I have a NAD C350 stereo integrated amp I use for stereo sources and
it sounds great. I have just bought the Denon 1907 receiever but still
want to run music through the stereo nad amp, and L + R movie channels
from the receiver to the same Left and Right front speakers.

Scenario ONE

Now, I could use the front L + R pre-outs of the reciever to feed the
C350 and permenantly have my speakers connected to the C350 and
disable the front L + R outputs of the receiver...


Scenario TWO

Just run one set of left and right cables from BOTH the Stereo amp AND
the receiver to the SAME terminals on the speakers, so I would get
sound from either amp at any time. (But would this cause damage with
both amps technically working 'against' each other?? They both
wouldn't be switch on at the same time, but still.....)

Scenario THREE

Run L + R wires from BOTH amps to the speakers as in scenario two, but
connected to SEPARATE CROSSOVER TERMINALS on each speaker, (the
terminals that would usually be used for bi-wiring). (But would this
cause one amp to sound 'tinny' and one to sound 'bassy'??)

Scenario FOUR

Have the C350 permanantly connected to the receiver's front L + R pre-
outs, then connected to one crossover on the speakers AND have the L +
R outputs of the receiver enabled, connected to the other crosspoint
terminals on the same speakers. (would this be classed as as an
effective way of bi-wiring, or would this setup sound odd??)

Advice much appreciated!

Cheers,
Dan

On 17 Feb 2007 13:37:18 -0800, wrote:

I have a NAD C350 stereo integrated amp I use for stereo sources and
it sounds great. I have just bought the Denon 1907 receiever but still
want to run music through the stereo nad amp, and L + R movie channels
from the receiver to the same Left and Right front speakers.

OK, I think I understand this - you reckon that the NAD will sound
better, and either your existing front speakers are very good or you
can't find the space/money for a second pair. Sounds logical - I also
use a different stereo amp for music from my surround receiver, but I
have a second pair of front speakers.

Scenario ONE

Now, I could use the front L + R pre-outs of the reciever to feed the
C350 and permenantly have my speakers connected to the C350 and
disable the front L + R outputs of the receiver...

You could, but that would give you problems balancing the front L+R
with the rest of the surround system for surround use. Too much hassle
for my liking.

Scenario TWO

Just run one set of left and right cables from BOTH the Stereo amp AND
the receiver to the SAME terminals on the speakers, so I would get
sound from either amp at any time. (But would this cause damage with
both amps technically working 'against' each other?? They both
wouldn't be switch on at the same time, but still.....)

I'm no engineer, but I suspect that this might not cause damage.
Nonetheless, I wouldn't want to run the risk if it was my kit.

And then there'll be the time when you forget to turn one off when
using the other.

Scenario THREE

Run L + R wires from BOTH amps to the speakers as in scenario two, but
connected to SEPARATE CROSSOVER TERMINALS on each speaker, (the
terminals that would usually be used for bi-wiring). (But would this
cause one amp to sound 'tinny' and one to sound 'bassy'??)

If the crossover remains connected to both sets of terminals, I think
that this would be effectively the same as no. 2 above.

Scenario FOUR

Have the C350 permanantly connected to the receiver's front L + R pre-
outs, then connected to one crossover on the speakers AND have the L +
R outputs of the receiver enabled, connected to the other crosspoint
terminals on the same speakers. (would this be classed as as an
effective way of bi-wiring, or would this setup sound odd??)

Don't think I understand this one.

I think that there's a fifth option, and it's the one I'd try, though
it does involve spending a little more money. There are switchboxes
around that are designed to allow the switching of two pairs of
speakers from one amp (example at
http://www.audiovisualonline.co.uk/d.../display.html).
I don't see why you couldn't reverse this - ie, connect both amps to
the speaker terminals and the speakers to the amp terminals. NB: the
example I've offered is for a series switch. I'm not certain that it's
not the parallel version that you'd actually want.

Peter.

Please forgive me for following up my own post...


On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 09:09:31 +0000, Peter
wrote:

On 17 Feb 2007 13:37:18 -0800, wrote:

Scenario THREE

Run L + R wires from BOTH amps to the speakers as in scenario two, but
connected to SEPARATE CROSSOVER TERMINALS on each speaker, (the
terminals that would usually be used for bi-wiring). (But would this
cause one amp to sound 'tinny' and one to sound 'bassy'??)

If the crossover remains connected to both sets of terminals, I think
that this would be effectively the same as no. 2 above.

And if it's a split or disconnected crossover, I think that they will
both sound terrible in the way that you describe.

I think that there's a fifth option, and it's the one I'd try, though
it does involve spending a little more money. There are switchboxes
around that are designed to allow the switching of two pairs of
speakers from one amp (example at
http://www.audiovisualonline.co.uk/d.../display.html).
I don't see why you couldn't reverse this - ie, connect both amps to
the speaker terminals and the speakers to the amp terminals. NB: the
example I've offered is for a series switch. I'm not certain that it's
not the parallel version that you'd actually want.

