|
MY ONKYO HAS HDMI PROBLEMS AND IS OUT OF WARRANTY! This is a known issue with Onkyo receivers. Contact Onkyo even if you're out of warranty and you stand a good chance of getting things fixed. http://www.onkyousa.com/ http://www.eu.onkyo.com/en/ Usually Onkyo is very good with their support. You can always make the issue public, that has also gotten results in the past. https://www.facebook.com/OnkyoUSA/ https://www.facebook.com/OnkyoEU/ Quite a few people have had issues with Onkyo receivers. It is likely a better idea to buy Yamaha, Denon or Pioneer as the pricing is similar and there haven't been quite as many bad experiences.  NEW RULE If you get a system based on what you learn in this thread and what is recommended here, pay it back. Tell us what you got and what your system sounds like when you set it up. We all are interested in what you think. Really. What's this then? This thread is meant for people who are purchasing their first audio systems. It'll hopefully give enough information so you can make informed decisions and understand what things mean when browsing for the perfect setup. I have no clue, where should I start? Consider your budget. How much can you afford to spend? What will you be listening to? Music, movies or games, something completely different? They all have somewhat different requirements. Do you want headphones or speakers? Headphones are handy in some cases, such as nighttime, public transportation and workplaces. They can also offer you a very fine audio experience with relatively small investment. They're also a completely different beast to tackle, for several reasons. What do I need? A receiver and some speakers. Recommended setups are: 2.0 for music 2.1 for music with lots of bass 3.1 for movies when you don't want to set up the surrounds 5.1 when you do want to set up the surrounds 7.1 is only recommended if you know you have audio sources that support it. Some Playstation 3 games do, some movies do. A lot of the time you'll end up with back speakers either quiet or repeating the same audio as surrounds. Why not 4.0 or 6.1? When you use surround setups, the two most important speakers are your front left and right speakers. Sounds from channels you don't have get mixed to them. Accordingly, use most of your budget towards them. The next most important speaker is the center channel. Practically all speech gets reproduced there: if you can't hear what people are saying it's a pain to watch a movie. Surrounds get maybe 10% of the attention: they're there to bring a little extra, not to steal your attention (movie makers don't want to steal your attention from the screen). Get surrounds last and don't worry if you only have a fraction of the front speaker budget available for them. Subwoofer can be completely superfluous or very important part of your theater setup. It depends a lot on your front left and right speakers. Can they reproduce low sounds? Many satellite systems only go down to 120Hz, leaving subwoofer to fill the gap from 20 to 120Hz. In systems like these it's very important. On the other hand, in systems with floorstanding full-range speakers it's completely possible to skip the sub. It brings a little extra if you get one, but you can enjoy movies even without it. How do I set it up? Connect every source you have to the receiver. Connect your receiver to TV. What does all this 2.0, 3.1, 7.2 mean? The amount of speakers. First number is for speakers that can replicate most of the audible audio spectrum, second is for subwoofer which generally replicate only sounds below 120Hz. For music a 2.0 (traditional stereo) or a 2.1 (stereo with a subwoofer) system is the best. Spend at least 50% of your budget to your two main speakers. Those are what you'll hear most of the time. Movies use more than two speakers, being surround sound. Most DVD sources use a 5.1 setup, some movies go up to 7.1. From thx.com: quote:
If you have a 5.1 system, it's the same setup except you lack the Surround back speakers. For most practical purposes today you don't need them: not many sources support 7.1 yet. This may change in the future. If you're worried, most receivers support 7.1 by now. Simply get 5.1 speakers and buy an extra pair of speakers once you decide you want to expand. What if you don't want to wire the whole room for speakers? A workable compromise for movies is 3.1 where you have front left/right and center speakers, with subwoofer for bass. You'll lose some of the ambience but it'll be a lot easier to set up especially if you don't have a dedicated room for watching movies. What's a receiver? Receiver is the center of your whole audio system. It's where you'll want to connect all your audio sources and all your speakers. Many receivers handle also video. Cheap home theater receivers handle up to 6 HDMI devices in addition to all the other inputs. Connect everything you have to the receiver and your receiver to your TV or projector. What should I consider when looking for a receiver? Does it have enough inputs? If you have 4 devices you need to connect and the receiver you're looking at has only three inputs, then you need to consider something else. Does it have the features I need? This is mostly preference. Some notable things you might want are Audyssey, night modes and HD radio via Sirius or similar. Does it do analog-to-digital conversion or upscaling? If you have analog devices (devices you connect via component or composite) and want to connect them via receiver, you need one that does upconversion. Otherwise you won't get any picture via HDMI out to your TV. Does it have enough power? This is generally only an issue if you choose a T-amp. More about power later. Does it sound nice? If you feel the receiver does not sound nice, it's not for you. What are soundbars? Soundbars are 2.1 or 3.1 systems that come in one package. They're useful to consider if you have a small space where you want to place your whole audio system. Some come with inbuilt HDMI repeater capabilities, some are just for audio. They're pretty limited in capabilities and can't be expanded later but if you're tight on space they can be a good solution. What's with all these technical specifications? Is 1000W a good thing? Speakers are devices that transform electricity into sound and heat. For the most part you need to look at your speaker sensitivity, impedance and recommended power ratings to get by. Sensitivity is how effective the speakers are. Normal entry-level speakers run between 80-95dB measured from one meter at one watt of power. If you're getting a receiver with considerably little power (T-amps are one example) or want to fill a very big room with sound then you want efficient speakers. Impedance is the resistance of your speakers: the less impedance they have, the more current they'll draw. Think of it as a water hose. One hose pushes through so much water. Two hoses and the impedance is halved or the amount of water is doubled. As a rule of thumb, as long as both your speakers and receiver are certified for the same impedance you're golden. The general impedance seen in entry-level stuff is 8 ohms. Power is the amount of electricity needed to run the speakers. It is measures in watts. Most watts are "marketing watts" and as numbers they're BS. Thousand watts is something you'd more likely use to heat your electric oven, not power your stereo. Normal home theater systems use between 15-40 watts (W) of continuous power per channel. Peak power can rise up to 100W or more when audio gets really loud. As marketing loves big numbers, they tend to mention peak power in ads even if as a number it is meaningless. As a rule of thumb, don't run your speakers with way too little or way too much power. Both can damage your speakers. If you have to choose, it's better to have an amp (receiver) with a little too much power rather than not enough. I can get a Home Theater in a Box package. Is this a good deal? Generally speaking pre-packaged audio systems are not good. The speakers often come with proprietary connectors and do not sound especially good. The amp is inbuilt into a DVD or Blu-Ray player and can't be replaced if the original unit dies. It generally has little to no connectivity. If all you do is watch DVD movies, then it might be a worthwhile system for you as you can get one very cheaply. Otherwise you'll run into problems sooner or later. Some audio manufacturers package speakers with their receivers. These may or may not be worthwhile, depending on the individual package. Generally speaking they are little cheaper than buying separates but are on the low end quality-wise. I want headphones. You're in luck, we have a thread for that! Vinyl? Yes. Thread. These are all audio. Where's the video part? Somewhere else. HTPCs? For that too. Audyssey Setup FAQ for Audyssey users (Onkyo, Denon, Marantz etc) http://www.avsforum.com/t/795421/of...0#post_21782993 Pioneer MCACC setup thread (First post is out of date since 2009, still worth a read) http://www.avsforum.com/t/1112470/o...er-mcacc-thread What is Multi-Zone? Multi-Zone capability is a function in which the Receiver can send a second source signal to speakers or a separate audio system in another location. This is not the same as just connecting additional speakers and placing them in another room. The Multi-Zone function allows a Home Theater Receiver to actually control either the same, or a separate, source than the one being listened to in the main room, to another location. For example, the user can be watching a DVD movie with surround sound in the main room, while someone else can listen to a CD player in another, at the same time. Both the DVD player and CD player are connected to the same Receiver, but are accessed and controlled separately using the same main Receiver. What should I keep in mind when choosing speakers? You have to like them. If you don't, buy something else. This is the most important and really the only requirement for them. If you're getting a setup for movies, choose a center channel speaker that is matched with your fronts. They'll be playing a lot at the same time: you want them to sound the same. Generally the easy way of doing this is getting the center channel from the same manufacturer speaker line as you're getting your fronts. Otherwise you can mix and match relatively freely. What sorts of speakers are there? Does it make a difference what speakers I pick for what purpose? There are, very generally speaking, four types of speakers. Floorstanding speakers, bookshelf speakers, satellite speakers and subwoofer. They function as follows: Floorstanding speakers are generally speaking large. Their size allows them to house larger drivers thus allowing better bass response. Simply put, they can replicate the entire audible audio spectrum. If your main use is music, consider getting a good pair of floorstanding speakers. Bookshelf (or standmounted) speakers are smaller speakers that are intended to be mounted on speaker stands. They are smaller in size and generally do not replicate the low frequencies as well as bigger speakers. On the positive side, they're physically smaller and often cheaper. Satellites are a type of speaker that does not even attempt to replicate low frequencies. A satellite speaker system relies on subwoofer to fill in the bass. This allows satellites to be physically very small and thus easy to hide. They also tend to be relatively cheap. This unfortunately often (but not always and not necessarily) means that satellite systems are trash. Subwoofer is a specialized speaker that handles only one thing: bass. Generally they are set to handle frequencies from 100Hz down. The "magic number" in crossover (the point where other speakers let the sub handle bass) is 80Hz. At 80Hz or lower sound waves become non-directional. Speakers come in active and passive varieties. Passive speakers need to be powered by receiver, active speakers do not. Normal computer speakers are active speakers. Generally speaking "normal" speakers are usually passive and subwoofer is active. How much will this stuff cost me? A basic 5.1/7.1 system will cost you around $500 with all the cables you need. There usually are sales going on where it's possible to skim $100-200 off that price. A good system will cost you $1000-1500 plus whatever you want for video (TV, projectors etc.) or audio (turntable, CD) sources. At roughly $5000 you hit the point where you have to spend exponentially more money to get miniscule improvements. How much can the systems cost? Sky's the limit. You should consider spending most of your money towards speakers. They are the most durable part of your audio system. You need new inputs for receivers (HDMI today, who knows what tomorrow), media formats change (DVD, Blu-Ray, Netflix...) but good speakers will always be good speakers. Traditional split is 60-40 with 60% going towards speakers. Feel free to spend a bigger portion there, especially if your budget goes much over $500. How do I hook this thing up? For 95% of the stuff you have or see, you need the following: Speaker wire. This is used to connect your speakers to your receiver. If you are considering a system that does not allow the use of normal copper wire you should steer clear. Banana plugs. These are not 100% necessary but ease the installation of speakers considerably. Check whether your speakers and receiver have banana connectors before getting these: a lot of entry-level stuff doesn't. HDMI is the standard digital connector for modern AV equipment. If you have a choice between HDMI and something else, go with HDMI. It transfers both video and audio, so you only need one cable. The current revision of HDMI protocol is 1.4 which supports audio return channel and 3D movies. HDMI has one major downside and that is called HDCP or High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection. This copy protection essentially means that you have to build the system as the manufacturers have intended (source ->receiver->TV) or your system simply won't work as intended. As long as you connect everything through your receiver, you should be fine. RCA connectors. This is the basic analog audio connector that is supported by practically anything audio-related. RCA plugs are generally color-coded for your convenience. White (or black) and red are for audio, yellow is for composite video, green, blue and red in the same wire are for component. Plug color to color and you should be fine. Active subwoofers can generally be connected with normal red-and-white RCA cable if you don't have dedicated subwoofer cable at hand. TOSLINK digital (optical) cable. Audio only. Does not support HD formats. Mostly replaced by HDMI. Many sound cards support optical, so if you want to connect your computer to your receiver and can't use HDMI for whatever reason optical is your best bet. Some older stuff (notably Minidisc) can use optical. What is this upconversion stuff? If you have old equipment that uses component or composite for video, you need a receiver that upconverts the signal. Otherwise you can't get any image out via HDMI. Wii is the greatest problem here as it does not have HDMI out. If all your stuff is connected via HDMI, you can simply forget about it. Some people recommend brand X, some brand Y, which are better? It's all in the end personal. Speakers are machines that turn electricity into sound and heat. You have to make your own decisions. If you want a reference point, go into a local hi-fi shop and ask to listen for a roughly $5000 setup. That's a good SACD player, good receiver and a pair of excellent speakers. That should give you a very decent point of comparison to whatever else is out there. You can get pretty close with a $1000 system, and have completely enjoyable sound with a $300 stereo system. It's not about the money you spend, it's about the sound and whether you personally like it. This point can not be repeated too many times. I have some speakers and stuff chosen. What now? Once you've had a couple sets of speakers recommended to you, try to listen to them personally before making the purchase. The most important thing about the speakers is that you like how they sound. When listening, use the same songs/movies for every speaker to get a honest picture. Make sure they're the type that you most often listen to. Speaker performance varies between different types of music/movies, get ones that reproduce your favorite types the best. Just because 500 people liked the speaker in Amazon reviews doesn't mean you will. Buying "temporary" speakers and aiming to upgrade them later is usually a bit of a waste. It's better to get a good pair of speakers and a cheap receiver than vice versa: 10 years from now who knows what ports your home theater receiver will need but good speakers will still sound good. There is one notable exception: if you want a full 5.1 and can only get 3.1 for now, you can relegate the front speakers to rears later on. That way they won't be wasted. Great, I got everything! Now, where should it all go? It's important after you get your new toys that you try to place them in optimal positions around your listening area to improve their effectiveness. There are a number of things to consider with room size and materials, but it's always good to start by placing them in the most effective positions and then moving or adjusting your receiver levels/timing to tune them in. Dolby has guides for positioning speakers. Start with these positions. LISTEN BEFORE YOU BUY! If you don't like the sound, buy something else! Hob_Gadling fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Mar 30, 2015 |
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 07:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 10:49 |
|
|
I have two systems. One for movies, one for music. I believe the needs for those kinds of things are different, starting from the chair I like to sit in while consuming my entertainment. The stereo setup is this: Marantz PM 7004 2x B&W 683 speakers roughly a meter away from my seating in about the worst room you can have for audio AKG 701 headphones Pro-ject USB Box DAC Dual CS 505-4 Record player with no tuneup (and about 300 records of variable quality) Philips 963SA cd player (very rarely used) About the cheapest cables you can get Spotify, Youtube, games and other random sources of audio This is what I spend most of my time with. I would like to have more time to spend with records, but Spotify is good enough in most cases. Love the speakers, love especially the headphones. If I ever get to retire I'll spend the rest of my life listening to music. The more often useful, home theater setup is this: Denon X1000 receiver 2x OR 440 speakers roughly 3 meters from my seating Argon center channel speaker Argon bookshelf speakers Argon subwoofer Sony HW40ES projector with a painted wall to project on Love the Argons, got them all told for about a hundred bucks or so on a sale. OR fronts have been with me for over 15 years, and I still like them very much for almost everything including music. If you're from Finland try OR stuff out. I could do with a screen, but I could also do with better curtains or a better home theater room in general. Until I move somewhere from my apartment (never gonna happen) this stuff is good enough considering the limitations of the environment. Hob_Gadling fucked around with this message at 17:57 on Jun 11, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 07:37
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:Do I just lose the surrounds or will the receiver mix the audio into the fronts/center? Depends on your receiver and your preferred settings, but most likely the missing channels are mixed into what you have. ExCruceLeo posted:How much better would Personally, I'd say "A lot". Have you listened to what's available anywhere? For $700 you can be a little picky if you want to. standardtoaster posted:You forgot SVS. Duly noted, but I haven't listened to them (like most of the speakers in the world). Your input is appreciated, people! Alfajor: ARC is one of those things that is not worth it practically anywhere anyway. It's more trouble than it's worth, but I'll try to make some sort of note about it. Jonathan: added link to Pioneer receivers. I understand they had a pretty decent speaker line out also? Used components are often very much worth the money, but it's not something I want to add into the mix when a first-timer is trying to read what he needs.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2011 20:54
|
|
|
SeventySeven posted:Does anyone have any experience with the Monitor50s (~$260 a pair) or the Monitor60s (~$360 a pair)? The only difference I can perceive is bass. As to CS1, it'll work with both sets.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2011 04:25
|
|
|
SeventySeven posted:As someone who is probably be going 3.0 (tightish budget, most of it going on a nice big LED LCD If you're not getting a subwoofer, certainly. You'll get a better match from CS1 than CS2 if you go with Monitor60s: CS1 has the same drivers. You'll be surprised at how loud you can go with those things. I don't think you'll feel the need to upgrade any time soon either. What's the receiver you're using?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2011 01:24
|
|
) would it be worth moving up to the 60s then?
|
King Bahamut posted:Is the Pioneer VSX-520 decent? Yes. quote:a. Is 2.0 the way to go after all? You don't need a center channel if you don't have any audio sources that make use of it. It's easy enough to start with a 2.0 and get one more speaker if you want the center channel later on. You can't use TV as center channel: you need to connect all your speakers to your receiver via speaker wires. Do you need a sub? It's a matter of personal preference. Try without one at first, you can always add more speakers later. quote:b. I'm assuming the way this works is that I plug my components into the receiver and the receiver outputs to the TV so I don't have to switch the input on both the receiver and TV every time. Correct? Yes. You should also have HDMI control option somewhere in your TV settings, which will automatically turn your TV on (or off) when you turn your receiver on. That practically eliminates the need of TV remote. quote:c. Are wireless rears any good? No, not really. You need power to run speakers: either "wireless" speakers will have a power cord that you need to plug in somewhere or they eat batteries like crazy. As far as I know, there simply are no wireless speakers that have a decent solution for this problem. quote:Honestly I considered a sound bar, given that we're cheap and not audiophiles by any means, but a modular system seems like the way to go so I can reuse components later if we expand. Your base setup looks good. It's easy to expand by getting more speakers if you feel you want more audio channels.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2011 03:35
|
|
|
So how does it sound? We need more testimonies in this thread!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 09:11
|
|
|
jonathan posted:When we talk about better sound, what we mean is a more accurate reproduction of the source material. That's not strictly speaking true, but for the purposes of this thread it might as well be. When the starting level is a pair of $50 computer speakers, the most obvious advantage of getting a proper system is the clarity and resolution of sound: ie. more accurate reproduction of whatever the artist originally wanted you to hear. There's a limit to accuracy, however. If you measure your speaker output you'll notice that the curve is not exactly flat. If it were, you'd most likely think the sound is "weird". Most of audiophile language (warmth, life, openness etc.) concentrate on describing what the curve sounds like. The key to getting a "good" system is finding a curve that you personally prefer. There's one place where differences in sound become obvious to everyone and that's solid state vs. tube amps. Solid state amps are way more user friendly and they're what everyone here really wants as their first system. Tube amps have a distinct sound that people usually describe as "warmer, fuller" sound. While solid state amps are more "accurate", some people prefer tubes for their sound. I have a tube radio in a wooden casing dating back to 1970. I love the sound. To me it sounds warm and personal, despite being mono and technically very basic.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2011 08:49
|
|
|
Chin Strap posted:Mainly listen to music, watch TV, a few movies and games. If music is high on your priority list, consider spending the lions share of your budget in front speakers. 2.0 is the best possible setup for music. 3.0 and 3.1 are for sources that utilize the center channel. Movies with surround sound do: generally their speech track is on the center channel. TV depends mostly on the channels you watch. Do they send stereo (2.0) or surround signal? Center channel is useless for TV if you only get 2.0 audio. Amazon sells decent enough speakers. Take a look at Polk, Klipsch, Infinity or Energy brands. We recommend you listen before committing because you're effectively buying an expensive set of items that last potentially a decade completely blind. That said, one example set from Amazon: Polk CS1 center channel speaker ~$80 Polk Monitor 60 floorstanding speakers ~$250 Denon AVR 591 5.1 receiver ~$275 + cables for aforementioned ~$10-20 extra, depending on what you need. 50 feet of 12ga speaker wire is $10 on Amazon. Banana plugs for 3 speakers are another $7,50 or so. Get these first. After listening to this setup for a while decide if you want a subwoofer. You can get one later on easily enough. Same with surround speakers: if you want them, it's easy enough to get a pair later on.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2011 12:11
|
|
|
Chin Strap posted:Thanks! Where am I going to find the different brands to listen to though? Would Best Buy have mots the major brands you are talking about? Actually yes, they seem to have a selection of speakers that should be large enough. I don't know how good listening facilities they have (small hi-fi shops often have a dedicated listening room) but anything is better than nothing. From the list of speaker brands that Best Buy has, try MartinLogan, Pioneer, Polk, Klipsch and Energy. They have the speakers jonathan mentioned on previous page, give them a spin. If you get the chance, try listening to B&W 683 speakers with a Marantz amplifier. That's my dream setup (well, I'd love a pair of 802Ds but they're way above my budget). AC/DC - Thunderstruck sounds just about perfect on that. If you want a setup for mostly music, you could take a look at their little brothers, 685s. quote:How am I really supposed to judge how much better one set sounds over another? With your heart, my dear friend, with your heart! Bring your own music and judge for yourself. If you can't hear any difference between two setups, get the cheaper one. You're getting a system for yourself; you are the best person alive to say whether something sounds good to you.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2011 13:24
|
|
|
Gadamer posted:If I'm looking for a setup for a computer, should I just be looking for bookshelf speakers + woofer? Depends on what you want. I have 2 floorstanding speakers and an amplifier connected to my computer since at least 80% of my use is music. 2 bookshelfs + subwoofer is a perfectly valid setup also.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2011 20:51
|
|
|
jmoney posted:I'm buying a new house and it has a media room pre-wired for 5.1 surround sound in the ceiling. From what I've read online so far, it's seems like the consensus is that I can get away with the rear speakers in the ceiling but the front, center, and sub are better off not being in the ceiling. What's the A/V Arena verdict on this? Agree. The conventional wisdom is that you want to place center speaker either behind the picture (if you have a silver screen that allows it) or right below it. The reason for this is the fact that it sends out very directional audio; the effect of seeing someone speak but hearing their voice come out somewhere else is strange and distracting. Since it's recommended to place your front speakers on (roughly) the same level as your center, mounting them in the ceiling is usually out. It's not nearly as bad as ceiling-mounted center, though. Rears are only for ambient effects. As long as they're symmetrically placed it doesn't really matter how high or low they are. Bullet bouncing off the roof creates as much ambience as bullet bouncing off the floor. As to losing out, it's hard to see. Generally speaking you can get by with very modest surround speakers since there's so little audio coming out of them. I use personally surrounds which cost about $50 for the pair and am completely happy with them.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2011 07:43
|
|
|
3,5mm miniature jack. It's the same plug that many MP3 players use.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2011 15:10
|
|
|
DragonKeeper posted:My question here is, would it really be worth it to try the open box 70s? Impossible to say. Open box is not a big deal since speakers are sturdy (although you may have a scratch or two on the speakers) and can last for a long time. The big question is, do you think it's worth the price difference? Even if it's $150 more to get the speakers you like, I think it's worth it. For reference, I've had my current speakers for over a decade now. quote:I know from the specs that the 70s are supposed to have a better lower end frequency response, but is this something that just looks good on paper? No, there's a difference but probably not quite as drastic as you may think. They won't replace a dedicated subwoofer but music will sound better. Test with Roger Millers song King of the Road and listen especially to the bass: if you can't hear the difference then there's no point. Better yet, test with music you like. It's not likely I'm gonna come over to listen Roger in your livingroom.  quote:This should be a good match for either the 60, or the 70, yes? I'd get CS2 for the Monitor70s. quote:Slightly less future proof, but about a hundred bucks cheaper. As long as we're going to get bang for the buck, Denon AVR-891 is a tough contender. Then again, I don't value features in receivers especially high. For an opposite point of view look what jonathan has written in this thread. In my humblest of opinions I'd spend the lions share of your available budget towards speakers and worry about receiver after that. If you have a budget of $1000 to spend, $600 towards the speakers and $400 towards the receiver makes sense. quote:I guess my question still stands about the heat & ventilation of the receiver, and the placement of the center. I don't have any hands-on experience with the new Onkyo line, but I'd be wary about placing them anywhere they can potentially overheat. You might want to try your luck with another brand if it's going to be a tight fit. Also, if this is the first setup you're getting and you have no experience about speakers and receivers beforehand, do yourself a favor and visit a hi-fi shop near you. Nothing I write will make half as much sense as you hearing the differences for yourself.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2011 16:38
|
|
|
DragonKeeper posted:Do you have personal experience with the Denon? My Denon AVR-1610 runs cool despite being a tight fit heightwise. It has plenty of room on all four sides and is placed in an open shelf. I repeat the recommendation to get out there and listen before buying. You're about to spend up to $1000 for equipment that can last you 10 years or more. Are you sure you don't want to give the speakers a least a quick listen before committing?
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2011 17:13
|
|
|
BlueFootedBoobie posted:The 2112 isn't actually out yet but from just looking at the specs there doesn't seem to be much differentiation. Looks like Audyssey MultEQ XT is the only major difference. Maybe there's some differences in build quality or something. MMania posted:Is there a way to balance out the speakers without buying a sound meter or hiring professionals? Did you already run the measurement tool from your receiver? Barring that, there's not much you can do without a sound meter.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2011 18:11
|
|
|
Chin Strap posted:Lets say that I'm on the first floor of a three floor house turned into apartments. I'm not interested in too much bass because I don't want to piss off neighbors. Would the pioneer sub be fine in that case? Impossible to say. So much depends on the construction of the building. You can try to isolate the room with acoustic materials, good feet under the subwoofer, sandbox etc. They only do so much, however. Can you test how well bass carries around the building with a bass test record and your current speakers?
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2011 14:12
|
|
|
Just connect the Sub pre out to your subwoofers left input and you'll be fine. The other connections are for speakers, but since you have a full-fledged receiver you don't need to (and in fact shouldn't) use them.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2011 14:43
|
|
|
Chin Strap posted:Why only the left and not both? If i have a y cable should i still only do the left? As far as I know, there's no harm in connecting both plugs of an Y cable. It just doesn't do anything extra. willkill4food posted:Newegg has the Monitor 50s for $80 each or the Monitor 60s for $120 each. Am I going to be able to hear much difference between the two? Will you be using them for music or HT mostly? You can hear the difference in music pretty easily. For HT use it isn't that big a deal, especially if you use a subwoofer. Then again, "much difference" is very subjective. I know the difference would bother me. Edit: removed some crap. I must have been tired when writing that. Hob_Gadling fucked around with this message at 11:49 on Jun 9, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2011 10:49
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Are there any wireless speaker systems that I should even consider? You can look up something like Rocketfish. It'll bring a considerable extra cost to your system, however. It's probably easier to just go with a 3.0 or 3.1 system. quote:A friend of mine recommended these: If you're willing to sacrifice a little sound quality for looks and get a subwoofer (that set only goes down to 120Hz), sure. Klipsch makes quality speakers. They're pretty strictly for home theater use, though. If music is a priority, a 3.0 with two good floorstanding speakers and center channel is way better. Floorstanding speakers on the other hand are more visible: if you want to hide your speakers definitely get a small set like that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2011 17:44
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Will this 3.0 system wow me? (This setup would be almost exclusively for movies and sports. As it happens, people on start of page 2 have pictures of exactly that. They seem happy. As to whether it'll wow you, no one but you can say.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2011 19:21
