Which Receiver Would You Recommend

rainman

I want to buy Lsi speaker system for my home theater, I have built a 7.1 system and I need a very good receiver, not seperates. I am cuurently looking at the Pioneer 59txi and the denon avr 3806, Does anyone have this speaker system and if so, what receiver can handle the 4ohm speakers.

Let me know
Thanks

shack

You will quickly get several responses telling you to go with separates (preamp/processor and 7 channel amp or mono blocks). If you really want to stay with a receiver for a HT setup then look to B&K, Sunfire, NAD and Rotel. They all make reasonably priced AV receivers that will easily dirve 4ohm speakers. There are others from Bryston, Parasound and Anthem that are good as well but they are a little more expensive.

Refefer

Not to sound affronting, but why can't you buy separates? Most receivers except for the very high end don't have the balls to really do the lsi series justice.

*edit* Argh! Shack caught me redhanded!

shack

When looking don't just look at generic wpc. Look for high current and solid wpc with all channels driven. The ones I mentioned above will generally have these characteristics.

cfrizz

Welcome Rainman.

Lots of people have the LSI series, but they also know that the vast majority of receivers including the 2 you mention are not capable of powering the LSI's to their full potential.

You would be better off getting a lower priced receiver that also has preouts & getting a separate amplifier of at least 200wpc to power the speakers properly. (200wpc = high current)

Do a search here on the forum & you will find tons of info about the LSI's & receivers.

Early B.

Yamaha, Denon, Marantz, Pioneer, etc... -- hell, they're all good.

Just buy a receiver that you like and one that has the features you're looking for in your price range. That's the best anyone can do. It's tough to find a "bad" receiver over $500 these days.

rainman

To be honest, I like the simplicity of a single receiver, also I am not too familar with seperates. Would I not need 2 seperates to run a full 7.1 system.
My price range I would like to spend is between 2500-4000 dollars, and spending that much on a single receiver is a pretty damn good one. I just don't know what kinda of seperates you can get for that coin.

Early B.

rainman wrote:

My price range I would like to spend is between 2500-4000 dollars, and spending that much on a single receiver is a pretty damn good one. I just don't know what kinda of seperates you can get for that coin.

It's your money, but there's no way in hell I'd spend that kind of cash on a receiver. You can do ALOT better buying separates with change to spare, especially if you're willing to purchase used gear. Besides, AV receivers lose their value very rapidly.

But if you must have an all-in-one box, take Shack's advice.

jdhdiggs

Seperates are simple: Picture a receiver in two pieces, one processes the signal, one amplifies it. For 7 channels of sound, this means 7 more cables but a lot more flexibility. Seperates may also be a better suggestion for future proofing your system a bit more. Amps will stay in a system until they wear out while the pre-amp would need to go as soon as there's a new format or standard that you "must" have. In the receiver case, you'd have to replace the amp and pre at the same time. Also, the complexity of the receiver is higher possibly leading to reliability issues, though in the price range you're looking, that SHOULDN'T be an issue.

I might hold off for a while until the HDMI 1.3 thing gets resolved as that seems to be on the near horizon and could obsolete your system rather quickly if you are heading into HDTV land.

As someone who has an LSi setup (9's and 7's) and a power meter tied to each channel, I can most certainly tell you that you do NOT need 200 WPC to drive the LSi's well. In fact, my best 2 sounding amps are 45 WPC and 2 (yes two) WPC. On the second amp I can blast large orchestra's, rap, or rock, but the 45W is more than enough for damn near anything. (I do have SS amps that will push well over 500W into them as well). As long as it says you can use 4 Ohm speakers and the power rating is over 150-200 range (meaning at least 50 real WPC given how some rate their units) will keep the LSi's from dying. The highest peak I've seen was around 36 Watts.


Shack nailed the best receivers out there. I believe Sherwood and Outlaw would be a step below what he listed but are priced accordingly. In your price range, you will not damage the LSi's with any of the brands and all should give you great sound. Can you demo any of the brands with the LSi's? Different amplification units can make the LSi's sound extremely different. Anyway, without getting a benchmark as to what kind of sound you like, I can't give you any more suggestions.

venomclan

For that much you can easily buy a new Outlaw seperates system new, a favorite with the LSI's. There are several 7 channel amps on the market. All you need is the amp and the preamp, which will take up more room, but will blow away most lower-mid priced receivers. I too would never spend that much on a receiver.

The one thing that becomes obsolete the quickest is the receiver. Amps and speakers can last decades.
Venom

read-alot

I was somewhat in the same boat except it was my wife who didn't want to touch my gear because she thinks it is too complicated for her. I bought her the B&K off ebay and sent it in for all the updates, she loves it but I am saving my money for a Halo 21 to replace the old school Carver someday.

shack

See...I told you so.

Separates aren't the be all...end all for a HT setup. They are fine if that is what you want. They have their advantages...and there are also disadvantages. But there are some excellent AV receivers out there that power some of the finest home theaters you will ever set foot in. It's really all in what you want. I have no desire to get separates for my HT but I happen to have separates for my 2 channel rig (and that could change). It seems like separates is the automatic response when dealing with 4 ohm or LSi speakers. There are suitable receiver alternatives that will drive the LSis as well as separates and sound just as good. Obviously many here disagree.

Whatever you decide enjoy your rig and hang around Club Polk.

Maurice

I haven't made the jump into seperates *yet* but if I were ready now, I would get a seven channel amp as was stated before, and an inexpensive 7.1av reciever. No need to spend alot on any type of processor now seeing the new ones with the new audio formats will be out before long. You know your gonna want the new hotness:p

rainman

Cool, there are sure alot of ideas out there, still I just don't know what I want to do, it seems seperates can do the same, if not a better job then a high end receiver, and come in a little cheaper. I just don't have the experience with them, that's all. My last set of speakers was the high end Rti's, csi, fxi's and the psw404 all run by a hk avr525. It seemed I was never getting the full potential out of my speakers because of my receiver not being able to keep up. This next step, I want to make it right, wheather I go with a 4ohm or 8ohm speaker system from Polk, I just want to be blown away.

PolkWannabie

shack wrote:

See...I told you so.

Separates aren't the be all...end all for a HT setup. They are fine if that is what you want. They have their advantages...and there are also disadvantages.

What are the disadvantages ? ... Besides potential WAF ( Which shouldn't be an issue once it's hooked up since there's nothing do with the amp other than making sure it's on which can usually be handled automatically and there is no real difference to operating a pre/pro then a receiver ) ...

maingey

Rotel 1067 gets my vote, or you could definitely do a prepro/amp setup in that $ range.... All receivers sound 'ok' but there is definitely a difference in characteristics from one to another....to 4 ohms stable I dunno

reeltrouble1

Seperates are better than a receiver.

All this really means is the amplifier is in a seperate case and has one job to do with the signal, namely make it louder.

RT1

shack

PolkWannabie wrote:

What are the disadvantages ? ... Besides potential WAF ...

Space, Cabling, Pricing (a single box is cheaper than a comparable pre-pro/amp combo), lack of a tuner (believe it or not, some want an AM/FM tuner) and simplicity (some just want ONE box).

shack

reeltrouble1 wrote:

Seperates are better than a receiver.

My point is - Not everyone wants or needs separates. Better to some is relative. There are some excellent AV Receivers that will do EVERTHING a person wants and do it to their total satisfaction. There is a reason that integrated amps and receivers sell very well and are popular It is what people want.

PolkWannabie

Those are pretty weak reasons, some of which I don't agree with ... but to each his own ...

Space ? ... Yeah ... you need another shelf ...
Cabling ? ... Yeah ... you need another set of IC's ...
Pricing ? ... This is one I don't agree with ... While one can of course go to the moon in pricing of separates one doesn't have to in order to get better bang for the buck and with receivers there are diminishing returns a lot sooner in the price curve ...
Simplicity ... I suppose if you think another set of IC's some how makes things overly complicated.
Lack of Tuner ... Is a non issue with many pre/pro's ...

... and as far as upgrade path goes it would seem simpler and cheaper longer term to be able to swap pre/pro's as new features come along that you want that are not field upgradable ... receivers tend to lose their value in a hurry ... good amps especially if bought used lose almost no value ...

cfrizz

Then you really do need a separate high powered amp Rainman. It is the power of high wattage/current that makes speakers perform to their full potential!

Getting an amp & adding it to my receiver has to date been the biggest & best addition that I have made to my system.

If your current receiver has preouts, just get a separate amp & try it out. You just might find that you no longer need/want to upgrade your speakers.

Check out Outlaw Audio for good bang for the buck amps. Also check out Audiogon for used amps.

rainman wrote:

Cool, there are sure alot of ideas out there, still I just don't know what I want to do, it seems seperates can do the same, if not a better job then a high end receiver, and come in a little cheaper. I just don't have the experience with them, that's all. My last set of speakers was the high end Rti's, csi, fxi's and the psw404 all run by a hk avr525. It seemed I was never getting the full potential out of my speakers because of my receiver not being able to keep up. This next step, I want to make it right, wheather I go with a 4ohm or 8ohm speaker system from Polk, I just want to be blown away.

Early B.

I've gone from a receiver to separates, then back to a receiver, and now have a 2-channel amp powering my fronts. IMO, separates sound better when you've got the cash to spend on them, but nowadays a decent receiver powering speakers with a sensitivity of, say 90 dB or higher, is almost as good as separates (for HT only!). I think receivers have come a long way in the past several years.

