Sun-fired

[gene]

<font color='#000000'><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Decided to come on over and speak up here:</td></tr></table>

That is fine Mike, we always welcome feedback from our articles.  I am glad you have done so with more civility here than you have extended both myself and this website on other forums.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">While this thread may not be the place to point out other objectionable articles, reviews and/or comments Audioholics has published, it's worth mentioning there have been other controversies.  This particular TGIII controversy, if it is indeed one, is not the first.</td></tr></table>

Really?  It seems you’re an expert at assigning controversy and/or ulterior motives we may have with our articles.  I could also ask the same of you.  Are you a Sunfire employee?  What is your motive to come here under the guise of concern regarding the tone of our articles, yet offer no constructive criticism based on the technical content presented?  

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">First, I would like to address your statement that you have never claimed to be experts.  No, maybe you never have explicitly said you were experts.  </td></tr></table>

I believe Steve was addressing the fact that we are not acoustical experts as a previous poster labeled us to be.  

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But your articles and reviews say plenty that make your audience believe you know a heck of a lot more about audio than the average reader.  Your site serves a purpose of getting information out - unbiased information.  And to get that information out responsibly.  Yes, people should evaluate any product for themselves, but a site such as yours can put on or remove an item from a person's evaluation list.  An irresponsible or unprofessional review of a product that is deserving of more can easily dissuade potential buyers from even demoing it at all.  So your very public, and in most cases, respected opinions can be extremely influential to many people.  Not unlike an experts opinion.  Would you not agree to this?  Having said this, read on.</td></tr></table>

Firstly, anyone of reasonable competence knows that reviews are not purely objective.  In fact we even explicitly state that in our mission statement:
“Where audio and video equipment undergoes rigorous objective and
subjective tests by our staff, ensuring that marketing slogans aren't
the only guideline for your home theater choices.”

Note the word subjective tests.   Where does it say our reviews are purely objective?

I would also point out that we usually assign a Subjective Score Card at the end of each review.  Here is an example:
Summary of Subject Listening Tests
The scoring below is based on each speaker doing the duty it is designed for. The numbers are weighed heavily with respect to the individual cost of each unit, thus giving a rating equal to:
Performance x Price Factor/Value = Rating
Ratings Scale:
9 - 10 Outstanding
8.0 - 8.9 Above Average
7 - 7.9 Average
5.8 - 6.9 Below average
&lt; 5.7 Very poor




<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">To the subject at hand - the review of the TGIII:  I don't have an overly huge problem with it in it's current state.  But your explanation of how the original review escaped your normal checks and balances is less than reasonable.  How is it that time and resources were limited?  What constraints did you have that wouldn't have allowed the review to go through all of the normal checks and balances and delay the review until it had?  Are you saying you had a deadline?  If you say yes, I would love to hear the explanation for that one.  My bet is that you won't respond to this because you don't have an explanation.  </td></tr></table>

We don’t owe you an explanation.  We already made our statement and it stands as is.  So you are wrong, I did respond.  

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And if that's true, then what you did explain is either not true, or you were just plain unprofessional in allowing that initial review to see the light of day.  And if you can't tell the truth to your own forum members, or be consistently professional, then why would anyone have reason to trust your review of the TGIII or any other?  This is what makes you controversial, not because you decide to publish a negative review.</td></tr></table>

Mike believe what you will.  Personally if you find our reviews to be unprofessional or untruthful, then why do you bother to come here?  You do everything in your power to discredit this website in other audio forums.  What is your motive?  Why are you so infatuated with us?

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That original review used the words &quot;muddy&quot;, &quot;tinny&quot; and &quot;piss yellow&quot;.  Those words indicate you more than disliked the product - not that it was only &quot;somewhat&quot; deficient for the price as the review now states at the end.  It also makes the reader wonder if there is an agenda against Sunfire. </td></tr></table>

Originally the review used those words in his review and later we felt they were inappropriate for a variety of reasons.  The reviewer is the Vice President of Audioholics and he has every right to post an article prior to my or other staff member peer reviews.  If it is decided later that the review needs revisions, we do so and note it as we did.  Again, one wonders what agenda you have against Audioholics.


<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Those words were not appropriate, and to let them appear at all, even for a day, was irresponsible.  A non-suspecting reader may have crossed the TGIII off his list simply because he trusted those remarks.  And that was unfair to Sunfire, it's retailers, and to any potential buyer.  You will respond with something like &quot;well, other sites say &quot;just buy them&quot;, what do you think about that?&quot;.  We're not talking about other sites and their lack of professionalism.  We're talking about yours and how it relates to this specific review and your credibility on the whole.</td></tr></table>

Not appropriate by whom, you?  I don’t remember asking for your permission as to what is or is not appropriate for us to post.  Last time I checked I was the owner of this website, and freedom of speech is protected by the United States Constitution.  

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If you really felt the TGIII exhibited qualities of muddiness and tinnyness compared to anything, why remove those terms from the review?  Those terms are not offensive (like piss yellow is).  You can't answer this because you know I am correct in the above paragraph where I say those words were not appropriate.  And by not appropriate, I mean not a true representation of what you really thought.  So it is clear you published thoughts which were not true.  Bravo once again for removing those misrepresentations.  It is telling however that you would or could allow any misrepresentation to be printed.</td></tr></table>

Again, those words were chosen by the reviewer.  Since three of us actually performed the listening tests, we deemed it more appropriate to average our listening experiences and choose our wording based on that.  We all agreed that the Sunfire III had an appreciably higher noise floor than the other processors we compared it too, we all agreed it was somewhat lacking in lower end response as well, thus we updated the review accordingly.  Again I did answer your question.  Based on your writing style and tone, I really wonder if I am responding to an adult or a disgruntle teenager.  



<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Like you hope, I do appreciate your efforts in revising the review to read more diplomatically.  I have to wonder though, what was the motivation in doing that?  It was obvious to me that the revision came only after a big flare-up at the AVS forum regarding you and your review.  Without that &quot;bad press&quot;, I really wonder if the original review would still be intact.  And if it would be, I think you would have a MUCH more difficult time defending it.</td></tr></table>

Again, I need to give you no further reasons as we made our intent clear.  However, I will go further and say the article was revised for a variety of reasons listed below:
1) We all unanimously agreed it should have been written more diplomatically so it would not offend owners and the company itself, especially since Sunfire was nice enough to extend a review sample.
2) We all had differences in opinion on its overall fidelity and decided to average our subjective findings.
3) Yes reviewing the feedback in AVSforum also made us realize that it did offend owners and thus for the same reasoning as #1, we changed it.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In the reviews current state, I think you are still overly harsh of some things.  You are correct in pointing out many deficiencies that you believe to be critical at that price point.  But you failed to give credit and even mention some of the features that were most likely put into the TGIII that were trade-offs to many (some nitpicky) things they didn't implement.  You mention the extensive audio and video jacks, but you don't mention there are a whopping 3 component video inputs AND 2 outputs.  What other piece has 2 outputs?  </td></tr></table>

There are many other processors that also offer 2 component video outputs so I fail to see your point.  Again, we explicitly stated this was not a complete review based on our disappointment in its performance and feature set.  Again we believe it was inexcusable for a $3500 piece to have channel trims of only 1dB accuracy, and no adjustable group delay setting for the subwoofer as another example.  

 
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A very nice included feature for some folks with two display devices!  You don't even mention the front side effects channel availability.  And your biggest mistake is the exclusion of anything regarding the staple of Bob Carver's feature set:  Holographic Imaging.  The exclusion of these features is again irresponsible and is a sign of objective reporting not being totally present.</td></tr></table>

Either you have comprehension problems, or you did not read the entire review.  We already stated it was NOT A COMPLETE REVIEW and we also commented on the excellent choice of remote control Sunfire has choosen.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You are adamant that the inclusion of only one IEEE port is a terrible thing, and maybe it is.  But what good is two or three in today's world?  Any more than one?  This technology hasn't taken off, and when and if it does, there exists the possibility that one port could be useful.  You can't know that it won't (for certain).  I certainly do not, but I can foresee the possibility that an external IEEE hub or dual-headed cable would be able to accommodate a unit with only one port - not making it useless.  Maybe, maybe not.  Beating on this one point seems premature and unnecessary.  The TGIII or any other unit that employs a single port may or may not be useless.  You don't know, and you should have left it alone as every other review of it has.  Not because they left it alone, but because that is the proper thing to do.</td></tr></table>

Again inappropriate by your standards?  Last time I checked you did not operate this website.  Perhaps you should start your own so it will have perfect reviews written by a fair guy named MikeyB.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Your emphasis on SNR may well be valid.  I have got to wonder though, if you were to take part in a blind test of preamps, would you be able to identify the TGIII every time (all other pieces being equal)?  If your answer is that you could do it 10 out of 10 times because the noise level is so darn poor, then you are being overly arrogant and/or lying.  </td></tr></table>

Again the SNR was merely average for this unit.  Given our careful testing between units, it was identifiable each time to our ears.  I wonder how many publications that write reviews on products, including exotic speaker cables employ your DBT criteria for listening tests?



