New B&W CM9s not sounding so good

ravaneli

cnh wrote: »

Let me get this straight. You're saying that a pair of B&Ws are 'KIND OF DULL' and you have them hooked up to an Emotiva as the power amp???

Then there IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING NOT RIGHT in the way you're running things. B&Ws should "never" sound dull being run by something like an Emotiva which is quite bright and forward! In fact, it should be quite the "opposite"!

cnh

Finally someone notice! I was sure people will be quick to blame the Emo amp despite the symptoms being opposite to the viciously spread rumors of Emo being bright.

To the OP, glad you figured it out. That finding makes sense. Emo is a great amp and so is the Marantz receiver. Don't know how good is the source though, if quite old. Most new players, even inexpensive ones have pretty flat response but worth trying something else too. How would you compare the difference between your room and the shop where you heard them? usualy your room is smaller and more reflective but you complain of 'dull' sound, so i don't know. Perhaps play with different locations to see if room acoustics will change. Also, if dull, toe them in a little. That will bring some spark : )

gdb

I've never understood the "wisdom" of the practice of using an AVR reciever to act as as a pre/processor, and in doing so, relegate the amplifier section of the receiver to basically, paperweight status. Wouldn't a dedicated pre/pro offer better performance, and without a bunch of "wasted" iron? Just curious.

tonyb

True GDB, but thats 2 pieces of gear to buy rather than one. Most don't get an amp until they already have a receiver in place and upgrade speakers. Decent HT pre/pros aren't cheap either. Plus in a pre/amp scenario, if the amp goes down your out of luck, where as a receiver could handle it at low to mid volumes and keep the tunes rolling. Pro's and cons to each, with SQ obviously being a plus to seperates. Though even I must admit top of the line AVR's these days do a fine job acting as a pre/pro.