Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
Custom Installers' Lounge Forum - View Post
Previous section Next section Previous page Next page Up level
Up level
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:

Login:
Pass:
 
 

Page 1 of 2
Topic:
Anyone else use the new mini amps?
This thread has 23 replies. Displaying posts 1 through 15.
Post 1 made on Friday November 1, 2013 at 01:48
BrettLee3232
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
December 2009
423
I used the 3 channel & paired it with the 55" 500T sound bar & a cub sub. It sounded VERY good! I was a little hesitant at it only being 35 watts, but WOW!!!! I am going to use a bunch of these guys.

I'm using one next with a 55" 300 series soundbar. Next week I'm doing one with (3) 500T in ceiling speakers. This weekend I'm trying out the 2 channel versions for multi room audio with an AppleTV.

Anyone else use these yet?
Knowing that Gold went up a few K makes me think "well now I have to do a better job on selling more equipment".

-Me... Jan. 2014
Post 2 made on Friday November 1, 2013 at 03:12
Ernie Gilman
Yes, That Ernie!
Joined:
Posts:
December 2001
30,104
Good thing these don't have a brand name. If they did, they might sell out!


I know, I know, you were just discussing these amps in another thread a few days ago, so of course you remember the brand name. I have done hundreds of things since then and forgive me, I must be reminded.
A good answer is easier with a clear question giving the make and model of everything.
"The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." -- G. “Bernie” Shaw
Post 3 made on Friday November 1, 2013 at 03:29
gerard143
Advanced Member
Joined:
Posts:
May 2012
956
I wouldn't have known if I didn't just read the email the brand sent out that referenced these minis
Post 4 made on Friday November 1, 2013 at 09:49
GotGame
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
February 2002
4,022
The SnapAV unit has not shipped to me yet. Hope to see it soon.
I may be schizophrenic, but at least I have each other.
OP | Post 5 made on Friday November 1, 2013 at 10:37
BrettLee3232
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
December 2009
423
On November 1, 2013 at 03:12, Ernie Gilman said...
Good thing these don't have a brand name. If they did, they might sell out!

I know, I know, you were just discussing these amps in another thread a few days ago, so of course you remember the brand name. I have done hundreds of things since then and forgive me, I must be reminded.

Oh my bad let me rephrase....

Has anybody used...
Episode® 35 Watts per Channel Digital Mini-Amplifier (2 Channel with IR learning and subwoofer output)
&
Episode® 35 Watts per Channel Digital Mini-Amplifier (3 Channel with IR learning and subwoofer output)

Lol, sorry I didn't know a lot of mini amps were in the market.
Knowing that Gold went up a few K makes me think "well now I have to do a better job on selling more equipment".

-Me... Jan. 2014
Post 6 made on Friday November 1, 2013 at 10:50
Fred Harding
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
October 2001
3,456
No, but I've the Parasound Z amps and they are great.
On the West Coast of Wisconsin
Post 7 made on Friday November 1, 2013 at 14:08
Soundsgood
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
November 2005
363
I am looking forward to trying out the 2 channel version. I don’t think I will be using the 3 channel version due to this statement on the product sheet.
Note: This amplifier uses an internal DSP for intelligent blending of signals to create a unique center channel while maintaining stereo separation. It supports two-channel inputs only and does not perform surround decoding for Dolby/DTS formats.
I know the reason for this is because most TV’s don’t output 5.1 over the digital out. Not Snaps fault and they are trying to make a product that compensates for bad TV’s but to me it feels like going back in time 20 years. They are essentially just trying to fake a center channel. For a little more I will just be using an entry level receiver that can actually route HDMI from multiple sources, do proper surround sound decoding and bass management, and allow the option for surround sound speakers. When you factor in the price of multiple long HDMI cables from the source units to the display it may actually be cheaper to do it right with a receiver.
I know the point of this is to have a small amp located behind the TV. IMO if that is the only option I would much rather have a 2.1 system that is actually playing the program information as recorded then a 3.1 system that fakes a center channel just so you have 3 speakers that are making sound. Good 2.1 is better then bad 3.1 IMO but to each their own.
I normally don’t post things like this on a public site because some manufactures see them as a slam but I know that Snap is one of the good guys and takes installer comments seriously and uses them to give us better products. If they want to go beyond 2.1 what we really need is a device that passes thru the HDMI video to the display and strips and amplifies the audio. This would be killer for use with their HDMI matrix products. Basically a product that strips all of the stuff out of a receiver that we don’t need like multiple audio/video inputs and switching and gives us just what we need. One HDMI input or an HDbaset input, 1 HDMI out to display, an audio decoder and 5 or 7 amplified channels and a .1 out for the sub.
Post 8 made on Friday November 1, 2013 at 20:34
drewski300
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2007
3,849
We installed one today with a TV output and a Sonos output as a secondary input. It did sound very good and integration worked pretty well. We didn't get the Sonos to roll over properly because we initally programmed a on/off command so that when the TV is powered off the amp turns off as well. We learned the on/off command of the TV which we should have left unprogrammed. We didn't have time to fix it and will likely do it early next week. Give yourself an extra half hour for the first install because there are some great features but you have to figure out how to make it work properly. The manual isn't extremely clear on the roll over features and the auto power features. Pretty cool product though!!!
"Just when I thought you couldn't possibly be any dumber, you go and do something like this... and totally redeem yourself!"
Post 9 made on Saturday November 2, 2013 at 03:02
Ernie Gilman
Yes, That Ernie!
Joined:
Posts:
December 2001
30,104
On November 1, 2013 at 10:37, BrettLee3232 said...
Oh my bad let me rephrase....

