Need guidance on a Computer as source with some movie watching (Sierra 2s)

[Darkestred]

Hello. Forgive me if this is in the wrong section and if so, can a moderator please move to the proper forum.

I have always loved everything audio. I spend a lot of my time on the computer and a few years back bought a Heed Canamp, AKG701s and a USB Dac to start my Computer as a source and audiophile adventure.

Currently, i bought a real cheap pair of Cyber Acoustic Speakers to alleviate the monotony of putting/taking headphones on and off.

I have my video card connected to a 55" Plasma that i use for movie viewing. My room is 12x15 with the tv in one corner and my bed/chair at the opposite end.

I have had my eye on Kef q300s and as always, through researching, i stumbled upon the Sierra 2s.

I have been eying a Musical Fidelity M3SI. It has a built in DAC with amplifier and the ability to connect to a computer via USB.

I was wondering if A) this would be a viable choice for these speakers and/or B) do AVRs have the same capabilities or would i need to buy a separate DAC? Forgive me as i'm sure the answer could be found by reading but i have so many source components listed that its a bit overwhelming.

I'm not looking to spend much more than $1500-2000 to accomplish what i need but i am open to ideas and if separate components can get me the same result while costing less or a little bit more I am open to that, as well.

[markie]

Hi there!

If you are content watching movies through 2 channel audio then the Musical Fidelity M3SI would probably be very nice. It must be new because I haven't seen a review of it yet, but I know that Musical Fidelity has a good reputation at least on the dac front. Price might be a little high though seeing that it sold through dealers.

There are a few threads having to do with a good integrated amp for the Sierras. The latest one is here:

http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/sho...no-amp-because

Lots of options! It would be great to have them all in the same room to compare, but alas...

An alternative would be to get a receiver (if your computer can output HDMI) which would enable hooking up more speakers and also using room correction and equalization options. But if you value 2 channel music listening over movies then it probably wouldn't be the best route to go.

Good luck!

Mark

[Darkestred]

Thanks markie. That makes it even harder. Haha. Well, i did have a question. I'm thinking of going with something like an emotiva xda-2 to xpa 2 or xsp-1 to dc-1. Would i be able to still connect my tv to this system to utilize the speakers, as well?

I'm ok with 2-channel audio as i do not plan on getting more speakers anytime soon but i could always buy an AVR or something equivalent down the road.

[markie]

Well now, if you are willing to go separates (as opposed to an integrated unit) then the possibilities open even more.

Computer and TV to xda-2 (dac/preamp) to xpa-2 (amp) to speakers would work.

My favourite would be

Computer and TV to dc-1 (dac/preamp) to upa200 (amp) to speakers.

The dc-1 is quite special, so I've read. In another league compared to the xda-2 and worth the extra money. You would be saving money using the upa200 instead of the xpa-2. Anecdotally, a couple of people here on this forum thought the xpa-2 / sierra combo was a little too bright or even harsh at higher volumes.

So your PC would be connected to the dc-1 via USB, and your TV would be connected to the dc-1 via optical cable. The dc-1 doesn't need to be fed into a preamp because it is a great preamp as is. In fact I've heard people with the xsp-1 preamp say they prefer the sound of the dc-1 feeding their amps directly rather than going through the xsp-1. On the other hand, if you had subs, the xsp-1 has bass management, allowing 2 subwoofer outs. It would also allow for home theatre bypass if you were to get a home theatre receiver later.

So many options, and to think this is just Emotiva stuff!

Mark

[Darkestred]

Thank you very much for that. Still reading up before i pull the trigger. You helped but now you made things worse!! (:

thanks again.

[curtis]

FWIW...an AVR setup would be much easier to implement, and offer you a much bigger feature set.

Basically, the HDMI from video card (assuming that it also handles audio) to AVR, and then HDMI from AVR to the TV.

Many AVRs also have a USB input as well, but you wouldn't need it if the the computer's HDMI output handled audio...and most do.

[Darkestred]

FWIW...an AVR setup would be much easier to implement, and offer you a much bigger feature set.

Basically, the HDMI from video card (assuming that it also handles audio) to AVR, and then HDMI from AVR to the TV.

Many AVRs also have a USB input as well, but you wouldn't need it if the the computer's HDMI output handled audio...and most do.

I'm not really interesting in many features. I don't see myself going to a 2.1 or greater environment. Not anytime soon. I understand future-proofing and the like, but in your opinion with what i have revealed would you still go AVR? I'm torn between the two, honestly. If i can get the same sound out of an AVR i may go that route, but if i'm better optioned for separates/2ch audio.

I've read both sides of AVR and Separates and it seems like an AVR can be as good with todays technology.

And if that's the case would it be wise to do a pre amp with AVR.

[curtis]

Is the PC the only thing hooked up to the TV?

IMO, yes, an AVR can sound as good...and better with room correction.

[Darkestred]

Is the PC the only thing hooked up to the TV?

IMO, yes, an AVR can sound as good...and better with room correction.

Yes. I purchased a denon x4000. I have gone back and forth. I was totally set on separates and maybe i should have gone with my gut but we will see.

If it does not fit the bill i will look into separates or maybe i'll buy separates (will have to look into demo'n) and try both. Since i am curious.