Audio quality

Are you going to be using the Denon as a prepro with the Carver amp? You didn't specify.

If it is the case that you are really looking to update the preamp/processor part of the equation, then I highly suggest the Onkyo PR-SC886 or the slightly older 885. Extremely hard to beat for the money. I seriously doubt your wife would be unhappy with the SQ.

If you intend a receiver switchout for your current separates, also consider one of the 8 series Onkyos along with the Denon. They are also hard to beat with what they offer. Some run hot though but that is largely due to the video processor which is excellent BTW.

Marantz has a few offerings as well which should pass the WAF.

Harman Kardon has always delivered superb SQ for me having owned many models through the years. They can be buggy though.

Good Luck.

Very Nice speakers!

Paul

+1 to Clarkbar's post. You can get the SC885 or SC886 at accessories4less refurbished for very good prices. I own the SC885 and find the sound quality to be excellent. The SC886 is for the most part a carbon copy of the SC885 - it'll just cost you a few more $s.

The SC885 comes up on ebay once in a while and usually goes for around $700 used or refurbished.

There is a Primare SP 31.7 available for $900 OBO at Audiogon - that would be hard to beat for superior sound quality. Don't be afraid to offer a lower price or shipping included. Also, having briefly owned one I would suggest replacing the mediocre (IMO) Carver 705X amp with the Theta Digital Intrepid also available at Audiogon for about $1,000. Together they will move your system light years ahead of where it is now.

Edit - I see now the $1,000 Intrepid has a sale pending but there is another available that I am pretty sure can be had for less than the $1,695 asking price, and with full warranty as a demo - the seller is an authorized dealer.

IMO, moving to a Denon receiver will be a downgrade; certainly an injustice to those Thiel speakers. You didn't mention budget, but there are lots of better options from which to choose. Separates from Parasound Halo, Classé, Bryston, Simaudio, Marantz Reference, Emotiva, are worth looking into.

No, most of the high end audio side is based on nothing more then opinions that can not be backed up. The denon will be fine.


What would justify the Primare SP 31.7 having "better" sound quality? Stay away from theta amps, they do not put out near what they are speced at and they have very high THD distortion numbers.


Why would it be a downgrade?

Are separates better? I am still trying to figure out why that would be the case?

Of course, receivers tend to have less power than amplifiers - but if the receiver puts out enough power without clipping, isn't that sufficient?

Hmm, I'd suggest moving to a pre-amp that has XLR balances +4 line level output and an amp that has XLR balanced inputs.

Staying with RCA - pre-outs isn't going to buy you much and probably would be a downgrade in fideleity.

If staying with RCA, maybe look into a Marantz SR700x AVR. Marantz still hase that well earned repution for music reproduction is all.

How would it be a "downgrade" in "fideleity"?

6th avenue has a pretty good price on the Denon 3808ci right now...been happy with mine for a year and a half

+1
Too many have the notion that balanced outputs are the only way to go.

If you have a long run from the preamp/AVR to the external amp of over 15' or so then the XLR connections might make sense - most will only use 3' interconnects - not much danger of introducint stray signals in runs that short.

Is there any reliable data on the SN ratio between audio over 3ft of RCA and audio over a balanced connection?

Hi. I looking for something to feed a 2ch amp myself. I am trying to decide between a multichannel pre-pro amp vs a AVR with pre-outs(like above)

I'm just curious, what would be the differences (advantage/disadvantage) for the above equipment (PR-SC886 vs Onkyo 807) for feeding a 2 ch amp?? I am guessing they would use very similar components.

thanks in advance.

The OP's Thiels are revealing speakers. I'm generalizing somewhat but in my experience and opinion, a mass market receiver is not going to have the level of transparency, resolution, etc., worthy those speakers. Also, the Thiels are 4 ohms nominal. The Denon 3808 is rated for 8 and 6 ohm operation only, and even then, the 6 ohm spec is at 1kHz versus 20Hz-20kHz, and at 0.7% THD. Denon does not even have the cojones to openly list these specs on their website. This information is listed only in the product owner's manual.

I have nothing against mass market electronics. An Onkyo AVR has formed the heart of my HT/secondary 2-channel system for several years now and sounds pretty decent. However, when it comes to serious music listening, I rely on my dedicated 2-channel system of separates. Every aspect of the sound with the latter is just more refined.


Ditto what I said above.

In what way? What would cause this huge difference in sonic capability?


