Looking for 2 channel integrated amp to power my Monitor Audio speakers...

[crossedover]

yes that will work.

 

[1957Goldtop]

Ok, that fixed things. I can't do a thorough listening since my daughter is going to bed and my stereo is right next to her room but at low volumes it sounds normal again.

Thanks!

 

[M Code]

I have some old speakers that I still think sound pretty great… Monitor Audio Silver 9i.
Product Review

I currently have a Marantz SR6005 receiver and the speakers are being powered by a Sherbourn 5/1500a amp.
Sherbourn 5/1500A Five-Channel Amplifier | Sound & Vision

I don’t really use my system for home theater any more and my main priority is 2 channel music via a Rega RP3 turntable.

I’d like to get rid of my Marantz and Sherbourn and replace them with a good 2 channel integrated amp.

I was reading about the Rotel RA-1570 and it looked interesting.

My budget is capped at the $1600 Rotel price. When i say $1600 I really mean $1200 but I’ll go ahead and bump it up to $1600… so there is no more room for “it’s only an extra…”. I’d even be open to keeping it under $1000 if that’s possible with some used gear.

I have a Rega photo stage, but I’d love to get rid of it so I’d love something that has a good quality phono stage built in. HDMI to connect to my TV would be nice. I don’t need any USB ports.

Thanks!

Check out the HK990 (150W x 2)..
Great reviews, originally $2500 available for $999..
Excellent Room EQ, superior to Audyssey developed by Dr.Toole's R&D team..

Harman Audio - HK 990

Just my $0.05...

 

[PENG]

Check out the HK990 (150W x 2)..
Great reviews, originally $2500 available for $999..
Excellent Room EQ, superior to Audyssey developed by Dr.Toole's R&D team..

Harman Audio - HK 990

Just my $0.05...

That is a good find for sure, but being a reconditioned unit does it comes with a one year warranty? I thought the 150W was conservatively rated though the Stereophile measurement showed only 190W at 1% THD+N and they defined that as "at clipping". There is a fan in it, but hopefully it won't turn on unless pushed to the limit. I don't know about the EZ/Set EQ, but I believe every EQ brand has their followers and fans. Without conducting a fair scientific comparison, to say one is superior to the others would be a matter of opinion.

 

[PENG]

The wire will make no difference (expensive cables make absolutely zero sound improvement compared to the same gauge as lamp cord) unless you forgot to hook up the phone stage, I'm completely dumbfounded how there would be a sound difference that noticeable ( let alone even at all). Check your connections again. Did you replace the jumpers on the back of the speakers?

Good catch!

 

[panteragstk]

That is a good find for sure, but being a reconditioned unit does it comes with a one year warranty? I thought the 150W was conservatively rated though the Stereophile measurement showed only 190W at 1% THD+N and they defined that as "at clipping". There is a fan in it, but hopefully it won't turn on unless pushed to the limit. I don't know about the EZ/Set EQ, but I believe every EQ brand has their followers and fans. Without conducting a fair scientific comparison, to say one is superior to the others would be a matter of opinion.

I would really love a VERY detailed review of all the room correction options available. The hard part would be reviewing all the different levels within all the brands. My $150 pioneer has RC, but it won't be the same as a $500 pioneer even though it isn't labeled any different in the manual.

 

[PENG]

I would really love a VERY detailed review of all the room correction options available. The hard part would be reviewing all the different levels within all the brands. My $150 pioneer has RC, but it won't be the same as a $500 pioneer even though it isn't labeled any different in the manual.

I think the knowledge base involved in such software and implementation could make it a nice university R&D project to evaluate the effectiveness of some of the more popular ones.

 

[crossedover]

Above 200hz I'm not a huge of room correction unless it's extreme and can't be treated. I like a lively room that has the early or first reflections dealt with, especially with ribbon,electrostatic speakers and open baffles. Linkiwitz addresses this in a few papers. Below 200hz their are a plethora of options, all in varying degrees of difficulty.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I think the knowledge base involved in such software and implementation could make it a nice university R&D project to evaluate the effectiveness of some of the more popular ones.

By an independent 3rd party like Audioholics.

