So, I'm debating whether my next eventual upgrade move from my 1070 should be to a newer HDMI-capable receiver with decent room correction *or* going towards separates.

At this point I'm considering the Anthem MRX-300, which is in the $1000 range and has Anthem's well reviewed ARC technology for room correction. The receiver's amps are roughly comparable to the 1070's amps, which is suitable for my speakers.

On the separates front, I'd be looking at the upcoming Outlaw 975 paired with the 7075 amp assuming the pair can be had in the $1300-ish price range. I'm not clear on whether or not this processor would have room correction or not.

Is there any way to tell if I would benefit from room correction? For instance, are there test tones that I could use in conjunction with an SPL meter that would indicate sonic holes/dips etc. that if corrected, would result in generally accepted better sound? My setup is in a 12'x10' area of a finished basement open on the back and on one side, drywall walls and ceiling, carpeted floors total area is approx. 30'x25'.

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
John

No doubt there is a need for room correction for almost any room. Any of the Audyssey products will function very well for most rooms. Keep in mind that although you can set up the room manually with a meter it is much faster and more accurate to use a room correction system. Most of the systems perform many measurements using the calibrated microphone which is more consistent that our ears and much less subjective.

If you want to hear less of your room and more of the source material then you need room correction. Sure, you can download a test tone CD here. Once you graph peaks and dips, you'll have to get some sort of external equalizer to correct them. By comparison, you'd get much better results using a receiver that has built-in automated room correction (like Audyssey XT32).

I think Xenon got it right. Every room will benefit from room correction. What drove me to it was inconsistent bass responce in different areas of the room. I had some seats that the bass would drive you out of the room and other seats where the bass was inadequate. That was due to sound reflections coming from the room. No automated electronic room correction system is going to fix that. I bought a kit that contained bass traps for the corners of the room and sound absorbing panels for the walls. After it was installed, it not only corrected the bass problems, it made the whole system sound much better through the full frequency spectrum. It was the single most effective improvement in sound I have achieved. It gave me more improvement that any electronics or speaker upgrades that I have ever done. Once you have a decent system and start upgrading, you get to the point that the sound improvement from the upgrades are quite subtle. The improvement from room correction was not subtle. It was dramatic.

It is my opinion that an electronic room correction systems will help flatten the frequency curve, and will easily set the speaker distances and levels for you, but it will not adequately correct for sound reflections in the room.

Concur with Xenon and Blind.

+1

Hey, thanks for the input guys. You've swayed me towards valuing a setup that has decent room correction. Let's hope the up-coming Outlaw 975 has that capability.

Sanjay, thanks for the link to the test tones, I'll give those a try to see how the response curve is looking un-eq'd.

Blind Hog, room treatment sounds like the right way to proceed, but it's likely a non-starter for my room for a few reasons...well one primary reason actually ;-)

I don't have the issues with bass inconsistency around the room that you are describing and the sound is generally decent, so hopefully the addition of room eq will just make it a bit better.

I've read in quite a few places that the next step up from a quality $1000-ish receiver would be to go with separates. Any opinion on how significant this step is for a setup mostly used for HT, gaming and background music? My speakers range from 92dB to 95dB sensitivity if that's relevant.

-John

3 primary reasons I can think of to go with separates:

1) More honest power rating for the amplifiers. Most receivers are rated with only two channels driven at the rated power. Some power amps are rated this way but all of the outlaw amps are "all channels driven" rated so there is more available power.
2) Heat generation aroung sensitive electronics. Since the amp generates most of the heat and it is in close proximity to the electronics in an AVR the life span is likely to suffer somewhat.
3) More electronis noise generated by the power amps again close to the electronics.

Two big reasons to stay with a receiver:

1) Cost. AVRs tend to be less $$$ than separates. Even AVRs with sibling AVPs in the same lineup are not as expensive as the AVP when you factor in buying the amp.
2) Many more choices and most have all the bells and whistles that AVPs sometimes lack.

That's a good list. I could see some people adding a fourth reason to the separates list:

4. Upgrade path. You can get a really good amp and keep it for many, many years, upgrading the processor portion with newer processors (or even receivers used as processors) as features change.

+1 Don't most of us Outlaws have separates?