A/V Receivers

RGA, there must be more to a receiver than a chip connected to an amp section, your assumption is like saying all CDP's with Burr Brown's sound the same, you just move up in features.

I know a lot of people are downing Yamaha for the way they handled things in the mid 2000's and I can understand that. But as everyone knows companies can go through good and bad times and decisions just like Pioneer did, marantz and almost everyone else did at one time go through a time when their build quality and sound was not at what their reputation their past models had. Yamaha is one of them and from around 2004 until about recently I would have left Yamaha alone myself but it seems like they may be going through a realization that their receivers and other equipment have been getting worse reviews in the past and the recommended receivers for HT in the past few years have not been yamaha and I would think that they would have payed attention to this and are now doing something about it. Now to the people who have owned them and have had problems I understand your statements I used to sell Yamaha and we sold tons of them with virtually no returns for quality issues and I have owned one for years with no problems. Now RGA is correct that for the most part the mid level and higher end receivers are separated mostly by there power supplies and amplifier output sections and not the processing even though there might be subtle differences in the way the processing is separated from other components within the unit that can give minute sound improvements but I seriously doubt that at a receivers level that these differences would yield a big improvement and if a person is considering adding a outboard power amp then saving some money on a lower powered model would probably be logical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

RGA, there must be more to a receiver than a chip connected to an amp section, your assumption is like saying all CDP's with Burr Brown's sound the same, you just move up in features.

---

I think there is a difference in different models in that standpoint but within the same series and some level a lot of receiver companies use the same chips and overall design what really changes are power supply and power amp sections or at least the models that I sold and have also seen lately. Now comparing a Best Buys pioneer receiver chip set and overall build to a elite model in a totally different class is crazy but models within a certain price category usually share similarities with the exception of power amp sections and power supplies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

RGA, there must be more to a receiver than a chip connected to an amp section, your assumption is like saying all CDP's with Burr Brown's sound the same, you just move up in features.

---

Well partly. But I look at receivers differently than high end amplifiers. I look at them as computers that happen to also amplify signals. The actual processors may be exactly the same in many computers and you can expect the same perfermance from a Dell as you will get from a Toshiba or HP. Provided they're using the same hard drives etc but Windows 7 should run similarly on all of them. If you want to play games you need a better graphics card etc as you move up the line.

With a receiver though, if it says it can do 7.1 and has the DTS HD processor in it then that is a standard chipset that Yamaha or Denon has purchased and both receivers should output that processing in exactly the same way.

To my audiophile way of thinking - the difference then would be the quality of the power amp to take the signal it is being fed and sending it to the loudspeakers. All of the reviews I have read so far on the 667 have stated that it's pretty much the best receiver in its price class or at least very close - and it's one of the few that has amplifiers rated to handle 4ohms.

I just think that the most expensive aspect of these receivers ends up coming down to the power amplifiers - because if you look at it - the processing chips are similar from the V667 all the way up to near the top of the line. The differences are much bigger power amplifiers (transformers) and a lot more inputs and likely proprietary expensive things like THX certification which is something makers had to pay for to get recognized but many amps which don't have the certification were and likely still are capable of meeting the requirements but chose not to waste the money on the advertising gimmick.

Don't get me wrong comparing the RX-V677 to an upper scale model the upper model may sound significantly better but I would posit that a major reason for that is the much better power amplifier section. The 665 for example was sited as sounding poorer perhaps because of cheap OP amps, some use grungy digital amplifier sections. If you simply take the entire power amplifier section out of the cheap receiver by using an external this should improve the sound dramatically. I did this with my Pioneer Elite - the power amp section was complete rubbish compared to Bryston and Arcam and the sound improved dramatically.

I am certainly not saying this is true but I certainly would like to test my suspicion here that if I run the $500 RX V677 to three Rotel RB1050 amps at about $1200 for the three of them and then compare the sound quality of that to an all in one $1700 receiver. There is a massive toroidal transformer in each Rotel Power amp and I suspect there isn't in a $1700 receiver - it probably has one toroid and splits off into a bunch of channels. And the separation of power is an issue I would think is big as well.

I own a Marantz SR 4300 and now that I have a power amp I think I may just run both ans see what effect it has on the sound quality of the receiver in 2 channel. I can't really test it in multi-channel since I don't have a surround sound set of speakers. But the actual sound quality of this receiver is no worse than the top of the line Pioneer Elite I owned and on two channel was no worse than the top Marantz receiver I was comparing it against. It's not great but neither was the Elite or the Marantz. The Bryston greatly improved them in terms of clarity and noise floor. Bryston still sounds like Bryston but...

The Marantz SR4300 is a bit out of date me thinks but it does have preouts. http://www.onecall.com/product/Maran...iver/_/R-18002

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harley .guy07

I think there is a difference in different models in that standpoint but within the same series and some level a lot of receiver companies use the same chips and overall design what really changes are power supply and power amp sections or at least the models that I sold and have also seen lately. Now comparing a Best Buys pioneer receiver chip set and overall build to a elite model in a totally different class is crazy but models within a certain price category usually share similarities with the exception of power amp sections and power supplies.

---

I'd also be very very very careful at making this assumption. I can't speak for now but I can speak to mid 1990's Pioneer and Pioneer Elite. There were several crossovers where an Elite was a prettier box but the guts were identical to non elite models. Not in all cases but there were some. I owned a laserdisc Player CL1049 or something (it's been a long time and i can't recall the numbers exactly) but this unit was identical in every way to the Pioneer Elite version except that the Elite had Rosewood side panels and a Piano Black face. Everything else was exactly the same. The Elite had a slightly nicer remote control. My Elite receiver was the same as a regular production top of the line unit except again the cosmetics were better and the Elite had a copper chassis. Though I would argue that even that is cosmetic since none of them were particularly high grade. Same goes for the mega changers they had. Cosmetics and remotes. The Elite differences came in the tape decks and most of the Elite LD and DVD players and Elite offered integrated amps and CD players which were more upscale. But they did have some crossovers. Interestingly though the crossovers prices were not too far off so Pioneer wasn't ripping anyone off. I actually got the Elite version of the receiver at a lower price than A&B Sound was charging for the regular version so you'd be nuts to not buy the Elite.

I guess with Yamaha I simply like the idea that they are giving you the processing and a decent sounding unit (according to the reviews CNET and What Hi-fi) and basically let you bypass the weakest part of the receiver - the power amp/supply section and let you upgrade it. Pioneer and Marantz and Denon don't. You have to spend FAR more money to get the preouts and if you are spending that much to get the preouts it's almost better just to buy a pre/pro. Yamaha lets you do it cheaper. Personally I like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pixelthis

After my last YAMMY I will not buy another, AND they used to be my favorite brand,
but the rxv-750 I bought had inexcusable problems, like a bad digital board. For 800
BUCKS you deserve better.
ALSO the ergonomics were non-existent, the radio tuning was idiotic, and there was crosstalk.
MAYBE their high end stuff is okay, but their lower end stuff is just end.

---

you should try out a new one...

and from what period is the RXV-750?
we have an RX-V1300, and although it had the typical yamaha sound which many complained about in the past years, it works flawlessly, built quality is very good, easy to use, a step ahead back in it's time on DSP, endless inputs, ... nope, never actually had a problem with it...

and since their sound quality has increased so much with the last series, and they're using discrete amps again, I'm going for a RX-V667 or higher in the near future for my attic system.

This Panasonic class D AV receiver should make your list. Sadly it's no longer in production.

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-SA-X.../dp/B0009E1YPW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harley .guy07

I think there is a difference in different models in that standpoint but within the same series and some level a lot of receiver companies use the same chips and overall design what really changes are power supply and power amp sections or at least the models that I sold and have also seen lately. Now comparing a Best Buys pioneer receiver chip set and overall build to a elite model in a totally different class is crazy but models within a certain price category usually share similarities with the exception of power amp sections and power supplies.

---

Sometimes they come from the same factories, same basic form factor with features
added and subtracted per order.
AS FOR WHERE THEY ARE "MADE", that would be China, where most manufacturing is heading. YAMAHA makes theirs in MALAYSIA , and there are a few more holdouts, but only a few. A lot of electronics these days are "contracted" out, and a lot of audio gear is
no different. Of course, the more expensive the more "hands on".:1:

I am thinking (just a thought) of upgrading my HT receiver from a Sony to a mid level receiver costing up to $1,000. What would be a good one to power my front Totem Sttaf speakers, a Mite T centre , a Mirage sub and a a pair of small Polk as surround? The most important thing for me would be to get the best possible sound coming from the Sttaf when listening to music. I spent roughly 70/30 listening to music and watching movies. Which is better, an Onkyo, Pioneer Elite, Sony ES, Denon, NAD, Cambridge Audio, etc??? Thanks for all your input.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ken88

