Integra DHC-80.3 - Page 76 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 1Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #2251 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 02:00 PM
Member
 
Beto3645's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

First post here / occasional lurker -

Been looking into getting a DHC-80.3 for HT and perhaps some limited music listening.
Its to replace a Marantz AV8003.

I'm adding a Rec Room on my home which is approx 22x40 half is a billiard area/wet bar, other half a causal HT area. Seating about 12' back from TV. 12' celing, with 18' vaulted over billiard table. One wall, opposing the TV is glass folding doors. HW floors. so acoustics are going to stink I am pretty sure. Oh yeah, under HT area, is a basement with concrete floor beneath Hardwood.
RH

You're right in thinking that acoustics are going to stink. Vaulted ceilings tend to focus the sound, not good. And all those hard surfaces will probably make your room sound too bright, even harsh. Your room would benefit from professionally designed and installed room treatments: absorbers, diffusers, bass traps, etc. Since this is a casual HT, wife acceptance is not a factor, correct? (Room treatments tend to be ugly.) If you do this and then apply Audyssey to the treated room you will have better sound.
Beto3645 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2252 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 02:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,096
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post



Obviously there will be an internal crossover for the mids & highs. I assume therefore that when I connect each set of binding posts to an amplifier output channel, with an appropriately configured bi-amp capable preamp, that I am indeed getting active bi-amplification (or rather it would seem an active crossover). The Integra in this setup would be doing the active crossover prior to amplification I assume via Audessey setup.


Any advice helpful.

RH

An active crossover is an electronic device which sits between your preamp and power amp. It's not possible to do what you are describing. Passive biamping is pretty much a waste of wire and an amplifier.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2253 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 02:25 PM
Newbie
 
rh500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beto3645 View Post

You're right in thinking that acoustics are going to stink. Vaulted ceilings tend to focus the sound, not good. And all those hard surfaces will probably make your room sound too bright, even harsh. Your room would benefit from professionally designed and installed room treatments: absorbers, diffusers, bass traps, etc. Since this is a casual HT, wife acceptance is not a factor, correct? (Room treatments tend to be ugly.) If you do this and then apply Audyssey to the treated room you will have better sound.

Thanks.
Yes wife gets to have some input, but ultimately I think some type of acoustic treatments will be needed. She had her say the first go around, and the speakers are currently, I hate to admit, floorstanding speakers that are stuck into cabinets of the built-in entertainment cabinet! Not losing that fight this time around. The main listening area and speaker placement will not be under the vaulted ceiling portion of the room. I am going to try to work with the space to make it as good as reasonably achievable and live with it.

RH
rh500 is offline  
post #2254 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 02:30 PM
Newbie
 
rh500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

An active crossover is an electronic device which sits between your preamp and power amp. It's not possible to do what you are describing. Passive biamping is pretty much a waste of wire and an amplifier.

Isn't the DHC-80.3 performing the active crossover functions, and the Audessey tweaking the EQ and crossover/bandpass frequencies?

RH
rh500 is offline  
post #2255 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 02:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
SpotcheckBilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Colorado
Posts: 689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

Thanks.

My speakers have 4 binding posts and a removable bridge that unites them electrically. I do not know what is going on inside the speaker, but I assume the high and low inputs are electrically isolated without sharing any crossover. Is there any way to test this that doesn't entail tearing apart my speakers? Ohm meter for instance across both + terminals with bridges removed?

Obviously there will be an internal crossover for the mids & highs. I assume therefore that when I connect each set of binding posts to an amplifier output channel, with an appropriately configured bi-amp capable preamp, that I am indeed getting active bi-amplification (or rather it would seem an active crossover). The Integra in this setup would be doing the active crossover prior to amplification I assume via Audessey setup.

I have a three way active crossover setup in my car, with 3 channel amplifiers driving highs, mids, and lows. The processor is configured manually to do the active crossover and bandpass functions for the three channels and each channel is amplified by a dedicated amplifier channel. Difference between this and the home system is that I don't know what is going on INSIDE the speaker with its integrated passive crossover circuit.

Any advice helpful.

RH

The high/low inputs on your speakers will not be electrically isolated from the built in crossovers when you remove the jumpers.

There is no active crossover of the type you are describing in the Integra, nor is there one in any AVR or Pre-Pro that I'm aware of.

In order to accomplish active biamping you will need to utilize an outboard electronic crossover and internally disconnect the built in passive crossovers in your speakers.

This isn't car audio, thank God Don't confuse the issue with false assumptions.

Again, I urge you to perform a search on this subject in this Forum for all of the details.

Cheers,
SB
SpotcheckBilly is offline  
post #2256 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 02:35 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,096
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked: 1450
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2257 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 02:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
SpotcheckBilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Colorado
Posts: 689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

Isn't the DHC-80.3 performing the active crossover functions, and the Audessey tweaking the EQ and crossover/bandpass frequencies?

RH

No!

Reference the Audyssey setup guide and FAQ's at the beginning of the Audyssey thread for details that will provide an understanding of how Audyssey works and how to utilize it for optimum results.

Cheers,
SB

Edited to say - Keith, you beat me to it on this one
SpotcheckBilly is offline  
post #2258 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 02:39 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,096
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotcheckBilly View Post


No!

Reference the Audyssey setup guide and FAQ's at the beginning of the Audyssey thread for details that will provide an understanding of how Audyssey works and how to utilize it for optimum results.

Cheers,
SB

Edited to say - Keith, you beat me to it on this one

You were considerably less monosyllabic though SB
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2259 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 03:00 PM
Newbie
 
rh500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hmm.

Seems multiple folks are saying the same thing.

I always thought a passive crossover circuit required no power (DC voltage) to operate, and simply took the amplifier output, fed into the circuit, and then connect individual speakers drivers in the speaker to respective outputs, depending on the circuit type.

I always though an active crossover was a circuit that required power (DC voltage), and took pre-amplifier output and split it into High/Mids/Lows depending on how the circuit was designed, prior to power amplification.

I am going to search through the forum and read-up some more on bi-amplification, and also try to determine how my speakers internal crossovers are designed (I can't imagine there isn't at least some type of high-pass or low pass filter connected to each binding post - for sure will be a passive crossover on the mid/hi inputs). I read on the Integra homepage that it can do bi-amplification for Front pair, and can adjust crossover for individual channel pairs. That was the part that made me think it could do active crossover. I will have to D/L and read the manual.

I think even if I could find a way to get the low freq and mid/hi's separated that it might help improve bass response for stereo sources. Probably not worth the effort it's worth. Regardless, I still needed extra channels of amplification in order to get a 9.1 surround field. In my haste, perhaps i picked a poor choice for this (Adcom 5503) if I can't really do active bi-amplification.

That being said, what's the consensus on using the 3 channel Adcom amp (unbalanced outs only) for L/R/C and Marantz (XLR & RCA) for the satellites. OR using the Adcom for some extra satellites and the Marantz for the rest?

Thanks again
RH
rh500 is offline  
post #2260 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 03:41 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,096
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

Hmm.


That being said, what's the consensus on using the 3 channel Adcom amp (unbalanced outs only) for L/R/C and Marantz (XLR & RCA) for the satellites. OR using the Adcom for some extra satellites and the Marantz for the rest?

Thanks again
RH

Much better idea. Use your best amps on LCR channels and the others on the surrounds.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2261 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 05:32 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kal Rubinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC + Connecticut
Posts: 28,416
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Liked: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

Obviously there will be an internal crossover for the mids & highs. I assume therefore that when I connect each set of binding posts to an amplifier output channel, with an appropriately configured bi-amp capable preamp, that I am indeed getting active bi-amplification (or rather it would seem an active crossover). The Integra in this setup would be doing the active crossover prior to amplification I assume via Audessey setup.

Your assumption is incorrect. No AVRs are capable of active bi-amping. In addition, active bi-amping requires removal of the speaker's crossover.

Kal Rubinson

"Music in the Round"
Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/category/music-round

Kal Rubinson is offline  
post #2262 of 4277 Old 05-06-2012, 08:13 PM
Member
 
DrRx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Burlington, Ontario, CANADA
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotcheckBilly View Post

The high/low inputs on your speakers will not be electrically isolated from the built in crossovers when you remove the jumpers.

Help me out here ...... I always thought that removing the jumpers between the speaker binding posts created 2 isolated circuits - one for mid/high and another for low. I imagined: top binding posts -> high pass filter (x-over) -> tweeter, and, bottom binding posts -> low pass filter (x-over) -> woofer. In this scenario I imagined 2 separate cross-overs (one for high, another for low) and that the jumpers allowed you to feed both cross-overs from either set of binding posts. If the 2 circuits are not electrically isolated, then what does the removal of the jumpers accomplish?? I realize this is the wrong thread but hopefully someone has a quick educational answer so that we can move back on topic. Thx!
DrRx is offline  
post #2263 of 4277 Old 05-07-2012, 03:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
gurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,749
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
The separate binding posts are meant to be used for bi-wiring only, not bi-amping, because the corresponding branches of the crossover are still in place in front of the driver, which is a no go for bi-amping, where the crossover has to go before the power amp circuits.
gurkey is offline  
post #2264 of 4277 Old 05-07-2012, 05:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundofMind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE MI
Posts: 7,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

Isn't the DHC-80.3 performing the active crossover functions, and the Audessey tweaking the EQ and crossover/bandpass frequencies? RH

Most folks don't think of it that way, but the answer is yeah, kinda, so take heart. The 80.3 is quite capable of performing an active crossover function in the most important area, which is the bass. And this precludes your having to worry about placing active crossovers higher up where they matter little.

When you set the crossover for a satellite channel (=all chs except the sub channels), it puts in place electronic high pass and low pass filters (this is what the term crossover refers to). For ex., setting the front L/R to 80 Hz keeps all freqs above 80 in the FR ch and FL ch respectively, then to the respective FL/R ch amps and from there to the respective FL/R speaker. All freqs below 80 get directed to the sub ch and from there go to the sub amp and then to the sub speaker. This is true biamping. Note that those low freqs are extremely demanding on both an amp and a speaker. As mentioned, the 80.3 and pretty much all modern processors incorporate the advantage of true active biamping for the bass. You can easily take advantage of this by using one or more subs and employing proper bass management settings as described in the Audyssey Setup Guide.

To do further true biamping again on the satellite channel may or may not have any audible benefit and is rather involved, as referred to by Keith above. Passive biamping is regarded as a waste by the rational hobbyist, as is biwiring.

Yes, I still like playing with Dalis.

SoundofMind is offline  
post #2265 of 4277 Old 05-07-2012, 07:47 AM
Advanced Member
 
fitzcaraldo215's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

First post here / occasional lurker -

Been looking into getting a DHC-80.3 for HT and perhaps some limited music listening.
Its to replace a Marantz AV8003.

Seems like most/all the bugs have been worked out (bi-amping in particular).
I've tried to read through all the posts, but... WOW huge thread! read at least the first half and skimmed the remainder.

I'm adding a Rec Room on my home which is approx 22x40 half is a billiard area/wet bar, other half a causal HT area. Seating about 12' back from TV. 12' celing, with 18' vaulted over billiard table. One wall, opposing the TV is glass folding doors. HW floors. so acoustics are going to stink I am pretty sure. Oh yeah, under HT area, is a basement with concrete floor beneath Hardwood.

I can't really describe myself as an "audiophile" but I do appreciate good music and sound quality. Not really any big showrooms where I live without a lengthy drive.
A couple of years ago I re-designed a built-in wall cabinet containing the HT equipment in a DIFFERENT room in my home which is best described as a "great room" onto which all rooms open into more or less. 22' ceilings, loft approx 40x40, horrible acoustics, and no great mounting points for even a 5.1 setup. Bought some HT speakers (Paradigm Signature S8, C8, ADT2) for 5.1 with DT Trinity SW. Running on a Marantz AV/MM 8003 set. Mitsu 73" DLP. Have been fairly happy, though underwhelmed with overall sound results, which I blame mostly on the room itself.

Am planning to move most of this equipment to the new rec room area, and put in more modest equipment in its place due to poor acoustics. Also adding in-ceiling surrounds on on wall surrounds so I can do 9.1 (9.1=7.1 w/front height spks?)
In order to manage this, I am considering the DHC-80.3 which can do 9.1 (AV8003 cannot), and can also do HDMI1.4a which AV8003 cannot, and the workaround is not very friendly on my existing setup. New TV going in is a laservue 75". Also picked up a used 3 ch Adcom 5503 amp on ebay (no balanced inputs).

so onto my couple of questions.
Q1 I am planning to bi-amp the front speakers. Any suggestions on which amp channels to use for this? Marantz amp is 8x140W, Adcom in 3x200W. was initially thinking using the Adcom for the L/R/C channels, but for the bi-amp portion of the L&R should I setup the Adcom's for the LF or HF part (unless folks think I should run the Adcom for the surrounds instead).

Q2 an early poster reported some issues with Laservue TV. I hadn't seen any other comments about that and was wondering if anyone has used a Laservue with this PrePro?

Q3 I am planning to use a PS3 for BD playback and digital file streaming from a connected DLNA media server (Synology). Is it recommended that PS3 do the audio decoding? My AV8003 could not do both decoding and Audessey EQ functions at same time. I have heard the Integra does not suffer this limitation. Also upscaling. I think PS3 does this, and has been previously recommended that Integra would be better for video upscaling.

Q4 Any other bugs I missed reading about in skimming the last half of this thread? Saw some post about a Starwars 6.1 DTS-MA bitstream bug but saw no responses.

Thanks

RH

I think you will find the 80.3 to be an upgrade over the 8003, particularly XT/32. That may mitigate your room problems somewhat. But, because of the large room, I think you should also consider Audyssey Pro. It will allow you to choose a target curve that may be better for a large room. Stock Audyssey does not.

The ideal solution may be a combination of passive treatments plus EQ. But, getting passive treatments right may be daunting. I do not trust just throwing off the shelf treatments at the problem. It requires more research, independent measurements and some knowledge, short of hiring an acoustics expert to do it properly, such that it yields a positive improvement. But, try just EQ first, preferably with Audyssey Pro.

I agree with others here that passive biamping, which is all the Integra can do, is likely a waste of time and money.
fitzcaraldo215 is offline  
post #2266 of 4277 Old 05-07-2012, 08:26 AM
Newbie
 
rh500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks to all.

I think the passive bi-amplification is off the table for me. Not going to do that.
Since nobody directly answered, I think that I'll probably use the used Adcom amp for the front 3 speakers, and the marantz for the remaining. I read a test/review of the marantz amp and though rated at 140Wx8 it begins to suffer in quality at just over 100W. The Adcom will likely provide better power. I am curious if there will be any time lag between the different amplifiers however.

As far as acoustic treatment, I am planning to do some through a local expert. I'll probably not get too crazy with it, but will attempt to do what is reasonably achievable.

Haven't had time to read through the 2 Audessey threads yet. What exactly is the Audessey Pro? Seems like a professional tuning setup rather than a DIY with built in mic setup. Is this something that is possible to do oneself without being an expert?

That all said, I am considering the denon 9.2 receiver with defeatable amplifier section also. Seems like it could get the job done for me just as well perhaps.

Thanks!

RH
rh500 is offline  
post #2267 of 4277 Old 05-07-2012, 10:20 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,096
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

Thanks to all.

I think the passive bi-amplification is off the table for me. Not going to do that.
Since nobody directly answered, I think that I'll probably use the used Adcom amp for the front 3 speakers, and the marantz for the remaining.

Er, http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=2260

Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

I am curious if there will be any time lag between the different amplifiers however.

Not sure what you mean, but when you run Audyssey it will take care of that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

Haven't had time to read through the 2 Audessey threads yet. What exactly is the Audessey Pro? Seems like a professional tuning setup rather than a DIY with built in mic setup. Is this something that is possible to do oneself without being an expert?

Pro is the next (and final) step in Audyssey EQ-ing. The Pro kit consists of a separate, high quality, individually calibrated mic and a software program which runs on a laptop. Pro has various benefits, not least of which is the ability to use 32 mic positions, to save and reload calibrations and to create filters which are optimised for the selected crossovers. You can read about Pro on Audyssey's website. Pro can only be used with certain AVRs and AVPs - usually the manufacturer's flagship models. You can, and many of us do, use Pro yourself without being an expert.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

That all said, I am considering the denon 9.2 receiver with defeatable amplifier section also. Seems like it could get the job done for me just as well perhaps.

Thanks!

RH


Which Denon is that - the 4311? Excellent choice for $1300 (street). Has XT32 and is also Pro-ready if you ever want to go that way.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2268 of 4277 Old 05-07-2012, 11:09 AM
Newbie
 
rh500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Oops! I missed that on the speaker/amp advice. I guess you were agreeing that the adcom was better, I think It will be too.

