Bi-amping with a Marantz Cinema 60

[Chrispy]

I appreciate that, but I'm trying to take in so much at once. I heard the answers but didn't understand why. I just have to keep digging until it makes sense in my head.

Sometimes you just need to do some learning/research so you can understand the responses....but ask away on what's not clear.

 

[tmtomh]

I appreciate that, but I'm trying to take in so much at once. I heard the answers but didn't understand why. I just have to keep digging until it makes sense in my head.

Maybe this might help you make sense of the responses so far.

Bi-amping a speaker means using two amps to drive that speaker - this you already know.

There are two things to consider with bi-amping:

1. the power delivered to the speakers, and
2. what's happening with the speaker's crossover - the electronic components inside the speaker that direct only lower frequency sounds to the woofer and only higher frequency sounds to the tweeter.

If you bi-amp a speaker, then #1 will increase: you will be delivering more power to the speaker because you're delivering the combined power of both amps to it.

However, #2 will not be changed: the same set of electronic components - the crossover - will still be doing the job of filtering the sound so that the woofer gets only the lower frequencies of what the amp is feeding the speaker, and the tweeter gets only the higher frequencies.

I am simplifying things a bit, but the point here is that the crossover has an impact on the sound of the speaker. At the most basic level, the crossover has a positive impact because it prevents the woofer from trying to reproduce frequencies higher than it can properly reproduce, and it prevents the tweeter from trying to reproduce frequencies lower than it can properly reproduce (and from destroying itself in the process). But beyond that basic, beneficial role, the crossover also has a somewhat negative impact, because the filtering it does to limit the frequencies that get sent to each speaker driver also has other impacts on the sound of the speaker.

This is just one of the unavoidable tradeoffs that one has to deal with in a conventional, passive speaker. (It's called a passive speaker because the crossover is passive - the crossover comes after the amplification in the signal chain and just filters the full-range amplified signal coming in to the speaker).

So... when you bi-amp a speaker, you are not changing the speaker's fundamental sonic profile, and you are not overcoming the problems created by the crossover inside the speaker. All you're doing is pumping more power into the speaker.

And if your speakers are getting enough power from a single amp, then there is literally no need for - and no benefit from - giving them more power with two amps.

This is why folks are telling you that "vertically bi-amping" some of your speakers is not going to do anything.

Now, there is something called active bi-amping, which @Chrispy has mentioned in a comment earlier in this thread. With active bi-amping, you disable or remove the speaker's internal crossover, so that when you hook up two amps to the speaker, one amp's output goes directly to the woofer and the other one goes directly to the tweeter. But when you do this, you need what's called an active crossover: you need to replace the speaker's original crossover with a crossover that comes before the amplifiers in the signal chain, so that the amp feeding the woofer is only outputting lower frequencies and the amp feeding the tweeter is only outputting higher frequencies. If you just feed each amp's full-range output directly into each driver in the speaker, then the sound will be awful at best - and at worst you'll damage or destroy the tweeter and maybe also the woofer. An active crossover can be beneficial because doing that frequency filtering before the amps instead of after the amps in the signal chain enables you to do it in a way that can minimize negative impacts on the signal and give you more precise (and adjustable) control over how loud each speaker driver plays relative to the other one, and what the exact crossover frequency between the two is.

But most speakers do not deactivate their crossovers when you bi-amp them. So you cannot actively bi-amp them with a new crossover before the amps. You are only passively bi-amping them, which is what I've described above: same exact speaker, same internal crossover in the speaker, just pumping more power into them - more power that you don't need and that won't make the speaker sound any better.

Does this help at all?

 

[Focus SE]

Maybe this might help you make sense of the responses so far.

Bi-amping a speaker means using two amps to drive that speaker - this you already know.

There are two things to consider with bi-amping:

1. the power delivered to the speakers, and
2. what's happening with the speaker's crossover - the electronic components inside the speaker that direct only lower frequency sounds to the woofer and only higher frequency sounds to the tweeter.

If you bi-amp a speaker, then #1 will increase: you will be delivering more power to the speaker because you're delivering the combined power of both amps to it.

However, #2 will not be changed: the same set of electronic components - the crossover - will still be doing the job of filtering the sound so that the woofer gets only the lower frequencies of what the amp is feeding the speaker, and the tweeter gets only the higher frequencies.

I am simplifying things a bit, but the point here is that the crossover has an impact on the sound of the speaker. At the most basic level, the crossover has a positive impact because it prevents the woofer from trying to reproduce frequencies higher than it can properly reproduce, and it prevents the tweeter from trying to reproduce frequencies lower than it can properly reproduce (and from destroying itself in the process). But beyond that basic, beneficial role, the crossover also has a somewhat negative impact, because the filtering it does to limit the frequencies that get sent to each speaker driver also has other impacts on the sound of the speaker.

This is just one of the unavoidable tradeoffs that one has to deal with in a conventional, passive speaker. (It's called a passive speaker because the crossover is passive - the crossover comes after the amplification in the signal chain and just filters the full-range amplified signal coming in to the speaker).

So... when you bi-amp a speaker, you are not changing the speaker's fundamental sonic profile, and you are not overcoming the problems created by the crossover inside the speaker. All you're doing is pumping more power into the speaker.

And if your speakers are getting enough power from a single amp, then there is literally no need for - and no benefit from - giving them more power with two amps.

This is why folks are telling you that "vertically bi-amping" some of your speakers is not going to do anything.

Now, there is something called active bi-amping, which @Chrispy has mentioned in a comment earlier in this thread. With active bi-amping, you disable or remove the speaker's internal crossover, so that when you hook up two amps to the speaker, one amp's output goes directly to the woofer and the other one goes directly to the tweeter. But when you do this, you need what's called an active crossover: you need to replace the speaker's original crossover with a crossover that comes before the amplifiers in the signal chain, so that the amp feeding the woofer is only outputting lower frequencies and the amp feeding the tweeter is only outputting higher frequencies. If you just feed each amp's full-range output directly into each driver in the speaker, then sound will be awful at best - and at worst you'll damage or destroy the tweeter and maybe also the woofer. An active crossover can be beneficial because doing that frequency filtering before the amps instead of after the amps in the signal chain enables you to do it in a way that can minimize negative impacts on the signal and give you more precise (and adjustable) control over how loud each speaker drive plays relative to the other one, and what the exact crossover frequency between the two is.

But most speakers do not deactivate their crossovers when you bi-amp them. So you cannot actively bi-amp them with a new crossover before the amps. You are only passively bi-amping them, which is what I've described above: same exact speaker, same internal crossover in the speaker, just pumping more power into them - more power that you don't need and that won't make the speaker sound any better.

Does this help at all?

At all? That wraps all the little tid bits into one big present. Thank you. I just simply did not completely understand what was happening in the crossover. I literally believed the binding cable completely disconnected high and low and could not understand what I was missing. The reasoning behind buying this particular amp wasn’t the 1000 watts it was head room. With my lack of understanding of the technical workings I didn’t want to over tax the Marantz amp (right or wrong that was the belief) I knew I would be throwing all sorts of music at it and I wanted a powerful enough amp to move the massive drivers on these speakers. Again it’s overkill bordering audiofool territory. I know that but right now I could not be happier so what seems excessive to most, including my wife. I am happy with the result.
As far as playing with active bi-amping well I can assure you this, I am way over my skis with the purchase of these speakers and amps. And they were both acquired used. I won’t be experimenting on them whatsoever. I would consider it with my old speakers but the reason I came here ( I am glad I did) was to avoid damage. Even though I previously thought it was a good idea my brain told me I could run into trouble. if I just winged it and I can’t afford to replace what I have.
I am very glad I came here and thankful for dumbing it down for me. I truly learned today. Many have given good advice I just didn’t comprehend.
Thank you

 

[sam_adams]

Considering that the OP still has many questions—and that this subject has been talked about to beyond the point of ridiculous—the following two links provide the best, easiest to understand analysis of bi-amping speakers that has been available for more than twenty-five years:

Benefits of Bi-Amping (Not Quite Magic, But Close) - Part 1

Benefits of Bi-Amping (Not Quite Magic, But Close) - Part 2

 

[Focus SE]

Considering that the OP still has many questions—and that this subject has been talked about to beyond the point of ridiculous—the following two links provide the best, easiest to understand analysis of bi-amping speakers that has been available for more than twenty-five years:

Benefits of Bi-Amping (Not Quite Magic, But Close) - Part 1

Benefits of Bi-Amping (Not Quite Magic, But Close) - Part 2

Thanks for the info unfortunately I haven’t been paying attention for twenty five years to lean all of this. I jumped on the pile in may of this year. As for the questions in the original posts I still don’t know how the signal gets split using the rear surrounds but at this point I now have enough understanding to know it won’t matter to me with this system and that I’m ok with. Thanks for your patience with me but the why always bugs me until it’s explained to make sence. I have a lot of reading to do tomorrow unfortunately it’s not reached ridiculous status for me maybe after twenty five years. Haha I’ve learned a lot many already know.

 

[Chrispy]

Thanks for the info unfortunately I haven’t been paying attention for twenty five years to lean all of this. I jumped on the pile in may of this year. As for the questions in the original posts I still don’t know how the signal gets split using the rear surrounds but at this point I now have enough understanding to know it won’t matter to me with this system and that I’m ok with. Thanks for your patience with me but the why always bugs me until it’s explained to make sence. I have a lot of reading to do tomorrow unfortunately it’s not reached ridiculous status for me maybe after twenty five years. Haha I’ve learned a lot many already know.

Lots of bullshit out there about bi-amping/bi-wiring, mostly for the benefit of the cable profit margin (maybe amp sales). The signal doesn't get split by your avr, it's the same signal merely duplicated to each "amp" (internal or external). Many good speaker designers hate this bi-wiring/passive bi-amping option. If more than a two way speaker just how meaningful can it be in your case?

 

[antcollinet]

My guess is there is probably no one here with less knowledge on what any of this means than me. I am trying desperately trying to learn. Quite honestly, I truly don't even want to learn what it all means but what I want to do is get the most out of these as possible and I don't even know if it is possible and I am ok with that.



"MASTERS COLLECTION

i·V4 ULTRA​

Legacy's i·V4 ULTRA offers a dedicated module for each of its four channels. The amplifier approaches 80% efficiency while delivering 610 watts per channel into 8 ohms, 1,000 watts into 4 ohms."

Specifications Legacy’s i·V Series amplifiers are the most powerful home theater amplifiers to date. Featuring state of the art ICEedge® technology, the powerhouse delivers up to 1kW into 4 ohms at less than 0.005% distortion to each of its channels. The elegant amplifier operates at nearly 80% efficiency at rated output and delivers more than 600 watts into 8 ohms all channels driven while remaining stable into impedances as low as 2.7 ohms. The amplifier supports 12VDC triggered on/off and is available in a rack mount 8 channel version for Atmos® installations. Crystal clear sound is virtually noise free, without transformer hum. Power rating: 1,000 watts continuous per channel @ 4 ohms, all channels driven 610 watts continuous per channel @ 8 ohms, all channels driven Each channel meets the following specifications: 1.2kW @ 4 Ohm /1kHz with less than 1% distortion Dynamic Range 127 dB, A-weighted Voltage gain 25.8 dB Inputs Fully balanced XLR ,single-ended gold RCA Input Sensitivity 5.0 Vp @ 1200W/4 Ohm Input impedance 38 kOhm for both pin 2+ and pin3- Max peak output: 1250 Watts Voltage/Current: 98 Vp/ 38Ap Damping factor: 750 from 20 Hz to 1kHz Channel separation: 120 dB at 1kHz Weight: i·V1 22 lbs, i·V2 25 lbs, i·V3 26 lbs, i·V4 26.5 lbs

Ok - I think what people are trying to tell you, but not making clear.

Bi amping can have two valid use cases.

1 - If you are doing active crossovers using DSP before the amplification AND removing any crossovers inside the speakers, you can manage the speaker frequency response better, and if done right might get better sound.

2 - If you have two amplifiers you can split the power between them, and get away with two less powerful amps, rather than one more powerfull one. But even then most of the power is needed in the woofer(s), so. you still need an amp powerful enough for that. In this use case there will be no sound imporvement so, it is almost certainly simpler, easier and cheaper to get an amp with sufficient power in the first place.


There is NO advantage if you are leaving the crossovers in the speaker, and already have an amp that is easily able to drive the power you need for the SPL you want. You seem to be in this catagory, so will get no benefit from bi amping.



Having said that - if you go ahead anyway, then the answer to your OP is you may as well split the fronts pre-out, leaving the rear channel usable in case you want to add rear speakers later.


EDIT : Just seen @tmtomh s post - so just pretty much just re-iterating what he said.

 

[NiagaraPete]

Thanks, like i said there is no one here that knows less than me. honestly, I don't even know what an active crossover is (just looked it up and I didnt even know you were able to have separately powered crossovers. Additionally when you speak of passive bi-amping vs active I need to do research as well.

