Audio-fool needs help from audiophiles

[mapmn006]

Im interested in buying the towers within a month. I've never owned home speakers before. I will only have the two speakers and will not go beyond 2.1 (a 15" Rhythmik is only a maybe, and it would be way down the road). I have a 50" plasma, a cable box, and apple TV. I use an apple airport express for my wi-fi. All my music is on my Macbook with iTunes. I was wondering should i get an AV receiver or separates? Im still confused on what i would need if i get separates. Do i just need a preamp and an amp? Will i need a tuner and DAC? Seems easier to get AV receiver but which one? Would separates be higher quality with more power and better for 2.0(2.1)? I'm not into home theater and speakers will be for music and sports on TV (UFC). I'm comfortable spending $1,100 USD or so. Specific models would be very helpful. I just registered and this is my first post. Thanks for taking the time to help/educate me. :)

[jollo]

...

[FirstReflect]

Hi, mapmn006! Welcome to the forum :)

First up, congrats on choosing the Sierra Towers as your first home speakers! Man oh man, you are going to be blown away by their sound quality! I'd venture to say that most people sort of "work their way up" to speakers as good as the Sierra Towers. To start with those right off the bat? You're in VERY good shape :D

Second, I'm going to make the argument that an AV Receiver is your best choice. Now, I understand that you only ever plan to use two speakers, with the possibility of adding a subwoofer in the future. I would certainly highly recommend that you DO add a subwoofer. In fact, I would highly recommend that you add TWO subwoofers! But that is down the road. :) My point is that I understand that it might seem like a "waste" to buy an AV Receiver that can power 5 or 7 speakers, but I assure you that it is not. And here are a bunch of reasons why...

a) Very few 2-channel Integrated Amps or Processors include HDMI inputs. You've mentioned that you have a cable box and an AppleTV. So you already have at least two HDMI sources. And I imagine you might also have a Blu-ray player, or a videogame console or two, or you might want to add another streaming set-top box like a Roku, or maybe you'll want to add an HTPC. My point is that HDMI is a useful connection option. And it's convenient to be able to plug all of your sources into your AV Receiver using HDMI, and then have just a single HDMI cable that goes from the AV Receiver to your TV. That let's you easily switch between all of your sources using the AV Receiver, and the TV never needs to switch inputs ever again!

b) At some point, the audio needs to be converted from a digital signal into an analogue signal. The question is simply: where do you want this Digital-to-Analogue conversion to take place?

Some 2-channel Integrated Amps and Processors are strictly analogue. This means that you either have to send out an analogue signal from your sources (which, on things like your cable box, is often a pretty low quality signal. Or, on things like your Apple TV, is not even possible!) Or you have to send the digital audio from your source device into a separate DAC, and then from the DAC into your analogue 2-channel Integrated Amp. That is needlessly complicated and expensive.

Several 2-channel Integrated amps and Processors do offer digital inputs. But they typically only have 2 or 3. Two optical and one coax digital - or something along those lines. So you can quickly run out of available inputs if you ever have more than just 2 or 3 source devices.

Once again, an AV Receiver is often more convenient. You can use HDMI to keep the audio digital until it gets into the AV Receiver, where the AV Receiver will handle the Digital-to-Analogue conversion. And AV Receivers typically have many more inputs than 2-channel Integrated Amps or Processors.

c) You need to consider bass management. If and when you add one or two subwoofers, you are going to need a crossover. The crossover filters out most of the low bass from the speakers and sends it to the subwoofer(s). And the crossover also filters out most of the higher frequencies from the subwoofer, and sends them to only the speakers.

Some 2-channel Integrated Amps and Processors offer bass management and subwoofer outputs. But many do not. On the other hand, pretty much all AV Receivers offer bass management and dedicated subwoofer outputs.

d) Then there is decoding. Any source device can output a straight 2-channel stereo signal. But sometimes, it is nice to be able to send the 5.1 or 7.1 surround sound from the source to your AV Receiver, and then have the AV Receiver decode that surround sound, and downmix it to 2-channel stereo. The reason it's nice to be able to do this is because many AV Receivers include listening modes that can create a fairly convincing surround sound effect using only 2 speakers. I also like to be able to see on the front panel of my AV Receiver that it is receiving, say, the full quality Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD Master Audio signal from a Blu-ray player or an HTPC. These sorts of things are not necessary, but I just personally like to have them available to me as options :) It's just comforting to be able to visually see that your AV Receiver is being sent the full quality audio signal - exactly as it is on the disc, or coming over your cable TV lines, or being sent by the internet feed. When you are limited to only ever sending 2-channel out of your devices, technically, they should be converting the audio in the source properly, but there is no easy, visual way to tell that you're really getting the full quality audio. With an AV Receiver, it's right there on your front panel, or on screen when you push the info button. I just think that's nice :)

e) There's also auto-setup and room correction. Very few 2-channel (in fact, I can't think of a single one off the top of my head) offer auto setup and room correction, such as Audyssey, or YPAO, or MCACC. Auto setup and room correction can be a bit of a contentious issue. Some people swear by it. Some people hate it and never ever use it!

Personally, I view room correction programs as a "cherry on top". In my experience, nothing can compensate for first buying good speakers, then positioning and setting them up properly, then making sure that your room is a good acoustic environment - with your seats in a good location, and the walls, ceiling and floor treated with materials and objects to tame any acoustic problems with the room itself. So-called "room correction" programs cannot ever replace those steps! But once you have all of those things taken care of, in my experience, a good room correction EQ program can be the "cherry on top" that handles any remaining little problems with your acoustics. And this is especially true in the deep bass, I've found, where room acoustics play a very, very big role, and it can be very, very difficult to make the bass smooth, and even, and accurate without any help from an EQ or other filters.

Bottom line is that any AV Receiver I would recommend will include an auto EQ program - particularly one that is effective in EQ'ing the deep bass. That is where you need EQ the most. And I can't think of any 2-channel Integrated Amps or Processors that offer it built in. So that's a BIG reason to go with an AV Receiver, IMO :)

f) Finally, I think it makes sense to consider price, and having options for future expansion of your system. Frankly, many, many more AV Receivers are sold than dedicated 2-channel equipment. And, as a result, the price points on very, very good AV Receivers is lower. I've seen some people make the claim that, because AV Receivers do so much, they MUST sound inferior to dedicated 2-channel gear that costs more. Simply put, that is not true. And I can only guess that people who make that claim have never made an honest listening comparison between any of the better quality AV Receivers, and the 2-channel gear that they hold in such esteem . High quality AV Receivers can deliver superb 2-channel audio quality! The only reason they can also cost less at the same time is due to economies of scale.

But that aside, a good AV Receiver will also, IMO, include pre-outs! Those pre-outs allow you to connect a separate, more powerful, or high quality amplifier if you ever decide you want to do so! That basically means that if you want "separates", you can still have them! The AV Receiver will simply be acting as your Processor at that point. But it will be a Processor with many more inputs, HDMI switching, a built-in DAC, built-in bass management and subwoofer crossover, the full suite of surround sound decoding formats, auto EQ and room correction, and likely a whole host of Ethernet connected features and maybe wireless features as well. If you're concerned that a separate amp might give you better sound quality, you can go ahead and connect a separate amp whenever you want!

So, in summary, to me, there is zero downside in getting an AV Receiver, and potentially many, many upsides. You do not have to give up anything in the way of sound quality or higher powered amplification if you do not want to. And if you do not want to ever use the surround sound decoding, the subwoofer crossover, the HDMI switching, the Ethernet or wireless features, the auto EQ room correction, etc. etc. - if you don't like or don't want to use any of those things, you don't have to! You can turn them all off :) But the point is that you HAVE all of those options. You can try them out, and decide for yourself whether you want to use them or not. With most 2-channel gear, you won't have all of those options available to you.

And none of that is to mention the fact that, you MIGHT, one day, decide that you'd like to add Surround speakers, or a Center speaker, after all. I know that is not your plan right now. But plans can sometimes change :) Again, the AV Receiver just gives you more options.

That's my argument for going with an AV Receiver :)

In terms of specific products, I personally prefer Denon, Marantz, Onkyo and Integra brand products, simply because I happen to find Audyssey to be the best auto EQ program. That's just me. And to be honest, I find Pioneer's MCACC to be the 2nd best, with Yamaha's YPAO rather far behind.

As I said, I personally only like to recommend AV Receivers that include pre-outs so that you can add a separate amplifier if you ever want to! To me, probably the best choice right now is the Marantz SR5008. It's a gorgeous AV Receiver with every feature that I've talked about, and excellent sound quality all on its own. Should you ever want to, you can add separate, high power amplification, though it's unlikely you would actually need to. One quibble is that the Marantz units don't off a phono input for a vinyl record player. But if you're not spinning vinyl, I'd most highly recommend the Marantz AV Receivers to you.

Hope that helps!

[mapmn006]

Thanks for the responses guys! It took me 2 months of research to find and settle on the Sierra towers as the speakers for me. Im in Las Vegas and am planning a trip to Ascend to listen to them within the month (it's only 4 hrs. away!). Powering them was the sticking point I was unsettled on. I just want to do these speakers justice. I think going with an AV receiver makes sense for my situation. The Marantz 5008 was one of the receivers on my list of possible options. Another one i was looking at was the Denon 3313ci ($800 USD). Ive heard Onkyo have had hdmi quality issues recently, but i was also looking at the Onkyo 709 ($500 USD). Johnathan, what would a step up from the 5008 be? Would it be worth it to step up, or at $900 USD on Amazon would the 5008 be the right fit for me?

I just want to thank you both for taking the time to help me. I am a research nut with everything i buy. I think it's great how forums can be used to let people help each other. I've read many forums over the years when researching topics, but this is the first one I've participated in. I once spent 25 hrs. trying to figure out what the best dog food is for my Rottweiler puppy (the answer was Orijen). Thanks again guys ...ill keep the thread updated on what i go with and maybe a pic of the setup in the end.

Now i have to settle the RAAL vs NRT issue for my situation...arggggg :D

[Kisakuku]

The Marantz 5008 was one of the receivers on my list of possible options. Another one i was looking at was the Denon 3313ci ($800 USD).

If you do value room correction, there's quite a bit of difference between Audyssey XT (16 filters for your upcoming Sierra Towers) and XT32 (512 filters). I would go with a Denon X4000 (or older 4311 if you can find one). Also a good idea to call AVScience; they are an authorized dealer and usually sell quite a bit below MSRP.

[mapmn006]

I value room correction based on what i have read. Having never used it what i know is it is quit important. The price difference between the Denon 3313/Marantz 5008 (XT) and the x4000 (XT32) is 400-500ish. Is XT32 worth the price premium? I guess the answer will be unique to each owner...but I'm not sure for my situation...i'll see if i can find info on comparing the two...the X4000 might have other advantages too. Thanks for bringing it up. :) I've read good room correction is more important than say RAAL vs NRT...hummm

[Kisakuku]

I value room correction based on what i have read. Having never used it what i know is it is quit important. The price difference between the Denon 3313/Marantz 5008 (XT) and the x4000 (XT32) is 400-500ish. Is XT32 worth the price premium? I guess the answer will be unique to each owner...but I'm not sure for my situation...i'll see if i can find info on comparing the two...the X4000 might have other advantages too. Thanks for bringing it up. :) I've read good room correction is more important than say RAAL vs NRT...hummm

Until you get a subwoofer, you won't be using XT to its full potential, because its filter resolution for satellite channels is only 1/8 of the filter resolution for the subwoofer channel. XT32 will have 32 times more filters for your new Sierra Towers. So for your system, the upgrade from XT to XT32 is even greater than for a typical HT enthusiast with a subwoofer or two.

Here's an AVS thread (http://www.avsforum.com/t/1470889/denon-avr-3313ci-or-denon-avr-x4000) about picking between 3313 and X4000. The price premium for X4000 might be smaller if you go through AVS, might be worth a call.

[mapmn006]

I read the thread last night. I also read a few threads on XT and XT32. Seems XT32 is a big deal. Some people were getting new receivers just to get XT32. Seems when Audyssey comes out with a new version it's a quantum leap.

Both 3313ci and X4000 have 125 watts per channel. The Marantz 5008 has 100. Is that a big difference? 125 vs 100. Also as far as power goes...will adding a sub give the speakers more power because now the speakers don't have to worry about the crossed over lower Hz. I'm not sure if i just made that up or I read that somewhere. I ask because a few people are saying all middle of the road receivers will need a separate amp. By adding a sub it seems to be a better use of $$$ if a person wants a sub, adding a sub does in fact give the mains more power, and the added power is enough to now not have to add an amp.

[tme110]

Is that a big difference? 125 vs 100. .

Its not even noticeable, the difference.

But with a sub the RCVR no longer has to power the low frequency stuff which takes the most power. It may not be a noticeable difference unless you are power limited to begin with. My last receiver only had 50watts so I had no choice. Now I use separates probably have a couple 1000 watts of combined sustainable power so it's no longer an issue but still can't live without the sub. Look at the emotiva stuff if you want to think about separates some more.

[FirstReflect]

If you can afford the Denon AVR-X4000, that unit is an absolute BEAST in terms of features and sound quality. I have ZERO reservations in recommending that AV Receiver! My only reason for recommending the Marantz SR5008 previously was that I figured you might want to keep the price as low as possible while still getting every important feature that I mentioned, along with great sound quality. Going one model up in the Marantz lineup (to the SR6008) didn't really get you any important features for your 2-channel + subwoofer(s) setup. And the SR7008 goes way above your desired budget!

But the Denon AVR-X4000 is more within "striking distance" of your desired budget, and it offers up some nice upgrades in terms of features, to be sure!

An AV Receiver like the Denon X4000 can be a little bit confusing and intimidating if you're new to home theater, though ;) It really does have just about every feature and input under the sun! But that also means there is more the manage, and deeper, more confusing menus to dig through. But if you love playing with features (and everybody should! :D ), and you can afford the X4000, by all means, I have no qualms in saying, "go for it!"

The whole "how many Watts do I need?" topic can be confusing. But here's the quick breakdown:

The first thing to know is that movies are meant to have an average loudness of 85dB with peaks in the speakers as loud as 105dB, and peaks in the deep subwoofer bass as loud as 115dB. Music is a little bit different. Not every recording adheres to a set standard the way movies do. But a full blast orchestra or grand piano can get as loud as 120dB!

To figure out how many Watts you need, there are a few things to know.

First, every time you increase the loudness by 3dB, you need 2x the Watts. Yes, you need to DOUBLE the number of Watts in order to get a 3dB increase in loudness. To get a 10dB increase in loudness, you need 10x the Watts.

So, real quick, you can see that going from the 85dB average in movies to those 105dB peaks -- that's 20dB louder, so you need 100x as many Watts to hit 105dB as you do in order to hit 85dB. Yes. 100x as many Watts. So the numbers can rise very quickly!

But the second part is this: the efficiency (aka. sensitivity) or your speakers. The Sierra Towers have an efficiency of 89dB/2.83 Volts/1 meter in a completely anechoic (zero echoes or reflections) chamber. In any real room, where there will be some reflections and the sound will bounce around a little bit, you will get at least a 3dB boost to the loudness that you hear from the speaker. That's conservative, but you can count on 3dB louder, just from being played in a normal room.

So, in real world terms, what those numbers mean is that if you put 1 Watt of power into the Sierra Towers, and you stand 1 meter (about 3 feet) away, they will produce 92dB of loudness in any normal room! Yes, 92dB from just 1 Watt!

So good news! That 100x as many Watts figure isn't so bad or out of reach anymore, is it? :)

Well, one more thing to consider is that the farther away you are from the speaker, the quieter the sound gets. In a wide open field, where there are almost no reflections or echoes, every time you move twice as far away (from 1 meter to 2 meters, or from 2 meters to 4 meters, etc.) the sound gets 6dB quieter. Again, inside a real room, where there ARE reflections, every time you move twice as far away, you lose about 3dB of loudness instead of 6dB.

So, let's say you're sitting about 12 feet away from the speakers - a pretty common distance in an average home, maybe even a little on the far side since your speakers are typically a bit closer to you than your TV screen. But, for this example, it works nicely, since that's roughly 4 meters, which is the 1 meter distance doubled, and then doubled again. So, in any normal room, we've lost about 6dB of loudness by moving to 12 feet away instead of 3 feet.

So, once again, we put just 1 Watt of power into the Sierra Tower speaker, and - from 12 feet away now - it produces about 86dB of loudness. So great news! In order to hit those 105dB peaks that movies call for, you only need 100 Watts or so! And any of these good AV Receivers that we've talked about can deliver that. Especially when it is only 2 speakers and not 5 or 7. So the bottom line is that, mathematically, anyway, you should not really need a separate amplifier :)

Now, your situation could easily be different. Maybe you sit farther away. If you sit closer to 20 feet away, you might need another 3dB more loudness or so. Remember, 3dB more loudness requires 2x the Watts! So you've suddenly jumped up to needing 200 Watts instead of 100 Watts in order to hit those 105dB peaks. You can see how it starts to add up quickly!

And if you were using less efficient speakers, or using them in a gigantic room, or a very heavily deadened room that provides almost no reflections to help boost the loudness that you hear, well, you might drop another 3dB or 6dB, which might mean you'd need 400 Watts or 800 Watts to keep things equally as loud.

So, you can see where separate, high power amplifiers certainly have their place. But for MOST situations, the power provided by any of these good AV Receivers is perfectly adequate.

