Well I have decided to dedicate yet another thread to this unit for reasons that will be obvious....

Equipment:
Auralex Treated room (bass traps / absorption)
Panasonic SA-XR55 receiver
B&W 802D mains (powered in bi-amp mode)
B&W HTM1 center
B&W SCMS rears
standard oxygen free copper 12 guage speaker wire
coaxial output from m-audio soundcard with bit-perfect output

Prior system same except:
Rotel 1095 200 wpc 5 channel amplifier
M-Audio delta 1010 10 channel computer DAC with balanced output to amp

I won't go into long drawn out discussions about sonic characteristics of amplifiers. All I can say is that there is no clear audible difference between this $230 unit and my prior $2500 amp+d/a . What is clear is that without a signal this unit is dead quiet as all class D units are. The sound quality is simply excellent and if there were any deficiencies the 802 Diamonds should have made them obvious.

Every song I know and listen to all the time, I tried on this amp... and they all sound superb. I'm not so sure with 100% certainty that this is better than my old setup and I don't want to make sensational comments that it is.... but it certainly might be. I am not setup to do a proper a/b comparison to prove this to myself.

High end clarity, bass response.... pretty much fantastic.

I popped Star Wars episode III that I have seen on my prior setuo several times this week. Again I could hear no difference between this setup and DD 5.1 decoded by windvd and the m-audio d/a.. Again reproduction was fantastic.

Guys I don't know what to tell you.... Class AB has seen it's last days on this Earth when a ridiculous company like Panasonic can implement a third party chip (in this case TI Equibit) and come out with results this good. Don't get me wrong, the fit and finish of this thing are completely lame as has been said before. This thing has boring cosmetics and it really doesn't need ANY buttons or knobs on it.... I'm not sure why they made this thing cost more money with that stuff.

I vote for a version with better rear connectors, COMPLETE elimination of video switching circuitry, no radio tuner NONSENSE, no buttons or knobs (just remote), and an increase of wattage to 200 per channel. Pretty much the cost could be brought down to around $150 making this the greatest audio value in all the universe if it isn't already.

My old stuff is going on sale ... what a waste of money. I'm going to use the money for a velodyne DD sub or something.

From soundstage's review of your 802D's: http://www.ultraaudio.com/equipment/bw_802d.htm

"B&W specifies the 802D’s impedance as "8 ohms nominal," which is positively disingenuous alongside the admission that the speaker’s minimum impedance is 3.5 ohms. According to my measurements, the impedance falls to around 3 ohms in the power-hungry midbass region, indicating that the 802D’s nominal impedance is actually around 4 ohms. This will pose no problems for any decent solid-state amplifier, but might give unpredictable results with low-powered, single-ended tube amps -- or, indeed, output-transformerless (OTL) tube amps."

Any problems driving the 802D near 4 ohm load with the XR55?

I was a bit concerned about this myself and nobody was sure if there would be a problem or not. So far there have been no issues.

I'm not really sure under what circumstances that the speaker drops to 4 ohm load.... any examples? deep bass or high volumes or what? How does the fact that they are in bi-amp mode help or hinder this situation?

Blazar,

nice review, thanks.

I vote for a version with better rear connectors, COMPLETE elimination of video switching circuitry, no radio tuner NONSENSE, no buttons or knobs (just remote), and an increase of wattage to 200 per channel. Pretty much the cost could be brought down to around $150 making this the greatest audio value in all the universe if it isn't already.


I want one of those too!

Nice Review!

I hope more is to come as you gain more experience with the XR55.
With all being equal as you said, at least now your setup is DEAD QUITE. No more hiss, no more noise floor. I believe that it is at least one bit of an advantage.

Well blazar, this review is very meaningful and another win for the "little beast". I wouldn't say that it is a bit odd as more and more people are getting in the "groove", but to match a $200 receiver perfectly with a $20,000 speakers must be quite a sight to see. As they say... PRICELESS! And you may take that literally. :D


...

I think it's safe to say that nobody who knows anything is the least bit surprised by your findings.

