Audioholics Ultimate System Guides - Official Thread

[sjdgpt]

Personally, I like my Lazyboy. Which also stretches out to a nearly flat position, has low(ish) armrests, and works surprisingly well for that other subject.

Any my Lazyboy only cost $750 per.

 

[Leprkon]

so when do we get to see the Ultimate, no holds barred, sky's the limit, Aston-Martin V12 Vanquish of home theatre systems ?

It's only been "coming soon" since September... slightly quicker than Denon Link and somewhat slower than BluRay

 

[BMXTRIX]

I gotta say when a more high end store budgets a theater usually the starting number is around $20 - $30K for the one room. I think it would be good to see at least two more levels so that people have a couple of things to compare.

First would be a 'really nice' theater. Good DLP, some acoustical treatment, minor room design enhancements, furniture, a good screen and really good audio and a decent control system.

Then a really overboard system with tiered seating, hidden projector (long throw), and the works to go with it... It is pretty easy to drop 100K+ on a single theater when money is no issue and you really can justify almost every penny spent.

 

[RLA]

Any my Lazyboy only cost $750 per.

Hi
We have to post the retail price of the products listed The street price of the 090 with Auto recline and a LFE buttkicker installed is about $900 per chair No buttkicker then you are looking at about $800 per chair with A/R

 

[Audioholics]

Updated $5K Ultimate System Guide!

<P><A href="http://www.audioholics.com/news/uploads/axiomaudioepic.jpg"><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2><IMG style="WIDTH: 125px; HEIGHT: 88px" alt=[axiomaudioepic] hspace=0 src="http://www.audioholics.com/news/thumbs/axiomaudioepic_th.jpg" align=left border=0></FONT></A><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>We've received&nbsp;an abundance of&nbsp;requests to update the </FONT><A href="http://www.audioholics.com/showcase/systemguide/index.php"><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>Ultimate&nbsp;Home Theater&nbsp;Buying Guides</FONT></A><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>, so we have&nbsp;put our heads together and started in earnest to get you the best bang for your home theater buck. This week we </FONT><A href="http://www.audioholics.com/showcase/systemguide/5KRecommendedhometheater.php"><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>updated the $5K System Guide</FONT></A><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2> with all new products (last week we brought you the&nbsp;</FONT><A href="http://www.audioholics.com/showcase/systemguide/12KRecommended-HTSystem.html"><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>$12k System Guide</FONT></A><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>.) The $5K system features Yamaha&nbsp;electronics and a custom Axiom Audio Epic system tailored for best sound&nbsp;on a&nbsp;budget. One additional note is that, for the most part, Audioholics has stopped recommending rear projection CRT displays for home theater. Why is this? Well, for one they are a pain in the butt to install due to weight and size. Digital technologies, for the average consumer, also offer a bit more reliability, (hands-off) performance and overall capabilities than their competitively priced CRT counterparts. The newest batch of digital displays from the major manufacturers has, in our opinion,&nbsp;surpassed the edge rear projection CRT displays have held on the past <EM>(commence flaming...)</EM> We recommend you opt for convergence free, digital nirvana and be sure to get those sets properly calibrated when you bring them home!</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>[Check Out the Ultimate $5K System]</FONT></P>

 

[Engine Joe]

Axioms...

You mention the QS4's for the surrounds in the text of your piece, but use the M2i's in your table breakdown (and most pictures).

 

[Audioholics]

There shouldn't be any QS4 pics except for the home page post which I believe shows the Epic Grand Master system. Thanks for the heads up on the QS4 text. We added the QS4's as an option and have the System Guide configured for using M2i(s) for surrounds and back surrounds. I originally spec'd a QS4 but to meet the budget we swapped it out for the M2i(s) which are a great alternative if the room can support it.

 

[Engine Joe]

I was wondering if it was something like that (budgetary constraints causing a shift from QS4s to M2s).

Overall, nice setup!

 

[gene]

Yes, we wanted to do a 7.1 rather than 5.1 system. People can always opt for OS4's for the side channels if they have the budget and proper room.

 

[bleeding ears]

Yamaha receiver?

Hi all, just wanted to raise or continue discussions on the $5000K system.

IMHO I question the choice of Yamaha RXV1500 receiver.

In the list of alternative receivers there is RXV 2500(dearer) and Pioneer TX 52 I think.

In similar price to the Yamaha RXV 1500 is the Marantz Sr7400 or (Sr7500 now) ,and the Rotel 1056 receivers.

I question the power output of the Yamaha receivers.

Marantz claim (105 or 110 Watts x 7) with a power consuption of 540Watts.
Marantz also (from Marantz website) give a 70% minimum all channels running wattage. ie( 7 x 75 watts all channels running approx)

The Rotel 1056 is claimed 75 x 5 (or 7) all channels running and I don't doubt their ratings at all.

So what does yamaha claim?

Yamaha claim (120 Watts x 7) with a power consumption of 500 Watts? (less than Marantz Sr 7500 of 540 Watts) and they give no minimum guarantee like Marantz as far as I know.

Is not power probably the biggest issue with receivers ie (no room)

After some research I found archives/tests of receivers (will not mention brand) with similar claimed wattages (100 - 120 watts) putting out only 45 watts x 4 just before shutting down.

To me if they cannot put it on the line and quote an all channels running wattage I will look elsewhere.

I was disappointed that no all channels running wattage was given in the review of the RXV2500 by Audioholics. Perhaps not a realistic measurement, but how else can joe consumer compare apples with apples?

After all aren't we pursuing the truth?

What do all you guys out their reckon?

Thanks for any replies etc P.S Those comfy cinema chairs are great I will have to get some. Not sure about 7.1 being necessary though.

 

[gene]

Bleeding;

The RX-V2500 is out of budget for the $5k system which is why we chose the 1500 instead.

Regarding the all channels nonsense and power of receivers, please read the following articles:

All Channels Driven Test
Product Managing Receiver Platforms

You will soon realize that at comparible price points, most of these receivers will yield similar power measurements. While the Marantz receiver you mentioned may in fact be a good unit, we have a hard time recommending gear we haven't yet tested. We plan on reviewing Marantz receivers shortly.

 

[bleeding ears]

Receiver output

Gene, I am sure that most receivers at the same price point do have similar output wattages, but I read reviews to get the facts and compare one unit against another.

The best way for me to compare units is to compare them on the same basis
ie all channels running or some other basis.

As long as the method of testing is stated and the wattage output is stated after the test I then know I am comparing units on an equal basis.

By saying a unit (Yamaha RXV25000) has "respectable power output" for it's price point is good to know but for us wanting to know which is best, a figure such as all channels running appears the best basis for comparison. After all , it can do no harm by providing that data alongside all the other data. EG signal bursts or whatever.

Since a lot of work was probably put in testing the RXV2500 its a shame that the all channels running wattage was not provided in the review. Useless as it may be , if the power output of this unit is compareable to others there should be similar ratings in the all channels running test wouldn't there?

It just appears to joe consumer (me ) that sometimes data is not provided for a reason. I would like to know all the facts and make up my own mind.

Thanks, I look forward to the review of the Marantz 7500 .Hopefully data will be presented in an apples against apples comparison to other units.

PS A review on Rotel receivers would be great. I believe they are unbeatable.

 

[gene]

We don't do tests that have little to no real world implications so you will likely never see "all channels driven test" just like you won't see us discuss the chocolately midrange performance of cables.

We are however devising real world amplifier tests which to date have never been respectably done by any publications thus far.

However, testing 2CH's in the methods in which I have done does give you a good indication of amplifier and power supply performance of the product thus you do have a valid method of comparing products we review.

So many people fail to realize how impractical it is when a publication tests amplifers with all channels driven into a resistive load and holding the line voltage constant to do so.

For example if an amp is rated at 400wpc all channels driven with 7 channels and its a traditional class a/b amp with linear power supply, than the actual power consumption to deliver this much power would be (400*7 / .35) = 8000 watts. Not even two power cords in two wall outlets can deliver this much power!

In addition, most amplifiers will yield excellent distortion measurements into a purely resistive load. But watch out when they drive reactive loads such as a loudspeaker! We will be testing this but it takes time, money and resources to build these loads and acquire precision test equipment to measure it.