Updated 11/23/2008 - HDTV and Surround Sound Recommendations!

[Shike]

Originally Posted by Deathwish238

Right and the SA-XR57 costing less than $300 has the sound quality of a $1000 receiver makes it an excellent value imo

If you're not using the digital amps, there is no SQ improvement. Let alone, you haven't sourced anywhere that says it sounds like $1000. Every place I go to says "it sounds okay/good".

It can be useful. Like in Lambo's situation where his mains could use the extra power.

The purpose of Bi-amping is NOT to increase power, it's to increase crossover performance. Anyone who claims to know as much as you should at least know that much . . .

Having a hole would be even worse. I don't know if I can pinpoint the sub because I know where it is or because I can actually hear the difference. I don't have an amazing sub, but a very good sub can throw the sound in a way that it would be difficult to pinpoint its location.

Science says different

haha, I would be too. The more I see or hear about your sonotube the more I want one.

He was like "what's that?" He then proceeded to ask if it would fit in our dorm when we head to college.

[Deathwish238]

Originally Posted by Shike

If you're not using the digital amps, there is no SQ improvement. Let alone, you haven't sourced anywhere that says it sounds like $1000. Every place I go to says "it sounds okay/good".

yeah I was waiting for when you'ld ask for a source. My source is the avsforum. I'm too lazy to dig around again and come up with a plethora of people comparing the SA-XR55/SA-XR57 to receivers 3 or 4 times its price. If you care to look around, you'll find a lot of evidence. I didn't believe it at first, but now I definitely do.

It's only downside imo is no Component Upconversion and no OSD.

Originally Posted by Shike

The purpose of Bi-amping is NOT to increase power, it's to increase crossover performance. Anyone who claims to know as much as you should at least know that much . . .

If you're using 1 amp for the mids/highs and another amp for the lows wouldn't the speaker end up seeing more power? My understanding is that it increases power as well as sound quality

Originally Posted by Shike

Science says different

I've always read that hole in frequency range = bad. I've also read that pinpointing speakers = bad. What have you read comparing the two?

Originally Posted by Shike

He was like "what's that?" He then proceeded to ask if it would fit in our dorm when we head to college.

haha. I can't imagine the number of complaints you would end up with...

[Shike]

Originally Posted by Deathwish238

yeah I was waiting for when you'ld ask for a source. My source is the avsforum. I'm too lazy to dig around again and come up with a plethora of people comparing the SA-XR55/SA-XR57 to receivers 3 or 4 times its price. If you care to look around, you'll find a lot of evidence. I didn't believe it at first, but now I definitely do.

Meh, I've met crazy people on there before too sooo . . .

If you're using 1 amp for the mids/highs and another amp for the lows wouldn't the speaker end up seeing more power? My understanding is that it increases power as well as sound quality

A search on google will tell you different. Basically, no matter what on your regular wiring you have the same amount of watts to power the speaker. All bi-amping does is split the frequencies, but you will still get the same amount of watts in the end. Even if you're supplying 100W to upper, and 100W to lower, it still only goes up to 100W and the 100W under single amping doesn't split into 50W and 50W.

I looked it up numerous times in the past to make sure, and this is the most common answer I got. Usually if someone talked of power increase the answer was "Marginal if any".

I've always read that hole in frequency range = bad. I've also read that pinpointing speakers = bad. What have you read comparing the two?

I'm sorry, that's not what I was really commenting against. I was referring to the sub "throwing" sound . . . sound waves are sounds waves, and no matter what it will respond a certain way. Even if you could guide the waves across the room, you would still pinpoint them "somewhere". It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

haha. I can't imagine the number of complaints you would end up with...

I finally decided to adjust the volume to the rest of my system. My room can still really shake, when it's meant to. Not as often anymore though, but my music prefers it this way.

[Deathwish238]

Originally Posted by Shike

Meh, I've met crazy people on there before too sooo . . .

haha as have I. Part of the reason I don't browse the avsforum much is the excessive amount of bickering and people that are too stubborn or close minded to accept other ideas

Originally Posted by Shike

A search on google will tell you different. Basically, no matter what on your regular wiring you have the same amount of watts to power the speaker. All bi-amping does is split the frequencies, but you will still get the same amount of watts in the end. Even if you're supplying 100W to upper, and 100W to lower, it still only goes up to 100W and the 100W under single amping doesn't split into 50W and 50W.

I looked it up numerous times in the past to make sure, and this is the most common answer I got. Usually if someone talked of power increase the answer was "Marginal if any"

hmm interesting. Well generally lower frequencies require more power to be amplified when compared to higher frequencies.

Originally Posted by Shike

I'm sorry, that's not what I was really commenting against. I was referring to the sub "throwing" sound . . . sound waves are sounds waves, and no matter what it will respond a certain way. Even if you could guide the waves across the room, you would still pinpoint them "somewhere". It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Well yes you can pinpoint it...but that's what throwing the sound is supposed to do. For example, in Master and Commander when you people are walking above you on the deck of the ship, a good sub will make the bass sound like it's coming from above you...not in front of you where the sub is.

What's bad is if the bass always sounds like it's coming from wherever the sub is located

Originally Posted by Shike

I finally decided to adjust the volume to the rest of my system. My room can still really shake, when it's meant to. Not as often anymore though, but my music prefers it this way.

Yeah when I first got my sub I had it up too high as well.

[Shike]

Originally Posted by Deathwish238

Well yes you can pinpoint it...but that's what throwing the sound is supposed to do. For example, in Master and Commander when you people are walking above you on the deck of the ship, a good sub will make the bass sound like it's coming from above you...

. . . you're crazy

There's no way of magically "throwing" a wave unless it's actually aimed at an area. A down-firing will reflect into itself if it's above 80hz and you will hear it where it's at. A front firing you will probably hear either where it's at or where it's aimed. As for coming from above you, that only works if it's omnidirectional (below 80hz) and technically it "surrounds" you. Now, if they use a soundstage with the other speakers and techniques to change how all the channels respond on certain levels you may feel like there's another soundstage above you. However, it's nothing more than how it's recorded/mastered and having the equpiment to take advantage of it.

You make it sounds like there's some magical subwoofer tech out there. The only magical type out there is making a sealed sub F3 under 20Hz, and that's because they specifically built drivers for their subs to do it.

[Deathwish238]

haha. Well I didn't believe it until I heard it

[pebblez]

would you guys suggest the Panasonic or the Yamaha? Can either of you give a link to a panasonic sale page?

about the sonotube... i'm jealous, and doubt it'll fit in the dorm room.

And finally pointing to speakers in a surround sound. I've always been able to do that. Infact, yesterday I went to see the Reno 911 movie (good flick by the way) and upon the sub's first input from the previews, I imediately knew where it was.

[ArielAtom]

What do you all think of iTunes in terms of Sound Quality? If it is really that bad then my plan is pretty much out the window. For my coming birthday, I will have 700 (CDN), enough to cover the headphones, DIY amp, and sound card. If I also have to get an Oppo and a pre amp/amp, then that would go way out of budget. So it all rests on iTunes shoulders for the sound.

I couldn't bring myself to manage two libraries, unless it was a really noticable dfference. I will do some tests and state my conclusion.
Out of this list, do you recommend any in particular?
Cog
Cynthiune music player
MacAmp Lite X
PureMusic Audio Player
Songbird
VLC
XiphQT component for Quicktime/iTunes that supports Ogg FLAC playback

Last night I received my ethernet cable from Ebay, and hooked up my PS2 to the internet, and online play was pretty fun, although there understandably weren't many people playing TOCA 2 (in total there were three:P). I am thinking about getting live on my original xbox.
Is the account transferrable to the 360 live network?

What do you think I should get, these headphones, or a 360? I remember death that you thought I should get the xbox, but I think I have enough on the go without that slowing my other things down, for example school, piano, soccer and doing stuff on my computer. When I got my computer I thought it would end my want for new things for a good couple years! Not quite... I could get a gaming fix by just picking up a copy of Vista Home basic (200 I think), and playing games on my computer. The 360 would have way better graphics though, right? Oh and games I like more! Hmmm.
What do you think?

My e-bargaining with a retailer for the m00s is not going as well as I had hoped. He said that he had them for 900. I asked if he could go closer to their american online competition. They say the american MSRP is 700, although it is not even listed on their site, so I am forced to beleive him. Cross those off my list I suppose.

My everyday speakers here I think really aren'y meant to be heard from this close (2.5 feet). I can hear the tweeters separate from the drivers. Why is it that most tweeters I have seen on speakers are no bigger than 1.5", but mine are 2"? Is that good?

lol Lambo, sorry but I need all of the cash I can get! I am even operating a small-scale bank operation. I loaned people some lunch money,and over march break they will accumulate interest. When they give me back my money, I will make $1.50 off of $7.00.
Plop that in the penny jar...

[ArielAtom]

I just read the DIY guide to building that amp, and it seems really complex. I could do it, but the article says you shouldn't go this route to save money, as once you upgrade it becomes more expensive than commercial ones. Have you ever done this before? Can you share your experience? @Shike, mainly


Also, what do you think of this computer sound card?
http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/firewave/

[Shike]

Originally Posted by lambo_freak

would you guys suggest the Panasonic or the Yamaha? Can either of you give a link to a panasonic sale page?

Get the Yamaha and be happy is my opinion. You'll have support for a seperate amp later when you want more power. Until then you will have solid SQ and a great receiver.

And finally pointing to speakers in a surround sound. I've always been able to do that. Infact, yesterday I went to see the Reno 911 movie (good flick by the way) and upon the sub's first input from the previews, I imediately knew where it was.

Speakers you should usually be able to tell unless the soundstage is perfect. Subs you're not supposed to.

Originally Posted by ArielAtom

I couldn't bring myself to manage two libraries, unless it was a really noticable dfference. I will do some tests and state my conclusion.
Out of this list, do you recommend any in particular?
Cog
Cynthiune music player
MacAmp Lite X
PureMusic Audio Player
Songbird
VLC
XiphQT component for Quicktime/iTunes that supports Ogg FLAC playback

Then IMO ditch iTunes. Songbird really sticks out if you want to stick to a library interface.

Now, as for what you should do regarding costs etc. I say ditch the thought of SACDs and DVD-As for now. Plain and simple, it takes more equipment than you have money for. If you feel the audio outs on your actual PC aren't offering you decent sound quality, the external Sound Blaster may be better. What Mac do you actually have so I can check up on its audio chipset?

The most I would buy at this point is headphones, DIY Amp with Omps off ebay, and if required a sound card.

I just read the DIY guide to building that amp, and it seems really complex. I could do it, but the article says you shouldn't go this route to save money, as once you upgrade it becomes more expensive than commercial ones. Have you ever done this before? Can you share your experience? @Shike, mainl

I myself have not done it, as my IEMs are extremely efficient. However, I'm pretty sure he means it gets more expensive when you upgrade to premium equipment. In terms of the bitheads you saw and the DIY there should be relatively little difference (and depending on what parts, it may lean in favor of the DIY). However, when you start working up the amp lines it does a 180 on you completely.

I don't believe you will need to upgrade that far as you probably won't be able to take advantage and utilise it to its fullest.

As for the Mac sound card you linked to, it looks close to the external Sound Blaster at twice the cost in terms of what it does.

EDIT:

As for getting a 360 or audio gear, it's up to you. Would you rather play games, or do other things while listening to your music?