However, if you want to see if it'll strain at low impedances, IMO a movie soundtrack isn't the way you want to go. Try something big and orchestral, or a studio sonic spectacular (e.g. Dark Side of the Moon, Brothers in Arms) in DPL2 (unless you have a hi-rez multichannel version) at volumes that will probably require earplugs to see if it's an issue. Of course, if you don't regularly listen with earplugs in it probably will never pop up. :)

Thanks for your impressions Blazar:

But seriously.... how do the highs sound to you?

Not harsh? Not "phasy"? Crystal clear?

Many report brightness on top for the first few days/weeks... what level is your treble set at?

TIA

I have had a chance to sit around with it all evening and listen some more. It really sounds quite good right out of the box so I have no idea about burn-in and all that.

It basically sounds crystal clear with the 802d's. I don't use the tone controls at all. Like I said, my room is treated with a reasonable amount of absorption panels in my rather large 20x23 room.

I'm not really sure what you mean by "phasy".

I'm not trying to make the 802's sound like a jet engine so I haven't really cranked up the volume like I could. -20 is the highest setting I have been comfortable with and the amp doesn't strain at all at that level. So far I have been a bit scared to drive the amps too hard given the potential impedance issues and some people having "blown out" their xr55 with too loud of a volume. As great as this unit sounds, I'm sure I will eventually get the next bigger and better version of pcm->pwm technology. I need this one to tide me over until the next best thing. I am just not willing to test the "limits" of this in my current system... I can't afford to break the speakers lol.

I am sure I will never get a separate d/a converter and separate analog->pwm amp or a separate pre-amp. I am convinced now that the "d/a converter with gain" concept is what I'm going to look out for in the future. This is such a well setup unified component it makes no sense adding more noise to the system by trying to create "separates". Perhaps the IcePower pcm->pwm modules will also be good and we will see more receivers from that camp as well. Perhaps the Nuforce people will come out with a 7.1 integrated amp like the panny.... only time will tell.

Thanks for that.

I used to have the XR45 on my B&W Signature 805s and I loved the clarity thru the bass and mids, but just couldn't stand the high end: harsh, and sounding out-of-phase on my tweeters (same tweeter as those in B&W's top line 800).

Hence my curiousity.

Based on your impressions, I guess I'll just have to try 'em for myself...

BTW, you don't happen to work for Panasonic do you?? ;)

no I defintely don't work fr panasonic.... and for that matter I think their user interfaces and lack of a full complement of discreet IR codes is abysmal on on their stuff.

I do own a panasonic ae700 projector also which is a decent product for the price.

If a more respected audio brands build a pcm->pwm 7.1 channel class D receiver with built in bi-amp capabilities I would very likely buy another brand.

Thanks for that.

I used to have the XR45 on my B&W Signature 805s and I loved the clarity thru the bass and mids, but just couldn't stand the high end: harsh, and sounding out-of-phase on my tweeters (same tweeter as those in B&W's top line 800).

Hence my curiousity.

Based on your impressions, I guess I'll just have to try 'em for myself...

BTW, you don't happen to work for Panasonic do you?? ;)

The 802D's are definitely less harsh than the original 800 series speakers... I know because I own the old 802's as well. I think that attribute is one of the speakers and may be a fault of the speakers themselves and not the receiver.

The high end extension of the 802d's is about as good as it gets and the xr-55 at least sounds decent in the upper end. I can't claim "huge veils have been lifted ... blah blah blah" because I had a pretty good setup before this. The best I can say is that I can't hear any significant differences. it's certainly not worse at the very least.

The rotel 1095 and m-audio da have individually higher signal to noise ratios and better THD stats than the panny but I'm not sure what the combined signal to noise and THD is. The end result of "separates" MUST be a lesser s/n and THD compared to either of the individual components.

Wow, cool review blazar. Agree with you that the traditional analog amps are seeing its last days.

LOL! For me, a "huge veil have been lifted" with the Panny... ;)

I vote for a version with better rear connectors, COMPLETE elimination of video switching circuitry, no radio tuner NONSENSE, no buttons or knobs (just remote), and an increase of wattage to 200 per channel. Pretty much the cost could be brought down to around $150 making this the greatest audio value in all the universe if it isn't already.


