its internal amplifiers. I used an Onkyo M-504 2 channel for the front L/R speakers and an Anthem PVA-5 for the rest. I don't know whether or not the outboard amps would play louder than the internal amps, but they sure sounded much better. I used 3 Onkyo M282 2 channel amps with the Sony, and that set-up certainly sounded much better than the Sony's internal amps.

I have a really nice 2 channel system in my garage - a Kenwood KA9100 with twin power meters, and a pair of Dahlquist DQM905s. I was listening to some nice jazz at pretty high levels and noticed that the Kenwood's power meters rarely bumped past 3 watts and most of the time the amp was putting out under 1 watt!

Now, for HT (and symphonic pieces) you need head room - amps which have the power reserves to handle sudden transients to high levels, booms, bangs, roars ... or the cannons from the 1812 Symphony ... that means you need more than 3 watts per channel. So, if most of the material we listen to does not require more than (let's go crazy) 5 watts per channel, what can be the difference between the internal amps in our receivers and dedicated outboard high power amps? More ... the Anthem PVA-5 puts out 120 watts per channel - pretty much the same as the rating for the internal amps in the Onkyo 797. So, if it's not the number of watts, what's the difference between the internal amps and dedicated outboard amps?

There's a saying - if the first watt isn't any good who cares how many more like it are lined up behind it? If you believe there is no difference between amps of similar output, then don't bother getting outboard dedicated amplification.

I tested the proposition using my ears - and upgraded my HT systems by using the receivers as processors with outboard amps. I've since sold my receivers and picked up dedicated processors - an Integra DTC 9.4 for the 7.2 system, and a fabulous Sony TA E9000ES for my 5.2 system. (I've since passed the Onkyo M282s along, and replaced them with 3 Yamaha M80s). Do I hear a difference? You betcha! Do I play my movies or music any louder? I do not! Do these systems sound better than with internal amplification? Absolutely they do! Do I know exactly why? No.

2x6spds, you nailed it man!

I agree with 2x6 and Minirock.
I used to run receivers like Rotels flagship RSX1065 receiver and the Pioneer 53TX. Both handled HT and music great. But when I went with external amps through the preouts of the above receivers using Bryston 4B,3B and 2B amps and my current Musical Fidelity A300, my music and HT sounded much better. Without telling my fiancee that I switched out the receiver and put in power amps she noticed a big difference in dynamics and extra information. Many people that have come and demo my system also have mentioned the increase of sound quality at the same level of output. Today I have pulled out the receiver altogether and run the power amps from the sound card of my HTPC which does 7.1 output to my power amp and to the projector.

In reply to:

---

booms, bangs, roars ... or the cannons from the 1812 Symphony

---

Keep in mind that the aspect of audio that requires the most power -- bass -- is frequently offloaded to powered subwoofers.

I agree that many A/V receivers wouldn't be able to properly drive a pair speakers to cleanly reproduce the cannon fire found in the 1812 overture without the ability to offload much of the duty to the outboard amp in the subwoofer.

I've actually used the Rotel RSX 1065 before. Great piece by itself and an excellent preamp when paired with good amps. "Increase in sound quality at the same level of output," is the perfect way to describe the advantage of using an external amp. Smooth/ warmer midrange, crystal highs, better low end if you are running your speakers full range, and less chance of otic fatigue which plagues entry level to moderate priced (all but the best) receivers.

I hesitate to ask, but what is "otic fatigue?"

ot is a Greek word root meaning ear; otic is the term that means pertaining to the ear. Otic fatigue can relate to both the auris sinistra and auris dextra (both ears). I guess you could also call it audio fatigue.

Luis, I'm sure that your comments are well-intentioned, but those factors that you describe simply don't exist. Competently designed amps operated within their power limits are transparent. There would have to be major measurable differences in frequency response or distortion for such audible differences to exist. Such measurable differences don't exist and any audible differences claimed disappear when the listener is forced to trust only his ears in a blind listening test.

I'm thinking you guys are going to have to agree to disagree on this subject.

This sounds like another one of those subjects nobody should post about without a beer in hand.

My own experience is that having a good power amp (high quality, heavy, 150+ WPC) does make a difference but (a) I have no idea why that is, and (b) amps in high end receivers seem to have gotten a lot better in the last 5-ish years so maybe that isn't true any more.

My personal theory is that being able to watch the power meters adds another sensory input and makes the sound SEEM better

JohnK, I'm sure your comments are well intentioned, and I am sure you believe your opinions to be true, but they're still your opinions.

I agree with what you said about competently designed amps; however, in entry level to mid priced receivers they are few and far between. Also, there wouldn't have to be "major" differences in frequency response for audible differnces to exist. I'm not sure what receiver you use, but I highly recommend reading up on amps further (also check out Alan's article on amplification) and actually trying an external amp John if you are intersted to find out how mediocre most receivers internal amps are in producing clean clear sound. Good luck bud!

If you want to build up a DVD collection try pawn shops, I bought 40 movies in the last month or so for 4$ each. Thats is the same as renting a movie!

I sincerely agree with the fact that using a separate amplifier like B&K makes the system sound totally different. To test the theory I took some of my own sample CD’s and DVD’s to the local Tweeter store that sells B&K. I asked them to play the same song on a Yamaha, Denon, Sony followed by a B&K separate set up; the difference in sound for music is night and day, even though the same speakers were being used. I am not aware of how to technically evaluate a amplifier and compare it to a cheaper one but in a layman’s term there is a significant difference in the quality of sound.

I have to be honest that I didn’t notice a huge difference in HT but am sure the difference exists as I didn’t test the DVD’s for a long period of time.

Did you calibrate the amps so they were ouputting the same decibel level? A small volume difference might account for this.

I read Alan's article. I almost never listen to anything with a volume anywhere near 90 db. From the way I read that article, unless you're listening to pretty loud stuff, you shouldn't need large amounts of power.

Nice tip biggsly, maybe I'll grab an economically priced handgun while I'm there, too.

We have a beer thread, a politics thread - how about an "arguing about the same crap over and over thread"?

I added a 2 channel outboard amp and feel better about playing high volumes, but I have my M60s set to large and my QS8s about 24' apart in a pretty large space. For the original poster - assuming he's running his speakers "small" - doesn't an outboard amp seem like a terrible waste of money? I heard no complaint from the original poster regarding the quality of sound from his current system. Why change anything?

The same reason we all sink money into audio...it is a hobby.

The original poster also said he cam into some money, and if he see's value in it.....

Eh, good point. I'll stop.

>>We have a beer thread, a politics thread - how about an "arguing about the same crap over and over thread"?

It would get too messy. We need four threads :

1. Speaker break-in,
2. Outboard power amps with normal volumes and rooms
3. Different brands of high-end receivers have different sounds,
4. People who have never heard Axiom speakers but fervently believe they are crap.

Threads 2 and 3 could possibly be combined.

5) Cables

In reply to:

---

play the same song on a Yamaha, Denon, Sony followed by a B&K separate set up; the difference in sound for music is night and day, even though the same speakers were being used

---

Were they all in "direct stereo" mode? Were the speaker levels calibrated the same on each amp? Was the listening level the same?

It is actually quite painstaking to do a fair A/B test between amplifiers or speakers. For amps, you must ensure ALL DSP is disabled, and the listening level is the same.

Even simple DSP functions like digital time arrival could be calibrated differently between the amps, altering the sound. On amps with built-in EQ that can make a huge difference. Thus the easiest way is just disable it.

Even then there are differences in how MUCH is disabled in various amps "direct" or "pure direct" mode.

Imagine comparing a Yamaha receiver with EQ (which is well hidden in the menu system) to a non-EQ amp and attributing the sound difference to the amp brand when in reality it's the configuration.

The same with volume. It's well proven that people interpret the louder level as "better", even for small differences.

Getting all these things right is sufficiently laborious that I'll bet many people don't do it. And that's just for stereo. For comparing different amps in a 5.1 config, that's even more complex.

This thread really took off. Ive thought about it more and more and i am going to stick with what i have.

I agree Brit. I love my Yammie receiver, and all the previous Yammie, Denon, Pioneer, and HK receivers I have owned/used, but adding a quality amp from B&K, Rotel, Krell, Bryston, Parasound, and even Outlaw can make all the difference between weak midrange and harsh highs (that plagues all entry level to moderate priced receivers) to a smooth warm midrange and crystal clear highs that can only be had with high quality amps.

oachalon, it is time to cover your ears and chant, "I'm not listening, I can't hear you,..."

"but adding a quality amp from B&K, Rotel, Krell, Bryston, Parasound, and even Outlaw can make all the difference between weak midrange and harsh highs (that plagues all entry level to moderate priced receivers) to a smooth warm midrange and crystal clear highs that can only be had with high quality amps."

MiniRock
If you would make the statement "IN MY OPINION" after or before saying things like that, it would be appreciated, and probably make for fewer unnecessary arguments.
After all, it is only an opinion. And everyone has one.

Oach, take it from someone who has actually done what you have suggested.

I have a NAD T743 Receiver (50 watts). I bought two Outlaw Monoblocks for the fronts. Sound improvement (or difference) was quite easy to notice especially for movies. More dynamic and more full. My girlfriend noticed immediately and she had no idea what I was doing (so much for blind tests!). I know the science and math on decibels and watts and I don't really care. It sounded better at the same volume and this should be your reason for getting them. Do not get these because you want louder because the science is correct, it will not make your system that much louder. Athough, I don't know the specs on your Yamaha - just guessing.

The monoblocks are an inexpensive, modular solution. I believe they are comparable to products that cost a few hundred more.

That said, I just bought a stereo tube amp and I'm thinking of selling the monoblocks for extra cash for a new player. This is not a sales pitch. I'm actually thinking of getting one for the center channel also.

And if the presumptuous people have anything to say about that I have one message: get over it. Its a hobby and I can easily afford it.