I am thinking (just a thought) of upgrading my HT receiver from a Sony to a mid level receiver costing up to $1,000. What would be a good one to power my front Totem Sttaf speakers, a Mite T centre , a Mirage sub and a a pair of small Polk as surround? The most important thing for me would be to get the best possible sound coming from the Sttaf when listening to music. I spent roughly 70/30 listening to music and watching movies. Which is better, an Onkyo, Pioneer Elite, Sony ES, Denon, NAD, Cambridge Audio, etc??? Thanks for all your input.

---

This is exactly the point. A Yamaha RX-V667 with a Rotel RB 1050 external power amp would be $1000 or less. The Rotel power amp would drive your main speakers and the Yamaha would drive the center and rears. Then later you could buy a three channel version of the amp used etc (really any used good power amp) and it would very likely be better than any $1000 receiver on the market. What you're paying for in the receiver is better power amp section but i highly doubt they'd be better than the Rotel at ~$400.

The thing is buying separate amps take up more space but in terms of sound quality I think this has the edge which is what I have been talking about. The key question remains is the preamp and processing better in a $1000 receiver over the ones at $600? And I have a feeling not. What I am seeing is that the $400 difference is going to the amp section and some extra features (but not necessarily important ones). That $400 may be much better spent on the external power amps.

This is the budget Rotel http://www.masterblastersound.com/au...wer-amplifier/

and review http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazin...0601/rotel.htm

Totem seems to like the current so the external amp idea is good.

If against the external amp for some reason my choice of receivers to drive Totem would be Onkyo/Integra.

Is the Integra DTR 30.2 or the 40.2 better to drive the Totem Sttaf? The DTR 40.2 outputs 110 watts/channel v/s 100 watts/channel for the 30.2, considering the Sttaf can handle up to 100 watts/channel. Do you know of any existing issues with these two Integra models? Can anyone comment on the sound quality from these models? I want the best possible sound from the receiver. The price differential between these two models is about $200. Does the extra $200 justify the extra 10 watts/channel?? I am still wondering if there is a better receiver in the same price range compared to these two Integra (MSRP $800-$1,000) in terms of sound quality, product reliability, etc . Thanks in advance for your help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ken88

Is the Integra DTR 30.2 or the 40.2 better to drive the Totem Sttaf? The DTR 40.2 outputs 110 watts/channel v/s 100 watts/channel for the 30.2, considering the Sttaf can handle up to 100 watts/channel. Do you know of any existing issues with these two Integra models? Can anyone comment on the sound quality from these models? I want the best possible sound from the receiver. The price differential between these two models is about $200. Does the extra $200 justify the extra 10 watts/channel?? I am still wondering if there is a better receiver in the same price range compared to these two Integra (MSRP $800-$1,000) in terms of sound quality, product reliability, etc . Thanks in advance for your help.

---

You are like a friend of mine who recently bought a receiver, you are hung up on WPC.
The main concern is amps, mainly how beefy is the power supply. This will determine
how a receiver will hold up under high output conditions
A receiver with 40 wpc and a high current power supply will do better than a 110 wpc
receiver with a weak power supply. That "110" watts is just advertising. If your receiver
even got close to that, you would be deaf, and it would melt down shortly after.
The different channels in your HT receiver draw on the power supply as needed, not
all of them needing a huge amount of power at the same time is what receiver manufacturers count on. As for the Integras, they use similar amps that Onkyo does,
and I know from experience that they work quite well, no matter what the wattage.
And as for the Totems, havent been around any for awhile, but they used to be quite efficient, probably most anything could run them.
The most important thing about Integra is excellent quality control so that your tunes
won't get interrupted, a phono stage so that you can listen to that old PRETENDERS
LP, like I was the other day, a three year warranty , solid aluminum faceplate, and perks.
Also Integras make for a great inexpensive pre-pro when you're ready to get serious with seperates. HATE TO BRAG, but these are really nice receivers .:1:

Above is a pic of my 1200$ Integra 7.4 that I bought about five years ago. Still a nice
looking piece of gear, class never goes outta style. My current 6.9 is similar.:1:

Well the Totem Staff is one of their few speakers that is 8 ohm, so it is easier to drive than most of their models. At 88db's it still needs some power behind it to sing though.

