Receiver or Separates for my speaker choices

[roshi]

Hi,
I've narrowed down my speaker choices to the following two:
KEF iQ7 set-up
Aperion 5T set-up

Now, what makes more sense:
Yamaha RX-V1800
or
Emotiva UMC1 & LPA1 (or whatever the replacement's name is)

The Yamaha is a little bit cheaper, but separates are separates. So I guess my question is if it would be overkill to go with separates or if there will be a noticeable sound improvement.

Thanks for any advice.

 

[WmAx]

Separates are superior: you can insert very powerful processors such as the Behringer DCX2496 into the signal chain with separates. Such a device can vastly improve the performance and perceived sound quality of a high quality stereo system.

-Chris

 

[TLS Guy]

Hi,
I've narrowed down my speaker choices to the following two:
KEF iQ7 set-up
Aperion 5T set-up

Now, what makes more sense:
Yamaha RX-V1800
or
Emotiva UMC1 & LPA1 (or whatever the replacement's name is)

The Yamaha is a little bit cheaper, but separates are separates. So I guess my question is if it would be overkill to go with separates or if there will be a noticeable sound improvement.

Thanks for any advice.

Separates, separates, separates, by a landslide, and go with the KEF.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

KEF is certainly a bigger name, but Aperion gives you a totally free in-home audition. I mean you still have to put it on your credit card, but the shipping is free both ways and there is no re-stocking fees.

If you can do the same with KEF, then it's great. Otherwise, you're taking a bigger risk. Just the name KEF does not guarantee that it will sound good.

For one thing, the aperion 5T is 55Hz-20kHz +/-3dB and 45Hz-20khz +/-6dB.

The KEF just says 40Hz-40KHz without any tolerance, so it could very well be 80Hz-20kHz +/-3dB. Who knows? You might want to email KEF and ask for a more detail frequency response - on and off axis, +/-3dB, +/-6dB, etc.


Now, separates vs receivers.

Most people here will end up getting a separate amplifier anyway. It's inevitable.

So let's just save some time and money later due to upgraditis. Let's just cut to the chase and get the amp + pre-pro.

I think they will sound about the same in direct modes, but your speakers might need more power. I don't know what the MINIMUM impedance load of the KEF & Aperion speakers are. For all we know, they might be 3 ohms. If that's the case, you definitely want the separate amp + pre-pro.

 

[jcPanny]

Receiver options

FYI,
Either the receiver or seperates would be more than adequate for those speakers. Both are pretty easy to drive and 8 ohms. You would probably be just is happy with a $4-500 receiver like the Yamaha RX-V663 or Onkyo 606. The Yamaha has pre-amp outputs so you could add an amp in the future if necessary. Use the extra money for a BluRay player, room treatments, better sub, etc.

The Emotiva seperates would be great but the new pre-pro probably wont be out until the fall.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Separates only make sense when you need tons of power. This will be the case if you like it really loud, your room is huge, or you are using very inefficient speakers (eg electrostatics.) In all other cases, there will be no audible benefit to not using a reciever instead.

 

[itschris]

Separates only make sense when you need tons of power. This will be the case if you like it really loud, your room is huge, or you are using very inefficient speakers (eg electrostatics.) In all other cases, there will be no audible benefit to not using a reciever instead.

...or if you just want to have a seperate amp and another cool piece of gear to stare at in your rack. Audible and internal psychological benefits rank about the same in my book~!

 

[TLS Guy]

...or if you just want to have a seperate amp and another cool piece of gear to stare at in your rack. Audible and internal psychological benefits rank about the same in my book~!

Not true! Receivers have amps that can't or won't drive low impedance loads, certainly not with decent current output, and a lot blow up if presented with them. Actually blowing most of them up would be a good idea.

The point is, it is nigh on impossible to design narrow front tower speakers with decent low and upper bass response without dropping the speaker impedance to the region where it is inclined to blow a lot of receivers up. So receivers adversely and severely limit speaker choice.

Its getting past time to roll up the carpet on the receiver concept.

 

[darien87]

Separates only make sense when you need tons of power. This will be the case if you like it really loud, your room is huge, or you are using very inefficient speakers (eg electrostatics.) In all other cases, there will be no audible benefit to not using a reciever instead.

Not hardly true. I don't listen to my system all that loud, as I live in a condo, and my room is fairly small. I went from using my 661 to power my speakers, to using a separate amp and there was a very noticeable difference. My system sounds cleaner, with better mid-bass response now.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

Not hardly true. I don't listen to my system all that loud, as I live in a condo, and my room is fairly small. I went from using my 661 to power my speakers, to using a separate amp and there was a very noticeable difference. My system sounds cleaner, with better mid-bass response now.

When I went from a 150 watt Carver integrated to a 20 watt Onkyo "shelf system" reciever, there was almost no change in the sound at all. What little there was was actually an improvement resulting from the Onkyo having a somewhat lower noise floor.

 

[Stripes]

Get the RX-V663, if your not satisfied with the power you can always add a seperate amp down the road

 

[3db]

Seperates offer more flexability, more power, and a lower noise floor than do receivers. There are always exceptions but generally, that is the trend. Now if only I could afford these benefits, I'd be a happy camper.


TLS.

There are a few receivers like NAD that I would not hesitate using for low impedance loads.

 

[3db]

When I went from a 150 watt Carver integrated to a 20 watt Onkyo "shelf system" reciever, there was almost no change in the sound at all. What little there was was actually an improvement resulting from the Onkyo having a somewhat lower noise floor.

Are the speakers that you are now using with the Onkyo ever hooked up to the Carver? How loud were you playing them?

 

[Pyrrho]

It is amazing how myths never die. A receiver is a tuner, preamp, and power amp (and these days, typically also a processor) all in one box. With separates, these things are in separate boxes. Counting boxes is no way to determine quality.

Also, extra power is only useful if actually used. If you have speakers that are difficult to drive (e.g., low impedance, inefficient), or you listen at literally deafening levels of sound, then lots of power may be called for, but otherwise, any difference heard with typical equipment will be a result of lack of level matching and the placebo effect (i.e., in the person's head, not real). If you doubt this, do some double blind listening with level matched equipment with speakers that do not require lots of power.

 

[itschris]

Not true! Receivers have amps that can't or won't drive low impedance loads, certainly not with decent current output, and a lot blow up if presented with them. Actually blowing most of them up would be a good idea.

The point is, it is nigh on impossible to design narrow front tower speakers with decent low and upper bass response without dropping the speaker impedance to the region where it is inclined to blow a lot of receivers up. So receivers adversely and severely limit speaker choice.

Its getting past time to roll up the carpet on the receiver concept.

I think you quoted the wrong part there... but as someone who has a very capable receiver and an amp, I can tell you that the difference between running my system between the two is nominal. I certainly would not buy a seperate amp if I didn't already have the Sunfire. I played with my system both ways. While I do prefer the sound of my Sunfire (it just sounds a bit different... I won't use words like "warmer" or other such descripters because it get certain folks all up in arms... I'll just say different in a way I prefer) the Pioneer in no way had any issues driving my system to the max and I don't think I'd enjoy my system or be limited in any way using the amplification in my Pio.

That being said, more than anything, I like the way my system looks with the big extra box in my rack. It just looks more serious to me which in my mind makes me happy when I look at it.

I think one of the issues with seperates, and it's been talked about here before, is that the companies putting these out are usually smaller shops who just can't keep up with the rapid change in technology like the bigger companies putting out receivers. Hell, look at Emotiva. You won't be able to get a pre/pro with the current technology until fall... maybe... if they don't push it back again for the nth time. Even Sunfire's pre/pro only has 2 HDMI inputs and doesn't decode the lossless surround formats.

I'm not a proponent of either concept... evidenced by my ownership of both, but I'll stop way short of saying one is better than the other. I think it all depends on your application and what's important.

 

[darien87]

It is amazing how myths never die. A receiver is a tuner, preamp, and power amp (and these days, typically also a processor) all in one box. With separates, these things are in separate boxes. Counting boxes is no way to determine quality.

Also, extra power is only useful if actually used. If you have speakers that are difficult to drive (e.g., low impedance, inefficient), or you listen at literally deafening levels of sound, then lots of power may be called for, but otherwise, any difference heard with typical equipment will be a result of lack of level matching and the placebo effect (i.e., in the person's head, not real). If you doubt this, do some double blind listening with level matched equipment with speakers that do not require lots of power.

Gotta disagree with you here.

I am not an audiophile. But when I bought my first amp and played some loud music, I was very happy with the sound, but not floored. At first I was pretty unimpressed. Then I noticed that with the setting I was using, my subs would play with a movie soundtrack, but not with music. The reason I wasn't impressed is because my subs weren't even on! I was getting all that sound and bass from my towers alone. When I corrected the setting and the subs turned on with my music, I was pretty much blown away.

Maybe I have speakers that are hard to drive. But in my case, there was a deninite difference between my receiver and my amp.

 

[PENG]

Gotta disagree with you here.

I am not an audiophile. But when I bought my first amp and played some loud music, I was very happy with the sound, but not floored. At first I was pretty unimpressed. Then I noticed that with the setting I was using, my subs would play with a movie soundtrack, but not with music. The reason I wasn't impressed is because my subs weren't even on! I was getting all that sound and bass from my towers alone. When I corrected the setting and the subs turned on with my music, I was pretty much blown away.

Maybe I have speakers that are hard to drive. But in my case, there was a deninite difference between my receiver and my amp.

You hear the difference, good for you. Others could not, also good for them because it then makes their life simpler and can save them money. Is it a fact that more power helps even at lower volume and in a smaller room? We really don't know. All we know is that there are no shortages of DBT or similar tests done in the past and participants typically had tough time telling different amps/receivers apart. Is it then myth we are dealing with? May be, may be not. If it is, it is contagious. As soon as one starts saying it; others follow and say the same.

I know I tend to focus too much on supporting evidence of any claims and so I believe what some members have said before, that, power has its effect if you need it, otherwise it should make no difference. I also happen to know the basic electrical theory behind that does not support many of the claims. For example, even a low impedance load does not need the so called high current if it is not called for by the listener. I have also done many A/B tests including the use my 3805 and my separates. That being said, even placebo effects can work as good as real for some people. Bottom line, it really all depends on the individual.

 

[PENG]

Hi,
I've narrowed down my speaker choices to the following two:
KEF iQ7 set-up
Aperion 5T set-up

Now, what makes more sense:
Yamaha RX-V1800
or
Emotiva UMC1 & LPA1 (or whatever the replacement's name is)

The Yamaha is a little bit cheaper, but separates are separates. So I guess my question is if it would be overkill to go with separates or if there will be a noticeable sound improvement.

Thanks for any advice.

Whether it would be overkill depends on your listening habits, acoustic environment such as room size, types of music, e.g. classical, rock, jazz. For some classical music, even if you listen at relatively low volume you may still benefit from the power reserve separates typically offer, because of the dynamic peaks that could push any weaker amp the clipping point. I prefer receivers because I find it hard (if at all) to tell the difference between mid end receivers and separate preamps and I can add a 2 or 3 channel amps for the L/R/C channels where more power is needed. Then every 3 to 4 years when new features become available I can replace the receiver without feeling the pain of having to give up an expensive prepro/preamp. Some members will tell you a more powerful unit will always get you audibly better sound regardless of room size, listening volume etc. while others may tell you the opposite. You need to find out for yourself because such claims are not supported by theory, they are just claims based on their own personal experience. Your own experience may differ.

 

[roshi]

Wow I didn't expect this many replies. Thanks everybody!

I think so far I'm just going to wait for now. I'll be moving in a house soon and with that my living room will drastically change. Once this happens I will buy all the stuff mentioned above.

What I take from all the post so far:
- Separates (more power) are better for bigger rooms, so once I know the size of my new living room I'll ask again and see what you guys say...

Some more questions:
- Bi-amping: Now the KEF's can be bi-amped. Will it make a difference having the 2 more channels on the LPA to bi-amp the speakers? Or is it the same to use the Yamaha's extra channels?
- Wattage: The Yamaha is rated at 135W and the LPA at 125W. Now I heard before for example that you can't compare a receiver's power output with that of a separate (the person was talking about Rotel). What is the difference? Does that only apply to Rotel and other high-end brands?

Thanks again everybody!

 

[roshi]

Oh I forgot...

Get the RX-V663, if your not satisfied with the power you can always add a seperate amp down the road

The RX-V663 does not have enough HDMI inputs. That and the WAF of the RX-V1800 where the reason I chose the RX-V1800 as my receiver of choice.

Thanks though...