Obviously he would use the pre outs to his amp.


A lot of people tend to "think" this for some reason but when it comes to measurements and DBT's it does not add up.

I think I can offer a bit of input here.... First I would ask the following questions:

1) Listening levels/habits
2) Room size layout
3) What do you plan to gain from changing your electronics?

If you are trying to get a substantial improvement the quality of your audio then I would say you are looking at the wrong pieces to change. Is there something you are not happy with sonically? If so, have you looked at room/speaker interaction? If not, then that is where I would put my time and money. Of course you may have other reasons for wanting to change electronics (support for new formats, etc.)....

FWIW, I recently purchased a Denon 3808CI to run a simple 2.1 setup that I will be running in my living room. I'd say the unit powers the speakers I've tried on it fine (I ran them full range until my sub gets here) but I do not listen at loud levels (75-85db as I live in an apartment) and the speakers I will be running aren't hard to drive. I've also powered the same speakers with other electronics and amps (100 watt monoblocks from CIAudio, 250 watt Emotiva XPA-2, and a few others) and they worked fine too... Differences? Nothing dramatic for me. The biggest changes I heard was from spending time trying to get the placement optimized and then gradually treating the room as best as I could. If I were looking for an improvement in sound I would put my money into the speakers and the room first.

It's not the balanced part. DUH
It's the +4 line level as opposed to -10 line level.

The noise floor is so low it makes a pretty dramatic difference.

Because a Denon 3xxx series component just isn't so hot any way you look at it in real use.

Similar components is not necessarily the same. Unless you had both units and cracked the boxes to compare directly, you would otherwise have to go on features and any discernible SQ differences.

For many years I ran a number of mid to high level HK receivers as pre/pros and was very happy with the SQ. Unfortunately the heat produced can be an issue as most AVRs are not designed to significantly reduce their internal power when using the pre-outs. I have a rather small listening space, so while the HK amping in itself was never lacking in power for me when running the units as receivers, my external amps had significantly better specs and yielded better Bass control and greater reserves.

My main system now has an Onkyo PR-SC885 and this box beats anything I have previously owned for detail. The surround decoding is also decidedly better. A 2 channel purist may not wish to utilize the Audyssey XT but I can say it is the finest system I have used to date.

These threads always seem to end up with some folks saying that all you need is an AVR that drives your speakers at your listening levels without distortion and anything else is just so much psycho-acoustic babble. I guess with this in mind then all you really need is to grab the best Sony receiver out there and you should be good to go.

That isn't what everyone is saying. What I am trying to get at is there are better ways to get "detail" and improvements. The funny thing about audio is that it is all relative. While the Onkyo you mention may very well be great, there will be someone in the next thread saying that it's absolute crap. There have been some that knock the SQ for 2-channel, some that say it too is a small heater, as well as the various bugs that exist in the unit. I've read them as I was going that route to pair with either monoblocks or the XPA-2 I mentioned.
I still say that most of what you hear out of your system is the speaker and how it is interacting with the room. I have no problem with people saying that certain components are better than others. What is funny is when we have no idea how the setup is laid out and WHAT the OP's intent is for changing his electronics is. Will a better designed electronic component perform better than one with more compromises? It may very well. But how much of that will you hear with your speakers and room not setup as best as you can. Every room and speaker has compromises but getting the most out of them is more than just getting a nice pre.
Back to the original concern which I believe was music... There are some that would say that no Pre-Pro or AVR is adiquate for 2-channel playback. So again it is all relative. I'd say the OP should try to audition the pieces if he is set on upgrading to see what he really gains and or loses.

Have you considered a Harman Kardon as a pre? Excellent SQ and all the inputs you'd need.

Wilbee50,

My main point was that If someone is worried about audio quality and looking to upgrade pieces, put the money on the things that have the largest impact on what we hear: the speakers and the room. I haven't heard your particular model but I have auditioned some more current models that replaced them. I have nothing against your speakers or anyone's for that matter . In my first post, I was trying to get more information for why you were looking to move to the Denon.
You have answered at least a couple of my questions by stating in your last post that a) current sound quality is not an issue (no point in recommending new speakers) and b) you are looking for more utility out of your system. I'm still not sure if you plan to go with JUST the Denon or if you are going to use it as a Pre-pro. As I said in my case: lower SPL requirements, speakers that are easy to drive, etc. it made sense for me to try the Denon. I was also looking to downsize the footprint of my electronics as my current 2.1 setup will eventually end up in my bedroom and I didn't want to have a 75lb amp in there . Your speakers, room size, and listening habits may dictate that you use external amps instead of the ones in the Denon. Price wise the Onkyo Pre (and a couple of others) and Denon AVR are essentially the same.
If you aren't looking to downsize for space, you already have an amp. At that point, I would look into the Onkyo Pre-Pro (issues aside it seems to be one of the best values out) that was mentioned, or some of the other Pre-Pros that are available or soon will be (I think Emotiva and Outlaw have one on the way). Be sure to see if any of the bugs/issues will have an impact on the way you use your system.
Another thing I would look for in a processor would be ease of support. One of the nice things about the Denon AVR is that the firmware is user upgradeable without risk of voiding the warranty. I wish this was the case with the Onkyo. It can be user updated but I think you have to send it in to the factory to not void the warranty should something go wrong.
Also will the sources for music be analog, digital, or both? See if you can read some opinions on how each unit handles playback from different sources. It sounds like whatever you choose will be a nice upgrade in terms of features, inputs, and flexibility so good luck in your search!

I find it rather pitiful that, despite the obvious interest in audio quality in this and other forum sections, we have very few on-line or published listening tests (semi-blind, semi-rational) which could provide an an initial reference. I'm not saying that extensive double-blind tests are always needed or are always meaningful. On the other hand, conclusions based on listening to component A and component B on different occasions, or were not compared when listening to the same material, and with levels properly matched, are next to useless.

Obviously, we can't expect that every component of interest will have been tested and compared in blind tests with every other component of interest. However, tests of general classes of components, such as "high-end" pre/pros compared with pre/pros from Onkyo, Denon, and the like, shouldn't be out of the question. One obvious problem seems to be that blind testing may not be very helpful or beneficial to the manufacturers and publishers with the money to pay for them.

In any event, I suggest that assertions such as the above, that high-end pre/pros are necessary to do justice to the OP's Theil speakers, should only be made if the poster has actually compared mid and high-end pre/pros in a blind, LEVEL MATCHED listening test, at the same time, listening to the same music, using the same associated components, in the same room. Obviously, it would be somewhat more convincing to know that the conclusion reached is the same as those of a majority of other listeners. Otherwise, I suggest that the poster admit that, although he sincerely thinks he's right, he really hasn't checked it out in any meaningful comparison and really doesn't know how the audio from one component would compare with that from the other.

Jim

No one ever really knows for sure what SQ is when they can see the price tag, the name brand, the specs, pretty labels on front.

Remove all that then we have a legit chance of determining what has a better SQ.

I have no 2-channel analog opinion outside of that, I like my Ipod

Well if I was in the market for a new upgrade I would definitely look at this:

http://emotiva.com/umc1.shtm ...If you can wait!

That being said I do have a 3808 and like it alot but I do have a EMO XPA-3 running my three fronts, so I'm a little biased.

Jim,

Since you quoted my reply in your post, I assume the person you refer to in the last paragraph is me.

For starters, I never wrote that only a high end processor would be worthy of the OP's speakers. I don't know why people feel the need to do this kind of thing in these discussions. I mean, you even quote the post and what you ascribe to me is not present in it. Again, if you look at the very first reply to the OP, it is mine. You might want to actually read that as well and then come back and tell me about what I said about high end necessity in any regard.

If you in fact are not referring to me, even though my post was quoted, then please disregard. I know sometimes post replies from multiple sources can get garbled. I suffer from more than my share of brainfarts.

As to the rest of your post we are in substantial agreement.

For the record, I also don't know why it is always assumed that when people post about SQ differences, it wasn't under level matched conditions. Any references I make about my history of equipment and practices,comparisons, etc. (which is what I did), is always based on this.

I know many folks are certain that if all is reduced to level matched comparisons, differences will evaporate. This has not always been my experience.

Also, I personally would dearly love to participate in any equipment shootout of any kind, DBT or no, if my schedule would allow for it. It sounds like a good deal of fun and hard work.

Penn,

It's all in the ear buds.

How are the measurements coming along?

... and the acoustics of the space.

Have you added any "treatments" for first reflections?

I would argue this point to the extent that I can't imagine a case in which a properly conducted double-blind test would not be meaningful to the participants.

My favorites, back when I was invoved with high-end audio (before CDs but after wax cylinders) were the folks insisting the DBT had to be flawed because they KNEW x was far better than y!