Just Bought A New Av Receiver - At A Steal!

[Jase71]

eeewww compression :icon_vomit:

Oh c'mon, you can't tell me that MP3 format is as rich as the equivalent from album source ?

Maybe those silly HR Geiger speakers you have you eye on are the trick - to divert one's attention away from the richness of the actual music :beerbang:

 

[komodo]

I dont suppose anyone knows much about the Onkyo TX-SR605....I might be able to get my hands on one second hand at a good price...if I can bargain the right price that is...any idea how much they are worth? (under $500 SH?)

Other wise I am contemplating the following:

- Sony 3400ES - $900
- Onkyo 606 - $998
- Yamaha 1800 - $990

Only real down fall I can see with the 605 is it only has 2 HDMI inputs.

I really wouldnt worry about the fact that it only has two HDMI inputs as long as your display has enough as you can always use optical or coax out - its still digital and HDMI is no better or worse at carrying the signals than optical or coax - hdmi is just a more simple connection. You can always do your switching via a decent programable remote (I like the logitechs as they are cheap, easy to use and most importantly - they work).

You need to sit down decide what you need to connect. I dont see too many people requiring more than 2 hdmi inputs any way. Even so you can do external HDMI switching should you need more than say 2 on your TV and 2 on your AV reciver. IMO going straight into the TV and then out via optical is more flexible anyway. Just my 2c

Sony I dont like. I know sony has some awesome gear in the profield but imo their consumer products are over priced let downs and IO most certainly dont like their amplifiers - so IMO unless your using it purely as a preamp I wouldnt bother.

IMO the 605 is a good reciever and if you can get one under $500 jump on it!

The Yamaha would be my pick of the bunch but thats a personal bias towards yamaha products.

Jase as for your AR-4x's I probably would just scout the hard rubbish days - they were a common speaker and their pretty ordinary at best. The cross overs were crude - the box design was poor and the speaker drivers have no mechanical control particularly now as most examples will have coroded surrounds and sagging spiders. Many will have been poled out due to the lack of mechanical suspension. Not meaning to rain on your parade but unfortunately a perfect example with renovated crossovers will be worth about $80 They simply arent a very desirable speaker.
How ever if you have your heart set on repairing them you could see if you could find the specs for the bass driver and I'll see if I can recomend a suitable replacement. The other option is to give me the internal dimensions and I can use a bit of harris tech software to recomend a replacement - though this will most likely result in your cross overs needing to be rebuilt (unless you can get me the component values also).

Other wise take a look at a WES components catalogue or browse the partsexpress.com website and see if there is a driver on there that takes you fancy - you'll want high efficiency, low x-max and low power handelling as a rough guide. Its still going to be a punt but might be a "cheaper" option.

 

[komodo]

Compression is horrible - but the simple fact of the matter is very few people can pic a high bitrate MP3 from the original unless they are doing back to back critical listening

 

[Ducatiboy stu]

Oh c'mon, you can't tell me that MP3 format is as rich as the equivalent from album source ?

Maybe those silly HR Geiger speakers you have you eye on are the trick - to divert one's attention away from the richness of the actual music :beerbang:

HR Geiger speakers..never heard of them

I have my eye on B&W Nautilus... :icon_cheers:

 

[Jase71]

I've never ran them, and only heard a heavily refurbished pair once in the past and they were in a studio setting against a control set of powered monitors - and came through splendidly by comparison, albiet running through commercial equipment. It would be a shame to throw away a good couple of real wooden boxes though.

I thought they were a pretty reputable set back in the '70's as an 'entry-level' audiophile range.

What do you mean by 'mechanical control'? There's a variable pot at the back of the cabs which I beleive controls the top or mid range to customise room depth on these ones.

anyway, if they're not worth spending the money on, I won't bother. But it seems a shame to throw a pair of solid boxes away.

 

[Jase71]

Compression is horrible - but the simple fact of the matter is very few people can pic a high bitrate MP3 from the original unless they are doing back to back critical listening

It's a good point, but when one's ears are tuned to nuances, even a 320k compression is obvious. Of course there's the arguement of comparison (or back to back critical listening). It;s a shame that so much music is heard these days in an inferior format, or via inferior amplification. I'm not professing to be an audiophile, but there's minimum standards that I like to consider. Someone downloading an album as an MP3, listening to it through some tinny 'active speaker' setup (even with a woofer box) via their PC's sound output (if it's not audio specific) is a whole lot different than plugging the same compressed audio through a dedicated audio output and into a Hi-Fi amplifier, and delivered via soundwaves with attention to frequencies via a chosen speaker lineup. It's not even about being anal, it's just physics, really.

 

[komodo]

Jase I dont believe there is a direct driver replacement
I think something like this http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.c...tnumber=264-330 "might" be a reasonable drop in replacement.
Its been a while since I've heard AR speakers so I might be barking up the wrong tree. If memory serves me right they had a typical east coast sound as such something from the likes selenium or eminence sould produce a "similar" sound.
Obviously there are a great deal of variables.

Look just cause I dont like them doesnt mean they arent worth renovating. I dont know where you would go in sydney - ive used the services of total recoil (melbourne) in the past with varied success. They seem to have a great following with enthusiasts but my thoughts are that there are far better speakers around and "I" wouldnt bother.

Are you sure the cabinets are solid wood? solid wood generally isnt a good material for making speaker cabinets out of. Birch ply, MDF and chipboard are generally the preffered options.

 

[bum]

Some of you guys (possibly all) are using the term "compression" incorrectly. Compression of audio relates to dynamic range (compression of the actual peaks and troughs (so to speak) of the soundwaves). When you're talking about compression and MP3s all you are talking about is data compression - this cannot be heard. The faults in MP3s are to do with the format's inability to reproduce higher frequencies (upper level dependant on sampling rate but none go as high as that which can be reproduced).

 

[Jase71]

Komodo, are you either an American or at least familiar with 60's & 70's rock ? The "East Coast Sound" comment has me intrigued! :icon_cheers:

Anyway, it's all good food for thought. WHile I'm not entirely happy with the way my present combo represents the sounds I like to hear, I do feel there's some muddiness that can be overcome. But I should reconsider a refurbishment of the vintage AR's and perhaps look at a 'ready to rock' pair of speakers when my budget allows.

Some of you guys (possibly all) are using the term "compression" incorrectly. Compression of audio relates to dynamic range (compression of the actual peaks and troughs (so to speak) of the soundwaves). When you're talking about compression and MP3s all you are talking about is data compression - this cannot be heard. The faults in MP3s are to do with the format's inability to reproduce higher frequencies (upper level dependant on sampling rate but none go as high as that which can be reproduced).

Bum, I could argue/discuss this better face-to-face, because my limited basic technical terminology does not extend to the written word. But I equally agree & disagree with you. Let's take a step back from the end-album production. If you were to analyse the sound inputs when recording music in an analogue studio, you will indeed find that the waveforms round out nicely, whereas (early) digital recording equivalents are seen to have an 'upper ceiling' in the waveform where the wave is 'clipped' at the upper & lower ranges. So this is the dynamic range, right ?

As far as data compression is concered, I have not performed spectrum analysis testing to establish the 'why', but when put to my shonky organic equivalent (that is, my ears & my evaluative mind), find that the specifics within a peice of mucis aren't allowed to shine, and every element is fighting to rise to the top of the mix, in most cases with disasterous results. I've done my own comparative tests, taking a CD form an artist that I consider to have a good grasp of the recording process in the modern age, then ripping it to the highest bit-rate as MP3, then transferring that to a CD, so I can compare the official release to the burned copy. And for my ears, it typically falls short for atmosphere.

This alll could be irrelevant, depending on who is listening, and what you are listening to. But I've done the tests in environmnents of 'Home Hi-Fi" and at a mate's place with "Vintage Studio" and in just about all cases, the data-compression track in a back-to-back test can be determined in a blind test.

 

[bum]

What you are saying is essentially correct but it has nothing to do with compression.

Out of interest, can you describe how you have the lexicon hooked up to the bits on either end of it?

 

[Jase71]

What you are saying is essentially correct but it has nothing to do with compression.

Out of interest, can you describe how you have the lexicon hooked up to the bits on either end of it?

Yea, good query. I can already see the theoretical downfall, because it's not firewire. And FFS this is an issue with latency when I try and record instruments through it. Anyway, pick it apart, it still sounds better than straight up....

For MP3 Audio Playback: PC > USB > Lexicon > TRS L/R > RCA L/R >Amp IN

 

[bum]

So you're not using the pre-amps on the Lexicon? So basically your set up's advantage is that you're using the Lexicon for D/A conversion instead of a (presumably) shitty soundcard. Cool.

