arjun
Auditioning
- Joined
- May 2, 2006
- Messages
- 9
Hi,
I am trying to decide between the two on purely HT performancewise. I have a separate all tube music rig so I am not concerned about the 2ch performance of my HT system. I can find the ref 50 for about $1200 used and a little less for a new 3806. I have a B&K 5 channel separate amp and my system would be 5.1 only as I dont have any room for 7.1 speakers. Does the Ref 50 perform better than the 3806 in HT? I like the idea of multiEQ for room equilization as I strongly feel that average components in a properly setup room will sound better than super components setup in a poorly setup room. Does the B&K offer the same room eq flexibility even if its a manual procedure. I am not averse to using the SPL meter and seting up my room. I know the new Ref 50 offers 3 notch filters with variable widths etc but will it get to the same level of room correction as the 3806's Audyssey multiEQ correction?
Please help me decide.
Thanks in advance.
I am trying to decide between the two on purely HT performancewise. I have a separate all tube music rig so I am not concerned about the 2ch performance of my HT system. I can find the ref 50 for about $1200 used and a little less for a new 3806. I have a B&K 5 channel separate amp and my system would be 5.1 only as I dont have any room for 7.1 speakers. Does the Ref 50 perform better than the 3806 in HT? I like the idea of multiEQ for room equilization as I strongly feel that average components in a properly setup room will sound better than super components setup in a poorly setup room. Does the B&K offer the same room eq flexibility even if its a manual procedure. I am not averse to using the SPL meter and seting up my room. I know the new Ref 50 offers 3 notch filters with variable widths etc but will it get to the same level of room correction as the 3806's Audyssey multiEQ correction?
Please help me decide.
Thanks in advance.