Thus should answer most questions

Bi-amping 101

This article provides a quick look at how bi-amplification works. The conventional scheme is to split the signal into two frequency bands before the power amplifiers that drive the speakers. The bass (LF) amp sees only LF signals and drives only the LF driver (woofer). The treble (HF) amp sees...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Focus SE]

Lots of bullshit out there about bi-amping/bi-wiring, mostly for the benefit of the cable profit margin (maybe amp sales). The signal doesn't get split by your avr, it's the same signal merely duplicated to each "amp" (internal or external). Many good speaker designers hate this bi-wiring/passive bi-amping option. If more than a two way speaker just how meaningful can it be in your case?

Let me start with your last question. The perfectly sound logic that I had in my head was very simply the fact that I understood the speakers I have, to need power to push the very large drivers. Not knowing the inner workings of these components, I applied my real-life experience. (All be it improperly) Take any car on the roads today. What you will quickly learn from driving any one of them is that they all go from "0 to 60" the heavier ones need more power to do it well. I drive a Silverado with a 3-liter diesel. From a stop its great, it will very easily exceed the speed limit but if you try and pass at 55 there is far less top end responsive power in acceleration. (Headroom in audiophile speak) Even as I type this my brain tells me that adding power to a 2-way, essentially a bookshelf speaker, is absolutely over kill because it's not designed to project large amounts of multiple frequencies. and that speaker would not separate sound frequencies simply by adding power. As a kid I remeber standing in in a Pacific Stereo Store listening to different speakers. instantly my taste stood out against all of my friends. Bose was just really making a name for themselves, and everybody loved them. I on the other hand couldn't get enough of Infinity. What was also apparent was the fact that in the Infinity speaker line the larger the speaker the better the sound was to me, and the more power needed to push them. Their Kappa 9 series was dubbed the "amp killer"
that was my logic, thanks to you and others I am now viewing it differently. I will never win over a scientist in this arena to my views. But for me the experience of being immersed in the music is what it's all about. I have never been immersed in sound by a bookshelf speaker. Don't get me wrong, they sound good but not the way I like to hear things. Loudness is not the objective, its feeling the kick drum even at a low volume. Wow that's a lot of rambling!!!
Ill save it for another time, but the AVR signal split still confuses me. And why I started this thread. If the rears surrounds sound different that tells me the AVR is doing something to the signal I didn't want it doing the same thing to one half of my speaker.
I do really appreciate everyone's input here. We all communicate differently I am trying to absorb as much as I can!!!
thank you

 

[Hayabusa]

Let me start by saying what you are about to read could be full of ignorance on my part so please be patient.
Here are my two questions:
Using the equipment below, can I Bi-amp (not BI wire) my speakers using the equipment mentioned below? And if the answer is yes, then would it be recommended to wire to the AVR specified suggestions of using the surround rears via a pre-out (i am guessing) or to use an RCA splitter for the fronts?
I am attempting to vertically Bi-amp my speakers using an external amplifier.
I have provided links to the Marantz owners manual covering the my two areas of instructions.

in case this forum prohibiting me from posting direct links so add Marantz . Com to the front of these
/CINEMA60/NA/EN/DRDZSYcqhsmjdu.php (bi-amping speakers)

/CINEMA60/NA/EN/DRDZSYqibytsvl.php (connecting an external amp).

The instruction indicate using the surround rears to wire for bi-amping using the internal amplification of the Cinema 60. (not my goal) As far as I have been able to find it does not indicate the same procedure for using external amps using the pre-outs. I can only assume the procedure would be the same using the pre-out fronts and rear surround would be the same.
Now here comes the fun part and where my ignorance will really shine through. I correctly used the term external amplifier in the singular not multiple. The amplifier is a "Legacy Audio IV4 Ultra". it is a class D amplifier with four independent modules with each module having its own transformer providing separate amplification to each of the four channels. As I understand in layman's terms, it is 4 mono blocks in one chassis. While I am absolutely in love with the Legacy Products and how they sound when it comes to online manuals they are way sub par.
In their image gallery you can see the internal components.

add to this legacy audio . com
/products/view/i-v4-ultra#images

As you can see there are four separate modules internally
The difference between the IV4 and the IV4 Ultra is the number of independent internal amplification boards. The IV4 has two modules driving 4 channels and the Ultra has four modules driving four channels.
next is their lack luster owners manual that includes all of the ultra amplifiers in one manual. (I can only assume that because each processor/AVR is different they leave it up to the processors instructions on how to accomplish this.)

