Need a full 2-channel tower speaker system for music + movies — ₹1.2L max (12×25 ft hall)

[Akshay0]

Hi all — looking for advice on a new system for my place.

Quick background: I already own a Mission LX-4 + Marantz M1 at my parents’ house (that setup came from recommendations here),cant be more impressed, the whole system works really well for the usecase at their place. but now I’m putting together a system for myself and want fresh recommendations for the system.

• Room: 12 ft × 25 ft, speakers + TV at one short end, main seating ~8–10 ft away (other end is dining).
• Use: ~50/50 music and movies/TV
• Speaker choice - I would like to get tower speakers because I would like a fuller sound and a better bass since I would like to watch a lot of movies as well.
• Will get connected to TV, Ps5 for gaming, and music streaming, and maybe in a bit I might get a turntable.

Budget

• Total budget: ₹1,20,000 (max) for the whole system.
• I could still get the lx4 and marantz m1 for 1,10,0000 at hifimart but I was thinking of exploring new systems maybe a class a/b amp like the stereo 70s.

But the problem I faced while trying to research for this new system was that I was going back to the m1 marantz and lx4 combo in my mind again and again because I have some bias towards that system since I really like it. But I don’t want to constraint myself to only that system because Of my limited knowledge. And also lx4 costs I think around 40k and lx5 around 65k sort of is in the sweet spot for my budget. And that is why I keep going back to them, if you could recommend some other floor standers I would be open to that as well.

On the amp side of things again, M1 marantz is on my radar i think it does everything but idk if am missing out on the rich warm sound a class a/b can provide or is it overrated? I was also looking at the stereo 70s since its sort of in the same budget, but it has only 75 watt per channel output against 100 watt per channel in m1, i was told that 25watt difference does not make a huge difference after some calculations there will only be a 1.25 decibel increase in the output volume between the two?

Can you tell me if this is right? Or is there something am missing? Could the 100watt make a noticeable difference?

I am going to stop myself before I go on a ramble, anyway for my use case are there any other towers I should be looking at in this price point? And what amps would you recommend?

I am not using the dirac in my current m1 system, but would like to try and see if it actually makes a difference? What is your opinion on this.

Should I go for a class a/b if yes which one?
Theres also the audiolab 6000 but that one only outputs 50watt per channel. So idk. Lets start a conversation on what is the best system that could be achieved in this price point since I think it would help a lot of people and me


Also one question if I do get lets say a marantz m1 can I somehow pair it with my other marantz m1 to try and create a surround sound experience? I know I am reaching here but bare with me. Anyway don’t constrain yourself with the option I told you, but I do feel like they are best option I got at this price point.

 

[ketansethi1987]

If you wish to watch lot of movies why not go for a 5.1 setup or 5.1.2 dolby atmos setup
You can get Cinema 70 with taga harmony tower 5.1 speaker system along with dolby speakers and 12 inch subwoofer for approx 1.5L. I think it would be a good system and enough and appropriate for the room size

 

[Akshay0]

If you wish to watch lot of movies why not go for a 5.1 setup or 5.1.2 dolby atmos setup
You can get Cinema 70 with taga harmony tower 5.1 speaker system along with dolby speakers and 12 inch subwoofer for approx 1.5L. I think it would be a good system and enough and appropriate for the room size

The cinema 70s output for each channel drops to 25-30W per channel when I connect 5 or more speakers I suppose. I didn’t want to underpower my system. It felt kind of half-assed to get a 7.1 just to get it. And I would also like really good sound quality in my stereo system. With regards to movies I absolutely love the virtual mode in the marantz m1 rn kind of provides a spacial sound. And 70s also doesn’t have room correction I suppose. Correct if am wrong any where here. It just feel like getting a 5.1 system just to get one leaving out on getting a good sounding system. Which is why I figured when I have the money to invest in a 5.1 system or higher. But if my assumptions here are wrong please let me know.

 

[kawaiiitakko]

Hi all — looking for advice on a new system for my place.

Quick background: I already own a Mission LX-4 + Marantz M1 at my parents’ house (that setup came from recommendations here),cant be more impressed, the whole system works really well for the usecase at their place. but now I’m putting together a system for myself and want fresh recommendations for the system.

• Room: 12 ft × 25 ft, speakers + TV at one short end, main seating ~8–10 ft away (other end is dining).
• Use: ~50/50 music and movies/TV
• Speaker choice - I would like to get tower speakers because I would like a fuller sound and a better bass since I would like to watch a lot of movies as well.
• Will get connected to TV, Ps5 for gaming, and music streaming, and maybe in a bit I might get a turntable.

Budget

• Total budget: ₹1,20,000 (max) for the whole system.
• I could still get the lx4 and marantz m1 for 1,10,0000 at hifimart but I was thinking of exploring new systems maybe a class a/b amp like the stereo 70s.

But the problem I faced while trying to research for this new system was that I was going back to the m1 marantz and lx4 combo in my mind again and again because I have some bias towards that system since I really like it. But I don’t want to constraint myself to only that system because Of my limited knowledge. And also lx4 costs I think around 40k and lx5 around 65k sort of is in the sweet spot for my budget. And that is why I keep going back to them, if you could recommend some other floor standers I would be open to that as well.

On the amp side of things again, M1 marantz is on my radar i think it does everything but idk if am missing out on the rich warm sound a class a/b can provide or is it overrated? I was also looking at the stereo 70s since its sort of in the same budget, but it has only 75 watt per channel output against 100 watt per channel in m1, i was told that 25watt difference does not make a huge difference after some calculations there will only be a 1.25 decibel increase in the output volume between the two?

Can you tell me if this is right? Or is there something am missing? Could the 100watt make a noticeable difference?

I am going to stop myself before I go on a ramble, anyway for my use case are there any other towers I should be looking at in this price point? You can also check https://directv.pissedconsumer.com/customer-service.html for reference, and what amps would you recommend?

I am not using the dirac in my current m1 system, but would like to try and see if it actually makes a difference? What is your opinion on this.

Should I go for a class a/b if yes which one?
Theres also the audiolab 6000 but that one only outputs 50watt per channel. So idk. Lets start a conversation on what is the best system that could be achieved in this price point since I think it would help a lot of people and me


Also one question if I do get lets say a marantz m1 can I somehow pair it with my other marantz m1 to try and create a surround sound experience? I know I am reaching here but bare with me. Anyway don’t constrain yourself with the option I told you, but I do feel like they are best option I got at this price point.

For your room and use, the Mission LX-5 paired with the Marantz M1 is a safe and musical choice that fits your budget and gives full sound for movies and music. A Class A/B amp like the Stereo 70s can offer a slightly warmer tone, but the difference between 75 W and 100 W per channel is minimal in practice, so wattage is not a major concern. Other tower options in your budget include Q Acoustics 3050i and Wharfedale Diamond 12.4/12.5. Dirac can improve room response, especially for movies, but two M1s cannot be paired for surround sound, you would need a proper AV receiver for that.

 

[Amarendra]

The cinema 70s output for each channel drops to 25-30W per channel when I connect 5 or more speakers I suppose. I didn’t want to underpower my system. It felt kind of half-assed to get a 7.1 just to get it. And I would also like really good sound quality in my stereo system. With regards to movies I absolutely love the virtual mode in the marantz m1 rn kind of provides a spacial sound. And 70s also doesn’t have room correction I suppose. Correct if am wrong any where here. It just feel like getting a 5.1 system just to get one leaving out on getting a good sounding system. Which is why I figured when I have the money to invest in a 5.1 system or higher. But if my assumptions here are wrong please let me know.

If you can keep aside prejudices and common beliefs aside then have a look at JBL 308p/ 306p studio monitors. The 308 has a 8 inch woofer and dips to 35hz in room negating the need for sub/ towers. These are individually powered speakers and I just started using 3 of these in my HT setup with my AVR. I also use Marantz M1 with KEF LS50 with Dirac in a separate setup. Don’t think of the JBLs as studio monitors- they mix the best of both worlds. Connectivity is through TRS / XLR but that can be managed through the right cables. With JBLs you will not have to think about wattage anymore since they are monsters.

 

[ketansethi1987]

The cinema 70s output for each channel drops to 25-30W per channel when I connect 5 or more speakers I suppose. I didn’t want to underpower my system. It felt kind of half-assed to get a 7.1 just to get it. And I would also like really good sound quality in my stereo system. With regards to movies I absolutely love the virtual mode in the marantz m1 rn kind of provides a spacial sound. And 70s also doesn’t have room correction I suppose. Correct if am wrong any where here. It just feel like getting a 5.1 system just to get one leaving out on getting a good sounding system. Which is why I figured when I have the money to invest in a 5.1 system or higher. But if my assumptions here are wrong please let me know.

The brochure says 90 watts

 

[ketansethi1987]

The brochure says 90 watts

Room correction is also there

 

[jai1611]

The brochure says 90 watts

90w, 6ohm, 1%, 1ch driven. With multiple speakers, the number would end up much lower. My guess would be 45-50w

 

[ketansethi1987]

90w, 6ohm, 1%, 1ch driven. With multiple speakers, the number would end up much lower. My guess would be 45-50w

Then what does 90 watt per channel mean?

 

[jai1611]

Then what does 90 watt per channel mean?

It means 90w if you have a single speaker connected in this case. A lot of AVRs quote 1 or 2 channel driven specs unfortunately. Try and find the all channels driven spec for whichever AVR you’re looking at

 

[Nitin K]

It means 90w if you have a single speaker connected in this case. A lot of AVRs quote 1 or 2 channel driven specs unfortunately. Try and find the all channels driven spec for whichever AVR you’re looking at

Unfortunately among the mainstream avr's, only Nad honestly specifies all channels driven @ 8 ohms.

 

[ketansethi1987]

It means 90w if you have a single speaker connected in this case. A lot of AVRs quote 1 or 2 channel driven specs unfortunately. Try and find the all channels driven spec for whichever AVR you’re looking at

I have an Onkyo AVR 5.1 Channel HTR-393 which supports passive subwoofer. It is around 100 Watts per Channel and one channel driven. It means when I connect all the speakers along with the subwoofer it should be giving just 16 watts per channel. But practically when I connect all speakers I hardly feel any difference in the output whether I connect just the front speakers or all the speakers. I have connected a 12 Inch Infinity subwoofer to it, fronts and rear are Sony bookshelf speakers which are 6-7 inch in size along with a tweeter and the then center is also Sony which has two 3 inch drivers. So, what I mean to say 16 watts should be enough for just the center one probably but 16 watts can never drive the front and rear along with the 12 inch subwoofer at high volumes and there is no clipping etc at all. Even when I increase bass the distortion is from the speakers or the subwoofer but not from the AVR. So the concept of dividing the total power by the number of channels is wrong. What I feel is when and AVR is quoted as 100 Watts per channel and 1 channel driven it can be it is actually 500 watts for a single channel or total power is 500 watts. I do not know if I am wrong but playing all the speakers together in All Channel mode along with the subwoofer does not feel they are being fed 16 Watts only.

 

[jai1611]

I have an Onkyo AVR 5.1 Channel HTR-393 which supports passive subwoofer. It is around 100 Watts per Channel and one channel driven. It means when I connect all the speakers along with the subwoofer it should be giving just 16 watts per channel. But practically when I connect all speakers I hardly feel any difference in the output whether I connect just the front speakers or all the speakers. I have connected a 12 Inch Infinity subwoofer to it, fronts and rear are Sony bookshelf speakers which are 6-7 inch in size along with a tweeter and the then center is also Sony which has two 3 inch drivers. So, what I mean to say 16 watts should be enough for just the center one probably but 16 watts can never drive the front and rear along with the 12 inch subwoofer at high volumes and there is no clipping etc at all. Even when I increase bass the distortion is from the speakers or the subwoofer but not from the AVR. So the concept of dividing the total power by the number of channels is wrong. What I feel is when and AVR is quoted as 100 Watts per channel and 1 channel driven it can be it is actually 500 watts for a single channel or total power is 500 watts. I do not know if I am wrong but playing all the speakers together in All Channel mode along with the subwoofer does not feel they are being fed 16 Watts only.

My guess was the 90w number Marantz quotes would translate to 45-50w. I didnt suggest 16w. I also have no idea of the Onkyo you are talking about.

The basic point is that the 90w number you had cited in an earlier post is unreliable. People shouldnt be making a buying decision based on that.

 

[ketansethi1987]

My guess was the 90w number Marantz quotes would translate to 45-50w. I didnt suggest 16w. I also have no idea of the Onkyo you are talking about.

The basic point is that the 90w number you had cited in an earlier post is unreliable. People shouldnt be making a buying decision based on that.

All AVRs hve similar working. Earlier they used to have STK chips like in Sony systems and now they have MOSFETs approx one pair per channel which can easily give 100 watts per channel depending on the voltage and ampere of the transformer being used, If all speakers are connected to Marantz Cinema 70s the output should drop to 90/5=18 Watts per channel. How do we get 45-50 Watts figure? There should be some formula to it.

 

[Nitin K]

All AVRs hve similar working. Earlier they used to have STK chips like in Sony systems and now they have MOSFETs approx one pair per channel which can easily give 100 watts per channel depending on the voltage and ampere of the transformer being used, If all speakers are connected to Marantz Cinema 70s the output should drop to 90/5=18 Watts per channel. How do we get 45-50 Watts figure? There should be some formula to it.

Years back Onkyo use to advertise specs @ 4 or 6 ohms which translates into more wattage while most of the other avr brands would specify @ 8 ohms.
Now-a-days many brands resort to dubious advertising and marketing strategies regarding specs to push the sales of their products.

 

[ketansethi1987]

Years back Onkyo use to advertise specs @ 4 or 6 ohms which translates into more wattage while most of the other avr brands would specify @ 8 ohms.
Now-a-days many brands resort to dubious advertising and marketing strategies regarding specs to push the sales of their products.

I understand that but what I am trying to say that if an AVR is able to drive all the speakers properly we should not worry about the specs they mention. And while listening to music one can use stereo mode which will power only the front speakers. I have heard good feedback for Marantz so suggested it. Not an owner though. I have been owning Onkyos only.

 

[jai1611]

All AVRs hve similar working. Earlier they used to have STK chips like in Sony systems and now they have MOSFETs approx one pair per channel which can easily give 100 watts per channel depending on the voltage and ampere of the transformer being used, If all speakers are connected to Marantz Cinema 70s the output should drop to 90/5=18 Watts per channel. How do we get 45-50 Watts figure? There should be some formula to it.

I've looked at the measured performance of older Marantz slimline AVRs for this heuristic. Thats why I framed it as a guess

The 90w figure is what individual channels can deliver performance on assuming the power supply keeps up. Generally the power supply is the constraint. Divide power supply by no of channels to get actual power. For eg, the Marantz 1510 has 210w of power draw for a five channel amp. That lines up with measured performance.

Generally, 50w per channel is enough unless the speakers are particularly difficult to drive