Get an exclusive sneak peek into our new project. >>> Click Here
Our native mobile app has a new name: Fora Communities. Learn more.

Anyone compared the the Lexicon MC-4 or MC-8 with Parasound C1 or C2 processors ?

2808 Views 31 Replies 8 Participants Last post by Steve Zodiac, Jun 7, 2006

Steve Zodiac

Discussion Starter · May 7, 2006

As simple as the title really.

The priority is for movie use and will be used along with the Parasound A51/A21 amps. I was originally just going to go for the matching Parasound C2, but one supplier of both Lexicon and Parasound said his choice would be a Lexicon processor with the Parasound amps. His reason was the processing of the Lexicon is more advanced.

Any advice from those who have heard both makes would be most welcome.

Status: Not open for further replies.

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

carlm9

· #2 · May 8, 2006

Steve,

I am also very interested so hope this bump will help. I asked the same thing and got no response as well. It is hard to believe there isn't anyone who has compared these great products.

Jason

Steve Zodiac

Discussion Starter · #3 · May 8, 2006

Hi Jason,

I spotted your thread shortly after posting mine. I should have searched harder first!

There will be someone out there who has compared them, but it just a matter of when and if they'll read our posts!!

carlm9

· #4 · May 8, 2006

Bump!

Come on, there has to be someone that has had personal experience between these units?

J.H.

· #5 · May 8, 2006

well I will say this so take it for what its worth. I had a Parasound 7100 processor and had to sell it. For some reason it was not a great sounding processor. It did something it to the sound from the surround speakers that i still can't explain. It made the sound from the surrounds muffled and muddy and just not as clear as it should be. It wasn't verry enveloping as a good processor should be especially one as expensive as this. I sold it and bought a B&K Ref50 S2 and now this is what a good processor should sound like. Incredible sound and very enveloping. This thing really surrounds the room with sound. Its very clear and nice. Now I realise this is not the Halo so again take it for what its worth. I would save my money and go with a Ref50 S2. Thats just my opinion though. Also I have always been a huge fan of Parasound. I am still using a Parasound amp and love it. Its not a personel thing with Parasound its just this processor needs to be redone and rethought.

ss9001

· #6 · May 8, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.H.
It made the sound from the surrounds muffled and muddy and just not as clear as it should be. It wasn't verry enveloping as a good processor should be especially one as expensive as this.

J.H.

I'm curious what surround modes you were using, or was this the way all of them sounded? Were you using THX modes by chance?

BTW-Thanks for replying to my PM, I appreciate the input. Still thinking about jumping in or waiting awhile.

ss9001

See less See more

J.H.

· #7 · May 8, 2006

Ya know it is the oddest thing that processor. It pains me to say anything bad about Parasound because i love thier equipment. This thing just sounded bad for some reason. I didn't use any surround modes just straight DD and DTS. The sound wasn't clear from the surrounds. It didn't fill the room with sound. It did something to the sound from the surround speakers that I can't even explain well enough to make you understand. Even my Girlfriend who couldn't care less about HT commented the other night while watching "House of Wax" thats this processor draws you into the movie WAY better than the Parasound. Thats my test. If she can hear it and she doesn't care much about it then its got to be a pretty big difference.

ss9001

· #8 · May 9, 2006

I was just curious. I have tried THX processing many times on my setup and everytime the output from the surrounds diminishes and the overall sound is not as clear as regular DD, dts, DPLIIx. I have a Pioneer Elite 59TXi used as a pre/pro. Just yesterday I was playing a DVD of an 60's vintage movie with a DD mono soundtrack. It was too bright for my tastes, so for kicks I engaged THX cinema and it took some of the edge off.

Sounds like the B&K is just better for you. Glad you're liking it.

ss9001

J.H.

· #9 · May 9, 2006

Yeah it is and I think THX can help in certain situations. Also the problems with the 7100 were not because of THX I rarely used it. The B&K is working out great.

Steve Zodiac

Discussion Starter · #10 · May 9, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.H.
..... I had a Parasound 7100 processor and had to sell it. For some reason it was not a great sounding processor....Now I realise this is not the Halo so again take it for what its worth....

I was told by a UK retailer, that the processing in the Parasound 7100 and Halo models was pretty much the same. It certainly wouldn't be the first time I have been given inaccurate information from retailers, but this one did appear to know his stuff.

AudioArchitect

· #11 · May 9, 2006

The main differences are as follows:

The 7100 uses Wolfson single channel 24/192 DAC's, whereas the Halo processors use 24/96 true dual-differential AKM Dac's. The Halo processors have balanced in and outs. The circuitry in the Halo was designed by John Curl, whereas the 7100 was designed by Parasound. The 7100 has component video upconversion, whereas the Halos just have no upconversion. I believe the DSP's in both lines are the same.

They are both great processors. THe 7100 achieves performance very close to the Halo line. Being that you are in UK I would consider Arcam which should be cheaper in your neck of the woods. The AVP700 is amazing for the price.

Steve Zodiac

Discussion Starter · #12 · May 9, 2006

Perhaps it was my mistake and the retailer actually said it was the DSP's that were the same, I'm really not sure. I do know that he said sonically there wasn't a lot between them and a lot of people do buy the Halo because of the look and build quality.

The Arcam range I thought was usually described as "Warm", which isn't something I tend to like. One guy on the UK AV Forums bought an AV9 to replace his Parasound C2, and his initial impression was that the C2 was better for movies. May be he'll change his mind after futher testing.

J.H.

· #13 · May 9, 2006

Well I hope the Halo line does not sound anything like the 7100. Hey Steve Zodiac have you heard the 7100? I think though the B&K Ref50 S2 is not talked enough about around here. It is a great processor.

Steve Zodiac

Discussion Starter · #14 · May 9, 2006

No J.H. I haven't heard the 7100.......or the C2 come to that. I have read a review and comments on another forum that spoke very highly of it, so I am a little surprised that you found it to be so poor. Didn't you try a replacement 7100 in case it was faulty?

From AudioArchitect's post it would appear that the 7100 and Halo C2 are considerably different in the design. Hopefully a C2 should be better.

Philip Brandes

· #15 · May 9, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by AudioArchitect
The main differences are as follows:

The circuitry in the Halo was designed by John Curl, whereas the 7100 was designed by Parasound. The 7100 has component video upconversion, whereas the Halos just have no upconversion. I believe the DSP's in both lines are the same.

No, John Curl designs the Parasound amps; the processors are OEM'd from Flextronics, as is the case with many companies who lack in-house processor design expertise. Curl's amps are great performers and excellent value, but there is nothing unique about the Parasound pre-pros--they are rebadged off-the-shelf components. In contrast, Lexicon incorporates its own proprietary technology and surround algorithms (such as Logic 7) into its in-house processor designs. The supplier who recommended a Lexicon processor and Parasound amp seems to know what he's talking about.

Cheers,

Philip Brandes

J.H.

· #16 · May 9, 2006

You are right Philip about Flextronics making Parasound Processors thats why I think the B&K sounds better. It was designed and manufactured by B&K here in American. They have a plant in Buffalo NY where they actually build their amps and processors. Actually for now on I am sticking with companies that actually make thier own stuff in thier own factories.

AudioArchitect

· #17 · May 9, 2006

Halcro uses the same design firm, Flextronics, and would you also call their processors run of the mill? Actually most companies purchase an OEM design and have it modified to their specs. It costs lots of money to design in-house. Arcam spent over 1 million dollars designing the AV8 and have to charge more for it to recoup the cost.

For the price that B&K components are priced I seriously doubt they are designed in house. Import/export laws are such that "Made in the USA" can be designated to products with a certain amount of manufacturing here, not necessarily designed by the same company.

Bottom line, with inhouse design you pay a huge premium for the product. If it sounds great most people dont care who made it. This is a time where people use Denon receivers as processors. I highly doubt people would pay the added asking prices for stand-alone processors.

J.H.

· #18 · May 9, 2006

No all B&K products are designed and manufactured in thier Buffalo NY plant. They started in Buffalo and are still thier believe me I checked it all out before I bought. I wanted an American made,American owned company and thats what B&K is. I have no problem with Parasound using Flextronics to make anything. Good for them but don't try and tear down a company actually building thier products here. I find it quite refreshing that they do. Also I belive that everyone is mixing up companies here. I believe the Halo line is made by Vinci Labs not Flextronics. The 7100 might be Flextronics but I believe the Halo is Vinci Labs.

Philip Brandes

· #19 · May 9, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by AudioArchitect
Halcro uses the same design firm, Flextronics, and would you also call their processors run of the mill?

As a matter of fact, yes. Other than the snazzy faceplate, it offers nothing more than the generic surround and signal processing available anywhere else. There is a huge difference between surround processing and amps, and this is a prime example of a company leveraging its genuine superiority in one area (amps) to enter a completely product category where it has no expertise.

Quote:

Bottom line, with inhouse design you pay a huge premium for the product. If it sounds great most people dont care who made it.

Anything can "sound great" if you don't know what else is possible, but this dodges the issue with a false premise. I'm not claiming in-house engineering is great simply for the sake of in-house engineering--there is no value in re-inventing the same wheel. Rather, a company like Lexicon, with decades of experience in pro audio and surround technology, and on-staff experts in psychoacoustics like David Griesinger and James Muller, can implement unique capabilities that differentiate itself from generic OEM products, no matter which off-the-shelf options they choose to implement. There is a significant, audible difference in the soundfield produced by Logic 7, which is easy to compare on a level playing field since Lexicon processors also offer the standard modes. Lexicon and Meridian are the only two companies that are continuously raising the bar in surround processing by developing their own technologies--everyone else is off-the-shelf. This is why the supplier in the original post made the recommendation they did--Lexicon offers superior surround processing, Parasound makes good amps. It makes sense to use the right component for the right job.

Cheers,

Philip Brandes

See less See more

J.H.

· #20 · May 9, 2006

Based on my experience Parasound makes better amps than processors plus John Curl designs thier Halo amps. He is considered a ciruitry genius. I have an older Parasound amp and man it kicks @ss. Plenty of power and very sweet sounding.

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

Status: Not open for further replies.