On second thoughts, I think I've sussed it... these switches sound as
if they're designed to allow either or both sets of speakers to be
connected at the same time. If this is so, then neither version would
be suitable, since you'd want a switch which would only allow one to
be connected at a time. Nonetheless, I think that my theory's sound.
Perhaps someone else makes the sort of switch that I mean? Maybe
http://www.keene.co.uk/electronics/m...p?mycode=BT911 ? It looks
as if it has a rocker switch, which would appear to give the exclusion
that you'd want.

Peter.

Hi peter, thanks for the reply.

I have ruled out scenario 2 - connecting two amps to the same speaker
terminal - recipe for disaster!

Scenario three could sound odd, you're right.

The first scenario would work as I can bypass the pre-amp on the
stereo amp and just use it as a power amp. I just run the receiver pre-
out's to it and have the speakers connected to this. My confusing
scenario 4 was exactly the same as this, but adding ANOTHER set of
speaker cable from the original receiver to the separate set of
crossover terminals on the same speakersl. I have found out this is
actually bi-AMPING, I think. I wonder if the tonal qualities of the
stero amp and receiver would be different though - would this have an
effect I wonder??

Sorry, I'm thinking out aloud here!

On 18 Feb 2007 06:07:41 -0800, wrote:

Hi peter, thanks for the reply.

I have ruled out scenario 2 - connecting two amps to the same speaker
terminal - recipe for disaster!

Scenario three could sound odd, you're right.

The first scenario would work as I can bypass the pre-amp on the
stereo amp and just use it as a power amp. I just run the receiver pre-
out's to it and have the speakers connected to this.

I see what you mean, but still think that you'll have trouble
balancing them. You're assuming that:
(a) the output of the Denon and NAD power amps will be *exactly* the
same; and
(b) the sound quality of the two power amps will be identical (ie,
that any colourations introduced in the power stages will be the
same).
Frankly, I think that neither is likely to be the case. I still think
that balancing will be a lot of hassle. Even if the amps are of the
same nominal power (I haven't checked), the reality is that you'll
still have to adjust the balance via the Denon's setup process
(assuming that yours has a similar system to my 3805), and that
getting this right won't be easy.

Peter.

Oh yea... of course... power outputs! The stereo amp is 60w and the
receiver is 85w per channel. The bi-amping idea WILL sound odd then!

I might just run the front speakers on the NAD via the pre-outs of the
receiver then, and set the NAD as a straight power amp & see what the
auto setup comes up with! You're right though, it will prob be hard to
get the balance right. I'll try it - if it gets awkward, I'll just see
how the receiver copes with music by itself and make life simple! :-)

On 18 Feb 2007 08:37:47 -0800, wrote:

Oh yea... of course... power outputs! The stereo amp is 60w and the
receiver is 85w per channel. The bi-amping idea WILL sound odd then!

I might just run the front speakers on the NAD via the pre-outs of the
receiver then, and set the NAD as a straight power amp & see what the
auto setup comes up with! You're right though, it will prob be hard to
get the balance right. I'll try it - if it gets awkward, I'll just see
how the receiver copes with music by itself and make life simple! :-)

By all means try it, but my guess is that the Denon's auto adjustment
won't have sufficient range to cope with a difference that great.

Sure it'll be simpler if the Denon can cope well enough with music.
And you might make a few bob selling the NAD on eBay. But I rather
expect you to find that the NAD really is better for music, and that
your original idea was right.

Oh, and... good luck!

Peter.

Thanks - Setting it up today!

On 22 Feb 2007 02:13:57 -0800, wrote:

Thanks - Setting it up today!

So... which option did you go for? How did it work out?

Peter.

I've tried two scenarios.

I connected the front pre-outs of the receiver to my NAD stereo amp,
and then the speakers connected to that. The cd player is connected
through the receiver. Sounds great - exactly like it does when playing
directly into the stereo amp itself (to my ears anyway).

I also tried the bi-amping option. The nad driving the HF crossovers
and the Receiver driving the LF crossovers. I did this via an input on
the NAD so I could tweak the volume of the HF level, as it has 60
watts per channel as opposed to the receiver's 85 watts. I was very
impressed actually - sounds good - but I haven't really listened to
enough to decide which is best yet.

I've only just got round to setting it all up tonight, so I'm going to
spend some time listening to both arrangements and decide which I
prefere.

Either way, all I will have to do is leave the stereo amp on the
correct volume and forget about it as I have bought one of those
'ONECLICK' multiplugs. So everytime I switch on my receiver or take it
out of standby, the Stereo amp will fire up at the same time without
even having to think about it

I will spend a while with both setups and let you know which one I
decide to stick with.......