I also use four Klipsch Dolby Atmos speakers of this type. I have never heard ceiling mounted speakers to compare (not an option in my home), but I'm quite pleased both for music and movies. Just point them towards the listening position for best results. Also a more reflective ceiling will produce better results.
New AVR ordered...
- Thread starter GOS
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
These will be sitting on top of my current Klipsch. So, whatever their position is....will be position for these. Only, they will be pointed up towards the ceiling obviously.
milt
800 Club - QQ All-Star
The man simply has no self control.
I'm looking forward to your opinion on all this new stuff.
I often wonder about those Atmos height speakers that sit atop the main speakers. I don't think they would work for me as my listening area has a dropped ceiling made from sound absorbing fiber-like tiles.
It was only a few years back that the audio gods were directing us to reduce reflections like the ones we are now trying to produce with atmos. Go figure.
What you want to avoid is a Direct Reflection.
5.1 and above is by it's nature is reflective.
Atmos done right is very immersive.
I have a stupid equipment question for anyone... I'm thinking about getting an Emotiva 5 channel, 100W per channel amp. My Yamaha AVR is already 100W per channel. Would this be an additive effect of 200W per channel, or would the Emotiva wattage replace the Yamaha wattage? (sorry to invade your thread, Gene, but I thought I could get a quick answer by posting on this popular thread!@
@
I have a stupid equipment question for anyone... I'm thinking about getting an Emotiva 5 channel, 100W per channel amp. My Yamaha AVR is already 100W per channel. Would this be an additive effect of 200W per channel, or would the Emotiva wattage replace the Yamaha wattage? (sorry to invade your thread, Gene, but I thought I could get a quick answer by posting on this popular thread!
It would replace the Yamaha's power output.
How can it be additive? Unless you are going to bi-amp the speakers, how do you connect both amps to the same speaker array? It may not even be electrically possible without shorting something out.
You may still get a minimal upgrade however in that the Emotiva amp is probably rated at 100 wpc with all channels driven. Most AVRs rate maximum power with only a pair of channels driven. The separates usually have more dynamic headroom.
I have a stupid equipment question for anyone... I'm thinking about getting an Emotiva 5 channel, 100W per channel amp. My Yamaha AVR is already 100W per channel. Would this be an additive effect of 200W per channel, or would the Emotiva wattage replace the Yamaha wattage? (sorry to invade your thread, Gene, but I thought I could get a quick answer by posting on this popular thread!
Strange question Sean. Unless your speakers have bi-amping capability, any arrangement where you try to connect anything to both amps at the same time will blow them both to smithereens.
I don't see why 5.1 would be any more reflective than a stereo setup. If each speaker in the array is equally positioned from side walls and obstacles, the front pair is no more or less reflective than the rear pair.
If you are referring to the addition of ambiance in the rear channels, that a different argument. In that case, what is coming from the rears aren't reflections from the other speakers. That is a deliberate attempt at recreating the reflections of the original venue.
Spock
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Those low/mid range reveivers usually deliver good power with only 2 channels driven - 100 to 150W per channel, but with 5 channels driven usually falls below 50W per channel:
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/yamaha-rx-v775wa-av-receiver-test-bench
Supplying with a 3x150W amplifier to drive center and surround channels, letting receiver drive fronts - you will have a 3 times more powerful combo. A lot more headroom!
Edit: My answer was to Skherbeck
Thanks to everyone who responded to me (I told you it was a stupid question)... looks like I'll have to spend a lot more money to upgrade my power output!
Those low/mid range reveivers usually deliver good power with only 2 channels driven - 100 to 150W per channel, but with 5 channels driven usually falls below 50W per channel:
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/yamaha-rx-v775wa-av-receiver-test-bench
Supplying with a 3x150W amplifier to drive center and surround channels, letting receiver drive fronts - you will have a 3 times more powerful combo. A lot more headroom!
Edit: My answer was to Skherbeck
This is unfortunately a true statement regarding most AVR's...output drops substantially with all channels driven. The AVR power supplies just aren't robust enough to produce that much juice with all channels driven. Unless you have very efficient speakers like GOS's Klipshes, you may notice "compression" when you crank up the volume. Subwoofers help to reduce compression because low frequencies consume lots of power which the subwoofer's amp provides. But those of us who who prefer to use inefficient full range speakers all around that can reach down to below 30Hz...well, we need amps with huge power supplies.
During the 2000's decade, there were AVR beasts out there like the Lexicon RV-8 that could indeed produce a full 140 WPC with 5 channels driven, close to 200 WPC with 4 ohm speakers, and stable down to 2 ohm speaker loads. It weighed a ton and was made out of unaffordium. I need to keep mine a very, very long time...so it had better not die on me!
markshan
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Actually, what you need is a good HT pre and a rack of two channel amps to drive those power hungry beasts.
markshan
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
I love the tone on my older Denon. It is the setup/menuing that I hate. Have they simplfied it at all?
markshan
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
If your receiver has surround pre outs, you could use a dedicated stereo amp for those. That wouldn't "add power" to the other channels, but it would allow more headroom since the power supply would only be taxed by three channels instead of five (provided your receiver has a way to "kill" channels), so it is kind of the same net effect as adding power.
Edit: I missed Spock's answer when I wrote this.
Spock
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
This is very true, I use to have the Pioneer Elite VSX-94TXH (VSX-LX70 in Europe) and was very happy with it. Then "upgraded" a few years later to a Yamaha Advantage RX-A1030 and experienced that when it got busy soundwise, in movies, the sound collapsed, plenty compression.
Later read those measurings:
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/pioneer-elite-vsx-94txh-av-receiver-measurements
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/yamaha-rx-a1020-av-receiver-ht-labs-measures
Pioneer all channels driven, 7 channels = 120W per channel
Yamaha all channels driven, 7 channels = 57W per channel
This on medium efficient speakers using subwoofer, all speakers cut at 80Hz - at "normal" sound level for movies. Well, it explained the problem...
I believe GOS will be happy with the performance of his new Denon, it delivers close to 100W per channel 5 channels driven, should be good on those effective Klipsch speakers.
https://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-x4200w-av-receiver-review-test-bench
milt
800 Club - QQ All-Star
oops, see several people already answered
Amplifiers don't have a 'tone'.
Denon AVRs , like many, have a number of DSPs that might 'on' by default. Those could add 'tone'.
But anyway.
Denon AVRs , like many, have a number of DSPs that might 'on' by default. Those could add 'tone'.
But anyway.
markshan
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Absurd.
Hi Mark!
This is basically my first Denon. It works for me. Denon does have a setup wizard one can use at anytime to simplify the depth of the menu for configuring the speakers, etc.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2013
- Messages
- 24,493
Regarding sully's remark that amplifiers have NO TONE IS absurd. Ever have a tube amp? A much different tone than a solid state one....although problematic [and expensive] when it comes time to change the tubes. I've been through many amps over the years and the way each one controls various speaker systems [ohms], etc. some do sound way better than others but the suggestion that GOS should invest in a beefier amp for the fronts [and even the rears] and use his receiver as a pre/pro ain't such a bad idea as receivers do have limitations as pertains to output wattage, especially when running running 7.1. THAT IS TRUE!
I've always been a firm believer in separate components and only use a receiver in my bedroom. Larger rooms require a much larger sound and when you start raising the volume on receivers, their limitations are quite obvious. Suggestion: I'd invest in a separate 5.1 AMP and use the Denon amps to drive the Atmos speakers....IF that's feasible.
Similar threads
