September 30, 2002
I am looking into various speakers for the front left and
right of a 60/40 music/home-theater setup. A few of these speakers are not shielded. I was
wondering how far non-shielded stand-mounted speakers generally need to be kept from a
television.
Thanks,
Tom
It varies -- obviously -- based upon how powerful
the driver magnets are. Usually about a foot will do it, but the only way to find out is
to experiment with placement. Most modern large-screen and projection TVs have ring
degaussers built-in. So, every time you turn on the set, it sends a cleansing pulse
through the screen.
Wait, wait I hear you saying, how do I
know if I've put the speaker too close to the set? There are two obvious clues: You'll
see linear distortion (straight lines will bend or veer off of straight) and the colors
will get funky in the area affected (frequently taking on a greenish tinge).
And there's even a tricky little non-intuitive
detail about the auto-degaussing. Once you've affected the image, you need to get the
offending speaker out of there. Leave it where it caused the problem in the first
place and no amount of automatic degaussing will fix it.
(By the way, if you have an older TV that doesn't
have an internal degausser, you may be able to borrow (or rent) a ring degausser from your
local high-end A/V dealer. They aren't really all that expensive, but how often do you
really need one?...Wes Phillips
September 22, 2002
I am in the process of putting together a system for both
HT and two-channel use. In terms of speakers, my focus right now is on the front L/R. I am
looking for a stand-mounted speaker that will perform well matched with Bryston
components. I also need something that will sound good and detailed at lower volumes, as I
am not always able to listen at the levels I would prefer. My current options, all of
which I liked for different reasons, are: Dynaudio 1.3 Mk II, Revel M20, B&W 805, and
Monitor Audio GR10. The Dynaudios were my favorite, but I have read that they lose a lot
of detail at lower volumes -- I heard some of this while auditioning, but am concerned
that this will be even more of an issue in my home. I'm looking for advice as to which of
these, or any other, will sound best at lower volumes, yet not sacrifice sound quality at
mid to higher volumes.
Thanks.
Tom
There are speakers that really need to get kicked
in the butt to come alive, but frankly I don't rate the Dynaudio Contour 1.3 Mk IIs among
them -- at least not when driven by something like the Brystons. Yeah, they do lose a
smidge of presence at lower volumes, but I suspect you can compensate for that by setting
up your HT for nearfield listening.
By the way, many AV processors offer a
"night" mode, which compresses the dynamic range so that the loud passages are
less loud and the quiet passages are less quiet. That lets you listen at a slightly louder
average volume, but avoids the big dynamic swings that are the usual cause of late-night
altercations over loudness-- and is probably a better solution than purchasing your
second-favorite speaker simply to preserve domestic tranquility.
That said, all speaker choices are intensely
subjective (duh!) and any of your other choices would make fine candidates....Wes
Phillips
September 17, 2002
Hi Wes,
Thanks for that great reviews. I have a two-year-old Onkyo
TX-DS777, and I am thinking of upgrading. Is the Integra the best choice before I go
separates in the future? I also wonder if buying expensive speaker wire is worth all the
bucks. Last question: I have Cambridge SoundWorks tower speakers. Where would you put your
money to upgrade?
Thanks in advance for your time.
T Talbot
Well, first off, I'm not completely convinced that all HT
enthusiasts should go for separates, as I've said before. I personally believe that
the current generation of A/V receivers offers incredible performance and incredible
value. It's entirely possible you won't feel a need to upgrade from a really top-end
receiver.
Of course, some of us just can't resist the urge to
"improve" things -- and beyond the level of the top-end receivers, you are
forced to seek out separates. Just know your own mind and act accordingly.
That said, I really did like the 825 and it has a really
nice feature set. I could happily live with it.
When you ask if expensive speaker wire is worth it, that
all depends -- on what you mean by expensive and what you mean by worth it.
When I reviewed the $13,500 Thiel CS7.2, it took a pair of
$7000 MIT speaker cables to make that system sound like a Class A system should
have sounded. If I owned those speakers and the $10,000 Krell power amp I auditioned them
with, I would not be wild with joy at the thought of spending $7000 to make them sound
their best -- but I'd be even more bummed knowing I could make such a drastic change and
hadn't.
