[bobby_t1]

Edit:[b/] I have update this post since I originally posted. I have learned and read many of the replies to my initial post and so I have removed my "newbie" questions and put more specific questions regarding equipment.

I just pulled the trigger on a Sony GWIII 50" LCD RPTV from Sears and am expecting delivery on 11/7.  In the meantime, I figured it would be a good idea to start research speakers and receivers.

I am a geek at heart and need to research everything to death.  You don't want to know how much research I've did to decide on my TV

I was initially thinking of doing a 5.1 surround sound setup right out of the gates and was thinking of the Bose Acoustimass. Luckily I found AVS forums, or else I would have made a mistake.  Reading these reviews on here saved my wallet!

Here's my situation:

• 90% TV (DVDs and TV)
• 10% Music -- all kinds -- Electronic, Classical, Rock, Rap
• Size of the speakers is a huge issue, more so the rears than the fronts.  I need to keep the fronts limited to about "We" don't want to put up with huge speakers, and being such a small area, don't want to reduce its effective space by having huge speakers.  Running cables across the room to rear speakers is not cool with us at this time, hence even more support for 2.1.
• Room: 14' x 20' x 9' (about 280 cubic feet), but it is split in 2 -- half for eating area (kitchen table) and the other half is the TV area.  So the subset TV area is about 14'x 10' x 9' in reality.
  
• Budget: Would like to keep is less than $1500 for 5.1 + receiver.
  
• I live in a townhouse, but am an end unit that only shares one wall. The TV wall is not shared luckily.  However, I don't really need gut wrenching bass or insane volume levels.  But I like my audio clear and full sounding (if that makes any sense).
  [/list:u]
  
  Speakers:
  
  I am considering these speakers:
  
  • M&K: K-5 fronts, K-4 rears, not sure what center channel.
  • M&K: K-7 fronts, K-4 rears, not sure what center channel.
  • Energy: Take 5.2
  • Energy: Encore
  • Mirage: OmniSat 6
  • What else should I be considering?
  [/list:u]
  
  
  Receiver:
  Lookign for:
  
  • 5.1, 6.1 and 7.1 are not required.
  • about 60W+ per channel.
  • Receiver will not be doing any video switching, my TV has enough video inputs.
  • Less than $450, preferable less than $390.
  [/list:u]
  
  I am considering these receivers:
  
  • Pioneer VSX-D912k
  • Panasonic SA-XR45
  • HK AVR125/130? perhaps AVR225/230?
  • Denon?
  • What else should I be considering?
  [/list:u]

[Double Ugly]

At slightly below your budget I'd try these.

You can use as many or as few of the speakers as you want or have room for, and still have a full 5.1 compliment if/when you decide to make room or move to another room.  I haven't heard them, but considering the price and inclusion of a new AV receiver, I'd give 'em a try if I were in the market.  They offer a 30-day money back guarantee as well (minus shipping).

I spoke with an AV123 representative (Sean Parque) several months ago and found him to be very pleasant and knowledgeable.

Caveat:  I have no association with AV123, nor do I own any of their equipment.

DU

[bobby_t1]

At slightly below your budget I'd try these.

You can use as many or as few of the speakers as you want or have room for, and still have a full 5.1 compliment if/when you decide to make room or move to another room.  I haven't heard them, but considering the price and inclusion of a new AV receiver, I'd give 'em a try if I were in the market.  They offer a 30-day money back guarantee as well (minus shipping).

I spoke wit ...

Thanks for teh suggestion, but these are not "wife approved". Too big and she doesn't like the look.

[Sa-dono]

For tiny speakers, some of the most currently popular speakers are Gallo (which I see you have already heard) and Mirage.

You may also want to take a look at the upcoming Tykes from AV123 as well, if you want a more conventional looking speaker. Below is one of the latest pics. You can also go to the main page to get an idea of how small they really are.



3.1 vs. 2.1? If anyone is going to be sitting off center, a center channel will be necessary for proper imaging. 3.1 vs. 5.1? You'll want 5.1 if you want to experience surround sound. Many movies unfortunately make either poor or little use of the surrounds. You'll have to listen for yourself to decide whether you feel you want surround sound or not.

As far as receivers go, it would be advised to try and hear the receiver with whatever speakers you buy. Since most of the speakers in this price range tend to be on the brighter sound, I would personally go with a warmer sounding receiver..but as always, you have to determine what type of sound you enjoy. Good luck with whatever decision you make!

[bobby_t1]

For tiny speakers, some of the most currently popular speakers are Gallo (which I see you have already heard) and Mirage.

You may also want to take a look at the upcoming Tykes from AV123 as well, if you want a more conventional looking speaker. Below is one of the latest pics. You can also go to the main page to get an idea of how small they really are.

Thanks for the info.. Perhaps speakers as small as teh Gallo's aren't neccessary, but tsill need to be conscious of size though.  From what you are saying, it sounds like I would be okay with a 3.1 setup and coudl save a significant amount of money.  I could even add on 2 rear channels later if needed.

Right now I'm looking at the Energy "Take" system.. they have a "take 5.2" system, but I'd really only want the 3.1 version and ditch the 2 rears.

Any recommendations on "warmer" receivers?

[ABEX]

I will be trying the new Panasonic VR25 or 45 receiver. there is a thread here at AC which you can do a search for.

Good luck!

[bobby_t1]

I will be trying the new Panasonic VR25 or 45 receiver. there is a thread here at AC which you can do a search for.

Good luck!

Did you mean "XR"?  I can't fidn the VR25 or VR45.

[ABEX]

Yes,you are correct my mistake.I plan on selling something to get the 45 unit. I was waiting for a set of Monoblocks which I do not think will ever come.

BTW there is another unit.The Sharp Digital amp that is going for $120 something another place on this BB you can checkout also. The drawback is that the unit only has 25watts a channel.

Of what I understand the Panasonic might be a steal at the price.I would upgrade the Power cord also. Great deal!  

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=4991&highlight=panasonic

[ABEX]

Sharp is the other unit.Here's the link!Good Luck!

 http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=5636&highlight=panasonic

[Sa-dono]

Thanks for the info.. Perhaps speakers as small as teh Gallo's aren't neccessary, but tsill need to be conscious of size though.  From what you are saying, it sounds like I would be okay with a 3.1 setup and coudl save a significant amount of money.  I could even add on 2 rear channels later if needed.

Right now I'm looking at the Energy "Take" system.. they have a "take 5.2" system, but I'd really only want the 3.1 version and ditch the 2 rears.

Any recommendations on "warmer" receivers?

NHT may also be worth a look for speakers then.

Harman Kardon, Rotel, Marantz, and NAD would be the brands of receivers I would check out and sample. Of course the latter two have had reliability problems, so use caution. The Sony digital systems (receivers and all in one units) appear like they may be worth a look too.

[jjb]

Here's a few options, Being an audio junkey and having bought, built and designed several HT/Sterio systems I would suggest the following; 1) think of your AV reciever as you car engine the rest of your system will only work as efficient as your engine, spend some money here and look at the Marantz AV line, Onko Line, Parrsound, or look for seperates. Stay away from Sony, HK, Pioneer, etc. 2) As for speakers given that your room is not as big as a movie theater a center channel is a waste of money (marketing hype), setup a 2 or 4 channel system with sub. Spend some money here a good speaker will show a weakness if you purchase a lesser quality reciever, You named a few quality speakers, I would also look at paradigm, definitive technologies, and if you have any building talent I would consider building your own the value to quality will outperform anything you could buy check out gr-research or ellis 1801b. good luck

[bobby_t1]

Thanks for all the input guys.. i'm still undecided.

Receivers

jjb's post seems to indicate that the HK, panasonic or denon receivers are of lower quality? Is it unreasonable to expect a good receiver for less then $350?

I was shortlisting these:

Panasonic SA-XR45
Kenwood VR-7070
Pioneer VSX-D912K
[/list:u]

Center Channel

This is the first suggestion I've read that says not to go for a center channel.  Everything I've read say a center is required especially if there is off axis seating.  I would've expect most ppl's HT setups would include off axis seating?  Mine certainly does.

Speakers

From the research I've done on this forum and AVS forum, these are supposed to be "good" receivers?

After more research on speakers, here are current contenders I'm looking at:

Morel: SA-2 for fronts, SI-2 for rear, I9A sub
Paradigm Cinema 70
Anthony Gallo: Micros for front, rear and center with MPS-150 sub
M&K: either K-5 or Xenon LCR25
Polk: RM6700 with upgrade to PSW404 sub
KEF: KHT 2005.2
[/list:u]

[jjb]

I like your speaker selection good choices, I appologize for omiting Dennon having had one and researching them fully they are a good unit. I would scrap your reciever list and look at Onko, Dennon, Marantz, & HK arround the 500 to 800 level, you will like the performance much better. (for a quick test on how a reciever is built pickup and hold a 350 sony or panasonic reciever then pickup a 500 to 800 reciever you will notice the weight difference, this has to due with how a unit is built) As for center channel a room the size of a movie theater needs to fill a tremendious void, as for most HT the center does nothing more than look good I was trying to save you money. When you demoing a system ask the retailer to disconnet the center within the system and see what you think good luck.

[Rob Babcock]

FYI:  the Panny isn't light because it isnt' well made.  It's lightweight because it incorporates new digital amplifier technology, which simply doesn't weigh as much.  Everyone I know who's heard it has been very pleased with the sound, and the unit runs very cool.  The only downside I've heard mentioned is that it isn't a super high powered model, amp wise.  Still, it should be on any short list of budget receivers.

[lcrim]

I just wanted to weigh in on the subject of a starter HT system.  It would be a mistake to judge receivers by their relative weight, as Rob and others pointed out.   The digitals from Panny and some others utilize a technology that is where the others will be when they catch up in a few years.  
If you want to spend money on a stereo pair of speakers only at this point
then omit the other three and sub for now and listen in stereo.  If you listen in a surround format, all the dialogue is on the center channel and omitting that could make movie watching a task for Sherlock Holmes.

[bobby_t1]

I added 2 new speaker sets to my post a few back:

Polk: RM6700 with upgrade to PSW404 sub

Heard some great things about this Polk system with teh upgraded sub.

KEF: KHT 2005.2

Heard direct feedback from someone who bought this for a room much larger than mine (he has 14' ceilings whereas I have 9' ones) and he was very pleased.

[jjb]

I hate to see people spend a fair amount of money for audio equipment and be told that new technology improves sound dynamics. Don't be fooled clean power is a major componit and there is little substitution for high end amp, converters, etc. Spend your money wisely and go demo various systems at a high end audio store not at a best buy, cirect city, etc. for a few dollars more or a smart purchase you will walk away with a accurate sounding system. If you want a bang with after roll, uneven or over stated highs and limited midbass with uneven off-axis responce purchase any of the 350 recievers and HT packages.  

[Sa-dono]

Here's a few options, Being an audio junkey and having bought, built and designed several HT/Sterio systems I would suggest the following; 1) think of your AV reciever as you car engine the rest of your system will only work as efficient as your engine, spend some money here and look at the Marantz AV line, Onko Line, Parrsound, or look for seperates. Stay away from Sony, HK, Pioneer, etc.

I like your speaker selection good choices, I appologize for omiting Dennon having had one and researching them fully they are a good unit. I would scrap your reciever list and look at Onko, Dennon, Marantz, & HK arround the 500 to 800 level, you will like the performance much better. (for a quick test on how a reciever is built pickup and hold a 350 sony or panasonic reciever then pickup a 500 to 800 reciever you will notice the weight difference, this has to due with how a unit is built)

First you say to stay away from HK, and then you recommend them. Are you confused? Also, that is Onkyo and Denon..not "Onko" and "Dennon"..for anyone confused.

2) As for speakers given that your room is not as big as a movie theater a center channel is a waste of money (marketing hype), setup a 2 or 4 channel system with sub.

As for center channel a room the size of a movie theater needs to fill a tremendious void, as for most HT the center does nothing more than look good I was trying to save you money. When you demoing a system ask the retailer to disconnet the center within the system and see what you think good luck.

Are you one of those people that think you can get proper imaging from two speakers, setup for one sweet spot, anywhere in the room? The purpose of the center channel is not to "fill a tremendous void" or just "marketing hype"....it is to lock the center image to your screen so you have proper imaging from off-axis.

[jjb]

Sa-dono, I appoligize if you can't read, I'll type slower. The difference between the two paragrahs you sited is the pricing differential between a entry level reciever and a mid-level reciever of H/K. I would suggest you do some research regarding what of-axis means and the sonic seperation between main & center channels within a A/V system. A good 2 channel system should provide a solid sweet spot, or perhaps your speakers are wired out of phase.  Audio Circle contains some great articles and reference material take a close look.

[Sa-dono]

Sa-dono, I appoligize if you can't read, I'll type slower. The difference between the two paragrahs you sited is the pricing differential between a entry level reciever and a mid-level reciever of H/K. I would suggest you do some research regarding what of-axis means and the sonic seperation between main & center channels within a A/V system. A good 2 channel system should provide a solid sweet spot, or perhaps your speakers are wired out of phase.  Audio Circle contains some great articles and reference material take a close look.

Look carefully at what you wrote:

spend some money here and look at the Marantz AV line, Onko Line, Parrsound, or look for seperates. Stay away from Sony, HK, Pioneer, etc.

You said to "spend more money" and then said to "stay away from" "HK". Completely contradictory. Also, you recommended looking at Parasound (aka "Parrsound"), when they do not to my knowledge sell any receivers. You later say "or look for seperates" which means you did refer to "Parrsound" as a receiver and not "seperates".

And yes, a "good 2 channel system should provide a solid sweet spot"...it will not magically provide proper imaging off-axis, in relation to the screen/video. Perhaps you have some special "magic dust"