Would a Power Amp Help my Denon Receiver?

[PENG]

The tweeters and midrange probably need about 1-10W. It's the bass that need all the power. But if he sets the speakers to small and Bass Crossover to 80-100Hz, his dual subwoofers will be handling the most of the bass that requires the most power.

For dual subwoofers, I would go for XO 100 Hz for better integration, keeping in mind the XO is not a brick wall. At the low XO of 80 Hz, they may interfere with the sub too much, in a negative way.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

For dual subwoofers, I would go for XO 100 Hz for better integration, keeping in mind the XO is not a brick wall. At the low XO of 80 Hz, they may interfere with the sub too much, in a negative way.

I also think that 80Hz is too low for my setup. My XO is set to either 100Hz or 120Hz. I think 120Hz. I couldn't tell much difference between 100Hz vs. 120Hz.

 

[everettT]

I also think that 80Hz is too low for my setup. My XO is set to either 100Hz or 120Hz. I think 120Hz. I couldn't tell much difference between 100Hz vs. 120Hz.

Your setup definitely lends itself to a higher crossover due to the location of your subs

 

[Pogre]

I think we've drifted in this thread. OP made a few posts that no one replied to!

Multi-Source/Multi-room


With the AVR-X1300W it's possible to enjoy 5.1-channel surround in one room, while another 'zone' plays another source–such as CD or streaming audio. You can simply connect a pair of stereo speakers to the multi-room amplified outputs. Or, connect a separate stereo amp and speakers to the Zone 2 pre-outs, allowing full 7 channel surround sound in the main room with stereo in the second.

Page 142 of my manual

Connection 2 : Connection using an external
amplifier (ZONE2)
The audio signals of this unit’s ZONE2 audio output connectors are
output to the ZONE2 amplifiers and played on these amplifiers.
View attachment 22394

Regarding post 17

That's exactly what I did.

I made the same mistake when I "upgraded" my receiver. You have to look for a full set of preouts (not just zone 2) to use an amplifier the way you want to. Those are generally offered only in the mid to upper tier receivers. With Denon that starts with their 3000 series and up models.

 

[everettT]

I think we've drifted in this thread. OP made a few posts that no one replied to!



I made the same mistake when I "upgraded" my receiver. You have to look for a full set of preouts (not just zone 2) to use an amplifier the way you want to. Those are generally offered only in the mid to upper tier receivers. With Denon that starts with their 3000 series and up models.

No we replied and covered before said questions were asked, he just ignored . I'm pretty sure post 2 ended it

 

[PENG]

So to be clear, the Pre Out (Zone 2) L/R on the AVR-X1300W cannot be used for external amplification?

Technically speaking, you can use it but it is not a practical solution unless you use them as intended, e.g., for zone 2.

 

[Pogre]

No we replied and covered before said questions were asked, he just ignored . I'm pretty sure post 2 ended it

Good point. Fair enough.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Your setup definitely lends itself to a higher crossover due to the location of your subs

You mean having 5 subs in the room?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[everettT]

You mean having 5 subs in the room?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

That and the location in proximity to the "upper" speaker module.

 

[Verdinut]

I understand your point on this, but as a matter of terminology, you were clearly passive biamping with your Marantz AVR back then.

There is no need for me to explain the details because AH actually has a great write-up on this topic, thanks to Steve. I have read numerous online articles on the differences and merits about biwiring, active and passive biamp schemes, and so far I have not seen a better one than Steve's, in terms of accuracy and readability.

http://www.audioholics.com/frequent-questions/the-difference-between-biamping-vs-biwiring

I know the difference between passive and active bi-amping.

But, why does Marantz then offer passive bi-amping when you have 2 amps per channel to use? Wouldn't have a slight modification to the LFE circuit make it possible to actively provide a low pass section for the woofers, with the crossover management taking care of the high pass section when the mid and high frequency drivers are set as small speakers? That was the understanding that led me to believe that the SR5010 was providing active bi-amplification.

