I Want Better Sound... [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : I Want Better Sound...



accastil
12-06-2005, 04:35 PM
Hi, i have an existing Marantz SR5500 receiver but i still want better stereo sound while im listening to music. what should i do? do i have to buy a separate power amp or integrated amp? my speakers are rated 150W at 8ohms. how much wattage of amp should i add-on?

another question. while listening to stereo music? which receiver input is best to use? is it the digital input (coax/optical) or the stereo (L/R) analog inputs?

final question...what is bi-amping? how is the connection configuration for this set up?

frenchmon
12-06-2005, 04:56 PM
I too have the Marantz sr 5500 and I think its a great reciever. I don't know what you mean by wanting better stereo sound in music.

If you are listening to music from a DVD or CD player you should use the digital inputs on the receiver seeing that DVD's and CD's are digital.

You should not worry about bi-amping your sr 5500. What I would do if I were you is to bi-wire my speakers.

You have more that enough power to drive 8ohm speaks...How effecient are ytour speakers

L.J.
12-06-2005, 05:25 PM
I upgraded my entire system piece by piece throughout the year. My biggest difference in sound came from upgrading my speakers. HUGE difference. You can try repositioning your current speakers to acheive better sound. Experiment.

markw
12-06-2005, 05:38 PM
My biggest difference in sound came from upgrading my speakers. HUGE difference. You can try repositioning your current speakers to acheive better sound. Experiment.Ones choice of speakers and their positioning in ones environment have the most affect on the quality of sound of a system produces. Speaker wise, It doesn't take too much to acheive a satisfying HT experience. Heck, you can add a sub to any system.

But music takes a little more. As I've always said, I hear many people compilaining that they like their HT on movies but don't like the way it does music. I can't ever recall hearing anyone say they like the way their system does music but not HT.

The speakers impedance and power handling have virtually no arffect on the sound. Likewise, which input type you use is moot here. And, you can have the bestest, most powerful amp in the world and quad amp it, but it still funnels through the eweakest link in the chain, the speakers the room. Those last two are ones biggest limitation.

If music has any part in one's plan for a system, I strongly suggest the decision on equipment be made using music as the sample source, not HT.

Then again, maybe he could try a yamaha receiver. (inside joke ;))

RICKY009
12-06-2005, 06:14 PM
Hi, i have an existing Marantz SR5500 receiver but i still want better stereo sound while im listening to music. what should i do? do i have to buy a separate power amp or integrated amp? my speakers are rated 150W at 8ohms. how much wattage of amp should i add-on?

another question. while listening to stereo music? which receiver input is best to use? is it the digital input (coax/optical) or the stereo (L/R) analog inputs?

final question...what is bi-amping? how is the connection configuration for this set up?


THE MORE POWER THE BETTER. YOU CAN NEVER HAVE TOO MUCH POWER. IN FACT, YOU CAN RUIN YOUR SPEAKERS USING A 50 WATT PER CHANNEL RECEIVER IF PLAYED TOO LOUD. YOU WILL GO INTO "CLIPPING": AMP ATTEMPTS TO DELIVER MORE POWER THAN ITS DESIGN ALLOWS. WHEN OVERDRIVEN, THE AMP WILL CLIP SIGNAL WAVEFORMS, A CONDITION OF SEVERE DISTORTION WHICH MAY DAMAGE THE HIGH FREQUENCY TRANSDUCERS IN THE SPEAKER (OR ANY OTHER SPEAKER, INCLUDING THE CROSS-OVER NETWORK). I KNOW, B/C I DID IT.
FOR YEARS I PLAYED MY SPEAKERS WITH A GOOD, SOLID YAMAHA RECEIVER, WHICH IS RATED AT 80 WPC AT 8 OHMS. I THOUGHT MY SYSTEM SOUNDED GOOD, UNTIL I BROUGHT HOME A 250 WPC BRYSTON POWER AMPLIFIER. WOW! THE DIFFERENCE WAS UNBELIEVABLE. THE BASS WAS DEEPER, MORE POWERFUL. I COULD PLAY MY ROCK MUSIC LOUDER AND IT WAS CRYSTAL CLEAR. THE VOLUME LEVEL WAS EAR-SHATTERING. SO, A GOOD AMP IS VERY IMPORTANT. CHECK OUT ROTEL, NAD, MUSICAL FIDELITY, BRYSTON, PARASOUND, CREEK, ARCAMAUDIO ANALOGUE PRIMO, MUSIC HALL "MAMBO", VINCENT. YOU CAN BUY A GOOD AND I MEAN GOOD, 50-100 WATT AMP OR INTEGRATED AMP TO DRIVE YOUR SPEAKERS.
YOU WOULD CONNECT THE AMP, BUT NOT INTEGRATED AMP (HAS AMPLIFIER AND PREAMP IN SAME BOX) TO THE "PRE OUT" RCA JACKS ON THE BACK OF YOUR RECEIVER. YOU MAY NOT HAVE THIS PRE OUT FEATURE, WHICH ESSENTIALLY DISCONNECTS THE AMPLIFIER FROM THE CONTROL AMPLIFIER, OR PREAMP, INSIDE YOUR RECEIVER. YOUR VOLUME CONTROL AND SELECTOR SWITCH/BUTTONS (VCR, CD, DVD, ETC) WILL WORK AND THE POWER AMP WILL DRIVE YOUR SPEAKERS. THAT'S WHAT I DID WITH THE 250 WPC BRYSTON 4B ST AMP, WHICH I IMMEDIATELY BOUGHT AFTER HEARING THE DRAMATIC CHANGE IN MY SYSTEM, AS DESCRIBED ABOVE.

BI-AMPING IS WHERE YOU USE TWO IDENTICAL AMPLIFIERS TO DRIVE YOUR SPEAKERS. TYPICALLY, ONE WOULD USE ONE AMP TO DRIVE ONE SPEAKER AND THE OTHER AMP TO DRIVE THE OTHER SPEAKER. THIS IS WHAT "MONOBLOCK" AMPS DO. EACH MONOBLOCK DRIVES ONE CHANNEL. TWO FOR STEREO, FIVE FOR 5.1 SURROUND SOUND. THIS IS KNOWN AS "VERTICAL BI-AMPING". ANOTHER WAY IS TO USE ONE AMP TO DRIVE THE WOOFERS OF BOTH SPEAKERS, OR THE BOTTOM END OF SPEAKERS WITH BI-WIRE CAPABILITY (TWO SETS OF SPEAKER JACKS ON THE BACK OF YOUR SPEAKERS). THE OTHER AMP IS USED TO DRIVE THE UPPER END (TWEETER. OR TWEETER/MIDRANGE DRIVERS). THIS AMP WOULD BE CONNECTED TO THE TOP PAIR OF SPEAKER JACKS ON THE BACK OF YOUR SPEAKERS. IF YOU BI-AMP, YOU HAVE TO HAVE SPEAKERS THAT HAVE TWO SETS OF JACKS ON THEM. EITHER WAY, YOU USE "Y-CABLES" TO CONNECT ONE AMP TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF YOUR PRE-OUT JACK AND THE OTHER AMP TO THE OTHER SIDE. OR PUT IN OTHER WORDS, THE POWER AMP HAS TWO INPUTS JACKS, ONE FOR THE RIGHT AND ONE FOR THE LEFT. YOU USE 2 CABLES FROM THE AMP AND CONNECT THEM TO YOUR SHORT "Y-CABLE", WHICH HAS TWO JACKS AT ONE END AND ONE AT THE OTHER. THEN YOU CONNECT THAT ONE END INTO THE ONE SIDE OF THE PREAMP/PREOUT JACK. THEN, WITH THE OTHER AMP, YOU DO THE SAME: TWO WIRES OUT FROM THE POWER AMP INTO THE Y-CABLE, WHICH LEAVES YOU WITH 1 WIRE NOW (2 INTO 1), AND THEN THE ONE JACK INTO THE OTHER PREAMP/PREOUT JACK. YOU PROBABLY HAVE "RCA" JACKS, WHICH IS THE STANDARD TYPE OF JACK ON THE REAR OF MOST RECEIVERS. THIS WAY I DESCRIBED IS KNOWN AS "VERTICAL BI-AMPING", WHERE 1 AMP DRIVES ONE SPEAKER AND THE OTHER AMP DRIVES THE OTHER SPEAKER. THE OTHER WAY, WHERE 1 AMP DRIVES WOOFERS AND THE OTHER AMP DRIVES THE TWEETERS, IS CALLED "HORIZONTAL BI-AMPING."
YOU PROBABLY WON'T BE ABLE TO BI-AMP, THOUGH WITH A RECEIVER, UNLESS YOU FIND A POWER AMP OF THE SAME BRAND, POWER, SPECS, AS THE POWER AMP INSIDE YOUR RECEIVER. FORGET IT. TOO FRICKED-UP. I TRIED IT.

FINALLY, YOU WILL GET "BETTER" SOUND USING THE STEREO JACKS (2 JACKS, OPPOSED TO ONE DIGITAL JACK). THE FEELING IS AMONG AUDIOPHILES IS THAT ANALOG IS BETTER FOR MUSIC. DIGITAL IS BETTER FOR WATCHING MOVIES. HOWEVER, USE WHAT SOUNDS BEST TO YOU. BUT, GENERALLY, HANDS DOWN, ANALOG IS BETTER FOR MUSIC, ACCORDING TO THE EXPERTS, WHICH I AM NOT. I AM NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT ANALOG IS SMOOTHER, MORE RICH FOR MUSIC LISTENING. IT IS QUITER TOO. DIGITAL IS CONSIDERED MORE NOISY, MORE DISTORTION. CD PLAYERS PLAY DIGITAL MUSIC READ FROM THE DISCS. THEY HAVE DIGITAL TO ANALOG CONVERTER's (DAC's), WHICH CONVERTS THE DIGITAL SIGNAL FROM THE CD INTO AN ANOLOG SIGNAL. GOOFY. FINALLY, IF YOU ARE GOING TO USE THE DIGITAL JACK, IT IS SAID THAT A COAXIAL CORD IS BETTER THAN THE OPTICAL. SO COMPLICATED... I GUESS THE OPTICAL (TOSLINK) IS NOISIER. I THINK IT MAY BE BETTER FOR VIDEO, BUT NOT FOR MUSIC ONLY. I USE BOTH. I HAVE A OPTICAL FROM THE DVD TO MY PROCESSOR (5.1 DOLBY DIGITAL).

WHAT I DID WAS LOOKED AROUND FOR A STEREO MAGAZINE. I FOUND THAT "THE ABSOLUTE SOUND" AND "STEREOPHILE" WERE VERY GOOD. ALSO I GET "SOUND AND VISION" WHICH HAS BOTH AUDIO AND VIDEO INFO. IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS E-MAIL ME.

kexodusc
12-06-2005, 06:29 PM
The choice to use analog or digital has nothing to do with CD's being digitally recorded, or the number of channels. It's all about the digital-to-analog conversion. Sooner or later the info becomes analog in the chain, the better the DAC, the better the sound. If your CD player's DAC is better than your receiver/processor/pre-amp's DAC, use the analog, if the receiver's DAC is better, use digital...

Be careful with speaker power ratings. Most speakers wil reach their maximum output at much less than the rated wattage because they run out of excursion (and in some cases can suffer a melt-down)...I'm not aware of any rules of thumb, but I have a pair of speakers I built that would claim 120 watts, but reach their mechanical limits at 9 watts below 50 Hz!!!

Your marantz receiver is a good start. As others have mentioned, room acoustics and speakers will introduce the most improvement in the majority of systems...what kind of speakers do you have?

accastil
12-06-2005, 09:36 PM
The choice to use analog or digital has nothing to do with CD's being digitally recorded, or the number of channels. It's all about the digital-to-analog conversion. Sooner or later the info becomes analog in the chain, the better the DAC, the better the sound. If your CD player's DAC is better than your receiver/processor/pre-amp's DAC, use the analog, if the receiver's DAC is better, use digital...

Be careful with speaker power ratings. Most speakers wil reach their maximum output at much less than the rated wattage because they run out of excursion (and in some cases can suffer a melt-down)...I'm not aware of any rules of thumb, but I have a pair of speakers I built that would claim 120 watts, but reach their mechanical limits at 9 watts below 50 Hz!!!

Your marantz receiver is a good start. As others have mentioned, room acoustics and speakers will introduce the most improvement in the majority of systems...what kind of speakers do you have?

kexodusc, i have the Mordaunt Short 502 THX declaration speakers...is there anything wrong with these pair of speakers?
im gettin more confused here..i am getting too many different answers from you guys... :(

accastil
12-06-2005, 09:38 PM
Ones choice of speakers and their positioning in ones environment have the most affect on the quality of sound of a system produces. Speaker wise, It doesn't take too much to acheive a satisfying HT experience. Heck, you can add a sub to any system.

But music takes a little more. As I've always said, I hear many people compilaining that they like their HT on movies but don't like the way it does music. I can't ever recall hearing anyone say they like the way their system does music but not HT.

The speakers impedance and power handling have virtually no arffect on the sound. Likewise, which input type you use is moot here. And, you can have the bestest, most powerful amp in the world and quad amp it, but it still funnels through the eweakest link in the chain, the speakers the room. Those last two are ones biggest limitation.

