Love my panasonic SA-XR55 a brief review & upgrade story

 

Silver Member
Username: Cheapskate

Post Number: 436
Registered: Mar-04
for a while, i was tired of the treble speed and extension of my NHT superzeros. i originally got rid of my NAD stereo reciever and bought an onkyo HT reciever which claimed 100KHz treble extension and is a brand often called "bright" for that reason.

the sound was alot more to my liking. the onboard D/A converters walked all over my sony CD player's converters and the onkyo allowed my zeros to finally start imaging where the NAD was practically treble free to the point of sounding like there was a sleeping bag over my speakers.

after casually listening to some new B&W 2 ways in my local hi-fi store when late night DVD viewing was proving to be a chore, i started to crave the treble speed and extension that superior metal domes seemed to offer.

on another visit, i was introduced to magnepan sound. i was blown away by the midrange speed and detail that my system couldn't match. planars are so unboxlike it isn't even funny.

i decided right there that i wanted planars. unfortunately, my onkyo couldn't handle 4 ohm loads, so i was held back by the prospect of a very expensive 4 channels worth of high current amps + an A/V reciever (with surround preamp outs) upgrade to accomodate the MMGs i wanted. NAD would have been cheaper, but i'd already decided NAD and i will never get along.

then i heard about panasonic class-d recievers. at first, i was hearing how great they sounded, then i heard that several people were successfully using them with maggies.

here was the affordable amplification solution i had been searching for! for just $240 delivered, i could have a complete A/V amplification solution instead of $1,500 in cobbled amps and recievers.

what i wasn't expecting was how much better the panasonic would make my superzeros sound! the first few hours, it had a little bit of a spitty treble, but i still noticed right away how much smoother and relaxed the midrange sounded. by day 2, everything was sounding awesome.

i'd never heard vocals sound so realistic in my apartment before. the class-d amps also took control of my soft dome tweeters and gave me the low level detail that i desperately needed to watch movies late at night.

now i ALWAYS hear details i'd never heard before when i go back to an old CD. what sounded like white noise on one track turned out to be a bean covered gourd. WOW! listening has become a pleasure again.

i'm still digging old CDs up to hear vocals so much more palpable and still get suprised by dynamics that jump out of the speakers much more forcefully than i remembered.

the bass improved too. maybe it's the higher power reserves of the reciever (100wpc vs. 55wpc) but i never listen loud. whatever it is, this new reviever has cleared gobs of top to bottom congestion out of my system. all the time i thought my speakers were just too polite in the treble it turned out they weren't being fed quality treble to begin with.

that $240 reciever brought my current speakers nearly 1/2 way to the speed and detail of the planars that i bought it for. i don't really want them anymore. i don't have the absolute speed of planars, but now i have alot of the midrange neutrality but with much better imaging. nothing beats small speakers in that department.

i see now where the rumors i'd heard of people getting rid of more expensive gear for cheap panasonic class-d recievers might have a kernel of truth. i've never heard so much treble speed and detail before in my system or midrange so natural.

even when i put my ear a foot from my speakers, i can't hear any of the treble grain that i had always thought all tweeters produce.

for someone for whom "bang for the buck" is like a life quest, the panny has been more than a pleasant surprise. what was intended as a stepping stone has become a stopping point.

now i can finally sit back and enjoy my system as opposed to strain to hear it. i've heard more expensive gear that doesn't sound as uncolored or as image precise.

i might not own the best system in the world, but it's pretty darned good.

i laugh in the face of stereophile magazine and it's rich snob's only club. very nice sound is possible for reasonable amounts of money. don't believe them for a second!

 

Gold Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 6177
Registered: May-04


It's good to hear you are satisified with your purchase, though you must have assumed everyone reading this would know you are a treble freak (your own words, I believe), who can never have enough high frequency emphasis in their system and who "detests" bass response and "warmth" because those qualities give you a headache. Not to abuse your comments, but those personal quirks of the reviewer are important to know before anyone can seriously consider an opinion of any product. As I've said before, everyone is entitled to like what they like; but knowing your penchant for what most would consider excessively bright playback puts the Panasonic in a different perspective for someone who prefers a more nuetral playback.


I don't mean to be argumentative (really I dont), but since this is a forum which people use to learn about audio, there are a few comments which I think require some clarification.





" ... an onkyo HT reciever which claimed 100KHz treble extension and is a brand often called "bright" for that reason."


There is no correlation between the bandwidth response of any well designed audio amplifier and its inherent "sound". Hundreds, if not thousands, of audio products (pre and power amplifiers as well as source products) have been designed with bandwidth extension to 100kHz or beyond and have not been labeled "bright" by the audio press or buying community. From the early days of Gloden Age audio products, when Harman Kardon first introduced their line of Citation tube products, the benefits of a power bandwidth to 100kHz have been evident. It is not uncommon to see specifications for "frequency response" to 50, 75 or 100kHz on tube products and certainly not unusual for the same extension to be found in solid state equipment. It is the design topology of a particular piece of equipment, the application of that design when picking the individual componets to build with and the system matching that will contribute to whether a component gains a reputation for being bright, warm or nuetral. In the case of the Onkyo, it is the relatively poor choices made in design and implementation which gain it an apparently deserved reputation for being rather bright and nasty with an inability to drive odd impedance loads. Nothing having to do directly with high end frequency response is accountable for those qualities unless you consider the negative effects of global feedback.





"i started to crave the treble speed and extension that superior metal domes seemed to offer."


Once again you have mistaken a concept which accounts for a partial explanation of a product's performance and turned it into a raison d'etre for making choices in audio. There are more than a fair number of soft dome tweeters which can have frequency response roughly equivalent to many metal domes. And, if we consider the motor system of a driver as the essential component in what determines the "speed" of a driver (the motor assembly of a ribbon tweeter having a vastly superior "speed" over any dome), there is no evidence a metal dome should, or would, have a different motor system, and therefore a "superior speed", when compared to a soft dome (or any other material for that matter). It is the stiffness and consequent resonant frequency of the various materials which make their contribution to the pros and cons of each type of dome tweeter design. Going from a silk to a diamond or berrylium tweeter, the break up modes are higher and more well damped in the stiffer materials. Beneath 20kHz, however, the "speed" of most of these drivers is similar if the motor system is similar. Equating speed and extension to a particular type of material ignores vast amounts which play on the performance of a driver.

That metal domes of any sort have a "sound" which many listeners find unbearable in a nuetral balanced system (as opposed to a system tilted upward in the high frequencies) is reason enough to argue against the virtues of a "speedy" metal dome.





"the class-d amps also took control of my soft dome tweeters"


I'm not sure how an amplifier "takes control" of a soft dome tweeter but the comment itself seems to make the point for my previous statements regarding tweeters. It is not the material alone which makes the tweeter sound best.

In the area of "taking control", this quality of an amplifier's performance is typically equated with the low frequency driver and the damping factor of the amplifier vs. the back EMF of the driver's motor assembly in conjunction with the impedance of the circuit. In very simple terms, this is mostly an issue of current delivery into an inductive load which varies with frequency. None of this "battle" occurs in the operation of a tweeter to a negligible degree. While the sound of the amplifier may have improved over a period of listening, I doubt it was due to "taking control" of the soft dome tweeters.





Personally, I don't think Stereophile has ever implied that "nice" sound is not possible on a tight budget. Quite the contrary. However, I think their position would be they are in the business of reviewing products which transcend "nice". Reviewing "nice" sounding systems would be the equivalent of asking the photography magazines to review one use cameras and declaring which model under $5 was judged as giving "nice" results.




Once again, it's good to hear you are happy with your purchase. Before you rush into the Magnepan purchase however, if you did not see my comments to ed concerning Class D amplifiers, be aware they are typically very load dependent in terms of frequency response. The four Ohm load of the panels combined with the output impedance of the Panasonic Class D amplifier will probably make for a slightly rolled off high end compared to a more conventional eight ohm or higher load. I have not read any comments concerning the combination of the Panasonic and the small Magnepans, but, with your desire for unusually bright treble, I would ask a few questions before I jumped into owning new speakers.










 

Gold Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 1985
Registered: Feb-05
One factor for your previous dissatisfaction may have been that you were driving very inefficient speakers known for a dry midrange with a low power low current Onkyo receiver. Just my observation.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 6187
Registered: May-04


How about we conclude most receivers (especially the home theater sort) never get above the level of "nice" and few manage the uphill struggle to that level of quality?


 

Gold Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 1986
Registered: Feb-05
I'm with you. I think that the Magnum Dynalab (not HT) may reach a bit higher but then it is a different breed.
 

Silver Member
Username: Dakulis

Spokane, Washington United States

Post Number: 619
Registered: May-05
Well,

Just because of Ed's constant barrage, this is my response to bm's comments.

First, putting index fingers in both ears.

Then, saying loudly to myself:

"La la la la la la la la la la la la la . . . "

You get the idea. I refuse to believe, I refuse to believe, I refuse to believe . . . LOL!!!
 

Anonymous
 
"How about we conclude most receivers (especially the home theater sort) never get above the level of "nice" and few manage the uphill struggle to that level of quality? "

Depends on who you ask and what your definition of "nice" is. In an elite/esoteric (dare I say, Stereophile) sense, your statement would be accurate. OTOH to all the rest of us content to wallow in our own distorted, low-fi sound, a good Marantz/HK/Pioneer Elite/etc will sound far more than nice.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 6191
Registered: May-04


Yes, we all want someone or something to look down upon. The "nice" Marantz receiver will sound far "nicer" than a Sony rack system, which will sound far better than a JVC boombox, which will be better ... and so on. And, therefore, the "elites/esoteric" snobs at Stereophile are looked down upon by the people with "nice, sensible" systems.

I have no problem with anyone owning a "nice" receiver. I've sold many and own a couple. But, I've been around here long enough to know there is no free lunch. If you are satisfied with what you own, that's terrific. I think more people should be estatic over what they own instead of always looking for an upgrade. I only hope most listeners do not assume what they are hearing cannot be improved upon or that buying features makes your system more than nice. As with the original post, many concepts of audio are misapplied in what they can accomplish. Understanding what you are buying is far more important than owning the most expensive products.



I have no problem with anyone's choices, even those who buy Bose are OK by me if the owner realizes there are plenty of people who will never have anything as "nice" as what they own.


 

Anonymous
 
"Yes, we all want someone or something to look down upon."

Its great to be human, isn't it?

"And, therefore, the "elites/esoteric" snobs at Stereophile are looked down upon by the people with "nice, sensible" systems. "

Not even their systems are perfect after all. Although personally Stereophile doesn't bother me any more than reading the Bugatti Veyron review in Motor Trend. If people have money to spend on high end equipment/cars/whatever, more power to them.

" But, I've been around here long enough to know there is no free lunch. "

Depends on what you mean by that.

"If you are satisfied with what you own, that's terrific. I think more people should be estatic over what they own instead of always looking for an upgrade. I only hope most listeners do not assume what they are hearing cannot be improved upon or that buying features makes your system more than nice. "

I won't argue with that.

"Understanding what you are buying is far more important than owning the most expensive products. "

Or that.

 

Gold Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 1988
Registered: Feb-05
"I have no problem with anyone owning a "nice" receiver. I've sold many and own a couple. But, I've been around here long enough to know there is no free lunch."

Amen!

"If you are satisfied with what you own, that's terrific. I think more people should be estatic over what they own instead of always looking for an upgrade. I only hope most listeners do not assume what they are hearing cannot be improved upon or that buying features makes your system more than nice. "

Amen again!

Snobbery is in the eye or the ear, if you will, of the beholder.

I have a nice system that I enjoy very much but having decades of experience in this hobby I know there are a whole lot better.

Example, when I'm at work I have by far the most expensive and esoteric system of all of my colleagues. When I'm hangin' with my audiophile friends most of whom own audio stores my system is by far the most mundane. It's all about your frame of reference.

 

Anonymous
 
"Snobbery is in the eye or the ear, if you will, of the beholder. "

To some extent; however, if for some reason Bill Gates took a leak on your car and proclaimed it unworthy of transporting his feces around, I think that would be fairly universally judged as snobbery. OTOH we have Jan saying "How about we conclude most receivers (especially the home theater sort) never get above the level of "nice" and few manage the uphill struggle to that level of quality?"; this may be a little more grey to some, but I would be willing to bet more than a few people would put that in the snobbish category. (One will note however that Jan has himself stated that he is a bit of an equipment snob, and that overall he is a loveable little teddy bear) Now mind you I havn't said that Stereophile is snobbish. They don't generally go out of their way to degrade other people's equipment. They do from time to time mind you, but they don't make a habit out of it. They might be a bit elitist for my taste in that they review absolutely nothing in my price range, but I doubt that I am their target market.
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2609
Registered: Mar-05
Here's a an alternative to blind-testing, since most Panny-skeptics are unwilling to place themselves under normal blind testing: placebo testing!

I propose putting the Panny inside the casing of say an Arcam, weld a 35lb lead plate into the bottom to create that nice reassuring analog heft, and presenting it to all the anti-digital naysayers as Arcam's newest model.

I'd bet good money that at least 95% of the Panny naysayers will come away singing the praises of our new Panarcam. (Art may or may not be in the 5%, based on his cables story.)

Preconception + Pride + Pricetag = Audio-Mystic Reality
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2610
Registered: Mar-05
budget,

while I partially agree with the others here that the Onkyo is easily bested by any number of receivers, I think your overall results with the Panny is hardly unusual.

I have followed threads about the Panny on a number of different forums, and the number of people who have preferred it over much more expensive gear they OWN is very impressive.

Here's a sample:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...t=591368&page=3

specifically, read posts #53, 56, and 57 from that link I posted for a small sample. These are owners of a Denon 5800, HK7000, HK7200, and Denon 3802.

(Nice thing about avsforum is how they number each post in each thread for easy reference.)

Will be interesting to hear the results if you ever get your Maggies mated to the xr55 though.

In the meantime, enjoy that little marvel!
 

Gold Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 6195
Registered: May-04


Ed - Since you are so interested in everyone testing the Panasonic reciver, why don't you do what Tim offered? Pack up the Panasonic and ship it around to everyone interested in listening to the unit. We can all give our impressions of the performance as we did with the Lings. This would be a perfect way to get your message out.


Anon - I am a bit of an equipment snob, I admit to that. But, even I wonder just who is buying these $5,000 CD players and $7,000 phono cartridges the magazines rave about. I'm not sure what if any point there is to be had in your last post however. While we all like what we own until we are ready to replace it, all that should be required by most listeners to understand my statement is a trip to any high end audio shop with a few discs to listen to something slightly beyond a "nice" receiver. Afterwards, if the listener is still convinced their receiver is up to the task, they are welcome to keep what they own.


 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2613
Registered: Mar-05
Jan,

that's a very intriguing idea. HOWEVER it makes no financial sense whatsoever since every person who receives my Pansonic sa-xr55 would have to spend $15-20 to ship it on to the next person anyways...so they might as well put it on their credit card at Amazon.com where they'll get a brand new one and pay the same amount to return it for a refund minus that return shipping.

Or, they could go to a local Circuit City and not worry about return shipping at all and get a 100% refund. (Chances are, at least half of them would end up keeping it.)

In contrast, Tim is the ONLY source of the Lings so there was no other way any of us could hear them.

*** now if I had the money and the technical know-how to successfully disguise an xr55 inside the box of an Arcam, that would be an absolutely PRICELESS joke if I sent it around to all the Panny-doubters on this board! LOL...
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2614
Registered: Mar-05
PS. Actually I'm not "so interested in everyone testing the Panasonic receiver" per se---that is just my challenge to people who dismiss it based on its pricetage and nameplate alone, and my invitation to newbies who don't even know the distinction between analog vs. digital and swallow the default "you get what you pay for" rigid preconceptions that Madison Avenue fosters and exploits so skillfully.

So you see it's not the Panny xr55 in particular that I am pushing, it's the big picture of lazy assumptions and insidious marketing propaganda that I am against.

In fact if the xr55 cost $800 instead of $250 I don't think I'd get this excited about it.

It's the difference between Porsche coming out with yet another awesome sports car for +$50K as opposed to Hyundai pulling one out of its @ss for $5K. (Theoretical examples, I don't know much about cars.)
 

Anonymous
 
"Anon - I am a bit of an equipment snob, I admit to that. But, even I wonder just who is buying these $5,000 CD players and $7,000 phono cartridges the magazines rave about. I'm not sure what if any point there is to be had in your last post however. "

Ehh, no specific point really; just digging in on where I stand, and talking a bit about snobbery since Art said something I disagree with to some extent, although I think he misspoke.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 6199
Registered: May-04


And you thought I was a better example of what you disagreed with than Art who actually said what you disagreed with?
 

Gold Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 1992
Registered: Feb-05
Edster have you followed BM's story? Do you know what he has stated good sound is? Jan was not making up that stuff about BM he really said it. That said whatever opinion he has about the Panny is moot as he prefers what most folks consider poor sound. It's like saying that I prefer lifeless sound with no high end and low end to speak of, and oh have I ever found a receiver that meets my needs. Who cares!
 

Gold Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 1993
Registered: Feb-05
No anon I said what I meant.
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2615
Registered: Mar-05
well I know he's a Maggie maniac, prefers treble over bass, and hates NAD. However what he writes about the Panny's superb bass, detail and midrange/vocals is consistent with what almost every Panny owner raves about---and this is a very diverse group with a wide range of tastes and gear.

So while I agree that in previous threads BM often sounded like he had one too many bong hits, the superlatives he's used here are pretty standard issue for 90% of the people who've tried out the xr55 at home.
 

Anonymous
 
Well, I will open myself up to ridicule here. Although this was a specific thread other names have been mentioned so I will respond here instead of starting a new thread. Some years back I bought a brand new Nakamachi RE2 50W per channel receiver at a price that was unbelievable, I still think Tweeter screwed up on that but I am not complaining.It was not a home theater receiver just stereo. It was raved about as being very good and I agreed but I wanted home theater a couple years later so I regretfully sold it to a relative and have never yet got paid for it. I bought a Denon 3600 HT receiver the non DTS version which had been originally $1799 at the time but during a model changover I bought it brand new in the box for $999.00. I don!t think it was considered one of your better pieces for music but I did a back and forth listening tese which required I manually switch thee speaker wires in between changing back and forth and I honestly could not see that the Nakamachi sounded better for music and I was didsappointed because I wanted it to. A few years ago I brought my 3 or 4 year old Sony single dvd player to a store who had a spectacular buy on a NAD 521I cd player and they set uit up in the store so I could switch back and forth and although the Nad was a well respected piece and a designated cd p[layer was supposed to sound better I preferred the sound of the Sony and I have to tell you I tried over and over again to make myself believe the Nad sounded better but it did not to me. I was shocked. I am aware of differences in sound and what to listen for, maybe I am missing parts of the hearing range who knows. The point I am trying to make is that sometimes the piece that should sound better does not always come true for whatever reason. For people with limited budgets the receivers in the Yamaha RX V 657 range offer very good performance and depending on your needs and usage the Pioneer 815 and Onkyo 503 can suffice. Unless you look for refurbed or no warranty stores to buy higher quality at lower prices. Also unless you have a big room or want to share with the neighbors they should play loud enough too.
 

Anonymous
 
Jan: Yes, the way Art talks about low end audio equipment could easily be considered snobbery by some people. But your quote was just a quick scroll up at the time. Sorry if it caused you any undue anguish.

Art: Is it so wise of you to bash other people's tastes and what they like to listen to when most people would describe audiophile equipment as flat and boring?
 

Anonymous
 
And please Art, do account for the fact that there are people out there with different tastes than yourself, and their tastes are every bit as valid as yours. BM's observations are valid enough, regardless of his tastes. Realistically. it isn't like the opinions of the folks at Stereophile are any more useful in the real world. Yes, through years of reading, you know the various reviewers biases, but a first time reader would probably not be aware of these biases. In the same vein, you know BM's biases. If you utterly despise what he listens to, you can rest assured you probably won't like the piece of equipment in question.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 6205
Registered: May-04


"In the same vein, you know BM's biases. If you utterly despise what he listens to, you can rest assured you probably won't like the piece of equipment in question."



Uh, that's kinda the point that was being made.





Now I want to know what sort of crowd you run with who would "describe audiophile equipment as flat and boring." Compared to what? Bose?





 

Anonymous
 
"Now I want to know what sort of crowd you run with who would "describe audiophile equipment as flat and boring." Compared to what? Bose? "


KLH, CV, Bose, Sony, etc. It is no secret that more than a few people like colored sound. And I'm sure that you are well aware that audiophiles are generally not considered the majority.

"In the same vein, you know BM's biases. If you utterly despise what he listens to, you can rest assured you probably won't like the piece of equipment in question."

Uh, that's kinda the point that was being made. "

Art could word what he said in a better manner. That makes the difference between a complete snob and someone with a sense of tact and respect for other individuals. Statements like "who cares", "most folks consider what BM likes poor sound", are very arguably in poor taste.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 6209
Registered: May-04


Arguably!
 

Gold Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 1996
Registered: Feb-05
Anonymous, read up before you criticize. I have a long history of recommending gear in all price ranges on this forum. Get to know us before drawing conclusions.

I own equipment in several price ranges none of which is high end.

You seem like you have some fine contributions to make on this forum, please register and join us.
 

Anonymous
 
Don't get me wrong Art; I think you are a decent individual and you certainly make as good a contributions to this forum as anyone. However, I do find that you occasionally make some remarks that could be considered a little on the snobbish side in as far as audio equipment goes.

As far as the equipment you own, it probably is superior to what 99.9% of others in the US own. In any event, it is what you say and do that determine what people ultimately think of you, not what you own.

I do as well thank you for the invitation to register. I have in the past, and have deleted my prior accounts. This isn't because I have anything against the forum or anyone on it, but because I wish to focus more on other details in my life. We'll see how that one goes though as it hasn't been particularly successful so far...
 

Silver Member
Username: Chitown

Post Number: 372
Registered: Apr-05
" propose putting the Panny inside the casing of say an Arcam, weld a 35lb lead plate into the bottom to create that nice reassuring analog heft, and presenting it to all the anti-digital naysayers as Arcam's newest model. "

I have a question to everyone here: How do we know they aren't?

Sometimes in all of this conversations back and forth about quality of sound and equipment and prices, we forget the fact that these companies are in this business to be in business and in order to to that they have to make money. So in this era of a whole lot of these companies (Denon, Marantz, Mcintosh, Snell) being owned by one company, and yet others on the low end sharing manufacturing sites etc., how do we know that there isn't cost saving justification being pushed down to these engineers by sharing software code, engineering designs and material so that different companies can sell them under their own brand recognition?

After all the most attractive part of buying these companies for the holding company is usually their brand name recognition.

Think about the cost savings in such manuvers:

1) Lower cost of engineering and manufacturing
2) Lowering the cost of equipment by increading volume purchasing.
3) Lower cost of licensing software from outside sources (Dolby etc.)

 

Gold Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 1999
Registered: Feb-05
"We'll see how that one goes though as it hasn't been particularly successful so far..."

I'm sorry to hear that. Your contributions are welcome however you identify yourself. Take care.
 

Silver Member
Username: Stu_pitt

NYC, NY

Post Number: 669
Registered: May-05
"I do as well thank you for the invitation to register. I have in the past, and have deleted my prior accounts. This isn't because I have anything against the forum or anyone on it, but because I wish to focus more on other details in my life."

Does this mean you have to maintain a registration? Kind of like the continuing eductaion credits I have to earn to keep my health care certification?

Or does it mean that you need a certain number of posts every month to keep you account active?

Unless I'm wrong, I don't think you really need to maintain a registration here.
 

Anonymous
 
Its not that Stu. I'm just trying to break my addiction to this forum as well as looking at speakers, etc, so that I an spend more time doing other things with my life. I get too obsessive over these things and tend to neglect what is more important unfortunately. While that doesn't mean I have to break all ties here, I feel I need to significantly scale them back.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Paul98

Post Number: 39
Registered: Oct-05
I have been looking to upgrade my receiver, currently trying to find a great deal on a HK 435. But I might have to check out this receiver see how it sounds.
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2619
Registered: Mar-05
Paul, if you have a credit card buy both at Circuit City and AB them. I'd bet 3-1 odds that you'll end up returning the HK.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Paul98

Post Number: 43
Registered: Oct-05
Well I went to pick one up to try, and they were out of stock:-(. I almost picked up that onkyo txlr552 digital receiver to try out and see how I like d-class amps. anyone know how they compair? Plus I usually like a warmer sound which is why I really liked the HK. But I really want to try out one of these to see how it works.

Also my center channel is a 4( or 6ohm speaker), rest are 8ohm, are these going to have a problem with it?
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2624
Registered: Mar-05
I had the 552 for about 2 weeks before returning it, Fry's had it on clearance for just $100. It wasn't bad, actually much better than the Onkyo 601 I bought and quickly returned when I first started this hobby, but not quite the same power and finesse as the Panny.

Funny thing was, I had a big audiophile friend over (the guy has 4 different systems in his house which probably cost double my car) and we were ABing the 552 with my NAD separates. He clearly preferred the NAD separates all the way through...but there was one juncture where we had some sort of miscommunication and he thought I told him that I had already switched back from the Onkyo to the NAD when in fact I had not---and he started gushing about how great the NAD's analog sound was, when in fact it was still the Onkyo that he was listening to!

ROTFL...

*this* is the reason why I like the idea of blind ABX testing so much. My friend has promised to come back for a real blindfold test, so we'll see about that...
 

Bronze Member
Username: Paul98

Post Number: 44
Registered: Oct-05
Well I just ordered one online, plus have that 30 day no hastle return policy. Have at one point or another used a Denon 1801, Kenwood VR407, HK 525, and Pioneer 1014. The HK 525 had by far the best sound out of the bunch, as it was a much warmer sound than the rest. Didn't like the pioneer much at all. Plus my brother who lives near by has a system also with NAD amp, maybe Denon or Pioneer eliete receiver. I am not sure as he has changed them a couple times. He has Definitive, and Klipsch, and I have Polk, I will be posting my thoughts on the receiver when I get it, have it broken in and tested.
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2626
Registered: Mar-05
Yes, please post a detailed review. I am very curious as to how you'll like it compared to the HK in particular. Might also be interesting to take it over to your brother and see how it compares to his gear.

Which model Polks do you have?
 

Bronze Member
Username: Paul98

Post Number: 45
Registered: Oct-05
RT2000, FX500i, and LSiC( at some time I will upgrade all to LSi series, as I totally love the sound of those speakers), yeah I am sure we will be trying it out on both systems. It should be ariving around the 28th.

My brothers definitives are BP10 I think, and klipsch are RP5 I think.

I will also be testing it out with SACD, and DVD-Audio.
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2627
Registered: Mar-05
Interesting, you have 8 ohm towers with a 4 ohm center. I've heard of people running 4 ohm Maggies with these Pannys, I look forward to hearing how that LSi C does.
 

Silver Member
Username: Cheapskate

Post Number: 446
Registered: Mar-04
WOW! did i stir a hornets nest up or what?

as to maggies... they sound great... love em' but i'm already 1/2 the way there and don't see investing in 4 channels worth of them as worth it anymore. my superzeros are buttkicking little image monsters that never reached their full potential before.

yes.. i have stated that i absolutely MUST have treble detail more times than any old timers care to hear, but i wouldn't call the panny bright at all. now that it's breaking in, i'd actually say it's pretty darned warm, but it still can snap a tweeter with decent speed. i'm curious as to how my very fast for soft dome tweeter mission M71s will sound in the system. they were downright fatiguing with the onkyo which i now know was grainy having something to compare it against.

the thing that i'm impressed with most, which doesn't include tonality which is not the type (warm) i would have sought out, is the simple EASE that everything i put into the panny comes out with. everything sounds more organic and whole.

come on JV... you like to nitpick don't you? in GENERAL metal domes sound crisper and faster while cloth domes tend to sound more forgiving. of course it's possible for one to outdo the other in a specific category, but in general, that's the sound. you know it is... you just hate it whenever anyone generalizes don't you.

tubes sound warm. don't argue with me on that.. argue with EVERY reviewer who reviews tube gear. the one time i heard a muffled tube amp that i begged the store owner to swap for SS to no avail when listening to phase acoustics monitors, i'm inclined to believe them.

i might not have experience with 1,000 tweeter auditions, but the newest metal domes in B&W speakers are pretty darned fast and detailed compared to ANY tweeter my ears have come across including planars. my NHTs have extension to something like 24KHz, but they really don't sound like it. even my missions sound faster with their lighter cloth domes. light = speed... really?

by "taking control of my tweeters" i mean that the panasonic has removed alot of the HF congestion still left in the onkyo which EASILY bested that hideous wet blanket NAD. i think that the onkyo is brighter, but the panny is faster and more detailed. i hear alot more HF texture in white noise and buzzing type sounds and HF whistling noises aren't as stressful anymore.

today i noticed that a very low level HF sound that i could hear with my onkyo and that literally jumped out of B&Ws to the point of being stressful was barely audible on the panny. i'm starting to think it's tonally dark, but better controlled.

i just hear alot less grain in my system now. especially at lower volumes, i no longer have to strain to hear dialogue. dynamics really jump forth now where they didn't before.

as mentioned, it could be part of the 2X power rating, but according to my panny, i'm listening to 86dB speakers at -40dB on average. that's alot more than 3dB headroom.

regardless... anthing that makes metallic percussion sound slower and more blurred is definately a crime against nature to my ears. actually, i feel that way for all frequencies.

real sounds do NOT take their time like most speakers do. when i hear a cowbell get struck... it darned well better *CLICK* and not *thhhhlighhhhhhh*.

reality = no time delay and no late echo to MY EARS at least. maybe YOUR ears think that bass that massages your gut no matter how sluggish or resonant it is equals reality... that's your priority.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 6243
Registered: May-04


As I said, this is a forum where people with various levels of experience and knowledge gather to (hopefully) learn a bit more about the hobby they enjoy. My comments were made to clarify some of the statements you had posted. Statements which I felt might mislead someone reading this thread.


Speed and "brightness" have nothing to do with the material the tweeter is constructed from nor the frequency extension the manufacturer claims.

To that end, I have to "nit pick" the comments made here; "my NHTs have extension to something like 24KHz, but they really don't sound like it."


What, in your estimation, does extension to 24kHz sound like? In all the years I sold audio I had a few females tell me they heard the 19kHz carrier signal on stereo FM broadcasts or the 21kHz signal from a motion detector on the security system. I would be every impressed with anyone who could hear to 24k and I would still ask them what "extension to 24kHz" sounds like.



"i started to crave the treble speed and extension that superior metal domes seemed to offer."

"even my missions sound faster with their lighter cloth domes. light = speed... really?"


I think we can see where the problem comes in when those two statements are placed together. While moving mass will have some affect on the "speed" of a driver, the general consensus would be the mass of the driver has far less to do with the ability of the driver to respond quickly than does the motor system responsible for moving the mass.


Sorry if you see this as "nit picking"; I see it as making certain some commonly held falsehoods are not spread into the ranks of those trying to learn about audio.



 

Gold Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 6244
Registered: May-04


BTW, it would appear from your (and ed's) reaction to the Panasonic's sound quality, that speakers are not the most important part of the system. I'm sure most everyone on the forum agrees with that, but it should be pointed out to those just learning how to put a system together.


 

Bronze Member
Username: Paul98

Post Number: 49
Registered: Oct-05
Well I checked amazon.com today, and my XR55 shipped yesterday. I hope to get it in the next day or 2. I am happy because when I ordered it, it said it wouldn't ship untill the 24th.

So I expect to have the receiver and my thoughts on it up much earlier.
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2645
Registered: Mar-05
> BTW, it would appear from your (and ed's) reaction to the Panasonic's sound quality, that speakers are not the most important part of the system.

Yes. My experience has been that the speakers and power source are of equal importance, with the music source coming in afterward.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Paul98

Post Number: 54
Registered: Oct-05
Well it arrived today, I hooked up a couple of the basic connnections. all I can say about the sound clarity is WOW. I am amazed, it is crystal clear. The sound is amazing, there is clarity that I didn't hear in any other receiver I have tried. I feel like I can finally hear any and everything, plus great sound stage. It feels like it's almost too clear.

Now the only bad thing I can say is that at certain volumes I get this high pitch whine sound. It's very strange at vol less than -45 or so the whine isn't all that high, then from 45-40 it get higher and higher. Then 40-33 or so I don't hear any whine at all. Then again from 33-27 I hear it. Then it goes away again at 25. Also it's different for different inputs. Sometime I get a whine out of the speakers, sometime it's comming from the receiver it's self. I will have to see if it goes away after a couple days of useage. I also might want to check my connections to see if there is any interferance anywhere. Anyone else hearing this?

I am for sure keeping this thing, I can't beleive the sound you can get from it. Now I am really looking forward to see what they come out with in this sort of stuff. I can't wait to see what kind of power they will be able to make.

I still need to finish hooking it up which is a real pain where my equipment is. I will continue to post my thoughts after I finish connecting everything and use it over the next weeks. Plus once my brother trys it with his equipment.
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2662
Registered: Mar-05
Paul,

Great! Glad to hear you're also bowled over. Yep, $230 goes a heck of a lot farther all of the sudden doesn't it? lol

(btw, you might want to start a separate thread with a detailed review when you get the chance.)

The whining you are hearing is very unusual, I have never heard any other xr55 owner report this. I think you might have a defective unit. A good way to find out is when you take it over to your brother's house if it still has the same problem then you know it's not because of anything in your setup.
 

Silver Member
Username: Rsxman

Post Number: 120
Registered: Jul-05
Man...i am going to get this damn receiver as soon as I can now....edster stop finding things for me to buy!!!

I wonder how much better it will make the Fluance speakers sound?

I finally got the pioneer elite receiver to sound awesome with them after some major tweaking.
 

Silver Member
Username: Cheapskate

Post Number: 455
Registered: Mar-04
your panny will sound a little harsh out of the box. i've heard peaople claiming one month break in times so i've been trying to leave mine running 24/7.

even in just a few hours, mine relaxed alot and is sounding warmer and warmer by the day (i'm starting to worry that it will start to sound like my dreaded warm/polite NAD if it keeps up). in fact, i hooked my mission M71s (that were downright stressful to listen to with my onkyo) up and found that they are capable of much more ease than i had thought before. they still have a little bit of a woody sound (due to their larger cabinets and cheesy 1/2" MDF i'm sure) but they are showing the nice detail qualities that i read in reviews and bought them for now. i still think my superzeros are alot less colored in the midrange if not quite as treble revealing.

yes JV, motor structures contribute to sound too, but in all of my listening experiences, the smallest and lightest driver assemblies have always sounded the best. i really wish i could get a chance to listen to my former friend's infinitys (that got me into hifi to begin with) with their 1/2" tweeters again.
(infinities LOOKS correct, but there's a "Y" in the NAME)

the best tweeters i've ever heard are B&Ws newest metal domes (i can't really recall the sound of the infinity emit ribbons on the speakers i put on layaway once) and magnepan planar speakers with their featherweight drivers are the best BASS (if not the deepest) that i've ever heard for certain. of course where planars are concerned, motor assemblies ARE 1/2 of the speaker for sure.

where bass is concerned, i've NEVER heard a 12" or larger woofer that didn't sound like a fat lazy pig ever and porting only makes things worse, but a 4 1/2" sealed woofer can snap without draining much from the speed of reality.

overhand is evil. overhang is ugly. there is ZERO overhang in reality. if a driver can't keep up with the speed of reality, it's total junk to my ears. the "warm" sound that everyone likes isn't reality... it's a "pleasing distortion" that doesn't exist in reality. cowbells don't sound warm in reality, they sound crisp and fast.

yes... i'm a treble freak because REAL treble isn't slow and blurry. reality has warts. cover those warts, and you create a clown mask as far as i'm concerned. along similar lines... i think women are almost always sexier without makeup.

when others claim that their "pretty psychoacustics" are "true reality", yes i take issue. reality has no EQ curve that bumps midbass and rolls treble off. it might sound more pleasing to the ear, but it isn't reality.

those are my OPINIONS. anyone that likes lousy sluggish one note ported woofers for their ugly distortion rich "scale" need not pay a second's attention to anything i ever say. anyone that thinks that the more you can remove the sounds and distortions of mechanical devices the better, then you're in my camp.

NO audio camp has the ultimate answer. each seperate one has it's own individual priorities on what sounds real. a big part of the audio equation is the LISTENER and the baggage they bring to any system audition.

if you REALLY want to hear reality... toss your amps an speakers out, buy a pair of good headphones and listen to a binaural recording! LOL

why am i laughing? it's the truth. i've made way more realistic sounding recordings tinkering with my shure PZM mics taped to a sand filled 2 gallon plastic jug on a sony professional portable cassette deck than i've ever hear on any speaker system with any recording. when you hear a true left/right sound and an image depth into the hundreds of feet, then you'll have an idea of real hifi is. i wonder how much better my tinkering would sound with a true dummy head. i bet it would clear the hole in the center image up alot.

regardless of the center image, binaural sounds are the most natural i've ever heard. the first time i heard "binaural" was when i was playing with my sister's girlfriend's boombox back in the 80s and recorded someone walking into the room and talking to me. when i listened to the recording on headphones the next day, i jumped thinking someone was really in the room. the captured acoustic space fooled me with even cheap dynamic mics on a n $80 boombox tape deck. later i read about dummy head recordings.

i really should buy some binaural CDs, but none of the ones i've seen are anything i find musically interesting.

jazz? *vomit*
bach? *yawn*
thunderstorms? fun, but i can't dance to them
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2688
Registered: Mar-05
Eric,

now if you want to see some really sweet-looking stuff, check out the digital gear on this website:

http://www.acoustic-reality.com/

Have no idea how it actually sounds though, very few reviews of this manufacturer. Just some luscious eye candy...
 

Silver Member
Username: Rsxman

Post Number: 121
Registered: Jul-05
wow.......just bizarre stuff
 

Silver Member
Username: Cheapskate

Post Number: 469
Registered: Mar-04
the person the mentioned acoustic reality to me loves his amps driving his maggie tweeter panels.

there are alot of great class d amps out there that are getting great reviews:
Impact Audio
Toccata Industry: TacT Millennium
Bel Canto Design: Tripath
Jeff Rowland
PS Audio: HCA 2
eVo
DIYCable: Exodus
Flying Mole: Mole DAD-M100
Acoustic Reality
Sinic Impact: Class-T ($30!!! & being $450 modded! LOL)
Nuforce (i like the "high end" look of these)
Hypex (DIY)
and
Halcro (which has been called "the best in the world") by more than one reviewer. check halcros out of you want to see a really wierd looking amp.

besides the ridiculously cheap panasonic SA-XR models that aren't getting much serious press but raves in forums.
 

Gold Member
Username: Artk

Albany, Oregon USA

Post Number: 2048
Registered: Feb-05
I've heard the Halcro's driving Wilson Maxx 2's. Wow! Unbelievable sound.
 

New member
Username: Altern8

Post Number: 1
Registered: Oct-05
ok, I just got the panny sa-xr-55k. I do like this amp and am glad that it will get a little less bright. one thing i dont understand is why the factory presets on the EFFECT are at a full 7, it sounds all echo'y, i like it at 1, is there any reason for this EFFECT? There is another thing i am worried about, when my panny is in standby mode(off) it has a very high pitched tone comeing out of the reciever itself, you may have to put your ear right up to a vent, have either of you experienced this. Im thinking of returning it because i can forsee it getting worse. also what is a reasonable numarical volume for your amp, im running 120w jvc satalites? it seems as though i have to turn it up awful high to get it loud enough, around -29
 

Bronze Member
Username: Paul98

Post Number: 64
Registered: Oct-05
"ok, I just got the panny sa-xr-55k. I do like this amp and am glad that it will get a little less bright."

If you are having a problem with it being too bright right now you might want to turn down treble a couple of notches.

"one thing i dont understand is why the factory presets on the EFFECT are at a full 7, it sounds all echo'y, i like it at 1, is there any reason for this EFFECT?"

I don't know about that, I didn't have anything on the effects when I turned mine on.

"There is another thing i am worried about, when my panny is in standby mode(off) it has a very high pitched tone comeing out of the reciever itself, you may have to put your ear right up to a vent, have either of you experienced this. Im thinking of returning it because i can forsee it getting worse."

I get that at certain volumes when my receiver is on but not when it's off. It's been getting better, it used to be below 43 I could hear a whine, and at 43 I coudl hear a louder whine then at 40 I couldn't hear it again untill 33 or so. But now I don't hear any whine below 43 and I only hear one between 43 and 42 volume. I hope it continues to go away. I will try it more in a week. But give it some time it might get better, if it doesnt' return the receiver and try a new one. Also there might be something interfering with it's power.

"also what is a reasonable numarical volume for your amp, im running 120w jvc satalites? it seems as though i have to turn it up awful high to get it loud enough, around -29"

What do you mean by "loud enough," also is that on movies, cd's, the tuner,...? What are you listening to? There are a couple sources I need to turn it up to 30 or higher to get decent volume. Where as others are plenty loud at -47 or -40,
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 2705
Registered: Mar-05
Nate---see my response in the other thread.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Ptarmigan

Post Number: 13
Registered: Nov-05
Hmmm, I think I lost the thread of this enlightening discussion. So this comment may not be entirely sequential.
Panasonic created Technics in the late 70s as a foray into true hifi. Some of their initial stuff was truly high end for its day, yet reasonably priced. Remember their turntables? They even made some good cassettes.
What people may have forgotten is their computer Class A, or Class A+ amps. I have one. It is small but heavy. And it produces, still, a sweet, warm sound. In its day it was a marvel of quality for such a low price. But it had two problems: People judged their buys mainly on watts, not sound. And the 1980s Technics receiver was butt ugly.
I hooked it up recently and it still sounds warm. But it has an odd quirk: It almost sounds like it has an expander circuit. This is apparently because the Class A bias circuit would shift gears in response to changes in the music volume. It is also a little short on detail by today's standards, but it produces tons of bass and plenty of treble. In short, it was a serious and successful attempt to produce good sound inexpensively.
So if someone says that Panasonic makes a good receiver, I wouldn't sneer at them. Why they didn't keep the Technics name is a bit of a mystery. Panasonic actually used to have a better reputation for consistent quality than Sony, in my opinion. The problem is that Panasonic's reputation in the past few years has been going through the floor, from what I can tell from product reviews. I read that their DVD players were only lasting about six months. I think they are aiming more for cheap than for quality. But I could be wrong.

 

Bronze Member
Username: Fps_dean

Williamstown, MA USA

Post Number: 96
Registered: Oct-05
This is a little late, but Jan you are 100% correct when you said "There is no correlation between the bandwidth response of any well designed audio amplifier and its inherent 'sound'."

My father has a Denon DRA-685. it claims to put out bass to 5Hz or something really low like that and highs up to 50kHz or so (I am going by memory). I just got my Mcintosh MAC 1900 in tuesday and its frequency response I believe is 20Hz - 20 or 22kHz, not nearly as good as the Denon. The lows I can actually hear extend to lower frequencies, and likewise the highs go higher. And everything is better detailed.

Also most speakers will not put out many of the frequencies that many of these amps claim they put out so it does not matter because they are going to be inaudible. Additionally, different speakers react to different signals and power a little bit differently. Point in hand - my father has some Sansuis that sound the same no matter what you run through them. He has also had my Column IIs for the past 5 years because I never had an amp that could drive them and they sound fairly sloppy with his Denon, but sound killer with my new Mcintosh.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Fps_dean

Williamstown, MA USA

Post Number: 97
Registered: Oct-05
Digial amps should be a great way to buy a cheap CD player and have it still sound good too, because the most important part of a CD player is the D/A convertor!

My setup just greatly improved when I got the Mcintosh on tuesday. In addition to having a better amp, I can now use my speakers and give my father back his Boston Acoustics. Only thing that I now need is a better CD player. I am contemplating using my computer because I have a good sound card in that and I bet that would kill any of my cd players.
 

Jeffrey-WNY
Unregistered guest
I just wanted to add that I've had the same experience as Nate (Oct. 25) -- when my XR55 is in standby mode, it emits a very high pitched sound, almost like a hearing test signal. It only happens when it's cool in the room (about 65 degrees). I didn't notice the ringing until the weather got chilly here in Buffalo. [subliminal comment -- poor guy] When I turn the receiver on, the sound goes away ... same when the room is warmer. My guess is that the electricity in the standby mode is warming up the circuitry just enough to make something vibrate inside. BTW, I'm using the XR55 with the Panasonic F-86 CD/DVD changer, video circuit turned off, connected through the digital coax input.
 

New member
Username: Altern8

Post Number: 8
Registered: Oct-05
finally someone that at least believes me. iv sent it out and yelled at panasonic and no ones done anything about it. at least im not the only one. that makes me feel a little better. I did notice that after i had been listening to it for a while and then I shut it off, it didnt make a noise. but my apartments usually just below 70*.
 

Jeffrey-WNY
Unregistered guest
It's a little annoying because I can hear the ringing from about three feet away, but I don't think there's anything wrong with the receiver itself -- I think it's a flaw in the design -- so I haven't considered returning it. Anyway, winter doesn't last forever in Buffalo ... it should warm up somewhat by June. It's a great receiver otherwise and I'm going to use it to biamp my speakers when I get around to it.
 

Silver Member
Username: Cheapskate

Post Number: 531
Registered: Mar-04
wow... i haven't heard that from mine. maybe it's because my room is warmer at around 75 degrees usually.

from what i've read, the panny maintains a pure digital signal to the amp if you feed it a digital in, but yesterday, i tried hooking my new sony DVD player up via *gasp* analogue ins to see what happened as i'm considering getting some SACDs.

the results have left me scratching my head big time. as far as i can tell with a few seconds delay of switching between CD (analogue) and DVD (digital) and volume matching by ear, it sounds like the sony is actually more detailed and quick in the treble via analogue!

i don't get it one bit. 1st i associate sony with an overly polite trebled "house sound" and 2nd would think that D/A back to A/D conversion would only add distortion to the sound.

either i'm hearing more detail because my volume matching isn't as good as i think it is, or the panny uses a really high A/D sampling rate and that my sony has superior SACD D/A converters.

the results are driving me nuts because they go against everything i expected.

i'm inclined to think that those who claim that the signal is digital straight to the amp are mistaken. true, the amp is digital switching, but my understanding is that the switching is only the power supply regulation kind of like the handles on a faucet and not the actual signal.

if any of you other panny owners feel ambitious, try hooking your DVD players up with RCAs and see if you hear any improvement over coax.

if you already think your panny is bright (i don't, not at the volumes i listen anyways) you might not like the results, but if you'd like a bit more treble air... well... see what happens.

i'm inclined to think that the panny has great amps and slightly polite D/A converters. the only other thing i can think of is that the sony's coax has some jitter that's smearing the treble just a bit.

my onkyo -> onkyo setup (same exact D/A converters i think) sounded a little better with generic video cables for coax than $35 monster cables for analogue, but the sony sounds better with the stock A/V cable in analogue to a supposedly "all digital reciever". 2 extra D/A-A/D conversions shouldn't yield more detail.

at least i know one thing... i'm not hearing what i want to hear like i think tweak-a-holics do sometimes. i heard the exact opposite of what i expected.

demagnetized CDs? puhleeeeeeese! LOL
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 3084
Registered: Mar-05
can't really comment on the technical reasons, but I have my Marantz CDP hooked up to my xr55 with both a coax and a set of analog cables. It definitely has a crisper, more trebly sound on the coax and a softer, warmer sound on the analog---subtle though, not something that really jumps out at you. I switch back and forth between the two depending on the source material sometimes, or just for kicks.

Haven't tried this with my DVD player though, since I have no intention of ever watching movies in stereo when I can get Dolby surround.
 

Silver Member
Username: Cheapskate

Post Number: 537
Registered: Mar-04
my DVD player is my CD player. i've never seen the need to own both. i gave my sony CD player away when i got my 1st DVD player which is awaiting a new home now as it's starting to act up again. it would be a shame to see it go unused before it's time is finally up.

if your marantz sounds warmer than the panny, then i'd be inclined to think that sony DVD/SACD are alot airier than their circa '97 CD players were.

i think i'll be using multichannel ins for movies down the road, and might even end up getting a second DEQ2496 for surround EQ eventually. i'll need to get one to start out with and see how it's D/A converters fare. i KNOW i'd be using an extra A/D-D/A stage if i ever went multichannel, but i'll try straight digital for CDs first.

it's too bad that no-one with a panasonic SA-XR also owns a benchmark DAC. how sick would that setup be?
 

Gold Member
Username: Edster922

Abubala, Ababala The Occupation

Post Number: 3092
Registered: Mar-05
> if your marantz sounds warmer than the panny, then i'd be inclined to think that sony DVD/SACD are alot airier than their circa '97 CD players were.

Well, "airy" to you probably would mean "bright" to me. Different tastes I guess.

Are your NHTs bi-ampable? If they are, you can even further increase the treble response with the Panny because it lets you set how much power goes to the tweeter vs. how much goes to the woofer in bi-amp mode. I have it tilted to favor the woofer, as you might've guessed.

> it's too bad that no-one with a panasonic SA-XR also owns a benchmark DAC. how sick would that setup be?

Actually I think this ex-Rotel owner does:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=6492921#post6492921
« Previous Thread Next Thread »



Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us