Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Sound of Receivers

Can one end up with different sound "quality" from different receivers? I understand that there are many factors that will affect sound quality, and to a much greater extent than the receiver, but I've also read some references to receivers having sound that is "warm" and other receivers having a different type of sound.

Here is the context of my question: I have two receivers currently. One is a Pioneer Elite 72TXV that is a few year old. It currently is in our basement. The other is a new Denon 2310CI that is still in the box. I originally had planned to put the Denon in our basement and move the Pioneer into our bedroom. Now I am trying to decide if the switch is worth the effort, or whether I should just put the Denon in the bedroom. I still need to figure out whether there are any particular (non-sound quality) features of one of the receivers that I'd prefer in one location over the other. For example, the basement is going to have a new Pioneer Elite TV, and I think there may be some features that I get when the Pioneers are matched up. My question is this: Should different potential sound quality be one of the considerations as I decide where to put the receivers, or is the idea of different sound quality based on the receiver just a myth. In terms of power from the receivers, I'm pretty sure that is a non issue because I think both have plenty for my listening volumes.

Well built receivers, as both of those are, sound more alike than different. It really does come down to features, as you were thinking.

That said, pairing an older Pioneer receiver with a newer Pioneer TV really doesn't gain you anything. That receiver uses SR+ to send the extra info to the TV. When they are connected that way, the TV must be on, and the remote for the receiver must be pointed at the TV in order for it to be controlled. While I have a Pioneer TV, receiver, and DVD player, I've only connected the DVD and receiver together with the SR+ cable. I've also used the "out" on the receiver to go into the DVD player, so the receiver is the component which must be on to control the player. For some reason Pioneer only puts SR+ outs on their TVs so they become the control point. So there's no point in using the pairing feature available to you. If you had a newer receiver you would be able to use the HDMI-CEC (aka Kuro Link), but it's pretty much equally useless.

Also the older Pioneer doesn't support HD audio bitstreaming. With it's HDMI audio support being limited to LPCM. For me, that's not an issue, as I believe that's the way it should be done (i.e. the player unpacking the compressed audio and sending the result to the receiver, rather than sending the straight bits). Some people like to see the DD or DTS lights shining on their receiver, but that's meaningless to me.

The only limit I really see from the Pioneer receiver is that it only has 2 HDMI inputs, that's pretty restricting these days, but you could get an external switch. If it were me, I'd invest in an external scaler, like the DVDO Edge, or the Lumagen Radiance XS, to get extra HDMI inputs, and high quality scaling for all my sources, and run the display in Dot-by-Dot mode all the time.

So if it's easier to live the Pioneer where it is, I don't think you'll really be losing out, sound quality wise, and only slightly in the feature area.

Are you doing any critical listening? If not then it may not be worth the hassle, just put the Denon in the bedroom.

If you're worried about the sound differences then you'll have to factor in not just the receiver, but also the sound characterstics of your speakres and room environment.

Obviously you are already happy with the Pioneer in your basement, so I would set up the Denon in the bedroom first and see how it goes. If you're happy with how the Denon sounds with the speakers in your bedroom then leave it there. If you're curious then switch up the Pioneer and Denon and if there is a difference.

Thank you. The number of HDMI inputs on the receiver actually is not an issue for me. I only have a Sony Playstation and cable box connected to the receiver via HDMI. The only other thing I have connected to the receiver is a Wii (via component), but that does not have an HDMI output anyway. I recognize things can change, but at least at this moment it's a non-issue.

One other quick question for you (o.k. it really turned into two). Would you still recommend a scaler if I place the Denon in the basement with the Pioneer TV? I'm not too conversant on scalers, though I've read some stuff about them in the past. Do they help with pictures when the source is high definition to start with, or do they only help when I'm watching a non-HD source?

Thanks again.

The recommendation of a scaler was a two birds with one stone thing. It would 1. get you more HDMI ports, and 2. improve the video quality. The Denon only has a slightly better scaling ability than the Pioneer. I don't know if it's also limited to analog sources, but the specs page on Denon's site seems to indicate that.

The scaler won't do anything for 1080p sources (well, more expensive ones can do gamma/gray scale correction, but not the two I mentioned). But for anything less, 1080i/720p/480, they offer an improvement. I don't like overscan (when a display pushes the edge of the picture off the screen); while it might have been needed in analog days, there is actual picture content out there now, and it's being hidden. Only in 1080 mode can Pioneer's displays go into Dot-by-Dot (no overscan) mode. Many games, on the PS3 are only 720p, and bonus content on BDs is often 480p. Having a scaler will improve those things. A lot of television is 1080i, so having a superior de-interlacer can improve things there too.

A scaler isn't a necessary item, but it does offer some improvements. Just depends if you think it's worth the money.

An up-scaling device basically tries to 'enhance' a standard definition picture by using a best guess algorithm to 'fill in the banks' if you will and produce a HD signal to send to your TV.

For instance, the up-scaler in my AV receiver will take standard def TV (480i) and regular DVDs (480p) and upscale them to 1080i which is the maximum that my TV can handle. I assume it would also try to upscale a 720p HD signal to a 1080i HD signal but some would argue that that this is not worth the effort and could possibly be, in fact, detrimental.

I can tell you that I 'think' I see a Difference in standard def TV but it can't work magic. Shows poorly filmed still look poorly filmed.

DVDs definitely show an improvement. However, I think it is the upscaler in my Toshiba HD player that is doing the trick as it upscales it to 1080i at the source so the receiver wouldn't do anything. I say this because I think I see superior results when I use my Toshiba player vs. the PS3.

All HD sources, HD TV, and Bluray look great. The Bluray of course, would not be upscaled. Again, poorly produced sources will look worse than stuff well filmed or made specifically for HD.

As long as your not introducing any tone or EQ controls, most solid state receivers will sound no different in blind AB tests.

But what if you're not blind or your name isn't Ab?

Thanks everyone. Interestingly enough, my name is Ab and I'm blind. So, I'll assume no sound difference.

I'm going to look into scalers as well. Not sure I'll buy one, but I'll check it out. At a a minimum, it is something to kill some time with when I feel like taking a break at work.

The two I mentioned are the ones most worth reading up on. There are other models from those makers, and other brands entirely. But when a scaler costs more than the TV you're scaling to, you're doing something wrong. It wasn't until the DVDO Edge that I even thought about buying one; even if I've had an interest in the technology for much longer.

To get you started. You know how everyone goes on at length about how good the scaling is in Oppo's BDP-83 Blu-ray player? It uses most of the features that Anchor Bay put into the chip which also powers the DVDO Edge. So you could make the DVD output of the PS3 (turn off all scaling and noise reduction features) look as good as the Oppo, and have the same for your cable, and all other sources too.

Yeah Ray, audio engineers have known for many years how to make amplifiers which amplify with audible transparency. One of the great things about the modern audio scene is the availability at very modest cost of receivers which are audibly flat from 20Hz-20KHz along with inaudibly low noise and distortion. Nothing audibly better than that is possible, regardless of cost. These days no competently designed unit exhibits a sonic coloration(i.e., a "sound").

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the Denon 2310CI originally mentioned use this same Anchor Bay scaling chip?

Oh yeah, it does. Sorry for the confusion. I was reading Denon's detailed specs wrong. They list two different scaler chips there, but don't have checks next to either. But on the textual description it does say it has the Anchor Bay VRS ABT-2010. So as long as Denon implemented chip correctly, you can pass on the external scaler. Additionally, that ups my vote to putting the Denon with the Pioneer display.

Good catch, thanks.

That definitely seems to be a reason to go ahead and put the Denon in the basement, where I do my real TV viewing. That's what I'll do.

You all are a great resource for those of us who only dabble and can't figure most things out on our own (and I'm sure for those who know a LOT more than I do). A lot of this is hard to understand without a dumbed down explanation. It is very much appreciated.

It is that ABT chip in the Denons that has me looking at a new one to replace the 3808

Guys, do you know if the 2310 will convert all HDMI inputs to 1080p before sending them to the display? Right now I am letting my projector do the de-interlacing (BD player not included) because I thought the 2310 would only convert analog sources to 1080p and then output over HDMI. I have been looking in the manual and cannot find if it will do it with digital inputs. With my cable box or HD-DVD player, the projector is being fed a 1080i signal, not 1080p. Perhaps the results would be better letting the 2310 de-interlace?

Edit: Looks like it can, need to try that tonight

Yes, I've been looking at upgrading my receiver, as it doesn't handle HDMI of any sorts, and the analog audio work-around for my Blu-ray player throws everything else out of whack. The rave reviews the Oppo player has been getting has made my look at the Denon 2310 since it has the same scaler chip, though I realize that doesn't necessarily mean video performance will be equal to the Oppo's.

Let us know how well the Denon handles the upscaling.

Just an FYI--according to the AVS website, the Denon 890 is the same as the 2310 in all respects except the following: "1. the 2310CI has a second, Zone 2 remote in addition to the two-sided regular remote 2. the 2310CI adds 'CI' features for integration into automated, custom integrated home systems: an RS-232 port (e.g. for Crestron/AMX 3rd-party control, as well as for loading firmware updates), assignable 12V trigger" Typically the 890 is about US$50 cheaper than the 2310. I ended up with the 2310 only because I found a good sale on it that actually made it a few bucks cheaper than the 890 (which I had purchased but then returned).

They look slightly different as well, if that matters to anyone. Small differences though.

Its refreshing to read this, and to have it supported on an audio forum after years of reading bunk about the sound coloration of what are largely transparent devices.

Don't tell anyone, but I'm using auto-electrical cable in my HT... three times the copper and half the price of even bulk "speaker" cable.

I keep waiting to see someone using jumper cables. Hey, they're 8 gauge, and they're dirt cheap!

Actually, receivers and amplifiers do sound different.



When you put them in something like this, that is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-whDD3aCJw&feature=player_embedded

Peter, I watched and listened, but I still couldn't hear any difference between the "bright" Yamahas and "warm" Marantzes as they went through the shredder.

I've been threatening to use some spare battery cables I have or even better yet sell them to the masses as "High end audio cables' for 25 times there going price, I will be rich in no time.

[/quote]I will be rich in no time. [/quote]

Jay you mean richer don't you

Have a great time moving into the new house!

One of the first things I learned about, when I started to research how to put together a home theater, was about the speaker wiring. I literally had no idea what was involved in terms of wiring for home theater. When trying to research that topic to generally learn about the subject, I ended up in a thread on the AVS site where they were debating speaker wire. I was surprised when I became really interested in the topic, including the level of detail people provided when making their arguments. In other words, it seemed like some really smart people were thinking in detail about an issue as seemingly mundane as speaker wire, and that fascinated me. Even to the novice, it became clear that paying a lot for speaker wire was just throwing money away. To this day, it makes me mad when I go into Best Buy or similar stores and see just how expensive their speaker wire is (as well as all other calbes, really). On the one hand, I guess Monster and similar companies deserve some credit for great marketing. On the other hand . . . .

I don't remember if I learned about Monoprice here are on the AVS forum, but that site literally has saved me hundreds of dollars.

If it was helpful, give THIS forum the credit!

Have there actually been any direct A/B comparisons with receivers and/or amps in order to determine whether or not they impart their own unique sound?

In theory there shouldn't be a difference but there seem to be many arguements otherwise. No on really knows until a proper DBT is performed. Just going from one audition to another wouldn't be an accurate test given the variables (different speakers, room, etc).

I would be very interested to see the results given that a huge industry exists, along with numerous "experts" claiming there is an actual sonic difference between various receivers and amps. Are they all crazy or just lying to make a buck?

I think the most telling point is that it is never the equipment makers who go on about how their gear sounds so much better than another maker, or even within their own product line. They just list the specs, and the things they've done which are supposed to improve the sound. It is left to the consumers and the reviewers to express the words about how much more chocolaty this new fooswuzzle is than its nearest competitor.

The few companies which do spout superlatives about their products are the ones I just seem to reflexively avoid because their claims seem so outrageous.

Mark: I went back and researched it extensively, and I learned about Monoprice on thus forum, thus savings hundreds of dollars!

Good point, most of the claims aren't actually coming from the manufacturers, although they are stand to benefit the most.

So does it all come back to the consumers & reviewers hearing what they want or think they should hear? Have they simply been influenced by what they see and read?

I wish someone would do a proper test and help put this issue to rest, but I don't think the manufacturers and dealers would like it.

There is this (in)famous double-blind amplifier test, which shows a $6000 amp to sound same as a $200 amp: http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf

I came to this conclusion years ago after my first big Receiver purchase being a near top of the line Yamaha. After making that purchase, I bought a lesser priced amp for the living room. I couldn't tell any difference and at the levels we listen - there was no reason for the extra wattage. My latest purchase was ~$400 Yamaha that I picked up because it decodes the latest - DTS HD - etc.

I could tell a world of difference in sound between the only 2 receivers I've ever used. Both in 2 channel stereo mode.

1) Sony STR-DH500 $160
2) Pioneer VSX-21TXH. $630

Edit: The Sony just had a lot less power and couldn't drive the speakers nearly as good as the Pioneer can. After swapping receivers, I could hear a lot more bass coming from the M22's.

Conversely, I don't think I could really tell a difference between my ancient Toshiba silver face early 80s vintage receiver and my H/K AVR525, or my late 90s vintage stereo Marantz.

Nice read, thanks! That is the type of experiment I've been dying to perform. I would make it even easier on the participants though. Personally, I would not reveal the makes/models prior to or during the test, and I'd simply ask them a) if they could hear a difference and b) which one they preferred. Of course I would need to A/B the same unit against itself as well and see how the results compared to the A/B of different units.

Did you hear a difference at all listening levels or just high volume? Also, I wonder if the different (presumably better) DAC in the Pioneer is contributing as well...

I didn't have both at the same time, so I couldn't A/B, and went by memory. I remember when listening with the Sony that there was clarity of sound in the mid and upper range, but wasn't surprised with the lack of bass since these were M22's. Listened to them for about a week this way. After hooking up the Pioneer and listening to the same source material, I was amazed with the amount of bass coming out of these speakers. I played them both at various volume levels, and I know that volume wasn't a factor. As far as both at low volume, I don't remember the difference, so I'm referring mostly to the higher volumes.

I bought a Yamaha way back when (HDMI didn't exist, and TV's were only HD ready) and started my first home theater. 8 years later, the left surround channel went. So rather than buy a new receiver I bought a used amp - Anthem MCA 20 - for $250. It was $1500 when new the guy told me and I later verified. So this started me thinking I wanted to go with separates and I started acquiring more. Next one, an Anthem PVA7 for $450 which new was $2200. I liked the Anthem idea because the build quality was excellent and they were a Canadian company which made me feel good. I started looking for pre-pro's and to my shock nothing out there was a reasonable deal. A good pre-pro was the same as a top end receiver. So this made me start looking at cheap, but new, receivers to act as a pre-pro to the amp's. Vicious circle of this but not that and what about and don't forget cables and more power outlets and two more dedicated 20 amp circuits.

Finally, sold the MCA 20 for $750, sold the PVA7 for $1000 because audiogon.com guys love that stuff.

Bought a used RX-V3800 which has lots of power, HMDI, latest decoding, ABT 1010 chip for scaling all for the low low price of $350 because one HDMI port didn't work (does now).

Used the left over money (plus some) and got the M60's and a new EP350.

My point. At no time did the sound change for the better until I got the M60's. All the amplification before it had no impact. I'm stickin with receivers until the number of channels I need cannot be supported in a single chassis or a single power outlet.

Going from a 15 year old Sony, albeit a $500 model at that time, to a current Pioneer for about the same price, I was shocked at how little (if any) improvement I heard out of the box. Didn't A/B, just exchanged one for the other in my rack. But now I have HDMI, and MCACC which does seem to improve at least the quality of the bass heard in my room.

Dang, I'm trying to read your reply but I keep looking at your avatar instead LOL.

Really kind of annoying, isn't it.

I've seen worse. Hypnohead was pretty bad...

Hmm, I searched for Hypnohead and he/she/it wasn't in the user list. I did find Hypnotoad though, but he/she/it didn't have an avitar.

It was one of JP's old avatars.

It was always Sean's favorite. You don't know how hard I had to fight the urge to bring him back.

Oh, wait, just go check out the "Where Avatars go to die" thread over here.

Just scroll three blocks down from Dancin' Spiderman. If you get to Self-Facializing Cow, you've gone too far. (Ain't that the truth)

I stand corrected, the spiderman one was worse.

"If you get to Self-Facializing Cow, you've gone too far"--that really gave me a good laugh.

Nut, a comment on your reply discussing the Stereo Review double-blind amplifier listening tests. There was an open listening session before the blind tests and it's amusing to read some of the rather extravagant language describing the differences they claimed to hear when they knew the identity of the units they were listening to, so this increased the interest of the tests. Of course, the identities were concealed during the blind tests and the sound differences disappeared when the name plates and price tags did.

These tests still stand unchallenged(unchallenged by solid evidence to the contrary, that is, not simply by stubborn disagreement).

But stubborn disagreement can be a very effective rhetorical strategy!

Yes, I did notice that they had an open listening session first, but I felt that having the participants just knowing which amps were included in the blind tests would still influence them in what they think they hear.

I say send them in blind, don't tell them who or what they're listening to, don't even tell them we're comparing different amps, just tell them what to listen for (detail, brightness, warmth, imaging, soundstage, etc), and see what they say.

Of course knowing what they were listening to influenced what they expected to hear. That's the whole point.

As I have noted before, John, your signature speaks volumes...Rob

I made the mistake of clicking JP's link yesterday and just now snapped out of my Hypnohead induced trance. . .


Evil avatar. . .

I think it's great to dispell long held beliefs, such as you don't need $6000 dollars to buy a good 'sounding' amp. That's what made it so easy to purchase my Emotiva for $600 bucks, because I now know that 1 watt = 1 watt.

But one thing that may get lost in translation while reading all of this is that we should all go down to Radio Shack, pick up their cheapest 7.1 channel reciever, and think we're going to be ok. There is a difference in recievers, even if coloration isn't one of them.

My case and point, I've owned my Denon 4802 for about 8 years now. And ever since everything went the way of HDMI, I've been dying to upgrade to something with HDMI. But I've been confused about what I really needed, and what was just 'fluff'. So I got my hands on a Sherwood NewCastle 772 to test out it's HDMI features. The very 1st thing I noticed was how small the Sherwood was next to the mighty Denon. When I picked it up I thought perhaps it was a pre-pro... "How in the world can this thing be this light"?

When I moved the Denon to make way for the Sherwood it was two inches taller, 6 inches longer & weighed about 20 pounds more than the tiny (in comparison) Newcastle! It wasn't just a slight difference, it was like switching from a Ford Excursion to a Volkwagen Golf. I thought, "my God did they fill this thing with lead to make it hurricane proof"???

Ok so I knew from all the discussions on here that it wouldn't matter, it would still sound the same as my Denon. And as far as anything from half volume on down I would say this is correct. But when the volume goes up past 35 (the Sherwood goes from 0 to 70 on the volume scale where the Denon went from like -60 to +12) I could definately tell that something was missing. And that something was POWER!!! It first hit me when I accidentally sat on the remote control & it shot up to something near max, and it sounded like total SHIT!!! This poor Sherwood just does not have the juice it takes to keep the M80's happy, not by a long shot. And although the Denon is only rated to run 25 watts per channel more than the 772, let me just state for the record that the actual disparity is much greater than that.... MUCH! But even though the Denon commands the M80's with much more authority than the Sherwood could ever hope to, it still bows to the massive power reserves of the XPA-3. And keep in mind the Emotiva out weighs the Denon without any of that processing stuff to bog it down any. So does that mean pounds equals power? Not hardly. I would never go out shopping for a reciever with a scale under my right arm. But it did make me realize that those big, massive recievers/amps are that way for a reason.

Now not everyone will use the 300 watts of the Emotiva, hell I don't even use ALL of them. And yes I'll admit that for 98% of what I do, the Denon would suffice just fine. However I could not hit max volume with the Denon, it did start clipping a bit when I tried it before. Not nearly as garbled as it was when I accidentally blasted the Newcastle, but the Emotiva simply plays the M80's with complete authority all the way from -60 to +12 (with the Denon acting as a pre/pro... The Sherwood has no pre-outs, so I can't hook the Emotiva up while using it). I realize most of you have no interest in seeing +12 on the volume dial. I guess I just like having that peace of mind knowing if a buddy ever says, "say man how loud does this thing play", I can say, "well let me show you", & blow the roof off of the house for him.
I would not feel comfortable taking this Sherwood up past probably 55 for anyone. Most people have no clue what clipping is, or dynamic headroom, or THD or any of that good stuff. Not even if you sat there and tried to explain it to them. All they know is if you tell them you spent upwards of four grand on your home theater (while most of them probably thought their $150 dollar home theater in a box was 'expensive'), and then it starts breaking up when you turn it up too high... well they're going to think you're the biggest sucker to ever live.

Lol, hell I realize all that balogna is beneath the vast majority of you guys. But it does mean something to me. Enough to spend $600 bucks purchasing an amp that would drive my M80's to their full potential whether I use that potential very often or not. So no, there may not be any sound quality differences between the 100 watt per channel Sherwood Newcastle and the 125 watt per channel Denon paired with the 300 watt per channel Emotiva. But there is a major difference in how my speakers behave when I feed them all the power they ever thirst for.

Oh and one last thing... I played the Sherwood at the very peak of its performance level (where it was still playing fairly smooth, with minimal distortion), which was around 55 on the dial for about 6 minutes and then the reciever shut down completely due to the protection circuts kicking in. This is something I never experienced with the Denon..... EVER!

Yep, you still need to pay for features (power, inputs, channels, neons) and quality (fit, finish, use-ability, reliability).

Hi Micah,

I would point out here (as I'm sure JohnK will) that any AV receiver run past its output limits will shut down, even if it is rated to be stable with 4 ohms.

You have a huge room, many times larger than the average, which puts a lot of stress on the relatively modest amplifiers built into a 7-channel AV receiver.

Used in a typical living room of about 2,100 cu. ft (about 19 x 13 x 8), which the Axiom listening room emulates, the Sherwood R772 or even the $300 stereo model will drive the M80s to very loud listening levels--louder than I like, without overheating or shutting down.

No, it won't begin to reach the extremely loud levels some of my colleagues prefer, +100 dB SPL, for which only separate power amplifiers are recommended, but used within its limits, the Sherwood Newcastles have robust sturdy amplifiers that have never had the problems with 4-ohm loads associated with some other brands, including some models of Emotiva.

Regards,
Alan Lofft

Alan, when a new guy joins the "team", is he handed hearing protection?

If he doesn't already have hearing protection he wouldn't be on the team

Hey Mark,

Nope. Seriously, we all have different preferred playback levels. Unquestionably really loud, clean playback can be thrilling, especially in one's own home, but at least with music, I try and duplicate what I hear at classical concerts, opera, and in jazz clubs and the like. I don't blame some of my colleagues for trying to duplicate what they've heard at highly amplified rock concerts, which I mostly didn't attend.

In fact, one of the reasons Ian Colquhoun began development of the Axiom A-1400 amplifier was because he grew tired of re-setting two or three of the five Denon monoblock power amps, each capable of 350 watts into 4 ohms, that would shut down at parties (I put in ear plugs and went out on the deck!) driving the M80s to way over 100-dB SPL levels in a cathedral ceiling living room of large dimensions.

Regards,
Alan

I think that when reviewers start to talk about receivers or amplifiers being warm, etc. it is mostly B.S. But, I've read many reviews on how a separate high powered amp can be bring out more detail or help the speakers produce more bass than budget a AVR. The higher powered amp helping produce more bass makes sense since there is more wattage on hand and maybe the budget AVR can't keep up with the room/speaker combination even at moderate sound levels. Maybe the claim about more detail also makes sense in the same way. But, past that the rest of it seems to me like B.S.

I would still love to know if they make any sort of difference at the volume levels I listen--60-75dB.

Oh yes it's definately all about personal preference. In no way am I attempting to trash the Sherwood or any other reciever for that matter. As I pointed out up to somewhere between 50% and 70% of it's max volume the Sherwood gave me the exact same sound and performance than my other set-up that had many times the available power gave me. Therefore, anyone who listens to their music and or movies at those levels 100% of the time would be very happy with the unit. And as I mentioned in that post I'm sure the majority of the members on this board have no interest in maxing out the capabilities of their speakers. So in now way was I suggesting everyone needs an external amp.

But there are also others like me out there, that like to supercharge their home theaters. And that was my main point, that while recievers are for the most part identical in the way they reproduce sound, there are still differences between high end and low end recievers. Personally I would never drop more than say $1500 on a reciever. For one thing I've learned that as much as industry standards change in this area, recievers age very quickly (unfortunately). So it's hard to put much more than a thousand or so into something that may become obsolete in 5 or 6 years. I spent over $4000 on my speakers, but they will never become obsolete, I will enjoy them for decades, so I have no problem investing heavily in them.

Re. rock Concerts Alan, you might try picking up a copy of Collective Soul's "Home" DVD where they play along with their home town's Atlanta Symphony Youth Orchestra. It's probably the best rock band/symphony concert I have seen or heard.

The first couple of songs are mostly about the band but if you can stick it out, they do some really nicely integrated stuff with the orchestra. It's also fun to see the kids truly enjoying the experience and perhaps even more fun watching the conductor getting very into some of the tunes.

My Mom is a classical music nut and she adores this concert. Well, Actually, I think she adores the lead singer a bit too much also.

Ian sounds like my kinda dude!

Hey Murph,
If you enjoy rock/symphonic combinations, and I know there's many, try Tom Cochrane and Red Rider: The Symphony Sessions. It's a live CD with the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra and is mastered really well. If you sit in your sweet spot, you'll swear you're there. I believe it's the last album he did with Red Rider.

Cool. I wasn't aware of that one. I will check it out.

So I set things up over the weekend and last night. I'm still figuring things out with the Denon receiver, and this always could be my imagination, but something seems to sound better with the new receiver than the prior one. Per the earlier discussions, I don't think it's any "sound quality" of the receiver. I'm pretty sure it's the settings that the Audyssey came up with versus the settings from the Pioneer's auto setup. I feel like I am getting much more sound out of the surround speakers and I also seem to get more base. That's not to say I could not have gotten the same exact thing with the other receiver--I'm sure I could have if I'd been willing to adjust the settings from the auto setup on the Pioneer receiver. However, I figured I'd just screw things up so I never wanted to play with them.

Also, the picture on the new TV looks fantastic. Again, it could to some (or all) degree be my imagination, as I'm not sure my wife was nearly as impressed. All in all, very happy thus far with the new setup. After we get the bedroom setup, I'll try to get some pictures up (will need help from the wife with that).

The only thing that seemed a bit weird is I believe crossover was set at 60 hz. I thought I've read on any number of occassions that it should be at 80. I take it I should just adjust that. (As an aside, in a question that will make clear just how little I really understand, by setting it at 60 versus 80, does that mean bass is more likely to go to the sub or less likely.)

Thanks again everyone for all the comments and advice. I'm actually so excited about things I'll probably read up some more on the receiver and TV so that I can play with things and see if tweaks make things even better.

I read a very interesting and "revealing" article on the "Audioholics" front page this morning. When it comes to choosing the next piece of A/V equipment to buy, not that this "revelation" was a surprise, but after reading the column, I don't believe anyone will look the same way at reviewers and their reviews again! (At least with any credibility).

I remember reading that article on Audioholics when it first ran. I also remember even before reading, wondering about "reviews", which all had the same information, taken nearly word-for-word from the PDFs I was reading on the manufacturer's websites, and also using the same pictures I saw on their websites. I subconsciously filtered out that type of review. Although I did find some new music (like Cat Power) when reading the reviews, as them seemed to be talking more about how good some CDs sounded instead of the actual equipment.

The Internet. A tool perfectly made for my constantly diversion seeking brain. I started reading your article about reviewers of AV equipement but very quickly ended up following a link to a very well written article on the various experiments that gained our understanding of the atom. In ended up finishing up the article on the atom but couldn't explore the other tabs of articles I opened in my browser for later reference because my lunch hour is winding down.

Ray, setting the crossover at 80Hz instead of 60Hz means that the sub will be more responsible for 60-80Hz and the speakers less. 80Hz isn't necessarily the "right" setting, but it's a good compromise, as determined by THX and others, being high enough to allow the sub to take a significant amount of the lowest bass load off of the speakers, while not being so high as to make the sub easily localizable.

Hi Murph,

Thanks for the tip, which reminded me immediately of another concert that the Edmonton Symphony recorded years ago with Procul Harem (huge hit in my era: "Whiter Shade of Pale"). It's a live album--I have it on vinyl--and quite well recorded, if memory serves.

I hate generalizing about rock (I still do, of course) because there are so many exceptions in my listening history. I seem to recall liking Tom Cochrane and colleagues. It's just that in recent decades, I've moved more and more away from lots of rock and pop music. I still use Brothers in Arms (Dire Straits) for listening tests sometimes because it's so well recorded and has excellent deep bass and a few other albums that have well recorded vocals that aren't sibilant.

Regards,
Alan

I just received the Brothers in Arms multi-channel SACD the other day, but I haven't had a chance to really listen to it or do a comparison yet. The original CD been a "standby" demo disc for me since it's release.

Well!! get to it man!!

I'm waiting for Rick to test his VP100 and M60s in various locations first!

You're gonna dig that one, I promise! "Your Latest Trick" and "Ride Across the River" are frequently used when I want to demonstrate my system to others.

Thanks JohnK for the response above. I'm a little confused on some of the receiver settings related to the subwoofer and size of my speakers, but I need to noodle that some more and may just start a separate thread to get some good advice if I can't figure it out.

On the music front, I've always really like the Brothers in Arms album. Though a bit of a dated concept at this point, I always thought "side two" of that album was really, really great music.

My CD won't play anything when I put it in upside down.