I think there's a market for something like this. A digital amp with 5.1 or 7.1, lots of coax and optical digital connections, maybe 1 or 2 analog connections, no video, no tuner, and a couple of USB or firewire ports that handle an AC3 stream.

Actually gcbrowni, Here is a similar wishlist I made on another thread... I think it has everything most people want.

As an HTPC owner and a projector user with a room with great room treatments I don't need a receiver or pre-pro with 6 million spurious functions and switching capabilties or a fancy remote. I want quiet, efficient, compact, low-heat, and most of all audio fidelity that I can HEAR.

MANY of the products on the market are selling me 600 inputs and 500 surround modes... in reality I need GREAT stereo playback and decent movie sound. I only need ONE frekin input and the rest is a waste of money.


If I had my way, my perfect integrated amp would be:
1. signal to noise > 120db A weighted
2. THD <0.005% for all channels and ALL frequencies and wattages.
3. 200-300 watts per channel
4. An excellent surge protecting power supply with inbuilt hum/noise suppression.
5. efficient, compact, lightweight, cool (qualities of class D in general)
6. Sounds fantastic ... of course.
7. has inputs for coax, optical, USB and whatever other digital interfaces exist
8. NO VIDEO CRAP.... this is just noise and extra circuits that add complications
9. all known audio processing you can think of
10. voltage rail regulated volume control
11. direct PCM->PWM ONLY if it can meet criteria 1 and 2 above.
12. excellent remote control discreet functions for automation. I don't need a good remote, just great IR code functions to program into a good remote or computer.
13. The stereo bi-amp capability of the panasonic is now on my wish list for ALL units I ever buy... but I am unlikely to see this happen from most manufacturers. Frankly I'm shocked that panasonic introduced this to mainstream. Bi-amping of the center and main channels with active crossovers such as that found in the new TacT system would be amazing.
14. GREAT jitter reduction technology like that used in professional DAC's such as benchmark dac-1 etc. This involves proper reclocking before the pcm -> pwm transition occurs.
15. REMOVE radio tuners... what rubbish to add this potential noise into the system.
16. NO phono inputs on digital units.
17. NO useless spurious analog inputs.... I haven't used one of these in almost a DECADE. WHAT ARE YOU PEOPLE DOING THAT REQUIRE UNBALANCED INPUTS... The back of some of these receivers is RIDICULOUS these days.
18. 7.1 channel BALANCED analog inputs. If there wasn't so much nonsense on the back of receivers... you could put in balanced connectors easily.
19. 7.1 channel BALANCED analog outputs so you can use the unit as a movie processor only.
20. Automatic selection of surround modes on surround tracks so you never have to touch the remote for this.
21. All the usual bass management presets with a wide variety of crossover presets. usual delay and level features.
22. Onboard sonic testing utilities such as pink noise and sweeping tones, etc.
23. Room EQ, but only if it's any good...
24. better styling than the panasonic
25. lights on the front panel that are kept to a minimum or none at all. lights that can be completely turned off for those that want a dark environment.
26. case design that offers good RF shielding.


measured and audible performance should be outstanding and measurements should include the d/a conversion, volume control, and amplification in the final numbers.

You pretty much summed up the perfect amp for all.

Another question to add and I'm really curious, if such a product exists, how much is one willing to pay for such?


...

I think the best part is that the unit will probably cost considerably less than what we'd be willing to pay. I personally can't imagine paying much more than $500 for a receiver again, given what the panasonic costs now. I am guessing that the next receiver I buy will cost under $400. I mean, correcting for inflation or whatever, since I like the Panny enough that it may be a while...

Thanks for the review. I really like what I hear so far.

I know you guys don't like non-sense stuffs, but I need to know. Does the XR55 have On Screen Display (OSD)? Thanks.

I think the best part is that the unit will probably cost considerably less than what we'd be willing to pay. I personally can't imagine paying much more than $500 for a receiver again, given what the panasonic costs now. I am guessing that the next receiver I buy will cost under $400. I mean, correcting for inflation or whatever, since I like the Panny enough that it may be a while...

