From Vintage to Digital

[Big Joe]

So I figured it's about time to upgrade my old vintage Marantz receiver and old Jensen floorstanding 12" woofer speakers - perhaps finally join the 90's with it's dvds and surround sound.

After doing some research, I have decided on picking up the Denon AVR-1705, due to it's features and low cost. Now the problem is, will my old speakers sound good with this receiver? Would it be ridiculous to use these as the front two in the setup and get newer speakers for the back and center?

The old lady won't let me spend too much on our setup all at once (and, unfortunately, in total), so if I do need new front speakers (can only spend <$300 on the fronts now and will get the rest later) what would be best? Wharfedales? Some bookshelf speakers? I'm not a big fan of the whole "surround speakers out of the box" setup, so I will eventually buy all the speakers piece by piece.

If anyone has any advice I'd love to hear it - Thanks much!

[markw]

Many questions... many answers...

So, goin' from an old two channel Marantz to a 5.1 channel Denon, eh? Gonna take yer old Jensen thunder lizards with ya too, I see.

Well, those speakers still have a lot of life in 'em so don't throw 'em out just yet.

As far as the old Marantz vs a new Denon, well... here's some thoughts on that.

Good vintage two channel units were designed and made to put out two channels and they did this quite well. Their power supply was designed to supply (more than) ample power so both those channels would put out at least the rated power. You can thank the FTC ruling in the early 70's for that. So, if it's rated at 70 watts, you can rest assured that you are pumping out at least 70 watts per channel to each speaker.

Now, these new fangled multi channel units sorta play games with the watts you see advertised. They work on the premise that, unlike two channel stereo, you probably will not need equal power to each of those 5 channels simultaneously (sp?). What happens is while they may rate it at 100 x 5 when, if only one or channels are driven, it might be a realistic figure BUT when all five channels are called upon at once, that can drop significantly.

But, if you are only using the two channels you should be all right.

As far as the speakers go, use 'em. But, for HT use you should make sure that at least the front three channels sound pretty much alike. That way, whan the govenator starts out in the left channel and goes to the right, unless the three speakers are "timbre matched"*, he may sound like Pee Wee Herman in the center. Heaven forbid he should sound like a "girly man"

Now, the bad news. Getting a center channel to match those dinosaurs may be a bit problematic. This isn't to say that you will blow up anything but, If possible, consider using them as the rear surrounds and look towards getting a matched set in the near future for the front three. You'll be much happier.

FWIW, I've got an old Marantz 2270 in the gym (well, basement with a nordic trac and some weights) and a denon 2802 in the HT system.

welcome and good luck. It'll be worth it.

*voice range sounds pretty much the same across the speakers.

[topspeed]

Joe, I've got news for you; the Marantz probably sounds better than the Denon. If you're talking about a '70's vintage like a 2230 or 2275b, you're enjoying the classic Marantz sound which is saying a lot. True, you can't do surround but I definitely wouldn't relegate the Marantz to the garage just yet.

The Denon is fine receiver. I've got a 3803 myself so consider me a fan. However, for two channel music my 2230 is a more enjoyable experience. The Onkyo's are a bit warmer than the Denon's so you might look at them as well. Both are well regarded and you can't really go wrong here.

As for your speakers, the biggest challenge you're going to have is matching your front three speakers. It's important that your mains and your center channel are timbre matched so the soundstange is seemless. Obviously, you're not going to find a matching center for your Jensen's so I'd look at a nice set of bookshelf speakers that have a matching center in the line. My favorite bookshelf <$300 is the Epos ELS3. These highly musical little monitors will surprise you in how big they play with terrific extension, smooth mids, and a non fatiguing presentation. It even has a matching ELSC3 center channel. However, the key is to go listen to as much as you can pick what sounds best to you because audio is purely subjective and quite honestly, the ELS3's are going to be a bit of a shock after listening to those bit Jensens for so long. Just start saving toward a quality subwoofer at some point and you'll be fine.

http://audioadvisor.com/store/mfglisting.asp?hdnMfg=Epos&MFGID=41

Hope this helps.

