Ian S wrote:

I'll restate my original advice: get the latest issue of Consumer Reports
and read up on the newest TV technology since it sounds as if that will be
by far the single biggest item in your budget. Each technology has its pros
and cons and you have to consider the question of getting high definition
now or later. Screen size is not as simple as it sounds since you need to
consider how far away you'll be as well as how much off-axis viewers might
be.

Actually, I agree with you.

There are plenty of good receivers - Onkyo, Denon, Harmon-Kardon, Pioneer,
Yamaha, Kenwood, etc. - get one with at least 80 watts/channel RMS all
channels driven.

I have stated this in numerous product reviews and
commentary articles in The Sensible Sound, and also in my
two AV books. My floor is 100 wpc, however, at least with
the three channels up front.

Most receivers are tested using 8 ohm impedance speakers
which are the norm. However, a few speakers may be as low as 4 ohms and that
can cause problems for some receivers.

I agree. This is why it pays to go as upscale as possible
with receivers. Either that, or stick with speakers that are
spec rated at 6 - 8 ohms.

Get 6.1 or even 7.1 but bear in mind
that means either 6 or 7 passive speakers plus a subwoofer will be required
to get the benefit. Speaking of subs, you'll want a powerful one for the low
frequency effects in DVD movies - Hsu makes some exceptionally good value
ones.

Yes they do. SVS is in that same category. I own three Hsu
subs, one SVS, and two Velodyne servo jobs. Love them all,
and have reviewed all of them for The Sensible Sound.

I happen to like their Ventriloquist speaker set too but there are
plenty of good choices for front, center and surrounds.

I reviewed the Ventriloquist package in issue 101 (Sept/Oct,
2004) of The Sensible Sound. Included the STF-1 sub. Very
nice little group of speakers.

Decent DVD players
are pretty cheap these days.

Yep. I'd stick with something that costs at least a hundred
bucks, however.

You can even get "universal" players with DVD-A
and SACD playback for as low as $100 if those music formats are of interest
but then also make sure your receiver has the correct inputs for the
individual analog cables those formats use.

The issue here is bass management and distance compensation.
This puts SACD and DVD-A at a disadvantage if the system has
smallish satellites, for sure. Frankly, with DVD-A you can
play the DD or DTS alternate tracks on the discs and get
bass management and distance compensation. That makes those
tracks probably better sounding in most cases than the DVD-A
tracks. Actually, I have compared DVD-A to DD on a number of
occasions (easy to do if a distributor sends you multiple
copies and you have multiple players hooked into the same
system) and find that subjectively the latter sounds just as
good, period.

I have also compared SACD to some of the CD versions (a
lengthy report series will be in an upcoming review of The
Sensible Sound) and found that if good DSP ambiance
synthesis is applied to the two-channel CD versions they
will sound as good as the SACD surround versions, and
sometimes better. SACD and DVD-A are both overrated when it
comes to per-channel performance, in my opinion, but of
course they also offer surround. However, in some systems
that technology goes to waste, because of the bass
management and distance compensation issues.

Howard Ferstler