›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Home Cinema

Dazzle369Dazzle369
in Technology
If I'm really daft/ lazy I've missed the thread on home cinema. Really, just me personally I'm struggling to find a home cinema system that's affordable, that does what I want.

I have a logitech z5500, which has died and been replaced with a Z906 system. The 5500 was great for being excessively loud and producing the right amount of bass that I like. the Z906 not so much, but at least does the job.


I'm struggling to find a system that matches or exceeds what it does for the price. Does anyone know of any other devices that, have multiple inputs (PC 3.5mm x3 jacks), stereo RCA, optical and coaxial Spdif that doesn't require you do also buy for a dvd/ blu ray player with it. Or maybe that even has legit 7.1 surround sound speakers.

Comments

  • sK0pesK0pe
    If you want an all in one box like the Z5500 you could look at the Edifier range of 5.1 surround speakers.

    However if you have a bit more money I would recommend checking out Energy speakers and getting a separate AV receiver.

    I'm not quite sure what you need it for, is this a gaming PC or an HTPC?
  • Dazzle369Dazzle369
    Nice recommendation, thank you. For everything really, gaming PC, console, music devices and television.

    V-6.3 Home Theater System

    C6 hcs5640

    I'm liking the Energy speakers, just need to find a suitable AV receiver.
  • sK0pesK0pe
    The energy speakers are great.

    If you have enough money, you cannot compare Edifier or Logitech to Energy.

    I use a Z5500 on my gaming computer (this computer used to also be an all in one like you're talking about, I had a TV tuner in it). The bass you hear from those speakers is quite dirty so it has a very localised feel and sound to where the sub-woofer is, (like any cheaper sub-woofer).

    I use the Energy Take Classic 5.1 setup for my HTPC which is in a separate home theatre room. Those speakers look tiny but they provide excellent sound. The sub-woofer is very clean and it's almost impossible to locate it in the room.

    They didn't have the Veritas speaker range when I was buying my HTPC setup so I can't say much more than they would destroy the Logitech / Edifier range.
  • Dazzle369Dazzle369
    Im looking at the Pioneer VSX-923-K for a reciever, but I don't know...

    Never had a receiver in my life, am I just looking for wattage and inputs?
  • sK0pesK0pe
    If you're looking at all the big company names, there is very subtle to no difference between them. Just look for features.
    Enough HDMI ports to carry you if you want to add more devices.
    Bluetooth and WiFi, if you want to be able to play music directly from your phone or tablet.
    7.1 or 5.1 match your speakers.
    Multiple room zones.

    Remember a receiver should be able to last you over a decade.

    My picks for this category at the moment are -

    Sony STR-DN840 - Good wireless connectivity
    Marantz NR1403 - limited connectivity no ethernet port or wireless but sound quality holds up and is slim
    That Pioneer is pretty good too but has no wireless or bluetooth connectivity

    Check the models above these ones as well more than likely the only thing that they add is 2 more HDMI ports and the "2 sound zone" feature meaning you can play 2 streams of music to different rooms.

    I would go with the Sony but it's personal choice.

    Plus you might not need all the connectivity if it is connected to a PC which is always on.
  • OmnutiaOmnutia
    edited November 2013
    Today's Woot?
    http://www.woot.com/
    Post edited by Omnutia on
  • MattMatt
    Man I'm glad I checked this thread a day late. Just snagged the very nice Craftsman rolling tool chest on Woot. Go figure, I'd have my eye on something exactly like that since I'm finally finished moving houses for a long long time, and I have a nice garage now.
  • Hitman HartHitman Hart
    I work in Home Theater. Different receiver brands have different biases which are best brought out by doing some listening. Pioneers are a solid choice but they have a very "punchy" sound that is good for emphasizing action movies and such, but can be a bit fatiguing on the ear in the long run. Yamaha is also like this but they have a bit of a different flavor. Marantz and Denon tend to have a more subtle sound that sounds muted in comparison but is less fatiguing in the long run. My supervisor prefers Pioneer Elite even after being a Yamaha rep for a while, but my manager prefers Denon. It all depends on the person.
  • sK0pesK0pe
    Hitman Hart said:

    I work in Home Theater. Different receiver brands have different biases which are best brought out by doing some listening. Pioneers are a solid choice but they have a very "punchy" sound that is good for emphasizing action movies and such, but can be a bit fatiguing on the ear in the long run. Yamaha is also like this but they have a bit of a different flavor. Marantz and Denon tend to have a more subtle sound that sounds muted in comparison but is less fatiguing in the long run. My supervisor prefers Pioneer Elite even after being a Yamaha rep for a while, but my manager prefers Denon. It all depends on the person.

    There are plenty of flamewars around this subject, just like any audiophile discussion where the answer is subjective over objective, it devolves into irrational arguments.

    The more important part of the equation is speaker setup, room acoustics, speakers and the source.

    However if you want to go down the path of being that nitpicky, the only way to decide is to setup your entire system in the one room that they will always be used and swap in and out all the different receivers you want to try and listen to the same sample of sources. You would want to match the speakers with a receiver that would compensate for any of the speaker's weaknesses.

    Which is impossible.
  • MattMatt
    Whenever I hear the word audiophile, I think of that XKCD cartoon about wine tasting.
  • Hitman HartHitman Hart
    sK0pe said:

    Hitman Hart said:

    I work in Home Theater. Different receiver brands have different biases which are best brought out by doing some listening. Pioneers are a solid choice but they have a very "punchy" sound that is good for emphasizing action movies and such, but can be a bit fatiguing on the ear in the long run. Yamaha is also like this but they have a bit of a different flavor. Marantz and Denon tend to have a more subtle sound that sounds muted in comparison but is less fatiguing in the long run. My supervisor prefers Pioneer Elite even after being a Yamaha rep for a while, but my manager prefers Denon. It all depends on the person.

    There are plenty of flamewars around this subject, just like any audiophile discussion where the answer is subjective over objective, it devolves into irrational arguments.

    The more important part of the equation is speaker setup, room acoustics, speakers and the source.

    However if you want to go down the path of being that nitpicky, the only way to decide is to setup your entire system in the one room that they will always be used and swap in and out all the different receivers you want to try and listen to the same sample of sources. You would want to match the speakers with a receiver that would compensate for any of the speaker's weaknesses.

    Which is impossible.
    Or you can go to a Best Buy or any decent audio store and try listening to a few things. Ask for the Magnolia room if you go to a BB. If you get a good receiver, it will compensate for your room's weird shape for the most part.
  • Hitman HartHitman Hart
    Matt said:

    Whenever I hear the word audiophile, I think of that XKCD cartoon about wine tasting.

    I'm hardly an audiophile. I just like good sound.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    I laugh when people buy high end audio equipment but use MP3 for their music collection.

    There was a recent story about Graham Nash. He was listening to some of his old songs on mp3 and thought he was going deaf because he couldn't hear all of the music. Later he heard the same music uncompressed and realized his hearing is fine.

    Sadly much of today's music is flat.
  • sK0pesK0pe
    Had some fun today fixing up the surround system once I realised my brother had not set it up manually.
    It was fun listening to some of my favourite bass filled songs and movie action scenes.

    I don't think a 4k projector is needed till most everything is available at the higher resolution, however when it does I'll need to somehow replace the HDMI cable that is embedded in the ceiling and walls with Display Port.
  • ninjarabbininjarabbi
    Doesn't HDMI support 4K? Although with all of the different versions of HDMI I suppose older ones might not.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    HDMI 2.0 supports it just fine, the older standard has significant limits.
  • sK0pesK0pe
    ninjarabbi said:

    Doesn't HDMI support 4K? Although with all of the different versions of HDMI I suppose older ones might not.

    The house was built in 2007 so I think it is version 1.3b or maybe 1.4.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    Are the cables all that different? I thought, being digital, the cables would work for all versions?
  • sK0pesK0pe
    edited January 2015
    HMTKSteve said:

    Are the cables all that different? I thought, being digital, the cables would work for all versions?

    Yeah they're super different which is possibly going to cause the downfall of HDMI. Hopefully we get the one cable that rules them all but with the rate of advancement in technology the task seems to be quite difficult.

    The current cables that are built into my parent's house max out at 720p at 60 fps or 1080p at 24 fps.
    Regardless of the fact that the hardware can do much higher. Intel's wireless display technology could have some crazy impact on this market. I haven't checked if they are chasing it up.
    Post edited by sK0pe on
Sign In or Register to comment.