Official JTR speaker thread - Page 1334 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 11623Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #39991 of 40384 Old 04-04-2020, 08:46 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bear123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: PA
Posts: 7,655
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3555 Post(s)
Liked: 5473
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethos4Lyfe View Post
Thanks for the info - if I don't notice a big differnce in adding the cherry (I'll need the 2 channels anyways), I was thinking of Nord of something that uses Hypex.

As far as 2 channel goes, I heard @muscles system as blown away by how loud it goes. We have the same speakers, but his Mac 2600 pre as significantly louder than his Marantz for 2 channel. I don't usually get to listen that that, but I think there was an audible difference. I'm sure he will chime in here and speak to that effect - I have always been under the belief that a dedicated 2 channel pre will make my 2 channel sound better. I don't really get to a/b in my space, so I just have to go buy what I'm told by people smarter than I! haha
What you are saying makes sense...extra power will definitely make a very audible difference if you are listening loud enough to use it. My point is that adding something like a Cherry or Nord 3 channel for your LCR fed by the Marantz will give you all the performance benefit that you can get since the signal from your Marantz will be just as clean or cleaner than the signal either of those amps sends to the speakers. A separate 2 channel pre will make no audible difference...the Marantz is already completely audibly transparent. It's only the extra power that will matter.

Also, the 2 channel pre will reduce sound quality substantially as you will lose low frequency eq and subwoofer integration. Both are essential for optimal sound quality.

Be cautious of outdated 2.0 channel mystical beliefs.
bear123 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #39992 of 40384 Old 04-04-2020, 09:26 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 582
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123 View Post
What you are saying makes sense...extra power will definitely make a very audible difference if you are listening loud enough to use it. My point is that adding something like a Cherry or Nord 3 channel for your LCR fed by the Marantz will give you all the performance benefit that you can get since the signal from your Marantz will be just as clean or cleaner than the signal either of those amps sends to the speakers. A separate 2 channel pre will make no audible difference...the Marantz is already completely audibly transparent. It's only the extra power that will matter.

Also, the 2 channel pre will reduce sound quality substantially as you will lose low frequency eq and subwoofer integration. Both are essential for optimal sound quality.

Be cautious of outdated 2.0 channel mystical beliefs.
interesting, thanks for the note. i had been considering then athem str, which includes ARC and I can run my subs through it. ive been told/read many times that ARC is much better than Audyssey, especially in the bass department. and yeah, i dont buy into alot of audio world beliefs, but have just been curious about benefits of 2 channel listening w/ a preamp

Speakers: JTR 212RTs - JTR 210RM - JTR 110HTs (x4)
Subwoofer: Dual Rythmik G25HPSE
Audio Gear: Marantz 8805 - Krell Chorus 5200 + D-Sonic M3a-800S - BS Node 2i - Oppo 203
TV: LG 65 OLED
Bedroom: ML Ethos - ML Motion 30 - Samsung Q8 LED
Ethos4Lyfe is offline  
post #39993 of 40384 Old 04-04-2020, 10:16 AM
Advanced Member
 
muscles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 950 Post(s)
Liked: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethos4Lyfe View Post
Thanks for the info - if I don't notice a big differnce in adding the cherry (I'll need the 2 channels anyways), I was thinking of Nord of something that uses Hypex.

As far as 2 channel goes, I heard @muscles system as blown away by how loud it goes. We have the same speakers, but his Mac 2600 pre as significantly louder than his Marantz for 2 channel. I don't usually get to listen that that, but I think there was an audible difference. I'm sure he will chime in here and speak to that effect - I have always been under the belief that a dedicated 2 channel pre will make my 2 channel sound better. I don't really get to a/b in my space, so I just have to go buy what I'm told by people smarter than I! haha

There is more to it than distortion. I have pretty much the top of the line AVR from Marantz and it sounds like a crappy bluetooth speaker in comparison to music on the McIntosh. The dealer was so sure I would like it he let me borrow the McIntosh for 2 weeks before purchase. I listened to it for about 4 hours and called him and told him to charge my card. I am sure the tube pre and DAC and output voltage have a lot to do with it. The difference from Marantz (SR8012) and the McIntosh for music so damn dramatic that I cannot put it into words. Music through the C2600 is the most impressive thing on my system and really makes the JTR's shine, movies don't get nearly as loud or encompassing as music. 100% a good pre for music is recommended if you are a critical listener.



Greg
shivaji and feistyacorn like this.

Subwoofers: Dual JTR RS1's - SB13 Ultra (bedroom)
Speakers: 2xJTR Noesis 212RT 1 210RM - KEF LS50W
Audio:McIntosh C2600 Pre - Marantz SR-8012 -Dual McIntosh 601's - PS Audio M700 - McIntosh MT5 - GoldNotePH10 - Oppo UDP-205 - BlueSound Node 2
TV: Samsung 75" Q9FN - Sony 75" 940D
muscles is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #39994 of 40384 Old 04-04-2020, 12:23 PM
Member
 
mechtheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 166
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by muscles View Post
There is more to it than distortion. I have pretty much the top of the line AVR from Marantz and it sounds like a crappy bluetooth speaker in comparison to music on the McIntosh. The dealer was so sure I would like it he let me borrow the McIntosh for 2 weeks before purchase. I listened to it for about 4 hours and called him and told him to charge my card. I am sure the tube pre and DAC and output voltage have a lot to do with it. The difference from Marantz (SR8012) and the McIntosh for music so damn dramatic that I cannot put it into words. Music through the C2600 is the most impressive thing on my system and really makes the JTR's shine, movies don't get nearly as loud or encompassing as music. 100% a good pre for music is recommended if you are a critical listener.



Greg
To me this has to mean there is something wrong with your Marantz. I'm not trying to start an endless futile argument, but you're not claiming some laughable ethereal Sterophile-like BS, what you're implying shouldn't be possible with any competently designed amp.
N8DOGG likes this.
mechtheist is offline  
post #39995 of 40384 Old 04-04-2020, 12:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
muscles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 950 Post(s)
Liked: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechtheist View Post
To me this has to mean there is something wrong with your Marantz. I'm not trying to start an endless futile argument, but you're not claiming some laughable ethereal Sterophile-like BS, what you're implying shouldn't be possible with any competently designed amp.