If music has any part in one's plan for a system, I strongly suggest the decision on equipment be made using music as the sample source, not HT.

Then again, maybe he could try a yamaha receiver. (inside joke ;))

gosh, i just came from using a yamaha receiver and the reason why i replaced them is because it sounds pathetic in stereo music listening especially tracks requiring punching bass..never again will i buy yamaha products.

accastil
12-06-2005, 09:41 PM
The choice to use analog or digital has nothing to do with CD's being digitally recorded, or the number of channels. It's all about the digital-to-analog conversion. Sooner or later the info becomes analog in the chain, the better the DAC, the better the sound. If your CD player's DAC is better than your receiver/processor/pre-amp's DAC, use the analog, if the receiver's DAC is better, use digital...

Be careful with speaker power ratings. Most speakers wil reach their maximum output at much less than the rated wattage because they run out of excursion (and in some cases can suffer a melt-down)...I'm not aware of any rules of thumb, but I have a pair of speakers I built that would claim 120 watts, but reach their mechanical limits at 9 watts below 50 Hz!!!

Your marantz receiver is a good start. As others have mentioned, room acoustics and speakers will introduce the most improvement in the majority of systems...what kind of speakers do you have?

is this the same reason why DVDA/SACD players would require analog connection to amps instead of a single digital line? is it because these players have better DACs than the amps they are connected to? (whatever amp it may be).

accastil
12-06-2005, 11:57 PM
I too have the Marantz sr 5500 and I think its a great reciever. I don't know what you mean by wanting better stereo sound in music.

If you are listening to music from a DVD or CD player you should use the digital inputs on the receiver seeing that DVD's and CD's are digital.

You should not worry about bi-amping your sr 5500. What I would do if I were you is to bi-wire my speakers.

You have more that enough power to drive 8ohm speaks...How effecient are ytour speakers

i know it sounds fantastic already..i just want it better..all my speakers are already bi-wired. they are MS THX declaration series.

accastil
12-07-2005, 12:07 AM
I too have the Marantz sr 5500 and I think its a great reciever. I don't know what you mean by wanting better stereo sound in music.

If you are listening to music from a DVD or CD player you should use the digital inputs on the receiver seeing that DVD's and CD's are digital.

You should not worry about bi-amping your sr 5500. What I would do if I were you is to bi-wire my speakers.

You have more that enough power to drive 8ohm speaks...How effecient are ytour speakers

i know it sounds fantastic already..i just want it better..all my speakers are already bi-wired. they are MS THX declaration series.

kajak
12-07-2005, 12:37 AM
its not the quantity of watts but the quality of watts depends on your buget no point having lots of watts if you dont use them

kajak
12-07-2005, 12:40 AM
its not the quantity but the quality of watts that matter depends on your buget!

markw
12-07-2005, 03:37 AM
1) If the receiver is so fantastic for music, hoccum you're looking in all the wrong places for a more musically pleasing experience?

2) If the speakers are so fantastic for music, hoccum you're looking in all the wrong places for a more musically pleasing experience?

3) What exactly do you mean by your specious goal of "better sound"? "Different" may be achievable by serendipity but "better" requires a direction in which to proceed.

4) You DO realize that a THX certification on speakers means they were tweaked for HT use, not music, right? ...big difference. http://www.digitalhomemag.com/reviews/default.asp?pagetypeid=2&articleid=18764&subsectionid=1306&subsubsectionid=959

5) I see from the specs on your receiver that it's rated @ 90 wpc into 8 ohms @ .08% distortion. I also see it's rated @ 110 wpc @ 6 ohms with no distortion figure stated. I have NO idea what it's doing at 4 ohms, either power or distortion wise. Do you? But, if you notice, as the impedance goes down, the power goes up ...and so does the distortion.

Someday you may come realize that the answers to some questions are what they are, not what you want them to be. But, I think that rather than taking the advice of others you'll have to spend a lot of money to realize that.

P.S . The Yamaha mention in my previous post was a light-hearted reference to your input in another thread but, even though that was pretty much spelled out with a smiley face, I see you didn't get that either.

Jim Clark
12-07-2005, 06:17 AM
I know that you're getting some conflicting responses so I'll clear it up for you. Disregard everyone in this thread with less than 300 posts. The ones with fewer than that have no idea what they're talking about.

jc

Resident Loser
12-07-2005, 06:18 AM
...better...


...another question. while listening to stereo music? which receiver input is best to use? is it the digital input (coax/optical) or the stereo (L/R) analog inputs?

Using the digital connectons will bypass the DAC in your CDP for the one contained in your receiver, the analog does the reverse. Which sounds "better" to you...you are the only one who can answer that question...


..what is bi-amping? how is the connection configuration for this set up?

That depends..."true" biampng requires two stereo amps and electronic crossovers plus the time and patience to set it all up properly...also the Xovers internal to your loudspeakers should be bypassed...the Wal-Mart version simply requires two stereo amps, one for the highs the other for the lows...your speakers must be bi-wireable in either case, generally speaking.

NOTE: to RICKY009...try using lower case characters...your post may have contained the Great American Novel, but I read not one word of it because you are "shouting"...

jimHJJ(...now, that definition again?...)

GMichael
12-07-2005, 06:18 AM
gosh, i just came from using a yamaha receiver and the reason why i replaced them is because it sounds pathetic in stereo music listening especially tracks requiring punching bass..never again will i buy yamaha products.

HAHAHAH,

Accastil,

Your receiver is fine. It should do a good job. I have never heard your speakers so I just can't say if they are weak or not. But I think your best bet is to try moving your speakers around to find their best placement.
Has your system been calibrated?
Do you have a powered sub?

shokhead
12-07-2005, 06:22 AM
THE MORE POWER THE BETTER. YOU CAN NEVER HAVE TOO MUCH POWER. IN FACT, YOU CAN RUIN YOUR SPEAKERS USING A 50 WATT PER CHANNEL RECEIVER IF PLAYED TOO LOUD. YOU WILL GO INTO "CLIPPING": AMP ATTEMPTS TO DELIVER MORE POWER THAN ITS DESIGN ALLOWS. WHEN OVERDRIVEN, THE AMP WILL CLIP SIGNAL WAVEFORMS, A CONDITION OF SEVERE DISTORTION WHICH MAY DAMAGE THE HIGH FREQUENCY TRANSDUCERS IN THE SPEAKER (OR ANY OTHER SPEAKER, INCLUDING THE CROSS-OVER NETWORK). I KNOW, B/C I DID IT.
FOR YEARS I PLAYED MY SPEAKERS WITH A GOOD, SOLID YAMAHA RECEIVER, WHICH IS RATED AT 80 WPC AT 8 OHMS. I THOUGHT MY SYSTEM SOUNDED GOOD, UNTIL I BROUGHT HOME A 250 WPC BRYSTON POWER AMPLIFIER. WOW! THE DIFFERENCE WAS UNBELIEVABLE. THE BASS WAS DEEPER, MORE POWERFUL. I COULD PLAY MY ROCK MUSIC LOUDER AND IT WAS CRYSTAL CLEAR. THE VOLUME LEVEL WAS EAR-SHATTERING. SO, A GOOD AMP IS VERY IMPORTANT. CHECK OUT ROTEL, NAD, MUSICAL FIDELITY, BRYSTON, PARASOUND, CREEK, ARCAMAUDIO ANALOGUE PRIMO, MUSIC HALL "MAMBO", VINCENT. YOU CAN BUY A GOOD AND I MEAN GOOD, 50-100 WATT AMP OR INTEGRATED AMP TO DRIVE YOUR SPEAKERS.
YOU WOULD CONNECT THE AMP, BUT NOT INTEGRATED AMP (HAS AMPLIFIER AND PREAMP IN SAME BOX) TO THE "PRE OUT" RCA JACKS ON THE BACK OF YOUR RECEIVER. YOU MAY NOT HAVE THIS PRE OUT FEATURE, WHICH ESSENTIALLY DISCONNECTS THE AMPLIFIER FROM THE CONTROL AMPLIFIER, OR PREAMP, INSIDE YOUR RECEIVER. YOUR VOLUME CONTROL AND SELECTOR SWITCH/BUTTONS (VCR, CD, DVD, ETC) WILL WORK AND THE POWER AMP WILL DRIVE YOUR SPEAKERS. THAT'S WHAT I DID WITH THE 250 WPC BRYSTON 4B ST AMP, WHICH I IMMEDIATELY BOUGHT AFTER HEARING THE DRAMATIC CHANGE IN MY SYSTEM, AS DESCRIBED ABOVE.

BI-AMPING IS WHERE YOU USE TWO IDENTICAL AMPLIFIERS TO DRIVE YOUR SPEAKERS. TYPICALLY, ONE WOULD USE ONE AMP TO DRIVE ONE SPEAKER AND THE OTHER AMP TO DRIVE THE OTHER SPEAKER. THIS IS WHAT "MONOBLOCK" AMPS DO. EACH MONOBLOCK DRIVES ONE CHANNEL. TWO FOR STEREO, FIVE FOR 5.1 SURROUND SOUND. THIS IS KNOWN AS "VERTICAL BI-AMPING". ANOTHER WAY IS TO USE ONE AMP TO DRIVE THE WOOFERS OF BOTH SPEAKERS, OR THE BOTTOM END OF SPEAKERS WITH BI-WIRE CAPABILITY (TWO SETS OF SPEAKER JACKS ON THE BACK OF YOUR SPEAKERS). THE OTHER AMP IS USED TO DRIVE THE UPPER END (TWEETER. OR TWEETER/MIDRANGE DRIVERS). THIS AMP WOULD BE CONNECTED TO THE TOP PAIR OF SPEAKER JACKS ON THE BACK OF YOUR SPEAKERS. IF YOU BI-AMP, YOU HAVE TO HAVE SPEAKERS THAT HAVE TWO SETS OF JACKS ON THEM. EITHER WAY, YOU USE "Y-CABLES" TO CONNECT ONE AMP TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF YOUR PRE-OUT JACK AND THE OTHER AMP TO THE OTHER SIDE. OR PUT IN OTHER WORDS, THE POWER AMP HAS TWO INPUTS JACKS, ONE FOR THE RIGHT AND ONE FOR THE LEFT. YOU USE 2 CABLES FROM THE AMP AND CONNECT THEM TO YOUR SHORT "Y-CABLE", WHICH HAS TWO JACKS AT ONE END AND ONE AT THE OTHER. THEN YOU CONNECT THAT ONE END INTO THE ONE SIDE OF THE PREAMP/PREOUT JACK. THEN, WITH THE OTHER AMP, YOU DO THE SAME: TWO WIRES OUT FROM THE POWER AMP INTO THE Y-CABLE, WHICH LEAVES YOU WITH 1 WIRE NOW (2 INTO 1), AND THEN THE ONE JACK INTO THE OTHER PREAMP/PREOUT JACK. YOU PROBABLY HAVE "RCA" JACKS, WHICH IS THE STANDARD TYPE OF JACK ON THE REAR OF MOST RECEIVERS. THIS WAY I DESCRIBED IS KNOWN AS "VERTICAL BI-AMPING", WHERE 1 AMP DRIVES ONE SPEAKER AND THE OTHER AMP DRIVES THE OTHER SPEAKER. THE OTHER WAY, WHERE 1 AMP DRIVES WOOFERS AND THE OTHER AMP DRIVES THE TWEETERS, IS CALLED "HORIZONTAL BI-AMPING."
YOU PROBABLY WON'T BE ABLE TO BI-AMP, THOUGH WITH A RECEIVER, UNLESS YOU FIND A POWER AMP OF THE SAME BRAND, POWER, SPECS, AS THE POWER AMP INSIDE YOUR RECEIVER. FORGET IT. TOO FRICKED-UP. I TRIED IT.

FINALLY, YOU WILL GET "BETTER" SOUND USING THE STEREO JACKS (2 JACKS, OPPOSED TO ONE DIGITAL JACK). THE FEELING IS AMONG AUDIOPHILES IS THAT ANALOG IS BETTER FOR MUSIC. DIGITAL IS BETTER FOR WATCHING MOVIES. HOWEVER, USE WHAT SOUNDS BEST TO YOU. BUT, GENERALLY, HANDS DOWN, ANALOG IS BETTER FOR MUSIC, ACCORDING TO THE EXPERTS, WHICH I AM NOT. I AM NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT ANALOG IS SMOOTHER, MORE RICH FOR MUSIC LISTENING. IT IS QUITER TOO. DIGITAL IS CONSIDERED MORE NOISY, MORE DISTORTION. CD PLAYERS PLAY DIGITAL MUSIC READ FROM THE DISCS. THEY HAVE DIGITAL TO ANALOG CONVERTER's (DAC's), WHICH CONVERTS THE DIGITAL SIGNAL FROM THE CD INTO AN ANOLOG SIGNAL. GOOFY. FINALLY, IF YOU ARE GOING TO USE THE DIGITAL JACK, IT IS SAID THAT A COAXIAL CORD IS BETTER THAN THE OPTICAL. SO COMPLICATED... I GUESS THE OPTICAL (TOSLINK) IS NOISIER. I THINK IT MAY BE BETTER FOR VIDEO, BUT NOT FOR MUSIC ONLY. I USE BOTH. I HAVE A OPTICAL FROM THE DVD TO MY PROCESSOR (5.1 DOLBY DIGITAL).

WHAT I DID WAS LOOKED AROUND FOR A STEREO MAGAZINE. I FOUND THAT "THE ABSOLUTE SOUND" AND "STEREOPHILE" WERE VERY GOOD. ALSO I GET "SOUND AND VISION" WHICH HAS BOTH AUDIO AND VIDEO INFO. IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS E-MAIL ME.

Stop yelling! Yes,you can have to much power and why pay for more if you dont need it or its not the problem. You have to add quite abit of watts to be noticed. Some of that other stuff is questionable.

markw
12-07-2005, 07:56 AM
Some of that other stuff is questionable.You're being extremely charitable here.

Woochifer
12-07-2005, 02:24 PM
Before you even bother with amplification upgrades, you need to look at the speakers and the room acoustics as markw said. Speakers and rooms have far more variation and real world effect on the sound quality than any of the front end components will.

If you have a small and echoey room, then the room will produce standing waves (which create huge fluctuations in the low frequencies, making it sound overly boomy with some sounds and anemic with others), and time domain distortions (which make the sound harsh, mess with the imaging, and make the overall sound less coherent).

At a minimum, you should try different speaker positions (with two channel, you're best off pulling the speakers away from the front wall by at least 3 feet, and using sound absorption at the reflection points along the side walls). Room treatments that deaden the echoes can dramatically improve the imaging coherency and smooth out the sound overall.

If you use a subwoofer with your system, you should consider installing bass traps and/or a parametric EQ. A parametric equalizer can really improve the bass by targeting and attenuating boomy frequencies, and allowing you to more accurately calibrate the levels. The end result is extended, and fuller sounding bass.

Whether or not a source sounds better using an analog or digital connection depends on the quality of the DACs inside of your receiver versus those inside the CD player. Keep in mind though that a lot of home theater receivers convert all analog signals to digital anyway for DSP processing (including the bass management, which is almost always done in the digital domain with home theater receivers), so the quality of the DACs or the analog circuitry inside the CD player won't matter much. Most receivers do allow for direct analog connections (with no digital conversions) using the multichannel analog inputs, however keeping the signal in the analog domain means that the signal also bypasses the subwoofer.

Even though there can be audible differences between amplifiers, they are often more subtle than the improvement that a simple speaker repositioning can make. Speaker upgrades and room treatments typically make far more obvious and noticeable improvements.

hermanv
12-07-2005, 03:35 PM
Many audiophiles maintain two seperate systems, one for HT and one for music. There are a number of reasons that this is common.

1. Many already had a two channel system when HT became a big hit.
2. There so many movie sound encoding schemes that adding Dolby, PCM, DTS etc. to the existing stereo was improbable, buying a receiver for HT was much easier and cheaper.
3. I have never heard a receiver that can do the job of a first class two channel stereo (doesn't mean they don't exist but I guarantee they are rare indeed).

I don't mean to dis anyone's equipment (like I said I've never heard yours) but most purists buy seperates, not so much because we love buying absurdly overpriced interconnect cables but because it just plain sounds better.

Before you invest a large amount of money in your pursuit, perhaps you could find a local audiophile club or someone you work with who is an audiophile. You need to hear a good system for a reasonable amount of time to discover what is possible. Only then can you decide what level of investment makes sense to you. Many good systems easily cost the price of a car.

Most larger cities have high end shops, you know you found one when the salesmen pretend you don't exist and act like demonstrating a system is a special favor never before done for anyone but you. You will not find what you need at the local mass market electronics shop. You might find better than you have now, but it is very important to discover what is possible before spending any money on what may turn out to be an in between step.

Get some magazines, old copies are fine, learn some of the lingo, get familiar with the brand names that are highly regarded, learn about the used market. A decent piece of equipment will probably cost half as much used (most of it doesn't wear out, nothing wrong with used). Often you can find used close enough to home that you can go see and hear it.

Once you have a good overview you wont have to depend on others for advice, none of us can hear your system in your room. All of us end up guessing, you are far better off deciding these things for yourself especially if large amounts of money are involved.

Florian
12-07-2005, 05:41 PM
Well i consider myself as one of those purists on our site ;)

Its funny how so many people write about the difference of equipment and how money doesnt always get you more and acoustics and dvd-a and sacd etc... blablabla
Its quite amusing, and i definetly enjoy reading it. For starters i would make a list of what you want. Do you maybe want more defined bass? Maybe a larger soundstage? How about more max spl or a more emotionally involving sound? I did see some of our highly regarded members systems and have read their opinion on some highly regarded equipment and it makes me smile internally, very much. Listen to your ears and musical heart. Its funny how some mention biamping but dont list the real advantage of it all, and that is that the amp has to play a much smaller frequency range which reliefs it of much stress and introduces less distortion at the back of the amp. Some mention new super audio formats etc.. while not understanding nor grasping the heart of the music. I will gladly put any CD player or new hi rez format player against a Forsell or Goldmund TT and open some of your eyes. Anyways before i go on a rant, just ask yourself what you want. And then i can help you reach that goal, its not hard. But buying into one bigger sale then the other or buying the same drivers in a cabinet for the past 20 years under new super names wont get you there.

Cheers

Flo

Florian
12-07-2005, 05:49 PM
That depends..."true" biampng requires two stereo amps and electronic crossovers plus the time and patience to set it all up properly.. Just a hint, this is called "Drive the speakers active". If you use two poweamps but still use the internal x-over and match the power amps gains then you are biamped. A very good option is ofcourse the use of a digital active cross-over (a good one!) and the use of several power amps. One for each stage. I might do this next year to my Aps, well the start it will take propebly 3 to buy the amps :p

Woochifer
12-07-2005, 06:11 PM
is this the same reason why DVDA/SACD players would require analog connection to amps instead of a single digital line? is it because these players have better DACs than the amps they are connected to? (whatever amp it may be).

DVD-A and SACD require analog connections because of piracy concerns, no other reason. Fortunately, upcoming implementations of HDMI will be secure enough to allow for digital DVD-A and SACD connections. The latest midlevel Yamaha receivers can already decode DVD-A signals when paired with a HDMI 1.1 compliant DVD-A player.

Logan
12-07-2005, 06:31 PM
I know that you're getting some conflicting responses so I'll clear it up for you. Disregard everyone in this thread with less than 300 posts. The ones with fewer than that have no idea what they're talking about.

jc

I have fewer posts than that, but I might have around 300 in all the audio forums (fora ??) that I visit from time to time.

I'm not going to give you any advice. Maybe I wouldn't know what I was talking about. But that's because I spend most of my time listening to music and keeping my system in good tune rather than posting inane remarks on audio websites in order to reach the magic figure of 300.

Florian
12-07-2005, 06:33 PM
I have fewer posts than that, but I might have around 300 in all the audio forums (fora ??) that I visit from time to time.

I'm not going to give you any advice. Maybe I wouldn't know what I was talking about. But that's because I spend most of my time listening to music and keeping my system in good tune rather than posting inane remarks on audio websites in order to reach the magic figure of 300.
True, but then again you shouldnt insult those who have more. :D

markw
12-07-2005, 06:35 PM
I have fewer posts than that, but I might have around 300 in all the audio forums (fora ??) that I visit from time to time.

I'm not going to give you any advice. Maybe I wouldn't know what I was talking about. But that's because I spend most of my time listening to music and keeping my system in good tune rather than posting inane remarks on audio websites in order to reach the magic figure of 300.Now, not knowing your other posts, so far you're at least one inane remark in nine posts.

That's somewhere around an 11% inane ratio so far.

Now, you're free to offer some advice to the poster and, as is generally the case on this forum, I'm pretty sure it will be "judged" by the soundness of the advice moreso than the number of posts you have. ...and you just might drop your inane ratio by about 2%.

Jim Clark
12-07-2005, 08:18 PM
I have fewer posts than that, but I might have around 300 in all the audio forums (fora ??) that I visit from time to time.

I'm not going to give you any advice. Maybe I wouldn't know what I was talking about. But that's because I spend most of my time listening to music and keeping my system in good tune rather than posting inane remarks on audio websites in order to reach the magic figure of 300.

Seems you managed to take the time out for one right here. Keep up the good work, only 291 to go...

The simple point was, at the time of my post there were 2 posts with incorrect information. These were not simple differences of opinion, but wrong information. The conflicting reports created confusion were none was necessary. A quick check showed that people with very few posts were the culprits. At the point of my post on this particular thread my suggestion was pretty much spot on. It was clearly not meant as an indictment of every newcomer to the board.

You can go back to trying to keep your system in tune if you don't enjoy the board. Take care and enjoy your music.

jc

accastil
12-08-2005, 03:05 AM
Hi, i have an existing Marantz SR5500 receiver but i still want better stereo sound while im listening to music. what should i do? do i have to buy a separate power amp or integrated amp? my speakers are rated 150W at 8ohms. how much wattage of amp should i add-on?

another question. while listening to stereo music? which receiver input is best to use? is it the digital input (coax/optical) or the stereo (L/R) analog inputs?

final question...what is bi-amping? how is the connection configuration for this set up?

after reading your answers, do i get everyone to agree on this:
do i buy a separate amp? YES
how much wattage? JUST ENOUGH TO DRIVE THE MAINS
which rcver audio input is best to use? IF CDP DAC IS BETTER USE ANALOG, OTHERWISE, USE DIGITAL (not clear to me if optical or coax)
any more violent reactions???

markw
12-08-2005, 04:23 AM
...still no definition of "better" I see.

One more tidbit for you to ponder inyour quest for the holy grail. From reading the specs on your speakers, don't they have built in powered subwoofers? You may want to think about this.

I do have to give you credit though. You're more than willing to throw money at this problem.

Resident Loser
12-08-2005, 06:32 AM
Just a hint, this is called "Drive the speakers active". If you use two poweamps but still use the internal x-over and match the power amps gains then you are biamped.

...I've been active in this hobby for nearly forty years and have read copious amounts of it's early history..."true" biamping IS active bi-amping, always has been and always will be...the K-mart, Wal-Mart, bargain basement variant of "passive" bi-amping is, as Rod Elliot says:

"Passive biamping (where two amplifiers are used in a bi-wiring connection) is, IMHO, a waste of money. Although there may be some moderate sonic benefits, they are not worth the expense of the extra amplifier."

He says this, and more re: biamping, at his website:

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

In fact if you do a MS or Google search for "bi-amping" you will get a host of responses...do a search for "drive the speakers active" and see what you get...my browser is still scratching it's little silicon-based head trying to figure out what the he!! THAT is supposed to mean.

Much like the use of the term "burn-in" when what is actually meant is "break-in"...there is a long established meaning that has been bastardized by the jargon-spewing, audiopile-types in order that they might sound more "techie"...to those who know better, they simply sound like idiots..."drive the speakers active" indeed!

Perhaps you may want to "drive the autobahn sleepy"...

jimHJJ(...Oh, that hint: do us all a favor and just shut your strudel-hole...)

shokhead
12-08-2005, 06:39 AM
Or throw it away.

Florian
12-08-2005, 06:41 AM
Well there are plenty of people that drive the Maggies and the Apogees in a active configuration. This uses a digital active crossover with 3 stereo amps or 6 monoblocks which then drives each range of the speaker individually. The TACT people also drive their speakers digitally active and so do the new NHT guys ;-) I guess i am mistaken since i havent gotten forty years on yet!

Resident Loser
12-08-2005, 07:44 AM
Well there are plenty of people that drive the Maggies and the Apogees in a active configuration. This uses a digital active crossover with 3 stereo amps or 6 monoblocks which then drives each range of the speaker individually. The TACT people also drive their speakers digitally active and so do the new NHT guys ;-)

Bi-amping? Tri-amping? Quad- or quint-ampling? You do realize you are having an argument with yourself, don't you?


I guess i am mistaken since i havent gotten forty years on yet!

On what, the planet?

jimHJJ(...hopeless, utterly hopeless...)

Florian
12-08-2005, 07:48 AM
Bi-amping? Tri-amping? Quad- or quint-ampling? You do realize you are having an argument with yourself, don't you?



On what, the planet?

jimHJJ(...hopeless, utterly hopeless...)
Dear Mr.Looser, i am definetly not arguing. I wouldnt dare argue with forty years of experience.

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 01:11 AM
Using the digital connectons will bypass the DAC in your CDP for the one contained in your receiver, the analog does the reverse. Which sounds "better" to you...you are the only one who can answer that question...



That depends..."true" biampng requires two stereo amps and electronic crossovers plus the time and patience to set it all up properly...also the Xovers internal to your loudspeakers should be bypassed...the Wal-Mart version simply requires two stereo amps, one for the highs the other for the lows...your speakers must be bi-wireable in either case, generally speaking.

NOTE: to RICKY009...try using lower case characters...your post may have contained the Great American Novel, but I read not one word of it because you are "shouting"...

jimHJJ(...now, that definition again?...)

SHOUTING. GIVE ME A BREAK. I DON'T BELIEVE IN THAT - LOSERS DO. BUT, REGARDLESS, IT IS EASIER TO READ AND I DO NOT HAVE TO CAPTALIZE WHEN REQUIRED. YOU SHOULD READ MY POST, MAYBE YOU WOULD LEARN SOMETHING.