And yes, offloading most of the deep bass to a separate subwoofer with its own, built-in amplifier does take some of the strain off of your AV Receiver's amplifiers that are powering the speakers, which are now mostly playing only the higher frequencies.

There are still potentially other reasons to use a separate amplifier. Some of the very best amplifiers offer a better noise floor. With most amps, even good ones, if you crank up the volume, but just have it sitting idle, not actually playing any sound, you can make out a soft hiss coming from your speakers. You might have even noticed this in a full sized movie theater - when they first fire up the system, sometimes there's a short moment of blackness and silence, but you can most often hear a soft hiss coming from all the speakers.

That's just the inherent electrical background noise in your system! If you press your ear right up against any high-power device when it's just sitting idle, you can usually hear some sort of hum or slight buzz coming from its power supply. That sort of operational hum, along with other background electrical noises, can make its way into any amplifier, and you'll hear it as this very soft background hiss when your system is on, but just sitting there idle in silence.

It's really not a problem :) As soon as anything starts playing, even a very quiet sound, it completely masks that soft hiss, and you forget all about it! But with the very best amps, and the very best gear, that noise floor can pretty much completely disappear! I've had my own experience with this. I was honestly rather shocked. I've owned several very good AV Receivers, and a few separate amps. All of them had at least a little bit of noise floor hiss coming through the speakers. It was truly no big deal - I had to get my ear quite close to the speakers to even hear it. But they were all roughly the same. Some a tiny bit louder, but all pretty darn close.

Then I got a flagship Onkyo TX-NR5010. I didn't buy it because I "needed" it in any way, or had even really planned on buying it. I had an opportunity to buy one for almost $1200 off MSRP, and I just couldn't pass it up! I must stress that I did not expect any great improvement or difference from any other AV Receiver I had ever owned. I was convinced that amps - good ones, at least - really made virtually no difference to the sound. And I had often joked that the 5010 only existed in Onkyo's lineup for people who had more money than sense! After all, the 3010 offered all the same features for quite a bit less money (at least at the MSRP).

Well, colour me shocked. The TX-NR5010 was as close to DEAD silent as I've ever heard. Technically, there's still a noise floor. But I literally had to physically press my ear against the drivers of my speakers in order to hear it. It was just pure silence from even an inch away.

My ATI separate amps, and some of the Anthem amps that I've tried out in stores are the closest I've come to that same dead silence. But I have to say, the TX-NR5010 was even a touch quieter. It truly surprised me.

So how important is that dead silent noise floor in real world listening? Honestly, not very important at all :p But I must say, it's akin to having just the deepest black levels possible on a display. Having the deepest, inkiest black gives you the very best contrast, and I've found that to be similar with audio. From that utter dead silent background, I get the very best contrast in the sounds, and the sense that absolutely no detail what-so-ever is being obscured or masked in any way.

Then there are all the other forms of distortion, which a really great amp will shun a little bit better than a merely "good" amp. But, frankly, it's splitting hairs. And I would absolutely defy ANY listener to honestly pick out differences between competent amps in a truly blind test. Unless an competent amp is being pushed to the limits of its output capabilities (which can happen, especially with very low impedance speakers, or very inefficient speakers, or in a huge room) there just aren't any audible differences. Or if they are there, they're so small as to be inconsequential.

The bottom line is that you do NOT need a separate amp in order to get good performance from the Sierra Towers. Not in any "normal" sort of setting, anyway. But that does not mean that I think a separate amp is a complete waste of money. There CAN be improvements. But my point is that you honestly do not NEED them, those improvements - if they even exist - are minute, and you're often forced to pay quite a lot of money for so little gain.

Hopefully, this explanation will help you to feel more confident about what you actually need, what these AV Receivers can supply, and what some of these confusing numbers mean! :)

[mapmn006]

WOW...thanks again guys! Yeah seating is about 12 feet away.

So again last night I looked into XT32. I'm hoping it would really help me out. The room is 36X22. The room has tile floors, wood shutter window treatments, and all leather furniture. I don't think the room is very acoustically fit. We intentionally stayed away from cloth and carpet because of our big Rottweiler. Will XT32 help with this, or is this more of a room treatment issue. We will be putting in a 8X10 area rug but that is about the best i can do. If my wife comes home to giant stuffed animals placed around the room she might stop picking me up beer on her way home...:D So i started to wonder if XT32 will help. In fact the echo effect is bad enough that when we talk on the phone people comment on the echoey (echoey?) sound. Maybe a second area rug...

[FirstReflect]

Eep! That sounds like a bit of an acoustical nightmare, I'm afraid :(

I'm a fan of Audyssey -- MultEQ XT32 + SubEQ HT in particular -- if you can afford them. But I always recommend thinking of such programs as a "cherry on top". They are NOT a fix for bad acoustics or speakers. If they were, we'd all be using cheap speakers in any room and we'd all be getting the exact same sound! Well, of course that is not true. So we really should avoid thinking of any auto EQ program as being some sort of "fix" or panacea. It's not. So called "room correction" cannot eliminate reflections. Your speakers make a sound. That sound reflects off of your walls. There's nothing any software program can do about that! So fixing your room's acoustics requires fixing your room's acoustics ;) There's no magic way of doing that with software, I'm afraid.

I feel very strongly that the marketing term "room correction" is misleading. I much prefer the "old" name that we all used to call such programs, which is "Auto EQ". That's what the software really is. It's an equalizer. We used to equalize our systems manually. Something like Audyssey can simply do it automatically now, and save you a lot of time! So that's the way to think of any "room correction" program. It's not room correction. It's really just an EQ. We used to use manual EQs to "dial in" the sound -- to a flat frequency response, or some other "target curve", or just to taste. Audyssey has done a ton of research into psychoacoustics and the ways in which we perceive sound, and they have come up with their "Audyssey Curve", which is labelled as "Audyssey Movie Mode" these days. Audyssey also offers the option of a "Flat" setting, which they're calling "Audyssey Music Mode". Audyssey also makes some adjustments in the time domain, which affects the relative phase of some frequencies. But that is mostly about making sure that if two or more speakers play the exact same sound at the exact same time, that sound arrives at your ears at the exact same time, as it should. Differences in placement can lead to the sounds arriving at slightly different times if no adjustments are made. So Audyssey does a pretty good job of correcting any such timing errors.

But reflections, echoes, and noise in your room -- Audyssey cannot fix those things. And, in fact, due to Audyssey attempting to "hit" its "target curve" with its EQ adjustments, it can actually make your speakers sound much worse when you are in an echoey room! If you have very strong reflections and echoes in your room, Audyssey can get "confused" a bit. Basically, due to all the strong reflections, the microphone ends up picking up more acoustical energy than it would if you were in a good acoustic environment. It tries to compensate for this excess energy by decreasing the output of the frequencies that the microphone is reading as being too loud. But this can lead to a really messed up signal!

Once again, its best to just think of Audyssey (or MCACC or YPAO or ARC or Trinnov, for that matter) as simply being an EQ. If you were doing things manually, you might measure the sound with a microphone. And if you're in an echoey room, you might look at your readings and see that the high frequencies appear to be far too loud. That tends to happen in echo-filled rooms. And you will also likely notice some BIG peaks and dips in your bass below 200Hz. That happens in pretty much any room, but it can be even worse if you have a lot of hard, parallel surfaces. So, manually, you go about your business and adjust your EQ to tame that treble and try to smooth out the bass.

But then you sit down and listen to some actual music, and you notice that things sound very "confined" and "closed in". There's a lack of detail, everyone sounds like they have their hand over their mouth when they talk. And if you move to a different seat, you hear totally different bass notes being emphasized, or some bass notes vanish entirely!

Well, sadly, Audyssey can end up giving you those exact same results! And this is why I completely understand when some people swear off all "room correction", call it "crap" and declare it to be worthless. Well, it IS giving you a bad experience. But no more so than what almost anyone would have done if they had taken measurements manually, and manually adjusted an EQ to compensate for their readings. Audyssey is just trying to make the readings from its microphone match the flat or target curve that it has in its memory banks.

So, if its a manual EQ, you take one listen, know right away that something is wrong, and set about adjusting your EQ to taste. Once you have it where you like it, you measure again, and you'll see that the graph you get looks terrible! But that's the best you can do when you have bad room acoustics! We adapt our hearing quite well all the time in order to "pick out" the sounds that we want to hear. It's how we manage to carry on a conversation, even at a loud party, or in a restaurant. We learn to sort of "tune out" anything we consider noise, and focus on the things we consider important. If we go and use an EQ to remove or greatly reduce entire chunks of the frequency spectrum, we end up throwing out the important sounds along with some of the noise! So even though the final result that we end up with when we tune an EQ by ear can result in a horrible looking graph, the reason we ended up there is because our human ears decided to keep certain frequencies -- even though they're too loud, or full of reverberation -- because there was important information in those frequencies. Meanwhile, the Auto EQ just cut them out because they measured horribly ;)

So, bottom line is that an EQ -- even a very sophisticated and highly adjustable one, like Audyssey MultEQ XT32 -- cannot solve genuinely bad acoustical problems. And, in fact, it can make the end result sound worse. It will measure better. The graph will look flatter and more uniform. But the actual sound, to our human ears, will be bad, because a whole bunch of important sounds just got cut out or greatly diminished so that the graph from the microphone would look better.

