March 29. 2001

To Jeff Fritz,

With great interest, I took notice of your SoundStage! review on the Warner Imaging ER-300MSE mono amp. Having read it with keen interest, I have some questions with which I would deeply appreciate your knowledgeable advice. First, I will provide you a brief background on my system and intended application, and then will go into the specific questions.

My home-theater system comprises Aerial Acoustics speaker models LR5 (front L&R), CC5 (front center), and SW-12s (L&R subs). Technical specs. Of these speakers can be found at www.aerialacoustics.com. I currently drive the front LR5s and CC5 by means of one Proceed HPA-3 triple monaural power amp (3 x 250W @ 8 ohms, 3 x 500W @ 4 ohms). My preamp/processor is the Proceed AVP. I am certainly very happy with the performance of this system, which I use 75% for home theater and 25% for music. However, as it is true for any other A/V enthusiast, I am already planning my next move: upgrading power amps. I am willing to invest some $20,000 (USD, that is) on the amp upgrade. I could either purchase three mono amps for the front L/C/R Aerials or just two mono amps (or one stereo amp) for the front LR5s (in which case, I would use my current Proceed HPA-3 for driving the front center CC5 speaker and the L&R surrounds). Since my Aerial dealer happens to be a Madrigal dealer too, and since he always gives me very good deals, the first candidates I was considering for the amp upgrade were (in descending order of preference):

1. Mark Levinson No.33H (a pair of them. Proceed HPA-3 would drive center and surround speakers)
2. Mark Levinson No.436 (a trio of them)
3. Mark Levinson No.336 (one stereo amp)

However, upon reading your October 2000 review on the Warner Imaging ER-300MSE monoblock, I began to wonder whether this would be a worthy contender in my price range too. My specific questions follow.

1. In your opinion, how would you rate the Warner Imaging ER-300MSE against the Mark Levinson No.33H (and ML No.436/No.336) amps?

2. Given my speakers and preamp/processor, and knowing my 75% HT/25% music breakdown, which of these amps would you advise for upgrading my system?

3. If you had to invest $20k in my system to upgrade it, would you choose any of these amps or would you favor some other brand (say Krells or others)?

4. I read at www.highendaudio.com/warneramps.htm an apparently bold claim, in the sense that the Warner Imaging amp (quote) "will beat anything from Krell, Levinson, Lamm, Plinius, BAT, etc., combined." Is that true or just marketing hype? I truly appreciate your advice and guidance on this matter.

Warmest regards. Keep the great work!

Jose V. Gomez

Given the price range you are working in, you have some amazing products to choose from. The Levinson and Warner Imaging brands are both excellent. Having had both in my system, it is really a matter of preference over an absolute winner in terms of quality.

I would opt for three identical amplifiers (mono) across the front and a same-brand stereo amp for the rears. The front three speakers should be matched as carefully as possible, so identical amplifiers would yield excellent results especially with the closely-matched Aerial array. The rear stereo amp could be placed in the rear of the room with shorter speaker cables, also an advantage. That would be my game plan as far as configuration. Spending that kind of money, I would listen closely, carefully choose your

dealer, look at the companies service record, and general resale value in case you decide to go another route, among many considerations. Good luck….Jeff Fritz

March 28, 2001

Editor,

I was wondering if you could help me. I am deciding on a home-theater system, and it has come down to the Energy Take 5 or Axiom Epic Micro System, but I cannot find any reviews on the Axiom system. Do you have any input, especially on the Axiom system compared with Energy? Please help me if you can.

Best regards,

Jonathan Gagnon

Axiom's Epic Micro System is currently in-house, and you will see a review of it in the upcoming months at Home Theater & Sound....Jeff Fritz

March 21, 2001

Editor,

I would like to ask you guys about blending a subwoofer with my main speakers in a home-theater setup. I have four Rogers GS5s as main and rear speakers, a Ruark Dialogue One as center speaker, and a JBL MR Center as rear-center speaker. My subwoofer is a Paradigm PS-1000, connected at speaker level to my Yamaha DSP-A1. My sub has a cut-off frequency range of 50 to150Hz, a volume control and a phase control. The Rogers have a frequency range of 50Hz to 20kHz. So I initially set my sub cut-off frequency at 50Hz and adjusted the phase control with a sound pressure meter, looking for the sharpest and largest variation of the meter pointer, and I was very happy about the result.

That was until I used the Yamaha lowest-frequency test that generates pink noise from 250Hz to 35Hz. I set my Radio Shack sound pressure meter to 80, C weighting and slow response. My Yamaha volume was set to -21dB. The first set of readings was with the sub cut-off frequency at 50Hz, the second reading was with the cut-off at 150Hz. The reading was much more even with the sub turned off, even at 35Hz. I am trying to figure out what went wrong because I want to use my sub, but based on the readings I have already burst my bass out of orbit. I hope you guys could help advise me on it.

Thanks.

Swee Luon

If your main speakers are rated 50Hz to 20kHz +/- 3dB or something like that, that means they are -3dB at 50Hz. You want one octave of overlap between the bottom end of the main speakers and the top end of the subwoofer. One octave above 50Hz is 100Hz, so 100Hz is probably your ideal crossover point for those loudspeakers. A 6-10dB change in bass level is usually no problem and may not even exist depending on how it is being measured. Meters do not measure the same way we hear -- you sometimes will measure something like this that is inaudible. If you cannot hear the same thing the meter is telling you, do not trust the meter.

That said, you want to try different settings for the phase control also. This will affect how the subwoofer and main speakers blend together. You should probably set the crossover to 100Hz and try three or four different phase settings with all the bass frequencies to see which one gives the deepest bass. You should also verify that you have the + speaker terminals connected to the + amplifier terminals (and - to -, of course) on your main speakers. You also want to set the subwoofer level properly. In the measurements you sent [not published], it looks like the subwoofer is playing about 10dB too loud -- there are settings in the receiver to control the level of the subwoofer -- and you may have a level control on the back of the subwoofer also. This means two places to set the subwoofer level. I like to set the receiver or processor somewhere between 0dB and +10dB and use the level control on the subwoofer to fine-tune the subwoofer level to match the rest of the system -- or at least to get close before fine-tuning from the listening position with the receiver or processor level setting feature.

So it sounds to me like you have at least three problems with your present setup:

1. Incorrect crossover point -- use 100Hz.
2. Subwoofer level set too loud in the receiver or on the subwoofer.
3. Possible problems with the phase control affecting the integration of the subwoofer with the main speakers.

Good luck....Doug Blackburn

March 13, 2001

To Jeff Fritz,

I just read your review of the Magnum Dynalab Virtual Surround unit, and it sounds intriguing. Currently, I have a MartinLogan setup with ReQuests for the fronts and ML Cinema for the center channel. I'm currently using a Meridian 565 processor for my HT setup. I'm contemplating "simplifying" my system and enhancing it for audio performance with biamping (Marchand tube x-over): OTL for the 'stat panels and my trusty Classé CA-300 driving the bass. With this "new" system configuration, I think that the MD-10 unit will fit in nicely since HT performance is not such a high priority with me. Are there any drawbacks that you can see going with a virtual-surround setup like this? One of the main reasons I went with HT is for the clarity of the dialogue in movies. Will I be able to maintain the same kind of dialogue clarity with the virtual (phantom) center as compared to having a dedicated center-channel speaker? How about the sweet spot for the (virtual) center channel? Most of the time, I'm using my system for audio, and only 10% of the time for home theater.

Thanks in advance for your time.

Vuong Tran

I think the MD-10 would be excellent for your application for several reasons. First, since you are not currently using surrounds, the MD-10 would add ambiance information and more surround-like envelopment. Also, if your speakers image properly now, the dialogue will likely improve on movies with the addition of the MD-10. While a home audition would be warranted, as in most cases, I think your situation is perfect for the Magnum Dynalab Virtual Surround processor. Let me know how it works out....Jeff Fritz

March 10, 2001

Editor,

Are you planning to review the B&K 307 receiver in the near future? I've been looking at both the Denon AVR-5800 and the B&K 307 for my home theater. I would be very interested in your thoughts on how these two models compare to each other.

Mike Coffey

We will certainly contact them and request a sample, as we have heard good things about the B&K receiver ourselves....Jeff Fritz

• Go Back