SECOND, "TRUE BI-AMPING" DOES NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRE TWO (2) STEREO AMPS. YOU COULD USE FOUR (4) MONOBLOCKS. AND, CROSSOVER IS NOT REQUIRED, AS I EXPLAINED, ABOVE, YOU USE Y-CABLES. WHAT DOES YOUR SYSTEM CONSIST OF? I WON'T BRAG AND SAY WHAT I OWN, BUT I WILL SAY THAT I OWN A PAIR OF B&W 801's. ;)

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 01:15 AM
Oops, See I Tried To Write In Small Letters, And Mis-spelled A Word!

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 01:21 AM
ok loser, i will succomb to your "rules". But, a guy quotes hitler (name doesn't deserve capital letters)! hitler was a LOSER and not only killed himself, but had his worthless body burned.

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 01:35 AM
Another .... Get Over The "cap" Rule. Do You Have A Receiver Or Separate Amp, Preamp, Etc? The More Power The Better. But, Not From A Receiver.

shokhead
12-10-2005, 05:05 AM
Get off the more power the better crap. They must love to see you walk into a B&M to buy something,Ricky.

GMichael
12-10-2005, 05:43 AM
Get off the more power the better crap. They must love to see you walk into a B&M to buy something,Ricky.

But isn't louder better?

TURN IT UP
TURN IT UP!
TURN IT UP MORE!

shokhead
12-10-2005, 10:54 AM
Oh yes. 200watts into some orbs. I wonder how far the would fly? LOL

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 09:11 PM
there are huge differences between amplifiers. and i'm not talking about receivers, but separate amps. tube vs. solid state for example. mark levinson vs. rotel. BAT v. Bryston. ...........................

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 09:22 PM
first, i do not know what the "B&M" IS THAT you are referring to. obviously you haven't heard high-end audio equipment. And, i will stick by my more power the better. but, i do not refer to receivers, as the tuners create quite a bit distortion. i have heard, systems costing in excess of $100,000. i listened to HALCRO AND BAT if you know what that means. i don't want to brag, but i put together a world-class 2-channel analog system after much experimentation and auditioning.

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 09:32 PM
ok, i did look up this B&M site and i can see now what i am dealing with.

RICKY009
12-10-2005, 09:34 PM
Wal-mart Version? Lol

shokhead
12-11-2005, 04:28 AM
So you got this world class amp,oh lets say 250watts per channal into some nice bookshelfs that max at 100watts. This is a good match and a wise investment? Wouldnt you rather have the same amp at 125watts and a better bookshelf at 120watt max? Maybe i'm confused but when i started screwing around with this stuff at 15,i thought more,more power but then started learning about matching stuff closer and watts wasnt as important and a lot of other factors.

markw
12-11-2005, 04:59 AM
So you got this world class amp,oh lets say 250watts per channal into some nice bookshelfs that max at 100watts. This is a good match and a wise investment? Wouldnt you rather have the same amp at 125watts and a better bookshelf at 120watt max? Maybe i'm confused but when i started screwing around with this stuff at 15,i thought more,more power but then started learning about matching stuff closer and watts wasnt as important and a lot of other factors.As long as you have enough for your needs, it isn't important. IAlso, tt helps if they are both clean. You've got the law to be concerned about with one one and your speakers for the other.

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 05:08 AM
600 wpc @8 ohms, driving a pair of B&W N801's. no bookshelf speakers. need the power to drive the big speakers. you know, i found this site, by accident and tried to help some person who had a question. i wasn't sarcastic. but then, i found a bunch of ......... criticizing the font size, using caps instead of lower case letters.... i wasn't thinking about such ridiculous things such as that. some guy (+ i am being polite) calls me out about "not yelling!" i wasn't yelling. i did not give a thought to what cap size i was using. i read a question and answered it. you people (few) are ............................................good. polite.

then, some ..................person, tells me about not using alot of power. look, i fricked around with alot of gear over the past years and found that to listen to louder music, primarily rock (classic) i required a high powered amp to drive big floor standing speakers. i had a big room so i chose floor standers. small rooms, you can get by with bookshelf, but i could not. i found, when listening to separate solid state amplifiers, such as mcintosh,mark levinson, krell, bryston, musical fidelity, that higher powered amps seemed to bring out more sound out of the speakers. deep, firm, solid bass. crystal clear mids and highs. lower powered amps just couldn't do it. they would run out of steam. i got mad yesterday when i read some of the responses to my advice, but i realize that some of you may not have been exposed to some of the stuff that's out there. i haven't heard most of it, but i have seen and hears some pretty big-time equipment. bat amps, halcros, with astronomical prices. i have a good high-end system. maybe not world-class, but pretty frickin close. no tubes, no turntables, no esoteric racks and stands. but i found that a good, and i mean good amp, with reasonably high power, will take hold of your woofers and drive them like you never imagined. I NEVER IMAGINED UNTIL I, FOR THE FIRST TIME, BROUGHT HOME A BRYSTON 4B ST AMP, 250 WPC @ 8 OHMS, 400 @ 4 OHMS, AND HOOKED IT UP TO THE SYSTEM THAT I HAD AT THE TIME. I WAS AMAZED.

good bye and good luck.

PS CHECK OUT "MUSIC DIRECT" ON THE WEB. THEY HAVE SOME OF THE STUFF THAT I AM REFERRING TO. BAT TUBE AND SS AMPS; EDGE AMPS, LEGACY SPEAKERS. GREAT WIRES FROM NORDOST AND SUPERB POWER CONDITIONERS FROM SHUNYATA (I OWN HYDRA 2 AND HYDRA 6), PS AUDIO AND NORDOST.

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 05:17 AM
600 wpc @8 ohms, driving a pair of B&W N801's. no bookshelf speakers. need the power to drive the big speakers. you know, i found this site, by accident and tried to help some person who had a question. i wasn't sarcastic. but then, i found a bunch of ......... criticizing the font size, using caps instead of lower case letters.... i wasn't thinking about such ridiculous things such as that. some guy (+ i am being polite) calls me out about "not yelling!" i wasn't yelling. i did not give a thought to what cap size i was using. i read a question and answered it. you people (few) are ............................................good. polite.

then, some ..................person, tells me about not using alot of power. look, i fricked around with alot of gear over the past years and found that to listen to louder music, primarily rock (classic) i required a high powered amp to drive big floor standing speakers. i had a big room so i chose floor standers. small rooms, you can get by with bookshelf, but i could not. i found, when listening to separate solid state amplifiers, such as mcintosh,mark levinson, krell, bryston, musical fidelity, that higher powered amps seemed to bring out more sound out of the speakers. deep, firm, solid bass. crystal clear mids and highs. lower powered amps just couldn't do it. they would run out of steam. i got mad yesterday when i read some of the responses to my advice, but i realize that some of you may not have been exposed to some of the stuff that's out there. i haven't heard most of it, but i have seen and hears some pretty big-time equipment. bat amps, halcros, with astronomical prices. i have a good high-end system. maybe not world-class, but pretty frickin close. no tubes, no turntables, no esoteric racks and stands. but i found that a good, and i mean good amp, with reasonably high power, will take hold of your woofers and drive them like you never imagined. I NEVER IMAGINED UNTIL I, FOR THE FIRST TIME, BROUGHT HOME A BRYSTON 4B ST AMP, 250 WPC @ 8 OHMS, 400 @ 4 OHMS, AND HOOKED IT UP TO THE SYSTEM THAT I HAD AT THE TIME. I WAS AMAZED.

good bye and good luck.

PS CHECK OUT "MUSIC DIRECT" ON THE WEB. THEY HAVE SOME OF THE STUFF THAT I AM REFERRING TO. BAT TUBE AND SS AMPS; EDGE AMPS, LEGACY SPEAKERS. GREAT WIRES FROM NORDOST AND SUPERB POWER CONDITIONERS FROM SHUNYATA (I OWN HYDRA 2 AND HYDRA 6), PS AUDIO AND NORDOST.
NO LAW TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT SINCE I BUILT A BIG ROOM IN THE BASEMENT TO LISTEN TO MY STUFF. AND, ITS CLEAN. IT BETTER BE, ALL THE FRICKIN AROUND I DID.

ALSO, THE NAUTILUS 801's HANDLE POWER AMPS UP TO 1kW, SO NO PROBLEM THERE. IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A PAIR OF MUSICAL FIDELITY TRI-VISTA kW (1000 WATTS) "MONOBLOCS" OR A PAIR OF SIMAUDIO MOON ROCK MONOBLOCKS (1000 WATTS @ 8 OHMS, 220 LB BEHEMOTH!). OR, I'D SETTLE FOR A PAIR OF VTL-450 (TUBE) MONO'S.

GOOD BYE

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 05:22 AM
One More Thing.......... Person Who Said "watts Not Important." You Are Correct. It Is Current.

shokhead
12-12-2005, 07:02 AM
NO LAW TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT SINCE I BUILT A BIG ROOM IN THE BASEMENT TO LISTEN TO MY STUFF. AND, ITS CLEAN. IT BETTER BE, ALL THE FRICKIN AROUND I DID.

ALSO, THE NAUTILUS 801's HANDLE POWER AMPS UP TO 1kW, SO NO PROBLEM THERE. IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A PAIR OF MUSICAL FIDELITY TRI-VISTA kW (1000 WATTS) "MONOBLOCS" OR A PAIR OF SIMAUDIO MOON ROCK MONOBLOCKS (1000 WATTS @ 8 OHMS, 220 LB BEHEMOTH!). OR, I'D SETTLE FOR A PAIR OF VTL-450 (TUBE) MONO'S.

GOOD BYE

Your yelling again. :p

shokhead
12-12-2005, 07:06 AM
Nobody is saying to run sonething like the 801's with a 100watt amp/receiver but a 1000watt amp/receiver with 100watt max speakers is to much power.

noddin0ff
12-12-2005, 07:31 AM
(edit) bunch of stuff, twice...(/edit)

You needed to quote yourself? I'm glad you clean your basement. Bye.

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 08:24 AM
You needed to quote yourself? I'm glad you clean your basement. Bye.
idiot. OOPS, I FORGOT, USE CAPS. CLEAN POWER. LIKE I SAID, CHECK OUT SOME GOOD EQUIPMENT. I MERELY SAID "STUFF" B/C I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE EASIER FOR YOU KIDS TO UNDERSTAND. OBVIOUSLY, MOST PEOPLE HERE LIKE TO CRITIQUE, OR TEAR APART SOMEONE WHO IS GIVING ADVICE. I SEE QUOTES FROM ADOLPH HITLER, RECOMENDATIONS FOR PURCHASING AUDIO EQUIPMENT FROM WAL-MART, PEOPLE WHO GET ANGRY WHEN SOMEONE USES CAPITAL LETTERS (THAT'S THE KICKER, LOSERS), AND SOME GUY OR GIRL, CONTINUING TO SELL EMPTY BOXES. OF COURSE, THAT IS WHAT YOUR SPEAKERS PROBABLY CONSIST OF.

NEXT, IT IS FUTILE TO ARGUE WITH PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THAT B/C THEY HAVE POSTED GREATER THAN 1,000 (!) GOOD FOR SH.. COMMENTS, QUOTES, COFFIN SALES, ETC. WOW! THAT'S ALOT OF TIME ON THE COMPUTER. LIKE I STATED ABOVE, I STUMBLED ACROSS THIS BUSH-LEAGUE SITE CHECKING-OUT AMPLIFIERS. I MEAN BUSH. AKIN TO A COFFIN, OR EMPTY BOX. INITIALLY, I WANTED TO TRY TO ANSWER A QUESTION AND IT EVOLVED INTO ARGUMENTS WITH GOD KNOWS WHO. WHEN YOU CAN AFFORD A AMPLIFIER THAT COSTS AS MUCH AS MY POWER CONDITIONERS MAYBE YOU'LL UNDERSTAND. TO THE OTHERS THAT HAD TO READ THIS, IS SUPPOSE IT IS GOOD READING. I ENJOYED IT. BUT, I COULD HAVE DONE WITHOUT THE CHICKEN **** QUIRKS THAT APPARENTLY A COUPLE OF YOU HAVE. I LIKE THE TWO-ON-ONE GANG, LISTED ABOVE. ONE CRAPS, AND THE OTHER FOLLOWS.

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST. WRITING. I WILL NOT COMMENT ON SOME OF YOUR POSTS, SINCE IT IS OBVIOUS THAT YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF PUTTING TOGETHER A RESPONSE LONGER THAN 100 WORDS. BUT, YOU BIG BOYS OF THIS SITE RULE. SO, I SUCCOMB TO YOUR SUPERIORITY AND BID YOU, WELL, GOOD DAY.