Now, flip things around to a good acoustic environment, and Audyssey can work some wonderful fine tuning. Again, manual EQs used to be a common thing. But when you compare them to Audyssey MultEQ XT32, they were extremely coarse, not terribly accurate, and they would often affect far more frequencies than you really wanted to. If you start with a pretty good measurement to begin with, Audyssey, with its multitude of extremely fine and accurate filters, can really fine tune the response in ways we could only dream of back when all we had were manual EQs.

More than that, though, it's the bass below 200Hz where Audyssey XT, XT32, and SubEQ HT can have the most impact. Peaks and nulls are just a fact of life when it comes to producing deep bass in a room. There's no way to fix a null -- making the output louder won't "fill in" the dip because that dip exists due to the sound waves cancelling each other out at that particular frequency! So no matter how loud you play that frequency, it will still end up cancelling out, and you'll just end up working your subwoofer like crazy for no reason. So nulls are what they are, but peaks can be tamed. And if you use two subwoofers, and you tune them individually, the way Audyssey SubEQ HT does, you CAN fill in those nulls, by using the output of one subwoofer to compensate for the other!

So that's a HUGE benefit of Audyssey MultEQ XT32 + SubEQ HT. And, frankly, if you could use it for the bass below 200Hz alone, and somehow tell it to leave everything above 200Hz alone, I think a lot more people would find Audyssey extremely helpful and pleasing. But that is not the case -- not yet, anyways.

So we are back to the matter at hand. You need to address your room's acoustics. No ifs, ands, or buts!

To start, you should DEFINITELY opt for the RAAL tweeter upgrade if you can afford it! One of the greatest strengths of the RAAL 70-20XR tweeter is that it produces far less residual sound after a note than pretty much any other tweeter out there. When the signal says to stop making a sound, the RAAL tweeter stops -- on a dime. Pretty much every other tweeter in the world keeps moving just a little bit. It's simply inertia: an object in motion tends to stay in motion ;) But the RAAL tweeter is as clean as it can possibly be. So that means fewer and weaker residual reflections right off the bat. And that is a VERY good thing in your case.

Next, the goal is not to create a "dead" room, or a room that is totally free of reflections. You don't have to go crazy to still have good sound, and still get good benefits from Audyssey. But you DO want to eliminate genuine echo.

The easiest way to tell when you've got enough absorption and diffusion in your room is to do the simple "clap test". Sit in your primary seat, and make a short, loud clap with your hands. Just one, quick, loud clap. And then listen very carefully immediately after. In the worst cases, you'll actually hear an echo of your clap! But in less severe, but still "bad" cases, you'll just hear a slight reverberation of your clap. Another big problem is if you hear a sound that is more of a "zing". You'll know it if you hear it. It's a high pitch that seems to rise, and it just sounds like a "zing". That's a very bad thing ;)

Basically, you just want your clap to not echo back at you, not result in an obvious reverberation, and not result in a "zing". A minor little bit of "decay" is ok. But you basically want the clap to sound clean and distinct. You will also notice, once you get to that point, that just talking to someone in that room is much more pleasant. You will never struggle to make out what the other person said. And you won't feel the need to speak loudly, or to repeat yourself. In fact, you can be quite far away from each other, and still speak rather quietly once you have a good acoustic environment :)

So...how to get there? Particularly when you cannot have plush furniture or softer items on your walls due to your pets.

Well, the rug is a good start. Make sure you have it in between the speakers and your seat. And the thicker the better :)

The next obvious place where you could put acoustic treatments without worrying about your pets getting to them is on the ceiling, and particularly in the wall-to-ceiling edges. I can highly recommend GiK Acoustics (http://gikacoustics.com/products/) for all manner of acoustic treatments, including their "soffit trap" found here: http://gikacoustics.com/product/gik-acoustics-soffit-bass-trap/ , which can mimic the look of a soffit when you install it along those wall-to-ceiling edges, and do a terrific job of cutting down the reflections and echo in your room, and its also an excellent bass trap that can help reduce the severity of those peaks and nulls in your deep bass.

It's important to know that echoes and reflections happen in all directions. We tend to only think of reflections coming off of the walls because that's where our eyes are looking most of the time. But sound travels in all directions. So treating the ceiling and the upper edges of your room can be very effective, even though it doesn't immediately jump to mind.

That said, of course your walls also provide reflections. And the "first reflection points" create the strongest reflections -- sometimes almost as strong as the direct sound. But because they are a tiny bit delayed due to having travelled a slightly longer distance, they can "smear" the sound from your speakers, a rob you of detail and clarity.

So treating the first reflection points on your side walls would be worth while in a room like yours. And just to explain, the first reflection points are the spots on the wall where the sound waves would travel from the front of the speaker, hit the wall at an angle, and then bounce off at the same angle (like a billiard ball off the side of a pool table) and go straight to your ear. If you can picture it like a billiard ball shot, you can easily imagine how those particular spots on your wall would produce the strongest reflections, since it's the closest thing to a straight line in terms of getting the sound waves from the speaker to your ear with just one bounce ;)

With the restrictions you have in terms of looks, and with your pets, treating those first reflection points might be a challenge. But, thankfully, GiK has a lot of great products, including stands for their panels so that they can be free standing, and even be moved in and out of the room for temporary use. And they also have designer fabrics, as well as custom dyed panels, if looks are a problem. Those dyed panels, they can literally be made to look like anything you want! So if you were already going to have artwork, or posters, or pictures hanging on the walls, the dyed panels are the perfect way to "kill two birds with one stone"! You can have any image you like dyed onto the panel.

You can also use their smaller "Spot Panels". You can get creative with them. Get a few different colours and sizes, and you can arrange them into any pattern you can come up with.

There is also another absorption panel company called, Acoustimac (http://www.acoustimac.com/) . They offer even more size options, as well as more fabric choices, including suede, and patterned fabrics, as well as printed image panels that are similar to GiK's dyed panels, but don't look quite as perfect (you can sort of tell they're printed), although they're less expensive ;)

So looks should not be a problem!

What I would highly, HIGHLY recommend, though, is that you take advantage of GiK's FREE Room Analysis (http://gikacoustics.com/acoustic-advice/) . I mean, hey, it's free! So why not, right?

Naturally, price is going to be a consideration. And so will the details of exactly how you will install any absorption panels or bass traps or diffusion panels. The information you will get from GiK will be invaluable, though. So it is WELL worth your time to fill out their form, put a little thought into your room acoustics, and then decide what will work for you in terms of budget, looks, and placement.

You don't have to shoot for "perfection". With audio, there's genuinely no such thing, anyway! People debate exactly how much we should keep or deaden reflections all the time. Some people swear off all EQ and "room correction", while others swear BY it. But hopefully this reply will be helpful to you. And there's also just a bit of common sense involved here. An echo-filled room is going to sound...echoey. Shocker! haha. And that's not good when you want the best audio quality. I'm pretty sure everyone can agree on that! But it's very important to know that something like Audyssey, as powerful and precise as it is, cannot fix that sort of thing. Just think of it as a good ol' EQ. Use it the way we would have used a manual EQ in the past. But just appreciate that it can make many, many more adjustments that are more precise, and it can do it all WAY, WAY faster than the old manual EQ methods! That's what it's good for. I personally think it's excellent when it's used in that way -- especially for the bass. But it's not a panacea for all acoustical issues. Those need to be addressed on their own. The "clap test" will tell you if things are really bad, and let you know when things have improved. And the RAAL tweeter upgrade will give you the absolute cleanest sound to begin with, which will be a big, big help :)

[Kisakuku]

I feel very strongly that the marketing term "room correction" is misleading. I much prefer the "old" name that we all used to call such programs, which is "Auto EQ". That's what the software really is. It's an equalizer.

Audyssey filters work both in frequency and time domains and can help with ringing.

[mapmn006]

I think you're right that GIK would help me out a lot. After looking at their site I see that some things will definitely not fly with the wife, but some might. The acoustic panels on the walls might work. Color and/or art will have to be approved, but seems they would be very effective in helping to eliminate the echo. The cost is also reasonable. Thanks for the tip...I've never heard of GIK.

As far as XT vs XT32 I think for me I'll have to do cost benefit analysis to see if I can swing it. Going with the X4000 vs 5008 it's a $400 increase (using amazon prices as a price benchmark for comparison). $500 more than the 3313ci (which seems very similar to 5008) Than I ran into the Marantz sr5007. It seems the 5007 is the last years version of the 5008? It's only $600 (5007) vs $900 (5008). It's 7 channel, same power, and also includes Audyseey XT. Now 5007 vs x4000 is a $700 difference. Thats big. I know XT32 is sweet but $700 sweet?...for some people for sure, but maybe not me. So would the 5007 be the way to go if I'm not going for XT32? 5008 worth $300 over 5007?

As far as the RAAL upgrade...I know its great. I've read threads where Davidf explained how its measurements and structural design are Superior. I see how for many who are into critical listening and can make a dedicated listening room it would be the only way to go. At $700 it might be a reach for me. Also Nrt seems to be great. Again for me I think it comes down to cost for gain. Money no object sure I'll take the RAAL's with the X4000. I started out this audio quest wanting a sound bar. O-how thing have snowballed. And that's cool...as the saying goes buy once cry once. Honestly 3K total for speakers and a receiver is still pushing it, and thats without room corrections. I guess I could put purchase off a little bit to save more, but in the end I will not have a dedicated listening room and will most likely not get into critical listening.

Still trying to get to Ascend mid month (July) but not sure if that will happen. Anyone know if you can buy products there (San Clamente, CA) or is it just a listening studio? I guess I can just call them. Starting to figure things out...Thanks again guys (and gals)!

[FirstReflect]

Yes, Audyssey does make adjustments in timing as well as just EQ'ing the sound. But when you think about what Audyssey is really doing -- all it can do is alter the sound that comes out of your speakers. Once the sound waves have left the speaker, they're subject to your room's acoustics, just as they always would have been. So Audyssey can alter how loud those sound waves are when they leave the speaker, and it can alter the timing of when they leave the speaker a little bit. Those adjustments to the timing can, indeed, help with ringing and reverberation by causing cancellations. But now you're potentially dealing with a bigger issue, which is that you've altered the direct sound in order to try and compensate for the reflected sound. And that can lead to the issue I described where things seem to sound even worse than when you just left the signal completely alone.

I mean, I'm in complete agreement with the simple advice of, "try it for yourself, and see if you like the results!" But that sort of relies on just user preference, and what each person is already used to a little too much, IMO. So, I think we can offer better, more helpful advice than that :)

But despite how long my post was, I'm still trying to simplify things somewhat, and make them easier to understand. You're right that saying Audyssey is ONLY an equalizer is incorrect on my part. What I should have stated more clearly is that I prefer, in my own mind, to simply THINK of Audyssey as being just a good ol' equalizer. In my experience, if I think of it that way, and use it the way I would have used a manual equalizer in the past, that's when I've gotten the best results from using it. That is the point I was attempting to get across :) I've found that when I try to use Audyssey as actual "room correction", which is to say, I've attempted to use it to improve the sound in a genuinely BAD acoustic environment, my experience has been that the results are not very good.

So all I was really trying to get across, in answer to the OP's questions, is that I do not think it is good advice to say, "if you have a bad acoustic environment, one that is filled with echoes so bad that people comment on them when you are talking to them over the phone in that room, just use Audyssey MultEQ XT32 and don't worry about it...Audyssey will fix everything." That just is not the case. Certainly not in my experience, anyway.

Like I say, I'm a fan of Audyssey. I think it's rather remarkable. I certainly recommend using it -- especially the XT32 version with SubEQ HT. But it is NOT a fix-all. Like I mentioned, if it were, every room with an Audyssey system running in it would sound the same, even regardless of which speakers were being used! Well, that is obviously not the case. So we know there is more at play than just Audyssey's adjustments. And we know there are things about the room's acoustics and the inherent qualities of the speakers for which Audyssey cannot compensate. And that's not a knock against Audyssey! It's just that I think it's too easy to run the risk of thinking that Audyssey will fix all your acoustic problems based on the marketing.

So, the OP wanted to know if one area rug plus Audyssey MultEQ XT32 in his echoey room would be sufficient. And MY answer to that question is: no. I think mapmn006 would be disappointed with those results, and might even be in a case where things would sound worse after having run Audyssey. Perhaps not. But he's in a situation that does not bode well, IMO. So I'm just trying to get mapmn006 the best results possible :)

My advice is: if you THINK of Audyssey as simply being an EQ, I think that helps people to conceptualize how it is best utilized, and why it might not be the panacea that the marketing makes it out to be.

[mapmn006]

Found a good article comparing the new Marantz line for all interested...

http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/receivers/marantz-sr5008-sr6008-sr7008

[FirstReflect]

I understand completely when it comes to trying to stick to a budget, and figure out the cost - benefit ratio of each pricey upgrade :)

As you and I agree, mapmn006, if money is no object, it's easy! You'd be all over the RAAL upgrade, the higher-priced AV Receiver that includes MultEQ XT32 w/ SubEQ HT, and you'd be getting acoustic treatments from GiK and/or Acoustimac, as well! It's easy if cost is not a factor -- haha.

In the hopes of helping you to make a decision, though, I will simply offer you my opinion, and let you know what I would do if I were in your situation :)

My top priority, in terms of where I would spend my "wiggle room" budget, would be to get the echo in your room under control using acoustic treatments. The best speakers in the world put into an honest-to-goodness bad, echoey room are still going to deliver disappointing results -- even if you try to compensate with the best Auto EQ.

So, IMO, before the RAAL upgrade, and before the higher-priced AV Receiver, MY priority would be to get some FREE advice from GiK Acoustics, using their room analysis service. And then I would spend some money on getting that room echo under control. I would try to keep the cost down, if possible, with the hopes that I might still have enough left over to afford one of the other upgrades. But I would use that "clap test", I would take GiK's advice into consideration, and I would put my "wiggle room" money there first.

Second, for me, the next most important upgrade would be to get the RAAL tweeter. I know it's a relatively expensive upgrade, but we are talking about the two most important factors when it comes to determining the quality of the sound that you actually hear! We are first talking about your room's acoustics with the step above. And then we are talking about the sound that is projected into that room in the first place with this upgrade to the speakers themselves!

Now, the standard NrT tweeter is certainly no slouch! So it's not as though you're somehow getting a "bad" speaker by not doing the RAAL upgrade. FAR from it! The standard Sierra Tower with the NrT tweeter is really, really good.

But the RAAL is better ;) And it's better in a particular way that will be very important in your room -- namely, in its transient response, and nearly perfect impulse response, where it truly does stop producing any residual sound.

Like I say, in the first step, I'd really, really want to get that echo out of your room. But I would also try to get away with, basically, as little in the way of room treatments as I can so that I could still afford to do this RAAL upgrade. To me, the room and the speakers are like 50/50 partners.

The rest of the gear, to me, is far behind the room and the speakers in importance (so long as we're talking about "good" gear still, of course. I'm not talking about stepping down to junk just in order to treat the room and get better speakers ;) ). So, personally, if you were going to sacrifice one upgrade in this purchase, I would make it the more expensive AV Receiver, and I wouldn't worry about affording a separate amp right away, either. A separate amp can always be added at a later date. And you can always upgrade the AV Receiver in the future, as well. Especially considering how there are always new features being added to the new models every year. In other words, I think you're more likely to wind up upgrading your AV Receiver or Processor at some point, regardless. Meanwhile, though, your speakers could last you decades, and unless you move, your room isn't going to change. So even from that standpoint, to me, it makes the most sense, by far, to put any "wiggle room" money into your room and speakers :)

So, with all of that in mind, if going a bit less expensive on the AV Receiver means that you can afford the acoustic treatments for your room and the RAAL ribbon tweeter upgrade, THAT'S the way I would go, personally.

And on that front, I have another suggestion for you, which is that you check out accessories4less.com (http://www.accessories4less.com/) !

Accessories4less is the official, online "clearance and refurbished" retailer for Denon, Marantz, Onkyo, KEF, and a number of other brands. Now, I know that the whole "refurbished" label turns a lot of people off. But in the case of A4L, it shouldn't. Since they are selling the items directly from these manufacturers, you get a full 1 year warranty (no 90 day BS like you find on most "refurbished" items), and you get the full backing of the manufacturers. And a lot of times, even though they're being sold as "refurbished", the items are actually brand new, and they're simply being cleared out since they're a year old model, or there's excess stock.

So accessories4less is a fantastic way to save a bit of extra money on the AV Receiver! And that might allow you to afford the RAAL upgrade, or it will make your necessary acoustic treatments easier to afford.

I started my first reply with recommending the Marantz SR5008. At the time, this thread had started with you just looking at whether you should go with Separates or an AV Receiver. And I figured the SR5008 hit an attractive price point, had all the major features I would recommend, and it's the current model.

