Home Cinema/stereo music choice

[tommytom]

HI,

Looking for a little advice from the more knowledgeable here.

I'm about to put a projector and 5.1 setup into my living room. My budget is a little flexible, over £4k for stereo amp/receiver. I have a cheapish projector in mind that will hold me until 4K becomes a more affordable reality.

So the question is this; given that I want a system to cope with music well, and 5.1 channels, and be future proof (to a certain extent) what is the best way of doing that?

I pretty sure I'll buy some B&W CM10s for my two fronts, and a CM mid for the centre channel, not sure about rears at the moment. Soooo, I was thinking about the new Pioneer LX 58 AVR, just announced and available apparently in the next 10 days to run everything. However, reading through all the forums here, it seems the consensus is that a dedicated stereo amp does a noticeably better job with music than a receiver. Is this true of even a pretty good/new receiver like the LX58. I could bi-wire/amp the CM10s for extra control. I've demoed some lovely naim kit, the 172XS/200 NAP through the CM10s, and that was great, although significantly more expensive. So, should I go for:

Naim 172XS/200NAP and a cheap receiver (£600 pioneer perhaps) with pre-outs feeding into the Naim for the front 2 channels?

Or An expensive pioneer AVR and use it for everything? (is there much difference between the LX 58/78/88 other than a few more watts?

Or an Arcam FMJ750?

I hear great things about the Arcam, but the downside is that it doesn't have HDMI 2.0, which I 'think' means that when I come to upgrade the projector to 4k in a couple of years, I'll have to change the Receiver as well, which won't support the higher 4k 60p.

I'm having to chop and change my listening as can't find one dealer who can demo all the above options. so comparisons in different demo rooms is proving hard...

Please help.

Thanks

 

[tommytom]

OK, so the options with a 4K budget appear to be:
Arcam FMJ 750 (£4,000)
Naim 172/200 leaving about £1,000 to spend on a receiver. Anthem/pioneer.. whatever.
Or top of the range Anthem 750 (£2,000) plus perhaps a streamer?? or power amp for front channel speakers

 

[Glacialpath]

Once you have selected a reciever to audition, play some of your favourit music through it. Then play the same music from the same source through a Stereo amp and see what you think.

Pesonally dedicated bits of kit sound best to me but you might be happy with how good the AV Receiver sounds with just music. If you can intergrate the Subwoofer you get for movies with playing music the music should sound even better if set up properly.

Remeber the subwoofer is there to add the right amount a weight to sound and of course handle those big movie explsions and other large low end sounds. If you find some music to sound thin on even a really good set of speakers then the sub will add in that missing weight. Add is the wrong word, it's allowing what the speakers can't output to be heard.

 

[jmjones]

For a good balance of music vs cinema you could consider a system similar to the one I put together. Mine came about almost by accident when my disc player failed.

Oppo 105 used as a processor, add power amp and speakers to taste. It has a limited number of connections and adjustment for room acoustIcs is limited, but I tended not to use that anyway.

A little unconventional, but the upside was only two boxes to do a great job with music and movies. Also, power amp and speaker technology doesn't tend to date as fast as the "front end" technology. Maybe worth a thought.

 

[ric71]

I would say have a listen to the Anthem. If you want 5.1 look at the 310 if you want 7.1 the 510. Then find a good 3/5 channel power amp from the likes of ATI. I can't comment on the speakers other than Sub/sat is my preferred choice. Either MK or KK. These can be bought in stages. Save for a decent sub and you will eventually have the making of a very good system equally adept at both music and movies.

 

[bigboss]

To be honest, you should be looking at Anthem MRX710 or Pioneer SC-LX88 or Yamaha RX-A3040 as a minimum for the CM10, or the Arcam you have in mind.

 

[CnoEvil]

Make sure you demo the AVR750......it really is very good for both Music and AV.

 

[tommytom]

Hmmm, Have you heard any of the Anthem/Pioneer/Yamaha vs the Arcam...?

It's twice the price of these three, is it better? is is twice-the-price better?

A little bit loathe to spend this much on a receiver that only has HDMI 1.4.

It claims 4K60P passthrough, though I'm not sure what that means. If it can seperate the audio from a 4k60p feed and and pass the 4k60p visual element on to a projector, then that is basically all I need, and future proof. If it cannot use any of the signal in the incoming 4k60p feed, and it just goes straight throught the receiver, then whats the point?

 

[CnoEvil]

Hmmm, Have you heard any of the Anthem/Pioneer/Yamaha vs the Arcam...?

It's twice the price of these three, is it better? is is twice-the-price better?

A little bit loathe to spend this much on a receiver that only has HDMI 1.4.

It claims 4K60P passthrough, though I'm not sure what that means. If it can seperate the audio from a 4k60p feed and and pass the 4k60p visual element on to a projector, then that is basically all I need, and future proof. If it cannot use any of the signal in the incoming 4k60p feed, and it just goes straight throught the receiver, then whats the point?

I have heard expensive products from Yamaha, Pioneer, Anthem and Arcam, but you need to bear in mind that my opinion is subjective and may not apply to you.

I don't get on with Pioneer, which I find too forward for my taste and not that good with music.

I prefer Anthem (to Pioneer), but imo. it is not as good with music as the Arcam, but has a more sophisticated EQ.

Yamaha make good receivers that are on the smoother side and have great EQ.

I much prefer Arcam for a "musical" AV amp. I own the AVR600, which saw off some good 2 channel amps (MF M6i, Coda CSi and Moon i7). It has had its problems, but these have been sorted in the AVR750, which sounds even better.

I can't tell you if it's worth the money as that is too personal to call.....all I can tell you is that the AVR600 was for me, as there was nothing to touch it (with up to date specs) for two channel (ie. AV Receivers). You need to do your own demos and then reach your own conclusions.

 

[bigboss]

If you want to future proof for 4K, you need a receiver with HDMI 2.0. Arcam may announce new receivers this year. You should demo the receivers before purchase.

 

[tommytom]

If you want to future proof for 4K, you need a receiver with HDMI 2.0. Arcam may announce new receivers this year. You should demo the receivers before purchase.

I emailed Arcam directly about this, and they got back to me saying HDMI 2.0 isn't a reliable spec, and no-one can claim compatibility yet, as it hasn't been ratified...(?). I was asking if there would be a HDMI 2.0 receiver shortly, and he mentioned that there would be no new model of the 750, just an upgrade. When I asked what this meant, his answer was this:

The “upgrade” I mentioned will not be a new AVR it will be a possible upgrade be it hardware or simply software like Sony are claiming.

Do we think this is possible, that some 'software' update could take you from HDMI 1.4 to HDMI 2.0..... from what I've read, this is impossible as there are new chips involved. Also, are Arcam likely to retrofit a HDMI 2.0 board to AVRs??? Again, I'm not sure I can see that happening...

 

[CnoEvil]

Also, are Arcam likely to retrofit a HDMI 2.0 board to AVRs??? Again, I'm not sure I can see that happening...

They did it with 3D, as I had it done (to help solve other problems, so got it very cheap).

I sympathise with your predicament. On one hand, if you are constsntly chasing the latest tech, you'd never buy anything, as the next "big thing" is always just around the corner. On the other hand, you don't want to get something that's obsolete before the ink dries on the cheque.

I take a pragmatic approach, where if it sounds brilliant and the picture is great, then I couldn't care less about what's round the corner (I never got excited about 3D)....but if you have to have the latest and the best, then that's a different matter.

 

[tommytom]

I'm not overly bothered by the very latest and best, and understand all about compromise, I just think you must pick your moment. Of course everything will eventually be obsolete, I'm just hoping not to be the sap that spent £4K on a receiver without the most vital bit of kit, a few months before it became standard everywhere else...

Tell me more about your retro-fit...

what did they do, and how much did it cost?

Thanks

 

[CnoEvil]

Tell me more about your retro-fit...

what did they do, and how much did it cost?

Thanks

When 3D came out, Arcam released a retro-fit 3D board (that also allowed proper "pass through" of the digital signal), which was fitted by the dealer. In my case, I had a lot of problems with the unit, all of which have been sorted out under warrenty, and the 3D board came with other fixes as well, so Arcam gave it to me for a token amount (original price was £500 IIRC).

 

[bigboss]

So far, nobody has offered retrofitting HDMI 2.0 on older receivers. If HDMI 2.0 is really important for you, contact Arcam and confirm first.

 

[tommytom]

So far, nobody has offered retrofitting HDMI 2.0 on older receivers. If HDMI 2.0 is really important for you, contact Arcam and confirm first.

yeah, that's what post number 11 was about. I'm trying to make sense of what they said. I've emailed again for clarification. We'll see. Has anyone heard the 750 and compared directly to an Anthem 710, or a Yamaha 3040, Pioneer LX87/8?? Is it really worth twice the price?? And is it significantly better than the 450... double the price...

 

[CnoEvil]

So far, nobody has offered retrofitting HDMI 2.0 on older receivers. If HDMI 2.0 is really important for you, contact Arcam and confirm first.

Agreed....I hope I didn't give that impression.

 

[Native_bon]

So far, nobody has offered retrofitting HDMI 2.0 on older receivers. If HDMI 2.0 is really important for you, contact Arcam and confirm first.

I tried a lot of AV amps the Arcam AVR 750 by far best of the lot. Again this may just boil down to taste. I did any how settle for the AVR 450.. thought not much diffrence between the 750 & 450. Just the 750 being more powerful. So will have the ability to control more difficult loads in driving speeakers, thats not to so the 450 is not good at this.

The yamaha was very good with movies but not as musical as the Arcam 750 withy music. I found the Anthem a bit dry for my taste & also complicated to set up.. The Arcams have drive & power in abundance with real musicality.

Audition were possible.

 

[Sliced Bread]

So far, nobody has offered retrofitting HDMI 2.0 on older receivers. If HDMI 2.0 is really important for you, contact Arcam and confirm first.

yeah, that's what post number 11 was about. I'm trying to make sense of what they said. I've emailed again for clarification. We'll see. Has anyone heard the 750 and compared directly to an Anthem 710, or a Yamaha 3040, Pioneer LX87/8?? Is it really worth twice the price?? And is it significantly better than the 450... double the price...

I have compared the Yamaha 3030 with the Pioneer LX87 using CM8,CMC & CM1.

With Movies:

The Yamaha had a warmer more involving sound, although the bass was a little too loose for my liking (although i loved the overall tonal balance and top end).

The Pioneer was far more analytical and accurate, though it doesn't fill the room in quite the sameway the Yamaha does. The bass though feels like it extends lower and it definitely has more detail across the frequency range. (Note: It's very difficult to calibrate correctly).

With Music:

For me the Yamaha was definitely better than the Pioneer in this regard, however I have heard some people say it is the other way around. I found the Yamaha quite easy on the ear (although the bass was still a little too woolly for me), while the Pioneer is not a very comfortable listen imo.

Both would be thrashed with music by a dedicated stereo amp. You might want to also consider Onkyo as they are good with movies and music.

Overall:

I kept the Pioneer in the end, although even to this day I do go back and forward in my mind as to which was best. I'm considering an Atmos receiver as soon as B&W bring out an Atmos module for the CM range (I'm assuming they will), so I'll probably sweat over the decision again

 

[Native_bon]

From the above posts made, you can see everyone has got different taste in what they looking for as per sound.. All this are just a guide. It will always have to come down to demo some of the listed AV amps.

ALL THE BEST.

 

[Native_bon]

I tried a lot of AV amps the Arcam AVR 750 by far best of the lot. Again this may just boil down to taste. I did any how settle for the AVR 450.. thought not much diffrence between the 750 & 450. Just the 750 being more powerful. So will have the ability to control more difficult loads in driving speeakers, thats not to so the 450 is not good at this.

The yamaha was very good with movies but not as musical as the Arcam 750 withy music. I found the Anthem a bit dry for my taste & also complicated to set up.. The Arcams have drive & power in abundance with nice airy top end & real musicality.

As per the pioneer just too forward for my listening. Some of my friends tend to think my setup is too dull sounding, but again all about taste.

Audition were possible.

 

[tommytom]

The Arcams have drive & power in abundance with nice airy top end & real musicality.

How do you think the Arcams compare to dedicated stereo pre/pro like a Naim for music?

Cant find somewhere that has all the kit to demo side by side with the right speaker package...

 

[atkins4725]

Have a listen to the Cambridge Audio 751r you may be surprised by how good it sounds with music and movies. I previoulsy had the LX86 which supposedly has oodles of power. The Cambridge is in a different league altogether.

http://hometheaterreview.com/cambridge-audio-azur-751r-av-receiver/?page=2

 

[Native_bon]

The AVR 750 is a very good amp weather it will be to your taste I cannot tell you for sure. Naim amps have got their own distinctive sound. Am not really a fan of Naim sound, but others will tell you their amps are very good as far as musicality is concerned.

Am sure if you ask the shop for a few weeks demo at home they should be willing. If explain your situation & that 4k is a lot money, if you can demo before buying for sure.

Just try & ask nicely you never know...

 

[tommytom]

The AVR 750 is a very good amp weather it will be to your taste I cannot tell you for sure. Naim amps have got their own distinctive sound. Am not really a fan of Naim sound, but others will tell you their amps are very good as far as musicality is concerned.

Roger that thanks.

I know this is a tiny little thing, but I have i have copies of all my music as mp3 and Apple lossless where they're CD rips. Just noticed that the Arcam can't play ALAC... I know you can't have everything... but... £4,000.... really... come on... and yes I know there are a bunch of programs that will transcode my ALAC to FLACs... but still... reallly Arcam... ??

OK...

Yeah I've read all about the rail switching amp, and every review I read seems to talk about how the 'power' amp bit of the 750 is very good, but other than that, it's identical to the 450, so here we are again...you picked the 450 because the sound was 'just about' the same to paraphrase...