|
New member Username: MunnersShepparton, Victoria Australia Post Number: 1 Registered: Nov-05 | Going to buy this baby and was looking for some help with 7.1 speaker setup.The house i have just moved into has a medium sized room with what looks like a 5.1 setup on ceiling,wires still attatched from a bose setup.I have about 1300 to spend and was looking at orb 7.1 package, but hey if i can get more grunt from floor standing setup those wires can just dangle there as long as they want. Would spendind my 1300 on floor standing speakers give me better performance? if so can somone recommend a couple of packages in my price range that i can look into before i settle for the orbs. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 731 Registered: Oct-04 | What about the 2600? If you plan on getting HDTV in the future you may want to consider it. $1300 for floorstanders in a 7.1 setup isn't going to deliver in most cases. Ascend Acoustics may sound great with the Yamaha if you like a forward presentation for home theatre. CMT-340 front pr + CMT-340 center + HTM-200 surround pr + CBM-170 back surround pr + STF-2 sub this floorstanding set-up with a quality sub comes in at $1743. CBM-170 front pr + HTM-200 center + HTM-200 surround pr + CBM-170 back surround pr + STF-2 sub this set-up would offer some more depth than Orb and comes in at $1363 shipped. Very decent. Athena is a budget speaker recommended on here quite a bit. I couldn't stand the shrill highs through a Harman Kardon, which is warmer than Yamaha so I personally wouldn't go with them. I personally bought Polk Rti series, but the Ascend package costs half as much and is reported to deliver at least the same quality. The wood and finish of the Polks makes them much better to look at than the Ascends, but really that is all the Ascends give up. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2852 Registered: Mar-05 | Mick, It's almost impossible to find a negative review of the Ascends, just google them and you'll see what I mean. Here's what I'd get: CMT-340center CBM-170 L/R CBM-170 surrounds Hsu STF-2 subwoofer $1321 shipped The Ascends are IMO far better than the Polk RTi series, which distort quickly at high volumes and don't deliver the same luscious full midrange. The 170s are fantastic when used with a quality sub like the Hsu, and the 340 center is worth every penny...I find that I don't need to turn up the volume as much to understand dialogue anymore. If you don't listen to much multichannel SACD/DVD-A music, you can save some money by going with the much cheaper ($100/pair at audioadvisor.com) Athena AS-B1s for surrounds...the front 3 speakers do 90% of the work during most movies. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 733 Registered: Oct-04 | I have never heard any distortion from my Rti set-up at any volume. Also, if anything the Polks have a fuller midrange than the Ascends which have a more linear freq. response. Maybe I need to hook them up to a Panasonic digital to destroy the sound because I don't know where you get this stuff. Having off-timbre Athenas as surrounds is something I would expect the late Paul to recommend. |
|
Bronze Member Username: SteelhrdPost Number: 39 Registered: Jul-05 | I have a set of boston acoustic vr 975s i bought for less than 1300 and they give quite a bit of grunt. They also pair quite well with my yamaha 2500 in two channel mode. I would take them over comparably priced bookshelves anyday. |
|
New member Username: TchacePost Number: 1 Registered: Nov-05 | Hello all - I am in similar situation. I was looking at the Denon AVR-3805 and the Yamaha RX-V2500 and was wondering the better sounding receiver for my Def Tech (BP-20's, center and surround to match). I want the easiest to set up and use receiver I can get! Any suggestions - or maybe even something totally different. Thanks! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2193 Registered: Feb-05 | "Having off-timbre Athenas as surrounds is something I would expect the late Paul to recommend." LOL !!!!!!! I told you Eddie, it was only a matter of time before the comparisons emerged. Kano, I have to admit I agree with you. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2854 Registered: Mar-05 | > Maybe I need to hook them up to a Panasonic digital to destroy the sound because I don't know where you get this stuff. Heh, actually this was not done on a digital Panny, but on an ANALOG Harman Kardon 7200 at Fry's. The larger RTi8s and RTi10s did much better at high volumes, the smaller RTi4 and RTi6 sounded like crap when cranked. Many Polks in general cannot handle high volumes above about 85-90db without distorting. Even their top-end LSi's do that---just yesterday I was at Tweeter, popped in a Diana Krall CD, the LSi bookshelves sounded pretty good at moderate levels but when I had the salesman turn it to -15 or -20 volume it went straight to hell---really weird, the vocals and bass suddenly sounded very muffled and caved-in. I was shocked, because the last time I heard the LSi's at Frys I thought they were much better than that. In contrast, the Focal Cobalts were brilliant at those levels...reminded me a lot of the Ascends though just a tad harsher on the topmost treble, and better mid-bass. Of course the Cobalts were around $1200/pair whereas the Ascends 340s are 1/2 that and the 170s are 1/4 that. The salesguy was really nice, he's totally up for letting me bring in the Ascends for a side-by-side demo sometime. As for "off-timbre" surrounds, I stand by my statement that for HT they are perfectly acceptable. Yeah right, as if you or anyone else could really detect "off-timbre" ambient sounds (raindrops/footsteps) and spatial effects (whizzing cars/bullets) while watching a movie. LOL! |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2855 Registered: Mar-05 | well Art, it's not like I've suddenly started to recommend going cheap on the surrounds, this has been a staple of my audio beliefs from day one. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 735 Registered: Oct-04 | "Heh, actually this was not done on a digital Panny, but on an ANALOG Harman Kardon 7200 at Fry's. The larger RTi8s and RTi10s did much better at high volumes, the smaller RTi4 and RTi6 sounded like crap when cranked." The max power for the Rti6 and 4 is 125W, "cranking" a HK 7200 is not for these speakers. "As for "off-timbre" surrounds, I stand by my statement that for HT they are perfectly acceptable. Yeah right, as if you or anyone else could really detect "off-timbre" ambient sounds (raindrops/footsteps) and spatial effects (whizzing cars/bullets) while watching a movie. " Far more TV programming is being offered in 5.1 Dolby Digital. Ambient noises, background effects, voices which come through all speakers, sporting events all will not sound as good with off timbre speakers. If you like your speakers to make their presence known maybe mismatching the crappiest speakers you can find into your system is the best route. I prefer to have the sound blend seamlessly into the front soundstage. Comedy shows in 5.1 put the annoying laugh track through the surrounds, a warmer speaker may even benefit, but a brighter surround would be unbearable (at least to me) Playing a new Xbox game - Star Wars Battlefront 2. The Star Wars music all comes through the surrounds, would hate to have shite speakers as this is the best part of the game. Maybe DTS and THX are wrong and you can have aluminum cans hooked up to speaker wire on your walls, since the surround channels are worthless, but I'll trust my ears and say it affects everything in 5.1, not just music, and good quality timbre matched speakers offer huge benefits as surrounds. I'll save my critique of your advice that "the cheapest DVD player you can find is fine" for another day. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2202 Registered: Feb-05 | "well Art, it's not like I've suddenly started to recommend going cheap on the surrounds, this has been a staple of my audio beliefs from day one." And yet another reason why folks should take what you say with a grain. "I'll save my critique of your advice that "the cheapest DVD player you can find is fine" for another day." Me too, the rear speaker advice is enough for one day. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2882 Registered: Mar-05 | > The max power for the Rti6 and 4 is 125W, "cranking" a HK 7200 is not for these speakers. Sounds like a pretty weak excuse to me given that by "cranking" the HK7200 I didn't have it go over more than maybe 85db, but next time I go to Tweeter I'll ask them to play the RTis for me on a lesser receiver and see if there's any improvement. I doubt it but will give that a go anyways. Well I think that we may have differing expectations and usage patterns. For one thing, I don't play video games nor do I really watch much TV other than DVDs. However, most of the thing you cite---comedy laugh tracks, videogames (lol!) being in multichannel---can easily be remedied by increasing or decreasing the surround speaker levels on your receiver, and some receivers even let you EQ each speaker individually which should more than make up for timbre differences. Not that these make up even 50% of most viewer's experiences...just what % of cable programming is actually broadcast in 5.1? Maybe you've invested a lot of money on your surrounds and DVD player, and don't want to hear that it might've been for nothing, or that it could have been better spent elsewhere (for example, on better speakers than Polk RTis). What it comes down to to is priorities, usage, and budget. The majority of users on limited budgets are much better advised to NOT worry about secondary considerations such as surround speakers being timbre-matched and having some fancy DVD player to watch movies with. The front 3 speakers, sub, and receiver/amp are way the hell more important. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 738 Registered: Oct-04 | "The front 3 speakers, sub, and receiver/amp are way the hell more important." This is true, but at the same time using a Curtis DVD player and Polk R20 surrounds is detracting from the overall sound in a large way. Right now a small % of TV programming is in HD widescreen and Dolby Digital 5.1, but this is quickly changing. By 2008 all TV will be digital with the majority of programming in 5.1 "Maybe you've invested a lot of money on your surrounds and DVD player, and don't want to hear that it might've been for nothing, or that it could have been better spent elsewhere (for example, on better speakers than Polk RTis)." I have a growing DVD-A collection and love the sound of Polk. I've never claimed they are the best speakers, but they are sure a lot better than the picture you paint. "Well I think that we may have differing expectations and usage patterns. For one thing, I don't play video games nor do I really watch much TV other than DVDs." Then you would really benefit from a half decent DVD player. If your Panasonic is truly so revealing and articulate, you will hear a lot more with a better player. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2895 Registered: Mar-05 | > This is true, but at the same time using a Curtis DVD player and Polk R20 surrounds is detracting from the overall sound in a large way. "in a large way" only depending on your application, which I will detail below. I'd argue that it's a "small" way for most people. Actually the cheapest DVD player I recommend to people is the Toshiba 3980 which has gotten some surprisingly good consumer reviews on a number of forums (the Klipsch forum, for one) and at one modding site: http://www.referenceaudiomods.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Cod e=Tosh_3960&Category_Code=MODS&Product_Count=19 > I have a growing DVD-A collection and love the sound of Polk. Surely you've noticed that I always preface my rec to get cheap surrounds with "unless you listen to a lot of DVD-A/SACD multichannel music" I hope? True multichannel music is the ONLY justification I can see for putting money into good surrounds, either that or watching ONLY big-budget Hollywood action flicks night after night. > Then you would really benefit from a half decent DVD player. If your Panasonic is truly so revealing and articulate, you will hear a lot more with a better player. A higher quality DVD player would only make sense for me if I had some huge screen TV where I'd see better video quality, since supposedly the bigger the screen the more sensitive the picture quality is to the connection type and player quality. Very unlikely on my little 20" Panny curved tube with its composite connection. As for SQ while watching movies, I simply don't see how it would even matter as long as I have adequate power to drive all the speakers and a decent sub (I don't have the second, unfortunately). I watch movies for the story, characters, and dialogue, not for the sound quality---especially the 80% drama/comedies that I watch. and I have ABed music on my Panasonic DVD player and the Marantz CDP, and the Marantz does sound better---but a subtle rather than dramatic difference, and that's with me listening intently. With a movie, I'd be WATCHING intently a lot more than listening intently so I don't think I'd notice the difference at all unless the movie really sucked, lol. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 739 Registered: Oct-04 | Your current set-up of an Ascend front end with Polk R series surrounds will sound much better than having Athenas for surrounds no matter how much you EQ. Maybe for your application this is fine, but I find it hard to believe there is no material you'll watch in the future that wouldn't benefit from having Ascends for surrounds. "As for SQ while watching movies, I simply don't see how it would even matter as long as I have adequate power to drive all the speakers and a decent sub (I don't have the second, unfortunately). I watch movies for the story, characters, and dialogue, not for the sound quality---especially the 80% drama/comedies that I watch. " Missing information at the source can not be amplified by any amount of power, it simply cannot be heard. The largest difference I noticed was in the surround channels but overall the soundstaging for DVD playback was improved which you will notice in any movie. Having off timbre surrounds will destroy any soundstaging as soon as the surrounds are active, making noticing this much more difficult. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2898 Registered: Mar-05 | > Your current set-up of an Ascend front end with Polk R series surrounds will sound much better than having Athenas for surrounds no matter how much you EQ. Er, on what basis do you say this? Have you personally owned the Ascends and experimented with both the Polk R series surrounds AND the Athenas as surrounds in tandem with an Ascend front end? If not, what on earth makes you so sure the R20s are closer in timbre to the Ascends? (scratches head) > I find it hard to believe there is no material you'll watch in the future that wouldn't benefit from having Ascends for surrounds. Oh I'm sure there is probably SOME benefit to having matching Ascend 170s as surrounds, but it all comes back to budget and priorities. Seeing as how I need to get a better sub for my main system and better mains for my bedroom system, this is a very low priority however. > Having off timbre surrounds will destroy any soundstaging as soon as the surrounds are active, making noticing this much more difficult. But see, that's my point: I don't think the vast majority of people (myself for one) even NOTICE such things as "soundstage" when watching a movie because hey, we're primarily WATCHING...not listening to it! If it's a good movie, my attention is focused on the intangibles of plot, character, subtext, dialogue, etc.---not on whether my surround speakers are throwing an accurate soundstage or not, that's entirely irrelevant. Those are the kinds of sonic nuances that IMO will stand out only when you are listening to music intently, not when at least 80% of your attention is riveted to the TV screen. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 740 Registered: Oct-04 | "Er, on what basis do you say this? Have you personally owned the Ascends and experimented with both the Polk R series surrounds AND the Athenas as surrounds in tandem with an Ascend front end? If not, what on earth makes you so sure the R20s are closer in timbre to the Ascends? (scratches head)" My basis is that the Athenas are much brighter and forward than the Polks and this is the last quality you want to have from the surrounds. The Polks are more laid back and will fit better than the Athenas. When first purchasing my system, I was given a loner Athena centre channel until the Polk arrived. The sound from the Athena was unbearable, it was just... gross. Granted having on off timbre centre is much worse than surrounds, but it was still a valuable insight into how bad the Athenas sound. It's not like I concentrate on the soundstage while watching a movie, more a case of noticing some excellent soundstaging in certain scenes as the sound is coming from any and all directions. You can use your system however you choose but you consistently recommend buying the cheapest DVD player and surround speakers one can find. Every one's use is different - this is one thing that can be gleaned from this thread, and there's far more uses for a quality DVD player and surround speakers than just for multi channel music IMO |
|
Bronze Member Username: Wired_for_soundChicago, Il U.s.a Post Number: 16 Registered: Jul-05 | I beg to differ Edster, I currently have a RX V2500 receiver (with a M80 power amp a little extra power for the fronts)with Polk RTi 10's (fr), CS 3(ctr),and RTi 6's as rears and surrounds with (2) Cerwin Vega RL 28 subs in a 19 X 15 room and I find no need to play music or movies at -20db or higher unless your hearing impaired. I've experienced movies and music at -15db with my Polk's and they handled very well. Clear, crisp, must admit a bit loud on the highs but if you need to listen at these levels I can mail you or anyone some Q-Tips to help clear out the build up in your ears. LOL, BOTTOM LINE: POLKS DELIVER!!! |
|
New member Username: MunnersPost Number: 2 Registered: Nov-05 | Thanks guys,still undecided what to do atm,so will chew over it for a week or so, The $1300 is what my wife has opted for,so might dip into the slush fund and add another 500, So Edster now that i have around 1800 would you suggest at what Kano has suggested or something else?i like the idea of the centre as you suggested because i have a Davis dlp projector above us which is a little loud and sometimes makes it hard to pick up the dialogue but i am very happy at its picture quality after looking at alot of projectors over the years,its pretty much used as the house Tv and got 3 years out of first globe so im happy with that as it runs almost 12 hours a day. Bottom Line is all my friends have Bose in there ceilings as that is what is pushed from the local HT Specialist in my price range, i just want to make them all look like suckers lol. |
|
New member Username: MunnersPost Number: 3 Registered: Nov-05 | Would i still make my friends look like suckers if i had 7xMod2 Speakers from orb with a decent sub? as the wireing is already gtg in roof? then again if the nextdoor neighbor had the Ascends would i look like the sucker? is the differance minor or large? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2907 Registered: Mar-05 | Stephen, well the RTi floorstanders certainly did much better at high volumes than the RTi bookshelves, no doubt about that, if I were buying Polks the RTi8 or 10 would be at the top of my list. It's the RTi bookshelves that I'm really critical about. Also I'm sure that M80 you have makes a big difference too, I loved having a NAD amp powering my mains back when I was using a Marantz AVR. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2908 Registered: Mar-05 | > My basis is that the Athenas are much brighter and forward than the Polks and this is the last quality you want to have from the surrounds. Not sure about that. When using the R20s as surrounds, I have always had to set their speaker levels on my receiver at anywhere from +4 to +8 relative to the fronts...both when I was using the Marantz and now with the Panny. I guess what you consider "laid-back" I tend to consider "muffled and lifeless." This difference in taste might account for your reaction to the Athena center, though it's a little puzzling because I find the RTi4s to be far brighter than the R-series though obviously not JBL-bright. I don't remember thinking the Athenas were bright, ages ago when I heard them at BB. I forgot, what's your power source? > Every one's use is different - this is one thing that can be gleaned from this thread, I certainly agree with that. > and there's far more uses for a quality DVD player and surround speakers than just for multi channel music IMO Sorry, I still have many many doubts about that. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2909 Registered: Mar-05 | Munners, Well it's hard NOT to make Bose owners look like suckers, so if that's your main goal then I don't think you can go wrong with the Orbs (which I have not heard, btw) though my guess is that the Ascends by the sheer virtue of their conventional non-compressed speaker design would provide better sound quality, especially with music. If you really want to wow your friends, I'd spend an extra $200 and get the 12" STF-3 sub, that thing should really scare the living daylights out of them esp. since they're used to that pathetic little Bose "bass module," LOL. If your next door neighbor had the Ascends I'd say he was very well-informed, not too many people outside of these forums have ever heard of them. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2910 Registered: Mar-05 | PS. What receiver are you using? |
|
New member Username: MunnersPost Number: 4 Registered: Nov-05 | Was going to buy the yami 2500? because i thought it was good value atm |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2915 Registered: Mar-05 | I personally would have a hard time justifying more than say $500 for an analog AVR if HT was my main use. You're just paying for a few extra dozen connections and other bells and whistles, when just about any receiver in that price range will suffice. If you're set on Yamaha, I'd take a look at the RX-v657 instead, among one its niceties is being XM ready. If you don't require gazillion connections and bells and whistles you might be as happy if not happier with the digital Panny xr55...would be worth doing an AB comparison at home, thanks to no-hassle return policies at Circuit City or Amazon.com |
|
Bronze Member Username: Rysa4Post Number: 76 Registered: Jul-05 | Read through the thread. I am assuming you are getting that Yamaha receiver and have 1300-1800 for speakers and want to impress your friends for HT. You are best off buying a single brand in a 5.1 set up, except the .1 part ( sub) can be a different brand. Your medium sized pre-wired room for 5.1 is unlikely to see a big gain in 7.1 set up over 5.1 for most applications. Not all will agree but that's my honest opinion. For the speakers you have many choices; lets throw a few out; Atlantic Technology system 2200, except without the sub. I have heard this twice now and really liked it for HT both times. I also like AAD E series for HT. AAD stands for American Acoustic Development- Phil Jones stuff. e-40s and e-44c is what I am thinking. i also like the Klipsch rb series for HT. The speakers dont offer flat response for audiophile music listening, but provide excellent enjoyment for HT and have a reasonably balanced center channel relative to the rest of the system, the real deal maker or breaker in HT. RB-25s do fine for mains. Ascend 170s all the way around is a good choice too for HT. Since you will crossover to the sub at 80 HZ, floor standers for HT stuff become less important, and you can always switch to 2 channel with a sub for music as well. SO all points to the sub--well get a good one and your Bose friends will ": be assimilated" as they say. Put your money into a sub for HT. It will pay you back many times. Which one-- well--hmm. I dont have your room dimensions- but look at SVS offerings. If out of fiscal reach-- then get the best HSU you can--. Lastly, get an SPL meter for 50 bucks from Radio Shack and be sure your db levels are balanced via your receiver test tones. Calibrate as needed. This step is very important. Don't mix 5 channel speaker brands unless you have to. I didnt mention anything about Polks because I don't recommend them as a brand. |
|
New member Username: MunnersPost Number: 5 Registered: Nov-05 | Thanks for your input Ed,but if only Circuit City or Amazon.com and others delivered Downunder.The Pannny has been hard to find down here for some reason ,but the few dealers that are shipping these around aus are charging like 700au which is like double the price compared to you guys,which sucks big dogs balls. Can get a Yami RX-v657 for same price atm with 2 year warranty which to be more accurate is $511 US. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2216 Registered: Feb-05 | If you don't have an external amp for the fronts I would stick with the receiver you originally mentioned here, the RX-V2500. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2922 Registered: Mar-05 | munners, > The Pannny has been hard to find down here for some reason ,but the few dealers that are shipping these around aus are charging like 700au which is like double the price compared to you guys,which sucks big dogs balls. Probably the law of supply and demand at work. that's too bad, oh well the RX-V657 should be okay too. If those few Australian dealers of the Panny offer a no-hassle return policy it might still be worth paying more for it, depending on how you like its sound next to the Yammie. Like I've been saying, a lot of people have found themselves preferring the Panny over much more expensive analog gear so price is not its only attraction by any means. |
|
New member Username: MunnersPost Number: 6 Registered: Nov-05 | Art ,That was the plan,but after seeing the RX-V2500 for sale for around 560.00 us/770au,the best i can find is 1500au on ebay here which is a huge diff,the 2600 is just arriving so the asking price for it atm is 2500au,it just sucks when you do alot of research and see what others are paying,but yet again when i saw it for the first time on ebay i was thinking $1500 for the 2500 sounds good lol.If some of these retail net giants only took on stock for this side of the world. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 744 Registered: Oct-04 | Same deal here in Canada, on-line "bargains" disappear after paying S&H and cross border taxes. Just get what you like in your price range. In store may be the best route if buying a system as they can offer greater discounts vs. buying everything peace-meal from on-line retailers. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2221 Registered: Feb-05 | Sorry to hear that Munners. If your speakers are efficient the RX-V657 should do just fine. Good luck! |