would it make a difference ?

[pallpoul]

Ok, so I am debating if getting the MC-700 and the A-700 would improve the sound in my mini theater area, currently using a Yamaha RX A-1020 with 2 Tekton Lore's for front and polk csi center and 4 in-ceiling speakers: 5.5" for surrounds, and front high and two 10" subwoofers.

Room is 15#14 and 9 foot ceiling. The Yammi is rated at 110 wpc, 2 ch. driven. the A-700 at 80 wpc, all channels driven.
I also I was wondering if the MC-700 supports Dolby Prologic IIz for height speakers.

Any thoughts?

[cwt]

Dec 1, 2016 23:12:36 GMT -5 pallpoul said:

Ok, so I am debating if getting the MC-700 and the A-700 would improve the sound in my mini theater area, currently using a Yamaha RX A-1020 with 2 Tekton Lore's for front and polk csi center and 4 in-ceiling speakers: 5.5" for surrounds, and front high and two 10" subwoofers.

Room is 15#14 and 9 foot ceiling. The Yammi is rated at 110 wpc, 2 ch. driven. the A-700 at 80 wpc, all channels driven.
I also I was wondering if the MC-700 supports Dolby Prologic IIz for height speakers.

Any thoughts?

The yammi like a lot of avr specs probably doesn't have comprehensive specs like "all channels driven'' figures but non standard "dynamic power" figures and "into two channels" designed too look good.. The a700 has some nice headroom

The preliminary manual doesn't mention pl2z ;only pl2x pallpoul . Maybe wait for the final proof read one ; the umc200 had it but wasn't that popular ..

[vneal]

Get the XMC-1 and buy 2 monos for the front and a 7 channel for the rear

[millst]

Did you even look at OP's speakers? The Tektons are easy to drive: 98dB sensitivity and 8 ohm impedance. Everything else sounds entry level. Overkill.

OP, can you be more specific about what you are trying to improve in regard to sound quality? Is there something in particular about the Yamaha that you are unhappy with?

Sound and Vision measured that receiver. You're only going to pick up ~20 watts (or ~1dB of headroom) with the A-700:
2 channels / 8-ohm: 0.1% distortion at 113.5 watts
5 channels / 8-ohm: 0.1% distortion at 63.9 watts
7 channels / 8-ohm: 0.1% distortion at 57.0 watts

-tm

[KeithL]

I've got to put in my two cents here.
(Please note that I haven't heard that particular receiver - so I'm speaking in generalities.)

There's more to sound quality than just a few numbers.
The simple reality is that receivers often fail to deliver on sound quality.
Sometimes it's because of obvious limitations, like being unable to deliver enough continuous power with all channels driven.
And sometimes it's because they do something obviously wrong - like lots of distortion or a very high noise floor.
But sometimes it's something more subtle....
I'm the first person to argue that magic isn't real, and that anything you can hear can in fact be measured.
However, it's also true that sometimes it takes a lot of measurements, and careful analysis, to quantify something that's obvious to your ears.

To put it bluntly, I've heard my share of receivers over the years, and a lot of them didn't sound very good - even some that had pretty good basic specs.
And, while some receivers actually sound good, receivers are more likely to include some of the design flaws that compromise sound quality than separate power amps.
(And, to put it even more bluntly, we're a lot more careful to avoid design flaws that might compromise the sound quality of our equipment than most of the guys who design receivers.)
So, having a perfectly accurate and legitimate power measurement, at one point on the power and distortion curve, doesn't prove that something sounds good.
We consistently hear from people who found that the move to separates gave them a HUGE step up in sound quality.
And a lot of them previously owned other equipment with what seemed to be pretty good basic measurements.

All that comes back to an endorsement of your original question:
What is he dissatisfied with on his current receiver?
(perhaps it just doesn't sound very good)

Dec 2, 2016 10:10:20 GMT -5 millst said:

Did you even look at OP's speakers? The Tektons are easy to drive: 98dB sensitivity and 8 ohm impedance. Everything else sounds entry level. Overkill.

OP, can you be more specific about what you are trying to improve in regard to sound quality? Is there something in particular about the Yamaha that you are unhappy with?

Sound and Vision measured that receiver. You're only going to pick up ~20 watts (or ~1dB of headroom) with the A-700:
2 channels / 8-ohm: 0.1% distortion at 113.5 watts
5 channels / 8-ohm: 0.1% distortion at 63.9 watts
7 channels / 8-ohm: 0.1% distortion at 57.0 watts

-tm

[bolle]

So you are saying the Fusion-8100 was no good? Just kidding...

Personally I think the UMC-200 was darn good regarding SQ for its price. It bested my Onkyo PR-SC 886 by far, so I bet the MC-700 would also be an improvement in your case.

The BasX amp I don´t know personally. I am not a fan of "small" amps, but it should be sufficient here.

[rbk123]

You'll get:
- much better music/sound out of your mains; most notable in 2 channel music and in movie soundtrack music
- better surround sound processing - the effects will be articulated better

In comparison, I also have Lores and I started with a higher end Denon (AVR-2112CI) which I replaced with a UMC-1/UPA-700 combo. Big upgrade in quality.

After that probably not much else. Ceiling speakers aren't going to reveal a difference.

[drtrey3]

Some of us are big fans of using the matched speakers for a more immersive and coherent sound. They will speak up now that I have raised the opinion!

Trey

[pallpoul]

While the Yammi can get pretty loud, I just don't like the sound it produces. I changed the front speakers and tried mu Polk's Rtia7's for Front duties, then the JBL S-590 too, and in both cases u had the same result: loud but not accurate and sweet sound. I re ran the auto setup each time I swapped front speakers.

I have a fusion 8100 in another room, although rated at 65 wpc, it does sound better and cleared, and ? stronger !!, again to my ears,..

What I am trying to achieve is a big, beautiful, clean sound for my surround theater. I am using this setup with a Panasonic AE8000, projecting on a 92" inch screen. the picture is superb, but the sound is not a match. that's my goal, a great sweet sound to match my beautifully projected videos.

ty'all for all ur input.

[millst]

Do you like the sound of it at lower levels? Does it start sounding worse after a certain volume point is exceeded? That would be an indication of the receiver distorting.

Assuming everything is setup and configured properly, if you've gone through several speakers and aren't happy with the sound (even at lower volumes), then its likely your receiver or your room. If you're acoustics are poor, then it probably doesn't matter what's producing the sound (unless it has a better room EQ that helps). Room treatments are the primary solution.

I agree with, drtrey3, matching your front speakers really helps keep the front soundstage coherent. Once, you've settled on the electronics and mains, I think it'd be worth getting the voice-matched center.

-tm

[millst]

Not going to argue with that, but I get tired of people recommending $4k in amplifiers/prepro with so little information to go on. It's like putting premium gas in a Civic...

-tm

Dec 2, 2016 12:26:51 GMT -5 KeithL said:

I've got to put in my two cents here.
(Please note that I haven't heard that particular receiver - so I'm speaking in generalities.)

There's more to sound quality than just a few numbers.
The simple reality is that receivers often fail to deliver on sound quality.
Sometimes it's because of obvious limitations, like being unable to deliver enough continuous power with all channels driven.
And sometimes it's because they do something obviously wrong - like lots of distortion or a very high noise floor.
But sometimes it's something more subtle....
I'm the first person to argue that magic isn't real, and that anything you can hear can in fact be measured.
However, it's also true that sometimes it takes a lot of measurements, and careful analysis, to quantify something that's obvious to your ears.

To put it bluntly, I've heard my share of receivers over the years, and a lot of them didn't sound very good - even some that had pretty good basic specs.
And, while some receivers actually sound good, receivers are more likely to include some of the design flaws that compromise sound quality than separate power amps.
(And, to put it even more bluntly, we're a lot more careful to avoid design flaws that might compromise the sound quality of our equipment than most of the guys who design receivers.)
So, having a perfectly accurate and legitimate power measurement, at one point on the power and distortion curve, doesn't prove that something sounds good.
We consistently hear from people who found that the move to separates gave them a HUGE step up in sound quality.
And a lot of them previously owned other equipment with what seemed to be pretty good basic measurements.

All that comes back to an endorsement of your original question:
What is he dissatisfied with on his current receiver?
(perhaps it just doesn't sound very good)

[gzubeck]

Dec 1, 2016 23:12:36 GMT -5 pallpoul said:

Ok, so I am debating if getting the MC-700 and the A-700 would improve the sound in my mini theater area, currently using a Yamaha RX A-1020 with 2 Tekton Lore's for front and polk csi center and 4 in-ceiling speakers: 5.5" for surrounds, and front high and two 10" subwoofers.

Room is 15#14 and 9 foot ceiling. The Yammi is rated at 110 wpc, 2 ch. driven. the A-700 at 80 wpc, all channels driven.
I also I was wondering if the MC-700 supports Dolby Prologic IIz for height speakers.

Any thoughts?

I would try using your Yamaha as a preamp first with the a700. I'm using the a300 for two channel duty and the only time it's been used hard is watching the base intensive Blu-ray discs. If you have really sensitive speakers the a700 should be fine. Try the amplifier first.

[novisnick]

Heres two more cents, Im running the Yamaha 3020 with a set of XPA-1Ls for left and right mains. Then I have a pair of Sherbourn 2/150 for the front hights, everything else is running from the Yamaha.
Now this 3020 puts out some nice power but the extra amps allow for exceptional sound in both Two channel and HT.


                       

[ocezam]

Dec 1, 2016 23:12:36 GMT -5 pallpoul said:

am debating if getting the MC-700 and the A-700 would improve the sound in my mini theater area, currently using a Yamaha RX A-1020 with 2 Tekton Lore's for front and polk csi center and 4 in-ceiling speakers: 5.5" for surrounds, and front high and two 10" subwoofers. Room is 15#14 and 9 foot ceiling. The Yammi is rated at 110 wpc, 2 ch. driven. the A-700 at 80 wpc, all channels driven.
I also I was wondering if the MC-700 supports Dolby Prologic IIz for height speakers. Any thoughts?

Nope, no difference. Save your money...

[copperpipe]

Dec 3, 2016 0:18:04 GMT -5 millst said:

Not going to argue with that, but I get tired of people recommending $4k in amplifiers/prepro with so little information to go on. It's like putting premium gas in a Civic...

-tm

A good/solid amp + pre is considered "low hanging fruit". When you're not happy with your sound, and you're using a best-buy AV receiver, then 90% of the time replacing it with something like emotiva's offerings (even with stuff in their basx line) is a pretty good solution.

You're analogy is way out (premium gas in civic) as well Premium gas is a requirement for specific engines, and they don't have to be expensive. Many turbos (for example) require premium otherwise they start knocking.

I haven't heard the yamaha, but I'm quite sure replacing that thing with $4000 of Emotiva equipment would most definitely, improve his sound. Would he hear the improvement.... I can't say, but it'd be there.

[vneal]

I would think the the HDMI technology is much better, faster, newer. It will "latch" onto new HDMI products better with new EDID and CEC decoding and has 3 ports of 4K pass-through, 6 total HDMI inputs, and 2 HDMI outputs. As well, It has a better Auto room EQ and microphone, which will help the audio performance. It doesn't have the 7.1 analog inputs.

This is from EMOTIVA

[mdanderson]

I am having good results so far with the A-700 and my Marantz SR5010 as a preamp. I am very pleased with the upgrade in sound quality. I think it is worth trying out.

[millst]

Dec 3, 2016 9:08:02 GMT -5 copperpipe said:

Dec 3, 2016 0:18:04 GMT -5 millst said:

Not going to argue with that, but I get tired of people recommending $4k in amplifiers/prepro with so little information to go on. It's like putting premium gas in a Civic...

-tm

A good/solid amp + pre is considered "low hanging fruit". When you're not happy with your sound, and you're using a best-buy AV receiver, then 90% of the time replacing it with something like emotiva's offerings (even with stuff in their basx line) is a pretty good solution.

You're analogy is way out (premium gas in civic) as well Premium gas is a requirement for specific engines, and they don't have to be expensive. Many turbos (for example) require premium otherwise they start knocking.

I haven't heard the yamaha, but I'm quite sure replacing that thing with $4000 of Emotiva equipment would most definitely, improve his sound. Would he hear the improvement.... I can't say, but it'd be there.

That's all backwards. Speakers and the room are going to have the biggest effect on the sound. Modern DACs and amplifiers are all quite good so focus on that when they are known to be the weakest link. This isn't advice for an audiophile system.

Point is, if it's not required, it's a waste of money. White van speakers aren't going to sound great just because you power them with Bryston monoblocks.

The  A-1020 is not a bargain bin receiver. It's been highly-reviewed by reputable sources. Many people love that Yamaha sound. The OP is looking for a big improvement, unlike minor differences between two different DAC chips, and you can't even say that OP will hear the difference...

-tm

[gzubeck]

Dec 3, 2016 13:21:47 GMT -5 millst said:

Dec 3, 2016 9:08:02 GMT -5 copperpipe said:

A good/solid amp + pre is considered "low hanging fruit". When you're not happy with your sound, and you're using a best-buy AV receiver, then 90% of the time replacing it with something like emotiva's offerings (even with stuff in their basx line) is a pretty good solution.

You're analogy is way out (premium gas in civic) as well Premium gas is a requirement for specific engines, and they don't have to be expensive. Many turbos (for example) require premium otherwise they start knocking.

I haven't heard the yamaha, but I'm quite sure replacing that thing with $4000 of Emotiva equipment would most definitely, improve his sound. Would he hear the improvement.... I can't say, but it'd be there.

That's all backwards. Speakers and the room are going to have the biggest effect on the sound. Modern DACs and amplifiers are all quite good so focus on that when they are known to be the weakest link. This isn't advice for an audiophile system.

Point is, if it's not required, it's a waste of money. White van speakers aren't going to sound great just because you power them with Bryston monoblocks.

The  A-1020 is not a bargain bin receiver. It's been highly-reviewed by reputable sources. Many people love that Yamaha sound. The OP is looking for a big improvement, unlike minor differences between two different DAC chips, and you can't even say that OP will hear the difference...

-tm

Yes and no...I was using the a100 and stepped up to the a300...to say the least everything is smoother and more powerful. The receiver will be taxed...the a700 should be very good most of the time when not taxed. If there's not a noticeable improvement he can return it.

[pknaz]

I agree with Millst, your speakers and room are more than likely your weakest link, at this point, and I own quite a lot of emo gear.