At what point do you need an amp.

[rmcdermid]

Originally I had some pretty meh speakers but now I am getting to the point that I have what I consider a respectable number and quality of speakers. I have a Klipsch RC62 coming today to match my towers and I have klipsch synergy surrounds and bookshelves doing all the surround work. I am running on a Yamaha RX V563. it isn't the best receiver but it gets the job done so far.

My question is at what point do I need an amp?

[CollinViegas]

You need external amps when you own very demanding speakers. Like Martin Logans for example.

Klipsch on the other hand is a very efficiant speaker so a receiver will do just fine.

[rmcdermid]

Interesting. Should the receiver I have be fine or would I notice a benefit from going to a higher end receiver? Maybe something that puts out a little more power?

[Beta Man]

regardless of "power output" Amps are typically designed a heck of a lot better than receivers, to provide a lot "cleaner" power..... of course there are very nice receivers just as there are very crappy amps.... bottom line, like anything else, your speakers have a perfect "mate" out there..... whether you find it or not is another story.

[rmcdermid]

I would like to upgrade to a pioneer elite receiver at some point. I would assume that would be a decent bump over this yammy.

[arrt vandelay]

Originally Posted by rmcdermid

I would like to upgrade to a pioneer elite receiver at some point. I would assume that would be a decent bump over this yammy.

i have a yammy that's just a few bumps up the totem pole from yours(rx v765). i also added an amp to my set up just a few weeks ago. did i really need it...no...the yammy did a pretty good job running my energy speakers.

does it sound noticeably better? in a way, yes, when i listen to music in 2 channels, there is a noticeable difference in power and clarity from just the receiver. i can also crank movies a little louder. but, if it crapped out tomorrow, i'd be ticked, but i wouldn't lose very much performance if i went back to just my 765 powering everything.

like someone noted, your speakers are very efficient and probably will never really "need" an external amp. if i were you, i'd just eventually ugrade your receiver. the elites seem to be excellent all around, so you'd be good there. in the end, i added an amp not b/c i needed one, just b/c i was curious to see what it could improve. it did improve some things, but not to the point it's an integral part of my system now.

good luck w/ whatever you choose...

[Johk]

One of the plus thing of amplifiers is that they are more "future-proof" than receivers/processors.

For example, if you buy a high end receiver right now in a few years there will be new advances in technology, standards, etc. (like a new HDMI standard, advances in room equilization routines, ...). therefore you will eventually have to get a new receiver even if the "amplification part" of the receiver is still working fine. Therefore you will be "rebuying" the "amplification part".

If you buy separate components then you can keep the amp and upgrade the processor as needed.

Anyway, I just wanted to throw that in...

[solarrdadd]

Originally Posted by Johk

One of the plus thing of amplifiers is that they are more "future-proof" than receivers/processors.

For example, if you buy a high end receiver right now in a few years there will be new advances in technology, standards, etc. (like a new HDMI standard, advances in room equilization routines, ...). therefore you will eventually have to get a new receiver even if the "amplification part" of the receiver is still working fine. Therefore you will be "rebuying" the "amplification part".

If you buy separate components then you can keep the amp and upgrade the processor as needed.

Anyway, I just wanted to throw that in...

I agree with Johk, i would like to add that if you do upgrade, i'd actually recommend the better speakers first for two reasons. first, your new higher quality speakers will sound better right out of the box even being driven with a receiver. second, when you upgrade to a good power amp (and you will need to with the more demanding speakers) and you can either keep your existing receiver and use it's pre-outs or buy a dedicated a/v processor. you'll get a second boost and your speakers will open all the way up and it will be like getting a great gift for your birthday, then getting an even better gift on Christmas, it's a two-fer! for now stick with what you have and save to get some really nice speakers and move on from there. do your homework so you know what your getting and understanding what it can & can not do and how to get the most out of it before you buy! and that's my two cents!

[Big Daddy]

If you have a good receiver and average speakers, you don't really need an amplifier. You will need an amplifier when your speakers are bigger than you.

[Johnny Vinyl]

Your AVR - Yamaha RX-V563 does NOT have pre-outs, so the discussion about adding an amp in this scenario is a moot one.

As such, you basically have 2 options and they are:

1. Get a better performing AVR that has pre-outs.
2. Invest in better speakers.

If you're looking for better sound right out of the box, I'd suggest (like others have recommended) that you upgrade your speakers first.

John

[CollinViegas]

Originally Posted by Johk

One of the plus thing of amplifiers is that they are more "future-proof" than receivers/processors.

For example, if you buy a high end receiver right now in a few years there will be new advances in technology, standards, etc. (like a new HDMI standard, advances in room equilization routines, ...). therefore you will eventually have to get a new receiver even if the "amplification part" of the receiver is still working fine. Therefore you will be "rebuying" the "amplification part".

If you buy separate components then you can keep the amp and upgrade the processor as needed.

Anyway, I just wanted to throw that in...

The future proof arguement really goes both ways though. Most good processors cost as much as a good receiver. Example, When I bought my SC09TX the only other options with as many features as I was looking for at the time were the Denon 5803 receiver the Denon processor {$7000} and the Anthem Statement series.

The anthem while only being a processor costs considerably more. I had one in my system before I downgraded to the Pioneer SC09TX. The difference going from an anthem/bryston setup during film soundtracks to the Pioneer Flagship was alot smaller than you may think using my current speaker setup. But the cost difference was 3.5x as much.

If money were no issue I would have stayed with the seperates to get the extra ounces out of the system. But as for futue proof, I could buy the next 2 flagship receivers to hit the market and that would roughly give me a 12 year life cycle {Most flagships stay aound about 4 years}.

[T DUB]

With Klipsch speakers you don't ned much powere as they are some of the most efficient speakers out there. I read a review in home theater magazine that reviewed the big ass Klipsch RF-82 system, and they said that the RF-82s and entire setup could easily be run with a lower powered receiver.

If I were you and were looking get a little extra out of the Klipsch I'd just upgrade your receiver to higher end more powerful one. As already mentioned I am sure a Pioneer Elite would be a fantastic choice.

I think if I were running a Paradigm Signature line of speaker or B&W Nautilus series then you would really want seperates. They like more juice.

[mdabb]

You don't need more power, you need quality power ................ Your ears and speakers will thank you Invest in a low power amp & new receiver with pre-outs or a higher end receiver. Put quality watts first. Even if it is less than 100 watts per channel.