[phie]

Hi all.


I am wanting to get into HiFi as I have recently bought a TV. The biggest gripe I have with my TV sound is I can barely hear the voices unless I crank up the volume on the TV, which as soon as some action happens, the sound is deafening. I assume this is what a center speaker channel corrects?


I am very, very new to HiFi but I am really hoping to build a system I can be happy with for many many years.


I have heard mixed things about Japanese receives, and after doing some research, I have been focusing on NAD and Marantz. I've also done some research on the Outlaw Audio 1070 and it looks like a great receiver.


Saturday Audio Exchange has a special for the NAD T747 receiver for $599 (there's one on ebay for $500 including shipping). Given the original list price, this seems like a very good deal? Am I wrong?


I know with the older receivers, I will pass up HDMI. But from my reading, you can connect most bluray players to composite video and 7.1 or 5.1 analog. So HDMI doesn't seem necessary?


My vision looks like this:


Sony BRAVIA 46" LCD

-a good multipurpose AVR (unless it is advised to focus on an amp for music and a separate AVR for movies)

-2.1 channel sound (preferably 3.1, if that's possible, and if a center speaker channel solves the problems I have with voices now)

-in the next 3 years, I would like to build a 5.1 channel system, using the bookshelf speakers I will buy for the 2.1 channel sound to complete the 5.1 system

-eventually have a hookup to a media center computer

-eventually buy a blu-ray player (unless the media center computer suffices)



I don't have any plans to go to 3D; I am very unimpressed when I demoed 3D in the stores. It even bothered my head after a few minutes of watching.


I also do not plan on getting cable; I use Netflix and burned mkv files to watch movies and TV shows. I will use flac or 320kb/s MP3s for the music I listen to.



One of the biggest problems is I live in a small apartment in Boston. The sound insulation is very good and I don't like loud noise anyway, so I don't plan on having the volume loud, so my biggest problem is space. I just don't have a lot of it and the way I have my TV right now is not the best and I assume it will present issues for 5.1 sound (which is why I don't want to setup a 5.1 system now, I think it is better to wait until I move into the suburbs in ~2-3 years). My living room is about 9x10 ft.



I have read on avsforum that Dynamic EQ will "blow you away [and] once you have it, you'll never not want it again". I read about it and it seems it will specifically address my space/room size concerns. Is this true?


Is it wrong to assume the quality of older (2+ year out of date) receivers will rival the quality of the newer, sub $800 list price receivers of today? This is the main reason I am wanting to get a slightly out of date receiver; I believe it will lead to better quality for the price I can afford...



Can you recommend great used receivers to look for that match my requirements? Or would I be better off just using an amp and preamp to power my video and sound system? Would that yield better sound and would I find a better value?


I have looked at the NAD T747, NAD T743, Marantz SR 7400, Marantz 6005, Outlaw 1070, Marantz 6004. Any suggestions on which to buy? Or others to look at? I would like to spend less than $1000 for the receiver, and preferably under $600. Used seems the way to go!



Thank you for any and all help/tips!

 

[cavu]



Look on froogle.com for a Yamaha RX-V867 which is a one year old model but has all the performance of the newest units and can be found for staggeringly low prices!! About the best value out there!

 

[phie]



Quote:
Originally Posted by cavu /forum/post/20878130

Look on froogle.com for a Yamaha RX-V867 which is a one year old model but has all the performance of the newest units and can be found for staggeringly low prices!! About the best value out there!

Thanks. But I have read Japanese is not the way to go for AVRs, which is why I was looking at alternatives, e.g. NAD, Marantz, etc...

 

[cavu]



Quote:
Originally Posted by phie /forum/post/20878157


I have read Japanese is not the way to go for AVRs

Bullpucky.

 

[phie]

So, what makes you recommend the Yamaha? I really am trying to get a great value, which was why I am looking at used models. In every other domain, buying used always get you great deals (e.g. used cars).


I am brand new to the HiFi world, and am very thankful for this website, so please excuse my ignorance.

 

[cavu]

BTW, most, if not all, Marantz is made in Japan and China.

 

[cavu]



Quote:
Originally Posted by phie /forum/post/20878172


So, what makes you recommend the Yamaha?

Beyond the reasons already given above, EXPERIENCE ... I have been in professional audio for over 40 years.

 

[Knucklehead90]



Quote:
Originally Posted by cavu /forum/post/20878163


Bullpucky.

Thats one way to put it - road apples is another...


Denon - Onkyo - Marantz - hell's bells - most everything is made in China these days.


I'd sooner buy a Yamaha or Denon than a Nad...


I own 1 Onkyo - 1 Integra - 1 Denon - and 1 Harman Kardon. They all work great and one sounds pretty much like the other.

 

[phie]

So Marantz and NAD, which are--in my understanding--luxury brands above the rest, really not better than other AVRs? So what makes an AVR better is purely the price level? In other words, there's no Aston Martin of AVRs? Usually, one can find a good price on an older Aston...


I have done some more reading... Is this a valid statement: if you find an AVR in your price range with Audyssey technology, it is better than a similarly priced model without?

 

[Marty913]

I have the NAD T747 (driving a 5-channel Carver amp) and believe it to be an outstanding value at the current price. I went through a lot of receivers and pre/pros when I downsized my system last year (Pioneer, Denon, HK, Outlaw, Marantz, and NAD. I did like the Marantz line but having had past experience with NAD amps I choose the NAD receiver. Couldn't be happier.

 

[Marty913]



Quote:
Originally Posted by phie /forum/post/20882049


So Marantz and NAD, which are--in my understanding--luxury brands above the rest, really not better than other AVRs? So what makes an AVR better is purely the price level? In other words, there's no Aston Martin of AVRs? Usually, one can find a good price on an older Aston...


I have done some more reading... Is this a valid statement: if you find an AVR in your price range with Audyssey technology, it is better than a similarly priced model without?

I wouldn't use the word "luxury" but I do think that there are receiver manufacturers that concentrate on the feature of the year, and those that concentrate on sound quality first - even if that means fewer features. I do not believe it is an overall "price" issue, but rather where manufacturers choose to put their money (higher quality transformers, larger capacitors, copper shielding, and other unseen things). My experience (since the late 60's) is that NAD, Cambridge, Anthem, and a few others (in your price range) tend to take the second approach. Outlaw make s a good product also but recently started re-branding Marantz. Not sure that's a bad thing, just haven't owned one since the change.


I find most of the environment analyzer firmware (Audyssey, MCACC, YPAO, etc.) to all be adequate at taming difficult room acoustic problems. Audyssey is certainly the better known but certainly should not be used to determine whether one receiver is better than another. Most of the higher-end forums I hang out in are filled with folks that don't use any of them, preferring to do it by ear with a sound pressure meter (and a little experience no doubt).


Keep reading phie, I think you're on the right track with your priorities.

 

[Mpray1983]

Integra 40.3

 

[drumsky]

i've never compared NAD with the others, but i enjoyed it when i heard it. i listened to one of their integrated amps and the T747 when i bought my 'Digm Studio Series speakers, and i remember the sound as being "muscular". very taught, articulate bass. was it the NAD or the Studios? i don't know.

having said that, if you're in Boston, you should go to spearit sound - they're authorized NAD dealers (lots of other non-asian brands too) and always have tons of refurbs & used equipment.

http://www.spearitsound.com/specials.htm

 

[cavu]



Quote:
Originally Posted by phie /forum/post/20882049


if you find an AVR in your price range with Audyssey technology, it is better than a similarly priced model without?

ANY of the various audio analyzers are better than none. Audyssey and Yamaha's YPAO are both very good and are both far and away superior to a sound level meter approach in that they calibrate time delay and equalization in addition to simple audio levels. Using swept bandpass techniques, they can eliminate reflected sounds from the equation.

 

[phie]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty913 /forum/post/20882070


I have the NAD T747 (driving a 5-channel Carver amp) and believe it to be an outstanding value at the current price. I went through a lot of receivers and pre/pros when I downsized my system last year (Pioneer, Denon, HK, Outlaw, Marantz, and NAD. I did like the Marantz line but having had past experience with NAD amps I choose the NAD receiver. Couldn't be happier.

Do you have any comments regarding the T747 lacking Audyssey features? Will I really miss out if I get the T747 instead of another receiver in my price range (Japanese) that has Audyssey features?


Do you have any gripes with the T747?

 

[Marty913]



Quote:
Originally Posted by phie /forum/post/20882250


Do you have any comments regarding the T747 lacking Audyssey features? Will I really miss out if I get the T747 instead of another receiver in my price range (Japanese) that has Audyssey features?


Do you have any gripes with the T747?

I'm afraid I'm one of those old dinosaurs that don't use equalization algorithms. I set the sound levels by hand and setting the distances to each speaker takes care of the delays. I think the real payback in "auto systems" is twofold. One, it can provide a good starting point and they all do that. Two, I think they can help in difficult rooms (odd shaped). My belief is that the provided microphone doesn't know what sounds good - I do however. I really can't answer whether you would miss out on anything. Audyssey won't make a mediocre receiver sound good. Would it help a great receiver sound better? Maybe in the right room, but no more so than MCACC, EARS, YPAO, etc.


On the gripes, sure I do. I don't think I've ever owned an electronic product that was gripe-free. I think the menu system could be a lot better but fortunately you don't have to use it much. It would be nice if it had Ethernet upgrade-ability for firmware instead of RS-232 and the remote is nothing to write home about. If I really thought about it I could probably come up with a couple more.


When I sit down to do some serious 2-channel listening (vinyl, FLAC, CD) or watch a BR movie or concert video, it quickly reminds me why I bought it in the first place. I do appreciate the value in some of the newer features and can understand why they are important to some people. I just know that the inclusion of some of those things mean that something has to be left out. If whatever gets left out affects the sound quality (and it usually does) - then I'd rather do without them. For me at least, it's about the sound first, then the video, and lastly, the features.


If you are considering the NAD, you might want to go through the Forum thread for it here at AVS. There are both positives & negatives there.

 

[kikkenit2]



Quote:
Originally Posted by phie /forum/post/20882250


Do you have any comments regarding the T747 lacking Audyssey features? Will I really miss out if I get the T747 instead of another receiver in my price range (Japanese) that has Audyssey features?


Do you have any gripes with the T747?

The fact is hdmi carries the best video and the best audio so don't avoid/ignore it. The main weakness for the 747 is 3d video, not missing audyssey. So for you this is a strong choice. Many if not most brands sound good in their upper models as long as you set up the speaker and room correction software correctly. Composite video is to be avoided.

 

[phie]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty913 /forum/post/20882430


I'm afraid I'm one of those old dinosaurs that don't use equalization algorithms. I set the sound levels by hand and setting the distances to each speaker takes care of the delays. I think the real payback in "auto systems" is twofold. One, it can provide a good starting point and they all do that. Two, I think they can help in difficult rooms (odd shaped). My belief is that the provided microphone doesn't know what sounds good - I do however. I really can't answer whether you would miss out on anything. Audyssey won't make a mediocre receiver sound good. Would it help a great receiver sound better? Maybe in the right room, but no more so than MCACC, EARS, YPAO, etc.


On the gripes, sure I do. I don't think I've ever owned an electronic product that was gripe-free. I think the menu system could be a lot better but fortunately you don't have to use it much. It would be nice if it had Ethernet upgrade-ability for firmware instead of RS-232 and the remote is nothing to write home about. If I really thought about it I could probably come up with a couple more.


When I sit down to do some serious 2-channel listening (vinyl, FLAC, CD) or watch a BR movie or concert video, it quickly reminds me why I bought it in the first place. I do appreciate the value in some of the newer features and can understand why they are important to some people. I just know that the inclusion of some of those things mean that something has to be left out. If whatever gets left out affects the sound quality (and it usually does) - then I'd rather do without them. For me at least, it's about the sound first, then the video, and lastly, the features.


If you are considering the NAD, you might want to go through the Forum thread for it here at AVS. There are both positives & negatives there.

Thanks... does the T747 have any equalization algorithms? As you can see, I am largely ignorant in this. Do you know of any reason why one should not get the T747 (it really does seem like one of the best deals out there... refurbs for $500 and new from Saturday Audio $600)?

 

[phie]



Quote:
Originally Posted by kikkenit2 /forum/post/20882598


The fact is hdmi carries the best video and the best audio so don't avoid/ignore it. The main weakness for the 747 is 3d video, not missing audyssey. So for you this is a strong choice. Many if not most brands sound good in their upper models as long as you set up the speaker and room correction software correctly. Composite video is to be avoided.

I thought HDMI is digital audio and therefore, it is not the best? I thought audio people still highly recommend analog audio? I didn't realize that HDMI was better than S Video or the other ways to transmit video... thank you...

 

[pronghorn/az]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mpray1983 /forum/post/20882171


Integra 40.3

Plus 2 on the Integra. The 40.3 is new but it will last you many, many years. Sound and build quality is excellent.


Jeff