Its not an amp.



AVR's don't put any effort or money into 2 channel listening.



Greg
kyzer soze and feistyacorn like this.

Subwoofers: Dual JTR RS1's - SB13 Ultra (bedroom)
Speakers: 2xJTR Noesis 212RT 1 210RM - KEF LS50W
Audio:McIntosh C2600 Pre - Marantz SR-8012 -Dual McIntosh 601's - PS Audio M700 - McIntosh MT5 - GoldNotePH10 - Oppo UDP-205 - BlueSound Node 2
TV: Samsung 75" Q9FN - Sony 75" 940D
muscles is offline  
post #39996 of 40384 Old 04-04-2020, 02:15 PM
Member
 
mechtheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 166
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by muscles View Post
Its not an amp.



AVR's don't put any effort or money into 2 channel listening.



Greg
It's an amp. If you're talking about non-processed audio, then it's the same thing, electronics just don't have sound assuming basic competence, meaning their specs are typical of good design and nothing is driven beyond linearity. It's measurable, so if it meets spec, it isn't going to be audible and certainly not blatant. These concerns were laid to rest more than 25 years ago and repeatedly proven. I've had 3 AVRs, a mid-high end Yamaha, a high-end Yamaha and high-end Denon, they all had a 'direct' and 'pure' setting that was likely overkill but at least evidences real effort for 2-channel audio. If there is a significant difference in the sound reproduced by your electronics, there is something wrong with one of them, or both, or, there is some other anomaly.
jamiebosco likes this.
mechtheist is offline  
post #39997 of 40384 Old 04-04-2020, 02:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
muscles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 950 Post(s)
Liked: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechtheist View Post
It's an amp. If you're talking about non-processed audio, then it's the same thing, electronics just don't have sound assuming basic competence, meaning their specs are typical of good design and nothing is driven beyond linearity. It's measurable, so if it meets spec, it isn't going to be audible and certainly not blatant. These concerns were laid to rest more than 25 years ago and repeatedly proven. I've had 3 AVRs, a mid-high end Yamaha, a high-end Yamaha and high-end Denon, they all had a 'direct' and 'pure' setting that was likely overkill but at least evidences real effort for 2-channel audio. If there is a significant difference in the sound reproduced by your electronics, there is something wrong with one of them, or both, or, there is some other anomaly.
I am not following what it is or what it is you are trying to say? If you think an AVR can compete with a high end separate processor...it can't. I have had more people come to my house than I can count for demos, 100% of them have their jaws drop when I play music through the Mac 2600. You don't think the DAC matters either? I can tell you are one of those guys that thinks an amp is an amp, and I am not trying to change your mind. Check out the differences in phono Preamps if you don't think there is a difference, it is staggering the difference a high end unit will make. I am not fooled by audiophile BS either, I traded 18k speakers for JTR's because I heard a difference. I am not brand loyal whatsoever and I am a serious tinkerer. I won't even review a subwoofer or give my final thoughts unless its been at least 6 weeks.

The funny thing is..its so easy to AB test these, once you've heard a really good separate you can't listen to music through an AVR. If you think quality components don't matter, hook up a record player to your AVR's phono input and listen....its awful!!! Then try a gold note PH10, it will come through louder and cleaner than Tidal MQA given you have a nice turntable and cartridge.

Greg

Subwoofers: Dual JTR RS1's - SB13 Ultra (bedroom)
Speakers: 2xJTR Noesis 212RT 1 210RM - KEF LS50W
Audio:McIntosh C2600 Pre - Marantz SR-8012 -Dual McIntosh 601's - PS Audio M700 - McIntosh MT5 - GoldNotePH10 - Oppo UDP-205 - BlueSound Node 2
TV: Samsung 75" Q9FN - Sony 75" 940D
muscles is offline  
post #39998 of 40384 Old 04-04-2020, 11:38 PM
Member
 
mechtheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 166
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by muscles View Post
I am not following what it is or what it is you are trying to say? If you think an AVR can compete with a high end separate processor...it can't. I have had more people come to my house than I can count for demos, 100% of them have their jaws drop when I play music through the Mac 2600. You don't think the DAC matters either? I can tell you are one of those guys that thinks an amp is an amp, and I am not trying to change your mind. Check out the differences in phono Preamps if you don't think there is a difference, it is staggering the difference a high end unit will make. I am not fooled by audiophile BS either, I traded 18k speakers for JTR's because I heard a difference. I am not brand loyal whatsoever and I am a serious tinkerer. I won't even review a subwoofer or give my final thoughts unless its been at least 6 weeks.

The funny thing is..its so easy to AB test these, once you've heard a really good separate you can't listen to music through an AVR. If you think quality components don't matter, hook up a record player to your AVR's phono input and listen....its awful!!! Then try a gold note PH10, it will come through louder and cleaner than Tidal MQA given you have a nice turntable and cartridge.

Greg
As I said, I don't want to get into a futile argument but I will simply explain my position with more detail and quote from a great source to support my claims.


It is easy to do an AB test, it isn't so easy to do a properly setup double-blind AB test, if it's not double-blind, it tells you nothing. That has been understood since the 1930's or 40's I think, surely by the 50's. There are countless examples of confidently claimed pronounced differences in sound that disappear when subjected to test, it's no different than how wine prices are perfectly correlated with quality until they're compared in double-blind tests when suddenly some cheap wines become preferred over the hyper-expensive. Perception is an incredibly fascinating thing that is driven more by expectations of the mind than sensory inputs. That is key, it's fundamental, if you don't understand that, you can't understand much of human perception. One need only think for a second what it implies that double blind testing is required to understand how easily and how profoundly we fool ourselves.



One reason to think the inaudibility of electronics should be the case is audio simply isn't hard, they've understood the basics for decades. It's likely almost harder to do it badly than well enough. I used to read a fantastic audio mag back in the 80's and 90's, The Audio Critic edited by Peter Aczel, below is from an article from its Spring through Fall 1991 issue authored by the editor [sorry for any errors, I had to OCR this and may have missed some]:


Quote:
Basic Issues of Equipment Reviewing and Critical Listening: Our Present Stance


For the benefit of new readers, as well as longtime readers who may
need to be reminded, here are some of the fimdamental viewpoints that
divide responsible audio reviewers from the tweaks and cultists.


If you read a lot of audio publications and converse
with a lot of audio people, as I do, you know that the line
has been drawn between two opposing factions. The audio
world is at loggerheads as never before. The so-called
objectivists and subjectivists have evolved highly divergent
belief systems; each side shows a basic lack of respect for
the other; accusations of self-serving politics and defective
hearing abound; the general tone is uncomfortably confron-
tational. In the heat of the arguments, science and logic are
forgotten, methods and credentials are left unquestioned,
obfirscation is rampant, and wimpy suggestions to the effect
that the truth lies in between are slipped in sideways by the
knee-jerk conciliators. This is a good time, indeed an obvi-
ous time, for The Audio Critic to restate its position on the
issues that constitute the basis of the ongoing debate.



What sounds different?
To the dyed-in-the—wool subjectivists, everything
sounds different. One of my favorite dirty tricks is to go
through the motions of conducting a single-blind A/B am-
plifier or preamplifier comparison which is actually an A/A
comparison because I only pretend to switch to B but never
do. Lo and behold, some of the audiophiles in attendance
claim to hear major differences in front-to-back depth, im-
aging, "air," etc., and are quite certain they can pick out A
and B blind. A cruel experiment but educational. Thus I
have no fear that such audiophiles will argue with me when
I list the various elements in the audio chain that really do
sound different. To wit:
Listening rooms—and how! Loudspeaker systems,
even the relatively accurate ones. Surround-sound and other
environment processors, obviously. Phono cartridges and
tonearms, if you still care. Microphones—very important
and all very different. Recording studios and concert halls,
for the same reasons as listening rooms, only more so. And
finally, the widely differing recording techniques of differ-
ent record companies, producers, and engineers—even when
they use the same microphones in the same hall. What else
sounds different‘? That's just about all I can think of (No,
I'm not forgetting wires and cables. They constitute a very
special case, subject to serious misrepresentations, and are
treated separately in this issue.)

What sounds the same?
Here we come to highly divisive subject matter, the
major source of hostilities and character assassinations in
the high-end audio press, but there's no reason for rational
audiophiles to doubt what has been demonstrated over and
over again in properly conducted double-blind listening
tests. Power amplifiers, preamplifiers, CD players, D/A pro-
cessors, DAT recorders, FM tuners, and turntables sound
the same—with certain very important qualifications.
What are these qualifications? Power amplifiers must
have high input impedance, low output impedance, no fre-
quency-response anomalies, and be at all times operated
within their voltage and current capabilities in order to
sound the same. Preamplifiers must likewise be without
equalization errors, other fiequency-response anomalies,
and overload problems in order to sound the same. Digital
audio equipment must be up to the present-day level of con-
verter technology and, analogwise, meet the aforementioned
preamplifier qualifications in order to sound the same. FM
tuners will sound the same only when receiving a strong
signal without multipath. Turntables will sound the same
only if adequately isolated, damped, and free from drive ir-
regularities. Without these qualifications all arguments on
the subject are meaningless.
In general, any two components A and B that can be
alternately switched into and out of an audio system in an
AB test will sound the same if (1) their linear characteris-

tics are essentially identical and (2) their nonlinear charac-
teristics are below the threshold of audibility. If you think
about that statement for a minute, you begin to realize that
it‘s a truism rather than a heresy; the trouble is that the
tweaks and cultists often think for less than a minute.

...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	trx-cap -- 4_5_2020 , 00_36_52 - The_Audio_Critic_16_r (Secured) - PDF-XChange Editor.jpg
Views:	20
Size:	51.6 KB
ID:	2705894  
chucky7, tebling and jamiebosco like this.
mechtheist is offline  
post #39999 of 40384 Old 04-04-2020, 11:53 PM
Advanced Member
 
muscles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 950 Post(s)
Liked: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechtheist View Post
As I said, I don't want to get into a futile argument but I will simply explain my position with more detail and quote from a great source to support my claims.


It is easy to do an AB test, it isn't so easy to do a properly setup double-blind AB test, if it's not double-blind, it tells you nothing. That has been understood since the 1930's or 40's I think, surely by the 50's. There are countless examples of confidently claimed pronounced differences in sound that disappear when subjected to test, it's no different than how wine prices are perfectly correlated with quality until they're compared in double-blind tests when suddenly some cheap wines become preferred over the hyper-expensive. Perception is an incredibly fascinating thing that is driven more by expectations of the mind than sensory inputs. That is key, it's fundamental, if you don't understand that, you can't understand much of human perception. One need only think for a second what it implies that double blind testing is required to understand how easily and how profoundly we fool ourselves.



One reason to think the inaudibility of electronics should be the case is audio simply isn't hard, they've understood the basics for decades. It's likely almost harder to do it badly than well enough. I used to read a fantastic audio mag back in the 80's and 90's, The Audio Critic edited by Peter Aczel, below is from an article from its Spring through Fall 1991 issue authored by the editor [sorry for any errors, I had to OCR this and may have missed some]:
Any idea how far DAC's have come since 1991? Subwoofer technology? Speakers? I won't waste any more time on here because I actually own the equipment I am talking about.

Let's try to stay on topic and talk about JTR, I will waste no more time on this nonsense. I am in a quarantine and I don't have time for this, this is how annoying this is.

Greg
llang269 and feistyacorn like this.