QUOTE: ONLY BOXES SELL UNDERTAKERS. THAT MAKES MORE SENSE.

shokhead
12-12-2005, 08:44 AM
I would tell you to go fuc$ yourself but i'm trying to be nicer on here. I thought my replies were nice and thoughtfull. I can see how full of yourself you are so you can go somewhere else and post if you like,you dont have to be here otherwise i'll stick by what i'm trying to say,i wouldnt spend more money on more watts i cant use even if it means my friends wont say,gee,you have a lot of watts,your cool. You have some nice stuff but i'm not impressed,sorry RICKY. You have a lot of watts and i have just what i need we differ and thats fine but dont be an a$$wipe.

noddin0ff
12-12-2005, 08:47 AM
I STUMBLED ACROSS THIS BUSH-LEAGUE SITE CHECKING-OUT AMPLIFIERS. I MEAN BUSH. AKIN TO A COFFIN, OR EMPTY BOX.
I think you're mixing your similes (either that or you don't know what a bush is).

WHEN YOU CAN AFFORD A AMPLIFIER THAT COSTS AS MUCH AS MY POWER CONDITIONERS MAYBE YOU'LL UNDERSTAND.
Understand what? Your writing? Your use of the word 'bush'?

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST. WRITING. I WILL NOT COMMENT ON SOME OF YOUR POSTS, SINCE IT IS OBVIOUS THAT YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF PUTTING TOGETHER A RESPONSE LONGER THAN 100 WORDS.
You just commented.

I SUCCOMB TO YOUR SUPERIORITY AND BID YOU, WELL, GOOD DAY.
Thanks! I appreciate it!

….dang, I need sixty-one more words.

shokhead
12-12-2005, 09:20 AM
How dare you respond to RICKY,you dont have 1000 posts yet.

GMichael
12-12-2005, 09:36 AM
Easy guys. Let's just try to help the original poster.

More power (or current) is great, if your speakers can take it. If not, you may be better off looking and listening to as many speakers as you can. Once you find the ones you like then you can look into what amps are good for those speakers.

shokhead
12-12-2005, 10:05 AM
**** you. there. i'm not nice. does shock **** and nod eat it? i think he does! you are not impressed because your jealous, admit it. go ahead. you'll never have what i have. and **** YOU.

HEY NOD, SHOCK IS READY TO ****. YOU BETTER HURRY AND WIPE HIS ASS

LMAO. Oh stop it RICKY. Stop it right now! OK,i forgive you,you are a newbie so we can start all over again. I agree with GMichael. Thats what i thought i was trying to say but maybe it didnt come across that way.

noddin0ff
12-12-2005, 10:19 AM
**** you. there. i'm not nice. does shock **** and nod eat it? i think he does! you are not impressed because your jealous, admit it. go ahead. you'll never have what i have. and **** YOU.

HEY NOD, SHOCK IS READY TO ****. YOU BETTER HURRY AND WIPE HIS ASS
Pottymouth! Pottymouth! RICKY009 is a Pottymouth! You must make your mother proud (set you up for a free shot).
Remember, **** is the crutch of the illiterate.

bobsticks
12-12-2005, 08:52 PM
The "you" generalization is pejorative, effectively implying that nobody on this sight is capable of completing a 1000-word composition. Believing that brevity is the soul of wit I'll attempt to finish in 999 words or less.
Points of contention:
1) You obviously did intend to capitalize everything on your first thread which, no doubt,
accomplished your goal of being the center of attention.
2) You fail to understand that if any of us Newbies wanted a recitation of your magazine readings(looking at the pictures,I'm sure) we could employ a google search and be spared your open-mouth breathing antics.
3) You use the word "BIG" repeatedly...compensating?
4) "I DON'T WANT TO BRAG...", "BUY A(N) AMPLIFIER AS EXPENSIVE..."...compensating again?

Ostentation is in bad form, but being a hack poseur is just plain rude. So run, Ricky,run to your basement dungeon, crank up Gene Loves Jezebel on you 600 watt phallic symbol and repeat the following line..."IT PUTS THE LOTION IN THE BASKET!"

bobsticks
12-12-2005, 09:01 PM
Accastil,
Let us, or at least me, know if you try using the receiver as a preamp with a poweramp. I've been considering trying this as a short-term solution while doing the long-term upgrade thing, and I'd love to hear your input.
Sorry about the rant, but it seems from a newcomers standpoint, that while 99% of people on these forums wish to engage in helpful discourse, there is the self-egrandizing 1% that waste time.

Hope you find what you are looking for,
Bobsticks

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 09:20 PM
I Accept Apology + Apologize Myself. But What's W/your Buddy Nod? He Waits For You To Say Something, Then He Posts Some Stupid Comment Cheering You On? I Apologize To Him Too. Sincerely.

But, Now, I Have "bob" Here. What Do I Say To This ..... Person? I Am Sorry Bob. And No Bob, I Did Not Intend To Purposely Write In Caps On My First Thread. And As Far As My Reading Ability, I Will Humbly Say That I Graduated From Uw Wis Law School With A Jd. I Am A Member Of The Bar. Probably Not The Same Bar You Attend.

And For The Size Of My Schlong, I'm Too Old To Worry About That Crap Anylonger. What I Have Has Served Me Well. I'll Repeat, When I Wrote My First "thread" I Was Sincerely Trying To Give My Input To A Person Who Asked The Original Question. I Didn't Brag. Just Gave What I Have Learned Through The Years. And Bob, Now I Know Why Tigers Eat Their Young.

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 09:24 PM
Pottymouth? Are You Gay?

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 09:28 PM
$30,000 Phallic Symbol System. Bob Stick. Is That Some Sort Of Reference To Your Organ? A Stick? What Does "lmao" Mean?

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 09:30 PM
Hey Bob. Remember, I Am The Center Of The Universe, Not This Site!!! And Never Forget It.

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 09:32 PM
Bob. What Do You Do For A Living? What Does Your Audio System Consist Of?

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 09:35 PM
Nod, I Know You Are Here. Why Not Respond? Are You Waiting For Someone Else To Write First, So You Can Chime In?

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 11:29 PM
hey nodd, I FIRGURED IT OUT. YOU ARE EITHER GAY OR ARE A BROAD. RIGHT? RIGHT. WELL, I HATE TO DISAPPOINT YOU FEW ASSSHOLES, ESPECIALLY THE ASSSS HOLE THAT SOMEHOW FRICKED WITH MY ABILITY TO WRITE IN SMALL/CAPS - WHAT A LOSER!! IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THIS IS A BUSH LEAGUE SITE, WITH NO REAL EXPERTS GIVING GOOD ADVICE. NOBODY SEEMS TO MENTION BRANDS OF EQUIPMENT. JUST A BUNCH OF FIGS CRITICIZING OTHERS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY KNOW THAT SOMEONE MAY BE AS SMART OR SMARTER THAN THEM. OR, HAVE BETTER EQUIPMENT THAN THEY HAVE. THAT'S TOO BAD. IT IS CALLED JEALOUSY. I SEE IT CONSTANTLY. AND THE REAL CULPRIT, COMPETITION.

SOME ALPHA TYPE JAG FEELS THREATENED B/C HE/SHE (WHO KNOWS NOW ADAYS) NOW REALIZES THAT HE/SHE HAS A RIVAL. DOESN'T START OUT THAT WAY. SOME OTHER PERSON STUMBLES ACROSS NEW TERRITORY AND THE OLD ALPHA JAG TRIES TO RUN OFF THE NEWCOMER. SEEN IT BEFORE. THEN SOME OTHER JAG FOLLOWS ALONG, ONLY WHEN THE KING OF THE THREAD ROARS FIRST. OTHERWISE, THE SECOND JAG REMAINS QUIET AS A MOUSE. HIDES. MAYBE ITS THE ALPHA FEMALE?

I'LL SEE YOU FROM TIME TO TIME. BUT THIS BULL SH$IT IS DONE.

RICKY009
12-12-2005, 11:29 PM
I Was Wrong. Caps Still Available. But Not Before.

RICKY009
12-13-2005, 01:28 AM
first, i want to apologize to everyone. Some people made me angry as I wandered into this site. I AM SORRY.

MY SYSTEM (NOT WORLD CLASS, BUT TOO FRICKIN COSTLY)

1. BRYSTON 14B SST POWER AMP (600 WPC/8 OHM. 900 WPC/4 OHMS). STOCK 14 AWG CORD USED BETWEEN DEDICATED 20 AMP CIRCUIT AND AMP. NO CONDITIONERS.
2. BOWERS & WILKINS (B&W) NAUTILUS 801's- PAIR
3. BI-WIRED WITH BRYSTON 9 AWG SPEAKER WIRE
4. BRYSTON SP-1 PROCESSOR/PREAMP. HAS ANALOG BY-PASS TO LISTEN TO PURE 2-CHANNEL ANALOG MUSIC WHICH BYPASSES ALL DIGITAL CIRCUITRY. USE 14 AWG STOCK AC CORD INSTEAD OF 18 AWG IT CAME WITH. DISCONTINUED.
5. CONNECTED WITH ANALYSIS PLUS SOLO CRYSTAL 1M BALANCED (XLR) INTERCONNECTS (AMP -PROCESSOR FOR STEREO)
6. ARCAM CD23T CD PLAYER. WITH HDCD. AND DCS RING DAC. DISCONTINUED.
7. MUSICAL FIDELITY TUBE BUFFER, POWER SUPPLY, AND DAC. ALL LATEST, VERSION 3. CONNECTED BETWEEN CD AND PREAMP (EXCEPT NOW, NO M/F DAC)
8. TRANSPARANT INTERCONNECTS FOR CD TO TUBE BUFFER TO PREAMP/PROCESSOR.
9. SHUNYATA HYDRA 2 POWER CONDITIONER, WITH COPPERHEAD 10 AWG AC CORD FOR CD AND M/F TUB BUFFER AND ITS PSU (POWER SUPPLY UNIT). AC CORDS FOR CD AND PSU: AUDIOQUEST 12 AWG.
10. PAIR OF INFINITY INTERMEZZO 1.2S, 12" 850 WATT SUBWOOFERS. SEALED ENCLOSURE, WITH ROUNDED REAR ENDS. AND INFINITY'S RABOS WHICH I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SET. YOU HAVE TO CHART ON GRAPHS AND MEASURE SPL'S......... FRICK IT. DID IT BY EAR. USED PRIMARILY FOR DD 5.1, BUT WHEN I GET A BUG UP MY ASS (I'LL TAKE HEAT FOR THAT, BUT WHO CARES) I'LL LISTEN TO THEM IN STEREO MODE. ADDS EXTRA BASS WALLOP, AND SET UNDER 1/2 VOLUME. DISCONTINUED + GOT DEEP DISCOUNT.
11. INFINITY INTERMEZZO 3.5C, CENTER CHANNEL, W/BUILT-IN 250 WATT AMP FOR WOOFERS. DISCONTINUED. ANOTHER DEAL. 1/2 OFF RETAIL ($1500)!
12. CENTER CHANNEL AMP IS AN OUTLAW M-BLOCK 2000. 200 WPC/8 OHMS + 300/4 OHMS. CHEAP. ONLY $300.
13. BRYSTON 4B ST AMP FOR REAR SURROUNDS. 250 WPC/8 OHMS + 400/4. DISCONTINUED + REPLACED WITH SST LINE (SUPER STUART TAYLOR. MAN WHO DESIGNED THE ST AND SST BRYSTON AMPLIFIERS). REPLACED THE NRB AMPS.
14 DEFINITIVE TECHNOLOGY BP-30 TOWER SURROUNDS. BI-POLAR SPEAKERS - IDENTICAL SPEAKERS ON FRONT AND REAR BAFFLES. I BELIEVE TWO SEVEN INCH WOOFER/MID DRIVERS WITH 1" ALUMINUM TWEETER. GOOD SPEAKERS. HIGH POWER CAPABILITY FOR HARD ROCK FANS (500 WATTS). BRYSTON 4B ST DRIVES THESE DEF/TECH's.
15. SHUNYATA HYDRA 6 POWER CONDITIONER. HOME-MADE 10AWG AC CORD USED TO POWER THE HYDRA 6. HAD TO SEND AWAY FOR 20 AMP IEC FOR THE REAR OF THE HYDRA. HIGH CURRENT CONDITIONERS. PASSIVE.
16. CHEAP, BUT SURPRISINGLY SUPERB SONY DVP-NC685V,CD/DVD/SACD FIVE-DISC CHANGER. $250. UNREMARKABLE CD PLAYER, WHICH I DO NOT USE (USE ARCAM), BUT EXCELLENT SACD PLAYBACK RIVALLING ANY PLAYER $1000 OR LESS.
17. THREE (3) SEPARATE ELECRICAL CIRCUITS IN MY 16 FT X 28 FT ROOM. ONE 20 AMP CIRCUIT USED ONLY FOR AUDIO EQUIPMENT-STAR GROUNDED. AND , OUTLETS (20AMP) APPROX. 15-20' FROM ELECTRICAL SERVICE. OTHER 20 AMP CIRCUIT USED FOR SUBS (RAN OUT OF OUTLETS. ONLY MISTAKE, NOT ENOUGH OUTLETS) AND FOR DEHUMIDIFIER OUTSIDE OF ROOM. AND 15 AMP CIRCUIT FOR LAMPS, FANS, CHARGERS, FLOOR HEATER, ETC. PLENTY SOUND CONDITIONED, BUT NOT PROFESSIONALLY. IE, NO LIGHTS IN CEILING. SPECIAL SUSPENDED CEILING W/ HIGH SOUND ABSORBING PANELS 9CAN'T REMEMBER THE SPECS). DRYWALL WALLS, AND CARPETTED (W/PADDING) CONCRETE BASEMENT FLOOR. HOME-MADE SOUND-ABSORBING PANELS BEHIND FRONT SPEAKERS AND TO THE SIDES. SOLID, SIX PANEL DOOR FOR ROOM. USED 1.5 - 2" PINK PANELS PURCHASED AT LUMBER YARD.
ALL EQUIPMENT IS ON FLOOR. SET ON SPARE LUMBER FROM MY HOUSE. NO EXPENSIVE ESOTERIC STANDS. ALL WIRES ---------MOST WIRES OFF THE FLOOR. IF ON FLOOR, MAKE SURE THEY ARE PERPENDICULAR TO OTHER WIRE. ART DUDLEY'S (STEREOPHILE MAGAZINE) SUGGESTION, NOT MINE.


