September 9, 2001
Thank you so much for a website that is down
to earth and informative. I especially appreciate that your site caters to people who want
good sound but don't necessarily want to pay an arm and a leg!
I listen to mainly classical and jazz with
some pop. I bought Axiom M3Tis (on your recommendation!) and am planning to buy a Yamaha
CDC-675 CD player. The dealer I dealt with recommended that I buy an Onkyo TX-SV373 A/V
receiver that is being discontinued and on sale for $299 (Canadian) instead of a Yamaha
RX-396 receiver that I was intending to buy and is also exactly the same price. He says
that comparatively the Onkyo sounds better and has more features than the Yamaha. Is this
true? To me, sound is the most important thing. I don't intend to use my system for home
theater; however, if the receiver that I buy has the capability to do so, I don't mind!
(One dealer told me that pretty soon two-channel receivers will be obsolete because of the
popularity of home-theater receivers being used for stereo). Unfortunately, I cannot
compare the sound of both receivers together). Generally, I prefer a warmer sound. Should
I buy the Onkyo or Yamaha receiver?
Julia
I tend to agree with your dealer's
assessment that the Onkyo will give you a warmer sound than the Yamaha. Don't buy it for
more features though if home theater isn't on your to-do list. Listening to stereo doesn't
require any special features (except perhaps for a tone-control bypass or direct switch).
Your dealer might also be right about regular stereo receivers soon suffering the fate of
the dodo -- current-generation surround-sound receivers have gotten awfully good even in
two-channel playback -- as our review of the Outlaw 1050 receiver shows.
September 8, 2001
Hey there GoodSound! folks! This is
my second time writing, and once again, thank you. There is definitely a HUGE need for
publications like this, on both the Internet and in the printed press. Currently, if you
can't afford the multi-kilobuck gear reviewed in Stereophile or TAS or
audiophile websites, you are stuck with Sound and Vision. I am glad to hear you
are expanding.
My question is regarding my next purchase.
Currently I am using a very cheap DVD player as both CD and DVD player. Needless to say,
the sound is terrible with CDs and it does not play CD-Rs. So I am in the market for a
budget CD player. (I was thinking of the AMC CD8.) Here is the catch: Eventually I would
like to buy an external DAC, so I am wondering if I should just get a slightly better DVD
player (most likely a Pioneer, which will play CD-Rs), and then add the DAC when I can?
How do DVD players rate as CD transports? Will I get much better sound out of a CD-only
player/transport? What are your thoughts?
Eric
I would look at the $399 MSB Link DAC III
if your budget for a new DVD player is anywhere close to it. If CD-R playback is
important, a new DVD player is a must, and the Pioneers are a good choice. I'm not sure
that by itself, such a DVD player will sound that much better than your current one.
However, in tandem with the MSB DAC, you'll be more than competitive with an equivalently
priced CD player, plus you can enjoy movies.
September 7, 2001
I found your articles on speaker sensitivity
and impedance useful, but there are still things that confuse me, and I really need to
clarify a few things related to the power required to drive certain speakers.
Why is it that speakers with similar
sensitivity ratings often have wildly different power recommendations? Manufacturers'
power ratings are often very confusing. For instance, I've seen speakers that were rated
at 88dB/W/m with recommended amplification of 10 watts, and I've seen speakers with the
same rating where a minimum 50 watts is recommended. They were both two-way, dynamic
designs. I realize that impedance plays into this, but still, I can't believe that the
impedance curves on speakers of similar design principles are that radically different.
Also, what exactly does "easy to
drive" or an "easy load" mean? Apparently, different things to different
people. For instance, I recently read a review of a two-way, bookshelf speaker (B&W
Nautilus 805) which is rated by the manufacturer as 8 ohms nominal, 88dB sensitive. The
measurements in the review suggested it was actually closer to 86dB, but it also noted
that it was "a very easy speaker to drive" since its impedance never dropped
below about 5 ohms. So, if it's easy to drive, why on earth would the manufacturer claim a
minimum of 50 watts is needed? To complicate matters, another writer in the same magazine
referred to this speaker as a "tricky load" and yet another claimed he drove the
speaker with a 3Wpc 300B amp!
Wouldn't it stand to reason, with the
exception of exotic, unusual designs, all average speakers (two-way dynamic with a
sensitivity above 85dB and nominal impedance of 8 ohms) should be able to attain
reasonable levels in a small to medium room with only about 10-12 watts? If not, why not?
I've often heard that when we listen to music, we generally are only using 5 or 6 watts.
If a speaker is 88dB/W/m sensitive, how loud does it sound at two meters? Is there a
formula? Also, what is the "normal" listening volume for critical listening?
Rob
One design parameter that factors into
speaker "drivability" is crossover complexity. Low-order designs can have a
significantly reduced parts count that inserts less components into the signal path.
Speakers with protection and compensation circuitry or steep filter slopes will have more
complex crossovers. Everything else being equal, this can make one speaker easier to drive
than another.
Room size and listener distance from the
speakers affect power requirements for a given output level since sound pressure
diminishes traveling through space. While you're absolutely right stating that average
playback levels tend to occur with 10 watts or less, dynamic peaks may require short-term
amplifier output of 100 watts or more. What's normal volume for critical listening? In my
case, around 87 to 90dB. Your sensitivity to what's loud may be different. In general,
women listen at lower levels than men.
