Just wondering if anyone had any ideas on this.
The marantz is supposed to handle a 6 ohm load. If i biamp my m-60's will it be able to handle the load?
And in turn if i do buy a seperate power amp will it work in all the normal modes (eg dts, neo, dd, ect?)
does anyone know anything about this power amp as well... this was kinda what i was looking at. Its old but i'll bet money it sounds great http://www.targethifi.com/images/classedr8.jpg
In order to bi-amp, you need 2 amps. I don't know if the Marantz is set up like the Denons where you can set the 6th and 7th channel amps to do biamping of the fronts, but if it's not, you're not biamping. And you probably will damage the receiver. It's also debatable whether biamping will add anything without using an external crossover.
A separate amp will work with all the modes.
oh sorry not allowed to send links? I couldn't find any information about this amp i thought a picture might help, i've heard some of the new classe amps and was blown away. Sorry to offend, i'm new! in the future i'll be more creative
Dude, it is fine to have links in your post, I just fixed it so it was clickable...
No, no, links are fine.
Certain people (names shall not be named to protect...well, me, since I can't remember who does it) like to fix links for new posters (or old and lazy posters) so that they are clickable. That's all that happened...
ha beat ya to it...
Durn quick typing succinct link fixer person!
kcarlie
yes i was thinking about adding a seperate amp.
The b zone of the marantz will only support a 12-16 ohm load when A and B zones are being driven.
My question is if the marantz will be able to handle the load of the M60's when the shorting bar is removed at the binding posts.
You can post links if you like. As Ken says it is doubtful that you would hear any difference at all with passive biamping. IMO it is a waste of hard earned money.
You both type to fast for me, I beat out x2.
AFAIK, the impedence of the speaker doesn't change when you biamp; especially since the internal crossover is not being bypassed. Also, your Marantz can probably handle a 4 ohm load (should you with to throw M80s at it); it's a well made receiver, probably not marked for 4 ohms due to regulatory hurdles.
What was that Cheap Trick song Ken used to love back in the good ole days?
"The link police
They live inside of my head
The link police
They come to me in my bed
The link police
They're coming to arrest me
Oh no "
You are correct Ken, it does not change the impedence. There is no real benifit in doing this.
wow that burst my bubble. GD it all! It really wouldn't make a difference eh? Or would i have to bypass the internal crossover? I guess if i want more power then i'll have to buy BIG.
Well, if you want more power, you'd just mono-amp (to coin a phrase) with a big power amp. Such a Halo, Outlaw Audio, Rotel, Odyssy Stratos, or other, to name a few. Arr, the cliches be flyin'!
Biamping doesn't add power at all. It just (theoretically) lets you match amplifiers with individual drivers... if you have an external crossover between the amps.
How big is your room man, those 60's will rock your world if you give them the juice..
you'll laugh but i'm in an apt, been saving for a house and i want my toys and all the headroom i can get before i commit to the house thing. i figure the posts are there for a reason.
'Cause high end audio snobs won't buy them if they aren't there.
Didn't mean to "burst your bubble" but to spend money on something that will not improve the sound is, well, a waste. I also see no good reason to want to bypass the Axiom crossovers. Axiom has done a ton of research to in order to have the right crossovers in the speakers they build.
"Real" bi-amping (where you disable the speaker crossover and add an electronic crossover before the amplifiers) really does make a difference, but mostly by letting you run the woofer amp closer to clipping without hearing the distortion in your midrange and tweeters.
"Faux" bi-amping (where you run exactly the same signal into both amps) doesn't seem to accomplish much more than bi-wiring, and most don't feel bi-wiring accomplishes any more than going up to the next size of speaker wire.
As soon as you add a powered subwoofer with separate amplifier, you gain 99% of the benefit of "real" bi-amping anyways. Bi-amping was big back when woofers carried ALL the bass, and sub-woofers were a dream.
from what i read i thought that there would be alot better stereo seperation for older recordings. I was unsure of how this would work in the digital world. I am definatly not an audio snob, just a blue collared guy with a drinking problem that enjoys audio... especially when drinking.
There are a lot of interesting myths in audio... and I didn't mean to call you a snob. I was referring more to the people who write the articles and use words like "veil." If the article has the phrase "it was like a veil had been lifted..." it usually activates my bs filter.
Ahh, THAT kind of bi-amping. Using a separate amplifier (with a separate power supply) for left and right channels...
Again, that used to make a difference but nowadays my understanding is that most medium and high-end AV receivers run separate power supplies for different groups of channels to accomplish the same effect.
Bottom line is that it is still hard to beat getting all your components up to roughly the same level in a straightforward system before you spend $$ on anything non-standard. Exactly how and where you spend your money will depend on what you listen to and what your room is like, but if you're going to do anything out of the ordinary then IMO you should spend time and $$ improving your room acoustics first. It's a tossup between speakers and room re: which gives the most benefit per hour or dollar spent -- electronics are not going to have anything like the same effect.
well thanks guys. I am listening.
I definatly listened about the whole home depot cable thing, i am by no means an expert. But there wasn't any difference in the $400 cables the local dealer was trying to sell me and btw i work for a living.
just asking because i was thinking about it and didn't know much about it. thanks for the input. What significant improvement could i make for about $1500 cnd? any suggestions?
How big is your room, how "spread out" is your system (eg. how many feet from the main speakers to the listening position) and what do you listen to the most ?
More to the point, what would you like "more of" ? You have a pretty nice, well balanced system there already.
Dan my HT/Recroom is pushing 900Sq Ft with 9ft ceilings and my 60's go plenty loud with my Denon 2805 AVR. I was in high school back in the 80's metal days and also like it loud, and I am totally happy with no plans to upgrade soon. I know Wid thinks I need m80's but looking at the graph, other than a slightly better bass response, the 60 graph looks flatter.
hey don't get me wrong its good... very good. But if it can be better i'm there. i'm getting the notion that i should settle down though....
In reply to:
I know Wid thinks I need m80's but looking at the graph, other than a slightly better bass response, the 60 graph looks flatter.
That's why Ian owns the M80s
In reply to:
I was in high school back in the 80's
Darn kids
have you calibrated your speakers using pink noise tests from the receiver or other DVD and an SPL meter?
You only have 10years on me I think man.
Besides, I used to hang with all the kids that graduated in the 70's. That is why I started drinking beer in 9th grade.
i have a spl meter and have done calibration according to what i have read ect. I am soon to aquire the avia disk and revamp.
Dan, welcome. Your system looks pretty good and there shouldn't be anything that really needs to be replaced.
On the stereo separation point you mentioned, that's determined by the original recording technique and the mixing used in transferring it to CD. Any competently designed receiver, even the least expensive, has far more than enough interchannel separation; it's rarely even tested for anymore.
As far as a suggestion for something that would really make a difference for $1,500 CDN, my thought would be 50-100 CDs or DVDs.
sounds good to me.
I remember when i upgraded from an hk avr-125 to the sr-6300 and i was like whoa.
What about a better cd transport? Can that make a difference or is the bit rate pretty much standard on all players? Right now i have a 5 disc panasonic dvd F-65 player, seems to work good, and ideas on that?
In reply to:
I remember when i upgraded from an hk avr-125 to the sr-6300 and i was like whoa
I'm a Marantz owner too, and I had a similar experience when I upgraded from my Sony.
My SR5200 and the Axioms are a pretty sweet combination. I've often thought about upgrading to the M60s, but you're already there. I'd be hesitant about bi-amping like you described. First of all the benefits (if there are any at all to be had) seem suspect at best. Second, you might ruin a perfectly good receiver. Maybe the answer is a separate amp. The Rotel 1075 has been calling my name for quite a while now...
Dan, same thing with the player. Your F-65 is designed to read both DVDs and CDs flawlessly and if its in good condition there's no better sound available. If you'd like some additional feature, e.g. a 400 disc megachanger, that would be another matter.
In reply to:
"Real" bi-amping (where you disable the speaker crossover and add an electronic crossover before the amplifiers) really does make a difference, but mostly by letting you run the woofer amp closer to clipping without hearing the distortion in your midrange and tweeters.
"Faux" bi-amping (where you run exactly the same signal into both amps) doesn't seem to accomplish much more than bi-wiring, and most don't feel bi-wiring accomplishes any more than going up to the next size of speaker wire.
As soon as you add a powered subwoofer with separate amplifier, you gain 99% of the benefit of "real" bi-amping anyways. Bi-amping was big back when woofers carried ALL the bass, and sub-woofers were a dream.
This is a very informative post John, very well explained in a few lines.
I have my M60s bi-wired (not bi-amped). I noticed an improvement in my system, but I am not sure if this came from bi-wiring or from switching to a different, better speaker cable.
Seems like a number of people have noticed an improvement when switching to "better speaker wiring" (be it bi-wiring or heavier wiring), seemingly too many for it to be placebo effect.
Just curious, what was your "before" wiring and how long were the cables ?
>>Dan, same thing with the player. Your F-65 is designed to read both DVDs and CDs flawlessly and if its in good condition there's no better sound available.
Dan, we must really suck as friends. You have money to upgrade and we're telling you not to spend it
Good information to know guys, i appreciate all your input.
Just suffering from upgraditis. My summer car is away for the winter, i need SOMETHING to upgrade lol.
In reply to:
i need SOMETHING to upgrade lol
well if would help you could upgrade my system ep500 boston cherry please!!! lol
Previously, I had Monster "Original" speaker cable. Now I have
SignalCable bi-wire. The length is the same: 10ft.
Yum. Nice cables.
If I remember correctly, Monster speaker cable is only 16 gauge, so you effectively went from 16ga to 10ga with the new cables. I have always had my doubts about that 16ga Monster wire, even for short runs.
Some people would strongly argue that speaker cables make no difference for short runs. I would say that it did in my case, however there was a huge difference between the two cables I had in terms of build quality, you could easily tell. I guess when it comes to comparable thickness and quality, the differences in sound would probably be not so noticable.
my mains are wired with accoustic research cables (ms320's)
the centre and surround are wired with el cheapo 16 guage "pyramid" brand copper wiring.
I did notice a difference when i wired the front speakers, pretty minor though.
My fronts are 9 feet apart and the cables are 15 feet each. I didn't know how much i was going to have to play with the placement of the speaker when i purchased the cable. I spent half decent money on the fronts because most of my music listening is done on 2 channel.
http://www.plasma.com/acousticresearch/largeimages/ms320.jpg
You've got an excellent receiver there. I read a ton of reviews before I got my current Marantz dvd player. I found that many reviewers were pleased to the point of surprise at how well the Marantz equipment improved the sound of CDs and DVD audio; even the low end models. My suggestion would be to check out the accessories4less.com web site. Unless I'm mistaken, they sell a lot of "returned" or refurbished Marantz equipment, all with a 1 yr factory warrantee, and an available 3 yr warrantee for a little extra. Some of the items are as much as 50% or 60% off list price. Obviously, the newer stuff is less off, but still a bargain. I got my receiver from the dealer, but my DVD player from accessories4less.com. I love the Marantz sound. I can hardly wait to get some Axiom speakers to go with it all.....