COST: I WENT NUTS AND SPENT WAY WAY TOO MUCH, AFTER MY DAD DIED. HE HAD SAVED ALOT OF HIS OLD RECORDS. SOME VINYL, SUCH AS DAVE BRUBECK QUARTET, TIME OUT, TAKE FIVE, CLASSIC VINYL JAZZ RECORDING. MOST OF HIS RECORDS, HOWEVER, ARE OLD 78 RPM FROM BENNY GOODMAN, LOUIS ARMSTRON, STAN KENTON, TOMMY DORSEY, CHARLIE BARNET, PEE WEE HUNT, TONY PASTOR, AL JOLSON, HENRY BUSSE, FREDDIE SLACK, HARRY JAMES,COUNT BASIE, BUDDY RICH, LES PAUL AND HIS TRIO............AND DOZENS MORE. PAIN IN THE A$$ TO LISTEN TO, W/ALL THE POPS, STATIC ETC. TRIED TO LISTEN TO SOME, BUT TOO DIFFICULT. OF COURSE, I HAVE TO INVEST IN A GOOD RECORD CLEANING MACHINE AND A TABLE THAT PLAYS 78 RPM RECORDS - THEY'RE OUT THERE. I HAD A CHEAP THORENS, BUT RETURNED IT. I DIDN'T REALIZE, BUT MY FATHER WAS A MUSIC LOVER TOO, BUT HE NEVER BOUGHT ANY GOOD AUDIO EQUIPMENT, BUT FOR A CONSOLE STEREO IN THE EARLY 1960's. CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT BRAND IT WAS, BUT I DO REMEMBER SEEING HUGE WOOFERS, ON EACH SIDE - PROBABLY 12". IT PLAYED RECORDS AND AM/FM. I WANT TO SAY MAGNAVOX???


FINALLY, I FRICKED AROUND WITH ALOT OF DIFFERENT EQUIPMENT, BEFORE I SETTLED ON THE ABOVE. 7 DIFFERENT PAIRS OF SPEAKERS, AND AUDITIONED A COUPLE IN ADDITION - VANDERSTEEN 2CE SIGNATURES, WHICH I DIDN'T LIKE. I TRIED BOSE 701's - JUNK; PARADIGM MONITOR 7's - GOOD, BUT COULD NOT PLAY LOUD ENOUGH FOR PINK FLOYD; DEFINTIVE TECHNOLOGY BP-30's, WHICH WERE BETTER, COULD PLAY LOUDER, BUT WASN'T HAPPY; MARTINLOGAN ASCENT'S - GREAT, BUT WOOFER BLEW OUT AND SENT THEM BACK, BEFORE THEY WERE BROKE-IN (RUN-IN, AS THE BRITISH SAY); B&W CDM 9 NT'S (?) NICE, BUT COULD NOT HANDLE HIGHER SPL's; B&W NAUTILUS 802'S - GREAT, BUT HAD WOOFER PROBLEMS WITH ONE OF THEM; AND FINALLY, B&W NAUTILUS 801's, WHERE PIANO MOVERS HAD TO DELIVER THEM TO MY LISTENING ROOM. TOO FRICKIN HEAVY!!! I STILL HAVE THEM, BUT WOULD LIKE TO TRY B&W 800D'S, DALI MEGALINE, WILSON MAXX 2, MBL 101E'S, NOLA GRAND REFERENCE III's ($126,000/PAIR!). RIGHT NOW, THE MBL 101E LOUDSPEAKER IS (46,900/PAIR) DRIVEN BY MBL ELECTRONICS, ARE AMONG THE BEST IN THE WORLD. OR, HOW ABOUT A PAIR OF FOCAL-JMLAB GRANDE UTOPIA'S Be ($85,000/PAIR), OR A PAIR OF CALIX PHOENIX GRAND SIGNATURES @ $ 67,500! OR EVEN A PAIR OF MCINTOSHS' MARQUIS LOUDSPEAKER, THE XRT2K's!!! W/2000 WATT POWER HANDLING CAPABILITY. BUT YOU'RE GOING TO NEED A CATHEDRAL TO HAVE THEM SOUND THEIR BEST!

shokhead
12-13-2005, 07:20 AM
At least you have the right speakers in B&W. LOL

FLZapped
12-13-2005, 07:30 AM
Easy guys. Let's just try to help the original poster.

More power (or current) is great, if your speakers can take it. If not, you may be better off looking and listening to as many speakers as you can. Once you find the ones you like then you can look into what amps are good for those speakers.


Actually, more power may not be a good thing. Power Amplifiers are rated for a S/N ratio based on Max rated output. Therefore, two amps, each having a 105dB S/N rating, yet one is 400 watts and one is 100 watts. The 400 watt amp will have a higher absloute noise floor by 6dB - which might make the noise audible in your speakers with no other signal present.

If you've read enough reviews, you will also find that distortion follows a bathtub curve depending on power output. With a too powerful amp, you're running the risk of increased distortion on quiet passages.

-Bruce

GMichael
12-13-2005, 07:41 AM
Actually, more power may not be a good thing. Power Amplifiers are rated for a S/N ratio based on Max rated output. Therefore, two amps, each having a 105dB S/N rating, yet one is 400 watts and one is 100 watts. The 400 watt amp will have a higher absloute noise floor by 6dB - which might make the noise audible in your speakers with no other signal present.

If you've read enough reviews, you will also find that distortion follows a bathtub curve depending on power output. With a too powerful amp, you're running the risk of increased distortion on quiet passages.

-Bruce

A bathtub curve? OK, now you've peaked my interest. What's a bathtub curve? Does the tub have water in it?

I do see what you mean that more watts don't equal better sound. Too many other factors to factor in as they say. But if you stay within one class or manufacturer the other numbers tend to improve as the power goes up. Not that they have to. Just in a lot of cases they do.

I still think set-up, placement and speakers make the biggest difference.

shokhead
12-13-2005, 09:29 AM
What good is more watts if your speakers are rated at, lets say 125max? Is there a reason to spend your money on a 250watt per amp/receiver? If you upgrading to better speakers latter sure but not if your staying with the speakers ya got right?

FLZapped
12-14-2005, 09:02 AM
A bathtub curve? OK, now you've peaked my interest. What's a bathtub curve? Does the tub have water in it?

I do see what you mean that more watts don't equal better sound. Too many other factors to factor in as they say. But if you stay within one class or manufacturer the other numbers tend to improve as the power goes up. Not that they have to. Just in a lot of cases they do.

I still think set-up, placement and speakers make the biggest difference.


Just as described, distortion goes up and really low power levels, is low in the middle, and goes up as it approaches clipping. Resembles a bathtub....

-Bruce

GMichael
12-14-2005, 09:07 AM
Just as described, distortion goes up and really low power levels, is low in the middle, and goes up as it approaches clipping. Resembles a bathtub....

-Bruce

Oh, very simple. I'm supprised that someone as simple as me didn't get that.

Thanks, but you still didn't say if the tub needs water.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Resident Loser
12-14-2005, 10:03 AM
A bathtub curve? OK, now you've peaked my interest. What's a bathtub curve?

...If you plotted the numbers on a graph the end result would look like the profile of a bathtub...starting out as a high number(relatively speaking), dropping precipitously to a much lower level, staying there as a straight horizontal line for a bit and finally, rising in a similar fashion to the way it fell...sorta' like this:

---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---
---I---\---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I/--I---I---
---I---I\--I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---/---I---I---
---I---I-\-I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I--/I---I---I---
---I---I--\I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I-/-I---I---I---
---I---I---\---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I/--I---I---I---
---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---


jimHJJ(...please pardon the extemporaneous "artwork"...)

Finally figured out how to do it, this might be mo' betta'...

P.S. to quote a certain Mr. Bond "...shocking..."

...Go figure, it took me an hour to dash-dash-dash an example, then to find graph paper I could copy, then figure how to connect the jpgs...talk about a day late and a dollar short...gotta' get a hobby...

GMichael
12-14-2005, 10:11 AM
...If you plotted the numbers on a graph the end result would look like the profile of a bathtub...starting out as a high number(relatively speaking), dropping precipitously to a much lower level, staying there as a straight horizontal line for a bit and finally, rising in a similar fashion to the way it fell...sorta' like this:

---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---
---I---\---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I/--I---I---
---I---I\--I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---/---I---I---
---I---I-\-I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I--/I---I---I---
---I---I--\I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I-/-I---I---I---
---I---I---\---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I/--I---I---I---
---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---I---


jimHJJ(...please pardon the extemporaneous "artwork"...)

Finally figured out how to do it, this might be mo' betta'...

P.S. to quote a certain Mr. Bond "...shocking...")

But where's the water?

Florian
12-14-2005, 11:40 AM
I wish i could own a B&W Nautilus 801 :(

bacchanal
12-14-2005, 12:29 PM
Yeah, so I guess consider this thread TROLL territory...

abandon ship!

Resident Loser
12-14-2005, 12:41 PM
Yeah, so I guess consider this thread TROLL territory...

...I'd guess that's where the water is...under the bridge...with the trolls...

jimHJJ(...I'll wash my hands of the whole affair...)

GMichael
12-14-2005, 12:41 PM
OK, I'll be good.
Pass me a towel.

accastil
12-15-2005, 12:01 AM
Easy guys. Let's just try to help the original poster.

More power (or current) is great, if your speakers can take it. If not, you may be better off looking and listening to as many speakers as you can. Once you find the ones you like then you can look into what amps are good for those speakers.

so if my existing receiver is 90W/ch, do i have to get a more powerful stereo amp (greater wattage) to beef up my main speakers for it to sound better?

Resident Loser
12-15-2005, 04:58 AM
...a broken record, define "better"...better yet, what do you find lacking in what you have that prompts the search for that arbitrary level of quality.

Depending on the loudspeaker's efficiency, 90Wpc should be more than sufficient. I have a 100Wpc amp and relatively inefficient speakers and at normal listening levels the amp's metering indicates cruising at around 2-3 Watts, definitely <5...It also depends on what you listen to...music with a wide dynamic range will require more headroom than pop(generally speaking)...

The ability to produce volume isn't necessarily indicative of the quality of the sound produced, so that may not be what you require to get "better"...Perhaps you do need a more powerful amp because your playback levels are creating audible distortion due to the amp being overdriven...we can only guess...rather than play twenty questions, you tell us, otherwise the generic answers you can expect are: get speakers you think are superior, try some room-tuning, that sort of thing.

jimHJJ(...we really can't answer non-questions...)

noddin0ff
12-15-2005, 07:58 AM
accastil-
You said your speakers sounded fantastic. It is really hard to give advice on how to improve fantastic sound. You won't get any useful advice unless you tell us what you find lacking. If what you find is lacking agrees with the many things the reviewer in the link below found lacking, then the answer to getting better sound is not going to be a better amp, it will be obtaining different speakers. Your profile says you have these...yes?

http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_read.asp?ID=992

Some of the reviewers negative comments...


"the front-mounted main drivers also go deep into the bass, and this threw up phase cancellation problems. With the subs nominally in phase, there was considerable cancellation below 100Hz; setting them nominally out of phase moved the cancellation up to the mid/upper-bass (70-150Hz). Neither situation was satisfactory. Mordaunt-Short designer Graham Foy suggested I should use the line-level subwoofer feed from the AV processor, and this wrought a substantial improvement, though there was still a bit of a 'hole' in the upper bass."
-- they have complex bass issues and take much effort to set up properly.



"it could have livelier dynamics, and voices do sound a bit 'shut in', with a touch of nasality"
--they are built for HT dynamics, not musical subtlety.



"The centre speaker is a little more 'forward' and explicit than the main stereo pair"
--they are not well matched, and the mains are inferior to the center, most likely because most HT listening comes from the center, not the main. Sounds like they compromised on the mains.



"the system is not without its idiosyncrasies. It's not the simplest to set up - that phase switch always adds an element of uncertainty, and the subs should only be used via line/.1 inputs.
--it is difficult to get good sound out of this system.

Now, what don't you like...

GMichael
12-15-2005, 08:07 AM
so if my existing receiver is 90W/ch, do i have to get a more powerful stereo amp (greater wattage) to beef up my main speakers for it to sound better?

I think the power you have now in plenty to drive the speakers you have now. If you bought an amp with more power you may end up getting a little better sound but I don't think it would be worth the money unless,
A - the amp is free or very cheap.
B - you plan on upgrading your speakers as well in the future.

markw
12-15-2005, 08:20 AM
I think the power you have now in plenty to drive the speakers you have now. If you bought an amp with more power you may end up getting a little better sound but I don't think it would be worth the money unless,
A - the amp is free or very cheap.
B - you plan on upgrading your speakers as well in the future.Those speakers contain powered subwoofers. Virtually all the available amp power is going to driving the midrange/high drivers already.

And, those speakers are 4 ohm units. As we all know, amps tend to produce more power at lower impedances. Do you really more power would be of any benefit? As I've hinted at before, I don't, but obviously that's the answer he wants to hear.

GMichael
12-15-2005, 08:31 AM
those speakers ar e 4 ohm units,

Is his receiver 4 ohm stable?
I wonder if anyone has the resistance curve for these speakers.

markw
12-15-2005, 08:49 AM
Is his receiver 4 ohm stable?
I wonder if anyone has the resistance curve for these speakers.Check page 1, post 14, dated 12/07. I noted there in item 5 that Marantz does not rate these for 4 ohm, only 8 and 6 ohms. FWIW, the 6 ohm rating is 110 watts and the speakers rated max is 150 watts.

It looks like these speakers might not be a "fantastic" choice for this receiver or, conversely, this receiver might not be a "fantastic" choice for these speakers.

In either case, considering the subwoofers handle the heavy duty work, I doubt the mids and highs suck up that much power.

A quote from the review linked to in item 4 in my 12/07 post. "The powered bass sections of the main speakers allow ear-shattering volumes to be achieved even with a modestly powered amp."

Both Noddingoff's and my links to reviews of these speakers, both reviewers indicate some reservations about using these speakers for music,

IMNSHO, he can add all the power he wants and he may get a db or two more loudness but it's not going to change the overall sound of the system. Remember, a 3 db increase in volume requires double the power and, in the grand scheme of things, 3 db isn't squat.

GMichael
12-15-2005, 09:02 AM
OK, so what would be best would be a speaker upgrade.

Do you think a 4 ohm stable say 2 channel, 100 wpc would be of any help? These could be had for cheap from Ebay etc.

markw
12-15-2005, 09:07 AM
OK, so what would be best would be a speaker upgrade.

Do you think a 4 ohm stable say 2 channel, 100 wpc would be of any help? These could be had for cheap from Ebay etc....that depends on what the definiton of "better" is and he's not very forthcoming about that, now is he?

But, personally I doubt it. People here are using receivers rated to 6 ohms for 4 ohm speakers and are having no problems.

MNSHO, I don't think he likes the speakers for music but doesn't want to admit it or can't do anything about it. ...or both. He's hoping for a magic bullet and frankly, it ain't happenin'.

GMichael
12-15-2005, 09:11 AM
...that depends on what the definiton of "better" is and he's not very forthcoming about that, now is he?

But, personally I doubt it. People here are using receivers rated to 6 ohms for 4 ohm speakers and are having no problems.

MNSHO, I don't think he likes the speakers for music but doesn't want to admit it or can't do anything about it. ...or both. He's hoping for a magic bullet and frankly, it ain't happenin'.

Maybe pixie snot?

I see your point. His receiver should have no trouble driving those speakers from 100htz or so up. Oh well, we tried.

L.J.
12-15-2005, 09:48 AM
Maybe pixie snot?

How about some of that fancy Golden Quicksilver Uranium stuff I've been reading about in another thread? That should work wonders. :rolleyes:

GMichael
12-15-2005, 09:56 AM
How about some of that fancy Golden Quicksilver Uranium stuff I've been reading about in another thread? That should work wonders. :rolleyes:

It works well if you sniff it. But if you really want the most bang for your buck, you've got to melt it down and rub it in your eyes.

L.J.
12-15-2005, 09:59 AM
It works well if you sniff it.

Soooooo, you sniff this stuff, then about 15 min later your music/movies will sound alot better. i get it now.

GMichael
12-15-2005, 10:02 AM
Soooooo, you sniff this stuff, then about 15 min later your music/movies will sound alot better. i get it now.

Well, I think the way it works is that you won't care how it sounds. Hard to worry about music when you're having a coughing fit, or your eyes are burning like h.ll.

L.J.
12-15-2005, 10:19 AM
Well, I think the way it works is that you won't care how it sounds. Hard to worry about music when you're having a coughing fit, or your eyes are burning like h.ll.

:eek: ......................hhmmmm, I think I'll just stick to repositioning my speakers. A glass of wine while listening to some good tunes perhaps. That always gives me better sound. ;)

markw
12-15-2005, 11:16 AM
Maybe pixie snot?

I see your point. His receiver should have no trouble driving those speakers from 100htz or so up. Oh well, we tried.There's always these:

http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm

If worse comes to worse, they could always be used in the fish tank...

L.J.
12-15-2005, 11:28 AM
There's always these:

http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina31.htm

If worse comes to worse, they could always be used in the fish tank...

$129 a pop huh. That's less than the snot at $169. Hey, 30 day return policy. Hmmmm.... :D

2bluechris
12-16-2005, 04:06 AM
accastil , to put some of your concerns in perspective :- {1} Digital or Analog inputs - try both options and whichever you prefer the sound of is the better one to use .
{2} Marantz receiver - this is not likely to be your primary problem here , at least not yet , so keep it till you sort out the next point -> {3} The M-S 502 speakers - what "noddinOff" posted on page 4 is worth trying , so carefully read and try all the options suggested in the hi-fi choice link , AND , there may be some more options as the Mordaunt- Short data {elsewhere} seems to state that the speakers have a switch to select between 2 cross-over points for the subwoofers . If it does then try setting it to the lower of the 2 frequencies and with the polarity switch set to in-phase first . Next try switching the polarity to opposite phase , and listen if better or worse . The higher cross-over frequency option will probably worsen the phase problem that hi-fi choice reviewer mentioned . If there is an Equalizer for the sub-woofer , then try changing it also , but really these speakers were designed to work with an AV processor - as the M-S guy replied in the hi-fi choice review . I feared this when you mentioned these in your other post in November - but then you replied that you had already bought them .
{4} Perhaps M-S have identified a problem with this model as I see they have replaced it with their new 908 . This has a different cross-over type between the mid-bass drivers and the sub-woofer . I suggest you take your 502s to an M-S dealer and compare them to the 908 - or - perhaps a dealer will bring the 908s to try in your room - you must compare both in the same room and preferably both with the same amplifier to get an accurate comparison . {5} If you got a "better" sound after you tried the hi-fi choice suggestions , or my suggestion in {3} above , then next try the speakers in different positions in your room , as some others have mentioned in this thread . Keep them out of corners , but try with them at different distances from the side walls than to the back wall - yes , this is very time consuming but you may find a position where the bass response is better than all other positions . This will be owing to standing waves in your room - a topic too complex for me to explain quickly here .
{6} If you are still not happy after all that , then I think the problem will be that the speakers are for use with an AV processor and NOT for only 2-channel music {stereo} . I would forget all about speakers with sub-woofers with built in amplifiers , etc ... as these are diificult to design and get satisfactory for simple stereo music except in some very expensive models . So if you are still not happy after trying all the ideas above then I suggest you trade in your speakers on the Mordaunt-Short 908 but only if you really like the 908 . Before you go for the 908 comparison do listen to a good basic 3-way floorstanding speaker , of which the cheapest that I know of that will work with your Marantz receiver to sufficient volume in a large room is the B&W 704 . Listen also to the next price up B&W 703 - it sounds different to the 704 and you may prefer it . If you can afford more money then listen to the more expensive B&W 804 and 803 and 802 . After you have heard the B&W models that you can afford then listen to some other brands at that price and to the M-S 908 if you can afford it {I haven't looked at its price} . The B&W designs are all sensible designs that will work for 2-channel sound , so use them as a starting point to get an idea of "stereo" sound instead of THX / AV , etc ... best wishes , Chris .

frenchmon
12-21-2005, 02:20 PM
accastil

I was at a friends house the other day and he had a 5 channel amp hooked up to his YYamaha reciever. The sound was so much clearer. So I have decided to go and get me a 7 channel amp as well. The sound was so much more detailed and clear. It made his NHT book shelve speakers come alive. I already have Paradigm Monitor 7 speakers paired with my Marantz and Klipsch towers for my rears. I can't wait to get the 7 channel amp, the Paradigms are going to sing. Before I bought my Paradigms I listened to the B&W's in the same class and they were not as detailed and warm paired with the Marantz in my opinion. I love the natural sound the Paradigms give over the B&W in the same class. So if I were you I would just get an amp to pair with the Marantz.

frenchmon

accastil
12-21-2005, 06:44 PM
accastil

I was at a friends house the other day and he had a 5 channel amp hooked up to his YYamaha reciever. The sound was so much clearer. So I have decided to go and get me a 7 channel amp as well. The sound was so much more detailed and clear. It made his NHT book shelve speakers come alive. I already have Paradigm Monitor 7 speakers paired with my Marantz and Klipsch towers for my rears. I can't wait to get the 7 channel amp, the Paradigms are going to sing. Before I bought my Paradigms I listened to the B&W's in the same class and they were not as detailed and warm paired with the Marantz in my opinion. I love the natural sound the Paradigms give over the B&W in the same class. So if I were you I would just get an amp to pair with the Marantz.

frenchmon
thanks frenchmon. 7-ch amps are very expensive..way over my budget. i am just planning to add up a stereo amp to boost my front speakers so i can have better audio while listening to regular music CDs. what brand of 7-ch amp have you heard over at your friend's house?

markw
12-22-2005, 07:54 AM
I gotta say, In spite of all evidence to the contrary, you most certainly are determined.

frenchmon
12-22-2005, 11:29 AM
what brand of 7-ch amp have you heard over at your friend's house?


He had an AMC 5 channel amp paired with his Yammy...the music was so much more detailed. I just don't care to much for the sound of Yammies...His system was lacking in midrange....and thats why I love the Rantz...It is more detailed in the midrange and not as bright on the highs.

frenchmon
12-22-2005, 11:32 AM
I gotta say, In spite of all evidence to the contrary, you most certainly are determined.

Mark...after experencing the sound of a reciever as a processor with an external amp, I just can't rule out not adding the amp. It is a much better detailed sound. This is not a bad investment until steping up with dedicated seperates.

frenchmon

markw
12-22-2005, 11:39 AM
I gotta say, In spite of all evidence to the contrary, you most certainly are determined.

Mark...after experencing the sound of a reciever as a processor with an external amp, I just can't rule out not adding the amp. It is a much better detailed sound. This is not a bad investment until steping up with dedicated seperates.

frenchmonI don't doubt that in certain circumstances an external amp can improve things. I've even recommended it myself when the situation called for it, such as when inefficient speakers are being used. You might want to check out what the pros have to say about those speakers when being used for music. Several links were provided in this thread alone. ..not very positive I might say.. .

I'm sure he's grateful you gave him the answer he wanted to hear. That's the kind of answers he wants, not the truth.

But if he still believes this will be the magic cure then hey, it's his money.

frenchmon
12-23-2005, 06:08 AM
I don't doubt that in certain circumstances an external amp can improve things. I've even recommended it myself when the situation called for it, such as when inefficient speakers are being used. You might want to check out what the pros have to say about those speakers when being used for music. .

Mark...Do you have pictures of your gear???

also I thought adding an external amp would give better detailed in the music??? What do I know...I'v been listening to music for years but never knew how to tell if gear is good or bad...never bothered to learn.

To save me some time of looking through the thread, could you tell me If adding a external amp to my Marantz sr 5500 paired with Paradigm Monitor 7's would be good??? Are these speakers inefficient for music??? How do you go about determining if speakers are efficient??? Thanks.

frenchmon

2bluechris
12-23-2005, 06:18 AM
I've just had a look at your components list , AND , I've had alook at the Marantz SR5500 specifications . I very much doubt you will get a better sound by adding a stereo amplifier , because your Marantz seems to have quite good amplifiers in it . What is probably not good enough for 2 channel sound is your Philips DVD player . Yes , it will play audio CDs , but it is designed prmarily for DVD replay - the CD section will likely be a simple basic one and not high quality audio . As you plan to spend money on an amp , consider spending that money on a higher audio quality CD player . You have Marantz , so you will be able to buy Marantz where you live , and Marantz make CD players in several quality grades from "ordinary" through "good" to "very good" . See if you can borrow or rent a Marantz CD player and try it in your system to compare to the CD section of your Philips . Try a Marantz CD7300 - if you think you will be able to afford one . If that price is too high , then try the CD5400 OSE - that is the "Original Special Edition" version of the basic CD5400 . The OSE version has better components inside to optimize it for higher quality audio . I have a Marantz CD6000 OSE Limited Edition . These are no longer made , but if you can find one to try at home you will hear its sound is very good . It has much better sound than the basic CD6000 - I listened to both through the same system in the shop - the difference surprized me how much better the OSE version was . In fact , the basic 6000 was quite poor sound - an NAD 542 was better , and the 6000 OSE LE was better than the NAD . This will be similar with the two 5400 versions . The CD7300 seems to have the "better" audio quality components already installed in it . So , try a 7300 or a 5400 OSE through your SR5500 receiver before you spend money on an amplifier . "better" amplifying the ordinary sound of your Philips CD section will not give as good sound as a better CD player through your SR5500 - which itself seems to be quite good .
Also , I see the SR5500 has an adjustable cross-over for its subwoofer outputs - so try this to the subwoofers in your M-S speakers . Set the M-S subwoofers switch for in phase {same polarity} as the upper drivers , and set the crossover on the SR5500 to the lowest frequency it has - this should roll-off the subs output soon enough to prevent the phase cancellation effect the Hi-Fi Choice reviewer described . {phase shifts occur in all cross-overs , regardless of polarity setting , and these shifts cause the sound effect described in Hi-Fi Choice} . If you do not like the sound with the cross-over set to the lowest frequency , then increase it up to the next option , and continue till you find the setting you like best . Then try a better CD player . You might be surprized ! best wishes , Chris .

GMichael
12-23-2005, 06:19 AM
Mark...Do you have pictures of your gear???

also I thought adding an external amp would give better detailed in the music??? What do I know...I'v been listening to music for years but never knew how to tell if gear is good or bad...never bothered to learn.

To save me some time of looking through the thread, could you tell me If adding a external amp to my Marantz sr 5500 paired with Paradigm Monitor 7's would be good??? Are these speakers inefficient for music??? How do you go about determining if speakers are efficient??? Thanks.

frenchmon


I punched your model number into Google and got a few hits. Here is what I found on my 3rd click. About half way down you will see sensitivity ratings. Yours are 93/90dB. This is pretty good. They should not be very hard to drive. Your Marantz must make them sing.

http://www.paradigm.ca/Website/SiteParadigmProduct/ParadigmModels/MonSeriesII/MonitorSpecs.htm

frenchmon
12-23-2005, 07:20 AM
I punched your model number into Google and got a few hits. Here is what I found on my 3rd click. About half way down you will see sensitivity ratings. Yours are 93/90dB. This is pretty good. They should not be very hard to drive. Your Marantz must make them sing.

http://www.paradigm.ca/Website/SiteParadigmProduct/ParadigmModels/MonSeriesII/MonitorSpecs.htm


So GMichael...do you think I would get better detail in the music if I add a external amp??? Also what can you tell me about my CD player??? Is this thing junk or what I have a Sony CDP-ce245 and a Sony DVD player NS300. Are these things junk??? should I up grade them???

frenchmon

GMichael
12-23-2005, 07:26 AM
So GMichael...do you think I would get better detail in the music if I add a external amp??? Also what can you tell me about my CD player??? Is this thing junk or what I have a Sony CDP-ce245 and a Sony DVD player NS300. Are these things junk??? should I up grade them???

frenchmon

Better? Maybe. But I don't think it would be much. What you have is already up to the task.

I'll don't know too much about the CD player. Have you tried the review pages here?

frenchmon
12-23-2005, 07:39 AM
Better? Maybe. But I don't think it would be much. What you have is already up to the task.

I'll don't know too much about the CD player. Have you tried the review pages here?

Yes I looked at the reviews. I think I should up grade them...they are entry level products. What players are you using??? With what gear???

GMichael
12-23-2005, 07:43 AM
Yes I looked at the reviews. I think I should up grade them...they are entry level products. What players are you using??? With what gear???

Equipment List:
Yamaha RX-V2500,
Primus 360 fronts,
PS12 subwoofer,
Primus C25 center,
Primus 150 suround & rear,
JBL E10 front presence,
JVC DR-MX1 Hard Drive/DVD/VHS Recorder Player.
Sony 55" rear projection TV,

And a Yamaha CDR-HD1300 CD player, recorder with built in Hard drive.

http://www.yamaha.com/yec/products/DVD_CD/CDRHD1300.htm

frenchmon
12-23-2005, 08:23 AM
Equipment List:
Yamaha RX-V2500,
Primus 360 fronts,
PS12 subwoofer,
Primus C25 center,
Primus 150 suround & rear,
JBL E10 front presence,
JVC DR-MX1 Hard Drive/DVD/VHS Recorder Player.
Sony 55" rear projection TV,

And a Yamaha CDR-HD1300 CD player, recorder with built in Hard drive.

http://www.yamaha.com/yec/products/DVD_CD/CDRHD1300.htm

How do you like the Infinity sound??? Are they a bright speaker??? Pretty good reviews at CNET.com and reasonably priced.

My friend has an older model Yammy paired to his amp and it sounded really bright to me. Maybe because he had his DVD and CD player going through an external DAC before being processed through his reciever. There was hardly any midrange coming from his NHT speakers.

Also what is a "front presence??? I see you have a 7.1 configuration with the JBL E10 front presences??? Please explain.

I want a player that I could store my CD's on and have been looking for one. I thought I needed a music server...Is that what the CDR-HR1300 is??? Can you store your music on it and us it like a CD player??? Does it cataloge all your music??? Is it expensive???

GMichael
12-23-2005, 08:45 AM
How do you like the Infinity sound??? Are they a bright speaker??? Pretty good reviews at CNET.com and reasonably priced.
I love them. They sound great. They also got a good review from Stereophile mag. June of 2005. But I don't think they would be much if any of an upgrade from what you already have.


My friend has an older model Yammy paired to his amp and it sounded really bright to me. Maybe because he had his DVD and CD player going through an external DAC before being processed through his reciever. There was hardly any midrange coming from his NHT speakers.

I have heard that Yammies used to be "bright." Mine is very neutral. It will drive my Infinity's to ridiculously loud volumes without even a hint of clipping or complaining. Still sounds fantastic.


Also what is a "front presence??? I see you have a 7.1 configuration with the JBL E10 front presences??? Please explain.

The receiver will only drive 7 speakers at a time. But sometimes it sounds better to have the extra 2 fronts speakers on instead of the rears. I like them for live music DVD's. It keeps the sound on the stage. My wife likes them for kareoke as they are used for the echo effect of a large concert hall.
When I watch football it keeps the imaging in front of me more. You can hear the fans in the crowd swearing.


I want a player that I could store my CD's on and have been looking for one. I thought I needed a music server...Is that what the CDR-HR1300 is??? Can you store your music on it and us it like a CD player??? Does it cataloge all your music??? Is it expensive???

The CDR-HR1300 includes an internal hard drive. I have 116 CD's stored in it's memory that can be sorted any way I want. It plays them back and can record them onto CD's if I wish. I love it. There are others with bigger hard drives now.
Bought mine off Ebay for $400. But is was from a supplier I had done business with before, so I trusted them. It was new in a damaged box. Everything was fine inside but I got a great deal on it.

accastil
01-04-2006, 08:10 AM
hi guys! i respect everybody's opinion in this thread but i bought a power stereo amp to power my front speakers and they did magic. the rotel rb-03 made my system sound much better.

accastil
01-05-2006, 03:45 AM
I too have the Marantz sr 5500 and I think its a great reciever. I don't know what you mean by wanting better stereo sound in music.

If you are listening to music from a DVD or CD player you should use the digital inputs on the receiver seeing that DVD's and CD's are digital.

You should not worry about bi-amping your sr 5500. What I would do if I were you is to bi-wire my speakers.

You have more that enough power to drive 8ohm speaks...How effecient are ytour speakers
hi frenchmon..after reading mixed opinions in this thread, i finally did what i wanted to do in the first place. i bought a rotel 70wpc stereo power amp to boos my front speakers and you know what? they did magic...try it..youre gonna love it

frenchmon
01-05-2006, 07:12 PM
hi frenchmon..after reading mixed opinions in this thread, i finally did what i wanted to do in the first place. i bought a rotel 70wpc stereo power amp to boos my front speakers and you know what? they did magic...try it..youre gonna love it


Hi Accastil...Glad you did what you wanted to do. You beat me to the punch, I have not gotten me an external amp as of yet. I see you got the Rotel. I hear they are good amps. I did listen to a Marantz paired with a Rotel amp at 125 watts per channel last week. Tell me something. IF the Marantz is 90 watts and the Rotel is 70 watts, what does the Rotel do at 70 watts that the Marantz at 90 watts can not do.

2bluechris
01-06-2006, 05:05 AM
Well , you've bought a better power amp with the Rotel RB-03 than the Behringers ..{in your other post / query} and its probably a better amp than those Marantz use in the Receiver - indeed it seems so as you notice the improvement ! Now you have a component that is worth keeping , if you decide something more is lacking in your system . Still hear a better CD player one day , best wishes , Chris . [INDENT] P.S. Frenchmon - thete is very little audible difference between 70 watts and 90 watts , but a lot of audible difference between some types of power amplifier circuits , and / or , how well the designs are implemented .

PDK
01-06-2006, 09:20 AM
I
The receiver will only drive 7 speakers at a time. But sometimes it sounds better to have the extra 2 fronts speakers on instead of the rears. I like them for live music DVD's. It keeps the sound on the stage. My wife likes them for kareoke as they are used for the echo effect of a large concert hall.
When I watch football it keeps the imaging in front of me more. You can hear the fans in the crowd swearing.

.

Hello! I'm curious about this. Do you have 2 pairs of 7.1 surrounds that you control with a switch or do you just reposition your 7.1 surrounds up to the front? Where do you place them in relation to your mains? I've got a pair of Paradigm MiniMonitors and ADP350s that I'm alternating between for 7.1 (I really don't seem to get a lot of benefit from the 7.1) but am curious about the front presence idea. The ADPS (dipole) radiate a more diffuse soundfield but I wonder if with the MiniMons the cursing would be more fun- i.e. it might be more localized and I'd be able to point to the disgruntled fan...

accastil
01-06-2006, 10:37 AM
Hi Accastil...Glad you did what you wanted to do. You beat me to the punch, I have not gotten me an external amp as of yet. I see you got the Rotel. I hear they are good amps. I did listen to a Marantz paired with a Rotel amp at 125 watts per channel last week. Tell me something. IF the Marantz is 90 watts and the Rotel is 70 watts, what does the Rotel do at 70 watts that the Marantz at 90 watts can not do.
hi frenchmon, the 70wpc rotel sounds a lot like 100Wpc or more. i believe this is due to better amplifier design and component parts quality as those found in receivers. receivers are like everything else put in one box as compared to a dedicated amplifier doing nothing else but its sole purpose of amplification. not only will your system get louder, but the main selling point of improvement that youll be noticing is the big change in sonic reproduction quality. its gonna be more detailed, more balanced, and the bass a lot tighter.

accastil
01-06-2006, 10:40 AM
Well , you've bought a better power amp with the Rotel RB-03 than the Behringers ..{in your other post / query} and its probably a better amp than those Marantz use in the Receiver - indeed it seems so as you notice the improvement ! Now you have a component that is worth keeping , if you decide something more is lacking in your system . Still hear a better CD player one day , best wishes , Chris . [INDENT] P.S. Frenchmon - thete is very little audible difference between 70 watts and 90 watts , but a lot of audible difference between some types of power amplifier circuits , and / or , how well the designs are implemented .
hi bluechris, yes, i believe a better CD player would make things even better than as it is already today. do you have any suggested CD player in mind? would a good CD player be better in music reproduction than good universal players? or do you suggest that i must have separate players for music and movies? right now i am using a pioneer 655 universal DVD player...

2bluechris
01-07-2006, 02:44 AM
I listed the CD players that I think are good value in the low to mid price ranges in my post above :- 12-24-2005 , 12:18 AM ------------ #110 . I recommend you take your Pioneer to the shop and compare it through the same amp and speakers with some of those CD players . Use the most challanging music CDs that you have - ones that you think are critical to reproduce well . As you have written you understand about design and parts , etc ... for Receivers versus dedicated Amplifiers , apply the same thinking to Universal players versus dedicated separates . Most people trust their eyes more than their ears , and Manufacturers know this , thus for lower priced Universal players most of the design and components budget is spent on the picture quality ; next is spent on "new technology" such as any included DVD-A or SACD , and least is spent on "old technology" CD audio . Denon ; Marantz : Pioneer : Sony : Teac , and some others , can make good Universals with good CD audio if they want to , but any such will be very expensive - for both the extra parts ; design ; assembley costs , and that only a small number of these will sell , because most people do not care , or know about such as better for CD audio . seriously , Chris . .................................................. ..................... P.S. :- as well as the Marantz's and NAD CD players I have heard and recommend in #110 above , listen also to the Rotel RCD-02 . I compared it to the NAD 542 and heard both got equal detail from my CDs and both played equally well in terms of rhythm and timing , but each had a different "timbre" {presentation of tone of instruments and voices} - both were equally good , but simply "different" in that aspect . The Marantz 6000oseLE version got more detail off the CDs than the NAD and Rotel , and replayed the lowest pitched bass notes with less of their "fundamental" filtered off than occurred with the NAD and Rotel-02 . You have wide-bandwidth speakers , so you may wish to consider these aspects , so chose your test CDs carefully and compare all the CD players through the best quality amp and speakers that the shop will allow you . If you can afford one , listen also to the more expensive Rotel RCD-1072 . I have not heard it , but some Rotel enthusiasts say it is better than the RCD-02 , and it should be at its price !

accastil
01-14-2006, 01:07 AM
i can see that these dedicated CD players have better designs and performance to music as compared to universal players. now i am thinking if its worth the cost...is it gonna be that much difference? well of course ill be considering to buy one in the future but i guess not know..thanks a lot bluechris!