substance-p Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Today is a big day: the TV I ordered weeks ago is finally arriving and all of the speakers have been installed. Now it's time to put it all together; however, I can't decide which receiver to us. I have a Marantz SR 5001 that my brother gave me when he upgraded his system. I was planning on using it for the HT; however, it only has 2 HDMI ins and they are version 1.1 and it doesn't have any auto setup options, lastly, it is set up for 7.1 not 7.2 as my room is (although I have an adpater to split the sub signal so that's not a huge deal). I also have a Yamaha RX-663 that has HDMI ver 1.3, auto setup via a mic, 7.2 setup, etc. I will be hooking up the following components in the HT: HTPC with Blu-Ray/HD DVD player, HD Cable box, Wii, and LG 50" plasma with built-in Netflix streaming (so I will be running an optical cable from TV out to Receiver In for sound associated with Netflix movies. Which option would you choose: 1) Marantz with components connected to HDMI 1.1 on receiver and then to TV 2) Marantz with video connected directly to TV (HDMI 1.3 on TV) and sound directly to receiver (I guess through optical) 3) Yamaha with components connected to receiver HDMI 1.3 and then to TV 4) Yamaha with video connected to TV and sound directly to receiver. I have been reading threads trying to get caught up on benefits of HDMI 1.3 vs 1.1 vs. optical etc but would love to hear from some others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuzzzer Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Since you're using Blu-Ray and HD-DVD the only way you're going to get the HD audio formats is by sending the audio through HDMI. So, options 1 and 3 are the only way you're going to get the best audio. From my own experience I've found that Marantz receivers do a great job with 2 channel music and also with home theater. I know a lot of people on here use Yamaha and have heard very few complaints about them. I'd be inclined to hook up the bare necessities to the Marantz first (only enough to test the sound) and then switch to the Yamaha and see what you like best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winchester21 Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Agree with previous post. Try both 1 and 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Today is a big day: the TV I ordered weeks ago is finally arriving and all of the speakers have been installed. Now it's time to put it all together; however, I can't decide which receiver to us. I have a Marantz SR 5001 that my brother gave me when he upgraded his system. I was planning on using it for the HT; however, it only has 2 HDMI ins and they are version 1.1 and it doesn't have any auto setup options, lastly, it is set up for 7.1 not 7.2 as my room is (although I have an adpater to split the sub signal so that's not a huge deal). I also have a Yamaha RX-663 that has HDMI ver 1.3, auto setup via a mic, 7.2 setup, etc. I will be hooking up the following components in the HT: HTPC with Blu-Ray/HD DVD player, HD Cable box, Wii, and LG 50" plasma with built-in Netflix streaming (so I will be running an optical cable from TV out to Receiver In for sound associated with Netflix movies. Which option would you choose: 1) Marantz with components connected to HDMI 1.1 on receiver and then to TV 2) Marantz with video connected directly to TV (HDMI 1.3 on TV) and sound directly to receiver (I guess through optical) 3) Yamaha with components connected to receiver HDMI 1.3 and then to TV 4) Yamaha with video connected to TV and sound directly to receiver. I have been reading threads trying to get caught up on benefits of HDMI 1.3 vs 1.1 vs. optical etc but would love to hear from some others. Substance-P, The Yamaha has good sound, but most like the Marantz better with horns, so any reason why you couldn't feed into the Yamaha Pre section, and output into the Marantz amplifier section, or do these models not have that capability?? You could always updrade at a later time to a better seperate amp as well. Roger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
substance-p Posted July 6, 2009 Author Share Posted July 6, 2009 Substance-P, The Yamaha has good sound, but most like the Marantz better with horns, so any reason why you couldn't feed into the Yamaha Pre section, and output into the Marantz amplifier section, or do these models not have that capability?? You could always updrade at a later time to a better seperate amp as well. Roger The big obstacle to that is that I have to use one receiver or the other in the family room to (don't laugh) power the soundbar and sub that are in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Take some of that substance-p and meditate on it.[] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Substance-P, The Yamaha has good sound, but most like the Marantz better with horns, so any reason why you couldn't feed into the Yamaha Pre section, and output into the Marantz amplifier section, or do these models not have that capability?? You could always updrade at a later time to a better seperate amp as well. Roger The big obstacle to that is that I have to use one receiver or the other in the family room to (don't laugh) power the soundbar and sub that are in there. Then I wouls suggest using the Yamaha and upgrading to some seperate amps when you have the money. If you are on a budjet, a used adcom GFA-5500 and 5GFA-503 are a good bang for the buck and will help your sound out. The 5500 is a 2 channel times 200 watts per channel and the 5503 is a three channel 200 watts times three channels that is the match to the 5500 to get 5 channels at 200 watts each. You should be able to buy both amps for a total outlay of arround $900 used on EBay. Roger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
substance-p Posted July 7, 2009 Author Share Posted July 7, 2009 Thanks for the input Roger. What about something like this for a sepearate amp http://cgi.ebay.com/Outlaw-Audio-7100-100W-x-7-Channel-Amplifier_W0QQitemZ130317215553QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item1e5782e741&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12|66%3A2|39%3A1|72%3A1234|293%3A1|294%3A50 With the effciency of the Klipsch system, would 100 suffiece? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colterphoto1 Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 Use the BIG one. No I'm not kidding. Forget about all the fancy schmancy 7.2, 11.3, whatever and all those HDMI numbers. Ok, sounds like the Marantz doens't have the features your require. HOW BIG IS YOUR ROOM ?, what speakers are you using, how much output do you desire? I'm looking at the specs on the Yamaha (which I love, don't get me wrong) and it's 95 wpc at 1 Khz. This new way of rating power ususally gives an overage in the rating department. Plan on getting 75% of that, now we have a 70 watt per channel receiver, downhill, on a good day. Question, is that really enough good clean power to push your speakers to the HT levels you desire in your room? You've mentioned that you have a large space (open area). Have you calculated the cubic footage of all the space that these speakers will be playing to? That is a good first step. Report back. I get the feeling that my esteemed colleague is correct and that you might require additional wattage for the sound you're looking for. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 Thanks for the input Roger. What about something like this for a sepearate amp http://cgi.ebay.com/Outlaw-Audio-7100-100W-x-7-Channel-Amplifier_W0QQitemZ130317215553QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item1e5782e741&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=65%3A12|66%3A2|39%3A1|72%3A1234|293%3A1|294%3A50 With the effciency of the Klipsch system, would 100 suffiece? I am sorry but I couldn't open that up, there is some problem with it. The amp in your Yamaha reciever will suffiece, but what I am trying to steer you towards is an amp that will give you better Bass response without increasing the high frequencies as much on a budget. I don't know what you can afford to spend. The Yamahas usually increase the brightness of Klipsch that some complain about. Myself, I don't find it offensive, but I do unconsiously find it fatiguing as I find myself listening for much longer periods of time with an amp tailored to compliment the speakers, hence all of the tube lovers arround here. Don't worry about to many watts, it is distortion, not wattage that destroys speakers. Those Adcom amps for example have clipping lights and as long as you keep the amps out of heavy clipping, your speakers will be fine. The bigger amplifier, even if you only play it at 100 watt or lower levels, has more headroom, more storage in it's capacitors for a heavy Bass response even at lower listening levels. It is just like a sub woofer, without it, you don't realize what you are missing, but when you finally discover it, you wonder how you ever lived without it. Finally, a 7 channel amp is definetly a step up from a reciever, but it is still a compromise to get all of that hardware in one housing. I personally use four 2 channel amps that are rated at 200 watts per channel to get my 7 channels. Each one of my two channel amps weighs considderably more then most 5 or 7 channel amps out there. Just like speakers, all my amps are identical to get the same sound.[] Roger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
substance-p Posted July 7, 2009 Author Share Posted July 7, 2009 Sorry about that, it looks like a broken link: http://cgi.ebay.com/Outlaw-7100-power-amplifier-7-channel-100-wpc-top-value_W0QQitemZ290325767076QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item4398c3a3a4&_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116 Its to an Outlaw 7100 7 channel amp with 100 watts per channel for $597 OBO. I also noticed that there is an Emotiva 7 channel that is on sale for $649 new from Emotiva direct. I suppose I could also piece it together utilizing 2 channel options in some stages as I couldn't purchase 4 2-channel ones now (as long as I stuck with the same units) My guess is that either way, it would be a step up from sinking th money into a new recevier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 Sorry about that, it looks like a broken link: http://cgi.ebay.com/Outlaw-7100-power-amplifier-7-channel-100-wpc-top-value_W0QQitemZ290325767076QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item4398c3a3a4&_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116 Its to an Outlaw 7100 7 channel amp with 100 watts per channel for $597 OBO. I also noticed that there is an Emotiva 7 channel that is on sale for $649 new from Emotiva direct. I suppose I could also piece it together utilizing 2 channel options in some stages as I couldn't purchase 4 2-channel ones now (as long as I stuck with the same units) My guess is that either way, it would be a step up from sinking th money into a new recevier Seperates are always a step up from recievers. There is nothing wrong with using a reciever with the features you want for a pre, but I always suggest using a reciever that has pre-outs. These are put there specifically so you can step up to seperate amps. I am using four Nakamichi Pa-7 amplifiers. These were $2,500 a piece back arround 1989-90, and $2,500 then would be alot more money now. They can be had on ebay for arround $800-900 each depending on condition. I felt the Adcoms would be a much better bang for the buck for the system you have. The GFA-5500 is easy to come across, it is the three channel GFA-5503 that is harder to come by. You could always run a pair of GFA-5500s and a single GFA-5503 to get your 7 channels. Trust me, you will like the extra head room. You could always bid on a GFA-5503 and run it on your front 3 channels. If after listening to it you descide it is a good investment you can buy the other 2 amps as money allows. If you don't like it enough to justify it, you can always re-EBay it. Roger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 Sorry about that, it looks like a broken link: http://cgi.ebay.com/Outlaw-7100-power-amplifier-7-channel-100-wpc-top-value_W0QQitemZ290325767076QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item4398c3a3a4&_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116 Its to an Outlaw 7100 7 channel amp with 100 watts per channel for $597 OBO. I also noticed that there is an Emotiva 7 channel that is on sale for $649 new from Emotiva direct. I suppose I could also piece it together utilizing 2 channel options in some stages as I couldn't purchase 4 2-channel ones now (as long as I stuck with the same units) My guess is that either way, it would be a step up from sinking th money into a new recevier Have you read this thread yet??? The GFA-555 is the older version of the two channel GFA-5500. Roger http://community.klipsch.com/forums/t/121907.aspx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colterphoto1 Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 depending on your % of HT/2ch listening, a modest step up might be to get a 2 channel amp to take the load off the receiver's L/R channels, giving a bit of power supply in reserve for 5 channels instead of 7. I did this for a while by strapping a DC300 Crown to my RXV2300 to good effect. No it's not totaly balanced 7 channels of amplifier, but give more total watts which might serve your big room well. Again- WE KNOW NOTHING OF YOUR LISTENING ROOM so all of this is total speculation at this point. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
substance-p Posted July 7, 2009 Author Share Posted July 7, 2009 depending on your % of HT/2ch listening, a modest step up might be to get a 2 channel amp to take the load off the receiver's L/R channels, giving a bit of power supply in reserve for 5 channels instead of 7. I did this for a while by strapping a DC300 Crown to my RXV2300 to good effect. No it's not totaly balanced 7 channels of amplifier, but give more total watts which might serve your big room well. Again- WE KNOW NOTHING OF YOUR LISTENING ROOM so all of this is total speculation at this point. Michael Here are some of the details on the listening room. It is 21X21. Carpeted with slanted ceilings . It's a bonus room above a garage. I had to modify it as the previous owners had it equipped with a bose system and a 4:3 SD TV in the built in corner. We have it laid out for 7.2 with the front right corner as the point with the TV and center channel. We will put the couch about 12ft back in line with the channels. The rear speakers have the wires laid but I can move them around based on which models/stands I get and where the seating positions end up. The two subs are across from each other fairly close to theside channels. The room will be used almost exclusively for movies and TV. Here are some pics (keep in mind the room is still under construction! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 You could definately use the extra power!!! Another priority would be to get rid of the surround speakers and get an extra set of towers!! Surrounds are a comprimise to give you surround effects but are usually so much more efficient as to be rediculous!! The manufacturers know that most people will not coff up the extra money for more big speakers, or have the room for them. The extra towers will add more surround effects and will be an unbelievable difference in 4 speaker, 2 channel stereo music listening (AS much of a difference as your Klipsch system is from the Bose!!) What you have done so far looks great!! Roger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 depending on your % of HT/2ch listening, a modest step up might be to get a 2 channel amp to take the load off the receiver's L/R channels, giving a bit of power supply in reserve for 5 channels instead of 7. I did this for a while by strapping a DC300 Crown to my RXV2300 to good effect. No it's not totaly balanced 7 channels of amplifier, but give more total watts which might serve your big room well. Again- WE KNOW NOTHING OF YOUR LISTENING ROOM so all of this is total speculation at this point. Michael Michael, He emailed me off site a couple of times and I suggested basically the same thing, only I recomended the Adcom GFA-5503, which is a 3 channel amp at 200 watts per channel. This would keep him equal across the front for movies plus work great for music, and he can always re-eBay it if he doesn't like it enough to justify it.[] Rog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colterphoto1 Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Agreed Rog- that would be a good way to up the ante across the front, while maintaining the Yamaha processing and staying on budget. M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cal Blacksmith Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 I agree with a seperate amp to power the front 2 speakers (at least) but with such a wonderful room that is mainly HT, why limit yourself with the picture in the corner? I would put it on that large wall in the center. It would be much easier to ballance the room for sound and it would be an easy upgrade to go with a front projection / screen setup for a true HT wow factor![] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
substance-p Posted July 10, 2009 Author Share Posted July 10, 2009 I agree with a seperate amp to power the front 2 speakers (at least) but with such a wonderful room that is mainly HT, why limit yourself with the picture in the corner? I would put it on that large wall in the center. It would be much easier to ballance the room for sound and it would be an easy upgrade to go with a front projection / screen setup for a true HT wow factor! I hear you. We spent a lot of time looking into using our projector in this house in this room; however, the way the previous owner finished the room made it a real challenge (three exterior walls, no attic space, only partial crawl on one side, vaulted ceilings, two huge cut out areas that would have to filled in if not used for TV and then components, etc.). We decided to just do a rehab instead of a full remodel. This will allow us to use a portion of the room along the left side for our game table etc. (so it's not 100% dedicated HT). Furthermore, my Wife mentioned how it will be a great playroom for children when we have them (I am excited to have kids in a couple of years...but did not realize they would using my plaroom for their playroom [] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.