Also, in the owner's manual, Marantz say that the bi-amping method is used to connect separate amplifiers to terminal of bi-amp compatible speakers. They don't specify whether it's for an active or a passive configuration. Speaker cabinets without passive crossovers are also bi-amp compatible, aren't they? Rather confusing!

In addition, page 46 relating to this passive bi-amping process adds that such connection enables back EMF from the woofer to flow into the tweeter without affecting the sound quality, producing a higher SQ. What weird info is that? It's exactly the opposite: By using two amps either in a passive or active bi-amping configuration, the back EMF from the woofer is actually prevented from reaching the tweeter.

 

[mtrycrafts]

What you mention is inexact. I did actively bi-amp my front left and right speakers with the Marantz SR5010 with its inboard electronic crossovers as indicated on Page 46 of the Owner's Manual. (See attached page in post #17)
I did not need to use a passive crossover for the Dayton subs used in my DIY front speakers. I know damn well what is active bi-amping and what is passive.

Active bi/tri amping involves removing(totally bypassing) the crossovers in the speaker cabinets. Does the manual state how to do that? If not, then it is just passive amping no matter how you slice it.

I asked as perhaps his speakers which I have no idea about, has no crossovers in it, hence each driver needs an amp. JBL has such speakers but then they either provide the amp and all for active crossovers.

It seems the OP's speakers are just passive with internal crossovers even with jumpers removed.

 

[mtrycrafts]

... and readability.

http://www.audioholics.com/frequent-questions/the-difference-between-biamping-vs-biwiring

So, it is not in Greek.
Good news.

 

[Verdinut]

Active bi/tri amping involves removing(totally bypassing) the crossovers in the speaker cabinets. Does the manual state how to do that? If not, then it is just passive amping no matter how you slice it.

I asked as perhaps his speakers which I have no idea about, has no crossovers in it, hence each driver needs an amp. JBL has such speakers but then they either provide the amp and all for active crossovers.

It seems the OP's speakers are just passive with internal crossovers even with jumpers removed.

You have a very good argument there! Also, by the fact that the manual doesn't mention about setting the filter frequency, as it varies among the various speaker configurations, when thinking about it, that would be a confirmation.

I agree with you about the OP's speakers.

 

[Verdinut]

If you look at images of the AVR-X1300W, the pre-outs are for the subwoofer(s) only.

Looking at the image, pre-outs are both for subs and there two more for Zone 2.

 

[PENG]

I know the difference between passive and active bi-amping.

Good, so you must agree it would be hard to use the SR5010 to active biamp as it doesn't offer suitable crossover settings to do the job.

But, why does Marantz then offer passive bi-amping when you have 2 amps per channel to use?

Two amps per channel will allow you to passive bi-amp, that's why. To active bi-amp also requires the removal of the internal crossovers of the speakers and use external crossovers. I am not aware of any AVR or even prepro that has build in crossovers suitable for biamping 3 way, or even 2 way speakers.

Wouldn't have a slight modification to the LFE circuit make it possible to actively provide a low pass section for the woofers, with the crossover management taking care of the high pass section when the mid and high frequency drivers are set as small speakers? That was the understanding that led me to believe that the SR5010 was providing active bi-amplification.

For the subwoofer, if you can bypass it's crossover, or even simply set it to maximum, you are sort of biamping that part in a sense, the mid and high range drivers are the issues here because the AVR's high pass is limited to typically 250 Hz so even if you remove the internal crossovers of the speakers you still cannot do it right, not without adding suitable external crossovers. It is not that simple at all.

Also, in the owner's manual, Marantz say that the bi-amping method is used to connect separate amplifiers to terminal of bi-amp compatible speakers. They don't specify whether it's for an active or a passive configuration. Speaker cabinets without passive crossovers are also bi-amp compatible, aren't they? Rather confusing!

You got a point, they could have been more specific about this, but Marantz probably figure 99.99%(at least) of the people who use their AVRs to biamp, will have speakers that have build in crossovers.

In addition, page 46 relating to this passive bi-amping process adds that such connection enables back EMF from the woofer to flow into the tweeter without affecting the sound quality, producing a higher SQ. What weird info is that? It's exactly the opposite: By using two amps either in a passive or active bi-amping configuration, the back EMF from the woofer is actually prevented from reaching the tweeter.

That's a good find, I read the manual for the SR5009, AVR-X3300W, same mistake. You have to go way back to the manual of the SR5007, AVR-X4000 to get the correct description.

 

[PENG]

So, it is not in Greek.
Good news.

I trust Mr. Steve Munz could have written it in any language and it would still be easy to read and understood. You just may have to Google translate it. The guy is just talented in technical writing, plus I have the feeling that he wouldn't write something unless he understood the topic very well himself..

 

[Michael Hogan]

Thanks for your responses (everyone helped). Thanks PENG for the website links and Acu for some ideas about tweaking this Denon. My old AVR was a Marantz 5200...maybe I should have stuck with this brand.

The Denon X3300 does have a lot more power, but I'm willing to spend more to get better. I see this AVR is selling for 600.00 (US). In the 600-900 price range, is there something better? I just don't trust what the local dealers tell me.

 

[Pogre]

Thanks for your responses (everyone helped). Thanks PENG for the website links and Acu for some ideas about tweaking this Denon. My old AVR was a Marantz 5200...maybe I should have stuck with this brand.

The Denon X3300 does have a lot more power, but I'm willing to spend more to get better. I see this AVR is selling for 600.00 (US). In the 600-900 price range, is there something better? I just don't trust what the local dealers tell me.

The Denon X4300H is available now for $700. I think it's worth the extra hundo. That's about the best price on a really good mid tier receiver as you're gonna find right now. I've had great success with AC4L, but I'm pretty sure if you search around you may find similar pricing elsewhere.

If I were still shopping I'd be all over that. It also has Audyssey MultEQ XT32/SubEQ, which is really nice for smoothing out and blending in your sub(s).

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Brand new Denon X4300 for $799.

https://www.amazon.com/Denon-AVRX4300H-technology-featuring-Bluetooth/dp/B01KZRPNIQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1506310355&sr=8-2&keywords=denon+avr-x4300h

Or a brand new Denon X3300 for $599.

https://www.amazon.com/Denon-AVR-X3300W-Channel-Receiver-Bluetooth/dp/B01HL8KYAY/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1506310444&sr=1-1&keywords=denon+avr-x3300

But you may not need a new AVR yet.

 

[PENG]

Thanks for your responses (everyone helped). Thanks PENG for the website links and Acu for some ideas about tweaking this Denon. My old AVR was a Marantz 5200...maybe I should have stuck with this brand.

The Denon X3300 does have a lot more power, but I'm willing to spend more to get better. I see this AVR is selling for 600.00 (US). In the 600-900 price range, is there something better? I just don't trust what the local dealers tell me.

As others mentioned, of course the Denon AVR-X4300H is a better deal even for USD200 more than the X3300H, especially if you are coming from a Marantz SR5200. In this digital age, either Denon model will do better than your much older Marantz, in both power output and sound quality. If you want to feel good about having an excellent DAC on board then go for the X4300H. For equivalent Marantz models, you would have to go for the SR7010 or SR7011 that has the same 32 bit DAC onboard. The SR7011 will cost more because of a couple of not so popular features and the forever hearsay that they sound better because of their proprietary HDAM. I have, and still own AVR/AVP from both brands, and can tell you from my experience, such internet hearsay are just hearsay, not facts. The only apparent fact is, each brand has it's own fanboys.

Don't believe dealer talks about Marantz sound vs Denon sound. If either has their own sound then they are not accurate/transparent amplifiers. This is not to say they all sound exactly the sound, but in a properly conducted comparison test one will find it difficult to tell a difference. Denon and Marantz both make low cost entry level products and high end products that sell for upwards of USD5000, for like 50 to 100W and those are catered for audiophiles who have golden ears but also for enthusiasts who just love exceptionally high quality and good looking components.