A question sure to arouse the ire of all 'flat earthers'
Posted by: Johns Naim on 06 July 2002
Greetings All,
I'm a very happy, fully paid up member, of the Naim-Audio fraternity, and a strong advocate of PRaT.
But not Kans, or other bandwidth constrained speakers, unfortunately, sorry about that, no offence intended, and I hope none taken. Judging by some of the recent comments I've been reading on the 'Stallion' threads, my ears are blushing, and I'm in fear and trembling of raising a heretical subject, that I raised once before, to receive only one reply, of the unmentionable, and punishable subject of Home theater. There, I've said it now, so you can all relax.
I've been doing a lot of reading, and posting on other forums, relating to the subject, but none of them, with the greatest of respect, and it would perhaps be unfair to expect it, seem to know much about Naim, and it's design and performance principles.
I've recently been able to audition the new AV2/175 combo, with a view to hear what Naim could do re HT, and had a very pleasant surprise, in that it was far and away the best HT sound I've ever heard, but also that in the context of HT, with perhaps the picture being at least 50%, or even more of the total HT experience, and indeed arguably the dominant factor in the HT 'mix' that despite the wonderful sound, that my overall sense of the involvement/'being there' factor of HT was not substantially improved with the AV2/175 compared to a much more pedestrian Denon 3802 receiver, and the new Rotel 1065 receiver which we auditined back to back with the Naim.
My conclusion was that the Av2 is right up there with the best going, but, with the addition of the visual, whilst it may not be the most desireable case, one could get away with less re both $$ investiture and resulting performance with the sound side of HT, than one could with HIfi. The dominant factor always seems to be the acting, script, photography, etc, followed by the dialogue, sound effects, and then, in the 'background' a lot of the time, the music score adding atmosphere, and shaping the 'feel' and emotions of the overall 'being there' experience. I'm not advocating that one can get away with 'cheap and cheerful' not at all, the sound is still very important, but nonetheless, as finances dictate compromises for a lot of us, my bias will always be towards music when it comes to spending large amounts, and I would much rather say head towards active with my system than contemplate buying and adding in the AV2 for HT only.
Now if music becomes multi channel in a mainstream way, that may be a different story. But for HT, as I'm using a 28' TV for my monitor, I would overall I feel, get more of a total performance upgrade for HT use, by spending the AV2 money on a widescreen set, and economizing a LITTLE, on the HT sound side of it.
Now I know that we're all flat earthers here, and heaven help anyone who raises the heretical subject of multi channel, let alone Home Theater, but I know that there will be some amongst you who will have an interest in movies as well as music, just as I do, and I am interested in what solutions you've come up with, notwithstanding the AV2, for the price/performance reasons I've mentioned. Bear in mind that I'm in OZ, and with import duties, shipping, etc, the AV2/175 is an expensive item indeed, so I'm not trying to be a 'cheapskate' but just realistic and practical as to my assignment of resources.
The Denon, notwithstanding the 3802 is highly thought of, I found too thin and bright for my tastes, although good dynamically. The Rotel, conversly, was a lot richer, and smoother, but somewhat laid back dynamically. I'm conceptually most interested in a preamp/processor/amp combo, and that pretty much leaves me here with either the Sony TAE9000ES pre/pro, and it's matching 5 channel, bridgeable amp, the TAN9000ES, or the Rotel 1066 pre/pro, and a matching Rotel amp.
My on paper favourite is the Sony; it has excellent Bass management, and equaliser functions, which appeal as I will be using of necessity a mixed set of speakers - SBL's up front driven by 180, and small American EPI acoustic suspension bookshelf speakers driven by the aforementioned matching 5 channel TAN power amp,- which appeals in it's versatility by running it initially in bridgeable 2 channel mode with the EPI's, and later in 3 channel mode if and when I get a center channel to match the SBl's, and later, if I choose to seperate the systems, in 5 channel mode.
I also like it's sound quality in all but one important, or at least seemingly important area - maybe its not so important for HT as for HiFi. Its smooth, very clear and detailed, has excellent soundfield processing, good dynamics, both large, and small, microdynamics if you will, BUT, seemed just that little too laid back, and a bit lifeless at times. I couldn't quite put a finger on it, for on the part of the DVD auditioned (Fith Element) where the Diva ( no arcam pun, sorry,) sings, it had a good sense of toe tapping rythmn, or PRaT if you will, otherwise my first thoughts were that is was rythmically quite average, given the sense of almost 'laziness' in the sound, that just sort of lingered.
What thoughts all? I'm seriously interested in buying this product, but, given the time I've taken with my Naim system, as I'm sure we all have, don't want to make expensive mistakes either, so I'm hoping you'll all be able to put aside, at least some of the 'flat earth' approach here, and help me out with some eperience and ideas.
I'm mostly trying to figure out the laziness in the sound of the Sony combo, otherwise very happy with it. I have heard it eslewhere, but only the TAE pre/pro, paired with two 2nd hand meridian amps, back to back with the latest STRV-A555ES receiver with DPL2 etc, which the TAE/meridian combo comfortably left behind. The receiver did very well in the HT crash and bang stakes, and had a more lively sound than the TAE/Meridians, but on refinement, detail, smoothness, clarity, and all the sort of things one is used to hearing from good 2 channel HiFi, it was the TAE/Meridian combo all the way. HOWEVER, I don't want to buy 2nd hand if possible, and Naim is out of the $$ question new, so focussing on the Sony TAN amp for it's versatility and value, but with some queries over the sound.
The reason I've mentioned the Meridians with the TAE, is because there were traces of the same sort of laziness in the sound; certainly the reciever which is a later model, would have the more uptodate software installed ex factory (there is an available update for the TAE, but not factory installed) and I'm wondering if this would have anything to do with it. I can only think of either the software, if indeed this could account for those sort of sound differences, or either the amps, or the setup.
I'd appreciate all and any comments, as these units are in short stock, still in production after hiccups about a new model coming, but shipments are all backordered here, and it's first in best dressed, so hoping someone will have more experience than I to help me make the right decision.
Thanks to all for taking the time to read my lengthy post, and to all those that will hopefully reply.
Cheers,
John.
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
I'm a very happy, fully paid up member, of the Naim-Audio fraternity, and a strong advocate of PRaT.
But not Kans, or other bandwidth constrained speakers, unfortunately, sorry about that, no offence intended, and I hope none taken. Judging by some of the recent comments I've been reading on the 'Stallion' threads, my ears are blushing, and I'm in fear and trembling of raising a heretical subject, that I raised once before, to receive only one reply, of the unmentionable, and punishable subject of Home theater. There, I've said it now, so you can all relax.
I've been doing a lot of reading, and posting on other forums, relating to the subject, but none of them, with the greatest of respect, and it would perhaps be unfair to expect it, seem to know much about Naim, and it's design and performance principles.
I've recently been able to audition the new AV2/175 combo, with a view to hear what Naim could do re HT, and had a very pleasant surprise, in that it was far and away the best HT sound I've ever heard, but also that in the context of HT, with perhaps the picture being at least 50%, or even more of the total HT experience, and indeed arguably the dominant factor in the HT 'mix' that despite the wonderful sound, that my overall sense of the involvement/'being there' factor of HT was not substantially improved with the AV2/175 compared to a much more pedestrian Denon 3802 receiver, and the new Rotel 1065 receiver which we auditined back to back with the Naim.
My conclusion was that the Av2 is right up there with the best going, but, with the addition of the visual, whilst it may not be the most desireable case, one could get away with less re both $$ investiture and resulting performance with the sound side of HT, than one could with HIfi. The dominant factor always seems to be the acting, script, photography, etc, followed by the dialogue, sound effects, and then, in the 'background' a lot of the time, the music score adding atmosphere, and shaping the 'feel' and emotions of the overall 'being there' experience. I'm not advocating that one can get away with 'cheap and cheerful' not at all, the sound is still very important, but nonetheless, as finances dictate compromises for a lot of us, my bias will always be towards music when it comes to spending large amounts, and I would much rather say head towards active with my system than contemplate buying and adding in the AV2 for HT only.
Now if music becomes multi channel in a mainstream way, that may be a different story. But for HT, as I'm using a 28' TV for my monitor, I would overall I feel, get more of a total performance upgrade for HT use, by spending the AV2 money on a widescreen set, and economizing a LITTLE, on the HT sound side of it.
Now I know that we're all flat earthers here, and heaven help anyone who raises the heretical subject of multi channel, let alone Home Theater, but I know that there will be some amongst you who will have an interest in movies as well as music, just as I do, and I am interested in what solutions you've come up with, notwithstanding the AV2, for the price/performance reasons I've mentioned. Bear in mind that I'm in OZ, and with import duties, shipping, etc, the AV2/175 is an expensive item indeed, so I'm not trying to be a 'cheapskate' but just realistic and practical as to my assignment of resources.
The Denon, notwithstanding the 3802 is highly thought of, I found too thin and bright for my tastes, although good dynamically. The Rotel, conversly, was a lot richer, and smoother, but somewhat laid back dynamically. I'm conceptually most interested in a preamp/processor/amp combo, and that pretty much leaves me here with either the Sony TAE9000ES pre/pro, and it's matching 5 channel, bridgeable amp, the TAN9000ES, or the Rotel 1066 pre/pro, and a matching Rotel amp.
