Inexpensive seperates or all in one?

[drooze]

I am planning a dedicated HT room which will measure 17'x12'. I will be running 7.2 channels. I currently think I am going to be using Paradigm Studio 20s for the front and similar level Paradigm speakers for the other channels.

Can anyone comment on using entry level seperates (Emotiva, Anthem or Outlaw) versus all in ones like Denon etc? I have never owned separates so I don't really know what the advantage/trade offs would be.

 

[WmAx]

I am planning a dedicated HT room which will measure 17'x12'. I will be running 7.2 channels. I currently think I am going to be using Paradigm Studio 20s for the front and similar level Paradigm speakers for the other channels.

Can anyone comment on using entry level seperates (Emotiva, Anthem or Outlaw) versus all in ones like Denon etc? I have never owned separates so I don't really know what the advantage/trade offs would be.

Are you going to have an equipment closet? If so, I highly recommend getting a rack of pro audio amplifiers for the application. They are insanely cheap compared to home equipment, and will provide ample power and quality. Use a dedicated surround pre-amp/selector or use a high quality surround receiver's pre outs; which many times will end up being a better value(more features/function for lower cost) compared to a dedicated surround pre/selector. A big benefit of having the outboard amplifiers is that you can insert DSP loudspeaker management devices between them, giving you greater control over your speakers and subwoofers than is possible using the built-in management in the reciever. BTW, the most recent version of the Paradigm /20 2-way speaker was measured by Stereophile; it is extremely linear, and has a lower resonance cabinet than most speakers. I would use the /20 for all channels(left, center, right, rears, etc.) and use at least 2 high quality subwoofers.

-Chris

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Can anyone comment on using entry level seperates (Emotiva, Anthem or Outlaw) versus all in ones like Denon etc? I have never owned separates so I don't really know what the advantage/trade offs would be.

I personally believe in using separates, but I think you should stick to receivers for 3 reasons: 1) it's convenient, 2) it's simpler, & 3) they practically sound just as good as separates. You don't even need an external amplifier if your speakers are 8 ohms with a sensitivity of at least 88dB w/m.

Now that's the practical side of me.

Ask me the same question on another day, and well, you just may get a different answer.

 

[AVRat]

WmAx makes some valid points, but if you're not a tweeker it may be too much work. I will second Accu's reply. The Paradigm setup you're planning will easily perform exceptionally well in your room with a good mid-level receiver. Now if you're planning to seriously deaden the room with acoustic treatments then separate amplification may be warranted.

 

[WmAx]

I personally believe in using separates, but I think you should stick to receivers for 3 reasons: 1) it's convenient, 2) it's simpler, & 3) they practically sound just as good as separates.

Points 1 and 2 may be valid; but point 3 is not. Due to the incredible precision and versatile adjustments available using a high quality pro audio DSP loudspeaker management system between the separates; you can achieve much higher perceived sound quality in the end. The pro amps also have the ability to drive virtually any load; making them future proof, while most receivers have rather limited potential in comparison.

-Chris

 

[WmAx]

WmAx makes some valid points, but if you're not a tweeker it may be too much work. I will second Accu's reply. The Paradigm setup you're planning will easily perform exceptionally well in your room with a good mid-level receiver. Now if you're planning to seriously deaden the room with acoustic treatments then separate amplification may be warranted.

Let's face it: virtually any HT enthusiast ends up 'tweaking' the heck out of stuff - going through and trying to adjust all options/parameters in the menus, etc.. Unfortunately, the options really needed to achieve the best sound are not usually present, or if they are present, are not adjustable to the degree or precision needed to actually work as desired. With my suggestion - you are not limited by any such things. Your 'tweaks' will be worth while.

-Chris

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Points 1 and 2 may be valid; but point 3 is not. Due to the incredible precision and versatile adjustments available using a high quality pro audio DSP loudspeaker management system between the separates; you can achieve much higher perceived sound quality in the end. The pro amps also have the ability to drive virtually any load; making them future proof, while most receivers have rather limited potential in comparison.

-Chris

Yes, but the OP is talking about "Inexpensive Separates", not expensive precision high quality pro audio.

 

[drooze]

What is a "high quality pro audio DSP loudspeaker management system"? Can you give me some idea of make/models of "pro" amps?

I am looking for entry level separates and not looking to break the bank.

 

[WmAx]

What is a "high quality pro audio DSP loudspeaker management system"? Can you give me some idea of make/models of "pro" amps?

I am looking for entry level separates and not looking to break the bank.

The Behringer DCX2496 device fits the definition of a high quality pro audio DSP loudspeaker management system. They cost about $275 each. Each unit has 3 inputs and 6 outputs; configurable/assignable in any way you desire. For a 5 channel surround set up you would ideally use 2 units ( each one has 3 inputs - and you need ideally 5 total inputs; but you can get by with using just one unit on the front three channels and the subwoofer since these are the most critical channels and use the receiver's built in xover for the rear surrounds). As for amplifiers; you can choose from so many. Crown XLS amps are popular, and will provide transparent high power output. The XLS 202D for example, will output 200 watts at 8 ohms per channel, and 300 watts at 4 ohms per channel, and is about $250 shipped. Or if you want massive power; you can get a Behringer Ep2500 for about $350 shipped that will output a super clean 450 per channal at 8 ohms, 650 per channel at 4 ohms and about 1000 per channel at 2 ohms.

-Chris

 

[fmw]

Points 1 and 2 may be valid; but point 3 is not. Due to the incredible precision and versatile adjustments available using a high quality pro audio DSP loudspeaker management system between the separates; you can achieve much higher perceived sound quality in the end. The pro amps also have the ability to drive virtually any load; making them future proof, while most receivers have rather limited potential in comparison.

-Chris

As long as we understand that it is a "perceived" sound quality as written and not real sound quality. Also, there is no difference in future proofing between the two. Preamp/processors go obselete just like receivers.

 

[cbraver]

As long as we understand that it is a "perceived" sound quality as written and not real sound quality. Also, there is no difference in future proofing between the two. Preamp/processors go obselete just like receivers.

DSP opens a lot of doors for making a room sound good.

And, with seperates you don't have to pay to re-power each time you upgrade.

 

[WmAx]

As long as we understand that it is a "perceived" sound quality as written and not real sound quality. Also, there is no difference in future proofing between the two. Preamp/processors go obselete just like receivers.

Well, the amplifiers and the loudspeaker management DSP processors are future-proofed. There is no reason to change those in the future, excepting physical failure. You can change the pre-pro for the surround sound/switching without any modification/switching of the amplifiers and loudspeaker management systems. My use of 'perceived' is meant to imply that the likely tonal adjustments that the user may prefer and apply can only be interpreted as 'changes', not sound quality enhancements on a measured scale. However, the superior main to subwoofer integration possible with the suggested processors certainly could be declared superior based on measurements.

-Chris

 

[fmw]

We're talking about different things. Sorry. I'm referring to amplification and you guys are talking about DSP and EQ. Different issues. Take care.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The Behringer DCX2496 device fits the definition of a high quality pro audio DSP loudspeaker management system. They cost about $275 each. Each unit has 3 inputs and 6 outputs; configurable/assignable in any way you desire. For a 5 channel surround set up you would ideally use 2 units ( each one has 3 inputs - and you need ideally 5 total inputs; but you can get by with using just one unit on the front three channels and the subwoofer since these are the most critical channels and use the receiver's built in xover for the rear surrounds). As for amplifiers; you can choose from so many. Crown XLS amps are popular, and will provide transparent high power output. The XLS 202D for example, will output 200 watts at 8 ohms per channel, and 300 watts at 4 ohms per channel, and is about $250 shipped. Or if you want massive power; you can get a Behringer Ep2500 for about $350 shipped that will output a super clean 450 per channal at 8 ohms, 650 per channel at 4 ohms and about 1000 per channel at 2 ohms.

-Chris

Are you saying that this example (Behringer & Crown) will sound better than a Denon 5308 or Yamaha Z11?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

As long as we understand that it is a "perceived" sound quality as written and not real sound quality. Also, there is no difference in future proofing between the two. Preamp/processors go obselete just like receivers.

I agree with you 100%.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

DSP opens a lot of doors for making a room sound good.

And, with seperates you don't have to pay to re-power each time you upgrade.

I think DSPs open a lot of doors for sound distortion too. Every single DSP mode I've ever used seemed to do nothing but cause sound compression and unfavorable result for me.

I hate DSPs and EQs.

 

[jcPanny]

Seperate Pre-pro

The current "inexpensive" pre-pros wont have the latest HDMI features that are included on a new receiver. Emotiva will have their new HDMI pre-pro out this summer for about $700. There are several HT amplifier options from Emotiva, Outlaw, and others in the $500-$1k price range.

Another option is a mid range receiver with pre-amp outputs (Yamaha RX-V663) and adding a stereo or HT amp.

 

[WmAx]

Are you saying that this example (Behringer & Crown) will sound better than a Denon 5308 or Yamaha Z11?

The devices I recommended are transparent; exception being the exact processes/filters you instruct/program the DSP unit to use; which obviously, if you use a tone filter action - it will be audible as a function changing the response.

-Chris

 

[WmAx]

I think DSPs open a lot of doors for sound distortion too. Every single DSP mode I've ever used seemed to do nothing but cause sound compression and unfavorable result for me.

I hate DSPs and EQs.

The units I recommend cause no distortions or compression anywhere near audibility, unless one is simply incompetent in proper set-up of the gear, such as causing an input stage to constantly overdrive, for example.

-Chris