<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And if you can't do it 10 out of 10 times, then maybe the measurements you so highly tout are every bit as suggestive to what you think you hear as someone else's flippant comments can be.  I don't discount the importance of measurements and their impact on sound quality.  I do however believe ones own ears and the emotional impact of what those ears actually hear in the end is a product of much more than SNR measurements alone.  You can't simply state that good SNR measurements will ALWAYS equate to good sound reproduction.  </td></tr></table>

When did we make this statement?  Again are you reading the same review, or are you applying your own personal biases against Audioholics?  One wonders your motive again?
Here is an excerpt from our review  “SNR is an essential metric in determining fidelity of a system, especially since most critical listening is down at low power levels.”
Note the review states “an essential”, not “the essential”.


<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The inverse is also true.  Are SNR measurements important?  Definitely.  To harp on it like you have suggests you have made up your mind about the product, once armed with measurements, before sitting down and actually listening to it though.  Or that if you liked a product, but afterward found out it had poor SNR measurements, you would change your mind about liking it.  And that would be unfair.</td></tr></table>

Again this is Mike’s logic so it must be what we were thinking right?


<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Is the TGIII review definitively unfair?  I don't know for sure.  I've addressed some questions - maybe some reasonable answers by the staff would clear it up???</td></tr></table>

Mike, obviously you felt the review was unfair.  With that I suggest you pay no attention to it.  In fact since you felt that review was unfair, by your logic all of our reviews are unfair, thus I suggest you pay no attention to this website.

[edited, fixed quote commands]</font>

 

[Bprest0n]

<font color='#000000'>I also did some comparisons of my own and posted them on AVSforum where nobody discussed or challenged:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">
I too looked at the specs to the products you mentioned, and none of them tell you the reference voltage to which they measured SNR. IE if company#1 measures 100dB ref to 2V and company #2 measures 100dB ref to 1V, then company #2's product is actually 6dB better in SNR when compared equally. I beleive that was the point they were making. SNR should be a dBv reference that way everyone knows it is referenced to 1V.

Also, I checked out SoundandVision mag like they said at the end of the review.

http://soundandvisionmag.com/articl...mber=2&amp;preview=

Note the Denon AVR-2803 ($800) 6CH input measures SNR of 95.6dB ref to 200mV while in a past review they did on the Sunfire III measured a mere 87.2dB (p54 from Nov 2002 issue) with the same test conditions. Thats over a 8dB worse figure from a product $2700 more!!

Translate those #'s to 1V ref you get
Denon AVR-2803 SNR = 109.6dBv
Sunfire III SNR = 101.1dBv
about 4.4 dB difference

Equate this to resolution terms like they did in their review:
Denon aVR-2802: 109.6 / 6 = 18.2 bits
Sunfire III 101.1/6 = 16.9 bits

****UPDATE***
According to Home Theater Magazine
The Parasound Halo C1 SNR 6CH-IN = 95.65dB ref to 100mV which would translate to 101.65dB @ 200mV which is 15dB Better than the Sunfire III. Thus why you cant go by published specs as you don't know how they are rating them.
Translate that figure to 1V and it is 115.7dB which is over 19bits of resolution!

Parasound Halo C1
http://www.hometheatermag.com/showarchives.cgi?165:2

The Lexicon MC-12 rates 98.67dB ref to 100mV which translated to 104.67dB @ 200mV which is over 18dB better than the Sunfire III.

Translate that to 1V and it is 118.7dB which is over 19 bits of resolution!

Lexicon MC-12
http://www.hometheatermag.com/showarchives.cgi?94:2

As you can see, the Sunfire III is far from state of the art.

Wouldn't you want as close to 24 bit resolution as possible for the new DVD-A format?</td></tr></table></font>

 

[Eric]

<font color='#000000'>For those who missed it, Alan Cooney from Sunfire made a post on the AVS forum.

Alan Cooney's response</font>

 

[Audioholics]

<font color='#000080'>He's fair in his response... It's posters like R8der that bug me. We obviously have some overzealous supporters that like to post on other forums.

Funny, last time I looked we had over 700 members, not including guests and lurkers... but hey, let's assume the owners are the ones going around and defending this site.</font>

 

[gene]

<font color='#000000'>Alan's response is very fair. However, I do have a few issues with some of the points he has made that can use clearing up. &nbsp;I will see if we can get him to agree on posting either in this forum, or as an addendum in our review along with our rebuttal/comments.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Gene,

We are never going to agree or have a meaningful discussion about the &quot;correct&quot; way to run a review/opinion website. &nbsp;We are never going to settle the debate about whether you and your site is/has been controversial. &nbsp;Your failure to respond with reasonable answers in the past and now proves that. &nbsp;I do hope, however, that there will be others who will more carefully digest what you do say in your articles - past, present and future.

With that, I do thank you for responding directly to my comments this time. &nbsp;However, I still have problems with many of those comments. &nbsp;Just one of which is your rebuttle that many other processors have two component video outputs. &nbsp;Because I don't ever know what you are really saying, how many or what range is &quot;many&quot;? &nbsp;Can you give just two other examples of other processors with two component outputs anywhere near the price range of the TGIII? &nbsp;I don't think you can. &nbsp;If you respond with &quot;I don't owe you an explanation&quot; or that you can't name at least two, then you will provide additional proof that some of your comments that I have called &quot;unreasonable&quot; are unreasonable, and that you are an &quot;issue-skirter&quot;.

Also, your point about the review being not complete. &nbsp;I wondered about that (I did read your statement previously and was going to call you on it), and that is just further justification for my criticism of your site. &nbsp;Why would you post an incomplete review? &nbsp;Who is that fair to? &nbsp;I think an impartial 3rd party would agree that an incomplete review, even one stated as so, of a product, whether gushing or critical, is unfair.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Based on your writing style and tone, I really wonder if I am responding to an adult or a disgruntle teenager. &nbsp;/QUOTE]

We don’t owe you an explanation. &nbsp;We already made our statement and it stands as is. &nbsp;So you are wrong, I did respond. &nbsp;</td></tr></table>

Who's being childish here? &nbsp;No, you don't owe me an explanation, but you do owe your loyal readers the truth. &nbsp;It is the belief you are not always truthful that has me, and has had me in the past, so concerned with you and your site's public visibiliy. &nbsp;If I believe one to be dishonest, is it wrong to call them on it? &nbsp;So even if I was a Sunfire employee, I would be very concerned that you weren't misleading the public. &nbsp;You know I am not an employee of Sunfire, so again, who is being childish in their tone and writing style?

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Not appropriate by whom, you? &nbsp;I don’t remember asking for your permission as to what is or is not appropriate for us to post. &nbsp;Last time I checked I was the owner of this website, and freedom of speech is protected by the United States Constitution. &nbsp;</td></tr></table>

Words like &quot;muddy&quot;, &quot;Tinny&quot; and &quot;piss&quot; may or may not be appropriate in any article. &nbsp;The appropriateness in this case isn't a matter of who believes what is appropriate or not. &nbsp;Or that the constitution guarantees you the right to say pretty much anything you want when stated as opinion. &nbsp;You missed the point. &nbsp;The point is that a correctly working TGIII could not possibly sound muddy or tinny. &nbsp;There is just no way. &nbsp;If there was any truth that it did sound muddy and tinny, then I would put out the challange to the reviewer who believes that to be true if he thinks he could pass a blind test identifying the TGIII from any other processor anywhere near the price 10 out of 10 times. &nbsp;If he hears muddiness or tinniness, he should be able to identify those qualities 1000 out of a 1000 times when compared to a processor he thinks does not exhibit those qualities. &nbsp;If he can't identify it with 100% accuracy, then he at the very least over exagerated his description of what he heard with the TGIII. &nbsp;My entire point here is that using those terms was unprofessional, therefore they were inappropriate. &nbsp;&quot;Piss&quot; is just all together unprofessional in a public article of any kind. &nbsp;One last time, I believe you did the right thing in removing those terms. &nbsp;But the demonstration of or omission of professionalism was there when the article was first published.


<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Mike, obviously you felt the review was unfair. &nbsp;With that I suggest you pay no attention to it. &nbsp;In fact since you felt that review was unfair, by your logic all of our reviews are unfair, thus I suggest you pay no attention to this website.</td></tr></table>

Where did I say all your reviews were unfair? &nbsp;I never did? &nbsp;You miss my logic with great regularity (attempting to make me look foolish), and you skirt the issue by making rediculous comments like this. &nbsp;I believe, and have said as much previously, that if you have a history of not telling the truth, then anything you say subsequently deserves to be questioned and scrutinized. &nbsp;So if I believe your TGIII review is unfair, why would I as a concerned audio lover ignore something unfair or untrue when it reaches many other audio lovers? &nbsp;That would be irresponsible....something I believe you to be very familiar with. &nbsp;So anyone can see that my agenda or infatuation with you and Audioholics is based on my belief that you are not always honest. &nbsp;Notice, I did NOT say ALWAYS dishonest. &nbsp;I raise the question that you have not always been credible in your reviews and articles. &nbsp;The TGIII is just one example. &nbsp;Again, I thank you for commenting in this instance. &nbsp;But you have failed to clear up other issues from 3 years ago. &nbsp;It is this failure that has me so critical of your current &quot;questionable&quot; or &quot;controversial&quot; review of the TGIII.

I apologize for my tone and writing style if it appears childish. &nbsp;I don't believe it to be, and it's not intended to be. &nbsp;I simply am critical of you and your site. &nbsp;My criticism of you and your site on other forums is also only critical. &nbsp;There isn't anything that isn't civil in my comments on that other site. &nbsp;I do however express stonger opinions based on that criticism.

Going forward, I will not ignore publicly made comments made on public websites which I believe to be unfair, untrue or irresponsible - from you or anyone else.

Mikeyb
mpkistler@beckman.com</font>

 

[gene]

<font color='#000000'>You are correct MikeyB we are sometimes unfair to manufacturers by explicitly stating our views that we believe they manufactured substandard products for the money.  That was one of the primary reasons for starting this website over 4 years ago. We apologize that you may happen to own all of the below average performing products we have critically reviewed since Audioholics.com inception.  

I will not waste additional forum space debating your personal issues with me, my staff or your alleged intentions we have with this website.  If you wish to continue pursuit I suggest you do so via personal emails to myself or staff else you ultimately risk being banned from the privileges of this website (you would be the first in Audioholics.com history).</font>

 

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>As another staff member of Audioholics, I too wish to comment to MikeyB. &nbsp;As we stated in the review and in this thread, the basis of our critic of the Sunfire Theater Grand III is what it offers and doesn't offer for the $3,500 retail price.

As one of the technical writers of this site and the author of this article, we did our best to give a fair assessment of product. &nbsp;Given it's price, it lacks, plain and simple. &nbsp;We are not going to sit here and site multiple units that are better value and performance for the money, but we will continue to write reviews of other products and post them accordingly. &nbsp;The reviews will speak for themselves as to the better products.

As for your intentions, you clearly have some form of obsession with Gene and this website. &nbsp;This is clear by the fact that you actually save e-mails for several years. &nbsp;That being the case, we kindly ask that you no longer post on our forum and don't read any more of our articles.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Strange review.....your technical criticisms may be well founded...and the sunfire III is pricey. However your subjective comments are unfounded and without merit. Another example of unmanaged group dynamics. (group reviews where the alpha personalities rule).
Readers...please see the many other reviews on the web. Go to audioreview for a listing of pro reviews. I am not an employee of sunfire or have any interest in the sale of sunfire products....nor do I have any affiliation or loyalty to any magazine or site.
First I might &nbsp;ask how long they burned-in the unit before review.You need many many days of use to achieve final sonics .
Despite what this odd little review came up with...the sunfire II and III are known for there warm and rich...almost tubey sonic signature. The tinny part is totally off-the-wall.....It is not the best home theater engine out there........but far nicer with music than even most of the big boys....It blows away the lexicons. If you want a great pure home theater unit...check out the Anthem..........far supperior to the equipment used as &quot;reference&quot; in this review. </font>

 

[gene]

<font color='#000000'>Hi Mongoose; you sound a lot like a guy named John that just emailed us this:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What are you guys smoking?.....i'd like some lol.....I completely disagree with your view of the TG III 's sonics. Your review as a home theater engine is critical but fair.However..you guys ganged up on the Sunfire enthusiast....and ended up with a onesided review.Some people prefer a warmer and darker sound to a cold analytical sound( cold and bright). Ever heard of tubes? I am 55 yrs old and have just auditioned 8 prepros........I think you guys are nuts...You would prefer feedback obviously and other sound degradation for perhaps more accuracy... I don't want the bright sound you guys must like...I want sweet...and i'm just an average joe too.The TGIII has a better overall sound than any of your processors. If you want great home theater first..try an Anthem jr
</td></tr></table>

Here is my response to you.

We are happy you enjoy the Sunfire product and the tube amps.  We realize some people prefer the added harmonic distortions inherent in tube amps, as well as the higher noise floor sometimes associated, which can ultimately mask the subtle details of music.  Some people actually prefer coloration in their audio equipment as evident by their choices in high reactance speaker cables.  Since it appears you prefer the sound of tubes, which usually have a higher output impedance than solid state amplifiers, we suggest you couple them with high capacitance cables so it rolls of the highs and presents a warmer sound in your system since that is what you prefer.  However, I caution you that if your tube amp is only marginally stable, it could go into parasitic oscillation if the capacitance load is high enough, so you may wish to add a small series resistance and/or zobel compenstation to prevent this from happening.  Of course the down side to adding series resistance is reduction in damping factor and increasing insertion loss and ultimately making your amplifier power response more frequency dependent in nature.  However, some people may prefer this and they are entitled to their preferences.  

We never recommended anyone to NOT buy the Sunfire Theater Grand III.  Instead we listed its deficiencies, and voiced our OPINION that is was not worth its asking price.

In the end, it is what makes the user happy that matters.  We always tell people to use our reviews, and others reviews, as a guideline only to help them to compare data when shopping for various products.  

Our primary goal is always to evaluate equipment that is sonically accurate, implements the latest in sound engineering practices, and offers the greatest bang for the buck to consumers.  We realize not all consumers are looking for this in products.  Many consumers prefer a fancier package, thicker faceplates, and more name recognition in the products even if it compromises the technological implementations, features, and/or product performance.

If you are the same John, in the future I hope you become a registered poster, rather than sending us derogatory emails and posting your opposition to us anonymously.  We look forward towards your continued participation.  

[edited, spelling, added elaboration on tube amps]</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>That was a quick response.....and oh by the way i registered after i sent you the PRIVATE email you just made public. After sending the PRIVATE email, i registered....and then sent the less aggressive PUBLIC posting....So I guess I did not sign- in properly after my registration. ..whoops..Again, I said things in my private email that I felt were not appropriate for my post.
...and i am both a tube and ss fan by the way.
I still think that review's subjective criticisms were off-the-wall...
Whatever, I am a registered member and read all of your reviews...Sorry, but this one set me off...I've cooled down though..It's friday!
mongoose (john r) </font>

 

[gene]

<font color='#000000'>No problem John.  I am a bit irritable myself right now since I am at home recovering from a very fun sinus surgery  

Sorry that you disagreed with our subjective criticisms but again, if you preferred its sonic signature over other units then by all means pay no attention to how we felt and enjoy the product.  I don't expect our readership to see eye to eye with all of our subjective evaluations of product.  The most important thing to note is the objective limitations we listed with the product and for the user to determine if it will impact their intended application.</font>

 

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>Greetings all,

We are getting a great deal of criticism regarding our Sunfire review. &nbsp;People tend to think we are being unfare. &nbsp;To those who feel this way, I'd like you to check out this 9 page thread on a forum that discusses multiple firmware issues with the Sunfire Theater Grand III. &nbsp;I also must point out that this is Sunfire's third attempt with this unit, and yet it is plagued with firmware bugs.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb....umber=1

In order to get a feel for the multiple issues, you have to skip through many other discussions. &nbsp;But in summary, here is an abbreviated list of the reported issues.

1) &nbsp;One other thing - I think there's a little bug in 3.0 - in that if you shut the on screen display off (I don't like the volume adjustment to show on screen) then when you turn the TGIII off then on the last word shows on screen &quot;Grand&quot;. The only way to get it off is to go into the menu or hit the info button on the remote.

2) &nbsp;I'm really enjoying my TGIII. The only issue I have had is the auto sensing seems sporadic. Sometimes it works great and sometimes it doesn't seem to work at all. Worse case, is that it switches on when you turn the sending unit (like a DVD player) off (vs on). Since my amps are tied to the unit (via 12 volt trigger) to turn on, this is a real pain. For some reason this seems to be worse with the last release of code. I've gotten to the point where I pretty much don't use it anymore. It looks like v3.05 has cleared up my auto-sense issues.

3) &nbsp;Bass output for DD,DD-EX,DTS,DTS-ES, is very weak. I even turned the SW level up 5db on the TGIII, but am still getting very poor bass output. I set the speakers to small, and selected SW on. Is there anything i'm not doing? Have any of you had similar problems? I really hope that there is something I can do about the lack of bass issue. Any help you all can give will be most wecome.

4) &nbsp; My bass output was weak until I upgraded the software to 2.18, however, once I did this I began to have audio dropouts on dvd's and on the audio from my Tivo. Version 3.0 seems to have cured the dropout problem.

5) &nbsp;I'm wondering if it is a good strategy to release SO many upgrades for the TGIII. It is great to get new stuff, but it makes you wonder about quality assurance processes.

6) &nbsp;It seems interesting that they didn't mention fixing the auto sensing with V3.05. With TWO people on this forum having the same problem.... it is not a coincident! Makes you wonder how many things they are fixing behind the scenes which are caused by upgrades. Guess the engineers are controlling the upgrades (vs. marketing).

7) &nbsp;I don't think that the matrix mode setting is intended for analog sources only. In the section where it is mentioned in the manual there is no distinction made. &nbsp;Can I suggest you call Sunfire and log it as a problem? You can quote me in saying that I have called and reported the problem as well. Also the service rep I talked to suggested I try a system reset. I did this and nothing changed.

8) &nbsp;I received the V3.06 software CD, and I installed it 2 days ago. I calibrated the speakers with the default calibration noise generator(enabled with the new software), and now movie soundtracks really come to life. The only thing i've noticed is that bass output with CD playback is a bit extreme. I have to use the &quot;on the fly trim&quot; option and reduce the sub level by 7db(sometimes more). This is getting a bit annoying having to reduce the sub level everytime I want to listen to CD's. Is there anyone else having this problem? I wonder if sunfire can correct this problem via a firmware fix?

9) &nbsp;A while back I posted that I was having some problems with the bass output for movie playback. Shortly thereafter I talked with a tech from Sunfire about the problem. He suggested some things, which seemed to have helped. But I still wasn't totally satisfied with the low end. So after some thought, I realized that possibly I may have a faulty unit. So after using my TGIII for a month, I decided to exchange it for another one. I just received the new TGIII 4 day's ago. I can say one thing, the Bass difference is night and day! Now there's only one problem, the bass issue is fixed but now there 's a new problem, the new TGIII has a very annoying &quot;popping&quot; sound that occurs with DVD playback. The popping is heard when I press play,stop, pause, navigate the disc menu, and even during the layer change. This is something that is definitely &quot;not&quot; acceptable, as I don't want to risk damaging my speakers due to this constant popping.

Continued on next thread</font>

 

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>10)  Well guys, I just got my replacement TGIII today, and I'm sorry to report that this 3rd unit is also plagued with the popping issue. After 3 faulty units, I'm calling it quits with the TGIII. In a way I'm going to miss it, because there are some really cool features that the TGIII does offer. On the other hand I'm not going to miss the problems I've had with this pre-pro since day one. I'm definitely going with another brand, I'm just not sure which one yet. I'm seriously considering the Parasound Halo C2, or the Integra Research RDC-7. I'm going to miss sharing stuff about the TGIII with you all, but I hope that all you satisfied TGIII owners will keep this thread going for a long time to come. Take care and happy listening.

11)  After the upgrade, my 11-year old daughter walked in the room and immediately commented &quot;it sounds different. I don't like it!&quot;. Also, it created pops when the UR boots up to a certain point, and lounder pops when being turned off. It also pops when another piece of equipment is turned on.  For the version 3.09, Sunfire states : &quot;Eliminated audible clicks and pops from various sources&quot;. In my case it is the other way around. I didn't have those problems with 3.06 but new version 3.09 creates those very issues.  I re-installed 3.06 and got back to my former happy state.

12)  Since the last time I reported the problem, I went back and forth several times between 3.06 and 3.09 and the result was exactly the same. With 3.09, when I turn on the unit I can tell exactly when any particular speaker will pop during the boot-up sequence. And it is very consistent. When I went back to 3.06 all the pops are gone. So it must be the software.

13)  I am looking for a little help from you fellow owners. I went on vacation for about a week and a half and unplugged my equipment mainly because we have been having some real bad storms lately and I am paranoid about lightning. I got home plugged my TGIII back in and the only speakers that work are the front left and front right. I can go to the calibration screen and it shows the same settings I had before I left. I tried the reset procedure and reset up everything but still no sound from the center, surrounds, or subs. I switched cables to the amp to eliminate it and the speakers and got sound from the other speakers when connected to one of the mains. I am out of ideas for what I can do but maybe I am overlooking something.

14) &nbsp;I have one issue with the unit I've never been able to resolve and I thought I'd report it here again. I also reported it to your support number around March I think. The problem is with mono digital sources and pro-logic matrix mode. I can't get this to work on my unit. No matter what the pro-logic II setting is, the unit will not move out of mono mode. According to the manual this should work. &nbsp;One reason it's a bit of a problem for me is I have my Cinema Grand set up as auto power on and it will only turn on with a signal on the left input. Of course, I would also rather listen to 5 speakers than just 1.</font>

 

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>Below is a summary of all the firmware fixes on the Sunfire Theater Grand III. &nbsp;How can a third iteration processor have so many problems?

V3.11 Fixed issue that had some units mute unexpectedly after a period of time - especially with Neo:6
Further click and pop fixes for various sources
Fixed muting that may occur when switching from a DTS source to an analog source
Fixed bug that had system power up with Full Auto turned off, even though it was on when powered down

V3.09 Added front panel display of surround and surround back trim levels
Reduced time to reselect the digital input after temporary removal of digital stream. Applies to some satellite receivers, and some Marantz and Philips DVD players which mute their digital outputs at times
Corrected number of channels in INFO display for some modes with Dolby Digital 2.0 sources
Refined speaker calibration levels for some speaker configurations
Removed AMP enable/disable item from settings-amp menu as users were accidentally turning the amp off and then returning their units as defective (Ultimate Receiver only)
Fixed some minor zone 2 muting issues
Eliminated audible clicks and pops from various sources
Fixed condition wherein DTS sources could mute and not come back
Sped up video switching time when a new source is selected to reduce mode change issues with the Pioneer PRO-520HD monitor

V3.06 Fixed muting of audio for some satellite receivers when changing from a channel with Dolby Digital to a channel with straight PCM

V3.05 Eliminated slight 'step' noise sometimes noticeable when volume control is rotated while at high volume settings with no source playing
Fixed loss of first fraction of a second of a new CD track (introduced by V3.0)
Enabled functionality of input trims for zone 2
Improved FLASH update to include display of code revision at first power up after loading code (does this only once at first power up)
Eliminated slight video flicker seconds after loss or detection of a digital lock. This really only affected those with DSS/Tivo and a few other source products which shut off their digital output whenever skip/ff/rewind are used

