Would this A/V Receiver go well with these Speakers?

[palmerc2]

Let me start of by stating I know absolutely nothing about Sound. I have done a little research in the past few days, but that's really about as far as it goes. So with any replies please keep it in "English"..thank you.

I have a 5.1 Speaker System, and a Yamaha Receiver picked out. I just want to make sure these 2 devices will cope well and the Receiver won't melt. I know the Receiver is a 7.2 system, it's a great deal on Newegg and just want the option for future expandability...for now 5.1 is plenty.

Speakers: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0049P2000/ref=ox_sc_act_title_3?ie=UTF8&m=A2AX38OWVEV4V2

Receiver: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882115339

I will be using it for: DirecTV, XBOX 360, Blu-Ray / DVD Movies and Uncompressed Music.

I do live in an apartment so don't want to be too loud. I just want this sound system for clarity, and being able to hear things I'm not able to hear right now with the built in speakers on my Samsung PN59D8000 Plasma TV.

Thank you!

 

[Aragornii]

Those will go nicely together. The impedance matches and the receiver is in the power range for the speakers. Yamaha makes great receivers. I'm not familiar with those speakers but they get good reviews online. This will be a solid little system.

 

[DustinT]

I agree, you've made some smart choices. If you have some room in your budget, I suggest you look at the NAD t747 at $600. Its a $1400 receiver that's currently on sale from Crutchfield and it is a proper, audiophile grade receiver. I love mine. The power from it is tremendous, really unbelievable.

But, the Yamaha I used before worked well and I'm sure it would sound nice with the Martin Logans.

 

[palmerc2]

I agree, you've made some smart choices. If you have some room in your budget, I suggest you look at the NAD t747 at $600. Its a $1400 receiver that's currently on sale from Crutchfield and it is a proper, audiophile grade receiver. I love mine. The power from it is tremendous, really unbelievable.

But, the Yamaha I used before worked well and I'm sure it would sound nice with the Martin Logans.

I'm not looking to bust the windows out with heavy bass. I looked at that NAD system and it's discontinued, I looked at some other NAD systems but just too much. I just want a simple system.

Thank you both for the feedback!

 

[sycho]

I just bought one of those Yamaha's recently, refurbished as well. Looks mint, only thing on it that says refurb is the serial number. The receiver is awesome and is more than I need for the most part. I would say if you have the space to get some larger speakers. New egg usually has decent Polk Audio speakers on sale and they would be about 1/3 the cost of the ones you posted earlier.

Link Newegg Polk Audio
Hopefully that link doesn't expire.


I personally would do something like this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882290204 x3 for Front Left, Center, Right
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882290202 x2 Pairs for Surround Left and Right and Surround Back left and Surround Back Right.

 

[imahawki]

I'd second considering Polk. I downsized my $15,000 home theater (anchored by ~$3500 Gallo Acoustics speakers) and bought these Polk speakers and added a Polk sub and I have been completely blown away. They vastly exceeded my high expectations.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...17145&creative=399369&creativeASIN=B0043M667W

 

[ChrisA]

I'd second considering Polk. I downsized my $15,000 home theater (anchored by ~$3500 Gallo Acoustics speakers) and bought these Polk speakers and added a Polk sub and I have been completely blown away.

First off you are one of the few who gets this right -- put the majority of the budget into the speakers. That is what metters. The amplifier has much less effect of the sound. It's all in the speakers, their placment and aim adin room treatment. The amp.receiver is a distant second place. But so many (most?) people get it backwards. So already you are ahead.

For Home Theator I agree with the above quote. Polk is good and more cost effective. The only other thing to consider is if you want to play music. In that case I'd go with some "real" stereo speakers for the front left and right. there is no way around it, for stereo physical size does matter and you don't want statilite speakers and a sub if you care about recorded music

Also. You really should audition speakers. Best if you buy from a place that allows returns

 

[Seminoles]

I'd second considering Polk. I downsized my $15,000 home theater (anchored by ~$3500 Gallo Acoustics speakers) and bought these Polk speakers and added a Polk sub and I have been completely blown away. They vastly exceeded my high expectations.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...17145&creative=399369&creativeASIN=B0043M667W

Do you know of any soundbars you would recommend? I already have a POLK sub but looking for speakers and something that looks clean with very good sound. Do not want to ceiling flush mount the speakers.

 

[cawesjmu]

I couldn't let this slide. This looks to be the same set of speakers, but nearly 900 dollars less.

MLT-2 for 424 on Amazon.

I also went the Polk route with a BIC sub, but was looking at the Energy 5.1 classic set which is pretty sweet and can be found for under 500 or check Fluance speakers.

 

[imahawki]

Do you know of any soundbars you would recommend? I already have a POLK sub but looking for speakers and something that looks clean with very good sound. Do not want to ceiling flush mount the speakers.

I haven't looked into soundbars much because I've never had a desire for one. I know Polk makes one and I think they generally make great, quality mid-fi* products.

*Mid-fi is not an insult, a lot of hi-fi guys simply use it to refer to products that are good but outside of true high-end world, which often isn't a bad thing. The TRUE high end is often populated by extremely finicky, non-compatible products.

