Hello all.

First time posting to this board, and also a newbie when it comes to all the technical aspects of home audio, so please bear with me.
I purchased the M60's and VP150 a month or so ago, and have been very pleased with the performance. But, I'm looking for some advice on receivers. I have a Sony STR-DE598 with the following specs (power is towards the bottom):

Product Specifications
Convenience

* AM/FM Memory Presets : 20 FM - 10 AM

Power

* Power Consumption (in Operation) : 220W
* Power Consumption (in Standby) : 0.2W
* Power Requirements : AC120V, 60 Hz

Weights and Measurements

* Dimensions (Approx.) : 16 15/16 x 6 1/4 x 12 1/4" (430 x 157.5 x 310mm)
* Weight (Approx.) : 17 lbs 10 oz (8Kg)

Audio Features

* Digital Cinema Sound™ Technology : Yes
* Dolby® Digital Decoding : Yes
* Dolby® Digital EX Decoding : Yes
* Dolby® Pro Logic® Decoding : Yes
* Dolby® Pro Logic® II Decoding : Yes
* Dolby® Pro Logic® IIX Decoding : Yes
* dts® 96/24 Decoding : Yes
* dts® Decoding : Yes
* dts® NEO:6 Decoding : Yes
* dts®-ES Decoding : Yes

Inputs and Outputs

* AC Outlet : 1 Switched
* Antenna Terminal (AM Loop) : 1 (Rear)
* Antenna Terminal (FM 75 Ohm) : 1 (Rear)
* Coaxial Audio Digital Input(s) : 2 (Rear)
* Component Video (Y/Pb/Pr) Input(s) : 2 (Rear)
* Component Video (Y/Pb/Pr) Output(s) : 1 (Rear)
* Composite Video Input(s) : 4 (1 Front/3 Rear)
* Composite Video Output(s) : 2 (Rear)
* Headphone Output(s) : 1 (Front)
* Multi-Channel Input(s) : 1 (Rear)
* Optical Audio Input(s) : 2 (Rear)
* RCA Audio Input(s) : 6 (1 Front/5 Rear)
* RCA Audio Output(s) : 2 (Rear)
* Subwoofer Output(s) : 1 (Rear)

Speaker

* Center Speaker Terminal : Yes
* Front Speaker Terminal : Yes (A & B)
* Speaker Terminal Type : Spring Clips (A & B)
* Surround Back Speakers : Yes
* Surround Speaker Terminal : Yes

Hardware

* Remote Control : Yes

Audio

* Channel Power Rating : 7.1 Channel Power Rating: 90W x 7 Amp Power (8 ohms, 20Hz-20kHz, THD 0.09%)
* Impedance : 8 Ohms
* Sound Fields : Cinema - 4; Music - 3; Auto Format Decoding - 6
* Tuner Type : Auto Tuning, Direct Tuning, Station Name

My question is.......the receiver seems to have sufficient power to drive the M60's and VP150, so, if I were to upgrade the receiver significantly, can I expect the "sound quality" to improve significantly? I know the Sony is pretty much a budget receiver in terms of cost, but will I gain a lot in sound quality by spending bigger dollars on a new receiver, or will I simply be paying more for the newer "bells and whistles"??

Thanks

Mav, welcome. Because of the FTC regulations which govern amplifier power claims, this is about the only area in audio where we can be confident that the manufacturer's number will in fact be met(lab tests by some of the audio publications nearly always confirm this). The specified power of your receiver should meet nearly all reasonable home audio requirements, so no, spending more on a receiver won't result in any better sound quality whatever unless your particular use actually requires more maximum power capacity(unlikely). Yes, more up-to-date features can add improvements(other than simply a higher maximum power capacity)which can justify their cost.

"Mav, welcome. Because of the FTC regulations which govern amplifier power claims"

Is it not the CRTC in Canada and the FCC in the U.S?

Ukiah, welcome. No, the Federal Trade Commission has had regulations in effect for about 35 years which require a specific testing procedure by the manufacturer to arrive at power specifications for their home audio amplifiers. The regulations must be complied with for all units sold in the U.S. , and as a practical matter those sold in Canada meet the same requirements.

thanks, I always confuse FCC and FTC.

Inspite of the good advice and facts John brought up, I would be willing to say that you may in fact find better sound quality with a new avr, ie. Denon, Harmon Kardon, Yamaha, Onkyo, etc., just might yield better amplification, especially if you are looking at playing the M60s at louder volumes, say 85db and up. I had a Sony similar to yours, it was older bought in late 2003 and compared it to a Denon and running my M22s, the Denon had a better, more authoritative bass, it just sounded batter to me. I know others have found similar results. You could always buy one, compare it and if it doesn't sound any better, take it back.

It sounded like pancakes???

I'm not a loud listener, except when showing off, so I'm probably very rarely using more than 90 watts in my small 12x12 room where my HT resides. I have certainly never stressed out my 120 watt Denon, in any case, except maybe in experimentation.

However in comparison, in my much larger (forget the dimensions) living room with very high (2 story) vaulted ceilings and open concept to the kitchen and open double doors to another room, I have (although rarely) turned the volume knob on my old beater 100w Panasonic far enough that sound quality suffered. I suspect it was clipping just slightly, thus adding a small but noticeable level of distortion. It wasn't a static like distortion per say. I can best describe the sound as 'tiring' to listen to.

Different camps will argue about the perceived sound quality from amps at normal listening levels but both sides can probably agree that if you play exceptionally loud or have a huge area to fill loudly, then added amplification is required to avoid the effects of clipping.

You didn't mention your listening habits or your room size so I just thought I'd mention this.

D'oh!!!

Thanks for all the great advice. These forums have been a great help, and I've learned a lot just by reading thru the forums.
I guess for some reason I expected the higher priced receivers would somehow "process" the sound much better than a budget receiver, but I guess most of the dollars go into features, inputs/outputs, and of course more power.
Our room is not particularly large....about 17w x12d x9h, and sitting about 10 ft from the speakers. While I enjoy music fairly loud (rock, classic rock -- from Dave Matthews to Pink Floyd to Hendrix, Yes, Genesis, etc.) I don't consider it ear piercing. Hard to say exactly, but if the volume knob gives any indication (and it probably doesn't), I play the volume at about "50" vs. a max of "75".
I guess putting more dollars into the source component (cd/dvd player) would be worthwhile, as I assume this is the component that "processes" the sound?? We presently have an old 60-disc Technics cd player hooked up with rca plugs, and a Sony single disc dvd player hooked up by Toslink (also an xbox 360 hooked up by digital coax). I personally like the sound from the cd player best, even though it is by far the oldest component (over 10 years old).
As always, I appreciate the feedback and suggestions.

You have great taste in music!

In that size room, you are not likely to use more than 60-70w even at very loud levels.

Put the money saved into a bigger sub for movie booms and the synth and organ in ELPs debut album.

Some camps will also argue that 'modern' digital source components, all sound the same as long as you are not fiddling with any sound altering settings which is normally done at the receiver anyways. In a digital setup, all the player is doing is reading digital ones and zeros and transmitting those ones and zeros to the next device, the receiver which then then does the actual decoding. If it's sending the wrong binary data, it's broken, not better or worse.

The sometimes argued certainty of that statement aside, I think you should consider trying an upgraded CD player just so that you can ditch the analogue cables and modernize to a digital signal all the way to the receiver. However, you say you like the current sound so, your call.

The best bang for your buck is in speakers but you already have outstanding speakers with the M60s. The previous advice to add a good subwoofer is indeed going to make a big difference for you. It would be a great place to invest any extra cash.

However, if you really have the electronics bug (as we all often do,) I'd definitely consider upgrading the CD player to a DVD or even a Bluray player. They can finally be bought for almost as little as a midrange priced DVD player now.

If you go BluRay, you will might also consider an upgraded receiver, simply for HDMI inputs to get the benefit of the new HD Audio formats.

If you need to buy in stages, I'd go Subwoofer, then buy a BluRay player and you can still do Dolby 5.1 and DTS etc with your current receivers optical inputs. Then add surrounds to fill the room then finally a HDMI receiver for eventually playing with the new HD formats.

For the ULTIMATE audio experience, you owe it to yourself to buy the "Dave Matthews and Tim Reynolds - Live at Radio City Hall" Bluray (or DVD minimum) and play it through your new player via to the M60s. It will be a religious experience in audio unlike anything you could imagine via your current CDs and setup.

The spirit of the dead horse won't allow me to comment on the power issue, but having owned several Sony AVRs, I recommend you try Denon, Marantz, Pioneer upper-end, HK upper-end, etc. I find Sony juices up the bells and whistles and uses an MP3 player's amp section. Just try it, see what you think.

Also, DMB blu-ray is special to say the least. But I was shocked to see that once I had my speaker positions tweaked, the stereo CD version sounded 99.999% as good as the blu-ray in DD. I level matched with SPL and switched back and forth, and was shocked by the similarity. That stopped my hunger for the new HD audio formats as they are incrementally better than DD, while DD is supposed to be a leap from CD.

Still shocked by that.

I hear ya. I myself have only the DVD version of that concert and am completely awed by it's sound. As I often comment, I can't imagine the BR formats being much better, except by a nuance, for this particular material. That being said, BR video is indeed a magnitude above DVD so I still encourage a BR player for him, when he's ready.

Yes, the video is another story. It is so real, you can't explain it compared to DVD. The flesh is just ... well like real flesh.

Amazing.

Which is especially great if you're a zombie, I guess.

Once again, thanks for all the advice!
I guess I'm almost there in terms of having the necessary HT components. Frankly, while I'm very pleased with the M60/VP150 across the front, I must admit I was expecting an even better performance improvement when I upgraded from Nuance speakers (yes, I remember all the hype and ridicule about these things when I first bought them about 10+ years ago).
I kept the surrounds (Nuance SAT 1's), also have what I think is a decent sub (Sound Dynamics THS-10 with 100 watts RMS 0.04% THD), and fairly recent Sony DVD player (with HDMI). So, aside from the BR player, I wonder if it is the AVR that is the weakest link here.
Which leads to another question.....if the media player (CD, DVD or BR) merely "transfers" the digital info (the ones and zeros) to the AVR, why do some CD players cost in the thousands of dollars? Dumb question??

Stupid Question, but have you calibrated all your speakers and subs to the same SPL. How do you have the settings in the receiver setup, for ex., speaker size, crossover, etc.?

Thanks SQ.
AVR is set to small/small/small with 80 hz crossover.
Sub volume is manually set to what I "hear" is balanced with the fronts, and cross over setting is turned all the way up (sub volume is only at about 30% level based on the volume dial, if that means anything). I don't have a SPL meter (never used one before, and not even sure how it would work!).
For what it's worth, the fronts are all cabled with axiom speaker wire, and sub is hooked up with axiom coax cable.

Does your receiver have test tones/pink noise, where you adjust the dB level of each speaker and the sub to be the same? I assume you would have to do this by ear, if you don't have an SPL meter.

Because thats what some people will pay.

Yes, Sir, the AVR has test tones and I had to set by ear. The AVR also has settings to set distance of each speaker from the sitting position. Maybe I'll try fiddling around some more with the balance. The sound I'm particularly trying to improve is for music cd's -- as I mentioned earlier, for some reason I like the sound from the cd player, which uses analogue connections, over the DVD player or the Xbox360, both of which use digital connections.

I noticed with my older Sony CD player, which has analog and optical digital connections, that the analog seems to give me a better sound. I'm guessing my Denon is doing a better job converting the analog signal to digital.

Murph, thanks for the advice on the DM & TR DVD -- I'll have to check it out, as DMB has been one of my fav's for years.

And Fred, yes the debut ELP album would be awesome I'm sure. I know I still have the debut vinyl kicking around somewhere, and have some of the tunes on the ELP 4 disc box set. Haven't played it for quite some time, so will have to check it out with the new speakers.

Could not agree more. This is my favorite demo Blu-Ray for showing the 'awesomeness' of my Axiom setup for musical reproduction.

Hi Mav,

You may simply prefer the slighlty "softer" sound (slightly rolled off treble) of analog connections over optical or coaxial digital connections. That is typically the most pronounced difference you'll hear going from an analog to a digital connection from any CD or DVD player(digital audio).

At the risk of raising the ire of JohnK, I'll have to side with Zimm on his suggestion that you think about upgrading the Sony AVR. As a former AV magazine editor in Toronto and New York, I've found that Sony AVRs somehow always have problems of one kind or another, including really weak amp sections that do not meet spec. That does not mean your Sony is defective; it may be quite alright.

However, there is no reason to believe the "sound" from your old Technics CD changer will be improved by switching to a newer player. In years of A/B testing of CD players at many different price levels, I have yet to detect a particle of difference in sound quality using musical programming as a source. Yes, there are measurable differences but at such residual levels they are inaudible with music. If an analog preamp output from a CD player is defective or poorly designed, or uses vaccuum tubes (!) it may introduce audible differences, although quite honestly I don't recall ever finding one that didn't measure well.

