Marantz PM8005 or Rogue Sphinx with KEF R300

[KenM10759]

I'm wanting to gift the 1912 to my son and put the older Hafler & Infinity set of speakers in my machine shop with one of his current recievers. So that upgrade isn't purely because one is SO much better than the other.

The choice of R300's is main thing for me, those really are SO much better than what were $349 speakers in 1988 but especially what those Haflers are now.

 

[PENG]

I'm wanting to gift the 1912 to my son and put the older Hafler & Infinity set of speakers in my machine shop with one of his current recievers. So that upgrade isn't purely because one is SO much better than the other.

The choice of R300's is main thing for me, those really are SO much better than what were $349 speakers in 1988 but especially what those Haflers are now.

IMO the R300 most likely will work okay with the 4100 or 1912 but I would pair it with a 4100 and a decent power amp.

 

[KenM10759]

Educate me please, as I am an audiophyte.

What you are saying is to put signals from CD's, DVD's and other sources through the X4100 yet instead of connecting the R300's direct to the X4100, instead send a line-out signal to a separate power amp?

This is a guy who in 1988 got a receiver because although I knew a pre-amp and power amp was the preferred set-up, it was hard to justify the added expense over an acceptable amped signal from the Harman Kardon HK440 receiver.

Things haven't changed? Or is it that the R300's really just need more than 125w/ch @ 8Ω that the X4100 reports to deliver?

 

[PENG]

Educate me please, as I am an audiophyte.

What you are saying is to put signals from CD's, DVD's and other sources through the X4100 yet instead of connecting the R300's direct to the X4100, instead send a line-out signal to a separate power amp?

This is a guy who in 1988 got a receiver because although I knew a pre-amp and power amp was the preferred set-up, it was hard to justify the added expense over an acceptable amped signal from the Harman Kardon HK440 receiver.

Things haven't changed? Or is it that the R300's really just need more than 125w/ch @ 8Ω that the X4100 reports to deliver?

The power you need for your R300 depends on your room size, sitting position, sound pressure level and the types of music you listen to etc.

The R300 has average sensitivity with minimum impedance of only 3.2 ohms so without knowing anything about your listening habits and environments, I am going to say more power is better.

The 1912 does not have pre outs (pre amp outputs). With the X3100W or X4100W, you can use their pre outs to drive an affordable 2 channel power amplifier.

 

[KenM10759]

My room is 13' wide by 19' long. There are 32" doors at the corners of the 13' width, and my system with L-R mains sits right between them. One door is ALWAYS closed, the other whenever I decide to walk over and close it.

I have the faces of the ported Hafler 200's sitting 24" from the wall, and they can only be 6' apart. I realize that isn't ideal but nothing I can do short of moving them every time I want to sit and listen to 2.1 music.

My listening preference is between 80 and 86dB, as measured with my son's meter, though occasionally much higher for short periods of time. When I do listen, I am switching the 1912 to stereo mode. My understanding is that because they are 7 channel discrete amps, I'm not getting more power into the 2.1, just using less overall than I would if running 5.1 surround.

Forgive me. While I have plenty of experience in listening to live and recorded music (I'm 56), I have very little education in systems and specs.

 

[PENG]

My room is 13' wide by 19' long. There are 32" doors at the corners of the 13' width, and my system with L-R mains sits right between them. One door is ALWAYS closed, the other whenever I decide to walk over and close it.

I have the faces of the ported Hafler 200's sitting 24" from the wall, and they can only be 6' apart. I realize that isn't ideal but nothing I can do short of moving them every time I want to sit and listen to 2.1 music.

My listening preference is between 80 and 86dB, as measured with my son's meter, though occasionally much higher for short periods of time. When I do listen, I am switching the 1912 to stereo mode. My understanding is that because they are 7 channel discrete amps, I'm not getting more power into the 2.1, just using less overall than I would if running 5.1 surround.

Assuming you ceiling height is 8 to 10 ft you have a what we consider medium size room. 80 to 86 dB could be very loud if your son's meter is accurate and set to C weighting.

The 1912 can certainly output more power in 2 channel as it will be less limited by the power supply. I would think it can output 90WX2 of clean power. If you truly listen to 80 to 86 dB and want to have 20 dB on top for undistorted peaks and for serious stereo music listening, then I would say you need a 200WX2 amp. To be clear, all the talks about more power are based on having lot of reserves to take care of peaks in certain music contents and when you really crank the volume. This applies to both the Haflter and KEF. If I understood right the Haflter 200 are rated 4 ohms.

 

[KenM10759]

The ceiling height is actually a little less than that, at 91". The room is actually bigger than that too, when one considers that the area to the left side rear is open to my dining area, and that opening is 12-1/2' long against that 19' length and 10' deep. It's a home, and it's a compromise. Most of us seem to have that cross to bear.

I clearly must be WRONG about listening levels and either I recall what he said wrongly or his meter is way out of whack. Probably the former. Lets just say it's easy to carry on a conversation at slightly elevated levels while music is playing.

Yes, the Hafler 200's are a 4Ω speaker. I'm going to see how the R300's do with just output from the commonly used outputs of the X4100. It doesn't seem that I'll ever need to take it to "11" and if the volume level shown by the 1912 as "-40.0" to "-20.0" for the bulk of my listening I don't think I need more.

The R300's are being seriously considered mainly because I have heard them in person and loved the rich midrange and absolutely everything else about them. I'd be getting LS-50's if I tended to use higher power and volumes at near field range, but I don't. The off-axis performance of the KEF R300 also suits my needs because I rarely can sit in "the sweet spot" for very long, as required by some other designs.

 

[PENG]

If -20 is as high as you go with the 1912 then I agree you have enough power on hand. The R300 can play louder than the LS50.

 

[KenM10759]

I was considering LS-50's for a short time. I know they're a phenomenal speaker for the money, just not right for my needs.

So I hopped on my trusty Triumph motorbike and went to Audio Video Therapy in Nashua NH this afternoon, hoping to hear the R300. None in stock, but I did get to audition R500 floorstanders. Wow. The salesman tinkered with some settings in an attempt to mimic the R300 and I think he came close. They sell PSB, Paradigm, B&W, Focal and a few other brands, but no stand mount seem seemed to be competitive in woofer and cabinet size to the R300's. He gave me a great price and I'll be heading back Tuesday (with son in tow) to give him a deposit and get them ordered.

I was talking to him about the AVR I'm using and the possible "upgrade." He may have me talked into separates, as I doubt me or my wife would be so into home theater that even half the features of an AVR-X4100W would be needed. Given how much I use the 1912 in 2.1 mode for listening to music, the idea of moving to pre and power amps is growing on me. They sell Parasound, NAD and a host of others, so my son and I will be auditioning some options on Tuesday.

 

[PENG]

He may have me talked into separates, as I doubt me or my wife would be so into home theater that even half the features of an AVR-X4100W would be needed. Given how much I use the 1912 in 2.1 mode for listening to music, the idea of moving to pre and power amps is growing on me. They sell Parasound, NAD and a host of others, so my son and I will be auditioning some options on Tuesday.

I strongly suggest you resist being talked into separate as yet. Try the R300 on the 1912 first. If you they don't sound right then consider getting a low cost AVR that has pre outs and a 200 watts per channel power amp. I understand you want to focus on 2.1 but 5.1/7.2 AVRs nowadays are so cost effective that it could cost you more to get a 2.1 preamp and don't sound better.

I have preamps that cost me a lot of money and they don't seem to sound better than my 11 years old AVR that drives my LS50 and R900 with or without the help of my power amps.

PM ADTG about his experience on the SQ difference between his high end separates and AVRs and his response will surprise you. Salesmen like to push separates because of the higher margin.

 

[KenM10759]

Thanks for that! Of course I'm still feeling it out and he says I can take anything they have on their floor home to audition it. I'll be doing that with the SVS SB1000 and SB2000.

 

[PENG]

Thanks for that! Of course I'm still feeling it out and he says I can take anything they have on their floor home to audition it. I'll be doing that with the SVS SB1000 and SB2000.

That is a good thing as long as you audition and compare honestly without influenced by their look and price points.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

If you are an audio enthusiast and plan on chatting on audio forums like AH, there is a high risk of upgrade fever and spending a lot of money on separates.

On one hand, I feel comfortable saying that all you really NEED is an AVR in terms of features and sound quality.

On the other hand, I also understand the DESIRE for separates.

A few years ago I bought the Denon AVR-5308CI receiver. But then a few months later, I bought the Denon AVP-A1HDCI pre-pro.

A dangerous game.

 

[PENG]

If you are an audio enthusiast and plan on chatting on audio forums like AH, there is a high risk of upgrade fever and spending a lot of money on separates.

On one hand, I feel comfortable saying that all you really NEED is an AVR in terms of features and sound quality.

On the other hand, I also understand the DESIRE for separates.

A few years ago I bought the Denon AVR-5308CI receiver. But then a few months later, I bought the Denon AVP-A1HDCI pre-pro.

A dangerous game.

And I noticed you are still keeping your beloved low cost 3312, you don't always keep gear for that long.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

And I noticed you are still keeping your beloved low cost 3312, you don't always keep gear for that long.

Yeah, the 3312 is being used everyday by my 12 YR old daughter in the family room.

The 3312 will go into my daughter's room in the new house. The Denon X3100 will be used in the living room w/ the Linkwitz Orion 3.2.1 speakers & ATI AT6012 amp.

AVP-A1 will be for my HT room. AVR-5308 will be in the HT closet as backup.

I'll also add low-end Denon AVRs for my other rooms to go along with in-ceiling and in-wall speakers.

 

[KenM10759]

Well, I'm learning so much more about the mix of AV receivers and ancillary amps! Thank you all.

 

[PENG]

Well, I'm learning so much more about the mix of AV receivers and ancillary amps! Thank you all.

I have used separate preamps and AVRs and found little difference in sound quality but of course that's just my own subjective experience. Multi channel AVRs actually have the added advantage of very decent subwoofer bass management features that a lot of separate two channel preamps lack.

I do feel good about owning a few high quality preamps but cannot honestly tell you preamps will make your system sound better than a good avr will. I can also tell you that there are at least a few members here who reported that their separate preamps have improved sound quality for them. You can do a quick search to read up on their subjective reviews/comments. At the end of the day you can either do your own research and base your decision on specs and bench test measurements, or spend the money and/or effort to do demos including in home ones and then make up your mind.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I have used separate preamps and AVRs and found little difference in sound quality but of course that's just my own subjective experience.

Nah, I think 100% (of people ) feels the same way, but only 50% is willing to admit.

They may say things like, "Little difference may be big enough for me".