Help me with picking some stereo equipment for my house

Status
Not open for further replies.
JHZR2, because you started the thread with the discussion of 5.1 speaker packages and surround sound receivers, I may have steered you in the wrong direction. If music is your main goal and you don't care much about surround sound in movies, then I'd forget all this surround speaker/sub stuff, and spend your money on two high quality tower speakers. The key point is, trying to match a bookshelf speaker with a sub is almost never going to produce as smooth of a frequency response as a single full-range speaker. rpn453's recommendation for Paradigm is a good one. You should be able to find a local Paradigm dealer near you for auditioning. In your price range, something from their Monitor line should fit the bill... maybe the Monitor 7 or 9. Or maybe even their Studio series... not sure what they go for. You can also check sites like audiogon for used gear.

Pair that up with a nice amp (sorry, I don't know them well enough to recommend anything specific) and you'll have 2-channel stereo sound that will outclass any of those 5.1 HT packages mentioned earlier.

As far as what makes a sub musical, it's the ability to clearly produce many different tones of bass as opposed to a single 'thump' note. I own the 8" Hsu, and while it blends nicely with my bookshelf speakers for music, when watching movies, it doesn't make quite an impact I hoped it would. If I were to do it again, I'd get the STF-2 or the PB10 instead. But then again, I live in an apartment and can't really crank up my audio too much as it would disturb my neighbors, so getting a more powerful sub right now would probably just get me in trouble. One of these days...
 
Sorry... I guess Im in one of those postions where I dont know enough to know what I dont know...

When I think "home theater", I think of theater as being an all purpose entity... able to show movies and music (though with a bias towards music). The thing is, I need bang for the buck, and plan to have this right next to my TV (32" panablack CRT... not hi-tech per se... but darn good and its all paid for and works A-OK)... so the ability to do 5.1, and doing augmentation to the movie bit is important...

One of the reasons why the x-ls is appealing to me... with a decent receiver, I can change to "standard stereo" output, and have two front that play stereo decently, and then matched speakers for surround, center, etc. for watching movies or, say, 5.1 encoded CD/DVD audio.

I like good music sound... but I dont play it particularly loud, even though I have a house of my own now
smile.gif
So thats where the balance between 8 and 10" gets me... but it sounds like 10" wont effect music playback (if I use it for that) in any negative way, while givving a bit more oomph or when I want to watch movies.

Am I on the right track???

thanks,

JMH
 
Yeah, from all I've read, the STF-2 is just as musical as the STF-1, but more capable for movies. Again though, not knowing how big your listening area is, it's hard to suggest the right sub. Maybe you're an STF-3 candidate.
smile.gif


Ask around on the avsforum (the sub subforum). They may be able to recommend other musical subs that I don't know of. I think there are some Velodyne subs that people like for music, but I can't recall the particular model.
 
I can see me using paradigm monitor 5 speakers for the front for stereo and movie watching... and then get a hsu 10" sub to start...

http://www.paradigm.com/Website/SiteParadigmProduct/ParadigmModels/MonSeries/MonitorSpecs.htm

And then add two or three x-ls for the surround sound down the line...

This would optimize my stereo sound for music (with sub if I so desire), and then ofer me top notch surround as well... right?

Or is it smarter to just go x-ls 6.5" all around?

Thanks again for all the help!

JMH
 
quote:
Originally posted by JHZR2:
Could I have 2 subwoofers in the room, or would that cause issues in terms of sound, quality, etc?

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???
Click to expand...
I use two subs. Each is a 15" Adire Tempest in a 214L cabinet. A little on the large side
smile.gif
They are driven by a Carvin HD1800 - 2*600Wrms into 4 ohms.

The benefit of two subs is that they are positioned differently and can create a more even room response, with less need for bass traps. The downside is cost and space. If you are using subwoofers with built in amplification, just split the main amplifier subwoofer output to drive two subwoofer amplifiers. It's probably best if both subs are of the same type, but it will work if they are different and offer many of the same advantages over a single subwoofer.

The main impact of a subwoofer is to get the lowest one or two octaves than the main speakers can't handle. This is especially important with movies because they have real world sounds e.g. cars driving by. Musical instruments often don't have much energy in those lower octaves, and even when they do, the recording process seems not to capture it well. My son has a drumkit in the house and even with my twin monster subs and bass traps, I don't know of even one CD (or LP) that can recreate the full experience of the drumkit.

