What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?
-
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@jmoore but he would need 3 of those amps to have surround sound, assuming a powered sub.
Not to mention what the power drain might be from all of that. Granted it could be very close to what I have today for power use.. I'm not entirely sure.
But 4 powersupplies vs one, I expect some inefficiencies to make 4 require more more even if all other things are equal - but I do leave the possibility that these are so much more efficient vs my Pioneer to make it negligible.
-
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
Edit: nevermind, I didn't see the post about the Pioneer that you already have. Use that.
-
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
Edit: nevermind, I didn't see the post about the Pioneer that you already have. Use that.
LOL - I have been for over a year. It replaced a similar one I bought 10 years ago.
Frankly I was expecting a bit more conversation on what people are using - perhaps my question was to specific to spark that conversation.
-
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
So is there any real benefit to using a $600 processor and a $500 amp at this level compared to my $600 receiver?
Also, what is the life expectancy from either the processor or the amp?
-
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
So is there any real benefit to using a $600 processor and a $500 amp at this level compared to my $600 receiver?
Also, what is the life expectancy from either the processor or the amp?
Amps nearly last forever.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
So is there any real benefit to using a $600 processor and a $500 amp at this level compared to my $600 receiver?
Also, what is the life expectancy from either the processor or the amp?
Amps nearly last forever.
Well, at least there is that.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
So is there any real benefit to using a $600 processor and a $500 amp at this level compared to my $600 receiver?
Also, what is the life expectancy from either the processor or the amp?
Amps nearly last forever.
What if any kind of power filtering does anyone use?
-
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
So is there any real benefit to using a $600 processor and a $500 amp at this level compared to my $600 receiver?
Way better quality, and the ability to upgrade the processor (or the amp) without replacing the other. Receivers are the darling of the vendors because new technology means replacing everything, even the radio tuner. But in reality, amps, tuners, pre-amps, attenuators, displays, connectors and most other pieces are good for decades. Only the technology in the digital processor ages, so they take one minor part and make you keep re-buying all the expensive, important parts to replace that one.
My 20 year old Marantz are still better than most anything anyone I know owns, and weren't all that expensive even then.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
So is there any real benefit to using a $600 processor and a $500 amp at this level compared to my $600 receiver?
Way better quality, and the ability to upgrade the processor (or the amp) without replacing the other. Receivers are the darling of the vendors because new technology means replacing everything, even the radio tuner. But in reality, amps, tuners, pre-amps, attenuators, displays, connectors and most other pieces are good for decades. Only the technology in the digital processor ages, so they take one minor part and make you keep re-buying all the expensive, important parts to replace that one.
My 20 year old Marantz are still better than most anything anyone I know owns, and weren't all that expensive even then.
OK, definitely some value there, but when my receiver was the same cost as just the processor in this case, I'm not sure it's worth it to someone in my position.
-
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@jmoore but he would need 3 of those amps to have surround sound, assuming a powered sub.
Not to mention what the power drain might be from all of that. Granted it could be very close to what I have today for power use.. I'm not entirely sure.
But 4 powersupplies vs one, I expect some inefficiencies to make 4 require more more even if all other things are equal - but I do leave the possibility that these are so much more efficient vs my Pioneer to make it negligible.
no no, i missed surround sound requirements, my fault. no reason to have that many amps. just go up until you find the amp that covers your needs. i thought you already had speakers too
-
@jmoore said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@jmoore but he would need 3 of those amps to have surround sound, assuming a powered sub.
Not to mention what the power drain might be from all of that. Granted it could be very close to what I have today for power use.. I'm not entirely sure.
But 4 powersupplies vs one, I expect some inefficiencies to make 4 require more more even if all other things are equal - but I do leave the possibility that these are so much more efficient vs my Pioneer to make it negligible.
no no, i missed surround sound requirements, my fault. no reason to have that many amps. just go up until you find the amp that covers your needs. i thought you already had speakers too
I have five monoblocks in case I use them for surround sound
-
Simple surround sound improvement tip... if you don't need it due to crappy seating, simply remove the center speaker for improved sound quality. The extra center channel is the biggest source of audio quality loss in those setups.
-
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
So is there any real benefit to using a $600 processor and a $500 amp at this level compared to my $600 receiver?
Also, what is the life expectancy from either the processor or the amp?
the benefit will be better sound and longer lasting equipment. when you bunch everything up together in a receiver you will get 5-10 years from them on average because of all the heat. with separate components you will get double and longer. I have a friend who has Mcintosh and those must be approaching 30-40 years by now and still work great. receivers just don't last that long because of the heat build up
-
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@scottalanmiller said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
So is there any real benefit to using a $600 processor and a $500 amp at this level compared to my $600 receiver?
Also, what is the life expectancy from either the processor or the amp?
Amps nearly last forever.
What if any kind of power filtering does anyone use?
i use Furman for power filtering. can't remember the model right now. had it about 10 years now
-
@scottalanmiller said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@jmoore said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@jmoore but he would need 3 of those amps to have surround sound, assuming a powered sub.
Not to mention what the power drain might be from all of that. Granted it could be very close to what I have today for power use.. I'm not entirely sure.
But 4 powersupplies vs one, I expect some inefficiencies to make 4 require more more even if all other things are equal - but I do leave the possibility that these are so much more efficient vs my Pioneer to make it negligible.
no no, i missed surround sound requirements, my fault. no reason to have that many amps. just go up until you find the amp that covers your needs. i thought you already had speakers too
I have five monoblocks in case I use them for surround sound
that certainly works and would sound great
-
@jmoore said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@scottalanmiller said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@jmoore said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@jmoore but he would need 3 of those amps to have surround sound, assuming a powered sub.
Not to mention what the power drain might be from all of that. Granted it could be very close to what I have today for power use.. I'm not entirely sure.
But 4 powersupplies vs one, I expect some inefficiencies to make 4 require more more even if all other things are equal - but I do leave the possibility that these are so much more efficient vs my Pioneer to make it negligible.
no no, i missed surround sound requirements, my fault. no reason to have that many amps. just go up until you find the amp that covers your needs. i thought you already had speakers too
I have five monoblocks in case I use them for surround sound
that certainly works and would sound great
It does a good job. Used to have a full B&W system too, back before they went consumer.
-
I don't have expensive equipment but for speakers i use phasetech and boston accoustics. Phasetech twoers were $2500. Boston surrounds are just their taller bookshelves and don't remember price. Sub is an 18" phasetech, don't remember price. I can literally hear it pound down the street and pictures do come off the walls. I use marantz for pre-amp around $800 i think and qsc for my power amp around $600 if i remember. I use Furman power filter which was $300-400 range i think.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@jmoore said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@scottalanmiller said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@jmoore said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@jmoore but he would need 3 of those amps to have surround sound, assuming a powered sub.
Not to mention what the power drain might be from all of that. Granted it could be very close to what I have today for power use.. I'm not entirely sure.
But 4 powersupplies vs one, I expect some inefficiencies to make 4 require more more even if all other things are equal - but I do leave the possibility that these are so much more efficient vs my Pioneer to make it negligible.
no no, i missed surround sound requirements, my fault. no reason to have that many amps. just go up until you find the amp that covers your needs. i thought you already had speakers too
I have five monoblocks in case I use them for surround sound
that certainly works and would sound great
It does a good job. Used to have a full B&W system too, back before they went consumer.
b&w was good stuff too
-
Someday I want a Rotel system, that stuff is unbelievable. It changes people who don't care about music to people who can't live without it
-
@jmoore said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@rojoloco said in What do you like for a non expensive audio setup for surround sound TV/movies?:
@dashrender They have a 5 channel amp that's 499. That would knock out the amp side, but I think your needs would be easily met by a simple, all-in-one AV receiver.
So is there any real benefit to using a $600 processor and a $500 amp at this level compared to my $600 receiver?
Also, what is the life expectancy from either the processor or the amp?
the benefit will be better sound and longer lasting equipment. when you bunch everything up together in a receiver you will get 5-10 years from them on average because of all the heat. with separate components you will get double and longer. I have a friend who has Mcintosh and those must be approaching 30-40 years by now and still work great. receivers just don't last that long because of the heat build up
Not exactly a fair comparison with Mcintosh there.
I got 10 years out of my last receiver, and I replaced it not because it failed, but because I wanted/needed 4K passthrough. Heck come to think of it, I have a 20+ year old Pioneer receiver in the garage running that setup just fine.
If, if I was an audiophile splitting this stuff out (even at the higher cost) would likely be valuable because I could retain the value of the less frequently swapped parts (amps, etc), while only swapping the parts that frequently get updated (processor).
But as mentioned, my receiver cost $600. That's it, one and done. The above listed processor alone is $600, then we tossed in $1600 for amps - trashing the listed $1500 budget.
Considering my needs, it's not providing real value to me personally. Those more into audio than I, Please enjoy the benefits of splitting those things out.
