Moderators: Bakhtosh, EvilHomer3k
I was hoping for remote satellites, but not even sure if they are worth it? We would be willing to pay a nice chunk of change, but definitely under $1000, preferably under $500 if that would be good enough for the average enthusiast. 
I know nothing about this system so I"m not contradicting, but I'm immediately leery of any system that professes great 5.1 sound for only $299. Particularly when it's a satellite/sub system. Personally, I'm not fond of sat/sub setups, but everyone's tastes are different.
The subs are highly thought of and I have a STF-2 powering my lows but I didn't read of too many people who bought the sub that also bought the other speakers. By the way that $299 price did not include the subwoofer. Once you add in one of their subs your total price will be $600 to $1,000 on speakers.Boudreaux wrote:I know nothing about this system so I"m not contradicting, but I'm immediately leery of any system that professes great 5.1 sound for only $299. Particularly when it's a satellite/sub system. Personally, I'm not fond of sat/sub setups, but everyone's tastes are different.
The only Home-Theater-In-A-Box systems I've ever heard good things about at the home theater hangouts like Home Theater Forum and AVS Forum are the higher-end Kenwood HTB systems. Even then I think it was "hey, this is a great receiver and these speakers are decent for what you're paying."
It does state $199 with a sub added ($100 off helps), so maybe I can get the cheapest decent sub from them?Rich in KCK wrote:The subs are highly thought of and I have a STF-2 powering my lows but I didn't read of too many people who bought the sub that also bought the other speakers. By the way that $299 price did not include the subwoofer. Once you add in one of their subs your total price will be $600 to $1,000 on speakers.Boudreaux wrote:I know nothing about this system so I"m not contradicting, but I'm immediately leery of any system that professes great 5.1 sound for only $299. Particularly when it's a satellite/sub system. Personally, I'm not fond of sat/sub setups, but everyone's tastes are different.
The only Home-Theater-In-A-Box systems I've ever heard good things about at the home theater hangouts like Home Theater Forum and AVS Forum are the higher-end Kenwood HTB systems. Even then I think it was "hey, this is a great receiver and these speakers are decent for what you're paying."
At that price point, pretty much anything you're going to find is going to be comparable. The only place you're going to find complete receiver and speaker systems for under $500 is the chain marts like Best Buy, so just head down there and listen to a few and pick the one you think sounds best. Try to get a receiver with lots of digital audio and video inputs. If you narrow it down to 2-3 we could probably help you decide.lokiju wrote:@Boudreaux, we definitely want to stay below $500 if at all possible, and are really just two movies lovers who want extra enjoyment during the Matrix, etc... I honestly couldn't tell the difference in many systems I have heard in stores...
I'm not sure what you mean by a DVD player "built-in". Any home theater setup that includes a DVD player is just that - it comes with a (separate) DVD player. You do NOT want a receiver with a DVD player built in - what happens when you decide you need a progressive scan DVD player, or you want to buy a nicer receiver? Now you have to replace two components. Plus, nice progressive scan DVD players can be had for rock-bottom prices these days (~$100-$150).lokiju wrote:@Boudreaux, that system looks nice, though I wonder if, for that price, I should be getting a dvd player built in? Does make a difference for digital sound? Having the dvd player built in would eliminate the need for monster cables right?
This is so very true. Please keep this in mind if you're seriously considering a "budget" home theater setup. As in all things, you get what you pay for.One thing to keep in mind is that you might be able to get a cheap system that sounds "good enough", but you'll hate your system the first time you watch a movie on a very good system and realize that you could have had that if you had spent an extra $500.
Bose systems tend to be looked on favorably by everyone except those who are into home theater as a hobby. They cost in the $1000s because that's how much marketing money it takes to convince people they're worth it. They're not.rrmorton wrote:What do we know about the Bose 3-2-1 DVD setups? Anything?
I have a few Bose products and they cost $$$ but they never fail to impress.
I could use his wisdom right about now...Demosthenes wrote:If I had known you were yoda, I would have kept my thoughts to myself.lokiju wrote:Much to think about I have...
Still haven't changed the spelling to a-Meal-ya yet, eh? Anyway, girl, there's time for peein' and poopin' and making lots of noise, and that time is *after* daddy's sleepy time is over. See that little hand on the clock? Wait until it's pointing straight up, *and* the bright light is pouring in through the windows. Then its "Let's have a diaper party!" time. Got it?rrmorton wrote:Yes, I should be asleep! Tell that to Amelia.
