I really don't have a good sense of how much to spend on a receiver, how much to spend on speakers, and what kinds to get. All help would be welcome.

The audio system will go in a 12.5' x 15.5' room. I want surround sound capability. My couch will be against a wall, so the system has to be 5.1.

The quality of music is more important to me than the quality of audio for movies and TV. In particular, I would like the system to be excellent for classical music. I assume I will be listening to music in stereo, so I assume that my front speakers will be most important--but I may be wrong.

Price can exceed $3,000 if I'm going to see a big jump in performance.

What receiver(s) and speakers should I buy? Any other important gadgets?

try doing a search based on the question you asked. There are many similar posts. I am not qualified to recommend speakers, but have seen many brands on this site brought up again and again ( salk, ascend acoustics, axiom, swan, svs, paradigm, klipsch, and many other quality choices). You will need a sub(s). Popular AVR choices are onkyo, denon, marantz (all with audessey calibration). Pour through others posts on related subjects then ask more pointed questions like : My budget for 5.1 for speakers is $1500-2000. What speakers in this price range will be adequate for HT but will shine for music (mostly classical)? Do not shortchange your subwoofer. Many brands are recommended here by members: svs, elemental designs, velodyne, hsu and many others. Finally, go to a local BM audio store and audition different speakers to figure out what YOU like. If you find something, try asking AVS members about ID speaker companies that may compare. Good luck.

Try the Speakers and Amps/Receivers forums for equipment recommendations. As you suggested, the front speakers will be the most important. That's true for movies as well as music. Also, while lots of music is recorded in stereo, there are plenty of great, multichannel, high resolution classical recordings on SACD.

I really don't have a good sense of how much to spend on a receiver, how much to spend on speakers, and what kinds to get. All help would be welcome.

The audio system will go in a 12.5' x 15.5' room. I want surround sound capability. My couch will be against a wall, so the system has to be 5.1.

The quality of music is more important to me than the quality of audio for movies and TV. In particular, I would like the system to be excellent for classical music. I assume I will be listening to music in stereo, so I assume that my front speakers will be most important--but I may be wrong.

Price can exceed $3,000 if I'm going to see a big jump in performance.

What receiver(s) and speakers should I buy? Any other important gadgets?

You want to maximize your $$$ on your speakers.

$2500 in speakers and $500 worth of electronics will be superior to $1500 in speakers and $1500 in electronics.

Since your preference is two channel I would even recommend spending the bulk of your speaker $$$ on two incredible main speakers and then go cheap for now on the center and the surrounds. Maybe even ignore the Center for now.

You will maximize your 2-ch experience while still having some enjoyment out of your movies.

Here's one way to start. Go to Paradigm's (http://www.paradigm.ca) Web site, and look at their recommended systems. (You may need to download a PDF brochure.) Pick a system in the low $2000s. Since you care most about two-channel music, bump the main speakers up a notch, and the center and surrounds down a notch. That should leave you at roughly the same price point, with plenty of money left over for a nice receiver. If nothing else, it'll give you a frame of reference for assembling a system from other manufacturers.

Here's one way to start. Go to Paradigm's (http://www.paradigm.ca) Web site, and look at their recommended systems. (You may need to download a PDF brochure.) Pick a system in the low $2000s. Since you care most about two-channel music, bump the main speakers up a notch, and the center and surrounds down a notch. That should leave you at roughly the same price point, with plenty of money left over for a nice receiver. If nothing else, it'll give you a frame of reference for assembling a system from other manufacturers.

While I agree with most of the above statement, I would caution the op on downgrading the centre. I did this with my first system based on the same reasoning as the op. As soon as i started watching movies i was horribly disappointed and ended up upgrading the centre. Match the front soundstage!

While I agree with most of the above statement, I would caution the op on downgrading the centre. I did this with my first system based on the same reasoning as the op. As soon as i started watching movies i was horribly disappointed and ended up upgrading the centre. Match the front soundstage!
Fair enough. But Paradigm's line is timbre-matched quite well, and I'm only suggesting a single step down in quality, so I wouldn't expect this to be too much of a problem. But you never know till you try, which is why it's important to ask about return privileges.

Not sure if either of these appeal to you, but there are two ways to significantly leverage your funds - DIY and used - and get that 'big jump in performance'. Each of those can save you perhaps 50% for equivalent performance, and each can be done in a viable and safe manner, whatever your level of skill and risk tolerance.

There are compromises inherent in all choices, even if cost were no object, but even moreso when that is the case. Some have been suggested here (disproportionate use of funds on speakers vs electronics, mains vs center/surrounds, etc). I will offer one more - if music is indeed much more important than movies, and realizing that in a small room you will have considerable room gain at the low end, I might suggest foregoing the sub entirely initially, as anything close to full-range mains may be sufficient. Personally, I have gone through many iterations/configurations, and I have never been terribly happy with the integration of a sub with small speakers for music purposes, but I have been satisfied with full-range speakers without a sub for movies.

+1 on matching the front stage as closely as possible IF you are also taking heed on the availability of hi-rez multi-ch SACD classical.

Depending on your placement/seating configuration, I could also +1 on running without a center initially if you aren't going for multi-ch music.

For every 'speakers-first' advocacy, I can probably find a 'source-first' rebuttal. Personally, I have actually spent time in both camps along the way. At the moment what I believe is that once you are above a certain level of reproduction quality with your weakest link, then dealing with components that handle the lowest level signals (sources - especially turntables - and preamps is most important) and below that level, speakers are most important. I do not believe that your planned investment will put you above that threshold level, unless you go the used or diy route, and may be questionable even then for a full 5.1 system.

Depending on whether you are intending on a continuous improvement/upgrade path, or if you are a 'set-it-and-forget-it-same-system-for-10-years' kind of person, I might suggest you buy at least one 'keeper' component you love, and gradually put more of those around it. That will not result in the best sound quality at any given point in time as a more balanced approach would, but provides a clearer upgrade path toward a superior system some day, and you may find more satisfaction and pride of ownership in that.

I would like to see how you react to any of these and previous comments before getting more specific.

Thank you all for your comments. Based on the first set of comments, I did research on speakers first, and am considering the following set:

2 Aperion 6T Front Speakers = $1400
2 Aperion Intimus 5B Bookshelf speakers = $500
Aperion Intimus 5C Center Channel Speaker = $250
HSU STF-1 Subwoofer = $250

I'm not totally convinced I need a subwoofer, but I feel I can always turn it down, and it can't hurt.

Does my speaker set seem reasonable? Would anybody recommend substitutions? Given such a speaker set, and my initial comments, what would be an appropriate receiver?

Thanks!

Your main goal is music and classic music at that so your focus is in the right place now. You can always upgrade to a better sub later.

Does my speaker set seem reasonable?

That is really a subjective question that only you can answer.

I really don't have a good sense of how much to spend on a receiver, how much to spend on speakers, and what kinds to get. All help would be welcome.

Like people are saying, speakers first. BTW, all of my formal education is in classical music, and I've taught it on the west coast, east coast, and Europe. You're going to want to listen to as many speakers as possible. I aimed for 50 pairs, got about half way there before I bought my stereo rig. Besides the speaker choice, the biggest things you can do might very well be free: ideal listener positioning, ideal speaker positioning, ideal arrangement of furniture.

The audio system will go in a 12.5' x 15.5' room. I want surround sound capability. My couch will be against a wall, so the system has to be 5.1.

The couch against the back wall is going to be an issue, for various reasons, one of which is collecting, muddying bass, which masks your other frequencies. I would either put your couch feet on sliders to get away from the wall for critical listening, or permanently move the couch away from wall, or load this wall with treatments, or a combination of the above.

The quality of music is more important to me than the quality of audio for movies and TV. In particular, I would like the system to be excellent for classical music. I assume I will be listening to music in stereo, so I assume that my front speakers will be most important--but I may be wrong.

For movies/TV, it's really about dialogue intelligibility and dynamic capability. Classical music is much more exigent on an audio system, otherwise, IMO.

Price can exceed $3,000 if I'm going to see a big jump in performance.

What receiver(s) and speakers should I buy? Any other important gadgets?

Speakers, speakers, speakers. After that, treatments treatments treatments. And after that, EQ. The other electronics choices are not nearly as important, assuming one has adequate amplification, etc.

If I were you, I'd consider forgetting the surrounds altogether if that gets you better speakers. A pair of towers for instance. Or perhaps, a pair of bookshelves, coupled to a pair of stereo subs. Just tell the receiver the center is not connected, and it will be downmixed into mains. Better speakers will have superior offaxis response, helping your cause.

This is coming from someone with a separate stereo and 7.1 HT system. The stereo speakers cost more than the 7.1 rig combined. Are there diminishing returns, sure. Is there still a big difference, yes.

*I don't have mch SACD/DVDA capability, but if you see this is as a possibility, you really are going to want three identical speakers for your front stage. Vertically arrayed. It's possible if you're wall mounting a flat panel display for instance. Horiz MTM centers are a serious design compromise.

Spend half your budget on speakers as they produce the sound.

Spend more than half your budget on speakers as they produce the sound.
Fixed.

+2 for putting most of the budget in the speakers.

Absolutely. But make sure you still get your money's worth. Your target is to get great loudspeakers, not to spend a certain amount.

There's often a "subliminal markup" downside of setting a budget threshold. That's one reason that "high end" charlatans often offer the mantra of "you should spend 15% (or whatever) of your total budget on cabling (or other nonsense)"; it primes the unsuspecting buyer to willingly pay hundreds of dollars for 10 bucks' worth of wire.

Absolutely. But make sure you still get your money's worth. Your target is to get great loudspeakers, not to spend a certain amount.

There's often a "subliminal markup" downside of setting a budget threshold. That's one reason that "high end" charlatans often offer the mantra of "you should spend 15% (or whatever) of your total budget on cabling (or other nonsense)"; it primes the unsuspecting buyer to willingly pay hundreds of dollars for 10 bucks' worth of wire.

Some people can't let threads like this go without putting this topic in the limelight. Sad.

I will agree however with putting most of the budget into the speakers. However, you do need to be smart about possible upgrade paths with receivers. Preouts for adding additional power, appropriate HDMI usage, and reasonable distortion measurements from the outset are important. You cannot put a lawnmower engine in a Ferrari and expect to get good performance.

Some people can't let threads like this go without putting this topic in the limelight. Sad.

.

What topic? Overpriced cables?

What topic? Overpriced cables?

The troll topic du jour, yes.

The troll topic du jour, yes.

Really? Bob seemed to be giving the OP some good advice. I would think that many people spending that kind of money might feel they need to invest a certain % into cables/wiring etc. Bob merely pointed out some truth which I think everyone needs to hear again and again anyway.

Why is that trolling? Is wasn't inflamatory and was relevant to the thread given the budget. Are you one of those "high end" charlatans he mentioned?

Really? Bob seemed to be giving the OP some good advice. I would think that many people spending that kind of money might feel they need to invest a certain % into cables/wiring etc. Bob merely pointed out some truth which I think everyone needs to hear again and again anyway.

Why is that trolling? Is wasn't inflamatory and was relevant to the thread given the budget. Are you one of those "high end" charlatans he mentioned?

Yup!
Only the individuals that got "punched in the nose" consider good info/advice as trolling. Misery loves company. :D

Yup!
Only the individuals that got "punched in the nose" consider good info/advice as trolling. Misery loves company. :D

Slick answer, but wrong again. No stake here either way, but interesting that no one questions the stake that debunkers have. Typically, that is "don't spend money on cables, when my services/products are better investments."

Slick answer, but wrong again. No stake here either way, but interesting that no one questions the stake that debunkers have. Typically, that is "don't spend money on cables, when my services/products are better investments."

Feel free to show where debunkers have debunked and then pluged some other service and product.

Also, science (and some common sense) has been the debunker in most cases. Some of the posters here merely are just pointing that out and trying to show people that most of the assumptions in this hobby are just the wrong ones.

Self proclaimed debunker IMO. Are you "The Amazing Randi"? :)

No stake here either way
Then why do you care so much?

actually, jibberjab is (or at least was) in a field of work which benefits from the perpetuation & exclusivity of the "high end". Galling that he now casts vague aspersions about other peoples motivations.

actually, jibberjab is (or at least was) in a field of work which benefits from the perpetuation & exclusivity of the "high end".
Knock me over with a feather.