With everything we've talked about since, though. And with price being a consideration now. I completely agree that the SR5007 from last year is a fantastic way to save a bit of money that you can then put towards the other upgrades. I recommended the SR5007 a lot last year. It's not like it suddenly became a bad purchase just because a year went by! I had a couple of little quibbles with the SR5007, though, which were that, for some weird reason, both Denon and Marantz models from last year had no AM Radio tuner. I've no idea why that was the case, and AM Radio is not an important source for a lot of people. But still, I thought it was a weird omission. And second, the SR5007 only has 6 HDMI inputs total (that's including one on the front). That's probably fine for most folks. But I always like to have as many HDMI inputs as I can -- it's easy to run out :p

But the Marantz SR5007 can be had for $499 at accessories4less (http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/MARSR5007/MARANTZ-SR5007-100w-x7-NetworkingTheater-Receiver-w/AirPlay-3D-4K/1.html)! So that's a very compelling price point!

Of course, there are alternatives, as well. In particular, for just $50 more at A4L, there's the Denon AVR-3312CI (http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/DENAVR3312CI/DENON-AVR-3312CI-7.2-Network-A/V-Surround-Receiver-w/AirPlay/1.html#!wiki) from a couple of years back, now. And that's a real contender! You get your AM Radio tuner back ;) And an additional HDMI input.

So, I really like the AVR-3312CI as an option for you -- particularly at the accessories4less price. $550 on the AV Receiver should help you to keep the budget under control, and hopefully afford the necessary room treatments first, and then maybe even the RAAL tweeter upgrade second.

Hope that helps!

[natetg57]

Great find on the 3312ci for $550! I second that recommendation.

[JustaSheep]

I see Denon 3312ci for $650, $550 off the MSRP, but still a great value.

My bad, I was looking at the 3313ci.

[mapmn006]

I think that all sounds like good advice, and makes scene. The acessories4less sounds like a good find. Like GIK I've never heard of it before. I think going with a refurbished older model AVR might be the way to go to get the RAAL upgrade. Honestly That was the one upgrade I was worried about not getting because once I get the speakers there is no going back on that choice (unlike the Sierra 1 vs Sierra 1 Nrt). Going with the base tweeter with the Sierra 1 you could always upgrade later...not the case for the towers. I read a thread where Davidf was saying a towers nrt and RAAL center was a great combo especially for home theater. If I remember right he was watching Kung Fu Panda with the kids. He was taking about how the dialog from the RAAL center was great. As someone who will only have 2.0/2.1 I'm now thinking I need to find a way to make the upgrade happen. Also like what was said...I'll have these speakers for a long time. AVRs will come and go as technology advances. I'll just hold out for XT128:) Price wise nrt +$1100 AVR=$3100. RAAL+$550 AVR=$3250. Very comparable. I know that's without room correction, but that can happen over time. As with the F15:) Sounds like my plan is taking shape.

I will be MIA for the next 6 days...thanks again! :)

[JustaSheep]

That logic is sound to me. Had I know about that site, I would have bought a refurb AVR for sure. The ones listed really aren't even that old, so I don't think you have any worries about being outpaced by technology or codecs, especially for a 2.1 setup...and you have room to grow.

[mapmn006]

So I had a little time to think, and check some things out while I was up in MN over the last 6 days. Financially I think my mid July purchase will need to be pushed back a month. I'm ok with that so I have more time consider my options even though I think I like where I'm at with things. The Denon 3312ci from accessories4less for $550 seems like what I will go with. As far as room treatment goes I ordered a thick 5'X8' persian style area rug today. And by “I” I mean the wife. Also I think acoustic paneling behind the speakers on the front wall might fly with her at some point. Not to totally throw a money wrench into things, but I did look at the Salk Songtowers again. I know...please don't throw digital rotten vegetables at me:)...but given the price I just need to be sure on what I go with. I'm still planning on the Sierra Towers, but I do have a few questions that someone might help me with...

*The standard Songtower uses a Hiquphone OW2 tweeter. How would that tweeter compare to the Nrt? Also for $100 more they offer OW4...how would that compare to the other two? I'm leaning towards ribbons, but just for fun I would like to know. I tried to Google the info, and what I found was just technical info that meant nothing to me. Not sure if there is a simple way to explain their differences, but if there is I'd love to hear it.

*I've seen acoustic paneling in pics on the wall behind the main speakers. Could someone explain why this is helpful. Seems like they would not be very useful there. I guess the speakers are ported out the back, but is that all there is to it? On the side walls and far wall that makes sense to me...but behind on the front wall? Also any thoughts between diffusors vs. absorbing panels behind the main speakers? I've read people say diffusors on far wall with absorbing panels behind. Is this standard? I get that every room is different, but just wondering if there is a general rule.

*Also comparing the Songtowers to the Sierra Towers the biggest difference seems to be 3-way vs. 2-way. I know both are great and “better” is in the eye of the beholder, but is there one generally seen as more often preferred for home theater or music. I've read many threads comparing the 2 so I get that there is no right answer on which is better, but does anyone have any thoughts on 2-way vs 3-way?

Again...I'm leaning heavily towards the Sierra Towers. That is why I'm here on this site. I have a month to pull the trigger so I just thought I'd keep the thread going with some questions for all who are interested in reading/participating in educating me/others...thx again!:)

[mapmn006]

So I called Ascend the other day, and like others have posted they are 2-3 months out on their towers. They are waiting on cabinets. I guess the last batch was 90% preordered, and the other 10% went quick. I talked to them about listening to the Nrt vs Raal, but seems they only have Nrt in listening studio right now. So I will not be making a trip over. Getting close and leaning towards the matte black, but satin dark cherry looks real nice too!

[Kisakuku]

Getting close and leaning towards the matte black, but satin dark cherry looks real nice too!

Personally, I think that the cherry and the espresso stains are the most attractive, as they show just the right amount of the natural bamboo grain (a lot less than the natural finish, a lot more than the black bamboo and obviously matte black).

[JustaSheep]

I personally love the naturals, but SAF was low. I also really like the black bamboo, but the lighting would have to be perfect to show them off.

I have the espresso and like them a lot, too. They are easy to decorate around so the SAF is pretty high.

[curtis]

I love the naturals...but beggars can't be choosers, so I'll take any of them. :)

[mapmn006]

Yeah your right about seeing the grain in the satin finishes vs the matte. Our concern is that we have so much brownish wood it might be too much. I was on a “natural” kick for a while thinking the contrast in woods might look nice. She likes the black as a simple minimalist look, and at $200 cheaper than natural who am I to argue? :) Here are a couple pics of the room to show the wood colors, and It might help show what I was talking about when describing what an acoustical nightmare the room is. I had to resize the pics so I hope they upload correctly. We since got the area rug (not in any pics) and it looks good but unfortunately did only a little to kill the echo. Progress over time I guess...

ps: notice the space above the cable box for the avr - all ready to go...can't wait!

844845846

[JustaSheep]

I like how you slipped in that pic of your Rottie! Good lookin' dog!

The house looks great, too, but I see what you mean about tile, walls and such.

[mapmn006]

There is actually two pics of him...the second one is more of a "Where's Waldo" though...he he

[FirstReflect]

Nice-looking place! I like your wall colour :) But, my goodness, yes, that is less than ideal for acoustics!

In terms of cabinet colour first, I think you should go dark. Either espresso or black. You've got very little black in that room. Only the TV bezel and the picture frame, really. But that should be enough to tie in a black pair of towers. I'd opt for the black bamboo rather than matte in your room, though.

Speaking of the picture frame -- so long as you can stomach the cost, you can definitely bring a good amount of acoustic treatments into that room without them looking the least bit out of place! You could replace that large piece of artwork on the wall with a printed/dyed set of panels. Heck, you could have the exact same image replicated, if you'd like. You could also quite easily put some art panels on the front wall behind the speakers. And I'm sure the other walls could hold art panels, too.

Given your tile floor, I'd actually go a bit nuts on the ceiling. You could solve a lot of your echo problems with ceiling treatments. Easiest thing would be to just cover as much of the ceiling as you can afford with plain white absorption panels! You wouldn't even notice them up there.

The other thing you could use would be wood diffuser grids. Auralex has some really nice ones: http://www.auralex.com/sustain/default.asp

Diffusers keep the sound energy in the room, but they scatter then sound waves, rather than allowing them to bounce back and forth in straight lines. So they break up the echoes, but do not deaden the room in any way. Frankly, though, you could mostly do with plenty of absorption ;)

Having all the treatments look really pretty and more like decoration than acoustic products is awesome. But it ain't cheap. However, as long as you are aware of your options, you can always plug away at it a little at a time as funds allow. The way to come at it, IMO, is to simply always opt for an acoustic treatment any time you are going to add a bit of decoration anyway. Just always kill two birds with one stone! Any picture or artwork can be an art panel instead. Rather than painting the ceiling or texturing it, put panels or diffuser grids up there. If you always keep the acoustics in mind, it's much easier to "hide" the treatments in decorations that you would have added to your room anyways!

