Reciever suggestions?
|
Bronze Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 25 Registered: Jun-06 | Ok, within the next 6 months I need a new reciever. I just invested in new speakers from paradigm (montior 9s front, cc370 center, adp370 rears and a prd8 sub). I have a yamaha dvd-s657 as my dvd player and sacd dvda cd player. I have a satellite radio, and a ipod. Currently I have a sony reciever. Im planning on spending up to $1500 on reciever (thats not deffinite). I really like the idea of a seperate preamp and a seperate amps, but, I dont know what im looking for in that stuff. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4241 Registered: Mar-05 | I'd look at the Harman Kardon 635 for $550 shipped from 6ave.com (original list is $1200-1300) and add either a NAD c272 150wpc amp ($600-700 retail) or a pair of Outlaw Audio monoblocks ($650) for the M-9s. Of course there is a good chance you might decide that the HK is plenty for your speakers. In that case, what I'd do is return the PDR8 sub and buy a 12" Hsu or SVS sub which would eat it for lunch and will really be worth its weight in gold during action/thriller DVDs. |
|
Bronze Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 26 Registered: Jun-06 | Theres no way im getting a 12" sub. The main purpose of this system is for music, so I dont care about a big boomy sub, I want accuracy, I want to hear the upright bass in the jazz, I want to hear the notes being played, not feel them. |
|
Silver Member Username: Daniel_canadaCanada Post Number: 138 Registered: May-06 | If you want it for music only. Buy an intergrated amp or pre-amp power amp combo. Don't buy a receiver. For radio, just hook the Sony receiver into the tape loop. For a $1500 budget you can get something nice. NAD 162/272 combo. Hit up a local AUDIO store (no box stores please) and see what they have to offer. |
|
Silver Member Username: Daniel_canadaCanada Post Number: 139 Registered: May-06 | Arcam has a few nice units in your price range. |
|
Bronze Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 27 Registered: Jun-06 | Here comes the problem, music is number 1, however, I watch a very large ammount of music. Now, as far as listning to cds, satellite radio, ipod, etc, I perfer a 2.1 sound, so, I like the idea of a preamp and poweramp to get the true beutiful 2.1. Now, for movies, sacds, and dvdas, I want that 5.1 (someday 7.1) surround sound that fills the room. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4242 Registered: Mar-05 | Jeffrey, LOL all you'd need to do is turn off the 12" sub when you're listening to music...believe me, with a really strong amp your Monitor 9's bass will be HUGELY improved. My Ascend 340s were designed to be run with a sub, but when I added some NAD separates I kept having to pick my jaw off the floor at all the new bass I was hearing all of the sudden. Your Monitor 9s already have a fair amount of bass by themselves. Now of course the necessity of a monster sub is based on the assumption that you watch a lot of action/thriller flicks. It would be wasted on someone who mostly watches dramas, comedies, arthouse movies, etc. Generally speaking though, Paradigm's PDR subs are some of the weakest products in their lineup, with dismal bang for the buck compared to the Internet-direct subs. |
|
New member Username: LisamariaPlainfield, N.J. U.S.A. Post Number: 1 Registered: Jun-06 | hi there i have cool sat 5000 could anyone send me the new key or give me a site whereI can log in and get them. i lost all the channels . Thank you so much. a1m2o1@msn.com |
|
Bronze Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 28 Registered: Jun-06 | ok, so, I pretty much understand what you guys are saying that would be the "perfect" system for me. Keep my sony or get a better reciever and use that for movies/tv/etc with a 12" sub, then get a nice 2 channel integrated amp to run the monitor 9s off of and the prd8 for music only. So, here comes the "technical" question. Hooking up the 12" sub and the rear and center speakers would be simple enough, they would go straight into the reciever, and the 8" sub would go straight into the 2 channel integrated amp. How am I going to hook up the monitor 9s to the integrated amp and the reciever? Do I split the wires and hook them into both, or do I loop the integrated amp to the reciever? This is where I get a little confused. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3188 Registered: Dec-04 | Drop those wires! Jeff, you might want to feconsider your usage before your kit looks like mine, with multiple amps an receivers and whatnot. A good processor can provide very good stereo. Said processor mated to a 5 channel power amp will simplify things greatly, and add a bit of flexibility. Drop on down to Barret St. and check out the hi-fi shops for used amps, a 5 channel 100w Rotel is usually cheap, like 800 or so, then look into pre/pro's. Maybe? |
|
Bronze Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 31 Registered: Jun-06 | Is there such thing as a digital pre-amp that can upsample a analog source to something as high as 192khz? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4244 Registered: Mar-05 | > Hooking up the 12" sub and the rear and center speakers would be simple enough, they would go straight into the reciever, and the 8" sub would go straight into the 2 channel integrated amp. How am I going to hook up the monitor 9s to the integrated amp and the reciever? Do I split the wires and hook them into both, or do I loop the integrated amp to the reciever? First off, I seriously doubt you'd even need the 8" sub for music with a good integrated 2-channel amp running your mains. You can keep it of course for that purpose (have it run directly from the integrated amp) but that'd just be unnecessary clutter and complication IMO. Anyways, you'd run the amp using the pre-outs for the mains in your AVR. (Don't know if your Sony has pre-outs or not.) During HT, you'd have both your AVR and your amp on (if it's an integrated amp it can get a little tricky with volume matching, if it's a dedicated amp then no problem) and during music, you'd have the AVR off completely. Now ideally, if you have the space I'd just put the music system into a separate room and buy a pair of Monitor 5s or 3s for your mains during HT (towers are unnecessary for HT if you have a sub). |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 126 Registered: Jun-06 | Any opinions on the marantz SR8500 and the Denon AVR-4306? My dealer recommends the denon, however I hear that marantz is better for music, and I sampled my speakers on the marantz. Now, as far as the sub issues go, I purchased a paradigm pw-2100. Its a beast. For music, its excellent, it keeps up very well, and, even with my sony, the bass on the monitor 9,s is so plentyfull, I can turn off the sub if I want (I often do, espically for quite lsitning, prue 2 channel is beutiful). And for home theator, this sub can shake the house, even at 1/4 volume (I keep it at 1/3 tops, mostly 1/4, adn 1/8 for music!). Both recievers Im looking at are 125/130watts RMS, and both contain pre-outs for each speaker, so If I wanted to add more power, or by-amp the fronts, It wouldtn be a problem (bi-amping is a deffinite idea for 2 channel music, id eprobably get 4 outlaw m-blocks). Anyways, whats your thoughts guys? |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 127 Registered: Jun-06 | Oh, I replaced the adp-370's with monitor 3's. I didnt need di-poles cause my room was perfect for positining bookshelfs. My current idea right now is a A/V Reciever, than some outlaw mono-blocks for the front pre outs. During music I would turn off my PW-2100 and run 2 channel audio. During this, I would also have my mono blocks switched on, thus giving my towers a tonn of power. During home theator, I will just run 5.1, turn on the sub, and most likly turn off the mono blocks. If I have a good reciever, I dont need to have a integrated amp for my cds and such. Does this sound like a good plan? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4311 Registered: Mar-05 | I have to agree that for music, the Denon sound is very boring to my ears, identical to that of the higher end Yamaha AVRs. Get the Marantz first to see how much you'll even need the monoblocks; the 8500 has a torroidal transformer so should give you plenty of juice. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 128 Registered: Jun-06 | The Marantz is pushing 125watts RMS out each channel, however, Im curions, What is the amp that is running this like? Is this a class D amp, or something similar to what Outlaw uses with the A/B for the first 80watts than a G for the rest 120watts? |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 129 Registered: Jun-06 | To touch on a previous suggestion, would a integrated amp be a good idea for my music. Since (my ipod, satellite radio, cd player) are all true 2 channel sources, and I will be running them in 2 channel, would purchasing a integraded amp be a good way to go? Then, when I eventually get a nice marantz 8500, I can jsut plug the integrated amp in teh tape loop, or something like that. Also, what are som recomidations on good integrated amps under $1000cad?? Or would it be just as effective to get that marantz 8500 and run 2 channel audio? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4313 Registered: Mar-05 | nice integrated would be the NAD c372 or, if you're ok with less power, the c352. The Outlaw 2-channel receiver (forgot the model) also gets glowing reviews and has tons of features, though the faceplate is kind of ugly IMO. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 132 Registered: Jun-06 | For strictly music, would the C352 be enough? Its 80watts true power per channel (I know the C372 is 150watts true). I dont want to crank this system, but when Im listning at a low volume, I want to haer everything. Also, Im thinking bi-amping them in teh future. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 133 Registered: Jun-06 | Thinking of a NAD C352 Integrated amp, coupled wth 2 NADC272 Power amps. The entire system will cost near $2000, do you guys think this is something worth investing in? (I will be buying piece by piece, first a C352 ($600), than 1 C272 ($600), than a second C272 ($600)). |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4314 Registered: Mar-05 | why would you put together an integrated c352 with 2 c272s? You might as well buy a dedicated 2-channel pre-amp in that case. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 135 Registered: Jun-06 | The thought behind it was that right now, my avr isnt very good (lacking power). So, the c352 would be a improvment. Then, later I would expand by addign a c272 to bump the power up, and, than, even later, add another c272 and bi-amp the fronts. But I do see the point in running soemthing like a c162 and a c272 together. Than, later down the road, add another c-272 and bi-amp them. Only downside is that that would cost me $1500 for the pre and power amps. Instead of $600 for the integrated. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 136 Registered: Jun-06 | Just wondering, incase I everwanted. Would I be able to take those pre-outs of the pre-amp, and plug them into my av reciever. The only reason I would want to of course, is to get 5.1 sound. Also, how would I hook the fronts up to the avr and the pre-amp. I would require this since the towers are for home theator (with the avr) and music (with the pre/power amps)? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4315 Registered: Mar-05 | yes, you could either have one of the 162's outputs go into an input on your AVR. Or have one of your AVR's pre-outs go into one of the 162's inputs, or go directly into the c272 if you don't want to worry about volume matching during 5.1 |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 137 Registered: Jun-06 | At the moment, my reciever dosnt have pre-outs. Eventually I will get a reciever that has pre-outs. So, I still have the issue of hooking up my monitor 9's to the c272 and the avr. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 138 Registered: Jun-06 | My head is getting hurty! Im really tempted to purchase a NAD C352 and call it a day. At least that would be be affordable (can do it next month), and still a improvment in quality. I think, when it comes down to it. The C162 and the C272 will cost me $1500. I can get (For $500 more) a Marantz 8500. Then later work from there. After The Marantz 8500 (If I even feel the need) I can have the (marantz) front pre-outs go straight into 2 c272s and bi-amp the speakers. Would that be same quality as running my analog music straight to a c162 than into 2 c272s?? Than im using the pre-amp in my marantz 8500 (assuming I buy it), instead of my (assuming I buy it) c162. And Im still (assuming I buy it) having 2 c272s powering my mains bi-amping them. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1637 Registered: Feb-04 | No offence, but is this overkill for Monitor 9s? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4318 Registered: Mar-05 | read my mind, Peter... |
