Sifu's,

need some advice.... is there a way to soundproof my AV room?
Currently using Yamaha speakers but I only have my sofa in there so the sound is bouncing from one wall to another maybe a little too much... thinking of putting a carpet but I need more....

any cheap and easy way to have it done?

you can start with some book cases....fill it up with some magazine and books
have some curtains
also....if it booms...then perhaps move the speakers away from the rear wall a little

my room is quite small.... about 14ft x 12 ft.... only one small panel for window....
that's why cant fit in some book shelf already.

echo reverb or boom? different solution

Sound proofing and room treatment are 2 different things, please take note.
What you are explaining as your issue due to too many hard surfaces, causing too much reflections that negatively impact the dynamics of your speakers performance.

A big, thick carpet is the first thing you need indeed.

Then go DIY some sound panels (don't buy the rubbish egg crates that does pretty much nothing). Google up how to make acoustic panels, they're very cheap to do and doesn't take that long.
If you lack skills for DIY, can always just go to a hardware shop, tell them the dimensions for the wood you want and they'll cut it to size for you. You just need to provide them the other materials (rockwool for example) to fill the panel.

Treat the problematic areas in your room first. Don't need to go crazy by covering all your walls with acoustic panels. The key to room treatment is balance, too much absorption will make the overall sound of your speakers "dull".

From what I know, according to feedback from McIntosh, their MX122 Video Board is based on the same Marantz (Denon) board design, similar to the Marantz 8802A Video Board.

What is different (and very important for my choice) is that ALL other components of MX122 are McIntosh own proprietory design with their own AUDIO technology such as the internal DAC, Audio board, Power Supply, etc.

Denon and Marantz companies merged together to become D+M Group in 2002 so both their HT AVR products share almost similar design with the same "Setup Menus". I think Marantz licensed the Video Board design and technology to McIntosh so that's why the "Setup Menus" looks the same. However, the Video Board design is modified to make it compatible and work properly with McIntosh all other components, so this Video Board is manufactured in McIntosh factory with their own quality control.

Hehe... if its ALL the same as Marantz, I would NOT have bought the more expensive MX122 loh, and I would have save $$$ with the 8802A. After auditioning both McIntosh MX122 and Marantz 8802A, my own personal view and taste is that the MX122 AUDIO is much much better.

My MX122 supports Dolby Atmos, Auro-3D. Support for DTSX will come later when the MX122 new firmware upgrade is released.

Dolby Atmos, DTSX and Auro-3D are ALL AUDIO technologies built into the hardware codecs.

My MX122 also supports virtual audio emulation (not true audio channels) which changes the actual audio channels.

When I pressed my remote "Green" button, a menu pop out showing "Movie Sound" category. The different selections changes according to what audio is received.



When playing video with 5.1 audio channels, the pop out menu shows "Dolby Digital" already selected which is the actual sound. I can change this to "Auro-2D Surround" so the original Dolby 5.1 will be changed to emulated (not true) Auro 5.1 channels.

When playing video with (stereo) 2 audio channels, the pop out menu shows "Stereo" already selected which is the actual sound. I can change this to "Auro-2D Surround" so the original 2 channels will be changed to emulated (not true) Auro 5.1 channels, so the centre, surround and sub will ALSO have sound.

If I played bluray with Dolby True-Hd, this will appear as the original selected one. I don't have any Auro-3D bluray to test so I can only assume that the pop out will change to Auro-3D, NOT Auro-2D.

Oh yes, you are right.... sound-proofing actually means blocking or preventing the sound inside the room from "leaking" or going out. No need for me to explain about acoustic treatment in the room as you have already explained it.

This post has been edited by jamesleetech: Oct 11 2016, 07:00 PM

now i got the feel of using mcintosh... except the sound is not syok sendiri haha

now i know, auro 2d is 5.1 upmix. while auro 3d include height channels.

This post has been edited by ktek: Oct 11 2016, 09:09 PM

not saying d Denon X7200WA is of equivalent sound quality...but the Mcintosh MX122 shares a few bases with Denon X7200 WA and Marantz 8802A....not just the video card
but all 3 sound different side by side...and of coz the MC well known for their power supply and other stuffs

D&M Holdings owned Mcintosh and shared a few technologies together which brought Mcintosh more into HT....

I need to correct your statement on the ownership of McIntosh Laboratory.

Its common that many well-known brands changes ownership as time flies.

D&M Holdings bought McIntosh Laboratories around 2003.
Link to old news... http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dm...t-74622792.html

D&M Holdings did previously owned the McIntosh Group, the parent company that also owned McIntosh Labs, Audio Research, Sumiko, Pryma and Wadia.

Later, around 2012.... D&M Holdings then sold off 100% stake of the McIntosh Group to... Fine Sounds SpA from Italy.

Here are just 2 references of the ownership change...
http://www.strata-gee.com/dm-sells-mcintos...private-equity/
http://www.cepro.com/article/mcintosh_sold..._of_fine_sounds

Here is the present situation now...

D&M Group
owns Denon, Marantz, Botson Acoustics and HEOS as shown at their website...
http://www.dmglobal.com/home

Fine Sounds Group (Italian Company)
owns McIntosh Labs, Audio Research, Sumiko, Pryma and Wadia.
http://www.mcintoshgroup.com/en-us/brands



Yes, Denon/Marantz and McIntosh may have shared "technologies" many years ago AND may still have some sort of licensing collaboration with D&M Holdings. It depends on who actually owns the various design and technology patents on the Video Board. I don't know, so if D&M Holdings own 100% of the Video Board patents, then I guess that McIntosh should have paid D&M Holdings for using the Video Board technology and then modifying it to make it compatible with McIntosh own Audio Board and other components. That's why I said in my earlier comment... " I think Marantz licensed the Video Board design and technology to McIntosh". I should have said... "I think D&M Holdings licensed the Video Board to McIntosh".

As far as I am concerned, it doesn't matter which company owns which HiFi or HT reputable brands. I actually don't know what is the actual story on how McIntosh is able to use similar Video Board component & design. Probably they have some sort of licensing agreements between the two different companies.

Will Denon X7200WA, Marantz 8802A and McIntosh MX122 have the same video quality just because they used the same board design? Speaking for myself only.... no, each one should have some differences in picture quality because its not 100% built the same, its never a photostat copy of the same board.

Actually McIntosh is primarily well known for their Audio and Build Quality. In comparison, the power supply and other stuffs are not as well-known. McIntosh products are hand-made for most parts and this is shown at the rear of my MX122 with the label... "Handcrafted in USA" and only manufactured in McIntosh factory at Binghamton USA.

I did personally listened to the Denon X5200W, Marantz 8802 and McIntosh MX121. Did not audition X7200WA and Marantz 8802A. For me, somehow there is only subtle difference in video quality. Yes, I have the same opinion as you that each sound different side-by-side. Mmm... that means you have personally listened to the MX122?

It is the big difference in audio quality that was the reason why I had chosen MX122. The audio board and other components are entirely McIntosh own design, except for the modified Video Board. IF both the 8802A and MX122 share the same or similar audio and video boards, then I would have chosen 8802A and save $$.

It will be unfair to use Denon X7200WA as a comparison because it is a HT AV Receiver with Pre-and-Power components. Marantz 8802A and McIntosh are both HT AV Pre-Amp. So, AVRs are not in the same class and quality compared to Pre-Amp Separates loh. Unfortunately, the Denon AVP-A1HDCI Pre-Amp is very out-of-date (dinosaur) and Denon still did not come out with any new updated/upgraded Pre-Amp models. It seems to me that Denon is no longer concentrating on the very top-end audiophile market.

Anyway, my MX122 pairing with the MC302 gives it the extra warmth, details and punch needed for my Front floor-stands.

This post has been edited by jamesleetech: Oct 12 2016, 03:43 AM

Mcintosh is famous for its audio will stick to that. HT is a different thing so should go with those primary is doing HT stuff. No doubt mcintosh can be hand made or not but in HT they definitely not something they do best. No offense.

jamesleetech

I have auditted all 3 and they all sound different....

Thing is I hv my music on Audio Research gears hence I did not consider the Mcintosh processor due to its price

But again....there are too many variables in different setups and environments

You have the right to disagree and give your personal opinion. Its okay. No offense taken. For me, those companies with primary products do NOT necessarily do a much better job compared to those that don't. You have given a very wide and open opinion which is just based on a set of fixed perception and may not be exploring every possibilities. Even if any company comes out with a product for the first time that is totally different from their main primary ones, I will never straight away ignore such products because I always stay open-minded and will specifically research and explore all its good and bad points without pre-judging anything just because HT is not their primary HT stuff.

I will always try not to be dead set in my views on anything that are based on overall perception of things. An example of a general perception... Most cheap unbranded Made In China HiFi and AV products are bad or inferior compared to the branded reputable ones, and eventhough it may be true most of the time (if using my dead set opinion), I will never ever just simply ignore any product. Of course I will just ignore an unknown RM 150 bluray player because its obvious its a low end budget product. What I am saying is a reasonable comparison based on similar budget and quality.

As far as possible, I will explore its specifications and internal components first such as whether toroidol coil (transformer) is used and its build quality, the internal DAC chip + video chip used, the decoder used for HiFi/HT (Dolby, DTS), the internal PSU, the design, the technology and so forth.

When someone intend to buy any specific product, that person already have set the approximate budget, the required internal specs, the technology wanted (example... with or without Atmos), the build quality wanted and the after sales support. ALL of us ultimately choose ONE specific model and product to buy so, in my opinion, I should look at it in a way that is specific to the product that is targeted AND NOT simply ignoring that specific model just because its not the primary area that the company specialized.

Just because Samsung are very reputable and strong in the Phones and TV department, it does not mean that we should NOT go for their bluray players or HT AVRs. On the contrary, because one should look at each product individual merits. Its true that I may not buy it but I will surely not just ignore it without looking at it first and audition it if possible.

After putting all the necessary homework on the specific one, the final hurdle to go through is our own tastes, preferences and... our EARS !! YES... our EARS make the final decision.

You do know that ALL HT products have the Audio portion. You also do know that ALL good quality HT AVR/Pre-Amps products generally have the same decoder technology for Dolby, DTS and Auro... SO this should be "similar" quality across all those different brands. BUT... there is the final "analogue" path that is very important for HT too... after decoding PCM, DTS, Dolby or Auro, there is the conversion of the signal to analogue output to the Power Amp ! I do connect 2 XLR cables from my MX122 AV Controller to my MC302 power amp so its crucial for me that the analog process is handled beautifully. Bro, that analogue part to the power amp is the area that McIntosh excels !

Granted, McIntosh do not excel in the Video department as they do use Marantz technology for the video board BUT at least its similar quality without losing out. If I based my decision merely on just the video department then of course I won't be stupid enough to buy MX122! I will also not buy MX122 if they used similar technology and parts for both video and audio.

Its the analog process for the HiFi and HT part of the MX122 that, in my opinion, pushes the audio quality to a very very high level. Well... of course there will be people who hated the McIntosh audio character too so I can accept that.

Bear in mind that my MX122 is not merely for HT because I used it for HiFi too. I think I have the best possible quality for my external DACs, CD Player and Turntable too. Hehe, I want to kill two birds with one stone, as the English proverb says. Ya, its debatable whether I have achieved this HiFi and HT balance. Of course a separate Tube Amp will be so much better for my turntable. Mmm.... thinking... feeling a bit itchy here.

Being hand-crafted do not do anything to the audio or video quality but this gives me the comfort of knowing that my MX122 is built to last a long time.... its part but not the primary factor in my decision.

After everything have been said, I am always receptive on what everyone said, including yours so I can learn and digest all information and NOT lock myself to a general fixed perception. I am merely explaining to you what I believed in just and to let you know my thoughts.

Lastly, in many ways, your comment... "HT is a different thing so should go with those primary is doing HT stuff." is generally true and I do partly agree but I do have a somewhat different view which is what I have explained here.

Appreciated your feedback. Regards.



This post has been edited by jamesleetech: Oct 12 2016, 09:03 PM

I do understand, as each person have a budget that he/she can afford. The biggest problem here is that we are always thirsty for improvement in quality so there's no limit on the amount to spend ! Dangerous poison!

I have not audition Audio Research before but I have read and heard of numerous praises of their sound quality. If possible, I will want to audition Audio Research too.

I absolutely do agree that there are just too many factors and variables to determine in achieving the optimum quality. Its a balancing act that we try to achieve but actually we know that it can never be done ! Hehe.

The one thing that I have learned in my experience is NOT to pre-judge anything, NOT fix my mind on any common perception and try as much as possible to explore all reasonable possibilities.

Its not surprising to me that all 3 sounded different as I also felt the same too. What is even more difficult is that each person have very different eyes, ears and taste. Try bringing 10 friends to watch a LED TV at a showroom at the same time, tell them to keep quiet and write down their opinions on the picture quality... then compare the written opinions. Will it be exactly the same? You should know the answer. I think you know what I meant. Two persons who listened to the same song using the exact same system will have different opinions. One friend of mine really hated the Elac FS409 when he auditioned it at a dealer's showroom but I really loved it. So... can anyone say who is right or wrong? After all the necessary research is done based on your requirements... the final decision comes from your EARS.

This post has been edited by jamesleetech: Oct 12 2016, 06:05 PM

jamesleetech

I have owned both Mcintosh and Audio Research....i prefer Audio Research over Mcintosh over a few things

1. the micro details and micro dynamics are very well articulated
2. ARC has got more speed in their tube amps
3. they sound ultra natural with most speakers....
4. their cd player produces very wide big stage with superb imaging and accuracy and without a hint of digital glare

Mcintosh....what i like about them....their solid state is better than ARC....cd player sounded slightly more laid back....i had them in my car at one point driving Dynaudio

my dad had Mcintosh and Luxmans too....so yah...i've been listening to MCs for many years.....

Oh, when you said "I did not consider the Mcintosh processor due to its price", it was not because of affordability. This earlier simple sentence confused me. You have chosen Audio Research because it has a lower price with your preferred sonic qualities.

You were listening to McIntosh for many years. Which McIntosh and Luxman model were your dad using ? I assume your dad were using the McIntosh for the turntable so which turntable was used ? You said you owned McIntosh before so which model did you own and if sold, what was the reason? Upgrade? Audio Research better all-round performer?

I did not go with Mcintosh processor due to its price...that is correct...I don't use my Denon for stereo music....the price comparison is between the Mcintosh processor vs Denon X7200WA for solely HT purpose
after all....i'm playing 7.2.4.....so I need an AVR like 7200 to power my Atmos speakers....while d 7 channel goes to my ARC and Medusa....

I did mention I hv ARC gears for music....my bad for assuming that you would know where ARC stands in the music and hifi world.....

I have a heavily moded LS17 pre and a Ref110 power from ARC at the moment...the Denon sends L&R to my LS17>bypass mode>Ref110 for HT.....
Audio Research is not cheaper than Mcintosh....in fact in every aspect....Audio Research gear is more expensive
Audio Research doesn't have any HT processor in its series....its a pure stereo producer
ARC entry CD6 player is going for 28k while MCD500 is roughly 20k...

old models like MC225, Luxman C1010.....he had a few TT....pioneer, Technics and also a Luxman TT
those days we had large pioneer speaker..CS-88A...there was Goodmans at one point...but I can't recall the model

i've had the MA6000...MCD301...i used to have the MCC404M in my car too...with Alpine F1 CDA-7990 player...

why i sold it....lack of musicality....after listening to ARC....the musicality is of different level...there's not much soul in Mcintosh....

I've played with VS110, Ref7 CD, CD5, CD6, LS27 Pre....DSi200....many more...

one of my friend has MC with Sonus Faber.....my previous setup was ARC with Sonus Faber....just a different preference

and since I ventured into HT.....i think i've mentioned b4....i'm trying to get best of both world in 1 single room

Bro Hushymushy,can i come to audition when your dual pb13 ready?And curious to hear the medusa too..

This hushymushy selling off his dual SB2000s on hifi4sale.

I'm tempted.

Go go go