QS8s vs. ERD-1 vs. FXi A4 vs. ADP-590 (1 Viewer)

[Senator Miah]

Hey, I'm brand new to the forum. I'm about to graduate from Law School and the deal I struck with my wife was that my graduation present was going to be my dream home theater set up. I graduate in May, have set aside some hard-earned dough and I am excitedly looking forward to my new toys.


My current hodgepodge setup is a 46” Panasonic Plasma (TH-C46FD18), Panasonic Blu-Ray (DMP-BD55), Sony A/V Receiver (STR-DE985), DCM Front Tower Speakers (KX212), a cheap Sony Center Speaker (Crutchfield offered it free with the receiver), EPI side surrounds (EPI 200B), my rear surrounds are by Akai (RPM8) and the jewel is my subwoofer, a Sunfire True Subwoofer Junior. [COLOR= black] [/COLOR] [COLOR= black]The DCMs and the sub stay, no matter what, I absolutely love them. [/COLOR]From there though, I want to pick out the right surrounds, to match a new center speaker (and eventually the height and width speakers and extra subwoofer for an 11.2 set up). Once 3-D has settled down, the TV and Blu-Ray player will be upgraded too. [COLOR= black] [/COLOR] [COLOR= black]So, I am looking for your thoughts on the rear and side surrounds. I have read every review I can get my hands on and have come down to these four choices. [/COLOR]Please talk me through Axiom’s QS8s vs. Emotiva’s ERD-1 vs. Polk’s FXi A4 vs. Paradigm's Studio ADP-590. Your thoughts and feedback are greatly appreciated.

 

[Robert_J]

Speakers - listen to them first. If you can't, then compare the specs and see which ones have similar features to the ones that you like. If your current speakers have silk dome tweeters, then place a higher priority on that.


11.2 - There is no such thing as an .2 system. The 5.1 or 7.1 designation is how many discreet channels of information are on the SOURCE material. To get to 11 speakers, the processor must tweak the sound for those extra speakers. If you are a purist, then you don't want that. If you want overkill, go right ahead.


Sunfire makes a good sub. There are many more out there that are much, much better. I recommend a great sub over dual good subs any day.

 

[Senator Miah]

I looked at the 11.2 issue, but I'm not worried. Many Blu-Rays are now filmed in 7.1 and even if they are only filmed in 5.1, Audyssey DSX actually decodes the track and sends the signals to the correct speakers (i.e. a plane or helicopter flying overhead is sent to the "Height" speakers and truly sounds like it is flying overhead and, with their unique "Wides" setup, objects moving right to left or vice-versa, now sound like they entered from outside of your room, ran across it and then ran out through the other wall, the sound field is mind-blowing. So, I've listened to it and been enormously impressed. For more on that, you can check out their page: http://www.audyssey.com/technology/dsx.html


As for the Dolby Pro Logic IIz, they too specifically decode the data from the encoded 5.1/7.1 track that should be sent to the Height speakers, especially for music, the sound field was much more rich, full and bright, it was a much more immersive experience. Details here: http://www.dolby.com/consumer/understand/playback/dolby-pro-logic-iiz-details.html


As for .2 systems, most high-end systems are .2 (with the decoder doubling the subwoofer sound and emitting it to two separate subwoofers.


For example:

http://www.onecall.com/product/Marantz/SR7005/Receiver/_/R-105080

http://www.amazon.com/Onkyo-HT-RC180-7-2-Channel-Surround-Receiver/dp/tags-on-product/B002L6GEKG

http://salestores.com/denonavr991a.html

http://www.jr.com/onkyo/pe/ONK_TXNR5008/

http://www.amazon.com/Denon-AVR-4311CI-Channel-Multi-Room-Receiver/dp/B0042KVX2S


As for the second sub, any recommendations?

 

[JohnRice]

I jumped over from the other, essentially duplicate thread. You clearly received an effective sales pitch and demo and have decided on a particular course of action regardless. So, I'll just lend two suggestions and back off.


I have the Emotiva ERD-1s and am happy with them. Will they blend into your system? No telling, but since it is such a hodgepodge already, they should be fine.


Before spending that much on a receiver, I'd look into separates first.

 

[Jason Charlton]

Originally Posted by Senator Miah


As for the Dolby Pro Logic IIz, they too specifically decode the data from the encoded 5.1/7.1 track that should be sent to the Height speakers...

This is not the best way to describe the process. If the encoded 5.1 or 7.1 track HAD any data that "should be sent" to the height speakers, that would constitute a "discrete" channel of information. There is no discrete information as to what should and should not be sent to the height channels.


The very nature of DPL IIz is that it extrapolates data from the multichannel stream and, to the best of its ability, guesstimates what part(s) of the signal should be sent to the height (or width) channels. This is not an exact science. I'm sure the demo that you listened to used carefully selected scenes from certain movies that happened to produce the best end-result (that's what all demos do - when was the last time you tried to wow your friends with selected scenes from "When Harry Met Sally"?) The results will not be as spectacular with everything you watch.




7.1 has been around for many years, and only now are we starting to see more movies released in that format on Blu-Ray (of currently available 7.1 Blu-rays, a vast majority are 7.1 extrapolations of 5.1 source material). In fact, Toy Story 3 was the first theatrical release EVER to have a 7.1 mix that was designed from the ground up as such.


I have a 7.1 system at my home, and had I known how little material was available that is native 7.1 I likely would not have wasted the time and effort in going 7.1. As it is, I listen in "Direct" mode so my back surround speakers are rarely used and to my ears, everything sounds great.


As Robert_J suggested, if your interest lies in experiencing the material as intended by the artists and technicians who created it, then you should stop at 7.1. It will be MANY years from now (if ever) that anything beyond 7.1 gains a significant foothold in mainstream home theaters.

 

[Senator Miah]

Originally Posted by JohnRice

I jumped over from the other, essentially duplicate thread. You clearly received an effective sales pitch and demo and have decided on a particular course of action regardless. So, I'll just lend two suggestions and back off.


I have the Emotiva ERD-1s and am happy with them. Will they blend into your system? No telling, but since it is such a hodgepodge already, they should be fine.


Before spending that much on a receiver, I'd look into separates first.

The irony is that I haven’t been “pitched”, my buddy bought an Onkyo TX-NR808 and a 9.2 channel Denon (I don’t remember the model). We set them up, watched War of the Worlds, Bad Boys II, Hellboy 2, 3:10 to Yuma, Secretariat (one for the wife) and Saving Private Ryan (we chose the movies after looking for online surround sound recommendations). After two weeks, he ended up going with the 7.1 Onkyo (it was about $900 cheaper) and I ended up being sold on the 9.2 channel because the imaging of the front speakers. My buddy really liked the 9.2, just not $900 worth. So, it was after that demo session, playing with 9.2 Audyssey that convinced me.

 

[Senator Miah]

Originally Posted by Jason Charlton



"This is not the best way to describe the process. If the encoded 5.1 or 7.1 track HAD any data that "should be sent" to the height speakers, that would constitute a "discrete" channel of information. There is no discrete information as to what should and should not be sent to the height channels.


The very nature of DPL IIz is that it extrapolates data from the multichannel stream and, to the best of its ability, guesstimates what part(s) of the signal should be sent to the height (or width) channels. This is not an exact science. I'm sure the demo that you listened to used carefully selected scenes from certain movies that happened to produce the best end-result (that's what all demos do - when was the last time you tried to wow your friends with selected scenes from "When Harry Met Sally"?) The results will not be as spectacular with everything you watch.







7.1 has been around for many years, and only now are we starting to see more movies released in that format on Blu-Ray (of currently available 7.1 Blu-rays, a vast majority are 7.1 extrapolations of 5.1 source material). In fact, Toy Story 3 was the first theatrical release EVER to have a 7.1 mix that was designed from the ground up as such.


I have a 7.1 system at my home, and had I known how little material was available that is native 7.1 I likely would not have wasted the time and effort in going 7.1. As it is, I listen in "Direct" mode so my back surround speakers are rarely used and to my ears, everything sounds great.


As Robert_J suggested, if your interest lies in experiencing the material as intended by the artists and technicians who created it, then you should stop at 7.1. It will be MANY years from now (if ever) that anything beyond 7.1 gains a significant foothold in mainstream home theaters.

[COLOR= rgb(165, 42, 42)]Yes, your description is much more technically accurate concerning the process. Though, as I posted above, it was just my friend and I playing around with a 7.2 and a 9.2 system and the movies we liked. That's why I very surprised by how accurate the sound technologies where. If anything, they were slightly underinclusive with heights, we both felt that they were more sounds that could have been routed through the higher sound field than actually were. The wides though, since the tracking in the 5.1/7.1 channels were encoded to move right to left/left to right, the wides were spot on, every time. It just widened the front sound stage immensely. Given what I’ve heard, I think that the decoding will eventually be there, and if not, I was pleased enough with the how the technologies “decided” to place the sound, it was unquestionably broader and taller. (Ironically, the Secretariat scene was the most impressive, the front width of the sound stage was impossibly enormous-sounding 75 feet wide in a 14 ft wide room.)[/COLOR]




[COLOR= brown]If I'm going to drop $1800 on a receiver, I want to future proof it. Since I personally like the created sound field, I at least wanted to check to see if anyone knew of an 11.2 receiver.[/COLOR]

[COLOR= brown] [/COLOR]

[COLOR= brown]The two that I am most interested in short of 11.2 are:[/COLOR]




http://www.crutchfield.com/p_580TXN3008/Onkyo-TX-NR3008.html?tp=179&nvpair=FFBrand|Onkyo

and

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_580TXN5008/Onkyo-TX-NR5008.html?tp=179&nvpair=FFBrand|Onkyo


Do you think I could amp the extra 2 channels to make into a 11.2?

 

[JohnRice]

The bottom line is, you came here today ostensibly asking for advice, which you are receiving and completely disregarding. I assure you, robert knows what he is talking about, as do I, and Jason has given you some sound, supportable advice as well. If you already know all the answers, why ask?

 

[JohnRice]

You can find plenty of future proof receiver on eBay...

 

[Senator Miah]

Originally Posted by JohnRice

The bottom line is, you came here today ostensibly asking for advice, which you are receiving and completely disregarding. I assure you, robert knows what he is talking about, as do I, and Jason has given you some sound, supportable advice as well. If you already know all the answers, why ask?

John, my apologies, I haven’t meant to imply that I was disregarding any advice offered, I meant only to explain where I was coming from and to point out that I was not reacting to smooth salesperson as suggested.

With regard to the 11.2 receiver on the other thread, I asked because I do think that the sound field is the best I’ve personally heard (even compared against some extremely expensive 5.1 setups—$15K+). So, I was curious as to what my options for that were, hence that original thread and the follow-up question of whether anyone thinks that I could get the 9.2 setup and then amp the extra two channels to create an 11.2 system?


As for this thread, regardless of whether I end up at 9.2 or my desired 11.2 setup, I am looking for advice on the best speakers. My research so far, indicates that the three options I listed are widely regarded as the best options, but they offer features that make it tough for me to compare. I appreciate your feedback on your Emotiva ERD-1s. To follow up on that, have you ever heard the other two? (So far, I’ve only heard the Polks and in store).

Do you think it’s worth biting the bullet to audition all three in my home, knowing that I will have to pay to ship up to two back?


Thanks.

 

[JohnRice]

The ERD-1s are currently on sale for $320, which makes them a pretty easy choice. My side surround speakers are currently an older model Polk which at the time was the equivalent of the FXi A4. I plan to get another pair of ERDs to replace them, some day. The Polks are brighter, but the ERDs aren't even two weeks old, so I don't know how their sound might change in time. They are nice speakers, very flexible and have nice mounting plates. Their main down side is they are 4ohm, which means they are not ideal for receivers. I said it before, and one of the biggest improvements you can make aside from the speakers in sound as well as flexibility is to move away from receivers to separates. The potential power gain plus the change in sound quality from Class D to A/B amps WILL make a difference. You don't tend to get all the latest bells and whistles on separates, but you generally get better sound, so you will have to decide for yourself.


I have a couple other Emotiva components, and I am generally impressed with them, especially for the price. My long range plans are to have the (not yet released) XMC-1 surround Pre-Pro for video sources and XSP-1 stereo analog preamp for music. I use an XPA-5 for all the channels except L/R. I have another amp for those speakers.

 

[Senator Miah]

Originally Posted by JohnRice

The ERD-1s are currently on sale for $320, which makes them a pretty easy choice. My side surround speakers are currently an older model Polk which at the time was the equivalent of the FXi A4. I plan to get another pair of ERDs to replace them, some day. The Polks are brighter, but the ERDs aren't even two weeks old, so I don't know how their sound might change in time. They are nice speakers, very flexible and have nice mounting plates. Their main down side is they are 4ohm, which means they are not ideal for receivers. I said it before, and one of the biggest improvements you can make aside from the speakers in sound as well as flexibility is to move away from receivers to separates. The potential power gain plus the change in sound quality from Class D to A/B amps WILL make a difference. You don't tend to get all the latest bells and whistles on separates, but you generally get better sound, so you will have to decide for yourself.


I have a couple other Emotiva components, and I am generally impressed with them, especially for the price. My long range plans are to have the (not yet released) XMC-1 surround Pre-Pro for video sources and XSP-1 stereo analog preamp for music. I use an XPA-5 for all the channels except L/R. I have another amp for those speakers.

I have to admit, you are one of the first people that has suggested that I go the separates route. I guess my main worry has been cost. With the two receivers I am mainly considering, I’m looking at either 140 watts x 9 or 145 watts x 9, which seemed like plenty to me. The other main drawback is that I had a hard time finding separates that offered HDMI 1.4a and pass-through, which is necessary for 3D signals. How does the video upconversion and the video chipsets compare on the separates?


As for the Class D to A/B, I know nothing about that, could you point me to a link or two? I’m clueless on that front.

For the separates route, what would be a good pre-processor for movies and music, and then what would your recommendations be for amping the speakers?


Thanks again.

 

[JohnRice]

Never mind. You're really not a good candidate for separates.


As far as amp classes, you can look them up on wikipedia, but it doesn't matter since with receivers you are locked in to Class D amps and the differences aren't reflected in specs anyway.

 

[David Willow]

If you go with heights and wides, they should be DCM speakers that match your mains. This is also true for your center (you didn't mention if you were replacing the cheap Sony). Also, why spend so much on a receiver or separates when you have cheap speakers? That should be the opposite. Spend $400 on the receiver and $1800 on the speakers (I'm going on the prices I found for the DCM speakers online). I have QS8's in my HT, but I can't say for sure how the will work with your other speakers. Although it is not as important to timbre match the surrounds, if you are spending that much money then why not make it perfect. Sorry if I'm misunderstanding your intentions as I read this thread twice and its still not completely clear to me what you are try to accomplish. Maybe I need another cup of tea.

 

[Senator Miah]

Originally Posted by JohnRice

Never mind. You're really not a good candidate for separates.


As far as amp classes, you can look them up on wikipedia, but it doesn't matter since with receivers you are locked in to Class D amps and the differences aren't reflected in specs anyway.

On the basis of needing the HDMI 1.4a for 3-D?

 

[JohnRice]

Jeremiah on my impression that you want lots of speakers and up-to-the second processing codecs. Separates are generally intended for optimum sound quality, but available pre-pros tend to lag just a bit behind on latest codecs. My main suggestion is to be more concerned with implementation rather than piling every speaker you can find into the system, as was just suggested by another member. A well implemented 5.1 or 7.1 system will always out perform a cobbled together system with lots of speakers.

 

[JohnRice]

To reiterate what David said, my system has some fairly decent electronics, as well as over 3,000 watts of power (and I mean genuine power, with power amps weighing 65-75 lbs each) but there is still more invested in the speakers. If your speakers are junk and you don't select or set them up them properly, it makes no difference what comes before them, you get garbage out.

 

[Senator Miah]

Originally Posted by JohnRice

Jeremiah on my impression that you want lots of speakers and up-to-the second processing codecs. Separates are generally intended for optimum sound quality, but available pre-pros tend to lag just a bit behind on latest codecs. My main suggestion is to be more concerned with implementation rather than piling every speaker you can find into the system, as was just suggested by another member. A well implemented 5.1 or 7.1 system will always out perform a cobbled together system with lots of speakers.

Yeah, you've really piqued my interest and I read late into the night about separates. I absolutely love the idea of investing in a clean, powerful amplifier that will last me over the years ahead, then just updating the pre-pro if necessary. I think I will build my system from the speakers up, getting quality there first, matching as I go. Then, when the speakers are collected and matched, see where separates are at.

Most discerning listeners have stood by what they own in posts that I have read and the QS8s, while more expensive have a dedicated fan base. Since the timbre is not as essential for the surrounds, and my main interest is movie watching, I think I may audition the QS8s and the ERDs at home.

 

[Senator Miah]

Originally Posted by David Willow /forum/thread/310335/qs8s-vs-erd-1-vs-fxi-a4#post_3797792

David, in looking at it now, I think your strategy makes sense. I am going to have to try to listen to the rest of the DCM line and make sure I like it enough to fully commit to that line, especially the center channel speaker. Do you have Axiom for the rest of your system setup too? Axiom's center (yes, I desperately need to upgrade my center speaker) comes very highly reviewed and many posters have raved about it, so that factors into whether I end up going the ERD or the QS8 route.

 

[David Willow]

Jeremiah, Yes, I have Axiom for everything but my sub (that's SVS). You can see my gear from the link in my signature. Reviews are nice, but until you listen you won't really know. I am completely happy with MY choice. The Axiom center is very nice, but some folks have issues with it when they sit off-center (with the VP150 and VP180 models). I never had this problem since my HT room is long and narrow, so I cannot comment. YMMV. Again, there's no substitute for an in-home audition.