Those that don't mention cables can usually use better ones. Blue Jeans Cable, Signal Cable, Kimber, Speltz, lots of inexpensive choices here.
26 responses Add your response
First, there's not enough information on your scenario to recommend changes. Simply recommending changes to ANY SYSTEM, without knowing all the variables that are involved, is like driving blind-folded! More info needed on your setup and life-style habits, I'm afraid.
I mean, what is your application and life-style with the system? Do you do movies only?...or what ratio to movies/music? Do you sit between the speakers, or do a multiple seating? Do you move around the house listening to music with the system, or are you always anchored in your seats. Do you rock and roll, or are you a low volume listener. What are the acoustics in your room like?
Personally and professionally, I don't see how anyone could possibly offer you remotely any kind of sound advice with what we know from the data you've presented!
It is quite posible, that with your setup, room, acoustics, lifestyle, and budget, that some of the pieces you have are excellent choices! Then again, they might be the worst ones also. Again, not enough info to assess. I, for one, would want to know more before I said, "do this upgrade, that change, or this modification, etc."
Can you tell us more, please???
Yes, I agree that I didn't give much info : ) sorry.
NAD NAD T-754 Multichamp
Denon DVD-2910 CD Player
Monster HTS-3600 AC filter
(2)Klipsch RF-3 Front Speaker
Klipsch RC-3 Center Channel
(2)Klipsch RS-3 Rear Speaker
Paradigm PDR-12 (SUBWOOFER)
Monster 400 HDMI Interconnect(DVD to TV-Video)
MIT Terminator 3 NT Interconnect(DVD to TV-Audio)
Analysis Plus, 2.5M Subwoofer Cable Interconnect
Monster Video 3 (Video), 3 Video Component Interconnect
Monster Toslink Interconnect
PS Audio C7 Power cord
PS Audio XStream Prelude Power cord
Monster Cable Z3 Reference Speaker cable
Isonodes Bright Star-Large ($20)-located under DVD player
Mitsibishi DLP 1080i only :) Bummer, no 1080p yet.....
About the room:
Size: 18' wide x 12' depth x 8' high
1-Large window 65" x 62"(located on right hand side of room on the 12' depth)
Pergo wood with 5'x8' shag rug located in front of couch and TV
1 leather couch with ottoman
1 leather chair with ottoman
The couch is positioned center to the TV (9ft)
The two speakers are 12 ft apart and slighty toed in.
The 2 surround are located on the rear wall approx. 5.5' ft high and are parallel to the front 2 speakers. The center channel speaker is located right below TV and tilted up slightly. Hope this helps with letting you know what my system looks like. I plan on taking some pics soon. Thanks for any feedback.
80%+ of my time in this room is watching movies/HD TV.
If your budget can handle around $2200 for front main speakers, you might consider the Martin-Logan Source. They have been widely raved about for transparency and overall performance for the money, and I suspect would provide a huge difference relative to just about any dynamic speaker that costs significantly less. I should say, though, that I have not heard them myself, and that I have no feel for how well they might mesh with the other speakers of your multi-channel av system.
I should add to my previous comment that the Source's are 8db less sensitive than your Klipsch's, with similar power handling capability. So if you typically use most or all of the volume capability of the Klipsch's, the Source's would not be suitable. Essentially, I would expect the Source's to give you better transparency, accuracy, and detailing, while sacrificing peak volume. Their bandwidth specs are pretty similar.
OK looks like your system is set up on the longer wall, which can likely help your cause somewhat, acoustically.
I pesonally like your Klipsch's in your system/setup, as they do so many things well for what you have going. They are focused, and VERY efficient and easy to drive with a reciever, and they match well with your NAD.
Klipsch's are traditionally a bit bright, but they match with the smooth NAD, your monster cabling (Don't listen to those "anti-cabling" nay sayers - lol), and you can tinker with toe-in and such for best sound. Basically, the Klipsch's are strong dynamically, and offer good detail for the money. I do like em for HT dubties in the right system.
Yes, you could change speakers for more refinement, but you might easily run into trade-offs and sacrifice CRUCIAL dyanamics, focus, and efficiency in a receiver based system, and simply be tading one improvment while sacrificing in another department. Basically, the Klipsch's, yes, are strong HT candidates for the money, IMO. So, I would say you're fine on the speakers for a movie system, if push comes to shove. I say this and I've some rather expensive speakers in the past, including the likes of Sonus Fabers, Infinity MTS's, Theil's, Merlin's, Dunlavy's, and other. I've also had the Klipsch's in my systems, yes. (although, as an audiophile purist, I like tube gear ideally with horn speakers)
I would say I'd recommend you might focus primarily on upgrading your projection system for more immediate impact/improvement to your system. Getting into Blue-ray and 1080p, with a good sized screen would be my goal, if it were me. I think you'd get the most boost in satisfaction from the system.
That all aside, as for those who are recommending against cable considerations, my 20 years around all this, and hours and hours of dealing with professional audio equipment engineers who think that cables don't matter, my experience is that their systems always sounded mediocre to poor, at best!
Yes, it all very much add's up, and should be considered - regardless of what short-sighted, biased engineers and novices might lead you to think...wires matter!
Yes, many of the Martin-Logan's have been particularly noted for their good looks. And the Source's, in particular, have an unusually small footprint for an electrostatic (or in this case, an electrostatic/dynamic hybrid), which help make them a good match for your room in terms of physical size.
In a 19 x 12 room, I would guess that you would never come close to the sound pressure levels that your 98db speakers are capable of, at least at their rated 225 watts. Pictures on the wall would be falling off their hooks, and you would be running for either the volume control or the exits!
But on the other hand your 70W amplifier is only capable of driving them to around 5 db less than that full volume capacity -- not a huge difference, but noticeable. So as I said, my main concerns with the Martin-Logan's, aside from price, would be whether their 90db sensitivity is sufficient (my guess is yes, but that's just a guess, without being familiar with what you listen to and how loud you play it), and how well they would blend with the other speakers in the setup.
Best of luck!
Re cables, for a good read that was written by a person who is both a noted authority and someone who sells (non-cable) product to both the audiophile and professional markets:
I think he does an excellent job of explaining why and how cables can and do sound different, while at the same time putting in proper perspective the nonsense and hype that tends to surround them.
"Re cables, for a good read that was written by a person who is both a noted authority and someone who sells (non-cable) product to both the audiophile and professional markets"
Oh oh! Looks like we gotta "cables do/don't matter" war brewin again!- lol.
For all the sides of that debate, just dig deeper into any audio forum, and I assure you you'll find one!
I've said it for years now..."show me someone who thinks that cables and wires don't make a sonic difference, and I'll show you some who's own system sounds mediocre to down right aweful at best!
I would name a few professional otherwise award winning engineer's names, but I won't to protect a few ego's. LOL!
That was good sensible link. Cables can and do sound different and perhaps we can all stop arguing about it. Some believe in mundane ordinary explanations for differences while some, who don't accept the science, feel more comfortable with specialist expensive cables which include additional assurances from manufacturers and use special materials.
I've posted a thread related to my suggestion, called "3 channel tube amp for home theater".
I understand the klipsch speakers to be very efficient. If you could use a low wattage SET or similar tube amp to power left and right front klipsch speakers, it is conceivable that you could get a RADICAL improvement in sound, whether for music or movies.
I just set up my new NAD avr and it sounds so much cleaner in both movies and 2 channel cd. There was always a slight hiss in my speakers before and now silence.....ahhhhhh. Can't compare to the $$$ gear on this site but pretty good for a young guy : ) Maybe I can go to seperates in a few years. Happy New Year!
No offense meant at all, but in your current configuration,
the NAD and its 60 watts per side, on paper sounds fine,
with 98db sensitive speakers.
However, experience has shown me that, that specification
is NOT a fair gauge for buying an amplifier that at the lowest
volume the Bass is tight and full.
Experience also has shown me that, generally speaking, the
more power, the better.
My PS Audio GCA-500 at 4 ohms produces 1000 watts per side.
The reality is, the 60 watt NAD Receiver will likely damage my speakers, long before the PS Audio powerhouse would.
At 1000 watts, the Klipsch can demand all the juice they
want, and then some; And the P.S. Audio amp. NEVER will come close to straining(clipping).
Meanwhile, the NAD, is working harder, by the absence of
tight bass,flowing mids,highs that are sometimes harsh, signs the Klipsch,are politely clipping.
250-300 watts I feel is minimum power, to get the smooth
yet tight sound they became famous for.
The Klipsch will sound much better with a better amplifier.
Get a Soundcraftsman of E-Bay for $250, the very Dynamic
375 watts watts per channel at 4 ohms.(1000 peak!)
The first 1-5 watts, are critical to the Klipsch.
I throw 1000 watts per side, and my Chorus II's NEVER
sounded better. Sure, a transistor radio will drive them,
but,there is NO substitute, for RAW Power! It's ALL about,
You will think You DID! Buy new speakers, with a amp.
that has real Power.
That NAD is not doing Justice to the Klipsch, IMHO that is.
I have had NAD, and Klipsch, people see the 98db. and go
Many Folks think I only need a 75watt Receiver/
WRONG!WRONG!WRONG! Not NAD, Kenwood, Yamaha etc...
Luxman 4000,Pioneer M-91, are 2 older amps. that ARE able,
to make the Klipsch perform better.
The better the amplifier,pre-amplifier, and C.D., all
Will improve the speakers you have.
Before You get rid of the Klipsch, at least hear them, the
way they were meant to be used.
Now You can improve Your "Source", pick up a better C.D. player,or at least try a DAC.
Even 2 Sony 55 E.S. in Mono at 300 watts,Bi-amped with one 300 watts for Highs,and the other 300 watts for the Lows; Can be had
off E-Bay, both for $200 or less!
Just Trust me, You have NOT heard Your Klipsch sound their Best.
Enjoy the Music!