or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › 2 Channel Audio › integrated for Salk Songtowers & Rythmic sub
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

integrated for Salk Songtowers & Rythmic sub - Page 2

post #31 of 63
Quote:
Are they just clueless to the fact that people want to use subwoofers with their products?
Probably not. They almost certainly know their market better than you (or I) do. They're offering high-priced minimalist designs for people who want high-priced minimalist designs. And there are such people.
post #32 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

Probably not. They almost certainly know their market better than you (or I) do. They're offering high-priced minimalist designs for people who want high-priced minimalist designs. And there are such people.

I agree that's how they've designated their target market. But it seems out of touch. The stereotype of the audiophile who listens mainly to classical or jazz is no longer true. There are 20, 30, and 40 somethings who want extra bass beyond what a tower can deliver for hip hop, rap, electronica, etc. All-in-all, I think subwoofers are becoming more popular, too, because people have seen what they add to an HT setup.
post #33 of 63
Quote:
I agree that's how they've designated their target market. But it seems out of touch. The stereotype of the audiophile who listens mainly to classical or jazz is no longer true. There are 20, 30, and 40 somethings who want extra bass beyond what a tower can deliver for hip hop, rap, electronica, etc. All-in-all, I think subwoofers are becoming more popular, too, because people have seen what they add to an HT setup.
Right, but those people aren't seeking out 2-channel jewelry. And adding a sub out to an overpriced integrated amp isn't going to change the equation for them. They'll buy the gear that actually does what they need it to do—and they'll pay substantially less money for it, as well.
post #34 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

I agree that's how they've designated their target market. But it seems out of touch. The stereotype of the audiophile who listens mainly to classical or jazz is no longer true. There are 20, 30, and 40 somethings who want extra bass beyond what a tower can deliver for hip hop, rap, electronica, etc. All-in-all, I think subwoofers are becoming more popular, too, because people have seen what they add to an HT setup.

I agree with your reservations and conclusions, but see a more technology-driven picture. For one thing I like jazz and classical, and find that having a subwoofer enhances the listening experience for them as well.

Pure 2-channel is legacy technology. 2.1 is a strong option in the new millenium that started more than a decade ago.

Good subwoofers are readily available, and allow people a lot more flexibility in their speaker choices. They also facilitate a buy-as-you go strategy. You get a stereo speaker pair that has the upper bass, midrange and treble that you like today, and add the sub later on for even better sound without discarding what you already have and like.
post #35 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I agree with your reservations and conclusions, but see a more technology-driven picture. For one thing I like jazz and classical, and find that having a subwoofer enhances the listening experience for them as well.
Pure 2-channel is legacy technology. 2.1 is a strong option in the new millenium that started more than a decade ago.
Good subwoofers are readily available, and allow people a lot more flexibility in their speaker choices. They also facilitate a buy-as-you go strategy. You get a stereo speaker pair that has the upper bass, midrange and treble that you like today, and add the sub later on for even better sound without discarding what you already have and like.

Sorry. I didn't mean to imply that jazz and classical music listeners wouldn't like a sub too. smile.gif

I think the ID sub companies are helping, too, in putting out high quality subwoofers are more affordable prices.
post #36 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

It appears that you want to just illogically drop large amounts of money down an audio black hole for some purpose other than sound quality. Can't you find a deserving charity?

I already have an AVR and this one is going to be in a small space and aesthetics are important, so I want to go over my budget, with in a reasonable range. And I am going to take this with me to my home country and electronics are expensive there(atleast 3 times the price of USA), and I know for sure, I won't be upgrading any time soon. And I want better integration with my speakers, price/performance.

And thus far there wasn't strong recommendation.

It does makes sense for me to rethink about the budget. Let me know if I am still not being logical, here. Please help me understand, TIA.

BTW, if you have a good recommendation in my budget, I will be happy to go with that.
post #37 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackscorpio View Post

I already have an AVR and this one is going to be in a small space and aesthetics are important, so I want to go over my budget, with in a reasonable range. And I am going to take this with me to my home country and electronics are expensive there(atleast 3 times the price of USA), and I know for sure, I won't be upgrading any time soon. And I want better integration with my speakers, price/performance.
And thus far there wasn't strong recommendation.
It does makes sense for me to rethink about the budget. Let me know if I am still not being logical, here. Please help me understand, TIA.
BTW, if you have a good recommendation in my budget, I will be happy to go with that.

I don't know what AVR you have, but why not wait on the songtowers and sub. Then hook them up to the AVR. Run audyssey or whatever room correction sw the avr has. Then give it a listen and see what you think. You will be able to listen to them when they get there, and you can then evaluate that sound. You might find it is just fine and save the money, then go out and buy some new music!
post #38 of 63
If you are really dead set against anything to do with an AVR. I'd give seperates from emotiva a consideration. USP-1 stereo preamp with 2.1 base management and the UPA-200 two channel amplifier 125wpc 8 ohms, 200 4 ohms.
Total Price is 314 + 381, or roughly around 700 bucks. But me with a sub, I'd prefer an AVR to more acurately blend in a sub.
post #39 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by glangford View Post

If you are really dead set against anything to do with an AVR. I'd give seperates from emotiva a consideration. USP-1 stereo preamp with 2.1 base management and the UPA-200 two channel amplifier 125wpc 8 ohms, 200 4 ohms.
Total Price is 314 + 381, or roughly around 700 bucks. But me with a sub, I'd prefer an AVR to more acurately blend in a sub.

You might catch me running and amp from them but their preamps are garbage. They've had nothing but problems and are plagued with issues. There is a long history of their lineage if you've been around long enough to witness it.



There is only one choice for a 2.1 preamp with variable bass management - parasound 2100. Call avs store and get a good price. Get a simple amp and your good to go.


Sent by "TheNexus" from the future on SkyNet
post #40 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warpdrv View Post

You might catch me running and amp from them but their preamps are garbage. They've had nothing but problems and are plagued with issues. There is a long history of their lineage if you've been around long enough to witness it.
There is only one choice for a 2.1 preamp with variable bass management - parasound 2100. Call avs store and get a good price. Get a simple amp and your good to go.
Sent by "TheNexus" from the future on SkyNet

Thanks, I did not know that. A good data point to remember.
post #41 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackscorpio View Post

I already have an AVR and this one is going to be in a small space and aesthetics are important, so I want to go over my budget, with in a reasonable range

If you already have the AVR why not just buy the speakers and see how what you have works.

If you want to go into the import-export business, why tie that purchase to your current needs for audio? Why not find someone in your home country and work out a specific deal with them?
post #42 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

If you already have the AVR why not just buy the speakers and see how what you have works.

I got the impression that the OP was using the AVR with his separate HT system (see the first post).

However, this is great advice to try your receiver with your new setup before finalizing your decision. You may find that you want/need Audyssey and bass management to get the sound you want out of your Songtowers and Rythmik. At the very least, you might find out that Audyssey's ability to EQ the sub greatly improves the bass response, even if you don't need the crossover flexibility of a an AVR. If that is so, you'd have a choice of getting another HT receiver or buying an integrated amp and an Antimode 8033 sub equalizer. The Antimode works automatically like Audyssey with a mic for measuring at the listening position.
post #43 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

I got the impression that the OP was using the AVR with his separate HT system (see the first post).
However, this is great advice to try your receiver with your new setup before finalizing your decision. You may find that you want/need Audyssey and bass management to get the sound you want out of your Songtowers and Rythmik. At the very least, you might find out that Audyssey's ability to EQ the sub greatly improves the bass response, even if you don't need the crossover flexibility of a an AVR. If that is so, you'd have a choice of getting another HT receiver or buying an integrated amp and an Antimode 8033 sub equalizer. The Antimode works automatically like Audyssey with a mic for measuring at the listening position.

Thanks for picking up that point from first post.

This is going to be a completely different setup and I have no plans of connecting the current AVR to this setup and never will.

Looks like parasound 2100 with this amp going to be a winner. Any thoughts?
post #44 of 63
Great choice on the 2100, if you have a chance to compare it with your AVR, please report back.

I been through many AVRs but unhappy with the sound quality, also try few integrals but then adding a subwoofer is always a challenge.
(Do have NHT Cont/Power HT combo that sounds good with music too, its seem to have been properly design for the 2ch audio section.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackscorpio View Post

Thanks for picking up that point from first post.
This is going to be a completely different setup and I have no plans of connecting the current AVR to this setup and never will.
Looks like parasound 2100 with this amp going to be a winner. Any thoughts?
post #45 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackscorpio View Post

Thanks for picking up that point from first post.
This is going to be a completely different setup and I have no plans of connecting the current AVR to this setup and never will.

I can understand that. It's a pain in the ass to unhook everything from an AVR and hook it back up again. smile.gif
post #46 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post

I can understand that. It's a pain in the ass to unhook everything from an AVR and hook it back up again. smile.gif

I would have no aversion to owning 2 AVRs if they provided the best solution to the problems at hand. Fact is that I have separates (preamps and power amps) sitting on shelves in store rooms because they aren't the best solution to what I am doing right now.

My main 2.1 system has a stand-alone DAC to drive the headphones, allowing the receiver to be switched off most of the time, thus saving power and heat. Its all about the application.
post #47 of 63
What receiver you're using for your 2.1 system?
I really like receiver with Class D amp section, energy efficiency + very low heat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I would have no aversion to owning 2 AVRs if they provided the best solution to the problems at hand. Fact is that I have separates (preamps and power amps) sitting on shelves in store rooms because they aren't the best solution to what I am doing right now.
My main 2.1 system has a stand-alone DAC to drive the headphones, allowing the receiver to be switched off most of the time, thus saving power and heat. Its all about the application.
post #48 of 63
Upping your budget to around $750 brings some very good integrated amps in play on the used market. A few favorites include Primare A30.1, Unison Research Unico (Hybrid) and Exposure 2010S2. Here is a good deal on a Musical Fidelity A300, right at $750.

I've owned all these integrated except the A300 but have owned the Musical Fidelity A5. Each provides a little something different but can recommend all.

Read this regarding the use a subwoofer in a 2CH system. No need to be concerned with bass management or sub out feature, IMO. Why not feed your SW with the same signal as your speakers?
post #49 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I would have no aversion to owning 2 AVRs if they provided the best solution to the problems at hand. Fact is that I have separates (preamps and power amps) sitting on shelves in store rooms because they aren't the best solution to what I am doing right now.
My main 2.1 system has a stand-alone DAC to drive the headphones, allowing the receiver to be switched off most of the time, thus saving power and heat. Its all about the application.

What DAC do you use?
post #50 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevensctt View Post

Read this regarding the use a subwoofer in a 2CH system. No need to be concerned with bass management or sub out feature, IMO. Why not feed your SW with the same signal as your speakers?

That's a pretty weak argument against bass management, and notice that the author doesn't make a definitive claim either: ". . . you can lose some clarity. Experiment as different products work different ways."
post #51 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevensctt 
Why not feed your SW with the same signal as your speakers?

Two reasons.

(1) One of the major benefits of having a subwoofer is *not* stressing your mains with bass that should only go to the sub.

(2) Crossovers have two halves, and they generally work best when they are designed to work together and are in the same box. Having the high pass for the mains and the low pass for the sub working closely together is generally the best solution.

I've gone down both roads, and every time I've tried it, high passing the mains and low passing the sub with the same piece of equipment is the simplest and best solution.

The extra cleanliness due to offloading the mains has been the benefit that I noticed most.

One obvious benefit is that when the crossover's frequency is varied, you automatically vary both sides together, and you have one less adjustment to screw up.
post #52 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackscorpio View Post

What DAC do you use?

At this time, the DAC is a surround processor running in stereo mode. It's a Technics SHAC 500 which among other things has outstanding jitter resistance. I tested this mode of operation extensively back when I was running my www.pcavtech.com. It is a very clean piece, and was not cheap in the day. Given that its at the end of a signal chain that has a HDMI link, jitter resistance can't hurt.
post #53 of 63
I'll make another recommendation for the HK 3490. I picked up one off of Craigslist for about $265. It was brand new in the box and so far has been fantastic. It is an excellent sounding receiver that includes all the features you may need, like Phone, DAC, Optical/Digital input, Two sub outs, Preamp in/Main am out, Ipod dock (sold separately). It is an amazing amp for the money, and I can't imagine that spending near 2x that much on an integrated is going to yield anywhere near 2x the performance. Probably more like 25% more performance for 200% the cost.
post #54 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tweaked05 View Post

I'll make another recommendation for the HK 3490. I picked up one off of Craigslist for about $265. It was brand new in the box and so far has been fantastic. It is an excellent sounding receiver that includes all the features you may need, like Phone, DAC, Optical/Digital input, Two sub outs, Preamp in/Main am out, Ipod dock (sold separately). It is an amazing amp for the money, and I can't imagine that spending near 2x that much on an integrated is going to yield anywhere near 2x the performance. Probably more like 25% more performance for 200% the cost.

Are you using the HK with salks?
post #55 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackscorpio View Post

Are you using the HK with salks?

No, however I have used it with both my B&W 604 S3's and 602 S1's as well as with my Dali Lektor 3's. It has sounded amazing with all of them, but sounded the best with the 604's so far. Additionally, the B&W's are notoriously difficult to drive despite their 8 ohm, 89db rating. Most say that the sound better with more power, and so far I would have to agree. The 3490 has more than enough. Because of its Hi Current Capacity it can handle large impedance fluctuations.
post #56 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Why would this be a better choice as compared to less costly, more flexible alternatives?

Quote:
Originally Posted by smasher50 View Post

fwiw, there's a used outlaw rr 2150 tor sale on audiogon for $400 has bass management for your sub

bass management - if you have a 2.1 the amps work less if they are high passed IMHO

very few integrateds have pre-out and main in which could take advantage of the rca-in/rca-out with hpf of the rythmik amp.
post #57 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick240 View Post

bass management - if you have a 2.1 the amps work less if they are high passed IMHO
very few integrateds have pre-out and main in which could take advantage of the rca-in/rca-out with hpf of the rythmik amp.


I am sorry but I really didn't understand what you mean?
post #58 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackscorpio View Post

I am sorry but I really didn't understand what you mean?

In a 2.1 system you really don't want the speakers running full range - integration with a sub can be quite difficult (although many people run Song Tower 2.1s full range, ask over at Audio Circle for people's specific experience redface.gif).

If you have a integrated/receiver with bass management you can high pass the speakers at 80Hz (just like in your 5.1 HT system with speakers set to small) so that all of the low frequency signal goes to the sub only. This means the amp in the receiver is not working on the more difficult low frequency signals and sending them unamplified to the subwoofer.

There are only a few 2 channel systems with bass management - Parasound 2100 (what I have), Outlaw 2150 and HK990. Some people use an AVR to get bass management. Some integrateds are really like separate preamp and amp in a single chassis, so they have RCA outs from the pre-amp and RCA ins for the amp section. Most of the Rythmik amps have RCA-ins and RCA-outs; the RCA-ins come in with full signal, and the RCA-outs have had the low frequency signals removed (a high pass filter).
post #59 of 63
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick240 View Post

In a 2.1 system you really don't want the speakers running full range - integration with a sub can be quite difficult (although many people run Song Tower 2.1s full range, ask over at Audio Circle for people's specific experience redface.gif).
If you have a integrated/receiver with bass management you can high pass the speakers at 80Hz (just like in your 5.1 HT system with speakers set to small) so that all of the low frequency signal goes to the sub only. This means the amp in the receiver is not working on the more difficult low frequency signals and sending them unamplified to the subwoofer.
There are only a few 2 channel systems with bass management - Parasound 2100 (what I have), Outlaw 2150 and HK990. Some people use an AVR to get bass management. Some integrateds are really like separate preamp and amp in a single chassis, so they have RCA outs from the pre-amp and RCA ins for the amp section. Most of the Rythmik amps have RCA-ins and RCA-outs; the RCA-ins come in with full signal, and the RCA-outs have had the low frequency signals removed (a high pass filter).

I understood some and still more to understand.

please help me here, I recently bought an AVA amp used, as most recommended separates for the Salks, based on comments in this thread and over at "Salk owners thread". I will do some more reading but can you suggest me what is the best way to integrate a sub and your recommendations? Appreciate your help.
post #60 of 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackscorpio View Post

I understood some and still more to understand.
please help me here, I recently bought an AVA amp used, as most recommended separates for the Salks, based on comments in this thread and over at "Salk owners thread". I will do some more reading but can you suggest me what is the best way to integrate a sub and your recommendations? Appreciate your help.

So did you buy separates (pre-amp and amp)? Also, which Rythmik amp is on your sub?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 2 Channel Audio
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › 2 Channel Audio › integrated for Salk Songtowers & Rythmic sub