Joining the ICE Club...

Drenis

Check your PM. Since I've somehow "stepped out of line", I'll apologize. Let this thread get back on topic.

dorokusai

I just deleted it. I'm not engaging you in an offline dialogue since you have no idea what this forum is or how it even moves around. You should seriously take a deep breath and relax. Just look at your posts after #19....whew, chill out man.

tonyb

dorokusai wrote: »

As far as the dialogue goes, how about you read more, post less until you figure out Club Polk.

Good advice.

Many conversations on an internet forum can be taken the wrong way if you are unfamiliar with the people, or characters involved. This is a special place, with special characters.

cnh

xcapri79 wrote: »

I've got the ICE and it is ok, but it still can't match what a good amp will give you. Welcome to the Club.

Don't disagree with you there, thanks for the welcome...but I'm not quite a member yet.

I was also playing on irony above as it is implied in my original post that I thought John's Carver was probably superior to the Pioneer ICE amps or modules (as Face refers to them). It's all cool though.

Drenis, even those of us who know some of the others don't always read them properly. Doro is right. Just hang for a while and it'll become more transparent.

cnh

Gatecrasher

dorokusai wrote: »

I just deleted it. I'm not engaging you in an offline dialogue since you have no idea what this forum is or how it even moves around.

I think maybe you might want to consider taking some of your own advice.

Post count on a friggin' Polk Audio forum mean about as much as **** on a bull. I know I'm not impressed.

lol :rolleyes:

I'm on here just to shoot the crap about Polk Audio speakers and gear in general...not to be belittled or insulted by anyone.

The guy apologized for his somewhat offensive post in response to a somewhat inflammatory post by another member. Your holier than thou response to his honest-sounding apology was equally as offensive.

AsSiMiLaTeD

Some of you guys are funny. You're right, post count doesn't mean squat, but he's done more for this forum than any other active member I can think of.

VR3

Wow people are hypersensitive - I need to find a way to get Larry's 1.2tl cabs to light on fire to balance the universe, QUICK!

F1nut

Drenis wrote: »

Not everyone is arrogant or as rich as you... :rolleyes:

Really?

For the record, I use an SC-37 in my HT rig. In addition to hearing a multitude of other folks AVR's play music I have tried mine with music and therefore am fully qualified to make my original comment, which by the way was directed at nooshinjohn because I know he knows better. So slick, before you dig a deeper hole I suggest you get to know who and WTF it is you're talking about first, lest you appear to be rather foolish.

The same goes for you gatecrasher.

tonyb

Eh... I trust Mark will deal with it in his own way and we should return to our regular scheduled broadcast.

Back to Ice.....cream.....was that the topic ?


For me anyway, the ice powered receivers sound powerfull, but have a sterileness to them, for my ears anyway. Can't comment on any ice amps, haven't had a chance to hear one yet. People either love them or hate them, more seem to love them I guess. If HT is your bag, Ice power may be the way to go since it's power is more stable in surround mode as compared to other avr's. If your going to use seperate amplification, then of coarse, it's wasted and not necessary.

RuSsMaN

Solid state sounded like hammered doggie doo when it first came out. 'Digital', 'Ice', 'Chip' will all come into it's own as time progresses. They sound a lot better now than when they first came out. It's a natural progression, and I think it's a worthwhile one.

I've owned more than a handful, and they aren't 'right there' just yet, but it's getting VERY close.

Guys, it's audio, really? It's not hard. It's 1: Listening to Music. 2: On the HiFi. That's it. Can you dig?

Cheers,
Russ

dorokusai

Gatecrasher wrote: »

I think maybe you might want to consider taking some of your own advice.

Post count on a friggin' Polk Audio forum mean about as much as **** on a bull. I know I'm not impressed.

lol :rolleyes:

I'm on here just to shoot the crap about Polk Audio speakers and gear in general...not to be belittled or insulted by anyone.

The guy apologized for his somewhat offensive post in response to a somewhat inflammatory post by another member. Your holier than thou response to his honest-sounding apology was equally as offensive.

OK Mr. Sensitive Pants, I'll sticky note that to the computer screen. Read more, post less.

Guys, don't post stuff about what I do or do not, it's not needed but thanks. I'm a big boy and used to a douchey comment every year or so. It's forgetable. They eventually figure out how our forum works and the humor/sarcasm banter as well....it's a learning curve. It would be great if they would also try and help someone at the same time they hate someone for some silly reason.

Let's get back on the subject and if you have any questions or comments, send them in PM. That way you can be as angry and crazy as you want to be....or sane and logical, your choice of course.

heiney9

F1nut wrote: »

AVR's make a lousy substitute for real hifi gear when playing music, so it should come as no surprise. I mean, come on let's get real.

Drenis wrote: »

Not everyone is arrogant or as rich as you... :rolleyes:

Drenis, the truth hurts, doesn't it. One doesn't have to be rich to aquire "real" audio gear and a receiver isn't "real hifi" gear.

H9

Glowrdr

I'm Rich ****. Ok. Carry on. H9, I do like your idea of pics. Although I'd have to photoshop out a bunch of randon-too-short-cables strung all over the place.

dkg999

heiney9 wrote: »

Drenis, the truth hurts, doesn't it. One doesn't have to be rich to aquire "real" audio gear and a receiver isn't "real hifi" gear.

H9

Well unless you have a B&K AVR 507, then it comes amazingly close to "real hifi" gear. Russman is correct, they are making huge improvements to the sound of the ICE amps, unfortunately they still seem to lack the depth that you get with legacy SS amps. All the ones I have listened to have a somewhat mechanical sound to them.

Drenis

dorokusai wrote: »

Let's get back on the subject and if you have any questions or comments, send them in PM. That way you can be as angry and crazy as you want to be....or sane and logical, your choice of course.

What's the point if all your going to do is delete it?

heiney9 wrote: »

Drenis, the truth hurts, doesn't it. One doesn't have to be rich to aquire "real" audio gear and a receiver isn't "real hifi" gear.

H9

Your absolutely right. However, some of us 'polkies' have very limited budgets. And most AVR's that we here do own/use (Lot of Elite users) would prefer to spend the money on that rather then those crappy home theater in a box receivers! *yuck*

For example, I just jumped from all Bose to Polks. That was a big switch for me. Some "Bose fans" would claim I went backwards but we all know the truth. It takes time, some money and patience to acquire good gear. But you do have to have money, usually a good chunk of it for "real" gear. Some of us just don't make that sort of money. But what we have works for us, right?

BlueFox

Drenis wrote: »

But what we have works for us, right?

Did I miss something? Did anyone ever say it didn't?

dkg999

You have to give our Canadian friends a break this time of year. They don't handle the heat of summer very well.

madmax

heiney9 wrote: »

One doesn't have to be rich to aquire "real" audio gear.

+1
It takes some thought but a fellow can put together a few hundred dollar system which sounds way better than a mish mash of $10K pieces of equipment that don't synergize that well with each other.

unbridled_id

Anybody hear the NAD M2 yet and if so any feedback on it ?

Gatecrasher

I'm very satisfied with my ICE AVR.

Got it for a song too compared to what it originally sold for (of course that's not saying much with the original retail price of the SC-09).

I've had my RT5000 system for almost 10 years now and it never sounded better.

I kind of look at digital audio the same way as digital photography.

I remember talking to some of my die-hard 35mm aficianado buddys back when digital cameras started becoming more and more popular in the 90s. They trash-talked digital cameras saying they would never switch to digital and how it would never hold a candle to film.

Well, to make a long story short, I saw one of these guys (probably the hardest-core one of all of them) at a car show a couple months ago after not seeing him for 10 years and what did he have in his hands? A freakin' digital camera! A nice professional one too.

The first thing I said to him was, "I thought you told me you'd never be caught dead with one of those in your hands?" He laughed and said how the times have changed. He still does some film though too but says he's mostly gone digital now. I think the fact that film is getting harder to find and develop might have something to do with it too though.

I still have all of my vinyl I collected in my youth. But I can't remember the last time I listened to a record let alone purchased one. I still have my old Tandberg reel to reel sitting in a box somewhere too.

I'm into simplicity nowadays and now that I have an HTPC very rarely play CDs or DVDs anymore either unless they are new releases that I haven't ripped to my library yet. And it does sound darn good.

Toolfan66

Drenis wrote: »

Actually, no. His comment was uncalled for. Nice to know you support rude behavior here.

Dude relax, you act like someone is out to get you. maybe step away for awhile chill and come back at a later date..

Gatecrasher

I know I'm "chilled".

I'm just sitting here kicking it to my "fake" ICE audio gear and musically "crappy" Polk speakers that I paid too much for.

lol :biggrin:

Here's what I'm listening to (the 2009 Japan remaster):

nooshinjohn

...<sings> "another one bites the dust....>


Mods, time to flush another thread.

Drenis wrote: »

Actually, no. His comment was uncalled for. Nice to know you support rude behavior here.

If you want to trash someone's thread, start your own next time.


BTW, welcome to CP:mad:

and the IL.

mantis

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Have had some time today to learn a bit about the phono side of the SC-37 today, and it is not as bad as I had thought, but by no means is it tubes. I am glad that this is a temporary thing. I have also experienced just how quick an amp runs out of gas when exposed to a 4 ohm load. I really need to sit down with the book before I get to wound up on the little things.

The sound however is very very good. I cannot wait to unleash the dogs on a movie sound on a movie soundtrack

I mist have missed something somewhere , what speakers are you driving and rant the SC out of gas?

mantis

Drenis wrote: »

Not everyone is arrogant or as rich as you... :rolleyes:

I don't think he meant it that way.

mantis

xcapri79 wrote: »

I've got the ICE and it is ok, but it still can't match what a good amp will give you. Welcome to the Club.

This is a very true statement depending on the ohm load and how efficient the given speakers are. One thing about these ICE SC models is they can drive a full dedicated theater to reference levels with full dynamics in place. But if you try to drive 4 ohm load speakers in large , this is not a good task for these receivers or hardly any receiver for that matter.

mantis

F1nut wrote: »

AVR's make a lousy substitute for real hifi gear when playing music, so it should come as no surprise. I mean, come on let's get real.

This is a blanket statement that hold weight and value to some degree. As I do agree with you to a point , not all speaker classes need something better then what the SC models produce.
I have used the SC model receivers with a wide range of different 8 ohm load speakers with wonderful results with music including my personal setup. But to add to your statement , I'm in the process of trying out some amps with the SC being a preamp for music only usage. I recently heard the Def Tech STS off a full Bryston system in our showroom and I'm intrigued.
Better cleaner signal paths , no processing , no DAC converters , clean power with dedicated power supplies , good wiring plus a music server running Flac and Hi Rez files all added up to a wonderful musical experience.
I believe the trick today and has been for many years with a lot of us is trying to pull off double duty with one system. Theater can suffer if you try and run just the mains off a nice amp , 2 channel will benefit from this setup. You are constantly in a add lose situation.
The SC model receivers I feel are a excellent performing double duty unit all by them selves for most people. I'm pretty damn happy with my musical experience with it just driving my Def Tech ST's for music. They can move you pretty damn well and with SACD 2ch or even multichannel ( I have all Mythos 10's center and surrounds) can really be a wonderful experience.
For those who want to add a multichannel amp to the SC as if you have 4 ohm speakers this is a good idea.

SRTer

Well, my amp came in early. Therefore, a proper review will take place today.

I really feel it's a waste to use a 5 channel amp and not use any of the ICE amps so I will be using a 2 channel and let the SC-35 take care of my small speakers. The RTi A7 surrounds and the CSi A6.

If this AVR is anything like most others, there will be more power sent to the remaining channels with the RTi A9 fronts removed. Maybe 10-20 watts more for the remaining three speakers.

I have to pick up some audio cables for the amp.

mantis

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

I disagree I guess. I listened to the 25 and 27 side by side and could not hear a difference, I would assume the same would be true with the other series as well. I realize there is a difference, but if I blindfolded you I doubt you'd be able to hear a difference...

Obviously you work with these things all day, but to my ears (and many other apparently) I jsut don't hear a diference.

Sound quality is near identical I do agree , I was more talking about features. In my world of using these receivers for a theater and maybe 2 other room off of it , the 5 series strips a few features that the 7 series has.
Example: The SC-35 has 3 zones. Zone 2 can be powered or line level with volume control. Zone 3 is only line level and only fixed output. No volume control. You must use a external volume control to use zone 3. Stupid but it's how they meet the lower price point.
Now the SC-37 has the same exact ability but now has the ability to control volume with zone 3. Reason it's the flagship of this line and nothing got taken from it.
If you read closely the 2 receivers side by side , you will notice a few things that got taken away from the SC-35 from the SC-37. The SC-35 is exactly that , it's a stripped down version of the SC-37. Now most of these little things can be easily missed by someone like me but someone else may not need any of the missing features.

engtaz

Anybody doing the SC-55 and or SC-57's?