Looking to convert from 2.0 older system to new 5.1 surround sound

[frogcarmichael]

Hiya

My current set up is about 10 years old; NAD C320 BEE amp, with a pair of KEF Q1s. I feed my iPOD through the amp, with music at a minimum bit rate of 320kbs.I’m happy with the quality of the music, but better is always good J. In particular, I like my bass tight with real drive and love really expressive vocals. I listened to a friend’s high level set up and really like the detail on guitars he was able to uncover as well

So, I am looking at getting a surround sound system (AV receiver, 5.1 speakers) as part of a rework of the house. This system will be running TV, DVD and Bluray, as well as music, streamed from my computer. Budget is in the region of 3k –ish, with a little bit of room left over. It is the music part that I am most interested in getting right.

So, questions. I am not an expert but willing to learn. I’ve lurked on a few forums to get a general idea, but could do with some clarification on a few points.

Taking things from the source onwards for music. The music stream will be, clearly, digital. When am I best converting it (min bit rate 320kps) to analogue? Is it best to let the receiver do this, or am I going to get a significant jump in quality using a separate DAC and then bypassing as much of the AV electronics using a “pure direct” mode, or some such? Are DACs on AV receivers any good for music?

Whichever way I go, I want to have easy control of the streaming, via an app on Android or equivalent.

If I am looking for at least as good as sound as I have now from my NAD, what sort of range receiver do I need to be looking at, about £1000 (forums tell me AV receivers can produce music results equivalent to amps at 25% of their price)? Or am I going to be better off getting a receiver with preouts and putting it through the old NAD for music?

For the speakers, it seems that getting good fronts and equivalent model centre is key, with rears being less important. Given that I want good music quality, would I be better severed getting some decent floorstanders (e.g. Q2050i) and then something like the Q2010i for rears, rather than a full 2000 series set? If so, given the floorstanders will have decent bass do I really need a sub? The room in which this is going has a tiled floor. I know this is going to give some problems, and we’re putting a rug down etc. I am worried a sub would just be too boomy.

By the way, I’m not set on the Q acoustics, they are just a convenient example.

For cinema, this is my first surround sound system, to be put in a room of about 5m x 4m (15ft by 12 ft), not a huge space, so no need for huge sound, but a desire to have real quality.

It seems that the award winning receivers all do an excellent job of surround sound, given how competitive the market is, so I’m not too worried here (Yamaha, Pana, Onkyo).

So, I’m mainly looking to get some advice on the questions above, although recommendations for kit are always welcome. I’m currently thinking of:

Yamaha RXA1020

Q Acoustics 2050 floorstanders with the rest of the 2000 series surround sound

Panasonic TX-P42GT60B

Thanks for all and any advice you can give.

 

[Leeps]

Hi frog

I can't really answer all your questions, but as I made a similar jump to you about a year ago, some of my observations may help. I do know that some will disagree, so ultimately, do be prepared to demo and make up your own mind.

I vascillated for some time about whether to keep my two channel stereo system and have an additional 5.1 system alongside, but in the end once I'd set up the surround system, the music results were so much better than I expected that I decided to ditch the separate stereo.

Some results actually using my system (see signature) really did surprise me...

> Some sources DON'T always sound better (to me) using "Pure Direct". Some of the processing modes can improve things. For example, I was listening to a Radiohead bluray, I discovered that the Rock setting actually improved timing and punchiness to the bass. Pure Direct sounded a little flat in comparison. Really not what I expected. I find that the "optimum" setting (which increases the volume of quiet bits in movies and tames the loud bits) is also much better (to me) than pure direct.

>This is not a purist route, but I have discovered excellent results listening to music using the "Extended Stereo" setting. This does a similar thing to your typical 6 speaker car stereo. It doesn't mess about with too much processing (like Dolby Prologic for example), but does feed the stereo signal through all speakers. For the best results, I use the ipad control app to alter the balance towards the front speakers about half way. I can only describe the results as a 3-D mesmerising, almost harmonic quality to the sound; like I'm in the middle of the music rather than observing it from a distance. I use my system primarily for music (70%/30% ish balance), so the music results were really important to me. I think one thing that may contribute to this mesmerising effect is that all my speakers use exactly the same tweeters and midrange drivers and are powered by the same amp (rather than feeding the main L&R channels through a different amp that may have a quite different sound balance and power output). I accept that you could achieve a more true "hi-fidelity" sound through a dedicated stereo system, but having achieved the results I have, I wouldn't go back now. I thoroughly enjoy listening to stereo music through my system this way.

>Having tried it both ways, I personally prefer using a subwoofer with music and crossing over at 80hz. Having slim floorstanders myself, I did try running all the sound through a 5.0 system, but the quality suffered. The bass was boomy and flabby and the whole sound was too loose. Using the sub, but having comparitively small speakers I've retained many of the qualities I liked of my old standmounts I used in stereo; a fast tight treble and midrange; but with a beautiful wallop underpinning it all from the sub. Do bear in mind that you're then using a dedicated amp in the sub for bass (which in my case is a 250w RMS amp) , rather than using the AV receiver's internal amp.

>I can't comment too much about DACs because I use quite different sources to you, but I do feel that the DAC inside my CD player is of a higher standard to the DAC inside my receiver. Having said that my receiver was a mid-range unit with an £800 rrp when new. Presumably the higher you're willing to go up the food chain, the better the DAC quality.

>Socks. Yes that's what I said. I found stuffing socks into the rear ports of my floorstanders really tightened up the bass nicely. If you're checking out floorstanders, check out whether they're sealed or ported, and if ported, where the port is located. Experiment with port bungs (socks if none are available) and distance from the wall. This will have a dramatic effect on the whole sound.

>Control. The Pioneer AV control app is just excellent. I understand that some AV control apps from rivals (like Marantz) are not up to the same standard, so if you think that your shortlist of receivers sound much of a muchness for sound quality, then their respective control apps ought to be demo'd too. That might just swing it for you.

>Patience. A word of warning. Compared to a typical 2.0 system, an AV receiver is a very complex piece of kit and playing about with the crossover, sound modes, balance, speaker positioning and...socks, can make a huge difference to the end result. If I tried, I could make my system sound truly awful or quite brilliant, just by making some tweaks here and there, so at any demo, if it sounds awful, don't immediately write the kit off your shortlist. It may be that the set-up rather than the kit itself needs to be changed.

So there we are. Quite a lot of waffle really, but some of the above may help.

Anything I would change? I might consider upgrading my amp to the Pioneer SC-LX77 or LX87 at some point, but I'm not in any great hurry to do so. Really happy punter.

 

[Leeps]

PS, just noticed your comment "In particular, I like my bass tight with real drive and love really expressive vocals."

It's the midrange and particularly female vocals, that sound really beautiful through my set-up. Powerful, effortless full of breath and life. My R270HD's have recently been upgraded by Monitor Audio, but do check them out, as I would say that vocals/midrange in general are their strength, and quite a different feel to the R90HD's.

 

[mr malarky]

+1 for extended stereo for music.

 

[jonathanRD]

I have a similar sized room (5m x 4m) and I also had the dilema of whether to combine HC and HiFi or keep them separate. As I did not have the 'upfront budget' I decided to keep the systems separate and build up my HC.

If it is the music you are most interested in getting right, then I would demo receivers circa £800 - £1000 along with a main pair of speakers and compare the sound (for music) against your current set up. Hopefully you will find a combination that improves on your current setup, and you can then decide if you like the matching centre, rears and sub. A lot of receivers at this price level will also have pre-outs so you will also have the option of using your NAD if you wanted to experiment.

Most will say that the front three speakers are the most important for HC, the rear or surround speakers add some great effects, but I would urge you to get a sub as well, as they really do complete the cinema experience. I purchased a BK sub, but beforehand I telephoned them to ask advice (laminate floor over a concrete base) - they were very helpful. Maybe you can get some advice re your tiled floor.

 

[frogcarmichael]

Hiya All, thanks for the info. Really useful

It seems that many people end up juggling the HC, HiFi question.

@Leeps, great info and great to see a post of a real life implementation. The socks - were they clean, or were you hiding them in a mad panic tidy up before your other half came home?

I'll add your set up to my short list

@jonathan, what was the advice on the sub. I am wondering if a tiled floor means I should simply avoid any downward firing sub?

By the way, I do find it a bit frustrating that as you go up the price range, in most cases you go 5.1, 7.1, 9.1 etc etc. I don't want extra amps for 7, or 9.1, I want my money to go on better power supply, or DACs!

 

[Leeps]

No worries about Lounge Cheese, the socks were indeed clean, albeit quite small ones as I didn't want to stuff the ports too tightly.

i take your point about the higher-end receivers, but they really are trying to be all things to everyone & keep a wide variety of customer types happy. Initially I used the zone 2 output on my receiver through my old stand-mounted speakers, but now I've got some extra Radius 90HD's for front-height duties in a 7.1 set-up, so their flexibility can come in handy when your needs change.

When you consider that most AV receivers now provide 7.1 sound, decent stereo sound, internet radio, built-in streaming from a NAS, built-in Spotify (or even Spotify Connect now from some manufacturers) and ipod plug n play all controlled by a slick control app, they're very good value pieces of kit, especially when their annual replacement cycle means that you only have to wait 10 months to save up to 50% of the original RRP!

 

[jonathanRD]

BK actually advised to get the DF (downward facing) version. I assume because I have a hard & reflective floor (wood laminate over concrete base), where the sound both reflects off the floor and also penetrates the floor and reverberates around the room. I love it when the sub rumbles - it is very subtle but very effective.

The main reason I contacted BK was to seek advice whether to choose the Monolith or XXLS400. The Monolith is an all out cinema beast, whereas the 400 is excellent for music and very cable with movies too. I've connected my 400 via the high level connection to my Rega Brio amp and it adds the low end bass that my mission standmounts can't deliver. There are albums I've had and loved for 20 years which now sound better with the addition of the XXLS400.

I would assume that you would not use a DF sub if the floor was covered in carpet or likely to dampen the sound, but you should seek your own advice.

 

[mr malarky]

Hiya All, thanks for the info. Really useful

It seems that many people end up juggling the HC, HiFi question.

@Leeps, great info and great to see a post of a real life implementation. The socks - were they clean, or were you hiding them in a mad panic tidy up before your other half came home?

I'll add your set up to my short list

@jonathan, what was the advice on the sub. I am wondering if a tiled floor means I should simply avoid any downward firing sub?

By the way, I do find it a bit frustrating that as you go up the price range, in most cases you go 5.1, 7.1, 9.1 etc etc. I don't want extra amps for 7, or 9.1, I want my money to go on better power supply, or DACs!

keep in mind that a 7.1 amp (or higher) would allow you to bi-amp your front speakers should you choose to (either now or in future) so the extra channels aren't necessarily wasted if you stick to a 5.1 set-up. They will also usually allow the "front height/width" option, which can really increase the soundstage when watching movies.

 

[frogcarmichael]

Thanks malarky. That had never crossed my mind. There is so much to dig into in this area. Next stop, room acoustics!