My on paper favourite is the Sony; it has excellent Bass management, and equaliser functions, which appeal as I will be using of necessity a mixed set of speakers - SBL's up front driven by 180, and small American EPI acoustic suspension bookshelf speakers driven by the aforementioned matching 5 channel TAN power amp,- which appeals in it's versatility by running it initially in bridgeable 2 channel mode with the EPI's, and later in 3 channel mode if and when I get a center channel to match the SBl's, and later, if I choose to seperate the systems, in 5 channel mode.
I also like it's sound quality in all but one important, or at least seemingly important area - maybe its not so important for HT as for HiFi. Its smooth, very clear and detailed, has excellent soundfield processing, good dynamics, both large, and small, microdynamics if you will, BUT, seemed just that little too laid back, and a bit lifeless at times. I couldn't quite put a finger on it, for on the part of the DVD auditioned (Fith Element) where the Diva ( no arcam pun, sorry,) sings, it had a good sense of toe tapping rythmn, or PRaT if you will, otherwise my first thoughts were that is was rythmically quite average, given the sense of almost 'laziness' in the sound, that just sort of lingered.
What thoughts all? I'm seriously interested in buying this product, but, given the time I've taken with my Naim system, as I'm sure we all have, don't want to make expensive mistakes either, so I'm hoping you'll all be able to put aside, at least some of the 'flat earth' approach here, and help me out with some eperience and ideas.
I'm mostly trying to figure out the laziness in the sound of the Sony combo, otherwise very happy with it. I have heard it eslewhere, but only the TAE pre/pro, paired with two 2nd hand meridian amps, back to back with the latest STRV-A555ES receiver with DPL2 etc, which the TAE/meridian combo comfortably left behind. The receiver did very well in the HT crash and bang stakes, and had a more lively sound than the TAE/Meridians, but on refinement, detail, smoothness, clarity, and all the sort of things one is used to hearing from good 2 channel HiFi, it was the TAE/Meridian combo all the way. HOWEVER, I don't want to buy 2nd hand if possible, and Naim is out of the $$ question new, so focussing on the Sony TAN amp for it's versatility and value, but with some queries over the sound.
The reason I've mentioned the Meridians with the TAE, is because there were traces of the same sort of laziness in the sound; certainly the reciever which is a later model, would have the more uptodate software installed ex factory (there is an available update for the TAE, but not factory installed) and I'm wondering if this would have anything to do with it. I can only think of either the software, if indeed this could account for those sort of sound differences, or either the amps, or the setup.
I'd appreciate all and any comments, as these units are in short stock, still in production after hiccups about a new model coming, but shipments are all backordered here, and it's first in best dressed, so hoping someone will have more experience than I to help me make the right decision.
Thanks to all for taking the time to read my lengthy post, and to all those that will hopefully reply.
Cheers,
John.
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
Hello All,
Firstly thanks to Mike, Mr Sukebe, and J.N. for responding. I'm not as an experienced 'poster' as some, but do try and think of my 'audience' when posting, from what I can see of it, if ones post,is overly long, or perhaps -gulp- boring, or a topic that doesn't generate much interest, then one doesn't get many replies. Oh, and did I mention if you weren't a Low- Fi Kan type speaker person, then you'd probably have 'buckleys' or none.
So thanks for writng in, after putting some effort and thought into my post, I do appreciate it.
Goodness though, J.N. I think you're right, Home Theatre doesn't exactly seem to be a priority on many of the Naim faithfulls lists. I wonder how that bodes for Naim bringing products in the HT genre to market, if the 'faithful' are not interested? Still, as the UK would hardly be their biggest market, I would think, they probably have a more reasoned view on the US market place, where there's a much stronger interest in HT. And for sure, one needs a lot of space, and money to do it well, something the US market seems to have a lot of if you go by what one can read in the US HT mags and on the web. Small rooms, bookshelf bandwidth limited speakers on stands either side of a 20- 25" telly masquerading as HT is most definitely not their bag. So perhaps that in some way might explain the reluctance of the 'faithfull' to get involved in HT.
Maybe if I 'stir' hard enough, we might get some more 'posts'!
Mr Sukebe, thanks for your thoughts also, I've though of adding another Naim amp along the lines you've mentioned, however, apparently, according to my Naim dealer, whilst one can use Naim preamps with other power amps, a Naim power amp, such as the175 needs a Naim preamp as well, as the operating conditions for the power amp, are set by the preamp, so having to get a pre as well as the 175 as you sugggest, would again become prohibitively expensive.
Ultimately, I think I will be moving in the direction you have suggested Mike, but possibly with the Sony seperate preamp/processor, and matching 5 channel multimode power amp, as I would tend to feel it would have the edge sound wise over the receiver, for not that much more outlay. The receiver does have DPL2 which would be nice, but ultimately I'm more concerned about sound quality, than the latest decoding techniques etc.
I'm hoping that using my 180 and SBL's for the front left and right, from the processors preouts, as you've suggested, and letting the TAN9000ES amp drive centre and rears, will in some way negate the 'slowness' I heard when auditioning the processor/preamp, just with the TAN running in 5 channel mode. In 3 channel mode, it should have better dynamic reserves, and also the Naim would be handling the front, which is where most of the sound comes from as far as I'm aware with DD and DTS, I'm under the impression the rears are mostly for the steering of effects, and ambient background 'surround' details etc.
So I'm hoping putting a cuckoo in the Naim nest, will hatch some interesting and compatible eggs HT sound wise, whilst saving me at least both of my arms, and one of my legs.
Thanks once again for writing in, I do appreciate it, if there's anything else that you've thought of that could help, I'm more than willing, and would be very interested in anything you might like to add, like I said, just a learner....
Thanks once again guys,
Cheers,
John.
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
Firstly thanks to Mike, Mr Sukebe, and J.N. for responding. I'm not as an experienced 'poster' as some, but do try and think of my 'audience' when posting, from what I can see of it, if ones post,is overly long, or perhaps -gulp- boring, or a topic that doesn't generate much interest, then one doesn't get many replies. Oh, and did I mention if you weren't a Low- Fi Kan type speaker person, then you'd probably have 'buckleys' or none.
So thanks for writng in, after putting some effort and thought into my post, I do appreciate it.
Goodness though, J.N. I think you're right, Home Theatre doesn't exactly seem to be a priority on many of the Naim faithfulls lists. I wonder how that bodes for Naim bringing products in the HT genre to market, if the 'faithful' are not interested? Still, as the UK would hardly be their biggest market, I would think, they probably have a more reasoned view on the US market place, where there's a much stronger interest in HT. And for sure, one needs a lot of space, and money to do it well, something the US market seems to have a lot of if you go by what one can read in the US HT mags and on the web. Small rooms, bookshelf bandwidth limited speakers on stands either side of a 20- 25" telly masquerading as HT is most definitely not their bag. So perhaps that in some way might explain the reluctance of the 'faithfull' to get involved in HT.
Maybe if I 'stir' hard enough, we might get some more 'posts'!
Mr Sukebe, thanks for your thoughts also, I've though of adding another Naim amp along the lines you've mentioned, however, apparently, according to my Naim dealer, whilst one can use Naim preamps with other power amps, a Naim power amp, such as the175 needs a Naim preamp as well, as the operating conditions for the power amp, are set by the preamp, so having to get a pre as well as the 175 as you sugggest, would again become prohibitively expensive.
Ultimately, I think I will be moving in the direction you have suggested Mike, but possibly with the Sony seperate preamp/processor, and matching 5 channel multimode power amp, as I would tend to feel it would have the edge sound wise over the receiver, for not that much more outlay. The receiver does have DPL2 which would be nice, but ultimately I'm more concerned about sound quality, than the latest decoding techniques etc.
I'm hoping that using my 180 and SBL's for the front left and right, from the processors preouts, as you've suggested, and letting the TAN9000ES amp drive centre and rears, will in some way negate the 'slowness' I heard when auditioning the processor/preamp, just with the TAN running in 5 channel mode. In 3 channel mode, it should have better dynamic reserves, and also the Naim would be handling the front, which is where most of the sound comes from as far as I'm aware with DD and DTS, I'm under the impression the rears are mostly for the steering of effects, and ambient background 'surround' details etc.
So I'm hoping putting a cuckoo in the Naim nest, will hatch some interesting and compatible eggs HT sound wise, whilst saving me at least both of my arms, and one of my legs.
Thanks once again for writing in, I do appreciate it, if there's anything else that you've thought of that could help, I'm more than willing, and would be very interested in anything you might like to add, like I said, just a learner....
Thanks once again guys,
Cheers,
John.
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
Hello Connon,
Thanks for stopping by from the US to add some input here. I hope you, your friends and family had a great 4th July. Sounds like it was fun.
Now, you've thrown a small to medium size wrench in my thoughts, because I'm basically with you re integrating things, v's just straight stereo, so maybe a few words why thinking of going the route I am, and the compromises I'v found, both for and against.
My environment's very different, 5x4mtr solid constuction room, 28" (sob) CRT TV, but not too dissimlar on the system front:- CDI/72/HiCap/180/SBL's, and would also like a 250 on the way to acive, but probably wait till they update it almost inevitably with the new styling, and of course if $$ permits.
Probably my main reason for the sort of compromises I've been suggesting is that with constrained resources, like most of us, Id rather put it where I think it'd really count, like a 250, and then maybe active, rather than AV2/175, as whilst I really like movies, I LOVE my music most, and feel that in the prescence of High quality video, acting, sound effects etc, that the sound, whilst important, would be the area most, if I could say this, amenable to compromise, as perhaps having the least deleterious effect overall upon the total HT experience, when trying to contain costs, and work out priorities between music and HT.
For the last few years, my 'HT' if I could call it that, has been running my VHS tape player direct to the 72, and a line out from the HiCap to a 3 channel combined amp/DPL decoder, putting out DPL to a small set of American EPI lousspeakers for the rear. No center channel or sub. On all but the most extreme flyovers etc, this has worked rather well, being very satisfyig for taped movies, and apart from the extra 2 speakers in the room, having no discernable effect upon 2 channel listening. When doing said listening, I keep the processor at idle, it seems to help, and was suggested to me by my dealer as a way of helping minimise the effects of the speakers being 'driven' acoustically by the main SBL's as a pair of passive radiators. So far so good.
A year ago along came my DVD. I took my time in assesing players, and settled on the DVP Sony 9000ES player. If I had been concerned about CD replay as well, probably would've gone with the DV88 you mention; it's a fine player. Hoever, for movie use, I found on sound and mostly vision, that my preferences lead me to the Sony, but broadly speaking, the two are comparable, IMHO, so you'll have an idea where I'm coming from with my equipment.
Here it gets really hard. Essentially, the majority of DVD's have either 5.1 DD, or sometimes DTS, and also some with Dolby 2.0. IF, I play the 5.1 soundtrack, in stereo, in the setup as I've outlined, in the process of the player mixing down the 5.1 soundtrack to two channel stereo compatable via the DVD players analogue outputs, the resultant signal tends to be quite heavily compressed.
On the other hand, IF, there is a DD 2.0 track on the disc, then the dynamic range, and overall resolution is just stunning. Here lies the rub. The vast majority of DVD's don't have, at least in region 4 here in OZ the 2.0 channel soundtrack, so I'm losing sound quality, without having access to DD decoding. The 'squashed' dynamics actually sound worse in that regard, than the same movie using VHS tape as a source, where I'v had DVD and VHS copies, and done some AB's.
So it's a frustrating situation; I don't want to limit my investment in the DVD by staying with stereo only, for the compression reasons, and resultant disappointment in sound as I've mentioned, and don't want to stuff up the PRaT of my system either by inappropriate addons!
Conversly, especially when I listen to those few DVD's with DD 2.0 chan. sound tracks, about the only thing I would gain I feel from going DD pre/prec/and amp for the rears etc, as proposed, would be steering of effects, and rear channel information. Provided the source is up there, the system really rocks, and I can strongly identify with your comments re the sound at your friends with the Large screen, and SBL's etc.
Until Naim bring out a center channel speaker that wlll sit a little closer to my income level
- which I'm sure they will in time, I plan to run sans center channel, to avoid integration problems, and for PRaT reasons as well. Besides, sitting by my self in the sweet spot, it's arguably unnecessary to have a center speaker anyway.
Costs again will dictate holding off on a sub, again with the SBL's not really necessary, however I would have some concerns about overloading them, and here the sub appeals for that reason. Am envisaging seeing what Naim bring out, as rumours of one under development, or otherwise, one of the REL subs, preferrably the acoustic suspension Strata 111 appeals at this stage.
Anyway Connor, this is turning out to be a long post again, but just really appreciated you taking the time to write in, and just wanted to reply, to add a bit more to the background detail with my thoughts on all of this, and to once again thank all those who have kindly lent their time and expertise.
Hey, if I've got it all wrong, please tell me,... lets see now, maybe something like a pair of Kans, coupled with some Bose subwoofers,,, ahem...
Cheers,
John.
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
Thanks for stopping by from the US to add some input here.
I hope you, your friends and family had a great 4th July. Sounds like it was fun.Now, you've thrown a small to medium size wrench in my thoughts, because I'm basically with you re integrating things, v's just straight stereo, so maybe a few words why thinking of going the route I am, and the compromises I'v found, both for and against.
My environment's very different, 5x4mtr solid constuction room, 28" (sob) CRT TV, but not too dissimlar on the system front:- CDI/72/HiCap/180/SBL's, and would also like a 250 on the way to acive, but probably wait till they update it almost inevitably with the new styling, and of course if $$ permits.
Probably my main reason for the sort of compromises I've been suggesting is that with constrained resources, like most of us, Id rather put it where I think it'd really count, like a 250, and then maybe active, rather than AV2/175, as whilst I really like movies, I LOVE my music most, and feel that in the prescence of High quality video, acting, sound effects etc, that the sound, whilst important, would be the area most, if I could say this, amenable to compromise, as perhaps having the least deleterious effect overall upon the total HT experience, when trying to contain costs, and work out priorities between music and HT.
For the last few years, my 'HT' if I could call it that, has been running my VHS tape player direct to the 72, and a line out from the HiCap to a 3 channel combined amp/DPL decoder, putting out DPL to a small set of American EPI lousspeakers for the rear. No center channel or sub. On all but the most extreme flyovers etc, this has worked rather well, being very satisfyig for taped movies, and apart from the extra 2 speakers in the room, having no discernable effect upon 2 channel listening. When doing said listening, I keep the processor at idle, it seems to help, and was suggested to me by my dealer as a way of helping minimise the effects of the speakers being 'driven' acoustically by the main SBL's as a pair of passive radiators. So far so good.
A year ago along came my DVD. I took my time in assesing players, and settled on the DVP Sony 9000ES player. If I had been concerned about CD replay as well, probably would've gone with the DV88 you mention; it's a fine player. Hoever, for movie use, I found on sound and mostly vision, that my preferences lead me to the Sony, but broadly speaking, the two are comparable, IMHO, so you'll have an idea where I'm coming from with my equipment.
Here it gets really hard. Essentially, the majority of DVD's have either 5.1 DD, or sometimes DTS, and also some with Dolby 2.0. IF, I play the 5.1 soundtrack, in stereo, in the setup as I've outlined, in the process of the player mixing down the 5.1 soundtrack to two channel stereo compatable via the DVD players analogue outputs, the resultant signal tends to be quite heavily compressed.
On the other hand, IF, there is a DD 2.0 track on the disc, then the dynamic range, and overall resolution is just stunning. Here lies the rub. The vast majority of DVD's don't have, at least in region 4 here in OZ the 2.0 channel soundtrack, so I'm losing sound quality, without having access to DD decoding. The 'squashed' dynamics actually sound worse in that regard, than the same movie using VHS tape as a source, where I'v had DVD and VHS copies, and done some AB's.
So it's a frustrating situation; I don't want to limit my investment in the DVD by staying with stereo only, for the compression reasons, and resultant disappointment in sound as I've mentioned, and don't want to stuff up the PRaT of my system either by inappropriate addons!
Conversly, especially when I listen to those few DVD's with DD 2.0 chan. sound tracks, about the only thing I would gain I feel from going DD pre/prec/and amp for the rears etc, as proposed, would be steering of effects, and rear channel information. Provided the source is up there, the system really rocks, and I can strongly identify with your comments re the sound at your friends with the Large screen, and SBL's etc.
Until Naim bring out a center channel speaker that wlll sit a little closer to my income level
- which I'm sure they will in time, I plan to run sans center channel, to avoid integration problems, and for PRaT reasons as well. Besides, sitting by my self in the sweet spot, it's arguably unnecessary to have a center speaker anyway.Costs again will dictate holding off on a sub, again with the SBL's not really necessary, however I would have some concerns about overloading them, and here the sub appeals for that reason. Am envisaging seeing what Naim bring out, as rumours of one under development, or otherwise, one of the REL subs, preferrably the acoustic suspension Strata 111 appeals at this stage.
Anyway Connor, this is turning out to be a long post again, but just really appreciated you taking the time to write in, and just wanted to reply, to add a bit more to the background detail with my thoughts on all of this, and to once again thank all those who have kindly lent their time and expertise.
Hey, if I've got it all wrong, please tell me,... lets see now, maybe something like a pair of Kans, coupled with some Bose subwoofers,,, ahem...
Cheers,
John.
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
quote:
I recently read where one movie industry fellow wrote that if you are listening to his soundtrack, then he's not done his job on the package.
Funnily enough I think I've heard that from a musical artist as well
Jay
Hello All,
Many thanks for all those continuing, and those starting to join this discussion. I like to stir with a bit of Humour re the 'flat earth' thing, and have a polite 'snipe' at the kan 'set', but all in good fun, as they'e brilliant at what they do,- the speaker, not the 'set'! - but also at the risk of sounding a bit of an audio/HiFi elitist type person (a fancy way to describe what would otherwise be referred to in polite coloquial jargon as a snob!) I do feel somewhat more at 'home' here in this forum as against some of the other more HT orientated forums where I've been doing some reading/posting/learning, as although very worth while, this forum is I should think perused predominately by Naim owners, and accordingly I think we share something in common re our tastes in HiFi etc.
Besides, I don't have to wade through discussions about the latest piece of 'flavour of the month budget kit' or high end 'tweakers' , which whilst relevant, are not quite where I'm at as it were.
And lastly, if I may humbly suggest it, I think it's good that Naim afficianadoes, of which I think I could say I am one, have, or start to have a think/discussion about things like multi-channel HT, and/or music, pros and cons, etc, as I don't think it's going to go away, anytime soon, and if Naim are developing both HT, and multichannel music equipment, then they're mindful of that as well, and we need to be aware of the strengths, and pitfalls of new ways of doing things I feel.
Anyway, I digress.
Bob, I would have to agree totally, a point that as a music lover, I'm inclined to forget, and hence judge/evaluate HT equipment by HiFi standards, which to my mind, whilst comparable to some degree,
is as you say a different medium, and needs to be judged in a slightly different light.
When I auditioned the AV2/175, all the PRaT clues for eg were there; dialogue for instance now sounded so much more natural, and believable, with all the sense of timbral richness of the voices, the phrasing, breathing, intonation etc laid bare. It was so far ahead of anything else I'd heard it wasn't funny, and in a multichannel music system, say SACD, or DVD-Audio, or just for say a dyed in the wool Opera Buff, it would make a huge amount of sense.
But for movie use, these 'benefits' such as PRaT, made very little significant difference to the HT 'enjoyment/involvement' factor when compared to much cheaper units, given that a) the visual element, as eveyone seems to agree is the dominating one in the HT 'mix', and that B) whilst surround speakers, etc can cause a loss of PRaT, as pointed out by Connon in his post, in the HT setup, if the processing is of a high standard, then one is 'wrapped' for lack of a better word, in the overall soundfield, which seems to some degree to compensate for the lack of relative PRaT, or perhaps one just doesn't notice it's abscense as much, given the visual focus.
Certainly, FOR ME, I didn't think in the context of HT, that the AV2's PRaT added a lot to the OVERALL involvement factor with HT, compared to the lesser quality equipment.
Which was sort of surprising, disappointing, and good all at the same time, if that makes sense!
I vaguely recall reading somewhere about the bit re
From what I've gathered with this, the concept seems to be that the soundtrack per se, should augment/supplement the visual action, not dominate, or be overtly noticed per se. Interesting indeed. When I auditioned my DVD Players, one of them from a well known HiFi orientated UK company, made a great deal of the music in DVD movie soundtracks, - it's hiFi heritage showing through perhaps, BUT, to the detriment of the effects, which often lacked a sense of weight and scale, and at times the music seemed far to 'forward/noticeable' in the mix, and distracting from, rather than augmenting the visuals, such as to be disconcerting, so all this starts to 'fit' and make a lot of sense for me.
Mike, thanks for those thoughts; BTW, they're great pics of your setup - enjoyed having a look.
I've had my 'suspicions' about the role of the center channel, thanks for bringing it up. I'm not so much a 'flat earther' that I think the center channel is a waste of time. From what I've heard, it provides a better localisation for those off screen axis of dialogue, but also notice slight gains with intelligibility as well, and think for those reasons, as well as taking some of the 'crash and bang' load of the main L&R speakers, well worth while. However, I anticipate running sans center channel at first, mainly re $$ to get anything like a center channel that would 'mate' with the SBL's, and in that context, and also as I predominately hog the centre on axis 'sweetspot' when watching HT, would prefer 'phantom' rather than a mismatch.
I only realised after reading through the AV2's instruction manual that you could actually run 'phantom' for DD etc; I had previously thought this only applied to DPL, as did my naim dealer. Surprise, surprise, the Sony pre/pro I'm interested in even has a centre dialogue trim, for increasing the centre channel mix with the L&R mains, when used in phantom mode with DD and DTS.
Two queries you may be able to help me with. Setting up as you've explained, re L&R outputs from the processor to the naim preamp; I realise the Nait etc has unity gain, which the 72 doesn't - in the AV2 instruction manual (the recommended setup with 72, 102, 82 etc is the same as you've outlined, ditto the Sony pre/pro) they recommend setting the pre's (in my case 72) volume to around 12 o'clock, which seems very high. Can anyone explain what exactly is meant by 'unity gain'? Also I read somewhere, that in an active preamp, the volume pot actually initially ATTENUATES the signal, and then after a certain point, BOOSTS it, or provides gain as it were. Anyone know if this is true? I always was under tha impression that the vol pot on the pre boosted the signal only.
My other query is simply this. Would running the SBL's full range, ie Large setting from the processor, and with NO SUB as I'm first intending to do, put me at risk of overloading/damaging the SBL's. The DVD's I've been listening to where I've used the DD 2.0 soundtrack on the disc, with no compression, have a HUGE dynamic range; I've needed to be very cautious with the volume, and worry about inadvertantly damaging the SBL's. Does anyone have any experience with this??
Jootz, thanks for your most kind thought; unfortunately the Yamaha 800 is not brought into Australia by Yamaha - they say there's no market for it - sigh,
they seem heavily entrenched in the mainstream 'crash and bang' receiver market here unfortunatly.
Jay, great to hear from you, hey, you're not a Michael Jackson fan or anthing are you? - the latest I hear is that he's slagging Sony music for 'taking advantage of him and black artists generally'- maybe the 'packaging' exceeded the content BTW, working on that list for you!
Yes Richard, I hear you!!, now I know why I was such an ardent James Bond fan in my teenage years, reading all the Ian Fleming novels I could get my hands on, he was my hero. As for 70mm, so hard to find, but some of my faourites like 2001 Space Odyssey, or Lawrence of Arabia are incomparable from a visual standpoint without it, 35mm prints look ugh' in comparison. Unfortunatly, apart from the 'Seven Pillars of Wisdom' I don't know of any print medium that tells the tale quite as well as the picture. Oh well, back to my new 'remastered' DVD copy I suppose!
Anyway, one day I'll figure out how to express all my thoughts on this subject with less words; in the meantime, off to indulge in some music 'therapy' all this talk of HT is giving me withdrawal...
Cheers all, and thanks once again for taking the time to read this meandring post of mine, and contributing so much to my learning curve, and hopefully for us all; the expertise is much appreciated.
John
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
Many thanks for all those continuing, and those starting to join this discussion. I like to stir with a bit of Humour re the 'flat earth' thing, and have a polite 'snipe' at the kan 'set', but all in good fun, as they'e brilliant at what they do,- the speaker, not the 'set'! - but also at the risk of sounding a bit of an audio/HiFi elitist type person (a fancy way to describe what would otherwise be referred to in polite coloquial jargon as a snob!) I do feel somewhat more at 'home' here in this forum as against some of the other more HT orientated forums where I've been doing some reading/posting/learning, as although very worth while, this forum is I should think perused predominately by Naim owners, and accordingly I think we share something in common re our tastes in HiFi etc.
Besides, I don't have to wade through discussions about the latest piece of 'flavour of the month budget kit' or high end 'tweakers' , which whilst relevant, are not quite where I'm at as it were.
And lastly, if I may humbly suggest it, I think it's good that Naim afficianadoes, of which I think I could say I am one, have, or start to have a think/discussion about things like multi-channel HT, and/or music, pros and cons, etc, as I don't think it's going to go away, anytime soon, and if Naim are developing both HT, and multichannel music equipment, then they're mindful of that as well, and we need to be aware of the strengths, and pitfalls of new ways of doing things I feel.
Anyway, I digress.
quote:
Home theater is NOT music!
At least not for me. It's a whole different type of entertainment, manufactured with different priorites in mind from the outset. I recently read where one movie industry fellow wrote that if you are listening to his soundtrack, then he's not done his job on the package.
Bob, I would have to agree totally, a point that as a music lover, I'm inclined to forget, and hence judge/evaluate HT equipment by HiFi standards, which to my mind, whilst comparable to some degree,
is as you say a different medium, and needs to be judged in a slightly different light.
When I auditioned the AV2/175, all the PRaT clues for eg were there; dialogue for instance now sounded so much more natural, and believable, with all the sense of timbral richness of the voices, the phrasing, breathing, intonation etc laid bare. It was so far ahead of anything else I'd heard it wasn't funny, and in a multichannel music system, say SACD, or DVD-Audio, or just for say a dyed in the wool Opera Buff, it would make a huge amount of sense.
But for movie use, these 'benefits' such as PRaT, made very little significant difference to the HT 'enjoyment/involvement' factor when compared to much cheaper units, given that a) the visual element, as eveyone seems to agree is the dominating one in the HT 'mix', and that B) whilst surround speakers, etc can cause a loss of PRaT, as pointed out by Connon in his post, in the HT setup, if the processing is of a high standard, then one is 'wrapped' for lack of a better word, in the overall soundfield, which seems to some degree to compensate for the lack of relative PRaT, or perhaps one just doesn't notice it's abscense as much, given the visual focus.
Certainly, FOR ME, I didn't think in the context of HT, that the AV2's PRaT added a lot to the OVERALL involvement factor with HT, compared to the lesser quality equipment.
Which was sort of surprising, disappointing, and good all at the same time, if that makes sense!
