Receiver advice for a newbie

HTfreak2004

HTfreak2004

Senior Audioholic
Ultimately established to who ? You and a handful of others. There is no way any person who reads that article and testing can gleam it had glowing results. In fact it was quite the contrary.
Also seems like Some of the others over there at audioscience seem to bring up the same concerns I did. I am not going to repost his (amirm) results, others can go have a full read if they so desire. But when something advertises 105 watts per channel and as he said, could barely muster up 35 watts without shutting down during his testing. Just not an AVR that I would recommend to anyone, at any price. Especially when he says he has tested $30 amps that performed better. And it's ok if you want to recommend it. But don't knock me for posting concerns for future buyers to ponder.
I don't care if it's only $50, I hate to see anyone waste any money, if there's a possibility that product may not workout as they had hoped. as they had hoped.


"peng"
(quote) I have no qualms about having recommended the X3500H/X3400H many times. For Audioholics who are on a $500-$1,000 budget .

No i have no qualms over you, Pogre and a few others recommending the 3500. Yet some to seem have had an issue with me bringing up the 3600, because of the cost issue. But I clearly stated if it was in his budget to look at the 3600.
My only qualm was, when i brought up a few of my concerns regarding the 3500, some here seem to take them as ridiculous or invalid. Yet the guys over at audioscience seem to bring up the same concerns as I expressed. Some here seem to think it's (3500) a great value. But in my opinion, once a reviewer or tester or whoever states, (amirm)
"Clearly these AVRs are not designed for continuous duty operation." That should give anyone contemplating it's purchase, a little pause before making the purchase.
So when a newbie comes in asking for recommendations, it's usually a safe bet to think, they might intend on driving it hard. Not saying they will, but better to assume they might rather than not.

Just like when we drive a car. We don't usually intend to drive it hard, but there will be times when we do. And we expect and hope it will hold up. Maybe that's a bad analogy, but i think you get my drift.
Agreed on continuous duty point for sure!

Without any audio gear experience the most damaging controls in the fingers of a Newbie are the gains and volume knob :oops:
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Warlord
Ultimately established to who ? You and a handful of others.
I think most everyone here agrees that $549 is a fantastic price for the 3500? I didn't say anything in my post about the article you keep going on about...
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Seriously, I have no life.
Ultimately established to who ? You and a handful of others. There is no way any person who reads that article and testing can gleam it had glowing results. In fact it was quite the contrary.
Also seems like Some of the others over there at audioscience seem to bring up the same concerns I did. I am not going to repost his (amirm) results, others can go have a full read if they so desire. But when something advertises 105 watts per channel and as he said, could barely muster up 35 watts without shutting down during his testing. Just not an AVR that I would recommend to anyone, at any price. Especially when he says he has tested $30 amps that performed better. And it's ok if you want to recommend it. But don't knock me for posting concerns for future buyers to ponder.
I don't care if it's only $50, I hate to see anyone waste any money, if there's a possibility that product may not workout as they had hoped. as they had hoped.


"peng"
(quote) I have no qualms about having recommended the X3500H/X3400H many times. For Audioholics who are on a $500-$1,000 budget .

No i have no qualms over you, Pogre and a few others recommending the 3500. Yet some to seem have had an issue with me bringing up the 3600, because of the cost issue. But I clearly stated if it was in his budget to look at the 3600.
My only qualm was, when i brought up a few of my concerns regarding the 3500, some here seem to take them as ridiculous or invalid. Yet the guys over at audioscience seem to bring up the same concerns as I expressed. Some here seem to think it's (3500) a great value. But in my opinion, once a reviewer or tester or whoever states, (amirm)
"Clearly these AVRs are not designed for continuous duty operation." That should give anyone contemplating it's purchase, a little pause before making the purchase.
So when a newbie comes in asking for recommendations, it's usually a safe bet to think, they might intend on driving it hard. Not saying they will, but better to assume they might rather than not.

Just like when we drive a car. We don't usually intend to drive it hard, but there will be times when we do. And we expect and hope it will hold up. Maybe that's a bad analogy, but i think you get my drift.
Mind expanding on that part where "it could barely muster up 35 watts without shutting down"?
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Seriously, I have no life.
It’s funny since if it shuts down no wattage would be produced let alone 35!
Might be more your sense of humor?

Back to the point.....under just what circumstances did it have trouble at 35 watts, tho? Amir can be really weird about what he considers important.
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Warlord
Might be more your sense of humor?

Back to the point.....under just what circumstances did it have trouble at 35 watts, tho? Amir can be really weird about what he considers important.
I've noticed he likes to use a lot of hyperbole. I don't think I've seen "glowing results" on anything Amir's reviewed, lol.
 
G

Grandzoltar

Full Audioholic
I’m confused Amir says the amp section is an over achiever better than the nad avr. It just has a poor dac. Sound and Vision on the x3400 has great continuous numbers.

Two channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 123.0 watts
1% distortion at 147.6 watts

Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 97.6 watts
1% distortion at 106.1 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 72.7 watts
1% distortion at 80.8 watts


Read more at https://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-x3400h-av-receiver-review-test-bench#00epsR3ld45JTuw3.99

For perspective here’s the Yamaha 2070 number notice continuous 8 ohm 5 and 7 channel
1575643366609.jpeg



1575643366609.jpeg
 
Last edited:
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
My only qualm was, when i brought up a few of my concerns regarding the 3500, some here seem to take them as ridiculous or invalid. Yet the guys over at audioscience seem to bring up the same concerns as I expressed. Some here seem to think it's (3500) a great value. But in my opinion, once a reviewer or tester or whoever states, (amirm)
"Clearly these AVRs are not designed for continuous duty operation." That should give anyone contemplating it's purchase, a little pause before making the purchase.
So when a newbie comes in asking for recommendations, it's usually a safe bet to think, they might intend on driving it hard. Not saying they will, but better to assume they might rather than not.
As I mentioned before, Amir is very different than any other reviewers that I 've gotten used to and sort of know how to take them, that included JA of Stereophile. "Continuous" is a term that is not clearly defined in the audio world. Google hard, really hard, to sort out the hearsay, myth and technical stuff, and you would likely agree with me in the end. I learned quickly to skim over Amir's commentary part and focus on his measurements, and would ask him for clarifications of parts of the measurements if the conditions were not clearly stated.

But first, please do me a favor, read Gene's article linked below if you haven't yet. Then please do come back and discuss further.. thank you.

 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I’m confused Amir says the amp section is an over achiever better than the nad avr. It just has a poor dac. Sound and Vision on the x3400 has great continuous numbers.
Not trying to defend the X3500H here, just want to emphasize that the AVR-X3400/3500/3600H all have the same DAC as the AVR-X6400/6500H and Marantz SR7012/7013 and SR8012. It is the AK4458 VN, you can download the datasheet:


Only the AVR-X7200W/WA, AVR-X8500H and AV8802/A, AV8805 have the higher end AK4490

Now to put things in perspective:

As I repeated a couple times before, Amir said it was poor, but he had the pre-out voltage at 2 V, and it is still connected to the power amp section. Gene has pointed out before too, that somehow the power amp section, even when no speakers connected, might have resulted in (not in exact words but see links below...) higher distortions in the pre-out measurements.

To potentially add salt to open wound, Amir admitted he did not measure the X3500H in "pure direct" mode. For some other AVRs that may not make a different but I think it would in the case of Denon AVR, because in Stereo mode, the schematics of the Denon AVR-X3400/X4400H show the signal would go through the ADC (analog to digital converter) before it gets to the DAC, and the ADC chip used in D&M AVCs/AVRs are not that good, not as good as those used in Yamaha AVRs for sure.

Even under those conditions, Amir was still getting approx. 0.02% THD+N, that really isn't bad in real sense, just poor in relative sense to many of the separate DACs and a couple other AVRs he also measured.

Below is what Gene found in his review of the SR8012 about the pre-out performance, and that is what Amir referred to as his "DAC" measurement.

SR8012 review

Editorial Note about Preamp Mode:

I was unable to do a preamp frequency sweep exceeding 1.2Vrms as it tripped the protection circuits since the power amps were still engaged and exceeded full rated power (140 watt/ch, 8 ohms, Av = 29dB). Unfortunately, Marantz doesn't offer a preamp only mode to disconnect the power amp from the circuit if you're using only external amplification. This is something I'd like to see ALL receiver manufacturers offer that include preouts to avoid this very problem I noted. It would also be more energy efficient as well. We will be testing this on receivers going forward and lobbying the manufacturers to include a preamp mode if they already don't. Please note it's unlikely you will ever run into a problem driving external amplification as normal program material doesn't behave like continuous sinusoidal sweeps like what was used on my bench tests.


And here is what Gene responded to @lovinthehd 's post #32 in post #35

Gene's response
lovinthehd said:
So this is of limited value on this measurement? Is the amp assignment feature of the 3600 good enough just by not having them as mains (don't believe the 3600 offers a dedicated pre-out amp assignment mode)? What changes with pre-out measurement otherwise?
No. It will still do 4Vrms unclipped but without the amp disengaged, the receiver will likely go into protection on a sweep test above 1.5Vrms like the SR8012 did and 3rd order harmonics would,rise do to the unloaded power amp clipping. Read my SR8012 review for more info.

This thing has been discussed to the nth degree, I hope by including the above links could help things cleared up a little.
 
HTfreak2004

HTfreak2004

Senior Audioholic
The All Channels driven is for mono application.

Simply hook all the channels from any 5 channel amp to one speaker and you get more power than you will ever need :p .0000000000000001% distortion into 1/8 th of an ohm!
 
Truthslayer

Truthslayer

Full Audioholic
I think most everyone here agrees that $549 is a fantastic price for the 3500? I didn't say anything in my post about the article you keep going on about...
Sorry for late response, been a little busy here.
Anyway why I referred to aricle si , because yes I have brought it up, so has peng and so have you. In the Upgrade stress post- you said #113 " Looks like he says that despite some forgivable flaws it's a "decent option" at $999 (time of review). That is interesting. I guess that makes $549 a fantastic price then. Even incredible at $499 like @M Code says in post #101 in bold print at the top of the page. He's about as knowledgeable as it gets 'round these here parts when it comes to AVRs. Way above my pay scale."

( When what (amirm) says ( time of review $599 ) very first paragraph is-
Nov 23, 2019 "This is a review and detailed measurements of the Denon AVR-X3500H Home Theater Audio Video Receiver (AVR). It is kindly loaned to me by a member. The AVR-X3500H is a 2018 model but it is still available from Amazon for US $599 despite having a retail price of US $999. If it performs, this is a very attractive price." )

Now I take all reviews with a grain of salt. However I just find it funny when some, reads a review they agree with, they take the article and or reviewer as gospel. But when they don't agree with it, then we shouldn't take it to heart and just realize you cant always take to much stock in what the guy always says.

Mind expanding on that part where "it could barely muster up 35 watts without shutting down"?
Sure,, Better yet here is what he (amirm ) says-
" The amplifier modules use the same flimsy heatsinks many other AVRs use. Here, they made a mistake of running two wide ribbon cables over the left and right channels which likely block convection cooling fair bit. In use, during my normal testing those two challens felt pretty warm, eventually leading to amp limiting power output to some 35 watts or so. I then ran my regulated power test which caused the unit to shut down and go internal protection. I put a fan on it and it would again shut down. Clearly these AVRs are not designed for continuous duty operation. "

Now while he did not come right out and call it a pile of sh..., he definitely did not give it glowing results. Which if one reads the entire article they should be able to see that. And please don't start with the DAC results, preout voltage etc, that was never my point. Anyone who had read my previous post complaints (issues ) should know that.
Regarding his use of the term continuous,, I don't see why some here keep wanting to debate the term and what he meant by it (ask him). But anyone with a sane mind should realize that most new to the audio avr game, or even some of the old timers. When they see (read) not designed for continuous duty operation and some of his other statements. It will give them some pause for concern.

Now im only replying because, some of the previous post responses to post's that I had previously posted. Some here seem to think any concerns or opinions i had ( regarding the 3500) were invalid. And thought or made an attempt to make me appear delusional for voicing those concerns. Yet when someone who many here seem to trust and take their reviews as gospel, also expressed concerns on the 3500. Then they decide, well sometimes you cant take his stuff as gospel.

I am not going to go back and try to prove my point, regarding what I said or what the review stated. But anyone can and should read the full article and should be able to see from his review my points were not invalid (unless you have selective reading ).
So Please, Don't try and come back with, it did better than the NAD. Never said anything about the NAD. Dont care about it.

My only points and concerns from the get go were, amp longevity, cheap (crappy) heat sinks, possible over heating and the transformer placement. And not something i would be interested in owning. So sue me, since im not willing to jump on the 3500 bandwagon click.
So go ahead an attack this post, doesn't bother me one way or the other. I wont respond anymore regarding the 3500.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Seriously, I have no life.
Sorry for late response, been a little busy here.
Anyway why I referred to aricle si , because yes I have brought it up, so has peng and so have you. In the Upgrade stress post- you said #113 " Looks like he says that despite some forgivable flaws it's a "decent option" at $999 (time of review). That is interesting. I guess that makes $549 a fantastic price then. Even incredible at $499 like @M Code says in post #101 in bold print at the top of the page. He's about as knowledgeable as it gets 'round these here parts when it comes to AVRs. Way above my pay scale."

( When what (amirm) says ( time of review $599 ) very first paragraph is-
Nov 23, 2019 "This is a review and detailed measurements of the Denon AVR-X3500H Home Theater Audio Video Receiver (AVR). It is kindly loaned to me by a member. The AVR-X3500H is a 2018 model but it is still available from Amazon for US $599 despite having a retail price of US $999. If it performs, this is a very attractive price." )

Now I take all reviews with a grain of salt. However I just find it funny when some, reads a review they agree with, they take the article and or reviewer as gospel. But when they don't agree with it, then we shouldn't take it to heart and just realize you cant always take to much stock in what the guy always says.



Sure,, Better yet here is what he (amirm ) says-
" The amplifier modules use the same flimsy heatsinks many other AVRs use. Here, they made a mistake of running two wide ribbon cables over the left and right channels which likely block convection cooling fair bit. In use, during my normal testing those two challens felt pretty warm, eventually leading to amp limiting power output to some 35 watts or so. I then ran my regulated power test which caused the unit to shut down and go internal protection. I put a fan on it and it would again shut down. Clearly these AVRs are not designed for continuous duty operation. "

Now while he did not come right out and call it a pile of sh..., he definitely did not give it glowing results. Which if one reads the entire article they should be able to see that. And please don't start with the DAC results, preout voltage etc, that was never my point. Anyone who had read my previous post complaints (issues ) should know that.
Regarding his use of the term continuous,, I don't see why some here keep wanting to debate the term and what he meant by it (ask him). But anyone with a sane mind should realize that most new to the audio avr game, or even some of the old timers. When they see (read) not designed for continuous duty operation and some of his other statements. It will give them some pause for concern.

Now im only replying because, some of the previous post responses to post's that I had previously posted. Some here seem to think any concerns or opinions i had ( regarding the 3500) were invalid. And thought or made an attempt to make me appear delusional for voicing those concerns. Yet when someone who many here seem to trust and take their reviews as gospel, also expressed concerns on the 3500. Then they decide, well sometimes you cant take his stuff as gospel.

I am not going to go back and try to prove my point, regarding what I said or what the review stated. But anyone can and should read the full article and should be able to see from his review my points were not invalid (unless you have selective reading ).
So Please, Don't try and come back with, it did better than the NAD. Never said anything about the NAD. Dont care about it.

My only points and concerns from the get go were, amp longevity, cheap (crappy) heat sinks, possible over heating and the transformer placement. And not something i would be interested in owning. So sue me, since im not willing to jump on the 3500 bandwagon click.
So go ahead an attack this post, doesn't bother me one way or the other. I wont respond anymore regarding the 3500.
You still didn't actually provide the info....what test did this particularly? Obviously it does very well in other tests, so what was Amir's parameters for this one example you are citing?
 
HTfreak2004

HTfreak2004

Senior Audioholic
Why can’t we just say 1G instead of 999 or 550 instead of 549, 500 instead of 499 etc,

Could you imagine if a woman said I only want 7.99 inches tonight:eek:

:oops:
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
Now I take all reviews with a grain of salt. However I just find it funny when some, reads a review they agree with, they take the article and or reviewer as gospel. But when they don't agree with it, then we shouldn't take it to heart and just realize you cant always take to much stock in what the guy always says.
Sure,, Better yet here is what he (amirm ) says-
" The amplifier modules use the same flimsy heatsinks many other AVRs use. Here, they made a mistake of running two wide ribbon cables over the left and right channels which likely block convection cooling fair bit. In use, during my normal testing those two challens felt pretty warm, eventually leading to amp limiting power output to some 35 watts or so. I then ran my regulated power test which caused the unit to shut down and go internal protection. I put a fan on it and it would again shut down. Clearly these AVRs are not designed for continuous duty operation. "
Agreed, that might even be a human nature thing, and I bet some of us may feel you are sort of being selective here too, seemingly fixated on his "cooling" related comments. I don't see anything wrong either even when you are doing it. Nothing is perfect right? So there are going to be the + and -, and it is a not a bad thing for reviewers to cover both. I respect Amir doing that, and wish he would continue to cover both sides. His style and scope of this measurements do seem to attract more technically minded people so yeah he got questioned all the time on the how and what he did in his measurements. That doesn't mean people challenged his methodologies, most of the time people simply want clarifications/explanations and/or suggestions for additional measurements.

And please don't start with the DAC results, preout voltage etc, that was never my point. Anyone who had read my previous post complaints (issues ) should know that.
Example of being "selective" reading again? You may not want/need other facts, but others might.. Amir provided what he considered "poor" results when the pre out was at a higher voltage than what people normally use the unit for, but much better results at the lower voltage. So for readers here they may not mind it (I guess, I hope..) that I pointed out his following posts telling us about the better results at the lower pre out voltage. Gene here at AH always (iirc) mentioned both so there's no need to question him on that, but over there at ACR, people did ask him (no it wasn't me) and he responded, no fuss.. Amir is an engineer so he knows what to do.

Regarding his use of the term continuous,, I don't see why some here keep wanting to debate the term and what he meant by it (ask him).
That's because it is a fact that this term when used in the audio specs, testing, and measuring do not always literally "continuous", for AVRs and even many integrated or separate power amps, more often than it means something less than literally continuous.

But anyone with a sane mind should realize that most new to the audio avr game, or even some of the old timers. When they see (read) not designed for continuous duty operation and some of his other statements. It will give them some pause for concern.
Agree, but then what's your concern about raising this very point that one should take this term with a grain of salt, unless we really know what it means, if it does not mean literally "continuous". Even our beloved and trusted Audioholics.com have more than one article on a few popular myths such as on the "passive bi-amp", "all channel driven" topics. In fact, they might even have one on my very point about "continuous" rated, if not, I may actually be interested in contributing in some way..

I thought we have been having a good discussion and you seem to be taking some of the posts with counter points of requests for clarifications as "attack", well unless I missed something I didn't notice any such attacks so hopefully I am just being over sensitive..

I wont respond anymore regarding the 3500
Understood, and response not expected. I only posted thinking that it may help others who may be considering the AVR-X3500H and may be following this thread. In that case, I wish they would get a more complete picture instead of fixated on a few negatives (obviously some, if not most are valid depending on the applications) mentioned on this $599 (yes, discounted price) receiver.
 
everettT

everettT

Audioholic Ninja
Agreed, that might even be a human nature thing, and I bet some of us may feel you are sort of being selective here too, seemingly fixated on his "cooling" related comments. I don't see anything wrong either even when you are doing it. Nothing is perfect right? So there are going to be the + and -, and it is a not a bad thing for reviewers to cover both. I respect Amir doing that, and wish he would continue to cover both sides. His style and scope of this measurements do seem to attract more technically minded people so yeah he got questioned all the time on the how and what he did in his measurements. That doesn't mean people challenged his methodologies, most of the time people simply want clarifications/explanations and/or suggestions for additional measurements.



Example of being "selective" reading again? You may not want/need other facts, but others might.. Amir provided what he considered "poor" results when the pre out was at a higher voltage than what people normally use the unit for, but much better results at the lower voltage. So for readers here they may not mind it (I guess, I hope..) that I pointed out his following posts telling us about the better results at the lower pre out voltage. Gene here at AH always (iirc) mentioned both so there's no need to question him on that, but over there at ACR, people did ask him (no it wasn't me) and he responded, no fuss.. Amir is an engineer so he knows what to do.



That's because it is a fact that this term when used in the audio specs, testing, and measuring do not always literally "continuous", for AVRs and even many integrated or separate power amps, more often than it means something less than literally continuous.



Agree, but then what's your concern about raising this very point that one should take this term with a grain of salt, unless we really know what it means, if it does not mean literally "continuous". Even our beloved and trusted Audioholics.com have more than one article on a few popular myths such as on the "passive bi-amp", "all channel driven" topics. In fact, they might even have one on my very point about "continuous" rated, if not, I may actually be interested in contributing in some way..

I thought we have been having a good discussion and you seem to be taking some of the posts with counter points of requests for clarifications as "attack", well unless I missed something I didn't notice any such attacks so hopefully I am just being over sensitive..



Understood, and response not expected. I only posted thinking that it may help others who may be considering the AVR-X3500H and may be following this thread. In that case, I wish they would get a more complete picture instead of fixated on a few negatives (obviously some, if not most are valid depending on the applications) mentioned on this $599 (yes, discounted price) receiver.
I'm using one in the 2 channel setup with the Salks with a QSC amp and no complaints whatsoever at moderate volume. At its average street price it should satisfy most.
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Warlord
Sorry for late response, been a little busy here.
Anyway why I referred to aricle si , because yes I have brought it up, so has peng and so have you.
I never once brought up Amir or his reviews. You did and I replied. All I've done was recommend something and you've been beating me over the head with it in 2 different threads with these long convoluted replies.

I'm not the AVR expert here, but I trust the opinions and suggestions of our seasoned members like Peng, who are EEs and/or work in the industry and have insider knowledge. Sorry, but you appear to be neither... why don't you go to the "Upgrade Stress" thread you brought up and quote M Code, who seems to think it's an "incredible deal" and flog him over the head for a while? He's far more capable of addressing your concerns than I am...
 
Last edited:
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I never once brought up Amir or his reviews. You did and I replied. All I've done was recommend something and you've been beating me over the head in 2 different threads with these long convoluted replies.

I'm not the AVR expert here, but I trust the opinions and suggestions of our seasoned members who are EEs and/or work in the industry and have insider knowledge. Sorry, but you appear to be neither... why don't you go to the "Upgrade Stress" thread you brought up and quote M Code, who seems to think it's an "incredible deal" and flog him over the head for a while?
My points in summary is the same as M Code's, that it is a good deal. Of course it has the drawbacks that Amir brought up and Truthslayer quoted.. When I AB'ed it (the X3400H) with my separates I had it up to more than 80 dB average from 10 ft, two channels only, and never felt too warm without external fans, and sounded just as good. That's when I started recommended it for two channel use as an alternative to the A-S801 that cost almost 2X. Amir's measurements on the 3500 simply add to Gene's on the 3300 (pretty sure you read his) that explained why I heard what I heard in my very focused and serious AB sessions. I was so serious, that I even plotted REW graphs to compare with the separate pairs. Yes, that little light weight thing was that good on my "bench", when used well below it's output limit.

Everything is relative, if for the same price and strictly for two channel use I would likely prefer the A-S801 unless I need Audyssey XT32. I am only mentioning the A-S801 as an example for reference and for two channel use.
 
P

PENG

Audioholic Slumlord
I'm using one in the 2 channel setup with the Salks with a QSC amp and no complaints whatsoever at moderate volume. At its average street price it should satisfy most.
That's good for you obviously, but it would be nice if we can hear from others users of the 3300,3400,3500 (same pre-amp/amp sections) on the negatives such as getting too warm and shutting down during normal use. Normal means within it's specified output limit.

By the way, I did a quick check on Amazon:
4.5 stars out of 5
81 reviews/ratings

2% 2 stars and 5% one star - Read all of the 2 and 5%, not shutdown related complaints.
68%/20% 5/4 stars

Compared that to the RX-A1080,

4.5 stars out of 5
10% 1 star, 0% 2 star,
72%/11% 5 stars

I recommended both in the past;) in the <$1,000 range.
 

newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top