Subwoofers: Dual JTR RS1's - SB13 Ultra (bedroom)
Speakers: 2xJTR Noesis 212RT 1 210RM - KEF LS50W
Audio:McIntosh C2600 Pre - Marantz SR-8012 -Dual McIntosh 601's - PS Audio M700 - McIntosh MT5 - GoldNotePH10 - Oppo UDP-205 - BlueSound Node 2
TV: Samsung 75" Q9FN - Sony 75" 940D
muscles is offline  
post #40000 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 02:26 AM
Member
 
mechtheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 166
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 96
What is linear and what is non-linear haven't changed.


If you don't accept the need for double-blind testing, you don't accept the scientific method or maybe you think you're a super-human? That's what you are claiming if you think double-blind testing nonsense--that you're better than us mere humans. It's as simple as that and not at all a matter of contention amongst scientists or even audio engineers at the AES.
mechtheist is offline  
post #40001 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 09:25 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
N8DOGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,774
Mentioned: 58 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1494 Post(s)
Liked: 1760
Well, I'm 100% with mechtheist on the double blind. If you don't double blind, it's completely useless to do anything else. I've been to lots of audio meets where the perception of better or worse was completely gone after we did blind testing. It was about 15 years ago when I first experienced it and what got me on my path to audio.
We even had numerous times where we would flat out lie about what amp was playing vs another and you could just watch the old guys die inside when we revealed they liked the 500$ amp better than their 14k Odyssey amp hahaha.
That's not to say that all cheap amps sound good but that particular one did lol

That being said, for me, it's not about what amp sounds better or worse, it's about what amp can supply the power requirements I need. There just isn't any A/B amps that aren't the size of houses/or insanely expensive that give me over 1000 watts per channel In after.
tebling, jamiebosco and mechtheist like this.
N8DOGG is offline  
post #40002 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 10:31 AM
Member
 
mechtheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 166
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post
Well, I'm 100% with mechtheist on the double blind. If you don't double blind, it's completely useless to do anything else. I've been to lots of audio meets where the perception of better or worse was completely gone after we did blind testing. It was about 15 years ago when I first experienced it and what got me on my path to audio.
We even had numerous times where we would flat out lie about what amp was playing vs another and you could just watch the old guys die inside when we revealed they liked the 500$ amp better than their 14k Odyssey amp hahaha.
That's not to say that all cheap amps sound good but that particular one did lol

That being said, for me, it's not about what amp sounds better or worse, it's about what amp can supply the power requirements I need. There just isn't any A/B amps that aren't the size of houses/or insanely expensive that give me over 1000 watts per channel In after.
There's an awful lot of non-blind AB comparisons where they don't bother to ensure levels are matched, even double-blind tests won't be valid if you don't match levels. You have to match levels to within 0.1 dB, yes, our ears are that sensitive and louder is going to sound 'better'. If you're trying to compare a low powered amp with a high powered amp, you not only have to match levels, you really have to make sure you're not driving the lower-powered amp into non-linearity, very easy to do with music.


@muscles : "it will come through louder and cleaner" Yeah, and it's going to sound dramatically different because it's louder. Plus, I didn't notice the McIntosh in question has a tube preamp. Tubes have a sound, ergo, they're not transparent, by definition. If they don't have their own sound, why bother? And it's a big bother. They've been more than capable of building near zero-cost fully transparent electronics for a very long time. They've been able to measure way beyond inaudibility for a very long time. Why would any manufacturer put their reputation on the line by making a crappy preamp when it costs them almost nothing to make one that is more than good enough?
mechtheist is offline  
post #40003 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 11:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 582
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechtheist View Post
There's an awful lot of non-blind AB comparisons where they don't bother to ensure levels are matched, even double-blind tests won't be valid if you don't match levels. You have to match levels to within 0.1 dB, yes, our ears are that sensitive and louder is going to sound 'better'. If you're trying to compare a low powered amp with a high powered amp, you not only have to match levels, you really have to make sure you're not driving the lower-powered amp into non-linearity, very easy to do with music.


@muscles : "it will come through louder and cleaner" Yeah, and it's going to sound dramatically different because it's louder. Plus, I didn't notice the McIntosh in question has a tube preamp. Tubes have a sound, ergo, they're not transparent, by definition. If they don't have their own sound, why bother? And it's a big bother. They've been more than capable of building near zero-cost fully transparent electronics for a very long time. They've been able to measure way beyond inaudibility for a very long time. Why would any manufacturer put their reputation on the line by making a crappy preamp when it costs them almost nothing to make one that is more than good enough?
I forgot to mention I was considering the tube pre amp - the Mac would be tube, leading into solid state amp - so I'm imagining that is where I would hear the biggest difference (maybe upgrade, maybe not) LOL

Speakers: JTR 212RTs - JTR 210RM - JTR 110HTs (x4)
Subwoofer: Dual Rythmik G25HPSE
Audio Gear: Marantz 8805 - Krell Chorus 5200 + D-Sonic M3a-800S - BS Node 2i - Oppo 203
TV: LG 65 OLED
Bedroom: ML Ethos - ML Motion 30 - Samsung Q8 LED
Ethos4Lyfe is offline  
post #40004 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 12:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
N8DOGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,774
Mentioned: 58 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1494 Post(s)
Liked: 1760
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechtheist View Post
There's an awful lot of non-blind AB comparisons where they don't bother to ensure levels are matched, even double-blind tests won't be valid if you don't match levels. You have to match levels to within 0.1 dB, yes, our ears are that sensitive and louder is going to sound 'better'. If you're trying to compare a low powered amp with a high powered amp, you not only have to match levels, you really have to make sure you're not driving the lower-powered amp into non-linearity, very easy to do with music.
One thing that gets over looked is the amps gain structure. When Emotiva first came out (I had a xpa-5 and xpa-2) they were 32dB vs most everyone else's 28dB. So right off they bat, they are louder at the same settings. People were going nuts for them at the time "so clear, so much more transparent blah blah blah" then you could see others figuring it out, it was just louder... they would level match with another amp and be "oh" lol
I remember hooking mine up and going "holy crap!" Lol
I don't pay attention to reviewers of amps/processors. They are so full of garbage. I look for features I want/need and that's how I pick stuff now.... Like the new HTP-1, it will have the ability to EQ 5 separate subs! That's amazing! That's my next processor (once the world is done ending)

In the end, it's a hobby, everyone enjoys it however they want to. People think I'm absolutely insane with how much bass I run but I could care less. I enjoy my system. Do what makes you happy and enjoy life!
mechtheist likes this.
N8DOGG is offline  
post #40005 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 12:52 PM
Advanced Member
 
muscles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 950 Post(s)
Liked: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post
One thing that gets over looked is the amps gain structure. When Emotiva first came out (I had a xpa-5 and xpa-2) they were 32dB vs most everyone else's 28dB. So right off they bat, they are louder at the same settings. People were going nuts for them at the time "so clear, so much more transparent blah blah blah" then you could see others figuring it out, it was just louder... they would level match with another amp and be "oh" lol
I remember hooking mine up and going "holy crap!" Lol
I don't pay attention to reviewers of amps/processors. They are so full of garbage. I look for features I want/need and that's how I pick stuff now.... Like the new HTP-1, it will have the ability to EQ 5 separate subs! That's amazing! That's my next processor (once the world is done ending)

In the end, it's a hobby, everyone enjoys it however they want to. People think I'm absolutely insane with how much bass I run but I could care less. I enjoy my system. Do what makes you happy and enjoy life!
Do what you like. I realize this is a JTR thread and most people are more concerned with output and DB drag racing. I am a quality as well as quantity guy. If you can't hear a difference in equipment that doesn't make it a fact. I asked this same questions on the McIntosh forum and they almost laughed me off of it. The gist I received was that you cannot compare an AVR for 2 channel because it wasn't designed for it and they used the cheapest quality components to get that job done, most of the money is spent on digital processing. Playing music loudly through an AVR is hard to take for a long period of time, Playing much louder (DB Meter verified) sounds amazing through the McIntosh. My girlfriend who has ZERO background in this 100% prefers the McIntosh, she has a pretty good ear actually.

Old audio saying...if it sounds better it is better. A good preamp for music is the biggest upgrade you can give a system. I tried an Emotiva amp once...yikes. No thanks.

Greg

Subwoofers: Dual JTR RS1's - SB13 Ultra (bedroom)
Speakers: 2xJTR Noesis 212RT 1 210RM - KEF LS50W
Audio:McIntosh C2600 Pre - Marantz SR-8012 -Dual McIntosh 601's - PS Audio M700 - McIntosh MT5 - GoldNotePH10 - Oppo UDP-205 - BlueSound Node 2
TV: Samsung 75" Q9FN - Sony 75" 940D
muscles is offline  
post #40006 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 01:14 PM
Member
 
mechtheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 166
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 96
We're fortunate, we have some of the most revealing speakers out there. Like me, I'd bet they are the most revealing speakers heard by many or most of you. But even JTR speakers can't reveal differences that aren't audible. If you can't hear a difference, that doesn't mean it's not there, and it is there, no two systems will be identical, not even the same make and model manufactured at the same time with all identical components etc. It's a question of what is audible by a human ear and what a human mind perceives under various circumstances. Some of us trust objective numbers and objective tests, some just know what's true.
mechtheist is offline  
post #40007 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 02:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
muscles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 950 Post(s)
Liked: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechtheist View Post
We're fortunate, we have some of the most revealing speakers out there. Like me, I'd bet they are the most revealing speakers heard by many or most of you. But even JTR speakers can't reveal differences that aren't audible. If you can't hear a difference, that doesn't mean it's not there, and it is there, no two systems will be identical, not even the same make and model manufactured at the same time with all identical components etc. It's a question of what is audible by a human ear and what a human mind perceives under various circumstances. Some of us trust objective numbers and objective tests, some just know what's true.
I still don't know what your point is? I answered the question that was asked in this thread. Is there an audible difference between the 2 channel playback on a receiver built for movies where all facets and features share the same power supply and most music components are super cheap after thought parts or a $7000 top of the line, multi-award winning 2 channel Pre from McIntosh. 100% its better, 100% its audible, if you can't tell the difference, you chose the wrong hobby. Its like comparing a kia to a Ferrari. The kia can take you just as far, but its just not as good.

Btw, I don't do anything anecdotal. Those that have seen me post know that I audition everything, on my own dime. I have had 14 subs in the last 2 years alone. I am a straight shooter, no fanboy here. If I could get the same results with an AVR only setup or an Emotiva/monolith/outlaw amp I would, but I can't. I've tried them, they just don't sound as good. They do for movies, but movies are very easy. Music tells the real story of what a quality setup should sound like. A setup that sounds good for movies can sound terrible for music, but a system that sounds amazing for music can easily handle movies.

You speak anecdotally about stuff you haven't personally heard, and haven't demoed. Why would you think you could tell me how my stuff sounds? Thats the problem with this hobby, this is common, everyone thinks they know what sounds best, and its usually what they have. I will assume that you have an AVR or AV Pre and you think music can't get any better. It can, just go to magnolia and pick up a C2700 and demo it, you can return it in 15 days. Until then, your opinion isn't valid.

Greg

Subwoofers: Dual JTR RS1's - SB13 Ultra (bedroom)
Speakers: 2xJTR Noesis 212RT 1 210RM - KEF LS50W
Audio:McIntosh C2600 Pre - Marantz SR-8012 -Dual McIntosh 601's - PS Audio M700 - McIntosh MT5 - GoldNotePH10 - Oppo UDP-205 - BlueSound Node 2
TV: Samsung 75" Q9FN - Sony 75" 940D

Last edited by muscles; 04-05-2020 at 05:04 PM.
muscles is offline  
post #40008 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 02:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
N8DOGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,774
Mentioned: 58 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1494 Post(s)
Liked: 1760
Quote:
Originally Posted by muscles View Post
I still don't know what your point is? I answered the question that was asked in this thread. Is there an audible difference between the 2 channel playback on a receiver built for movies were all facets and features share the same power supply and most music components are super cheap after thought parts or a $7000 top of the line, multi-award winning 2 channel Pre from McIntosh. 100% its better, 100% its audible, if you can't tell the difference, you chose the wrong hobby. Its like comparing a kia to a Ferrari. The kia can take you just as far, but its just not as good.

Btw, I don't do anything anecdotal. Those that have seen me post know that I audition everything, on my own dime. I have had 14 subs in the last 2 years alone. I am a straight shooter, no fanboy here. If I could get the same results with an AVR only setup or an Emotiva/monolith/outlaw amp I would, but I can't. I've tried them, they just don't sound as good. They do for movies, but movies are very easy. Music tells the real story of what a quality setup should sound like. A setup that sounds good for movies can sound terrible for music, but a system that sounds amazing for music can easily handle movies.

You speak anecdotally about stuff you haven't personally heard, and haven't demoed. Why would you think you could tell me how my stuff sounds? Thats the problem with this hobby, this is common, everyone thinks they know what sounds best, and its usually what they have. I will assume that you have an AVR or AV Pre and you think music can't get any better. It can, just go to magnolia and pick up a C2700 and demo it, you can return it in 15 days. Until then, your opinion isn't valid.

Greg
Well to be fair, its not as if you've gotten a bunch of good receivers and actually tested them either....

And you point the problem is "what you have sounds best" which is what you are arguing about lol.

We all think what we end up picking is best. It's human nature to defend your choices.

I think this is done, no one is changing any ones mind lol.
mechtheist likes this.
N8DOGG is offline  
post #40009 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 02:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
muscles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 950 Post(s)
Liked: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8DOGG View Post
Well to be fair, its not as if you've gotten a bunch of good receivers and actually tested them either....

And you point the problem is "what you have sounds best" which is what you are arguing about lol.

We all think what we end up picking is best. It's human nature to defend your choices.

I think this is done, no one is changing any ones mind lol.
I tested 4 top of the line (well 3 top, 1 second from top). Actually if we go back a little further 5, I had a Yamaha but I hated the YPAO. I just want to stop the spread of false information, this is why people think that SVS has the highest output subs, etc.

Greg

Subwoofers: Dual JTR RS1's - SB13 Ultra (bedroom)
Speakers: 2xJTR Noesis 212RT 1 210RM - KEF LS50W
Audio:McIntosh C2600 Pre - Marantz SR-8012 -Dual McIntosh 601's - PS Audio M700 - McIntosh MT5 - GoldNotePH10 - Oppo UDP-205 - BlueSound Node 2
TV: Samsung 75" Q9FN - Sony 75" 940D
muscles is offline  
post #40010 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 03:18 PM
Member
 
mechtheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 166
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 100 Post(s)
Liked: 96
N8DOGG is right, it was done from the beginning and futile to argue. I haven't made a single specific claim about how anyone's equipment sounds other than that JTR speakers are revealing. I don't think I anecdotaled anywhere either other than relating what sorts of things one hears, but if you're telling someone about how something sounds and how others claimed it sound, you have committed an anecdotal. To refrain from the shame of the anecdotal claim, you need to have objective measurements, that's what it means to not be anecdotal. And, it's an incredibly extensively proven fact that without double-blind testing, human beings are without question or doubt utterly incapable of objective testing/judgements in most things.
mechtheist is offline  
post #40011 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 03:36 PM
Advanced Member
 
muscles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 950 Post(s)
Liked: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechtheist View Post
N8DOGG is right, it was done from the beginning and futile to argue. I haven't made a single specific claim about how anyone's equipment sounds other than that JTR speakers are revealing. I don't think I anecdotaled anywhere either other than relating what sorts of things one hears, but if you're telling someone about how something sounds and how others claimed it sound, you have committed an anecdotal. To refrain from the shame of the anecdotal claim, you need to have objective measurements, that's what it means to not be anecdotal. And, it's an incredibly extensively proven fact that without double-blind testing, human beings are without question or doubt utterly incapable of objective testing/judgements in most things.
Don't worry about it. The OP and I spoke via PM and sorted out what he needed to do. We are able to circumvent all this drivel and make a decision. We are all good.

Greg
tebling and Ethos4Lyfe like this.

Subwoofers: Dual JTR RS1's - SB13 Ultra (bedroom)
Speakers: 2xJTR Noesis 212RT 1 210RM - KEF LS50W
Audio:McIntosh C2600 Pre - Marantz SR-8012 -Dual McIntosh 601's - PS Audio M700 - McIntosh MT5 - GoldNotePH10 - Oppo UDP-205 - BlueSound Node 2
TV: Samsung 75" Q9FN - Sony 75" 940D
muscles is offline  
post #40012 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 04:18 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 582
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by muscles View Post
don't worry about it. The op and i spoke via pm and sorted out what he needed to do. We are able to circumvent all this drivel and make a decision. We are all good.

Greg
woooooooo
muscles likes this.

Speakers: JTR 212RTs - JTR 210RM - JTR 110HTs (x4)
Subwoofer: Dual Rythmik G25HPSE
Audio Gear: Marantz 8805 - Krell Chorus 5200 + D-Sonic M3a-800S - BS Node 2i - Oppo 203
TV: LG 65 OLED
Bedroom: ML Ethos - ML Motion 30 - Samsung Q8 LED
Ethos4Lyfe is offline  
post #40013 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 04:36 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bear123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: PA
Posts: 7,655
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3555 Post(s)
Liked: 5473
Here is where I think we can balance the subjective with the objective. If we are purely subjective, we will not be willing to admit that what we hear can be influenced by bias, or by a poorly controlled comparison, which involves may things. Maybe things aren't level matched. Maybe room correction is different which *of course* alters the sound. Maybe one of the devices is not sonically transparent. This is more likely to happen with higher priced audiophile gear as manufacturers strive for a house sound rather than a neutral, accurate sound.