I don't have a good explanation for
diverging manufacturer power-requirement specs except that some may err on the side of
caution while those appealing to low-power SET aficionados may overstate how little power
is required. In general, it is fair to say that consumers and sales people tend to err on
the side of caution by assuming more power is necessary than is actually used.
September 6, 2001
I'm completely new to home audio equipment,
and I'm trying to assemble my first "real" system. I just have what I hope is a
simple question on impedances. Does a speaker's impedance have to match the impedance of
the receiver driving them? Reading your "How To" article, I came away thinking
that the impedance rating of the receiver is only that -- a rating of the output power at
a given impedance -- and that the receiver doesn't have a fixed impedance level. Is this
correct?
I was looking for a 5x100W receiver, for a set
of 4-ohm speakers. I found two receivers. One is rated as 5x100W @ 8 ohms, the other as
5x100W @ 6 ohms. If I understood your "How To" section correctly, the 6-ohm
rating of 5x100W should really be higher than the other receiver's 8-ohm rating of 5x100W
if the receiver rated at 6-ohms was equally powerful. Of the two receivers, which delivers
more power, and which would be better suited to a set of 4-ohm speakers?
Paolo Vincelli
You're correct on both counts. A 6-ohm
amplifier power rating should be higher than a comparable 8-ohm rating to indicate the
same output power. To inflate that rating by instead using a 6-ohm value suggests that
this particular receiver is trying to appear beefier than it really is. One hundred watts
per channel is often considered "the magic number" by audio marketing gurus.
This manufacturer may simply be trying to "join that club" without paying the
entry fee.
A receiver's power rating at the
industry-standard 8 ohms doesn't indicate in and of itself whether that receiver is
compatible with a 4-ohm speaker. To be assured that a receiver under consideration is
appropriate for nominal 4-ohm loads, it should either feature a rear-mounted impedance
switch (8/4 ohms) or be actually rated into both 8 and 4 ohms. For example, a 100W/8-ohm
rating might also sport a (considerably higher) 170W/4-ohm reading. This shows that the
manufacturer anticipated that owners may want to use 4-ohm speakers. (Truly powerful
amplifiers will double their power ratings with each halving of impedance all the way down
into 2 or 1 ohm, but receivers, especially multichannel ones, tend to be less robust.) If
you don't find a 4-ohm power rating for your receiver, contact the manufacturer to be sure
that it is compatible with your speakers.
September 5, 2001
I am excited to see how much you have done
with GoodSound! over the past four months! One feature that I miss, however, is
the straightforward list of components by category (receiver, CD player, speakers, etc.)
with brief summaries that described each component. This list of components gave me an
excellent audiophile introduction, not to mention an high-level introduction to different
brands that weren't on my radar. Do you plan to continue that list? If not, could you
recommend another list of components that is comparable?
Jeff
This feature will shortly be added back to
the site and be called the GoodSound! Guide.
September 4, 2001
I read your review of the Outlaw 1050 A/V
receiver, and I am very impressed. In fact, I'm planning to buy this product and use it in
stereo mode initially until I can afford more speakers (I listen to music/home theater
80/20). For the same reason I am buying an entry-level DVD player as my first source with
plans to add a high-end CD player later (and much later to separate stereo components).
In your review you mentioned two ways of
connecting the source/receiver: via the normal audio inputs or 5.1 preamp inputs. Couldn't
you also connect via the digital input and let the receiver's DACs do the D/A conversion
instead of the (lower-quality) DVD player's DACs? Obviously you'd only want to do this
when you are using an inferior source like an entry-level DVD player. Is the receiver's
DAC programmed to do this conversion?
Thanks for your advice to all the audiophile
start-ups out there. Looking forward to reading your next review.
Cilius
The Outlaw receiver features one coaxial
and two TosLink digital inputs and, as you suggest, can do onboard D/A conversion. Would
this give better results than connecting digital sources via their analog outputs? Only
critical listening can determine that, and it will of course be on a case-by-case
scenario. But it definitely is an option and shows how full-featured this receiver is.
September 2, 2001
I have been enjoying GoodSound! quite
a bit since I discovered it last week. There really is a dearth of information for those
that are looking for the best possible sound for reasonable amounts of money. A useful
resource that I have yet to find -- and perhaps your site can provide this -- is a
reference home audio (or home-theater) system for different budgets. There are simply so
many products out on the market that it is difficult for people like myself with limited
budgets (but discerning taste) to make solid evaluations. For example, I would like to see
what I could get for a home-theater/audio system for around $1200 (minus a TV). The Axiom
M3Ti speakers look like a great buy -- but beyond that, I'm not too sure. I'd imagine that
a DVD player produces (mostly) the same quality audio that a CD player does, so I would
hold off on a dedicated CD player unless I found a great deal. Receivers and DVD players
are the two components I am not very clear on. Any sort of reference system, or pointers
to more information like that you provide on your site, would be fantastic.
Ryan
GoodSound! is sending writers to the
upcoming CEDIA Expo in Indianapolis to connect with manufacturers, learn about their
newest product offerings and solicit review samples of those that look most promising.
This will include receivers and DVD players. GoodSound! is also undergoing
expansion. New contributors are being added, and new features as well -- the GoodSound!
Guide will launch shortly. This will be an area of capsule-type mini comments on different
component and price categories. For example, if you were to look for recommended $300
bookshelf speakers, you'd go there to come up with a short list of contenders. For
home-theater information, you might like to visit our sister site www.hometheatersound.com.
|
