Speaker Selection

 

New member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 1
Registered: Oct-10
Hi guys, I'm new here in the forum, and it's great to read a forum when there are a lot of people that have great knowledge for all about audio and video stuff.

Well I have a Denon 1909 Receiver and a KEF KHT3005SE Speakers, but now I'm making a jump for a hi-end system.

I recently bought a NAD T765 Reciever and comparing it with my old denon 1909, it has nothing to do with the rich and natural sound of NAD. My room dimensions are 12.8ft x 14.1ft of Lenght and 9.8ft of Height.

I was looking to add some floorstanding speakers to the front, a good central speaker and a surround dipole speakers. The subwoofer I already bought it, is a Paradigm UltraCube 10. So for my budget, here are my options (Remember all options are with the Paradigm UltraCube 10 SW):

1) KEF Classic Q Series Nominal Impedance: 8 Ohms
KEF iQ90 BL
KEF iQ60C BL
KEF iQ10 BL (pair)
Total: $1540

2) Paradigm Monitor Series Nominal Impedance: 8 Ohms
Paradigm Monitor 9 v.6 BL
Paradigm Monitor CC-290 v.6 BL
Paradigm Monitor ADP-390 v.6 BL
Total: $2170

3) PSB Image Series Nominal Impedance: 6 Ohms
PSB Image T6 BL
PSB Image C5 BL
PSB Image S5 BL (Pair)
Total: $2380

4) KEF New Q Series Nominal Impedance: 8 Ohms
KEF Q900 BL
KEF Q600C BL
KEF Q800DS BL (Pair)
Total: $2650

Doubt What is the advantage or benefit to have a 6 or 4 Ohms speakers instead 8 ones?

Anyway, please advice me which will be my best option to run with NAD T765 for Stereo Music SACD's (2-Channel) and for Blu-ray movies (5.1 Channel) too.

Thanks
 

Platinum Member
Username: Plymouth

Canada

Post Number: 15385
Registered: Jan-08
Welcome to eCoustics Alex!

4 is my choice!

Lower is the impedance, higher the wattage you will get from your amplifier but is that your amplifier capable to run well under 6 or 4 ohms, under 6 ohms no problem but under 4 ohms the power supply is limited even if the spec give the wattage under 2 ohms(stereo).
 

Gold Member
Username: Stu_pitt

Stamford, Connecticut USA

Post Number: 4062
Registered: May-05
There's no real world advantage of lower impedance speakers. As long as your amplification can sufficiently drive them, they shouldn't make much if any bearing on your decision. Getting more power out of your amp due to it doesn't make any real world sense IMO.

All the speakers you mentioned are very good, and I doubt any would be too difficult to drive by your receiver. Your room isn't a huge room, so not much of an issue.

Which are best is a personal choice. I like the PSBs, but I'm sure others will like another speaker. NAD and PSB are owned by the same parent company and are made to be easily used together, if that has any bearing on your decision.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15486
Registered: May-04
.

"There's no real world advantage of lower impedance speakers."

For the most part this is the most accurate statement. However, there are real world advantages to creating a 4 Ohm speaker system, they just have more to do with the speaker manufacturer than they do with the speaker user. As has been suggested lowering the impedance of the speaker load will cause the amplifier to create higher voltages by a simple equation of watts - basically a division of power into a lower (resistive) load. Should a speaker manufacturer care to fudge some numbers on the spec sheet to confuse or even intentionally mislead a consumer who only sees on paper numbers, this could lead to a higher "sensitivity" spec which some would take as a desirable trait. There are no numbers on the average spec sheet that tell you anything about a speaker (or amplifier) other than physical dimensions. In the competitive market of consumer loudspeakers you need to be wary of anything that is out of the norm. It might well be the designer of the system felt the hook up required internally to achieve four Ohms made the system operate more to their desire or it maybe it was easier to use off the shelf parts rather than custom built which would require less manipulation to reach that desired end product. The impedance load of a speaker is complex, not reflected by one single number and is the result of the drivers and the crossover filters altogether. There are several reasons why a manufacturer might design a four Ohm system but IMO not many of them make sense in the real world of consumer audio at the level you're buying.

On paper your amplifier will indiicate higher wattage potential when it is working into a lower impedance load. However, this really only indicates the highest peak wattage available and you're more interested in how the amplifier performs under "average" loudness levels. The NAD already produces significant peak power so wriggling another smidgen out of its power supply won't mean much to you on instantaneous peaks. If you're driving the amplifier into distortion by asking it to play louder than its circuits can manage, then you'll need far more "watts" than you can find between eight and four Ohms.

If you tend to listen at high volumes, you should be looking at the "sensitivity" spec of the speakers you're choosing. The higher that spec, the louder the speakers will play with any given number of watts and the less the amplifier will work to get that volume. Choosing a 87 (or 90) dB system over an 84 (or 87) dB system is the equivalent of doubling the power in your amplifier. Each 3 dB increase/decrease is that same jump in equivalent power. Just be careful the manufacturer isn't using that four Ohm load to show you a higher number than is realistic, make certain the numbers is taken the same way and under the same restrictions in all comparisons. "In room" or "half space" qualifiers to the spec mean the number isn't the same as "XX dB/2.83V @ 1 meter" which is how the numbers should read. Do some reading here and find a reputable dealer with a knowledgeable staff and you should be able to understand through demonstration just what all this means. Lower impedance loads will cause the amplifier to work harder and many mass market amplifiers cannot tolerate lower than six Ohm loads for any duration. Your NAD should do fine with four Ohm loads but IMO you'll do better to keep the "nominal" impedance spec (the one you see on paper) as high as possible. https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/628565.html

"Low impedance" derives its higher wattage in the real world by requiring higher curent from the amplifier - "wattage" being made up from "voltage" and "amperage" or "current". High current capacity is difficult to built into an amplifier and costs money. Any amplifier will run cooler and be more stable into a higher impedance load than into a lower impedance. If your Denon had a "4/8 Ohm" switch for speaker loading, the switch was merely limiting the amount of current the amplifier could produce and thereby hoping to give the amp a break by not causing it to overheat or draw more amperage than its circuits could handle.

Finally, there's more to the "load" the amplifier must drive than one single impedance number. Read the forum and pay attention to what is said in that one link. If you have questions, go ahead and ask. However, which speaker you should buy is largely your decision. You've not mentioned a "bad" speaker. Go listen and ask questions of the salesperson. Go slowly and ask about return policies should you be dissatisfied once you get the system home. Don't be distracted when the salesperson tells you to listen for specific things you're going to hear, you may not hear them at all in a showroom, and the salesperson is not the one buying the speakers. Take in a few favorite CD's (you don't use MP3's, do you?) on a quiet weekday afternoon - not a weekend - and ask to be left alone with the speakers for a few minutes while you pay attention to the music and not the salesperson. Don't abuse the speakers during this time. "Tighter bass" and "cleaner highs" are nice but just pay attention to how you respond to the music. Do you feel one speaker plays music in a more realistic style than another? If so, buy that speaker.


http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=slv8-hptb5&p=how%20to%20judge%20louds peakers&type=

https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/56618.html Ignore the last bit of silliness.

http://diyaudiocorner.tripod.com/def.htm

http://eli47.tripod.com/audiogloss.html



.


.
 

New member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 2
Registered: Oct-10
Ok, so for floorstanding I like PSB Image T6 and KEF iQ90 because are three-way speakers.

Then for Central Speaker the only I don't like is the PSB because isn't three-way speaker.

For the Surround sound, I think any of the four options will fill my needs.

So is it better to have three-way speakers on front? or just central?

Thank you guys.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15487
Registered: May-04
.

Two or three way is not what you're looking for. Three way speakers have more cost to the manufactuer for the same selling price. That means each piece must cost the manufacturer less money to begin with. Complexity of parts to make a three way is higher and therefore more costly. This shouldn't rule out either a two or three way system but it shouldn't cause you to buy a two or a three way system either. Two or three "speakers" in a system means nothing to you at this point. Pay attention to the music as heard through the speakers and put the spec sheets down. You cannot buy a speaker through a piece of paper.

Do you intend to audition the speakers before you make a purchase?


.
 

New member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 3
Registered: Oct-10
Jan, I just reed your post and thank you for all your knowledgement. I appreciate your help.

I saw the back part of my NAD and it says the next thing about impedance:

"Speaker Impedance
SPK A FRONT + SPK B:
8 Ohms MIN/SPEAKER

SPK A FRONT / SPK B:
4 Ohms MIN/SPEAKER
CENTER,
SURR,
SURR-BACK:
4 Ohms MIN/SPEAKER"

So if I want to bi-amp my front speakers using speakers A front L & R and speakers B, I will need to run speakers of 8 Ohms right? So does the PSB Image T6 with nominal impedance of 6 Ohms will work or they won't?

The other thing is which are the advantages/benefits for bi-amp front speakers.

Thank you again for all your help.
 

New member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 4
Registered: Oct-10
Yes, I'm trying to audition the speakers before I make the purchase, but I live in Mexico City and is kind difficult to find them.

I made the audition for the KEF iQ90 with a NAD System, and I really liked them, but I want to try the other ones too. I think I can make the audition for the Paradigm ones today (I don't know if they will be the Monitor 9 or 11), for the PSB I think it will be hard and for the new KEF I will have to wait for the dealer to have them.

Thank you again.
 

Silver Member
Username: Kbear

Canada

Post Number: 804
Registered: Dec-06
In light of Jan's post I thought I'd ask a question. I was once told that small speakers with small drivers that are able to output relatively deep bass (45Hz and below let's say), will in compromise have relatively low sensitivity numbers. This in turn means the amp has to work harder for a given volume level, and this introduces distortion at lower volume levels than would occur with a speaker of bigger proportions.

In general, is the above accurate?
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15491
Registered: May-04
.

You cannot "bi-amp" any speaker with your receiver. It simply cannot be done and, in reality, would offer little to your present set up in the way of noticeable improvements. Concentrate on getting the best speaker system to go with your new receiver and pay attention to your sources (CD, DVD, etc). The system can only reproduce what is fed to it from the source. Low resolution sources such as MP3 or most computer files will leave the vast majority of what you have paid for unnoticeable with your new system.

A 6 Ohm speakr will normally be fine with most quality amplifiers. Remember, that six Ohms spec is just an "average" the manufacturter chose to promote. The speaker can still have a lower impedance point and you need to ask about the real world impedance load of the speaker. Your NAD should be fine with even a four Ohm load but any amplifier will be more stable when working into a higher impedance speaker load. Consider impedance not to be something to look for but rather something to be aware of when the load begins to drop beneath six Ohms.

.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15492
Registered: May-04
.

A speaker designer begins by considering three basic qualities of the potential final speaker; bass extension, sensitivity (how loud the speaker will play with "X" watts) and how large the enclosure will be. All three are tied together and, if one changes, the other two are affected. Large cabinets do not automatically mean deep bass extension but they will have higher sensitivity for the same bass extension over a smaller enclosure. You can take that sentence and manipulate the words "bass", size" and "sensitivity" to make any combination you want since all three values are interdependent with each other.


.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15494
Registered: May-04
.

I should clarify the above post. The three values which are manipulated are only consistent within a specific enclosure type. Comparing a bass reflex system to a sealed, acoustic suspension system will not provide direct one to one value exchanges for bass, sensitivity and size. When the original AR line of acoustic suspension speakers was introduced in the early 1950's, consumers had never experienced such low bass extension in such small packages. However, the trade for sensitivity remained as sealed systems which absorb the backwave of the low frequency driver within the cabinet's acoustic stuffing sacrifice approximately three dB of "volume" potential which would be available in a bass reflex or vented system. The stuffing inside a sealed system creates an "apparent" enclosure size and by manipulating the amount of stuffing the designer is also changing the "apparent" volume of the cabinet. Acting as an "acoustic transformer" a horn loaded system will be larger and play louder than any other common type of enclosure. However, a smaller horn will still sacrifice sensitivity and bass extension to a larger horn.

Bass reflex, vented systems, labrynths, passive radiators and so forth all roll off their bass extension at a rate of approximately -24 dB per octave whereas isobariks, sealed systems and infinite baffles roll out at -12 dB per ocatve. This makes valid comparisons between different enclosure types more difficult when looking at bass extension vs. size vs. sensitivity. Given the same system resonance (Fs) for both a sealed and a vented system, the useable bass extension (F3) reaching a roll out of -3 dB, -6 dB and -10 dB will be quite a bit lower in frequency and perceived loudness than that of a comparable vented system.

Dipoles/bipoles are an entirely different matter due to their multi-pole radiation patterns. Within any one configuration of enclosure type, however, the basic rules still hold true. New driver technologies are changing the old ways of building louspeakers by providing drivers with much greater bass extension than was possible a few years ago. This is most often accomplished through improved materials and driver motor design. These are often designed with car stereo in mind and are meant to take advantage of the smaller dimensions of the car's space vs the average home listening rooms. However, whatever the driver is capable of doing does not completely change the three basic values and their inter-related nature.


.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Plymouth

Canada

Post Number: 15395
Registered: Jan-08
Alex

Go for your choice 4, later with a better amp you will appreciate those speaker good for 20 years!
 

New member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 5
Registered: Oct-10
Right now I'm thinking for the Paradigm ones, they have the advantage that I already have the subwoofer (same brand) and my brother have a Paradigm center speaker, model CC-190, and I love the clarity of the voices on movies and you don't need too much volume to fill it. Anyway I will go slowly in my decision and I will try to audition all of them.

A better amp? isn't the NAD T765 have a good one? or what did you mean?

Thank you for your post
 

Platinum Member
Username: Plymouth

Canada

Post Number: 15409
Registered: Jan-08
Alex

OK I understand! Go for Paradigm!

Nad is a very good amp, I had one, the power supply is not too much powerfull but it sound great for the price!
 

New member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 6
Registered: Oct-10
Isn't better to have every speaker of the same brand? or at least from the same country. I mean, PSB, Paradigm and NAD are canadian, so isn't better to buy everithing canadian now?
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15503
Registered: May-04
.

You get to decide. That's the point of buying component stereo systems, no one is putting the pieces together for you. There really is no reason to buy all from one country. People design audio gear to match what they hear in music. You need to buy with the same idea in mind.


.
 

Silver Member
Username: Kbear

Canada

Post Number: 805
Registered: Dec-06
The prevailing wisdom is to have the fronts and center match, because those three speakers provide the most sound and they really cast the image of what you are hearing. I don't think matching the sub or rears is as crucial. So frankly, if I was setting up a home theater, I would have the same brand and preferably model line F-C-F.

Is the Paradigm center you currently have from the same line as the fronts you are considering? If not, they may have a very different sound compared to your center. But maybe not. Something to consider.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Plymouth

Canada

Post Number: 15414
Registered: Jan-08
Alex

Usualy we install same brand and series of speakers for front rear and center to have a best image and depht of surrounding, for the Sub you can use another brand without problem.
 

New member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 7
Registered: Oct-10
Ok, my last doubt, is that the T765 manual says: "If the surround back speakers are not used in the main zone, their surround back amplifier channels could be assigned for Main Front (Bi-Amp)".

Am I wrong but IMO the only way to bi-amp a speaker it is with two Amps isn't? So, what means this for NAD? and, what they are trying to say with this option?

Thank you everyone, you are helping me out to understanding a way better all this audio/video component things. I really appreciate that.
 

Gold Member
Username: Nickelbut10

Canada

Post Number: 3266
Registered: Jun-07
NAD, and a lot of other AVR's only support the B speakers when it comes to having a stereo pair in a second zone setup. I wouldn't worry about bi-amping you speakers personally.

May I add that I almost have the same paradigm speaker setup you posted powered by a NAD T763 and T753 and I am very happy with it. My rears are Monitor 3's. I have the Ultracube 10 sub which plays well. My two choices for match up with NAD would be PSB and Paradigm out of the speakers you listed. May I also make a suggestion. In the Paradigm V6 setup drop from the 9's to the 7's and take the extra doe you save and move up to the bigger center channel.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15504
Registered: May-04
.

"Am I wrong but IMO the only way to bi-amp a speaker it is with two Amps isn't? So, what means this for NAD? and, what they are trying to say with this option?"


After connecting a basic surround system you might have two channels of amplification unused on the NAD. In that case you can assign those channels to various optional configurations. One option would be to "bi-amp" a pair of speakers.

On occasion a speaker that is "bi-wirable" can also be configured into what the manufacturer promotes as "bi-amped" wiring. It's a long, drawn out explanation how this is meant to be of value to the end user other than as a marketing tool to get you to buy the speaker or, in this case, the amplifier.

"Real world" bi-amping is accomplished by placing crossover filters in front of the amplfiers which then restrict the frequency response of each amplifer according to the needs of the speaker section it is intended to run. In other words, the amp driving the high frequencies will be fed - through the filter - only those high frequencies which are required by the tweeter. Similarly power is divided amongst several amplifier channels with the other divisions in a bi-amp or even a tri-amped system according to specifc frequency range. It is then common to run a larger, higher powered amplifier for the bass section which is where most "watts" are consumed and a smaller wattage amplifier for the upper frequencies which seldom require more than maybe ten watts even at high volumes. This four way (two per speaker) division of channels provides the possible benefit of separate power supplies in each channel of amplification. On paper at least this spells a potential boost in performance over one power supply in multiple amplifier channels doing all the work for all the channels. Unfortunately, what the NAD provides is still restricted to that one power supply feeding all channels which then makes "bi- amping" a total "So what?". This is even more of a "So what?" when you consider the NAD will also have its one power supply still feeding the other channels of amplification required for the full HT system. Quite literally, you can only get so much out of a single power supply and HT recievers are not recognized as being the epitome of how to manage power in these cases. You will need to spend far more money to actually notice an audible improvement made through bi-amping a far more sophisticated system that where you are right now.* That's not a knock on your system, just a fact of audio life.

Your NAD provides no division of frequencies which would make for a common bi-amped system. You can run a "bi-amp capable" speaker with two discrete amplfier channels but both amplifier channels will be running full frequency range from one power supply and the division of frequencies will only occur at the passive crossover inside the loudspeaker. There is then no real accomplishment over "biwiring" the speakers and this becomes, for all intents, just another marketing scheme. If you had the filters - which you do not and they are virtually non-existent in the home audio market, you could make use of the bi-amp function. Even if you did have the filters, the real world benefits of bi-amping are generally recognized in a more sophisticated two channel system than in a HT surround package.

You'll often see bi-amped sound reinforcement speaker systems. Here, where high volumes above all else are of prime importance, bi-amping is attempting a different approach than in home audio. All in all, this mostly useless feature on the NAD doesn't take away from its value to you in a HT system. Think of it as two extra cup holders in a car where only one person rides along.


.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15505
Registered: May-04
.

*In the strictest sense, you already have a "bi-amped" system when you incorpprate the active filters within your surround processing to feed information (discrete frequencies) to both a subwoofer with it's own amplifier and your main/center front speakers using the amplification within the HT receiver. The "active" digital filters of the Dolby or DTS processing send only those low frequencies needed by the sub to the LFE (subwoofer) outputs while directing the upper frequencies to the higher frequency range speakers in the system. This isn't how most audiophiles have traditionally thought of bi-amping but technically it qualifies.


http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm



.
 

New member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 8
Registered: Oct-10
Ok, well for my needs, I will use this system like 60-65% of the time for music, and 35-40% for blu-ray movies.

I will play the music (SACD/DVD-Audio) from an Oppo BDP-83SE, via muli-channel output, but I just wanted to play in two-channel way, without the subwoofer, just the front L and R Speakers, that's why I'm thinking to get the biggest speaker of each series.

I saw that I put Paradigm Monitor 9, and I was thinking of getting the 11 instead 9 or new KEF Q900, PSB Image T6... (Still choosing)

Then my question for bi-amping was for music thing. I mean, am I going to hear any difference when I play music if I bi-amp the front speakers?, anything like a much richer sound or a deep bass sound or something (remember, in two-channel way)

Jan, I been reading the links you supply in your first post here and the thing I don't undesrstand very well is on the spec sheets, If some speakers manufacturer say that the nominal impedance of a speaker is 6 Ohms and sensitivity 87dB , what happen with the sensitivity at other impedance? I supposed it change, right?

Thanks everyone that are helping me out.
 

Gold Member
Username: Nickelbut10

Canada

Post Number: 3272
Registered: Jun-07
If your planning on using it for 60 percent music then by all means get the more musical speaker. If you choose the Paradigm monitor series the 9's are the worse. I feel the 7's are the star of the new V6 lineup. And are plenty "big" enough for your space. Just my opinion.

The 765 is a beast of an AVR and with something as sensitive as a Paradigm monitor series speaker I see no need to bi-amp for more power. Like Jan says its like having one cup of coffee and three cup holders. The other two cup holders are a nice feature to have but are useless to you. Up to you though. Some people claim to hear differences at absolute impossible feats in this hobby so if you bi-amp and think its better then giver giver blind river.

Jan can correct me if I am wrong, as Jan knows much more than I do about the actual technology behind bi-amping.
 

Gold Member
Username: Stu_pitt

Stamford, Connecticut USA

Post Number: 4066
Registered: May-05
I agree with Nick regarding speakers in a line not necessarily being better even though they're higher up the line. To my ears, the PSB Image T55 was better than the T65. The T65 had too much bass to my ears.

Keepin mind that speakers behave differently in different rooms. If you have a smaller room, a smaller speaker may very well sound better. In a bigger room, a bigger speaker may fill it better.

The only way to figure out what sounds best to to audition them in a similar sized and shaped room, then take them home and audition some more.

As far as bi-amping goes, when you get them home, you'll have the ability to try it out. No one can really tell you what you will or will not hear. If it sounds better, worse, or not different at all, you can do what needs to be done. Knowing the science behind it is good and all, but the measuring device you should be most concerned with is your ears.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15509
Registered: May-04
.

Sorry to say, if your intended use is 65% music, then, other than your source player, you've probably made a poor decision in your system choices. Maybe not, you aren't likely to hear everything I hear and vice versa. Your priorities in music playback probably have nothing to do with my own. So I could be quite wrong in what I'm thinking.

But experience tells me it doesn't take much time for any HT receiver owner to become less than satisfied with their receiver's performance in a two channel, music only situation. At times this is due to the overly processed signal path which exists in a HT receiver even in two channel mode. Sometimes the issues are those external to the receiver, say, a large screen TV in the same room which interferes with the basic requirements of good two channel sound quality. Even the presence of additional speakers can at times hold back a two channel system. This is certainly what I see coming from those HT receiver owners in the all-but-top-priced category. Some of the members here have more experience with this sort of set up than do I and possibly they can weigh in on my opinions here. I have always maintained a separate two channel system and kept it far away from the basic HT system I use. I do this because, IMO, the two systems have different end goals and therefore do not have the same potential performance when asked to operate outside their "comfort zone". Time after time the question has been asked on this forum and others regarding how to get satisfying two channel performance from a HT receiver. The real answer always seems to lie in setting up two separate systems or one system of far greater complexity which introduces other compromises to the whole affair. The bottom line always comes down to HT receivers are good at HT but seldom at music itself.

All that said, it's quite possible you will be content with the music performance of your receiver. If so, then I would personally suggest you make an effort to simply make the most of what you have and not get into the esoterics of a marketing concept which is unlikely to provide substantial "benefits". Bi-amping as accomplished through the NAD is not one of those options which will provide any real world benefit to you IMO.


"Biggest" speakers has nothing to do with sound quality. In some respects "big" is actually a deterrent to musical performance as large cabinets tend to have more difficulties not attracting attention to themself and away from the message of the music. Reading your posts I sense someone coming at audio from a background new to "high fidelity" systems. As such you are following a common thread of relying on what at first glance appears to be common sense yet which often is faulty logic played upon by marketing a product which can only continue to exist if the very few people who buy such a product continue to replace that product every few years. Replacement due to incorrect decision making in the first place is what all too often drives the desire to replace what you shouldn't have bought in the first place.

That isn't the gobble-de-gook it appears to be.


Big does not equate to "good" and more channels by themself have yet to provide higher musical enjoyment. At this point, you really need to put down the spec sheets and go do some listening.



"Then my question for bi-amping was for music thing. I mean, am I going to hear any difference when I play music if I bi-amp the front speakers?, anything like a much richer sound or a deep bass sound or something (remember, in two-channel way)"


No, you are not going to hear "a much richer sound or a deep bass sound or something" by employing your NAD receiver in a bi-amp configuration. Please understand that traditional bi-amping exists at the fringes of the audiophile world. If it did not, there would be more people actually using a bi-amped system and (we would hope) less confusion about its benefits. Bi-amping will not bring you noticeably richer sound nor will it accomplish "deeper bass". Bi-amping in its traditional use has existed along with SET tube amplifiers, balanced circuits and single driver loudspeakers on the very extreme ends of audio. These are the people who are after the very slightest improvements made at typically the highest costs. There is a point of diminishing returns where what you spend does not equate to what you get back unless you are at those extremes of the hobby and what you spend becomes less and less consequential to what you get back - just getting something out is more important than how much you have to put in. Trade offs abound in such set ups and they do not favor you in this situation.

For example, you will be spending double the amount on your cables to set up a bi-amped speaker. At the HT receiver level I doubt anyone here would suggest it is not wiser to invest in a single high quality cable rather than two lesser cables just to satisfy your curiousity about bi-amping.

The main benefit of bi-amping is, as I have explained, the use of filters in front of the ampifiers to restrict the frequency response of each amplifier. At the amplifier level this means the high frequency channels are not being forced to reproduce bass frequencies which are power thieves and (in a manner too complex to spell out here) have the potential to "interfere" with the very small, delicate signals which are present in the upper ranges. Your NAD does not provide for this division of labor and running 100 watts or more full range to the high frequencies is not going to affect any real world changes in the sound quality. Many of the benefits of bi-amping at the upper end of the audiophile market exist in the removal of filters inside the speaker. When no crossover filter is present in the speaker, the amplifiers have a direct connection to the drivers (speakers) to which they are assigned. There are no capacitors, inductors and resistors between the output of the amplifier and the speaker itself. As these passive components are removed from the signal chain, small and often difficult to notice, delicate benefits in transparency can be described on paper. Neither your HT receiver nor whichever consumer loudspeaker you purchase at your projected price range are meant to extract this sort of transparency to the source that exists at the very highest price level of audio. You really have to realize what you will have at your price and where you might go with that level of audio before you can make good choices about how to improve your system. You will own a modestly priced - as far as audio systems go - collection of components which are not yet beginning to approach the level of performance where bi-amping should even be a minor consideration. When you finally get into a store, ask to listen to some music played through their top priced system and then ask them two questions. First, why aren't they using a HT receiver in that system?. And, second, why haven't they bothered to bi-amp that system?

Don't take offense but as a newcomer you are being attracted by the esoterics of audio before you even have accomplished the basics. You want to make hand made, artisan pasta before you've learned to boil water. You need to make certain all of your bases are covered and you've set the system up as best you can at the basic levels of performance before you ever begin to concern yourself with the esoterics. Bi-amping the speakers you are considering with the amplifier you own is IMO not going to provide any audible improvements and will only set you back somewhat due to your monies being divided amongst too many items. This goes back to a three way speaker being somewhat less expensive and lower quality in each single component when compared to a like-cost two way. Buying lower quality parts just to make more of something is never a good idea. Too much processing and too many features add up to a HT receiver not being the best choice for two channel music. The same goes for "big" speakers. Big speaker cabinets have their own problems and those problems are going to be more difficult to rectify at a cost similar to a smaller cabinet. Just shipping a "big speaker" costs more than it does a smaller speaker and your money has gone where? to UPS and not to improving your system sound.


My advice is to concentrate on the basics of what you have. If you want a high quality two channel music system for the largest portion of your listening, buy the components which will make up the highest quality two channel system you can afford. Buying more channels, more processing and more speakers is not the way to go about acquiring the highest quality two channel music system. Invest in the best quality in each piece that you can rather than the most pieces you can see.


" If some speakers manufacturer say that the nominal impedance of a speaker is 6 Ohms and sensitivity 87dB , what happen with the sensitivity at other impedance? I supposed it change, right?"


I can't actually answer that question with a blanket response. Regulations have been put in place to supposedly make it simpler for the consumer to inform themself about a confusing topic. Unfortunately, the audio industry is no different than any other. Once a regulation is in place to asist the consumer, the industry immediately begins working out how to skirt the regulations and return to their old ways. "XX SPL @ 2.83 Volts @ 1 meter" is essentially how the sensitivity spec should read. Some manufacturers (particularly those selling 8 Ohm systems) will quote "1 watt" rather than "2.83 Volts" and that is acceptable. Once specs begin to stray from that basic formula there are only case by case explanations for what the spec is trying to tell you - if, that is, the spec is actually trying to tell you anything or merely trying to confuse or obfuscate the truth.

What the final, real answer comes down to is, you cannot choose a speaker by looking at a piece of paper anymore than you can choose a car, a wine or a spouse on such circumsantial objective/subjective opinions. You need to put the spec sheets down and find a good dealer who is willing to invest some of their time and some of their experience in your system. Stop reading and go listen.


.
 

New member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 9
Registered: Oct-10
Hahaha, Ok Jan, you have a point there when you say "Stop reading and go listen". Becuase I reed more, and they came to my mind more doubts.

But since I'm an Engineer, I have the need to learn about this things, becuase I have a lot of passion about speakers, receivers, amps, pre amps, and all that stuff, and that's why I'm asking here.

My idea was getting a hi-end HT Receiver because I still want to see concerts on bluray and movies too. I have a 30 day period to return the NAD T765 If I don't like it, so I was looking and in your opinion if I want to stay with HT receivers, do you think it will be better to get another one, like a Rotel RSX-1560 or an Anthem RMX-700 or just stay with the NAD. I really appreciate all your help and thank you for teaching me something well.

Thanks to everyone.
 

Gold Member
Username: Magfan

USA

Post Number: 1771
Registered: Oct-07
Alex,
I've worked with engineers for my entire professional career as a technician...in various guises. All that extra education can work against you in this situation.

DROP the engineer hat in the local trash when you are stereo shopping. I know how engineers can get. Spreadsheets of gear/specs/features. Analysis of reviews and trying to find consensus (where none exists!) Seeing if the plant where the gear is built is ISO certified and when WAS that last audit? Internet shopping / obsessing at work while you are supposed to be WORKING. Too much coffee?

Listen to Jan, in this case.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 15510
Registered: May-04
.

I would think the best way to answer your question, Alex, is for you to answer the question yourself. I have no idea what you listen for when it comes to music reproduced through a collection of boxes. I know rather specifically what I listen for and what I can live without but I recognized decades ago that my priorities in music playback have little to do with most other listener's priorities. IMO with very few exceptions and only in rooms which are geared toward an "entertainment/music room" only set up, you will never obtain the sort of values from an HT reciever of any stripe that you can manage with a somewhat ridiculously low priced budget of strict two channel gear. A low to mid line NAD, Rotel, Rega, Cambridge, Onkyo, Marantz, etc. integrated amplifier and some appropriate speakers will, I think, prove to be far more satisfying with music than virtually any cost of HT receiver and the necessary multi-channel speaker systems strewn about the average room. The HT system will always smack of an artifice and a "hifi" sound which I find unintersting while the budget integrated - pick your line of quality component - will have the ability to draw you into the music and not just the awesomeness of all that HT stuff lined up.

But you need to decide for yourself, there are too many issues about which no one can advise you when the real decision maker is your goal and how you decide you will get there. Go listen to some music at a dealer's showroom. Listen through a HT system with the attendant speakers and then to a two channel only stereo system and decide which you prefer. If you really want a theater experience with your movies, then you might lean one way and compromise another. If you really desire music to be your "thing", then you might lean the other way. You have to decide, we can only tell you what we know from experience, however, our experience is not your experience.

The point is, don't take anyone's opinion for any more than it is worth - not even my own. I can't tell you what you will like or dislike and there will always be compromises no matter which price range you are in. You have to make the decision you want this and not that and possibly you can get to this point as your budget and your knowledge grow. Take it slowly and learn about the sound of live music if that's what you want to have in your home. At that point, what you own is not the end, what you hear is the end and what you own is merely a means to that end.




