What audio system do you have, or plan on getting?

[drogulus]

Yahoooo!  Blu-ray operas and music here I come!

My new HDTV and Blu-ray system is diagrammed below. (The speakers I've had for a while but the other stuff is new.)

Very unfortunately this system doesn't provide for SACD of DVD-A playback, so further upgrades might be forthcoming.

     What do you think of the Onkyo? Is it powerful enough? Does it process audio for everything?

[Fëanor]

     What do you think of the Onkyo? Is it powerful enough? Does it process audio for everything?

So far I feel that the Onkyo is quite adequate for power -- and I love the Audyssey automated equalization & time correction system: fantastic!  Yes it does the audio for everything, although the way I set things up, it's possible to listen to TV sound from the TV without firing up the receiver.

You can check out the Onkyo 508's specs HERE.

[drogulus]

So far I feel that the Onkyo is quite adequate for power -- and I love the Audyssey automated equalization & time correction system: fantastic!  Yes it does the audio for everything, although the way I set things up, it's possible to listen to TV sound from the TV without firing up the receiver.

You can check out the Onkyo 508's specs HERE.

      Thanks, Feanor, I'm thinking about the 308 for my tiny living room. I don't need much power, just the features.

[DavidW]

      Thanks, Feanor, I'm thinking about the 308 for my tiny living room. I don't need much power, just the features.

I have that or the 307.  Only need 5.1, it can't do much with hdmi but pass through but that's all I need.  It has audyssey but I find that it does not give accurate results especially with bass.  I just manually tweak it with an spl meter and test tones.

Anyway it's very easy to use (unlike Denon) with great sound, even if it doesn't have a fraction of what a Denon receiver at the same price would offer. (my Onkyo replaced a Denon)

[drogulus]

I have that or the 307.  Only need 5.1, it can't do much with hdmi but pass through but that's all I need.  It has audyssey but I find that it does not give accurate results especially with bass.  I just manually tweak it with an spl meter and test tones.

Anyway it's very easy to use (unlike Denon) with great sound, even if it doesn't have a fraction of what a Denon receiver at the same price would offer. (my Onkyo replaced a Denon)

     The 308 does audio, including high rez BD audio. This is something new. In the past you had to read the fine print to find out just where processing starts and pass-thru only leaves off.

[Coopmv]

I have been thinking about setting up a 3.0 semi surround, i.e. FL, FR, center and forget the sub and the rear channel to conserve space.  I have 3 doxies at the house who run around and there is little chance that one of them would not knock the rear channel speakers off their stands.  That way, I can at least listen to 3 of the channels on my approximately 250 SACD's.  I will get a 5.1 or 7.1 HT processor and press 2 of my spare power amps in service and one of them can be bridged for the center channel.

[Fëanor]

I have that or the 307.  Only need 5.1, it can't do much with hdmi but pass through but that's all I need.  It has audyssey but I find that it does not give accurate results especially with bass.  I just manually tweak it with an spl meter and test tones.

...

I can believe that you might have a bass problem.  As I understand, bass can be difficult to measure in that different locations in a room can give widely different results.  In my own case I believe a little less bass would be a good thing;  if I decide to reduce it a bit, I'll just dial it back on the subwoofer itself rather than meddle with the receiver's equalization settings.

[drogulus]

I have been thinking about setting up a 3.0 semi surround, i.e. FL, FR, center and forget the sub and the rear channel to conserve space.  I have 3 doxies at the house who run around and there is little chance that one of them would not knock the rear channel speakers off their stands.  That way, I can at least listen to 3 of the channels on my approximately 250 SACD's.  I will get a 5.1 or 7.1 HT processor and press 2 of my spare power amps in service and one of them can be bridged for the center channel.

     I wouldn't get a processor, it's a huge expense. Get a good receiver with pre-outs. You can get a Marantz 4002 for less than $300. The only thing it's missing is HD audio from BD, insignificant in my view. With external power amps this would be a monster setup.

[petrarch]

I have that or the 307.  Only need 5.1, it can't do much with hdmi but pass through but that's all I need.  It has audyssey but I find that it does not give accurate results especially with bass.  I just manually tweak it with an spl meter and test tones.

I can believe that you might have a bass problem.  As I understand, bass can be difficult to measure in that different locations in a room can give widely different results.  In my own case I believe a little less bass would be a good thing;  if I decide to reduce it a bit, I'll just dial it back on the subwoofer itself rather than meddle with the receiver's equalization settings.

Yes, bass can vary quite a bit in a room. Just read up on bass modes (roughly, those frequencies whose wavelengths correspond to multiples of the room dimensions will stand out) and perhaps consider some bass traps (there are various types, some can be discreet and not at all imposing). I had to get a few bass traps in my own room when I moved from a hybrid electrostatic speaker with a cone woofer to a full range one and the results are very good. Untreated bass can skew the perceived frequency response of a system and totally muddy the sound.

Another quick test is basically to move your listening position or simply your ears a couple of feet forward, backward, upward or downward and see if the tonal balance changes. If it does, it means you have standing waves in your room and it is a sign that some treatment is in order.

[Coopmv]

     I wouldn't get a processor, it's a huge expense. Get a good receiver with pre-outs. You can get a Marantz 4002 for less than $300. The only thing it's missing is HD audio from BD, insignificant in my view. With external power amps this would be a monster setup.

I am really not into those bass-heavy action movies, which can only be fully appreciated via a full surround sound.  I am not averse to a sub but it has to have a small foot-print.  With 5 stereo systems set up around the house, I should not be taking up more space or I will get some serious gripe from my wife.

Not sure if you have heard of Emotiva, a relatively new audio company that only sells through the internet that has garnered some praises from another forum that is a bit more audio heavy than GMG.  It seems to have a much more reasonably priced HT processor.  The only reason for me to go semi-surround is to fully appreciate my collection of hybrid SACD's - fast approaching 300.  For now, I do not even have an SACD player ...  LOL

[drogulus]

     
     Yes, I know Emotiva. I'd stick with a receiver. It will do the 3 channel thing very well. I looked at the users manual for the Marantz and you can set it up any way you want.

     I wasn't thinking about movies particularly. I use a 2.1 system for everything, movies and music with the balances set to favor music (which works well for movies, too).

[Coopmv]

     
     Yes, I know Emotiva. I'd stick with a receiver. It will do the 3 channel thing very well. I looked at the users manual for the Marantz and you can set it up any way you want.

     I wasn't thinking about movies particularly. I use a 2.1 system for everything, movies and music with the balances set to favor music (which works well for movies, too).

You seem to think the HT processor portion of a Marantz HT receiver is better than what Emotiva has to offer.  But then I really do not need the amp.  My separate amps are probably better than the amp that comes with the Marantz receiver.  Besides, Emotiva HT processor is relatively inexpensive compared with most other processors on the market ...

[DavidW]

I can believe that you might have a bass problem.  As I understand, bass can be difficult to measure in that different locations in a room can give widely different results.  In my own case I believe a little less bass would be a good thing;  if I decide to reduce it a bit, I'll just dial it back on the subwoofer itself rather than meddle with the receiver's equalization settings.


Yes, bass can vary quite a bit in a room. Just read up on bass modes (roughly, those frequencies whose wavelengths correspond to multiples of the room dimensions will stand out) and perhaps consider some bass traps (there are various types, some can be discreet and not at all imposing). I had to get a few bass traps in my own room when I moved from a hybrid electrostatic speaker with a cone woofer to a full range one and the results are very good. Untreated bass can skew the perceived frequency response of a system and totally muddy the sound.

Another quick test is basically to move your listening position or simply your ears a couple of feet forward, backward, upward or downward and see if the tonal balance changes. If it does, it means you have standing waves in your room and it is a sign that some treatment is in order.

Boy I'll have to look up info about bass traps!  I had my system sounding muddy with too much bass before, and tinny sounding with not enough.  Getting proper bass response is important but so tricky.  I finally got it right when I used my spl because it now sounds airy.  The midbass was way too much before, and the deep bass was lacking.  Now I have a punch of bass but the dialogue is clear and not easily drowned out.

[Daverz]

Boy I'll have to look up info about bass traps!  I had my system sounding muddy with too much bass before, and tinny sounding with not enough.  Getting proper bass response is important but so tricky.  I finally got it right when I used my spl because it now sounds airy.  The midbass was way too much before, and the deep bass was lacking.  Now I have a punch of bass but the dialogue is clear and not easily drowned out.

The free Room EQ Wizard program has a real time analyzer that is very helpful for finding the best position for speakers.  This shows frequency response in real time, so you can watch how it changes as you move the speakers around the room (if you use spikes, it helps to take them off for this purpose.)  I use it with an old analog Radio Shack SPL meter.

[DavidW]

Oh neato!  I'll have to use that!

[drogulus]

     I found a good way to balance your subwoofer sound.

     1) Place your sub at the listening position.

     2) Play a bass eq loop (btwn. 20-200 Hz).

     3) Sit at several points around the periphery where a sub might be located. (use a stool or folding chair).

     4) When you find the point where the sonic balance is best (deep and smooth)....

     5) Put the sub there!

      Now you will have better results balancing the sub with the other speakers because you will have removed the worst bumps and nulls.

      I've never tried this, but it sure sounds like it would be worth trying.

[Bogey]

What do you folks rec. for a flat panel?  Small room (12'x12') and the tv is on its stand on a table so if we get a sound bar, I do not believe it will fit beneath.

[Bogey]

Sorry about that.  I meant a sound system for a flat panel for a room that size, David.

[DavidW]

Woops deleted then.

Are you thinking of 5.1?

[Bogey]

Woops deleted then.

Are you thinking of 5.1?

5.1....5.2.....whatever it takes.