Members RSBro Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 The stereo system I have hooked up in my living room to my TV and the one that gets used for the majority of my listening is a $350 NAD integrated amp, a $200 NAD dvd/cd/mp3 player, a $300 Audio Controls analyzer and equalizer (they key component being the analyzer) and a pair of NHT speakers that cost about $350. This system would benefit from a dedicated sub crossed over around 80 Hz, but I haven't taken the time to add that to the system yet. So you just stick with 2.1 usually then? Or 2.0, w/out the sub? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 12, 2008 Moderators Share Posted February 12, 2008 I plan on it. For a simple stereo setup, an integrated amp like this is a great long term piece: http://nadelectronics.com/products/hifi-amplifiers/C352-Stereo-Integrated-Amplifier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Psilocybin Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 I prefer other systems, but maybe you would hear my stereo setup and say ICK!Nah, in all reality, I'd probably hear it and be amazed. I'm just in the boat where I'd rather make house payments than upgrade something I already like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members i_wanna_les_paul Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 So you just stick with 2.1 usually then? Or 2.0, w/out the sub? I know you didn't ask me, but I'll respond. I'm bored...or I have inferiority issues...but let's go with bored I do all my listening on a 2.0 home stereo system. Denon receiver, Rotel CD player, B&W bookies on stands, all wired with Kimber. As Kindness said about his system, I'd definitely benefit from a sub, but I don't have the room for that right now. Many people still swear by 2.0 or 2.1 systems. I would have been in more of a hurry to get a 5.1 system, but I find that many movies use surround more gimmicky than not. However, I've heard some excellent music in surround format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 12, 2008 Moderators Share Posted February 12, 2008 So you just stick with 2.1 usually then? Or 2.0, w/out the sub? Movies, sports, music, etc. is all simple stereo for me. I prefer it to surround systems (and I've built and enjoyed quite a few 5k+ systems) for whatever reason I have. Let me take that back, my car is 5.1 HD-DVD and the separation between channels feels very unnatural to me. I think that is the biggest issue. In any case, whether on HDTV, LP, cd, etc. I am still smitten with stereo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 12, 2008 Moderators Share Posted February 12, 2008 I do all my listening on a 2.0 home stereo system. Denon receiver, Rotel CD player, B&W bookies on stands, all wired with Kimber. I like your style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted February 12, 2008 Author Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 So you just stick with 2.1 usually then? Or 2.0, w/out the sub? which brings up a question for the "I prefer a stereo to surround" crowd. Why can't you just listen in 2.0 for music? What other variables are there in system set up? Or are you just saying you'd rather spend the money on the fewer parts of the system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members i_wanna_les_paul Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 I like your style. I miss my Def Tech BP30's, but I definitely do not have enough room for those. I also have a third pair of speakers, some Mid-90's Klipsch bookshelves, but I haven't used those for 6 years. If they were all by the same manufacturer and in the same series, I could half-ass a surround system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members i_wanna_les_paul Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 which brings up a question for the "I prefer a stereo to surround" crowd. Why can't you just listen in 2.0 for music? What other variables are there in system set up? Or are you just saying you'd rather spend the money on the fewer parts of the system? That's usually it. If I'm looking at spending $3000 for 6 or 7 speakers or $3000 for two, I'll go for two. Modern surround receivers are also often full of gimmicky "features." I'd take a good, simple integrated amp, CD player and good speakers. Sound quality FTW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 12, 2008 Moderators Share Posted February 12, 2008 Or are you just saying you'd rather spend the money on the fewer parts of the system? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 12, 2008 Moderators Share Posted February 12, 2008 I miss my Def Tech BP30's, but I definitely do not have enough room for those. I also have a third pair of speakers, some Mid-90's Klipsch bookshelves, but I haven't used those for 6 years. If they were all by the same manufacturer and in the same series, I could half-ass a surround system. I sold off my JBL L7s a few years back. Same size issue. Those were amazing speakers though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 12, 2008 Moderators Share Posted February 12, 2008 That's usually it. If I'm looking at spending $3000 for 6 or 7 speakers or $3000 for two, I'll go for two. Modern surround receivers are also often full of gimmicky "features." I'd take a good, simple integrated amp, CD player and good speakers. Sound quality FTW. Agreed. Unless you are getting into the serious high end, nearly every surround receiver is the equivalent of a combo bass amp with preset EQ curves + graphic EQ + cd input and output jacks + whatever else... Just give me a solid piece of equipment that does nothing more than the simple task at hand, but does it well. When you get into the serious high end, they cut out the crap, but a lot try to gouge you for the voodoo they are marketing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members T. Alan Smith Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 That's usually it. If I'm looking at spending $3000 for 6 or 7 speakers or $3000 for two, I'll go for two. Modern surround receivers are also often full of gimmicky "features." I'd take a good, simple integrated amp, CD player and good speakers. Sound quality FTW. Amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RSBro Posted February 12, 2008 Members Share Posted February 12, 2008 Makes a lot of sense. Thanks guys! Something to think about in the future. Although I won't be spending the extra jack on the center/surrounds, I'd still at least need a receiver that could do 5.1/6.1, etc.. In all honesty, I've had this Kenwood system for about 5 years now, and am surprised it's lasted this long w/out crapping out as I crank my stuff pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members James Hart Posted February 13, 2008 Members Share Posted February 13, 2008 Stereo.... I love Ohm Speakers. I ran a pair of Walsh 2X0 until they got water damaged. I've replaced them with a 2.1 setup... MK sub with a pair of Koss satellites. Surround... clueless, I don't watch movies or TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted February 13, 2008 Moderators Share Posted February 13, 2008 Stereo....I love Ohm Speakers. I ran a pair of Walsh 2X0 until they got water damaged. I've replaced them with a 2.1 setup... MK sub with a pair of Koss satellites.Surround...clueless, I don't watch movies or TV. I like Ohm's practical approach. Here's a quote from their website: "There are only 3 important considerations in the selection of loudspeakers: 1. How do they sound with the rest of the system, played in your room, on the material and at the loudness you're going to use them? 2. Is their size and appearance acceptable in your listening room? 3. Do they fit into your budget for the whole system?" This is the type of reasonable approach few marketing departments can follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members filterthing Posted February 13, 2008 Members Share Posted February 13, 2008 bit late to the party, but i use these. They have some nice speakers in a box set ups. Paired with a yamaha 7.1 amp, good stuff.http://www.paradigm.com/en/paradigm/news/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members James Hart Posted February 13, 2008 Members Share Posted February 13, 2008 I like Ohm's practical approach. Here's a quote from their website:"There are only 3 important considerations in the selection of loudspeakers: 1. How do they sound with the rest of the system, played in your room, on the material and at the loudness you're going to use them? 2. Is their size and appearance acceptable in your listening room? 3. Do they fit into your budget for the whole system?" This is the type of reasonable approach few marketing departments can follow. I was more than happy with my Ohms... I might rebuild them, or might eventually score a new set. This is my pair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mmb Posted February 13, 2008 Members Share Posted February 13, 2008 I have a dedicated theater room where I currently use 5.1 surround and I'm wired for 7.2 surround. Unlike the others, I'm a big proponent of surround sound and the ability to be immersed in sound from a good DTS or DD mix to the point of having tactile transducers on the underside of some of my seating for those deep, feel the chair shake, bass moments. Movies like "Saving Private Ryan", the "Star Wars" movies and "Matrix" films make huge use of surround sound for bullets, explosions and the like whizzing around in the sound scape. Agreed, it is useless for most TV content, even HD that is "supposed" to be mixed for 5.1 DD sound. My TV system in the living room is a 3.1 system with left/center/right and a sub. Provides the ability for stereo music with sub while also allowing a center channel for dialog from movies. More often than not, a 3.1 system will cover most of your needs for multi channel audio and allow you to hear the action move across your sound stage. I like having movie nights and watching folks jump out of their chairs when the explosion hits below 70 Hz and the tactile transducer on the bottom of their chair rumbles in or when they look around the room because the movie has a cricket coming from a rear surround. Little things, I suppose, but it makes me feel like I'm getting everything the director wanted from the movie. *shrug* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted May 20, 2008 Author Members Share Posted May 20, 2008 any opinions on Era Speakers? Still plan on checking out the NAD stuff. We're in the home stretch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.