Good Processor


I know this has been discussed before and have read most of the posts. However, I haven't seen one that addressed this question. For good stereo what is a better option? Going with an older high end pro like a meridian 861 version 2.8/4 or Halcro 100 OR buying a newer unit such as the Integra 80.2/3. If I purchased the Integra it would be easy to setup with little in cables given the HD audio formats. With the older units I would be processing HT in my Oppo and using the 5.1 output into the processor.
jamesw20

Showing 6 responses by tcatman

you write

HD codecs can output from bluray so that's not an issue.

I don't understand your point.
So for a 7.1 system... you would need 7 high quality 1 meter interconnects.
That is not an issue?

And you won't have base management. (per Kr4) and that is not an issue?

If you don't care about the HD codecs...I could understand... For example... you want to run standard Dolby from your cable provider and rarely punch in a bluray.

I see these processors as computers (and just like PCs.. the life cycle is now closer to 5 years then new every 2) we are just now coming to the point where the technology improvements (room correction and high res formats) has slowed to the point where budget minded audiophiles > videophiles can enter and expect the value to last a bit.
Jdlynch can offer the best input here!

He evaluates the high quality multichannel analog stage of the lexicon as superior to the digital + analog of the marantz.

What he does not address is the value of room correction in his setup. The killer question is what is his room like acoustically and will bass management help or even be needed. Perhaps he has an ideal room and his bass management needs are trivial and so he really can't offer much. Perhaps, the Marrantz and full DSP never quite matched the Lexicon?

Finally, how does jdlynch (or anyone really) listen for optimal bass management... do you focus on your Two channel listening... OR do you evaluate the sound listening to multichannel blu ray sound.

For instance, if he is judging the marantz versus the lecicon on the basis of two channel music without a sub...
that might not be what you are looking for (opinion wise)
For example, your mains could desperately need the sub for that low base extension for music.

You make the point that your speakers are revealing... I read that as the speakers and your room are revealing.. what I don't know is what that actually means to you... (base extension, smoothness in the mids to highs, imaging, and all of those acoustic signatures) As you optimize the value in your upgrade choices... consider your gold standard.

IMO, the gold standard becomes a discrete two channel system with full range speakers in an acoustically treated room for the vast amount of music. Adding a video display changes the acoustics and so you start making compromises just by adding the flat panel. So, what tradeoffs make sense for your room and budget as you add in the other components given what you currently have and want to keep .... this is great fun!

I suggest you keep asking questions of others and yourself.
The great mystery to me is the value of room correction versus how your speakers perform and the nature of your room.

I am always looking for some wisdom here... Sadly, I don't have the budget to experiment for my self (sigh..... grin)!

What I follow is the advice that assuming you have good full range mains.. then you are best served with a discrete two channel system with HT bypass and then add an AV receiver or processor for the HT.

Then of course, you start looking at the other boxes you could add... (Analog Turntable), Music streamer, PC media server for high res music, Stand alone DAC cabled to your network, DAC wireless to your network. What about multihchannel content on your Media server...

My practice is... I tend to not punch in blue ray disks (hardly ever) .... and don't care enough about the video/sound to do more then watch the HD cable feed and plain vanilla 5.1 on movie content. I care a lot about the two channel music tho.
Back to the issue for Jdlynch and James20. (and to get some clarity in this discussion.)

Do JD and James take the room correction software approach... some flavor of Audessy (which is beside the point... IF)
Or...
do they choose to stay old school and get high quality but technologically dated analog system gear. (They lean this way now)

These two individuals seem to think that their highly resolving speakers minimize the need for DSP processing in the signal chain. Is this opinion widely shared???

What should they listen for as they evaluate the two approaches... (that they might be overlooking right now)

What is the advice for
say you for two channel music... no sub... full range speakers.

what say audiogon for 5.1 (Or more) music with the high resolution codecs.

What do you listen for to evaluate the DSP treatment or not?

Bo1972 is completely in the Audessy Pro camp.... He would argue that ANY high res system is improved by his measurement based approach to the room. Kr4 seems to minimize the advantages of the Pro treatment... (or at least how Bo1972 writes about it)
The issue raised was... what processor for two channel listening given full range, "highly revealing speakers"

The OP asks..
For good stereo what is a better option? Going with an older high end pro like a meridian 861 version 2.8/4 or Halcro 100 OR buying a newer unit such as the Integra 80.2/3.

So... working through the Audyssey site... It turns out that only MultEQ XT32 will process the main LR channels along with the sub. Every other Audyssey product processes the surrounds and sub only. (I did not recognize this limitation... no wonder I was never impressed by the RC treatment listening to two channel music)

Now I understand bo's post
10 years ago I always had big 2-channel highend systems without a sub. We sold the more expensive Rel sub's. But for me they were too slow and I did not like the focus wenn it was used. XT-32 was the first system I found 2 channel with a sub good enough to use for myself. Before roomcorrection I was never interested in a sub for stereo use. ......

This recommendation fits my current setup where my classic Kef 104's need a bit of low frequency extension but integrating the sub is problematic and never as good as full range modern speakers. XT-32 is the Audessy soln to my needs of integrating the sub with my mains for 2.1 and managing my room acoustics in a WAF manner.... (the 5.1 listening improvement is just gravy)

The old advice of using a sub with your two channel listening so that your mains were easier to drive (but of course the limits of how well you could integrate the sub with monitors remained) can now be upgraded. DSP processing of the Main LR and sub using Audessy XT-32 is a big jump in technology and can improve your two channel plus.1 listening in the room that you have... (Not to mention your mulitchannel listening experience)

Are many people using XT-32 for critical listening of 2.1 music? Probably a separate thread!

what does this mean from Audessy's web site

MultEQ
Our standard resolution room correction solution that uses mid-level resolution filters for satellites and subwoofers.

MultEQ XT
Our advanced resolution room correction solution with high resolution equalization filters for satellites and subwoofers.

I may be wrong... but that is not what the web site implies.

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?bhome&1358429802&openflup&41&4#41
I am still confused... I reread the following in the Audessy web site. (see below) What am I missing Kr4?

They claim that xt32
The ultra high resolution filters are applied to all channels including the subwoofers

while the processing for their entry product
that uses basic resolution filters for the satellites, but does not apply a filter to the subwoofers

See below for the complete text from their web page....

The mortal reader would conclude . ..only xt32 will digitally process the LR mains and subwoofer. I infer that xt32 has some macro that applies the settings for 2.1 redbook listening...
So.. What should I look at on their website..
(Inquiring minds would also like to know what kind of chip would process high resolution blu ray audio for all of the channels at the resolution they are claiming...IN REAL TIME..)


MultEQ XT32
Our newest and most accurate room correction solution with more than ten thousand individual control points allowing finer details of the roomÂ’s problems to be captured and corrected. The ultra high resolution filters are applied to all channels including the subwoofers, with the most obvious benefit being heard in the low frequency range where correction is needed the most.
MultEQ XT
Our advanced resolution room correction solution with high resolution equalization filters for satellites and subwoofers. Most products with MultEQ XT are installer-ready and can be calibrated by an Audyssey Registered Installer to provide even higher performance for even the most demanding large or odd-shaped rooms.

MultEQ
Our standard resolution room correction solution that uses mid-level resolution filters for satellites and subwoofers.
2EQ
Our basic resolution room correction solution that uses basic resolution filters for the satellites, but does not apply a filter to the subwoofers.