V3.0 Fixed audible 'pop' heard following ff/rew/skip, menu changes, and disc layer transitions with some Marantz DVD players
Fixed 'double mute' heard with DSS/Tivo and other units which shut off their digital output whenever skip/ff/rewind are used
Separated control of speaker calibration volume from main volume, and added a default calibration noise generator level of approximately -72 to -75dB SPL in a typical system
Improved handling of 'pop-up' on-screen-display, mostly when S-video and composite sources are simultaneously connected. This sometimes manifested as wavy lines in the video or a missing pop-up display
Added support for DTS Neo:6 with Dolby Digital 2.0 sources, while also fixing a mute issue with Neo:6
Improved handling of SOURCE DIRECT mode
Fixed audible clicks when selecting modes from page two of remote
Fixed tuner splash when selecting AM/FM and fixed small bug in tuner preset numbering
Added discrete IR and 232 codes to select Music, Cinema, etc. for Pro Logic II, Neo:6 and DTS LFE (new code list will be posted to our website).
Improved handling of subtle zone 2 muting issues

V2.18 Added Ultimate Receiver to titling on download app
Improved timing of download app to eliminate &quot;Theater Grand III not found&quot; message and subsequent need to restart download
Eliminated audible 'snap' on track skip with Philips DVD-R machines
Increased 8-channel sub level by 6dB (this was an oversight)
Fixed bug that sometimes manifested as surround mode auto cycling or other insidious effects.

V2.12 Increased the subwoofer output level by 6dB
Fixed bug that prevented renaming the 8-channel input.

V2.10 Eliminated display of mode and Holography LEDs when 8-CHANNEL source is selected
Fixed bug that allowed main display to show sometimes with unit off.

V2.07 Added enhanced 'extra bass' feature which provides subwoofer output even with large main speakers and stereo sources. (Note that it does not effect 5.1/6.1/7.1 encoded sources. Multichannel encoded sources are reproduced with all levels as the recording engineers intended). This item can be found at the bottom of the SPEAKERS on-screen sub menu. Choose 'ENHANCED' for extra bass, or 'NORMAL' for regular bass. You'll like this!
Added group audio delay for systems with video processors. This item is found in the VIDEO submenu
Added support for additional RS232 and infrared commands.

V1.12 Improved handling of DTS-ES streams comprised of out-of-tolerance data frames
Improved handling of source direct mode. Source direct is now not available whenever main speakers are set to SMALL to prevent low frequency audio from damaging small speakers
Fixed several small issues relating to OSD speaker parameter updates and zone 2 muting.

V1.09 Improved handling of digital streams with data errors. This reduces audible pops and ticks during menu navigation on some DVD players, as well as during track navigation on some CD and DVD players
Improved user interface for CD update of FLASH software.

V1.05 Initial shipping release.</font>

 

[Khellandros66]

<font color='#000000'>One comment, and I don't even own nor heard any Theater Grands.

If you want good separates go with Rotel, Lexicon, or Levinson.

Sounds to me like the new TGIII is a real P.O.S.

If my computer needed updated that often I would have busted it with a baseball bat a long time ago.

:0~

Bob</font>

 

[gene]

<font color='#000000'>Steve;

That is some very interesting data, independent of our own findings. &nbsp;I wonder if the popping is a result of digital clipping in the processor now that the unit is being tasked to produce a broader frequency spectrum. &nbsp;After all we all noticed it sounded weak in bass response and lacked dynamics compared to the other processors we faced it off against. &nbsp;

Bob;

I agree, the brands you mentioned appear to make very good products. I am particularly interested in reviewing the Levinson stuff since they appear to have a great digital architecture as evident by their dual differential DAC implementations, amongst other things.</font>

 

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>Gene,

As you and I discussed, based on their data sheets which advertises 105dB signal to noise ratio at 2V, we suspect the Theater Grand III uses only single ended, lower end (possibly by Crystal or AKM) DAC's.  That isn't even to the caliber of many receivers which have dual differential DAC's.

For the record, the Integra Research RDC-7 and Denon use Burr Brown premium DAC's. &nbsp;The Integra Research uses the 1704 in a dual differential and the Denon uses the top of the line 1738 in quad differential in two channel and dual differential in multichannel. &nbsp;That's impressive!</font>

 

[briansmith]

<font color='#000000'>Any idea how many DACs are used and how they are used in the Halo C2?

-Brian</font>

 

[gene]

<font color='#000000'>Hi Brian;

We don't have all of the details yet on the new Parasound Halo processor but from what we have heard so far it is supposed to be quite impressive. &nbsp;I plan on personally reviewing one in a few months and I am most excited to do so. &nbsp;They have some very cool proprietary technology packed into their processors such as group delay compensation at the LFE output when various channels bass is summed to it, as well as a calibration mic.</font>