Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater revised HT setup

Ok, after doing more research I think I'm narrowing it down.

2x Mi2Ti L/R Main
2x Mi2Ti L/R Rear
1x Mi2Ti Center
1x Hsu Research VTF2 Sub

The Arcam DiVA AVR200 Audio/Video Receiver is quickly becoming the front runner on a cost/quality basis, and the outstanding reviews it seems to be getting.

Last piece I need will be DVD player to use as the central music/media player. I ran across an interesting article about using a DVD instead of CD for those on a budget. Has anyone else done this? Any suggestions or other ideas?

Thanks!

Have you considered the QS2s at all for rear speakers?
Just curious.

As to your second query on the dvd/cd issue, i also had to choose between cd and dvd options. In wanting a multiple disc cd player for convenience i went looking around. In finding a dvd player with a 5 disc tray, both my requirements were solved. However, given the past couple of months of use, i am re-thinking my purchase of the MODEL of dvd player that i bought.
The concept is otherwise very sound. I absolutely love being able to load up the player with 5 discs and letting them play on random while knowing that i could pop a dvd movie into the player for HT.
Considering you are on a tight budget, judging by your component selection, i personally would recommend you look for a dvd player to use as both the movie and music source.
Some good names with decent prices that i came across were Panasonic, Toshiba (especially decent), Hitachi, Sony .
I think i may have copied an article from S&V not long ago about budget dvd players and all their specs.
If you are interested in this info send me a personal message and i'll dig up the scanned pages.
You can also chek out this post i did awhile ago on my choices:
the link

Whip, your speaker list looks great, although it wouldn't be out of line to consider QSs as surrounds, as Chess mentioned.

On the player; yes definitely a combined CD/DVD player should be fine, they're designed with dual lasers to play both optimally. Again as Chess mentioned don't overlook the convenience of a multi-disc player. The sound quality is just as good as single disc models.

Well, as I hoped is evidenced by my speaker & receiver choice, I am very concerned about quality. The reason I listed the M2Ti's as rear surrounds is because of the distance between the listening position and the back wall. I expect it is a good 6 ft at a minimum. Any feedback on placing the QS vs. M2/M3/M1 as rear surrounds? Can anyone give some feedback on price/quality using the, say the QS2 or maybe QS4 vs the M2 or M3?

On, the second question... I'm glad to hear about the success of others using a DVD inplace of a CD.

Another question. I've heard about some people saying the Hsu sub should be crossed over at 60 or below. Will the M2's fit the bill to cover the rest of my sound? Do I need to worry about my rear surround?

Lastly, does anyone have any comments about 6.1 or 7.1 surround sound? How common is it? Is it something I can worry about 2 years from now vs. today? If its reasonable to think that a 6.1/7.1 source now will make a difference then I may opt to purchase the B&K 307 instead of the Arcam DiVA AVR2200.

Whip, I'm going to ask something that puzzled me before, but I only commented briefly. You seem to be looking for quality components at modest cost, but with one glaring exception. Why the horrendously expensive receivers? The ones you mention run from about $1,200 to $3,000. This appears to be way out of proportion to the other components that you're considering. Clean power is cheap these days. As I said, I'm puzzled.

Hi Whipdancer,

I may be getting a little anal about this, but it's my modest program to correct a common misunderstanding. Surround speakers are intended to be placed at the sides of the listening area, not on the rear walls. That's the Dolby Labs specification--at the sides, up to 20 degrees forward or to the rear of an imaginary line across the listening area. That is where they work best at creating a sense of envelopment in the soundfield. QS surrounds are very forgiving of placement eccentricities and they'll work at the rear, but side placement tends to be superior.

The "back" speaker(s) in a 6.1 or 7.1 setup is intended to go on the rear wall.

There's no significant difference that I've ever detected--in terms of audible differences--between using a DVD player as a CD playback device and a dedicated CD player. Sometimes DVD players are slower recognizing and cueing up a CD, but there isn't any audible difference, nor should there be. Most such "differences" in audio quality are based on casual, anecdotal uncontrolled comparisons. If you do comparisons in a controlled, scientific manner, with duplicate CDs running in sync on the two machines you're comparing, equalized playback levels, and blind switching, alleged differences disappear.

Regards,

QS surrounds

Ah! I didn't know that about the surround speakers. Is ceiling placement acceptable for them or are they (like the front) supposed to be closer to ear level?

As for my receiver choice...
I listed the B&K 307 as my top choice, because it is. However the cost on it is prohibitive and IF I elected to purchase one it would be used (around $1k). For a new receiver I'm leaning toward the Arcom DiVA 2200 as a good compromise between cost/features/quality.

If you'll pardon the length of my post, I'll elaborate some. I'm building my first home (30days till close!) and want to have a first class HT/Stereo setup. I'm an avid music (blues mostly) fan and movie watcher. Given the size of my listening area some of the larger (physically) and more expensive speakers I've looked at are simply overkill. By acquiring quality bookshelf speakers, when the time comes that I move into a new home (with a dedicated theater room - hopefully) and I upgrade my mai room speakers, I will upgrade the system in my bedroom via the bookshelf speakers previously in the main room. Hopefully the only other upgrades would be to add dedicated amps utilizing the preamp outs of my existing AV receiver. In the mean time I want to make sure I am able to power a 5.1 system. This means I need 6 channels of power. If I elect to go with an A/V receiver that offers 6.1 or 7.1, then I'll need 7 or 8 channels of power. Take away 1 of those channels because the Hsu sub I'm looking at is self powered, but that still means I'm looking for quality 5 channels of power. Granted I'm not nearly as informed as I could be, I'm finding it difficult to get the information on the less expensive models, much less find less expensive models that offer 6 or 7 channels of amplification. Add in the fact that I've never been satisfied with the built in amplication in the common japanese AV receivers (Sony, Pioneer, Toshiba, etc), I decided to try what I've always viewed as the next step up in A/V equipment.

Now that's not to say that I've totally dismissed considering other models than listed. If anyone can make some recommendations I'd be more than happy to check them out.

I guess I've just always approached buying electronics with the mindset that its permanent. I am just now retiring my AR1-a speakers and JVC receiver (circa 1973 - inherited from my parents). I'm still using the Nakamichi cassette deck, AWIA reel-to-reel, and I forget the name of the turntable.

To make a long story slightly longer, I'm hoping the equipment I purchase today will still be used 15 or 20 years from now.

Hope this helps to explain my approach.

Yes whip, the position Alan describes, and about 3 feet above ear level is the most commonly suggested position for the surrounds. This isn't to say that the back wall can't be used reasonably well, especially with multi-polar speakers such as the QSs which have very broad dispersion.

Back on the receivers, it may be to your benefit to consider some of the fine 6.1 receivers available in the $400-$500 area. The Denon 1803 is very good and the Onkyo 600 and Yamaha 5560 are also worth considering.

Whipdancer,

If I can throw a receiver comment to you, you should try to save yourself a few hundred bucks and track down the Arcam AVR100. Unless you have a lot of digital sources, the 3 on the 100 are more than enough. The bass management issues you've read about were fixed in the software on later models (mine has full bass management), and the Hall DSP does a GREAT job on 2-channel, so the DPL-2 isn't that big a deal. Finally, a universal remote like the One-for-All will learn to control an Arcam, meaning you won't need to rely on the pathetic standard remote.

I can assure you that yes, the Arcam receiver is as good as advertised. If 10.2 ever becomes the standard for HT, I would still use the AVR100 for stereo music. Positively blows away the Japanese receivers.

I would also follow Alan's suggestion and consider a pair of QS surrounds. The difference is remarkable in comparison to direct-radiators (speaking from my own experience), and the sound is enveloping enought that you won't miss a surround back.

Whip, i understand your approach to designing your home theatre.
I did the same thing several months ago. I wanted to find a high end receiver that would last me a lifetime. I also wanted to find speakers that were as best quality for the price that i could get knowing that sometime in the future, as my preferences for sound continue to develop, i might switch them out for other speakers that i find more appealing whether they cost more or not.
Since speakers will comprise the greatest single change in the sound quality, they are the most likely candidates for future replacing.

That being said, i plan on keeping my Axioms for as long as i have my Onkyo DS797 receiver. However, i also plan on setting up a second system in the distant future which will be geared towards a high end HT application. That system will hopefully have all my dream components or those 'new' dream speakers that i have yet to come across. I have alot of auditioning to do in the next 5-10 years.

Anyway, on the QSx vs direct speaker thing, i had the chance to compare the QS8s to the M22s as rear surrounds. Here is a link to what i posted awhile ago:
the link