Here is my situation. My HK7300 has died. I have Axiom M60's/VP150/EP500/QS8. I was mostly happy w/the Surround Performance of the HK, but the music was harsh in what is a fairly bright room. I love the Axiom sound when I had it in a warmer room. Unfortunately, I have modified the room all the wife will allow and now need to mate my Axioms with a Receiver that will help w/some of those highs.
I have read AMAZING things about the Arcam Avr-350, but it does not offer Audyssey EQ. My question is, will the non-EQ'd Arcam potentially sound better than an EQ'd Denon 4806? I have heard the Arcam's are in a different class sound wise, but not sure if the EQ would outweigh the quality for my situation.
Thanks for any guidance. Also, my room is 32x12x10
One of my final choices before going with my current set-up (Outlaw 990/7125) was the Arcam AVR 300 (before they upgraded to the 350). You are right - it is a "giant-killer" in terms of bang for the buck. Kind of like Axioms!
I can't really advise you much, but am curious to hear how this turns out...
Kris, there aren't any miracles in audio electronics and that's about what it would take for a receiver such as the 350(as well as the newer 280)which has no special room equalization circuitry, to help with your situation. You'd be well-advised not to take seriously those "amazing" things you've read. Reality is that, along with all other competantly designed receivers which are engineered with the basic object of meeting the proverbial goal of "a straight wire with gain"(i.e. simply making the signal louder without adding any audible sonic characteristic of its own)the 350 has an audibly flat frequency response and can't do anything to help correct a too live listening room.
Although the majority of views seem to favor the Audyssey system, some have found that it didn't help their situation. It can be said, however, that there's at least a possibility that it could help with your room acoustics, while there's no such possibility with the Arcam. You might try one of the current Denons, or consider the new units with the full Audyssey system which are coming out in the next month or two(e.g. Denon 3808 and 2808, Onkyo 805 and 705).
Is there a difference in the new up and coming Denon's (3808) and the Audyssey implementation in the 4306/4806?
No, at least not as far as is known. By "full" I was differentiating from the simplified Audyssey system(fewer measuring points, no sub equalization)found, for example, on the Onkyo 604 and which will also be on the new 505 and 605.
What about the Outlaw 990 and the new Axiom Amp.
The Denon 48xx is $4000usd
and the Outlaw 990 $1000usd and the Axiom AMP I belive is around $3000usd
John has once again brought some clarity to a topic. Based on what you are looking to spend, an extra $40 for a simple Radio Shack SPL meter will provide better results than an embedded EQ system.
Quote:
John has once again brought some clarity to a topic. Based on what you are looking to spend, an extra $40 for a simple Radio Shack SPL meter will provide better results than an embedded EQ system.
I'm living proof of that. Never used or seen an SPL meter before I got started in this hobby a few months ago. I used the MCACC feature on my Pioneer AVR (similar to Audessy), saved the results, and then used an SPL meter to create a second set of adjustments. I found that the manual settings sounded much, much better to my ears than the MCACC settings. And, at the end of the day, isn't that what counts?
John's post, in my opinion, is completely true and accurate.
Another brand you might want to consider is Emotiva. Although I have never heard them myself, they are getting rave reviews and are quite inexpensive for what you get. I personally will be purchasing their products as soon as I move into a bigger, more soundproof place.
All- Thnaks for the input. My issue is not around speaker balancing etc though as I am a vetran with the SPL meter/calibration. My issue is truly around equalization. I have an SMS-1 and have my frequency response from 20-100hz pretty flat. My issue is in the high frequencies on 2 channel. The sound is too harsh and fatiguing at high volumes. I know this is not an issue of the speakers, b/c in my old room they sounded great. I have laid down all the padded rugs and moved furniture to the extent that my wife will let me. I also cut the treble function on my HK, but that was not enough and did not solve the issue. Just trying to figure out which receiver will likely have the most impact on softening those high frequencies.
Y’all are confusing Audysey EQ with speaker balancing. Two completely different things, although they do work hand in hand.
Speaker balancing / calibration should always be done with a meter and test tones. Audysey is very good, but after you run it, you’ll still want to verify the results with your meter and most likely change settings to some degree.
Where Audysey shines and does what a meter can never do, is add a multi point EQ to each speaker in the room and change the speaker’s sonic characteristics to match the room’s unique sonic characteristics. Again, you can later change these settings, but will probably leave them be.
Some audiophiles will gasp in disgust with the mention of using an equalizer, but they really need to climb out of the dark ages and give it a try.
I can toggle back and forth between the Audysey settings and no EQ and just can’t believe how better it sounds with the EQ on. Everywhere I sit in the room, I am sitting in a sweet spot. The sound is much more enveloping and enjoyable.
As far as recommending a receiver, I’d need to know if HMDI audio from HD / BR players is important to you. If so, you really need to be a bit more picky…….
So, Mike, it sounds like you're pretty satisfied with that Marantz, eh?
As far as recommending a receiver, I’d need to know if HMDI audio from HD / BR players is important to you. If so, you really need to be a bit more picky…….
Not concerned w/HDMI as I route from source to TV and have the necessary connections. I have also considered the Marantz SR8001 based somewhat on your ravings. Do you think it could assist w/my high freqencies where the HK7300 did not (Using Treble cut of -4)? Thanks Mike.
Tom and DK,
I am not completely satisfied with the Marantz, but that’s just me. I’ve come to the conclusion that Neverhappy took my screen name.
I think right now, for HD / BR HDMI lossless sound, either the Marantz 8001 or the Denon 4806 are the best two receivers on the market – considering price. My Marantz has an issue with discrete 6 /7 channel lossless PCM which the Denon does not. I just heard today this has been resolved with the latest batch of units being shipped. No word if Marantz will offer a firmware up date for current owners though. Other than that, I have no burning desire to buy a replacement. I don’t even need an external amp for my room. If I pin the volume, I can get an average spl of 105 db (with higher peaks) in my 1800 cubic foot room with the sub off. – and it sounds mighty fine….
I wasn’t trying to rave or put a plug in for any particular receiver with my earlier post. I am just making a distinction between Audysey and speaker calibration. And yes, I think that it will help you with your room, DK. You can run Audysey and let it do its thing, then go into the manual calibration mode and tweak these settings to your liking if they don’t completely satisfy you. Audysey will change the frequency response of EVERY speaker at numerous points after it runs test tones from each speaker six times for six different mic positions.
63
125
250
500
1k
2k
4k
8k
16k
You can then select to use the EQ settings as is, your own settings, flat or front. Flat changes all speakers to sound the same, front changes them all to sound like the mains. I wasn’t too impressed with flat or front. I wasn’t too impressed with MY settings either. Audysey is definitely smarter than I am….
When you run the set up, it also calculate speaker size, X-over point, delay and channel trim. Mine were very close and all I changed was a half a db hear and there. I also changed X-over points and tried running my M80’s as large and then small. I ended up changing them to small after tweaking with the Avia test disk (Audysey had the mains and center set to large). The LFE channel is smoother and more imersive with the mains and center set to small as it cycles back and forth from each channel to the sub. Don't ask me why....beats the hell out me. It was a blow to my pride to call my mighty M80's as "small", but I'm OK with that decloration of inferior manhood now. I've got a really big sub that compensates.
Nice post, Mike. Thanks for the information and ongoing tutelage. It's cool how we learn from each other.