Ever wonder why when you walk into say a shopping mall and can tell instantly if there is a live band playing or the music is recorded? Two speakers, or 7.1, just can not reproduce the original event. With all that in mind, I'd go for the sub with good bass extension and high SPL's, not worry so much about the THD. It's all an illusion.

Subs add hugely to the movie experience. King Kong's footsteps rattle the whole house. Good luck.
 
quote:
Originally posted by JHZR2:
And then add two or three x-ls for the surround sound down the line...
Click to expand...
Generally it's not adviseable to mix speakers from different manufacturers or even different lines of the same manufacturer for timbre-matching reasons. This is especially important with regards to the three front speakers (left, right, center) when it comes to movies. The point is that the same line of speakers will use the same tweeters and thus ensure that human voices sound the same as they move around the screen (say walk from left to right and their voice follows from the left, through center, and into the right speaker). It would be unnatural if the same actor's voice sounded differently through each of the speakers.

So, if you choose Paradigm Monitor as your fronts, then later on it'd make more sense to add the Paradigm CC370 or even a Paradigm MiniMonitor or Monitor 3 as your center.
 
So, with all the talk about bigger speakers, especially if I want to image stereo correctly... I took a look at the JBL E50 line... since they were offered at etronics and vanns...

http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/features/542459130

They are 8", with a 4" midrange and a 3/4" Ti tweeter. They are said to be well constructed, unlike some current JBL stuff, with a good solid feel and sound. I could use these up front, with smaller E20 (5.25) or E30 (6") in the rear/center to give myself a 4.1 or 5.1 sound...

theyre all here:

http://www.etronics.com/listproducts.asp?catid=4154&store=

Not as many 'pro' reviews out there, but what Ive read indicates that theyre real well made...

What do you think? Should I stick wth the five x-ls, or two paradigm monitor5's (which each have two 6.5" instead of one like in the x-ls) with maybe a center channel, or is this a good option... any with a 10" Hsu sub...

thanks!

JMH

P.S. Or, if Im looking for something bgger to do good music reproduction, should I just go for some 12" cerwin-Vega 3-way or similar speakers, which will certanly have the bass and all? or are those just too thumpy and not clear aenough for anything worthwhile??? There are just too many options!

[ May 14, 2006, 09:31 PM: Message edited by: JHZR2 ]
 
man oh man... here Im listening to "A Decade of Steely Dan" on the CD player on my IBM laptop... Its OK, but leaves so much to be desired...

Too much research to do.. cant wait to get a real system to listen to!

JMH
 
I just put together a system that only has two speakers, a CD player, an amp and a pre-amp and it's $8k.
Decade of Steely Dan sealed it for me. That's certain death for my wallet
cheers.gif

The wife's not going to be happy with me...
lol.gif


Scott
 
cripes!!!!!

what did you buy???!!!???

Wish I was in the position to pick up some top notch stuff like that!

JMH
 
quote:
Originally posted by 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.

Click to expand...
Well, Im definitely not #1... I appreciate the bass, but I dont want the house and windows vibrating with no real quality sound... how do I put it... I want to get good bass response, but I want to be able to make out each of Rocco Prestia's finger movements in Tower of Power's "Youve got to Funkifize" or "What is Hip?".

#2 definitely not... My ears are quite sensitive, and I appreciate music and all at reduced levels.

#3 I do like to pick up on detail, and I can do so really well... though I really dislike super high treble to the point that my ears hurt to get it...

#4 I suppose this would be me, though I cant say for certain that I recognize the "stage"... I care about accurate reproduction of all the sounds, the mid bass being where it should be, and all everything sounding clear... Cant say Ive heard "imaged" vs. non, to really know the difference, but Id venture to say that this would appeal to me the most... To hear the whole horn section just right would be nice.

Thanks,

JMH
 
quote:
Originally posted by keith:
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.

Click to expand...
Thanks!!! But now another dumb question...

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?

THis wuld theoretically cause more distortion and error or loss or whatever one calls it, as compared to if one had an analog amp and just took the analog signal straight through, right?

But then you dont have the clean direct path for digital in, such as CD, DVD, etc. correct?

Whereas an analog amp would only need to do one conversion, D/A for all digital in, and then it would spit out analog to the speakers, right?

So isnt it the path of least resistance/conversion to use an analog amp? Digital signals will need to be converted one way or another, either before the amplifier in an analog system, or afterwards in a digital one... and then analog signals, which I assume incudes FM radio, would need no conversion at all, reducing chances for further quality loss in what is a signal that is already missing something... right?

Is there a reciever that has a digital and an analog amp?

I assume that your take is that it is better quality and operation wise to do ALL amplification in a digital regime, regardless of number of necessary conversions, as compared to doing it as analog with less conversions? It would be my take that most losses of quality, fidelity, etc. would occur in the 'conversion' step, not the amplification step.

But your opinion would be most appreciated!

Thanks again!

JMH
 
Ideally, if you can compare speakers by fading from left to right to see which you prefer, that's best. I had a stereo shop in a town I used to live that let me take speakers and subs home to try out and I got to do some good comparisons that way. It's difficult to remember exactly what speakers sounded like at a different location with a different setup, but it's still worth going out and listening that way if that's all that's available.

I'd start with two good speakers and a good receiver and build from there. Like QP, I'd recommend sticking to the same brand and line though, which would be the Paradigm Monitor series for my budget and from what I've heard.

For a sub, I'd recommend one that emits sound in only one direction. Either a band-pass, like the Paradigm PS series, or a sealed enclosure, like the Paradigm reference series (though that one might be a little pricey!). Point them away from the corner and they will fill the room much more consistently than a ported design, which seems to cancel itself out in areas and have a lot of loud spots and dead spots around the room. Sealed boxes sound much better in a car as well, IMHO. My first decent sub was a Paradigm PDR-10. I've since sealed it up by plugging the port and I changed the driver to an Alpine S-10 to get it to sound how I wanted: smooth, low, not boomy, and consistent around the room. It's on my second stereo and I run a Paradigm PS-1200 (with Monitors) on my main setup.

When I said bigger is better, that doesn't necessarily mean driver size. I just meant that if you take the same speaker and put it in a larger enclosure, the sound will be fuller. The design of the speaker (drivers and crossover) are something that has to be there first. The first speakers I ever bought were cheap Technics speakers with a 12" woofer, 4" mid, and a 1-1/2" tweeter, and they don't even come close to a Paradigm with a 6-1/2" woofer and 1" tweeter in sound quality or even in bass quality.
 
That Atlantic speaker system is quite nice.

I prefer Yamaha over Onkyo, though I believe the Onkyo amps offer a bit more current than the Yamahas at a given rated power. I've got some Yamaha separates (reeciver and c changer)in the bedroom, hooked up to some mid-sized DCM towers and they sound great.

You might also conisider the Energy Take speakers. I've got the older Take 5 with a 10-inch sub and am very happy with it. The newer Take setup is even more highly rated:
http://www.hometheatermag.com/loudspeakers/805energy/index.html
 
quote:
Originally posted by JHZR2:
cripes!!!!!

what did you buy???!!!???

Wish I was in the position to pick up some top notch stuff like that!

JMH
Click to expand...
Thiel CS 1.6 speakers
Audio Research SP16 Preamp
Audio Research 150.2 Amp
Arcam CD192 CD Player
It was over $9k, got a deal...
Might end up dead, but what a way to go!

Scott
 
Papa Bear, if you have the patience you could buy and build a set of whatever they sell for much less and get same or better performance.

I just built a clone of the Klipsch Belle speakers with better drivers and am blown away. Accumulated parts from ebay as i could afford it and they sound better than the real thing to me.

Dan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JHZR2
Old car stereo concept advice?
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
JHZR2
O
Simple audio/video streaming arrangement (for old people)?
Replies
7
Views
796
benjy
1 SX
Good aftermarket speakers - 6.5 inch using factory headunit?
6 7 8
Replies
154
Views
17K
Heywood_6078
Nick1994
New Stereo for the Jeep
Replies
12
Views
1K
4WD
JHZR2
Bluetooth stereo for workshop
Replies
15
Views
943
Jarlaxle
Back
Top