Just in passing, Nuance speakers were not terrible at all; they were designed by a competent US speaker engineer, Win Burhoe, who designed the original Energy 22 and some good speakers decades ago from Genesis. It's just that Nuance were sold with a lot of magic dust dreamed up by the late George Baker, a kind of PT Barnum figure in Canadian audio history, who for years was the marketing guru behind Energy, Mirage and Sound Dynamics. He later started Nuance.

Regards,

Alan

I was going to say the same think about the Sony Alan, I've never been a fan and have found the same problems you mention with an older unit I used to own. Since I've owned Denon products, never had an issue and the sound is awesome.

All receivers are not created equal, they can't be.

I would suggest, as I said earlier, get a new receiver and try it out against the Sony. I did notice a difference going to a Denon from a Sony. I would also suggest you get an SPL Meter so you can properly calibrate the system, this helps immensely with sound stage and blending etc. especially with your sub. Don't worry about not knowing how to use it, we can help you out, it really isn't hard, use your test tones and adjust each speaker/sub so they all read the same on the meter at your main listening position. I would then suggest a new sub, the newer subs reach lower and offer more power for better HT rumble .

Thanks very much to all of you who have taken the time to provide your advice and feedback. All the comments have been very helpful, and I guess based on the comments I'm leaning toward upgrading AVR at some point.

I find my sub can be overpowering if it is cranked up beyond fairly low volume (cranked up only about 30%).
The sub I have has the following specs:

Discrete MOSFET
100 Watts RMS at 0.04% THD, 400 Watts peak
35hz-150hz +/- 3db
low pass filter 50hz-150hz (18db/Octave)
high pass filter approx. 85hz

As I said, I find the sub quite powerful, but based on specs how does it compare to the newer subs?

Also, there have been a number of suggestions to calibrate my system with an SPL meter. I've done some searching, and they appear to be quite expensive -- any suggestions?

They are only $40-50 in the states at Radio Shack, not expensive in my book, not sure about Canada.

Hello Mav and welcome to the forum.

Depending on where you are in Ontario, SPL meters can be difficult to find locally.

You can get an analog SPL meter here for $59. It is one of the best investments you can possibly make. Well worth the money IMO if you are interested in getting one.

http://www.sonicboomaudio.com/cables-acc...f7b4109b96d2b03

Mav,

One other thing to consider if you do decide to get a different receiver some day...Most of them will come with a mic and setup routine that will do an ecellent job setting the distance and dB levels of each speaker. I usually go back and verify with my meter, but 99% of the time, the built in setup will be just fine.

Most newer and better quality subs play down in the low 20hz range and some even go lower than that, they really add more rumble and shake for HT. Yours would be good for music with the lower point in the spec at 35hz. The EP350 specs out at 27hz and in room is sually in the low 20s. My PB13 Ultra reached down to 15hz in my room - generally anything below 20hz is considered subsonic - you don't hear but you feel it. So with your current sub you are missing out on at least 15hz worth of sound and even more feel.

All subs will sound overpowering when turned up beyond the mains output level, this is why an SPL meter is required. It will allow you to veryify you are not running the sub hot(higher than the rest of the system). As Randy noted the newer avr's have setup programs that set the system very close to even on all channels, but most seem to still have problems setting up the sub woofer correctly and certainly not to the liking of everyone using it, as some just like more bass than others.

The question is how does your sub sound with the rest of the system? I thought my old sub sounded pretty good until I started down the path of no return when I started demoing subs, then I realized just how much I was missing

Last time I checked, we're pretty much using the same book.

I too wonder if by describing his sub as "overpowering" if perhaps it is just not well tuned.

I know nothing of your sub and it could very well be be perfect but I have heard cheaper subs, especially cheap HT in a box subs, that rattle or sound boomy and end up drawing too much attention to themselves. A good sub should smoothly blend the bass into sound from the other speakers. At high volumes it might rattle the room but you won't get the impression that the rattle is coming from the sub.

Just something to consider. "Does my sub sound fine, I just need to turn it down to match the other speakers" or "does it not sound right when turned up to match the other speakers.?"

Funny you should mention that. I was in Future Shop today looking at bluray players when one of the sales people cranked an HTIB system. Sounded awefull!! It was painful on the ears without being articulate at all.

I'm glad I ended up here before buying a sub.