|
Silver Member Username: PraetorianCanada Post Number: 252 Registered: Dec-05 | but certainly provides for scalability... |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 139 Registered: Jun-06 | Ok, now, guys. If your going to start telling me that its overkill and such, you have to say what. Theres been ehough ideas mentioned that saying overkill is not helpfull at all. What is over kill? Marantz 8500? NAD C125 and C272? NAD C253? NAD C372? Bi-Amping? I personally dont think bi-amping is over kill for my speakers. I find them to be very high quality, and I think that bi-amping would be a good idea, it would sepearte the highs and lows a bit more, giving me more impact in them. It wouldnt be anything drastic, but, it would be enough for me to hear a difference. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 140 Registered: Jun-06 | Also, I dont like the idea of buying a "cheap" $500 reciever, than addign more power to the fronts. I want to run the most pwoer I can to each channel, for the movies, and music encoded in surround sound. I want a very good quality reciever, that is probably more than enough power, then eventually bi-amp the M-9's. I dont think bi-amping the monitor 9's is overkill, even with dual c272's. I know I will be pushing 300watts continius power to thoes speakers, but, they are some pretty intense speakers, do you honestly think they wont handel that much juice? |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 144 Registered: Jun-06 | OK, im gonna make this really simple. Im not going to start plannig thousand of watts. Im not goign to try and spend the most money I can, etc. I have a honest question, I need some answers. Will a NAD C352 be a noticble improvment (2 channel music, cd player) from my current sony av reciever. Will this give me enough power and then some to drive my monitor 9's? Will I have tighter and more responsive bass? If not, do I need to look at the C372? Or is the best and only way to go a C162 with a C272? Thats 3 options, cost ranging from $700, to $1500. If this was your system. If this was your money. What would you do? |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4321 Registered: Mar-05 | If this were my system/money, I would buy an HK 635 for $580 (6ave.com) and see how it does with those speakers. If I feel that in 2-channel mode the M-9s need more oomph, then I would add the c272. Rather than bother with bi-amping, I would take the money and upgrade the front 3 speakers instead. In fact I would probably do this after buying the HK. I think the reason "overkill" comes up is because---I'm sorry to say this and I hope you won't take offense, but since you asked for honesty---frankly there are much better speakers out there than the ones you've chosen, for the same or slightly more money. Spending tons of money on amplification is not going to make those Monitor 9s ever sound like, for example, Studio 20s. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 145 Registered: Jun-06 | Well, I just purchased this system. I spent 2 weeks listning to them. And, since I didnt only buy monitor 9's, I didnt have much play room for changing models. Im not a huge fan of HK, and espically not going to buy them online from some sture in the states (read under my name, it says canada!!!). And, though there may be better speakers, there are much worse. Now, what you said about these speakers not sounding better is pretty much bullsh!t im sorry. These are very good speakers, maby not as nice as yours, but, they keep my jaw on the floor. And, upgrading my amp to anything will keep it better. The reason I say no HK is cause I tend to lean away from big box brands. And HK is a big box brand, sold in every futureshop and bestbuy around. I guess since you guys arnt gonna really help me any. Im gonna jsut say this thread is done. Im new to this fourm, but, not people like you. I asked a fairly closed ended specific question. And you managed to take it, and tell me that my stuff isnt that good. You didnt mean to be rude, or mean offence, but, telling someone to return there gear that there still paying for, and buy better stuff, is pretty rude, no matter now you say it. Imagin painting your house, inviting your firends over and them saying, well, why didnt you just buy a new house? Anyways, Im goona do what the guys in the audio shop recommand, cause you guys arnt much help honestly. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4323 Registered: Mar-05 | > You didnt mean to be rude, or mean offence, but, telling someone to return there gear that there still paying for, and buy better stuff, is pretty rude, no matter now you say it. Imagin painting your house, inviting your firends over and them saying, well, why didnt you just buy a new house? Well if you kept pestering your friends for advice on how to make a $200,000 house feel/look like a $400,000 house---one of them just might tell you something like that, if they are honest enough and/or you are persistent enough. If you don't want honest feedback, then for God's sake don't ask for it. (Trying hard to avoid quoting Jack Nicholson in "A Few Good Men.") Geez, quite frankly I don't know why you even bother coming to ANY forum---you already know the answers you WANT to hear, so why bother? Bottom line is, you don't need any further self-justification to go out and continue throwing your money around willy-nilly. So fine, carry on...at the very least you're supporting your local economy, more power to you. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3350 Registered: Dec-04 | The loudest complaints come from the cheap seats. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 146 Registered: Jun-06 | Listen Edster. I asked advice on buying a reciever. I didnt ask your opinion on my speakers. I didnt ask advice on what I should return. Im sorry if your $10'000 speakers are better than my $3000 speakers. Im sorry if Im only 19, working 2 jobs so I can afford this shi t and still save for a real future, and Im sorry if you think my speakers arnt up to par. And Nuck, thanks. Eitherway, Ed, if you think I cant squeez any more power out of my paradigm monitor 9's. Than your in a dream world. Right now my reciever sucks a ss. And I cant believe that a C192 and a C272 is overkill. Anyways, Nuck, buddy. Since your hear, give your opinion. I know that your a pretty nice guy. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4324 Registered: Mar-05 | Jeff, now you're just flailing about in confusion. First off, I never said a c192 and c272 were overkill---just the idea of bi-amping your Monitor 9s with TWO c272s on top of a stereo pre-amp that is connected to a pricey AVR (since you pooh-pooh the HK 635, a receiver which despite being sold at BB and FS is still arguably in a higher class of gear than the Monitor 9s). And the biggest laugh of all: my speakers are cheaper than yours, probably by almost half in fact: Ascend 340 classics, about $570/pair shipped...God bless Internet direct! The reason I know they're better is that when I was speaker shopping I would have gone with the Paradigm Monitor 5 if someone on a forum like this had not told me about them. Since owning the Ascends, I can confidently say that they are significantly better than the Monitor 5s. And from the entire Paradigm Monitor line, I actually preferred the Monitor 5s the most. Why? Of course they can't match the bass of the 7, 9 or 11 but their mids and highs were much clearer and less shrieky, and what bass they put out was much tighter and more accurate. I was, and still am, happy to sacrifice some bass extension in exchange for better performance elsewhere, esp. since I do use a subwoofer. My decision to go with the Ascends was not based on any illusion that I was buying the greatest speakers on the face of the planet---just a conviction, developed from culling countless speaker threads on a number of different audio forums---about getting the best bang for the buck within a given price range. I also did not mind the plain black vinyl cabinets they come in (the Paradigms are certainly prettier) nor did I mind the relatively low-prestige I-D brand name which would be mostly unknown outside of the online audio community. As for what you asked, in your last post before I gave you that apparently too-rough wakeup call, you wrote, "If this was your system. If this was your money. What would you do?" My answer was, and is: get a decent AVR (since you said you wanted to have the surround sound option) and see if you'll be happy with it alone powering your speakers, and if not simply add a c272 for the M-9s and leave it at that. To wit: I feel that adding a second c272 in order to bi-amp them would be a total waste of money, for the negligible difference it'll make. Since you seem to have an immovable and irrational bias against HK merely because a couple of big-box stores carry them (you apparently are ignorant of HK's long and well-respected history in the audio industry long before the big box stores came along) then I suggest you try the Marantz, the 8500 with its torroidal transformer might be all that you need. BTW, just because 80% of the stuff the big box stores carry is crap doesn't necessarily that some of the 20% isn't decent. Frankly the audio store where you purchased these Paradigms doesn't seem all that great either if they sold you a PDR8 with your M-9s. That's like selling 22 caliber bullets with a .45 for God's sake. Did they come up with this hare-brained idea to bi-amp the M-9s? And don't they allow you to return inventory for store credit, at least with a restocking fee? The M-9s probably cost about the same as the Studio 20s, and since you now have a decent sub the 20s would be a much wiser choice especially with a c272 behind them. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 147 Registered: Jun-06 | OK, I think were both on different pages. And, I have changed some stuff in my setup befor I bought it. For example, I dont have a cc170, I have a cc370. And I dont have cc272's, I have monitor 3's. And When I talk about getting this stereo amp and such, I will only be driving my monitor 9's. Im looking for a true 2 channel stereo system for music. Yes, I have a cc370 for my center, monitor 3's for my rears, and a pw2100 sub, however, those are for movies, and of couse sacd and dvda cause they are encoded in 5.1. Now Do you still think the studio 20's are a good idea? Well, I know I can take them back, however, Im not planning on it. I love my M-9's, so, thats fine. Now, as far as H-K goes. Forget what there driving, would you honestly think that a HK reciever is better than a marantz? Im just curious? And im still curious why you are so opposed to bi-amping. And no, its not there idea. For a final note, However silly this may sound. Im not gonna trade my monitor 9's for studio 20's cause I want to run 2 channel. Wich means just that, no sub. And, though I havent sampled the studio 20's, I dont think they have the same bass as the monitor 9's. Finally, I sampled the entire monitor line, 9's are my favorite, however the 7's were a close call. Anyways, can we start talking stereo equipment again, and stop yelling at each other. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4325 Registered: Mar-05 | yes, let's chill on the yelling. The Studio 20s of course will not have the same bass as your M9s but they will be far better in every other department AND they will benefit the most from having a c272. But with your pw2100 this is not an issue---unless you are talking about having a music system in a separate room than your surround system? The HK 635 is a $1300 list receiver, the Marantz 8500 is in the same class in terms of power and SQ---I recommended the HK only because it's being cleared out at less than half the MSRP here in the US, absolute steal. However if you are keeping the M9s in a single dual-purpose system with a c272 driving them then yes IMO both receivers would be overkill. You will be perfectly fine with a Pioneer 1015 or a Marantz 5500/5600 ($400-500) driving your other speakers since you'll have the c272 on the mains. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 149 Registered: Jun-06 | Ok, now, I will have a seperate system for home theator, and for audio. However, it wont be seperate rooms. The only thing shared between the systems is tne monitor 9's. Of course in the music system, the monitor 9's are the only speakers. In the home theator, they are the fronts. I have no entention of hooking up a c272 to home home theator receiver. My plan is a NAD C162 and a NAD C272 for my audio, and of course a nice cd player. My home theator system will have a home theator reciever. Now you say that the HK and marantz are in the same class of power. The HK says running surround sound, you get 75watts per channel. The marantz pushes 125watts per channel. And im not (unfortunitly) going to buy from a dealer in the us because of the cost of shipping and the cost of customs. The Marantz is strictly a home theator reciever, but, I might just keep my sony for home theator. Right now I want more power for music. Do you say a NAD 162 and a NAD C272 is overkill for M-9's, on a dedicated music system? |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1640 Registered: Feb-04 | Just a few points... - Don't get upset. - Yes, I do think that the h/k receiver is sufficient to drive Monitor 9s. Handling 300W is not relevant. The question is whether the M9s has impedence dips at some frequencies that makes them very hard to drive. Unless they are very difficult to drive, the h/k receiver which handles 4-ohm speaker should be just fine. - The h/k receiver you dislike costs way more than the M9s in Canada. - I bought a h/k online from the US, from ecost.com, and had a very good experience. You get an upfront price in Canadian dollars with everything included. - My own ratio of spending on amplification versus speakers differs from yours. I happen to think that speakers affect the sound a lot more than amplifiers, so are worthy of a larger slice of the budget. So yes, I use multi-thousand dollar speakers on a mere 40-lbs h/k avr-325 receiver. - Although I like good bass response in stereo, qualities like imaging and realistics sounding instruments are more important. It's likely that the Studio 20 outperforms the M9 on these fronts. I spent 6 years in Halifax. Great city you live in. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 150 Registered: Jun-06 | Can we please stop talking about the studio 20's. Im not returning my monitor 9's. Now as far as the HK reciever, it sounds nice, but I do not want a home theator receiver for music. I like keeping things seperate. Now, the issue of speakers is closed, and it was never opened. I am not purchasing new speakers, I am not returning my Monitor 9's. As far as a home theator reciever, I am going to keep using my sony reciever. If one of you guys could tell me if a C162 and a C272 is overkill for a 2 channel stereo, than, that would be great. And Peter, ive been in quebec a few times and its a very beutiful city. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 151 Registered: Jun-06 | Oh, and, for a nother small comment, I dont want to make my speakers sound better than they can. But I know they dont sound near what they could right now. I want them to sound the best they can, and they dont right now. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 154 Registered: Jun-06 | Once I get my audio system built. I will probably be looking at a much snmaller reciever. Maby a HK, or a lower end marantz, or even a denon. But for now, I awnt to build my audio system first. And who knows, maby in a few years (no time soon for sure) I might buy a set of speakers that will leave my m-9's in the dust. Than I can use the m-9's souly for home theator, but, please please please, can we not even talk about new speakers. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1641 Registered: Feb-04 | The C162/C272 set retails for C$1700 (C$800 for processor and $900 for amplifier) and will outclass your M9s. At the same time, they will outlast them too, and you will still be using them in 20 years (Don't laugh). I'm not convinced how much better your speakers will sound over using a good quality avr (what model is your Sony?); it would be nice if you could try them and a good avr at home before you purchased. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 158 Registered: Jun-06 | Well, I sampled my speakers on a marantz Marantz SR7500 and I will guarente you that there was a dramatic difference. I believe you taht the C162 and C272 will last 20 years, but, I promis you that the Monitor 9's will stay in use for that long as well, maby as my primary speakers for music. Now, I can get teh C162 and C272 for $1400 and I dont think I can get a preamp and poweramp for much less (new instore). The idea is to get some gear that will last a lifetime. Im building audio first, home theator second, video last. My first purchase was speakers. Next I will be getting the pre/power amps for my audio section. I loved teh sound of the marantz on my speakers so, I will probably buy that model early next year, however, for now, like I said, audio is what I want. Is there any otehr brands worth looking at for audio pre and power amps? Is outlaw audio make good pre and power amps? |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1644 Registered: Feb-04 | Did you hear another good avr setup with the M9s? Was the Marantz that much better still? Any good quality separates will last 20 years and still be desirable, but I can't put the Monitor speaker in the same league. One day you'll hear something better and won't want to go back. Outlaw Audio are US internet-only, so I gather they should be off your list from previous comments you've made. Look at NAD and Rotel for good quality at a fair price, or go upscale Canadian with brands such as Bryston and Classé and never look back. I wish I could, but I have to buy a lawn mower and a nail gun and compressor this week, and just spent 6K in 800 sq ft of hard wood floor. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 161 Registered: Jun-06 | Ive herd other speakers on teh marantz. And Ive herd teh M-9s on my reciever, a denon, and the marantz. The marantz was top knotch. My sony just cant seem to deliver, adn, the denon was pretty darn good (super close to marantz). Why do you guys all seem to have a hate on for the M-9's. Every comment basically tells me that there not high quality. And as far as hearing something better, well, right now im 19, with 2 jobs, and like to dream about a better system. Im not even going to dream about better speakers though. For teh reason that I love my M-9's, and, well, I dont see the point in rushing out and spending $2500 on front speakers right now when Im still paying off the ones Im using. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 162 Registered: Jun-06 | I didnt mean to say that the marantz was the best avr there is. That was a mistake. All I mean is, compared to my avr, the marantz (with my m-9's) kicks the life out of my sony. Its not even a competition. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1645 Registered: Feb-04 | I was just wondering if the marantz was the only competition you had heard versus your Sony. I understand you are 19 and all, but if you are spending 2.5K on audio that you saved in a few months, that may mean that you are living with your parents or have very few responsabilities. Spend your money wisely because these are good years. There was a time 15 years ago when I wished I hadn't spent all that money on audio/video a few years before when living with my parents. Certainly that C$1500 VCR I bought over 20 years ago wasn't a good idea, in hind-sight. But the C$800 spent on Klipsch La Scala when I was 17 was a good deal since I still own and use them 25 years later! :-) So buy good stuff you'll own forever. I din't say anything about $2500 speakers in this thread. I mentionned bryston and classé. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 164 Registered: Jun-06 | Im saving and investing most of my money so, this is pretty much my sumemr slpurge. And yes, I live with my foalks. Now, I am planning on this system lasting. Thats part of the reason I get a little upset that you guys keep mentioning gettign new speakers. I mean, These monitor 9's sound amazing to me know, so why wont they sound the same later? They will, thats the point. I spent the money on the stuff so that I can have it for 20 years. I will ahve the speakers and the amps and stuff forever. The dvd players will probably change, the sources will, but the preamps and speakers, and poweramps, they will alwayse be the heart. Thats why im talkign to you guys. You all helped me pick the paradigms. You all help me choose this stuff, so, I know its gonna last for a very long time. The point im makign is, I dont mind If I spend a bit of money today, as long as it will last for that long. I know the speakers will, thats for sure, and im sure everyone here will agree, in 20 years, ill be listning to monitor 9's. Now, what im hoping is teh same, in 20 years, to be listning to the amp and preamp I buy this year. If it out ranks my speakers a bit, fine. As long as it will last for a very long time. And yah, the marantz was pretty much the only thing ive herd next to my sony. I hvae herd a denon however, only for a short time, and it was very very nice, its still a option. Im not overly worried about my avr right now. Im going to keep the sony, for now. I want a new audio system though. I want to seperate my audio from my avr. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3353 Registered: Dec-04 | I've just been lurking in the weeds, Jeff. If you are going to spend that kind of scratch, your Nad idea is a very good one. The power section will last forever, add a tuner or xm or whatever for radio. Sources will evolve, but your core will be there for good. And good forever. So run your Paradigms, get the power, get good cables and let er go! PS. you will still want a sub with the 20's after a while. No sweat, the Nad has sub outs. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1652 Registered: Feb-04 | Nuck, he has Monitor 9 and not Studio 20. The Nad has a pre-out for a sub? |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3357 Registered: Dec-04 | 2 line level outs, use one set for subs. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1653 Registered: Feb-04 | But it's not low-pass filtered. Does that matter? I suppose one then uses the crossover on the sub. Yeah, that works. Sorry. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3359 Registered: Dec-04 | Its not bass managed, I thought it had such. My bad. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 169 Registered: Jun-06 | So Nuck, now that you have announced yourself. I think its manditory that you make your opinion know on a avr. Do it.. Do it.. Give in.. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3370 Registered: Dec-04 | Jeff, that Marantz for the huge honkin' price will serve you well. You will not need anything else. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3371 Registered: Dec-04 | Myself, I just picked up a Classe 200 watt amp, used for 1500$. Pick and choose, man. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 4326 Registered: Mar-05 | Jeffrey, a couple of quickies: 1. No, the NAD separates with the M-9 is not overkill for a music system. Having TWO c272s bi-amped just to run a pair of M-9s however *would* be overkill in the extreme, IMO. 2. If your Sony receiver can play the M-9s on "small" while your sub picks up the low end then for HT, this *might* tie you over until you have the dough for a decent AVR. But again, I do not think you really need to spend more than $500 USD to get a decent AVR. 3. Do not get fixated on wattage numbers. HK along with NAD has the most conservative wattage numbers in the industry, and regularly outperform their own ratings in bench-tests. Marantz is no slouch but I doubt you will ever notice any difference between its claimed 125wpc and HK's conservative 75wpc. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 171 Registered: Jun-06 | Ya read my mind guys. That is my plan. Buy the C152, and the C272, than, later down the road, buy a much more moderate reciever. I do think that If I was getting a reciever for home theator and music, I would be best looking at the 8500 or similar, however, Im not, so, there. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 173 Registered: Jun-06 | Interisting question, would outlaw mono blocks be a better choice than the NAD C272? |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 176 Registered: Jun-06 | To go back to a old idea. Given what weve learnt from the past posts. Would you guy sjust get a $500-$1000 reciever, something nice, with plenty of power, and forget about a seperate audio and theator system. Or would you invest teh time, and extra money and build 2 systems. My sony reciever is great for movies, tv, etc, but, I know its lacking in music (though it still sounds great). |
|
Bronze Member Username: AlphabetCape TownSouth Africa Post Number: 84 Registered: Feb-05 | Jeff. I find it interesting that you want to buy equipment that will last a lifetime. Would that be your lifetime or the lifetime of the equipment LOL! Just pulling your socks! I have never heard the Outlaws, but based on reports they seem to be very good. The best would be to try and listen to the units you are interested in, although the NAD C152/C272 combo is quite good. As far as bi-amping is concerned, why not get one C272 first and see if you like the performance. Yeah, I know! The question would always be "What would it sound like if I have another C272?" Your Paradigms have quite a high sensitivity and I have a feeling that one C272 will blow your socks off. But it still remains your decision. Edster's take on wattage numbers is extremely valid. Many Japanese companies market their with much higher output than how it will perform in real life. They don't lie, just use different methods of achieving these figures. Now how about new speakers? LOL! I could not resist! |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 183 Registered: Jun-06 | AAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!! New speakers! (Jeff loads gun and heads for abe venter, abe gets scared untill he finds out its a potato gun). I hear what your saying, and, im not gonna bi-amp thoese guys intill I hear the 272 driving them. Im sure I will be amazed. Thanks |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 184 Registered: Jun-06 | And the life time of my pet turtle, cause thouse guys live for a couple hundread years. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3383 Registered: Dec-04 | Wash your hands after handling said turtle. They be nasty. Further, Jeff, the Nad combo will floor you. You do not need to pre-buy for more power. Just get the set, and the 542cdp and you will be fine. Until you buy cables.Ouch. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1659 Registered: Feb-04 | To go back to a old idea. Given what weve learnt from the past posts. Would you guy sjust get a $500-$1000 reciever, something nice, with plenty of power, and forget about a seperate audio and theator system. My own feeling is that with the Monitor 9, you might be hard-pressed to find a huge difference between the NAD combo and a good avr in direct stereo. So considering your plan is to keep those for a long time... Edster has had a different experience. What do you look for in music reproduction? Good bass? Realistic acoustic instruments? Realistic voices? The ability to pin-point different instruments on the virtual stage? How do the M9s deliver on these fronts? |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 186 Registered: Jun-06 | Cables? What is the meaning of this word cables? I connect my system with butchers twin and solid copper rods connected to my massive death ray (i mean antenna). |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 187 Registered: Jun-06 | I look for all of the above in my speakers. And right now. The M-9's do a excellent job. I can easily tell you where the piano is, or where the drums are etc etc. I want very realistic acoustic, voice, etc. And of course, bass is very important. I get this now, but, as you guys say, a good nad combo, o or a good avr, will floor my jaw (its still dusty from the last time). Now, im a little confised by a few things though. First, Nuck, what are you meaning about pre-buying, and cables? Also, Peter, what are you suggesting, just buy a good avr? Also, what do you mean by Ed has a different experience, should I let him explain that one? |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1660 Registered: Feb-04 | Just buying a good avr will lead to a balanced system, but you won't be using that avr in 20 years. Over-buying and getting the NAD combo might be more fun and you will still be using the amp somewhere in your setup in 20 years (but maybe not the pre-amp). It just isn't clear that you will get a huge boost from it now. Edster has had a different experience: his unexpensive and fairly easy-to-drive speakers sound a lot better when driven with NAD separates compared with an avr. Buy the separates and bring them on up with you if you visit and we'll hook them up to my speakers. Maybe I'll end up buying a pre-amp too! (Hooking up a power amp to my avr pre-outs makes very little difference to my ears). |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 189 Registered: Jun-06 | What AVR are you running? Would you say that older klipsch speakers are better than there new ones? Ive only herd there new reference series, and I wasnt that enthused. The mids were way to sharp (sharp painfull, not sharp clear). Other than that, they were good. I found the Paradigms to be a bit more balanced though, all around. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 190 Registered: Jun-06 | I suppose, I shouldnt expect huge boost, nomatter what I plug those M-9's in. However, I think (and tell me if im wrong) that right now, my current avr is underpower for the m-9's. And no matter what I get, there will be a difference, small, but noticable difference in teh quality. The bass will probably be a bit mroe noticable, and the highs and mids will be more presant. Also, the total acoustical accuracy will improve. All this will be very slight, and, probably, most wont notice. However, there will be a improvment. Also, if im buying a system to last, I should buy the nad gear. Though its a bit (not a lot) more than my speakers need, they will give me what I want, and they will last more than a avr. |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1661 Registered: Feb-04 | As I said earlier I use multi-thousand dollar speakers on a mere 40-lbs h/k avr-325 receiver. The old speakers I use are still available for sale new; I