Help me with picking some stereo equipment for my house

[JHZR2]

Hi,

I know there are a LOT of folks on here with a lot of knowledge and experience regarding old and new technologies and ways of settting up audio equipment.

I dont call myself an audiophile, but I have VERY sensitive ears as far as quality of sound reproduction goes... And Ive been happy with the reproduction from an old analog mercedes benz car stereo with four paper speakers, while at the same time disappointed with some high end home stereo stuff that friends own... I guess I just know what I like and how things should sound.

I listen to a wide variety of music, from tower of power to metallica... both being personal favorites, and a lot of oldies, hard rock, soul, country, etc in between. Of course, since this is to be set up in my new house in the living room, I want it to do well for watching movies and whatnot as well.

I dont wat to spend a LOT of money, as I want to be able to get a system relatively soon, and so dont want to have to save for that long... Im looking at probably ~$500 max for a reciever and $1000 max for speakers.

Funny enough, one of the reciever/speaker combos were reviewed at hometheatermag.com, and can be seen here.

OK, so for recievers, I am thinking of either the Onkyo TX-SR503, or the Yamaha RX-V559. Both are similar in price... though the Onkyo beats dollarwise, and the yamaha seems to have a bit more power and quality... Any opinions???

OK, for speakers, one set that caught my eye is the Atlantic Technology System 920, which has 5 satelites all sporting 4" speakers. The specs are as follows:
Model 920 LCR Type Sealed-box, 2-way Drivers: Woofer (1) 4” GLH Tweeter (1) 1" soft dome Frequency Response: 100Hz – 20kHz ±3dB Nominal Impedance: 8 ohms Crossover Frequency: 3.75kHz, 3rd order Sensitivity: 88dB Recommended Amplifier Power: 10 – 100 Watts RMS

And for the subwoofer:
Enclosure Type: Sealed 8" long throw composite cone Output Power/Distortion: 100 watts < 0.5% Frequency Response: 34Hz - 250Hz Acoustic Output: 102dB SPL into 1500 cubic feet

And supposedly puts out relatively clean bass... though Im not sure if that is truly better, as in most of the music I like, I want a real warm, muddy bass sound...

The other option Im considering is the Miller & Kreisel "System 1x" scroll down the page a bit. Which has a bunch of MP 5NK speakers which feature:
MP5NK 4 Ohms Recommended amp power MP5, 5 - 120 Watts; Drivers MP5NK 1 x 3"
Frequency Response ±2dB MP5 120Hz - 23kHz;

And the KX-10SFBK Powered Subwoofer which features:

Model: KX-10 Rated Power: 150 watts RMS Frequency Response: 35Hz - 200Hz ±3dB Low Pass Filter: Variable 40Hz-200Hz Bypass
Phase: Fixed Switch

And Im also considering the regular package from yamaha... the NS-FP9500 which were discussed in another audio thread...

So, please let me know what youthink and what you'd suggest... Of course ill scope them out to listen in person, but some general background and ideas/insight on what might be good to buy, what not, and what speakers might go best with what recievers would be appreciated...

until then, Ill keep enjoying my yamaha system attached to my computer, and my old Aiwa system... and await something more, bigger and better!

Thanks!

JMH

 

[TheTanSedan]

Take my comments as perspective.

The old rule is that anything will reproduce pop or rock music. Four chords simply hasn't the capacity for subtlety. The room itself, the listener and speaker placement will lend the greatest benefits.

For "serious" music it can become a different question. Most serious music performers (orchestral musicians, conductors, soloists) I've known had poor to middling systems . . . nothing matches what can be reproduced in the concert hall. The listening is on a different level.

As I care only a little about the first type music -- and long ago was a performer of the second type -- I've found that simplicity and reliability matter the most for a home stereo.

Good luck.

 

[keith]

The receiver market is in a shift to using digital amplifiers. Reason? They sound good and are cheaper to manufacture. The most popular is the Panasonic XR-xx line e.g. XR-55, which is about to be superceded by the XR-57. I'd take a look at the XR-57 and save quite a bit out of your $500 receiver budget. The XR-57 will have a street price under $300.

For speakers, get a set or sets of X-LS's:

x-ls Bookshelf Loudspeaker

I heard those speakers at the av123 Colorado show last August and they are neutral and clean, which is very unusual at that price point. Subwoofer - many good ones out there, even the cheap Dayton 12" will impress:

DAYTON SUB-120 12" 150 WATT POWERED SUBWOOFER

 

[JHZR2]

thanks!

the x-ls set seems to have the same philosophy as the atlantic set I cited above... no need for those little center speakers to differ and be arranged in another way... they just use the same setup for a center channel. You essentially have five identical speakers.

he x-ls has a larger diameter speaker in each, and has a lower price than the atlantic set... Im glad you linked to it for me!

As for receivers... Illhave to look ino the panasonic unit... Info seems a bit scarce on the net... not a lot of reviews and whatnot from my quick search... and the MSRP is apparently $400... $1 more than the yamaha and $100 more than the onkyo..

Is the panasonc line as good as onkyo, yamaha, sony, etc?

Im happy with my panasonicpanablack tv, but thats a way different piece of equipment...

Thanks!

JMH

 

[JHZR2]

update: found it on the panasonic site...

panasonic

And panasonic electronics is based in seacaucus, NJ... just a minute or two away... so maybe I can get one direct!

Thanks again,

JMH

 

[JHZR2]

OK, question...

The SA-XR57 site talks about how great digital amps are, and how there is no need to change from digital to analog for DVD playback, etc...

I can see that this is a benefit for a DVD or CD... or a CD of MP3s...

but what about if I want to play the radio through it... or if I want to play MP3 from my computer, etc.

Granted, its garbage in=garbage out... and neither MP3, radio, cassette, etc. offer that great of quality... but is it somehow worse to have to convert A/D compared to doing D/A?

Id assume that the yamaha and onkyo are digital amps too.. so maybe its all a moot point???

Oh, and is there a reason why if you were to buy the x-ls monitors, that you wouldnt buy the x-subwoofer that they offer in the 5.1 set?

And Ill make myself look really dumb here: if you have a 7.1 receiver and 5.1 speakers, what is left out or different connection and equipment-wise? Seems that 7 is better than 5, and so I must be missing something... but Im just dumb, so an explanation would be appreciated.

thanks again!

JMH

 

[Hirev]

Yamaha receivers generally do well.

Some of the package deals from Yamaha can do well for the dollars spent.

High quality speakers, design, and placement are the keys to good sound quality.

Definitive Technology makes some very nice speakers but not sure if they make anything in the price range you are looking for.

 

[keith]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JHZR2:

but what about if I want to play the radio through it... or if I want to play MP3 from my computer, etc.

Id assume that the yamaha and onkyo are digital amps too.. so maybe its all a moot point???

Oh, and is there a reason why if you were to buy the x-ls monitors, that you wouldnt buy the x-subwoofer that they offer in the 5.1 set?

And Ill make myself look really dumb here: if you have a 7.1 receiver and 5.1 speakers, what is left out or different connection and equipment-wise? Seems that 7 is better than 5, and so I must be missing something...

---

If you play analog sources with the XR-xx, they will be converted to digital inside the amplifier. I primarily listen to CD's and DVD's using the s/pdif coax input, and the digital sources are not converted (technically, there is a PCM to PWM conversion and the PWM stage drives the speakers). There is no cleaner signal path for digital sources.

I haven't heard the matching x-ls subwoofer, and it's new with little user feedback. It might be a winner, just don't know. The Dayton is a known entity and a good bang for the buck.

The Yamaha and Onkyo are 'old school' analog amplifiers. Nothing wrong with that. Harmon Kardon gets pretty decent reviews too in that price range.

If you set up a 5.1 system, and play 7.1 material, the extra two surround channels automatically come out of the surround speakers you do have, so nothing is left out but those two extra channels are located differently in the room.

The other major component in a sound system is the room. The typical room will wreak havoc with the bass response, creating peaks and nulls. This can be remediated to some degree with bass traps, which are acoustic absorbers. Lots of soft furniture will do the same, but usually extra bass traps are needed.

 

[1sttruck]

There are distinct 'camps' in audio, each claiming to have the ONE TRUE PATH to audio perfection :^) In general there are:

1. Bass freaks - most males don't get beyond this, judging from how most systems sound.

2. SPL (sound pressure level) freaks - the louder the better. If done cleanly this works well for rock, as you don't need to finesse other attributes of sound reproduction.