Lol, sorry I didn't know a lot of mini amps were in the market.

Neither did I, but see Fred's comment, and maybe you were talking about a brand we had not heard of. We simply would not know until you told us the brand and model.


On November 1, 2013 at 14:08, Soundsgood said...
I am looking forward to trying out the 2 channel version. I don’t think I will be using the 3 channel version due to this statement on the product sheet.
Note: This amplifier uses an internal DSP for intelligent blending of signals to create a unique center channel while maintaining stereo separation. It supports two-channel inputs only and does not perform surround decoding for Dolby/DTS formats.

That's not a big surprise, and I bet it would cost $75 more if it could decode 5.1 to 3

I know the reason for this is because most TV’s don’t output 5.1 over the digital out. Not Snaps fault and they are trying to make a product that compensates for bad TV’s but to me it feels like going back in time 20 years.

Odd. That's what was expressed here about the TVs when we discovered they did that. An amp that works with existing product should not be shunned!

They are essentially just trying to fake a center channel.

Wait a minute. From the very first DynaQuad wiring schemes forward, center channels were faked by putting in the center the sounds that are the same and of equal volume on left and right. You can actually do this yourself with a stereo signal and an extra speaker. And did you refuse to sell AV Receivers with ProLogic because they faked a center channel? They absolutely did that.

As I said, the TVs represent old audio technology and you should probably try out the three channel piece. Here's a quote from [Link: head-fi.org] about a product from the 70s that did the same thing passively:

At one point, after dropping thousands of dollars into my audio system, I would have never expected that a $20 gadget could transform my conception of hi-end audio. But a $20 little box I bought on Ebay actually took my speaker and headphone systems to a higher level, and forced me to think deeply about what the word "stereo" actually means.

The gadget is Dynaco QD-1 Series IIL, a passive box to perform ambience extraction, turning stereo audio into five-channel surround. The device was originally marketed by Dynaco in the 70s, called QD-1 Quadaptor.

Et cetera. Digital surround is pretty spiffy, but so is passive surround.

I know the point of this is to have a small amp located behind the TV. IMO if that is the only option I would much rather have a 2.1 system that is actually playing the program information as recorded then a 3.1 system that fakes a center channel just so you have 3 speakers that are making sound. Good 2.1 is better then bad 3.1 IMO but to each their own.

You have no reason to believe that this amp does this badly. You're just saying so. The only reason I would not want it in a similar situation would be if the center level were not adjustable. DynaQuad didn't let you adjust the center level, but ProLogic did.

I normally don’t post things like this on a public site because some manufactures see them as a slam but I know that Snap is one of the good guys and takes installer comments seriously and uses them to give us better products.

Then they should listen to me: this is a cool product!

If they want to go beyond 2.1 what we really need is a device that passes thru the HDMI video to the display and strips and amplifies the audio. This would be killer for use with their HDMI matrix products. Basically a product that strips all of the stuff out of a receiver that we don’t need like multiple audio/video inputs and switching and gives us just what we need. One HDMI input or an HDbaset input, 1 HDMI out to display, an audio decoder and 5 or 7 amplified channels and a .1 out for the sub.

