I'm confused

Pick up a higher powered ( 150 - 200 wpc ) 3 channel amp and use that for your center, left and right channels. This will take the load off of the power supply in the Denon and allow it to deliver more power to the remaining four channels in both a more consistent and dynamic manner.

Since you had all 7 channels pulling on the power supply at the same time, i'm sure that the power supply was sagging. This causes the power available to any channel at any given time to be reduced, resulting in starvation, clipping and smeared sonics. By reducing the number of channels drawing upon said power supply, in effect, you help to stabilize the power supply and minimize sag. This allows the amp to run at rated power with greated dynamic headroom for the remaining four channels.

At the same time that all of this is taking place, the majority of signal that you are listening to would be fed to the three front speakers in both a higher quality and more potent manner via the three channel amp. You get the most bang for the buck this way and can always upgrade the remaining channels at a later date should you feel the need. Sean
>

Buscis: While your comments about cleaning up the AC is quite valid in terms of providing a greater dynamic contrast, most multi-channel receivers are built phenomenally cheap. As such, the power supplies sag VERY noticeably when all channels are driven hard. I've seen units that are rated at 100 wpc actually produce 50 - 70 wpc when all channels are driven. Things can get even worse when driving low impedance speakers, since the power supply is REALLY "choking" as each channel tries to pull twice the current as it would at 8 ohms.

As such, going from a "choked" low power level for all channels to a "clean and real" higher power level for the mains and center and allowing the power supply of the receiver to somewhat "coast" and "stabilize" can make a drastic difference. Not only is the end result far punchier and cleaner, the increased stability of the power supply helps with better performance ( imaging, tonal balance, etc... ) in most every aspect.

Other than that, i agree with SD. 12 X 13 is WAY too small for a 7.1 installation. If you are currently running 5.1, what are you doing with the two extra Phantom's that you have ? Sean
>

Lej: I have seen and heard these speakers. The installation was far from optimum and we only listened for a brief period of time. They are a relatively unique design, that is for sure. Sean
>

Buscis: If the system was pulling as much power as you suggest, either the 15 amp breaker would be popping or there would be noticeable distortion of both the audio and video presentation on a regular basis. I do agree that there is a lot of gear hooked up to one outlet, but i really don't think that this is really that abnormal outside of "audiophileland" or "videophileland".

As to the wattage levels that you assigned the various gear, i think that they are a bit off in some respects. Most HT based subs use switching amps that are 90% efficient. There are some that are rated even higher i.e. at 94% if i recall correctly. Even under full load and working at an efficiency level of 90%, such an amp would be pulling 165 watts. At anything less than full throttle, it would be pulling quite a bit less.

As far as source components go, most of these devices are well under 45 watts at most. Most devices run somewhere between 15 watts and 35 under full load.

In terms of running another amp, you have to remember that we are removing power draw from the receiver for the two or three channels that the amp is taking over. Granted, i DO expect the amp to pull more power than the receiver does, but given the relatively low bias that most multi-channel amps operate at, it should still be within reason.

By the way, a 15 amp breaker running at 117 volts will allow 1755 watts to pass for an extended period of time before tripping. The same breaker running at 120 volts will trip at 1800 watts. I don't know where you came up with your figures, but they are incorrect. My figures are based on Ohm's Law and "theoretical" ratings of the breakers in terms of their "trip points".

Other than that, i do agree that another AC line would help things out. I still think that the receiver is anemic though.

Gunbei: Your suggestion about using the speakers in "small" mode is excellent. This will take much of the strain off of the receiver and may even allow the speakers to achieve a higher SPL AND do so in a cleaner fashion. Since the speakers would be seeing less power at lower frequencies, driver excursion and heat build-up would be reduced, allowing for both faster and more linear response at mid and high frequency levels. Since i sincerely doubt that these speakers are truly capable of deep bass due to their design and cabinet size, this should really help things out. Good thinking and a wise suggestion. I wish i would have thought of it. : ) Sean
>

Gunbei: My HT system consists of "large" speakers i.e. the mains have dual 12's and an 8", the center has dual 8's in a large box, the rears have two 10's and an 8", etc... As such, i've not had to tinker with various settings. With that in mind, the simple but elegant solution that you arrived at was initially out of my scope. That is, i never use those controls so i never thought about them. : )

Your suggestion to Lej regarding filter settings is right on the money. Hopefully he'll try that and be able to obtain a happy medium between fullness of sound and the SPL's that he desires. Sean
>

Gunbei: Are you green with an odd shaped head and hang around with a horse named "Pokey" ? Oh, nevermind. Wrong fictional guy, similar name... : )

As for my center channel, the cabinet is quite large at appr 4 cu ft. This is an obvious advantage when it comes to bass reproduction as you probably know. As such, the "little" pair of 8's can do 30 Hz quite well ). The fact that they are only running up to 1.2 KHz allows them to make pretty long excursions without muddying things up.

As for LFE subs, i've been experimenting in that department a bit. I typically run two independent subs with each one housing a downloaded 12" driver. These drivers are identical to those found in the mains. As to why i downloaded them, this helps to reduce the audibility of distortion, reduces the effects of localization, increases spl capacity, lowers the cut-off frequency of the driver, increases "earthquake effects" via floor transmissions, etc... The drawbacks of downloading are that it reduces power handling and stresses the suspension of the driver to a great extent.

All speakers in this system are of a sealed design ( the ONLY way to fly ). The mains are solid down to 23 Hz with a Q of .5, the center is solid down to about 32 Hz with a Q of .7 and the rears are solid down to 27 Hz with a Q of .65 or so. If someone reading this knows anything about interpreting speaker specs, they would instantly know that i am a big fan of very tight, well controlled bass. Ported or passive radiator "slop" is not allowed in my house ( just kidding ) : )

As far as amplification goes, the two mains are being fed 1200 wpc ( actually measured at 1480 wpc @ clipping ) and the center, surrounds and each sub are fed 800+ wpc. These ratings are based on the nominal 4 ohm load that each speaker presents to the various amplifier channels.

As far as my responses primarily concentrating on 2 channel, i have four 2 channel systems and 1 HT system. You tell me what is more important ??? : ) Sean
>