803S BiAmp or BigAmp?

**ninja12** · 06 December 2008, 19:53 Saturday

Originally posted by specialized

I got a HTM3S to complement my 803s connected to Rotel RB-1080. After few hours of testing i realized that DENON 3808 dont have enough juice to drive HTM3S and i got a little bit dissapointed.. Anyway, my dealer borrow me another RB-1080 to try to drive HTM3S. Awesome difference.. Everything much better (When i turn off the center speaker now, i can hear the difference. When HTM3S is connected to Denon , if i turn off the center speaker there is no difference at all, or there is better with ghost center). Anyway, while i have another RB-1080, i biamped HTM3S. One channel to Highs Other channel to Lows.. And i think i feel the difference.. So i wonder what is better for 803S.

Please compare this scenario One Rotel RB-1080 per speaker (one channel to highs, second channel to lows)

to

1. Rotel RB-1090
2. Rotel RB-1080 normaly driven (i would try my self, but dont have two y spliters in this moment, and no enough speaker cables).
3. McIntosh MC252
4. Primare A32

Greetings

Darko

I have the 803S and the HTM3S too. I use to run mine that way, and I loved it. I had one 1080 connected to my FL and the other connected to my FR. One channel to the highs and mids and the other channel to the lows. I had my RMB-1095 driving my center, surrounds, and rears. That's a very nice set up.

**Briz vegas** · 06 December 2008, 20:12 Saturday

I would go for a better amp over 2 good amps but I am 90% stereo these days.

Last time I was amazed by surround was Master and Commander with the great ship sounds.

**wettou** · 06 December 2008, 23:45 Saturday

specialized

1 better amp will do much better check this out

Emotiva XPA-1

**specialized** · 07 December 2008, 01:46 Sunday

The problem is there is not a much to choose where i live.. I can choose Rotel, somehow Primare and next jump is McIntosh or Classe (which are so expensive).

So i was wondering how much I'll get with biamping Rotel RB-1080

How much difference would be between Normaly Driver one RB-1080 vs two RB-1080 biamped..

Darko

p.s. This Emotiva look like impressive part of hardware and too bad that i cant get it here

Originally posted by wettou

specialized

1 better amp will do much better check this out

Emotiva XPA-1

**specialized** · 07 December 2008, 01:47 Sunday

Originally posted by ninja12

I have the 803S and the HTM3S too. I use to run mine that way, and I loved it. I had one 1080 connected to my FL and the other connected to my FR. One channel to the highs and mids and the other channel to the lows. I had my RMB-1095 driving my center, surrounds, and rears. That's a very nice set up.

How much difference u get between on Rotel RB-1080 vs Two?
Can u explain me please what got better and how much?

Darko

**Bluespower** · 07 December 2008, 06:13 Sunday

FYI - There are two Rotel 993s on AudiogoN right now. I have one doing the duty for center (HTM1) and surrounds (N805). Fronts are powered by a MC352.

**Ken49r** · 07 December 2008, 10:47 Sunday

Have you considered Rotel RMB-1095? Lot's of them on Agon for almost 1/2 price new. At least you will have even amount of power through out your system, then get a nice integrated down the road for 2 Ch.
I would change out the Denon with a Rotel RSP eventually as well.

**ninja12** · 07 December 2008, 15:40 Sunday

Originally posted by specialized

How much difference u get between on Rotel RB-1080 vs Two?
Can u explain me please what got better and how much?

Darko

The biggest thing that I noticed was that the overall sound was cleaner. I guess having a dedicated 400 watts available to each speaker was a big help. 200 watts for highs/mids and 200 watts for lows really opened and cleaned things up for me. But, as always, what works for one doesn't always work for another. The only way to find out is to try it and see if you like it.

**Kal Rubinson** · 07 December 2008, 15:46 Sunday

You should note that having 200w for highs/mids and 200w for lows does not equal 400w availability because the power distribution for most music, except for flute or violin solos, puts the greatest demands on the amp for the lows. In general, this results in a very small incremental difference between what was available for the lows (and the highs) and what is now available (for the lows only). A single 400w amp would provide much more usable power.

Kal

**specialized** · 07 December 2008, 16:32 Sunday

Originally posted by Kal Rubinson

You should note that having 200w for highs/mids and 200w for lows does not equal 400w availability because the power distribution for most music, except for flute or violin solos, puts the greatest demands on the amp for the lows. In general, this results in a very small incremental difference between what was available for the lows (and the highs) and what is now available (for the lows only). A single 400w amp would provide much more usable power.

Kal

I think this is the answer i was looking for.. Now it's more clear to me.. Thank u. . And too bad Rotel dont make RB-1090 anymore

Greetings

Darko

**ninja12** · 07 December 2008, 17:20 Sunday

Originally posted by Kal Rubinson

You should note that having 200w for highs/mids and 200w for lows does not equal 400w availability because the power distribution for most music, except for flute or violin solos, puts the greatest demands on the amp for the lows. In general, this results in a very small incremental difference between what was available for the lows (and the highs) and what is now available (for the lows only). A single 400w amp would provide much more usable power.

Kal

Man, I learn something new every day. Thanks for educating me on that. I thought 200 watts per channel would mean that I would have 400 watts available for each speaker since I was using one channel for highs/mids and the other channel for the lows.

**WI Rotel** · 07 December 2008, 18:04 Sunday

Just don't bother with the whole biamping BS. The rotels have more than enough juice to drive 803's silly. Just use your 1080 for the mains and buy another amp for the surrounds. The 1095 and 1080 are sonic peas in a pod. If you can get a 1095 at 1/2 price its a no brainer. If you are using subs you have even less need of an orangutan amp since they are doing all the heavy lifting!

**wettou** · 07 December 2008, 18:55 Sunday

Originally posted by Kal Rubinson

You should note that having 200w for highs/mids and 200w for lows does not equal 400w availability because the power distribution for most music, except for flute or violin solos, puts the greatest demands on the amp for the lows. In general, this results in a very small incremental difference between what was available for the lows (and the highs) and what is now available (for the lows only). A single 400w amp would provide much more usable power. Kal

Thanks Kal that makes sence, did you ever review some of Emotiva's products? I would be interested in knowing what you think about the new amp Emotiva XPA-1? http://www.emotiva.com/xpa1.shtm

On paper it looks outstanding :T

**Kal Rubinson** · 07 December 2008, 19:34 Sunday

Originally posted by wettou

Thanks Kal that makes sence, did you ever review some of Emotiva's products? I would be interested in knowing what you think about the new amp Emotiva XPA-1? http://www.emotiva.com/xpa1.shtm

On paper it looks outstanding :T

It does look interesting but there are many other items that appeal to me as much, on paper.

Kal

**wettou** · 08 December 2008, 13:54 Monday

Originally posted by Kal Rubinson

It does look interesting but there are many other items that appeal to me as much, on paper.

Kal

Kal, you should ask them for demo units so you can tell us what you think :T

803S BiAmp or BigAmp?

803S BiAmp or BigAmp?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Related Topics