2. home-theater
  3. 131566-98821

Component recommendations: best bang for buck.

Hello all. My first post for had very little traffic so I figure I try again. I plan on getting a pair of Martin Logans classics down the line. For now I’m looking for recommendations on the best set up for my budget of around 10-15K. My preference: HT and Audio is about 40%/60% respectively. Looking for a scalable system for future upgrades and future home/space addition. My current space is an open concept that measures about 45’x35’, 10 foot ceilings and hardwood floors with area rugsx3.

From my research, mostly reading reviews, I’ve narrowed it down to starting place:

Marantz 8802
McIntosh integrated amp: MA 8900 OR 9000

No specific brand loyalties, however I’ve read that the McIntosh equipment maintains its resale value. Open to suggestions for new or used items and going with separates as well.  Located in Oakland. Thanks very much.
128x128redphu72
auxinput
2,920 posts
 

I would say that it is up to you on whether HDR is more important or if sonic signature / sound quality is more important.  These are definitely factors that will affect your decision.

I did take a quick look at NAD.  They have a good "generic platform" for keeping current via upgrade cards.  Based on what I have read, the NAD sonic signature is on the warm side, like Marantz.

Here's a post I made back in April with more detailed information on the Marantz 8802a:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/help-w-preamp/post?postid=1411370#1411370

I haven't heard the Arcam.  Based on what I've read, it's a very good option for just about the best AVR you can get (though very expensive).  Are you looking at the ones listed on ebay?

redphu72's avatar
redphu72 OP
78 posts
 
One of the vendors contacted me and is recommending the Arcam AVR 850 as being far superior than anything out there, including the Krell Foundation. And it so happens that there are two available on eBay, however I did notice that it supports HDMI 2.0a and not 2.0b.  BTW what are your thoughts on Macintosh MC303 to power the L/R/C channels.
auxinput
2,920 posts
 

I would be very careful about listening to vendor opinions.  They do sometimes have their own agenda and they also do not necessarily know exactly what they are talking about.

It is possible that the Arcam may be better than the Krell.  I would hesitate to believe that because the Arcam is an AVR (with built in amplifiers).  It also does not have balanced XLR outputs.  I will believe that the Arcam sounds very good, however.

The cost of Arcam AVR is very close to cost of Krell Foundation.  The economy of scale tells me that better components would be used in the Krell (krell does not have any internal amplifiers).

I don't know the "sonic signature" of the Arcam, so I can't comment on how it would match up with MC303.  I do think that the Marantz would be too warm/slow for the MC303, but that might be what you want.

redphu72's avatar
redphu72 OP
78 posts
 
Thanks for the word of caution. It’s seems like an AVR is the easy option for now; the Yamaha Aventage RX 3070 seems to be getting high praises and supports the latest digital formats. I could mate this with a separate amp to handle the audio function. My question is would there be any benefit to getting a two channel vs a three channel power amp. Also with a three channel amp, can I use the channels separately, for example using the L and R only.
auxinput
2,920 posts
 

At this point, you will have to make a decision on whether you are chasing the latest digital formats / standards or if you are chasing sound quality.  The two do not always go hand-in-hand.  The HDMI 2.0b standard for HDR is so new that hardly anybody has implemented it.  You will always be behind the curve within a year of getting a device because they will always be bring new technology to market so that people will "buy more".

The Yamaha is a good choice for that price point, but I would pick the Arcam AVR 850 over the Yamaha unless the price was an issue.  I believe the Arcam will just have a more refined sound (even if used as just a preamp).

There could be a benefit of getting a 2-channel amp over a 3-channel amp in some cases.  If the manufacturer used the same power supply in both the 2-channel and 3-channel models, the 3-channel would have less power distributed for each channel.  Some manufacturers will increase power supply for the 3-channel model. Some will not.  In the case of the MC303, I would not worry because McIntosh has definitely increased the power supply for 3-channel.  The watts/specs also match.  Look

MC302 - 2 channel - 98 lbs

MC303 - 3 channel - 155 lbs

There is one benefit of getting a 3-channel amplifier and that is that the sonic signature for left/center/right speakers would match exactly.  If you get a 2-channel, then the center channel speaker would have to be powered by the AVR, which could/would have a different sound.  This would be noticeable when sounds in a movie pan from left to right (such as a motorcycle driving across the screen).

More to discover