If you're gonna play music in 2-channel mode, at least get a 2-channel amp for the fronts AND a badass CD player. The best setup I had was when the fronts were powered by a tube amp. Awesome for HT and music.

For a $4K budget, separates are a much better long term investment. But don't buy a receiver for the sake of simplicity 'cause receivers, by themselves, can be pretty complicated. Separates are simple, too -- just run a cable(s) from the amp to the pre-outs on the receiver, plug the damn thing in, then push the power button.

BTW -- space and cabling are very important considerations. Plenty of ventiallation issues. Lots of people simply don't have the space for lots of components. And good cables (interconnects and power cables) can increase the total price dramatically.

cfrizz

No one has yet to explain why there is such a bias against having separates for a HT system, but they are alright for 2 channel! Again not everyone has the space for 2 separate systems, so it just makes good sense to get the best equipment that you can for a all in one system.

jdhdiggs

Cathy:

HT has 5 or more speakers all going at once, typicallly less care with regards to placement than a 2 channel rig. What this leads to is a lot of imaging and smearing issues that disguise the differences between different levels of equipment.

If a person had a dedicated room built just for HT, I have no doubt that they would be able to tell the minor differences. However, most people don't spend 16hrs tweeaking their HT.

In 2 channel, that degree of pickiness is MUCH easier to get to, hence the ease of discerning the differences in equipment.

Now, if we can just break you of the 200WPC high current stuff...

cfrizz

I don't spend endless hours tweaking my system, however I can tell the difference.

As far as the high watts/current, FUGEDABOUTIT!:D

You guys have no one to blame for my enthusiam for separate amplification but yourselves! I didn't know what I was missing without it but now that I do, my ears WILL NOT let me go back to just a receiver or less wattage than 200wpc.

jdhdiggs wrote:

Cathy:

HT has 5 or more speakers all going at once, typicallly less care with regards to placement than a 2 channel rig. What this leads to is a lot of imaging and smearing issues that disguise the differences between different levels of equipment.

If a person had a dedicated room built just for HT, I have no doubt that they would be able to tell the minor differences. However, most people don't spend 16hrs tweeaking their HT.

In 2 channel, that degree of pickiness is MUCH easier to get to, hence the ease of discerning the differences in equipment.

Now, if we can just break you of the 200WPC high current stuff...

Early B.

cfrizz wrote:

No one has yet to explain why there is such a bias against having separates for a HT system, but they are alright for 2 channel!

For music, there's critical listening, so one can tell the differences among amps, cables, etc. much more easily. With HT, it doesn't matter as much, as long as you can be suspended in the action or drama.

To say it another way, music is an emotional experience, but with HT you're going for the WOW factor. It's simply two different approaches to sound.

For instance, I enjoyed my Parasound 1200 amp for HT, but not for music. Same is true with the Outlaw monoblocks and Rotel amp I had. Some amps sound better with music, IMO.

reeltrouble1

Seperates are better than a receiver. Seperates sound better than a receiver and seperates will in the big picture last longer.

There is no question that seperate boxes is better. Anytime you combine the functions of a tool, appliance or what have you there is a trade between its effectiveness at performing a task as measured against the effeciency of the unit measured in terms of cost.

That said Enjoy your receiver's, most audio gear sounds fantastic these days, we're not talking transistor radio's here.

There is nothing wrong with recommending a certain wattage rating that has been something that has worked for you, its based on real life experience, each system though is as unique as the user.




RT1

MSALLA

I listened to a Rotel receiver running a full set (5) of 4ohm Totems and it powered them just fine. I think for the $4000.00 budjet you have I would go with separates, but thats just me. I know that Rotel was only rated at 70wpc and blew my Yamaha (130wpc) away.

zombie boy 2000

MSALLA wrote:

I listened to a Rotel receiver running a full set (5) of 4ohm Totems and it powered them just fine. I think for the $4000.00 budjet you have I would go with separates, but thats just me. I know that Rotel was only rated at 70wpc and blew my Yamaha (130wpc) away.

What Totems were they?

MSALLA

zombie boy 2000 wrote:

What Totems were they?

Not sure on that. I was looking at subs and he had the Totems on the same system. He happend to mention they were 4 ohm while talking up the receiver. They were bookshelves, not towers.

PolkWannabie

Early B. wrote:

To say it another way, music is an emotional experience, but with HT you're going for the WOW factor. It's simply two different approaches to sound.

Some of us who for whatever reason don't have dedicated HT rooms and as a result have a HT in some place like their fam room usually also want the capability for better then average two channel capability there as well. This is true in my situation, plus there's no way in hell a receiver is going to drive the mains I have ... I've seen some amps struggle ... So whether one uses a receiver or separates seems to be a function of a variety of things ...