Need a Receiver!

[Nanometer]

I'm looking for a receiver for a new home theater setup. Budget around 300.

Requirements:

* Audio pass through on HDMI
* 5.1 surround minimum

[Serra]

Onkyo TX-SR307 (http://www.us.onkyo.com/model.cfm?m=TX-SR307&class=Receiver&p=i) should fit that bill at full MSRP. I'd try looking for a 507 (http://www.us.onkyo.com/model.cfm?m=TX-SR507&class=Receiver&p=i) on sale, I'd bet you could get one around $300 if you really scoured the Interweb.


I am a little confused on why you would want it to support audio pass-through and also be 5.1 capable... I would have thought you would use it for audio, but W/E. I haven't used either model to verify 100%, but I'm pretty sure you can configure audio pass-through on them.


This is, of course, assuming you want to buy new. Buying something used gives you a lot more options, but then you do of course have to take your chances with quality and lifetime.

[Taskforce]

Think the TX-SR607 is the best you can get for around $300.

[NKrader]

anything onkyo and the previous quote of onkyo 607.. is out of price range..

look for an onkyo 606 used.. its what i have its great i dono if its 300$ yet tho

[Nanometer]

Is the sony str1000 or a yamaha equivalent any good? Or does the Onkyo receiver pretty much trump those receivers? im kind of expanding the budget to 300-400

[HoJo]

Newegg has the 507 for $320 and the 607 for $400 both with free shipping.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882120131&cm_re=tx-sr507-_-82-120-131-_-Product

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882120133&cm_re=tx-sr607-_-82-120-133-_-Product

[Serra]

Is the sony str1000 or a yamaha equivalent any good? Or does the Onkyo receiver pretty much trump those receivers? im kind of expanding the budget to 300-400

I would expect the Onkyo to trump them, especially if you can get a 607. It won't drive as much wattage as a comparable Sony/Yamaha, but the sound quality at what it will drive should be better.

[Nanometer]

The 607 it is then... unless something better comes out in 3 weeks... thanks guys!

[jason str]

Best deal as of right now. :yepp:

http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/MARSR4002/Marantz/Sr4002-Receiver-80w-X-7ch-Hdmi-Home-Theater-Surround/1.html

[EniGmA1987]

Onkyo not having as much wattage as a Sony? What are you smoking man?

Sony bloats their wattage ratings a ton. It cant actually push out on a normal basis anywhere close to what they advertise. If a Sony says 100w per channel, it is probably closer to 30w. Sony is probably the worst offender in wattage ratings of any company.

And if you have efficient speakers, you dont need a lot of wattage anyway. If you have speaker with a 92dB efficiency, that means with only 30 watts you can get over 105 dB from your speakers. That is pretty loud. What you really need is current behind the wattage (as well as other things) and very few receivers have any real driving power, especially in the sub $1000 range.

[Computurd]

onkoyo is an excellent brand. i have the tx-sr805 and she is a beauty in every respect. they are the :banana::banana::banana::banana:!

[jason str]

The Marantz receiver is in a different class and will out perform any models previously mentioned here.

[crackhead2k]

Yamaha can take 8-6 ohm loads...
at 90-95 watts you can possibly get it for 300-500$
7.1 would probably be around 500 and you can bi-amp if you have a more power hungry floorstanding front speaker.

Onkyo and yamahas are great brands, onkyo seems higher priced were I am though.
Marantz is definitely better but would cost you more then 300 even used.
You maybe able to find a used rotel, I would be around the same level as the lower marantz stuff.

I hope this helps a bit in your choices.

[[XC] Lead Head]

Onkyo not having as much wattage as a Sony? What are you smoking man?

Sony bloats their wattage ratings a ton. It cant actually push out on a normal basis anywhere close to what they advertise. If a Sony says 100w per channel, it is probably closer to 30w. Sony is probably the worst offender in wattage ratings of any company.

And if you have efficient speakers, you dont need a lot of wattage anyway. If you have speaker with a 92dB efficiency, that means with only 30 watts you can get over 105 dB from your speakers. That is pretty loud. What you really need is current behind the wattage (as well as other things) and very few receivers have any real driving power, especially in the sub $1000 range.

Hmm..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSZlXoI_kCc. This "100" WPC Sony seems to have no issues delivering 112 WPC.

Yes manufacturers often "play" with the ratings a bit, but don't spew BS saying there is going to be that much of a difference between actual output and rated output with a somewhat respectable brand.

Also, Watts = Volts x Amps. Since speakers are a fixed resistance, the only way to drive more current into their voice coils is to pump more voltage in. A cheapo amp that putouts out an honest to god 100 watts with a 4 ohm load will be pushing the exact same current as a $15,000 100watt amp with the same 4 ohm load.

I will however agree that with efficient speakers, you don't need lots of power to get good loud sound.

[coyotetu]

Lead Head;4243344']Hmm..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSZlXoI_kCc. This "100" WPC Sony seems to have no issues delivering 112 WPC.

Yes manufacturers often "play" with the ratings a bit, but don't spew BS saying there is going to be that much of a difference between actual output and rated output with a somewhat respectable brand.

Also, Watts = Volts x Amps. Since speakers are a fixed resistance, the only way to drive more current into their voice coils is to pump more voltage in. A cheapo amp that putouts out an honest to god 100 watts with a 4 ohm load will be pushing the exact same current as a $15,000 100watt amp with the same 4 ohm load.

I will however agree that with efficient speakers, you don't need lots of power to get good loud sound.
Speakers are definitely not a fixed resistance, what is typically listed on commercial speakers is merely a nominal figure. The impedance range/curve of a speaker can easily dip well below its stated ohms in a given frequency range. This can result in a 4 ohm speaker's impedance being ~2 ohms, which receiver amplifiers (especially in this price range) are rarely built to drive these loads for any sustained period or regular frequency (and a good deal of separate amps aren't built to a 2 ohm standard either), potentially damaging both amplifier and speakers. This is not the case for all speakers, but certainly a considerable amount have these characteristics.

Now, let's be real about manufacturer stated specifications... they are indeed rarely close to what is stated. The problem is, what we're looking for is honest power ratings with all channels driven simultaneously, manufacturers rarely test with this methodology, this is intentional. They will say it's all channels driven, but it is not simultaneously, they will test with 2 channels driven at a time, or even 1 at a time. This is especially true of Onkyo, and more recently, Yamaha (I'm sure others, but I haven't researched other companies). It's a reasonable assumption that a majority of the most successful (what you might call "respectable") CE manufacturers employ this type of marketing. They appear to give you alot for your money, and rarely will a consumer have the capability or means to realize the difference, this has meant that real world simultaneous A.C.D. bench testing has yielded actual numbers that are half, or as much as a third of the stated specification.

Back to the original question, I would recommend a Yamaha RX-V665, it's around your desired price range and has a wealth of connectivity and all the features one would want out of an entry-level A/V receiver currently, including 7.1 analog pre-outs for if you ever decide to add separate amplifiers to your system. For the above reasons and others, provided you have good enough speakers, the upgrade is appreciable.

[EniGmA1987]

Lead Head;4243344']Hmm..[urlAlso, Watts = Volts x Amps. Since speakers are a fixed resistance, the only way to drive more current into their voice coils is to pump more voltage in. A cheapo amp that putouts out an honest to god 100 watts with a 4 ohm load will be pushing the exact same current as a $15,000 100watt amp with the same 4 ohm load.

That is not my understanding of speakers and power at all. I KNOW speakers are NOT fixed resistance, it varies depending on the speaker and the frequencies. So that part of your statement is definately wrong. This next part is my understanding but I guess I could be wrong and not know how they work...


wattage for speaker is V2/I, or voltage squared divided by impedance. Idealy a power amplifier should be able to double its power produced every time you half the Ohms. Now I THINK that power amps have a fixed voltage and the current is what fluctuates to give the different wattage. So having an amplifier capable of high ammounts of current would mean that the amp is capable of properly driving speakers across a large area of impedance, and when the speakers dip into really low impedance. I have seen some speakers that will even go down below 2 Ohms even if the nominal impedance is 4 Ohm. You can even see graphs showing that some speakers can go up higher than 30 Ohms at certain points in the frequency spectrum (generally down in the very low areas)

Also it was my understanding that since loudspeakers are rated in wattage, you can do different combinations of voltage and amperage to get the given wattage. Normal professional power amps are 35v outputs, and when bridged they become 70v. But I was given to understand that you *could* use 18v and double the amps and it would still work fine. But I really dont know for sure on that.





Also, I found this when researching you claimed 112 watts per channel that was measured in a Sony rated for 100w:


For example, an Onkyo 900, rated by the manufacturer at 125 wpc into 7 channels, was found by Sound & Vision to only produce 52 watts per channel when it was tested with all seven channels active. Yamaha, Denon, Kenwood, Onkyo and many others are all challenged to meet their specified power. Sony ES wouldn't even let Sound & Vision test one of their receiver's power claiming that "it wasn't designed to have all channels active at the same time."

[[XC] Lead Head]

That is not my understanding of speakers and power at all. I KNOW speakers are NOT fixed resistance, it varies depending on the speaker and the frequencies. So that part of your statement is definately wrong. This next part is my understanding but I guess I could be wrong and not know how they work...


wattage for speaker is V2/I, or voltage squared divided by impedance. Idealy a power amplifier should be able to double its power produced every time you half the Ohms. Now I THINK that power amps have a fixed voltage and the current is what fluctuates to give the different wattage. So having an amplifier capable of high ammounts of current would mean that the amp is capable of properly driving speakers across a large area of impedance, and when the speakers dip into really low impedance. I have seen some speakers that will even go down below 2 Ohms even if the nominal impedance is 4 Ohm. You can even see graphs showing that some speakers can go up higher than 30 Ohms at certain points in the frequency spectrum (generally down in the very low areas)

You can't control current without reducing voltage. If I stick a DMM across the output of my amplifier and turn the volume up, the output voltage goes up with it.

Fixed voltage/constant voltage amplifiers are typically only used for PA systems or the ceiling mounted speakers you see in restaurants, stores, supermarkets, etc..The amplifier usually has one fixed output level, and the speakers themselves have their own step down transformers. These systems are fixed volume. These systems put out a fixed voltage, and therefore current changes based on how loud the incoming music is. So yes in this case an amplifier that could deliver gobs of current would be ideal. I don't know about you, but I sure as hell don't use fixed volume PA speakers in my personal system...




Also, I found this when researching you claimed 112 watts per channel that was measured in a Sony rated for 100w:

That Sony I linked still put out 112% of its rated power

[sirheck]

All channels driven simultaneously?
My HK has that covered:)

Honestly ya can't go wrong with any receivers in the mid-range class.

Yamaha,Pioneer,s Elite class, Onkyo(my 605,s DD and DTS decoder works whenever it wants) :(
Denon, and Sony ES are all good.
I have had Sony ES, have an HK AVR 235 and the Onkyo 605. All sound great.

My next purchase will be another HK or i really want a NAD

[coyotetu]

All channels driven simultaneously?
My HK has that covered:)

Honestly ya can't go wrong with any receivers in the mid-range class.

Yamaha,Pioneer,s Elite class, Onkyo(my 605,s DD and DTS decoder works whenever it wants) :(
Denon, and Sony ES are all good.
I have had Sony ES, have an HK AVR 235 and the Onkyo 605. All sound great.

My next purchase will be another HK or i really want a NAD
Yamaha's entry level is lacking lately on keeping up with its stated specifications, Onkyo's been bad on that count for a long while, Pioneer used to build them well but they're also going down that unfortunate path and I'm not sure about Denon or Sony.

HK has been pretty consistent and truthful about their power ratings so far, which is why they seem so low in comparison to others. It's a shame their recent line(s) of receivers have been so buggy.

[PaganII]

Hi, HK AVR 245
It is an older model, has HDMI passthru, 7.1 direct inputs, 7.1 pre-outs, Honest 50wpc all channels driver low distortion. I have no trouble playing clean 105db with peaks to 115db from 6 feet without maxing the volume control. Has 2 HDMI inputs, 2 component inputs, no video processing (my favorite feature), optical and coax, other features. Only thing missing is a switched 120v output. The 7.1 inputs useful for Blue-Ray audio or PC gaming. Does DTS and DD+DPLIIx over optical. Picked it up for $100usd on ebay.

[crackhead2k]

Yamaha,Pioneer,s Elite class, Onkyo(my 605,s DD and DTS decoder works whenever it wants)

Use pure direct?

I have a lower end yammy @ 95wpc driving my energy rc-70 bi-amped... sound pretty good. Bass was better compared to normally wiring

Supposedly higher current could result in better sound and produces better bass and sounds more full, a 125 watt high current dedicated amp cna beat receiver that drives by voltage even if its rated at 200.
You might want t looks for specs that can double down say 100watts 8ohm, 200watts 4 ohm; higher end -> can double down further.

ie 100@8ohm -> 200@4ohm -> 400@2ohm

[ajaidev]

I found Denon AVR 1610 very good for the price it cost around $350-$400 in the states i think.

[Nanometer]

I just purchased the Onkyo 607, I hope I'm happy with it =-p

[jason str]

The Marantz i mentioned is a better receiver for less $$$, the "reconditioned unit" scare you off ?

[Donnie27]

I just purchased the Onkyo 607, I hope I'm happy with it =-p

Very nice choice!


Yamaha's entry level is lacking lately on keeping up with its stated specifications, Onkyo's been bad on that count for a long while, Pioneer used to build them well but they're also going down that unfortunate path and I'm not sure about Denon or Sony.

HK has been pretty consistent and truthful about their power ratings so far, which is why they seem so low in comparison to others. It's a shame their recent line(s) of receivers have been so buggy.

Having had many receivers, hell still got about 8 in the house right now I find that Pioneer isn't going down anywhere, hell, they seem to be getting better. I'd take my VSX-819H over any of the others in the $350 price range or less. I like my Harmon Kardon 245 but love my old school Harmon Kardon 730 and think NOTHING touches the 930 model of the same Receiver unless you start talking very high end MAC's and Carvers or similar.

All I have to say about Sony that they are FOS (Full of $#it! Sony's 100 watts is like Harmon Kardon's saying theirs are at 20W Per Channel. Sony invented the wattage lie and many followed their way of doing it. Had they tried something like this in the 70's, they'd have been laughed out of the Market.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/receivers/2353/sony-str-dg910-av-receiver-music-movies-specs-bottom-line-page2.html


All are worst-case figures where applicable.

Output at clipping (1 kHz into 8/4 ohms)
1 channel driven: 84/138 watts (19.2/21.4 dBW)
5 channels driven (8 ohms): 30 watts (14.8 dBW)*
Distortion at 1 watt (THD+N, 1 kHz, 8 or 4 ohms): 0.02%
Noise level (A-weighted): -75.1 dB
Excess noise (with sine tone)
16-bit (EN16): 1.2 dB
Frequency response: 20 Hz to 20 kHz +0, -0.1 dB

[CryptiK]

The Denon AVR-1610 is a nice unit for the price, not sure if you can get one though. I'd definitely advise you to audition the receivers in person, as the sound quality/colour can vary significantly between brands/models.

[jason str]

Rarely does any multichannel home theater receiver put out the stated power when driving all channels.

For instance you buy a new 7.1 channel top of the line system rated at 100 watts per channel and the power supply for the unit is rated @400 watts. Now there is no way to get 700 watts of output out of something powered by a 400 watt power supply is there, that would mean the amps are running over 100% efficient.

[Donnie27]

Rarely does any multichannel home theater receiver put out the stated power when driving all channels.

QFT! But some only lie a little while Sony will lie more than others!


For instance you buy a new 7.1 channel top of the line system rated at 100 watts per channel and the power supply for the unit is rated @400 watts. Now there is no way to get 700 watts of output out of something powered by a 400 watt power supply is there, that would mean the amps are running over 100% efficient.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882105285

Not only Sony, none of these companies should be using marketing numbers that look like 110 X 7 when it can't do 110 x 2 channels LOL. Consumers will think that it means each Channel might individually plays at a 110 watts.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Vintage-Harman-Kardon-930-Stereo-Receiver-PRINT-AD-1971-/160376135824

This receiver is advertised as 45 watts per channel. When I was in the Army I know one of these making a set of Klipsch Bells scream out in pain with ZERO noticeable distortion at all! Another made a set of Pioneer HPM 1500 boom so hard that it knocked windows out of the Day Room. Instead of getting mad, the Sargent on the Duty Desk went and bought the same set up LOL! I've heard many Sony receivers degrade at half its/this volume levels and even shakier at normal volume levels.

My Newer Harman Kardon 245's front two channels are decoupled so the Pre-AMP is connected Directly to the older Harman Kardon 730's lowly 35 watts Per channel twin amps. It and the DIYer speakers connected to it forced me to moved the Big speakers down stairs and move up my smaller 400W speakers LOL! I compare all my speakers in stereo or 2 channel mode. If were to compare it to a current receiver's (2 channel) measurements hell I could call it 150 Watts per channel hehehe! Not only the Harman Kardons, but the old Sansui, Pioneer, Nakamichi, Onkyo, Kenwood, Technics, JVC and others even up to the 1990's still crush modern day crap's AMP's for power, presence, imaging, fullness and many other whatever. Modern Pre-AMPs are are Da Bomb though.

As Raptor22 knows, once you go old school, you'll get a different view of most new stuff from all manufacturers.

[jason str]

Those products you speak of were very expensive back in the day, i recall dad's Marantz 2265 when purchased around 1977 or so was near $700, figure that out in todays money and it is quite a chunk of change.

There is lots of good products on the market better than the old stuff it is just not cheap, Marantz is one of the few company's left still producing decent solid state products.

Sony makes some decent stuff too and wattage is somewhat unimportant anyways when you are talking 100 watts or so, you would need to double the power to notice much difference to the ear.

[Donnie27]

Those products you speak of were very expensive back in the day, i recall dad's Marantz 2265 when purchased around 1977 or so was near $700, figure that out in todays money and it is quite a chunk of change.

There is lots of good products on the market better than the old stuff it is just not cheap, Marantz is one of the few company's left still producing decent solid state products.

Sony makes some decent stuff too and wattage is somewhat unimportant anyways when you are talking 100 watts or so, you would need to double the power to notice much difference to the ear.

Sony's Mid Range products suck more than the rest of these manufacturer's products in similar price ranges or even cheaper than Sony's. Sony's high can't touch the other main player in those markets either. I disagree, wattage is very important since the less a receiver strain to do normal duties usually means lower distortion and or better sound. I'm not talking about SPL, I like good sounds more than loud sounds. Sony doesn't sound that good at normal or barely louder than TV's volume sounds.

Oh don't get me wrong, these Old School receivers weren't cheap and since I was 20 years old and in the Military in 1977 I remember the prices well. I saved for a year to buy a Marantz Quadrophonic receiver and a DSP adapter. Used both were $655 that's more like $2000 to day. Yet, there were lower end stuff like another Marantz 2225 that didn't feature the Brute force of the 2265 but sounds just as sweet that sold some like $175. Marantz 2270's on EBay go for about $400 on EBay. Yet in stereo mode, they sound better than Denon, Pioneer ELite, and Onkyo costing less than $3000 in stereo mode.

[jason str]

I have never had any issues with any Sony equipment, my Sony ES 5 CD carousel is 20+ years old, my other Sony ES CD player is even older with no problems, one of my older Sony amp & tuner combo was over 10 years old when i sold it and is still being used by my friend i sold it to over 15 years ago.

Watts and sound quality have nothing to do with each other, more watts will not produce better sound quality or vice versa, wattage is just that the power rating.

[Nanometer]

I read several reviews, and I found the 607 to be consistently near the top for the price range. I've honestly never heard of marantz before. Also the wattage rating seems to be odd, it claims 90 watts on per channel with only 500 watts of input power. The Onkyo receiver is rated the same, but it has an input power rating of 800 watts. More then a 50 percent increase. Though I'm not denying that marantz makes good products, I just don't know. I can vouch that Onkyo has been around simply because I have had personal interaction with them. Simply put, I bought it because I recognize the name. The same reason everyone used to by Corsair RAM.. until they became just another RAM vender.

[jason str]

I'm sure you will be happy with your choice of receiver, if it works good when you get it you should be fine (shipping is hard on electronics).

Marantz has been around for a long time.

According to their specs the Marantz uses 450 watts and the Onkyo 660 watts but i dont know if these are rated at peak or continuous wattage but it really does not matter as the receivers efficiency is not listed anyways.

What really matters is that you are happy with your purchase. :up:

[PaganII]

Scored an HK 254 on ebay for<$140usd.
Has 7.1 analog inputs, Pre-outs, hdmi1.3 Deep Color, 1080p upconversion. Most problems you hear about on the internet about receivers are PS3 and Xbox related.

120mm fan on top of receiver blowing UP cools very well. Add some 1/4" adhesive backed rubber feet on each corner, wire it to a 12v wall wart and plug it into the switched outlet so it turns on with the AVR. LED fan for effect.

[Donnie27]

I read several reviews, and I found the 607 to be consistently near the top for the price range. I've honestly never heard of marantz before. Also the wattage rating seems to be odd, it claims 90 watts on per channel with only 500 watts of input power. The Onkyo receiver is rated the same, but it has an input power rating of 800 watts. More then a 50 percent increase. Though I'm not denying that marantz makes good products, I just don't know. I can vouch that Onkyo has been around simply because I have had personal interaction with them. Simply put, I bought it because I recognize the name. The same reason everyone used to by Corsair RAM.. until they became just another RAM vender.

To both of you!

I've had both good and bad from Sony! That includes a one year warrantied DVD player bought when they sold for over $250 that lasted 13 months of normal use, used for maybe 8 hours a week. Love my 19" Sony CRT even though I'm using a 22" LCD right next to it. My 20+ year old Sony Walkman still works. The nice one AM/FM radio and Cassette (Tape) LOL!

No, I'm a music nut and used Sony's own Super Audio CD player to show just how bad its Receiver's DSP, DAC's (not Opamps) sucked, not limited to just the AMP section. I've not had one Sony receiver owner even leave my house thinking they didn't get ripped off or cheated. Even let one of my best friend take a set of my speakers to his house. He also took one of my JVC receivers with him. He wanted a second source to test his own speakers with. He wondered if the sounds mine made were from efficiency or brute force. What happened? He found that the JBL and his DIYeer speakers he was using had similar specs to the one I built and that they were just simply under powered.

We didn't need any kind of measuring equipment. It wasn't even close. IIRC, that old JVC is advertised as 110 watts total and 55 Watts per channel. At 40% volume it can cause you pain long before distortion affects it at all.

First problem with a Harman Kardon, my Center Channel is going out!

[Soulburner]

I wanted a receiver that I could set and forget, save for volume and the rare setting change. I also wanted all the new Audyssey options. So, really my only choices were between two brands. I ended up with the Denon AVR-1910. A great A/V receiver :). Switches itself to different sound formats when changing channels or devices (WITHOUT CLICKING, unlike the Onkyos), remembers my settings per channel, and its all running automagically off my Harmony remote.

Oh and it powers my Infinity P362 towers with ease.

I did not bother with the Onkyo 607 - too many bad stories. Running way too hot, glitches in the firmware. Just not as smooth a device as the Denon.

[Donnie27]

I wanted a receiver that I could set and forget, save for volume and the rare setting change. I also wanted all the new Audyssey options. So, really my only choices were between two brands. I ended up with the Denon AVR-1910. A great A/V receiver :). Switches itself to different sound formats when changing channels or devices (WITHOUT CLICKING, unlike the Onkyos), remembers my settings per channel, and its all running automagically off my Harmony remote.

Oh and it powers my Infinity P362 towers with ease.

I did not bother with the Onkyo 607 - too many bad stories. Running way too hot, glitches in the firmware. Just not as smooth a device as the Denon.

I liked that one a lot Soulbuner, in fact, I liked it a whole lot!

Oh and the center channel problem was a bad wire!

[Soulburner]

Liked? Did you just test it out or own it for a bit?

Yeah the Denons seem to be great units. All the Audyssey features and more. Made in China nowadays, but the quality seems to be there.

The only real knocks against it that I can find, are the remote and the OSD. The remote doesn't matter to me since I have everything set up with a Logitech Harmony, and the OSD i'm very rarely in so I never think much of it.

[Nanometer]

Since I got the receiver I thought you guys might be interested in the rest of my speaker setup..

Center : Klipsch C-1
Front : two Polk Audio RTi 12 Black
Surround : two Polk Audio RCI 60 In Ceiling Speakers
Subwoofer : two Klipsch KSW-10

HTPC:
Asus P5Q -VM
Intel E5400
G.Skill 2 x 2Gig
Asus ATI 4350 Silent
Western Digital 500Gig
Samsung BluRay Reader
Enermax 300 Watt
Lion-Li 39B

[EniGmA1987]

Looks like a very nice little system you got there Nanometer :)

[Nanometer]

I especially like the towers, the subs and center are a close second...
http://www.polkaudio.com/images/highres/Home/Floorstanding/RTi12_BLK.jpg
http://www.klipsch.co.il/Klipsch/webcatalog/catalog/products/c-1.jpg
http://www.son-video.com/images/static/Rayons/HomeCinema/Sub/Klipsch/KSW10_L.jpg

[Nanometer]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v718/NanoMeter/0320000133a.jpg

[Soulburner]

Now that's a tight space for such huge equipment. I'd be really focused on trying to get those into a place where I could sit in the sweet spot at the desk. As they sit now, they aren't even pointing toward you.

Do you have plans to rearrange things?

[Nanometer]

I'm moving into my sisters house in a month, this is just temporary. I don't even have the center channel or the subs, they are at her house to save space, I just couldn't seem to part with these. haha I don't have the TV yet either just yet. It's a big room but the couch will probably be about 8 feet from the TV. I'm thinking of a 32 LCD or a 37 LCD. Which ever fits the budget, The towers weren't cheap.