• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

simple stereo reciever...?

I had a Technical Pro receiver for several months and it worked very well. Don't be scared off from trying one of these.
 
I think the feeling of needing an EQ is because im used to less than poor sound quality music playing systems and that allows me to get rid of the specific range that might be bothering me. Also I use it to isolate sounds to pick out instruments in a song or to hear lyrics that are lost in other sounds or hard to understand.
Im getting the sense that if you have good quality sound then an eq has no place, but if i were need one, maybe its best to add on separately from my receiver.
 
Many people say that any tone controls at all are blasphemy. I've found that bass, treble, and mid can usually get me where I need to go. Never felt a need for an EQ although I've had a couple of receivers with them.
 
Nolan#9 said:
I think the feeling of needing an EQ is because im used to less than poor sound quality music playing systems and that allows me to get rid of the specific range that might be bothering me. Also I use it to isolate sounds to pick out instruments in a song or to hear lyrics that are lost in other sounds or hard to understand.
Im getting the sense that if you have good quality sound then an eq has no place, but if i were need one, maybe its best to add on separately from my receiver.
Click to expand...
Generally, a high quality system shouldn't need much in the way of tone controls/EQ (this doesn't necessarily mean they don't need them at all). That being said, they can definitely help a listener get the sound fine tuned to their preference. Ideally, EQ should be used along with a microphone and software to flatten the response of the speakers in the room. Then, if flat is not to the user's preference, other adjustments can be made manually. This is the scientific way to do it; many find not using tone controls or measuring satifsying as their system is close to flat to begin with (either way is fine).

A poor quality source (a badly mastered CD or low bitrate file for example) is a poor quality source no matter the system. In fact, a lower quality system probably won't reveal it as much as a high quality system. Using tone controls to correct the source is a crude but effective method (a lot of times there is nothing more you can do).

I hope that makes sense. Get your system up to a high quality level first and then worry about EQ or tone adjustments.
 
twiiii said:
I would look for a Mcintosh MAC4300, thats in great shape from Audio Classics. You'll get great sound, graphic controls, and a great tuner. You could always get a reconditioned receiver from the 70's, Pioneer or Sansui, and then add a Rane or DBX professional graphic EQ to the tape monitor loop. You'll have a winning combination. I'm not a Soundcraftsman fan, so I would recommend staying away. If you want a smooth warm Sound, NAD made some great Receivers to which you could add a Graphic EQ. Older Marantz might fill your bill as would Denon. But I'm not to fond of current renditions.
Click to expand...

McIntosh of any kind won't be on his $300 budget generally. Triple that will get him a MA 5100 in nice order. A MAC 4300 is going to be 5 times his budget or more.
 
Nolan#9,

Pardon my coming in here OT and perhaps uninvited - and noticing you are new but not necessarily new to audio;

I have no recommendation regarding your request but I noticed mention made of tone controls. So in case relevant:

There is a minority with strong opinions about "tone controls are bad". To be blunt: I have yet to hear/read any acceptable reasons for that stance. Technical ones given are uninformed and often based on anecdotal experience of poorly designed examples. The normal bass and treble controls give one three different bands of frequencies to adjust which can be quite sufficient for many demands. Not to hi-jack your topic with explanations, just trying to put matters right at an early stage. Wishing you well while visiting here!
 
thanks vet. I think there are many reasons one could want to use tone controls. maybe turning down the bass so as not to disturb neighbors..
If you are knowledgeable about these things, then would you know what bands the most bass and treble tone controls do control? what range do each of them adjust?
 
I also produce some of my own music with low quality tools... so adjusting the levels to listen to these sort of tracks is usually necessary to get a sound that is pleasing since the adjustment was not able to be done during the recording or with the software that i used
 
many vintage jvc as mentioned
kenwood ka 88 also ... 100 x2 built in eq.... used under 100
 
Because of this thread I got out my Technical Pro preamp and connected it to my Crown power amp, and it sounds way better than it did with my AudioSource power amp, which is now in my living room system powering the subs. So I repent: the Technical Pro preamp sounds OK. It is actually a DJ preamp. Peace and goodwill.
 
glad this could inspire you , Drumolator to give it a try again. Just curious any opinions on the benefits of having separate amp and preamp as opposed to one unit like a receiver or integrated amp?
 
What about using an AV receiver that has room correction software built in like Yamaha's YPAO? Not sure if it works in stereo mode, but might be an option to get the best sound in your room.
 
you might consider using a PC as the source - there's a whole ton of free dsp, eq, and other effects that can be added and offer a lot more flexability....check out foobar and it's plugins
 
HTHMAN said:
What about using an AV receiver that has room correction software built in like Yamaha's YPAO? Not sure if it works in stereo mode, but might be an option to get the best sound in your room.
Click to expand...
It works in stereo mode. However, it doesn't work in "Pure Direct"/"Direct" mode typically. EQing the way the speakers interact with the room is always a good idea.
 
Nolan#9 said:
I think the feeling of needing an EQ is because im used to less than poor sound quality music playing systems and that allows me to get rid of the specific range that might be bothering me. Also I use it to isolate sounds to pick out instruments in a song or to hear lyrics that are lost in other sounds or hard to understand.
Im getting the sense that if you have good quality sound then an eq has no place, but if i were need one, maybe its best to add on separately from my receiver.
Click to expand...


Buying poor quality receivers just because they have EQ while claiming that the reason you feel you need EQ is due to the low-quality components you've owned in the past seems like self-fulfilling prophecy to me. Trying a Yamaha or NAD was good advice. Then if you find you really want a cheap EQ to add to it, they are available. Move up the chain a little.
 
Last edited:
The Yamaha YPAO works in stereo. That is how we have the living room / main TV system set up.

To me the difference between integrated amps, receivers, and preamps and power amps is subtle. To me clarity is a prime concern, and all of my amps have that. The Crown power amp is 200 watts per channel, so I have to be careful with the volume. It sounds only slightly better than the receiver I was using. One thing I like better about the preamp-power amp is that the bass adjustment on the preamp is at a lower frequency than the bass controls on my receivers, which makes my Polks sound a bit better. Peace and goodwill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom