|
New member Username: BusybornPost Number: 9 Registered: Aug-04 | i recently just put together my first system, and before i purchased i did alot of research and reading the boards. one set-up i listened to that i really liked was an Integra 6.5 Receiver with Monitor Audio S8 speakers. i really liked the sound of this setup, out of curiousity, would the Integra with Monitor Audio be condsiderd bright, warm, or neutral. thanks |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4113 Registered: Mar-05 | That sounds like a fairly neutral setup though I'm not a big fan of MA speakers. In any case, don't worry about adjectives, just buy what you like and make sure they have a decent return policy if you're not sure. Sometimes people get sick of their system after spending a few days or weeks with it, as opposed to a few hours in a showroom. This is particularly true of "bright" setups. |
|
New member Username: BusybornPost Number: 10 Registered: Aug-04 | Thanks for the quick response Edster, i actually purchased a different set-up. i went with the Rotel 1056 and MA RS-6. My decision was based on reading reviews instead of just trusting my ear. i hear the terms bright,etc. tossed around alot, so i was just curious. i am happy with my set-up, but when i make my next purchase, i am going to put more faith in my ears. thanks |
|
Bronze Member Username: Floyd_1977Plainfield, IL USA Post Number: 21 Registered: May-06 | I typically don't associate "bright" or "warm" with electronics, but rather with speakers. I am not aware of any competently made solid state receivers that do not have a flat frequency response from 20 Hz to 2 kHz. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1337 Registered: May-05 | Define "competently made." What's "competently made" to one may be garbage to another, and way too expensive to yet another. My NAD 320BEE is probably viewed by some as a cheap POS, to others as a good start, and to others as high-end. To each his/her own. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2787 Registered: Dec-04 | Your BEE is warm and family friendly, Stu, like an episode of 'Bernie Mack'. I thought you had the 720BEE? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Floyd_1977Plainfield, IL USA Post Number: 22 Registered: May-06 | For example, "competently made" receivers can include Sony (ES or not) and Pioneer (Elite or not), which are regularly bashed on this forum. There's no doubt there are cheap receivers, high-end receivers, etc., and there are merits to buying more expensive receivers. These include build quality, bragging rights, future-proofing, power, aesthetics, features, etc. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Floyd_1977Plainfield, IL USA Post Number: 23 Registered: May-06 | By the way, "competently made" has nothing to do with price. Someone may call my Pioneer "garbage", but that doesn't mean it's true, and it doesn't mean that he could distinguish my receiver from his own in a listening test. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2804 Registered: Dec-04 | Nathan, I think 'competently made' is a bit of a misnomer. Competent design is more accurate. I had a competently made Lada car, but it was designed with grade 2 bolts, which failed. Good designs are often shot down by bean counters and others, who cannot see the merit in investment. Very simply put, the numbers offa the test bench will prove the combination to be contender or pretender. Sure 20 to 20 is standard, but there are so many other considerations. Both the Integra and the Elite deliver good power, but neither deliver into all cahannels as advertised. Now, does moving 'upscale' to a unit that can deliver what it advertises make 'bragging rights' or good judgement? Or pride of ownership? Not exactly questions for the ages, but, in fact a purchase of a product like a receiver may reflect personal values and expectations. Good enough? You decide. How does it sound? You decide. Best value? You decide. Did you just buy something which obviously cannot provide the goods as claimed? As for features, so many bells and whistles can become a 'dog and pony show' after a while. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Floyd_1977Plainfield, IL USA Post Number: 25 Registered: May-06 | Nuck, I agree that power ratings are often misrepresented. "20 to 20" is assuming that the receiver is being operating within its limits, and it's those limits that are part of what separates an upscale unit from an entry level unit. An underpowered receiver may not perform as well as a more adequately powered receiver when all channels are being driven at a high volume, but if they are both being operated within their limits, I doubt I could hear a difference. Believe me, I'm not saying "all amps/receivers are the same," and I understand the value of headroom, but I try not to focus too much on power ratings. Keep in mind that 200 wpc will only give you 3 dB more output (per channel) than 100 wpc. When I watch movies, I'm usually listening at 20-30 dB below reference level. If I watch at 10 dB below reference, then I'm just showing off for company, and even then, it's for a short time (I value my hearing). On the other hand, someone who needs to drive a 7.1 system at reference level will have different requirements than me. Depending on their source material, they may also need a hearing aid if they sustain those volume levels. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 2812 Registered: Dec-04 | Sure, Nathan, pure volume is cheap, but in pure HT, you have to look at recovery rates for the power, and that is where great reserves really shine. A big boom is fun, but the receiver has to recover that and deliver another big boom next. A lesser powered, or not-to-specs powered receiver fails here. If you listened to a to-spec powered receiver(or amp), you would hear Indiana Jones saying 'not without my hat!' instead of waiting for the power to recover. Max numbers do not tell the tale fully, but are a good indicator of a poor power supply. A good power supply is what we pay for. The rest is just proper usefulness, followed by a dog and pony show. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1543 Registered: Feb-04 | Nuck, I see where Nathan is coming from on this issue. The receiver won't need to recover from a big boom to deliver the next one because (1) the big boom is often delivered by the powered sub and (2) he enjoys movies at -20 to -30dB on the volume dial. That's 1/100 to 1/1000 of the full rated power, well below a single watt per channel. What receiver can't handle that? I get more joy out of a quiet receiver (low noise floor and hiss from the speakers in quiet passages) than from a powerful one (which I rarely use). |
|
Gold Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 1057 Registered: Apr-05 | Nathan There are a lot of reasons why Sony gets bashed regularly on this site and I suppose your narrowed definition of what a "competently made" receiver is, should not be one of the reasons. However as a general statement I would say that Sony over the past decade has become much more interested in its media content holdings (movies, songs etc.) to the detriment of both its innovation and production of electronics. Case in point is a recent article from PCWorld posted here on ecoustics. https://www.pcworld.com/article/125706/article.html The last paragraph in that article captures my sentiment: "Worst Company of the Year We get the feeling that Sony doesn't trust people. Many of its ills over the past year involve copy protection: First was the fiasco with its music CDs, which installed rootkits on PCs to hide digital rights management spyware, thereby exposing the computers to viruses. Then came delays in the delivery of Blu-ray drives due to difficulties implementing a second copy protection scheme. And as a result of the Blu-ray problems, Sony had to push back its PlayStation 3 console to November. All this from the company that virtually pioneered copying with the Betamax." in my estimate this problem extends to all of their electronics. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Floyd_1977Plainfield, IL USA Post Number: 26 Registered: May-06 | Stof, While those are valid gripes that people have with Sony (and I am by no means a Sony defender), I was speaking specifically about audio receivers. I'm not sure what digital rights management, Blu-ray and PS3 have to do with the discussion. Your statement that "this problem extends to all of their electronics" requires a leap of faith. I wasn't commenting on the frequent bashing of the Sony brand in general (I'm well aware of the reasons for that), but rather of their receivers specifically. Sorry if that was not clear. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Floyd_1977Plainfield, IL USA Post Number: 27 Registered: May-06 | Peter, When I say -20 to -30, I mean 20 to 30 dB below reference level, not 20 to 30 dB below the full power of the receiver. Your points are still valid though. If your bass management is set correctly, your subwoofer will be handling all the "big booms," whether they were intended for the 5 main channels or the LFE channel. |
|
Gold Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 1058 Registered: Apr-05 | Nathan I know that some people bash Sony on their SQ on this forum, I'm not one of them. To me SQ is in the ears of the beholder and perhaps involves psychological and emotional attachement to their prefered music that is steeped early in their development. FYI I have been a big fan of sony products going back to the 70's. The company showed innovation and for most people in the world provided an excellent quality, innovative entry into the electronics considered luxury at that point. However my gripe with Sony now, and DRM and issues with Blue Ray are only symptoms of this problem, is that their attention on their content and protection has gone so far as to take focus away from innovation and affected the quality of the products they supply. Whereas at one time their electronics line ruled the company, every product they make now has to be vetted and get the blessing of their media conglamorate. This extends to DVD/CD players that for long time did not play MP3's and burned CD's. The DRM issue is just the one that got a lot of attention. Sorry to have taken this thread to a different course. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Floyd_1977Plainfield, IL USA Post Number: 28 Registered: May-06 | No problem, Stof. I appreciate the civil discussion. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1549 Registered: Feb-04 | Nathan, Sorry, you did say reference level. My, that's a low listenning level! Reference works out to -17dB on my dial, and I usually watch movies at 10 to 15 dB below that. I watch regular TV shows much lower of course. Stof, I also have a beef with Sony concerning DRM. It started a few years ago when I bought my wife a Sony MP3 player. It turns out that it rips CDs to a proprietary encoded format and doesn't le let "check-out" tracks more than 3 times. To make room to something else, you have to check a track back in. Imagine the surprise on my wife's face when I explained that she shouldn't simply delete a track from the player while on vacation, and had to wait to get back home to "check it back into the Sony DRM". |