|
New member Username: Boobay913Post Number: 1 Registered: Oct-11 | Newbee here. I am updating my 20 yr old Denon system (finally). I like simple. I will be purchasing an NAD C375BEE Integrated Amp and need some input on 3 different pairs of speakers. My room is large all hardwood floors, 18' wide x 30' deep with vaulted ceiling betwen 8'-12' tall. It is an open living, dinning and kitchen combo. This system is for audio only. I have a seperate home theater system. I may purchase an NAD CD player but will hookup ipod regularly. I listen to almost everything from Classic Country, Metal, Grateful Dead, Hip Hop, Funk/Jazz, Classic Rawk, Jam Band and everything in between. I like solid sounds with clarity, loudly at times b/c we like to rock and boom. No classical or new country. These three sets of speakers will fit my room and budget - B&W CM9, Paradigm Studio 100 or ProAc 140 mk2. If I need a sub woof I will get after I see what my purchases sounds like in my house. OK audio freaks, any input would be greatly appreciated. React, Thanks, B |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Canada Post Number: 3573 Registered: Jun-07 | The NAD 375bee is a nice amp. IMO it would not match up sonically with the B&W speakers. Paradigms of old perhaps not either, but the new Studio line is a great matchup IMO with the latest NAD amps. I had a pair of Studio 10's in my system for a while and they were a good speaker just too small for my room and not the best match with the NAIM amp. The new Studio line is a lively speaker. I have never heard the ProAc's so cant comment. If your building a system around the 375bee there are some other brands in that price range I would rather match up with personally. Also, what source will you using? How big is the room? What music do you most listen to? |
|
New member Username: Boobay913Post Number: 2 Registered: Oct-11 | Thanks for the input Nick K. Room size is in above post. Listen to most? Currently - Stanton Moore, Clutch, G Dead, Galactic, Prof Longhair, Wayne Hancock, Beatie Boys, Rolling Stones, Fu Manchu need I go on. Source will be ipod most of the time for now. Simple = ipod > Int Amp > Speakers > ears. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 16854 Registered: May-04 | . I know what "clarity" is for most listeners but what is a "solid sound"? The size of the room is not overwhelming - average, if nothing more for a decent system - but the use of the iPod is fairly underwhelming. The point of a higher quality system is to show you just what is available from the source. If that is not what you're after, why upgrade? The old system isn't working well? OK, that's reasonable. You want the newest looks and features? Yeah, you'll get some of that in a new system - but not in the NAD line. There are lots of reasons to upgrade a system but, if improved sound quality is not what you're after, then we need to talk about other options. In today's more sophisticated market "source first" is the most common way to construct a system when starting an upgrade path. An old Denon receiver and matching speakers might not sound too bad with the ipod - most especially for the more casual listener. However, if you're going for higher quality sound, why start with one tire in the mud by sticking with the lowest form of fidelity from the source? Think "garbage in = garbage out". MP3 formats - particularly those high compression, low bit-rate formats meant to load the highest number of selections onto one iPod - are, today, good only for loading lots of material onto a single drive. Fidelity has been compromised for convenience and there's no way for a decent system to put back what the (highly) "lossy" MP3 format has discarded. Quite the contrary, in fact! How causal is your listening vs how serious? Do you sit and only pay attention to the musicians' performance and the emotional connection to be found in excellent music? Or, do you read the paper, surf the web, walk around, fix a meal, etc. while the music serves as background material? If your primary listening is of the first type - paying attention to the way in which music is constructed, then you probably should be looking at "this" sort of system. If, instead, your listening is mostly background wallpaper, then "that" system, other components - most especially speakers - would probably be the better match. If you want occasional high volume levels, it's best to find those levels through your speaker selection and not by having higher wattage. Adding an additional three decibels to the "sensitivity" spec of a speaker through careful selection would be the same (in terms of volume potential) as doubling the wattage of the amplifier from any one point. In other words, if your amp is capable of 50 watts, adding the higher sensitivity speaker would be the same as having 100 watts available and would be far kinder to the amplifier and speakers both. If your average listening level were to consume ten watts total (a fairly common "average" listening level for all but the most ardent rock and Mahler fans), the higher sensitivity speaker would now only consume five watts and leave plenty of headroom for large peaks in the music. Adding an additional six decibels to the sensitivity spec is not far from playing twice as loud without strain. There are, of course, trade offs to be found when hiking up the sensitivity spec and careful auditions and selections would be required to satsify most "serious" and intent listeners. The up side, for you, would be many of the highest sensitivity speakers would also be considered - by the more causal listener - to have your stated "clarity". Be aware that, as a line of speakers, the B&W's and the Paradigms - though having higher sensitivity "specs" on paper - are also more complex as a load for any amplifier and virtually trade away their gains in level potential for a more difficult load which will require a more capable amplifier. Are we talking "danceable" levels are desired? Or, would "that's fairly loud" be sufficient? Are you going to be able to audition the components together before your purchase? Or, is this all going to be done on line and heard only after money has been committed and boxes unpacked? Are you open to doing a proper speaker set up to achieve the best sound quality performance from the system? Or, are the speakers going to be relegated to where they fit in the space? A corner and a shelf? One on one side of the room and the other somewhere else? 18' apart? Can you forsee using a few room treatment devices to bring the room sound into line? . |
|
Gold Member Username: Nickelbut10Canada Post Number: 3574 Registered: Jun-07 | BooBay - Jans approach to building a system is spot on. Might I quickly add, as Jan has already pointed out, that the I-Pod is a horrible source. It will simply make any system, regardless of the equipment used, sound horrible. I just had mine plugged into my two channel system the other night as there was some tunes on it I wanted to hear and it was painful to listen to. |
|
New member Username: Boobay913Post Number: 3 Registered: Oct-11 | I here you guys loud and clear. Yes I use the ipod. When I purchased the Denon System 20 years ago i also got the Denon 5 disc player. It has been used regularly and served its purpose. The entire system has done its job. Why am I upgrading? - My wife's amp is shot. It is the one we keep in the garage/mancuary and now the Denon is the replacement. Wala - I get new equip for the house. So I should look into a new CD player for the home. I will prob look at NAD since its the amp I am getting. Need to do some research... I appreciate all the input people. Anything else let me know... Last - I am leaning towards the ProAc 140 mk2's with the NAD 375bee amp. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 16859 Registered: May-04 | . What's your current investment in CD's? If I were looking to re-do an entire system today, CD's would be a fairly low priority. That would be true despite the fact the vast majority of my music exists either as analog discs or digital discs. However, the future is not in hard copies of music files. Reading a spinning disc is the most disruptive form of digital playback - should your listening be of the most intentive variety. Should your listening style be more casual, then CD's are still far from the most convenient source today and not noticeably better than the current stock of music servers and networks available. While an existing stock of CD's will necessitate a decent CD player in the system, I would be on the look out for a source/system which has the capacity to accommodate future and soon to be disc-less storage devices. Otherwise, you'll soon find yourself looking at another system based in decades old technology. . |
|
New member Username: Boobay913Post Number: 4 Registered: Oct-11 | Dam, Jan your knowledge is greatly appreciated. 1st I am not an audio master mind, electronic wiz or audiophile. I won't be sitting in front of my system sipping wine. Think of me as more of a Shiner Bock guy. However I do sit back and listen to my fav "albums" from start to finish regularly. Then again sometimes we want to rock out while doing various things around the house. Like I said previously - simple but I am upgrading so needed some input. That is why I registered for this forum. Yes I have a fair amount of CD's. 500ish I suppose. Curious - what is your fav source currently? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 16866 Registered: May-04 | . Each has its advantages and disadvantages. Access to the music is what counts though I have no MP3's. If I place something on my portable player, it is done in FLAC format and I loose content quantity while having significantly higher playback quality. Doing the same - or recording in WAV - would be acceptable with the iPod and even more so when you use an outboard DAC while bypassing the internal digital to analog converter. There are several ways to go aboutt his and any decent retailer should be able to lead you towards what might best serve your needs. This is an "ancient" review in terms of digital technology but it should serve as a starting point for your considerations. http://www.stereophile.com/mediaservers/934/index5.html There's also something like this which has more storage, includes an external USB card for additional files and was designed to sound good; http://www.stereophile.com/content/head-direct-hifiman-hm-602-digital-audio-play er Running an outboard DAC is a very simple affair and can be done through either a conventtional digital connection or through a USB from numerous digital sources; http://www.stereophile.com/content/hrt-music-streamer-pro-usb-da-converter And, of course, the dedicated music servers are available at ever declining prices depending on just how much verstaility you desire; http://www.sonos.com/shop/products/connect To add to the confusion of available selections, there are several CD players which accept external inputs while using the built in DAC's to process the digital bitstream; http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/products.php#cd-players If you intend to be a somewhat serious listener, then beyond "clarity", what qualities do you value? Saying "tight, bass, clear minds and clean highs" isn't much of an answer here. The current crop of high end audio products offer far more than those basic values. When you listen to a live performance, what are you hearing from the performers and what in the music affects you to the point you would like to replicate that particular quality in your home music system's performance? . |
|
Gold Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 1125 Registered: Dec-06 | Jan provided a link to Cambridge players, however it looks like the NAD C565 also accepts digital inputs (assuming you are set on purchasing NAD). NAD's current crop of players are quite well regarded. Cheaper NAD players do not seem to offer this feature though, so you'd have to spend about $700 for the 565 to get it. |
|
Gold Member Username: IlluminatorUSA Post Number: 5607 Registered: Apr-05 | I'd go for the CM9's and get whatever amp you can that will sound best with them. Personal opinion is that you get the speakers first, then decide what amp to purchase since the speaker will make more of a difference in the sound than the amp will. Admittedly, I'm a total B&W fanboy. I have the CM1's paired with a PV1 and they're stellar. Have owned nearly every model from the new 600 series, a few of their subs, the older DM600's, ZF series, heard the XT4's, and 705's, and it's really hard if not impossible to find a B&W speaker that doesn't please. I've never cared for Paradigm's sound (plus they're meant to be run with grilles on and grilles off is far more aesthetically pleasing to me). Also worth considering is the B&W's will hold their value FAR better than the other two speakers should you ever want to sell them. Don't have any experience with Proac so can't say much about them. Also, equipment is available to make an iPod sound pretty darn good. It's most definitely not a horrible source unless you're just plugging an aux-in cord directly to the headphone output jack. I mean, if a record can sound great, then an iPod can certainly be made to sound incredible. Something that bypasses the iPod's internal DAC would be sufficient. |