I thought there was 2 ways to get digital sound, coaxial and optical? Like, as in, that little black plug cover gets pulled out for the black optical audio (tos-link is it called?) wires, whereas the digital/coaxial is the cable internet looking plug (that is usally right next to the toslink connection if your item gives you a choice) that is where Monster Cables fit? You would want to have both optical and coaxial I think to give you better choices because what you are hooking up to it might only use one or the other. I know people who have dvd players with either a coaxial or optical hookup, not both.rrmorton wrote:Sweet lord above. I'm trying to research receivers and I'm just swimming in brand names and technical details I know nothing about. HELP!
Do I need optical audio?
If GG were still up I'd point you to the Home Theater articles Zaxxon and I wrote for the GG Mag. However, since that's gone I'll just re-post the pertinent section:rrmorton wrote:Sweet lord above. I'm trying to research receivers and I'm just swimming in brand names and technical details I know nothing about. HELP!
Do I need optical audio?
To expound on your question, optical audio (sometimes called "Toslink") is one type of digital audio connection. The other is coaxial (or "Datalink"). Both are essentially identical in function, one is fiber-optic cable and one is coaxial copper cable. There really isn't any difference in sound quality, but coaxial cables tend to be a bit less fragile than fiber-optic. Which one you use doesn't really matter, but you want a receiver that can input one or the other, i.e. it supports digital audio. Digital audio is for DVD players, some satellite receivers, basically anything that uses Dolby Digital or DTS audio. Any receiver that supports DD or DTS (which is pretty much all of them these days) will have one or more digital audio inputs, either optical or coaxial. More is better.Receiver
If the TV is the visual heart of your home theater, consider the receiver its audio brain. A receiver decodes the Dolby Digital/DTS signal, manages various audio inputs, receives AM/FM signals, and controls the signals sent to your speakers. A good receiver can make bad speakers sound much better, and with it good speakers really shine. Unfortunately, receivers are typically harder to judge than TVs or speakers. Here are a few things to look for:
• Dolby Digital and DTS support
• Digital audio inputs, can be either optical (fiber optic) or coaxial. It should have at least one input, preferably two or three as more components begin to support digital sound (i.e. DirecTV/satellite, Super-Audio CD players, etc.).
• Video inputs, usually S-video, though mid- and high-end models are beginning to support component video. These can be used for video switching, which allows you to run all video inputs into your receiver, then a single cable out to your TV.
• Binding posts - allow the most flexibility when connecting speakers. They look like a little knob that screws to loosen, exposing a slot for wire. Spring clips are a less convenient option and more prone to breaking. There’s a common misconception that adding banana clips or spades to your wire can improve sound. This is hogwash—by definition, adding anything to the wire causes signal loss. Bare wire through either binding posts or spring clips is just fine.
• Finally, power. This is where the information starts to get misleading. Receivers are often listed as having “500 Watts” - what this actually means is 100W for each of 5 channels. Remember - smaller rooms need less power, particularly if the receiver has a fairly low Total Harmonic Distortion, or THD - something on the order of ~.07% or less is desirable. A good receiver with low THD and 70W-80W per channel is plenty powerful enough for most average-sized rooms. (Note: wattage numbers by themselves are completely meaningless; power ratings require 5 things in order to be meaningful: wattage per channel, frequency range driven, number of channels driven simultaneously, THD, and impedence load. Let’s take, for example, a Technics receiver advertised in a Best Buy ad as a 500-watt receiver, and compare it to Zaxxon’s 80-watt Yamaha. Most shoppers would immediately discount the Yamaha, as to the uninformed consumer it appears only one-sixth as powerful. But on closer inspection, one sees that the Technics is 100 watts per channel, 2 channels driven, at 1KHz, <1% THD, into 8 ohms. The Yamaha is 80 watts per channel, 6 channels driven, over the full audible band of 20Hz to 20KHz, <0.04% THD, into 8 ohms. What this tells us is that the Yamaha is much more powerful than the Technics.)
Good budget brands to look for are Yamaha, Pioneer, Kenwood, and some Sony models - most of these are available for $300 or so. Mid-level brands to look for are Onkyo, Denon, Marantz, and Yamaha & Sony once again. There are very good receivers from these companies for under $1000.
Those are all great choices. The Yamaha receivers are slightly better performing (lower THD) but the difference is pretty negligible. The Onkyo receivers look like they might have slightly more inputs.rrmorton wrote:I might have narrowed it down to two brands/series...
Yamaha RX-V550, 650, and 750 models.
Onkyo TX-SR602 or SR702.