I think just adding a h t t p s and the two //: to the front of this brings you to the IV4 Ultra Manual at legacy audio.
d2digq31msfd9c.cloudfront.net/uploads/manuals/Legacy_Audio_2020_iV_Ultra_Manual_9_8_2020-compressed.pdf?mtime=20210302135955&focal=none

on page 11 of the owners manual named IV1-4 Ultra Amplifiers, are instruction on how to connect a seven channel system. What is pictured is an IV7. nowhere in this manual is the IV4 Ultra pictured showing the rear of the unit. but it is in fact a four channel out with four boards internally. I am not sure how to go about utilizing the capabilities of this Amplifier with this AVR. Ok third question, If I were to wire the Pre-outs using the front and rear surrounds one to each channel of the Amplifier and then wire to each of the the four binding posts on the back of the speaker, does anyone see any potential harm being caused?
Thanks for any thoughts on this!!!!

what 'bi-ampable' speakers are we talking about?

 

[Focus SE]

Ok - I think what people are trying to tell you, but not making clear.

Bi amping can have two valid use cases.

1 - If you are doing active crossovers using DSP before the amplification AND removing any crossovers inside the speakers, you can manage the speaker frequency response better, and if done right might get better sound.

2 - If you have two amplifiers you can split the power between them, and get away with two less powerful amps, rather than one more powerfull one. But even then most of the power is needed in the woofer(s), so. you still need an amp powerful enough for that. In this use case there will be no sound imporvement so, it is almost certainly simpler, easier and cheaper to get an amp with sufficient power in the first place.


There is NO advantage if you are leaving the crossovers in the speaker, and already have an amp that is easily able to drive the power you need for the SPL you want. You seem to be in this catagory, so will get no benefit from bi amping.



Having said that - if you go ahead anyway, then the answer to your OP is you may as well split the fronts pre-out, leaving the rear channel usable in case you want to add rear speakers later.


EDIT : Just seen @tmtomh s post - so just pretty much just re-iterating what he said.

I am not here to argue with anyone nor I am I here to argue with you. please DO NOT take my comments as a debate where I am challenging you!!!!!!!!

Your first Point, even if I really understood the results of "doing and active crossover using DSP" There is a small chance in hell I would think that my ignorance could re-engineer what I believe to be the best sounding speaker I have ever heard. That is subjective and I know it. I have strong opinions but knew enough to know the road I wanted to go down was not as simple as I originally thought. Turns out I was right for questioning it but proven to be for the wrong reasons. Dumb luck on my part. Maybe someday with different speakers but not these speakers on any day.
Your second point. I will categorize this as power. I started with a curiosity of whether or not it would really make a difference. Again, for the wrong reason I was right that it probably wont in my case. I fully understand and accept the fact that the speakers and amplifier I now have long passed the point of reasonable diminishing returns. Certainly for most everyone I know and even myself. Admittedly I am in what many call audiofool territory. The idea of splitting the amp power to reduce need makes sense and as you point out contradicted by still needing most of it for woofers. As far as buying the amp I did and its power, I have zero regrets. Like I said its overkill. but I never wanted to starve the drivers. I now believe you and others when you say there won't be an improvement, but I don't really understand why. I can only guess it's because the power I have is more than sufficient on its own. Hopefully I am correct because that is the logic used to justify such an over-the-top amp. I wanted the ability to never stress the speaker and if I occasionally wanted to push the system, I didn't want to abuse it. I bought the Marantz Cinema 60 and Marantz mm7015 fully intending to run speakers much more in line with a budget and was going to settle. Both would be excellent choices for that. I never thought these speakers would be a possibility for me. I've been told I'm nuts (likely true) and this upgraded amp could not have this affect the sound and heat. But after switching them I really believe I hear the difference at very low levels and cranking it. the AVR runs cooler and to me that's less wear and tear. That is my pouting point and I'm sticking to it.
Your third point: Yeah, if i still thought there was any benefit to doing this and I don't. As it relates to the signal coming out of the C60 I would RCA Y split the fronts. Mainly because I don't know what the processor is doing to the sound in the rear surround before it leaves to the amp
Thank I appreciate it.

 

[Focus SE]

what 'bi-ampable' speakers are we talking about?

The legacy Focus SE.
hopefully you got the joke of "bi-ampable"

 

[antcollinet]

.... I can only guess it's because the power I have is more than sufficient on its own. Hopefully I am correct because that is the logic used to justify such an over-the-top amp. ...

Exactly this - you've made spot on buying decisions with your speakers (that you are obviously very happy with) and the amp that has plenty of power for your application.

Well done. Relax, chill, forget about bi-amping (you don't need it) enjoy your system and music.


EDIT - and wow those are some sensitive (high SPL per watt) speakers. You'll note the recommended amp can be anything from 30W up.

That high sensitivity means with only two watts of power you will get 95dB SPL at one meter. This is an ear splitting level, and one you should only listen to for short periods of time. I've just run a calculator:

Assuming 3m listening distance
90dB listening level (still very very loud)
15dB of headroom (overkill)

With your speakers you would "only" need 180W. Normally I'd calculate with about 10dB of headroom, which would result in only 57W being needed.

Have you already purchased the amp? If not I'd suggest changing for 2 channels. You clearly don't need 4.

 

[Focus SE]

Exactly this - you've made spot on buying decisions with your speakers (that you are obviously very happy with) and the amp that has plenty of power for your application.

Well done. Relax, chill, forget about bi-amping (you don't need it) enjoy your system and music.


EDIT - and wow those are some sensitive (high SPL per watt) speakers. You'll note the recommended amp can be anything from 30W up.

That high sensitivity means with only two watts of power you will get 95dB SPL at one meter. This is an ear splitting level, and one you should only listen to for short periods of time. I've just run a calculator:

Assuming 3m listening distance
90dB listening level (still very very loud)
15dB of headroom (overkill)

With your speakers you would "only" need 180W. Normally I'd calculate with about 10dB of headroom, which would result in only 57W being needed.

Have you already purchased the amp? If not I'd suggest changing for 2 channels. You clearly don't need 4.

Yes I already have the amp. I got it used. I do also have a set of rears that are 4ohm as well so not all is lost in the 4 channels.

As far as the power calculations......... (no science was used in this comment, kids don't try this at home) When I started this path/journey to build a system, I found some really nice used infinity speakers. Having only a 90's receiver that wasn't enough for what I wanted to hear. I wanted something for retirement, and I was willing to settle knowing what I really wanted was out of reach. I bought the Marantz C60 and the Marantz 7015 to push the used infinity's hoping to someday upgrade. The 7055 is rated at 140 amps at 8ohms so what maybe 180 at the 6ohms for the infinity's I had? It was a great combination. All my favorites sounded good and clear. Yes I pushed them to the limits to see where the ear fatigue would start pleasantly it took quite a bit and I even triggered the limiter and shut the system down. It's not everyday and who doesn't buy a cool car and floor it every once awhile? the AVR and amp were probably beyond the level needed but I wanted a good processor going forward that would last any upgrades in the future. Life was good. Then after a looking over usaudiomart one day, I had a hard conversation with my wife, It went like this, You want to go where? and buy what? for how F$^$%^ MUCH. She prefers nic nacs and stupid stuff. Well it turns out I just like stupid. Like most everything I buy I like to see what it can do and how it performs. while hooked up to my (Marantz only rates it to 6 ohms so I am assuming about 200 watts at 4ohms.) I cranked it up to concert levels. Again to see where ear fatigue started. I DID NOT REMAIN IN THE ROOM. i WORKED IN THE GARAGE FOR A COUPLE OF SONGS. Oh by the way for the short time I was in the room no audible distortion clear as a bell. Well after a couple of good sounding songs from the garage I came back int to turn it down and check to see if I was burning up the AVR and the amp. They were hot but still alive and now limit triggering. my patio door however did not survive the experiment. I guess on a scale of 0-98 the volume dial up to 62 was where my patio door said nope, I'm out. Now before anyone runs to the electronics abuse hotline to report me you have to ask how cheap must the door have been? Right? And If you wanted to know if your phone was listening to you, it is. I was inundated with hearing aid ads for weeks after that. Well after another fun conversation with my wife I now have a good patio door. So now after telling you more than you ever wanted to know about my stupidity, your point about 200 watts being able to blow the doors off of your house is true I can prove it!!!
So why in the hell did you then buy a bigger amp people and my mainly wife have asked. Well what this totally unscientific experiment showed me was I was dumb to push it to the limits I did and was stunned by the performance BUT something was missing in sound. In search of something I wanted top tier to go with the speaker knowing what it could do. i knew just because the power rating Was high that not what I wanted. Did it improve sound quality. No not like I thought but at very low volume it pushes massive drivers to project a clear sound. better and on a song I have listened to my whole life that has moments of quiet that have always had a hiss in it. That is is now gone after a life of hearing it. I can hear the audiophiles now telling me to stop spreading unverifiable nonsense. Well really the only one I am trying to please with this is me and if that works well then all is good. Hopefully those that read my nonsense will understand that life is to short to be this serious about this stuff but learning is fun


Yes I occasionally like loud music. I enjoyed going to concerts.

 

[antcollinet]

Yes I already have the amp. I got it used. I do also have a set of rears that are 4ohm as well so not all is lost in the 4 channels.

As far as the power calculations......... (no science was used in this comment, kids don't try this at home) When I started this path/journey to build a system, I found some really nice used infinity speakers. Having only a 90's receiver that wasn't enough for what I wanted to hear. I wanted something for retirement, and I was willing to settle knowing what I really wanted was out of reach. I bought the Marantz C60 and the Marantz 7015 to push the used infinity's hoping to someday upgrade. The 7055 is rated at 140 amps at 8ohms so what maybe 180 at the 6ohms for the infinity's I had? It was a great combination. All my favorites sounded good and clear. Yes I pushed them to the limits to see where the ear fatigue would start pleasantly it took quite a bit and I even triggered the limiter and shut the system down. It's not everyday and who doesn't buy a cool car and floor it every once awhile? the AVR and amp were probably beyond the level needed but I wanted a good processor going forward that would last any upgrades in the future. Life was good. Then after a looking over usaudiomart one day, I had a hard conversation with my wife, It went like this, You want to go where? and buy what? for how F$^$%^ MUCH. She prefers nic nacs and stupid stuff. Well it turns out I just like stupid. Like most everything I buy I like to see what it can do and how it performs. while hooked up to my (Marantz only rates it to 6 ohms so I am assuming about 200 watts at 4ohms.) I cranked it up to concert levels. Again to see where ear fatigue started. I DID NOT REMAIN IN THE ROOM. i WORKED IN THE GARAGE FOR A COUPLE OF SONGS. Oh by the way for the short time I was in the room no audible distortion clear as a bell. Well after a couple of good sounding songs from the garage I came back int to turn it down and check to see if I was burning up the AVR and the amp. They were hot but still alive and now limit triggering. my patio door however did not survive the experiment. I guess on a scale of 0-98 the volume dial up to 62 was where my patio door said nope, I'm out. Now before anyone runs to the electronics abuse hotline to report me you have to ask how cheap must the door have been? Right? And If you wanted to know if your phone was listening to you, it is. I was inundated with hearing aid ads for weeks after that. Well after another fun conversation with my wife I now have a good patio door. So now after telling you more than you ever wanted to know about my stupidity, your point about 200 watts being able to blow the doors off of your house is true I can prove it!!!
So why in the hell did you then buy a bigger amp people and my mainly wife have asked. Well what this totally unscientific experiment showed me was I was dumb to push it to the limits I did and was stunned by the performance BUT something was missing in sound. In search of something I wanted top tier to go with the speaker knowing what it could do. i knew just because the power rating Was high that not what I wanted. Did it improve sound quality. No not like I thought but at very low volume it pushes massive drivers to project a clear sound. better and on a song I have listened to my whole life that has moments of quiet that have always had a hiss in it. That is is now gone after a life of hearing it. I can hear the audiophiles now telling me to stop spreading unverifiable nonsense. Well really the only one I am trying to please with this is me and if that works well then all is good. Hopefully those that read my nonsense will understand that life is to short to be this serious about this stuff but learning is fun


Yes I occasionally like loud music. I enjoyed going to concerts.

You have a great system. I'm a little envious

Now, as I said : enjoy it.

