Prioritize Speakers or Amps

[ufguy73]

Originally Posted by Mikado463

note your quote above, I translate knowledge into wisdom.............

Regardless, do what you want but the 'wise' money says pick your speakers to suit your listening tastes and the environment they will be used in, then power them accordingly ...........

I also indicated in portions you did not quote my hesitation about his advice - but, at any rate, i don't find him particularly wise

[ufguy73]

Originally Posted by GSOphile

B&W 800 D3s are fairly efficient speakers (90DB) - not, say, 85DB or less, where a 1.25KW might make more sense. B&W shows recommended power of 50 - 500 watts. The 3 ohms minimum impedance is an indication that they don't want a wimpy amp that can't supply sufficient peak current (PHC1's comment above). But a 462 or 611s should be plenty. If it was my money, I'd be looking toward a 462 and spending the savings on a better pre, source components, and/or cable/conditioning. If you're in doubt, why not ask for a demo/trial after you buy your speakers? (Probably a good idea anyway!)

Thanks, yeah - i have a seperate thread asking for some dealer recs, as i dont feel that comfortable working with magnolia on this...

Problem is I have been having problems trying to find one in the San Francisco...I had interacted some with one in the city a few years ago and it was a disaster!

[miatadan]

Your choice of speakers will determine which amplifiers will work best. It is not the issue of how much power but synergy between the speakers and amplifier.

For exsample I felt the McIntosh worked better with Martin Logan, than the Magnepan's.

Also the volume levels you play your music will be a factor. For me, one issue I had with the Acoustats is that they required average of 30 watts to play at same volume Martin Logan's played at 3 watts.

I was more comfortable with speakers where according to the meters 90% of the time meters showing 3 watts to 30 watts therefore leaving a lot of headroom.

But if you can afford the MC1.25KW , they should almost power anything with ease.

In my experience the actual room for the stereo is more important than the speaker choice or amplifier. With a great room even in-expensive bookshelf speakers can sound great ( Elac Debut ) while the B&W 800D3's can sound awful in the wrong room.

I have a friend with the B&W 800D3's that sound great because they are in good room. While been in some room's where someone spent mega thousands on speakers, electronics and still sound awful.

Dan

[ufguy73]

Originally Posted by miatadan

Your choice of speakers will determine which amplifiers will work best. It is not the issue of how much power but synergy between the speakers and amplifier.

For exsample I felt the McIntosh worked better with Martin Logan, than the Magnepan's.

Also the volume levels you play your music will be a factor. For me, one issue I had with the Acoustats is that they required average of 30 watts to play at same volume Martin Logan's played at 3 watts.

I was more comfortable with speakers where according to the meters 90% of the time meters showing 3 watts to 30 watts therefore leaving a lot of headroom.

But if you can afford the MC1.25KW , they should almost power anything with ease.

In my experience the actual room for the stereo is more important than the speaker choice or amplifier. With a great room even in-expensive bookshelf speakers can sound great ( Elac Debut ) while the B&W 800D3's can sound awful in the wrong room.

I have a friend with the B&W 800D3's that sound great because they are in good room. While been in some room's where someone spent mega thousands on speakers, electronics and still sound awful.

Dan

Curious what distinguishes a ‘good’ room in this context - I assume its more than just dimensionally large enough for given speakers? Maybe treatments as well? Other things?

Thanks

[W9TR]

A good room:
* Is built with ratios of height, width, and length that distribute modes evenly.
* has been acoustically treated for an even decay time vs. frequency
* ideally has non parallel walls and no large expanses of highly reflective materials like glass.
* is large enough that speakers can be placed away from room boundaries.
* has very quiet hvac and is held at comfortable temperatures even with all the gear running
* has pleasing lighting with no glare

[GSOphile]

If you haven't seen it, an excellent book on how to get the most from your room and system is "Get Better Sound" by Jim Smith, who has helped many audiophiles with system setup over the years.

[ufguy73]

Originally Posted by W9TR

A good room:
* Is built with ratios of height, width, and length that distribute modes evenly.
* has been acoustically treated for an even decay time vs. frequency
* ideally has non parallel walls and no large expanses of highly reflective materials like glass.
* is large enough that speakers can be placed away from room boundaries.
* has very quiet hvac and is held at comfortable temperatures even with all the gear running
* has pleasing lighting with no glare

Originally Posted by GSOphile

If you haven't seen it, an excellent book on how to get the most from your room and system is "Get Better Sound" by Jim Smith, who has helped many audiophiles with system setup over the years.

Thanks!

I will look for the book, as well

[miatadan]

Originally Posted by W9TR

A good room:
* Is built with ratios of height, width, and length that distribute modes evenly.
* has been acoustically treated for an even decay time vs. frequency
* ideally has non parallel walls and no large expanses of highly reflective materials like glass.
* is large enough that speakers can be placed away from room boundaries.
* has very quiet hvac and is held at comfortable temperatures even with all the gear running
* has pleasing lighting with no glare

Good explanation , also I use this Cardas formula

http://www.cardas.com/room_setup_rectangular_room.php

hopefully this be helpful for you

Dan

[RaceCarDriver]

I purchased 800 D3s first.

Ran them off an underwhelming 150 watt 7ch HT amp for several months because I already had it. I knew I’d upgrade, I was just waiting for the right time, and in the mean time I already had my dream speakers.

After that I swapped it out for the 200 watt Marantz PM-10. Again because I had it and was using it on my 805D3s in another room.

I then purchased a McIntosh MC303 to run my LCR and another to run my surrounds. The improvement was great and the intent is to go mono blocks for the LCR and used the 303s for surrounds and atmos.

Since the 303s have been in use I have added the C1100 and D1100. HT passthrough on the C1100 works great. Cables have been upgraded along the way with more to go.

The point of all this is I didn’t start out with the ideal combination, but I have a vision, an end game. And in the last 12 months a I’ve been slowly upgrading all while keeping the speakers I wanted. A lot easier to sell, buy and upgrade amps, even if they weigh as much as 803s.

IMO if you start with the right speaker it will be a lot more enjoyable, even if the rest of it is not what you ultimately want right away.

[Puma Cat]

I always, always prioritize obtaining the best possible source first, whether that be a phono cartridge or stage, DAC, or USB streamer etc. Getting my Mac Mini out of the audio rack and into another part of the house and installing my Sonore microRendu made one of the biggest improvements for digital content I've ever done.

The other area that is a top priority is clean, grunge-free power. I've found a really good power distributor and power cord makes quite bit more of a difference than better ICs or SCs.

The best amps and speakers can't put back what gets lost at the source.