|
New member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 2 Registered: Aug-10 | Hi there. I'm designing a simple music system (not ht) from scratch and so far local merchants have been less than helpful re: amps. - after listening to various towers, I'm leaning strongly towards a pair of Monitor Audio RX6s or RX8s - main concern atm is finding a strong clean amp here in Canada that's going to power those well - I've had Harmon Kardon ht amps, Denon, Pioneer all suggested to me (among others) - }In my mind, I had thought a two channel amp was the way to go, but have been 'advised' that direct mode into 2 channels on ht amps would be enough which my gut tells me isn't exactly accurate - Anyways - I'm looking for some insight and suggestions that would work for the MA's. - If you have a tower speaker I should consider - I would be most appreciative. Eg - PSB Image line has popped up in my search - Also - a subwoofer will also be part of the system so low end will be covered. Thanks a ton! |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 12990 Registered: Feb-05 | What kind of music do you listen to and at what volumes? |
|
New member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 3 Registered: Aug-10 | I listen to mostly hip-hop, r&b, trance, reggaeton - and I want to be able to crank it loud without distortion... Thank you. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 15270 Registered: Dec-04 | How much dough? |
|
New member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 4 Registered: Aug-10 | I'm thinking up to $750 CDN or so (definitely not over 1k). |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15088 Registered: May-04 | . http://stereophile.com/integratedamps/marantz_pm5003_integrated_amplifier/ 100 watts from a lesser amplifier won't play any louder. If you want louder than the MA's and the Marantz can provide, you'll have to change the speaker to a higher electrical sensitivity model. The MA's themself are on the high side of average for volume per watt and are a reasonably easy load on any amplifier so this should be a nice combination. . |
|
New member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 5 Registered: Aug-10 | For the avoidance of any doubt - that 750 figure is just for the amp (I'm anticipating about 3k for the system). Jan: Thank you for that reply. I think I'm a little slow - I'm not entirely sure what you mean by the first "100 watts from" sentence. =/ Can I take that to mean that I shouldn't worry about having something like 125 or 150 watts per channel for the MAs? Seeing as I'm not caring about home theatre applications, getting an HK AVR 3600 would be rather silly, no? http://www.harmankardon.com/EN-US/Products/Pages/ProductDetails.aspx?PID=AVR%203 600 Thoughts on the HK 3490? Thank you. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 3125 Registered: Jun-07 | I personally think for 750 a better integrated amp can be had than the HK 3490. I like Jan's recommendation of the Marantz, as it appears to be quit the sleeper (a product that nobody would expect to be good that actually turns out to be very good). In the 750 price range new, I would also consider Cambridge Audio and NAD if you go with the MA speakers. Good combos IMO. Of course, listening to the product yourself is key. Also, some really great integrated amps are for sale in the 750 range used. |
|
New member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 6 Registered: Aug-10 | Thanks for the input so far folks. I guess the weekend plays a role in the amount of feedback... I look forward to more suggestions this week. Hopefully someone can answer if I'm better off with getting a 2 x 125 or 150w amp (or thereabouts), than a 7.1 or 5.1 ht receiver where I won't use 80% of its features. Cheers. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 3126 Registered: Jun-07 | A HT receiver will never perform near as well for music as a similar priced Integrated Amplifier. Not even close. Especially a surround receiver under a grand. If there are people telling you other wise I would highly suggest you stop taking their advice. |
|
Gold Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 1426 Registered: Oct-07 | Buy what you need.......maybe more as far as features and power. Don't buy HT stuff when you are interested in stereo. Some stereo stuff even has HT style bass management which may help 'future proof' your purchase. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15097 Registered: May-04 | . "Hopefully someone can answer if I'm better off with getting a 2 x 125 or 150w amp (or thereabouts), than a 7.1 or 5.1 ht receiver where I won't use 80% of its features." Buy only the amount of "watts" you need and no more. Here's a calculator to get you started on buying "watts"; http://myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.html You should quickly notice buying more "watts" doesn't achieve much if you're after volume. Doubling watts at any point, from 5-10 or from 500-1k, works out to just about 3dB higher peak potential. If you're running your amp beyond it's peak potential, then 3dB isn't going to change much - you'll still blow up your speakers due to clipping. If you nnver approach the amplifier's peak, then why bother spending far more cash for what on paper equates to a product you will never use? The difference here being the term "on paper" suggests many amplifiers will never manage their stated wattage output into a real world speaker, only into a test bench load. The better choice for volume gains is buying a more electrically sensitive speaker which uses less watts to produce the same volume levels. Put your numbers into the "Speaker Sensitivity" column and see what you gain. Finally, without going in to a long dissertation about "power" all amps are not created equal and anyone who has been around audio for awhile can tell you about 40 watt amplifiers that not only sounded better than 150 watt amps but also played subjectively louder when both amps are coupled to a well thought out loudspeaker system. Watts ain't what they are cracked up to be and buying the lowest watts for the dollars spent will normally get you a better amplifier with fewer BS features. . |
|
New member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 7 Registered: Aug-10 | Nick, Leo, Jan - that's exactly the type of guidance I was hoping for. Alrighty - I'm on the hunt for a quality integrated amp for 750 or less... Thanks very much! |
|
New member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 8 Registered: Aug-10 | I guess now I'm also curious what 3way towers with 92 or 93 db sensitivity I might consider. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 15100 Registered: May-04 | . More drivers (more "ways") is like more watts. Buy only what you require and no more. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 12 Registered: Aug-10 | So I've decided to forget about the capability of blowing out my eardrums and will keep the MA RX6's in the system design. I'm still avidly searching and I seem to be heading towards these potential amps: - NAD C 355BEE - Cambridge Azur 840A (although I believe I read in a few places that Cambridge is weak on the low end of the spectrum). - Rotel RA-1520 I believe the Rotel would need a pre-amp no? Perhaps I'd be better running with the NAD based on that alone to keep the budget reasonable. Also, as my main source will be my computer, I will need a DAC too... Off to that forum to do some more reading. Good grief, I never thought a quality system design would be this involved. Thank you to everyone for your past and future guidance. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 13 Registered: Aug-10 | Looking like CA DacMagic is the no-brainer (not springing for BDA-1) as long as I use Optical connect - is what I read... Sound card for pc needed methinks. lol |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 3127 Registered: Jun-07 | DAC Magic is great for the money. Not bad on USB. "- NAD C 355BEE - Cambridge Azur 840A (although I believe I read in a few places that Cambridge is weak on the low end of the spectrum). - Rotel RA-1520" Not sure what you mean about the 840A being the weak end? Out of those three Integrated amps you have listed, in my opinion, the 840A is hands down the better amp, especially with MA speakers. This is just my opinion, if you can audition these models with your speakers than do so. David Mitchel currently has that amp, owned NAD, and Rotel, and played them all on his MA RS6 speakers. He could give a straight up opinion on which he thinks is the better match. My personal experience with Rotel and MA together is horrible. Your experience may differ. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 14 Registered: Aug-10 | Valuable input - thank you Nick, For the Azur - I meant weaker for bass - is what I had read in a few places. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 3128 Registered: Jun-07 | If you need a separate audio card that will do everything you need when it comes to music here is what I suggest : http://ca.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=zCDHPnfR1jymHK2f&templete=2 Built in Burr Brown DAC as well as headphone amp and dedicated Coax for surround sound and/or DAC integration. The onboard DAC is probably the best integration you can find for a PC audio card. Doubt it would top the DacMagic via Coax. Can be purchased for around 129 American, 180 Canadian. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 3129 Registered: Jun-07 | http://ca.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=zCDHPnfR1jymHK2f&templete=2 |
|
Bronze Member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 15 Registered: Aug-10 | Nice. As I just have mobo audio atm... I would need both DAC Magic And a card like the ASUS even though it too has a DAC, yes? |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 3131 Registered: Jun-07 | Technically you dont need the DAC. What you could do, if you do buy the Audio card, is to test the onboard DAC. If you feel its good enough then put your money into music. If not, Buy the DAC, and run it from the Coax. I am hearing really good things about that Asus card from reputable sources. Of course your going to be using a source of uncompressed audio files right? No MP3's or you might as well buy a Bose Wave system.lol. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Uncanny1Post Number: 17 Registered: Aug-10 | Hmmm. I'm certainly not interested in re-ripping x,xxx tracks to uncompressed audio files, so I'm thinking all this won't even be worth it even if my mp3s are mostly 192+ bitrate. =(( Maybe I'll just dump the MAs as they won't be used anywhere close to their fullest, get some crappy Polks, and get a lower end amp to go with em. Although this is quite saddening, everyone's guidance has certainly helped with potential future purchases. Thank you again. |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Post Number: 3133 Registered: Jun-07 | I wouldn't limit yourself to crap gear simply because you have MP3's. No, you will never get the fullest out of any system, even polks with MP3's. However, if you buy crap gear them IMO you are limiting yourself for the future. Use your MP3's that you have, start ripping future music in WAV format. Then, down the road when you have a load of WAV files, you have a good system to play them on. Limiting your gear now limits anything you dump into it for music and you will just be wasting your money as an upgrade will shortly follow. Go with the MA's. Get a decent Amp. Start ripping in WAV, and play your MP3's. Enjoy it. You wont enjoy Polks for long. |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 4137 Registered: Feb-07 | Nick is correct - Rotel gear with Monitor Audio is a match made in hell. "- Cambridge Azur 840A (although I believe I read in a few places that Cambridge is weak on the low end of the spectrum). " Nope, absolutely not. I've owned various NAD and Rotel power amps and integrateds, and the 840A is by far the best of the bunch. Most balanced, powerful, cleanest sounding of all the mid-fi stuff I've owned. And seriously not lacking in bass. |