2. home-theater
  3. 1104106416

A somewhat unusual request for PrePro help

I have been in 2 channel high end for a long time. I've been very happy for many years with the following:

EAD T1000 transport
EAD DSP-7000 v.III D/A
Bedini Preamp
Bedini 803 amp
Shahinian Diapason speakers
Kimber and Siltech cables throughout

Like others I am struggling with the desire to move into HT, without sacrificing musical reproduction. My problem is as follows: my house does not allow me to support a dedicated 2 channel AND a HT setup (not enough room). I also find that most HT receivers I have heard (B&K, Denon, Yamaha, Marantz, some others) really do not sound all that good - each in their own way (relative to what I'm used to) for unadulterated musical listening. So I have decided to try and put together a HT system with parts of my existing system.

Since the space I have for HT is also non-ideal (it's big enough, but its arrangement makes for troublesome equipment placement), I decided that I would try to replace parts of my system in an effort to try and consolidate things. One of the first new things I bought was the Marantz DV-8400 DVD player. I listened to a few units (including Denon and Sony) in the hope of finding a universal player that would work well with 2 channel music. I settled on the 8400 because it was the best compromise (for me) given its cost. It does 2 channel in a nice, musical fashion. The low end is reasonably articulate (but does not go down quite as low as my EAD rig). The mid is somewhat laid back, but not recessed. The high end is (again) musical and reasonably airy (but not as extended or haze-free as the EAD rig). I know this sounds like a *negative* assessment, but it really isn't. Given that I was not about to look at a Linn Unidisk or anything like that, it's really quite nice. The Marantz is also quick and has nice pace. It was a steal at the price I paid. Plus, it's video performance is quite good.

So I am now looking to replace my Bedini pre with a HT prepro. Now I know that I *should* be looking at using my Bedini in some kind of pass-thru fashion with a HT device just handling multichannel, but I really am trying to consolidate things, so I am willing to make compromises, but only very SMALL ones (g).

I've read up on a few prepros, and have narrowed my interest to Bryston, Cary, Naim, and EAD. My desires are for the following:

Multichannel analog direct mode
2 Channel analog direct
Video switching is not a requirement
The usual other stuff that makes for HT audio capability (but well done)

I am primarily hoping to find something in the $2500-$4000 range (like new or new) that will help the 8400 in both the upper and lower extreme, but not at the expense of grain or hardness at the top, or boominess at the bottom. I am greatly interested in the Naim, but I am a little concerned about how much of the classic "Naim sound" it may have. Now my audio experience is all in 2 channel, and may be a little out of date. But my memories of the Naim sound were that of incredible pace and rhythm, and excellent midrange, a tuneful upper and lower end, but not as airy on the top or as resolved at either end as I would have liked. Additionaly, I found that the old style Naim sound tended (IMO) to impose that sort of Naim-toe-tapping effect on everything that went through it, even when it didn't seem right. Again, IMO, but if the Naim sound has evolved over the years to keep that sense of pace but also add extension and openness then it will definitely help in my thoughts regarding the AV2.

I would greatly appreciate help and opinions from those of you who are familiar with the sound of the Bedini/Shahinian combination (are there any left out there?). As far as speakers go, assume I will eventually move to maybe Arcs or the like for rears, but I don't know yet what to do about a center (unfortunately Shahinian does not make a shielded speaker).

Is it possible for the price range I've laid out to get HT sound that will at least approach what I'm used to?
tonyptony
nighthawk
259 posts
 
Tony, maybe I missed it, but I didn't see any mention of power amps for the surround channels. If you get a pre-pro, you're going to need some amps. On the other hand, if you get a cheap receiver, as Beemer said, you can use the internal amps to power the surrounds. A decent mid-grade HT receiver can be had for around $1000 new or $500 used.

I think maybe you're expecting too much out of the surround system. Think of it as a fun adjunct to your 2-channel system and don't spend much on it. Route the receiver's pre-amp outputs for the front channels to one of your existing preamp's inputs and set the preamp volume control to a known position. This isn't as cumbersome as it sounds.
Get a powered sub, like an SVS cylinder, which is killer for HT, and connect it to the receiver's sub out. One of these will run you about $500.

Don't spend much on surround speakers, either. They are primarily for effects and don't have to be the latest word in resolution or tonal accuracy. It helps if the tweeter has wide dispersion, though. About $500/pair is good enough. Aim for about 90dB sensitivity, since most receivers calibrate to the 75dB reference level at midscale, using 90dB speakers. Extemely sensitive or insensitive surround speakers may be hard to match levels with your mains.

Avoid the center channel. You don't need it. Just set the receiver to phantom center channel mode.

So, for about $1500 to $2000 you have added surround sound capability to your 2-channel system and haven't compromised the sound one bit. Also, you only added one component (the HT receiver) to your rack.

If you have a DVD player, don't worry about the quality of its DACs. Just run a digital output to the receiver. You'll need this to decode Dolby Digital and DTS anyway using the receiver.

I ran a system configured as above for about 2 years and it was entirely satisfactory. About a year ago I got a front projector and 110" screen and split the system into seperate 2-ch and HT systems, which is preferable if you have the room for it, but I could have lived with the previous setup, strictly from an audio standpoint.
maril555
619 posts
 
Tonyptony, the difference between Bryston and Mac was pretty significant, I almost tempted to mention proverbial "blanket taken off of my speakers". More detail, better defined bass, very transparent HF's, very "musical" and "organic sound". Actually you can look up a review by Kal Rubinson in Stereophile ( I think it's March '04 issue). Also, Mac is a very flexible preamp and does have a very decent phonostage ( tuner module is optional). Regards.
tonyptony OP
617 posts
 
Nighthawk, in my ideal approach I would plan to get a two (or three) channel amp to support the additional amplification. Like you, I'm not sold on the merits of a center channel. I'm not sure about going the receiver route. I'm a big believer in trying to get a consistent "voicing" in my system. I'd like to approach that in HT no differently than in my 2 channel experiences. In that regard, I will probably get a pair of Shahinian ARCs or Slants for the surround channels. There aren't really many options from other manufacturers in matching with anything from Shahinian. As I would like to get a consistent voicing for multichannel music I don't see where it's worth the risk or trouble of trying to find someone else's speakers for surrounds.

I have heard amps that have a similar sound to the Bedini, so I would feel better going that route.

Again, I'm not sure how I feel about going with a receiver-centered approach. Maybe I have my high end thumb stuck too far up my a$$, but honestly most of the HT receivers I've heard that are not too expensive I have not been too impressed with. I still have to consider the quality of a multichannel music presentation. I agree that for movies I could probably be happy with a decent receiver. If I could find a musically satisfactory HT receiver for that kind of money - and if I could get a reasonable match in voicing with my existing amp - it might be a viable option.

BTW, it seems you are not familiar with the Diapasons; the low end is the least of my problems. The Diapason is a complex midrange / high end module sitting atop a Double Eagle subwoofer. A pair of these Double Eagles are pretty much the bomb when it comes to musical low frequency reproduction. (Yes, I believe that there is such a thing as stereo low end.)
tonyptony OP
617 posts
 
Thanks for the words on the Mac, Maril.
nighthawk
259 posts
 
Tony, you're right, I was unfamiliar with your speakers. I looked them up on Shahinian's website and they look quite interesting. Even though your mains are capable of subwoofer-quality bass you may still want a dedicated sub for the LFE channel. In my setup, when I was using my Soliloquy 6.5s as mains, which are -3dB at 22Hz, the dedicated sub was still advantageous. The main reason is you can goose the level on the LFE channel 3 to 6 dB to make explosions, etc. more impactful without affecting the level of the mains.

Your concerns about voicing are warranted for music, but for HT you won't notice much of a difference.

One note on surround speakers for HT use - generally you will be better off running the surrounds as "small" in HT processor terms. The bass management function of the processor routes the LF info from the surrounds to the sub. This reduces LF cancellation effects. As a result, you don't need much LF capability in the surrounds since the standard crossover frequency is 80Hz.
More to discover