 

[komodo]

Two different forms of compression thats correct - but its still compression.
And it can definately be heard no matter what the experts tell you in your latest PC magazine. Most people are just ignorant to it and are happy to accept compressed tracks to play on their iPods and department store stereo "hifi" systems

Compression of dynamics is a totally different kettle of fish and is done at mix down and mastering stages. Its actually "limiting" and expanding to reduce the dynamic range to increase the perceived volume - well no thats not entirely true. Its used to "regulate" the amplitude. Theres more to it than that but I'll have to sit back and think how to explain it.

Compression of *.wav files to MP3 limits dynamic range as well as frequency range. If you actually analyse a compressed format even lossless formats are only mathmatically lossless and they contain virtually no information for frequncies over 12kHz which to some might seem like no big deal because there are virtually no fundementals over about 7kHz - but there is a great deal of harmonics and for instruments like triangles and cymbals with no real fundimental frequency theres a lot of information up this high. Then when you get to the bottom end and you lose all the bottom end information you loose a great deal of the life and power of "big" sounds. This is a massive issue you notice if your used to a GOOD system with a subwoofer capable of getting down to at least 25Hz.
Also compressing audio introduces artifacts into the compressed track which arent present on the original.

I've been playing with audio since I was about 8 or 9. I've never been good at playing an instrument so ive focused my attention to sound reinforcement and reproduction. As such I've worked in large format live sound reinforcement and become a hobbiest in speaker designing and building. I've also judged a national car audio sound quality format as well as having the opportunity to listen to some top level IASCA competitors vehicles. I can honestly say in my experiance there is big differences between MP3 (or what ever compressed formats) and CD audio

 

[komodo]

No Jase not an american but the east coast, west coast and english sounds are well documented. Most people who like 60-70's rock preffer the english and east coast sounds. I preffer the english sound.
West coast sound is also often called the "american" sound. They are just terms to descibe tonal similarities between certain speakers. Obviously certain tonal characteristics were more prevailent in certain regional areas.

Using a decent DAC makes a big difference.

 

[barclayton]

wow, with that sort of amp. you better be running monster cables.

 

[Jase71]

Dude, the lexicon is an active pre-amp, when it's powered and inline. To the point that I can plug end-mixing inserts into it if I wanted to (or, um, had any LOL). Do you know the Lambda ? You know it's not of the 'studio' ilk of the earlier Lexicon 'rack' range, but a little box that costs a few hundred bucks, yea ?

I'm not arguing the greatness of the Lambda, I simply outlined what I was running when I listen to music that's not on album, ie MP3. But if I tapped into the little headphone plug from my PC's onboard soundcard and into the amp, it's very clearly a different quality. In fact I can do it, and toggle between inputs, and the latter is shithouse by comparison.

 

[bum]

Two different forms of compression thats correct - but its still compression.

It is also compression when I squeeze my fermenter and the airlock bubbles - it does not mean it is the same thing. You are compressing different things therefore it is different compression.

And it can definately be heard no matter what the experts tell you in your latest PC magazine.

Or how about my latest degree from RMIT in Sound Design, you condescending arsehole?

Most people are just ignorant

Point proven, well and truly.

Compression of dynamics is a totally different kettle of fish and is done at mix down and mastering stages.

And recording. And even prior to the mic in many instances.

Its actually "limiting" and expanding to reduce the dynamic range to increase the perceived volume - well no thats not entirely true.

I'd go further than that - I'd say it isn't even true. "Limiting" is what may be referred to as infinite compression through using the highest ratio (although it is more practical to think of it as maximum compression). Expanding is the opposite of compression - it broadens dynamic range.

Its used to "regulate" the amplitude. Theres more to it than that but I'll have to sit back and think how to explain it.

I don't think that will be required but I'd quite like to read it none the less.

Compression of *.wav files to MP3 limits dynamic range as well as frequency range.

No, the format limits dynamic range and frequency. This data (as opposed to audio) compression does introduce artifacts but it is a different issue completely.

I've been playing with audio since I was about 8 or 9. I've never been good at playing an instrument so ive focused my attention to sound reinforcement and reproduction. As such I've worked in large format live sound reinforcement and become a hobbiest in speaker designing and building. I've also judged a national car audio sound quality format as well as having the opportunity to listen to some top level IASCA competitors vehicles.

Since cars are the ABSOLUTE WORST environment for critical audio reproduction I'm not sure how much bragging rights that garners. But good for you. I'm sure it's great but it doesn't mean shit in an arguement about sound quality.

I can honestly say in my experiance there is big differences between MP3 (or what ever compressed formats) and CD audio

Who said there wasn't?

 

[Jase71]

wow, with that sort of amp. you better be running monster cables.

Screw you, man.

Komodo, I can relate to a point, but I find characteristics to be misleading. Let me see if I follow:

Crosby, Stills & Nash - West Coast
Velvet Underground - East Coast
The Kinks - English Sound

yea, I know it's a bad generalisation, look at Zeppelin, they had a lot of 'West Coast' sound, perhaps the Stones - maybe southern US. And my fave band, being the early Jethro Tull from 67 to 75, who pioretted between styles.

I do know what you mean, especially with "West Coast" sound though. But I like a lot of English Progressive Kinda defies genre.

 

[bum]

Dude, the lexicon is an active pre-amp, when it's powered and inline. To the point that I can plug end-mixing inserts into it if I wanted to (or, um, had any LOL). Do you know the Lambda ? You know it's not of the 'studio' ilk of the earlier Lexicon 'rack' range, but a little box that costs a few hundred bucks, yea ?

I'm pretty sure you'll find the pre-amp is actually for the mic ins. A pre-amp doesn't know what to do with the ones and zeros from the USB. Once the DA converter has done it's job it is already at line level and ready to go to the line out. Do the gain pots do anything to your sound, or just the level pots?

I'm not arguing the greatness of the Lambda, I simply outlined what I was running when I listen to music that's not on album, ie MP3. But if I tapped into the little headphone plug from my PC's onboard soundcard and into the amp, it's very clearly a different quality. In fact I can do it, and toggle between inputs, and the latter is shithouse by comparison.

I'm not having a go at it. Lexicon make GREAT A/D-D/A converters.

 

[komodo]

Komodo, I can relate to a point, but I find characteristics to be misleading.

Yeah I get where you coming from - but it actually relates more to the characteristics of the speakers - not really anything to do with the music.


Dude all I can say to you is chill the heck out.
Whilst I may not have a piece of paper that says I know any thing (hell I dropped out of school in yr 11 - schools not my thing). I did work in the industry for a number of years. Throwing around the fact that you have a degree in the pro sound arena wont win you many freinds. Most of the guys I've worked with bumping in rigs have no formal schooling what so ever. I'm not saying theres anything wrong with having schooling - all im saying is that you shouldnt use it as a "one up" on other people. Heck I still get calls from a mate who did the RMIT course asking me questions when he's stuck - why? cause I have the hands on experience. Just like I call him when I have a problem I'm not sure of - our skills and areas of knowledge allow us to compliment one another. I'm sure in time the balance will weigh more in his favour as he will have the theoretical knowledge and will gain the real world experiance. Plus I've since basically stepped out of the industry to earn real money and a decent living without the sucky hours.

As for your comments about the automotive environment - your right. The automotive environment is one of the worst environments any one will come across for reproducing quality music - hence the attraction to the challenge. I guess thats why many respected audio brands such as Kef, Focal, Morel, Peerless, JL, Cerwin Vega, JBL, Crown and Harmon Kardon etc invest large sums of money into the car audio arena for enthusiast. Many guys I know of from the car audio scene have far better systems in their car than their home because they spend 2-3 hour travelling every day and they never get that type of opportunity to spend that type of time at home listening to their favorite albums. Probably why many of these guys spend $20-30k on a sound system in their vehicles. I cant list too many people that I know who have invested that sort of money into home hifi. Obviously there are people who do I just dont know many of them.

By the way I'd suggest in future you dont quote people out of context - it wont win you any freinds.

Plus I'm a little confused as to WTF we're arguing. I actually thought we were agreeing? Other than you dont agree with my interpretation of what a compressor does. Which I have to be honest doesnt bother me. What I'm saying and how im writting it and then you are reading and interperating it - it may very well be getting lost in translation due to my poor explaination. Though I hardly see that as a reason to take to me like you did in your previous post.

Re the lexicon unit I can see where both of you are coming from. I would assume the lexicon is being used for volume control - ie a passive pre-"amp" which both you and I understand that gain control is a seperate entity to volume or level control we surely can agree that it is easy for someone with out proper understanding to get the two terms confused (no offence Jase)

Now I hope we're all cool and can shake hands, kiss and make up cause that seemed to get heated for no reason what so ever.

Cheers,
Komodo