dadfey

I found the MX 500 easy to program, easy to use, and inexpensive. What could be better?

As you can see I love the M&K, they are awesome. To each his own.

I bought the digital, it works fine. I don't think there is much of a difference. For my purposes either one would have worked fine, I bought the more expenive digital one only because it cost only $10 - $20 more.

I have the Denon 4800 and love it. I had a Yamaha before this. I decided on power and features as I did not notice a significant sould difference between similarly priced components. I like the reciever approach for simplicity. I know this may sound like heresey to many on this site, no klipsch pun intended, but every time I audition equipment I need to get to the Krell, read unaffordable level, to notice any differences. At this point I cannot justify the cost. I tend to get the second from the top from "Good" companies so I can replace equipment with newer models without feeling guilty. My only exception has been my Klipsch horns which I like as much now as I did twenty years ago when I bought them.

I have the Denon 3800. It has been excellent. I looked at the 9000 but could not justify the increased cost. In general I find the second best of a "good" line is plenty good for me. If I spend more I can never justify an "newer" model. The 9000 costs $3,500, I think, the 3800 was $1,200 list and I paid $900. I use this primarily for home theater and like everything about it.

I have the same problem. I would have loved to use a Belle as the center, the preferred approach, but as you also noticed it is to big to be practical. I thought about using a Heresy in the middle but decided it was also quite large. I believe I originally chose the C7 as it was recommended by Klipsch. I did not know about the timbre match problem until I read about it on this web site. I love the sound overall, so I pretend not to have read about the "problem" of timbre matching... "ignorance is bliss"

I have used Denon and Yamaha for 20 years without any problems. It is easy to use a well known, well respected brand. I'd like to own Krell but can not afford it. Other than that huge step, the differences I have noted are marginal. (and I like the look, sound, and dependibility of Denon)

Thanks for the input. What would you say to my using my Heresy's as the center. If this is not good I will see if I can get a cabinet made to raise the TV and replace the KLF C-7 with the Belle. To be honest I have not been satisfied with the my current combination either. What would you suggest for surrounds? Thanks again.

I am looking to complete my home theater. I have the following system. Center - KLF-C7 Fronts - Klipschhorns Surround - Heresy's Sub - M&K 350THX AV - Denon 4800 DVD - Denon 3800 Power - Monster Power 5000 TV - Mitsubishi 73" 907 HD - SonyHD100 Directv and cable I wanted a Bell as a center, however, as this requires 36" it was not practical with my TV. It was suggested that I add another KLF-C7 as a second center. Any opinion's? Would the RC-7 match? Also I was told that adding a second M&K 350-would improve by 4-6db the sub performance. Any opinions'? Also the 350 THX is now a 350THX ultra. I was told this only increased bass options and would match perfectly? I have read the board the past two years and find the comments extremely valuable. Thanks in advance

I use "old" heresy's for back surround speakers/ I need them 42" high. I cannot mount them to the walls. Does anyone know of anyone who makes a "surdy" speaker stand which can handle this. Thanks