Should I get a new amp?

[Dave]

Hi,
I'm trying to build a midto high-fi audio system on a reasonable
budget for 80% audio and 20% movies. Right now I'm sticking to 2
channel but would like the option to upgrade in time. I'm worried my
amp is lower in quality then my speakers and subwoofer and was hoping
to get some advice as to whether I should return the amp/receiver in
favor of higher quality. Are my strong speakers and sub being wasted
with my mediocre receiver?

- Receiver - Pioneer VSX-1014TX-K
(http://reviews.cnet.com/Pioneer_VSX_1014TX_K/4507-6466_7-31000741.html?tag=spec)

- Main speakers - Soliloquy 5.0s
(http://www.solspeak.com/sol_products/i_monitors.php)

- Subwoofer - Audio Physic Luna
(http://www.aanvilaudio.u-net.com/ap_luna_1.htm)

My speaker cables are decent 12AWG and I will have qulity RCA
interconnects. Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

-Dave

[Lucas Tam]

(Dave) wrote in
m:

> I'm worried my
> amp is lower in quality then my speakers and subwoofer and was hoping
> to get some advice as to whether I should return the amp/receiver in
> favor of higher quality. Are my strong speakers and sub being wasted
> with my mediocre receiver?
>
> - Receiver - Pioneer VSX-1014TX-K
> (http://reviews.cnet.com/Pioneer_VSX_1014TX_K/4507-6466_7-31000741.html
> ?tag=spec)

The VSX-1014 is a very nice receiver (for movies). It's THX certified and
has the ability to layer Dolby Pro Logic IIx Music over 2 channel sources.
There are only a couple of weak points - the controller (too cramped) and
you can't layer DPLIIx Movie mode without 7.1 speakers.

--
Lucas Tam )
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/

[JBorg]

Dave wrote in message

> Hi,
> I'm trying to build a mid to high-fi audio system on a reasonable
> budget for 80% audio and 20% movies. Right now I'm sticking to 2
> channel but would like the option to upgrade in time.

Dave, since you plan on using your system watching movies 20% of the time,
you need to accept now that what you need is a multi-ch amp. and additional
speakers.



> I'm worried my
> amp is lower in quality than my speakers and subwoofer and was hoping
> to get some advice as to whether I should return the amp/receiver in
> favor of higher quality. Are my strong speakers and sub being wasted
> with my mediocre receiver?

As I don't own that receiver, none of that specs, prints, and picture would
tell me if it'll sound good along with your speaker and powered subw --
which I also don't own. There might be others in this ng who has that particular
Pioneer.

Since you think that it is a mediocre receiver, I think you should get a receiver
that is not mediocre.



> - Receiver - Pioneer VSX-1014TX-K
> (http://reviews.cnet.com/Pioneer_VSX_1014TX_K/4507-6466_7-31000741.html?tag=spec)


I can't tell whether you're wasting your strong speaker and sub on this receiver.
They might, in fact, be a perfect match.

Do you have any other question ?

[Fella]

Dave wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm trying to build a midto high-fi audio system on a reasonable
> budget for 80% audio and 20% movies.

> - Receiver - Pioneer VSX-1014TX-K
> (http://reviews.cnet.com/Pioneer_VSX_1014TX_K/4507-6466_7-31000741.html?tag=spec)

Some months back I auditioned a pioneer vsx 1013, or some such, I think
quite similar to what you have, plus a yamaha dsp az something-or-other,
etc.. I even went all the way up to a 2500euro rotel, which was the best
amongst the bunch. The problem with all of them was that they just
didn't have the ability to render decent two channel audio. Most notibly
they lacked in dynamics and detail. The pioneer even missed completely
whole set of sounds on some bueno vista social club tracks !! :)

The *cheapest* model I auditioned, end ended up buying was the Cambridge
Audio Azur 540R receiver. It's two channel delivery is miles ahead
compared to much more expensive models mentioned above (costs 690euro
here in finland). I would recommend this to you.

My setup eventually turned into a "hybrid" system though, consisting of
a "real" two channel amp (Densen beat 100) for the front channels,
feeding sonus faber concerto grand pianos. For home theater the
cambridge just works as a pre amp feeding a the tape loop of the densen
(with the densens volume turned to max) for the front channels. For all
them other channels required for HT I use audio pro speakers, plus an
audio pro sub, fed directly by the cmabridge unit.

I know it's no ideal solution but works like a charm. I have spectcular
(by my standarts) two channel audio, plus good HT for movies *without*
comprimising from my pure two channel audio bliss.

I have read in some forums that the Marantzin SR5400OSE and SR5400 are
even better then the cambridge in two channel sound quality, plus that
they have more of the typical HT receiver bells and whistles involved.
So you might want to give an audition to them also.

But my ultimate advice to you would be that get some primare,
electrocompaniet, densen, krell etc, dedicated two channel integrated, a
good cd player and enjoy real music. Like I do, use the front LR preouts
of your 6/7.1 channel receiver (you might no even need to change your
pioneer for this) to feed your *real* amp for the front channels in HT
mode..

My last advice would be that do not use your DVD player (unless it's
some meridian, linn, etc) for CD audio rendering. Do get a reasonable
dedicated CD player for that.

[Arny Krueger]

"Dave" > wrote in message
m
> Hi,
> I'm trying to build a midto high-fi audio system on a reasonable
> budget for 80% audio and 20% movies. Right now I'm sticking to 2
> channel but would like the option to upgrade in time. I'm worried my
> amp is lower in quality then my speakers and subwoofer and was hoping
> to get some advice as to whether I should return the amp/receiver in
> favor of higher quality. Are my strong speakers and sub being wasted
> with my mediocre receiver?

First off, let me complement you on having a nicely-balanced system. No, I
don't think that the receiver is unduely limiting your system's sound
quality.

I want to know where you want to go with your system. I think you have a
nice LITTLE system, but it seems that does not satisfy you. That's fine, but
where do you want to go? What is your vision for your next system?

Perhaps it would help you if I pointed out that your current system, as nice
as it is, can't go deep and can't go loud and stay clean-sounding. The
problem area is the speakers, probably mostly the subwoofer. On the scale of
subwoofers, a subwoofer that crows about generating a mere 104 dB ain't
much. OTOH, if you live in a shared building, it might be as far as you can
go and still keep the neighbors out of your hair.

[Dave]

>
> Since you think that it is a mediocre receiver, I think you should get a receiver
> that is not mediocre.
>

Ok, I threw the Pioneer on eBay and I think I'm going with a Xindak
XA-6900SE with a Xindak SACD. I've read strong reviews of Xindak sound
and quality compared with the Pioneer. My concern now is that I'll
have to turn this thing on hours in advance before it reaches its
sound potential. I would also like to leave it on all the time, but I
doubt that's smart since the amp and CD have some tubes running
inside. Can I leave on all the time?

[MINe 109]

In article >,
George M. Middius > wrote:

> Dave said:
>
> > I think I'm going with a Xindak XA-6900SE with a Xindak SACD.
>
> You might want to wait on this idea. The company's web site seems to be
> MIA. I know dealers have merchandise to sell.... but if the company's in
> trouble, it would be a risky investment.

The distributor still has a "products" page:

http://www.bertrandaudio.com/Products/XINDAK/Xindak.htm

> Note to Harold: The amp om question is sleek and snazzy and it costs
> *only* $2000. What a deal!

I only want to know why he didn't spend another thou and get the ARC
integrated.

Stephen

[JBorg]

> Dave wrote in message
>
>
>
>> Since you think that it is a mediocre receiver, I think you should get a receiver
>> that is not mediocre.
>
>
> Ok, I threw the Pioneer on eBay and I think I'm going with a Xindak
> XA-6900SE with a Xindak SACD. I've read strong reviews of Xindak sound
> and quality compared with the Pioneer.

The Pioneer receiver you tossed cost about $400, with the 2 ch Xindak SE amp
that your considering at $2000, that's 4 times your original budget plus another
$1700 for the SACD. I think you should judiciously allocate your budget if you
still plan to build a mid to hifi audio system yet, aspire to use it to watch movies
20% at the time.



> My concern now is that I'll have to turn this thing on hours in advance before it
> reaches its sound potential. I would also like to leave it on all the time, but I
> doubt that's smart since the amp and CD have some tubes running
> inside. Can I leave on all the time?



I have a tube preamp that uses 4 tubes. There are times that I listen to my system
on consecutive days for several weeks, so I leave it on. I turn it off if I don't plan
to listen in 2 - 3 days. At one time, I left them on for over a year and the tubes
lasted about the same time compare to another set a year later after they've
been consistently powered off at the end of day. Both sets lasted 12 1/2 mos.

[Dave]

George M. Middius > wrote in message >...
> Dave said:
>
> > I think I'm going with a Xindak XA-6900SE with a Xindak SACD.
>
> You might want to wait on this idea. The company's web site seems to be
> MIA. I know dealers have merchandise to sell.... but if the company's in
> trouble, it would be a risky investment.
>
try xindak.com, not xindakaudio.com. It look to me like high quality
Chinese audio equipment is just starting to trickle into the market,
not the other way around.

[Dave]

"JBorg" > wrote in message >...
> > Dave wrote in message
> >
> >
> >
> >> Since you think that it is a mediocre receiver, I think you should get a receiver
> >> that is not mediocre.
> >
> >
> > Ok, I threw the Pioneer on eBay and I think I'm going with a Xindak
> > XA-6900SE with a Xindak SACD. I've read strong reviews of Xindak sound
> > and quality compared with the Pioneer.
>
> The Pioneer receiver you tossed cost about $400, with the 2 ch Xindak SE amp
> that your considering at $2000, that's 4 times your original budget

Amp is costing me the same as the Pioneer.

plus another
> $1700 for the SACD. I think you should judiciously allocate your budget if you
> still plan to build a mid to hifi audio system yet, aspire to use it to watch movies
> 20% at the time.
>
SACD is costing same as amp- I think I am being judicious here. I
decided if I start watching more movies down the road I can get a DSP.
This is minimum several years away.

>
> > My concern now is that I'll have to turn this thing on hours in advance before it
> > reaches its sound potential. I would also like to leave it on all the time, but I
> > doubt that's smart since the amp and CD have some tubes running
> > inside. Can I leave on all the time?
>
>
>
> I have a tube preamp that uses 4 tubes. There are times that I listen to my system
> on consecutive days for several weeks, so I leave it on. I turn it off if I don't plan
> to listen in 2 - 3 days. At one time, I left them on for over a year and the tubes
> lasted about the same time compare to another set a year later after they've
> been consistently powered off at the end of day. Both sets lasted 12 1/2 mos.

Only 12 1/2 months? I was expecting 5 years from them. This is a
concern. My seller told me not to leave on b/c it will "greatly reduce
tube life." Sounds like that's not the case.


Thanks for the info.

[JBorg]

> Dave wrote in message
>> JBorg" wrote in message
>>> Dave wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Since you think that it is a mediocre receiver, I think you should get a receiver
>>>> that is not mediocre.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, I threw the Pioneer on eBay and I think I'm going with a Xindak
>>> XA-6900SE with a Xindak SACD. I've read strong reviews of Xindak sound
>>> and quality compared with the Pioneer.
>>
>> The Pioneer receiver you tossed cost about $400, with the 2 ch Xindak SE amp
>> that your considering at $2000, that's 4 times your original budget
>
>
> Amp is costing me the same as the Pioneer.

The Xindak amp don't look like $400, you sure?


>> plus another
>> $1700 for the SACD. I think you should judiciously allocate your budget if you
>> still plan to build a mid to hifi audio system yet, aspire to use it to watch movies
>> 20% at the time.
>>
> SACD is costing same as amp- I think I am being judicious here. I
> decided if I start watching more movies down the road I can get a DSP.
> This is minimum several years away.

You sure? You might wanna check if they're giving you the same gear.

BTW, if you're gonna use dsp, are you going to get separate amp to drive the
speakers in the back ? Hmm, maybe you don't want speaker for the back
and that's ok too.



>>> My concern now is that I'll have to turn this thing on hours in advance before it
>>> reaches its sound potential. I would also like to leave it on all the time, but I
>>> doubt that's smart since the amp and CD have some tubes running
>>> inside. Can I leave on all the time?
>>
>>
>>
>> I have a tube preamp that uses 4 tubes. There are times that I listen to my system
>> on consecutive days for several weeks, so I leave it on. I turn it off if I don't plan
>> to listen in 2 - 3 days. At one time, I left them on for over a year and the tubes
>> lasted about the same time compare to another set a year later after they've
>> been consistently powered off at the end of day. Both sets lasted 12 1/2 mos.
>
> Only 12 1/2 months? I was expecting 5 years from them. This is a
> concern. My seller told me not to leave on b/c it will "greatly reduce
> tube life." Sounds like that's not the case.
>
>
> Thanks for the info.


Dave, 12 1/2 months is a stretch. When I was using that preamp early on anywhere
from 1 to 3 hours a day, 4 to 5 days a week, on the average they lasted 10 months.
Sovtek 6922 cost $15 a pop, so that wasn't so bad. Ask the dealer for specific
infos. alright.

You sure you don't have any more question?

[Sander deWaal]

"JBorg" > said:

>Dave, 12 1/2 months is a stretch. When I was using that preamp early on anywhere
>from 1 to 3 hours a day, 4 to 5 days a week, on the average they lasted 10 months.
>Sovtek 6922 cost $15 a pop, so that wasn't so bad. Ask the dealer for specific
>infos. alright.

Note that ECC88/6DJ8/6922 is a low voltage/high current tube, and will
in general wear out sooner than a ECC83/82/81 type.
NOS Telefunken, Siemens or Mullard ECC88s will last longer than
Sovteks, and sound better in most preamps.

--
Sander deWaal
"SOA of a KT88? Sufficient."

[Rich Andrews]

Sander deWaal > wrote in
:

> (Dave) said:
>
>>Only 12 1/2 months? I was expecting 5 years from them. This is a
>>concern. My seller told me not to leave on b/c it will "greatly reduce
>>tube life." Sounds like that's not the case.
>
> For preamp tubes, it's usually best to keep them on at all times.
> Tubes suffer more from daily switching on and off than from a steady
> "on"situation.
>
> NB. power tubes are excluded from this picture, as they will wear out
> soon because of the higher currents and dissipation involved.
>
> My (phono) preamp tubes (Mullard CV4004) usually last for about 5
> years or even more, and they're always on.
> My KT88s have about 2 years on them now, with almost daily 2...3 hrs
> of use. They still test over 100 % on my tube tester (mutual
> conduction, not just emission).
>
> My former power amps had Philips 807s in them and those lasted for
> over 5 years before falling off to about 90 % of the rated Gm.
>

The tubes in my preamp are now 40 years old and they are still within 90%
of new. One guess what I don't do. I do turn it on daily for at least 6
hours.

r

[Arny Krueger]

"Rich Andrews" > wrote in message


> The tubes in my preamp are now 40 years old and they are still within
> 90% of new. One guess what I don't do. I do turn it on daily for at
> least 6 hours.

Rich, are you saying that you've run the same tubes daily for at least 6
hours for 40 years?

[rj]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in
:

> "Rich Andrews" > wrote in message
>
>
>> The tubes in my preamp are now 40 years old and they are still within
>> 90% of new. One guess what I don't do. I do turn it on daily for at
>> least 6 hours.
>
> Rich, are you saying that you've run the same tubes daily for at least
> 6 hours for 40 years?
>
>
>

no....I am not sure exactly how many hours were on the preamp before I
got it.

Lets just say this, the tubes are original, they are 40 years old, they
have 90%+ emission, and I shut the unit off when not being used. I
could just leave it on 24x7, but really doubt it would have the original
tubes in it by now.

In the last 5 years it has been on an average of 6 hours per day.
Now it could be that they have dropped signifiantly in the past 6 months
and I do not know it.


r