Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

How do Pro Sound amps compare with "audio only" amps for mains use?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
19 replies to this topic

#1 of 20 OFFLINE   MichaelDDD

MichaelDDD

    Supporting Actor



  • 593 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2003

Posted October 17 2003 - 01:11 AM

This may be comparing apples to oranges, but I'm a spec-sheet kinda guy...and they look similar to me.

Talking about amps like Crown, Behringer, QSC vs. amps like NAD, Outlaw, Rotel.

I know that many people use prosound amps on their sub, where freq response isn't critical...big power is. But what about on you main 5 (or 7) speakers?

I've noticed that most of the prosound amps don't have RCA ins...but that easily fixable with some 1/4"-to-RCA plugs from radio shack...I doubt there'd be any signal loss with it.

Some of the better prosound amps have better than 100db S/N ratios, .01 THD, etc.

Here's an example

Thanks for your input.
Yeah, I base all my HT purchases on the WAF, too. Wallet Acceptance Factor.

#2 of 20 OFFLINE   Chu Gai

Chu Gai

    Lead Actor



  • 7,270 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 29 2001

Posted October 17 2003 - 09:39 AM

Spectacularly well however fan noise may be an issue. Also many don't like the utilitarian appearance but if you can get by those issues then you'll have power up the wazoo.

#3 of 20 OFFLINE   Tuan Le

Tuan Le

    Agent



  • 40 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 01 2003

Posted October 17 2003 - 10:15 AM

I'm interested in knowing the differences as well. I have been looking at couple Crown amps. Posted Image

#4 of 20 OFFLINE   Wayne A. Pflughaupt

Wayne A. Pflughaupt

    Producer



  • 5,910 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 05 1999

Posted October 17 2003 - 10:36 AM

As with many other component, it probably depends largely on the overall quality of your system. For instance, if you have $10,000 speakers fronted by similarly-priced separates, you may not like the sound of a pro amp. However, if you’re using more ordinary equipment, you’ll probably be very happy with a pro amp.

I’d avoid low-end brands like Behringer, Samson, etc. altogether, and possibly even the low-end offerings of the more respected brands. Pro amps designated for studio use are always a good choice, although many of them have power ratings similar to home amps.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

My Equipment List
“A nice mid-fi system,” according to an audiophile acquaintance.

My Tech / DIY Articles and Reviews

#5 of 20 OFFLINE   MichaelDDD

MichaelDDD

    Supporting Actor



  • 593 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2003

Posted October 17 2003 - 12:40 PM

Interesting and hope-inspiring responses! Posted Image Thanks guys. Anyone else care to throw their opinion into the ring?

The look doesnt' matter much to me; it's an amp. In fact, I happen to find a rack full of black boxes with little LEDs on them quite stimulating. Posted Image

Now, the receiever or pre/pro, that's gotta appeal to me b/c I'll be interacting with it constantly. The amp just sits there and does it's thing. Clean the dust off it once a week, vacuum off the heatsinks and it's happy.
Yeah, I base all my HT purchases on the WAF, too. Wallet Acceptance Factor.

#6 of 20 OFFLINE   JohnMW

JohnMW

    Second Unit



  • 283 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 2000

Posted October 17 2003 - 01:15 PM

Wayne, any particular reason why you'd avoid Samson?

SVS seems to like them

#7 of 20 OFFLINE   Yogi

Yogi

    Screenwriter



  • 1,741 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 25 2002

Posted October 17 2003 - 01:23 PM

I find pro amps to sound quite lively and pretty detailed. To my ears they seem to have accentuated treble and so they lead to fatigue. But this is only to my ears. I won't say they sound worse than 'audio only' amps, only different. If you like forward, analytical sound then pro amps may be the ticket. They give you the most bang for the buck and are usually built like a tankPosted Image.


Best of luck.
The truth is not out there but within you.

#8 of 20 OFFLINE   JimPeitersen

JimPeitersen

    Second Unit



  • 474 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 07 2001

Posted October 17 2003 - 06:58 PM

I agree with most of the comments. It has been my observation that the "better" lines of pro amps (QSC PLX & Powerlight, Crown MX & Macrotech, Crest CA, Stewart Reference, etc.) sound very good, at least the equal of fine "home" amps. Yes, you do get "power," but the cost is also quite high. So, are you getting a better value with the pro amps? The cheap lines look good at first glance, but probably won't make you happy in the long run. Many here have pro amps, just wait to hear there opinions.
JP

#9 of 20 OFFLINE   MichaelDDD

MichaelDDD

    Supporting Actor



  • 593 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2003

Posted October 17 2003 - 07:04 PM

Yeah, I've been looking into the "better" pro amps. $500 for a two channel, 250 WPC @ 8ohms is not uncommon.

By the time I finished "amping up", I'd have spent a pretty penny. This is not a cheap addiction...er, hobby. Posted Image

For that kind of money, I could get an Outlaw 5.1 or 7.1 amp and be done with it. Posted Image

I'm concerned b/c my receiver (Kenwood VR-409) isn't rated to drive 6 ohm loads, only 8 ohm loads.

My center and surrounds are 6 ohm and the main L/R are 8 ohms.

Would it lessen the load (or have a positive effect) on my reciever to have a single two-channel outboard amp for the front left/right? That would leave only the center and surrounds powered by the receiver.

Even though each of the 5 channels has it's own "power", they all still draw off the same power supply.


Would this be a good idea?
Yeah, I base all my HT purchases on the WAF, too. Wallet Acceptance Factor.

#10 of 20 OFFLINE   Wayne A. Pflughaupt

Wayne A. Pflughaupt

    Producer



  • 5,910 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 05 1999

Posted October 18 2003 - 02:12 AM

John,

Quote:
Wayne, any particular reason why you'd avoid Samson? SVS seems to like them.
Please note, the discussion here is about using pro-amps for the main channels, not subs. I’ve seen several people on this Forum who said they tried using the Samson for their mains, and they weren’t happy with the results. One person described the sound as “gritty.”

Michael,

Quote:
I'm concerned b/c my receiver (Kenwood VR-409) isn't rated to drive 6 ohm loads, only 8 ohm loads.

My center and surrounds are 6 ohm and the main L/R are 8 ohms.

Would it lessen the load (or have a positive effect) on my reciever to have a single two-channel outboard amp for the front left/right? That would leave only the center and surrounds powered by the receiver.

Even though each of the 5 channels has it's own "power", they all still draw off the same power supply.

Would this be a good idea?
If you check Kenwood’s stats from Sound & Vision’s Test Reports web page, you can see a significant discrepancy between their rated power compared and actual power with all channels driven. This is consistent across the board for all Kenwoods tested. Thus I would expect that with two channels “relieved of duty,” as it were, you would expect to see the remaining channels deliver more power.

However, keeping in mind the standard wisdom that you have to double power to see a significant increase in performance, you might be better off getting outboard power for all channels.

What you might do is get a two-channel amp with a return policy and try it out. The added power to the other speakers might be just enough to “get them over the top.”

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

My Equipment List
“A nice mid-fi system,” according to an audiophile acquaintance.

My Tech / DIY Articles and Reviews

#11 of 20 OFFLINE   MichaelDDD

MichaelDDD

    Supporting Actor



  • 593 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2003

Posted October 18 2003 - 03:32 AM

Thank you, Wayne. I appreciate the link too.Posted Image

You know, before I realized what I was missing and started upgrading, I thought my little Kenwood was pretty good. :b

Now I realize how wrong I was. Well, it's great for what it is: a 5.1 DD/DTS receiver for the budding audio/videophile type person. Gotta have more now, though.

The question is: do I keep the Kenwood and use it as a pre/pro or get a new "real" receiver?
Yeah, I base all my HT purchases on the WAF, too. Wallet Acceptance Factor.

#12 of 20 OFFLINE   Salvador

Salvador

    Second Unit



  • 431 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 04 2001

Posted October 18 2003 - 07:00 PM

i recently sold my denon 3802. i'm using the samson s1000 as my amp for my mains (paradigm sutdio 20's). I'd have to say that the sound i am getting from the s1000 is a definate step down from the amps of the 3802. The best way i could describe the sound is it became 'thinner'. Cymbals now sound like tin cans and voices are a bit more shrill (causing listener fatigue).

Quote:
Please note, the discussion here is about using pro-amps for the main channels, not subs. I’ve seen several people on this Forum who said they tried using the Samson for their mains, and they weren’t happy with the results. One person described the sound as “gritty.”


i agree

#13 of 20 OFFLINE   MichaelDDD

MichaelDDD

    Supporting Actor



  • 593 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2003

Posted October 18 2003 - 08:15 PM

Thanks for your input, Salvador. I'll definitely be staying away from the Samson, that's definite.

Looking at Crown right now. Looking at the CE1000, specifically. Just waiting to hear back from their tech support on using RCA-to-1/4" adapter plugs. The input level should be OK; the amp is rated for full output with 1.7v in. The Kenwood puts out either 1.5 or 2.0 volts on the preouts...can't remember which one.
Yeah, I base all my HT purchases on the WAF, too. Wallet Acceptance Factor.

