What are the benefits of a receiver with more watts?
|
Bronze Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 88 Registered: Jan-09 | I currently have a new Harmon Kardon AVR 146 used in a 2.0 system. It produces 40 watts per channel in a 2.0 setup. I have Wharfedale 9.1's with a Nominal Impedance: 6 ohms and Sensitivity: 86dB and required Power Handling: 20 - 100 Watts. I am thinking of buying an Harmon Kardon HK 3490 which has a Continuous Average Power (FTC) Per Channel : 120 Watts per channel, 20Hz -- 20kHz @ <0.07% THD, both channels driven into 8 ohms 150 Watts per channel, 20Hz -- 20kHz @ <0.2% THD, both channels driven into 4 ohms I'm not sure how to calculate watts per channel for 6 ohms but I assume the watts per channel will between 120 and 150. My question is, what are the immediate benefits besides playing louder that the 3490 will give versus the 146? Will sound quality improve? If so, how and why? I can get the 3490 right now for $289 shipped and I'm sure I can sell the 146 for $125. I'm trying to decide if the additional cost of $150 is worth it from a sound quality perspective. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13500 Registered: May-04 | . "What are the benefits of a receiver with more watts?" More heat, even from solid state. "My question is, what are the immediate benefits besides playing louder that the 3490 will give versus the 146? Will sound quality improve? If so, how and why?" How many watts are you using now? If you aren't clipping the amplifier, you're not using forty watts. So what do you expect will happen with more watts you don't use? As the saying goes, Mordecai, "If the first watt isn't all that good, why would you want 200 more of them?" That isn't to say your receiver doesn't sound good. It means there is more to this than watts. My experience - which is not with the two receivers you have mentioned - is that within a decent line of products, you should hear very little difference and only minor improvements when moving up or down the line. IMO you would be better of spending your money to get out of a receiver. . |
|
Bronze Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 90 Registered: Jan-09 | Thanks Jan, I was told by another person on this site that it is not necessarily about power but the quality of power. I am assuming that the 3490 would have more power and quality power. I'm not sure I understand what is meant by quality power. I also really don't know what clipping sounds like. Can you please explain what that might sound like? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13502 Registered: May-04 | . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipping_(audio) Look at the waveform displayed on the oscilloscope in this article. It shows the top and bottom of the wavefrom clipped off. This is "clipping" and it results in large amounts of distortion. You hear it as distortion, a sharp edge to the music that quickly becomes an irritating constant if you don't turn down the volume. If you listen to a lot of music that relies on distortion from the performers' amplifiers, then you can know when clipping is setting in by listening to when the music stops getting louder. At some point on the volume control the music no longer gets equally as loud for a further rotation of the dial. The more you turn up the volume control the more compressed the music becomes. At that point the amplifier is severly clippping the signal and you need to turn down the volume or risk damaging your equipment. If you listen as relatively moderate levels, then you might not ever hear clipping. If that's the case, don't go looking for trouble. The HK line is good quality power and you are unlikely to find much improvement by simply buying a more powerful receiver. If you really need more volume for the music you prefer, buy a more efficient speaker instead of more power. I suspect anyone who carries HK has a return policy. If you want to make a comparison, make certain you can return an opened box and try the higher powered receiver for yourself. . |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 3606 Registered: Sep-04 | Also, bear in mind that power is merely one aspect of what combines to give you a result (whatever it may be). For example, a receiver contains two main sections - a preamplifier stage and a power amplifier stage. The preamplifier stage is that which aligns your sources, allows you to control gain (volume) and generally tries to provide a clean signal to the power amp section. The power amp section attempts to drive that signal through the load (speakers). Wharfedale Diamond 9.1s are an easy load by most measures. They consistently stay above 5 ohms which gives the amplifier a nice steady load to deal with. They're not particularly sensitive at 86 db, but it's only just 1db shy of the average so they won't go as loud with low power, but that's all. I've happily driven 9.1s with all kinds of amplifiers from little Onkyo all-in-one systems through the NAD 325BEE to some rather tasty integrateds such as the Arcam A65+ and Naim Nait5i. None of these would have come close to 100 watts per channel at 