If the OP comes back, I'd recommend he listen to Jon. He doesn't sound like one who has been sucked into the hype, like so many here.
I got my first dose of reality about 25 years ago. A jaded salesman at a "sonic emporium" type place had me listen to two different receivers plugged into the same speakers. He switched from one to the other, and asked what difference I heard. I told him the truth, that I couldn't hear a difference. He told me that the one receiver was $150.00 and the other was $1,500. He asked, "Why pay that difference, when they both sound the same?" Beats me! Didn't need a receiver at the time, but I purchased a set of KLH speakers from him, and they're still in use at my in-laws today.
Put the money into some decent speakers, even if they're only bookshelf sized. When you move into a house, they can be moved to the den, or bedroom or something. The speakers are the weak link in any system. To test the quality of the sound, listen to a recording of a naked acoustic piano and hear which speakers sound most realistic. Buy the cheapest ones that meet that goal to your satisfaction.
I got my first dose of reality about 25 years ago. A jaded salesman at a "sonic emporium" type place had me listen to two different receivers plugged into the same speakers. He switched from one to the other, and asked what difference I heard. I told him the truth, that I couldn't hear a difference. He told me that the one receiver was $150.00 and the other was $1,500. He asked, "Why pay that difference, when they both sound the same?" Beats me! Didn't need a receiver at the time, but I purchased a set of KLH speakers from him, and they're still in use at my in-laws today.
Put the money into some decent speakers, even if they're only bookshelf sized. When you move into a house, they can be moved to the den, or bedroom or something. The speakers are the weak link in any system. To test the quality of the sound, listen to a recording of a naked acoustic piano and hear which speakers sound most realistic. Buy the cheapest ones that meet that goal to your satisfaction.
thankyou
I always try to avoid the hype and try to seak out the best bang for the buck. in receavers it seems to be Digital Amplification, to be totally honest with you guys up till last mounth when I saw these dvd player sized Panny amps I though yeah right that must be a peice of crap then my dad god one (against my recomendation at the time). and I really tried hard to find flaws in it. hell I even did an A/B with it with my Uncles 1000 dollar denon amp, and although the denon sounded slightly better at very high volumes it was not worth the 500% premium over a $200 dollar XR50.
my opinion would be to get a good solid receaver like the XR50 and don't skimp on speakers. if you don't have money for a full 5.1 setup with quality speakers start off with some quality towers to start with then buy surounds and a center when you have the money.
i am waiting for the original poster to post a price range
but a lot of the difference in price is the fact that you get different outputs like sub outs, ir, etc.
as for a sub, hop over to http://www.adireaudio.com and check out some of their stuff. they have good prices and GREAT equipment. even compared to svs etc, you can compare without a doubt.
MIKE
but a lot of the difference in price is the fact that you get different outputs like sub outs, ir, etc.
as for a sub, hop over to http://www.adireaudio.com and check out some of their stuff. they have good prices and GREAT equipment. even compared to svs etc, you can compare without a doubt.
MIKE
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
Originally posted by: apac
Case in point regarding budget. If anything, I'd recommend some sort of Denon/Yamaha/Onkyo/Harmon Kardon receiver because they accurately reflect continuous wattage. The panasonic/sony/etc receivers claim "200 watts!" but that's maximum output, and the actual wattage could be anywhere in that range. If you're not an audiophile just keep in mind higher CONTINUOUS wattage = better.
In terms of speakers well...you get what you pay for. Just avoid Bose
umm go to avsforum.com to check out the XR-50 very highly rated receaver. also the plus with the XR-50 is its a digital receaver so if your using a digital source it never needs to be converted to analog which helps alot. granted its actual RMS watts are around 35watts but be honest with your self 5 clean watts is all most people ever need, and will drive most effecient speakers well over 100db
5 clean watts? Are you kidding me? There's a reason people buy the 130W (continuous) Yamaha and Denon receivers. I personally have a HT set of Klipsch Reference 35's and my $500 Onkyo receiver at 70W/channel maxes out at a decent level in Surround mode, but it's obvious they could go so much higher and cleaner. And this is with extremely efficient horn speakers. Granted they are 8ohm speakers, so the wattage will go up with lesser quality, but a 5 watt source definitely will not cut it.
Given my experiences there is no way I'd recommend anything below 70W/channel continuous if you're buying at least decent speakers.
I think we've been syringered by the OP though.
Originally posted by: apac
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
Originally posted by: apac
Case in point regarding budget
In terms of speakers well...you get what you pay for. Just avoid Bose
umm go to avsforum.com to check out the XR-50 very highly rated receaver. also the plus with the XR-50 is its a digital receaver so if your using a digital source it never needs to be converted to analog which helps alot. granted its actual RMS watts are around 35watts but be honest with your self 5 clean watts is all most people ever need, and will drive most effecient speakers well over 100db
5 clean watts? Are you kidding me? There's a reason people buy the 130W (continuous) Yamaha and Denon receivers. I personally have a HT set of Klipsch Reference 35's and my $500 Onkyo receiver at 70W/channel maxes out at a decent level in Surround mode, but it's obvious they could go so much higher and cleaner. And this is with extremely efficient horn speakers. Granted they are 8ohm speakers, so the wattage will go up with lesser quality, but a 5 watt source definitely will not cut it.
Given my experiences there is no way I'd recommend anything below 70W/channel continuous if you're buying at least decent speakers.
I think we've been syringered by the OP though.
its because the onkyo you have deffinately does not put out 70w. it probably puts out 70 watts to a resistor possibly. ever manufacturer has a different way of testing the receivers capabilities. a nice quality 30 watt amp (tube, or normaly) will power speakers, but it depends on the size of the room.
MIKE
Originally posted by: nourdmrolNMT1
Originally posted by: apac
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
Originally posted by: apac
Case in point regarding budget
In terms of speakers well...you get what you pay for. Just avoid Bose
umm go to avsforum.com to check out the XR-50 very highly rated receaver. also the plus with the XR-50 is its a digital receaver so if your using a digital source it never needs to be converted to analog which helps alot. granted its actual RMS watts are around 35watts but be honest with your self 5 clean watts is all most people ever need, and will drive most effecient speakers well over 100db
5 clean watts? Are you kidding me? There's a reason people buy the 130W (continuous) Yamaha and Denon receivers. I personally have a HT set of Klipsch Reference 35's and my $500 Onkyo receiver at 70W/channel maxes out at a decent level in Surround mode, but it's obvious they could go so much higher and cleaner. And this is with extremely efficient horn speakers. Granted they are 8ohm speakers, so the wattage will go up with lesser quality, but a 5 watt source definitely will not cut it.
Given my experiences there is no way I'd recommend anything below 70W/channel continuous if you're buying at least decent speakers.
I think we've been syringered by the OP though.
its because the onkyo you have deffinately does not put out 70w. it probably puts out 70 watts to a resistor possibly. ever manufacturer has a different way of testing the receivers capabilities. a nice quality 30 watt amp (tube, or normaly) will power speakers, but it depends on the size of the room.
MIKE
I'm not sure what you mean, unless this is EE related. Here is the manual for my receiver, it specifically states 70W continuous to all 5 channels.
Ironically enough I checked the fs/t page where I bought this and Falloutboy PMed the seller after I'd already bought it
. I'm aware manufacturers test their hardware differently but the quality brands, i.e. Harmon Kardon, Onkyo, Denon, etc. are known for accurately testing them. Other more commercial brands such as Panasonic, Sony, Pioneer, etc market their receivers based on the maximum wattage. So just like Falloutboys example, they claim their receiver puts out 200 watts when the actual continuous wattage is roughly 35."5 watt source definitely will not cut it..."
He didn't say the source only needs to be 5 watts, but that most people use less power than that. Get your hands on an audio watt meter and hook it up to your system. You'll be surprised to learn that it will be loud enough to make your ears bleed at only a few watts output.
He didn't say the source only needs to be 5 watts, but that most people use less power than that. Get your hands on an audio watt meter and hook it up to your system. You'll be surprised to learn that it will be loud enough to make your ears bleed at only a few watts output.
Originally posted by: apac
Originally posted by: nourdmrolNMT1
Originally posted by: apac
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
Originally posted by: apac
Case in point regarding budget
In terms of speakers well...you get what you pay for. Just avoid Bose
umm go to avsforum.com to check out the XR-50 very highly rated receaver. also the plus with the XR-50 is its a digital receaver so if your using a digital source it never needs to be converted to analog which helps alot. granted its actual RMS watts are around 35watts but be honest with your self 5 clean watts is all most people ever need, and will drive most effecient speakers well over 100db
5 clean watts? Are you kidding me? There's a reason people buy the 130W (continuous) Yamaha and Denon receivers. I personally have a HT set of Klipsch Reference 35's and my $500 Onkyo receiver at 70W/channel maxes out at a decent level in Surround mode, but it's obvious they could go so much higher and cleaner. And this is with extremely efficient horn speakers. Granted they are 8ohm speakers, so the wattage will go up with lesser quality, but a 5 watt source definitely will not cut it.
Given my experiences there is no way I'd recommend anything below 70W/channel continuous if you're buying at least decent speakers.
I think we've been syringered by the OP though.
its because the onkyo you have deffinately does not put out 70w. it probably puts out 70 watts to a resistor possibly. ever manufacturer has a different way of testing the receivers capabilities. a nice quality 30 watt amp (tube, or normaly) will power speakers, but it depends on the size of the room.
MIKE
I'm not sure what you mean, unless this is EE related. Here is the manual for my receiver, it specifically states 70W continuous to all 5 channels.
Ironically enough I checked the fs/t page where I bought this and Falloutboy PMed the seller after I'd already bought it
and i'm not saying its a bad receaver its quite good but in my research as of late pannys digital amps seem to be the way to go in the sub 500 dollar catagory and alot of people at avsforum agree with me
This is true, however, to be able to listen at THX reference (real theater levels) levels your gonna need more than 5 watts.
I don't know enough about Panasonic to say whether it's quality or not, but why would they advertise such a false statistic like maximum wattage? Thanks but I'll stick to dedicated HT companies rather than commercialized brand names.
"...your gonna need more than 5 watts"
No, you're still only going to be using 5 watts, but you'll need an amp "rated" higher. The gear has to be able to keep putting out that 5 watts constantly, cleanly (without clipping), and without burning up components.
No, you're still only going to be using 5 watts, but you'll need an amp "rated" higher. The gear has to be able to keep putting out that 5 watts constantly, cleanly (without clipping), and without burning up components.
yes I know this but the OP also said he didn't want loudness he wanted quality. if you want Theater level volume and quality sound were talking seperate receaver/monoblocks which I don't think many of us can afford.
but any way the OP goes, be it the lowend Denon, Onkyo, HK, or Panny XR series they all will sound good. and they both have thier strengths analog audio will sound better on the denon, onkyo and HK. but if you go with a digital input (from a HTPC, XBOX or DVD) the panny will blow the others away. it just has to do with the way the two types of amps works.
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
Originally posted by: apac
Originally posted by: nourdmrolNMT1
Originally posted by: apac
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
Originally posted by: apac
Case in point regarding budget
In terms of speakers well...you get what you pay for. Just avoid Bose
umm go to avsforum.com to check out the XR-50 very highly rated receaver. also the plus with the XR-50 is its a digital receaver so if your using a digital source it never needs to be converted to analog which helps alot. granted its actual RMS watts are around 35watts but be honest with your self 5 clean watts is all most people ever need, and will drive most effecient speakers well over 100db
5 clean watts? Are you kidding me? There's a reason people buy the 130W (continuous) Yamaha and Denon receivers. I personally have a HT set of Klipsch Reference 35's and my $500 Onkyo receiver at 70W/channel maxes out at a decent level in Surround mode, but it's obvious they could go so much higher and cleaner. And this is with extremely efficient horn speakers. Granted they are 8ohm speakers, so the wattage will go up with lesser quality, but a 5 watt source definitely will not cut it.
Given my experiences there is no way I'd recommend anything below 70W/channel continuous if you're buying at least decent speakers.
I think we've been syringered by the OP though.
its because the onkyo you have deffinately does not put out 70w. it probably puts out 70 watts to a resistor possibly. ever manufacturer has a different way of testing the receivers capabilities. a nice quality 30 watt amp (tube, or normaly) will power speakers, but it depends on the size of the room.
MIKE
I'm not sure what you mean, unless this is EE related. Here is the manual for my receiver, it specifically states 70W continuous to all 5 channels.
Ironically enough I checked the fs/t page where I bought this and Falloutboy PMed the seller after I'd already bought it
and i'm not saying its a bad receaver its quite good but in my research as of late pannys digital amps seem to be the way to go in the sub 500 dollar catagory and alot of people at avsforum agree with me
apac:
basically a speaker will state that it is a 4 ohm nominal load. which means with no other factors, temperature, box, etc. it will show a 4 ohm load. however once you put that speaker in a box, the ohmage the amp sees is different. and if a company tests their quality by using a resistor, then you will only get that power at that resistance specifically and you have no idea how the amp will react to the different loads the speakers can possibly show.
and yea panny has some good reccomendations from what ive seen.
MIKE
every company exagerates on watts in the lowend of the product line, I mean think about it you know nothing about home theater and you are faced with an advertised 100watt per channel KLH amp for 100 bucks sitting next to it is a $500 denon labled at 40watts per channel. the consumer will buy the KLH almost everytime. but in reality the KLH's audio isn't as clean at 5 watts as it is at full blast on the denon. this is why all companies exspecially on the consumer end exagerate watts, because the public thinks if its not over a 100watts its crap. I mean I would think computer geeks exscially would be able to under stand this because of the whole MHZ myth thing intel has tried to pull for years
Originally posted by: nourdmrolNMT1
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
Originally posted by: apac
I'm not sure what you mean, unless this is EE related. Here is the manual for my receiver, it specifically states 70W continuous to all 5 channels.
Ironically enough I checked the fs/t page where I bought this and Falloutboy PMed the seller after I'd already bought it
and i'm not saying its a bad receaver its quite good but in my research as of late pannys digital amps seem to be the way to go in the sub 500 dollar catagory and alot of people at avsforum agree with me
apac:
basically a speaker will state that it is a 4 ohm nominal load. which means with no other factors, temperature, box, etc. it will show a 4 ohm load. however once you put that speaker in a box, the ohmage the amp sees is different. and if a company tests their quality by using a resistor, then you will only get that power at that resistance specifically and you have no idea how the amp will react to the different loads the speakers can possibly show.
and yea panny has some good reccomendations from what ive seen.
MIKE
That's a good point. I did look at some XR series reviews and they seemed decent. Either way, just from my experiences and extensive research, I definitely trust a dedicated HT company such as HK and Denon more than a commercial one like Panasonic.
Yet low end products from companies like Denon still sell great because anyone worth their salt cares nothing for exaggerated wattage. Who spends over $500 on something without looking more than skin deep? Everything I say applies to someone who has researched technical HT stuff, not some idiot from McDonalds. The only reason to list such a statistic is shady propaganda and marketing technique that helps salesmen screw a customer into buying the product. Based on that fact alone I'll stick with Denon.
and denon is a fine product but what I'm trying to get across is that brand isn't everything and as long as you are willing to research products thier are better buys out thier, for those who research whats out thier, I myself didn't think anything of the panny amps when they came out I figured they were just a piece of crap little amp to make wives happy because they weren't huge but I ended up researching them then hearing them and I relized they were very good at what they do, and for $200-300 bucks they are a freaken steal for the money.
granted if I'm a somewhat informed customer but don't have time to research what I want denon, onkyo, or HK would be a perfectly logical choice, because everything they put out is quality but if you really beleave that the watt numbers even these companies advertise is the truth then you really need to wake up.
Assume a 90db/1W@1m sensitivity. With 5 W, you get about 97dB at 1 meter. Assuming a listening position of 3 meters, you get 87.5dB.
That's a pathetic sound level. Of course, that might go up to to 89 or 90dB or so, given that two speakers slightly up the sound pressure, and the room adds a bit.
Assuming the same 90dB sensitivity, 200W will get you about 113dB at 1 meter in an open field.
Keep in mind that these figures are ideal and DO NOT include such effects as power compression.
You can only do so much with 5W. See my post.
EDIT: To OP - a home theater in a box is fine. Your XBox can output composite sound (the typical red and white cables in a 3-cable RCA composite bundle) for sure, and you can add a digital S/P-DIF output.
http://www.xbox-scene.com/articles/digital-output.php
EDIT2: IIRC the XBox comes with a TOSlink output anyway.
your math is flawed. two speakers outputing at 97db would be 100db at 1 meter. and the fall off is 3 db for every meter so you would be at 90db at 3 meters without even calculating in room gain which depending on the size of the room could be alot or a little. also add into this a 5.1 setup in that thier would be more than 2 speakers at anyone time outputing sound and as long as you aren't trying to fill a large room you got quite a bit of sound at "only" 5 watts.
"That's a pathetic sound level..."
Don't babble anymore without doing some real world testing. I've got an audio meter here, and it's reading a fraction of 1 watt most of the time. If the OP is in an apartment, he won't be using much more than that either.
Don't babble anymore without doing some real world testing. I've got an audio meter here, and it's reading a fraction of 1 watt most of the time. If the OP is in an apartment, he won't be using much more than that either.
No, two speakers playing the same sound DO NOT increase SPL by 3dB.
Sound falls by 6dB per meter. Do the math. (Find the ratio between the surface area of two spheres, given a radius of r, and r + 1 meters).
EDIT: I rescind that statement until I can figure out how I calculated it before.
EDIT2: Sound pressure falls by 6dB every time distance doubles. So we're both wrong.
EDIT3: Room gain typically refers to the increase in bass, and usually starts where the wavelength of the frequency is... one-half of the longest dimension of the room? IIRC, anyway.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter