Art loses his mind (smashes his NAD with a baseball bat) and buys a Yammie....Lord help me!
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1736 Registered: Feb-05 | Well here it is, I admit defeat...NAD AVR's suck. I listened to many receivers today while shopping in Portland but came home with the Yamaha RX-V657. I listened to it driving 4k Energy Veritas speakers and it sounded ok but driving 2k Energy speakers it really performed well. It had some difficulty driving inefficient NHT's but what do you expect from a receiver that I got for $400 bucks. More about this later when Paul and Edster join the discussion. Dave I'm expecting some commentary from you as well. Anyone else please feel free to jump in and ask questions. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1738 Registered: Feb-05 | Remember Eddie that Yamaha has several lines of product and the receiver line that Paul and I have is NOT the one that you see in the big box stores. Use the Yamaha dealer locator for the series that I have and you will find one chain "The Good Guys" and just a couple of other stores in Oregon that carry it. Well guess what...most of "The Good Guys" are out of business. There are less stores in Oregon to buy that damn Yamaha than there are one to buy NAD avr's. The NAD still sounds wonderful on every digital hookup but hums on every analog one. It will sound better for movies than the Yammie (probably), but at least my damn sub won't hum. I hate to say it but I can't wait to use some of the features. Now even my SACD stuff will go back to being 2 channel and I will enjoy the Yammie for what it was built for...movies. Please don't read into any of this a change of heart for me relative to NAD 2 channel gear. I am currently melting away to Stephon Harris' album "The Grand Unification Theory" while enjoying a little scotch whiskey. 2 channel rules!!!!!The Yammie will not be hooked up at home until tomorrow. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1739 Registered: Feb-05 | http://www.yamaha.com/yec/products/reviews/pdf_reviews/RX-V657review.pdf http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_12_3/yamaha-rx-v657-receiver-8-2005.html |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5832 Registered: May-04 | Hey! There's a blank spot on the rear panel. How'd that happen? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1741 Registered: Feb-05 | LOL!!! An oversight I'm sure. They'll fix on the next model run. |
|
Silver Member Username: SmittyCanada Post Number: 235 Registered: Dec-03 | Art, so really...what'd you do with the NAD T763? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1745 Registered: Feb-05 | It's for sale or trade. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2194 Registered: Mar-05 | $400 for an HT receiver...well that's not too bad, though it's exactly $170 more than what I'd be willing to spend for HT if you know what I mean, lol. But comparable to the Pioneer 1015...did you have a chance to listen to that one? I'd be curious to hear how you thought it compared to the Yammie. I had a feeling that your complaint with NAD didn't extend to the two-channel gear, mine's never had anything resembling an audible hum. Though I did recently notice that at really really low whisper-level volumes the left channel goes out, could be just because it's a vintage unit though. Not that I ever listen to music at such levels of course... At least you didn't peee away $1000 on a silly rx-2500 like some people around here... |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2195 Registered: Mar-05 | BTW what did your local NAD dealer have to say about this? Did he check to see if you had a defective unit, or did he say that's just the way they are? Also curious why you never heard any hum on the Era or SVS subs you've had, only on the Hsu? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1746 Registered: Feb-05 | The other subs were hooked up to the pre outs on NAD pre amp. Now that I have 2 subs I figured I could dedicate one of them to the LFE that's when I found the hum. BTW I did what you know I dread, I dragged equipment all over the room. I tried the Era with LFE...less hum but still loud hum. Hsu where the Era was way less hum barely audible with ear next to it. I listened to music with the Hsu and give you the rundown on that later. I called the NAD dealer that I bought it from and they are excellent. They have offered to to replace with another one but I said no. The owner, Teri, is on vacation and when she gets back we will discuss what else can be done, if I haven't sold it by then. |
|
Anonymous | NAD Engrs suck....can't design a good power supply!!!! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1748 Registered: Feb-05 | Power supply doesn't seem to be the problem. It has more power than anything in it's class. It's the interface between the power supply and the rest of the internal components that they seem to have trouble with. |
|
Bronze Member Username: SteelhrdPost Number: 30 Registered: Jul-05 | As one of the people who peed away 1000 dollars(750 actually) on a yammy 2500 at least it doesn't hum at any level on any source or input. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1751 Registered: Feb-05 | I agree Reginald. Edster I did listen to Pioneer but not at the same place that I bought the Yammie. I bought the Yammie at a place called the Home Video Library in Portland. It's a real dive. They had Yamaha, HK, and Onkyo AVR's and strange as it may seem Energy (including the Veritas line), NHT and Klipsch speakers. I compared Pioneer to the Sony's and Panny's at CC using their best speakers which were Infinity's and Polk's. The Sony was the clear loser it really didn't do anything well. The Pioneer for my taste sounded the best although as you've said the Panny seemed to have limitless power. They are having trouble keeping the Panny on the shelf as it has become quite a cult favorite. I found the sound not to my liking, too artificial. Detail emphasized to the detriment of musicality. In all fairness I was not able to audition anything yesterday in what one would call optimal conditions. The HK, Yamaha comparison was the most interesting as they both sounded pretty good. Neither of them had the grunt to drive the NHT's but then again my old Marantz didnt either back when I owned NHT's. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2200 Registered: Mar-05 | Art, I'll be very curious to hear how you find the Yammie at home, especially if you try music on it just for the heck of it. It's possible too that the Panny might go very well with your Paradigms since I've been told the Studio series are warm bordering on neutral which would be similar to the Ascends (though I've not heard anyone call those "warm"). Don't know much about the Infinity Betas at CC, I do know that the Polk Monitors are quite mediocre and I didn't think that CC would carry the Polk RTi line which is a little better. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1752 Registered: Feb-05 | CC also carries the Infinity Primus line which are considered by some to be a good entry level line. I'll not hear the Yammie with my mains hooked up directly to it as it is too much work. If you saw my configuration you'd know why. Not to mention I have other things that need to be accomplished around here, like yard work. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1755 Registered: Feb-05 | BTW Eddie, I heard Pauls receiver yesterday. It don't sound a bit better than the Yammie I just bought. It has more power which is not an issue for me with the Hafler hooked up. I must admit though that they (the Yammies) made those Energy RC 70's sound real nice. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 529 Registered: May-05 | Art, Say it ain't so. NO NADs. So, I finally decide to look at the NAD pair and now you're telling me I'll be disappointed when I bring them home because I'll get hum and you bought a Yammy and have gone back to a separate 2 channel system? Aren't you the guy who said you couldn't separate your systems, either. How'd you get the wife to go for this, young man? Geez, maybe I just keep the Denon for HT. Fight my wife like crazy, go buy the souped up Jolida 502b and match it with a pair of Tim's Lings or Rosas and call it good. YOU GUYS ARE DRIVING ME EVEN MORE CRAZY than I already am! LOL |
|
Bronze Member Username: SteelhrdPost Number: 32 Registered: Jul-05 | When i bought mine from American i didn't like the sound initally. I found the hihs to be harsh and the midrange to be thin when paired with my boston acoustics vr975's. I was going to exchange for pioneer or something else. But the salesman told me to take it back home and play with the peq(he extended my exchange period). He was right the sound i was looking for was there. i wish ithad a little more oomph but that just gives me a reson to buy the emotiva amp i want as soon as the wife turns her head |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1756 Registered: Feb-05 | My system is still together (I did not seperate them) Dave and I still have my NAD cd player and pre amp with the Hafler power amp. I just substituted the Yamaha receiver where the NAD T763 was. Testing has just begun so I must be off. I'm listening to the Boz Scaggs DVD (great test disc for tunes). Remember Dave what I originally said. A pre amp and power amp to add to your AVR is better than a pre/pro and power amp for all duties. If music is most important the bang for buck is much higher my way. Any full featured AVR (like the one you have) can handle the movie duties especially if bolstered by a power amp on the front 2 via a quality 2 channel pre. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1759 Registered: Feb-05 | If you like good FM as much as I do you would be thrilled with the Yamaha. The tuner in this unit is the best I've ever heard in a receiver. The Willamette Valley in Oregon is notorious as one of the worst places in the country for FM reception. This receiver gets stations that my NAD and Marantz couldn't get at all. What's more it gets them clearly and they sound good! Marvelous tuner! It's worth the price of admission just for the FM tuner an XM satellite radio. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 535 Registered: May-05 | OK Art, for a second there, I thought I'd lost your mind. LOL OK, so you're saying I shouldn't be looking for a 7.1 or 5.1 set of separates, I should be looking for a 2 channel set-up running off the Denon? I need to go back to your original post on this, I never looked at the NAD T763 and I assumed, bad thing that, it was a multi-channel set-up. Well, as Jan says, okie dokie then. Although I am more and more intrigued by the Anthem PVA7 the more I read the reviews on it. Hasn't anyone out there demoed this thing or heard it or anything. If so, how's it compare to NAD separates or Rotel separates or Outlaw separates? Anyone? Back to the drawing board. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BunnyBig D, Texas Post Number: 30 Registered: May-05 | Art, I was just wondering, have you had the opportunity to audition the Pioneer Elite Line? (Particularly the VSX53 or VSX 54). And if so, how would they (in your opinion) compare to the Yamaha? Thanks in advance. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1765 Registered: Feb-05 | Anthem and Lexicon are in a different league. Even so they will only sound better for a multi channel setup. For 2 channel nothing substitutes for 2 channel seperates. In other words yes I've heard Anthem gear and yes it is fabulous but no it ain't 2 channel seperates. Bug's the Pioner Elites are some of the best sounding AVR's out there. I like the feature package a little better with the Yammies but it's close to a draw for sound. Denon's, HK's and Marantz are also very good. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1769 Registered: Feb-05 | Watched U571 last night with the new receiver. Yikes...between the Yammie and the Hsu I thought perhaps I was doing structural damage to my home. The sound isn't as clean as with the NAD but as a listener it is more involving for movies. The voices in dialogue aren't as real sounding and are a little thicker than the with the NAD but I can actually hear what they are saying a little better. Again that is part of the overall involvement that I spoke of. That was the most fun I've had watching a movie since I had my old HT setup a couple of years ago. Rotel RSX965 A/V receiver Rotel RB981 power amp Marantz DV6200 DVD player Paradigm Reference Studio's all around (same as now but v2) Paradigm PW2200 sub Rotel RCD971 cd player That setup had it's own humming issues. That's why I don't have it anymore. That and my foray into Magnepan. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2209 Registered: Mar-05 | Art, will we get a review from you soon on the Yammie with music, and the Hsu with music? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1773 Registered: Feb-05 | As I said before...no. I listened briefly to the Hsu with music when I was checking for hum and it sounded more musical, meaning tight and articulate with a nice plumpness, than any other sub I've owned except the Era. Had I bought the Hsu first I probably would never know how wonderful the Era is because I would have been satisfied with the Hsu. The Yamaha will only be used like the NAD as a source component for movies, FM, and XM satellite radio (I ordered the connect & play XM unit yesterday). I can tell you that that for it's intended purpose it is quite adequate. It only powers the rears and center during movies and as such doesn't even get warm. The FM radio sounds fantastic with great reception. Besides that I've been doing yard work and washing my car. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2213 Registered: Mar-05 | Darn! I was hoping to read about the Yammie getting creamed badly and the Hsu scoring a surprise upset for music. LOL |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1775 Registered: Feb-05 | Sorry Eddie but so far so good with Yammie. I can't wait to get the XM hooked up. Hey at least we have discovered a couple of great budget AVR's. Cool eh! |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2214 Registered: Mar-05 | so the XM goes directly into the Yammie? That's pretty sweet! I recently got it for my car, it's excellent. Channel 70 Real Jazz especially. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1776 Registered: Feb-05 | Yep! |
|
New member Username: T2tPost Number: 2 Registered: Sep-05 | Art, I was just wondering, have you had the opportunity to audition the Pioneer Elite Line? (Particularly the VSX53 or VSX 54). And if so, how would they (in your opinion) compare to the Yamaha? This really boils down to personal preference. I've had many makes of receivers. To me, the H/K, Yamaha and Panasonic receivers seem to do the best when it comes to separation during stereo listening. I'd love to say, go buy "x" because that's what I own and it's the best, but I don't live by those rules. After switching out many receivers over the years, for my the Panny XR55, I find myself not believing how great it performs for being so compact and lightweight. Also, it seems like I should have dropped $500 - $800 instead of $250. But, to me, it really is no joke. I have great sound and have saved a bulk of money along the way. Now, I just need to keep enjoying it for the next few years and not mess with it when I hit the 1-year mark. That seems like the time-frame when I get a bit antsy and like to switch things around. In any regard, the XR60 (speculation) will be available in a year, feature more watts and HDMI switching for a nice price tag. If that's the case, I'll convert over to that model when the time comes.  |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2216 Registered: Mar-05 | oh and Art, once your XM is all hooked up: 9pm Fridays on Channel 70 they have the French Quarter Jazz Show...manna from heaven!!! I need to figure out how to record XM on my computer, just for that show. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1777 Registered: Feb-05 | Wayne it sounds like your enjoying your Panny. I'm glad to hear it. A little Nawlins Jazz anyone! Sounds like the ticket Ed. I just received an email telling me that my XM unit has shipped. By next weekend I should be jammin'. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 536 Registered: May-05 | Art, Congratulations. Glad you're loving the new set-up. I am excited to hear your reviews on new stuff as it comes in or as you listen to some new HT material. Keep it coming. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1789 Registered: Feb-05 | Thanks Dave. The little Yammie is a great piece of budget gear. |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 332 Registered: Apr-05 | Curiously Art would you now buy into the theory that newer technolgy can improve on sound? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2242 Registered: Mar-05 | Art, how would you compare the Yammie's HT performance against your Marantz 5400? Just curious... |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2555 Registered: Jan-05 | LOL I just discovered this thread. I cant blame you for dumping NAD. In fact, I wouldnt touch NAD AVRs with eddies 10 foot pole. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2556 Registered: Jan-05 | Oh, I almost forgot to say...... Congrats on discarding the 'boutique' brand, and finally deciding to buy from a REAL manufacturer who knows what the hell they are doing. Yammi is the way to go!! BTW, I watched "I Robot" yesterday for about the 3rd time since the DVD release. That movie is becoming one of my cult fav's. Excellent sound, and some of those chase scenes are just amazing both visually and sonically. I played some of the action scenes at -5db and I could feel the soundwaves hitting and going through me from every possible direction.........LOL |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1792 Registered: Feb-05 | Hi Paul, Believe it or not I still haven't seen that one yet. I intend to soon. I wondered when I would hear from you. You see Paul this is how it's done. Ya know, admitting that perhaps you were wrong about something. I now believe that even though the NAD, Rotel, and Arcam sound much better musically than the other brands, for movies the Yamaha, Denon, HK, Marantz, and Pioneer's of the world add excitement to movies that the (god forbid) boutique brands can't match. Put another way, when it comes to movies you don't want the polite brand you want the gear made by folks who have fun in mind. Others may not understand what I mean by that by I know you will. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2559 Registered: Jan-05 | Yea, I cant believe this thread lasted nearly 5 days before I noticed it. What do you mean I never admit when Im wrong??? Who was the anti-subwoofer person who openly changed his position and now sings the praises of owning a quality subwoofer for movie purposes?? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1795 Registered: Feb-05 | Now Paul, where did I say that you never admit when your wrong. Sounds like a Freudian problem to me. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2563 Registered: Jan-05 | You see Paul this is how it's done. Ya know, admitting that perhaps you were wrong about something. ============== Yea, as if it takes a rocket scientist to translate that....... |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 545 Registered: May-05 | Now, do we really need to take Art to task on that one, Paul? Could it be that you're feeling just a little guilty about something, Pauly? Come on, you can talk to Dave and Art, we're here for ya, big fella. But, I have to admit, I think someone stole Art and is using his body and fingers. First, he buys a Yammie and now he is singing the praises of Yamaha, Denon, HK, Marantz and OM gosh Pioneer for HT purposes. Somebody give us the real Art back, please. We'll pay whatever you ask? LOL |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2249 Registered: Mar-05 | David, What has transpired here with Art only corroborates my longstanding belief that HT does not exactly require a state of the art high fidelity receiver/amp, in contrast to a dedicated music system. Remember, in HT at least 80% of your attention is riveted to what's happening on your TV screen. That $400 Yammie is a perfect case in point. |
|
Silver Member Username: SmittyCanada Post Number: 238 Registered: Dec-03 |
The Cambridge Audio 540R is quite good for music and excellent for movies. I suspect the Outlaw 1070 may be in the same boat. You don't have to completely give up on music reproduction for decent HT. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1796 Registered: Feb-05 | A careful examination of my system reveals that I don't need my AVR for music. My Avr is my movie source component. The Cambridge is in the same boat as the NAD. QC problems have plagued that model. The NAD/Cambridge dealer in Portland won't even carry the Cambridge as she is tired of taking them back. Having listened to the Outlaw gear I'm not impressed with it for anything. It's good but bland. David, never fear I'm still obsessed with good musical reproduction I just don't expect to find it in AV gear for less than way more than I am willing to spend. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2264 Registered: Mar-05 | Art, how does the Yammie stack up to your Marantz 5400 at least for HT? |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2575 Registered: Jan-05 | A careful examination of my system reveals that I don't need my AVR for music. -------------- I just had a flashback of a Dumb & Dumber scene when Lloyd Christmas was riding in the doggiemobile and he proclaims..."We dont need no stinking radio"....and he starts singing "Mockingbird". HEH |
|
Silver Member Username: SmittyCanada Post Number: 239 Registered: Dec-03 | That's the first I've heard of recent CA QC problems. I know there were some issues with the early batches from last year with bass management settings but that's since been fixed. Any idea if there were specific issues? I talked to two dealers and they said they hadn't had any warranty returns at all. Then again...they said their NAD return rate was almost nil as well ;) |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1797 Registered: Feb-05 | Excellent question Edster. The Yammie and Marantz feel about the same for power and comparing their power supplies visually they are similar in size. The Yamaha weighs about a half pound more. The Yamaha has a much better user interface and remote, this makes using it fun. As far as sound the Marantz is warmer but lacks the neutrality and detail of the Yamaha. I hate to keeep coming back to this but the Yamaha has made me excited to watch movies again. It has added excitement to the whole experience. No doubt that Dr. Hsu's contribution to my HT has added some fun as well. Smitty, I don't remember what she told me the problem was and she is on vacation now so I can't ask. When she gets back I will probably be more concerned with what to do with my NAD. BTW she used to sell Marantz as well and stated that she had way more QC issues with Marantz and Cambridge that she has ever had with NAD. Yeah! She intends to start selling the next generation of Cambridge AVR's. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1798 Registered: Feb-05 | BTW first impressions aren't everything. This weekend will be a whole new round of tests. |
|
Bronze Member Username: SteelhrdPost Number: 33 Registered: Jul-05 | Art i glad to see you unlike others were able to drop your prejudices against a particular brand and be objective. I think to many people close thier mind and ears before actually hearing equipment. |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 335 Registered: Apr-05 | However Reginald you can have bad predisposed notion of a product based on its quality. I will not buy another Sony and I don't care how it sounds. Unless, who knows, I read in industry rags consistently that somehow Sony has improved it's quality of design and production. |
|
Bronze Member Username: SteelhrdPost Number: 34 Registered: Jul-05 | Much agreed i do not by sony for that reason |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 547 Registered: May-05 | Well Art and other thread fellows, I am excited for Art and await his weekend movie spree. Art, consider the 2nd LOR it has some great battle scenes that will test your AVR. Gladiator will do the same and any of the Matrix movies likewise. Also, I suggest you take a listen to Phantom of the Opera, the movie is OK, but the music is incredible in a good system, it will sent chills down your spine, even if you're not an "opera buff" and I sure ain't. Then, for a little fun, do something old style funky like "Car Wash", no real plot, not a great movie but some great old early 70s stuff. LOL After you've ODed on the above and anything else you may watch, let's have an update on picture and sound. GO ART!! |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2590 Registered: Jan-05 | Almost all newer movies with the slightest hint of action have great LFE tracks. Tonight Im going to watch "Lost"(my fav TV show), and believe it or not, they even have a good LFE track and it's just a flippin TV show. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1800 Registered: Feb-05 | Yep I'm lookin' forward to the weekend. Thanks Reg for your supportive words. As audio geeks we do need to stay open to new experiences. Dave, trust me we'll get down with the movies this weekend. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2597 Registered: Jan-05 | BTW...I think "Invasion" is my 2nd favorite. Heh..... I follow a very 'few' shows, but those are two of them. Plus.......... they're both HD and the nice soundtracks never hurt |
|
Silver Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 920 Registered: Sep-04 | Paul, Although it's just a TV show, Lost had the most expensive pilot ever at $5 million. That's pretty expensive so you'd expect them to make it properly. The DVDs have an excellent soundtrack in full surround too. It's true that you don't have to have high end surround to have fun, but that's also true of 2-channel. When you do have a quality surround system, the difference can be quite awesome. I just hope not everyone ends up thinking that their local $400 HTIB is the pinnacle of what they can achieve at home. Regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1806 Registered: Feb-05 | Good point Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2290 Registered: Mar-05 | > I just hope not everyone ends up thinking that their local $400 HTIB is the pinnacle of what they can achieve at home. $400 HTIB would be overdoing it. A wisely chosen $400 AVR like Art's Yammie though would IMHO be more than sufficient for most folks' needs...in the same way that a BMW 735i is overkill for most people who'd be fine with a Honda Accord. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1810 Registered: Feb-05 | Another good point. Let me add that the "finer" AVR's from NAD and Rotel hum with the analog connects making it difficult for folks like myself to enjoy multichannel music through them so then what are they for. The NAD and Rotel units don't hum with the digital connects so they are fine for movies...well my $400 Yamaha outdoes my NAD for movies so..... You get my drift. Frank is correct about the multi channel (surround) but you have to be committed to make a real investment to get the desired return. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2297 Registered: Mar-05 | Art do you find such a huge difference going from an analog connection between your CDP and receiver to a digital one? I'm sure that NAD T763's internal DAC is no slouch and since it's analog not all digital I would think that the end result would still be far more "musical" and "warmer" to your ears than a digital connection to an all-digital receiver. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1817 Registered: Feb-05 | Edster you know how my system is hooked up so why would you ask that question. The only analog connection I used was for SACD and the sub both of which hummed like crazy so I didn't bother. Multichannel music was the only reason I paid NAD bucks for a receiver and so when I couldn't listen to it due to the hum I was disgusted and disappointed. Otherwise all analog connections for music were with the real system. The NAD still sounds better than the Yamaha and Marantz by a mile. But I'm not one who can stand humming and hissing. I wish I could draw some kind of schematic or something so you could see exactly how the system is connected. I think then you would get a clearer idea of how it all works. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2301 Registered: Mar-05 | oops, forgot: CDP to NAD 2-channel pre-amp which probably has only analog connections? > the "finer" AVR's from NAD and Rotel hum with the analog connects making it difficult for folks like myself to enjoy multichannel music through them so then what are they for. I guess I took the above to mean that you also have the universal player (don't you have a Denon 2910?) hooked up to the AVR for SACD or DVD-A listening...so SACD/DVD-A cannot be played through a digital connection? Since I have never used those formats I have no idea. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1819 Registered: Feb-05 | I did have my 2910 connected to the 5.1 on my receiver but it hummed and since the Yammie just ain't up to high end standards I hooked up my 2910 to the NAD pre as a 2 channel component. It sounds fabulous even in 2 channel. |
|
Silver Member Username: KanoPost Number: 688 Registered: Oct-04 | Hooking the 2910 into the Yammi's 6 ch inputs with the Hafler connected to the left/right pre-outs should sound fine. The Yamaha is only amplifying the surround and centre channels. I'd be surprised if it sounded bad. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1829 Registered: Feb-05 | I like 2 channel SACD. The Hafler is not connected to L/R pre outs of the Yammie it's connected to the L/R pre outs on the NAD C162 pre amp. The L/R pre outs on the Yammie are connected to the video in on the C162. The Era sub is connected to the other set of pre outs on the C162. The Hsu sub is connected to the LFE on the Yammie. The hambone is connected to the.......oh I'm sorry I just got carried away. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1835 Registered: Feb-05 | Much to my shocked amazement (redundant I'm sure)"The Perfect Vision's" sister publication "The Absolute Sound" ran 2 reviews of AVR's. This is a first to my knowledge. One of the two was the Yamaha RX-V657. It appears to be the same review that is in "The Perfect Vision" but I was taken aback to find it in the "The Absolute Sound". This little AVR appears to have broken the sound barrier in some fairly haughty circles which would be amazing by itself due to the Yammies affordability, but that it is an AVR leaves me with my mouth open. |
|
confused22 Unregistered guest | I agree, and it is on my very short list. I have one gripe, albeit a small one. I wish it was Sirius capable |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1836 Registered: Feb-05 | My XM connect and play is on the way so I will soon see if I enjoy it. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2334 Registered: Mar-05 | I get the impression XM is better for music fans, Sirius is better for everything else. I do wish XM had NPR though. They have BBC which is a huge improvement over CNN and Faux News. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1839 Registered: Feb-05 | I would prefer the BBC over the whiney sound of NPR. NPR and Fauxnew are two sides of the same ridiculous "official news" coin. I'm glad the XM is better for music because that is whst I listen to primarily. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1840 Registered: Feb-05 | I would prefer the BBC over NPR. NPR and Faux news are two sides of the same ridiculous "official news" coin. I'm glad the XM is better for music because that is what I listen to primarily. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2335 Registered: Mar-05 | Art, It's kind of funny that you think this of NPR, since they have been pretty much muzzled and castrated by their blatantly rightwing Bush-appointed director for years now. About the only truly "liberal" media I've ever come across are obscure little college radio stations and publications like The Village Voice and Mother Jones which nobody reads anyways. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1841 Registered: Feb-05 | Not gonna talk politics Eddie. Had enough of that here. Just stating the obvious about the American news media. You did miss my point though. They are 2 sides of the same "OFFICIAL NEWS". Get it, see how that actually agrees with what you said. As much as NPR isn't the news organization that liberals would likely point to as speaking for them neither is Fox for any self respecting consrvative. Both of them just find the liberal or conservative snippets of official dogma and blow them up for personal gain. I don't enjoy either of them. Nonetheless I hope XM has great musical content. I especially hope they dig deeper into the classical repertoire than cable tv's digital music stations. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 557 Registered: May-05 | Art, How about a report on the movies you watched and what you enjoyed or didn't enjoy with your new toy. I have some news to report, nothing on a new addition or two, BUT, I did get to listen to Paradigms and I was impressed!!!! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1850 Registered: Feb-05 | Actually today I've been listening to FM all day and it has been very pleasant. Good overall balance and neutral tonal balance coupled with great reception = nice FM experience. I don't know about you David but I get a bit nostalgiac about my FM listening days. Back in the 70's receivers often had great tuners. Today the best tuner that I know of is the Magnum Dynalab. The Yamaha's tuner has that kind of sound. I won't lie and tell you that it sounds as good as a $1600 Magnum Dynalab tuner but the two have a similar quality. I did watch some movies but they were mostly without special effects. I still have no complaints. Do I wish that the NAD had worked out? Oh yeah, it sounds great when it ain't hummin'. But I am struck by the sonic neutrality of the Yamaha and can't help but wonder what their flagship sounds like. Check out my post above. The little Yammie made it to the big time and is reviewed in "The Absolute Sound" this month. So did you listen to the Paradigm Reference Series? I love my Studio 40's and 20's. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 559 Registered: May-05 | Art, See my post on the Denon 5803 vs. Separates and "yes" I did. My impressions are on the other thread but now I know why you like 'em. Pretty dang impressive, warmer than the Ascends. Edster will probably kill me but for 2 channel I like the sound better than the CBM 170s. But in fairness, I've never listened to the 170s as a strict 2 channel, well placed, with balanced sound and a decent amp driving them but the Studio 60s were very musical and I liked what I heard. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2346 Registered: Mar-05 | David, see my post in your Denon thread. |
|
Gvenk Unregistered guest | Another review on the RX-V657 (note part about switching the Panny XR50 out to compare). http://www.audioreview.com/YamahaRXV657crx.aspx Bench tests http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=863&page_nu mber=1 |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2361 Registered: Mar-05 | gvenk, that first link doesn't work, keeps saying "URL Redirect Limit exceeded" |
|
Gvenk Unregistered guest | Hmmm.. they don't seem to allow links from outside. The only way I can suggest is to go to http://www.audioreview.com Click on the Editorial Reviews link near the top of the page under reviews (if one does not have the patience to find this link on the home page, they don't deserve to learn anything ). Then select the review for the Yammie near the top of the review list. If someone can post a direct link that works, please do. |
|
Gvenk Unregistered guest | This is very strange. Even the link to the audioreview.com home page takes you somewhere else than I intended. Don't kow if it is ecoustics or audioreview.com doing the redirections. Let us try this instead. http://snipurl.com/i4nn |
|
Gvenk Unregistered guest | The above snipurl works to go directly to the Yammie review |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1857 Registered: Feb-05 | Anyone who's reference system consists of a Panasonic SA XR50 receiver and Aperion speakers lacks credibility with me. Check the reference used by Chris Martens of "The Absolute Sound". That's how it's done. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2362 Registered: Mar-05 | Interesting review, Gvenk. I know Art will scoff at this, but I find the reviewer's assertion that the Yammie is underpowered compared to the xr50 to be quite plausible. Of course the vast majority of consumers nowadays will have speakers with 89db sensitivity and up so in real life this is probably not much of an issue. Digital power switching is simply a whole other ballgame, as I found when my xr55 easily outpowered my NAD separates. I'm sure the Yammie is a good receiver in its own right, but I'd happily put it up against my Panny at almost half the price. Of course I do wish my Panny were XM-ready, had better bass management and YPAO like the Yammie does too. Oh well, I'll be ready when they come out with say a Panny xr65 that has that too, I'd gladly pay more to have the xr55's phenomenal SQ with all the full audiophile features and a better remote. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2363 Registered: Mar-05 | > Anyone who's reference system consists of a Panasonic SA XR50 receiver and Aperion speakers lacks credibility with me. Check the reference used by Chris Martens of "The Absolute Sound". That's how it's done. Actually Art, if one is to follow the typical "you get what you pay for" logic of many audiophiles, the argument could be made that since Chris Martens reviewed the Yammie with much more expensive speakers, source, and cables (lol!) than Eric LoBue did, it only figures that the Yammie sounded much more impressive than on LoBue's poor man's system. Now what I'd love to read is Chris Marten and several of his colleagues doing a budget AVR shootout which included the xr55, the Yammie 657, the Pioneer 1015, Marantz 5500, and HK235. Preferably with a good bit of blind testing thrown in there of course! |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 565 Registered: May-05 | Art, Edster and Gvenk, Still and a pretty impressive review for the Yammie. Personally, I like my Denon and Ascends for HT and I'd put it up against the Yammie/Paradigm combo, Art. Now music, that may be a different can of worms BUT tonight I try something new with my speakers and we'll see if it brings them a little more to life. More to report tomorrow. |
|
Gvenk Unregistered guest | This is not to take a position on either. I have not listened to either the Yammie or the Pannie nor do I intend to in the near future. But I am amused at the "cult" positions people immediately take to a piece of equipment they like (to the point of ignoring/rejecting what they don't want to hear). I would say the Absolute Sound review is useless for 95% of the people here or for most of the target audience for the Yammie since they will not be using the "reference" quality equipment. The fact that Yammie works great with that equipment means nothing to people who will want to pair it with other stuff especially lower priced equipment. It is useful to hear what limitations Yammie has with low-end stuff (the Yammie is indeed a budget speaker) as much as how good it does with a high end set up. It is not a matter of credibility but a review in the context of what one is likely to deploy in their homes or upgrade from than with what the Yammie can do in a high-end context. Having said that, I actually think the audioreview.com review was a strong recommendation of the Yammie with a few caveats (all equipment has caveats). Rejecting such reviews outright is a sign of religion not reason. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2371 Registered: Mar-05 | good points, and your impartiality is duly noted. Yeah, it sure would be nice if professional reviewers could write two reviews: one of the gear with high end stuff and one of it with low end stuff... Though for a budget receiver you'd think that pairing it with budget speakers and source would make more sense. Now if I ever review the Panny with some $5000 speakers any of you are free to whack me for it. (Especially if you buy me the speakers!) |
|
Silver Member Username: SmittyCanada Post Number: 243 Registered: Dec-03 | Speaking of Yamaha, I'm suprised that even the high-end Yamaha RX-V4600 rated at 130wpc can't even muster 40wpc with five channels driven:
from: Yamaha RX-V4600 Review |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2372 Registered: Mar-05 | wow. I think I saw something similar about Onkyo's 901 too. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1861 Registered: Feb-05 | "I'd put it up against the Yammie/Paradigm combo, Art." I don't have a Yammie/Paradigm combo David I have a Yammie/Hafler/NAD/Paradigm combo. Gvenk you misread my post. I didn't reject the review. I feel that having a budget system as your reference as a reviewer says something about the reviewer. I feel that what it says is not good. A reference system is one by which others are measured. Most reviewers understand that and use gear that reflects that. "I would say the Absolute Sound review is useless for 95% of the people here or for most of the target audience for the Yammie since they will not be using the "reference" quality equipment." What reviews are useful then? Are any of them useful. Most folks buying low end gear think Bose is still the name to trust. Should the reviewer have used Bose speakers. Where does it end. I have known since I started at ecoustics that there is a heavy bias against reviews so I rarely mention them. Frankly, I think it's silly. Reviews simply give you a reference, a starting point, that's all. "Rejecting such reviews outright is a sign of religion not reason." That is even more silly. First, unlike my friend Edster (no offense Eddie) I don't care one iota what people here buy. You won't see me running around the forum telling people to "just try this product or that" because I couldn't care less. I give advice where I find it is appropriate and leave it at that. I am not one bit bought into any of this stuff, especially not Yamaha. I think it's a great budget piece and that's it. Second, you just did a better job of dismissing "The Absolute Sound" review than I did the other. "Now what I'd love to read is Chris Marten and several of his colleagues doing a budget AVR shootout which included the xr55, the Yammie 657, the Pioneer 1015, Marantz 5500, and HK235. Preferably with a good bit of blind testing thrown in there of course!" Eddie you should subscribe to "What HiFi" they do that kind of stuff. If you follow Chris Martens and the "The Absolute Sound " crew you have a good feel for what they've listened to and what they like. It's just like following the folks you know here. Ya get a feel for their tastes. Now David you know I care about what you buy so don't be offended...lol. Bye for now guys. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2378 Registered: Mar-05 | > First, unlike my friend Edster (no offense Eddie) I don't care one iota what people here buy. hm, hadn't thought of it that way. I just think that less well-known products like Ascend, Hsu and this digital Panny that offer exceptional bang for the buck simply deserve any free publicity I can give them. Overall I consider my often-repetitive buying advice about the equivalent of a street demonstrator throwing stones at an advancing tank. The tank in this case is driven by the likes of big-box stores and mega-corporation brand names (e.g. Bose, Sony, among others) AS WELL AS the subculture of audio mysticism, sales propaganda and elitism that likes to assume that a $10000 amp is going to give you 10 times more performance than a $1000 amp. In other words, it's a Sisyphean exercise in futility...but fun anyways. |
|
Silver Member Username: Devils_advocatePost Number: 458 Registered: Jul-05 | Eddie: Yes the NR901 was rated at 50wpc after the protection mode hit, a whopping 3 watts more than the entry level 501. Of course Onkyo products still get good reviews. A quote from the Cnet review of the 503 would indicate it sounds pretty good regardless of whether it is 10-20wpc shy of its rating : "As it stands right now, the SR503 might be the best-sounding entry-level receiver we've heard." This of course demonstrates that personal tastes are more important than numbers from time to time. |
|
Gvenk Unregistered guest | Art, you are showing more symptoms of religion...defensiveness You dismissed the review simply saying as being from someone not credible because of the reference equipment used. If you read the article carefully, you will see that he used the "reference" in quotes with an explanation of why he called it reference. In no way can this use be confused with the use of reference equipment for serious comparison that you make it out to be. This in no way negates his experience with what happened in switching over from the Pannie. Are you saying Yammie does not have a problem for sure with power output into inefficient speakers? If not, it would seem the credibility is not an issue at all. Nothing that is in this review contradicts anything the Absolute Sound review has said, just different contexts. I only posted the link because you kept mentioning the absolute sound review and there was a back and forth between Yammie and Pannie recommendations and this had such a direct comparison. As I mentioned one needs to hear multiple viewpoints (no reviewer is unbaised and no review reflects what might happen in everyone's usage of the equipment). Knowing how an equipment sounds with equipment comparable in price is as important as hooking it up to expensive equipment. And in that respective both are useful to know. Saying a review should be used in the context of the review which may or may not reflect what some users may want to consider the equipment for is not dismissive, it is placing the value of the review in context. Saying that the reviewer's mother wears combat boots to have credibility is just dimissive. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2381 Registered: Mar-05 | DA, I do use CNET but have gotten burned by them before on some other things that they recommended (computer related) so I tend to take them with many grains of salt. But yes, personal tastes are always an intangible and inherent factor. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1862 Registered: Feb-05 | All reviewers are different and I sure don't put the likes of CNET or"Sound and Vision" in the same league with "The Absolute Sound", "The Perfect Vision", or "Stereophile". If you do then I guess that speaks for itself. Eddie, as we saw with Tim and his Ling's, Ascend Acoustics has no problem behaving like a tank. Another thing you may not be aware of being new to this hobby. The principle of diminishing returns. "AS WELL AS the subculture of audio mysticism, sales propaganda and elitism that likes to assume that a $10000 amp is going to give you 10 times more performance than a $1000 amp." Certainly if you've read my posts you've heard me refer to it. No one who has been around this hobby (Tawaun would likely tell you) believes for a second that because they pay 10 times the amout they are going to get 10 times the sound. As the price goes up so do the returns diminish, such is the principle. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2383 Registered: Mar-05 | Art, Well I think that whole Ascend-Lings thing was kind of weird from all sides, but again I don't think we'll ever truly know the whole story. Yes you did mention diminishing returns before, so I was not thinking of you when I wrote that. However, very closely related to what I described is the common belief that you ALWAYS get what you pay for, which I think is why if the xr55 were repackaged with an extra $500 added to its pricetag I'll bet many more folks around here would be willing to give it a try than with its insane $230 current pricetag. (Again, I am not referring to you in this instance either since you did say that you have heard it before and simply dislike the digital sound character, and that's perfectly kosher in my book.) All of this is human nature of course. We all want to believe that we have great gear, though IMO this tendency is magnified by those who've spent much more money than others...a tendency that the higher-end audio industry very skillfully cultivates and exploits. |
|
Silver Member Username: Devils_advocatePost Number: 459 Registered: Jul-05 | "All reviewers are different and I sure don't put the likes of CNET or"Sound and Vision" in the same league with "The Absolute Sound", "The Perfect Vision", or "Stereophile". If you do then I guess that speaks for itself. " I take offense to that remark. The folks at Stereophile have heard a fair share of equipment and have developed their tastes in audio. But at the same time so have the folks at Cnet and S&V. What makes one so much better than the other? They all take measurements as needed. They all listen with their ears and then form a judgement. So whats the deal? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1865 Registered: Feb-05 | No harm was meant by the statement but if you take offense I can't stop you. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1866 Registered: Feb-05 | The XM connect and play unit arrived last night so I will see about getting the subscription going and have something to report sometime this weekend. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2388 Registered: Mar-05 | The subscription activation is more a matter of hours rather than days, just go to their website with your credit card ready. I think you will be in for a real treat, Art! (Assuming your listening room has some line of sight to the southern sky, or you have a long cord to an outside antenna.) |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 346 Registered: Apr-05 | Eddie to your comment about repackaging this Pannny xr55 and selling it for $500 more, if this is as good as you say it is and it does get good response, I have a feeling they will very soon. However repackaging would involve adding software for OSD and more features which raises the cost of production. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2407 Registered: Mar-05 | Stof, yeah I'd love to chat with whoever's in charge of marketing over at Panasonic for this model. I've heard from some posters that it's flying off the shelves at Circuit City but all the same the "you get what you pay for" logic is very difficult to work around especially with mid- to high-end audio consumers. If I were Panasonic I would be concerned that the average Joe who walks into CC and buys this thing is going to pair it with some cheap KLH or Sony speakers which will sound horrible with it, and then return it and tell all of their equally clueless friends that it sounds like its price. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 568 Registered: May-05 | Well, I'll throw my $.02 worth in on the whole, you get what you pay for stage. As several of you know, I just had the opportunity to listen to systems running about $6000 (low-fi according to the owner) up to $100,000 (hi-fi). It was an interesting experience and confirmed what I already believed, you had better spend some time listening before you buy anything. As I've told Edster and Art, Art's speakers (sorry Art to misquote your system as Yammie/Paradigm only) sounded very good - warm and forward and, to my ears, very satisfying. Were they as good as the Vandersteens at 20 times the price, "NO!!!". Would I take them home and snuggle up to them, YOU BET!!! And IMHO, the Vandersteens sounded better - warmer still, deeper and broader sound stage but hey, they weren't worth the extra dough for a guy like me who can't listen to music for 24 hours a day at home while earning millions on my computer or whatever the heck Bill Gates does all day. |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 347 Registered: Apr-05 | Dave I think it is hard to argue against that. I don't think I have heard anything better than a Martin Logan (I don't remember the model). Part of my reason at the time was that I was standing next to one (about my height) and talking to someone without shouting and on the other side of the room there were people dancing to the songs. There certainly is some differene between a $600 pair of Ascends and the Martin Logans. However I think everyone's point is that there is not much if any difference between a $600 ascends and a $3000 Bose. Ed will tell you it's even superior. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1867 Registered: Feb-05 | Dave, I love the Vandy 5a's. One of my favorite speakers. An absolute steal at 15k. The only speaker I like better is the Wilson Maxx 2's. Eddie, I was just going to be lazy and not hook up the XM until the weekend but curiosity got the best of me and I subscribed this morning. How cool! More about it this weekend when I get a real opportunity to listen. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2408 Registered: Mar-05 | > However I think everyone's point is that there is not much if any difference between a $600 ascends and a $3000 Bose. Ed will tell you it's even superior. Lordy, that's insulting to the Ascends! Even the $100/pair Athenas would crush the Boses into fine powder. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2409 Registered: Mar-05 | Art, you may never listen to FM ever again...well unless there are some really great FM stations in Oregon. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 569 Registered: May-05 | Stof, Gotta agree with Eddie on the Ascends v. Bose. My friends still refuse to come over and listen to my system vs. their $5,000 Bose set-up. BUT, their 16 year old son was over on Sunday and I set up LOR II, battle scene, and he was absolutely amazed, stating "Gee, that sounds a lot better than ours, what is it?" NO CONTEST!!!! Of course, I'm running a real sub and they're running the Bose whatever that thing is. Passive/active don't do much thingamajiggie. |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 348 Registered: Apr-05 | I know that of course. I was just trying to rile up our friend here and, of course, he was on cue. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2415 Registered: Mar-05 | figured as much, heh... |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2416 Registered: Mar-05 | > My friends still refuse to come over and listen to my system vs. their $5,000 Bose set-up hmmmm, reminds me of some folks who refuse a home demo of the xr55... :- ) |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 570 Registered: May-05 | OKIE DOKIE, guilty as charged? LOL But, do you have any idea how long it's taken me to get this system put together and I still haven't used a sound meter to balance all the speakers AND now you want me to start over. Heck, I'd be 90 before I ever got everything put back together . . . (Further whining was shut down to protect the innocent.) |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2421 Registered: Mar-05 | full disclosure: my SPL meter's only about 2 months old. |
|
Silver Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 349 Registered: Apr-05 | hmmmm, reminds me of some folks who refuse a home demo of the xr55... :- ) Yep Eddie got you all there!! |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 572 Registered: May-05 | Hey, at least you bought one. I'm still hangin' out with my ears, and you know how well they work, right? (High level hearing loss bilaterally.) I need the thing just to tell me if the speakers are actually working. LOL |
|
Silver Member Username: Stu_pittNYC, NY Post Number: 622 Registered: May-05 | Ed - I think you're a good guy, and this isn't a personal attack so please don't take this the wrong way - Their are other receivers out there. I'm sure the Panny sounds very good for the money, maybe even double the money. Their's no doubt that you love it. But it seems like every time the word receiver is mentioned, you're the first one there and relentless about the Panny. Even if someone is asking about a 2 channel receiver, you're pushing the Panny. This thread got turned into Art's Yamaha vs. Edster's Panasonic for a little while. I don't know if you realise this or not. Please don't take this as a shot at you. I'm really not trying to call you out here. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2427 Registered: Mar-05 | I appreciate your thoughts, Stu. I'll refer you to my Monday October 03 - 10:09am post as to my motivations therein. I understand that the sheer repetitiveness must get tiring for old regulars around here but when newbies come on and they obviously are not aware of this OPTION (and yes it's by no means the ONLY option) I simply feel that it's my humanitarian duty to concisely inform them for the reasons in the aforementioned old post. I think what I'll do from now on is paste a little all-caps header on it saying "CAUTION, ED'S XR55 BLURB FOLLOWS" so regulars like you will know to just scroll down past it. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1877 Registered: Feb-05 | XM channel 70 in the morning with a cup of Seattle's Best. Great way to start a day! |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2430 Registered: Mar-05 | oh and btw Art if you have some computer speakers you can get XM streamed online for free as part of your subscription...actually sounds much better than the Internet radio stations I used to listen to using WinAmp. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1879 Registered: Feb-05 | Already done! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1890 Registered: Feb-05 | XM has some great channels but some definitely sound better than others. The "Real Jazz" channel sounds very good thankfully but others are mediocre at best. All-in-all I'd say I'm glad I have it as it provides me more opportunities to hear new or different music. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2479 Registered: Mar-05 | It's kind a like when I had cable, I only listen to maybe 5 out of the 100+ channels on a regular basis: Real Jazz (60% of the time) Luna (latin jazz) XM Classical BBC local traffic/weather |
|
Bronze Member Username: AlphabetCape TownSouth Africa Post Number: 40 Registered: Feb-05 | I have followed this thread with interest for a while now. I had the previous iteration of Art new toy, the Yamaha RX-V650 and recently listened to a Panasonix XR50 in a store as well. My experience with the Yamaha echoes what the reviewer from Audio Review says about the Yammie sounding underpowered as that was exactly how I felt as well. My main reason for buying the 650 at that time was that I had the 450 and also felt that it was underpowered. I understand Art going Ape about acquisition(Boys and their toys!), but I am sure that if the Yamaha was the only amplifying component in his setup, he would have grown tired of it very quickly. Having it connected to a power amp off course makes a big difference. The Yammie is good in movie mode, but in music mode I considered it very mediocre. A benchmark test on Sound and Vision also confirms Now the Panny. I have not spent a long time listening to it, but I have to admit that for the price it is impressive. If only they could make it look less cheap! |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2489 Registered: Mar-05 | Abe, when you get a chance to spend more time with your Panny, please post your thoughts on the "what 228 bucks will getcha" thread. I'd recommend buying the xr55 from Circuit City with their no-hassle return policy, my sense is most stores have it setup very badly and also after a few days of listening only to it at home, when you do switch back to your analog gear that's when the differences will really hit you. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1891 Registered: Feb-05 | Anytime I've recommended the Yamaha to someone I believe I have stated that you will need efficient speakers. Abe I don't believe that I've gone "ape" over it. In fact I've been quite frank about it's shortcoming's. On a number of occassions I've stated that the NAD sounds better, if it weren't for the hum I'd buy a Polk XM tuner and be done with it. However I am very impressed with the neutrality of the sound that I am getting from the Yamaha. It certainly sounds better than the Marantz SR5400 that I have. I also quoted the S&V bench test in another thread where someone was comparing the similarly priced HK. The Yamaha benched out at about 70 watts and the HK at about 60. Regardless of what either company claimed the end result was that the Yamaha was still more powerful. I listened to both of them and they appeared to have about the same power running the same speakers. Both powered efficient speakers to volumes far above my average listening level without any outward signs of strain. Neither of them did well with NHT speakers which are notoriously power hungry. I owned NHT's at one time and couldn't afford to feed them. I would also add that I would not own the Yamaha alone for music (without my power and pre amps), then again I wouldn't own any AVR for music. It's just a source component in my overall system. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1893 Registered: Feb-05 | BTW it's good to hear from you Abe. Your contributions are always welcome. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1895 Registered: Feb-05 | Well the NAD dealer is back from vacation and she graciously agreed to take the T763 back in trade for whatever product they carry. They have AVR's by Arcam, Cambridge, and Integra...CD players by Rega, Simaudio, Naim...turtables by Rega and Nottingham...amps, speakers...well you get the picture. It's a shopping day in Portland tomorrow. Yee haw! |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2497 Registered: Mar-05 | Jesus Christ Art, you must've already spent a hell of a lot of money with your NAD already, 'cause that sure is one sweet offer! So does this mean your Yammie's gonna go back? Otherwise you'd have THREE receivers at home, on top of the 2-channel separates! |
|
Silver Member Username: SmittyCanada Post Number: 248 Registered: Dec-03 | Hey Art, you mentioned earlier that they no longer carry the older Cambridge AVR model (540R) --- do they actually have the new 640R available now? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1899 Registered: Feb-05 | She told me that she expects the new one anytime. She doesn't have any other Cambridge AVR's in stock but it's a brand name who's products she carries. At this point I don't have any interest anyway. I really want to audition turntables and CD players. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1900 Registered: Feb-05 | Edster, If I were to chose another AVR the Yammie might go back or I might just keep it as an FM/XM/AM tuner (or I might sell the SR5400). The most likely scenario is that I will get a turntable or a new high end CD player and keep the Yammie. Like you Eddie I'm pretty satisfied with my AVR. With the Hafler on the fronts the Yammie has plenty of juice to drive the center and rears. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1905 Registered: Feb-05 | Back from Portland with a new toy. Teri at Stereotypes was gracious and took back the NAD T763 in trade for exactly what I paid. Heard some incredible gear. Listened to the Prima Luna Prologue driving a pair of Naim Arriva speakers with the $1700 Arcam CD player. Very nice setup. I decided to trade for a better CD player and the competition was between the Arcam CD73 and the Audio Refinement Complete. Both sounded fabulous. I took several musical selections, 2 pairs of my custom interconnects, and I asked that my pre amp (NAD C162) be used as they sell it. We used 2 different power amps, the NAD C272 and the Audio Refinement Complete. Teri new that my Hafler was better than either but her next amp up trumped my Hafler. The Arcam was really more of the same as my NAD C542. Very similar presentation but more detail better overall imaging. Good rhythm and pacing with tight refined bass. The high end could get a bit dry and sibilant but not usually. The Audio Refinement is an altogether different beast leaning way over to the warm side. This CD player made the Naim Arriva's sound similar to what I heard a few moments earlier with the Prima Luna tube amp. The Audio Refinement has less detail but instead relies on it's natural presentation of timbre and scale. The piano is less detailed than on the Arcam but has more appropriate scale. It sounds like an instrument capable of very low notes which all too often isn't the case with CD players. Neither player is perfect which was made all too clear as I was standing in the presence of cd players by Naim and Simaudio. Teri assures me that she knows where to get a mod (and usually hates mods) that will make the AR sound better than any player she sells minus the high end 3k Naim. This should be in the CD player section but it belongs here as well as this is all part of the ongoing NAD T763 saga. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2504 Registered: Mar-05 | Interesting coincidence, the ARC was the first high-end CDP that I ever heard! |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 577 Registered: May-05 | OK Art, I know I'm slow but I assume you went with the AR and a mod. So, is there anything left to play with or are you done? I know nothing about the pricing on these two high end players. But, I would be interested in your thoughts, or anyone else's, on a CD player in the $500 range or so. I'm thinking about a used Denon 2910 to use in the 2 channel setup if I go that direction. Any thoughts anyone. As usual, sorry for deflecting your thread momentarily, Art. Thanks, Dave. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1921 Registered: Feb-05 | Hi Dave, No, I just bought the ARC without the mod. It's fabulous. The Denon DVD 2910 is a great DVD player and a pretty good hi res (SACD and DVD-A) player. It is however IMO a very poor cd player. I spent a couple of hours the other day comparing the Denon and my NAD C542 and the NAD just flat out performed it in every way that is important with music. I used classical, jazz and rock music. There wasn't any music that the NAD didn't sound better with. There are several very good CD players in the $500-700 range. The Rotel RCD 1072, NAD C542, Music Hall CD25.2, and the Arcam CD73. The NAD is the least expensive of the 3. I would audition all of them and see which you like the most. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2514 Registered: Mar-05 | David, Onix sells what is basically a $600 Music Hall CD25 in the form of its xcd-88 which goes for a very attractive $300, b-stock is $250. Tawaun actually turned me onto this one. Would love to have you be the forum guinea pig on this one especially since you can AB it with your Denon! : ) http://www.av123.com/products_product.php?section=processors&product=25.1 |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1924 Registered: Feb-05 | The Music Hall would be my last pick of that bunch for a number of reasons not the least of which is reliability. The Arcam is clearly the best of the bunch. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2515 Registered: Mar-05 | Art, you may be right about the Arcam, because I've never heard it nor have I heard the Music Hall but as I remember, Tawaun already clarified that the reliability question on an earlier thread in the CDP section, said that it was a higher up model that had the glitches and that the cd25 was fine. Guess I just like a sweet deal when I see one, lol. BTW David, Onix being an Internet-direct company, you do get the usual 30 day trial period. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1927 Registered: Feb-05 | But he was not correct I was just at the Music Hall dealer yesterday. He was talking about the Maverick which also is having issues. The issues stand out a bit more when something costs $1500 than when they cost $600. In either case the Arcam blows it away, not even close. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2517 Registered: Mar-05 | So you're saying that the MH dealer told you that he's had reliability issues with both the Maverick *and* the CD25? Whoa! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1928 Registered: Feb-05 | Yes, that is Correct. Jeff (one the store owners)owns the Maverick and it has spent more time in repair than at his home. Don't get me wrong Eddie I like the Music Hall player it sounds pretty good "as is" and very good with a mod. But the Arcam is just a better player. I could have bought the Music Hall when I bought my NAD but chose not to. The Arcam has a couple of quirks as well. It doesn't always read cd's well the first time but gets it right the second time. It's also just a bit dry in vocal area. Very accurate but a bit clinical. We're talking about a price range where there are going to be compromises. I was pleased that my ARC actually sounds better at home than it did in the store. Anyway the original point was that any of these cd players will run circles around the Denon for redbook playback. I was shocked the other day when I was comparing the Denon to the NAD at just how bad the Denon really is for CD's. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 585 Registered: May-05 | Ed and Art, Can we ever get together on one of these so I can try something without fearing that there's something else out there that's better for another $50 or so? LOL Geez, this stinkin' hobby is going to drive me nuts, actually I'm already there I'm afraid. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2521 Registered: Mar-05 | Art, I'll take your word for it on the Arcam's superiority, in part because there is no way in hell I would ever even consider spending that much on a CDP, and listening to one might just change my mind so better to steer very clear of it...so I will just have to live vicariously through your high-end indulgences, Art...lol |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 591 Registered: May-05 | Ed, Ed and Art, "Here Davey try the Life cereal (xcd-88), you'll like it." Then to, "Art, I'll take your word for it on the Arcam's superiority." Yeah Ed, that's helpful in whether I act as the guinea pig on a $300 CDP. LOL OK, I'm asking for Jan's advice as a tie breaker and no fair throwing in a $1000 CDP that no one has talked about yet, Jan. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2534 Registered: Mar-05 | LOL! note however, that the Onix is easily refundable, the Arcam probably will not be. Hell why not take the Onix into your dealer and AB it against the Arcam? That'd be interesting. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 592 Registered: May-05 | Ed, That's true. Tell ya what. As soon as I am certain that I'm going with a separate 2 channel set-up, at which point I'll need a dedicated CDP, I'll consider the xcd-88. As for an A/B against the Arcam, you forget that I live in the audio desert. Here, it Huppin's page with CD players. NOTE, no Arcam, no Rotel, no NAD, no higher-end universals from Denon. So, from the attached list, are there any reasonable options? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2536 Registered: Mar-05 | Maybe the Denon and HK. The HK can be had for around $100 from Harman Audio on eBay, btw. But I doubt if either of those would be any improvement over your current Denon. If you want a really low cost and surprisingly excellent CDP, look at the Marantz 4300, $142 shipped from accessories4less.com In store, I actually preferred it to the NAD c542 by a narrow margin. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1931 Registered: Feb-05 | I own them both and can tell you without reservation that the NAD is a FAR better player than the Marantz. Which one you prefer is obviously a matter of choice. The Marantz has the benefit of being inexpensive and possessing a well balanced sound. From your list there aren't any good options. If you really can't venture out and hear other gear perhaps the Onix is better than the other (Marantz) options. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1966 Registered: Feb-05 | Used the YPAO feature on my RX-V657 last night to calibrate the the HT. WOW, it works very well. The system sounded very well balanced, I was impressed. The XM continues to delight. Great byproducts from buying this receiver. 1) Traded NAD T763 for ARC cd player (see cd player section). 2) As of today consigned my old C542 cd player to buy Project Debut 3 turntable (report forthcoming). |
|
Rantz Unregistered guest | I agree with Edster the Marantz CC4300 is great value for the money - surprisingly good! Art, if NAD C542 is FAR better than the Marantz and you have tossed yours in favour of the ARC then the ARC must really be something out of this world, yet yours is the first I've heard about it. I wish there was a dealer here, I'd sure like to hear it. Not doubting your opinion, but that's all we audio nuts have - opinions. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1968 Registered: Feb-05 | I'm hip! OMG did that ever date me. Yep, the ARC sounds bigger, fuller and more analog. I'm lovin' it. I still have the Marantz CC4300 for my second system. Getting rid of the NAD because I can net enough for the entry level Pro-Ject table and why waste a C542 on a Marantz SR5400. |
|
Unregistered guest | Opinions? Will agree with Rantz. Expensive vs. cheap CD players are discussed here, starting with post #6: http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=7673 and: http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=1778 and: http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=5793 How resolute/or expensive does one's system have to be? What does one hear/want to hear? Those guys discuss their experiences. Can't do Sim Audio or Wadia so why tempt myself. The Arcam I did test in my system vs. my inexpensive Yamaha was an ear shattering sounded about the same to me. Just my opinion. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1979 Registered: Feb-05 | I'm happy that your inexpensive Yamaha suits you. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2605 Registered: Mar-05 | > The Arcam I did test in my system vs. my inexpensive Yamaha was an ear shattering sounded about the same to me. Just my opinion. Aha! I love it when someone's experience trumps the conventional audio wisdom. HOWEVER to be fair, this might be influenced by your system, especially the speakers and also the room accoustics. I was far more impressed by the Marantz at home than I was in the shop, and I think it mostly had to do with their speakers. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1982 Registered: Feb-05 | "Aha! I love it when someone's experience trumps the conventional audio wisdom. HOWEVER to be fair, this might be influenced by your system, especially the speakers and also the room accoustics." Or bad taste, how do we know? There is no doubt in my mind that the Yamaha is inferior in every way to the others. I had the displeasure of listening to the Yammie players at the shop where I bought my receiver. "my inexpensive Yamaha was an ear shattering sounded about the same to me" And what does that mean? |
|
Gvenk Unregistered guest | No experience without a double-blind test means anything. Have seen a fair number of beer and wine "connoiseurs" humbled that way. Not to say that there aren't large differences in SQ of components, just that reported experiences are subjective and the subjective influence of brand and price are well-known, flowery adjectives not withstanding. |
|
Bronze Member Username: BumblebeePost Number: 35 Registered: Jul-05 | Art, How is the Yammie inferior? What's your criteria? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1983 Registered: Feb-05 | Gvenk, as I said in the CD player section, I won't engage in this debate about who can hear what, as I wouldn't convince you and you won't convince me. Pointless. I know what I hear and you know what you don't. So be it. |
|
Gvenk Unregistered guest | That post wasn't for you Art let alone to get you to debate. It was in response to Ed's comment for any one who cares to read. Despite the thread title, it isn't ALL about you :-) Now a comment for you even if you don't want to respond for your comment on not hearing: Not all people who insist on double-blind test are suggesting you don't hear a difference, a tone-deaf squirrel could possibly distinguish between two pieces of equipment at different price-points, it has to do with whether one's expressed preferences based on the perceived difference are reliable enough without a double blind-test. It is a common misconception amongst the "golden ears" that others don't hear the differences they do. Hearing a beer snob describe the subtle hints of gobbledy-gook and how he prefers the smooth texture of Chimay over the Coors Light while drinking the latter blindly is all it takes one to convince anybody of the fallibility of golden ears/tongues/etc. All of them (blind or not) can point out that the two beers taste different. But I am not trying to convince you, just placing your preferences in context of the fallibility of human beings for the benefit of others. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1984 Registered: Feb-05 | Gvenk, well said and I understand. "Golden ears" are just well trained ears. Here are some excerpts from the CD player forum, a discussion between Eddie and I on the subject (Edster is quoted); It's not a Stereophile review it is a series of editorials. "More troublesome (at least to me) is the implication that you should just stick to whatever makes you FEEL good rather than what demonstrably IS good" What is demonstrably, and to whom? I can easily tell the difference in cables without knowing to what I'm listening and when they have been changed. I don't know the brand right away but I know that I am hearing something very different. I just demonstrated that the other day at Stereotypes. Yet many, and at least you at one time you stated that that is not possible. I don't have "golden ears" but I do have well trained ears. Reality based testing IMO is for folks who don't have confidence in their listening skills, I don't suffer that. We were using the cables that I always use at home which were custom made by Jim Ott at NWAL, also Analysis Plus, Tara Labs, and Kimber. Like I said I never knew which brand I was listening to (except Jim's which I listen to all of the time) but I always knew when there was a change and to which piece of gear, even though I could not see which one (or more)she was changing. I was also consistent which ones I liked best with which equipment. As far as the cable debates I don't engage in them, except only to say once that I can hear the differences. I could never convince someone who doesn't hear the differences or who is convinced by science that the differences don't exist that they really do, so why bother. Sounds like we agree but are saying it differently. |
|
New member Username: PatrickbatemanMA Post Number: 2 Registered: Oct-05 | Art, Have you compared the Yamaha vs the Marantz strictly for 2 channel music? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1987 Registered: Feb-05 | The receivers or the CD players? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2608 Registered: Mar-05 | Gvenk, are you saying that in a blind test some beer connosieurs mistook Coors Light for Chimay??? This I would love to see/read. Links? |
|
New member Username: PatrickbatemanMA Post Number: 3 Registered: Oct-05 | "The receivers or the CD players?" The receivers. It seems that you prefer the Yamaha used as a pre., I was wondering if you compared them for 2 channel |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1994 Registered: Feb-05 | Yes, I own the Marantz SR5400 and the Yamaha RX-V657. It really depends on what you like which one you will prefer. I like the Yamaha's relative neutrality compared to the overly warm sound of the Marantz. Remember these are inexpensive AVR's and as such neither of them are anywhere near the sound of a good integrated or seperates. But to answer your question the Yamaha has a more neutral and so to me a more pleasant sound for music. If you use the Yammie without an external power amp remember to mate it with efficient speakers (89db and up) because the power supply ain't all that. |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics