Home theater

[MINe 109]

I'm think about theater again. I have a bit of a dilemma because my
current setup is good enough presenting a stable centered soundstage
that I don't need a center channel speaker for movies, but I'm curious
about three-channel golden age recordings. To add to the complication,
my front speakers are active, so I need a receiver with pre-outs as well
as an analog multichannel input.

Can anyone recommend: a cheap (>$800) receiver; or a similarly priced
center channel that stands a chance at matching Linn Kabers?

Thanks, all!

Stephen

PS I wonder how Howard's doing:

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/destinations/2006-02-16-toilet-cinema_x.ht
m?POE=TRVISVA

[Harry Lavo]

"MINe 109" > wrote in message
...
> I'm think about theater again. I have a bit of a dilemma because my
> current setup is good enough presenting a stable centered soundstage
> that I don't need a center channel speaker for movies, but I'm curious
> about three-channel golden age recordings. To add to the complication,
> my front speakers are active, so I need a receiver with pre-outs as well
> as an analog multichannel input.
>
> Can anyone recommend: a cheap (>$800) receiver; or a similarly priced
> center channel that stands a chance at matching Linn Kabers?
>

If you just want three channels, consider Linn's match and simply add a used
preamp.....this will let you hear SACD's at their best running in direct
mode..then take the output from the player via analog. Once you decide how
MUCH you like it, you can then expand further and/or add a reciever.

Just my opinion, of course. But I do operate a 5.1 system via three analog
preamps.

[MINe 109]

In article >,
"Harry Lavo" > wrote:

> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I'm think about theater again. I have a bit of a dilemma because my
> > current setup is good enough presenting a stable centered soundstage
> > that I don't need a center channel speaker for movies, but I'm curious
> > about three-channel golden age recordings. To add to the complication,
> > my front speakers are active, so I need a receiver with pre-outs as well
> > as an analog multichannel input.
> >
> > Can anyone recommend: a cheap (>$800) receiver; or a similarly priced
> > center channel that stands a chance at matching Linn Kabers?
> >
>
> If you just want three channels, consider Linn's match and simply add a used
> preamp.....this will let you hear SACD's at their best running in direct
> mode..then take the output from the player via analog. Once you decide how
> MUCH you like it, you can then expand further and/or add a reciever.

I had my Linn Majik de-amped some time back. It might be worth the
experiment to reactivate it. I have inexpensive rear speakers already
that could be powered that way.

> Just my opinion, of course. But I do operate a 5.1 system via three analog
> preamps.

They're all the same brand, IIRC, so not a multiple remote nightmare? I
don't suppose any inexpensive preamps use Linn's code?

Stephen

[Harry Lavo]

"MINe 109" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Harry Lavo" > wrote:
>
>> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > I'm think about theater again. I have a bit of a dilemma because my
>> > current setup is good enough presenting a stable centered soundstage
>> > that I don't need a center channel speaker for movies, but I'm curious
>> > about three-channel golden age recordings. To add to the complication,
>> > my front speakers are active, so I need a receiver with pre-outs as
>> > well
>> > as an analog multichannel input.
>> >
>> > Can anyone recommend: a cheap (>$800) receiver; or a similarly priced
>> > center channel that stands a chance at matching Linn Kabers?
>> >
>>
>> If you just want three channels, consider Linn's match and simply add a
>> used
>> preamp.....this will let you hear SACD's at their best running in direct
>> mode..then take the output from the player via analog. Once you decide
>> how
>> MUCH you like it, you can then expand further and/or add a reciever.
>
> I had my Linn Majik de-amped some time back. It might be worth the
> experiment to reactivate it. I have inexpensive rear speakers already
> that could be powered that way.
>
>> Just my opinion, of course. But I do operate a 5.1 system via three
>> analog
>> preamps.
>
> They're all the same brand, IIRC, so not a multiple remote nightmare? I
> don't suppose any inexpensive preamps use Linn's code?

Yes, three identical using one remote. That's a big convenience. But I did
use three manual preamps for about two years....I placed little calibrated
tape markings on the volume controls for my low, average, and loud listening
volumes....all calibrated via the speaker calibration tones of the Sony SACD
player. So when I went to listen, I basically just set up the tone controls
for the type of music and time of day....and rarely had to change much from
there (although some SACDs and DVD-A's don't seem to follow F-R volume
conventions very well).

As to Linn's code, I doubt it unles perhaps some of the lower priced British
units use it. Possibly a "learning remote" but that may be a bit pricey.

"Harry Lavo" > wrote in message
...
>
> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article >,
>> "Harry Lavo" > wrote:
>>
>>> "MINe 109" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> > I'm think about theater again. I have a bit of a dilemma because my
>>> > current setup is good enough presenting a stable centered soundstage
>>> > that I don't need a center channel speaker for movies, but I'm curious
>>> > about three-channel golden age recordings. To add to the complication,
>>> > my front speakers are active, so I need a receiver with pre-outs as
>>> > well
>>> > as an analog multichannel input.
>>> >
>>> > Can anyone recommend: a cheap (>$800) receiver; or a similarly priced
>>> > center channel that stands a chance at matching Linn Kabers?
>>> >
>>>
>>> If you just want three channels, consider Linn's match and simply add a
>>> used
>>> preamp.....this will let you hear SACD's at their best running in direct
>>> mode..then take the output from the player via analog. Once you decide
>>> how
>>> MUCH you like it, you can then expand further and/or add a reciever.
>>
>> I had my Linn Majik de-amped some time back. It might be worth the
>> experiment to reactivate it. I have inexpensive rear speakers already
>> that could be powered that way.
>>
>>> Just my opinion, of course. But I do operate a 5.1 system via three
>>> analog
>>> preamps.
>>
>> They're all the same brand, IIRC, so not a multiple remote nightmare? I
>> don't suppose any inexpensive preamps use Linn's code?
>
> Yes, three identical using one remote. That's a big convenience. But I
> did use three manual preamps for about two years....I placed little
> calibrated tape markings on the volume controls for my low, average, and
> loud listening volumes....all calibrated via the speaker calibration tones
> of the Sony SACD player. So when I went to listen, I basically just set
> up the tone controls for the type of music and time of day....and rarely
> had to change much from there (although some SACDs and DVD-A's don't seem
> to follow F-R volume conventions very well).
>
> As to Linn's code, I doubt it unles perhaps some of the lower priced
> British units use it. Possibly a "learning remote" but that may be a bit
> pricey.
>
As I've mentioned before, I helped a friend pick out an excellent IMO, HT
receiver from Pioneer that includes a learning remote. The Pioneer
VSX-1015TX is 7.1 capable, THX certified, and 120wpcx7. Lots of decoding
capability and features. He got it from an online vendor for $399.00.

Worth a try, especially if you can get it with a money back guarantee.

http://www.nextag.com/pioneer-vsx_-_1015tx/search-html Don't know what
their return policy is, but you can read a review and the price is even
better.

[Sander deWaal]

"Harry Lavo" > said:

>As to Linn's code, I doubt it unles perhaps some of the lower priced British
>units use it. Possibly a "learning remote" but that may be a bit pricey.


Linn uses (at least up to about 2002 ) the standard Philips RC5 code
for remotes.

--

- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -

[MINe 109]

In article >,
Sander deWaal > wrote:

> "Harry Lavo" > said:
>
> >As to Linn's code, I doubt it unles perhaps some of the lower priced British
> >units use it. Possibly a "learning remote" but that may be a bit pricey.
>
>
> Linn uses (at least up to about 2002 ) the standard Philips RC5 code
> for remotes.

I know Arcam uses the same as Linn. Philips, so presumably Marantz?

Thanks,

Stephen

[Sander deWaal]

MINe 109 > said:

>> Linn uses (at least up to about 2002 ) the standard Philips RC5 code
>> for remotes.

>I know Arcam uses the same as Linn. Philips, so presumably Marantz?


Yup, all RC5.

--

- Never argue with idiots, they drag you down their level and beat you with experience. -