But most of the time, such extreme measures aren't required
-- there are very fine speaker cables out there for a lot less money. Of course, you might
consider those prices expensive, too. While I think speaker cables can make a substantial
difference in how a system sounds, you don't have to take my word for it. Many dealers
offer trial loans (usually secured with a credit card) and you can decide for yourself.
There are also retail websites that offer cable loans, so no matter where you live, you
can try some out and discover the truth for yourself.
As to the Cambridge SoundWorks towers, I don't know those
models, but I've heard quite a number of CSW speakers over the years, so I think I have a
good handle on their designs. CSW's speakers are good and offer great value, but I suspect
you're currently near their line's quality pinnacle. Check out the Polk LSi15s I
reviewed here recently. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised -- and filled with speaker
lust all over again....Wes Phillips
September 10, 2002
Dear Wes,
I am looking to buy a new receiver. I have an old Sony, and
I want to replace it. I am looking for a receiver that will enhance my movie-watching
pleasure, as well as make music sound good. I'm mostly into movies. I have heard that the
Harman/Kardon AVR-520 is supposed to be a good product. I was wondering what you think of
it and if there are any other brands that would be better than it? Some of my friends have
suggested buying a cheap receiver and then amps; would this be better than an all-in-one
product like the AVR-520? If so, what kind of cheap receiver and then what kind of amp? I
am looking to spend around $1000. I own Polk and Energy speakers if that helps.
Thanks,
Austin
OK, let's deal with the terminology first. A receiver is
what you have now. It is an all-in-one unit that combines a radio, a surround-sound
processor, a preamplifier, and power amplifiers. Your friends were probably suggesting you
buy separates or one each of the above components -- or possibly that you buy an A/V
preamp, which is still a combination unit, consisting of everything but the power amps.
Although it is a widely held tenet in high-end hi-fi that
separates are "better" than receivers, this piece of wisdom is highly
subjective, even there. In home theater, there's an even greater chance that it is not the
case, however.
At the very top end of the field, where staggering amounts
of money are the norm, separates rule. If you want the very best picture you can possibly
get, you don't just buy a TV; you buy a projector, a screen, a scaler, component cables,
and so on. And there's no denying the results -- once you've warmed up the projector,
triangulated the focus, and blacked all the windows. But a lot of people wouldn't want to
go through all that just to watch Survivor, so a TV would actually suit their needs
better.
For $1000, it would be difficult to put together separates
that offer as much performance as the average $1000 A/V receiver -- and with the receiver,
you don't need to buy interconnects and mess around with five boxes instead of just the
one. I'm not saying that you couldn't conceivably optimize performance for a specific
aspect of A/V use with $1000 separates, but if you were inclined toward that sort of
system micromanagement, you probably wouldn't need me to explain what a receiver is.
As to receiver brands, just look over my reviews here and
the ones archived at Home
Theater & Sound to see which ones have impressed us reviewers. There's a lot
of good stuff to choose from....Wes Phillips
September 7, 2002
Dear Wes,
I am using an Outlaw Model 1050 receiver to power a set of
six Anthony Gallo Micros and a Gallo MP-150 powered subwoofer, with the receiver and sub
crossovers set at 120Hz. The front speakers do not go through the sub. The speakers are
all set up in a fairly largish space (12' by 20' with 14' ceilings) with the front
speakers and the sub in one corner of the room. I recently listened to a Denon receiver
playing through some Klipsch RF3 speakers in a Tweeter showroom and heard much more full
dynamic range compared to the sound I think that I presently have (the example used was
the Finale to "Candide"). Right now, I am thinking of trying to optimize my
system to give me more of the sound that I heard, but I don't know which is my weakest
link: the Outlaw, the Gallos, or the size/layout of my room. I know that answer is all
three combined! But I was hoping to get some ideas on what to try first.
Thanks,
Denis Reidy
It's the speakers and that room -- the speakers are
miniscule and the room is huge. Now don't get me wrong -- the Gallos are amazing little
speakers, and it's a tribute to Anthony Gallo's abilities as a speaker designer that he
can seem to subvert the laws of physics to the extent those speakers do. However, you're
still trying to fill over 3000 cubic feet of space with five 3" drivers! It just
isn't going to happen.
So I recommend you consider getting bigger speakers. The
RBH system I review this week is impressive, but still a tad small for your room I
suspect. Why not investigate the Axiom system I reviewed in August? It's very reasonably
priced and I loved it....Wes Phillips
|
