Which home theater amp and why?

[PristineSound]

what processor are you going to use? Of its a marantz, they have some good bundles eith their amps

I am looking at the Tide16.

 

[jimmyjames8]

I will be building a home theater system soon, it will be a 7.2.4 system.

I would like the amp(s) to be as my final amp(s) as possible, which means I need it to be high performing, reliable and can stand the test of time of new surround formats to come in the next two decades or so. Hypex is not an option for various reasons that I rather not get into now.

Below are the options:
1) Monolith 33307 (11 channel) $2,500
The most convenient and fits my purpose exactly but may not be future surround format proof/friendly. It should have enough power for all of my speakers, especially LCR is 200w into 8 ohms.

2) 2x Monolith 14566 (7 channel) $3,880
The most flexible option, the most performant option, also the most expensive option.

3) 2x Outlaw 7000x (7 channel) $2,200
The most flexible and affordable option, but also likely the lowest performant amp of all 3 options.

Which option would you pick and why? What other options would you recommend (that is not Hypex)?

#3 because I have owned several Outlaw products over the years and been very happy with them and gotten good service. Own 2 of the their M2200 monoblocks right now in my shop system and could not be happier. Great bang for the buck.

 

[peng]

I am looking at the Tide16.

The tide 16 has impressive SINAD spec, so Hypex amps will be a much better match than Outlaw’s. Also, if you want it more future proof something rated 350/500 W 8/4 ohms maybe a good idea. I have a buckeye amp for a few years now, there have been no issues. If that is not an option for you there are obviously many others to choose from but Hypex and Purifi amps are hard to beat in terms of high SINAD, light weight and relatively low prices if you are okay with buckeyeamps and Audiophonic’s.

 

[Steve Dallas]

I have the KH120 now, their $1k/ea. That's $11k for speakers. And ceiling mount would be difficult. I was planning on Q bookshelves.

I also need to figure out Dirac over Neumann's own room correction or not. And does the active speaker's DSP add any delay and if that delay would screw with Dirac.

You have KH120s and you are worried about Hypex reliability?

I am actually looking at passive speakers and external amplification for studio monitors as one of my 120s is making the tick of death sound. I think the era of actives is over for me after losing a half dozen internal amps in the past 20 years.

 

[PristineSound]

You have KH120s and you are worried about Hypex reliability?

I am actually looking at passive speakers and external amplification for studio monitors as one of my 120s is making the tick of death sound. I think the era of actives is over for me after losing a half dozen internal amps in the past 20 years.

I personally hate having all the electronics inside the speaker, I said this probably every chance I get.

Thank fully my Neumann is still in good shape . . .so far.

 

[Power Pop 23]

You have KH120s and you are worried about Hypex reliability?

I am actually looking at passive speakers and external amplification for studio monitors as one of my 120s is making the tick of death sound. I think the era of actives is over for me after losing a half dozen internal amps in the past 20 years.

Ouch,

I envy your faith.

Even with the advantage of an amplifier EQ'd to the drivers, I would have bailed on internal amplification after failure #2.

 

[PristineSound]

Which is why I'm not a fan of active speakers, even though I know there are magic you can do with active speakers that you can't with passive.

My most fervor wish is individual drivers amplified and DSP controlled speaker with all the electronics external. Alas, such product does not exist.

I appreciate everyone providing alternatives, but as I mentioned, Hypex (and by extension, Purifi) is not an option, due to the cost and as for the Hypex MP series, there are reported reliability issues (and also still very expensive). And as for active speakers, well, you now know how I feel.

I think I will lean towards either the Monolith 11x or two Monolith 7x.

 

[ErVikingo]

On my prior room I had a Lexicon pre/processor with 2 massive sherbourn 5/1500 amps plus 2 Sunfire signature subs. Everything still works even when i bought all of that back in the late 90's.

For the current room, I kept it simple and went with Denon. Has Audissey great video switching, plenty of power for my speakers plus it smulti zone and has built in HEOS.

 

[Sal1950]

Which is why I'm not a fan of active speakers, even though I know there are magic you can do with active speakers that you can't with passive.

What "magic" is that?

 

[Steve Dallas]

What "magic" is that?

DSP crossover, methinks.

 

[Sal1950]

DSP crossover, methinks.

No problem, all it takes is separate leads to the individual drivers. The JBL M2 does that for one.
A fully active speaker, only it has the digital crossover, dsp, and amps in external boxes.

 

[Steve Dallas]

No problem, all it takes is separate leads to the individual drivers. The JBL M2 does that for one.
A fully active speaker, only it has the digital crossover, dsp, and amps in external boxes.

Eh. I know all about it. I have DIY'd it in the past. Most people don't know how or want to run 4 channels of external amplification plus a DSP DAC or have a measurement rig or spend the time to make it work. They just want to buy a couple speakers with it all built in and reap the 'magic' benefits.

 

[BigStreetCinema]

No problem, all it takes is separate leads to the individual drivers. The JBL M2 does that for one.
A fully active speaker, only it has the digital crossover, dsp, and amps in external boxes.

I have a couple of them and none of them is fully active.
Fully active have everything built in.

 

[Chrispy]

I have a couple of them and none of them is fully active.
Fully active have everything built in.

Terminology can go either way. Active refers mostly to having active crossovers rather than where the amp/crossovers are located.

 

[BigStreetCinema]

Terminology can go either way. Active refers mostly to having active crossovers rather than where the amp/crossovers are located.

I am from the PA world and Active is an Active speaker with build in amps and crossover.

So my 7 subs are wood and a driver, then it should be called active and not passive?
Make ZERO sense

Active crossover and Active speaker isn't the same.

 

[Sal1950]

I have a couple of them and none of them is fully active.
Fully active have everything built in.

Disagreed.

 

[BigStreetCinema]

Disagreed.

You do that.

 

[Sal1950]

You do that.

? I thought I did ?

 

[Chrispy]

I am from the PA world and Active is an Active speaker with build in amps and crossover.

So my 7 subs are wood and a driver, then it should be called active and not passive?
Make ZERO sense

Active crossover and Active speaker isn't the same.

I am not from the PA world and largely this forum isn't either. Mostly active vs passive crossovers. The terminology isn't precise as various people use it differently. YMMV

 

[BigStreetCinema]

I am not from the PA world and largely this forum isn't either. Mostly active vs passive crossovers. The terminology isn't precise as various people use it differently. YMMV

Then many people use it wrong and don't know better.
Active Crossover/ Active system and an Active Speaker isn't the same.

JBL don't even use "Active Speaker" for the M2

Even in the Studio world it is active Nearfield monitor with amps built in.
Passive if there are no amps built in.

And subs in Hifi, Car audio and cinema using the same logic.
Passive subs vs Active subs.

And many Hifi brands using Active Speaker for amps build in.