I use a McIntosh MX123 pre-amp / surround processor with a BAT VK6200 amplifier. The processor selects the outputs according to the source and number of channels input. When I watch movies it’s surround sound, when I listen to music the system works in stereo. The BAT amplifier is really six, 180 watt, individual, independent, single-channel amplifiers in a card cage chassis. But, I’m satisfied with a mid-fi system. If you don’t need to play the extreme end of the audio world games, you can find a quite satisfying middle ground that will work for both video and music without needing separate systems. I know, on this website it’s total heresy...but someone had to inject a bit of sanity into the all-or-nothing approach to audio...
surround processor?
Where to go? Older Lyngdorf MP50, JBL SDP-55,Arcam AV40.Lexicon MC ( the cheapest)? Love to watch the movies but also listened to 2 channel stereo. Are there a big sound difference in those? Just the general advice please. Will probably look into second hand.
- ...
- 57 posts total
buckhorn_cortez that seems like a terrific system. I just don't understand why all multi channel systems have been strangely lumped together and classified as crap. Persoanlly I believe they can be fantastic when setup correctly and it is indeed the statement that is crap. How do you find the Audyssey? Mine sounds best when I limit correction to below 500Hz on all channels. |
you can find a quite satisfying middle ground that will work for both video and music without needing separate systems.Sure, but you can also have an even more satisfying system that gives you the best of both worlds in one system, if only you knew what you were doing. I just don't understand why all multi channel systems have been strangely lumped together and classified as crap.They’re not crap, but if you really care about better 2-channel sound reproduction there are compromises multichannel processors make that undermine achieving that end. If you’re happy with the stereo performance of an AVP or AVR then rock on and it’s all good. But if you’re looking to maximize 2-channel performance those compromises can be unacceptable, and for those people who can’t have two separate systems there is a viable alternative without having to compromise. All depends on what your end goals are. |
So what are the compromises multichannel processors make that undermine achieving that end? Surround processing is exceptionally suspectible to EMI and it is not all uncommon to see huge transformers so close they contaminate the process. The best solution is separate power supplies, but that's an impossibility that'll never happen. |
How do you find the Audyssey? Mine sounds best when I limit correction to below 500Hz on all channels.I have an open floorplan so there are no walls between the living area and kitchen, with a large opening into a transition space to the other side of the house. The acoustic space is tall (12 feet) and large counting the kitchen. The rear surround speaker placement is limited to specific locations. The Audyssey system has made it possible to tune the surround system for better surround sound. It is far more balanced than it was with a previous surround processor that did not have that function. Compared to no Audyssey processing, there is an easily identified audible improvement. Sure, but you can also have an even more satisfying system that gives you the best of both worlds in one system, if only you knew what you were doing. Admittedly, I obviously have no idea what I’m doing. However, I’m satisfied with the results of my ignorance since I can’t hear the difference in fuse direction, am not concerned about the "blackness" of my system (whatever that is). I’m also convinced that people who use music to listen to their components in the belief they can buy and confect a system that will give them "realistic" sound reproduction are delusional... |
- 57 posts total