3. Detail freaks - ears bleeding from the tilted high frequencies, asking 'did you hear that ?'

4. Imaging freaks - concerned with how well the system reproduces a sound stage. Sometimes fruitless as so much music is done in the studio with multiple tracks and doesn't have a soundstage.

What's the first impression of people listening to your system ? 'Gee, that has a lot of bass man', or 'Gee that loud', or 'wow, it sounds like someone playing right there'. Non-audiophiles with good ears are good test subjects, as they know what an instrument should sound like, and what sounds natural. I'm an imaging freak as from my experience a clean system with a good midrange that images well floats the most realistic impression of someone playing in front of you, provided you're using good recordings. From previous investigations, not only in stereo but also in different aspects of '3D sound', which doesn't really include home theater, I've come to appreciate speakers that are 'phase coherent', that have a good impulse response, and are thus capable of doing a credible square wave.

Only a handful or two speakers over the years meet this. Some have come and gone, like Dunlavy (used as full range monitors by some studios), Spica (my speakers), and others have been around, like Quad (best violin I've ever heard), Thiel (careful component matching needed or they tend to be bright), Vandersteen (popular and recommended) and there are newcomers. I haven't looked at the following site but a first glance looks good. Note that most people have no idea what you're talking about whan you mention imaging, but that is what stereo was designed to do. From my experinece it does it better than any 'home theater' system that I've listened to, which was designed to do movie special effects.

http://phasecoherent.com/recprice.htm

You started with a budget, that's good, now I'd suggest figuring out what type of reproduction you like, bass vs spl vs detail vs imaging, where more money gets you more of all of all attributes. As far electronics go just make sure you adequate current capability, like the ability to handle 8, 4, maybe 2 ohm loads, but that's something else that most chain stores don't seem to know anything about.

Not that I have a strong opinion on the subject or anything :^)

 

[keith]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JHZR2:
Speakers are analog devices, right? So if I have a bunch of analog inputs: phonograph, satellite radio audio out, ipod, computer... And have a digital amp, Ill need to do A/D, then D/A to feed the speakers, right?

---

No, the digitals based on TI Purepath technology, as the Panasonics do, don't work that way.

Audio signals off of CD and DVD and digital audio out of satellite and cable, and ATSC digital TV, are all digital audio, typically PCM or Dolby or DTS, sometimes mpeg. Dolby and DTS and mpeg are decoded inside the receiver to PCM. PCM gets converted to PWM which drives the amplifier output MOSFET's and the signal passes through a passive filter to the speakers. The signal at the output of the PWM stage is still digital. The conversion to analog happens at the final passive filter. As such, these amplifers are conceptually similar to a power DAC.

With an analog receiver, the digital sources do have to go through a DAC whereas analog sources go directly to the amplifier. With the digital amplifiers, digital sources stay digital until after the amplifer, with a passive conversion to analog, whereas analog sources go through an ADC.

Both types of amplifers get the job done. The digitals are cheaper than analog because cost of manufacturing is cheaper at the same performance level. I paid under $250 for the XR-55 and there isn't an analog receiver at $250 that comes close.

 

[Dan4510]

I would recommend research to find out what others are saying.

All of the below have good forums.

www.partsexpress.com

www.klipsh.com

www.jbl.com

If you arent in a hurry, there are some really good deals on ebay. I am partial to the older lines of JBL speakers and Klipsch type horn speakers.

Always spend more money on speakers than you do on anything else. They have the most variablity in sound and make the greatest impacct.

If you are interested in music, go with a good stereo setup first, then go for the surround later. Partsexpress has a good lineup of subs and parts and if you want to build one yourself, they are an excellent place to start.

Dan

 

[johnsmith]

Most SACD and DVD-audio players only have analog outputs (unless you buy a universal player) for the reasons listed above: you want as little conversion going on as possible. You’re right on track. Analog vs. digital is an all or nothing venture: you have to pick your poison and stick with it if you're going to get serious. If you need an example, listen for differences between different versions of the same album based on the AAD, DDD, ADD or DSD labels. You don't know it yet, but you are now infected... should have used protection. Get back to us when you start ordering $200.00 rubber feet for your equipment; I think most doctors put you on medication at that stage. (But I hear going on the meds really opens up the mids and highs!)

quote:

---

. . . nothing matches what can be reproduced in the concert hall. The listening is on a different level.

---

Exactly. If you really want some advice, don't dive into the world of high-end audio to begin with. Searching for the holy grail of musical reproduction has a high propensity for ending in debt (unless you’re rich to begin with), madness and/or AAH (annoying as ****) personality disorder. Think BITOG oil sickness, but worse. Exactly what you don't want; just buy something within a reasonable price range that sounds good to you. Take it from me and use the money you were going spend on all your future audio purchases, and buy concert tickets and go to local shows. Get drunk and have a good time while you're at it. You've been warned...

 

[Quattro Pete]

JHZR2,

In the price range you mentioned, my recommendations would be as follows:

Receiver: Harman-Kardon AVR240. It can be had on-line for about $320 right now. You can move up to the next model up if you want to max out your receiver budget. The HKs are known for their warmth which is something you mentioned you liked. They are also high quality pieces and rated very conservatively (i.e. their 50W per channel is comparable to almost double that from other manufacturers - very low distortion).

As for speakers, the x-ls that keith mentioned have been getting praises left right and center (and surround

) so you can't go wrong with them. The only thing I might change is the sub, depending on how big your listening room is and how many openings to other rooms it has. For very small (say 12x12x8 feet) and totally closed off rooms, that 8" X-sub may be fine. For larger rooms (and keeping your budget in mind), I'd look at Hsu STF-2 or SVS PB10. Both are highly regarded by HT freaks, Hsu being a little more musical, while SVS having lower extension (good for movies).

While on the subject of SVS, they also sell an entire 5.1 package that would fit in your budget as well (SVS SBS-01). It uses that PB10 sub I referenced above.
The only problem with an internet-only company like SVS (or even AV123 for that matter) is that listening before buying is not possible, unless you find someone in your area that has them. There is an SVS SBS-01 owners' thread going on at AVS forums, which by the way is a good resource for all HT-related stuff, too.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=625876
Of course you can always send it back if you don't like it, but shipping may be a hassle.

The problem with the speaker systems you listed is the very small drivers (3-4"). They cannot extend to the lower frequencies with any authority. By lower frequencies I mean around 80 Hz. I would not recommend crossing over to the sub at higher than 80 Hz because then the bass may become too localized and thus distracting from the listening experience. And if you cross over at 80 Hz and the speakers can't go that low, then you'll be missing that range of audio material.

Anyway, just my 2 cents...

 

[JHZR2]

Hi,

OK, dumb question yet again...

Say I got a receiver, whichever one... and then got the x-ls speaker package... the one complete with subwoofer...

And then decided that later on I wanted to get a bigger sub, say the dayton or the hsu...

Could I have 2 subwoofers in the room, or would that cause issues in terms of sound, quality, etc?

I dont know the exact dimensions of the space that Ill be putting the stuff into... but there is a staircase, two french doors ont he one side, and one folding french door (wider) on the other...

I assume with all the opportunity for sound pressure to escape in such a space, that a bigger sub would be preferable???

Im now leaning towards the x-ls, with the SBS in second (need to try to hear them all of course) over the atlantic, as the x-ls is 6.25" and the SBS is 5.25"... comapred to 4" from the atlantic system. But we shall see...

fixe x-ls and a dayton sub would be relatively cost effective (about the same price as the x-ls set at $659) option... Will I get a lot better music quality using the hsu instead???

Thanks!

JMH

[ May 14, 2006, 04:12 PM: Message edited by: JHZR2 ]

 

[Quattro Pete]

quote:

---

Could I have 2 subwoofers in the room, or would that cause issues in terms of sound, quality, etc?

---

It's possible to have two subs, however, most people that do use two, they use two of the same kind. Two different subs will most likely have two different frequency response curves in terms of SPL. A two-sub setup is more tricky to set up correctly. There are placement and wave cancellation issues to worry about, but it can be done with some experimentation and measurements.

quote:

---

I assume with all the opportunity for sound pressure to escape in such a space, that a bigger sub would be preferable???

---

Pretty much, yeah.

quote:

---

fixe x-ls and a dayton sub would be relatively cost effective (about the same price as the x-ls set at $659) option... Will I get a lot better music quality using the hsu instead???

---

I haven't heard the Dayton, but all the reviews said it's OK for movies, but a little one-toned for music. The Hsu subs on the other hand are more musical. So is the x-sub, but for movies, having only an 8" driver, it may have difficulty making a proper impact in a larger room.

 

[Al]

I went with Polk over Klipsh

I am not an expert. Went with some Hi-Tech friends' advice.

I have:
RTi6 (Fronts-Bookshelf)
RTi4 (Rears- Bookshelf)
CSi3 (Center)
PSW202 (sub)
Total cost 2 years ago From Crutchfield (no shipping/Tax) was $840. The Sub was free with the Center Speaker.

My Tuner and CD are very ancient Pioneers. But but they deliver the goods.

I am very pleased with my decision.

 

[JHZR2]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quattro Pete:
I haven't heard the Dayton, but all the reviews said it's OK for movies, but a little one-toned for music. The Hsu subs on the other hand are more musical. So is the x-sub, but for movies, having only an 8" driver, it may have difficulty making a proper impact in a larger room.

---

OK, I have to ask finally... what makes a sub more or less "musical"???

I will say this: while it will be neat and important to spruce up my movie watching with surround... my main goal is to have top notch music playback... Now, whether Im going about this all wrong, and should really just have two front speakers imaged correctly, no sub, etc. I can't say, but IMO, my best purchase for all around use will be the x-ls speakers (unless listening teaches me otherwise), based upon what Ive heard... however, I will buy 5 of them (or 6 if they will only sell them in pairs, and then have a rear channel too).

But that said, any boom or deep sounds in a movie are IMO too short lived for me to want to optimize in any way for that kind of audio... musical enjoyment will be much more fulfilling in terms of subwoofer bass than a little extra whallop when watching a movie.

So, that said, I think I will need to get a "musical" sub.

Per reading some reviews, the Hsu 8" sub gets good marks for musical playback... whereas I didnt see as much on the 10" unit. So that equates to one of two things, which I cannot be sure: either that an 8" sub really is quite good for music playback, as its the right cross beteen bass and boom... or, that the Hsu design is just really good, and that if their 8" is top notch, then their 10" will be even better... if it is the first, than maybe Im smarter to by the x-ls set that comes with an 8" sub???

Probably for me to find this out will involve a lot of effort in terms of ordering, shipping, returning, etc., and cost... So experience from you all would be most appreciated...

What do you think?

Thanks again!

JMH

 

[Auto-Union]

Just keeping it short....
I've been happy with my system for a long time, which mostly consists of...

Adcom 545 MkII Amp
NAD 1300 Pre-Amp
Nakamichi MB1-S (worth the $)
KEF C95 Speakers
KEF Sub

I've spent 1000s of hours in MAJOR recording studios. While I was available for him, my friend Scott Storch (who is about the hottest Hip/Hop/R&B Producer there is) would eq his tracks to sound "right" on my system. Studio owners also complement me on the sound. For the most basic set-up, I'd just get a CD Player (maybe ONKYO for starters) with variable out, even the headphone OUT and plug right into the AMP. That system as described, will satisfiy.

 

[Auto-Union]

PS, I like Polk car speakers a lot.

Funny thing, my system componets represent the stereotypical (allow me the pun) engineering of the repersenative countries.

ADCOM- Heavy-duty and brutally power-sucking USA transistorized amp with the dual-use of melting lead. (I've lit 120v lightbulbs with mine for fun, no kidding)

Nakamichi CD- Techy and overly-complex Japanese precision-engineered IC device. Truely state-of-the art.

KEF Speakers- Typically British, quite accurate and true but somewhat frail. Seriously "Dry" sound. Seems to reproduce the pop-inspired semi-hollow body guitar really well.

[ May 14, 2006, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: Auto-Union ]

 

[rpn453]

I'd recommend Paradigm for speakers. They have very accurate sound reproduction, they're as good as anything I've heard, and they're a reasonable price. All their speakers are +/-2dB from the low end up to 20kHz. Not many manufacturers make that claim. I bought a Klipsch center channel once before I knew about Paradigm and it was absolutely shamed when I compared it to Paradigms, so I put it on the system I donated to my mother. Paradigm's PS line of subs is very good too.

I'm just using an inexpensive Panasonic SA-HE100 receiver. I was thinking of upgrading, but it sounds good and hasn't given me any problems so I'll keep using it.

Of course, like anything else, there are many good manufacturers in the business.

Bigger is better (for the same quality of speaker)!

[ May 14, 2006, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: rpn453 ]