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:I suppose what I mean is, will those three speakers produce quality, cinematic sound? Yes (they'll also work nicely for music)! quote:Also, will the woofers in the towers provide bass comparable to a decent dedicated subwoofer? No, but it'll probably be enough anyway. Definitely enough if you live in an apartment. The standard recommendation is to first try floorstanding speakers without a subwoofer. You can always add one if you want more bass. One of the main advantages of buying separates instead of a pre-made set is that you can buy stuff in smaller sets. Test out what you have and get more speakers if you think you need them. It'll also allow you to spend money in proportion to the importance of speakers. Better to have expensive fronts and cheap surrounds than four equal speakers when 80% of the sound is going to come from front anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2011 19:46
|
|
|
kinkster posted:Currently I've got an 3.5mm to RCA wire from my MBP to Onkyo TX-8255. That's pretty bad right? As long as you don't get interference, there's nothing wrong with that. If you want to connect all your stuff to receiver, you should check whether you can return your current receiver and get one with HDMI. It will make the setup a lot easier. If you want to connect your other devices to that receiver, you need either 3,5mm to RCA or RCA to RCA. TX-8255 is a stereo receiver that doesn't do video passthrough. Accordingly it doesn't have inputs that do video. quote:I have a Polk 60 hooked up with two speaker wires, the "right" ones so I set the right/left dial on the reciever to all right. This is wrong. Connect your speakers as per Polk manual p. 10 (Option 2). You need to connect your receiver speaker outs to subwoofer speaker ins and connect your speakers to subwoofer. You should also connect "Speakers A" left and right rather than both right speakers and turn the dial to center. The manual should have a picture of how to set it all up.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2011 11:30
|
|
|
Chin Strap posted:1) Besides running the auto calibration, what other settings do I need to play with on my receiver? What should I do about the cutoff knob on the sub? None, they're there in case you want to adjust something that the auto setup didn't get right. Most of the time it sounds ok. Turn the cutoff knob to 80Hz, subwoofer level knob to 12 o'clock position (ie. half volume) and run the auto setup. Mess with the level knob if you think there's too much/not enough bass. I used Fantasia 2000 to determine the proper amount of bass: Pomp and Circumstance is an excellent test piece for that purpose. quote:2) Besides setting my computer audio output to be 3.1, is there any other thing I need to change on the computer hooked up to the reciever? No. quote:4) Ever since running my computer through the receiver, whenever I turn the tv off then back on, any fullscreened windows get shrunk to half the size, like the desktop resolution has changed. I have to unfullscreen then fullscreen the window again to get it to look right. Why is the receiver doing this? Do you have a separate monitor in addition to TV? Do they have the same resolution? Neenski posted:1. I have to adjust the volume every time I switch sources. Auto level control (manual p. 57) doesn't work here? quote:2. Center channel sounds overpowering, I kinda regret getting the CS2 over the CS1, or maybe I'm not used to 3.0 sound yet. Playing with the equalizer helps a bit. Did you run the auto setup with the mic? It shouldn't be overpowering. I'd try running the setup again. Sounds like it failed somehow if one channel is a lot louder than others. In any case it's not the fault of the speaker. It just reproduces what gets sent to it: you'd have the same problem with CS1. Does the same problem happen with all sound mixes or just stereo sound that gets mixed to one of the pseudo-surround types? I had to make the center channel a little louder than others just so I could hear clearly what people were saying. quote:3. Just a nitpick, but it's kinda weird to have to turn off the receiver and the TV after watching TV, turning off just the TV results in sound still coming through the DVR. Use HDMI control to shut down or start up both devices with one push of the button. Check manual p. 63 for instructions. quote:Any recommendations for a receiver in the 250-350 range with this capability? If rerunning the auto setup doesn't help, you could look at Denon AVR-391. I have the version two generations past (AVR 1610) and it should deal with all the problems you have. I'd definitely fiddle a little with the settings, though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2011 17:21
|
|
|
rekamso posted:How "bad" is future proofing with receivers? In your case, not that bad. The price difference between 5.1 and 7.1 is negligible and HDMI is not likely to go away in the next two years. If I was in your shoes, I'd get the 7.1 receiver straight away.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2011 07:20
|
|
|
JHomer722 posted:Can anyone think of a reason why this isn't my best option? Unless you prefer Onkyo which has a similar set (real 5.1 receiver and bundled speakers), go for it. $70 for 5.1 speakers, even if they're mediocre in quality, is a fair deal. Obviously the first upgrade is front left & right, after which you get to make the choice whether the bundled subwoofer actually brings anything to the table anymore. Since I started with a similar setup back in the day (Sony receiver and 5 speakers with Jamo subwoofer), I can't be too harsh about it. Compared to TV speakers it's a completely different experience. Just to clear things up, when we say HTiB here we don't mean a system like that. We mean a DVD/Blu-Ray player with integrated amplifier and speakers with proprietary connections. If you break your DVD player in DHT-391XP you can get a new one anywhere. If you break the DVD player in a HTiB you have to toss the whole drat system and spend 5-10x the money to get another, never mind the pain of setting up it all again.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2011 20:11
|
|
|
Tool_Fan posted:How much of a difference does a receiver have on sound quality? Potentially a lot. In practice the differences aren't that big, when we're talking entry-level stuff. Spending most of the budget towards speakers is the smart move if you want quality sound. In stereo sets it's easier to hear the differences. If you get the chance, listen to a tube amp and compare it to a solid state amp. Tube amps have a distinctive, warm sound that is pleasant to listen. Chin Strap posted:So if I've run the auto config, then all the center settings should be set automatically? Yes, it should set up the appropriate volume level for your center channel. quote:The remote has "auto-surround", but also dolby pro logic and PL II No. Most of those are automatic surround mixes for stereo audio. If your receiver is set on one of those it's likely to sound a little strange. Auto surround (manual pages 57 and 122) should be the correct setting for everything. Description of all the modes you likely have is here. Hob_Gadling fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Jun 15, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2011 19:55
|
|
|
Ocular posted:Is is possible for me to just head into a shop (even Best Buy?) or some place that has a home theatre room basically and test out what they have and see if I can get a decent set based on the recommendations. Yes, this is exactly what you should do. Once you've decided on a setup ask if you can try it at home. Hi-Fi shops normally let you do that for a nominal fee. If it still sounds good, pay the bill and you're set. Since you're Canadian, why not sample the local goods? NAD electronics and Athena, Energy or Totem speakers are examples of Canadian audio expertise. dammitcharlie posted:I'm considering going with some Swans because mine kick so much rear end. Is this a good decision? As long as you like them it is. You're the one who has to listen to them, after all. threeagainstfour posted:Hey guys, I'm thinking of pairing the following receiver with a pair of Polk Audio monitor 60s: That receiver only had 3 HDMI ins. How many devices are you going to connect? If you need more HDMI ins, get a receiver with the right number of inputs right away. It'll make everything so much easier. As a general note, the suitable number is usually at least 4. HTPC, gaming console (or 2), cable box, Blu-Ray player.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 16:03
|
|
|
Ron Burgundy posted:For some very unusual equipment I use to watch movies, I need a receiver that still has RCA inputs for separate audio channels. A few years ago many had this, can someone recommend a good cheap new unit that still does? Harman Kardon AVR 2600.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2011 18:01
|
|
|
coolskillrex remix posted:I dont get the huge boners over polk monitors, ive heard them, theyre very bright and arent that great. To get back to this, there are some things going for Polks. They're very cheap for floorstanding speakers. They're readily available practically always. They're decent for movies and games where high fidelity is not absolutely necessary. With floorstanders you don't miss a subwoofer as much. Most importantly people should make their own choices based on what they can themselves hear. I hope I've made it clear enough that you should always listen before buying. Floorstanding or bookshelf? There's a difference between the two types that's not easy to describe. How would you describe the difference between a violin and a cello, or say which is technically the better instrument? I personally like floorstanding speakers more. The technical differences are easy to spot, differences in sound less so. For music I'll always recommend a pair of as good floorstanders as you possibly can get your hands on. Movies, it's a harder choice with many valid setups. I can (and have, for years) live without a subwoofer if front left & right are good floorstanding speakers with enough bass depth. On the other hand, a good subwoofer can bring those low waves forward like nothing else. 5 satellites and good sub is a totally valid system, as long as it's properly set up. It's summer: go and listen to live music! Gather memories for long and cold winter! I personally aim to visit as many church concerts as I can during this summer. Gospel, Bach, local talents. Churches are fantastic acoustic spaces. That's one instrument you can't get at your home so go out and enjoy it while you can.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2011 22:18
|
|
|
Nerf Herder posted:What do you think is a fair price? Whatever you're willing to pay for an used Onkyo receiver + $20 for the speakers if they're the speakers that came bundled with the receiver. You can get a Onkyo HT-3400 (a 5.1 system) for under $300 from Amazon and I'm guessing it's perfectly competent for your current needs. If you want that particular receiver, HT-5400 is the updated model and it's little under $500 with bundled 7.1 speakers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2011 21:37
|
|
|
_aaron posted:Any thoughts on these Infinity Classias? I never thought them to be worth $800, but at this price they're a good buy. They're very nice looking and at a quick glance seem solidly built, I'll give them that. Looks like they're ending that particular line, so if you want matching rears or subwoofer (neither of which are particularly important soundwise, but may look nice together) you should probably get them now. Citycop posted:Also picked up some Energy Classic 5.1 speakers, they have a ton of raving reviews all over the net. I'm hoping they live up to the hype. The problem with buying speakers blind (of deaf) is the utter lack of reliability in reviews. You can dig up glowing reviews about just about any speaker and system ever made. Just look at the 2.0 and 2.1 computer speaker review at Amazon and try finding one pair that has average reviews of less than 4 stars. A large part of this is preference: some people like one type of system, some another and neither are wrong. Very few people want to admit they got crap, and magazines know who are buying the ad space. This is not to say that the set you bought is a lemon. Most likely you'll like it and it will certainly be better than TV speakers. Be prepared to fiddle a little with the subwoofer to get a decent sounding system. The satellites can't go low enough so you need the sub to get a good listening experience. Baddog posted:Receiver: Onkyo HT-RC360, its $40 more than the 260 recommended in the OP, has a few nicer features. I should really update that recommendation list or at least remove any particular models. quote:Center and Fronts: Klipsch RF-42 and RC-42. I feel like its worth it to get decent center and front speakers, but anything more than this is overkill for such a small room? Larger speakers do not equal more volume. Your amp, which feeds power to speakers, is the thing that mostly dictates how loud the sounds will actually be. Speakers are just machines that transform electricity into sound and heat. What's the deal with bigger speakers then? You build a violin to certain measurements to ensure good sound. Same with cello, except you have to build a bigger instrument to hit the lower frequencies. Speaker is a sort of "generic instrument". It has to reproduce both violin and cello, and do them both well. Smaller speakers have no problem in the highs, but lows are really hard unless you build the speaker enclosure (or "box") large enough. Instruments such as bass or tuba will simply lose some of their sound if your speakers won't reproduce low enough sounds. Quality of the sound you hear will still depend upon many things, such as quality of the elements, quality of signal both in and out of the amp, audio source quality and so on. Personally I think nothing can beat a good pair of floorstanding speakers. I've listened to these in a 20x12 room, and didn't feel the need to get further away from them. Is it overkill to get bigger speakers? Maybe, maybe not. It's more a question of quality and intended use than volume.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2011 13:56
|
|
|
Baddog posted:But aren't the larger speakers generally capable of handling more power from the amp, and isn't that capability a decent amount of the price difference? That depends on the individual speaker elements. The element will be able to handle the same amount of power regardless of the enclosure.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2011 18:05
|
|
|
duckfarts posted:Is the auto-calibration included in receivers all you need to do? After setting the system correctly up, yes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2011 18:12
