A/V Recievers?

[rnatalli]

OK I am 42 been audio since I was about 10 years old I have never heard anyone say "pick the speakers first" and IMHO onkyo makes a good sounding avr as well and so does Pioneer, lets not for get them.

What happens when someone gets home with their brand-new Magnepans and tries to hook them up to the Sony receiver they bought 5 weeks earlier? This is one of many reasons you choose speakers first. Not to mention they have the greatest impact on the sound. Both local shops I buy from always recommend speakers first. Once you have speakers, you'll know what kind of power you'll need to drive them.

To the OP: Denon, Pioneer, Onkyo, HK, and Yamaha all make fine receivers. Buy the one with the features you want and the lowest price. Simple as that.

 

[gliz]

What happens when someone gets home with their brand-new Magnepans and tries to hook them up to the Sony receiver they bought 5 weeks earlier? This is one of many reasons you choose speakers first. Not to mention they have the greatest impact on the sound. Both local shops I buy from always recommend speakers first. Once you have speakers, you'll know what kind of power you'll need to drive them.

To the OP: Denon, Pioneer, Onkyo, HK, and Yamaha all make fine receivers. Buy the one with the features you want and the lowest price. Simple as that.

but if you get the AVR first, and then get speakers that match the output of the AVR is that not the same thing? the way you suggest is get the speakers first and then get an avr that matches the requierments of the speakers, either way things have to match seems like the whole chicken and the egg thing to me. I am ,however not too old to learn something new though

 

[rnatalli]

but if you get the AVR first, and then get speakers that match the output of the AVR is that not the same thing? the way you suggest is get the speakers first and then get an avr that matches the requierments of the speakers, either way things have to match seems like the whole chicken and the egg thing to me. I am ,however not too old to learn something new though

It's not the same thing. Speakers impact sound the most and you don't want to limit your audition list simply because of the AVR. I'd rather have a wide selection of speakers and limited selection of AVR's rather than the other way around.

 

[DD66000]

No, you felt that H/K sounded better. H/K "will" not sound better than the Yamaha, they will sound aproximately the same. This can easily be verified through a simple level matched DBT.

Don't even go there!

 

[rnatalli]

Don't even go there!

I agree with Seth. A $500 HK receiver will sound 95% identical to a $500 Yamaha receiver assuming DBT and matched levels. I'm going there as the objective data certainly supports this position

 

[gliz]

It's not the same thing. Speakers impact sound the most and you don't want to limit your audition list simply because of the AVR. I'd rather have a wide selection of speakers and limited selection of AVR's rather than the other way around.

Ok that makes sence.

 

[DD66000]

I agree with Seth. A $500 HK receiver will sound 95% identical to a $500 Yamaha receiver assuming DBT and matched levels. I'm going there as the objective data certainly supports this position

That would only be true IF the receivers in question came off the same production line, used the same components, and same circuity.
Replace any of those things with something different, the resulting sound will change, maybe by a lot, maybe only a little.

 

[rnatalli]

That would only be true IF the receivers in question came off the same production line, used the same components, and same circuity.
Replace any of those things with something different, the resulting sound will change, maybe by a lot, maybe only a little.

Many of the components used to assemble these receivers come from the same place. Of course there are some differences, but it isn't like HK somehow uses vastly superior components to say Onkyo as an example. Now you change the comparison to a $1,500 receiver vs. a $500 receiver and you'll likely see differences. Then there's always adding a separate amp which changes things.

The problem with this type of thinking is that people concentrate on the 5% difference in sound between receivers rather than concentrating on speakers which is what really matters.

 

[Pyrrho]

I agree with Seth. A $500 HK receiver will sound 95% identical to a $500 Yamaha receiver assuming DBT and matched levels. I'm going there as the objective data certainly supports this position

That would only be true IF the receivers in question came off the same production line, used the same components, and same circuity.
Replace any of those things with something different, the resulting sound will change, maybe by a lot, maybe only a little.

You are mistaken. Some completely different amplifier designs, when operating within their design parameters (e.g., not driven to clipping, driving an impedance of speaker for which it is designed, etc.), have been shown to sound the same in level matched double blind tests. Indeed, they should sound the same, because they are supposed to reproduce the signal that is fed into them, only at a greater level. If they do anything else to an audible extent, they are not doing their job properly.

See:

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_pwr.htm

Of course, some of the amplifiers they tested did sound different. But in those cases, there is a reason for it (see, for example, the frequency response curve of one of them).

The reason why so many people believe that amplifiers sound different is because they do not level match them and listen blind, but instead listen after being told a lot of BS about how they all sound different. People then believe they hear a difference (which, since they are not level matched, they might).

 

[Taxman]

If I should decide on speakers first, then what should I get? I was looking to spend around $500, but am willing to spend more? I really wanted a wireless setup but I heard they don't have that for speakers yet? Does anyone know why not?

Originally I wanted two front speakers, two rear speakers, and a sub, but someone suggested I should get a front center speaker as well? Money really isn't an issue, it was just what I was looking to spend. I mean I don't want to go crazy, but I wouldn't mind spending upwards of 7 or 8 hundred for the speakers alone.

Also, is it true that wood speakers are better? I have heard that too.

Thanks for all your help!

 

[Seth=L]

Don't even go there!

Don't worry, I don't need to go there. It looks as though rnatalli and Pyrrho have taken care of this misunderstanding.

Personal bias is the technology they use to get different branded equipment to sound better/different than other. Monster, a leader in employing personal bias technology, has used that same technology for years with astonishing results. I must say I am dumbfounded.

 

[Seth=L]

OK I am 42 been audio since I was about 10 years old I have never heard anyone say "pick the speakers first" and IMHO onkyo makes a good sounding avr as well and so does Pioneer, lets not for get them.

You have never heard anyone say pick speakers first? You must have misspoken, or I can't read.

 

[corey]

If I should decide on speakers first, then what should I get? I was looking to spend around $500, but am willing to spend more? I really wanted a wireless setup but I heard they don't have that for speakers yet? Does anyone know why not?

Originally I wanted two front speakers, two rear speakers, and a sub, but someone suggested I should get a front center speaker as well? Money really isn't an issue, it was just what I was looking to spend. I mean I don't want to go crazy, but I wouldn't mind spending upwards of 7 or 8 hundred for the speakers alone.

Also, is it true that wood speakers are better? I have heard that too.

Thanks for all your help!

Money is not always an issue, but some sort of budget usually is - keep in mind that some speakers cost more than $100,000 EACH. Spending more money on speakers does not guarantee better speakers, but it does open up your set of possible speakers. If you shop well, you should be able to find 3 or 4 hundred dollar per pair speakers that sound better than $100 / pair speakers. Not that you need to make that jump, there might be some $200 / pair speakers with your name on them.

Another way to focus in on what will work for you is to figure out your size limits - do you want the biggest possible boxes, or would you rather have less obtrusive enclosures? Keep in mind that it costs more to get the same sound quality from a smaller speaker than a larger one.

Think about speaker construction too. If you plan to place your main speakers close to the wall, you might want to avoid rear ported speakers.

Think about your front three (left, right & center) as a group - read up on timber matching. It's great to have matching rears, but not as important as the front three. so your rears are the first place to cut corners.

For sub woofers, the price / performance curve climbs pretty steep up to 5 or 6 hundred dollars (and some would say much more.) This might be a good place to look at used. Try craigslist, because if you can get it local there's no shipping. Used subs should be half retail or less.

Wood does not make speakers sound better, but it can make them look nicer. How much extra do you want to spent on looks?

Hope these thoughts help.

 

[gliz]

seth,

I stand by what I said. If I have someone that needs to put a speaker system (for now I am just referring to the mains) and an AVR together and they can spend lets say $500 on speakers and $500 on and AVR there is very little chance that you will have any issues matching the speakers to the AVR. What I have heard was that one should take more care in picking out speakers. They do have the biggest impact on sound. Now if you are not a work-a-day person and you have a large budget, then yes get the speakers first. To me the amount that a person has to spend on the total system guides how the components are picked out. But, Like I said I am willing to lean, I dont think that I know it all. People who thing that they know it all never learn anything. it is just lke playing bass, maybe I have learned a bad habit and need to un-learn it. so lay it on me!

DING DING I can see a reasone to pick the speakers first, the room size, DOH!!

 

[DD66000]

You are mistaken. Some completely different amplifier designs, when operating within their design parameters (e.g., not driven to clipping, driving an impedance of speaker for which it is designed, etc.), have been shown to sound the same in level matched double blind tests. Indeed, they should sound the same, because they are supposed to reproduce the signal that is fed into them, only at a greater level. If they do anything else to an audible extent, they are not doing their job properly.

Once again someone is confusing the issue, changing the conversation from receivers to amps, not the first time I've seen that happen. I never said anything about amps. Receivers are more than just an amp, some receivers can sound "warm", while others can sound "bright" using the same speakers, in the same room.
Then there is also the added things to any given receiver, or pre/pro.
Just look at HK, for an example, the L7 processing in the HK receivers isn't the same as it is in Lexicon products, with exception of maybe the HK745 receiver and the Lexicon MV-5, which is the low end Lexicon.

 

[rnatalli]

Receivers are more than just an amp, some receivers can sound "warm", while others can sound "bright" using the same speakers, in the same room.

That might be true out of the box, but after proper calibration, there'll be a subtle difference if any. Truth be told, most people won't calibrate their systems so meticulously so I don't see the harm if someone buys a $400 Marantz over a $400 Yamaha because they feel a Marantz sounds "warm." So long as they don't spend all their time comparing receivers when the time would be better spent comparing speakers.

I recently compared a Yamaha 663 to a Cambridge Audio 540R v2 and found I could hear subtle differences. However, this was comparing a $799 MSRP receiver to a $499 MSRP receiver and it's likely I didn't calibrate everything perfectly. It's also likely that the Cambridge simply had more juice and was better able to keep composure with low-efficiency speakers when being pushed hard.

 

[DD66000]

In the real world of audio, speakers are king.
Pairing an average receiver with a good pair of speakers is much better than pairing a high end receiver with cheap speakers.
Its also easy to tell when a cheap receiver isn't cutting it with a very good set of speakers.
About 1 1/2 years ago I bought a cheap Denon stereo receiver to drive a pair of custom speakers. Having those speakers for quite some time, I could tell that the Denon left much to be desired. So I picked up a vintage late '70's pre-amp and power amp combo, result, BIG improvement. Of coarse, that's an example of extremes.

 

[Seth=L]

In the real world of audio, speakers are king.
Pairing an average receiver with a good pair of speakers is much better than pairing a high end receiver with cheap speakers.
Its also easy to tell when a cheap receiver isn't cutting it with a very good set of speakers.
About 1 1/2 years ago I bought a cheap Denon stereo receiver to drive a pair of custom speakers. Having those speakers for quite some time, I could tell that the Denon left much to be desired. So I picked up a vintage late '70's pre-amp and power amp combo, result, BIG improvement. Of coarse, that's an example of extremes.

Chances are the custom speakers placed in imposing load and/or weren't very efficient. I am not saying higher dollar equipment has no place in the market. Some of it just goes beyond non-sense of course. The important thing is, if you have hard to drive speakers that you don't try to power them with any bottom of the barrel receiver. Depending on the configuration of your speakers they could dwell around 4 ohms, possibly lower, which isn't easy for even many mid-level receivers to handle at extreme levels.

 

[DD66000]

Chances are the custom speakers placed in imposing load and/or weren't very efficient. I am not saying higher dollar equipment has no place in the market. Some of it just goes beyond non-sense of course. The important thing is, if you have hard to drive speakers that you don't try to power them with any bottom of the barrel receiver. Depending on the configuration of your speakers they could dwell around 4 ohms, possibly lower, which isn't easy for even many mid-level receivers to handle at extreme levels.

That wasn't the case, the speakers in question are rated at 91db, 8 ohm and had been driven in the HT with a Marantz 110w receiver, and then a 90w HK 635 previously.
The Denon, used in a smaller room, just made the speakers sound thin.
Install a Citation pre-amp and a 100w power amp, and all was good again.

 

[Seth=L]

That wasn't the case, the speakers in question are rated at 91db, 8 ohm and had been driven in the HT with a Marantz 110w receiver, and then a 90w HK 635 previously.
The Denon, used in a smaller room, just made the speakers sound thin.
Install a Citation pre-amp and a 100w power amp, and all was good again.

You say the speakers where custom, as in DIY? Did you measure the impedance? No offense, but either you aren't considering a factor concerning the speaker's drivability or your bias is the cause for the audible difference (assuming none of the components where faulty).

Don't make me use my Goldilocks argument, you won't like it.