 

[Hayabusa]

The legacy Focus SE.
hopefully you got the joke of "bi-ampable"

Indeed: 'bi-ampable'

 

[Chrispy]

Let me start with your last question. The perfectly sound logic that I had in my head was very simply the fact that I understood the speakers I have, to need power to push the very large drivers. Not knowing the inner workings of these components, I applied my real-life experience. (All be it improperly) Take any car on the roads today. What you will quickly learn from driving any one of them is that they all go from "0 to 60" the heavier ones need more power to do it well. I drive a Silverado with a 3-liter diesel. From a stop its great, it will very easily exceed the speed limit but if you try and pass at 55 there is far less top end responsive power in acceleration. (Headroom in audiophile speak) Even as I type this my brain tells me that adding power to a 2-way, essentially a bookshelf speaker, is absolutely over kill because it's not designed to project large amounts of multiple frequencies. and that speaker would not separate sound frequencies simply by adding power. As a kid I remeber standing in in a Pacific Stereo Store listening to different speakers. instantly my taste stood out against all of my friends. Bose was just really making a name for themselves, and everybody loved them. I on the other hand couldn't get enough of Infinity. What was also apparent was the fact that in the Infinity speaker line the larger the speaker the better the sound was to me, and the more power needed to push them. Their Kappa 9 series was dubbed the "amp killer"
that was my logic, thanks to you and others I am now viewing it differently. I will never win over a scientist in this arena to my views. But for me the experience of being immersed in the music is what it's all about. I have never been immersed in sound by a bookshelf speaker. Don't get me wrong, they sound good but not the way I like to hear things. Loudness is not the objective, its feeling the kick drum even at a low volume. Wow that's a lot of rambling!!!
Ill save it for another time, but the AVR signal split still confuses me. And why I started this thread. If the rears surrounds sound different that tells me the AVR is doing something to the signal I didn't want it doing the same thing to one half of my speaker.
I do really appreciate everyone's input here. We all communicate differently I am trying to absorb as much as I can!!!
thank you

Paragraphs!

"power hungry" often just means they need significant current at times (low impedance load) from the amp. Often overstated, especially at typical listening levels, at elevated listening levels can be more important if you're exceeding the capability of the amp. The size of the driver isn't particularly important, the speaker sensitivity is a better indicator (check out Hoffman's Iron Law of speaker building for example).

I spent a lot of time in Pacific Stereo stores in my youth, altho don't think I ever bought anything there. Bookshelves with a well integrated sub can be great. All the avr does is split the signal into two with its bi-amp feature, no change in frequency range. The passive crossover built into the speaker will still limit the usefulness of splitting the power between the bass driver(s) and the others....and even if the bass drivers are separated from the crossover the advantage to it/them having their own amp is limited. If your rear surrounds sound different more likely due the speakers themselves (or their place in your room), but how did you integrate the new amp into the system to level match between mains/surrounds?

 

[Chrispy]

Made me think about Pacific Stereo....while I generally told the sales guys to go away, do remember many were full of shit in what they did want to impart to me.

 

[Focus SE]

Thank you this is helpful,
Sam Adams linked me two articles. I had to read them twice and am probably going to misinterpret but oh well. My take away with bad mental math is that in order for these speakers not to clip anything above 400 watt’s really is the beginning the cliff when it comes to diminishing returns on what I have. I’m still trying to wrap my head around the log rhythmic doubling of power to get maybe +3db. It makes sense and I don’t need to understand completely. It’s all agreed power will not be an issue. My marantz 7055, I’m guessing was around 200 at 4ohm (rated 140 at 8ohm).I will occasionally push them for fun and never wanted to stress the system. Im guessing 90% of use will be in the 3 to 7 watts. That what makes the need for 400 or whatever crazy number to not clip. (If I’m using the right term)
Haha my speakers are floor-shelf, no book-shelf in my house will hold 136lbs a piece.
I’ll save the splitting the signal in two out of the surrounds for later. Again no science but every rear surround if heard is processed and sounds different than the fronts. I agree now bi-amping is off the table and I’m not touching these to play with active bi-amping. Haha I know have knowledge on something I’m not going to do for a long time if ever.
For now what I did (and that will soon be undone) is the fronts are hooked to front pre-out to the amp. (Original intent was use the four channels for bi-amping (scrapped that idea) Rears are currently hooked up through the rear pre-out to the marantz amp. ( they are going to be still Hooked to the rear surround pre out but now to the same amp utilizing the other two channels.)
I will now use the marantz amp with the infinity kappas in another room
Thank you so much for your help. This is fun even if it’s only to come to the conclusion all this was a bad idea. But I’m glad I did because all of you likely saved me from potential damage. I don’t want that!!!!

 

[Focus SE]

Made me think about Pacific Stereo....while I generally told the sales guys to go away, do remember many were full of shit in what they did want to impart to me.

Haha if they wrote their business plan for forty years to wait for snotty broke kids to be done raising there families before coming back to buy stuff they might be in business