8 ohms, a couple might get to 75W at 4 ohms. However, the difference in preamp stage, for which there are usually little or no numbers, makes a great deal of difference in the quality of the result. And all this signal has to come from somewhere. The amp doesn't create music out of the blue. If the CD player isn't up to much then there's simply no way that the signal coming from it is going to be better through a better amplifier. Sure, the result may be better because a better amplifier allows more of the signal through, but it's not going to make a silk purse of a sow's ear. Don't forget it's possible to spend as much on CD players as amplifiers. ideally you want a balanced system, but if it needs to be unbalanced you will get a better musical result by spending a touch more on the source material. Note: MP3s and 256k iTunes downloads aren't really very good. If you're using this as a source (say, from a computer or MP3 player), then the results you achieve, irrespective of amplifier will be limited. |
|
Bronze Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 91 Registered: Jan-09 | Thanks for the feedback. I don't hear any clipping but I'm listening near field so I've never turned it up loud enough I guess. Yes, I am using Itunes but all the files are lossless and is sent to the receiver via digital coax so the receiver DAC is doing the conversion. I think it sounds quite good. However, I'm sure if I listened to a highend system I would think my setup sounded terrible. Ignorance is bliss the say. |
|
Bronze Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 92 Registered: Jan-09 | One other thing, the receiver does not allow me to set the ohms to 6 which the spec on the 9.1's. Does this hurt the speakers in anyway? Or, does it mean they are not driven effeciently? |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12075 Registered: Dec-04 | The receiver does not care, Mord, nor do the speakers. It matters not. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12076 Registered: Dec-04 | I would look into a reasonable outboard dAC for music, IMO. |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 2429 Registered: Feb-07 | I'm not as technically knowledgeable as the other guys that posted here Mordecai, but I can tell you 40 watts is probably more than enough for a music system. One of my systems is driven by a 40 watt Rotel integrated and it goes to absolutely ridiculous volumes. To put this in perspective, my McIntosh integrated "only" is rated up to 100 watts. This is relatively small compared to some of the other solid state amplifiers out there. Do I need more watts? No way! Most listening sessions at comfortable volume levels, the pretty blue McIntosh meters never peak beyond 7 watts. If I get the meters above 10 watts my wife closes the door to the basement where my listening room is, and turns the TV up. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 3617 Registered: Sep-04 | oops dbl post |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 3618 Registered: Sep-04 | Mordecai, I'm glad to see it's lossless. If it was less than that I'd have a problem. Lossless should give reasonable results. The problem here is one doesn't know what the quality of the rip is (rips can be better or worse depending on the ripping software, the optical drive you used and the qiuality of the computer's power supply which drives the whole thing). Some people say that the difference between rips can be big and others say there can be no differences. My experience is that there are differences, but that lossless is halfway there! The digital coax connection is also good news since, in 90% of cases, I have found that coax sounds better than optical. I've done a bit of research on the 146 and it seems this is a fairly entry level unit. Upgradng to a better unit should result in better fidelity thanks hopefully to better processing and componentry. That said, another way to do this for stereo music is to invest in a better sound card and do the conversion in the computer, taking an analogue signal to the receiver. I've heard that the more computer literate spend many hundreds on their sound cards for this purpose but I don't know enough about this to recommend one to you (sorry). Frank. |
|
Bronze Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 93 Registered: Jan-09 | Thanks Frank. I've got an Onkyo 705 for HT. I'm going to hook them up to the 705 which produces 100 per watts per channel in 2.0 setup to see if I can tell any difference. I'm also going to a do a little comparison between the 9.1's, Beta 20's and Acculine A2's. The A2's planar magnet tweeter has a very life like quality and has excellent mid base but not much low end. It should be interesting. I'm also considering the EVO2 8's. I just realized you are in the UK so I figure you are familiar with Whardedale. Have you heard the EVO's and Diamonds side by side? |
|