#14 of 20 OFFLINE   Mike Sloan

Mike Sloan

    Second Unit



  • 456 posts
  • Join Date: May 18 2002

Posted October 19 2003 - 01:11 AM

I read a review on the Crown K2 where the "reviewer" also experimented with hooking the amp up to a pair of B&W 804's and he remarked that the amp exhibited gobs of power but was less detailed in the treble frequencies. I would definitely go with the offerings from Outlaw...especially the deals they are runing on their 200W monoblocks!
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain.

#15 of 20 OFFLINE   MichaelDDD

MichaelDDD

    Supporting Actor



  • 593 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2003

Posted October 19 2003 - 01:24 AM

Hi Mike Sloan,

Believe me, I've looked at the Outlaw offerings; I am sure they are most excellent products.

But $300 for a 200-watt single channel amp? That seems a bit pricey to me.

Looking at offerings from Crown or QSC, for another $50-$100, I can get a 200W.P.C. stereo amp that would do 900watts mono @ 8 ohms if need be. The specs aren't all that far off, either.

I've got emails in to both Crown and QSC tech support telling them what I want to do and soliciting advice. Haven't heard from either one yet, but it is the weekend. Posted Image

I know there's more to sound than just specs...but I'm just stuck in a quandry right now. Want the best bang for the buck. Monoblocks are snazzy, but the value vs. price ratio just isn't there, IMO.
Yeah, I base all my HT purchases on the WAF, too. Wallet Acceptance Factor.

#16 of 20 OFFLINE   Tom Grooms

Tom Grooms

    Second Unit



  • 273 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 17 2000

Posted October 19 2003 - 02:54 AM

Quote:
But $300 for a 200-watt single channel amp? That seems a bit pricey to me.
ROTFLMAO, they dont get any cheaper (less expensive) than that.

MichaelDDD, Why do you feel you need so much power? Are your speakers inefficient? Huge room? Tell us about the rest of your gear, room and listening habits and maybe we can be more helpful.

#17 of 20 OFFLINE   MichaelDDD

MichaelDDD

    Supporting Actor



  • 593 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2003

Posted October 19 2003 - 03:01 AM

I just KNEW someone was gonna say "$300? That's dirt cheap for a monoblock!!" But I decided not to edit my post. :P

"Expensive" is relative, you know. Posted Image

Here's the deal. My current receiver, a Kenwood VR-409, runs out of steam with movies at high volume. I.E. all channels driven. It does OK w/2-channel music, though.

I watch horror and action flicks 99% of the time, so it's usually loud.

Also, the 5-piece set I just bought (Axiom)is 6 ohms and the Kenwood isn't rated to 6 ohms. I'd DIE if anything happened to my new speakers...could care less about the receiver.

Ergo, this quest for better/more juice. Posted Image

*edit*
Listening habits? Does "freakin' loud" cover it? Posted Image
Seriously, during dinner or business meetings, it low, of course. But movies, it's cranked. Music, it's cranked at least 50% of the time. I may not be home for days, but when I am, I wanna feel it, man.
Yeah, I base all my HT purchases on the WAF, too. Wallet Acceptance Factor.

#18 of 20 OFFLINE   Tom Grooms

Tom Grooms

    Second Unit



  • 273 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 17 2000

Posted October 19 2003 - 03:12 AM

Do you own a good subwoofer?

#19 of 20 OFFLINE   Phil A

Phil A

    Screenwriter



  • 2,894 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 01 2000
  • Real Name:Phil
  • LocationCentral FL

Posted October 19 2003 - 03:16 AM

If you are looking for monoblocks, I picked up a used Marantz monoblock on Audiogon recently for a rear center. They go for $150-200 each (such as these that sold - http://cgi.audiogon.....ran). Your receiver runs out of steam since it shares power supplies. An outboard amp will of course put less burdern on them. Another possibility is something like http://cgi.audiogon.....an&1070385460, I actually have one of those laying around. I was thinking about saving it for the basement for the reason if I get a receiver down there (my main system us upstairs) it would run out of steam as well.

#20 of 20 OFFLINE   MichaelDDD

MichaelDDD

    Supporting Actor



  • 593 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 29 2003

Posted October 19 2003 - 03:20 AM

Yep, got the sub-bass covered. SVS PB2-plus.

Phil, thanks for sharing the info and links. Posted Image I'll check those out now.

The good thing is that I'm in no rush...don't need to buy anything tomorrow, so I can take my time and research.

The bad thing is that I have no money right now...so I guess the good thing is REALLY good. Posted Image
Yeah, I base all my HT purchases on the WAF, too. Wallet Acceptance Factor.


Back to Receivers/Separates/Amps



Forum Nav Content I Follow