|
New member Username: SammygeorgePost Number: 5 Registered: Oct-05 | After much trawling of the web, i have now finalized on the combination of NAD 352 and Marantz CD 7300. The speakers are Quad 11L or Wharfedale 9.1. Would love to hear the opinion of the members of the forum before I part with the bucks! And any suggestions for the interconnects/cabling? Thanks |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 173 Registered: Dec-04 | Nice combo. What is your music preference and size/config of the room? |
|
New member Username: SammygeorgePost Number: 6 Registered: Oct-05 | primarly classical music and of course the best of sixties! The room size is around 25' by 20'. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6351 Registered: May-04 | http://search.yahoo.com/bin/search?p=loudspeaker%20placement |
|
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 477 Registered: Mar-04 | if you were to dig a little deeper in your research, you might have come across panasonic SA-XR models. they're 100wpc X 7 and they sound awesome. i had an older NAD stereo unit whose muffled treble i hated on my soft dome tweetered NHT superzeros. then i bought an onkyo HT reciever which cleared the treble up alot and improved imaging. as i do alot of low volume late night listening, i began to look for more low level resolution and discovered magnepans which are awesome for their price, but my onkyo couldn't do 4 ohms and there's no way i'd go back to NAD ever again. then i started hearing about how great panasonics sounded and eventually that people were using them with maggies with great success. this was the solution to my impedence problem, or so i thought. the problem is, my panasonic SA-XR55 sounds so darned good, that i no longer want the maggies that i originally bought it for! it's that good. it has increased treble speed and resolution a great deal while lowering grain at the same time. even with my ear right next to my tweeters, i can't hear any spit. my bass is deeper and tighter. (NAD does bass well... i'll give them credit on that) my zeros sound alot fuller with my sub turned off now. dynamics are MUCH more punchy and weighty. i've been surprised a few times when tracks i've heard dozens of times jump out of the speakers in crescendos. the soundstage is dramatically better. it's wider to the point where it extends past the speakers sometimes. (neither the NAD not onkyo ever did), and it's more precise. the entire space between my speakers now sounds like a continuous whole. the most impressive improvement though is the midrange. it's incredible! vocals sound so much smoother and lush now. this was the trait that gave me goosebumps when i powered it up. i never knew my speakers had it in them until then. that $240 (delivered) reciever made what i thought were low resolution speakers bridge about half of the gulf between them on my old recievers and the sound of maggies on $1000 amps. i've heard rumors of people trading their old gear in for panasonic class-d recievers and now that i own one... i can believe it. it's so detailed and smooth sounding it isn't even funny. i don't hear it as much as i did before now that i'm getting used to it, but the moment i turned it on, my jaw dropped even though the treble was a little hard for the first few hours. before you spend more on marantz or nad... you owe it to yourself to do a little more research on panasonic SA-XRs (10, 30, 45, 50, 55 & 70) especially in forums from people who own them and love them. edster has raved about his here for so long that people say "here he goes again" when he does, but there are a few people at audioasylum that love theirs too. if only a magazine like 6 moons or audioholics would review a panny, more people might know about them. i found out about them by accident in an asylum thread. info is rare... but the audio underground is hip to panny and behringers, but room correction and x-overs are another story. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 198 Registered: Dec-04 | I have never been a big fan or hugely priced intrconnects, although cabling makes sense to me. A good cuality spool connector coax whth solder ends have never done me wrong, although I have never tried an a/b compare. You may want to try zip cord or monster before trying the big$$ stuff, maybe a waste of money? I want to try both beore shelling out the dinero. |
|
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 488 Registered: Mar-04 | if you want great cable that's better than expensive cables, just get some 10 guage (or even 12 guage) "wire king" cable. it features oxygen free copper too. you can pay a couple hundred dollars for just 16 guage cable and build a pair of 10 guage cables for less than $50. MCM electronics sells it along with some really nice heavy duty RCA $12 interconnects that don't sound any different than my $35 monstercable interconnects and come in sizes from 1 foot to at least 6 feet. those suckers grip so hard you can drag a VCR around the room with them! they also sell AR cables for about the same price and someone at stereophile raved about cheap AR cables that he bought at best buy. bigger speaker cables make the most difference. my 10 guage monstercables do bass alot better than the puny zip cords (22 guage?) i was using and image better too. alot of people swear by their home depot home made cables too. the nice thing about DIY is that you can solder your connectors. i pulled the pins out of one of my monsters when i accidently stepped on it. one of these days i'm going to solder the banana jacks that i bought onto them. |