New member Username: FreetPost Number: 2 Registered: Apr-09 | The power (watts) you need depends on what you are listening to. To put it in another light, the higher the frequency output, the less power required to produce the sound at x level. For example, if you are listening to a whistle, very little power is needed for you to hear it loudly. If you are listening to a bass drum, a great deal of power is required to produce that sound at the same decibel level. Now, to answer you question. For a movie in surround sound, at normal listening levels in an average living room, 40 watts is more than enough. The problem is, if you decide to crank up the volume and the action in the movie gets hot, then your lower frequencies will suffer. The reason to have a higher wattage amp is to allow for those times when average is not quite enough. If the wife is visiting her sister and you want to listen to "Dark Side of the Moon" then most likely you will wish you had purchased the higher wattage unit. Clear as mud, hey? |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12106 Registered: Dec-04 | Wattage numbers dont mean much, especially in receivers. The ability of the power supply to seliver current at a sustained level matters, as does the recovery rate of the supply after rapid high demands in quick succession. The value to look for here is slew rate, which indicates recovery time. Wattage ratings are a joke. Think of it as.."horsepower sells cars, torque wins races" |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 2466 Registered: Feb-07 | Good analogy Nuck. |
|
Silver Member Username: SoundgameRichmond Hill Toronto, Ontario Canada Post Number: 749 Registered: Jun-08 | I just learned something myself. I have a Bryston and had no idea what slew rate want. Now I know. Thanks Nuck. That said, torque wins the short to medium race but on the salt plains you need horsepower to break the speed record. |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 2467 Registered: Feb-07 | I didn't know what slew rate was either George. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12117 Registered: Dec-04 | Be careful with it boys..slew rate has been bastardized almost as much as damping factor used to be a useful caption. The 'new' math and a lack of standardization leave things pretty wide open, unless you are dealing with real builders. Bryston, Classe and other $$ stuff is reliable, receivers need not apply. Damping factor was based on a real value a zillion years ago as well, but these values are moot as well, as far as receivers are concerned. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12118 Registered: Dec-04 | George, cars are not allowed side by side on the plains, thathppens on a 1/4 mile, and in the showrooms of years gone by. Always remember that HP= torque X RPM/5252 Or PLANK Mean effective pressure X length of stroke(in IN) X area of bore # of cyls X RPM Or an Olds 455 at 550 lbs/ft of torque will win. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Mike19Tallahassee, Fla USA Post Number: 22 Registered: Jan-09 | My experience has been that when brands such as NAD, Rotel, Harmon Kardon and Parasound list specs of 100w x 5 you will get at least 100w x 5 and probably more. When brands like Onkyo, Denon, Yamaha and Pioneer list specs of 100w x 5, you will get 100w x 1 or maybe x 2. God only knows what they put out into 5 channels, but it ain't 100w! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13519 Registered: May-04 | . "My experience has been that when brands such as NAD, Rotel, Harmon Kardon and Parasound list specs of 100w x 5 you will get at least 100w x 5 and probably more." While that is probably true, what you will get is 100 watts driving only a large load resistor (not a reactive load that would be similar to most real world loudspeakers) and using only a 1kHz sine wave (which bears as much resemblance to music as Nuck does to an Olds 455). The point here is "watts" are not all they're cracked up to be when it comes to reproducing music through a loudspeaker. If you are not clipping a smaller amplifier to achieve the desired volume level and the sound quality of that amplifier is satisfactory (it drives the speakers with competence), then buying more watts is not very likely to gain you much improvement simply because you have more watts - all things being equal in other respects, which they hardly ever can be. In many respects a small amplifier has the advantage of simplicity that you cannot find in high powered amplifiers and certainly not in high powered receivers loaded down with features and geegaws. The further point is mass market receivers have no business in high end systems. If that's what you can afford, then that's what you listen to but buying something other than a receiver is the first step to better sound quality. While a receiver that contains a more powerful amplifier might also include other components that result in better sound in certain areas, the best way to better sound is to not have a receiver. Stop wasting your money on receivers and get serious about a high quality music system if that is your ultimate goal. . |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3262 Registered: May-05 | There are exceptions to that rule however. Arcam, Naim, and B&K come to mind. McIntosh also makes/made an AV receiver. But you'd be paying a lot more than we're discussing. And for the same amount of money and a bit less, their respective 2 channel stuff sounds better. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12120 Registered: Dec-04 | Yup. Posters who 'want better sound' are asking what is a better receiver. A better unit is called an integrated 2 ch amplifier, with a minimum of extra noisy circuits. |
|
Bronze Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 96 Registered: Jan-09 | Nuck, I am open to suggestions for a 2 channel amplifier. I am using a computer with coax connection. That is the problem. I can't find a integrated 2 ch amplifier that has digital connections for the $300 I can get the HK3490. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 2436 Registered: Jun-07 | I agree with the guys so far, a receiver has no business in a dedicated 2.0 system. None what so ever. AVR's/Receivers should only be used for what they are built for, home theater. Nothing else. I have learned this the hard way myself Mordecai. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 2437 Registered: Jun-07 | Oh and screw two channel receivers as well, buy an integrated or separates. If you need radio (radio is for the car) buy a tuner. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12125 Registered: Dec-04 | We can all afford what we can, Mord, just offering opinions and so on as they come up my friend. |
|
Bronze Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 99 Registered: Jan-09 | Wow! You guys are really hard core with opinions. I guess I'll need to go slumming somewhere else cause I ain't spending the money for separates. I'm also not the audiophile you guys are and don't plan to become one. I don't listen to music enough to justify the expense. I also don't enjoy messing with CD's. So, I must compromise with equipment and you guys don't. So, that clearly separates those of us using a PC for music source. I am okay with the opinions but nobody has mentioned a single integrated with digital inputs and I have yet to find one that was reasonable. Thus, I'm considering a receiver (shame on me) because they at least have come into the 21st century with digital connections. Plus, the are affordable. And, you know what they say about opinions  |
|
Gold Member Username: Mike3Wylie, Tx USA Post Number: 1868 Registered: May-06 | No Mordecai we just care about the music and are most willing to help those who come here for our advice. Some folks only want to be told they are right in what they are doing others heed good advice. You invested in a good pair of speakers which you are not going to experience the value of with how you decided to proceed. Wish you well. One post short of Silver too. |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzAustralia Post Number: 2161 Registered: Nov-05 | Mordeci, since you asked if the suggested reciever would offer better sound quality than what you have, I guess posters here assumed better sound quality was of importance. Since it's not really high on your preferences then go with the reciever you are considering. More power may not necessarilly make much difference in SQ, but it will help your speakers perform better. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 2438 Registered: Jun-07 | If I were you Mordecai I would be looking for an integrated amp in the 300 dollar range bud. It can be done, and be done in a way that would benefit you more than that H/K 3490 or whatever its called. Cambridge Audio's 540 series, and entry level NAD, entry level Rotel. Those would be the three I, personally, would be looking at. All those brands have new models coming in, leaving blow out deals on last gen models. Or used perhaps. Looking at used/new NAD 325bee or 315bee's. New used Cambridge 540a/V1 models or used Rotel RA-1062. All could be had within your budget. I would take 50 watts of a Cambridge power any day over 150 watts of H/K. Move up the ladder, don't move sideways. Cheers Mordecai. |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 2470 Registered: Feb-07 | Right on Nick. My 40 watt Rotel integrated never fails to impress me. And I paid 250 bucks for it on Agon. Good deal. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 2439 Registered: Jun-07 | Perfect Example right there David. 250 bucks. Probably the easiest 250 you have ever spent too. Good sound, robust power. 250 bucks. That is wicked. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13521 Registered: May-04 | . I would guess you are not finding reasonably priced integrateds or pre amps employing digital inputs for one simple reason. The audio industry has encouraged anyone with a digital source other than a stand alone player to be considering an outboard DAC to use as the processor for your computer based source. Any such product would then provide you with the analog outputs required to interface with a more conventional audio product. An outboard anything generally provides the sort of flexibility that is at the heart of getting away from a receiver. You gain flexibility of budget, of sound quality and upgradability and you minimize obselescence and repeated purchases of the same product. How long have you had the receiver you now own? And you are already looking to upgrade to a more expensive unit just for the sake of a connection? Even for those of us who aren't a member of the constant upgrade wagon train flexibility is how we achieved our goals - one piece at a time. Everyone gets to choose their own priorities, Mordecai. If your's include a simple interface between lesser components sound wise, then I would suggest you consider just what it is you are buying with higher dollars. In this case it sounds as though it might be not much more than a connector to gain access to a built in DAC of unknown quality. Is it possible shifting your resources to include a DAC and then looking at a higher quality component might be the better move? Only you know how much you are willing to sacrifice on sound quality but possibly a trip to a well informed dealer might answer your new question more fully than we could your old when we didn't have all the information required from you about your desires. . |
|
Bronze Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 100 Registered: Jan-09 | I find all of this very confusing. I also want to separate facts from opinions. No offense but there is a tendancy for people to confuse the two. Everyone has made some good points. I did say that I am going sacrifice some sound quality because I don't want to sink a bunch of money into this. Again, I've never hear a really good 2.0 system like most of you have. So, ignorantly I don't know what I'm missing out on. I do know that the 9.1's sounded better with my Onkyo pushing more watts than the Harmon Kardon. I did consider getting a outboard DAC and a NAD or Cambride integrated amp. Yes, I can buy them as separates. Before I do that I would like to hear the two options side by side. I'm not sure I will be able to enough of a difference. Also, I've read were the more connections you have the more sound quality is degraded. So, I find a DAC to take the digital feed from the PC and then connect to an int amp am I not going to realize some sound degradation? I will then need to buy more expensive interconnects and it never ends this pursuit for sound quality. You guys are really invested in this stuff both equipment wise and knowledge wise. You all have your opinions on what sound good and such. I am considering upgrading my sound equipment because I intended to use the Beta 20's until I heard how great the Wharfedales were. I'm glad I got the 9.1's but I think I need a higher quality system to drive them. I found a few NAD's and Cambridge IA on Audiogon below $300 which is in line with the HK3490 except I will also need a DAC. I'm sure a decent DAC is going to cost $200 and up. I've not really looked around for a local shop to go a listen to this kind of equipment. I don't think there are that many in my area. |
|
Silver Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 101 Registered: Jan-09 | By the way, if all you guys detest receivers then why are you trolling the receiver section? Shouldn't you be in the integrated amp section? Receiver haters! |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 2442 Registered: Jun-07 | lol whats up Mordecai. Glad your still here man. More watts means nothing in most cases. Better watts always means better in most cases. When you went from your H/K to the Onkyo, perhaps you liked the Onkyo better than the H/K. Was it better because the Onkyo claims it pushes more watts? No. Is the 3490 going to benefit you because it has more watts? No. It may benefit you because it may have better watts though. Am I confusing you yet?lol |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 2443 Registered: Jun-07 | I would keep the 146 and save the pennies for a bit longer until you can do the right thing here. I know the 3490 is only going to put you down 150 because you will be selling the AVR, but it would still be 150 dollars wasted in my opinion. If you had to go down another 150 dollars than that, but would come out of it much happier with the sound and have something you could live with for a while, wouldn't that be a better investment? Put aside some money for a bit, take your time, listen to some stuff, and when your ready, nail the purchase buddy. Have fun. Enjoy the music. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3266 Registered: May-05 | Mordecai, We're just trying to help you out here. You asked us if getting an HK with more watts is going to improve the sound. Its seems like most of us don't think so. Most of us agree that dollar for dollar, an integrated amp will sound better, even if its rated at less power. There are very few integrated amps with built in DACs. I can't think of any affordable ones. Bryston, Naim, and Simaudio come to mind. Far beyond a few hundred bucks. More like a few thousand. A bunch of inexpensive integrateds have already been mentioned. NAD, Rotel, and Cambridge sound far better than HK anything to my ears. Here's an excellent price on an excellent intergated for the money IMO (New NAD 325BEE for $300) - http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/clt.pl?intatran&1223981822 As far as a tuner, FM radio is sounding worse everyday due to compression and a bunch of other stuff. If going the computer route, why not go with internet radio into a DAC? Speaking of which, there are some inexpensive DACs out there. Pro-Ject makes a USB DAC for $150. It only has a USB input, but it can get you started - http://www.musicdirect.com/product/84211 There are a bunch of other brands out there. I'm just throwing out examples. I haven't looked into DACs in this price range, so I have little information. |
|
Silver Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 104 Registered: Jan-09 | Nick, You make sense. I found this DAC that seems to get solid review. http://www.audio-magus.com/Super_Pro_DAC707SE_USB_p/dac707usb.htm I may give it a try then pickup a NAD356 or 326 on Audiogon. This would at least get me a little further down the line on minimal investment. If I like this then I can upgrade the DAC down the line. This DAC will allow me use Coax out of the PC into the DAC. Do I need to purchase high end interconnects? I know you can go wild with interconnects just like speaker cables. I realize again that when you are putting together a budget system you are going to make compromises. I would rather make these compromises with little risk as oppose to spending big dollars and not spending adequate listening which to me equates to a return on investment. I usually wade into things slowly but that does not mean you need to spend silly money to get good sound. I don't care about radio by the way. I didn't get an HT receiver for radio but because it was affordable and I was thinking I might watch more movies then listen to music. Well, I listen to music more than I watch movies on my computer. So clearly I purchased the wrong equipment based on that. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13528 Registered: May-04 | . Mordecai, can you tell me what it is you want from this thread? You asked about more power but than you said you really wanted a connector. You say you are willing to sacrifice sound quality but you ask what more power gets you. Why would you ask that if you weren't thinking it might sound better? Right now I get the impression you really just want to spend some money and don't know where to do it. Do you want us to talk you into buying a receiver or do you want us to talk you out of buying a receiver? We can do either but you need to tell us what it is you want and we'll go from there. ?"I've read were the more connections you have the more sound quality is degraded. So, I find a DAC to take the digital feed from the PC and then connect to an int amp am I not going to realize some sound degradation?" The fewer connections concept actually applies to the logic of buying seprates and not receivers. Fewer parts with higher quality rather than the multitude of features with litle money spent on sound quality so the receiver is put together with push on connectors and spring loaded clips and lots of wire where the separates are often hand wired and soldered. Certainly when you compare the number of connections in a receiver to those in a separate pre amp and amplifier the separates win on having fewer connections total. Separates win on parts quality. And on layout, a receiver's layout is hardly in the same league as separates. Power supplies are better in separates and designed to handle just the job of the one component. " I'm not sure I will be able to enough of a difference." But you say you could distinguish the differences between two receivers ... "I do know that the 9.1's sounded better with my Onkyo pushing more watts than the Harmon Kardon." You keep comingh up with reasons not to buy the better units. Just tell us what you want us to say and we'll convince you to buy the component you say you want to buy. It doesn't matter to us, we've made our decisions. Just make a choice and we'll go with that. If you want to spend more money just to gain a connector and get less than improved sound for your money, just say so. I'll tell you anything you want to hear, just tell me what it is you want to hear. OK? . |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 2445 Registered: Jun-07 | LOL Jan. Mordecai- Good start bud. Stu's recommendation of the 325bee is a damn good one. 300 new is sick. I think you can find blow out deals on Cambridge 540's right now for around the same too. Anyway, your last post made sense to me, and I dont mean that as an insult. I think your getting on the right track now. Cheers. |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 2478 Registered: Feb-07 | That's a good idea, Mord. The DAC should make a noticeable difference for you. Pair that with a half-decent integrated, and you're set. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13529 Registered: May-04 | . I just read that post. I shouldn't try to type just before I turn in for the night. |
|
Silver Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 105 Registered: Jan-09 | Jan, this was my original questions which you answered nicely with the very first post. "My question is, what are the immediate benefits besides playing louder that the 3490 will give versus the 146? Will sound quality improve? If so, how and why?" This was my attempt to see if there was any real value in moving to the HK 3490. You cleared that up early on. The rest has been an ongoing conversation with others. I don't want you or anyone else to convince me to buy anything. I simply requested information as part of the learning process. Your insight has been invaluable as well as others. I purposely posted in the receiver section because I had heard much of the comments following your post from others. I just wanted to see if this was more peoples opinion/preference or fact. Since nobody has made a good argument for buying a receiver and I can't demo this receiver anywhere I will have to buy based on the expertise of the folks who responded. I have said repeatedly that I'm a beginner and I had no idea about all the possible options to build a 2.0 system. Think of me as your wife and don't try to fix anything for me just let me talk myself through the process I really had no idea about this world you guys live in until I came across this site while doing a search for reveiws on the Infinity Beta 20's. I'm glad I did because the AVSForum was mostly useles for quality information. So, I am about to purchase the SuperPro DAC707. I hope to pick up a NAD or Cambridge IA in the next month used or clearanced. Oh, and the difference I think I heard with the Onkyo receiver was a fuller clearer sound. However, I was also in a different room then I usually listen. I was mostly comparing 4 speakers. I trust you guys that a DAC and IA will provide improved sound that I will notice and I will not have to spend much more than I originally planned. Jan deftly cleared up my question about more connections. |
|
Silver Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 106 Registered: Jan-09 | Nick, The Cambridge 540 is a CD player right not an integrated amp? WHat would be a good Cambridge IA to look for? |
|
Silver Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 107 Registered: Jan-09 | Forget that post. I just realized the 540A is the amp the 540C is the CD player. |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 2479 Registered: Feb-07 | Have you checked out Spearit Sound Mordecai? They often have tons of NAD and CA stuff for pretty cheap. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3269 Registered: May-05 | I'm not a fan of receivers, but this one will probably make a bunch of us put our foot in our mouths...  This is the entry level one. Tube/Hybrid, tuner, DAC, and 125/250 wpc in 8/4 Ohms. Made in Canada. Magnum Dynalab doesn't make junk. Only $5800. Who'll be the first one to try it out? I think Nuck's got some cash burning a hole in his pocket. http://www.magnumdynalab.com/integrated-amplifier-md209.htm |
|
Silver Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 108 Registered: Jan-09 | It looks like I'm buying the NAD C325BEE from Saturday Audio for $299 plus shipping. I don't think I can beat that price for a brand new unit with full warranty. I hope to order today or tomorrow. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 12169 Registered: Dec-04 | That will be a lot of fun for you Mord. The bass is going to change... |
|
Silver Member Username: MordecaiTexas Post Number: 113 Registered: Jan-09 | I know this thread is dead but I thought I'd let everyone who contributed know that I order a NAD 325BEE today. I should have it by midweek. However, until I pick up a DAC I won't be able to listen to it (well I do have CD player I can use). I hope to make a decision on the DAC but I decided not to rush into anymore purchases until I know what I want. I know I want the Evo's but they will have to wait for a bit until I can get more cash. The DAC is the problem. Like everything else I'm buying, I'm trying to spend as little as possible without totaly sacrificing quality. I trying to understand the difference between non-ovesampling and oversampling DACS. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3276 Registered: May-05 | There's a ton of different approaches to DACs. Oversampling, upsampling, and on and on. Everyone agrues as to which is best, which reinforces my feelings about everything in audio (and everything else for that matter) - There's no one right way to do things. Its not the technology or design, its how well its implemented. Forget about the technical side of it and listen to it. I'm not saying you can go out and gear whatever you want, but I think you get my drift. The end result is how well they used the technology with everything else, not what technology is used. There are a lot of people who don't like "digital amps." I'm one of them. But I've heard some that will run circles around Class A and A/B. At the end of the day, its the amp, not the class of operation. I own an A/AB amp, but only because its the best amp I can afford, not because the technolgy. |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyBrooklyn, NY United States Post Number: 2566 Registered: Oct-04 | Congrats on the NAD Mordecai, I'm sure you'll be pleased with it. |
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