[Geoffcin]

So I figured it's about time to upgrade my old vintage Marantz receiver and old Jensen floorstanding 12" woofer speakers - perhaps finally join the 90's with it's dvds and surround sound.

After doing some research, I have decided on picking up the Denon AVR-1705, due to it's features and low cost. Now the problem is, will my old speakers sound good with this receiver? Would it be ridiculous to use these as the front two in the setup and get newer speakers for the back and center?

The old lady won't let me spend too much on our setup all at once (and, unfortunately, in total), so if I do need new front speakers (can only spend <$300 on the fronts now and will get the rest later) what would be best? Wharfedales? Some bookshelf speakers? I'm not a big fan of the whole "surround speakers out of the box" setup, so I will eventually buy all the speakers piece by piece.

If anyone has any advice I'd love to hear it - Thanks much!

With the budget you have you might be stuck with speakers that aren't anything like what your used to. Also, your going to have to make a decision about a 5.1 system when you purchase your mains. It's a tough one, but here's my advise;

Keep your Jensens as mains right now. Go out and listen to some speakers and decide what brand you want to go with and get thier center channel speaker. Then, when you've got a bit more cash get the surrounds. Last step, and the most expensive will be to replace your mains. Save your $$$ for these, you want to get the best you can.

I've bought quite a few speakers from Cambridge Soundworks off of Ebay, and have been happy everytime. These are speakers that have been returned, but still carry the full warrentee. I use the MC500 for my center, and I would reccomend it. The MC300 is also good, I use the inwall version for my rear speakers, and they work great. Here's a link. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=14991&item=5719999747&rd=1

[stratman672001]

I dunno... Giving up a vintage Marantz for a modern 5.1 receiver? I wouldn't do it.

[RGA]

i have heard few vintage recievers - But I've heard a great many and expensive receivers.

Frankly I would stay happily in the 1970s if I were you. I don't about your speakers at all. But I'm well known for supporting the notion that TWO good channels whether for home theater OR for two channel music beats 5 lesser ones every time.

I recently reviewed and would recommended the Wharfedales. But I would buy a set of Original Snells of E-Bay and with a bit of re-foaming I would take it over any current $2,000.00US new loudspeaker.

The question is not what i would do. Ask your dealer to take some Paradigm Atoms (great budget standmount for around $150.00US or Candiaan strangely, and try them out against your Jenson. You wil probably noticed a more focussed and brighter treble response. Let that sink in for a while and then notice what you will lack - BASS.

The Wharfedales, B&W's other Paraidgms, Energy's etc will be improved variations on a the same thing geenrally speaking. Contrary to popular belief newer is not automatically better.

I have had Pioneer Elite's top of the line Pro logic system complete with powewered sub. I have heard the current jaw dropping proiced Pioneer Elite receiver with an all Paradigm surround system, I have heard the flagship Denons and Yammies and Marantz's.

I even bought a little Marantz Receiver comparable to the one you're looking at. IMO - keep what you have unless those systems truly impress you musically. Get them to set the receiver to flat with no surround modes and listen to two channel music through one with somehting like the Atoms or Wharfedales etc. You tell me. Better yet take the receiver home first and try it with your speakers against your amp. You never know. Your mileage may vary.

[Big Joe]

Hmmm - I suppose I'm going to have to give this some more thought then. I do love my Marantz, but I just assumed I was missing out on all the new technology. Perhaps the old cliche "they don't make 'em like they used to" rings true in this case. I'll go ahead and test out some new receivers and try to decide if there's any sound degradation, and if so, if it outweighs the surround features.

Thanks for all the advice - I appreciate it.

[Resident Loser]

...in your hand?...

A few other things to consider is: do the new units have "phono" inputs...if you have a TT(which I assume you do) you need a place to plug it in. With out a proper "phono in" you will need an outboard pre-amp/eq which will add some to the purchase price...ALSO, if you have a tape deck(specifically a 3-head) you will need a true "tape monitor" circuit(maybe even "tape copy") not just "tape in/tape out" setting...

My argument with most of the newer stuff is they have sacrificed reasonable two-channel performance and usable features for the "bells & whistles" required by HT...not a good trade-off IMHO...

jimHJJ(...two-channel vinyl and proud of it...)

[RGA]

Big Joe

You are correct - when you already made excellent stuff what is there left to sell? CD sales start to suffer because of the Napsters (and the grossly over inflated prices of cds) and so they come out with the new end all perfect sound SACD(perfect sound as you recall was what Sony and Phillips said about CD) - as the market changes so does perfection it would seem. But there are enough people who will buy whatever the latest gadget is because the manufacturer wrote an impressive technical document stating how great the new thing is.

You do get surround sound - so it's not like you're getting nothing for your money.

[Woochifer]

You very well might need to start over on the speakers if you intend to build a surround setup. I grew up with a Marantz 2275 and it indeed is a fine two-channel receiver. However, if your Jensens are similar to the ones that I'm thinking of right now in my oh-so-fuzzy recollection, you will not be able to find any modern speaker to adequately match with those speakers. Those 12" Jensens if I remember right were voiced with a fairly weighty sound in the bass, but not a whole lot of detail in the highs.

The thing about moving up to a more modern AV receiver is that the older two-channel receivers very likely have more actual output capabilities than the newer ones with two-channel sources. As mentioned, it's a simple consequence of the older receivers getting tested to more stringent standards on their output specs.

What differentiates modern AV receivers from the what came before is the 5.1 capability. The full range split surround channels add a whole new dimension to your listening that two-channel and the old Pro Logic surround simply cannot do. Your Marantz might be able to render the two-channel sources slightly better, but it cannot do digital decoding, video source switching, bass management, or multichannel playback.

If you get a new receiver, you can hook up the Jensen and use the virtual surround modes on the new receiver. But, for the true effect of what 5.1 DVDs and music discs bring to the table, you need to plan for an eventual upgrade of the entire speaker setup. Go ahead and do some listenings and find a set of speakers that you like. More than likely, you'll find that newer speakers cannot do the deep bass like your Jensens, but with the midrange consistency and high end detail, most speakers nowadays will convey that much better than a floorstander of that vintage can. If you add the subwoofer, then you'll have a system that bests your current setup in every facet.

[Woochifer]

Big Joe

You are correct - when you already made excellent stuff what is there left to sell? CD sales start to suffer because of the Napsters (and the grossly over inflated prices of cds) and so they come out with the new end all perfect sound SACD(perfect sound as you recall was what Sony and Phillips said about CD) - as the market changes so does perfection it would seem. But there are enough people who will buy whatever the latest gadget is because the manufacturer wrote an impressive technical document stating how great the new thing is.

You do get surround sound - so it's not like you're getting nothing for your money.

Most people's decisions to upgrade to surround sound don't have anything to do with SACD or CD sales. The move to multichannel did not occur because the industry ran out of things to sell, it occured because the discrete 5.1 formats that before you could only hear in a showcase movie theater or professional recording studio were now easily available to home consumers via the DVD. The adoption of the DVD has driven the push to multichannel.

The merit of surround sound is not in some manufacturer's technical document, but in how it conveys the now plentiful material encoded for full range 5.1 playback like DVDs and HDTV broadcasts. Most multichannel sources are 5.1 DD and DTS, and those require a multichannel setup to play back properly. I didn't upgrade to multichannel because some manufacturer's technical document said so or because I just want the latest gadget, I made the upgrade because I heard for myself what good 5.1 soundtracks were capable of and wanted that experience at home.