Current state of affordable surround sound electronics?
bobboyer -- Thu, 05/29/2008 - 17:20
Newbie here. Just found the time to sign on and can say after a few minutes, I appreciate already the intelligence and civility of the discussions here.
Anywhoo...wanted to pose a somewhat theoretical question for any reviewer who might like to pose some thoughts, as my searches didn't turn up any direct answers.
I'm finally thinking seriously of going to the dark side (surround sound) and have just recently sold an upgraded Counterpoint 5000 preamp to begin funding the project. Since this is my primary music system, I'm vitally interested in its over all sound, but I'm wondering if five (or six) speakers may overcome some of the limitations of current $2k A/V receivers as compared to 2 speakers and higher end stereo components of ten years ago. Or am I kidding myself?
I've been listening to said Counterpoint gear (SA-5000, an NPS 200 and later, a 75w Parasound) for several years now and have been happy with the sound. I listen in a nearfield setting to some Signet floorstanding speakers from about a decade ago, as well. If I switch to a surround sound setup, my budget will probably limit me to a $2k receiver, so I'm thinking in terms of the Arcam DIVA receivers, the big Rotel A/V receiver, or the Marantz 8002/number of the month receiver coupled to 5 LSA Monitor 1 speakers.
So I guess my question is: how good is the sound, given the dynamic limitation of 5, 6, or 7 amplifiers being driven by one transformer, from today's A/V receivers when compared, say to some of the best equipment you've auditioned from the past fifteen years?
And if the quality of the sound from the electronics is not as good as sound from the quality/expensive components of the last decade, is there the possibility to achieve an overall listening experience with the surround components, in an audio-only environment, that will overcome some (hopefully enough) of the differences? I think I'm searching primarily for insight concerning the equipment's ability to resolve the lows and the highs accurately; it seems from everything I've read, all of these units get the midrange pretty close to right. And I've got to assume that the surround systems provide an amazing soundstage - am I off base here as well?
Thanks in advance...
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Those are all good questions, and ones that will yield different answers depending on whom you ask. Some on our staff have had excellent results with today's AVRs. In fact, Anthony Cordesman gave a Golden Ear Award to two Onkyo receivers (both under $2k) in the current issue of The Absolute Sound (Issue 182, June/July). The new generation of AVRs benefits from sophisticated DSP, particularly the Audyssey room-correction system. This system flattens the frequency response at the listening position.
On the other hand, an AVR won't have the same ability to deliver current into low-impedance loudspeakers as will a separate high-end amplifier. As you point out, an AVR has one smallish transformer to supply power to seven amplifier-output stages. The result can be a reduction in dynamics and a sense of strain during loud and complex passages.
Some on our staff would argue that you're much better off spending the fixed budget on two good amplifier channels and loudspeakers than on five (or seven) compromised channels. Your question also brings up a deeper question of whether a simple signal path is best, or if DSP is a panacea.
Perhaps other on the TAS staff can weigh-in with their own views.
Robert Harley
My experience is with the Onkyo receiver line. I think the intrinsic quality of the electronic circuitry is pretty high, but in their line the errors are on the side of less transparency. While that sounds bad, I find that a lot of sub $2k electronics err on the side of edginess or a certain dryness in the high frequencies. Personally, I prefer the Onkyo approach.
I use the Onkyo with a sat/sub speaker system. For this, the DSP system is not to be overlooked. It is a very big deal in creating a sense of coherence. In the Playback magazine labs, I've heard that same DSP make huge improvements to some relatively expensive full-range speakers as well.
I share your concern about dynamics, but I don't think it is a simple issue. First of all, assuming you are using one 15 amp AC line, in some sense that is your limitation. That is, 15 amps x 120 volts = 1800 watts. Assuming 33% conversion efficiency, you're going to get at most 600 watts to the speakers. Mono, stereo, 5.1 or 7.1. One transformer, properly sized, isn't the issue. What might be the issue is if you listen to a lot of 2 channel material or material where L/R signals predominate. Then I can see the individual channels of a receiver possibly as not being beefy enough (not enough current capability).
Onkyo (and others, like Denon I believe) offer two ways around this:
1. You can use 4 of the 7 channels for L/R duties (assuming your speakers can be bi-amped).
2. Instead of buying a $1500 or $2k receiver, buy the $800 version, and use it as a 5.1 or 7.1 channel preamp with DSP. With the $1200 you have left over, get a stereo amp of your choice for L/R. I don't recall whether the amps in the receiver are assignable enough that you could use 6 of the seven channels for C/Lsurround/Rsurround in biamp mode.
CEO and Editorial Director, Nextscreen LLC
Tom,
Option 2 you gives you the best of both worlds - good stereo amplification for two channel music, and a good surround system for movies, multichannel and the rest. It's a clever idea that gets you more performance for the same investment. It never would have occurred to me to go about it this way. I may go off and implement this myself as I contemplate building my family room surround system!
Thanks for the insights so far, folks. I do like Tom's option 2 as well and I'm going to look into that idea - maybe use the Parasound as a test before committing to bigger amplification again.
I guess I'm getting back to that demonstration that I think I read of years ago in TAS when Henry Kloss arranged a dozen or so speakers in a semi-circle and A/B'd them against some musical ensemble in Boston and the effect was reportedly pretty stunning, if memory serves.
I was approaching the question from that standpoint as much as anything - it's counterintuitive to me that multiple channels can add so much to the listening experience that they could overcome, to a large degree, "deficiencies" in the surround electronics compared to higher quality two channel electronics.
While there are differing views of Bob's last point (can MC really make up for intrinsic deficiencies in electronics?), two more things should be considered:
1. With music as source material, I think it is unarguable that only a small % is in MC form. That reinforces concerns about using MC in preference to the same money spent on 2 channel.
2. In my experience, it is not a good assumption that receiver electronics are grossly inferior to 2 channel electronics. In the case we are discussing, there is the added question of DSP, as well.
CEO and Editorial Director, Nextscreen LLC
I think Tom's Option #2 is a great way to go. I have parallel systems in my listening room, with a two-channel system that's independent of the multichannel system. I would skew the budget allocation to spend more on the two-channel system and less on an AVR.
Ideally, the AVR would have line-level outputs that would feed the stereo integrated amplifier's "theater" input. An input marked "theater," "pass-through" (or something similar) can be set to a fixed gain so that the channel-level calibration you perform on the AVR isn't changed by going through the integrated amplifier.
Robert, I am interested in learning more about how your parallel system is hooked up. (1) Do you have all of your dedicated 2 channel sources directly connected to your 2 channel preamp/amp only, and not your AVR? (2) Are your Home Theater sources directly connected to your AVR which in turn feeds your your 2 channel preamp/amp that's doing double duty for your Home Theater left/right channels (through a unity gain or equivalent function on your 2 channel preamp)? (3) Are there any sources that you are connecting directly and simultaneously to both your dedicated 2 channel preamp/amp and your AVR?
Thanks in advance.
Syd:
Here’s how my system is configured. Two-channel analog sources feed the Spectral DMC-30SS (an Aesthetix Rhea phonostage, the analog outputs from a Classe CDP-502 CD/DVD player, and the Spectral SDR-4000 Pro). Multichannel sources feed an Arcam AV9 controller (coaxial digital out and HDMI from the Classe, optical digital and HDMI from a DISH Network DVR, six-channel discrete analog from a Sony SCD-9000ES SACD player).
The controller’s left and right outputs feed input 3 on the Spectral, which can be put into unit gain mode by holding down the input 3 button for several seconds. When in this mode, the Spectral passes the input signal directly to the output at a fixed gain.
The Spectral preamp drives the pair of Spectral DMA-360s, and then the Wilson X-2s. The controller’s center, and four surround outputs drive an Anthem P5 five-channel amplifier. This in turn drives a Wilson Watch center channel and four Revel Embrace surrounds. The controller’s LFE output is fed to a pair of JL Audio Fathom f113 subwoofers.
The controller’s HDMI output goes to a Sony VPL-VW50 1920x1080 projector. A motorized Stewart Filmscreen 92”-wide Firehawk descends only when the projector is turned on.
The Spectral front end is powered by a separate MIT Z-System and Z-Cords AC system. The other front-end components are conditioned by a Shunyata Hydra-8 and V-Ray, with Shunyata AC cords. The power amplifiers connect to the wall through MIT Z-cords and MIT Z-Stabilizer.
This system delivers no-compromise two-channel performance, while also providing outstanding theater and multichannel music playback.
Very impressive Robert...
A few clarifying questions:
1. Since HDMI carries audio/video, what's the purpose of having the coax outputs (which should be audio only) on the Classe and Dish DVR hooked up to the controller if you already have the HDMI outputs hooked up to it?
2. How do you like the Dish Network? I currently have Comcast Cable + DVR service. AT&T is pitching a combo home phone, cell phone and Dish Network package at a very attractive bundled discount. Maybe we can discuss this on another thread if it is not appropriate here.
3. I take it the HDMI hookup to the projector gives you better video performance and is more convenient than hooking up the component video?
4. Are you splitting the LFE output to the JL subs or does the controller provide for two (mono?) outputs?
The Arcam controller doesn't support audio over HDMI (neither does the Classe controller). Many high-end designers believe that HDMI degrades sound quality, something I found in my recent review of the Sony AVR and Blu-ray player. It's not a big deal to run a second (coaxial digital) cable.
As for DISH Network, it's the best in my view. I've had other systems, and like the user interface, selection of HD programming, and DVR functionality. I'll be reviewing DISH's new DVR in an upcoming issue of Playback.
HDMI video connection is significantly better than component video connection in my system.
The JL subs have a "master" and "slave" option in which one sub controls the other. You connect the controller's LFE output to the "master" sub, and then a cable from the "master" to the "slave." Incidentally, I set the left/right speakers to "large," meaning that the X-2s get full-range signals including LFE information. Can you imagine what soundtracks with powerful bass sound like through X-2s and a pair of JL Fathoms? It's startling.
Good God Robert, full range X-2's and a pair of JL subs on LFE soundtrack material? You must need to where a pressurized suit to keep from getting squashed from the sheer volume and force of air moving in your room!
Thanks for the coax/HDMI explanation. I guess the next generation of high end controllers will support a full array of HDMI inputs, switching, upscaling and cross conversion (I think I'm using the right terms). The master/slave implementation of multiple JL subs is pretty cool. I take it you can daisy chain as many JL subs as one wishes using this method?
I also look forward to hearing why you're high on the Dish Network and there DVR versus others. Perhaps you can provide a "sneak preview" of your impressions in the appropriate section of this forum?
Thanks!
Robert, I forgot one other question - are you running one or mutiple pairs of DMA 360's (in a bi or triamped mode) on the X-2's?
I'm running one pair of DMA-360s---plenty of power for the 95dB-sensitive X-2.
Robert - Any chance we can see some pictures of this system?
Syd:
Photos are on the way.
Syd:
Here they are:
The shot of the back of my room was taken during the X-2 set-up. You can see the X-2's bass cabinets before they were put into place and loaded with the "wings" and midrange/tweeter modules.
Thanks for the pictures Robert. Do you get the feeling Darth Vader is hovering down on you when looking at those speakers? They really have an ominous look to them.
If I recall, your listening room is something like 14x10x19. Do you find the X-2's bass (with or w/o the JL subs) overload the room? I've got to imagine Peter McGrath dialed those X-2's in for you.
Btw, who's that guy sitting on the couch? :D
My room is 14.5' x 21' with a 9' ceiling. I chose these dimensional ratios when building the house.
I'm not intimidated by the visual presence of the X-2 at all. They blend surprisingly well for such a big loudspeaker. The color tends to take on and reflect the color of their surroundings, lowering their visual profile.
One would expect that a speaker with such prodigious bass output placed so close to the corners might sound boomy or thick. In fact, the bass I'm hearing from this system is the tightest, most articulate, and tuneful bass I've heard from any system, either in my home or at a show. The low-end extension is simply stunning. The speakers sound like minimonitors on passages with no bass energy, and then have startling power that seems to appear out of nowhere when the music calls for it. The integration of the mid-bass into the room is fabulous.
Interesting...
I noticed the tape markings on your carpet near the speakers. Did placement of the X-2's require a lot of finicking (especially with respect to dialing in the bass properly), or did they pretty much end up where most other speakers ended up in your room? I know that Wilson has a specific set-up process for their loudspeakers, but I'm still curious to know how much effort was required to dial-in them in (bass and ultimately imaging, soundstage, etc.) to say 90-95% of there performance potential.
I do understand that getting that last 5-10% out of any speaker would require working at it over an extended period of time.
Dave Wilson and his son Darryl spent nearly two days assembling and dialing-in the X-2 (I had all the components uncrated and in the listening room when they arrived; that's the glamorous part of reviewing). Dave has a specific, repeatable technique that I plan to describe in detail in the review (including photos). He's incredibly meticulous. The method is the antithesis of "hit and miss" or "trial and error." Dave knows exactly what he wants and how to get it. This is the same technique taught to all Wilson dealers. What really matters is the final performance in the customer's home.
The X-2 ended up pretty close to where the MAXX 2 was, but farther back than the Magico V3 that the X-2 replaced. You can see where the V3 was from the blue tape on the floor in front of the right speaker. The tape marked the front inside corner of the V3.
I look forward to reading all about it Robert. I take the MIT Oracle MA speaker cable chassis are sitting behind each speaker? I did not readily see them in the photographs.
The MIT Oracle boxes are indeed behind the loudspeakers.
And where might the JL subs be located? Perhaps in the rear corners of the room?
The two JL Audio Fathom f113 subwoofers are behind the listening seat.
Nice!
This post is pretty nice!
I'd support you 100%!!! 8) :D