3.1 av receiver

I had a Arcam system, bought 6 years ago. It provided center and rear(mono), it was such a faff to set up, each disc seemed to need a different  setup, I eventually gave up, as the resulting sound was dissapointing.

Whether a newer set would be any better, but you really need to audition as the sound needs to balance well with your main rig.

I have an old Linn Classik Movie System, it is 5.1, but won;t play SACDs. I don't use it at all these days for exactly the same reason as BigH - wires everywhere and getting the .1 right was a chore and .5. 

I use Eclipse speakers in my office, I bet these would sound great in a 5.1 system if you could tolerate the wires.  I know Eclipse does a sub, but it may be a silly price. I just use a stereo pair

I tried the Marantz AV7005 for a couple of weeks into NAP 150 and NAP V175.  I decided I was happier overall with my old Denon AVR-4800 into the Naim amps instead.  Lots to like about the Marantz; but the factory remote conflicted with the Naim remote for the NAC 112.  Don't buy unless you listen and like the sound in 5.1 AND 2.0 (and with headphones, too, if you care).  Maybe I got a bad sample, or set it up wrong; I think not.  After two weeks of aggravation, I was relieved to have the old AVR back in place, and budget building toward an nDAC.

I will be interested in following your progress.

Good luck.

Nick

I listen to films in 2 channel. If I were more serious viewer of films maybe a sub for the films with explosions and such like.

Several years back I had a full Naim surround set up, ie. DVD5/AV2 etc., (but only Naim speakers for front L/R), plus a projector. I had a few years of terrific fun from this but I eventually went back to 2 channel. Reasons: I got fed up with the lounge looking like the auditorium of a cinema rather than a living room. Also the whole thing was a hassle to get balanced right - what seemed a good sound balance for one movie didn't suit another so well. But the predominant reason for returning to 2 channel was simply that the novelty of surround wore off, and once that had happened I found that the experience added very little, if anything, to my enjoyment of movies. I find that watching movies in stereo is absolutely fine. So I would caution - don't spend a fortune on a surround set-up unless you are absolutely sure you need/want/will stick with it. Personally I would just use the Superunity for music and movies and plough the remaining finds into something else.

Peter

I watch lots of movies and a good surround-sound system's essential for me. Expensive and difficult to get right but well worth it - 'ordinary' stereo doesn't cut the mustard for films.

I don't understand folks' comments about sound balance; a sound meter's essential & as long as you set the system up correctly to begin with there's no need to fiddle with it unless you alter something. Film soundtracks vary enormously in terms of sound quality and channel balance but then that's the way they've been mixed.

Tony,

The balance issues for me were mainly the sub and surround levels. On some 5.1 movies they would seem to contribute nothing at all to the sound, whilst on others they would be clearly active. I appreciate that in theory, once initial set-up has been performed correctly, then further adjustment should not be required. But as you say, DVD's/Blu-rays are all balanced differently, and the sound mix for the home version of the movie will be different from the theatrical mix designed for large auditoriums and (relatively) lower quality sound systems. Taking the variables into account (different disc manufacturers/distributers, different engineers, differing quality and formats of original source material) it would perhaps be surprising if any kind of consistency between discs existed!

As for surround sound itself, there's no doubt at all that it adds another dimension to watching movies, and with a projector this is the nearest you will get to a commercial cinema experience at home. A large-screen TV is a quite different experience and no contest IMO. As I said, my wife and I had terrific fun from our set-up for a few years. I began in the end though to find it a bit "full-on" for regular viewing,  and eventually it was only used about twice a week. The rest of the time we just watched DVD's on our 26" TV with a dedicated 2 - channel system. A totally different experience - far less impressive, and certainly nothing like a commercial cinema,  but somehow just easier to relax into and enjoy the movie. All just my experience/opinion of course!

Cheers,

Peter

Fritz,

Denons work better than most for your budget.  My first venture was the budget 2106, feeding pre-outs to my 282/250/Allaes, and also a pre-out to a NAP140/nCent.  Worked very well, and I am happy that no subwoofer is required either.

Later on I added surround sound using in ceiling speakers (Niles, run off the Denon's amplifiers) - relatively low cost, but definitely gives a far more immersive movie watching experience.

Cheers

Pete

Hi Guys

Thanks for the replies (I had some difficulty login on).

I have decided to purchase the superuniti (will come in next week) together with a Monitor audio 300GX. For the rear and centre the 50 and 150GX plus sub.

If have on review a Cambridge audio azur650r as, from reviews, sounds very good!

I will use the CA as receiver and pre-amp for video related sounds. The Superuniti will handle all music related stuff. I will set it up as soon as i have the superuniti.

So far the CA is installed and sounds good!

Sorry for the delay.

Keep you posted if you like!