 

[penguy]

Not to hijack the thread, but after reading this thread, I looked for more information on the speakers and noticed that the reviews are all very positive...given that I can't spend much on this...I'm interested. The problem is I intended to install 'in-wall' speakers for the rears and bookshelf for L,C,R and a sub-woofer. The room is part of an addition and the wire is already in place...thoughts? Could the ML-2 rears be mounted on the wall w/ some bracket?

or forget this and wait until I can afford the B&W I planned on?

 

[mikepro]

Uh.... seriously?? You are comparing an (alleged) $15,000 home theater system with Gallo speakers to a Polk home theater in a box setup, and were blown away by the Polk setup? Don't know what you are smoking or what you did wrong setting up your alleged $15,000 speaker system that causes that $380 Polk system to blow it away....

But, to the OP, you can get some decent value out of inexpensive Polk speakers.

I would also suggest you consider the Pioneer VSX line of receivers, such as the 921 or 1021. These have some nice features, including Airplay capability, a nice iPad interface, and speaker auto calibration and room correction (also part of of iPad interface) that can really help you get the best sound out of your speaker and room limitations.

Also, some Onkyo receivers are pretty decent value as well, usually great bang for the buck.

I'd second considering Polk. I downsized my $15,000 home theater (anchored by ~$3500 Gallo Acoustics speakers) and bought these Polk speakers and added a Polk sub and I have been completely blown away. They vastly exceeded my high expectations.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...17145&creative=399369&creativeASIN=B0043M667W

 

[scott911]

I have the think the gallo to polk guy is pulling your leg. that's nuts. Polk are just barely maybe mid-fi in my opinion.

I have a different approach to recommend. Get the receiver, it's fine.
and by a single pair of stereo speakers and a subwoofer. Invest you're whole speaker budget into just those now, and set the foundation for a good system.

Then, next year - get a some surrounds with you extra cash. Then you can enjoy the arguably small benefit of "extra" effects - and still have a solid, reputable core for meaningful stereo sound.

I'd recommend looking at Kef , and NHT . Maybe also emotiva. I like emotiva's amplifies and DAC but can't speak to the speaker line...

Read up on audioholic.com - and avoid the little pre-packaged sets of multiple speakers. If you care about your music enough to be soliciting advice in a forum, I don't think you'll be happy going the route you were planning.

 

[DustinT]

I'm not looking to bust the windows out with heavy bass. I looked at that NAD system and it's discontinued, I looked at some other NAD systems but just too much. I just want a simple system.

Thank you both for the feedback!

Ya, it's not so much about the volume, it's about the quality. I'm sure there's plenty of amps out there with more watts per dollar, but I doubt you can find one with better power, control and tone for the dollar. I got mine back in July before they were clearanced. With the 4 year warranty extension on mine, I'm covered for 5 years and I'm rocking a really terrific amp. The feature set is a little dated compared to the new units, but when you listen to them you won't compare the feature anymore. I still recommend you grab one and get the most expensive speakers you can afford. Those are investments that will pay off for years to come.

Anyway, there's a lot of great sounding receivers out there and you can hardly go wrong if you buy into at least a midrange receiver. I suppose the only additional advice I can give you is to ignore the features on the receiver. The other thing you should take with a huge grain of salt is the rated ampilifier power. There's plenty of games that can be played to make a 10 watt receiver look like a 50 watt unit. And the manufacturers won't hesitate to label the box 50 watts when they know it can't push it. It's the input, outputs, amps and dacs that matter. And the best way to check the actual output of the receiver is to go to HomeTheater.com since they publish instrumented testing of the amps. As an example, the NAD t747 is rated at 60 watts and their testing showed it pushing over close to 115 watts. That kind of rating is very typical for an audiophile grade product. A consumer company would rate this same receiver at 175-200 when it couldn't do it.

My point is, just do your homework and you'll be fine.

 

[imahawki]

Uh.... seriously?? You are comparing an (alleged) $15,000 home theater system with Gallo speakers to a Polk home theater in a box setup, and were blown away by the Polk setup? Don't know what you are smoking or what you did wrong setting up your alleged $15,000 speaker system that causes that $380 Polk system to blow it away....

But, to the OP, you can get some decent value out of inexpensive Polk speakers.

I would also suggest you consider the Pioneer VSX line of receivers, such as the 921 or 1021. These have some nice features, including Airplay capability, a nice iPad interface, and speaker auto calibration and room correction (also part of of iPad interface) that can really help you get the best sound out of your speaker and room limitations.

Also, some Onkyo receivers are pretty decent value as well, usually great bang for the buck.

Uh no, I was comparing against EXPECTATIONS for each package. My expectations for the Polks were obviously low. I expected a tinnier sound, perhaps a notable gap between the speakers and the sub, but they produce a nice warmish, fairly full sound. They're not as good as the Gallos (but that should have been obvious and not needed to be said). But you're talking a few hundred bucks for a 5.1 system vs. ~$3500 for JUST the L/R speakers of the Gallo setup.