or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › don't seperates kill even the best receiver?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

don't seperates kill even the best receiver? - Page 5

post #121 of 196
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen Traveler View Post

I appreciate you bringing up this thread. I can't wait until you hook those badboys up and report back to us.

I hope you don't mind if I pose the question, what would be the point of diminishing returns in guitz' (or my) scenario from a power stand point (even if it is "on paper")? How many wpc do we need to get the most out of our Home theater without going overboard?

FWIW, My Denon AVR-4806 is rated at 140 wpc. The Secret's Benchmark test of it stated it output 118 wpc into 7 channels and 180 wpc into 2 channels. I understand that Separate Amps power ratings are usually accurate, but I assumed that the Benchmark number (AVR 4806) would be appropriate to compare to Separates. Am I wrong?


1 thing to think about a receiver's amps....it has the single transformer, beefy though it may be....your parts are gonna huff and puff much harder than 4 or 5 dedicated transformers when you really crank it up, thus another point of contention.....
post #122 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex solomon View Post

I have been using low end HK receiver, the AVR330 with and without my Rotel 100 w x THX amp and the improvement I heard form using the amp was a much improved bass response. However, I recently got the Onkyo 805 and I could not detect any difference using the external Rotel amp vs. the receiver by itself. NONE! I am therefore putting the amp for sale and use the proceed to upgrade my front speakers.

I can believe this. Amplifier sections in receivers have greatly improved over the last couple of years. The Amps in the new Onkyo's (805/875/905) are truly un-receiver like.
post #123 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Look, cecaa850, you're the one quoting numbers, using it as a figure of merit, as the statement directly above is yours. You point to an impedance drop to 2.8 ohms and wave that around like it's a guaranteed killer, yet you can't frame it in any sort of context. You don't or can't provide a graph from whomever that allows one to look at the impedance and phase angle as a function of frequency so that an informed or gut feeling can be established. Further, you haven't qualified what constitutes a capable amp especially in light of a 5.1 system where the sub is off-loading the requirements placed on the amp but you say things will come alive. It's to everyone's advantage when they can understand measurements and frankly, no one has seen any for the RF-7.

There's a fellow who is running Wilson X-2 Alexandria's, which are substantially less efficient using a 20 wpc, give or take tube amp. I run a pair of Whispers with an older Yamaha integrated amp. Others have noted they had no problem driving a particular Klipsch to painful levels using modest receivers.

Look, sometimes separates are the way to go if for nothing else, they offer flexibility. Sometimes they offer more. Sometimes they offer nothing more than puffery. However, unless you can qualify your particular speakers, what you listen to, how loud you prefer to listen, then suggestions are largely meaningless because they can't be framed in the proper context. It's like asking for a recommendation on a car but not telling the person you need it to tow a 6,500 boat and also carry 5 passengers.

Now, when I was younger, I dated a smokin' babe and I remember that hard-hitting bottom end. The harder I hit it, the better it was.

http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/thread/541631.aspx

One of many threads on the subject. I'm not into verbal jousting so I'll make a couple of points and this will be my last post on this subject, especially as it seems to be going OT.

I referred to stereo listening, not 5.1 where the bottom end is transferred to the sub, thus lightening the load on the amp.

The "others" you refer to as using low powered amps to drive Klipsch speakers are most likely running Heritage speakers, not Reference. Reference speakers and Heritage speakers offer vastly different characteristics as far as the load that the amp sees.

The RF-7's impedance drop is around 40 and 100 Hz.

Do you have any graphs of the smokin' babe?
post #124 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by iove View Post

I'll try and move this discussion back on track!




Bob,

What do you mean by sound quality? You're not suggesting that if I send identical signals (either via toslink or analog L/R from a DVD player) to an Denon 1707 and to a Mcintosh separates to the same speaker that it will sound identical are you? I thought I could tell the difference in the showroom when the salesman and I were A/Bing it, but maybe you're right...

Could you elaborate?

They could very well sound identical, if they're competently designed and you match the levels for your comparison. I wouldn't assume beforehand that they're different.
post #125 of 196
No pics unfortunately. She was a 5'1" firecracker with the thickest black hair down to below her ass and a body that made believers out of atheists. Those things tend to get purged when you get married.

Why anyone, even with full range speakers, would arbitrarily use an old and reactionary approach of not using a sub is beyond me. After all, the best place for low frequencies is invariably not the same location as your speakers.
post #126 of 196
[quote=Chu Gai]I run a pair of Whispers with an older Yamaha integrated amp. QUOTE]
Are you talking about those huge speakers made by Legacy?
post #127 of 196
Yes.
post #128 of 196
Cool.
post #129 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex solomon View Post

I have been using low end HK receiver, the AVR330 with and without my Rotel 100 w x THX amp and the improvement I heard form using the amp was a much improved bass response. However, I recently got the Onkyo 805 and I could not detect any difference using the external Rotel amp vs. the receiver by itself. NONE! I am therefore putting the amp for sale and use the proceed to upgrade my front speakers.

I did virtually the same thing twice; once with an HK AVR8000 and Anthem PVA5 that I was using to bi-amp my mains and then again with a Yamaha Z9 and PS Audio HCA-2's (Stereophile "A" rated by the way.) and both times I switched out the amps to go back to the receivers amps without there being a discernable difference. In fact the Z9 had a quieter noise floor than the HCA2's.
post #130 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post

I did virtually the same thing twice; once with an HK AVR8000 and Anthem PVA5 that I was using to bi-amp my mains and then again with a Yamaha Z9 and PS Audio HCA-2's (Stereophile "A" rated by the way.) and both times I switched out the amps to go back to the receivers amps without there being a discernable difference. In fact the Z9 had a quieter noise floor than the HCA2's.

Discernable difference? Does that mean there was some difference?
post #131 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuthed View Post

Discernable difference? Does that mean there was some difference?

Discernable = noticeable. "No noticeable difference"

Both the RX-Z9 and AVR8000 were statement products that neither manufacturer has yet to replicate to date. I think Yamaha might in the future, a Z10 perhaps, but HK is putting out tin cans now - I'm very disappointed with the build quality and QC of their top of the line stuff.
post #132 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnn1265 View Post

This is my experience as well. I was blown away when I heard a flagship Denon receiver driving McIntosh floor standing speakers. I did an A/B comparison with the McIntosh tube separates in the room and the difference was there but not by much... and certainly not enough for me to justify spending the extra $20k for the separates.

As for my wife, she said she couldn't tell any difference at all. Of course she doesn't have any idea the separates are supposed to sound so much better. I wonder how much of it is psychological.


I had a very similar experience. I own a Denon 5800 (the top model about 6-7 years ago) running a 5.1 Paradigm Signature speaker set-up ($11,500 total) and I wanted to take my system to the next level, so I plunked down about $9,500 on an Anthem D2 prepro and A5 amp. The amp alone weighs as much as the AVR.

Truth be told, there was so little difference in sound quality that I sold off the Anthem gear just days after buying it. In fact, even though the Anthem amp was considerably more powerful than the Denon AVR, and my speakers dip below 4 Ohms in the bass, I could not play my system any louder than before. I could reach the threshold of pain with either.

I think that most high-end AVRs and separates are so over-engineered for what they need to do these days, that the differences are mainly on paper. Sure high-end separates may have better specs and build quality, but what is really needed to reproduce an audio signal?

I will just get Denon's next flagship when it is released later this year (the 5308) to get the HDMI connections and features I want, while saving a bundle over high-end separates.
post #133 of 196
Wow! You fellow Denon Owners are making me grin ear to ear. ;-)
post #134 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonoMan View Post

And to the guy who claims to listen loud: I highly doubt you're listening at 105dB at the listening position. Highly.

I prefer to listen around -5 dB from reference levels, since my subwoofers tend to compress and distort at full reference levels, but I'll be doubling my subwoofage in the next year to ameliorate this problem. However, sometimes I'm in the mood for full reference levels (often when demoing). I've calibrated my system with a professional microphone, so yes, I am listening at these levels. I believe MKtheater, Art Sonnenburg, thebland, and a few others also listen at these levels. The few of us who chase reference levels have realized that it's only "too loud" when your speakers/electronics/room aren't designed for high SPL.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonoMan View Post

Something sounding too loud is not about distortion, it's about pressure. Period.

It's about both. The feeling of "too loud" can either come from high SPL with distortion, or just plain high(er) SPL. It's a well documented psychoacoustic response. You can do some reading on it, if you don't want to take my word for it - I don't have references on hand, though I probably should, considering how many people question me on this statement. Still, there are many people chasing reference levels who have noticed this same phenomenon and have made similar statements. I believe Mark Seaton has even mentioned this phenomenon once or twice in his postings here (or perhaps elsewhere).

One problem is inadequate mid-bass, which becomes compressed, creating an upward tilted frequency response, and adding harshness that can be unbearable at high SPLs ("too loud"). Another problem is inadequate power, which compresses output at frequencies when the impedance dips or power requirements are greater, altering the frequency response - this often increases harshness ("too loud"), due to the requirements being greater in the bass frequencies. Another problem is tweeter distortion. Typical home audio speakers are not designed with reference levels in mind, but instead, are designed to reduce beaming in the midrange - this means low crossover points. A tweeter pushed to high SPL with a low crossover point will create a lot of distortion in the presence region, creating a lot of harshness that will be quite painful to listen to ("too loud"). Finally, a fourth problem is just plain too much distortion - usually from using cheaper drivers or inadequate power. The frequency response then becomes so obnoxious at higher SPLs that many describe it as being "too loud".

The feeling of "too loud" is pain or unbearable sound after turning the volume up. If your frequency response changes as you turn up the volume, creating a painful frequency response, is it really too loud? Or is it just that your speakers/room/electronics are straining too much? Or... it could just be too loud, and the pain you feel is your hearing being lost. The only way to know is to listen to a system capable of clean high SPL - concerts *ahem*. How many people go to concerts where the peak SPL level reaches above reference levels? Many. Is it too loud? No. Why? It's reproduced cleanly with little or no distortion.
post #135 of 196
It's really a case by case basis but unless you've got some idea of what the speaker is doing over its frequency range, it can become a hit or miss proposisition here and vendors aren't doing anywhere near enough to help consumers out. It's not like they can't make it simple enough for people to understand. They can. There's a part of me that says this is entirely intentional. After all, if you dick around long enough trying this receiver, that one, this amp, this prepro, well you're past the point where you can return the speaker. Manufacturer wins. Dealer wins. And you?
post #136 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post

Not bogus at all. Listening distance is ~12 ft = ~4 meters = 12 db + 105 db = 117 dB. Given the highest sensitivity speakers on the market have a real sensitivity of around 91 dB... add in some very limited room gain, maybe 1-2 dB, and you need 24-25 dB gain to reach 117 dB. That's about 300 watts. Remember... this is the power requirements for reference levels with the most sensitive and easiest to drive speakers on the market.

Your math appears to only take into account one speaker playing at reference level. For each speaker you add, you gain another 3dB. Plus, with a listening distance of 12 feet, that is only 9 feet in addition to the 3 feet used to determine the 1 watt sensitivity rating. (The first three feet is "free".)

Lets assume that most of the output during movie playback is coming from the front three speakers (L/C/R). I make this assumption because the surround channels rarely contribute much to the dynamic peaks in a soundtrack (in my experience).

Working under that assumption, heres how I see it:

Using a speaker with a 91dB sensitivity rating, you gain 6dB by adding two more speakers for a total of 97dB for 1 watt at 1 meter. Subtract 9dB for a 12 foot listening distance and you have 88dB to start with for just 1 watt of power. We need just 17dB of gain to reach a reference level of 105dB. You can attian that with just under 65 watts of power. And that is only taking into account the front three speakers! Bump that up to five speakers (assuming they are all being feed equal signal strength) and you only need around 15 watts!

Now lets assume you have a more conventional speaker sensitivity rating of 87dB. It would take about 128 watts to reach 105dB with three speakers and 32 watts with five speakers.

Many upper-end AVRs can easily supply this much power.
post #137 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifisponge View Post

Your math appears to only take into account one speaker playing at reference level. For each speaker you add, you gain another 3dB. Plus, with a listening distance of 12 feet, that is only 9 feet in addition to the 3 feet used to determine the 1 watt sensitivity rating. (The first three feet is "free".)

No, when you add a speaker, you don't gain 3 dB. You gain 3 dB each time you double the number of speakers. Regardless, reference levels dictate 105 dB at the listening position per main channel, and 115 dB at the listening position for the LFE channel. The result is about 120 dB at the listening position. Or, about 112 dB at the listening position for all 5 main channels. If you crossover your mains to your subwoofer, your subwoofer must be capable of 120 dB peaks. Decibels are a logarithmic function, hence you can't just add. Use the Peak SPL calculator, posted above, if you don't believe me.

Reference levels without compression produce some seriously realistic and scary dynamics. It is something that everyone that is passionate about movies should experience at least once in their life. It's truly an impressive and emotional experience - I can't get enough of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peak SPL Calculator View Post

Most moderate HT systems are capable of 102 to 107 dB peaks at a decent (10+ feet) listening position, at these peak levels the normal dialog is going to be at least 85-90dB, within the range where permanent hearing loss can occur.

The above is wrong. Normal dialog levels (for most movies) are normalized to be around 75 dB when a system is calibrated for and listened at reference levels. There is a 30 dB headroom for special effects to achieve a dynamic impact that the sound engineer designs for. However, the average volume throughout the entire movie is generally around 85 dB.
post #138 of 196
I never listen to Shirley Temple movies at those volumes!
post #139 of 196
a better question to ask is what will your amp or rec do at 4ohm, 3ohm and 2ohm and
what is the signal to noise ratio and what is the dynamic headroom these specs will tell
me a lot before i set down to listen.
post #140 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post

No, when you add a speaker, you don't gain 3 dB. You gain 3 dB each time you double the number of speakers. Regardless, reference levels dictate 105 dB at the listening position per main channel, and 115 dB at the listening position for the LFE channel. The result is about 120 dB at the listening position. Or, about 112 dB at the listening position for all 5 main channels. If you crossover your mains to your subwoofer, your subwoofer must be capable of 120 dB peaks. Decibels are a logarithmic function, hence you can't just add. Use the Peak SPL calculator, posted above, if you don't believe me.

I stand corrected. However, I know that I would never listen to reference level now that I know it means 105dB per channel and 112dB for all 5 channels! I pulled out my SPL meter a little while back and the loudest I could tolerate was 105db with all channels driven. This is in a 2700 cu ft room, sitting 12 feet from the speakers, all of which are speced to be capable of meeting THX requirements.
post #141 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

No pics unfortunately. She was a 5'1" firecracker with the thickest black hair down to below her ass and a body that made believers out of atheists. Those things tend to get purged when you get married.

Why anyone, even with full range speakers, would arbitrarily use an old and reactionary approach of not using a sub is beyond me. After all, the best place for low frequencies is invariably not the same location as your speakers.

I know a girl That fits that same description But She's a Blonde! (them is good ones) and she can go down To 20 Hz with Ease!

I just wouldnt tell her that!

I've never been anything but freinds with a girl so I don't know about the hard hitting bottom End! But I will in College I hope.
post #142 of 196
Quote:


I pulled out my SPL meter a little while back and the loudest I could tolerate was 105db with all channels driven. This is in a 2700 cu ft room, sitting 12 feet from the speakers, all of which are speced to be capable of meeting THX requirements.

If you're using a Radio Shack SPL meter, it's probably a bit lower than 105 dB (C-weighting tends to over measure). THX, even Ultra2, doesn't dictate how good equipment will sound high SPL, just whether or not it can achieve high SPL. Mind sharing a bit about your equipment? Maybe I can make a suggestion for your next upgrade that would allow you to enjoy higher SPL, or at least enjoy it at 105 dB (as opposed to tolerating).
post #143 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifisponge View Post

I had a very similar experience. I own a Denon 5800 (the top model about 6-7 years ago) running a 5.1 Paradigm Signature speaker set-up ($11,500 total) and I wanted to take my system to the next level, so I plunked down about $9,500 on an Anthem D2 prepro and A5 amp. The amp alone weighs as much as the AVR.