What is the retail for the three channel amp, and what would be the retail for the product you describe? How, in a practical manner, could you use a device that outputs five or seven channels and is placed behind the TV? You're not talking about the same product.
A good answer is easier with a clear question giving the make and model of everything.
"The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." -- G. “Bernie” Shaw
Post 10 made on Monday November 4, 2013 at 09:55
GotGame
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
February 2002
4,022
Do any of you find it hilarious that a $99 Vizio sound bar has the amplifier that can decode Dolby/DTS?
I may be schizophrenic, but at least I have each other.
Post 11 made on Monday November 4, 2013 at 10:54
highfigh
Loyal Member
Joined:
Posts:
September 2004
8,311
On November 1, 2013 at 14:08, Soundsgood said...
If they want to go beyond 2.1 what we really need is a device that passes thru the HDMI video to the display and strips and amplifies the audio. This would be killer for use with their HDMI matrix products. Basically a product that strips all of the stuff out of a receiver that we don’t need like multiple audio/video inputs and switching and gives us just what we need. One HDMI input or an HDbaset input, 1 HDMI out to display, an audio decoder and 5 or 7 amplified channels and a .1 out for the sub.

These exist, but they aren't particularly cheap, especially when the amp you seem to be alluding to would sell for about $300. The device that strips the audio is about the same price and has optical, S/Pdif and analog output.

BTW- you think that a "pseudo-center channel" is fake? Unless the actual source of the sound is recorded with two mics in a way that accurately causes a realistic-sounding stereo effect, all music and movie soundtracks are pseudo-stereo/surround. Separate tracks, recorded at different times, at different locations, but different people, must be made to sound like stereo or surround.
My mechanic told me, "I couldn't repair your brakes, so I made your horn louder."
Post 12 made on Friday November 8, 2013 at 19:39
FunHouse Texas
Active Member
Joined:
Posts:
June 2013
595
I put one in today for an outside TV powering a set of outside speakers via a volume control. The amp can play LOUD and clean. The priority feature needs some work but I made it work.
Be sure to have an IR receiver AND the little remote with you when you put one in.
I AM responsible for typographical errors!
I have all the money I will ever need - unless i buy something..
Post 13 made on Friday November 18, 2016 at 08:41
dbpaddler
Lurking Member
Joined:
Posts:
October 2006
7
If anyone still follows this thread, what IR receiver are you guys using? I couldn't get the snapAV one as they denied my request to buy from them. Installs is just a side job for me a few times a year.

Will the Speakercraft or Niles ones work? I had a couple generic ones, but I don't think the pilot matches up. On a side note, I have a chromecast audio connected to the three channel one with three angled in ceiling speakers mounted about the TV. The angle is perfect for hitting the sofa from the wall rsther than the ceiling. For now zone just used it for chromecast audio as I can control the volume from the phone until I find an IR receiver that works.

Thanks in advance.
Post 14 made on Friday November 18, 2016 at 11:46
Brad Humphrey
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
February 2004
2,586
Just about any IR receiver should work for it. I have used Xantech on it with no problems.
I had one on my test bench to take apart for evaluation - Notes:

The amp is made by Sonavox of Canada (built in China).

It is a digital amplifier and the outputs are BTL - so do not allow the negative speaker connections to contact ground or each other. This is important because some cheap volume controls are common ground (like Russound).

Rated output is 35w per channel @ 4ohm. The actual power output is 26.7w per channel @ 4ohm, both channels driven, full bandwidth.

Sound quality is what you would expect from a cheap digital amp. It is OK but not anything you would want to put high quality speakers on. Regardless of what some tone deaf people might post. :)

FYI: There are a lot of small digital amps on the market now. And they all have about the same sound quality, just different wattages. Having more power sometimes gives the illusion of better sound quality when comparing 2 models. Also this includes SONOS, HEOS, and the other small digital amp products - these units have slightly more power than the standalone mini units.

Again, these are fine for common audio distribution jobs and sound bars. Just not something I would use when powering a high-quality audio system.
Post 15 made on Friday November 18, 2016 at 13:29
thecapnredfish
Senior Member
Joined:
Posts:
February 2008
1,397
In one of my systems at home I run dual sound bars off a big ole 2ch rec. It's funny, the manual said to place them on the floor on each side of the listening area slightly out from the wall. They really kick ass. Sorry for derailing. Just jumped in because of all the talk of bars and fake center mentioned in the beginning. Two channel works just fine for some applications.
Page 1 of 2


Jump to


Protected Feature Before you can reply to a message...
You must first register for a Remote Central user account - it's fast and free! Or, if you already have an account, please login now.

Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.

Hosting Services by ipHouse