For example, my Denon AVR produces a signal from its pre-outs with a 100% accurate frequency response within the audible spectrum from below 20 Hz to above 20KHz. Also, it provides a signal to whatever external amp is being used that has total distortion and noise of around -95 dB, or less than .002%. This is 100% completely audibly transparent, and it doesn't matter how much more you spend on ultra "high end" audiophile pre pros or amps. This is a scientific fact....audible transparency is cheap, and has been for decades. In other words, zero coloration of the signal.

Great amps with lots of power are not cheap, and are one of the areas where audible improvement can be made if listening levels are high enough.

What absolutely *does* affect the sound is the speakers, room, and having enough clean output to drive the speakers to ones listening levels.

If an AVR is driven to clipping, then *of course* a more expensive, more powerful amp will improve sound quality.

But the FACT is, an ultra expensive pre will not improve sound quality vs the Denon..in many cases, the ultra high end pre might even have *worse* distortion, noise, and linearity than the cheap Denon.

That doesn't mean folks won't swear on their lives that the expensive pre has vastly superior sound quality. There are many things that affect our *perception* of sound and sound quality, and it is *never* just the actual sound being produced. The only way to eliminate all the other biases that affect what we hear is accurate, double blind level matched testing. If anyone can't admit that our hearing and perception is easily fooled, they are kidding themselves. It's a scientific fact of being human.

.002% distortion from the Denon's pre-outs driving a very good amp is 100% sonically inaudible, almost guaranteed to be higher fidelity than the signal being sent to the speakers from the amp(almost all amps have higher distortion than this), and orders of magnitude lower distortion than the speakers themselves.

This signal from the Denon *includes* the DAC, so an ultra expensive audiophile DAC makes no difference either.

Do people *perceive* big sound quality difference between these items? Of course. But there is a reason for it beyond any actual change in sound.
tebling and mechtheist like this.
bear123 is online now  
post #40014 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 04:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 582
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123 View Post
Here is where I think we can balance the subjective with the objective. If we are purely subjective, we will not be willing to admit that what we hear can be influenced by bias, or by a poorly controlled comparison, which involves may things. Maybe things aren't level matched. Maybe room correction is different which *of course* alters the sound. Maybe one of the devices is not sonically transparent. This is more likely to happen with higher priced audiophile gear as manufacturers strive for a house sound rather than a neutral, accurate sound.

For example, my Denon AVR produces a signal from its pre-outs with a 100% accurate frequency response within the audible spectrum from below 20 Hz to above 20KHz. Also, it provides a signal to whatever external amp is being used that has total distortion and noise of around -95 dB, or less than .002%. This is 100% completely audibly transparent, and it doesn't matter how much more you spend on ultra "high end" audiophile pre pros or amps. This is a scientific fact....audible transparency is cheap, and has been for decades. In other words, zero coloration of the signal.

Great amps with lots of power are not cheap, and are one of the areas where audible improvement can be made if listening levels are high enough.

What absolutely *does* affect the sound is the speakers, room, and having enough clean output to drive the speakers to ones listening levels.

If an AVR is driven to clipping, then *of course* a more expensive, more powerful amp will improve sound quality.

But the FACT is, an ultra expensive pre will not improve sound quality vs the Denon..in many cases, the ultra high end pre might even have *worse* distortion, noise, and linearity than the cheap Denon.

That doesn't mean folks won't swear on their lives that the expensive pre has vastly superior sound quality. There are many things that affect our *perception* of sound and sound quality, and it is *never* just the actual sound being produced. The only way to eliminate all the other biases that affect what we hear is accurate, double blind level matched testing. If anyone can't admit that our hearing and perception is easily fooled, they are kidding themselves. It's a scientific fact of being human.

.002% distortion from the Denon's pre-outs driving a very good amp is 100% sonically inaudible, almost guaranteed to be higher fidelity than the signal being sent to the speakers from the amp(almost all amps have higher distortion than this), and orders of magnitude lower distortion than the speakers themselves.

This signal from the Denon *includes* the DAC, so an ultra expensive audiophile DAC makes no difference either.

Do people *perceive* big sound quality difference between these items? Of course. But there is a reason for it beyond any actual change in sound.
Thanks for the input - and I know I can't a/b in my room or blind test in general. However, I know that @muscles 2 channel goes really freaking loud and sounds amazing. Much louder than I could imagine pushing an avr too. So my thought is that the pre just has better components, which cause less strain on the amp/speakers. I could be way off, and again, it was on his gear so I don't want to speak for him. But that thing at like 35% MV was so loud I could barely him talking to me. ahah what fun!

Speakers: JTR 212RTs - JTR 210RM - JTR 110HTs (x4)
Subwoofer: Dual Rythmik G25HPSE
Audio Gear: Marantz 8805 - Krell Chorus 5200 + D-Sonic M3a-800S - BS Node 2i - Oppo 203
TV: LG 65 OLED
Bedroom: ML Ethos - ML Motion 30 - Samsung Q8 LED
Ethos4Lyfe is offline  
post #40015 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 04:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bear123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: PA
Posts: 7,655
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3555 Post(s)
Liked: 5473
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethos4Lyfe View Post
interesting, thanks for the note. i had been considering then athem str, which includes ARC and I can run my subs through it. ive been told/read many times that ARC is much better than Audyssey, especially in the bass department. and yeah, i dont buy into alot of audio world beliefs, but have just been curious about benefits of 2 channel listening w/ a preamp
Better room correction can definitely improve sound quality. So if you get a separate AVR or pre pro that has better room correction, sound quality will certainly be improved or at least changed. But don't mistake this with the pre itself somehow magically improving sound quality over another piece of equipment that is completely, provably, scientifically audibly transparent. Better room correction can sound better. Reducing audible distortion can improve sound quality(or hurt it, some prefer distortion hence vinyl, 2 channel, tubes, etc), improving linearity can improve sound quality.

As consumers, I think it is important to base purchase decisions on factual sound quality improvements, rather than imagined.
bear123 is online now  
post #40016 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 04:54 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bear123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: PA
Posts: 7,655
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3555 Post(s)
Liked: 5473
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethos4Lyfe View Post
Thanks for the input - and I know I can't a/b in my room or blind test in general. However, I know that @muscles 2 channel goes really freaking loud and sounds amazing. Much louder than I could imagine pushing an avr too. So my thought is that the pre just has better components, which cause less strain on the amp/speakers. I could be way off, and again, it was on his gear so I don't want to speak for him. But that thing at like 35% MV was so loud I could barely him talking to me. ahah what fun!
The pre has almost zero impact on how loud the speakers play....that's all amp. Muscles has great amps with lots of power. All a pre, or AVR does, is supply a voltage signal to the amps. An audibly transparent voltage signal being sent to the amps from a $600 AVR will not "sound" any different than an audibly transparent signal being sent to the amps from a super expensive pre. As long as either piece of gear can provide enough voltage with audible transparency, there is no *real* difference in sound quality. Can one be perceived? Of course. The amp provides the power. The pre or AVR tells the amp how loud to play. If a pre has better room correction than an AVR, sound quality may be better.
bear123 is online now  
post #40017 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 05:07 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bear123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: PA
Posts: 7,655
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3555 Post(s)
Liked: 5473
Quote:
Originally Posted by muscles View Post
I tested 4 top of the line (well 3 top, 1 second from top). Actually if we go back a little further 5, I had a Yamaha but I hated the YPAO. I just want to stop the spread of false information, this is why people think that SVS has the highest output subs, etc.

Greg
I've measured the results of YPAO before and the results were extremely underwhelming. No ability to eq subs, and almost no measurable improvement on frequency response. Maybe the newest, higher end versions have improved some, not sure.

What room correction do you currently use, if any, and over what frequency range?

Also, what are you doing for training/lifting these days with all the gyms closed?
bear123 is online now  
post #40018 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 05:12 PM
Advanced Member
 
kyzer soze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 979
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 584 Post(s)
Liked: 412
This thread took a turn for the worse

@muscles What ever happened to your friend who was interested in your 212 RT's? I think you mentioned going with the 215 RT's possibly.

Ascend Sierra 2's (LCR & side surrounds) + Pioneer atmos modules. 5.1.4 setup
Marantz AV7703
Rythmik FV15HP
JVC DLA-X590R (RS 440) projector
Stewart StudioTek 130 screen
kyzer soze is offline  
post #40019 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 05:15 PM
Advanced Member
 
muscles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 950 Post(s)
Liked: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123 View Post
The pre has almost zero impact on how loud the speakers play....that's all amp. Muscles has great amps with lots of power. All a pre, or AVR does, is supply a voltage signal to the amps. An audibly transparent voltage signal being sent to the amps from a $600 AVR will not "sound" any different than an audibly transparent signal being sent to the amps from a super expensive pre. As long as either piece of gear can provide enough voltage with audible transparency, there is no *real* difference in sound quality. Can one be perceived? Of course. The amp provides the power. The pre or AVR tells the amp how loud to play. If a pre has better room correction than an AVR, sound quality may be better.
I compared them with no room correction for either(mac pre's do not have room correction at all), just straight 2 channel. I don't know why the Mac C2600 pushes the amps so much harder and cleaner, it is awe inspiring. I am just thankful I don't have to use my AVR for music listening because its no where near as good. IMO movies aren't nearly as impressive sonically as a good music setup.

It's not just the volume that is different, because I am running the amps with both systems, I use a home theater bypass. I use an SPL meter to get the amp to about 110-115DB during the same music and the sound coming out of the AVR compared to the Mac hurts your ears and doesn't separate the instruments nearly as much. Why would I keep it if it didn't vastly improve things? I could sell it for like $5500 dollars???

If you don't think Preamps effect quality of output, hook up your turntable to any AVR and listen..yeah, its awful. Then try a high end Phono Pre, no need for a blind there. It matters.

Greg

Subwoofers: Dual JTR RS1's - SB13 Ultra (bedroom)
Speakers: 2xJTR Noesis 212RT 1 210RM - KEF LS50W
Audio:McIntosh C2600 Pre - Marantz SR-8012 -Dual McIntosh 601's - PS Audio M700 - McIntosh MT5 - GoldNotePH10 - Oppo UDP-205 - BlueSound Node 2
TV: Samsung 75" Q9FN - Sony 75" 940D
muscles is offline  
post #40020 of 40384 Old 04-05-2020, 05:18 PM
Advanced Member
 
muscles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Costa Mesa, CA 92627
Posts: 763
Mentioned: 99 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 950 Post(s)
Liked: 1558
Quote:
Originally Posted by bear123 View Post
I've measured the results of YPAO before and the results were extremely underwhelming. No ability to eq subs, and almost no measurable improvement on frequency response. Maybe the newest, higher end versions have improved some, not sure.

What room correction do you currently use, if any, and over what frequency range?

Also, what are you doing for training/lifting these days with all the gyms closed?
I use Audyssey MultiEQ XT32, I first EQ them with MiniDSP and REW.

As far as training goes, I have a very small setup in my garage that I use for just the basics. I have a peloton bike upstairs for cardio. I can't wait to get back into a real gym. I am over 230lbs right now, I need to drop some bulk.

Greg

Subwoofers: Dual JTR RS1's - SB13 Ultra (bedroom)
Speakers: 2xJTR Noesis 212RT 1 210RM - KEF LS50W
Audio:McIntosh C2600 Pre - Marantz SR-8012 -Dual McIntosh 601's - PS Audio M700 - McIntosh MT5 - GoldNotePH10 - Oppo UDP-205 - BlueSound Node 2
TV: Samsung 75" Q9FN - Sony 75" 940D
muscles is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Tags
215RT , 228ht , captivator , Jtr , Jtr Noesis 212ht 212ht Lp , noesis

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