Truth be told, there was so little difference in sound quality that I sold off the Anthem gear just days after buying it. In fact, even though the Anthem amp was considerably more powerful than the Denon AVR, and my speakers dip below 4 Ohms in the bass, I could not play my system any louder than before. I could reach the threshold of pain with either.

I think that most high-end AVRs and separates are so over-engineered for what they need to do these days, that the differences are mainly on paper. Sure high-end separates may have better specs and build quality, but what is really needed to reproduce an audio signal?

I will just get Denon's next flagship when it is released later this year (the 5308) to get the HDMI connections and features I want, while saving a bundle over high-end separates.

Nice speaker setup there!

Yeah I agree with you. I purchased an Anthem AV7 amp for use with my Studio 100 based 7.1 HT setup... if I do decide to pair that with the Integra 9.8 pre/pro they will come in at right around the price of a flagship Denon. I'd expect them to be about equal as far as results. I think the high-end seperates cater to people with extraordinary needs (applications) and obsessed audio enthusiasts that need that psychological performance boost.

However, I wouldn't criticize someone for spending bug bucks on seperates (maybe they can hear a difference where I may not) but to me it would be wasted money.
post #144 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post

If you're using a Radio Shack SPL meter, it's probably a bit lower than 105 dB (C-weighting tends to over measure). THX, even Ultra2, doesn't dictate how good equipment will sound high SPL, just whether or not it can achieve high SPL. Mind sharing a bit about your equipment? Maybe I can make a suggestion for your next upgrade that would allow you to enjoy higher SPL, or at least enjoy it at 105 dB (as opposed to tolerating).

I'd welcome any advice you could offer that would allow me to acheive higher listening levels.

My equipment is as follows:
L/R Speakers - Paradigm Signature S4's (1" tweet, 7" mid/woof, 7"woof) 87dB
Center - Paradigm Signature C3 (1" tweet, 4" mid, 2 X 7" woofs) 87 dB
Surrounds - Paradigm Signature ADPs (2 X 1" tweets, 2 X 4" mids, 8" woof) 85 dB
Sub - Velodyne DD15 THX (15" driver with 1250 watt RMS amp)

Here's a review with measurements if you think it would help.

http://ultimateavmag.com/speakersyst...gm/index4.html

Manufacturers specs:
http://paradigm.com/en/reference/spe...-2-17.paradigm
http://paradigm.com/en/reference/spe...-3-17.paradigm
http://paradigm.com/en/reference/spe...-4-17.paradigm

AVR is a Denon 5800. 143 watts per channel, six channels driven, as tested by Ultimate AV Mag.

Measurements:
http://ultimateavmag.com/avreceivers/12/index5.html

BTW - my room is untreated and never will be. I plan to have a dedicated AV room in our next house, but just an average living room is all I have to work with at this point.

Oh, and I don't know if you caught my earlier post, but at one point I bought a 180 wpc Anthem A5, 5-channel amp, hoping that it would make my system sound less strained and bright at high levels, but I heard no difference in that regard.
post #145 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnn1265 View Post

Nice speaker setup there!

Yeah I agree with you. I purchased an Anthem AV7 amp for use with my Studio 100 based 7.1 HT setup... if I do decide to pair that with the Integra 9.8 pre/pro they will come in at right around the price of a flagship Denon. I'd expect them to be about equal as far as results. I think the high-end seperates cater to people with extraordinary needs (applications) and obsessed audio enthusiasts that need that psychological performance boost.

However, I wouldn't criticize someone for spending bug bucks on seperates (maybe they can hear a difference where I may not) but to me it would be wasted money.

Thanks for the compliment. The sigs are certainly the best sounding speakers I have ever owned, and I've gone through quite a few.

KEF Reference speakers - very detailed but unbearabley bright at anything even slightly over moderate levels.

Martin Logans - great transparency but the sounded strained and congested at moderately loud levels and they are too directional.

Vienna Accoustics - great sounding speaker, with a laid back sound yet detailed sound that I really liked, but the woofs would bottom out before reaching the loudest levels I like.

Dynaudio - nice speakers with very powerful and articulate bass, but just a bit too forward through the mids, which also made them hard to listen to at higher volumes.

Aerial Accosutics - nothing offensive about these, but they just sounded lifeless to me.

