any home audio heads? avr recomondations?

[s14xman]

i am currently in the market for a new reciever, please help me choose:

speakers: difinitive Mythos seven center
Mythos six fronts
Mythos gem rears
velodyne dps 12 sub

TV: Samsung 50'' rear projection HL-T5055W

Use: 90% movies 10% music

Price range: 1000-1500

Interested in: Marantz Sr70001, denon avr 3806, mybe other?

pros and cons of each? any recommendations?

[cdlong]

i was going to say denon but i guess you beat me to it. sony is a good value and good quality but it looks like you are going more for quality than value. yamaha makes decent stuff but their egronomics are terrible in my opinion. less of an issue if you have a universal remote but still an issue.

speaking of, do you have a universal remote? a simple remote can make the system so much more enjoyable to use. i've got one like this, simple is better, touch screens are overrated.http://www.remotecentral.com/mx500/

[s14xman]

haven't gotten a remote yet but maybe in the future.
I do want quality over a bunch of features i prob won't use.
I just don't want to spend 1500 on something that will be out of date in a few months

[Frosty_spl]

See if you can jiggle the big volume knob. If you can, its crap.

I have mcintosh tube stuff from the 70s though, and a newish dynaco tube poweramp. I just moved into my house, i need to hook it up.

[ixfxi]

See if you can jiggle the big volume knob. If you can, its crap.

I have mcintosh tube stuff from the 70s though, and a newish dynaco tube poweramp. I just moved into my house, i need to hook it up.

hahahahahahahha fucking COMEDY, but fucking TRUE.

i am an old schooler who does the SAME fucking thing. here are a few other things i'de like to add to the list:

- lift the unit and feel how heavy it is. heavier stereo equipment rules, its built for real men. if your stereo is light, its bullshit. light stereos are solely intended for women and homosexuals (not the strong homos, the anorexic ones). even real gay men are known to appreciate quality stereos.

- size. stay away from ANYTHING small, *especially* speakers. small stereo equipment (like bose) is designed to be played at low volumes with no care for quality. when turned loud, it sounds like distorted garbage (much like when a woman gets fustrated and starts yelling at her husband). therefor, focus on buying big and large speakers. larger speakers will be useful later, especially when youre married, in helping eliminate audible noise and complaining from your kids and nagging wife.

- less features = good. feature laden = shit. features are for fags. all that surround sound processing shit, does nothing other than impress your metrosexual friends when they're looking at your pretty receiver. fact is, its all bullshit. no real man cares to listen to his music in "church" setting, or "classic" or any of that fucking gay garbage.

with that said, lets look at what real men do.

-----------

Real men buy stereo equipment manufactured PRE 2000. So, if your shit is made in the year 2000 or later, be careful.. it may suck. Good audio equipment has come to a hault, all due to the "digital revolution." sound isnt digital, its analog. but because sales keep companies in business, many audio companies have had to compete with all the digital features.

so, the reality is.. the stuff made PAST 2000 can be decent, but you're paying a shitload of money for something that doesnt have features, which USED to be a standard back in, lets say, the 70s.

now, i personally dont like receivers, i think they suck. but, you're a movie guy.. so you'll most likely end up buying some 5.1 or 7.1 receiver shit. its great for the basics, but maybe one day you'll come to the dark side.. of monobloc amps and preamps and shit like that. honestly, i get more enjoyment out of my 2.1 setup than i have over ANY other setup ive ever owned. 2.1 is superior. you dont NEED all those channels, its such a waste of shit. focus on clarity, focus on power, and quit the surround sound revolution.

the reality is, the greatest stereos lack features and flashy design. the amps are fucking heavy and huge, they create heat. the preamps are simple with nice quality knobs on them. and the speakers should be fucking huge, or atleast well designed.

i once had a receiver, now i use it here in the office to listen to my PC make beep noises, and for bullshit "office music" which should be rather quiet.

but at home, i run classic kenwood monobloc 150w amps (3x) which power my martin logan electrostats. i run a marantz preamp and thats it. oh yeah, a 15" jbl sub.

its one of those things, less is more.

[cdlong]

damn mike, you're a lot more serious about audio than i would have imagined. though your views aren't that suprising now that i think about it. while i agree, surround sound music is stupid, for home theater, it makes sense and does enhance the experience.

haven't gotten a remote yet but maybe in the future.

get one. the one i posted or the 700 are both nice and very effective. it cleans up your coffee table and anyone that understands how a TV works can use mine after about 2 seconds of instruction. plus because of the varied layout of the hard buttons i can use it in the dark and without looking at it (moving eyes from the screen).

the macro is my favorite part. i have mine set up so when i want to watch a DVD i just press one button. it will turn on the TV, receiver, and DVD, and change the TV and DVD player to the right input.

I do want quality over a bunch of features i prob won't use.
I just don't want to spend 1500 on something that will be out of date in a few months

yeah the extra sound fields are bullshit, but good luck finding anything without them. they're so easy and cheap to put in, companies aren't going to risk loosing a sale for something so petty. just ignore them.

receiver technology doesn't move as fast as other equipment but no matter what you buy it will be "out of date" in a few months. my receiver is about 8 years old and won't even decode DTS, let alone DD EX, prologic II, and DTS ES. it's technically out of date but the only thing i miss is having enough inputs. the best way to make something future proof is to have all the inputs you need plus some extra.

i don't see any new input format coming anytime soon so just concentrate on HDMI. your TV won't support 1080P but you might want to consider HDMI switching that will handle it in case you upgrade your TV and DVD player in the future (or add a PS3 or Xbox elite). the sony and yamaha on crutchfield that are comparable both have 1080P switching, the denon didn't.

that's all i would consider outside of sound quality. even if it doesn't have 7.1 or DTS ES i doubt you'll miss it, i don't.

on a side note, i bet you would get better sound with better speakers than with a newer receiver. i agree with mike on this one, bigger is better. there's no reason to have those fancy wall mountable speakers unles your TV can do the same. you have a rear projection TV, get some big speakers to match.

[ixfxi]

damn mike, you're a lot more serious about audio than i would have imagined. though your views aren't that suprising now that i think about it. while i agree, surround sound music is stupid, for home theater, it makes sense and does enhance the experience.

for those who think i am old, think again. when i was a kid, i used to go to roger soundlabs and day-dream at the amazing stuff they sold. this was in the early 90s. roger soundlabs had their cheaper stuff (modern day kenwood, yamaha, denon receivers).. then they had their REAL shit, like nakamichi, carver, and all the other top brands. i could spend days sitting there admiring the top-end gear, its really just amazing stuff. when you're 12, you cant really understand why a $200 receiver has so many features, and why 2,000 buys you just a pre-amp.. another 5,000 buys you a 1 channel amplifier. but sound speaks, and hearing the top end systems makes you realize the difference.

you touch a knob from a cheap receiver, it feels cheap. when its rated at 250w RMS and doesnt compete with a nakamichi 50w rms, you wonder why. because its bullshit, thats why. dont focus on specs, focus on build and quality. use your intuition and your ears, they dont lie.

.....

when i *was* into home theater, 5.1 or 7.1 dolby digital is all thats needed. nowadays, if i was this guy.. i'de pick a reciever thats made quality and has HDMI inputs - seems that this is where the technology is going. speaker-wise, i dont think it matters.. he probably wont appreciate super sound.. you not only need the ears to appreciate it, but the music. with home theater, all you care about is good diaglogue (center channel) and hearing gunshots wiz around the room. his sub will make him smile when he hears lots of rumbling and explosions.... weee!

you cant go wrong with marantz. some denon and yamaha products are good too. my brother sells boston acoustic receivers, they're pretty expensive but look like very decent units. i saw the higher end sony stuff, not bad. i think sony is also decent. bottom line is, when you want quality.. you go component. when you want simplicity and features, you go receiver. its a sacrifice.

but if you're badassed and insane.. you can do home theater with components, just costs a pretty penny. ;-)

[s14xman]

yea i guess i'm going marantz, more quality over quantity. I just bought those speakers and they are pretty much wife proof. Anything bigger and my wife would be all pissed off so i think they were a good compromise

[cdlong]

I just bought those speakers and they are pretty much wife proof. Anything bigger and my wife would be all pissed off so i think they were a good compromise

no doubt on that one. if you had tried to go big your wife might have flipped and made you get shitty little satellites. i've never been drawn to marantz but the one you picked looks nice.

mike, it sounds like you're about as old as me. i didn't think you were old, maybe a couple years older at most. i agree with you for the most part, i'm more of a fan of effective, simple equipment in all areas too. i'm suprised they let a 12 year old near the high end equipment.

[s14xman]

i remember ripping shit apart like speakers and amps when i was like 8 just to see what makes them tick. Now that i have more money and my own house i can play my shit as loud as i want! I love it

[ixfxi]

http://home.ix.netcom.com/~philox/_uimages/MLScreen.jpg

yea i guess i'm going marantz, more quality over quantity. I just bought those speakers and they are pretty much wife proof. Anything bigger and my wife would be all pissed off so i think they were a good compromise

Its all relative. In my massiv 2 years of marriage, I've learned that the wife-factor is something that constantly varies. In other words, grow thick skin and dont worry so much about what they say and how they react - afterall, women dont give a shit when they complain.. its neverending. Serious, in my life I have a never-ending amount of tasks given to me by my wife. I'm not complaining, its part of marriage.. but if you're the person working and hustling, women better close the lid on certain things..

like speakers. Above is a pic of what i'm running, a good balance of size and performance. Actually, they're some of the larger speakers I've owned.. not so wide, but tall. Nice thing about electrostats is that they are thin. Either way, I always wanted a pair of electrostats ever since I heard them when I was a kid. Very neutral sound, very clean - and appearance is something that people always talk about anytime they come over. They're not the loudest speakers I've ever owned, and they're very weak with bass so a good sub is mandatory (though, ANY good system will have a sub, imo). Funny though, the biggest weakness with these speakers is that they are very picky with placement.. and therefor, they're not for filling sound into a room with lots of people. They're more for serious listeners who enjoy placing themselves in the sweetspot.. kinda like studio monitors.

[ixfxi]

no doubt on that one. if you had tried to go big your wife might have flipped and made you get shitty little satellites. i've never been drawn to marantz but the one you picked looks nice.

mike, it sounds like you're about as old as me. i didn't think you were old, maybe a couple years older at most. i agree with you for the most part, i'm more of a fan of effective, simple equipment in all areas too. i'm suprised they let a 12 year old near the high end equipment.

the nice thing about marantz is that they try to balance quality with all their designs. they understand that 2 channel setup should be as discrete as possible, and when you look into the internal construction of the unit.. it should have independent amp circuitry for eacxh channel (or atleast the main 2) for proper separation. i cant comment so much on this model or the newer marantz stuff, but for SURE on the classic marantz products. the company was bought and sold a few times (share-wise), so who knows how things have changed. overall, the marantz i have has lasted a very long time. I run an AV-600 pre-amp with kenwood L-07M amps.

i was amazed that they would let us in the store. jeez.. my friend and i would go there for hours almost several times a week, no wonder i like expensive gadgets.. i've always had a taste for expensive things and appreciated fancy creations. i'm 29 btw....

[s14xman]

man that looks like a sweet set up. Maybe as i grow older my set up will grow. I have been spening money on this lately and am hooked. Stuff always seems to get in the way thought like furniture, the mortgage, and of course my damn car. I remember my first pair of big speakers, Sansui towers with a 15'' cardboard sub on each one that i got from a garage sale when i was like 12. what about you guys?

[ixfxi]

crazy, i actually had a sansui speaker at some point in time! it wasnt a great speaker, but served its purpose.

my first system is very similar to the system i have now, as it uses the same 1970-ish kenwood monobloc amps. 2 of the 4 amps i have are from back in the day, they STILL fucking work and have been on 24-7 EVER SINCE I HAVE OWNED THEM. the second pair (gen2) were purchased on ebay, and also work flawless.. 24-7 are lit.

the first system used dahlquist speakers which were pretty nice (expensive too, so i heard). i didnt actually pay a dime for that system, my friend gave it to me because he knew i was into stereos and he had all this old equipment that he didnt know how to setup. after no more than 6 months, i did irrepairable damage to the speakers. internet didnt exist back then, so i didnt know that they could actually be serviced. here is a pic of the speaker:

http://www.audiocostruzioni.com/r_s/diffusori/dahlquist-20/dahlquist-20-320.jpg

i blew the subwoofer as well.. what a shame. my friends used to hear me from houses away, those were good times. the amps were controlled with a very beautiful INFINITY pre-amp, blue lit face.. very fancy, i should have kept it and tried to restore it. but i wanted remote and features.. which brings me to.........

MY BULLSHIT SONY RECEIVER. out with quality, in with surround sound dolby digital garbage. i bought some klipsch speakers second hand, they were pretty decent (model kg 5.2). IMO, klipsch is known for efficiency and loudness, but not for quality nor for eveness. i feel the model i had lacked mid-range and the highs were very aggressive. overall, the speaker just didnt sound balanced. i've heard great things about thier old school corner horns though!

anyway, ALL of the klipsch stuff got ditched after a few years of unpleasant music listening. no amount of tuning was able to give me clarity or clean power. the sony was ditched, the old kenwood amps were brought BACK out from storage and back into reality. the marantz was ordered. after another 3-6 months, the klipsch were donated to the poor (my parents) (its a joke, calm down).. and i purchased the martin logans. i can honestly say i dont have the need to tinker anymore. the setup is really good, sound is great.. and overall, the speakers are so clean and detailed that i dont want to dirty them with dolby digital.

-end