Okay, Im going to sound crazy here...but I have come to the conclusion that

Rich Wenzel · 10-09-2003, 12:45 PM

a series of upgrades for hometheater audio equipment is just not worth it...

I find that the difference in sound quality when watching movies with top notch speakers (say $5k for the fronts) a top pre/pro (like an anthem or lexicon), and a great amp is not significantly better than lower end stuff like outlaw, rotel, adcom etc with good speakers...

I have found, however, that a nice 2 channel system, using the cost difference from going to a lexicon system from a rotel system, really improves.

Am I missing something?

For me, I just think that my upgrades in the future are going to be 2 channel music oriented rather than 5-7 channel stuff. I have no room for 7 channels anyway, and i havent heard that much of a difference using $20k versus $7k of audio equipment when decoding DD and DTS signals...

Am I alone in this? Are there steep dimishing returns curve in hometheater after you go to entry level separates or a flagship receiver and good speakers?

I heard the sunfire, denon 5803, anthem, rotel 1098, and the lexicon (all using different amps) and in 2 channel it could compete with a $2k channel preamp...to my ears anyway. Don't get me wrong, the 2 channel sound is great with those pieces, but I was just amazed at how much better a dedicated 2 channel preamp did (was a Naim, didnt get to test out a naim av2 yet, also heard a Creek) did. I figured it would be better, but I didn't realize how much so.

Rich

John Garcia · 10-09-2003, 01:01 PM

Nope, you are not alone. I watched Gladiator on a $100K system, and while it sounded great, it just wasn't necessary (Aerial, Krell, Runco) Now for 2ch MUSIC, that system is going to sound SPECTACULAR, with the side benefit of being able to view movies as well, and that's my mentality too.

If I were looking to drop $20K into a system, most of it would focus on the 2ch abilities, IMO, with movies as a fringe benefit. My system is under $6K and it still focuses more on 2ch, because that's what I listen to most.

MikeRP · 10-09-2003, 03:46 PM

I think if you can imagine a curve with expense increasing exponentially and sound quality increasing 10 percent for the high end home theater stuff one might be approaching the difference.

I'm not saying if I had the money I wouldn't do it - and I love to hear from the guys who do buy the really high end gear. But, I think once you get a good system for Home Theater, I'd put my money into better room setup, better picture technology and the like. Matter of fact, a great room setup, makes a lot of equipment sound good.

Its a different case for 2 channel audio. I don't listen much any more and I'm 98% Home Theater.

But, its really to each its own. I have many other hobbies besides HT and they all compete for resources.

Mike

Sonnie Parker · 10-09-2003, 04:04 PM

I can agree to a point... that point being that I've never owned the super duper high end stuff that would compare to Krell pricing.

I did own some very expensive McIntosh amps (~$4000), Snell B-Minors (~$3700), Snell surrounds (~$2000), Lexicon DC-1 (~$3000) back when.

Now I have the Rotel 1066, PSB Image speakers, and a Sunfire Cinema Grand that cost several thousand less and I can honestly say it sounds as good, probably better than my previous system.

Heath_E · 10-09-2003, 04:29 PM

The law of diminishing return definitely exists in my opinion. Same as trying to squeeze more and more horsepower out of an engine(my other expensive hobby). The argument is, at what point do the two lines start to curve dramatically in opposite directions. Much easier to figure out when dealing with horsepower, do to it's completely non-subjective nature. Unfortunately, there is no dyno machine for sound quality.

BTW, I couldn't agree more with MikeRP about room setup. It is one of the most important elements of sound quality, and gets ignored far too often. I guarantee that crappy room acoustics will cause the cost/performance ratio to drop off sharply.

**HTF Ads**

Rich Wenzel · 10-09-2003, 06:09 PM

I also agree that room setup is extremely important. but i live in an apartment in NYC, so i am fairly limited in what I can do...

Rich

Cary P · 10-09-2003, 06:58 PM

I agree 100% - putting more money into the 2 channel signal chain is definitely a better investment in the long run.

Of course, this approach depends greatly on one's priorities - most of the people I know spend very little time to sit down and intently listen to music - they are using their systems mainly for TV, DVD's, and gaming.

But in my case, I routinely spend hours just sitting and listening to music, and have found that I've gotten way more bang for the buck spending money on the 2 channel signal chain. I bought a 2 channel tube-based preamplifier with a HT bypass about two years ago, and it has allowed me to really enjoy my system to it's fullest without constantly worrying about having the latest and greatest home theater receiver or processor.

I've been through quite a few mid-level home theater receivers and processors over the last three or four years, eventually returning them all. It always seems that it would be best to just wait for the next model with all of the latest processing, or perhaps a new pre/pro coming out that might finally get it right in terms of connection options, system operation/bass management, useable remote, upgradeability, etc., etc. I'm still waiting for that perfect home theater product to come along, but am always left with a vaguely unsatisfied feeling.

The whole process has left me quite reluctant to drop a lot of money on a home theater receiver or processor, so instead I've gradually put a bit of money into my 2 channel signal chain - power cords, conditioners, interconnects, upgrading the vinyl rig, various other tweaks - and have been a lot more satisfied with the results.

Lately, I've been researching products such as the Anthem AVM20, Rotel 1098, Parasound Halo C2, B&K Ref 50, Integra DTC-9.4, and they all seem like fine products which I'm sure sound really great. But for my priorities and needs, I can't help but believe that I would get perhaps 90% of the home theater sound quality, and in some cases, MORE system functionality by going with a product such as the Pioneer Elite VSX-55TXi or Marantz SR-8300 at one half to one third the price.

So I've concluded that, when strictly considering home theater applications, a $500-$1500 receiver/processor will likely give almost all of the functionality and sound quality needed for the vast majority of users.

Some of those $2500 and up flagship receivers and processors are mighty tempting - and I will probably spring for one some day - but I agree that the law of diminishing returns definitely applies at that price point.

Craig_Kg · 10-09-2003, 11:19 PM

I agree with you 100% as well. This is why I keep advising people to only buy a mid range receiver (basically the cheapest one with the format feature set, connnections + preouts) and use it has a prepro or semi prepro with a stereo setup for the front channels.

Plus a really good sub.

Cagri · 10-10-2003, 02:43 AM

An off topic question Rich, how is the sound insulation of the apartment you live in? I used to live in a flat in a converted house and then in an apartment in both of which I was never able to listen to music at high volumes. I hear that apartments in NY are built with very thin interior walls. I'm really surprised to see people living in apartments with beefy systems and curious if you guys can justify the capabilities of your components ?