Love to know where're I could pick up a NEW Denon 4311ci at that $! Have to research the major differences between the two.
At any rate, thanks for the help. Looks like I can't really go wrong with either. I think I'll try to get the Audessey pro setup given my horrendous room acoustics.

Thanks!

RH
rh500 is offline  
post #2269 of 4277 Old 05-07-2012, 12:11 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,096
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

Oops! I missed that on the speaker/amp advice. I guess you were agreeing that the adcom was better, I think It will be too.

Yes, I was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

Love to know where're I could pick up a NEW Denon 4311ci at that $! Have to research the major differences between the two.

It's easy to find the 4311 for $1500. But certainly not impossible to find it at $1300 either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rh500 View Post

At any rate, thanks for the help. Looks like I can't really go wrong with either. I think I'll try to get the Audessey pro setup given my horrendous room acoustics.

Thanks!

RH

You're welcome. Make sure you get XT32 whatever unit you buy. XT32 is a big step up from XT, especially wrt to the bass EQ and its ability to handle two subs independently and properly (which XT can't). Personally, I would gain experience with XT32 before moving on to Pro. But if you think you will want to graduate to Pro at some point, then make sure you buy a Pro-ready unit. Currently, by far and away the best deal on a Pro-ready unit is the outstanding Denon 4311.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2270 of 4277 Old 05-09-2012, 07:17 AM
Newbie
 
rh500's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks!

I think I've decided upon the 4311 Denon instead of the integra. In fact I am going to get two. One I will use as preamp only, the other will be running 5.1 in my existing great room. Also, with my "new" Adcom amp, I'll have 11 channels of amplification, so I think I'm going to get some front wide speakers so I can do 11.1.

TD
rh500 is offline  
post #2271 of 4277 Old 05-11-2012, 10:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
blazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 241
I used a splitter for rear side channels to get rear back channels to get to pseudo 11 channel and it sounds quite good. Maybe in a few years they will make an 11.2 xlr preamp.

Blazar!
blazar is offline  
post #2272 of 4277 Old 05-11-2012, 02:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
blazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 241
I run my dhc 80.3 with 8 channels of Crown XLS 2000 amplifiers and these things basically ROAR with limitless POWER. Highly recommended and Vastly superior to the integra amp in terms of power. Also they are 100% inaudible class d amps at low volume.

Using the pass labs xa30.5 Class A amplifier with the dhc along with Avantgarde Duo Omega speakers.

What can i say, the experience is like being touched by God awesome. Love what Audyssey does to the stereo signal for subwoofer integration (bg radia bgx in-wall subs).

Extremely satisfied with the Integra DHC 80.3 and I feel this is the best pre-amp i have ever used. I would bet money that this thing sounds better than anything outside of dolby's or dts' experimental labs.

The avantgarde duo omega.. Well i am probably the only one using this pre-amp for these to integrate into a theater but so far the results are are simply an addiction. The equilization is sounds like melting butter on your brain. You can feel the bass in your mandible and it eminates out of your teeth. The midrange sounds better than real life... Larger than life even. I have a hard time tearing myself away from it. Hours just melt away. The midrange on the avantgardes is nothing short of being hypnotized.

Save for the addition of the paradigm sub2, i am in audio nirvana.

any other details about this setup are on another thread.

Blazar!
blazar is offline  
post #2273 of 4277 Old 05-11-2012, 07:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TheFactor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Great Northwest
Posts: 4,058
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Trying to decide between the Integra 80.3 and the Rotel RSP 1572 and would like oppinions from both owners on a satisfaction basis and bang for the buck . I have a Integra 40.2 now and love it but have always wanted a Rotel . What do you guys think in comparison ? Thanks in Advance
TheFactor is offline  
post #2274 of 4277 Old 05-12-2012, 03:38 AM
Advanced Member
 
SpotcheckBilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Colorado
Posts: 689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFactor View Post

Trying to decide between the Integra 80.3 and the Rotel RSP 1572 and would like oppinions from both owners on a satisfaction basis and bang for the buck . I have a Integra 40.2 now and love it but have always wanted a Rotel . What do you guys think in comparison ? Thanks in Advance

I have an Integra 80.1 with Audyssey MultEQ XT, and will eventually upgrade to a unit with the more advanced XT32 or similar. After dialing in my Audyssey system I don't think I'd want a HT without a good room correction system like Audyssey, ARC, or Trinnov for example.

