Integrated amplifier with USB input and subwoofer out?

[oqpi]

Hey Adam,

Thanks for your reply.

I may not have stated clearly the USB thing. In my research I had noted several models that featured a USB port as a "direct connection" from PC to amplifier vs going through the soundcard.

Evidently this vastly improves the sound, and may or may not relate to what seems to be referred to as a "DAC". Is there a relationship between "DAC" and direct USB connection? I fear I may not be describing this properly but hopefully you understand!

Edit: I am hoping to maximize the sound quality I get from digital music (mp3s, streaming, etc)

USB connection transmits digital signals. The DAC converts them into the analog waves, which we need to drive the speakers (after amplification, of course).
From USB to DAC though, the signal may be quite noisy and bad, mostly because of the PC USB port 5.0 V power. I personally encountered that issue and that's why I inserted the WYRD decrapifier in between.
With that said, you will not need an external DAC, but only a good receiver with its own DAC (which Outlaw has) and the little cute WYRD.
Online streaming is really good with that setup

 

[agarwalro]

a good musical system can get you a good movie sound, but not viceversa.

This is classic audiophile talk and complete BS. Speakers/electronics/rooms don't differentiate between music and movies.

A judicious selection of speakers and electronics, correctly set up, in a properly sorted room will do justice to all recordings.

 

[KEW]

KEW, appreciate the input. Are there any best practices in terms of reconciling the compatibility of amp and speaker specs? Need I examine much more than whether the speakers are capable of supporting the maximum amp wattage?

First off, what passive sub(s) are you considering? They are pretty rare.

I think you should buy an integrated sub/amp system. I disagree with the idea that you can reasonably spec a proper mate (at least without substantial education and an inordinate amount of research into the amp characteristics), and you still may not find an ideal fit.
For example, read the section (via the link below) following this graph:

http://www.audioholics.com/subwoofer-reviews/sb12-nsd-subwoofer/sb12-nsd-measurements

Here where the testing involves taking the sub to it's limits, the conclusion reads:

the protection and limiting circuits employed in the SB12-NSD are extremely effective at limiting any chance of damage to the unit and preventing offensive overload noises.

It is my understanding that SVS (and other good sub manufacturers do this as well) had that amp designed specifically for that sub. limiters are applied before the amp reaches clipping and before the driver is overloaded. Also important is when these limiters are engaged, it simply results in the lower frequencies being limited to a design maximum SPL without any nasty intrusions on your listening experience.
So the advantage of a well designed amplified sub system is it is bullet-proof. You can crank it however much you want, knowing you will not damage it.
I just don't know how an individual would reasonably be able to replicate that!

 

[KEW]

This is classic audiophile talk and complete BS. Speakers/electronics/rooms don't differentiate between music and movies.

A judicious selection of speakers and electronics, correctly set up, in a properly sorted room will do justice to all recordings.

I agree with you, but also need to acknowledge that music is more demanding than HT because we are ignorant of how HT should properly sound. If dinosaurs are stomping about, we will not notice a problematic difference between a poorly designed sub that over-emphasizes the port tuned frequency and a well designed sub. Either way the presence of powerful impacts is more gratifying than how exact they are in reproducing the original stomps.
Of course almost every movie has music and from that standpoint, it is total BS!

 

[oqpi]

This is classic audiophile talk and complete BS. Speakers/electronics/rooms don't differentiate between music and movies.

A judicious selection of speakers and electronics, correctly set up, in a properly sorted room will do justice to all recordings.

You do not understand the meaning of what I said.

 

[oqpi]

I agree with you, but also need to acknowledge that music is more demanding than HT because we are ignorant of how HT should properly sound. If dinosaurs are stomping about, we will not notice a problematic difference between a poorly designed sub that over-emphasizes the port tuned frequency and a well designed sub. Either way the presence of powerful impacts is more gratifying that how exact they are in reproducing the original stomps.
Of course almost every movie has music and from that standpoint, it is total BS!

To some degree... we don't know how HT should sound; if we take as a reference a good movie theatre, I can say that you can replicate that with a decent HT.
But that HT will not reproduce music as a good stereo system in the same price range would. Just because the costs to make a HT work, with multi-channels that need bigger power supplies, more component separation, it should cost 5-10 times more than a stereo system, in order to deliver sound of the same quality.
Of course it can be done, but in reality it is NOT done. Not for comparable price levels for HT and stereo.
You want to listen to the music on your HT system?.. Good luck !
You will need to spend $15-20k perhaps, to have the same sound quality as a $2000-$3000 stereo.

 

[markw]

To some degree... we don't know how HT should sound; if we take as a reference a good movie theatre, I can say that you can replicate that with a decent HT.
But that HT will not reproduce music as a good stereo system in the same price range would. Just because the costs to make a HT work, with multi-channels that need bigger power supplies, more component separation, it should cost 5-10 times more than a stereo system, in order to deliver sound of the same quality.
Of course it can be done, but in reality it is NOT done. Not for comparable price levels for HT and stereo.
You want to listen to the music on your HT system?.. Good luck !
You will need to spend $15-20k perhaps, to have the same sound quality as a $2000-$3000 stereo.

Now you're adding qualifiers. not a valid argument to try to make your invalid point. I don't see where cost was discussed before.

Besides, to dupplicate the sound of a stereo would only take two speakers, which any HT can handle. Assuming they are the same quality as your two front speakers and the power requirements are met, which is fairly easy since only two channels will be driven, that makes it even more "equal"

There is no reason a well designed HT can not do two channel as well as a dedicated stereo system. period.

 

[agarwalro]

You do not understand the meaning of what I said.

Yeah I do, and I'm calling it BS.

 

[agarwalro]

also need to acknowledge that music is more demanding than HT because we are ignorant of how HT should properly sound.

By this argument anything that is an artificial/synthetic sound (not produced by nature or having natural reference) need to be stricken off the list of music used for evaluation. Yet, a lot of these recordings are not classical/a capella/nature sounds.

I'd even argue that other than the conductor and audience, no one is really truly experiencing what was played live. Does that mean only recordings of performances one's attended can be used as reference and not any other?

 

[oqpi]

Yeah I do, and I'm calling it BS.

Now you're adding qualifiers. not a valid argument to try to make your invalid point. I don't see where cost was discussed before.

Besides, to dupplicate the sound of a stereo would only take two speakers, which any HT can handle. Assuming they are the same quality as your two front speakers and the power requirements are met, which is fairly easy since only two channels will be driven, that makes it even more "equal"

There is no reason a well designed HT can not do two channel as well as a dedicated stereo system. period.

It ia always about money, of course. The point is that an HT will deliver the same sound quality with a Stereo System only if it costs several times more. My experience tells me about 5-10 times more.
On a different topic, please do not throw your venom on other people's knowledge, just because you are frustrated with life and have nowhere else to express it.

 

[markw]

It ia always about money, of course. The point is that an HT will deliver the same sound quality with a Stereo System only if it costs several times more. My experience tells me about 5-10 times more.
On a different topic, please do not throw your venom on other people's knowledge, just because you are frustrated with life and have nowhere else to express it.

You make is seem as us here won't go the extra mile with our systems to enjoy music. That's a pretty stupid assumption on your part. And, your "5-10" times more is questionable. Remember, we only have to get two channels up to your standard, not all 5 or 7.

You seem to think that those who own HT systems are incapable, or too poor, or too ignorant, to have a system fit for music. You might be surprised.

Please take your snobbery elsewhere. It won't fly here, as you may be learning.

 

[KEW]

By this argument anything that is an artificial/synthetic sound (not produced by nature or having natural reference) need to be stricken off the list of music used for evaluation. Yet, a lot of these recordings are not classical/a capella/nature sounds.

I'd even argue that other than the conductor and audience, no one is really truly experiencing what was played live. Does that mean only recordings of performances one's attended can be used as reference and not any other?

You have the general idea, but you are wrong in inferring black and white from shades of gray!
I do believe acoustic instruments are generally the best reference material...if you are familiar with them! I once watched Dennis Murphy evaluate a pair of speakers he had never heard before. He listened to a full orchestral chord for about 45 seconds and was done! He plays in an orchestra and yes, I do believe that is helpful for his ability to evaluate a speaker so quickly.
I play in a Big Band, and have great confidence in evaluating the sound of the horns played in my band. There is variety in the sound of these horns, some from the horn brand/model, and others from the performer; however, there are enough commonalities that I feel pretty good about evaluating any acoustic instrument that is in my band. Certainly, it would be better if I was familiar with the exact performer playing the exact instrument I was listening to.
Electric guitar is a different critter. With the special effects boxes. etc. It is very difficult to know how accurately it is being reproduced. I have listened to two good speakers and while the guitar sounded different on both, it sounded very good on both, and I was at a loss to know which was correct. I figured it out listening to the horns I know well.
The reason I am specifying "good" speakers is because crappy speakers reveal themselves by having over-emphasis on a certain frequency ranges. Recordings of electric guitar or synthesizer will reveal this.
So, I am not saying only acoustic sounds evaluated by people familiar with the original sound should ever be used. However, I will agree that that may be the ideal scenario.
Hope this helps!

PS - I definitely believe it would be a mistake not to include acoustic music in your audition music.

 

[jetsetter439]

Well, I can certainly appreciate everyone's passion in here.

Perhaps someone wouldn't mind advising me on my new dilemma, which is whether it's possible to hook up a powered 2.1 system to an integrated amp or receiver.. As some of you might know, one of my preferred features is having tone control knobs for quick adjustment to bass/treble, if need be. However the system I am interested in is fully powered.

Is it just a matter of hooking it up to the right RCA output on the integrated amp/receiver?

 

[KEW]

Well, I can certainly appreciate everyone's passion in here.

That is it!

To answer your question, the ideal scenario is to use the pre-amp outputs from the 2.1 system. However, these outputs only exist on higher end models. The Denon X4000, for example, has them. Another option if you only need L & R channels to go to amp is to use the headphone output adapted to RCA connections for your amp.
There may be some slight mismatch in headphone output vs amp input sensitivity, but it has worked fine the times I have done it that way.

 

[anamorphic96]

It ia always about money, of course. The point is that an HT will deliver the same sound quality with a Stereo System only if it costs several times more. My experience tells me about 5-10 times more.
On a different topic, please do not throw your venom on other people's knowledge, just because you are frustrated with life and have nowhere else to express it.

I call BS as well. You really have no clue what your talking about.

 

[PENG]

Jetsetter,

Adam,
If I want to hook my computer to my Denon (which has USB input) do I simply need a standard USB cable?
Do I need special software to output via cable? Do I need to configure audio output via USB in control panel (Windows)?

I don't see a response from Adam but I can try to answer your questions as below.

1) Computer to Denon X4000 - I think the USB ports found on AVRs such as the X4000, AVR-4520, Marantz AVRs and prepros are meant for iPods and for playing music files on a USB flash drives. To play music files from your PC via its USB output to a preamp, integrated or headphone amp, (e.g. Oppo HA1, BDP-105/105D you would typically find an Asynchronous USB input on such device for good results.

2) If you meant via USB cable, then yes you need software such as iTune, Foobar, JRiver and most likely hardware (e.g. media players, DACs) as well. The hardware, say a DAC, will likely require you to install a driver. For Mac PC, there is a good chance you don't need to download a special driver but for Windows PC you most likely will need to do it. The types of USB cables required will depend on the hardware.

For software I am happy with Foobar that is free and has the features that I need.

 

[jetsetter439]

Thanks PENG. Much appreciate the input.

I would like to know your guys' thoughts on my tentative setup which would be a NAD C 316BEE integrated amp joined with the Schiit Bifrost DAC. I would have this going to the Paradigm Millennia One speakers supported by a SVS SB-1000 sub, or possibly the SB-2000.

There is also the NAD C 356BEE with onboard DAC however I have heard great things about the Schiit unit above.

Thanks guys

 

[anamorphic96]

Thanks PENG. Much appreciate the input.

I would like to know your guys' thoughts on my tentative setup which would be a NAD C 316BEE integrated amp joined with the Schiit Bifrost DAC. I would have this going to the Paradigm Millennia One speakers supported by a SVS SB-1000 sub, or possibly the SB-2000.

There is also the NAD C 356BEE with onboard DAC however I have heard great things about the Schiit unit above.

Thanks guys

Both are good choices however going with the external DAC offers greater flexibility when upgrading in the future. Also if the amp dies you would still have a DAC which could then be used with any other amp you get.

 

[PENG]

Thanks PENG. Much appreciate the input.

I would like to know your guys' thoughts on my tentative setup which would be a NAD C 316BEE integrated amp joined with the Schiit Bifrost DAC. I would have this going to the Paradigm Millennia One speakers supported by a SVS SB-1000 sub, or possibly the SB-2000.

There is also the NAD C 356BEE with onboard DAC however I have heard great things about the Schiit unit above.

Thanks guys

I also think the external DAC is a better option. The Schilit is made in USA so you can expect to pay more. For sub, I think the Rythmik F12 http://www.rythmikaudio.com/F12.html offers better quality for $170 more. I don't know how SVS can make their non Ultra series sub so much lighter.

 

[highfigh]

I don't see a response from Adam but I can try to answer your questions as below.

1) Computer to Denon X4000 - I think the USB ports found on AVRs such as the X4000, AVR-4520, Marantz AVRs and prepros are meant for iPods and for playing music files on a USB flash drives. To play music files from your PC via its USB output to a preamp, integrated or headphone amp, (e.g. Oppo HA1, BDP-105/105D you would typically find an Asynchronous USB input on such device for good results.

2) If you meant via USB cable, then yes you need software such as iTune, Foobar, JRiver and most likely hardware (e.g. media players, DACs) as well. The hardware, say a DAC, will likely require you to install a driver. For Mac PC, there is a good chance you don't need to download a special driver but for Windows PC you most likely will need to do it. The types of USB cables required will depend on the hardware.

For software I am happy with Foobar that is free and has the features that I need.

Re: USB ports, what you wrote is pretty much what they're for. Because most of the AVRs with this ability are also network-enabled, there's usually a way to find a music server of some kind, be it a NAS, laptop/desktop, etc. Some work best with .wma and some are more agnostic. The USB often works well with i-devices and that enables the user to bypass the DAC in the i-device, which is inferior.

What drive do you use with Foobar?