[kupan787]

Ok, I just got a pair of McIntosh speakers from my Dad (sorry, not sure on the model number they are probably about 6-7 years old at this point). I need to get a receiver, but don't know what to get. My Dad recommended something that puts out around 100 W minimum per channel, and recommends like 150-200W. The only real requirements are that it has component hookups (at least 2, 3 would be great!), and be around the $500 range (I know that is probably cheap, but it is all I got right now). I don't currently have a sub, but may be getting one in the not too distant future, so the receiver would also need a hookup for that as well.

I was at a Magnolia Hi-Fi today, and they had a Denon (100Wx2) for $499, but it didn't have component hookups. The only other option was a Denon (80x6) for $499 (as it did have component hookups), but I have no use for the 4 extra channels on it.

Thanks for any help.

[EDIT] Anyone coming in late to the game, looks like I don't need a receiver, just an amp. So amp recommendations are welcome.

[Disgruntled Head of C-3PO]

Check
http://www.marantz.com/

They have more bang for the buck than Denon and I have found better quality (no damn fans)

[kikkoman]

The Onkyo TX-SR602 is packed with features for $500. It's 85W x 7 channels driven but it should have no problem driving a pair of speakers. Three component inputs, 192kHz/24 bit DACs, auto speaker setup, learning remote etc.

[kupan787]

Originally posted by Disgruntled Head of C-3PO:
Check
http://www.marantz.com/

They have more bang for the buck than Denon and I have found better quality (no damn fans)

Something like the Marantz SR-6400 6.1? One thing I am unsure of is the "Speaker Selection" option (A+B or A/B):

Using the Speaker Selection function allows you to choose which speakers use which impedance. For example, if Speaker A is 4 ohms, and Speaker B is 8 ohms, then selecting A+B will give you 4+8 ohms impedance, thus providing more power to the speakers. This is typically an option on higher-end receivers.

If someone could explain this, I would be much appreciated. Does it only effect surround sound systems (my guess) or does it have anything to do with just 2 channel setups?

The Onkyo TX-SR602 doesn't look too bad, a little less wattage than the Marantz. Anyone heard the two and could say one way or the other which they preferred? The Onkyo has one extra component input, which is a plus. Or if anyone else has any recommendations on other receivers, let me know.

[jebjeb]

When you mention component hookups do you mean Y, Cb, Cr (three separate RCA connections)? This would mean you want to route your video connections through the amp. I find this a little strange as you are only running a two channel setup but I understand (I ran a two channel AV setup for a while).

You will find it very difficult to get a 2 channel receiver/amp with component connections. This is an AV feature and therefore is pretty much limited to surround receivers/amps.

I assume you are from the US. I am not too sure what the availability and pricing is like of NAD over there but that would be a very good option. NAD amps are able to deliver a lot of power despite their conservative power ratings (nice high current power supplies). A lot of the Japanese stuff may have high power ratings but don't deliver it so well. I had a quick look at you should be able to get a NAD C352 itegrated 2 channel amp in your price range. This is "only" rated at 80 WRMS a channel but it will be some of the best power you can get at that money.

That said, I have Denon gear myself and have nothing but good things to say about it. Most of their surround receivers now have up-conversion on their video inputs/outputs. This means that you can just use one output to your display. Eg. I have the following hooked up to my system (type of connection);

- Video (Composite)
- Satellite (S-video)
- PS2 (S-video)
- DVD (Component)
- Home Theatre PC (DVI so it doesn't go through the amp)

I then have one decent component cable running from the amp to my projector (plus the DVI from the HTPC to the projector). This means that the projector only has to be switched between DVI (for the HTPC) or Component for any of the sources run through the amp. Makes life a lot easier.

To throw another option into the mix I would look at either using your displays' video inputs/switching or buying a separate video switcher and then put your $450/$500 towards a better two channel integrated amp that will run those speakers so much better than a similar priced surround receiver. I would take a guess and say that your Mckintosh's are 4 ohms which means that the amp needs to produce a bit more current than many surround receivers it that price range. Most amps power ratings are specced at 8 ohms (plus a few other criteria). When an amp is driving 4 but it must have a good power supply. Some amps won't even let you go lower than 6/8 ohms.

(Sorry if I got a little off topic)

[jebjeb]

Originally posted by kupan787:
Something like the Marantz SR-6400 6.1? One thing I am unsure of is the "Speaker Selection" option (A+B or A/B):



If someone could explain this, I would be much appreciated. Does it only effect surround sound systems (my guess) or does it have anything to do with just 2 channel setups?

The Onkyo TX-SR602 doesn't look too bad, a little less wattage than the Marantz. Anyone heard the two and could say one way or the other which they preferred? The Onkyo has one extra component input, which is a plus. Or if anyone else has any recommendations on other receivers, let me know.

As far as I can see this is only if you are running two pairs of main speakers (such as a second pair in another room). Having impedance matching helps the amp to output more relative power to each of the pairs of speakers. It is not making any more power than if you were just running a single pair of mains, in fact it is probably producing less. This is only a feature over other amps that are less efficient when running two pairs of mains. So it is not really that useful. I am running two pairs of speaker of one of my amps at home. However, it is only for background music in the kitchen and dining room so there are no huge power demands anyway.

Forgot to mention that A+B means running both pairs of mains at the same time and A/B means running either pair individually.

[effgee]

Originally posted by jebjeb:
...I assume you are from the US. I am not too sure what the availability and pricing is like of NAD over there but that would be a very good option. NAD amps are able to deliver a lot of power despite their conservative power ratings (nice high current power supplies). ...

Dittoing the recommendation for NAD equipment - my AV receiver and DVD player are NAD and I got nothing but good things to say about either of them. And yup, their products are available in the US.

[jebjeb]

If you do want a surround receiver, I would have a look at the Denon 1905 http://www.crutchfield.com/S-dtgDfFt...?i=033AV1905B. Has all the bells and whistles as well as component video conversion. Right on the money as well.

[tooki]

I was just gonna say... I have the Denon 1905, and it's pretty sweet.

tooki

[jebjeb]

Its a nice machine. I have the 3803 which has been superseded by the 3805. The 3803 is a lovely bit of kit. Solid as a rock with some top USABLE features.

I used to have Yamaha gear which is still nice stuff but I find that many of the features you just don't touch. Who wants to use 48 different ambiance effects? Just give me some top notch PLII Music decoding or Pure Direct Stereo.

I like the style of Denon decoding as well. It is a little more laid back rather than the rather aggresive surround decoding of Sony and Pioneer. The latter is great for demos but much more annoying to live with. I guess it all comes down to how you set it all up. I am running 7.1 channels with some dipoles for my surrounds and some bookshelves for the rear effects. Guess that means I can afford to run it a bit more laid back.

Yeah, to reiterate, if you have $500 to spend on a surround reciever, go the Denon 1905, it will do you proud. Don't forget to look into the 2 channel side as well.

[kikkoman]

No doubt NAD equipment is good but the entry level receiver is out of your price range. I think the Marantz model you found is a discontinued model as I can't find any info on Marantz site about it. If you can get it for less than $500 that would be great deal. The dealers listed on dealtime are not Marantz authorized so you do not have a warranty unless you buy a service plan.

Both the Marantz 6400 and the Denon 1905 have preamp outputs which Onkyo 602 lacks. This will let you add a more powerful amplifier should you need it. I've had a Denon receiver in the past and was satisfied with it's performance.

[Dalhectar]

A lot of buzz over at AVSForum is on the Pioneer VSX-1014. The receiver has the same build as the Elite VSX-52TX, but without Multi Zone and RS-232 for half the price of the Elite VSX-52TX. For $400 online or $450 at BB, it's a very hard receiver to beat at its price.

I have a Denon AVR-1803, which is also very good sounding. I'm going to use that to use that to replace the older Onkyo while the Pioneer replaces the Denon.

[kupan787]

Originally posted by jebjeb:
When you mention component hookups do you mean Y, Cb, Cr (three separate RCA connections)? This would mean you want to route your video connections through the amp. I find this a little strange as you are only running a two channel setup but I understand (I ran a two channel AV setup for a while).

You will find it very difficult to get a 2 channel receiver/amp with component connections. This is an AV feature and therefore is pretty much limited to surround receivers/amps.

Well, I don't totally know what I need then.

Basically here is my setup. I have an HDTV with a DVI input, 2 component inputs, and 2 "regular" inputs. I have a TiVO (regular), HD Cable Box (DVI), XBOX (component), and DVD Player (component). I am soon to have 2 speakers and a sub. What I want to do is power the speakers and sub so that I can use them for listening to music (either streamed through the TiVO, or from the DVD player), or for watching a movie (from the DVD player). I don't know exactly what I need to do this, if it is possible just to leave all the video plugged right into the TV, that is fine. I thought a receiver was the way to go, but perhaps there is a better solution.

I have no desire for surround sound at all.

To throw another option into the mix I would look at either using your displays' video inputs/switching or buying a separate video switcher and then put your $450/$500 towards a better two channel integrated amp that will run those speakers so much better than a similar priced surround receiver. I would take a guess and say that your Mckintosh's are 4 ohms which means that the amp needs to produce a bit more current than many surround receivers it that price range. Most amps power ratings are specced at 8 ohms (plus a few other criteria). When an amp is driving 4 but it must have a good power supply. Some amps won't even let you go lower than 6/8 ohms.

(Sorry if I got a little off topic)

Ya, I guess I don't really need video to go through the receiver now that I think more about it. So my new question now is what kind of an AMP is recommended (again the $500 price range ideally)? Do I need to do an amp and a pre-amp (what exactly does a pre-amp bring to the table), or is just an AMP good enough?

[kikkoman]

Originally posted by kupan787:
Ya, I guess I don't really need video to go through the receiver now that I think more about it. So my new question now is what kind of an AMP is recommended (again the $500 price range ideally)? Do I need to do an amp and a pre-amp (what exactly does a pre-amp bring to the table), or is just an AMP good enough?

If you can don't need video switching, surround sound or radio than you can get by with an integrated amp, which is just an preamp and amp in one box. NAD and Cambridge Audio makes some nice integrated amps.

[kupan787]

Originally posted by kikkoman:
If you can don't need video switching, surround sound or radio than you can get by with an integrated amp, which is just an preamp and amp in one box. NAD and Cambridge Audio makes some nice integrated amps.

Ok, thanks.

The cheapest NAD integrated was like $699, a little out of my price range. I will try and see what I can find as far as Cambridge Audio goes.

[kikkoman]

The NAD 320EE is $399. You should be able to find the Cambridge Audio Azur 640A for $499. Only issue with this piece is that it does not have preamp out which is the best way you would want to connect a subwoofer. There are alternative methods but are less than optimal.

http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/640a_amp.html

Also stereo receivers are an option too, like the Denon you saw at Magnolia.

[kupan787]

Originally posted by kikkoman:
The NAD 320EE is $399. You should be able to find the Cambridge Audio Azur 640A for $499. Only issue with this piece is that it does not have preamp out which is the best way you would want to connect a subwoofer. There are alternative methods but are less than optimal.

http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/640a_amp.html

I really like the look of the 640A (not overly complex looking, very clean). I am a little worried about the lack of sub capability however. When you say there are ways of hooking it up, but less than optimal, what do you mean exactly? Possible damage, or just not the best sound?

Also stereo receivers are an option too, like the Denon you saw at Magnolia.

Ya, that Denon was $499. There are a few others in this thread that said Denon isn't too bad. Plus they had it at the Magnolia right up the road, so it would be an easy pickup.

I think I am leaning toward the Denon at this point. I go to pickup the speakers on Friday, so I will probably place an order for the amp/receiver by Wednesday/Thursday.

The one other thing now is speaker cable. Anyone have thoughts on this?

[kikkoman]

Originally posted by kupan787:
I really like the look of the 640A (not overly complex looking, very clean). I am a little worried about the lack of sub capability however. When you say there are ways of hooking it up, but less than optimal, what do you mean exactly? Possible damage, or just not the best sound?

The other method would be to connect the sub to the amp using the second speaker outputs using regular speaker wire. The sub converts this signal to a low level signal, applies a low pass filter and amplifies it again. No damage should occur just not the best sound quality I guess. When you connect using the preamp outputs the conversion from high to low level signal is avoided.

Sorry to throw another factor into the mix, but do any of your sources have digital audio outputs? I'm sure your DVD player does. What about your cable box and XBox? It maybe worth the complexity of an AV receiver to get the best sound quality out of them since integrated amps typically don't have digital inputs.

As for speaker wire ordinary 16 or 14 gauge wire from the hardware store should be sufficient for most peoples needs. No need to spend more money on brand name speaker wire.

[kupan787]

Originally posted by kikkoman:
Sorry to throw another factor into the mix, but do any of your sources have digital audio outputs? I'm sure your DVD player does. What about your cable box and XBox? It maybe worth the complexity of an AV receiver to get the best sound quality out of them since integrated amps typically don't have digital inputs.

The Cable box and DVD player do. I don't know off hand if the XBOX does or doesn't. The 2 channel Denon receiver doesn't have digital inputs on it. If I wanted to go that route, I would need to go with a 5/6/7 channel receiver, and then we are talking about less wattage again. So I don't know what would necessarily be better in this case, digital inputs, or an extra 25W per channel?

The signal will be converted to analog at some point for the speakers, correct? So is there really that much of a gain in going digital into the receiver?

As for speaker wire ordinary 16 or 14 gauge wire from the hardware store should be sufficient for most peoples needs. No need to spend more money on brand name speaker wire.

Sounds good.

[kupan787]

Ok, on the speaker cable front, I just talked with my Dad, and he mentioned that the speakers have a special hookup, and would need something like this. Is this a common thing? Would I be able to find cheaper than $85 for 10 feet (I don't need monster, that just happens to be what he showed me)?

[zigzag]

Originally posted by kupan787:
Ok, on the speaker cable front, I just talked with my Dad, and he mentioned that the speakers have a special hookup, and would need something like this. Is this a common thing? Would I be able to find cheaper than $85 for 10 feet (I don't need monster, that just happens to be what he showed me)?

Waste of money, pure marketing BS. Go to Radio Shack and get some 12 or 14 guage for 50 cents a foot or whatever it's going for these days. You can either buy it raw and solder the connectors on, or buy them ready-made.

[kupan787]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Waste of money, pure marketing BS. Go to Radio Shack and get some 12 or 14 guage for 50 cents a foot or whatever it's going for these days. You can either buy it raw and solder the connectors on, or buy them ready-made.

Ok, I had never seen speaker cable with multiple hookups (biwire), so I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't some special deal. I guess as long as I can find that "biwire" hookup anywhere, I am fine with it.

[MaxPower2k3]

Originally posted by kupan787:
Ok, I had never seen speaker cable with multiple hookups (biwire), so I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't some special deal. I guess as long as I can find that "biwire" hookup anywhere, I am fine with it.

some speakers can be bi-amplified, and have two sets of speaker posts. those speakers usually have some kind of metal bracket to bridge the two sets so you only need one set plugged in. that monster cable is pretty pointless. also, you don't even need a connector on the wire. you can just strip an inch of insulation off the ends and twist the strands and use it like that. you might achieve a slightly better connection if you soldier a banana plug on the end, though. and any cable will work just fine. unless you're making 100ft runs, 12-16 gauge lamp cord from Home Depot for $0.10/foot is just fine.

[kikkoman]

The extra 20 watts isn't goint to make much of a difference. Keep in mind your comparing a 100 watts x 2 channels to 80 watts x 7 channels. An AV receiver with a decent power supply should be able to deliver more power when only two channels are driven.

Can you tell us more about these speakers? Are they towers or bookshelfs, how many drivers or cones does it have? What is the nominal impedance? Most speakers are 8 ohms but some are 6 or 4 ohms. Speakers with lower impedance require more current.

[kupan787]

some speakers can be bi-amplified, and have two sets of speaker posts. those speakers usually have some kind of metal bracket to bridge the two sets so you only need one set plugged in.

So by bridging the back, I save on cost for the speaker cable, as then I can just by standard stuff? Do I loose quality by bridging? Is there any chance of damage in the short/long term by bridging?

The extra 20 watts isn't goint to make much of a difference. Keep in mind your comparing a 100 watts x 2 channels to 80 watts x 7 channels. An AV receiver with a decent power supply should be able to deliver more power when only two channels are driven.

Ok, this I wasn't sure of. I feel like I keeping getting back to square one

Can you tell us more about these speakers? Are they towers or bookshelfs, how many drivers or cones does it have? What is the nominal impedance? Most speakers are 8 ohms but some are 6 or 4 ohms. Speakers with lower impedance require more current.

They are the McIntosh SL-4 (just talked to my Dad, and was sure to ask him the model).

I don't know any of the "specs", and I don't think my Dad has much paper work on them any more (they are like 6-9 years old if I recall). I found some info using Google:

2-way floor system with two 6-1/2" woofers and 1" aluminum dome tweeter.
Crossover frequency: 2400Hz
Impedance: 4 ohms
Output: 84dB @1w/1m [87dB @ 2.83v]
Power rating: 150w
Overload protection: none
Size: 41"H, 10"W and 10-1/4"D
Weight: 23 lb.

So at this point, my options are as follows:

integrated amp
stereo receiver
5/6/7 channel receiver

I don't have plans to do surround sound, just simple 2.1 stuff. I realize now I have no need to hook up video through the box at all. So what would be my best bet for that $500 mark? I have seen nods for Pioneer, Marantz, Onkyo, Denon, NAD, and Cambridge Audio. NAD has a dealership close to me (45 minutes), and Pioneer or Denon I can go pickup at Best Buy/Magnolia.

Thanks everyone for all your contributions.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by kupan787:
Ok, I had never seen speaker cable with multiple hookups (biwire), so I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't some special deal. I guess as long as I can find that "biwire" hookup anywhere, I am fine with it.

OK - I didn't notice the bi-wiring aspect. I don't put much stock in bi-wiring. It shouldn't hurt, I just wouldn't go to any extra trouble to do it. But if the speakers are set up for it, you might have to (however, the speakers probably came with a connector that bridges the speaker posts, allowing you to use a single speaker cable).

My main point was that you don't need to spend extra for Monster Cable - the claim of better sound is BS and you can save quite a bit by looking elsewhere. But it might be more convenient for you to buy ready-made cables, which is fine.

There's nothing really special about banana plugs, either - they're just more convenient than wrapping the leads around the speaker posts.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by kupan787:
I don't have plans to do surround sound, just simple 2.1 stuff. I realize now I have no need to hook up video through the box at all. So what would be my best bet for that $500 mark? I have seen nods for Pioneer, Marantz, Onkyo, Denon, NAD, and Cambridge Audio. NAD has a dealership close to me (45 minutes), and Pioneer or Denon I can go pickup at Best Buy/Magnolia.

Thanks everyone for all your contributions.

IMO:

- You might as well get a surround receiver. It will do 2.1 as well as any integrated amp in that price range and will allow you to do surround if and when you decide to try it (which you might as well do if you're using surround DVDs). It will have the added advantage of a built-in tuner and a dedicated subwoofer output.

- Any of the mentioned brands would do, as would a Sony. The innards are probably made in the same factories in Taiwan and I would bet my house than no one could distinguish between them in a blind test. NAD has a more audiophile-ish image but I wouldn't pay any extra for one. Buy the one with the features and price that suits you. I would probably choose based on how well I liked the remote and setup interface.

[kikkoman]

Ok that info helps a lot. Whatever you choose, the most critical thing is to make sure it can handle a 4 ohm load. You can download the spec sheets or manuals from the manufacturer's website to find this info. This is usually stated in the section of the manual describing speaker hookup or look for power output rating at 4 ohms in the specifications. If the manufacturer doesn't publish that spec there a good chance it wasn't designed to handle it.

Weather you choose an AV receiver, stereo receiver or integrated amp will depend on how much flexibilty you want. If you can find an AV receiver that can handle your speakers it will give you more configuration options than just a stereo receiver or integrated amp. For example, in my previous setup I had my video and analog audio connections connected directly to my TV, then had my digital audio connections to the AV receiver. This way I could use TV speakers to watch a DVD or TV w/o needing to turn on the whole system, which is fine for watching things like the news or weather. When I wanted to watch a movie in surround sound or listen to a CD I would turn on the AV receiver and mute the TV speakers and listen through my good speakers. Think about how your going to use the system and make sure what you buy accomodates your needs.

[kupan787]

Originally posted by kikkoman:
Ok that info helps a lot. Whatever you choose, the most critical thing is to make sure it can handle a 4 ohm load. You can download the spec sheets or manuals from the manufacturer's website to find this info. This is usually stated in the section of the manual describing speaker hookup or look for power output rating at 4 ohms in the specifications. If the manufacturer doesn't publish that spec there a good chance it wasn't designed to handle it.

Think about how your going to use the system and make sure what you buy accomodates your needs.

Well the Denon stereo receiver supported 4 ohm, so thats a plus.

As far as get what I need, basically I just need a box that supports 4 ohm speakers, can have a sub added later, and has at least 4 audio inputs. Anything extra is gravy. Basically what I am trying to avoid is buying this Sony that is 100w per channel for only $139. I know that is going to be crap compared to a 100w per channel Denon selling for $499. That is where I need your guys help.

So here is a (short) list of what I have found (I don't know if these support 4 ohm, only one Denon mentions it on the website), let me know what you guys think are good and which are bad. I will try and dig through service manuals on the manufacture websites to see what support 4 ohm speakers.

Onkyo TX-8511
Denon DRA-685
Pioneer VSX-1014
Onkyo TX-SR502
Denon AVR-1705

[jebjeb]

Hi kupan787. It's a difficult decision isn't it!

Hifi is one of those things you will get very different opinions on. I have generally always liked the hifi advice zigzag has given in the past however I disagree with him regarding cables (not that I have voiced it before due to my prior case of cronic-lurking). Speaker cable and interconnects are one of the most debated things in hifi. I don't want to open the debate here, it is to each his own. I personally spend about 10-20% of the system price on cables but thats me. I believe I can hear the effect they have on the sound (and picture) but I know some people believe they don't make a monkeys difference. To be frank, on a system of this level, you could do a lot worse than some chunky speaker cable from Radioshack or whatever. One think I do believe strongly in is good termination. I think that a lot of the cable non-believers would at least agree that having exposed connections on something with fairly high current passing through that it is not going to remain the cleanest connection. If any of you have ever had some bare wire stuck or screwed into your amp or speakers, have a look at the ends and you will see it has oxidised and gotten all cruddy. Cut that off and strip a new bit and compare the difference.

So what I am saying is get whatever speaker cable you want but make sure you terminate it nice and tightly in some solid banana plugs. One big advantage of pre-made speaker wire sets is the terminations are sealed at the factory.

As for the biwiring, I would say that if you don't believe in the benefits of better than normal speaker cable, bi-wiring has to be a crock. I don't agree with bi-wiring. When I say "agree" I don't necessarily mean "believe". I just think that if you do want to spend money on speaker cable, two lengths £/$ 10 a metre cable to bi-wire is not as good as £/$17-20 a metre for a single run of better cable.

As the others have said, check to see if there are any bridges on the speakers connections. If so, you can just hook a single run up to one of the sets of posts. If not, either make some bridges (a very short length of cable from one pair of connectors to the others on the same speaker) or splice the cable into two (by soldering extra cable or whatever).

As for the amp, the Denon DRA-685 looks like a winner. Appears to have all the features that you need as long as you have enough connections in to your HDTV for all your video inputs. I would always go with HDMI/DVI over component if you have it and I don't think there are any receivers out yet that can switch or route HDMI/DVI.

With the sub, it all depends what one you get regarding connections. As the pre-out on the integrated amp is most likely full range and not filtered to just pass through sub frequencies, you will need to use the sub's internal filter anyway. My Rel has connections for both speaker (high level) and pre-out (low level) and they recommend that you use both simultaneously. It even has separate level controls for each type of input to balance the characteristics of each input. From memory, most other subs will not let you run both at the same time so be a little careful with it. If you have the pre-out, I would tend to use that connection rather than running speaker cable to the sub.

Just to confuse things a little more, some times it is a good thing to route the speakers via the sub. Some subs will actually pass a hi-pass signal to the speakers if they are hooked up to the sub. This can be a good thing if you had smaller book shelf speakers as they won't have to try and handle the lowest frequencies. It is sometimes difficult to get a good match where it crosses over from the sub playing to the speakers. Sometimes worth a try but with your speakers I would keep them full range.

Might be stating the obvious but when you do get around to buying a sub, make sure it is an active one.

So, in summary, get some reasonably thick speaker cable, terminate it well on both ends and enjoy the tunes.

Hope I haven't sounded patronising or condescending.

[jebjeb]

Originally posted by kikkoman:
The other method would be to connect the sub to the amp using the second speaker outputs using regular speaker wire. The sub converts this signal to a low level signal, applies a low pass filter and amplifies it again. No damage should occur just not the best sound quality I guess. When you connect using the preamp outputs the conversion from high to low level signal is avoided.

Sounds good to me except for the odd exception like my post above.

Sorry to throw another factor into the mix, but do any of your sources have digital audio outputs? I'm sure your DVD player does. What about your cable box and XBox? It maybe worth the complexity of an AV receiver to get the best sound quality out of them since integrated amps typically don't have digital inputs.

Now this is where it can get interesting! It all depends on all the gear you have including the source and the amp. Lets say one had a $500 receiver with digital inputs. If the XBox has a digital output (I know the PS2 does) then hook that up with a digital connection to the amp. Now, if one has a $100-$200 DVD player then do the same. But if that DVD player was a bit higher up the range, then hooking it up digitally may not always be the best option. Which DAC (Digital to Analogue Converter) would you rather use. The one in a $400 DVD player or the one in a $500 surround sound amp that also has 6/7 channels of amplification, a tuner, a huge power supply and all the other electronics included in the price? There is a good chance that the DAC in the DVD player is a much better DAC then in the do-it-all amp. Now this means that you would need to have three pairs of stereo RCA interconnects to hook the DVD player up to the 5.1 inputs on the amp, plus this connection is in the analogue domain and is much more subject to noise and interference but there is a good chance that it would be the higher quality connection. The other factor that can influence this is how much processing is done in the digital or analogue domain. If your amp did everything digitally (not always better, we must not confuse digital with higher quality) then having the DVD convert the signal to analogue, pass it to the amp, the amp convert it back to digital, process it and then convert it to analogue again to amplify it would probably not be the best option.

Of course, if the source does not have multi channel (5.1) outputs then the only way you will get Dolby Digital or other surround formats (except Pro Logic I and II) will be through the digital outputs. As kupan787 is not after surround then this shouldn't be an issue.

I think in most cases, using digital connections is the best but I have experienced when it isn't before. You could say though that if the DAC's in your DVD player are better than your amp then there may be a slight mismatch happening!

[kikkoman]

It appears none of the AV receivers you listed can handle a 4 ohm speaker which is not suprising. The Denon 685 stereo receiver should handle all your basic needs. The Onkyo 8511 would also work. It is almost half the price of the Denon 685 and delivers the same power but you would need to connect your subwoofer via speaker wire, which might not be too bad at this price point. Also consider the Denon 395 which falls between the 685 and Onkyo 8511 price wise. It delivers a less wattage but it does have a dedicated subwoofer output which makes hookup easier. The $399 NAD 320 integrated amp would work too. It's power output numbers look small but NAD is rather conservative when it comes to power ratings.

Good luck! Let's know what you end up with.

[jebjeb]

What kikkoman said sounds good to me! Not the hugest fan of Onkyo but you go with what you find best.

Ditto on the letting us know what you get!

[kupan787]

Originally posted by kikkoman:
It appears none of the AV receivers you listed can handle a 4 ohm speaker which is not suprising. The Denon 685 stereo receiver should handle all your basic needs. The Onkyo 8511 would also work. It is almost half the price of the Denon 685 and delivers the same power but you would need to connect your subwoofer via speaker wire, which might not be too bad at this price point. Also consider the Denon 395 which falls between the 685 and Onkyo 8511 price wise. It delivers a less wattage but it does have a dedicated subwoofer output which makes hookup easier. The $399 NAD 320 integrated amp would work too. It's power output numbers look small but NAD is rather conservative when it comes to power ratings.

Good luck! Let's know what you end up with.

I like the clean look of the NAD, as well as what the writeup has to say about it. I would probably go with either the Denon 395 or the NAD at this point (the 20W difference in the Denon vs the dedicated sub output is a good tradeoff for me). I probably would have skipped right over the NAD, rated at 50W but after hearing what you said, and reading this, it doesn't sound bad.

• 110W, 160W, 210W, IHF Dynamic power into 8, 4 and 2 ohms, respectively

...

NAD’s modest rating of continuous power in the C320BEE is very different from the overblown power ratings quoted by many competitors, which don't give a realistic indication of an amplifier's true capabilities. Our Full Disclosure Power ratings give the guaranteed minimum continuous power output under the "worst case" loading of 4 Ohms and 20Hz to 20kHz with all channels driven simultaneously. And we also supply dynamic power ratings, which are more indicative of perceived power in actual use.

The C320BEE benefits from NAD's proprietary PowerDrive™ topology. This further refinement of Power Envelope and ISC is now well established and used throughout much of the NAD product range. PowerDrive™ endows the C320BEE with tremendous dynamic power and low-impedance drive capability, seemingly contradictory traits to be found in a single amplifier. This is accomplished by using a multistage power supply with a very sophisticated analog amplifier determining whether to switch in a high-voltage or a high-current rail, depending on the specific operating condition. This optimization is fully automatic and utterly transparent in operation; the result is that the C320BEE sounds far larger and more powerful than its continuous power rating would suggest.

PowerDrive™ is a practical approach to enable an amplifier to easily deal with musical dynamics and difficult speaker loads. Most impressive are the C320BEE's dynamic capabilities; up to 210W into 2 ohms and up to 50 amps peak current capability!

So it sounds like that I would be getting as good of sound out of the NAD (if not better) then the Denon would offer me. Is this a fair judgment? I think that will be what I probably get at this point. When I drive down on Friday to get the speakers, I will drive through a NAD "dealership" so I can grab it as well. I will post back here once I get it all hooked up, and let you know how it all sounds (maybe take a few pics if I can borrow my roommates camera).

[jebjeb]

Sounds great mate!



Oh dear, that is a terrible pun...

[zigzag]

Although I'm a skeptic on the subject of cables, jebjeb is obviously very knowledgeable and gives good advice. Solid, well-constructed terminations are better than exposed leads - at the very least, they're more secure. I've never found corrosion of exposed leads to be a problem but that doesn't mean it never is; exposed leads also have a greater tendency to loosen, fray, and create short-circuits. Good terminations are a pleasure to use whether you can hear a difference or not.

And if you like the look of the NAD, by all means get it - I've owned many NAD components over the years and have always appreciated their against-the-grain approach to things. I honestly think that any name-brand unit with adequate power would satisfy your needs but you should get what you like - I'm all for Pride of Ownership.

[jebjeb]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Although I'm a skeptic on the subject of cables, jebjeb is obviously very knowledgeable and gives good advice. Solid, well-constructed terminations are better than exposed leads - at the very least, they're more secure. I've never found corrosion of exposed leads to be a problem but that doesn't mean it never is; exposed leads also have a greater tendency to loosen, fray, and create short-circuits. Good terminations are a pleasure to use whether you can hear a difference or not.

And if you like the look of the NAD, by all means get it - I've owned many NAD components over the years and have always appreciated their against-the-grain approach to things. I honestly think that any name-brand unit with adequate power would satisfy your needs but you should get what you like - I'm all for Pride of Ownership.

Thanks for the compliment mate. I think my thing with good terminations started after stabbing myself too many times with little bits of wire trying to twist it up to fit in some stupidly small spring clip terminals.

You are dead right with the Pride of Ownership thing. I think that is very important as long as it is coupled with the right product for the job. To be honest, I have the money to get a decent amp for my kitchen system but I know I don't need it as the old Sony does it fine.

ps - I think I remember seeing the explanation before, but why the pic of Battersea Power Station in your sig? I thought you were a Yank? Take it on vacation sometime?

[zigzag]

Originally posted by jebjeb:
ps - I think I remember seeing the explanation before, but why the pic of Battersea Power Station in your sig? I thought you were a Yank? Take it on vacation sometime?

Just a fan of industrial architecture. A friend of mine took it on a trip to London - just walked up to the chain-link fence and took a snapshot. I touched it up a bit and thought it made for a nice, dramatic image.

[jebjeb]

Originally posted by zigzag:
Just a fan of industrial architecture. A friend of mine took it on a trip to London - just walked up to the chain-link fence and took a snapshot. I touched it up a bit and thought it made for a nice, dramatic image.

Very nice. I like the burned in sky. Its a shame they haven't done anything with it actually as it is a fantastic building. Full of flying rats (pigeons) and lots of broken windows now.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by jebjeb:
Very nice. I like the burned in sky. Its a shame they haven't done anything with it actually as it is a fantastic building. Full of flying rats (pigeons) and lots of broken windows now.

Actually, I didn't have to do much - that's pretty much how the snapshot looked. I just improved the contrast, and I think I edited out some chain-link fence. The foreground is weeds and concrete, and the building looks decrepit, but it works well on a postage stamp scale. Unfortunately, I can't find the original.

Last time I was there, they were talking about turning it into a multi-use retail-entertainment sort of thing, but I don't think they ever got the financing together. I hope it remains standing.

[tooki]

Originally posted by jebjeb:
I would always go with HDMI/DVI over component if you have it and I don't think there are any receivers out yet that can switch or route HDMI/DVI.

Oh, there are. But not for less than $4000.

tooki

[kupan787]

Hey everyone. I just got the NAD 320 and the speakers all setup. Things sound good so far (I havn't turned the volume nob past about 25% yet). I am a little worried at what one salesman told me (he was at a high end audio place, so I figure he knows what he is talking about). At any rate he made a comment (to the effect of):

Be careful running your setup to loud. The speakers you have are used to more power than your amp can put out, and you WILL blow your speakers if you turn it up to loud. If you stop and ask yourself if this is to loud, then it is.

This really scared me a bit. The last thing I want to do is blow my speakers. I have never heard of blowing speakers with too little power, is that really a possibility? My amp has a feature called Soft Clipping, which I am thinking may help here:

NAD Soft Clipping

Any amplifier that is overdriven (asked to generate levels beyond its undistorted capabilities) will produce distortion (clipping). The result is not only very harsh sound but often damage to speakers — especially tweeters. The selectable "Soft Clipping" feature on NAD amplifiers gently transforms the music waveform as the point of clipping approaches, resulting in much clearer reproduction and simultaneous protection of speakers. One very valuable time to consider using the soft clipping option is during a party. As more and more people crowd into a room, and create more and more background noise, it is all too easy to keep setting the volume higher without realizing just how high you have turned it up. Switching in Soft Clipping will greatly reduce the chance of damage. Nothing, however, can absolutely guarantee protection against cranking volume up and leaving it there for a prolonged period. So it is best to use Soft Clipping as temporary protection until you can get to the volume control to set loudness at a more reasonable point.

I don't know what too high is, but do you think 50% volume is too much? 75%? I really want to take it easy with these speakers for now, but I know that when we have some people over in a few weeks to play Halo or listen to music, I am going to want to turn them up a bit. Is distortion the sign of too far? I just am looking for some kind of a sign (if one even exists).

[zigzag]

Yes, that's what he's talking about: inadequate power can result in clipping, which can damage speakers. There's no way to predict if this would happen at 25% or 50% or 100%. I suspect the NAD will be able to drive the speakers at more-than-satisfactory levels, even for parties, without clipping. Just use common sense: if you're playing clean source material and it starts to sound distorted, turn it down, or select Soft-Clipping (if you're having a party, no one's going to care that Soft-Clipping is on or that it softens the sound a bit). But I'd be surprised if you have a problem.

[jebjeb]

An amp with a lower wattage than the speakers it is driving is much more dangerous than a higher powered amp.

As zigzag said, it is not really the wattage that damages the speakers, it is distortion. I have heard setups with 50kg, 500W amps power speakers rated at 100W. I have also heard systems with Speakers rated at 200W powered by a 15W tube amp. Wattage really doesn't mean that much.

The thing I recommend to do is find the loudest mastered piece of music you have (the CD/song that sounds louder than all the rest) put it on, gradually turn up the volume (with the soft clipping circuit off) until everything starts to get a little rough/compressed/slightly distorted. Quickly turn it back down and mark a little below that position on the volume. This is now your max. As you have done this with a nice dynamic and highlevel mastered song, most other music which is a little (relatively) quieter will be safe up until this point. If you are running it all off one source (your computer) then you will not need to find which source is punching out the highest level. If you do have a separate CD player as well, you will need to do this test with whatever you think sounds the loudest out of the sources. Hope this makes sense.

You will probably find this max volume is around the 12 o'clock position (or 50%) on the volume knob. On an amp such as this, I have never seen one go much beyond the 12 o'clock position. Strange. I guess they put the rest of the range in there to boost quiet sources/material.

The soft-clipping feature is good and as zigzag said, if you are worried about pushing it too much, turn this on. (actually, can you turn this on and off or is it permanently on?).

Your speakers are quite inefficient so you will find that they will not go as loud with this amp as other speakers would. As long as they sound good to you and go loud enough for you then its great!

A bit of rough science here. Your speakers produce 84db from 1 Watt of power measured at 1 metre from the speaker (we will assume everything has been measured the same [20-20K, 0.01 THD]) This doesn't mean too much until you compare it to other speakers. The norm these days is for a speaker to produce between 88 and 94db from 1 watt at 1 metre. Now, as the decibel scale is logarithmic, an increase of 10db is actually about twice as loud. This means, if you had a speaker rated at 94db sensitivity, it would play roughly twice as loud as your current speakers with the same amp. Pretty wild eh! Next time you are in the market for some speakers, look for some higher sensitivity ones and it will be like you upgraded your amp to some behemoth. This is a nice cheap way of getting some more volume. Personally, volume is not the biggest plus rather the increased dynamics is.

Now, I am trying to remember the rule for wattage and volume. I think it is something like for every 10db you would need a quadrupling of power (this all assumes that the equipment can handle this). That would mean, to get you speakers to play twice as loud, you would need a 160W amp (to compare apples to apples it would have to be 160 NAD watts) instead of your 40W one.

Now most of this is theoretical. As long as you have found the setups limits and don't exceed that, you will be fine. I remember with one of my first setups, taping a pen to the volume control and sticking a block at the maximum volume setting to stop the volume knob from being turned any further. This saved the system a few times during some parties (especially when I had a few beers under my belt!).

Good luck and I hope you enjoy it

[kupan787]

Originally posted by jebjeb:
The soft-clipping feature is good and as zigzag said, if you are worried about pushing it too much, turn this on. (actually, can you turn this on and off or is it permanently on?).

Yes, I can turn it on and off. Is it something I should just leave on always? What is the downside?

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by kupan787:
Yes, I can turn it on and off. Is it something I should just leave on always? What is the downside?

If you leave the feature on all the time the sound will be less distinct and "softer", not a huge deal listening to party music, but is quite noticeable when you're just listening for enjoyment.

[kikkoman]

If i remember correctly it takes double the power output to increase the volume 3 dB. So if the efficiency of your speakers are 84dB

1 watt -> 84 dB
2 watts -> 87 dB
4 watts -> 90 dB
8 watts -> 93 dB

It takes approximately a ten fold increase in power output for a doubling of percieved loudness of 10dB. So

10 watts -> 94 dB

To put these numbers into prespective OSHA warns that prolonged exporsure to constant noise over 85 dB will result in hearing damage. More information here...

http://www.lhh.org/noise/decibel.htm