Oh, and you need a BIG, and well damped/decoupled subwoofer. You've got loads of open air space. To get really satisfying deep bass, you need a sub that can pressurize that entire volume of open air! And damp the heck out of the space between the bottom of the subwoofer and the floor. The last thing you want is a big ol' sub literally vibrating the whole house and creating a bunch of distortion and a crazy amount of "bass bleed" into every room of your house, and probably into your neighbor's house, as well! haha

Seriously, though, rather than an end table, you should get yourself a nice, BIG sub. It could live next to the love seat, and literally act as an end table for it. Could look really nice, actually. See? Audio hidden everywhere :D

[Kisakuku]

And damp the heck out of the space between the bottom of the subwoofer and the floor. The last thing you want is a big ol' sub literally vibrating the whole house and creating a bunch of distortion and a crazy amount of "bass bleed" into every room of your house, and probably into your neighbor's house, as well! haha

All you need is some rubber feet.

http://billfitzmaurice.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=19112

[FirstReflect]

Ah, geez. Are we really going to go through the whole "to damp or not to damp" opinion debacle again?

Look, this is the easiest experiment to run for yourself. The guy in that post is seriously going to say, "you don't know what you're hearing"? As in, a window rattles when my subwoofer is sitting directly on the floor, and then the window does not rattle anymore when I put some sort of shock absorber underneath it? Really? I can't hear that? Only a measurement microphone can tell me whether the window is rattling or not?

Please. Give me a break.

Simplest experiment ever. Play your subwoofer or tower speakers with them sitting directly on the floor, or play your bookshelf speakers sitting directly on a stand or a table or a shelf or what-have-you. Observe the results in your favourite seat inside your theater. Also go and observe the results in other rooms of the house.

Now put some sort of shock absorber under your subwoofer or tower speakers, or in between your bookshelf speakers and whatever surface they're sitting on. Observe again.

Yes, your observations -- with just your human ears -- are perfectly valid. If it's the same either way, it's the same either way. If there's an obvious difference one way vs. the other, then there's an obvious difference one way vs. the other.

My window rattles when I have my subwoofer sitting directly on the floor. My cat jumps when the window rattles. My window does not rattle when I put my subwoofer onto some sort of shock absorber -- an isolation riser, a folded up blanket, a few layers of carpet pad...whatever, just a shock absorber. My cat doesn't jump because the window doesn't rattle. But according to that forum post, I'm not capable of making that observation. And my cat is lying.

Sure...

[Kisakuku]

My window rattles when I have my subwoofer sitting directly on the floor. My window does not rattle when I put my subwoofer onto some sort of shock absorber -- an isolation riser, a folded up blanket, a few layers of carpet pad...whatever, just a shock absorber.

That's why I said "rubber feet" and not "directly on the floor".

"Properly designed and constructed sub boxes do not vibrate within the subwoofer frequency passband. Even a relatively poorly made sub won't have panel resonances below 400Hz. A sub box that actually did vibrate even at 200Hz would be unusable.

The benefit that might be seen is in those frequencies where the sub panels can vibrate, above 400Hz. 400 Hz and higher frequencies do not cause a floor to vibrate, but they could cause audible panel buzz if in direct contact with a hard surface. Any and all vibration of a floor is directly related to the acoustic output of the sub, not physical contact. If the floor is vibrating in the 20-150 Hz range that vibration could cause the sub to vibrate atop a bare floor. All it takes to stop that vibration is rubber feet or a thin resilient pad." (http://www.avsforum.com/t/644330/auralex-subdude-a-must-have/1050#post_22943163)

[JustaSheep]

Yeah, I had to look for him, I see his head peaking out now. Here's a pic of my setup...and rottie, of course. :)

847

[mapmn006]

WOW!!! Absolutely awesome! The speakers look great too.:)

[davef]

Yeah, I had to look for him, I see his head peaking out now. Here's a pic of my setup...and rottie, of course. :)

847

Absolutely LOVE this pic!!! Thanks for sharing!!!

[JustaSheep]

Thanks guys. Those are 2 of many joys in life...Good audio and a good dog. It's not all peaches and cream, though. Take a look at the outtake below. The lighting is terrible, the "photographer" and wife are seen in the reflection of the TV, the picture is grainy, and one of the subjects looks like he spent the evening out with Ms. Lohan. The only things that hold their own in this debacle of a pic are the speakers.

848

[mapmn006]

Well today is the day. I finally got all my audio ordering placed. In the end this is what I got...

Sierra Towers in satin black bamboo with RAAL upgrade. Color wise I really like all of them, but like I posted earlier we have so much brown in the house black should look nice. This way it keeps all our audio/video stuff consistently colored black (TV, AVR, and now speakers). I was going back and forth between natural and satin black this last week, and finally had to just choose.

Denon 3312ci AVR. I purchased it on accessories4less.com. It's a refurbished model, but I think for the $550 price it will do just fine. Thanks for the help picking out this one guys!

Cables from Blue Jeans Cables. I bought a few HDMI cables, a cat 6a ethernet cable, two coax cables to connect cable box to wall and modem to wall, and speaker cables (two five foot 10-gauge Belden 5000 series white wires with ultrasonically welded locking banana plugs on each end). WOW! The speaker cables probably just sounds cooler than they really are. What I love about the site and the company is they will cut and terminate all cable to the exact length (and color) you want. So I'll be able to have no slack in any of the runs. This will give a nice clean look. Price wise it's not too bad, but some might argue it's an unnecessary expense. The speaker cables were $64. Yeah I know I probably could have gotten the same performance from 12 gauge Monoprice copper wire for a fifth of the cost but these will look cool. :)

In the end I feel really good about my purchases. Thanks again for all who helped/educated me on this project. 5 months ago I knew nothing about audio, and just knew I wanted some good sound at home for music and TV. I'll post some pics of the set up when they are set up (2-3 months).

***EDIT*** As I write this Mark from Accessories4less.com called and told me their database was incorrect, and they don't have anymore 3312ci. He said he would give me the 3313ci for $50 more. I said ok. I know the 3313ci has 3 zones or something, but I will not need that. In the end I don't think I'll really get anything I'll use for the extra $50. O well I'm sure it will still work great for me.

[FirstReflect]

Congrats!

Oh, man. To go from, "I'm not super familiar with audio" to THIS?! Dude, you just skipped right to the head of the line! haha.

I like your choice of the Black Bamboo finish. I think those'll look really nice in your room. But the SOUND! I'm excited for you! Going with the RAAL tweeters was the right call. You really can't get a cleaner output in terms of just what the speakers themselves will be sending out into your room! As we've discussed, room acoustics are going to play a large role in your setup. But by going with the upgraded RAAL Towers, you're at least starting with the cleanest output possible. Sometimes, we question what's responsible for any issues or dissatisfaction that we hear; "is it the speakers? Is it the room? Is it the processing? Or the amps?" In your case, you've taken out most of the guesswork. If you hear something you don't like, it ain't your speakers! They'll be doing their job, that's for sure!

And, on the processing and amplifier end, I think you'll really enjoy your Denon 3313. I'm sorry to hear about A4L's stock indicator mess up. I really hate it when a company I recommend screws something up >:( That sucks that it wound up costing you $50 more than you had originally planned. But, at least the good news is that you got a very, very good price for the 3313. It's a stellar unit, so it's no down side in that respect! A4L IS a stand up company. At least you got a call reasonably quickly, and they didn't jerk you around really badly. But still. In sorry to hear that. You'll be really pleased with the 3313, though :)

So, all-in-all, really great stuff! Oh, and I'm 100% on board with you getting all of your cables and wires at Bluejeanscable. They're one of the few places where you can be absolutely sure that every cble they sell truly meets all the specifications! To me, that's totally worth their asking prices! I find it funny; Bluejeans used to be considered a "budget" cable brand! Back before a lot of the public got wise to the incredible rip-off that is Monster Cable, Bluejeans' offerings were considered "cheap"! Monoprice and Amazon have completely moved the goalposts now, though. And everyone expects cables to sell for pennies, not tens of dollars -- haha. But the fact is: while monoprice cables are perfectly capable of transporting an electrical signal from one end to the other, there's still something to be said for build quality, reliable spec compliance and testing, and American-made cable stock and assembly. Not to mention, monoprice isn't quite the same great deal that they once were, now that they're charging surprisingly high rates for shipping, and branding their own products, including blatant knock-offs that are earning them lawsuits.

So, all of that is to say, there's no "wasted" money on Bluejeans cables in my view. I still think they're a phenomenal value. And, like everything else in your sound system, you're going to love the quality, performance, and service!

Congrats, again!

Now, go save up for some 'frigerator-sized subwoofers!

:D

[mapmn006]

Progress! This batch of towers will be done in two weeks...i think mine are the ones on the left :).

892893894

Also...I think my speaker cables are getting lonely...

895

[FirstReflect]

Hot damn!

Y'know, I think I could live with that totally unfinished bamboo look! I really love the bamboo cabinets. If it weren't for my "everything must be black and non-reflective" craziness, I definitely would have gone for the bamboo finish for my own speakers -- haha

It's a shame that the wait times have grown so long, but it will be TOTALLY worth the wait. I speak from experience ;) It's nuts how quickly all of Ascend's speakers are selling. Literally faster than they can be made! That's certainly one of the "better" problems to have in business, though. And I'm really happy that so many people are getting to experience truly excellent sound reproduction! I'm still kind of shocked, though. Ascend doesn't even advertise! Shows you the true power still held by word-of-mouth, though, doesn't it?

Anyways, I've been stuck waiting on repairs to my theater room's ceiling (damaged by a leaky hot water pipe), so I know the agony of anticipation all too well. I can't wait to hear your impressions, though, and to share my own pics and review! We're in this together, man. haha :D

[davef]

Here are some more recent pics from our cabinet maker... These should provide a better idea of just how many cabinets they are building for us in this run :)

[mattcantu]

Wow. I love the look of the unfinished bamboo.

All of those stacks of cabinets kind of remind me of the warehouse scene at the end of Raiders Of The Lost Ark. ;) Ok, maybe not so much... but those are some awesome pictures. Thanks for sharing, Dave!

[petmotel]

Here are some more recent pics from our cabinet maker... These should provide a better idea of just how many cabinets they are building for us in this run :)

Unbelievable, I hope the bamboo forests of the world can keep up with you :o!

Truly though, can't imagine how you've had time to develop the new Sierra-2 with what are obviously enormous demands on your time. You are an amazing guy! Best wishes for you, Ascend, and family.

[Dark Ranger]

Well said, Jay! :)

Great pictures, Dave. Thank you.

[curtis]

Unbelievable, I hope the bamboo forests of the world can keep up with you :o!
I know you were joking, but bamboo is truly a remarkable plant. As we all know, it has great tensile strength. It is a grass/weed and grows very quickly and is classified as renewable, in fact, many people do not want any notion of it in their yards because it grows so fast.

SO...Dave can build A LOT of cabinets!!

Oooh...I like how the shape of the tweeter cut out allows for the RAAL 70-20xr!!

[pierreterrier]

It looks like the next batch of Sierra Towers owners are going to have some holidays to remember!

My Towers with the Raals are the bomb and I wouldn't upgrade them to anything else even if I had the dough. It is truly a magical musical experience that never dulls out my senses and if anything it seems to get better and better as time goes on. So far I got nearly 275 hours of purely analog music played on these babies and I still can't get over how the bass articulation and its powerful punch knock my socks off every time I crank it up! And the Raals are exactly as advertised; the best treble clarity ever. Poor midrange, it's hard to pay it any attention, LOL.

Merry Christmas to all the newbie owners to be, it looks like 26 of them from the pics. Dave really is
Santa Claus!

[pierreterrier]

Or 36?

[pierreterrier]

And this batch has the same black groove all around the front face just like it was first done on my batch. Dave e-mailed me something about the advantages of this new cut design making the cabinets much stronger. Since I never saw it mentioned on the forum I thought I'd share. They look hot with that thin black stripe on my dark cherry is all I know.

[pierreterrier]

900

If this pic posting works I will send more pics of my set up on the photo gallery. Took me a while to figure I had to adjust the pixels down on my smartphone for this site to be able to take them.

[pierreterrier]

Oops, LMAO!

[petmotel]

It looks like the next batch of Sierra Towers owners are going to have some holidays to remember!

My Towers with the Raals are the bomb and I wouldn't upgrade them to anything else even if I had the dough. It is truly a magical musical experience that never dulls out my senses and if anything it seems to get better and better as time goes on. So far I got nearly 275 hours of purely analog music played on these babies and I still can't get over how the bass articulation and its powerful punch knock my socks off every time I crank it up! And the Raals are exactly as advertised; the best treble clarity ever. Poor midrange, it's hard to pay it any attention, LOL.

Merry Christmas to all the newbie owners to be, it looks like 26 of them from the pics. Dave really is
Santa Claus!

After owning my Towers/Horizon for well over a year now, I fully agree with your views, with the exception of the "poor midrange" comment. Those things are so punchy/dynamic, I think they are one of, if not the biggest part of the equation.

I listen to my Ascend system pretty much daily, and get withdrawal symptoms if I'm out of town for more than a day!

Jay

[JustaSheep]

I think he was saying the mid-range is neglected in his setup because he's so impressed with the highs and lows.

[pierreterrier]

That's it, sheep has got it right, I meant poor little midrange, it's hard for them to get any respect in the middle of all that greatness, haha, blogging isn't like talking to someone, often things get misunderstood.
BTW midrange are excellent also :)

[petmotel]

That's it, sheep has got it right, I meant poor little midrange, it's hard for them to get any respect in the middle of all that greatness, haha, blogging isn't like talking to someone, often things get misunderstood.
BTW midrange are excellent also :)

I understood your meaning, I just think they really stand out is all! There is a lot of information in the midrange, kinda hard to miss them. At least they get plenty of my respect LOL.

Jay

[JustaSheep]

Here, too. I had to read the original twice to catch his meaning and thought maybe you misread it too. All in agreement, mid-range rocks, too!

[pierreterrier]

Gotcha. Treble and bass is what floors me and midrange is what holds it all together so not as jaw dropping to me.

[davef]

Or 36?

Oh, a LOT more than that... These are just some cabinets on pallets that have completed the sanding process... I try to avoid walking into the sanding/cutting (CNC) room when I am there as it is just too dusty for me ;)

[mapmn006]

It's Friday, I have the day off work, and these came... :)

930

931

Setup was fairly easy and I've got Dream Theater, Scenes From A Memory playing at 65 db. Life is good! One question...I ran Audyssey at 3 points and it said “analyzing” than “storing.” It seemed to have finished up. I now have Audyssey selected under the MultEQ XT heading under the Audio category. The other options are “off,” “Audyssey Flat,” or “Graphic EQ.” Am I understanding this correctly that whatever Audyssey corrected in its test is now happening when I play music because it on this (Audyssey) setting? I ask only because I can't seem to find what changes the program made. I know I've scene pics of other peoples room correction settings, but maybe it was on a different version or something. Also, dose the system only have one memory of the last test ran. In other words you run it, set it to Audyssey, and that's it?

Have a good weekend all...full review to come for those interested... :)

[Peabody]

Thanks for sharing the pics! Looks fantastic! I just placed my order so I've got several weeks of waiting. Aaarrrggghhh! :eek:

I've really enjoyed reading this thread and learned a lot. Thanks to mapmn006 for asking the questions and to those who answered, particularly Jonathan for his clear, detailed explanations.

(Wish I could answer your Audyssey question, but I will leave that to someone more experienced. I have an older version, and it's been a long time since I ran the calibration.)

[natetg57]

I ran Audyssey at 3 points and it said “analyzing” than “storing.” It seemed to have finished up. I now have Audyssey selected under the MultEQ XT heading under the Audio category. The other options are “off,” “Audyssey Flat,” or “Graphic EQ.” Am I understanding this correctly that whatever Audyssey corrected in its test is now happening when I play music because it on this (Audyssey) setting? I ask only because I can't seem to find what changes the program made. I know I've scene pics of other peoples room correction settings, but maybe it was on a different version or something. Also, dose the system only have one memory of the last test ran. In other words you run it, set it to Audyssey, and that's it?



Rerunning Audyssey will erase the previous correction/measurements. If you click on Audio>Audyssey>Parameter check, (i hope that's the correct path...)that should show you what Audyssey is correcting. Try the different modes to see what sounds best to you. And try it with different genres of music. 'Flat' has a little more treble than the default Audyssey setting.

[davef]

It's Friday, I have the day off work, and these came... :)

930

931

Setup was fairly easy and I've got Dream Theater, Scenes From A Memory playing at 65 db. Life is good! One question...I ran Audyssey at 3 points and it said “analyzing” than “storing.” It seemed to have finished up. I now have Audyssey selected under the MultEQ XT heading under the Audio category. The other options are “off,” “Audyssey Flat,” or “Graphic EQ.” Am I understanding this correctly that whatever Audyssey corrected in its test is now happening when I play music because it on this (Audyssey) setting? I ask only because I can't seem to find what changes the program made. I know I've scene pics of other peoples room correction settings, but maybe it was on a different version or something. Also, dose the system only have one memory of the last test ran. In other words you run it, set it to Audyssey, and that's it?

Have a good weekend all...full review to come for those interested... :)

Looks great - you definitely picked the right finish for the towers! Love all the contrast in your room.