What kind of room correction does the Rotel that you mentioned have?

Cheers,
SB
SpotcheckBilly is offline  
post #2275 of 4277 Old 05-12-2012, 03:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,096
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpotcheckBilly View Post

What kind of room correction does the Rotel that you mentioned have?

Cheers,
SB

Oh, you are a tease, SB! LOL.

Does the expression "10 band parametric equaliser" float your boat? No, I thought not. Nor mine.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2276 of 4277 Old 05-12-2012, 03:55 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,096
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFactor View Post

Trying to decide between the Integra 80.3 and the Rotel RSP 1572 and would like oppinions from both owners on a satisfaction basis and bang for the buck . I have a Integra 40.2 now and love it but have always wanted a Rotel . What do you guys think in comparison ? Thanks in Advance

Hi TheFactor,

Sorry, Spotcheck and I were having a little fun above. The serious answer is that the main problem with the Rotel unit is that it doesn't have any worthwhile form of electronic room EQ in it. SB and my view (and that of many others of course) is that Audyssey XT32 represents the current pinnacle in room EQ systems and we would never buy a unit that doesn't have it (until or if something better comes along). XT32 revolutionises the way in which speakers and rooms interact and is especially valuable when room treatments and bass traps are not possible for whatever (wife) reason. So, for that reason alone, my money would be on the 80.3. If you want to discuss Audyssey more before making your decision, pop across to the Official Audyssey Thread where you will be certain of a warm welcome.
kbarnes701 is offline  
post #2277 of 4277 Old 05-12-2012, 04:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
g_bartman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: cleveland, oh
Posts: 3,204
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked: 53
I have been into audio equipment for nearly 40 years and would say that xt32 has improved the overall sq of my system more than any other single item. There is no going back for me at this point.

g_bartman is offline  
post #2278 of 4277 Old 05-12-2012, 05:59 AM
Advanced Member
 
fitzcaraldo215's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by g_bartman View Post

I have been into audio equipment for nearly 40 years and would say that xt32 has improved the overall sq of my system more than any other single item. There is no going back for me at this point.

Agreed, except I would include Hi Rez Mch sound, including even 48k/24 bit Blu-rays. Between Mch and Audyssey, absolutely nothing has come as close to elevating my sound for music listening. No super expensive stereo I have heard, especially without EQ, gets remotely close. Together, they have changed my life like nothing else.
fitzcaraldo215 is offline  
post #2279 of 4277 Old 05-12-2012, 07:20 AM
Member
 
Beto3645's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFactor View Post

Trying to decide between the Integra 80.3 and the Rotel RSP 1572 and would like oppinions from both owners on a satisfaction basis and bang for the buck . I have a Integra 40.2 now and love it but have always wanted a Rotel . What do you guys think in comparison ? Thanks in Advance

I had an Integra 40.2 and last year I upgraded to an 80.3. Even though the 80.3 cost twice as much, the addition of Audyssey MultEQ XT32 (over XT in the 40.2) was well worth it. Other improvements: the 40.2 suffers from occasional audio dropouts when fed DSD (my dealer replaced the first unit, but the second unit exhibited the same behavior); the FM tuner is much better (not that I listen to FM much anymore, but the improvement is very noticeable); the 80.3 has XLR connectors. All in all, the 80.3 is a much better pre/pro than the 40.2. Go for it!!
Beto3645 is offline  
post #2280 of 4277 Old 05-12-2012, 07:26 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
kbarnes701's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Main Listening Positon
Posts: 17,096
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 893 Post(s)
Liked: 1450
Quote:
Originally Posted by g_bartman View Post

I have been into audio equipment for nearly 40 years and would say that xt32 has improved the overall sq of my system more than any other single item. There is no going back for me at this point.

Same here. The bass in my awkward room is literally unlistenable without XT32, and more recently, Audyssey Pro. Benefits right through the audio spectrum of course, but especially in the bass area.
kbarnes701 is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Onkyo Integra

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off