Trying to build a nice 2.1 system (5.1 Receiver) (1 Viewer)

Hi all,
I've grown frustrated with the sub par performance of HTiB and 2.1 systems so I've decided to make my own powerful 2.1 system (my current room is to small for 5.1 IMO just sounds messy.)
I really just need input on everything sub speakers and receiver.
This is what I picked out so feel free to disagree or offer differ suggestions. That's why I am here.
Trying to keep it around 700 for everything.
Speakers:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882290204
or
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882290202
Sub:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882290130
or
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882290036
The Receiver I am not to sure of? I'd like one that has fully adjustable equalizer not just "treb, mid, bass" I was looking at a 5.1 or 7.1 ONKYO?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882120178&nm_mc=EMC-EXPRESS051212&cm_mmc=EMC-EXPRESS051212EMC-051212-IndexReceivers82120178-L03C
please help me out!

Sub - Instead of those, get a BIC F-12. Same price range and more performance.
Why do you want an full EQ? 5 band? 7 band? 33 band? Most auto calibration systems will adjust the sound for the flattest response possible.

I don't really know? about the eq I am used to 10 I think? from car stereos. I just like the options of tweaking it how I want.

I also like to tweak the eq settings but not too far from the automatic settings. Harman Kardon is the only receiver brand (that I know of) that doesn't allow you to set the internal equilizer manually. Denon, Marantz and Onkyo all use the same system-Audyssey-which can be set manually or automatically (or both). I'm sure Yamaha's YPAO can also be set manually. Pioneer's Advanced MCACC offers the most user adjustmants with 6 presets (like having 6 seperate eq's in one receiver) which can be copied from one preset to another. Look for a good deal on last years 1021. Walmart .com sells the Elite VSX-40 for $279 but Pioneer won't honor the warranty as Walmart isn't an authorized dealer. But the Onkyo's have more band (15) than the others but check the manuals to confirm. Ac4l sells factory refurbed Denon's, Maratz and Onkyo's http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/category/avreceiver/Home-Audio/Home-Theater-Receivers/1.html
Polk Monitors are great for a HT system at a good value but if you're looking for a real good 2.1 system then consider higher quality bookshelves to go with that BIC F12 (not either Polk sub ), something like these Energy RC-10's ($255 + sh) http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/clearance/542469405/energy-rc10 They're open box from Vanns clearance center
Or these Mourdant-Short Aviano 1 ($225 shipped) http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/MORDAVI1RW/Mordaunt-Short-Aviano-1-Two-way-5-Bookshelf-Speaker-Pair-Rosewood/1.html
On ebay are a pair of used Phase Technology Teatro 6.5's for $149 shipped. Someone needs to get those before I do.

Do you tweak by ear or use some type of RTA to set it? I ask because one of the missions of this forum is to advocate accurate reproduction of the movie soundtrack as well as the video content. That means a flat frequency response (or relatively flat) from 20hz to 20,000hz in your room. That doesn't mean the EQ is flat though. Your room plays a huge part in the frequency response and the EQ is there to correct it.
Also, you would need 3 channels of EQ as opposed to the standard 2 channel EQ in most stereos. If your receiver doesn't have enough channels of EQ then you will either have to upgrade the receiver or go with outboard EQs and amps. Your cost for that will be in the thousands.
Why don't you go with a basic receiver with auto calibration and decent speakers? You will be amazed at how good a setup like the one you have picked out will sound.

First off, I always set my receivers up with music in mind first. Movis, I'm not so critical of. And while I understand what Robert is saying, the fact is I've never used a receivers automatic room correction that sounded perfect to me without a little tweaking. They also all work a bit differently. If they all work differently then it stands to reason they will all come up with different results. So which one is right? In my opinion, none of them. Several times I've immediately re-run the setup routine and the eq settings were a bit different than they were the first time. So which one was correct? I don't know either. I've had several receivers over the years, all the well known brands except for Yamaha and have never been completely satisfied with the room correction of any of them (but an H/K 435 was pretty close :yum: ). But some people prefer a warmer sound, some a brighter sound. That's why we all like different speakers. And we probably all hear things differently as well. Some of us don't hear the top end as well as others, MCACC has no way of knowing that. Personally, I don't hear quite as well from my right ear as I do from my left so I always have to up the db's on the right side a bit.
Bottom line is, we're all different. We like different things and we hear things differently. It may be the Forums mission to aspouse a flat frequency response but it's my mission to set up my equipment so it sounds the best to me, not to Audyssey or MCACC. And that means a little tweaking .

Ithink those Polks will be great for the price.

gene c said:

Bottom line is, we're all different. We like different things and we hear things differently. It may be the Forums mission to aspouse a flat frequency response but it's my mission to set up my equipment so it sounds the best to me, not to Audyssey or MCACC. And that means a little tweaking .

Click to expand...

I was just trying to make sure he didn't go with the "smiley face" EQ settings like I did in 1985.

"Smiley Face " We all used to do that. I wonder why that was
Sorry if I let my frustration rear it's ugly head but I spent most of the afternoon trying to setup a Marantz 5005 and Audyssey just ain't doing it for me. These things seem to work for everyone but me! I ran Audyssey 3 times and while the results were fairly consistant the eq just didn't make sense. In "Audyssey" mode the low frequencies were very eggagerated and in "Flat" mode the 8K and 16K were raised 4-6 db for each speaker (ouch!). Either way it's un-listenable. Thankfully this thing belongs to someone else and soon I'll be able to put my Pioneer back in the rack. Marantz is a fine receiver but me and this 5005 just ain't gettin' along.

“1980’s Smiley Face equalization”, +1. I bet I still have that graphic equalizer in the garage somewhere.
I didn’t realize it was so widespread; I think we need a poll. Kind of ironic since now we usually don’t even get bass & treble on the receiver’s front panel anymore.

I had boom and sizzle with my EQ. It was a 12 band connected through the tape look of my 40w/channel Technics. I had a pair of Sears speakers but when you took the drivers out, they were really made by Fisher. They looked like a cheaper version of the Realistic Mach 1. They whole system was stolen during my freshman year of college.

I had two stereo systems stolen from my apartment in my early years. I don't remember a thing about the first one but maybe Sound Design?. 7-8 months later they hit me again after I had replaced everything. I should have figured that might happen. The second one was a receiver/cassette tape unit that actually wasn't that bad for the times. Bought it at Radio Shack. I have no idea what speakers I was using for either system. I then went to Macy's and bought a Fisher receiver (with the new digital display! Cool ) and a pair of Fisher 12" speakers. The receiver had a built in 5 band eq which un-doubtedly was wearing a smile . That was 1981 when Macy's was named "Electronics Retailer Of The Year!" Boy how things have changed. I used that setup for almost 20 years. The receiver is still going strong in my brothers garage.

How about these 2 components?
Speakers
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882981007&nm_mc=EMC-IGNEFL052212&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL052212EMC-052212-IndexHomeAudioSpeakers82981007-L031C
Subwoofer
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882780078&nm_mc=EMC-IGNEFL052212&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL052212EMC-052212-IndexHomeAudioSpeakers82780078-L031B
better worse?
Also any help on what kind of receiver I should get?

Those ML speakers are 4 ohm so you need a receiver that can drive them properly. Most receivers are rated for 8 ohm. A few of the more expensive models will drive a 6 ohm load. Fewer and more expensive models drive a 4 ohm load.
The Epik Legend will outperform that Klipsch - http://www.epiksubwoofers.com/legend.html

Well the Klipsch is only 299 right now? I thought that would be a great deal.
crap about the speakers!
I really need a good direction on a receiver

299 is a deal but not a great deal. It depends on if you are willing to pay for performance.
There's a receiver section here at HTF that can help.

So we have established the Polk monitors are a decent speaker? I am assuming they will sound far superior to the small 3" mids from my 2.1 systems. as much as I would like to go all out on this I am trying to keep the prices down. (for my long term well being, I buy enough toys... =P) If I sell both my 2.1 systems they should cover either the speakers and most of the receiver leaving me only having to pay for a new sub.

Looking at this BIC eviction sub woofer anyone know if its better or worse then the regular BIC sub?
http://www.amazon.com/BIC-Eviction-RTR-EV1200-Front-Firing-Subwoofer/dp/B003H3G5D8

I have never heard of that BIC model. I'd stick with a known model unless you can afford to lose $220.

I have had good luck with the nht bookshelf speakers. Specifically the absolute zeros good sound for the size of the speaker