Please recommend upgrade from Lexicon MC-1

[GIEGAR]

Not necessarily anything, but I am not familiar with the brand, it kind of sounded like one of those new Chinese brands, not real keen on those. That and I didn't know what "Burger with the lot for <$1K" meant.

Sorry about the confusing slang. I just meant it had every feature available in a pre-pro for under $1000.

Integra is a division of Onkyo and is their "custom installation" brand. They've been around for at least a decade. The Integra DHC-80.2 is basically the equivalent of the Onkyo PR-SC5508, with a different facia a few extra features for the pro installer.

Onkyo PR-SC5508 THX Certified Processor First Look | Audioholics

Integra DHC-80.3 AV Preamp Controller Preview | Audioholics (Has upgraded video processing; otherwise the same as 80.2.)

Music in the Round #49 | Stereophile.com (Settle... it's Kal Rubinson!)

 

[brad1138]

That is a good deal, unfortunately, I won't be able to swing the $1000 for a couple months. I will contact that seller and let him know I would be interested if it is still available around January. If that one is not, I will look elsewhere. Thanks.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I totally agree with you on all of that, FWIW.

However, there are a couple of scenarios where - provided the individual already has power amps (or powered speakers) with balanced inputs - I'd easily recommend a pre-pro for it's balanced (XLR) outputs:

1. Where long cable runs or other electrical factors warrant the noise rejection capability of a balanced connection.
2. Where the input sensitivity of the power amp is high enough to require the higher pre-out voltage of balanced outputs (typically double that of unbalanced) to comfortably (ie. with headroom) drive the amp to full power.

I can see no inherent advantages in a pre-pro with only unbalanced (RCA) connections over an AVR used as pre-pro.


Or exactly the same? Has anyone taken the cover off a Lexicon pre-pro lately?



That, and the big omission (for me at least) by D|M Pro with the DN-500AV is the complete lack of an automated speaker/sub setup routine, including... NO BLOODY AUDYSSEY!!!

Well, I think some guys just want to have "separates" and brand names like Lexicon, McIntosh, Meridian, Bryston, Anthem, etc. It's a personal preference.

I used to think that way. So I understand completely. Now I think differently.

 

[brad1138]

Well, I think some guys just want to have "separates" and brand names like Lexicon, McIntosh, Meridian, Bryston, Anthem, etc. It's a personal preference.

I used to think that way. So I understand completely. Now I think differently.

It depends a lot on your needs, there is no "receiver" that is going to have enough power to run my M3Sis. They get 400wpc from the Citation amp and that is perfect. They are very power hungry and don't really come alive with anything under 200 wpc.

Buying an AV receiver just for the preamp section is wasting money that could be put into a better preamp.

 

[crossedover]

It depends a lot on your needs, there is no "receiver" that is going to have enough power to run my M3Sis. They get 400wpc from the Citation amp and that is perfect. They are very power hungry and don't really come alive with anything under 200 wpc.

Buying an AV receiver just for the preamp section is wasting money that could be put into a better preamp.

From the Denon 4520ci:
Analog frequency response in Pure Direct mode:
–0.05 dB at 10 Hz
–0.01 dB at 20 Hz
–0.11 dB at 20 kHz
–3.54 dB at 50 kHz

Your current lexicon has a filter limiting frequency above 20hz, with a very sharp roll off as it approaches it. A very important fact remains in that a dedicated preamp for home theater in todays market will unlikely yield any different results than a mid to upper AVR over 1K. Is the pre amp section of the Marantz 7702 any better than the 7009? Maybe slight measured from the balanced analog inputs, probably no difference from the digital inputs. Picking up a unit like the Denon 4520ci to use as a preamp and/or to drive surround channels and handle subwoofer correction is a very smart move at 999, same price as the Marantz 7701 without the balanced inputs/outputs and has all the same bells and whistles.

 

[crossedover]

ask this member his impressions of a AVR as a preamp. http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/pros-joes-systems-gallery/91768-my-basement-rec-room-wet-bar-build-5.html#post1055401

 

[brad1138]

I found a good deal on an Onkyo PR-SC885. It seems to be the same as the Integra DTC-9.8, which is the predecessor to the DHC-80.2 Any thoughts on that?

Thanks

Edit: Just saw unfavorable review from Stereophile, think I'll pass.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

It depends a lot on your needs, there is no "receiver" that is going to have enough power to run my M3Sis. They get 400wpc from the Citation amp and that is perfect. They are very power hungry and don't really come alive with anything under 200 wpc.

Buying an AV receiver just for the preamp section is wasting money that could be put into a better preamp.

Why? Most of the time the impedance is 6-8 ohms with a mild phase angle of less than +/-40 degrees. Sensitivity is low @ 83dB/2.83v/m, but
from Stereophile measurement of M3Si speakers: "The overall impedance indicates a fairly easy load to drive, dipping just below 4 ohms only once, at just under 100Hz."

Assuming your max SPL is the same as mine in 2.0 mode @ 94dB from 3 meters distance, it would require 57 watts.

For 97dB, it would require 113 watts.

How do you define "better preamp"?

If you could get the Denon X4000 for $650, that's cheaper than most preamps. And I don't define most preamps as "better sounding" or more cost effective.

 

[brad1138]

Why? Most of the time the impedance is 6-8 ohms with a mild phase angle of less than +/-40 degrees. Sensitivity is low @ 83dB/2.83v/m, but
from Stereophile measurement of M3Si speakers: "The overall impedance indicates a fairly easy load to drive, dipping just below 4 ohms only once, at just under 100Hz."

Assuming your max SPL is the same as mine in 2.0 mode @ 94dB from 3 meters distance, it would require 57 watts.

For 97dB, it would require 113 watts.

How do you define "better preamp"?

If you could get the Denon X4000 for $650, that's cheaper than most preamps. And I don't define most preamps as "better sounding" or more cost effective.

On the M3SIs, I have tried running them with a 100 WPC amp, 150 WPC. I have biamped with 150 to the woofer and 150 the the mid/tweet. Also tried 200 WPC and ~400 WPC (not biamped). The speakers REALLY come alive with 400 WPC more than any other combination. Other reviewers of these speaker have had similar findings.

Although not always the case, generally, the more you spend the better quality equipment you get. If that was not the case, we could all go by $299 Insignia surround receivers from Best Buy and be happy. If I am paying for the amplification portion of a receiver that is not going to be used, why not put that money into the next model up preamp? Aside from that it just bugs my to have the amplifier section of a receiver just sitting there unused, eating up power.

 

[crossedover]

There is a point of diminishing returns in audio. I'd put a crown pro audio amp that costs under $400 up against a krell fbp.

 

[brad1138]

There is a point of diminishing returns in audio. I'd put a crown pro audio amp that costs under $400 up against a krell fbp.

I understand that, but this is also my stereo, I want to maintain as high of quality for 2.1 channel CD listening as possible, something that isn't always topmost in a surround receiver/preamp.

 

[crossedover]

I understand that, but this is also my stereo, I want to maintain as high of quality for 2.1 channel CD listening as possible, something that isn't always topmost in a surround receiver/preamp.

Did you read the sterophile review of you your lexicon? I'm not saying it's accurate out side of their measurement potential for flaw. I've used all kinds of high end gear, and as for as HT goes when looking for double duty most of the 1k crop cuts it. If your a purist then go class a all way on amps have your crossovers designed 1st order. However it's been my experience that may not be the sound your looking for. When it comes to sound I've found its your room and speakers that have the greatest effect on your ears.

 

[brad1138]

Hello again, I never ended up moving on a new(er) preamp, but I think I am about to. I have a line on an Emotiva UMC-1 for less than I can sell my MC-1 for (That will hopefully keep the wife happy ). From a handful of reviews I read, it seems to be more or less on par with the preamps we discussed earlier, and has a better than some, if not most, musicality. I know it had some issues, but I think the final firmware fixed those. It is probably a step backward for music listening, but I think overall, I will be happy.

Any thoughts before I move on this?

Thanks again.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I don't know if the Emotiva is "better than most".

I guess if you are a fan of Emotiva, then it might be better than most to you.

Others may think an AVR from Denon/Marantz is better.

 

[brad1138]

I don't know if the Emotiva is "better than most".

I guess if you are a fan of Emotiva, then it might be better than most to you.

Others may think an AVR from Denon/Marantz is better.

I am not a fan of Emotiva, necessarily, but if it is even "more or less on par", I'll be happy. And a few of the reviews said things like:

"The UMC-1 was better, much better(than the Onkyo 9.9). Gone was the harsh quality and I heard a very musical presentation. "

"I listened to quite a bit of The Pulse by Pink Floyd… bringing back memories of The Division Bell concert we attended. The UMC-1 did not disappoint me with its ability to pass the unadulterated signal right on to the EmotivaXPA amps and Martin Logan Prodigy speakers, when used in the Direct mode. However, I preferred Stereo, since there was more bass presence, and once again, I was pleased with UMC-1 performance for 2.1."

 

[agarwalro]

If you're competent with room measurements and setting up PEQ filters, the Emo offers EQ capabilities that would delight tweakers. If not, the Denon X4000 used as pre-pro will be the best bang for buck with top of the line Audyssey auto calibration.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

"The UMC-1 was better, much better(than the Onkyo 9.9). Gone was the harsh quality and I heard a very musical presentation. "

"I listened to quite a bit of The Pulse by Pink Floyd… bringing back memories of The Division Bell concert we attended. The UMC-1 did not disappoint me with its ability to pass the unadulterated signal right on to the EmotivaXPA amps and Martin Logan Prodigy speakers, when used in the Direct mode. However, I preferred Stereo, since there was more bass presence, and once again, I was pleased with UMC-1 performance for 2.1."

Very stereotypical and generic description of most components IMO.

 

[brad1138]

Very stereotypical and generic description of most components IMO.

True, but they could have also said it sucked, or was poor.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

True, but they could have also said it sucked, or was poor.

When was the last time you saw a review that said something "sucked"? Like never?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

 

[brad1138]

When was the last time you saw a review that said something "sucked"? Like never?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

I know, but you don't always have a positive review. There were aspects that got poor ratings, such as the auto EQ, but that part doesn't bother me.

Being able to buy it, sell my MC-1 and possibly make money, as long as it is in the discussion with these other pre-amp, I will be happy. I guess I just wanted to see if anyone would tell me not to get it for some reason.