.
 

Platinum Member
Username: Plymouth

Canada

Post Number: 15419
Registered: Jan-08
Alex

A good system ia capable of playing all kind of musics not just rock or vocals, I like classic because my system can play this kind of music, on a bad system the violins are aggressive, look for the hability of playing a music with very loaded of different musical instruments, the ability to well recognize all performers.

The Nad is a very good amplifier for its price, I was talking like a purist which does not apply for your HT system without a high spending of money, if you like the Nad buy it!
 

New member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 10
Registered: Oct-10
Hi everyone,

I just came back from two dealers.

1st dealer, had PSB T65 & T55 unplugged and couldn't show them to me. Next I saw a Monitor Audio RX8 which I didn't like the sound, too bright.

2nd dealer, had a Paradigm Monitor 7, PSB T65 & T55 and KEF iQ70, every speaker unplugged too, so I talk to the salesperson and he said me that if I want to try them out so he could arrange a room test with the them, so he will call me when he finish to install everything on the test room.

For Nick, Stu and Jan, you were right, I didn't imagine that the Paradigm Monitor 7 v.6, PSB T55 or KEF iQ70 were the perfect size I was looking for, so this changes all. I let know the salesperson that I wanted to tryout those speakers.

Thanks to all. He said me that maybe in one or two weeks, he will have the new PSB Image T5 & T6, so I will be try it too, and I think I will wait to try the KEF Q700 because I have a good feeling about them.
 

Gold Member
Username: Magfan

USA

Post Number: 1773
Registered: Oct-07
Not that it matters, and I certainly listened under LESS than even good conditions, but my single run-in with KEF IQ-90s showed them to be a little hot on the top end. almost a glare.
Again, not definitive and certainly not with NAD / Rotel 2ch amps, but still and all....I didn't think I could stand an afternoon of them.

My Maggies are on 8 hours / day 5 days a week, playing music.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 11
Registered: Oct-10
Just an update since I'm following the steps that Jan told me:

"Take it slowly and learn about the sound of live music if that's what you want to have in your home. At that point, what you own is not the end, what you hear is the end and what you own is merely a means to that end."

I return the NAD T765HD and I will be audition a lot of systems this weekend and I will update when I choose Receiver and Speakers.

So for everyone, thanks and have a good day.
 

Gold Member
Username: Magfan

USA

Post Number: 1793
Registered: Oct-07
Good idea!
Looking forward to your listening impressions.

I suppose, once you find something you like, a home approval audition will be in order. Your room than becomes a very important part of the 'system'.
 

Gold Member
Username: Dakulis

Spokane, Washington United States

Post Number: 1143
Registered: May-05
Jan,

I agreed with almost everything you said in this post. I have to take exception to: "you cannot choose a speaker by looking at a piece of paper anymore than you can choose a car, a wine or a spouse on such circumstantial subjective/subjective opinions."

I've seen pictures of several women that would lead me to disagree with that in both directions, i.e, "Yep, she could be my wife" or "ain't no way she could be my wife", but then, maybe that's just me. LOL. Otherwise, I'd say great posts and explanations.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Alexalanis

Mexico City, DF Mexico

Post Number: 12
Registered: Oct-10
Hi guys, just an update.

The first time I heard the Monitor Audio RX8 Speakers, were connected to a Rotel Amplifier, Now I heard it with a NAD and what a difference. Rotel, treble was to bright and the mid's were to low (volume) and now with NAD Amplifier I saw that you need more volume (maybe it was the difference on wattage) but they sound excellent, warmer sound, better mid's and controlled treble, for the bass I think Rotel was more tight and faster, but no to much, believe me, NAD bass are fast too, but Rotel's are faster, what I like about the RX8 too was the dynamics were excellent.

I heard the Mourdant-Short Mezzo 6 too, I like them, they had a good image and the mid's and treble, were good, but they don't have the bass I want for front speakers.

For last, I heard Bowers & Wilkins 683 and I think they have a better mid's than the RX8 but the treble was more controlled to much that sounds low (volume) and the bass was better for RX8. What I saw for the bowers is that you need a powerful amplifier.

Now my question is that right now I'm staying with the RX8 (I'm still waiting for more options) but what I didn't like about them is that they are 4 Ohms nominal impedance form specs sheet, so If I take the NAD T775HD AV Receiver does the NAD will support the low impedance without any problem?

I'm still waiting for the KEF Q900 to arrive here in Mexico and try them, I don't want to miss any speaker I was looking for. Tomorrow I will try the RX6 because I hear good things about it. I have an appointment too for December 8th to try the PSB Image T5 & T6 and Imagine T too. I will update my thoughts about them.

Thank you everyone.
« Previous Thread Next Thread »



Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us