Unless the more expensive version had some features you needed the less expensive unit should do fine. 10 watts won't be noticeable but I suspect there is some reason the other model is more expensive other than just 10 watts. The Integra would be very good as a receiver to drive the Totem they have more current than most.

From what I could tell the major difference between the 30.2 & 40.2 is the 40.2 has the networking features. The front channels on both can be either bridged or used to biamp which would be a nice feature for the Totems, bridged would provide more power and when I listened to the Totem the sales person had them bi-wired to a Naim integrated. Not sure what the advantage was. The Integra look to be very well built, a couple independent power supplies, the processor and amp sections are isolated from each other and the amp is all discrete circuitry (no IC's). I think you'd be pretty happy with the improvement over what you have now.

Generally you can look to see if the receiver is 4ohm capable. The RX-V667 for instance is rated for 4 ohms and even 2ohms (which for a $500 receiver or any amp really is pretty exceptional - assuming the fuse doesn't blow). This is partly what has drawn my attention to it. I posted a thread about this unit on AudioAsylym.com to see if people have tried it out.

To much of my surprise when I checked the price for the Integra 30.2 and 40.2 in Calgary, they are selling for $1,100 and $1,400 respectively compared to $800 and $1,000 in U.S.!!!!!!! Given the Canadian currency is above the U.S., what a rip-off!!!!!! There is only one authorized dealer here and this just pissed me off!!!!! I understand I can order from U.S, but if the product is defective or damage when I get it, it will be too much hassle to get it shipped back, etc. Now, I will be looking for other similar brands where the prices are comparable to those in the U.S.

You might want to check Amazon.com for prices. Shipping damage from where ever you order shouldn't be a problem to get taken care of and when you have problems these days with a product you are almost always on your own to deal with the manufacturer, no such thing as customer service after the sale any more.

You seem to have a decent budget, what prices do Rotel or NAD start at in Canada? Shame the Integra is off the list it looked like it would rock the Totem. The Yamaha is probably decent for the money but I doubt it could touch the 30.2 but on the other hand you do have the option of adding an external amp which would level the playng field.

I have not checked into Rotel and NAD yet as they are sold by one authorized dealer only. I know for sure every one of their models costs a lot more in Calgary. In general, electronic products, especially high-end vehicles, cost at least 25-30% more than in U.S. Mr Peabody or anyone, do you know of any good integrated amplifiers (up to $500) off your head which I can use to listen to music only?? My receiver does not have a pre-out. Currently, I have my Onkyo Blue-Ray player hooked up to the receiver. If I am correct, you don't need to hook up the integrated amplifier to the receiver to make it work, just hook up the speakers wires from the speakers to the integrated amp?? As I said, the receiver does not have a pre-out. Do I have to re-connect the cable from the Blue-Ray player to the integrated amplifier? So when I want to play the HT on 5.1 surround mode, what shall I do? Do I have to turn on the integrated amplfier and the receiver? So to summarize, when I just want to listen to music in 2 channel stereo mode from the integrated amplifier, how do I go along to set up the system. Thanks.

An integrated amp is just like a receiver but without the tuner section and typically better sound quality. Not sure in Canada but check Cambridge Audio, NAD and JoLida for integrated amps in your price. Onkyo makes a 9555 that created a bit of a buzz for being a good value. Marantz has some integrated in your range as well.

You should be connected from Onkyo BDP to receiver via a digital connection. You can simply connect the Onkyo BDP to the integrated via left/right analog for music.

BTW, Pixelthis, your Integra 7.4 looks very nice!!!!! I am still interested to get an Integra receiver if I can get a good deal !!! I notice that all the new receivers come with 3D ready video capabilities. What I don't understand if why would you need a 3D ready receiver if you have a 3D TV and a BlueRay 3D player and you can just automatically watch 3D DVD movies. Say, if any TV networks can broadcast any programs and movies in 3D, you will automatically watch them in 3D format, so why do you need a 3D receiver? Thanks for all your comments.

Any comments regarding my previous post!!!!!! Thanks.

I know you have to have the glasses in order to watch 3D. I personally haven't kept up with it because it's not an interest to me. I too wonder if it's just a sales thing for newer receivers or one really needs anew version of HDMI or something. You might try crutchfield.com for one of their learning articles. I also have an old email from Amazon called "3D 101" I'll try to go back to see if I can find anything out. Do you plan to go with
3D?

I don't plan to go with 3D for now but I am just trying to future proof the receiver as much as I can if I do go ahead to get a new one. Any new receiver with 3D video capabilities needs a special HDMI cable 1.4a, I believe. What I don't understand is why do you need a 3D receiver if you have a 3D TV and a 3D Blue Ray player, including the 3D glasses in order to watch 3D movies and programs.

Your receiver wouldn't have to be 3D if you went directly to the TV but then you'd forgo the switching capability of the receiver. You'd have to switch both TV and receiver, plus more chance of audio/video sync issues, and, you'd need more cables.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ken88

I notice that all the new receivers come with 3D ready video capabilities. What I don't understand if why would you need a 3D ready receiver if you have a 3D TV and a BlueRay 3D player and you can just automatically watch 3D DVD movies. Say, if any TV networks can broadcast any programs and movies in 3D, you will automatically watch them in 3D format, so why do you need a 3D receiver?

---

3D ready simply means that the video switching and processing on the receiver is compatible with the bandwidth and signaling requirements with 3D devices.

Remember that you'll use the receiver as your primary video switch (i.e., all of your video sources will plug into the receiver, which will run one HDMI cable out to the HDTV), so the output will need to retain a high enough bandwidth to support 3D. That 3D ready label simply ensures compliance, but other receivers without that label still potentially could passthrough a 3D signal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

An integrated amp is just like a receiver but without the tuner section and typically better sound quality.

---

The absence of a tuner is the ONLY thing that differentiates an integrated amp from a receiver. Any differences in sound quality have nothing to do with the tuner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken88

I have not checked into Rotel and NAD yet as they are sold by one authorized dealer only. I know for sure every one of their models costs a lot more in Calgary. In general, electronic products, especially high-end vehicles, cost at least 25-30% more than in U.S. Mr Peabody or anyone, do you know of any good integrated amplifiers (up to $500) off your head which I can use to listen to music only?? My receiver does not have a pre-out. Currently, I have my Onkyo Blue-Ray player hooked up to the receiver. If I am correct, you don't need to hook up the integrated amplifier to the receiver to make it work, just hook up the speakers wires from the speakers to the integrated amp?? As I said, the receiver does not have a pre-out. Do I have to re-connect the cable from the Blue-Ray player to the integrated amplifier? So when I want to play the HT on 5.1 surround mode, what shall I do? Do I have to turn on the integrated amplfier and the receiver? So to summarize, when I just want to listen to music in 2 channel stereo mode from the integrated amplifier, how do I go along to set up the system. Thanks.

---

Are you planning to share the BD player (and presumably your speakers too) with both a 5.1 receiver and two-channel integrated amp? Makes no sense to me, given that you're doubling things up here.

If you're really concerned about two-channel performance, you should consider going with a two-channel integrated amp (or two-channel receiver) and forget the 5.1 receiver, or use the 5.1 receiver as a preamp and hook up a dedicated two-channel amplifer to the L/R mains.

But, realistically, I would just get the 5.1 receiver and see how you like the sound quality for all your sources. You're getting wound up over irrelevant issues before you even know what you're getting yourself into.

Sorry you made that connection but I didn't say anything about a tuner effecting sound quality, merely that manufacturers tend to build the integrated amps to sound better than the receivers they offer, and that too is a general statement.

Thank you for your comments, Mr Woochifer. Right now, I have a 7.1 receiver which I share with the BD player and speakers, etc. The sound quality when listening to music is pretty good actually but I was thinking of upgrading my receiver to get an even better sound (I have that audio bug eating into me lately!!!!!). That's how I got into the idea of integrated amplifier, etc, etc. Ultimately, if I do decide to upgrade, I will get a higher end receiver to get that better sound when listening to music!!!!!!.

I use the Arcam AVR600 to drive Martin Logan Summits (woofers
not used) Martin Logan Logas (center channel) 4 Gallo Micro
Nucleus rear speakers and 4 side speakers, 2 Spica TC--50'S
and 2 more Gallo Micro Nucleus. This receiver is truly state of the
art and does a fantastic job of driving all these speakers. It has
huge current capabilities and detail, imaging, depth and reproduces ambience and spacial properties that is simply awesome. Using
7.1 Dolby Matrix is so very realistic and gives one a accurate
and very spacious sound that feels like you are in the venue where
the recording was made. For sound like this, the cost is absolutely
worth it.

Nice set up magtrw. The Gallo's would make great surrounds and I bet they still make a pretty good match witht the ML's. Why aren't you using the Summit's bass modules?

I have sold Yamaha and Denon in the 90's when both were head to head as far as price goes and I preferred Yamaha overall but Yamaha also went through a stage from around 2004 or 5 to just recently where they were slipping a little bit on quality and sound. The new Aventage series from Yamaha are supposed to be some very fine units and the sound is up to the standards they should be from what I have seen and Yamaha are very reliable. I have ran a 2001 yamaha receiver for my theater setup for years and still run it. I even used it as my preamp for my two channel amp for my mains and while it can't hold a candle to my Nuforce preamp it did a fine job in my opinion for the money spent. It also has the 6 channel inputs so I can use my Oppo processor for dolby and dts master off of my blue rays. I am not going to down Onkyo, Denon or any of the others but I would not buy one of there offering that they sell at the mass market stores like Best buy (not magnolia) since they are a different unit specially made for a lower price point and lower end crowd. I would just go to your local better audio dealers and listen to some of the receivers out there and let your own ears be the judge of what you like.

I want to ge OFF this merry go round. While I've only replaced my main television once in the last 11 years going from a 35-inch CRT to a 52-inch LCD, I've replaced my HT receivers 6 or seven times. While the end use has remained constant the manner the video is delivered and the sound processed seems to change every other week. It feels to me like Onkyo, my current company of choice, is on a 6 to 8 month cycle of this that and the other. I'm tired of it. My next HT upgrade will be to go to separates. I'll find a good 5 or 7 channel power amp and keep it, swapping out pre amps only when technology truly forces me to.

I read recently that Onkyo's coming out with a series of separates, they're selling em overseas I think but not here in America. When they do become available, if the price is right I'll buy this hook up and only change things out when I have to.

Worf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

Nice set up magtrw. The Gallo's would make great surrounds and I bet they still make a pretty good match witht the ML's. Why aren't you using the Summit's bass modules?

---

I use Magneplanar Tympani IV bass panels instead of the
Martin Logans woofers because of several reasons. The
Magneplanar bass panels, being a dipole, match the Summits
dipole electrostatic elements and integrate perfectly. One gets
superior depth, ambience, stunning bass impact, a huge
sound-stage and a realistic size of instruments. Each two bass
panels have 1254 sq. inches of surface area with very low mass
providing very quick and exciting bass response. This combo
of speakers far outclasses just using the Martin Logan Summits.
I have a very large room and the Summits bass is good, but
no comparison to the Magneplanar Tympanis. The Tympanis
are driven by an Audio Research D400MKII power amp that
is individually controlled utilizing a Mark Levinson 380S
preamp (the volume control has .1 db increments) which gives
one total control of balance.

An online friend has a set of the Tempani and talked about the great bass. I believed him but it was hard to imagine from Maggies. The Tempani must be the way to go if one has the room. I'd like to hear them some day.

intersting :)

but why aren't you using the tympani's alltogether?
and isn't that projector in your way when watching movies?

Great system!

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by basite

intersting :)

but why aren't you using the tympani's alltogether?
and isn't that projector in your way when watching movies?

Great system!

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

---

I use Martin Logan Summits for the electrostatic transducers that
are considerably better than the midrange and tweeter of the
Magneplanar Tympanis. The electrostatic transducers are better
for several reasons. There is no xover between the midrange
and high frequency range and because of this the imaging is
far superior to the Tympanis. Another area is low level detail
that is simply awesome and transparency is also in a class by
itself. Electrostatic transducers have far less distortion because
of the operating principle. The technique is known as push-pull
operation and is a major contributor to the sonic purity of the
electrostatic concept due to its exceptional linearity and low
distortion. Since the diaphragm of an electrostatic speaker is uniformly
driven over its entire area, it can be extremely light and flexible.

As for the projector, it is not blocking the screen because the
seating is raised up and the view is perfect. With the projector being
located in a straight line with the screen the picture is sharper
and brighter.

I've heard several ML models and a few different Maggies and I have to agree, I've always preferred the stats.