I vaguely recall reading somewhere about the bit re
quote:
one movie industry fellow wrote that if you are listening to his soundtrack, then he's not done his job on the package.
From what I've gathered with this, the concept seems to be that the soundtrack per se, should augment/supplement the visual action, not dominate, or be overtly noticed per se. Interesting indeed. When I auditioned my DVD Players, one of them from a well known HiFi orientated UK company, made a great deal of the music in DVD movie soundtracks, - it's hiFi heritage showing through perhaps, BUT, to the detriment of the effects, which often lacked a sense of weight and scale, and at times the music seemed far to 'forward/noticeable' in the mix, and distracting from, rather than augmenting the visuals, such as to be disconcerting, so all this starts to 'fit' and make a lot of sense for me.
quote:
On the issue of the center channel, I believe it's more important in HT than the L+R front channels. Most of the dialog and a whole lot more comes exclusively from that speaker. Therefore, make sure that you get something that is as good as your front channels. In my case, my Royd AV77 is basically a Royd Doublet on it's side, which is significantly better than the Squires that I use for the front channels.
In fact, if you can't get a center channel to match the L+R front, then I would suggest that you go with a "phantom" center (unless you intend to have a bunch of people sitting off-center of the screen).
Mike, thanks for those thoughts; BTW, they're great pics of your setup - enjoyed having a look.
I've had my 'suspicions' about the role of the center channel, thanks for bringing it up. I'm not so much a 'flat earther' that I think the center channel is a waste of time. From what I've heard, it provides a better localisation for those off screen axis of dialogue, but also notice slight gains with intelligibility as well, and think for those reasons, as well as taking some of the 'crash and bang' load of the main L&R speakers, well worth while. However, I anticipate running sans center channel at first, mainly re $$ to get anything like a center channel that would 'mate' with the SBL's, and in that context, and also as I predominately hog the centre on axis 'sweetspot' when watching HT, would prefer 'phantom' rather than a mismatch.
I only realised after reading through the AV2's instruction manual that you could actually run 'phantom' for DD etc; I had previously thought this only applied to DPL, as did my naim dealer. Surprise, surprise, the Sony pre/pro I'm interested in even has a centre dialogue trim, for increasing the centre channel mix with the L&R mains, when used in phantom mode with DD and DTS.
Two queries you may be able to help me with. Setting up as you've explained, re L&R outputs from the processor to the naim preamp; I realise the Nait etc has unity gain, which the 72 doesn't - in the AV2 instruction manual (the recommended setup with 72, 102, 82 etc is the same as you've outlined, ditto the Sony pre/pro) they recommend setting the pre's (in my case 72) volume to around 12 o'clock, which seems very high. Can anyone explain what exactly is meant by 'unity gain'? Also I read somewhere, that in an active preamp, the volume pot actually initially ATTENUATES the signal, and then after a certain point, BOOSTS it, or provides gain as it were. Anyone know if this is true? I always was under tha impression that the vol pot on the pre boosted the signal only.
My other query is simply this. Would running the SBL's full range, ie Large setting from the processor, and with NO SUB as I'm first intending to do, put me at risk of overloading/damaging the SBL's. The DVD's I've been listening to where I've used the DD 2.0 soundtrack on the disc, with no compression, have a HUGE dynamic range; I've needed to be very cautious with the volume, and worry about inadvertantly damaging the SBL's. Does anyone have any experience with this??
Jootz, thanks for your most kind thought; unfortunately the Yamaha 800 is not brought into Australia by Yamaha - they say there's no market for it - sigh,
they seem heavily entrenched in the mainstream 'crash and bang' receiver market here unfortunatly.Jay, great to hear from you, hey, you're not a Michael Jackson fan or anthing are you? - the latest I hear is that he's slagging Sony music for 'taking advantage of him and black artists generally'- maybe the 'packaging' exceeded the content
BTW, working on that list for you!quote:
You've hinted at the important issue here, its not the sound, its the vision.
Ignore that pathetic domestic TV,
Go to the Cinema (*)
Demand 70mm, no, demand Imax...
Or read a book, you don't get much more Source-First than that as far as mass media goes... (i.e. unless you can get access to the author!)
Yes Richard, I hear you!!, now I know why I was such an ardent James Bond fan in my teenage years, reading all the Ian Fleming novels I could get my hands on, he was my hero. As for 70mm, so hard to find, but some of my faourites like 2001 Space Odyssey, or Lawrence of Arabia are incomparable from a visual standpoint without it, 35mm prints look ugh' in comparison. Unfortunatly, apart from the 'Seven Pillars of Wisdom' I don't know of any print medium that tells the tale quite as well as the picture. Oh well, back to my new 'remastered' DVD copy I suppose!
Anyway, one day I'll figure out how to express all my thoughts on this subject with less words; in the meantime, off to indulge in some music 'therapy' all this talk of HT is giving me withdrawal...
Cheers all, and thanks once again for taking the time to read this meandring post of mine, and contributing so much to my learning curve, and hopefully for us all; the expertise is much appreciated.
John
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
quote:
Can anyone explain what exactly is meant by 'unity gain'?
It means that it's at a fixed level (much like saying it's always at 12 o'clock). It expects the level to be controlled before it hits the pre, which it would be from your SS processor.
quote:
Also I read somewhere, that in an active preamp, the volume pot actually initially ATTENUATES the signal, and then after a certain point, BOOSTS it, or provides gain as it were. Anyone know if this is true? I always was under tha impression that the vol pot on the pre boosted the signal only.
This seems quite reasonable to me. The signal coming from a CD player is actually quite loud. In fact, a passive pre-amp (no Naim pre-amp fits into this camp) only attenuates.
quote:
My other query is simply this. Would running the SBL's full range, ie Large setting from the processor, and with NO SUB as I'm first intending to do, put me at risk of overloading/damaging the SBL's.
Not at all. Just because you send fullrange information to the speakers doesn't mean they'll reproduce it. This is no different from playing music: some sections are louder than others, and some have more bass. If it doesn't cause a problem there, then it won't with HT.
BTW, in my HT system all of the speakers (including the surrounds with their 6" woofers) are set as "Large". The "Small" settings is really only for Bose-like speakers, which are not expected to reproduce any bass. Even if you had a subwoofer, I would strongly encourage you to specify that the SBLs are Large speakers. That way the bass can be spread throughout the room, rather than being handled only by a "paltry" subwoofer.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
Hello All,
Hey Emmanuel, great to hear from you in this discussion. I was kinda hoping that you would join in, as I remember you from my very first post quite some months ago, re DVD players, and noted you were one of the very few who wrote in, using a Sony DVPS9000ES DVD player as I do, and using the AV2 which I was very interested in hearing more about, so it's great you've joined in.
And as another "non English speaking guy" may I thank you for your compliments re my posts; as I'm discovering, it takes quite a lot of time to write in, and trying to be mindful of ones' audience etc, so especially appreciate it when others take the time to contribute as well, keeps the forum alive, and the knowledge and experience flowing. Great stuff.
Well what can I say! apart from WOW! With a setup like that, you've got 'the best' in HT. I've yet to hear better HT sound than the AV2/175, and O/H projection and a large screen is THE way to go for HT if you can do it re space and $$. I'm almost green, maybe not as much as the naim logo, but getting there.
Sadly for me, purely one of cost. IF I had the reserves, I'd have the AV2/175 like a shot, BUT, having to choose between being able to upgrade my 2chan to say active, OR add on HT of the Naim standard to my system, then given that choice I'd have to go with the music, as it's the medium I enjoy the most overall.
I think the 'split' if one can call it that, re what is the most 'influential' element of the HT experience, ie sound or picture, is very hard to define. Probably about 50/50, or maybe a slightly higher bias towards the picture. Certainly it would appear that a lot of people think that to be the case. Then again, maybe I'm trying to use logic to talk myself out of the feeling of slight disappointment at knowing, certainly at this stage, that I can't afford to do BOTH Naim standard HT as well as Music.
BUT, from my starting point with CDI/72/HiCap/180/SBL's etc, I still tend to feel that if there was an area to address re a substantial lift in the enjoyment stakes in HT, then going from my 28" 4.3 aspect ratio CRT TV, to either a large 16.9 CRT set, or plasma, or O/H projection, would in all likelihood give a greater jump than leaving the visuals as is, and going say for the Naim AV2/175. So my thoughts so far, have not been to in any way denigrate the importance of sound in the overall HT experience, indeed I agree with pretty much all of your comments, but rather, finding my self in the either/or category a lot of us do, re expenditure, I'm trying to assess the most important area to allocate resources.
And as always, value for money comes into it, particularly with freight costs, import duties and taxes etc, and of course the rate of exchange. As an example, in the thread about DVD players, I ended up on the grounds of picture performance, movie sound, and overall build quality and finish, going with the Sony DVD player, as against the much vaunted Arcam 88.
Actually, I had almost decided upon a 7700 Sony DVD player about 18mnths earlier, but was advised to 'wait' by my Naim/Arcam dealer, as the 88 was coming and would kill everything going. Well, 6 mnths became 18, and of course out came the 9000ES.
Whilst an excellent unit, despite having early problems with the software (a nightmare at the time, to quote my dealer friend) and in my view, as one who uses reading glasses, an ergonomic disaster of a remote, the Arcam DVD88 had excellent sound on CD, preferable to the 9000 Sony, IMHO, BUT, for movie sound, and picture, the prime prerequisite and purpose for purchasing the player, it was the Sony all the way.
Now the value rub. Consider the Sony cost's more in the UK than the Arcam; here, it's quite comfortably the other way around. Add the arguably superior build quality of the 9000ES (more directly comparable to the FMJ27 than the 88) and it is, as the Americans are want to say, a 'no-brainer. Well, it wasn't quite for me, as I had to confront my own buying set of biases and prejudices towards European goods, but it was a sobering and enlightening purchasing experience.
The same problem arises trying to qualify where to go with the HT. The AV2 retails Aus$7000, and the 175 is Aus$4000, ie $11k in total. By comparison, THE top-of-the-line large widescreen, 16.9 CRT Sony HDTV televison (and yes, although limited, we do have HDTV out here in the 'colonies' ) retails for the same Aus$7k, but street price is around the Aus$6000 mark. LCD projectors can be had, and good quality ones, for around Aus$5k upwards, with Digital light projection sitting around the 10-15K mark. So apart from obvious personal values as regards assesing value per se, the varying costs, with varying markets, make a not insignificant contribution to what one percieves as overall value in the 'bang for your buck' stakes, ie the best overall performance jump re enjoyment/involvement etc in HT with relatively limited resources, sound or picture.
And that's why I've been debating, for lack of a better word, what the dominant element in HT is, not to lessen the importance of either the sound, or what Naim have achieved with the AV2 which is a truly sensational product.
I'm thinking of the top-of-the-line Sony ES series preamp/processor, and its matching multimode 5channel amp, the TAE/TAN 9000ES combo, which lists for Aus$5k, but can be had discounted for around the $3.5 to $4k mark, and spending in time, as the $$ will allow, similar or more on the display side of things.
I'm hoping, that whilst obviously not the 'best' that the overall level of performance will be one where I can be very happy for a considerable period of time, without feeling the need for 'upgraditis' etc. Quality, is quality, regardless of where a product is made, or by whom, and I'm far more interested in something which will keep me satisfied for many years than simply buying something with the latest 'gadget' count.
Who knows, in time, if I go active, say a 82, or 52, with 250's etc later on, then that would free my 72/180 to do HT duties, so things may be able to be built up later, although one can't foretell the future unforunately.
Meantime, the Sony's looking pretty good. I'm hoping the 'slowness' in the sound I've commented on, is a byproduct of the TAN amp, and the speakers being used at the demo (German Magnets, not at all familiar with them) match, or mismatch as the case may be, and poor overall setup. The dealer took a best guess approach at speaker to seating distances, and didn't make any attempt whatsoever to adjust relative volumes, so was hardly the ideal setup.
Also, and it sounds Emmanuel as if you've done it earlier on, I'm hoping that as the whole system will 'hang' from the processor, with the Naim handling L&R fronts, and the sony amp only the rears, and maybe later on a center, that the dominant sound quality, apart from the proccessor, will be that of the Naim.
Well, the proof of the pudding as they say, will be in the listening...
Hello Mike, and thanks for the explanation re unity gain.
One thing I'm not quite clear on though. What is the reason that the preamps vol needs to be set to 12 o'clock as Naim suggest? Could not one use say 9 o'clock or similar, or is it maybe that 12 o'clock is the midpoint, ie, not attentuating, or providing gain. Just curious.
I'm encouraged to hear that I may possibly not destroy the SBL's if I don't use a subwoofer!
Actually, rather comforting in fact!
Curious, once utilising the full DD decoding signal, would there likely be any more bass present, than what I've been getting with my present setup, ie running the fronts in straight stereo from the DVD players analogue outputs? The sound from 5.1 tracks is compressed as I mentioned, but otherwise certainly has very deep bass.
Anyway, must go, thanks once again all for reading my meandering post, - hey, you can blame Emmanuel this time, as he encouraged me!
Cheers All,
John.
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
Hey Emmanuel, great to hear from you in this discussion. I was kinda hoping that you would join in, as I remember you from my very first post quite some months ago, re DVD players, and noted you were one of the very few who wrote in, using a Sony DVPS9000ES DVD player as I do, and using the AV2 which I was very interested in hearing more about, so it's great you've joined in.
And as another "non English speaking guy"
may I thank you for your compliments re my posts; as I'm discovering, it takes quite a lot of time to write in, and trying to be mindful of ones' audience etc, so especially appreciate it when others take the time to contribute as well, keeps the forum alive, and the knowledge and experience flowing. Great stuff. Well what can I say! apart from WOW! With a setup like that, you've got 'the best' in HT. I've yet to hear better HT sound than the AV2/175, and O/H projection and a large screen is THE way to go for HT if you can do it re space and $$. I'm almost green, maybe not as much as the naim logo, but getting there.
quote:
Yes, it is crasily expensive, but your stereo systems are already crasily expensive, you are looking for the Nirvana in music reproduction, why not trying to reach it for movie.
Sadly for me, purely one of cost. IF I had the reserves, I'd have the AV2/175 like a shot, BUT, having to choose between being able to upgrade my 2chan to say active, OR add on HT of the Naim standard to my system, then given that choice I'd have to go with the music, as it's the medium I enjoy the most overall.
I think the 'split' if one can call it that, re what is the most 'influential' element of the HT experience, ie sound or picture, is very hard to define. Probably about 50/50, or maybe a slightly higher bias towards the picture. Certainly it would appear that a lot of people think that to be the case. Then again, maybe I'm trying to use logic to talk myself out of the feeling of slight disappointment at knowing, certainly at this stage, that I can't afford to do BOTH Naim standard HT as well as Music.
BUT, from my starting point with CDI/72/HiCap/180/SBL's etc, I still tend to feel that if there was an area to address re a substantial lift in the enjoyment stakes in HT, then going from my 28" 4.3 aspect ratio CRT TV, to either a large 16.9 CRT set, or plasma, or O/H projection, would in all likelihood give a greater jump than leaving the visuals as is, and going say for the Naim AV2/175. So my thoughts so far, have not been to in any way denigrate the importance of sound in the overall HT experience, indeed I agree with pretty much all of your comments, but rather, finding my self in the either/or category a lot of us do, re expenditure, I'm trying to assess the most important area to allocate resources.
And as always, value for money comes into it, particularly with freight costs, import duties and taxes etc, and of course the rate of exchange. As an example, in the thread about DVD players, I ended up on the grounds of picture performance, movie sound, and overall build quality and finish, going with the Sony DVD player, as against the much vaunted Arcam 88.
Actually, I had almost decided upon a 7700 Sony DVD player about 18mnths earlier, but was advised to 'wait' by my Naim/Arcam dealer, as the 88 was coming and would kill everything going. Well, 6 mnths became 18, and of course out came the 9000ES.
Whilst an excellent unit, despite having early problems with the software (a nightmare at the time, to quote my dealer friend) and in my view, as one who uses reading glasses, an ergonomic disaster of a remote, the Arcam DVD88 had excellent sound on CD, preferable to the 9000 Sony, IMHO, BUT, for movie sound, and picture, the prime prerequisite and purpose for purchasing the player, it was the Sony all the way.
Now the value rub. Consider the Sony cost's more in the UK than the Arcam; here, it's quite comfortably the other way around. Add the arguably superior build quality of the 9000ES (more directly comparable to the FMJ27 than the 88) and it is, as the Americans are want to say, a 'no-brainer. Well, it wasn't quite for me, as I had to confront my own buying set of biases and prejudices towards European goods, but it was a sobering and enlightening purchasing experience.
The same problem arises trying to qualify where to go with the HT. The AV2 retails Aus$7000, and the 175 is Aus$4000, ie $11k in total. By comparison, THE top-of-the-line large widescreen, 16.9 CRT Sony HDTV televison (and yes, although limited, we do have HDTV out here in the 'colonies'
) retails for the same Aus$7k, but street price is around the Aus$6000 mark. LCD projectors can be had, and good quality ones, for around Aus$5k upwards, with Digital light projection sitting around the 10-15K mark. So apart from obvious personal values as regards assesing value per se, the varying costs, with varying markets, make a not insignificant contribution to what one percieves as overall value in the 'bang for your buck' stakes, ie the best overall performance jump re enjoyment/involvement etc in HT with relatively limited resources, sound or picture.And that's why I've been debating, for lack of a better word, what the dominant element in HT is, not to lessen the importance of either the sound, or what Naim have achieved with the AV2 which is a truly sensational product.
I'm thinking of the top-of-the-line Sony ES series preamp/processor, and its matching multimode 5channel amp, the TAE/TAN 9000ES combo, which lists for Aus$5k, but can be had discounted for around the $3.5 to $4k mark, and spending in time, as the $$ will allow, similar or more on the display side of things.
I'm hoping, that whilst obviously not the 'best' that the overall level of performance will be one where I can be very happy for a considerable period of time, without feeling the need for 'upgraditis' etc. Quality, is quality, regardless of where a product is made, or by whom, and I'm far more interested in something which will keep me satisfied for many years than simply buying something with the latest 'gadget' count.
Who knows, in time, if I go active, say a 82, or 52, with 250's etc later on, then that would free my 72/180 to do HT duties, so things may be able to be built up later, although one can't foretell the future unforunately.
Meantime, the Sony's looking pretty good. I'm hoping the 'slowness' in the sound I've commented on, is a byproduct of the TAN amp, and the speakers being used at the demo (German Magnets, not at all familiar with them) match, or mismatch as the case may be, and poor overall setup. The dealer took a best guess approach at speaker to seating distances, and didn't make any attempt whatsoever to adjust relative volumes, so was hardly the ideal setup.
Also, and it sounds Emmanuel as if you've done it earlier on, I'm hoping that as the whole system will 'hang' from the processor, with the Naim handling L&R fronts, and the sony amp only the rears, and maybe later on a center, that the dominant sound quality, apart from the proccessor, will be that of the Naim.
Well, the proof of the pudding as they say, will be in the listening...
Hello Mike, and thanks for the explanation re unity gain.
quote:
It means that it's at a fixed level (much like saying it's always at 12 o'clock). It expects the level to be controlled before it hits the pre, which it would be from your SS processor.
One thing I'm not quite clear on though. What is the reason that the preamps vol needs to be set to 12 o'clock as Naim suggest? Could not one use say 9 o'clock or similar, or is it maybe that 12 o'clock is the midpoint, ie, not attentuating, or providing gain. Just curious.
I'm encouraged to hear that I may possibly not destroy the SBL's if I don't use a subwoofer!
Actually, rather comforting in fact!
Curious, once utilising the full DD decoding signal, would there likely be any more bass present, than what I've been getting with my present setup, ie running the fronts in straight stereo from the DVD players analogue outputs? The sound from 5.1 tracks is compressed as I mentioned, but otherwise certainly has very deep bass.
Anyway, must go, thanks once again all for reading my meandering post, - hey, you can blame Emmanuel this time, as he encouraged me!
Cheers All,
John.
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
Hello again all,
Well I kept away from the dreaded infernal MS Gates computing device last evening, as I had done some serious equipment auditioning during the day, and spent a good part of the evening going through brochures, magazine reviews etc, with my thoughts in a whirl, so am interested to find some more comments and thoughts here logging in today.
Hello Gusi - thanks for the compliments re the post, it's much appreciated, and I'm glad people are starting to join in. I've been thinking of a parallel thread, to see if we can encourage the Kan 'brigade' to join in, with some constructive thoughts, and was wondering how Vuk, and Stallion would view improving the performance of my TV if I sat it on an appropriate Mana stand.
Just a thought!
I really don't know tha answer to that one I'm afraid, maybe someone else might have more knowledge on this?
I have to agree re the picture size, and cost factor; I saw a 100" screen yesterday with my HT auditon, with a top Sony LCD display, and whilst not quite the black and brightness levels of say DLP, it was hugely impressive nonetheless. At least with Briks you won't need a subwoofer! but perhaps the preamp would be a limiting factor in your present setup by the sound of it.
Mike, I'm fairly sure that this is the indicator for the LFE channel, the light showing you when, or not, there is information present in that .1 channel. I seem to remember reading about that, as I've downloaded the manuals for the various pre/processors I'm interested in to evaluate ease of use as well as to endeavour to ascertain which features are of importance to me.
Manu, have you been able to figure out why this was? I don't have enough experience to comment here, but it sounds as if it would be a real pain in the proverbial.
Agreed, and one of the better points of having seperates. If the gods should smile upon me in the future, and I'm able to upgrade to say a 82/250 combo, that would free up my 72/180 for just such a job, and I'm mindful of that. Certainly, if in a few years, mainstream music goes perhaps multi-channel SACD, then Naim would be the only alternative in that context for me. Meantime, I'm planning a less expensive dip of the toe into the waters of HT as a starting point.
Manu, is there any hard and fast rule with this, as I've read elsewhere conflicting thoughts re whether one should run all speakers large, or small, is it perhaps more of an individual system tuning thing? Again, I've no real HT experience to comment here.
But it would have to be very interesting to those running bandwidth limited speakers, such as, for eg, ahem, cough, KANS.
Harris, I just thought that was a fantastic post, so insightful how different markets have such different perceptions, and how things like exhange rates, taxes, duties etc which are ultimaltely reflected in the retail price affect consumers perception of quality and relative value etc.
It's not that dissimilar here in Australia. Goods of asian, and US origin are often cheaper than the UK, or european equivalent, compared to the relative prices of those same goods in the UK. The standard of living is also relatively high, and there is a strong consumer culture of 'having' all the latest electronic 'gadgets' etc. Unfortunately there doesn't always appear to be a lot of discernment at this level though, apart from price, and there's a considerable lack of choice in the middle, to say upper middle market, until one goes into the 'really' high end, say Conrad Johnson, Krell, Mark Levinson, Audio Research, Naim, etc.
I would have to agree with Harris 100% on this. The mainstream are happy to have HT, even if its an all in one box complete with ghetto blaster sound, it is after all HT. Either they can not, or do not choose to look any further, and are happy at that level, and who am I to criticise? I mean, I couldn't stand it, however, it's not my choice, or money, and if one is happy there, then so be it and good luck.
On the other hand, HT is a big 'thing' at the moment in Home Entertainment, and those with the Income are happy to let the 'knowledgeable' dealer tell them what to buy, and they just hand over the cheque, knowing they have the 'best'. Having met a few such people, and heard their systems though, at least with the ones that I heard, the owners did not fall into the enthusiast realm, rather wealthy people who scarecly seemed to be able to appreciate
what they had, apart from the status, rather sadly.
I don't know if I'd ever be able to kid myself that somehow I could build a rig for half the price that equalled or exceeded the performance of the more expensive one next door, but I do know that like most enthusiasts, that I'd at least get true value out of my system.
And sometimes, just sometimes, bigger and more expensive isn't always better. I auditioned Meridian/Krell on the way to purchasing a CD player a few years back, and it was comfortably outperformed by a Nait/EposES14's combo at about a fifth of the price. And certainly, I think, especially from the sound side of HT, the law of dimishing returns seems to kick in even earlier than with 2 channel. Bigger 'aint always better! Um, well at least with HiFi, can't comment upon the other popular coloquial use of that particular saying!
David, agreed on this one too; the HT crowd seem very 'hung up' for lack of a better term on the speaker count, specifications, etc, hardly anyone in that scene seems to know, or care how it sounds, in terms of it's INTRINSIC sound quality. Again, pre-occupation with sound modes, no of channels etc, rather than whether it actually adds something to the overall experience, re involvement, and 'believebility' of the movie experience.
My major reason in investigating adding DD5.1 etc to my system, is the compression, and resultant compromises experienced in the sound with movies, by running it in two channel stereo from the DVD player, as I think I mentioned earlier, but still prefer straight stereo to 'average' DD 5.1.
Too true Manu, and I agree with the family thing re HT choices etc, but the other side of the coin, selfish as it may be, is that one can have a HiFi system tailored exactly as you want it, no compromises, or as few as possible allowed.
Bit tough on relationships though, although from what I've seen of it, sometimes some sell their Hifi, as well as their soul, to the 'new' love of their life, only to see it end in ruin some too few years later, and, no HiFi to keep away the tears.
Very fortunately, I'm not speaking from experience, but know of a few who can, sadly. Life can be tough sometimes.
Anyway, on a more cheerful note, I've finally had an audition I've been hanging out to have with the Sony TAE/TAN pre/processor/5 channel multi-mode amp combo, v's the new DPL2 receiver, the STRV-A555ES. I won't bore you all re the details, on a Naim forum, unless you want to hear, in which case I will,(hopefully not bore you, but the details I mean!) but suffice to say it was the seperates that one the day. I've also auditioned the much vaunted Denon 3802, but not satisfied enough to run for my wallet, and ditto the latest Rotel receiver. I've yet to audition the Rotel 1066 pre/proc/5 channel amp combo, and may do so before making a final descision, but the Sony looks a lot better on paper, and as I imagine the Rotel pre/pro would not be that dissimilar from the receiver, it's looking more like the Sony everyday.
Strangely, and I think it's that market perception thing again, if you'd asked me a year ago if I'd be contemplating buying Sony anything, re serious HT, I'd be looking at you sideways, but there's none so blind as those that don't want to see, and here in OZ with our particular market situation, it offers superb performance, build, finish, and overall quality and hence value for money, for not a 'sell you soul' price. And a very large percentage of the overall enjoyment factor in HT that an AV2 brings to the party, IMHO.
I'll keep you all posted.
Sorry about the meandering post again, but hey, I'm a Naim fan, and I can't help being enthusiastic about all of this. If you think I'm being an evangelist, just don't start me on the subject of computers, grrrr....
Cheers all,
John.
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary
Well I kept away from the dreaded infernal MS Gates computing device last evening, as I had done some serious equipment auditioning during the day, and spent a good part of the evening going through brochures, magazine reviews etc, with my thoughts in a whirl, so am interested to find some more comments and thoughts here logging in today.
Hello Gusi - thanks for the compliments re the post, it's much appreciated, and I'm glad people are starting to join in. I've been thinking of a parallel thread, to see if we can encourage the Kan 'brigade' to join in, with some constructive thoughts, and was wondering how Vuk, and Stallion would view improving the performance of my TV if I sat it on an appropriate Mana stand.
Just a thought!
quote:
It seems that each dvd has a different balance between mains and center and my pet peeve is to have to adjust the "balance" between the mains and center speaker all the time, as it is burried in one of the setup menus. Am I the only one who has to do this? Perhaps there is something wrong in my setup.
I really don't know tha answer to that one I'm afraid, maybe someone else might have more knowledge on this?
I have to agree re the picture size, and cost factor; I saw a 100" screen yesterday with my HT auditon, with a top Sony LCD display, and whilst not quite the black and brightness levels of say DLP, it was hugely impressive nonetheless. At least with Briks you won't need a subwoofer! but perhaps the preamp would be a limiting factor in your present setup by the sound of it.
quote:
With my Sony, every once in a while it flashes a light indicating that it's pumping extra bass for effects. I don't recall ever seeing this light until I attached the sub. However, it may just be then that I first noticed it.
Mike, I'm fairly sure that this is the indicator for the LFE channel, the light showing you when, or not, there is information present in that .1 channel. I seem to remember reading about that, as I've downloaded the manuals for the various pre/processors I'm interested in to evaluate ease of use as well as to endeavour to ascertain which features are of importance to me.
quote:
With my previous system, i was always changing the LR and C balance, and the main volume. I thought each movie has its own balance.
With the new setup, (AV2 included) i never have to change. The "MODE" is in the "auto" detect, AV2 volume is always at 40. 52 volume at 12 o'clock ( at 9 for music listening) and on the AV2's speakers setup, only 1 or 2 db adjustments. IMO this indicates a properly setup system.
Manu, have you been able to figure out why this was? I don't have enough experience to comment here, but it sounds as if it would be a real pain in the proverbial.
quote:
The 175 is not a mandatory compagnon of the AV2. You can replace it by second hand NAIM amps. This can be less expensive. I use a 160+140 combo. The extra channel can be used to biamp your Center, or to power the 6th channel (rear).
Agreed, and one of the better points of having seperates. If the gods should smile upon me in the future, and I'm able to upgrade to say a 82/250 combo, that would free up my 72/180 for just such a job, and I'm mindful of that. Certainly, if in a few years, mainstream music goes perhaps multi-channel SACD, then Naim would be the only alternative in that context for me. Meantime, I'm planning a less expensive dip of the toe into the waters of HT as a starting point.
quote:
If you have a good subwoofer, at the right position, you should set all speakers on the "SMALL" setting, and the sub's cut-off around 60 to 70Hz. The overall sound is crisper, more "NAIM audio", more PRaT. I think (I'm sure) there is more bass in movies than in music. This "excess" bass should be routed to the sub.
Manu, is there any hard and fast rule with this, as I've read elsewhere conflicting thoughts re whether one should run all speakers large, or small, is it perhaps more of an individual system tuning thing? Again, I've no real HT experience to comment here.
But it would have to be very interesting to those running bandwidth limited speakers, such as, for eg, ahem, cough, KANS.
quote:
s many people have suggested HT is much more popular over here and is helping what would previously have been called high end gear become mainstream. As an example, there is currently an advert on a local channel showing an HT setup with very expensive electrostatic speakers used front and rear. Indeed, many of the makes that people had previously heard of only from hi-fi geeks are cropping up in people's homes for the HT.
First and foremost the reason is that electronics, at least those of American and Asian origin, are around 30% cheaper than the UK (not the case with Naim). The next is that our cousins seem more willing to spend. People of my income level back in the UK would never have spent the amounts on gadgets as they do here. I don't know the exact reasons but i would guess that consumer culture and image have alot to do with it (its the same with cars).
Harris, I just thought that was a fantastic post, so insightful how different markets have such different perceptions, and how things like exhange rates, taxes, duties etc which are ultimaltely reflected in the retail price affect consumers perception of quality and relative value etc.
It's not that dissimilar here in Australia. Goods of asian, and US origin are often cheaper than the UK, or european equivalent, compared to the relative prices of those same goods in the UK. The standard of living is also relatively high, and there is a strong consumer culture of 'having' all the latest electronic 'gadgets' etc. Unfortunately there doesn't always appear to be a lot of discernment at this level though, apart from price, and there's a considerable lack of choice in the middle, to say upper middle market, until one goes into the 'really' high end, say Conrad Johnson, Krell, Mark Levinson, Audio Research, Naim, etc.
quote:
I also happen to believe that the reason that HT is more accessible to the mainstream is the lack of 'voodoo hobby culture'. Getting an expensive hi-fi to work properly requires careful levelling of stands, polishing of plugs, green felt tip pens etc. but as has been mentioned above HT soundtracks are much less sensitive to these things so as long as you have enough power things are going to work well. The lack of black magic in HT helps appeal to those who have bigger wallets than brains. Those of us who have always struggled with the money equation always like to think we can build a rig for half the price that sounds better than the expensive one next door.
I would have to agree with Harris 100% on this. The mainstream are happy to have HT, even if its an all in one box complete with ghetto blaster sound, it is after all HT.
Either they can not, or do not choose to look any further, and are happy at that level, and who am I to criticise? I mean, I couldn't stand it, however, it's not my choice, or money, and if one is happy there, then so be it and good luck. On the other hand, HT is a big 'thing' at the moment in Home Entertainment, and those with the Income are happy to let the 'knowledgeable' dealer tell them what to buy, and they just hand over the cheque, knowing they have the 'best'. Having met a few such people, and heard their systems though, at least with the ones that I heard, the owners did not fall into the enthusiast realm, rather wealthy people who scarecly seemed to be able to appreciate
what they had, apart from the status, rather sadly.
I don't know if I'd ever be able to kid myself that somehow I could build a rig for half the price that equalled or exceeded the performance of the more expensive one next door, but I do know that like most enthusiasts, that I'd at least get true value out of my system.
And sometimes, just sometimes, bigger and more expensive isn't always better. I auditioned Meridian/Krell on the way to purchasing a CD player a few years back, and it was comfortably outperformed by a Nait/EposES14's combo at about a fifth of the price. And certainly, I think, especially from the sound side of HT, the law of dimishing returns seems to kick in even earlier than with 2 channel. Bigger 'aint always better!
Um, well at least with HiFi, can't comment upon the other popular coloquial use of that particular saying! quote:
Still, two killer channels beat five lame channels of mush, in a small room
David, agreed on this one too; the HT crowd seem very 'hung up' for lack of a better term on the speaker count, specifications, etc, hardly anyone in that scene seems to know, or care how it sounds, in terms of it's INTRINSIC sound quality. Again, pre-occupation with sound modes, no of channels etc, rather than whether it actually adds something to the overall experience, re involvement, and 'believebility' of the movie experience.
My major reason in investigating adding DD5.1 etc to my system, is the compression, and resultant compromises experienced in the sound with movies, by running it in two channel stereo from the DVD player, as I think I mentioned earlier, but still prefer straight stereo to 'average' DD 5.1.
quote:
On the contrary, an audio system is generally a one person affair (the man), the wife and children may use and enjoy it, but this person alone takes all decisions (what to buy,...).
Too true Manu, and I agree with the family thing re HT choices etc, but the other side of the coin, selfish as it may be, is that one can have a HiFi system tailored exactly as you want it, no compromises, or as few as possible allowed.
Bit tough on relationships though, although from what I've seen of it, sometimes some sell their Hifi, as well as their soul, to the 'new' love of their life, only to see it end in ruin some too few years later, and, no HiFi to keep away the tears.
Very fortunately, I'm not speaking from experience, but know of a few who can, sadly. Life can be tough sometimes.
Anyway, on a more cheerful note, I've finally had an audition I've been hanging out to have with the Sony TAE/TAN pre/processor/5 channel multi-mode amp combo, v's the new DPL2 receiver, the STRV-A555ES. I won't bore you all re the details, on a Naim forum, unless you want to hear, in which case I will,(hopefully not bore you, but the details I mean!) but suffice to say it was the seperates that one the day. I've also auditioned the much vaunted Denon 3802, but not satisfied enough to run for my wallet, and ditto the latest Rotel receiver. I've yet to audition the Rotel 1066 pre/proc/5 channel amp combo, and may do so before making a final descision, but the Sony looks a lot better on paper, and as I imagine the Rotel pre/pro would not be that dissimilar from the receiver, it's looking more like the Sony everyday.
Strangely, and I think it's that market perception thing again, if you'd asked me a year ago if I'd be contemplating buying Sony anything, re serious HT, I'd be looking at you sideways, but there's none so blind as those that don't want to see, and here in OZ with our particular market situation, it offers superb performance, build, finish, and overall quality and hence value for money, for not a 'sell you soul' price. And a very large percentage of the overall enjoyment factor in HT that an AV2 brings to the party, IMHO.
I'll keep you all posted.
Sorry about the meandering post again, but hey, I'm a Naim fan, and I can't help being enthusiastic about all of this. If you think I'm being an evangelist, just don't start me on the subject of computers, grrrr....
Cheers all,
John.
Populist thinking exalts the simplistic and the ordinary