just can't afford them new and they age very well anyway. They are the Heritage series and few stores carry them (none around here anyway). I've never heard a good demo of Klipsch Reference series because only the local Dumoulin store carries them and (1) they don't have an auditionning room, (2) they cram everything in one room separated into alleys, (3) they space them apart by about 2 to 3 feet, and (4) the highest model in the Reference lineup that they stock was the RF-15 last time I went in (last year). I wanted to hear the RF-7 before I bought the Klipschorns, but couldn't. I also don't audition stuff while on trips because I'm usually busy with work or family then, and also don't like to ask for demos for gear that I don't plan on buying. You may get better control of the speaker with better amplification, leading to better sound and imaging. But don't expect a huge boost in loudness. They is very little difference in acoustical output between X numbers of watts and twice the amount, only 3 decibels. The progression is logarithmic. You get a 10 dB increase by going from 0.01W to 0.1W, again to 1W, again to 10W and again to 100W. I typically use less than 1W per channel on my gear to watch movies at loud levels, and typically use 0.01W or so to listen to jazz. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3387 Registered: Dec-04 | You are correct, Jeff. The Nad seperates will outlast AND outperform a 1900avr. The features will be lacking from componants to avr, but it not be that way. Outlaw makes the 970 and 990 preamps with all the bells and whistles(and hockey cards in the spokes) for a good price. Mated with mono's or a multi channel amp, this is a very desirable combo. Berny here runs that setup. Flexibility, with a bypass for stereo as well. Cables are the interconnects between componants, and can ruin an otherwise fine set-up. More learning need you, young Buck. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 191 Registered: Jun-06 | Dont worry, I was only having fun about cables, Im running good stuff. Audio Researh, and Evolution II Platnium. I know evolution is a brand owned by the source by cc (i supposed owned by circuit city), however, I have never seen much that can beat them, in the same price, and with the same quality. These are some top notch cables for sure. Anyways, I dont really want a pre-amp with all the fancy lights and buttons. I want this to be a simple and basic as possible. I look at it this way, technology changes every day, if you buy something with all the fancy settings today, tomorro youll see something better. If you buy something taht is all analog (or close to it), that does its job, and does it well, and doesnt try to get all the ditital conversions and ins and outs that are avaible today, than you got yourself a good piece. Also, I am not, under any miens trying to get more volume out of those speakers. Dear GOd no, those guys are loud enough. Im simply trying to get the most I can for tone, clarity, and perfornance. I think that based on that, I should just stick with the NAD gear. Unless theres sone canadian stuff for the same price. Ive herd a few brands, however no prices, and I forget the names. Also, why dont you think that the preamp will last as long as teh power amp? |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1664 Registered: Feb-04 | Unless theres sone canadian stuff for the same price. Ive herd a few brands, however no prices, and I forget the names. Not really at the same prices AFAIK. Canadian brands have prices where "if you have to ask" (which I can't afford). The Classe integrated amp retails for US$5000 and the Bryston B-100 SST is close to that as well. These are cheaper than separates too. |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 192 Registered: Jun-06 | Oh dear. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3393 Registered: Dec-04 | Classe preamp CP50 and Classe power amp CA200 for 2300$cdn. I be happy. 4 yrs old, will outlive me(at present rate). |
|
Gold Member Username: PetergalbraithRimouski, Quebec Canada Post Number: 1665 Registered: Feb-04 | Yeah, this is good stuff to buy slightly used. There are always people with more cash for things audio who crave the latest and greatest, and are willing to sell perfectly good gear that only a few years old. That sounds like a good deal Nuck. Good for you. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3397 Registered: Dec-04 |  |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 193 Registered: Jun-06 | Well, guys, I just got a email from the local NAD dealer (Glubes Sound Studio), and the salesmen there has given me a offer that I cant refuse. I will be getting this in september hopefully. NAD C162, a NADC272 and a C521BBE for $2000 including tax. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 3423 Registered: Dec-04 | Jeff, that is a combo that you will be very very happy with, I think. Lots of people figgur this is one of the best midrange packages available. A lot or regular listeners consider this a high end package as well. Without sounding rude or invasive...can you get up to the c542 cd player? That would top it off so well. Congrats, Jeff. A well fought battle with a very good outcome. A sidebar...I have read all your postings, and want to chip in that you DID leave a lot of open questions that a bunch of members responded to. Simple words on a page like 'overkill' can seem a bit more onjectionable than intended. Remember that most of us here intend only to help(me included) and the text does not always belie the intention. Cheers! |
|
Silver Member Username: HannjeffHalifax, Nova Scotia Canada Post Number: 194 Registered: Jun-06 | Thanks Nuck. And, yes, you seam to have read my mind. I am thinking of upgrading the cd player. I dont think it would cost "that" much more, and, it would make for a better system. And thanks, some times I do get a little edgy, some may say very edgy. Sorry for snaping you guys, even your overkill comments did help abit. At times we were all on different pages anyways. Instead of getting all wierd and thanking you guys, im just gonn ago back and finish watching saving private ryan, the surround sound is insane with these speakers, and the sub shakes the house. |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics