I need help to decide on multi channel amp config.

thanks for the advise
that would eliminate option 1.
Any comments respect to comparing options 2 and 3? (Aragon 5 + 2 vs Rotel 5 +2 )
alfredo

alfredo, I would hope that you could listen to the Rotel RB-1090 and the Aragon 3002. On paper the Rotel looks to be the better amp for the big Paradigm front speakers..but does is sound better? I can't answer that, I hope someone else that has tried both with your speakers can give you a little help. After you decide between these two..pick the five channel amp of the same brand IMHO. I would also have dedicated circuts installed for your system.

Dave

Hi Dave

Thanks again

I have already installed a dedicated circuit for this HT/music room. Besides the two amps and the sub,the same circuit will feed AC to the rest of small (powerconsumptionwise)equipment: Pre-Proc, players and cable boxes. Do you think that is good enough?

Respect to the comparison, I agree that is the best way to choose, unfortunately I will not be able to do it because there are not local dealers for these brands. Even in the US I think Aragon dealers would not carry Paradigm speakers and viceversa. So its hard to find a salesman than could give me an honest pinion based on a A-B test.

The only thing I have heard from dealers is that Aragon MC amps have been tailored for the Klipsch speakers (K. owns Aragon) and Paradigm dealers would say Aragon amps suck as compared to Rotels (they usually do not carry Rotels).

Still waiting for some help from someone who has tried both amps.

Alfredo

Hi Alfredo,

I have listened to both Aragon and Rotel amps previously, and my preference is for Aragon. I find that Aragon has more depth and detail.....but that is just my preference....

As crazy as it sounds, I would recommend that you go for 2 five-channel Aragon amplifiers for your 7-speaker configuration. I have found that I got the best result through bi-amping (2-channels for 1 speaker), rather than a single-channel for 1 speaker. Even though the single channel has larger power output on the 2-channel amp (300 watts vs. 200 watts), the sound will come through with much more dynamic and resolution when the speakers are bi-amped with the five channel amp. I have tried out this type of arrangement, and what I found was that bi-amping always sounded better with comparable amps. The only caveat to bi-amping is to make sure that the amps have the same gain. This will be ensured when you use the same amp.

Currently, I am using a Krell KAV-1500 (5-channel amp) and a Krell KAV-350a/3 (3-channel amp), to drive my 5-speaker B&W Nautilus 801/HTM-1/805 set up. I use six channels to bi-amp my two front and center speakers, and the remaining two channels for the rear surrounds.

So with 2 five-channel amps, you can use six channels for the two front and center speakers and the remaining four channels for the two side and two surround speakers....

Anyway, enjoy building your system and happy listening.....

Thanks for you co
mments!
One more question:
I have been told that bi-amping my paradigm studio 100's without an active crossover will be worthless..do you agree?

the person who said that claims that "passive bi-amping" - as he calls it- consisting in just removing the bridges between the tow pairs of posts in the back of the speaker and feeding each set of posts with a diferent amp is a "dubious benefit" that he would not recomend, as opossed to doing the same with prior active filtering to send to each set of posts only part of the spectrum.

what do you think?...do you passive bi-amp?

regards

alfredo