# audiophile speakers for a tight budget?



## darcangelo

hello, I'm interested into some good speakers for a low price (200 EUR max)... I'd also like to have a LOT of bass in them. At first I wanted to go for some computer amplified speakers but I get the impression from reading stuff here that they're not really good... So does anyone around know of a 200 EUR max solution for getting good bass-heavy speakers? Oh and I already have a 2 channel amp so active speakers are kindof redundant (but I'd still need an active subwoofer, supposing I'd go for one...)


----------



## eyeteeth

There is no such thing as "audiophile" speakers for $200EUR/$240USD unless you stretch the term audiophile to include all speakers. And that you want "good bass-heavy speakers" implies you are eliminating monitors and looking for full range speakers. You could find $200EUR full range speakers with lots of bass but they will be far from audiophile.


----------



## dudlew

I think he means not the pioneer or sony or some other none factor brand in affordable speakers that their drivers arebare paper with foam surrounds.

 It all depends on your setup. If you have a good amp yo can look for a used speaker like Mission's or Acoustic Energy's most affordable stand mounters. I hear that these speakers generally produce a satisfying bass and the rest of the sound is not too bad. You could check these out or other similar speakers, but if bass is paramount, then you could probably look for the biggest thing you can find for your price range!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 D


----------



## ooheadsoo

Got tools handy? This is probably your best bet, thanks to terabyte for reminding me: http://speakerbuilder.net/web_files/...D3/dayton3.htm 

 If you can build a cabinet and solder, these will go down to 37hz and I don't think that accounts for any room gain. There's an 8" mtm version floating around out there on the web too, but it sacrifices some midrange clarity.

 If you have to buy something, I recently heard of this Chinese speaker that is supposed to sound really good: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...62696&tc=photo
 Yeah, that's real wood for under $200. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 In western world costs, $200 wouldn't even cover the cost of the cabinet. I just paid $100 for an unfinished mdf cabinet way smaller than those.


----------



## Sovkiller

Get a pair of Axioms, and later on the subwoofer, with no sub you will not get bass in a 200.00-300.00 euro speakers....


----------



## ADS

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_Got tools handy? This is probably your best bet, thanks to terabyte for reminding me: http://speakerbuilder.net/web_files/...D3/dayton3.htm 

 If you can build a cabinet and solder, these will go down to 37hz and I don't think that accounts for any room gain. There's an 8" mtm version floating around out there on the web too, but it sacrifices some midrange clarity.

 If you have to buy something, I recently heard of this Chinese speaker that is supposed to sound really good: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...62696&tc=photo
 Yeah, that's real wood for under $200. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 In western world costs, $200 wouldn't even cover the cost of the cabinet. I just paid $100 for an unfinished mdf cabinet way smaller than those._

 

I'm actually building the Dayton IVs (aka Lyras) for a nice budget speaker system in my apartment. The parts+shipping cost me about $300 US. I haven't finished them, but supposedly they compare favourably with speakers costing many times as much. I'll probably post a review here when I finish.


----------



## meat01

Maybe Mission monitors?


----------



## rsaavedra

In Europe a pair of used Triangle Titus speakers might go for around 200 EUR?, maybe without shipping though.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ADS* 
_I'm actually building the Dayton IVs (aka Lyras) for a nice budget speaker system in my apartment. The parts+shipping cost me about $300 US. I haven't finished them, but supposedly they compare favourably with speakers costing many times as much. I'll probably post a review here when I finish._

 

Very cool. Be sure to let us know how it goes. The D3 comes in at $150 though and mdf will be about $25. As long as he has the tools, he can do it under $200..

 I'm building the mbow1 2 way monitor with plans to convert it to the mbow1 3 way later on in my life. Parts and cabinet for the mbow1 2 way come out to a bit over $500 though. You could save about $70 if you had the tools to build a cabinet, and I would have tried if it hadn't been for the routing necessary for the tweeter and the roundovers for all the baffle edges. I'll try to document my building process, hopefully you can do yours too


----------



## cosmopragma

Sorry,any new speakers for 200 are total crap.
 You'll have to buy used to get half decent speakers in this price range.
 What speaker amp do you own?
 Room size?


----------



## eyeteeth

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cosmopragma* 
_Sorry,any new speakers for 200 are total crap._

 

I salute you're frankness.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Used is almost always better than new in just about any price range 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Considering that the cost of parts in a speaker is typically 10%-25% of a speaker's retail price, calculated using retail market prices on said parts, used and diy speakers just start to sound better and better, eh?


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cosmopragma* 
_Sorry,any new speakers for 200 are total crap.
 You'll have to buy used to get half decent speakers in this price range.
 What speaker amp do you own?
 Room size?_

 

Well, in fact 200.00 is a little tight, but if you go DIY you could get, for let's say 300.00, the sound of maybe 2000.00 market speakers, using the best parts available.

 OTOH there are still very good choices in the market for that price, in studio monitors, and other small brands, Axioms, Polk, Athena, included. Of course maybe they won't compete with multithousands speakers setups, but do sound good.
 OTOH more important than the speakers themselves, are the room size, geometry, acoustic treatments, placement, etc....that everybody seems ot forget frequently, just to get good expensive speakers and place them wherever, will not give you a good sound, and that's for sure....


----------



## eyeteeth

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* 
_Well, in fact 200.00 is a little tight, but if you go DIY you could get, for let's say 300.00, the sound of maybe 2000.00 market speakers, using the best parts available...._

 

That's optimistic if we're going to throw the word "audiophile" around. 

 SEAS EXCEL-VIFA-SCAN SPEAK-FOCAL,etc

 prices of some drivers & kits:
http://ldsg.snippets.org/sect-15.php3


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *eyeteeth* 
_That's optimistic if we're going to throw the word "audiophile" around. 

 SEAS EXCEL-VIFA-SCAN SPEAK-FOCAL,etc

 prices of some drivers & kits:
http://ldsg.snippets.org/sect-15.php3_

 

Yep, of course if you go to the top of the line drivers, of course they are expensive, but Vifa has a lot of inexpensive good drivers, same as other brands, one kit that I like is the Dinavox one, very nice indeed, IIRC it is a Dynaudio clone, but of course vifa has tweeters of 250.00 plus also each, we aretalking of inexpensive good speakers, not the best money can buy....


----------



## ooheadsoo

Drivers aren't that expensive, you know. Usually the greatest cost is the cabinet. Crossover parts are often more expensive than the drivers when you diy and get good parts. The tweeter in the speaker I'm building is arguably the best dome tweeter bar none, and it's only $180 for a matched +/- 0.5db pair. Normal scans and seas type drivers are typically less than $100 each unless you're talking about subwoofers with massive cast frames and motors. You won't see any of these woofers in any commercial offering until you get near or past $2000. You won't see premium crossover parts - ever - in a commercial design, and when you use them in diy kits, it gets pricy REAL fast. But since even the best commercial designers don't use them, you can probably skimp there. Even Wilson speakers use run of the mill scan speaks, etc. Nothing special. There are also other good drivers in the world outside of the danish ones 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Cabinets are usually at least $500+ in an expensive kit. Building the cabinet yourself takes it down to $50 worth of mdf at most (maybe more if you're making a line array,) + bits and odds depending on veneer etc. 

 The dayton drivers are definitely budget but definitely bang for buck. When you're on a budget, it's NOT a bad place to look. The dayton woofer was chosen because 1) it's cheap, and 2) it does great bass, which is one of his main criteria. As diy'ers know, better cheap drivers and a good crossover than expensive drivers and a cheap crossover. At $150 not including the cabinet, you can get peerless (danish! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




)woofers and northcreek tweeters, no problem. Or there's another design around $230 minus cabinet that will match gr-research's m130 woofer to a bg planar neo 3 electrostat tweeter. There's good stuff to be had for cheap, that's for sure. You won't find stuff of this quality anywhere near the price commercially until you go used.

 Here's a link to some basic reasons why to diy: http://ellisaudio.com/whydiy.htm
 Here's one on xover components: http://ellisaudio.com/CrossoverComponents.htm
 Dave Ellis has a bunch of interesting articles.


----------



## Sovkiller

Honestly with 300.00 I will not look any other place than Axioms, for 300.00 you will not go far better, not even DIY....titanium tweaters, aluminum woofer, natural crossover, nice cabinets. What the heck? And 30 days to try them


----------



## ooheadsoo

NM.


----------



## erikzen

I've been talking with Brian Bunge at Rutledge Audio Design in Georgia. This is a small operation and I don't think they do this full time. They generally build speakers on order although to specific designs they have already developed.

 I was in a situation where I needed the smallest speakers possible and I found the RAD Micros. They usually sell for $200 a pair but Brian has some that are already made with a previous design. When I called him to ask about the speakers we ended up chatting for close to half an hour about audio.

 Now, keep in mind that for $100 each you're not getting audiophile in the true sense of the word. The speaker is a single driver and will not give you really deep bass. However, he is developing a nice subwoofer that will be in the neighborhood of $300-$350 and will go pretty low. What I like about the speaker though is that it isn't made of plastic, like so many small ones are. The cabinets are medium density fiberboard (MDF) with real wood veneers.

 I have not received these speakers yet and have no idea how they sound. I figure for $200 if they don't sound like a boombox I'll be happy, and if they sound halfway decent I might just have Brian make me a sub.

 Now I don't know if they will ship to Europe and even if they do the cost may be prohibitive, but then again you never know.

 If you're at all interested the website is http://www.rutledgeaudiodesign.com/index.htm

 I found out about the RAD Micros from this other thread I posted about a week ago. Check it out: http://www5.head-fi.org/forums/showt...light=speakers


----------



## ooheadsoo

I'd be interested in hearing how those full range drivers sound. True point source must image pretty well, eh? No crossover to get in the way either. Perfect phase integration and everything 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Happy to hear you took the plunge on the micros. Be sure to let us know how they sound. You got the pair with the spring clips right?

 Btw, don't go for these if you want bass for $200


----------



## erikzen

Yeah, I ordered the spring loaded ones so they only cost $150 + shipping. Thanks for pointing me in that direction.

 Not expecting a lot but after talking with Brian awhile I get the feeling he puts a lot of thought into building these things. He told me he played around with the Micros a bit with the newer designs adding in a filter (additional resistors, I guess). It seems he found the midrange a bit harsh at high volume and wanted to tame it down a little. Mine don't have the filtering but I'm not worried. With a wife and little babies around I won't be turning my amp much past 10:00 anyway.

 I'll be sure to post some impressions.


----------



## 3lusiv3

Gee, you guys are so quick to discount due to price. What about these:

http://www.audioadvisor.com/store/pr...ack%20-%20Each


----------



## Wmcmanus

First of all, don't let anyone discourage you based on your budget. Your budget is your budget, end of story. This is a very personal matter and will remain so even if in the future it expands to allow you to put $200k speakers in your bedroom! The nice thing about this hobby (audio, in general) is that there are a million and one options. As some have suggested, there may be DIY projects that will allow you to put together amazingly good speakers for 200 Euro (about US$250). I don't know what to suggest in the DIY category but know that there would be many options worth considering.

 Brands like Mission, Axiom and Triangle have all been mentioned, and these were the ones that came to my mind as well. Some years ago, I bought a pair of Mission 780's bookshelf speakers (in a stunningly beautiful Rosewood color) that cost about US$400 used, but they would probably be much less expensive now. These are phenomenal little speakers, and do not lack in the bottom end at all. Sure, they're not on par with full range speakers costing 10 times as much, but they definitely can fill a small room with a smooth, even and natural sound. If anything, they tend to be a bit on the 'lush' side and mate well with tube amplification. I just checked Audiogon, and there is a pair of Mission 701's listed for US$245 (not the same model as the 780's which I can personally recommend, but similar). This is not to promote one particular speaker (or even brand) but to demonstrate that good values are out there. BTW, those 780's are now being used as surround speakers in a small 5.1 system that features Bohlender Graebener ribbon speakers for the fronts and center, and surprisingly, they can keep up very well with the quickness of the ribbons.

 With your bugdet you are not really too far away from a used pair of Magenepan MMG's (figure about US$400, and sometimes even US$350), and now we're definitely talking 'audiophile' sound. For your application, I really wouldn't recommned these because 1) they take up a lot of space 2) they require a bit of an investment in amplification because they are inefficient, hard to drive, speakers and 3) where they lack is in the bottom end which is what you want the most. My point of bringing the MMG's up in this discussion, however, is that these are wonderful speakers that resolve details like you would never believe, and they are not far out of your budget!


----------



## sacd lover

The JMLab speakers are very, very good. I picked up a pair of the chorus 706 speakers for $225 new. Their entry level speaker, the chorus 705 was selling for under $200 at the time. These two have been superseded by the chorus S and were being closed out. Look for a speaker thats being discontinued or updated. This is where you can really get some good deals. I highly recommend JMLab as they do everything well. I havent heard a JMLab speaker that didnt sound much better than you would expect for their price.


----------



## darcangelo

aha thanks for your replies, but now with all the recomendations I'm even more confused...
 1. of course by "audiophile" I mean something that is the closest to audiophile sound for the price... I know that miracles won't happen for 200 euros but I just want the best I could get for the money.

 2. this DIY thing has got me thinking too... first of all, I don't undesrtand why you guys consider MDF panels to be so expensive, I could get it at my local DIY store for very cheap (but maybe it needs to have a certain density/ quality?)

 3. I don't really mind buying used, after all it's just a speaker, not much could go wrong, right?

 4. regarding the crossovers if I go for DIY... if I have a 4 channel amp, then I could biwire them without needing to go for a crossover at all, right? I thought nothing beat biwiring, not even the best crossovers?

 5. yeah a few specs: I have a JVC MCA-V5E integrated amp, got it used for not much, I think it can do 100W per channel in 2-channel mode and 50W per channel in 4 channel-mode. And my room if pretty small with a lot of furniture in it, so I don't have much choice in where i could place the speakers...

 6. oh and I just thought... since car subs can go on eBay for pretty low prices compared with subs for home use (like this one for example http://cgi.befr.ebay.be/ws/eBayISAPI...e=STRK:MEWA:IT ), couldn't I somehow adapt one for home use? I mean, a sub's a sub, right?

 7. and just to emphasize that I'm a total bass freak, bass is like a drug for me when listening to music


----------



## ooheadsoo

MDF is really cheap. When you want someone to build you a cabinet, that's when it gets expensive. Also, maybe you can buy smaller piece of mdf than we typically can. Here, I only have access to large sheets of mdf that are easily enough wood for 3-5 pairs of speakers and it sells for around $25-30 a sheet.

 Bi-wiring/biamping has nothing much to do with crossovers except that you can't use it in a series xover. You still need a crossover to biwire. The only time you don't use a crossover is when the designer designed the speaker to work with the natural roll off of the drivers (RARE) or if you use active xovers (pretty expensive, around $1000 for a good marchand one.) Many people and speaker designers don't even like biwiring/biamping and discourage it. There are technical white paper articles written on how and why biwiring/biamping is bad. Biwiring (not biamping,) btw, is an audiophile tweak type trend and most people, let alone engineers and designers, don't believe in it. The only thing for sure is that biamping can give you more power if done correctly.


----------



## Czilla9000

While I have never heard them, Athena Technologies makes inexpensive loudspeakers that are supposed to sound very nice and have strong bass for their size. 


 AT Audition AS-F2 Tower Speakers are $399 per pair (brand new) at audioadvisor (regular price is $600). They have *dual* 8-in woofers with a synthetic silk tweeter. 
 They are more than three feet tall 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 and have won lots of awards.
http://www.audioadvisor.com/store/pr...ers%20-%20Pair

 AT Audition AS-B1 are $179 brand new. They have also won plenty of awards and have bass for there size.
http://www.audioadvisor.com/store/pr...ers%20-%20Pair

 Once again I have never heard them personally but from what I have read they are good.


----------



## pandasonic

Since you're in Europe, how about the Wharfedale Diamond 8.1/8.2 for $200 US, i'm not sure how many EUR is that. or cheaper, 7.2. 

 Athena Technology sells a pretty good bookshelf in the BS-1. Can be had for $149 USD @ Best Buy. I think Stereophile gave it a pretty good review. I have heard these personally and they are great for computer use.


----------



## darcangelo

ah yes, I've been thinking about Wharfedale as well... I guess I could buy some used ones even cheaper.

 But what about my idea with the car sub? you guys think it would be a good idea? frankly I'm amazed by the price difference between a car sub and a home sub... I mean, for the price I could even get 2 and it would still leave some cash for some speakers!

 oh and maybe to specify a bit more on the bass thing (since after all, it'll be one of the main qualities I'm looking for...) I like the bass to sound like in a club (I listen mostly to electronic music). The closest I've come to hearing "the club sound" in a home was through a pair of Genelecs a friend owns (the middle range ones, I think the 1030s?)... of course, those are WAY out of my price range... I guess this would be kindof hard to ask, but is there anything in my price range which could get close to that Genelec sound?


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cosmopragma* 
_Sorry,any new speakers for 200 are total crap._

 

I guess you mean they are built with relatively inexpensive materials and parts, not that they necessary sound like crap. You might have meant that but I'm not sure. I would comment that certainly for $200 you can get speaker parts (e.g. drivers, crossovers, housing) with higher specs than the specs of the parts you get in general from a $200 new speaker. But putting them together, and expecting the sound to be proportionately better as the parts are supposed to be independently, would be quite naive. 

 Of course I'm biased because I own Paradigm Titans and Atoms and CC-170. I bought them knowing how they were built, since I had done my research and had seen the pics online in detail. I couldn't care less, I simply heard them at the store and they sounded great for the money. The signature of one headfier (I can't remember right now who) couldn't be more opportune: *"if it sounds good, it is good."*

 The dissapointment of the writer of some comments in one of the links posted here, being very dissapointed after "seeing" the interior of a Paradigm CC-150 is quite thought provoking. So the speaker suddenly started sounding "worse" after he knew how it was built? It was ok before, so much so that he purchased it, but then opening it he wasn't happy about their sound anymore? Talk about placebo.

 Good engineering and expensive parts are different things. A speaker built like a tank and using parts with the highest specs won't necessarily be a great performer. Not to be dogmatic about those statements, but just adding them to this soup of opinions and general points of view.


----------



## darcangelo

aha, I think I've found a way to better articulate my needs:
 a few years ago there was a track by CJ Bolland - The Prophet in which he tried to produce a song that would sound at home just like it would in a club. If you don't know the song, I have put a sample of it on my website, you can see the link below. It's that kind of deep bass (from "normally-produced" tracks, this one's a one-off production AFAIK) that I'd want from my set of speakers.

 And I included another little sample Kindzaza - Romantik Moments. Now ideally, if the speakers are good, your walls should be shaking from all the bass... it's that kind of feeling I'd want 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 so here is the page with the samples (right-click and save as when on the page)
http://membres.lycos.fr/lemmiwinkssnusnu/examples.html

 if anyone would take a moment and listen and compare it would be neat


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *darcangelo* 
_if the speakers are good, your walls should be shaking from all the bass..._

 

If "good speakers" are those that can shake walls, forget about speakers, just get an out of balance washing machine 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 J/K

 No really, for *good* wall shaking type of bass, bookshelf speakers won't do. You need full range speakers, or properly setup bookshelves + subwoofer. Either option will be kind of difficult if not impossible for <200 EUR, even DIY.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* 
_If "good speakers" are those that can shake walls, forget about speakers, just get an out of balance washing machine 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 J/K

 No really, for *good* wall shaking type of bass, bookshelf speakers won't do. You need full range speakers, or properly setup bookshelves + subwoofer. Either option will be kind of difficult if not impossible for <$200, even DIY._

 

LOL....that's true, I was looking for some quite decent bass for a long time, and for now a sub did it for me, but it was a way over 200.00, the maps was almost that, and the driver a Shiva Avatar was IIRC 150.00 at that time, enough to kiss your ***** but add the cabinet, and you are around 500.00 vecinity....just for the sub....

 Why not getting a decent bookshelves and later on the sub, with more money, I will suggest you to get the Axioms M3ti for around 275.00 US and keep on waiting for the sub later....


----------



## darcangelo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* 
_LOL....that's true, I was looking for some quite decent bass for a long time, and for now a sub did it for me, but it was a way over 200.00, the maps was almost that, and the driver a Shiva Avatar was IIRC 150.00 at that time, enough to kiss your ***** but add the cabinet, and you are around 500.00 vecinity....just for the sub....

 Why not getting a decent bookshelves and later on the sub, with more money, I will suggest you to get the Axioms M3ti for around 275.00 US and keep on waiting for the sub later...._

 

yes but that's where the multimedia speakers come in... for around 200 EURs you can get a pair of Klipsh Promedias 2.1 or some equivalent in Creative or Logitech... now the thing is that I'm bass-biased but I'd still want an all-round decent speaker... from what I read in PC audio reviews, these speakers do the job nicely, but when i read audiophile reviews they say they're crap... so what will it be?

 and what about my idea on the car sub? still waiting a reply on that one... it would be pretty easy to find a 220V - 12V transformer to make a car amp work at home...


----------



## ooheadsoo

It sounds like you'd be ok with a klipsch setup or something if the club sound is what you're aiming for. You won't be happy with "audiophile" speakers.


----------



## eyeteeth

F it


----------



## pandasonic

I agree with headsoo that you're going to be disappointed with "audiophile" speakers in this price range since they're going to lack the slamming club bass that you seem to prefer. perhaps you'd be better off with one of the logitech or klipsch computer speakers, since they have plenty of bass, sometimes too much i think.


----------



## ooheadsoo

You should consider auditioning the klipsch subwoofer. Keep in mind that you can swap out the satellites any time you want when you have money to upgrade, but blending them and finding ones of decent efficiency will be an issue. Snake has done it with his megaworks and he's happy with it.


----------



## HiGHFLYiN9

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_There are technical white paper articles written on how and why biwiring/biamping is bad._

 

Not to argue but there are probably just as many articles out there stating why it is good. I had Rick Craig design my speakers and he chose to use bi-wired crossovers, and he believes in less voodoo than any other audio nut I've known.


----------



## spwal

spend about a g and we can talk.

 there are alot of nice speakers in the 350-750 range and then get a nice pair of speaker cables.


 sorry, if you cant get into the 2 channel thing full force, stay in headphone realm.

 once you cross over, it can get real ugly real fast.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *darcangelo* 
_yes but that's where the multimedia speakers come in... for around 200 EURs you can get a pair of Klipsh Promedias 2.1 or some equivalent in Creative or Logitech... now the thing is that I'm bass-biased but I'd still want an all-round decent speaker... from what I read in PC audio reviews, these speakers do the job nicely, but when i read audiophile reviews they say they're crap... so what will it be?

 and what about my idea on the car sub? still waiting a reply on that one... it would be pretty easy to find a 220V - 12V transformer to make a car amp work at home..._

 


 Multimedia speakers are for computer use, not to use with a dedicated amp, and with a dedicated audio system, if you want to go that way, is up to you, but IMO any decent amp, receiver or whatever, will beat easily the ones inside those multimedia speakers.....and IMO i ahve not heard yet any decent sound on those, Cambridge Soundworks has some decent ones IIRC, and does not compete with any home based rig.... 
 The car sub is not an option, those are designed to give you that boomy bass, in a very small volumes, like the inside of the cars, in a room they will sound differently and the effect will be another (more volume)


----------



## ooheadsoo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *highflyin9* 
_Not to argue but there are probably just as many articles out there stating why it is good. I had Rick Craig design my speakers and he chose to use bi-wired crossovers, and he believes in less voodoo than any other audio nut I've known._

 

...Biwired or biamped? Technically, every crossover is "biwired" after it reaches the binding posts (inside the speaker.) Unless it's a series xover. That's why biwiring is viewed by most to be bunk. Biamp is a different story. Biwire is driving the tweeter and woofer with the same amp, just running two sets of wires. Biamp is using an amp for the tweets and an amp for the woofs, or an amp for the left speaker and an amp for the right speaker, though the first situation is what most people use.


----------



## HiGHFLYiN9

Yeah I know exactly what u mean. The speakers I'm referencing are enclosed in two seperate chambers so the signals are completely isolated except at the amp end.

 EDIT: I'm talking about bi-wired BTW


----------



## ooheadsoo

That's a cool design. I don't think he did it because "biwire" was the advantage though 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Most likely it was to deal with diffraction issues. Well, now that I think of it, cabinet dampening would be helped, as well as the potential to physically time align the phase.


----------



## HiGHFLYiN9

Lol, you're going a little over my head with that vocab


----------



## ooheadsoo

I was thinking of biwiring speakers that use a single cabinet. There shouldn't be any advantage there. Having separate cabinets for each driver is a different story! Hehe, I'm no expert, I've just been obsessing about where to get the money to build some diy speakers for about a year now 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 AFAIK: keeping the woofer away from the tweeter is a positive thing. You don't want the vibrations generated by the woofer to contaminate the tweeter doing its thang. Having a beefy cabinet is the usual trick. Sometimes you make a separate compartment for a specific woofer to isolate it. Things like that. These are obviously very costly in terms in time and materials so you don't see it in a commercial speaker very often. Aesthetics and WAF can also be compromised 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Tweeters are sensitive to the baffle width due to diffraction problems (sound travelling in the plane of the baffle get disturbed by the corners - the distance to the edge of the baffle determines the frequency where this kind of problem starts, etc) and typically you want the baffle to be as small as possible. If you are forced to fit the woofer into the same baffle, you'll be limited in terms of how small you can make the baffle. Phase...I'll stay out of that one 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I hope I'm not wrong on any of this and have to sneak back to edit my comments later


----------



## soundboy

FWIW, Athena Technologies speakers sound good. They are a part of the company that also manufactures Mirage and Energy speakers.....

 which brings to my latest acquisition....Energy C-3 bookshelf speakers. These are awesome bookshelf speakers!! I went into my local Good Guys (electronics chain on the West Coast) ready to lay down my $$$ for some Monitor Audio Bronze B2 and noticed the big sale on the Energy C-3 (was US$500.00/pair, now US$300.00/pair until August 5th). Oh boy, I auditioned both speakers head to head. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses, but it was the C-3 that caught my ears. Highly recommended!

 BTW, the Energy C-3 was Soundstage.com budget component of the year in 2002. And its review mentioned the C-3 in the same sentence as Revel. Wow!


----------



## Wmcmanus

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *rsaavedra* 
_The signature of one headfier (I can't remember right now who) couldn't be more opportune: *"if it sounds good, it is good."*_

 

Raul, maybe you were referring to my signature? Either way, it's so true.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* 
_Raul, maybe you were referring to my signature?_

 

No he is referring to JMT's, IIRC this was said by Duke Ellington but he was referring to music itself (jazz) not the sound, but you could apply it IMO also to the sound in general, at least I do......


----------



## rsaavedra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wmcmanus* 
_Raul, maybe you were referring to my signature? Either way, it's so true._

 

Gee it's yours Wayne!!! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 LOL! Had read it quite a few times and I really hadn't noticed it was you who had it!

 Oh now that I read the other post, maybe I've read it in JMT's posts too, I really hadn't noticed who had it, but I know I've read it several times.


----------



## Sovkiller

Well the one by Duke Ellington, says exactly what you stated:

*If it sounds good, it is good..............Duke Ellington*


----------



## rsaavedra

Sov is right, yes the one I was literally thinking of was that by the Duke, so yes then it was JMT's. Wayne yours is similar that got me thinking, but not exactly the one I had in mind.


----------



## Ferbose

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Czilla9000* 
_While I have never heard them, Athena Technologies makes inexpensive loudspeakers that are supposed to sound very nice and have strong bass for their size. 
_

 

I second that. 
 Athena AS-B2 extends to 50 Hz. Which is sufficient for a lot of music, especially in a smaller room. If it is available in your part fo the world, I would recommend it because I have read lots of positive reviews about it. They are designed similarly as my Athena S2, so I expect them to sound excellent as well.


----------



## darcangelo

OK so after considering all the options I think this would get me the best bang for the buck: I make my own cabinets from MDF boards bought at my local DIY store (it would be like 20 euors for a huge plate, probably more than enough to make some big cabinets for my speakers, anyway I could always buy another plate if I don't have enough). I have a lot of tools to work the wood since my house is currently in restauration, so basically the tools are free. That would basically leave me with 180+ Euros just to buy the drivers and crossovers! I gather I could get some decent parts for that money, right?
 oh yeah and I also happen to already have a pair of 10cm Audax drivers I could recuperate without any problems from my current speakers, I suppose I could use those as well, but for what? they're too little for bass and too big for high-range. On the other hand throwing a pair of Audax drivers to the bin would be kinof stupid. So any recomendations in the line?

 BTW for the biwiring thing... maybe I'm not doing it properly but currently I have a 4-channel amp. I basically connect the cables from each driver of my current speakers directly to a channel out of my amp. Each channel is individually adjustable so I have separate control over the amplification of each driver in my speakers, thus rending any crossover completely useless (hence I'd have 180+ EUR just for the drivers)... now I thought this was a good thing, but you people seem to say otherwise... so what will it be??


----------



## cosmopragma

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *darcangelo* 
_BTW for the biwiring thing... maybe I'm not doing it properly but currently I have a 4-channel amp. I basically connect the cables from each driver of my current speakers directly to a channel out of my amp. Each channel is individually adjustable so I have separate control over the amplification of each driver in my speakers, thus rending any crossover completely useless (hence I'd have 180+ EUR just for the drivers)... now I thought this was a good thing, but you people seem to say otherwise... so what will it be??_

 

What was the original purpose of the 4 channels amp?
 Delivering sound into 2 rooms? Is it an old 4 channel surround amp?
 I have to simplify to keep it short, but I hope you'll get the picture.
 However, what you are doing is feeding each driver with the amplified full range signal, from 20 Hz deepest bass up to the highest treble at 20000 Hz.
 A bass driver isn't supposed to reproduce treble, but you can force it to try.
 At least it isn't good at it.A way too huge mass isn't good in the sphere of quick moves, it's lame, probably lots of distortion, and it's heavily rolled of treble interferes with the treble of the much better suited tweeter.
 The drivers don't have the same timing when reproducing the same frequenzies.
 Mud on the dancefloor.
 A friend even fried a passive subwoofer by fooling around with an nonappropriate signal. Same for the other driver(s), vice versa, don't know about dangers there.
*One* of the purposes of crossovers is to split the signal in order to deliver the appropriate range to the specialized drivers.It is common practice to use crossovers since at least it simply sounds better.


----------



## cosmopragma

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *darcangelo* 
_SMI²LE_

 

Birthday 4.9.1980?
 I didn't expect that anybody younger than 35 knows about our dreams represented by this acronym.
 But maybe SMI²LE is a popular belgian punk rock band.


----------



## ooheadsoo

You can't just take an audax driver and plop it into any random design. You should know exactly what driver it is and then go search for designs made for that driver. Also, keep in mind that not all designs are good. You kinda have to go out on a limb of faith.


----------



## darcangelo

Quote:


 I didn't expect that anybody younger than 35 knows about our dreams represented by this acronym.
 But maybe SMI²LE is a popular belgian punk rock band. 
 

hehe no but if you're into psytrance (like I am), you'll find that the 60s spirit is still pretty much alive... I recomend you take a trip to Goa (India) and you'll see the 60's San Francisco spirit all over again


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Ferbose* 
_I second that. 
 Athena AS-B2 extends to 50 Hz. Which is sufficient for a lot of music, especially in a smaller room. If it is available in your part fo the world, I would recommend it because I have read lots of positive reviews about it. They are designed similarly as my Athena S2, so I expect them to sound excellent as well._

 

It will sound good, but I really strongly doubt that any 6-1/2" driver will reach 50HZ, in this tiny enclosure, even for a 8" is hard to achieve 50Hz...


----------



## ooheadsoo

It can do it if you have a good enough amp with good control down low. My sealed nhtpro monitors do solid 50hz in room according to sine wave generator tests I run.


----------



## ampgalore

A good amp does make a difference on bass.

 I just got my new Rotel RB-1080 hooked up. The RB-1080 has a damping factor of 1000. I am hearing that thump thump for the first time. What have I been missing all these years 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 On second thought, I have to get used to all that bass coming from the bookshelf speakers. It's truly a revelation. Never thought these little buggers can put out so much bass.

 Now I am a firm believer in source first, amp second, speaker third


----------



## ampgalore

After having listened to my new amp speaker combo for the past 2 hours or so, now I can understand why audiophiles say a sub is not necessary in a good stereo setup. Even with bookshelf speakers, a good amp will bring out the bass.


----------



## Sovkiller

Power up a nice good sub, set properly, and you will change your mind in the next 15 minutes.....


----------



## ampgalore

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* 
_Power up a nice good sub, set properly, and you will change your mind in the next 15 minutes..... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	








_

 

Actually I am already getting a headache from all that bass. I can't imagine I can withstand the bass from a sub


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ampgalore* 
_Actually I am already getting a headache from all that bass. I can't imagine I can withstand the bass from a sub 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

But it is not the amount, is the lower extension.....if you get a headache, it is not good....


----------



## ampgalore

Before I got the Rotel amp, I had a Yamaha integrated. With the Yamaha, I always thought the bass was on the thin side. Now with the Rotel amp, there is just suddenly so much more bass. It's like they are completely different speakers.


----------



## Sovkiller

Maybe the Yamaha was not that good of course, but if the bass is too evident, it is not good neither....


----------



## ampgalore

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* 
_Maybe the Yamaha was not that good of course, but if the bass is too evident, it is not good neither...._

 


 Now I am getting more used to it. Maybe I was just shell shocked to hear real bass coming out of my bookshelf speakers for the first time.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Hey Sov, see if you can get a chance to hear a sunfire amp, one of those $2000-3000 Bob Carver amps some time. I've heard that amp make 2"-3" speakers produce what sounded to me like a solid 50hz bass. That damping factor does make a difference. Btw ampgalore, damping factor is different for each frequency, so it makes more sense to quote a freq. along with the factor


----------



## ampgalore

Looked in the manual, it says damping factor of 1000 at 20-20,000 Hz at 8ohms.

 Pretty impressive spec I must say


----------



## ooheadsoo

Hahaha 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I wonder what the real specs are 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Glad you're happy with your new amps. Speakers are a real wonder when you get a nice setup, aren't they?


----------



## ampgalore

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_Hahaha 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I wonder what the real specs are 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Glad you're happy with your new amps. Speakers are a real wonder when you get a nice setup, aren't they?_

 

Let's not talk about reality 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Reality often conflicts with euphoria 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Really, I had no idea what kind of bass response my bookshelfs are capable of. Before I was contemplating getting towers. Now I am having serious doubts.


----------



## OogeleyBoogeley

Just to drop a quick note:

 I just picked up a pair of Paradigm Studio/20's V.1. I am using them with my restored H.H. Scott LK-48 (222C). They get great bass extension, but not too much. They sound natural and can be found for between $300-$400 if you can find em. I got my pair for $300 from a friend and havent looked back. I also built a pair of stands for them last week using this basic design: http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/stubby_e.html
 If spiked to the carpet, these stands really make a big difference. Hope this helps.

 -Dan


----------



## erikzen

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_Happy to hear you took the plunge on the micros. Be sure to let us know how they sound._

 

They just came this evening. I was hoping they'd show up today but by 7 PM I figured they wouldn't come until Monday. Then the UPS guy shows up. Late night for him.

 I only got to listen to a few songs with them so it's hard to say what I think of them. However, my first impression is that it's a lot of speaker for $150. The look is all class with real maple veneer well fitted to MDF.

 In terms of sound I was actually surprised at the bass response. There's definitely no "club slam" but the bass information is there. What seems to be missing is something in the midrange, especially on vocals. Vocals seem to fade into the background. However, horns are crystal clear and very upfront.

 Soundstage and imaging was pretty good. The room is about 13 x 15 and these little speakers fill the room with sound with ease. At some point (probably when my wife goes out) I'll try driving them a bit more as I didn't put the volume past 10:00. Still the sound is a bit congested, for lack of a better term. I'm hoping the sound will open up a bit with break-in.

 I'm going to live with these for awhile but I think I'll eventually get a sub-woofer for these. Of course, I should probably get a better amp, after reading ampgalore's posts. A 1989 Onkyo TX-822 probably doesn't really let these speakers perform to their peak ability. Also, buying a sub turns a budget speaker into the $500 range. However, because of size limitations this is probably the best way for me to go. The speakers can sit on the mantle and the sub can go behind the tv cabinet.


----------



## ampgalore

Edit


----------



## ooheadsoo

Cool first impressions. I hope you have the flexibility to work on the placement. A sub with those and a new amp will do you wonders 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 You might consider one of the new digital amps since a lot of people are enjoying the bang for buck value immensely. I hope to be one of those people in a few weeks! My cabinets for my diy speakers are shipping out today, so I guess I'll be ordering my drivers, xover, and amp soon. There are a lot of subwoofer options out there and all of the good ones will cost you a few hundred


----------



## darcangelo

aha interesting what you guys say about the amp factor... I never thought amp was that important... guess I'll have to give the question some more thought then....


----------



## ampgalore

The amp section in most modern day receivers cannot compare to dedicated amps.

 It's just like the headphone world. You have $100 headphone amps, and you have $1000 headphone amps. And we have all debated about these headphone amps ad nauseum. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 P.S. I am NOT going to purchase another stationary headphone amp (unless someone buys my Grace 901 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 )


----------



## erikzen

Yeah, the amp is what's going to kill me. Right now I have very limited funds so I'm going to have to live with the setup as is for a while.

 I'm not going to be able to do much with placement but where I have them, on either end of a fairly large mantle, is pretty ideal. On a shelf, so to speak, near the wall and about 10 feet apart.


----------



## 3lusiv3

I have a Musical Fidelity X-A100R amp which I have found is of extremely good value. It's no longer in production but if you see one second hand you should check it out.


----------



## erikzen

Thanks for the tip!

 I eventually also want to have a real home theater setup. Are there any surround sound amps that are of good value? How about a decent amp and then eventually a separate processor?


----------



## ampgalore

The more I listen to the Rotel, the more I find it to be very similar to Ray Sammuel's house sound.

 Now I know where Ray gets his house sound from


----------



## ooheadsoo

I highly recommend checking out the digital amps. I'm planning on buying a jvc digital amp that is (true) 100w peak into 6ohms for 5.1. It should be no sweat driving your micros. It's under $200 because it's discontinued, $300 street price retail. There are also digital surround amps available for around $100-160. It's fairly good stuff, I'm sure. A guy I know was satisfied enough to sell his sugden integrated off to a friend in place for one of these surround amps. I don't know if you could say that the digital amp beat the sugden down hands down, but close enough. He went from a $1600 integrated to a passive pre and a $100 digital surround amp.


----------



## soundboy

ooheadsoo,

 I received an e-mail from J&R informing that the TEAC digital power amp is back in stock. I am so tempted to get one and use my Cambridge Audio A500 as a pre-amp.


----------



## erikzen

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_I'm planning on buying a jvc digital amp that is (true) 100w peak into 6ohms for 5.1. It should be no sweat driving your micros. It's under $200 because it's discontinued, $300 street price retail._

 

Do you have a model number or link for that amp?


----------



## ooheadsoo

Do you need it soon? If not, I'll wait til after I make sure I get one before handing out any more info 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 There seem to be only a few left, literally. Well, even so, the replacement amp for it is only $280 street price and it IS better. It's called the jvc rx-f10 is 6.1 and has a digital equalizer built in. The eq is only functional when fed a digital signal though. $100 for an extra amplifier channel, probably better dolby processing, and the opportunity to use a digital eq, amongst probably more added features, seems like a bargain to me 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 oooh, teac digital. I'm struggling right now between getting the teac digital and the jvc. I'm leaning towards the jvc right now.


----------



## Wodgy

ooheadsoo, have you ever heard any of the digital amps you're recommending?

 Soundboy, I doubt that you'll be able to better your Cambridge Audio A500 with a cheap digital amp. Make sure you try before you buy. My experience with digital amps (I own two) is that you get what you pay for. The deep, pounding bass and low distortion of a good solid-state amp are not what digital amps are known for.


----------



## ampgalore

How does a digital amp work? Do you input digital signals or analog signals into the digital amps?


----------



## ooheadsoo

Nope Wodgy, I haven't. I hope to soon. I'm going to have to decide on which one to order in a few days. I have heard the equivalent priced normal solid state competition and can't say that I am impressed in any way shape or form though. I don't trust those reviewers who gush about what great values budget oriented NAD/Rotel/etc amps are anymore. Got burned by what I bought twice and was never impressed at the stores, but I just figured that it was their particular setup at the time. 

 Wodgy, remind me again which two you own? I also remember you recommended an inexpensive amp before as being quite good, but it all slips my mind now. I really still continue to hear nothing bad (considering the price) about the jvc's, teac tripaths, and the panasonic xr series digital amps. Not to mention the Carver Pros and a few other pricier variants.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ampgalore* 
_How does a digital amp work? Do you input digital signals or analog signals into the digital amps?_

 

It can work either way. Class T amps like the tripath accept an analog signal. The digital part of the name refers to the way class T tries to deal with transistors in a digital way. I don't claim to understand any of it, of course, but here is a general overview: http://www.tripath.com/downloads/an1.pdf

 Panasonic's xr series is the only amp confirmed for sure that works natively in digital. There is possibly a Kenwood receiver that is also pure digital like the pannies. The ADC portion of the original xr-25 and 45 were said to be utter crap, but the new 50 is reportedly improved. On the 25 and 45, the digital inputs are what people are raving about.


----------



## Wodgy

So you don't trust online reviews of solid state amps but you trust online reviews of digital amps? Seems odd. It's better to be wary. There is a lot of fishy stuff out there, and you should really listen for yourself before buying or recommending to others.

 For instance, there are reviews online claiming that $50 digital amps you can buy at Target destroy mythical $1000+ setups. How likely is this to be true, given that the unit itself likely contains about $5 worth of parts, including the power supply? No one ever posts measurements.

 From what I've seen, a lot of the online reviews of digital amps compare them not against their solid state brethren but against low-power, single-ended tube amps, such as EL84 designs. The thing is, in my experience they do have a lot in common. 8-watt single ended tube amps usually have nice highs but very little bass control, sounding slow and bloated. (Whether this is caused by a lack of power or a low damping factor I can't really say.) In my experience, digital amps sound a lot like that. They have smooth highs, and somewhat deep bass, but the bass is often soupy and uncontrolled. It's not surprising, since they tend to be underpowered and have a low damping factor. You can almost never find accurate measurements of digital amps, and many of the power claims are simply misleading. 100 watts peak? That means what in the real world? 20 watts continuous? Less? At what level of distortion?

 The two amps I have are a Sharp SD-SH111 and a Sharp SD-SX10 (not sure about the model number of the last one). For the price I paid for the SD-SH111 ($150), it was a bargain since it plays DVDs and doesn't sound too bad, but there is no comparison between it and my current inexpensive favorite conventional amp, the Pioneer Elite A-35R (around $150), driving speakers. For instance, in my review of the SH111 I mentioned that I needed to use it with a self-powered subwoofer because the amp's control of low bass in my main speakers was poor. I agree with you that some of the low end solid state competitors sound terrible -- you've probably seen me relentlessly pan the NAD C320BEE which is clearly not worth the money in my opinion, but that doesn't mean they all sound bad. Shop around and audition. You may find that you prefer the digital amps, but in my experience the digital amps are no low-cost magic bullet. You tend to get what you pay for.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Very true, Wodgy. It's just that I've been burned on solid state so I'm kinda turning to digital. To tell you the truth, I haven't seen many user reviews of NAD and the like that say good things, just magazine reviews. The rest of the guys are just guys like me who tend to parrot what they've heard other people say. I've only heard one solid state amp that I've really enjoyed to date, and its price is way out of my reach. Btw, I thought only the Sharp SX series were digital.

 Another thing: the amps that you hear sound like el34 big buck tube amps are the tripath class t amps. Of the ones I mentioned (teac, jvc, panny) only the teac is tripath. The jvc uses its own digital analog hybrid feedback system, and the panny is pure digital. People are driving their VMPS RM40's with the panny xr-45 and are very happy. http://www.vmpsaudio.com/rm40Pic.htm That's two 10" drivers and a bevy of planars. RM40s are notoriously hard to drive, as well. It's as anti-tube as a speaker can get. However, the bass control on the panny is supposed to be quite good. I find that kind of testimony hard to fight against, just due to the sheer massive "size" of it 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Oh well, we'll have to see, eh? lan is driving his maggie mmg's, another notoriously hard to drive pair with his xr-25 and he's pretty satisfied. So I think it's safe to say that the tube-like comments only refer to the tripath based amps, and indeed, most of the positive tripath comments are being generated by horn users.

 Edit: for reference, those rm40's are about 6 feet tall.


----------



## erikzen

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_Do you need it soon?_

 

No, just trying to do my due dilligence.


----------



## ampgalore

We are only seeing the first or the second generation digital amps.

 Whereas analog amps have been a mature technology for decades. 

 I would wait for a fourth or fifth generation digital amp to come out before jumping on the digital amp bandwagon. By then all the quirks will have been worked out.


----------



## ooheadsoo

"Bleeding edge" is my middle name!


----------



## soundboy

Wodgy,

 I haven't hear the TEAC digital power amp, but I am extremely intrigued given its $100.00 price tag. To be honest, it's between the TEAC digital amp and the upcoming Sony SACD changer competing for my last audio hardware purchase this year.

 I have listened to the Panasonic SA-XR25 when it was available at Circuit City. Despite the less than ideal listening environment, it was very VERY impressive. Then seeing it actually out-powering similarly-priced HT receivers from Onkyo and Yamaha in a group review (with measurements) in Sound & Vision magazine, it was proven as the real deal.

 I believe we are on the edge of a revolution in amplification technology. Yes, I think there are still issues to work out, such as the extra analog >>> digital >>> analog conversion when used with SACD/DVD-A players, but I believe this will be solved in time.

 Regarding the $30.00 Sonic Impact digital amp available at Target, 6moons.com is reading a review. Boulder Cable Company has several "mods" available that can work with it.


----------



## eyeteeth

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *soundboy* 
_I believe we are on the edge of a revolution in amplification technology._

 

PS Audio's HCA-2 Digital Stereo Amplifier has been out for a few years already.
 There is also the wonderfully named 'Flying Mole'. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



http://www.flyingmole.co.jp/en/index.shtml


----------



## soundboy

eyeteeth,

 By that quote, I meant that digital amps can be afforded by mass consumers. Will digital amps replace solid-state amps? Too early to tell, but certainly possible. The paradigm is shifting indeed.


----------



## Sovkiller

There is a common confusion while talking of Class-D amps, and digital amps, could anybody explain this, in details, please? I found this article browsing that explain some of the misnomer commonly found while talking about the digital amps. But I still have my doubts about the digital truth...IMO there is such a "digital amp" at one point the signal has to be converted to analog anyway, IIRC there is no transducer capable of accepting the digital signal as such, here is a part of the article:

 "......*The Truth About Digital (Class D) Amplifiers:*

 Firstly I'd like to point out that "digital amps" is a misnomer. There are two categories:

 1.Analog-controlled class D. Switching amplifiers with an analog input signal and an analog control system. Normally some degree of feedback error correction is present. 

 2. Digitally controlled class D. Amplifiers with a digitally generated control that switches a power stage. No error control is present. Those that do have an error control can be shown to be topologically equivalent to an analog-controlled class D with a DAC in front. 
 Both use switching power stages and have high power efficiency as their most eye-catching feature.

 Digitally controlled class D: dead end street. 

 Analog controlled class D: definitely the future, although you shouldn't expect it to flatten competition from traditional solid- state and tube amps by a tremendous margin......." etc.....

 you could find the rest here


----------



## Wodgy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *soundboy* 
_I have listened to the Panasonic SA-XR25 when it was available at Circuit City. Despite the less than ideal listening environment, it was very VERY impressive. Then seeing it actually out-powering similarly-priced HT receivers from Onkyo and Yamaha in a group review (with measurements) in Sound & Vision magazine, it was proven as the real deal.

 I believe we are on the edge of a revolution in amplification technology. Yes, I think there are still issues to work out, such as the extra analog >>> digital >>> analog conversion when used with SACD/DVD-A players, but I believe this will be solved in time.

 Regarding the $30.00 Sonic Impact digital amp available at Target, 6moons.com is reading a review. Boulder Cable Company has several "mods" available that can work with it._

 

I don't doubt that the Panasonic XR25 and XR45 are competitive with similarly-priced HT receivers from mass-market brands, which likely use analog chip amps. However, I'd be more interested in a shootout between a high-performance, good value conventional discrete amp like the Pioneer Elite A-35R (ironically cheaper than even the XR25) and one of the digital amps.

 One of the reasons I'm skeptical of digital amps, including the Panasonic XR25 and XR45, is that they make ludicrous performance claims. For instance, the XR45 is claimed to be rated at 100 watts for each of 6 channels. Trust me, there's no way there are large enough heatsinks inside the slimline XR45 to dissipate 600 watts, and that's assuming the impossible -- that the amplifier is 100% efficient. Digital amps are efficient, but in the real world you'd realistically need heat sinks that are capable of dissipating 900 watts or more.

 The problem is that digital amps are like car audio -- there don't seem to be any FTC standards mandating what manufacturers can claim. Hence the $99 car amps that produce 500 watts of power.

 Another reason that I'm skeptical of digital amps is because the distortion numbers tend to be bad. I checked out the Panasonic XR45 web page this morning and it's rated at 0.9% THD. In comparison, that's more than 10 times higher than even an average discrete amp like the A-35R, and nearly 50 times higher than the NAD C272 (which I do like, though I pan the C320BEE relentlessly). 0.9% THD wouldn't be bad for a tube amp, but it sucks for a solid state amp. And the Panasonic has the upper hand to start with -- you'd think with a pure digital signal path the result would be lower distortion.

 Anyway, the reason manufacturers are moving to digital is not for performance. It's for cost. Because digital amps are more efficient, they can build them for cheaper, with smaller heat sinks, in the slim-line cases consumers prefer, and because there are no standards mandating what they can claim, they're much better for marketing purposes. A revolution may be in the making, but it's not here now.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Distortion is not necessarily bad, particularly even order harmonic distortion, which may even be considered preferable. Tube amps measure poorly in distortion but it's even order, and many people prefer that sound. The distortion that these (good) digital amps make are reputedly of the good sounding kind, with the exception of the pannies, which people do not say sound tube like at all. Rather, it's supposed to have the best qualities of solid state amps at a low price. Wodgy, you don't think a wimpy amp could drive the rm40's do you? Those speakers take immense amounts of current to drive 4 10" woofers and a bevy of planars. I know people have driven the rm40's to 110db+ peaks when biamping using party mode with a single panny without problems. Unfortunately, these digital amps come with fans instead of heatsinks, but I also don't hear of the fan activating very often except with faulty units.

 I also think a lot of people make way too much hay out of specs and numbers, like all the rmaa specs being put out lately. Do you think you could reliably point out a 0.5db peak in the 16khz area? That's what these people are comparing. I bet most people couldn't even point out a 2db peak reliably beyond 16khz. There comes a point where it's all relative. You can't hear any of it, it's just become a pissing contest. The car amps make my point. Those wattage specs mean squat. What about FTC regulated home theater specs? They mean squat too. Specs for the NAD C320BEE? They look ok, but they mean squat. Still sounds like crap, right? I don't think a distortion figure necessarily makes the sound of an amp.

 We people with small wallets need to be optomistic! I'll go out on a limb again and see what this jvc is all about. I wish I could hear your pioneer a-35. Do you think good guys or maybe circuit city would have it?


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


 .....One of the reasons I'm skeptical of digital amps, including the Panasonic XR25 and XR45, is that they make ludicrous performance claims. For instance, the XR45 is claimed to be rated at 100 watts for each of 6 channels. Trust me, there's no way there are large enough heatsinks inside the slimline XR45 to dissipate 600 watts, and that's assuming the impossible -- that the amplifier is 100% efficient. Digital amps are efficient, but in the real world you'd realistically need heat sinks that are capable of dissipating 900 watts or more.

 

Just to clarify something one of the virtues of the digital amps is the high efficiency, they are on the range of the 95+%, so you do not have to dissipate 600 watts. Sorry but you are assuming all the opposite, that the amp is dissipating the whole power, and you have an amp not an iron, the huge part of this power goes in the audio amplification and 5% or less of it dissipates in heat, and not only at the amp, voice coild get hot, cables get hot etc...assuming 10% of 600 watts, this figure is about 60 watts of heat, and you could disipate this with an small heatsink on each channel.....about the distortion as you say, if you go to tubes amps they are a lot bigger and some of them sells for thousands of $$$$ BTW 0.9% is not that bad for a 600watts amp this THD is usually at full power, you will not hear it at 20 watts....


----------



## Wodgy

I agree with you that specs generally bear little relation to sound, but there is a difference between _honest_ and _dishonest_ specs, and manufacturers that make dishonest claims tend to make me skeptical about the product. A small fan is just physically not going to be able to dissipate 600w+ of heat.

 Also, I'm kind of curious about your claim that you know more than one person who is driving VMPS RM40s with the Panasonic XR45. The RM40s are $4600 speakers. It seems unlikely to me that you would know several people who have those specific speakers, and even more unlikely to me that they all happen to be using the same $350 amp for driving them, but hey, I believe you. It just seems odd to me.

 Anyway, do check out the A-35R. My guess is that either Good Guys or Circuit City would have it. Look through the top. Unlike the NAD, which mounts all the transistors to the same heatsink (increased thermal crosstalk), there are actually four separate large heatsinks in the A-35R, one per transistor.

 It is possible that digital amps do have low distortion levels at very low power levels, which is typical of tube amps and atypical of solid state amps. That would be a desirable feature. I'd be interested in seeing distortion vs. power graphs for a typical digital amp.


----------



## ooheadsoo

VMPS has a forum over on audiocircle, so there are quite a number of rm40 owners there. I believe it was at one of the Denver, Colorado audiocircle meets where a bunch of them got together to hear the panny 45 drive the rm40's in both regular and biamped fashion. Subsequently, I think more of them got pannies to drive their rm40's. Wayne of Bolder Cables brought the measuring gear and computers over, I think. 

 Sov makes some interesting points. Also, I think it's important to note that those 600 watts are not ALL being converted to heat. Wouldn't that mean that the amp was about as inefficient as a log? As Sov mentioned, the white papers state that digital tech is pretty efficient. Also, it gives me pause to think of anyone running 600 watts RMS into any normal set of speakers. If that were the case, there would be no room for dynamics...And everyone would be deaf in short order


----------



## soundboy

I wish either Circuit City or The Good Guys would sell the Pioneer Elite A-35R integrated amp. Between those 2 chains, they sell *ONE* stereo integrated amp....a Yamaha model at something like $500.00. The A-35R is probably one of the best-kept audio bargains/secrets out there and I would highly recommend it to anyone considering an inexpensive stereo integrated amp.

 As for the Panasonic SA-XR25/45/50 HT receivers, almost all comments I have read about its spectacular performance involving it being used in a 2 channel setup. In fact, these receivers' HT performance is rarely mentioned. As for their specs, you can check out how the SA-XR25 did in a comparison test done by Sound & Vision magazine here. And the lab measurements here. It's rare for *ANY* receiver, at any price, to deliver its rated power to all of its channels at the same time. The Panasonic XR25 delivering 82 watts into 8 ohms, all channels driven, is actually excellent numbers. This from a 10 pound receiver with no vent on the top. Here is a webpage with lab measurements from Sound & Vision magazine regarding rated power vs. actual delivered power.


----------



## soupy

I replaced my nad c320bee with a panasonic xr25s...and all I can say is that I'm darn glad that I did.


----------