There may be more, but I think that covers the big players.
post #146 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifisponge View Post

BTW - my room is untreated and never will be. I plan to have a dedicated AV room in our next house, but just an average living room is all I have to work with at this point.

Oh, and I don't know if you caught my earlier post, but at one point I bought a 180 wpc Anthem A5, 5-channel amp, hoping that it would make my system sound less strained and bright at high levels, but I heard no difference in that regard.

The straining and brightness you are hearing are most likely the room. Your room arguably has the most effect on what you hear. It kills me when people will throw thousands of dollars on equipment and nothing on the environment that the equipment resides. BTW, I was one of those "people" for years. You can find some tasteful panels and treat your first reflection points and make a huge (noticeable) difference in your system. Many people describe room treatments as having the same effect as jumping up a grade in speakers.
post #147 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifisponge View Post

Thanks for the compliment. The sigs are certainly the best sounding speakers I have ever owned, and I've gone through quite a few.

KEF Reference speakers - very detailed but unbearabley bright at anything even slightly over moderate levels.

Martin Logans - great transparency but the sounded strained and congested at moderately loud levels and they are too directional.

Vienna Accoustics - great sounding speaker, with a laid back sound yet detailed sound that I really liked, but the woofs would bottom out before reaching the loudest levels I like.

Dynaudio - nice speakers with very powerful and articulate bass, but just a bit too forward through the mids, which also made them hard to listen to at higher volumes.

Aerial Accosutics - nothing offensive about these, but they just sounded lifeless to me.

There may be more, but I think that covers the big players.

If you've described these speaker characteristics as having listened to them in your house, then you've made my point for me.
post #148 of 196
Yup, enjoy that clean sound at 105 dB. Do it for a while. With good amps.

post #149 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by cecaa850 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by hifisponge View Post

BTW - my room is untreated and never will be. I plan to have a dedicated AV room in our next house, but just an average living room is all I have to work with at this point.

Oh, and I don't know if you caught my earlier post, but at one point I bought a 180 wpc Anthem A5, 5-channel amp, hoping that it would make my system sound less strained and bright at high levels, but I heard no difference in that regard.

The straining and brightness you are hearing are most likely the room. Your room arguably has the most effect on what you hear. It kills me when people will throw thousands of dollars on equipment and nothing on the environment that the equipment resides. BTW, I was one of those "people" for years. You can find some tasteful panels and treat your first reflection points and make a huge (noticeable) difference in your system. Many people describe room treatments as having the same effect as jumping up a grade in speakers.

The room is definately something you could treat, and there may be some real improvement there. But, it's hard to say if it's the bottleneck without looking at the absorption characteristics of the natural room state. However, I think you might find some decent improvement by getting speakers that are better built for high SPL, specifically something with a more ideal crossover. The S4s have a 3rd order tweeter crossover at 1.9khz, when pushed, the tweeter may be heavily distorting (the benefit is better dispersion), especially when pushed higher than the rest of the range:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimate AV View Post

I had some concerns with what I ultimately perceived as a certain uptilted tonal quality during the review period, bear in mind that the abundance of hard surfaces in my listening room would easily exacerbate the situation.
...
The on-axis average shows a distinctly elevated response from about 2.4kHz to just over 15kHz

Off axis listening may help with this elevated response, but it won't do anything about the increased distortion. Of course, if you enjoy your speakers a lot, for music, you may not wish to change them out for a more impressive home theater experience. Finally, at 140 watts/channel, you're pretty close to the limits of your amplifier with 105 dB in-room, all speakers firing, so more power may help, but I'm not sure how well the tweeter will handle it, even if it is loaded in a mini-waveguide.

Just thought I'd point this out:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimate AV View Post

The Paradigm's treble range was more extended than the Dynaudio's and just a tad more pronounced in the presence region, but that's never a liability with home theater.

These are the types of things you need to pick out of a review (pretty much every sentence that has a 'but' or 'however' in it). This pronounced presence region will become a liability with home theater if you turn the volume up.
post #150 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond Leggs View Post

I know a girl That fits that same description But She's a Blonde! (them is good ones) and she can go down To 20 Hz with Ease!

Flat?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › don't seperates kill even the best receiver?