Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: About to build new system

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    134

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tripp1n
    im gonna hold you to it bolu!
    Ok i guess since everyone here is recommending the panasonic i think ill get it, now does the hdmi that the xr57 offer over the 55 worth the sound quality for $100 extra it costs?
    And can anyone else confirm price/quality differences between the 340se and 170s when using it with this reciever.
    Hoping someone can push me to finnaly make the right decision so i can get this system up and goin.
    I have the XR57 with 3 340s and 2 170s. The XR57 can dual amp the mains in 5.1 mode, the XR55 can't. I don't have the XR55 so I don't know how much difference it makes.

    Both can dual amp in stereo mode.

    I love my set up!

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, New York
    Posts
    1,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grayson73
    I have the XR57 with 3 340s and 2 170s. The XR57 can dual amp the mains in 5.1 mode, the XR55 can't. I don't have the XR55 so I don't know how much difference it makes.
    I had the 55 till last week. I now have the 57. Dual amp makes no difference in my set-up with either receiver.

    David

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, California
    Posts
    7,054

    Default

    The "Dual Amp" feature is suppose to double the amount of power available to the respective speaker, right?

    I can't see that making a difference unless you are playing at extremely loud levels or have difficult load.
    -curtis

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    11

    Default

    so is there really any reason worth it for me to spend the extra $100 for the xr57 over the 55?
    what does the hdmi input do on the xr57 i dont understand, provide better sound quality??
    im guessing even with the 80hz crossover and 340s and using my sub it wont cause a problem with music being not clear and and to much bass?
    Last edited by tripp1n; 03-22-2007 at 12:23 PM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, New York
    Posts
    1,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tripp1n
    so is there really any reason worth it for me to spend the extra $100 for the xr57 over the 55?
    No. It's basically the same unit. Spend the "extra" $100. on wine, women and song. I picked up an open box 57 for about the same price as a 55. That's the only reason I went with the 57.

    David

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Manlius (Syracuse)
    Posts
    28

    Default

    If you have a TV with only one HDMI input, and you have two HDMI sources, then you can use the HDMI inputs on the XR-57 for switching sources. That's really the only time I think it would be worth the extra money for the SR-57 over the SR-55. Performance is basically the same (although the 57 has a couple of other features of minor importance).

    They make it sound like dual amp will double power availability by putting two channels of amps together, but I don't know if it's really true. I have not seen output statistics in dual amp mode.
    Last edited by Classpro; 03-22-2007 at 12:34 PM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    11

    Default

    ok sounds like im getting the xr55 to use with my ps12, now if anyone can convince me on which route to go to pair with these either a couple 170s, or 340s, will the extra cash be worth the extra sound quality for the speakers.(sorry if i ask same questions over,really want to be sure so i can order these before i go on vacation in a couple days)
    Last edited by tripp1n; 03-23-2007 at 06:38 PM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, New York
    Posts
    1,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tripp1n
    ok sounds like im getting the xr55 to use with my ps12, now if anyone can convince me on which route to go to pair with these either a couple 170s, or 340s, will the extra cash be worth the extra quality for the speakers.(sorry if i ask same questions over,really want to be sure so i can order these before i go on vacation in a couple days)
    The quality of the speaker won't change. The 170 is just as well built as the 340 or the 200. I'd rely on Ascend to let you know which speaker is best suited for your situation.

    David

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Manlius (Syracuse)
    Posts
    28

    Default

    I suspect this 170 v. 340 issue is important to a lot of people. I have not had the pleasure of being able to do a comparison crossed over at the lowest 80hz point available with the Panasonic receiver. My logic tells me they should be quite similar, but another poster said he had both and found the 340s significantly better. Some guidance from Ascend on the 170 v 340 issue (when, if you're going to use a sub and cross over at 80hz, does it make sense to pay the extra for the 340s) would be helpful.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NW Burbs of Chgo, IL USA
    Posts
    376

    Default

    I have had both the 170's and 340's as mains XO 80hz. Yes, the 340's are noticably better because they can play louder with less distortion. I would say if you never get above 85db or so, the 170's would more than enough. However, if you are like me and really get on them, you would be happier with the 340s
    L/R - Sierra Towers
    Center - Sierra Horizon Tower
    Surrounds - 200SE
    SW - Dual PSA XV15's
    TV - Panasonic TC-P65VT60
    A/V Receiver - Denon AVR-4311CI
    Blu-ray/DVD - Sony BDP-S5100
    DVR STB - Motorola Arris X1

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •