HT and 2 channel help. Best AVR for both.

[pinball]

Hey gals and guys,

New here and was hoping for a little advice.

So I really enjoy old school 2 channel setups but also the latest HT experience for movies.

Below is my current setup. I have a seperate 2 channel system and a HT in the same room. I want to just have one good system for both.

2 Channel:
ADS L1230 speakers
McIntosh C712 preamp
McIntosh MC2002 Power Amp
Bluesound Node 2i Streaming device

HT setup:
Martin Logan Motion 60(2), 50, and 35(2) (hope to add ATMOS up firing speakers soon)
SVS sub (2)
Marantz SR6010
Proceed (Mark Levinson) AMP3 (Using for the L,C,and R)

So I love the sound of my 2 channel setup. It has a nice warm sound but I would love to delete it and get a AVR that would sound very musical with the Martin Logan speakers.
Currenty I have tried connecting the Node 2i to the HT setup and running it in with Audessey turned off. Not very happy with the sound. A little harsh (fatiguing) on my ears after extended periods of listening.

Which AVR would you recommend that is great for both 2 channel and HT? I doubt I will go any farther than adding 2 ATMOS speakers to my 5.1 setup.

The room is 13x21x8. The floor is carpet. Walls are drywall except right side is block.


Thanks and look forward to hearing everyones recommendations.

 

[mazersteven]

AVR's from Denon, Marantz and Yamaha are recommended.

What's wrong with using the Marantz you already have?

 

[pinball]

AVR's from Denon, Marantz and Yamaha are recommended.

What's wrong with using the Marantz you already have?

Like I mentioned it is more fatiguing to the ears. I can connect the two front Martin Logan speakers to the McIntosh 2ch setup and it is not fatiguing.

 

[mazersteven]

AVR's produce power, connectivity, and room correction. Not Sound

 

[pinball]

AVR's produce power, connectivity, and room correction. Not Sound

AVR has a preamp and built in amplification which effects the sound. I know the speakers are the largest factor but the AVR is part of the overall equation.

 

[mazersteven]

 

[pinball]

Ok so you are saying I can go out and buy a $100 receiver and connect it to the Martin Logan speakers and they will sound the same as connecting to a $1000 receiver?

 

[mazersteven]

Ok so you are saying I can go out and buy a $100 receiver and connect it to the Martin Logan speakers and they will sound the same as connecting to a $1000 receiver?

If that $100 receiver can produce Clean Power within what the speakers recommend then yes.

The Room, and its Treatments will effect sound

An AVR's room correction will effect sound

 

[Pogre]

Ok so you are saying I can go out and buy a $100 receiver and connect it to the Martin Logan speakers and they will sound the same as connecting to a $1000 receiver?

Where are you seeing receivers for $100...? I think price does matter to a point, but once you get into competent manufacturers with the goal of accuracy in mind the differences tend to be slight and inaudible. That's where placebo and expectation bias come into play.

That said, basically yes. If they're both competently built, have enough power, operated within spec and all else equal then I don't think you'd be able to pick one over the other in a controlled comparison setting like a DBT. The main differences are going to be feature set and room correction/DSP.

 

[pinball]

If that $100 receiver can produce Clean Power within what the speakers recommend then yes.

The Room, and its Treatments will effect sound

An AVR's room correction will effect sound

So you feel if you take any AVR or 2 channel receiver and they all produce enough clean power they will not change the sound that comes out of a set of exact same speakers? Let's remove the room correction out of the equation for now.

A 2 channel receiver from the 70's that is up to spec and produces clean power.
An AVR from the 90's that is up to spec and produces clean power.
A modern AVR producing clean power.

All will allow the speakers to produce the same sound with no difference in characteristics?

So receivers/AVR does not effect "warm or cool" characteristics of the sound?

 

[Mikado463]

Like I mentioned it is more fatiguing to the ears. I can connect the two front Martin Logan speakers to the McIntosh 2ch setup and it is not fatiguing.

Ok, so the Logans sound better driven by the Mac, have you tried using the pre-outs on the AVR to intern feed the MC2002 and drive the Logans ?

 

[Pogre]

So you feel if you take any AVR or 2 channel receiver and they all produce enough clean power they will not change the sound that comes out of a set of exact same speakers? Let's remove the room correction out of the equation for now.

A 2 channel receiver from the 70's that is up to spec and produces clean power.
An AVR from the 90's that is up to spec and produces clean power.
A modern AVR producing clean power.

All will allow the speakers to produce the same sound with no difference in characteristics?

So receivers/AVR does not effect "warm or cool" characteristics of the sound?

Yup.

 

[pinball]

Where are you seeing receivers for $100...? I think price does matter to a point, but once you get into competent manufacturers with the goal of accuracy in mind the differences tend to be slight and inaudible. That's where placebo and expectation bias come into play.

That said, basically yes. If they're both competently built, have enough power, operated within spec and all else equal then I don't think you'd be able to pick one over the other in a controlled comparison setting like a DBT. The main differences are going to be feature set and room correction/DSP.

My point about the $100 is the fact of a cheaper system such as a Sony or similar VS say a Top of line Arcam, Anthem, etc... .

I just know with my setup, I have plenty of clean power available 200WPC at minimum available in both systems. After listening to my 2 channel using the Martin Logans vs the HT setup using Martin Logans(No room correction) my ears let me know there is a difference.

I can listen to the same music and the same volume level and my ears are fatigued after the HT setup for awhile. My 2 channel system while using the same Martin Logan speakers doesn't have the same effect.

If this didn't happen, I would not have asked for help from this group. But it's kinda disheartening when the first response basically says I don't know what I am talking about and hearing.

 

[mazersteven]

A 2 channel receiver from the 70's that is up to spec and produces clean power.
An AVR from the 90's that is up to spec and produces clean power.
A modern AVR producing clean power.

Are you really asking me about a 30-50 year old receivers? Really

So receivers/AVR does not effect "warm or cool" characteristics of the sound?

Warm or Cool? No they DON'T

 

[Pogre]

Here's an interesting article. There aren't a lot of proper comparisons out there because DBTs are a real pain to set up properly, but this one did a pretty good job of eliminating as much bias as possible.

Matrix HiFi --> Blind testing high end full equipments

 

[Pogre]

My point about the $100 is the fact of a cheaper system such as a Sony or similar VS say a Top of line Arcam, Anthem, etc... .

I just know with my setup, I have plenty of clean power available 200WPC at minimum available in both systems. After listening to my 2 channel using the Martin Logans vs the HT setup using Martin Logans(No room correction) my ears let me know there is a difference.

I can listen to the same music and the same volume level and my ears are fatigued after the HT setup for awhile. My 2 channel system while using the same Martin Logan speakers doesn't have the same effect.

If this didn't happen, I would not have asked for help from this group. But it's kinda disheartening when the first response basically says I don't know what I am talking about and hearing.

There are many possible explanations as to why you hear differences, not the least of which placebo and expectation bias, but there's more to it than that. That's why I mention DBT (double blind testing). It has been proven over and over that sighted comparisons simply can't be trusted.

 

[mazersteven]

But it's kinda disheartening when the first response basically says I don't know what I am talking about and hearing.

The first response DID NOT say you don't know what you're talkin about.

"AVR's from Denon, Marantz and Yamaha are recommended.

What's wrong with using the Marantz you already have?"

 

[pinball]

Ok, so the Logans sound better driven by the Mac, have you tried using the pre-outs on the AVR to intern feed the MC2002 and drive the Logans ?

I have not yet. I was hoping to keep the AMP 3 on the front 3 speakers but I guess I could use it to power the center and rear speakers.

 

[pinball]

The first response DID NOT say you don't know what you're talkin about.

"AVR's from Denon, Marantz and Yamaha are recommended.

What's wrong with using the Marantz you already have?"

Sorry #6. Should have said first replier.

 

[SimplyEpic]

The McIntosh C712 has sperate controls for tonality including Bass, Treble and loudness (flat to Max which I think is bass related). The Marantz has an EQ that may or may not be active or adjusted so I think this is an apples to Asparagus comparison as there is no way to see if both are set to a true neutral allowing for the source (which in and of itself is another item that can change the sound) is playing true.

With that being said if you are experiencing fatigue when using the Marantz you may want to see about adjusting the EQ or using the room correction software to see if it helps.