Lexicon MC12 & other high end processors Vs Onkyo with Audessy - AVS Forum
1 2  3  ... Last
Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) > Lexicon MC12 & other high end processors Vs Onkyo with Audessy
audvid's Avatar audvid 07:46 AM 03-07-2012
I would like to hear from people who own High end processors like Lexicon MC12, Krell, Anthem, Meridian Etc.. and also have compared them to Onkyo processor..

A bit of history about myself - which might be useful for reader to understand my preference and probable ability to discern audio.
17 years ago.. Started with Onkyo receiver and bose speakers (Hey, I didn't know anything about anything).
Next I bought the JBL Synthesis 3 audio system (I think list was around $30,000). It came with fossgate analog processor. Excellent for that time.
Then Lexicon DC1 when Dolby Digital came out. Not as good as Fossgate but digital advantage was clear.
Next Lexicon Dc2 - no better than DC1..
Added Bryston Monoblocks etc, to the audio path. Moved Synthesis Fronts to back and put Large professional Electrovoice for front three..
Next I upgraded to MC1 - This was a great processor.
HD Audio came out. Sold MC1 and got Integra processor with DTS HD etc... Immediately, I realized that this was a cheap receiver sounding processor. With and without Audessy, it was Awful! "Cheap sound" came to mind.
I got rid of it right away and bought the Lexicon MC12 (non HD). I found it to be delightful. Clearly superior not only to the Onkyo but also the MC1. The audio quality superiority was very clear.. It was.. simply put "amazing".

I realize that it would not be comparing oranges to apples, when we compare the Onkyo with DTS HD MA to the Older Lex mc12 non hd audio.. But there is "something" about the MC12 that makes it sound amazing.. and there was something about that Onkyo, even when I tried HD Audio through it - which made it sound like a typical cheap receiver..

Subsequently, I installed an Anthem processor for a friend and it was very good.. I think it was as good as MC12 in many ways but the mc12 "might" have a slight edge. I didn't do a/b comparision. Hence I have to say that the Anthem (around $5000 list I think. forgot model number) seems almost as good as MC12.

I don't mean to berate anyone's preferences to the Onkyo but I would appreciate comments, particularly from those who actually own one of the $5000 to $15,000 list high end processors..

Someone emailed me, on this forum, that the $900 Onkyo was better than the Lexicon Mc12 and Krell..
I wanted to start a discussion on this subject, just for my own information.. I have no intention of buying the Onkyo anyway. I have been advising friends to buy the Anthem and not the Onkyo.. Just checking to see if my recommendation is well placed or misplaced.
Thank you.

hd_newbie's Avatar hd_newbie 05:48 PM 03-07-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by audvid View Post

I would like to hear from people who own High end processors like Lexicon MC12, Krell, Anthem, Meridian Etc.. and also have compared them to Onkyo processor..

A bit of history about myself - which might be useful for reader to understand my preference and probable ability to discern audio.
17 years ago.. Started with Onkyo receiver and bose speakers (Hey, I didn't know anything about anything).
Next I bought the JBL Synthesis 3 audio system (I think list was around $30,000). It came with fossgate analog processor. Excellent for that time.
Then Lexicon DC1 when Dolby Digital came out. Not as good as Fossgate but digital advantage was clear.
Next Lexicon Dc2 - no better than DC1..
Added Bryston Monoblocks etc, to the audio path. Moved Synthesis Fronts to back and put Large professional Electrovoice for front three..
Next I upgraded to MC1 - This was a great processor.
HD Audio came out. Sold MC1 and got Integra processor with DTS HD etc... Immediately, I realized that this was a cheap receiver sounding processor. With and without Audessy, it was Awful! "Cheap sound" came to mind.
I got rid of it right away and bought the Lexicon MC12 (non HD). I found it to be delightful. Clearly superior not only to the Onkyo but also the MC1. The audio quality superiority was very clear.. It was.. simply put "amazing".

I realize that it would not be comparing oranges to apples, when we compare the Onkyo with DTS HD MA to the Older Lex mc12 non hd audio.. But there is "something" about the MC12 that makes it sound amazing.. and there was something about that Onkyo, even when I tried HD Audio through it - which made it sound like a typical cheap receiver..

Subsequently, I installed an Anthem processor for a friend and it was very good.. I think it was as good as MC12 in many ways but the mc12 "might" have a slight edge. I didn't do a/b comparision. Hence I have to say that the Anthem (around $5000 list I think. forgot model number) seems almost as good as MC12.

I don't mean to berate anyone's preferences to the Onkyo but I would appreciate comments, particularly from those who actually own one of the $5000 to $15,000 list high end processors..

Someone emailed me, on this forum, that the $900 Onkyo was better than the Lexicon Mc12 and Krell..
I wanted to start a discussion on this subject, just for my own information.. I have no intention of buying the Onkyo anyway. I have been advising friends to buy the Anthem and not the Onkyo.. Just checking to see if my recommendation is well placed or misplaced.
Thank you.

You will not receive a satisfactory answer on this part of the forum. Every owner will claim their processor is the next best thing since the invention of light bulb without any tangible evidence other than "but i heard and my wife heard". Better post in the audio section.
audvid's Avatar audvid 06:32 PM 03-07-2012
hd_newbie, You might consider not quoting my post.. since your answer is brief.
You might well be right but this is the forum where people invest in the $10,000+ audio processors and frankly, I want to hear from them..
hd_newbie's Avatar hd_newbie 06:50 PM 03-07-2012
knock yourself out! i am as curious about this (notice no quote)
thebland's Avatar thebland 07:33 PM 03-07-2012
Onkyo is great if funds are limited. There are about 10 active threads in the amps forum. It's the people's receiver. I've owned a MC-12. I've heard an Onkyo at my buddies and at local shoppes. I'd use it for a bedroom system but beware the HDMI switching is flakey on many models.
Joelc's Avatar Joelc 07:39 PM 03-07-2012
I have owned a Lexicon DC-1, Lexicon MC-1, TagMcLaren AV32R, TagMcLaren AV192r, Meridian 861 V4.25, ADA Mach IV B so I have owned a few high end processors..

I have -- at present -- an Onkyo receiver in my family room and, while it is good value at 1ts price point it is nowhere near the league of the above assuming generational comparisons are fair...

The Onkyo is good and does what it is suppose to do but it is not high end...I knew this going in and am very satisfied with its performance..
Browninggold's Avatar Browninggold 08:05 PM 03-07-2012
First off its Audyssey....I think it's the best since sliced bread. On my Denon A100. If you want to tweak it a little more you can purchase a " pro kit". A100 is the same as the Denon 4311. Runs problem free and not as hot as the oinks
hifiaudio2's Avatar hifiaudio2 09:16 PM 03-07-2012
I was kind of assuming the OP was using "Onkyo" to mean anything of that ilk, especially the pre-pros from them and of course Integra. I own the Integra 80.2 and am very happy with it and Audyssey xt32. I have it paired with Martin Logan clx speakers.

But I have not heard the other options listed here. I think Kal Rubinson has the Integra and is also a big Meridian fan, but I *believe* he chooses the Integra in his own system. Hopefully he can chime in and elaborate.
badbenzz's Avatar badbenzz 01:42 AM 03-08-2012
I have owned a Lexicon DC1, MC12, Casablanca III with extreme dacs (pre hdmi), Meridian 861 and a Halcro. I purchased the Integra 80.1 as a stop gap until something better came along and frankly for movies it sounded very good and for music pretty bad. I recently replaced it with an 80.3 and it sounds even better for movies and surprisingly pretty good for music. The Casablanca hands down was the winner in the music department whereas the Halcro was the overall winner as it did everything well since it had HDMI. Although the Integra was only purchased as a stop gap measure I have been re-thinking it and may just replace it every couple of years instead, since there isn't much on the market that does everything this unit does at it's price point. I even thought about the new McIntosh MX121 but it smelled like a rebadged Marantz. Overall for the money you can't beat the Integra 80.3 as there is nothing else in this price range and for movies it sounds damm good.
audvid's Avatar audvid 06:05 AM 03-08-2012
All your replies has been quite informative to me, so far. It is quite interesting to hear from people who have owned the best of the best in audio processors and it intrigues me that some of you actually consider the Integra satisfactory. It must have improved a lot, since I last heard it, about 2 or 3 years ago..
Mr Kal Rubinson.. I would enjoy hearing from you also.. you being the meridian fan and your comments on the Integra, would be quite interesting..
Kal Rubinson's Avatar Kal Rubinson 07:21 AM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by audvid View Post

All your replies has been quite informative to me, so far. It is quite interesting to hear from people who have owned the best of the best in audio processors and it intrigues me that some of you actually consider the Integra satisfactory. It must have improved a lot, since I last heard it, about 2 or 3 years ago..
Mr Kal Rubinson.. I would enjoy hearing from you also.. you being the meridian fan and your comments on the Integra, would be quite interesting..

I use the Integra in my weekend system and the Meridian in my weekday system. While the Meridian (and some other high-end prepros) sound superior on classical music, the Integra is not too far behind and its feature set is vastly superior and more configurable for general music and HT use.
audvid's Avatar audvid 07:27 AM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

I use the Integra in my weekend system and the Meridian in my weekday system. While the Meridian (and some other high-end prepros) sound superior on classical music, the Integra is not too far behind and its feature set is vastly superior and more configurable for general music and HT use.

My use is strictly home theater. Am I understanding you correctly that the Integra is as good (or pretty close) to the Meridian (and possibly the MC12?). Do you not feel that it has the "typical mass market receiver sound"? I have not heard the current generation integra but as I wrote, I did own the first Generation HD audio version Integra (I think it was 9.8) and it was bad.. Thanks for your comments
hifiaudio2's Avatar hifiaudio2 08:50 AM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by audvid View Post

My use is strictly home theater. Am I understanding you correctly that the Integra is as good (or pretty close) to the Meridian (and possibly the MC12?). Do you not feel that it has the "typical mass market receiver sound"? I have not heard the current generation integra but as I wrote, I did own the first Generation HD audio version Integra (I think it was 9.8) and it was bad.. Thanks for your comments

If you go over into the processor forum and read the 80.2 owners thread, you will see many on there that had previous units, like the 9.8, and feel that the 80.2 was the start of Integra truly sounding great on music and being a huge difference from the older ones.

I have never heard any of them before the 80.2 so I cannot comment.

And just fyi -- the 80.2 and 80.3 are almost identical except for a different scaler and maybe extra streaming audio support. Sound is the same.
hifiaudio2's Avatar hifiaudio2 08:57 AM 03-08-2012
My real concern with getting a "better" surround processor would be one that improves on the already good Audyssey. There seems to be a large gap between Audyssey and the "next step up".

I would love to hear a Trinnov system, but other than the cheap Sherwood receiver, the next step is a kludgy (to me) standalone 15k processor, or a $40k (!) ADA processor.

I actually would be interested in that ADA at about $20k.. but 40k seems crazy... but there is plenty of market for that I assume. Just because I wouldnt pay that for a processor doesnt mean others wont.
Bulldogger's Avatar Bulldogger 09:39 AM 03-08-2012
Integra is what I would chose. A friend swapped her California Audio Labs processor out for one. She's very happy with the sound. It's not as good as the Cal for the formats it handled but it's damn sure good sound. I purchased a couple of receivers over the last few years while I waited Theta, to re-enter the market with an update to the Casablanca. The Onkyo model I had was about 800.00 retail. The other model was a Harmon Kardon around the same price point and it was much more impressive sonically.
noah katz's Avatar noah katz 11:25 AM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifiaudio2 View Post

I would love to hear a Trinnov system, but other than the cheap Sherwood receive...

Cheap but very good sound; ask Kal about that.
Kal Rubinson's Avatar Kal Rubinson 11:39 AM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by audvid View Post

My use is strictly home theater. Am I understanding you correctly that the Integra is as good (or pretty close) to the Meridian (and possibly the MC12?).

?? Is there an objective scale for this?

Quote:


Do you not feel that it has the "typical mass market receiver sound"?

I do not know what that is. Never owned one.

Quote:


I have not heard the current generation integra but as I wrote, I did own the first Generation HD audio version Integra (I think it was 9.8) and it was bad.. Thanks for your comments

I owned a 9.8, too, and this is really much better.
audvid's Avatar audvid 11:43 AM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

?? Is there an objective scale for this?

I do not know what that is. Never owned one.

I owned a 9.8, too, and this is really much better.

Objective scale? I have experience with Lexicon MC1 - its good but the Lex Mc12 and the Anthem are better. Not an objective scale but on a subjective scale, I would put these two as "high end audio for home theater/movies" on my scale.. I have no interest in music or 2 channel performance - just a personal preference.

As I wrote in the beginning, I am not in the market for a processor. On occasion, I advise friends.. and this thread was only for my informative purpose.

"cheap receiver sound"? If you owned a integra 9.8, that would be the "cheap receiver sound" I was referring to.
Glimmie's Avatar Glimmie 11:57 AM 03-08-2012
To me, a "processor" is used to enhance older material or perhaps even new material that was not mixed well or to your liking.

If I have a new release Bluray no matter what audio CODEC was used, in theory why would I want to "process" that? The cleanest is just to decode it and send each channel to it's designated speaker. In this case even the cheap Denons do a respectable job. In fact they may even use the same decoder chip set the ultra high end units use.

Where a high end processor comes in is taking 2.0 or even mono sound tracks and extrapolating them into 5.1, 7.1 or whatever. This is where all the proprietary and highly subjective algorithms come into play. This is where I think the differences in manufactures lays.

My experience in high end consumer processor is limited to Lexicon. But that's what I like about Lexicon. To me, they seem to do a fabulous job spinning straw into gold. When I use BluRay, my MC8 is in analog bypass mode (note this is not stock, I put that mod in).

As for music, well I have a seperate very simple tube system in the family room. The only music in the HT is concerts.
audvid's Avatar audvid 01:55 PM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glimmie View Post

To me, a "processor" is used to enhance older material or perhaps even new material that was not mixed well or to your liking.

May be true but that is only one of its functions. A function that I personally never use but it might well be useful and be liked by someone like you. That's fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glimmie View Post

If I have a new release Bluray no matter what audio CODEC was used, in theory why would I want to "process" that? The cleanest is just to decode it and send each channel to it's designated speaker. In this case even the cheap Denons do a respectable job. In fact they may even use the same decoder chip set the ultra high end units use.

Where a high end processor comes in is taking 2.0 or even mono sound tracks and extrapolating them into 5.1, 7.1 or whatever. This is where all the proprietary and highly subjective algorithms come into play. This is where I think the differences in manufactures lays.

My experience in high end consumer processor is limited to Lexicon. But that's what I like about Lexicon. To me, they seem to do a fabulous job spinning straw into gold. When I use BluRay, my MC8 is in analog bypass mode (note this is not stock, I put that mod in).

First.. I am not an audio expert but here are my thoughts/responses to your comment. And I am making these statements with all due respect.. There are many on this forum, who are absolute experts on audio video subjects.. I am not one of them and this discussion is only for informative purpose. Not intended to berate anyone.. Fair?

Having said that, I disagree with your comments about limited function of the processor and your definition of "audio processor". For example, a good (high end) processor has superior d/a circuitry. This is a critical part, I believe, of my listening preference. Bass management is another. The MC12 offers many "subwoofer" options.. I like to use a passive sub for the center channel. Not for "effects" but to suppliment and compliment my main speakers (which also are already very large - with 15" woofers). The front left and right low freqs are also combined and sent to one sub.. I would imagine that the MC8 is very close to the MC12 and superior to my prior MC1. I also enjoy Logic 7. In fact, I don't even use any other mode. Again.. its not just logic 7.
A high end processor would have an excellent audio path.. It's not one chip.. but I would assume they have high end/quality designs and components - especially designed by people who know what good audio is/should be. That's why the comment that "many original engineers of mc12 left" concerns me. A high end processor like MC12 needs continuty in engineering excellence.

Then there are things like Audessy etc.. I have never been a fan of "altering the sound path" with equalizers or artificial processors. I have tried a few.. My original jbl synthesis came as a package where the JBL guy would come in and adjust equalizer settings, after installation. I suppose there is some value in that but frankly, I prefered my system, with the (analog) equalizer removed from the path. But then, I need the screen boost for High freq roll off (perforated screen with speakers behind screen) and the hf/screen boost unit provided by Stewart was horrible. Finally, after I got the MC12 and used it's 4 microphones, I felt that finally, I found a processor, with a built in equalizer, which seems not to intrude too much (if any?) into the fidelity of the original audio.

Another friend, who owns a Meridian (865?) told me a few years ago, that Meridian limits equalization to below 800 Hz, for fidelity reasons. Is that still true? kal?

For the reasons above, I am highly suspect of the "audessy".. My experience with it is 3+ years old and it was an unsatisfactory and distortive experience.
Glimmie's Avatar Glimmie 02:29 PM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by audvid View Post

May be true but that is only one of its functions. A function that I personally never use but it might well be useful and be liked by someone like you. That's fine.


First.. I am not an audio expert but here are my thoughts/responses to your comment. And I am making these statements with all due respect.. There are many on this forum, who are absolute experts on audio video subjects.. I am not one of them and this discussion is only for informative purpose. Not intended to berate anyone.. Fair?

Having said that, I disagree with your comments about limited function of the processor and your definition of "audio processor". For example, a good (high end) processor has superior d/a circuitry. This is a critical part, I believe, of my listening preference. Bass management is another. The MC12 offers many "subwoofer" options.. I like to use a passive sub for the center channel. Not for "effects" but to suppliment and compliment my main speakers (which also are already very large - with 15" woofers). The front left and right low freqs are also combined and sent to one sub.. I would imagine that the MC8 is very close to the MC12 and superior to my prior MC1. I also enjoy Logic 7. In fact, I don't even use any other mode. Again.. its not just logic 7.
A high end processor would have an excellent audio path.. It's not one chip.. but I would assume they have high end/quality designs and components - especially designed by people who know what good audio is/should be. That's why the comment that "many original engineers of mc12 left" concerns me. A high end processor like MC12 needs continuty in engineering excellence.

Then there are things like Audessy etc.. I have never been a fan of "altering the sound path" with equalizers or artificial processors. I have tried a few.. My original jbl synthesis came as a package where the JBL guy would come in and adjust equalizer settings, after installation. I suppose there is some value in that but frankly, I prefered my system, with the (analog) equalizer removed from the path. But then, I need the screen boost for High freq roll off (perforated screen with speakers behind screen) and the hf/screen boost unit provided by Stewart was horrible. Finally, after I got the MC12 and used it's 4 microphones, I felt that finally, I found a processor, with a built in equalizer, which seems not to intrude too much (if any?) into the fidelity of the original audio.

Another friend, who owns a Meridian (865?) told me a few years ago, that Meridian limits equalization to below 800 Hz, for fidelity reasons. Is that still true? kal?

For the reasons above, I am highly suspect of the "audessy".. My experience with it is 3+ years old and it was an unsatisfactory and distortive experience.

You raise some legitimate points regarding bass management and room correction. But IMO, you have to have a reasonable room to make these options worth while. However most people shopping in this price range have good rooms. And of course the analog circuitry is a step up from mainstream consumer gear. I know for a fact Lexicon uses commercial parts, same as pro and broadcast gear.

The MC8 is indeed a scaled down MC12. It lacks the additional zones, just has a zone2 feature. I believe it can accept the calibration option, at least there are slots for it.

I personally am now looking at the ADA which has gotten rave reviews here. But I don't know if it has similar 2.0 to 7.1 synthesizer functions. I have always been a big fan of LOGIC7 since the DC1. The biggest improvement of the MC8 over the DC1 for me was the inclusion of three LOGIC7 modes, 5.1, TV, and Music. I don't use the TV setting much, the 5.1 is my default for movies, and the Music setting is great for concerts.

I should also note in my system, I go beyond the MC8 in terms of processing. I have two outboard DBX dynamic range expanders on the LCR (center is rarely used). These are bypassable of course via my Irule remote. And I use analog graphic equalizers for room correction. I also employ an 11 band sub woofer specific equalizer I built myself to get those under control. I found basic bass management in the MC8 was not enough.

And FWEIW, my LCR amps are vacuum tube via tube based electronic crossover.
gamelover360's Avatar gamelover360 02:39 PM 03-08-2012
I think that if you are talking movies only, then you could swap out an Integra and a high priced processor in blind testing and nobody would do very well picking which is which. (that is of course assuming they are both level matched and no EQ..since different EQ's will can produce different results). I think you should focus on features and the best EQ solution for yourself.
hifiaudio2's Avatar hifiaudio2 03:00 PM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Cheap but very good sound; ask Kal about that.

Yeah I would like to hear that then.. I just find it odd that its not sold at more price points. Either "de-featured" and sold in a mass market device, or sold at the very high end. Why no 5-10k device?
Kal Rubinson's Avatar Kal Rubinson 03:15 PM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by audvid View Post

I have no interest in music or 2 channel performance - just a personal preference.

Then, I am not the one to advise you as those are much more important and relevant to me than movies, about which I am fairly uncritical.

Quote:
"cheap receiver sound"? If you owned a integra 9.8, that would be the "cheap receiver sound" I was referring to.

Could be.
Kal Rubinson's Avatar Kal Rubinson 03:18 PM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by audvid View Post

Another friend, who owns a Meridian (865?) told me a few years ago, that Meridian limits equalization to below 800 Hz, for fidelity reasons. Is that still true? kal?

Never was. The EQ is limited to 300Hz and down.

Quote:
For the reasons above, I am highly suspect of the "audessy"..

I must have missed them.

Quote:
My experience with it is 3+ years old and it was an unsatisfactory and distortive experience.

It is a lot better these days.
audvid's Avatar audvid 07:35 PM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Never was. The EQ is limited to 300Hz and down.

It is a lot better these days.

300 Hz not 800Hz? You are correct. I simply forgot the number he told me.. but I do recall him saying that Room Eq by meridian is only for lower frequencies. I simply forgot the number he mentioned.. Anyway, my curiosity is, how come an obviously high end processor company like Meridian restricts its EQ to 300 Hz max, but others like Audessy are performing equalization over the entire spectrum. I am no expert but I am more supportive of the Meridian decision than the Audessy one.. except that I do realize that a screen boost for HF is necessary for some perforated screens (perhaps not as important for the new woven/screen research type screens which profess no hf roll off).

I am curious to know if anyone else shares my opinion that "less processing" is better. Of course, my room is fairly well treated acoustically, but the treatment was not done with computer design analysis.

Here are the pics, if anyone is curious. The wall panels have 2" dense fiber glass board and loop carpet with foam backing.

Off topic: These are 12+ year old pics, with the Marquee 9". and JVC had just come out with the DILA G10 (back wall).

http://www.audvid.50megs.com/Theater/
Kal Rubinson's Avatar Kal Rubinson 08:03 PM 03-08-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by audvid View Post

300 Hz not 800Hz? You are correct. I simply forgot the number he told me.. but I do recall him saying that Room Eq by meridian is only for lower frequencies. I simply forgot the number he mentioned.. Anyway, my curiosity is, how come an obviously high end processor company like Meridian restricts its EQ to 300 Hz max, but others like Audessy are performing equalization over the entire spectrum. I am no expert but I am more supportive of the Meridian decision than the Audessy one..

You should read their AES paper on the topic. Basically, they state that the EQ is intended to correct for room modes/reflections in the sub-Schroeder frequencies because, above that point, one can deal easily with room effects with proper arrangements and treatments and not change the character of the system.

Quote:


..... except that I do realize that a screen boost for HF is necessary for some perforated screens (perhaps not as important for the new woven/screen research type screens which profess no hf roll off).

Shouldn't that be a separate issue?

Quote:


I am curious to know if anyone else shares my opinion that "less processing" is better. Of course, my room is fairly well treated acoustically, but the treatment was not done with computer design analysis.

Agreed. We should not make this any more complicated than it need be. But, also, no less.[/quote]
audvid's Avatar audvid 06:25 AM 03-09-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

[screen bost]Shouldn't that be a separate issue?

You are correct. It might be a separate issue but again, screen boost if required, also introduces its presence/processing into the audio path.. and that intrusion into the audio path, even if justifiable, concerns me. I believe, from experience, that the analog EQ and screen boost which came with the JBL synthesis system were detrimental (I didn't realize it until a few years later).
audvid's Avatar audvid 06:37 AM 03-09-2012
It seems that we might have come to the end of the discussion about the MC12 Vs Integra..

If I might divert/digress a little.. How about Anthem?

I did not realize it in until now but based on the mc12 replacement thread and the comments on the smr forum about the cancellation of mc20 etc and the comments by someone here that lexicon has lost its (some? Main? Important?) engineers.. It seems to me that Lexicon might have lost its mojo.. I would probably not want to consider the next lexicon.. of course we need to wait for it to come out and share experiences with it

Therefore and meanwhile, how about the Anthem? Has anyone experienced it and compared it to the Integra?
The meridian would be out of my price range and that of my friends'.. The integra does seem to be a very good option but I am still gun shy and very hesitant.. I am probably going to audition it but it would be with different speakers.. different room.. If and when I do so, I will post my comments..
hifiaudio2's Avatar hifiaudio2 08:08 AM 03-09-2012
Buy a used 80.2 and see what you think. Should be able to flip it for about what you paid and no harm done if you dont like it....
1 2  3  ... Last

Up
Mobile  Desktop