Not by a company that has vested interest in their own software.

 

[M Code]

That is a good find for sure, but being a reconditioned unit does it comes with a one year warranty? I thought the 150W was conservatively rated though the Stereophile measurement showed only 190W at 1% THD+N and they defined that as "at clipping". There is a fan in it, but hopefully it won't turn on unless pushed to the limit. I don't know about the EZ/Set EQ, but I believe every EQ brand has their followers and fans. Without conducting a fair scientific comparison, to say one is superior to the others would be a matter of opinion.

The HK990 was designed by Richie Miller who has since retired from Harman but to his credits are some significant products including the incredible Citation amplifiers. Regarding the comparison of various Room EQ schemes, the one used in the 990 was developed by Dr.Toole's R&D team and used in some of the high-end JBL Synthesis products, it is excellent especially for taming the multiple peaks & resonances <400Hz. Since we are under NDA, we cannot disclose the final results but suffice to say 6 different EQ schemes were tested, run under tight control and judged by a sample group of 72. The EQ scheme generally hyped as the best came out a distant 4th.. One EQ scheme not often mentioned but received high marks was the Dirac S/W out of Sweden.


Just my $0.05...

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The HK990 was designed by Richie Miller who has since retired from Harman but to his credits are some significant products including the incredible Citation amplifiers. Regarding the comparison of various Room EQ schemes, the one used in the 990 was developed by Dr.Toole's R&D team and used in some of the high-end JBL Synthesis products, it is excellent especially for taming the multiple peaks & resonances <400Hz. Since we are under NDA, we cannot disclose the final results but suffice to say 6 different EQ schemes were tested, run under tight control and judged by a sample group of 72. The EQ scheme generally hyped as the best came out a distant 4th.. One EQ scheme not often mentioned but received high marks was the Dirac S/W out of Sweden.


Just my $0.05...

Did they try Audyssey bypass L/R + DEQ, which would bypass the Audyssey EQ for the L and R speakers, but still keep the Sub EQ + DEQ?

 

[M Code]

No..
The basic premise was to run each of the (6) Room EQ schemes as a normal user would do when setting up his 5.1 home theater system. Any loudness, dynamic range control or tone controls were either set flat or switched out. Frequency sweeps of the ON & OFF setups were done, and then correlated with the sample groups numerical rankings. One apparent difference between the various Room EQ schemes was their own properietary transfer function, this was significantly different for each especially in the frequency response regions above 8kHz..
Also the ability of each Room EQ scheme to adjust/correct for low frequency problems was vastly different, and often the final EQ curve was worst than the original. It is very sad today How many users simply install the AVR, run the Room EQ software and accepting its results as being optimized..


Just my $0.05...

 

[PENG]

Thanks again for the insight. However, I would only go with facts and figures such as the appropriate response curves, distortion etc. but not by listening tests by other people. I see not much point in listening tests as it would be naturally subjective, like some people love Deftech speakers while others prefer KEF's. Most people probably prefer more treble and bass but I prefer neutral and my reference point is always live classical unamplifiered music. Also, as ADTG alluded to, such tests should be conducted by independents who don't have their horses in the race.

 

[M Code]

The testing had 2 elements, and were run under a tight criterria. 1st to compare the measured results of before/after of running the Room EQ schemes. And 2nd to measure the reaction/perception of a controlled sample group to each Room EQ scheme. Since the client is a name brand both in electronics and loudspeakers, the results pertained to both categories. The results were very, very interesting as some highly rated certain EQ schemes and how they handled low frequency issues, they actually made matters worst. The results for the 2nd part of the listening tests were interesting, as they disclosed certain likes/dislikes for modifications of the transfer function some were expected others were not.

Just my $0.05...

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

No..
The basic premise was to run each of the (6) Room EQ schemes as a normal user would do when setting up his 5.1 home theater system.

Wait a minute. Who are they to assume what a "normal" user would do?

There are 4 possible "normal" options for Audyssey: 1) Audyssey, 2) Audyssey Flat, 3) Audyssey Bypass L/R, and 4) Audyssey Off.

If there is an option to EQ only the bass and not the entire speaker and the researcher didn't test that option, then I think the researcher is remiss.

If there is a possible better function, it should be tested. It's not like it is too difficult to toggle from one of the 4 options to the other.

Why penalize one company just because the other companies don't have all the equivalent options?

The best option for me is Audyssey Bypass L/R + Dynamic EQ. If the researcher didn't test that, then I say they are remiss.

BTW, does the researchers or the sponsors of the research have their own room correction software in this study?

 

[M Code]

The primary objective was to evaluate each Room EQ scheme on its own merits as the primary AVR user would do in his initial setup. The multiple variations of Audyssey addresses the more advanced user, but 85% of the AVR users run the Room EQ in the standard position.
Yes...
They may try another mode if unhappy with the initial results.

There is a ton of BS flying around on the forums about the various Room EQ schemes each claiming unique capabilities..
The research findings were for the brand's internal use only, but as I have posted multiple times certain EQ schemes actually create their own issues, some of which are worst off compared to without. The biggest issue is the listening room itself and respective loudspeaker positioning.

For your info..
The sponsor of the research actually had (2) versions of their Room EQ s/w in the mix of 6. Regarding Audyssey we know them even when Chris & Phil were working out of USC in the early days several years back. So yes we have some conclusions about each Room EQ scheme their pros/cons but they will remain confidential due to the NDA. Suffice it to say that in the last 3 years there have been some significant development work done on this subject, with notable advances. If you want more info about some of the later developments, check out Sterophile, you will find some interesting comments regarding Dirac..

Just my $0.05...

 

[crossedover]

Just boycott all licensed room correction and get a deq dsp and be proud that you took the time and effort to apply it. Most people that use room correction and EQ have no idea of their rooms response before applying it. REW is so powerful and free, and with so many people that have separate amps, it's easy to insert the deq dsp into the chain. Personally I'd rather play around with it then be told by a chipset. This is not to say that the masses won't benefit for an auto eq.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

There is a ton of BS flying around on the forums about the various Room EQ schemes each claiming unique capabilities..
The research findings were for the brand's internal use only, but as I have posted multiple times certain EQ schemes actually create their own issues, some of which are worst off compared to without.

I agree with that personally. I personally don't believe in any room EQ. I think worst case is they soil the sound. Best case is they improve the sound slightly, but the magnitude is equivocal.

I just like Subwoofer EQ/DEQ.

That is why I asked about Audyssey Bypass + DEQ. I am sure Audyssey discourages and dissuades, but that is what I use.

 

[M Code]

U are not a typical user..
Keep in mind the early CPU/DSP loudspeaker s/w schemes were to just trim channel levels & set delays for a balanced sound stage. Then next the EQ part was added since tweaking tone EQ controls almost every user plays with plus the significant trend to using satellite/subwoofer systems over full-range loudspeakers became the norm.

Another point to consider is the source material, it may be a 192kHz Cheskey or a 128kHz AAC iPod track or a highly compressed audio channel from the cable/sat box. A big nuisance is to have keep adjusting volume levels up/down...

Suffice to say thats how we make our $, as we hold multiple patents in the field of audio and video s/w setup schemes that are licensed to various CE brands. @ last count our patents have been used in > 5 million AVRs. And now that more processor poweris available and stronger, more refined background research studies the advanced s/w developments will continue.

Just my $0.05....

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

U are not a typical user..
Keep in mind the early CPU/DSP loudspeaker s/w schemes were to just trim channel levels & set delays for a balanced sound stage. Then next the EQ part was added since tweaking tone EQ controls almost every user plays with plus the significant trend to using satellite/subwoofer systems over full-range loudspeakers became the norm.

Another point to consider is the source material, it may be a 192kHz Cheskey or a 128kHz AAC iPod track or a highly compressed audio channel from the cable/sat box. A big nuisance is to have keep adjusting volume levels up/down...

Suffice to say thats how we make our $, as we hold multiple patents in the field of audio and video s/w setup schemes that are licensed to various CE brands. @ last count our patents have been used in > 5 million AVRs. And now that more processor poweris available and stronger, more refined background research studies the advanced s/w developments will continue.

Just my $0.05....

Who is "we" ?