|
|
|
film_critic posted:I lost the mic to calibrate my HK AVR247, is there anyway to order a replacement or can i use some sort of generic mic to calibrate? Try asking Harman Kardon directly. I'm pretty sure those mics are available.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2011 22:20
|
|
|
RaoulDuke12 posted:Any recommendations for a VERY slim center channel bar? Depends a lot on what you have for other speakers. A couple that come in mind are Paradigm Cinema CC (4 1/2") Definitive Technology Mythos Seven (4 1/16") Yamaha NS-C225 (3-11/16") Wharfedale Diamond 9.CC (~4")
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2011 09:28
|
|
|
Turb posted:Id like to keep my budget around 800 for a 2.0 or 2.1 setup and I dont mind coming back for the sub later to get quality stuff up front. If you are going stereo, get a stereo receiver. The main advantages of AV receivers are multi-channel setups, multiple sources and video passthrough, all of which are wasted on a 2.0 computer-only system (I take it you're watching movies from your computer monitor). It's worth it if you want to expand to 5.1 on a later date or use it in a home theater setup or something like that. One example of a stereo receiver you could consider. You can bi-wire the speakers with this. About the maximum I'd spend for a stereo amp in your case would be for a Marantz PM5004, and even then it'd make more sense to spend more on speakers and less on amp. quote:Should I be worried that all sound would be transferred via a silly headphones audio jack to RCA connection and are there options of getting a better sound card that would have a digital output? Get an USB DAC if you're worried about the sound quality. You need to do the digital to analog conversion somewhere: in practice I haven't noticed a difference between doing it in receiver or (reasonable quality) DAC. What I'd do is try the setup with 3,5mm to RCA first. If you get electric interference then get an external USB soundcard. quote:What kind of budget but huge sub should I be looking for to keep pace with this setup? Unless you're dead set on getting a lot of bass, you'd be better off by investing into speakers that can go lower. Music is mostly a 2-channel deal. Hob_Gadling fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Aug 15, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2011 17:46
|
|
|
RaoulDuke12 posted:How far is too far to run HDMI and speaker cables before I'm starting to worry about delay issues? You might want to read this.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2011 08:50
|
|
|
Turb posted:Seems to me(unless I am missing something which is very possible) this would supply less power for a higher price than the pioneer and I will almost surely be going home theater at some point in the time I plan on owning this setup(sorry should have specified) If you're going to get a home theater setup in the near future, then an AV receiver makes a lot more sense. Power is an interesting thing. You know how music has loud and quiet parts, right? Even if you don't touch the volume knob the amp requires a different amount of watts to power the speakers. Some manufacturers report "average maximum" per channel: as in, the average watts per channel used for a given duration when you max the amp out. Others report "maximum maximum" WPC, which is the peak amount of power used by a channel in any given moment no matter how short. Think of a drum beat: it uses a lot of power on the moment of strike and considerably less at every other moment in time. In addition to the above, there's a thing called Total Harmonic Distortion. Wikipedia has a pretty deep article on it, if you're really interested. The point of THD is to measure how much the signal is distorted when it's amplified. 0.1% is really good, 1% is audible and 10% is at the limit of wanting to listen to something. Less THD means better signal quality. THD is meaningless without watts reported: 1% THD @ 100 WPC sounds better when cranked up than 1% THD @ 10 WPC. If you want more things to calculate, you can look up speaker impedance and start figuring out how it will affect power draw (and thus effective THD) when you go from 2 to 5 speakers. And then there are things like cable resistance, speaker sensitivity, SPL and so on, not to mention that different brands simply sound different due to different technical solutions and so on. The technical side of audio systems is fascinating and one of the reasons some people go nuts over it. Long story short: this is why I always, always recommend you listen for yourself. If you want a system for music, go stereo. If you want a system for movies or games, go with a home theater receiver. Look up what coolskillrex remix said a little earlier on subwoofers. A pair of nice bookshelfs, good subwoofer and AV receiver would make for a good HT starting point if you want to go that route. I don't personally like heavy bass music, so I can't really help you there. A few of your earlier questions: quote:1. Is it possible to run the receivers rear channel outputs to the front speakers second input while running in stereo? 1. No, but you don't need to. You have two sets of outputs for front channels, which can be used for bi-wiring. 2. You can do that also, but separates are probably not worth it unless you upgrade your speakers significantly. The Pioneer receiver should have quite enough power for the speakers as is. 3. Yes. You can hear when you're playing too loudly: the sound will be very distorted. As to what you should buy: have you visited your local hi-fi shop and listened to what they have? Bring your own CD or two.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2011 18:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 10:49 |
|
|
TheChimney posted:What kind of specifications do I need to be looking at? Bitrate and sampling rate. Try to match your audio files. Connectivity. Do you want it to do something else besides work as a DAC for computer, like work as a headphone amp? Otherwise it's just like sampling any other piece of audio equipment. Listen for yourself, judge for yourself. quote:How important are they to the overall listening experience (is there a certain price that there is no point in going over)? I have a Pro-Ject USB DAC and have been completely satisfied with it. I don't have high quality lossless music, all my stuff is CD quality. It cost me around €100 and I don't feel I can gain anything by upgrading it. For SACD material I'd just use a SACD player since even a quiet computer is relatively loud compared to other audio equipment. I would guess around $200 is the point where diminishing returns hit hard, and you can good performance with less if you don't need iPod docking or whatever. quote:Lastly, what kind of models/brands should I be looking at? Pro-Ject, NuForce, FireStone FUBAR if you want a reasonably priced DAC. KingRex T20U is an interesting little thing. Unfortunately I haven't heard it personally. Linn Majik DS-I if price is no objection and you want the best possible "all-in-one" unit. It sounds nice, but $4200 MSRP is way above my means.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2011 19:35
|
|