I don't think $2000-$2500 is out of line for a receiver that's basically the Panny but with the addition of a good EQ (such as the Audessey design) + calibrated mic, more high-end design/construction, finer resolution of level and delay settings, maybe a little power bump, etc. I'd buy such a beast right now if it were out there, even over a $500 unit that had all of the above except for the better design/build quality. I'd just as soon keep the video switching in the box, though, because I don't care enough about video to buy a separate box and running a whole bunch of long wires to the TV is ugly.

However, I think (hope?) that the next logical phase of mass market audio is ironically enough a return to separates of sorts. That is to say, instead of integrating the amps with the switching/decoding, they'll finally go where they belong: in the speakers, preferably at a ratio of 1 amp per drive unit. If they're not already, I suspect that soon enough assembling speakers using TI-type amps with on-chip crossover/EQ/room correction functions will be cheaper than designing, voicing, and building passive good passive crossovers. Hopefully, in the process we'll be able to get rid of proprietary audio cables/connectors in favor of piggybacking on the Airport networks most people already have at home. Polk's started with their IP-addressable class-D amp'ed in-walls, though I don't know if they're wired or Airport.

Then, from my perspective the best part of that revolution is that soon enough after the first wave of commerical stuff comes out somebody's going to start selling those modules as plate amps with a computer program to configure easily configure/calibrate the DSP, and then DIY types will be able to combine whatever drivers they want with the latest-greatest in signal processing. Imagine slapping something like that on the back of an Altec VOTT, Lowther, or Tannoy Gold! Or seven of 'em! :)

PS: No OSD, or even remote setup of your speakers. You have to twiddle the smaller knob on the unit itself.

Thanks for the review. I really like what I hear so far.

I know you guys don't like non-sense stuffs, but I need to know. Does the XR55 have On Screen Display (OSD)? Thanks.

The XR-55 does not have O.S.D. I wish the next version would have a USB port which you could use a laptop to setup.

interesting comments. Now i would like to see a comparison against Rotel's expensive digital amp. I expect digital to be digital, but who knows? Something about that huge price disparity sparks my curiosity to ask "what gives?"

That being said, would the "no noise" benefit still be there if you use a normal pre/pro with a digital amp?

interesting comments. Now i would like to see a comparison against Rotel's expensive digital amp. I expect digital to be digital, but who knows? Something about that huge price disparity sparks my curiosity to ask "what gives?"

That being said, would the "no noise" benefit still be there if you use a normal pre/pro with a digital amp?
I believe Dozer42 has both (Panny XR55 and Rotel 1077).
It is susceptible to hums and noise just like the others. But once cleared, yes it is DEAD quiet.


...

Thanks for the review blazar - i think at least a few more people will give the panny a shot based on this alone. Besides, it makes me feel better about my purchase ;)
no I defintely don't work fr panasonic.... and for that matter I think their user interfaces and lack of a full complement of discreet IR codes is abysmal on on their stuff.
I just wanted to note that the panny does in fact have discrete codes, they're just not all on the original remote. You can get power via a pronto or any JP1 remote (or potentially any other PC programmable remote). The input and audio mode discretes are directly on the original remote. Panny has them for my TV as well. The key is that they hvae it in their library.

The stereo bi-amp capability of the panasonic is now on my wish list for ALL units I ever buy... but I am unlikely to see this happen from most manufacturers. Frankly I'm shocked that panasonic introduced this to mainstream.


To think that Panasonic introduced a feature merely for its sonic benefits is a bit shocking. :)
As I understand it, the 55 goes into dual-amp mode automatically when reproducing a stereo signal, apparently engaging the back-surround amps for this function. That being the case, I wonder why you can't have the dual-amp function active for the L/R in multichannel when you don't have back surrounds.

To think that Panasonic introduced a feature merely for its sonic benefits is a bit shocking. :)
As I understand it, the 55 goes into dual-amp mode automatically when reproducing a stereo signal, apparently engaging the back-surround amps for this function. That being the case, I wonder why you can't have the dual-amp function active for the L/R in multichannel when you don't have back surrounds.I think it has to do with the way the relays are configured. Hopefully they'll pull it off with their next-gen model. Or maybe they didn't want to have unequal power going to the fronts? The need to advertise equal power to all channels? Who knows...

Blazar, havent you ever tried separate powerfull amp with your setup ? The 802 needs LOTS of power to sing.

audiman,


.
.
Prior system same except:
Rotel 1095 200 wpc 5 channel amplifier
.
.


how much more power than 200wpc?

Blazar, havent you ever tried separate powerfull amp with your setup ? The 802 needs LOTS of power to sing.

THe most I have done is bi-amped with 4 of the 5 channels from the rotel 1095... that's pretty decent power output. It sounded the same as using a normal single amp configuration. At first I thought maybe I heard a difference (psyched myself into it) but then with further listening I couldn't really tell when I switched back and forth on songs that I knew.

They 802's are singing with the 80 watts per channel + bi-amping of the panny too.... so im not sure it was wattage they were missing...

To think that Panasonic introduced a feature merely for its sonic benefits is a bit shocking. :)
As I understand it, the 55 goes into dual-amp mode automatically when reproducing a stereo signal, apparently engaging the back-surround amps for this function. That being the case, I wonder why you can't have the dual-amp function active for the L/R in multichannel when you don't have back surrounds.


when doing 5.1 the mains are still bi-amped. Only in 7.1 do they revert back to single amps per channel for the mains.

Thanks for the review blazar - i think at least a few more people will give the panny a shot based on this alone. Besides, it makes me feel better about my purchase ;)

I just wanted to note that the panny does in fact have discrete codes, they're just not all on the original remote. You can get power via a pronto or any JP1 remote (or potentially any other PC programmable remote). The input and audio mode discretes are directly on the original remote. Panny has them for my TV as well. The key is that they hvae it in their library.


in some of the products I have owned from panasonic, it's not the lack of discreet codes I had problem with.... it was a lack of a FULL complement

when doing 5.1 the mains are still bi-amped. Only in 7.1 do they revert back to single amps per channel for the mains.
Ok...when you set up the bi-amp mode with bi-wire speakers. How about dual-amp?

I think dual amp is simply zone A and B mode... I haven't really tried the "dual amp" mode. I'm not sure how it's different since I haven't read the manual.

dual amp is NOT zone A / B. Dual amp engages automagically when playing 2 channel stereo music. It uses 2 of the surround channel amps to add to the regular channels to drive the front L/R channels.

Dual amp engages automagically when playing 2 channel stereo music. It uses 2 of the surround channel amps to add to the regular channels to drive the front L/R channels.

Yes, when you use regular non bi-wireable speakers Dual amp engages automagically in 2 channel stereo. If you use Bi-wireable speakers & speakers are Bi-wired and the Bi-wire option is selected in the set up, then Bi-amp is engaged automatically in 2 channel stereo.

[QUOTE=blazar]THe most I have done is bi-amped with 4 of the 5 channels from the rotel 1095... that's pretty decent power output. It sounded the same as using a normal single amp configuration. At first I thought maybe I heard a difference (psyched myself into it) but then with further listening I couldn't really tell when I switched back and forth on songs that I knew.
QUOTE]

Boy do I ever hear you on that one, it is so easy to fool yourself with audio. I did the virtually same thing; bi-amping with an out-board amp & thinking it was a HUGE improvement only to discover that my original receiver sounded the same after I sold the amps and hooked it back up.

I find it refreshing to read real-world opinions like yours with no alterior motives like self validation for your purchases.

The Pansonic is a very interesting unit and got me interested in digital amps; I now have three PS Audio HCA-2's to bi-amp my mains. (Paradigm Sigs)Outstanding amps really, but I'm going to sell them and try a few of the Danish ICEpower 1000ASP module based monoblocks just for fun. I am reading that they even outpreform the Bel-Canto eVo II's. Which is quite a feat in my books.
I always reccomend the Panny's to friends that are starting out systems, to get that quality of sound for that amount of money allows them to spend more on the speakers which in my mind is the most important money spent on any system. (They're not likely to spend $10k on them though :D )

blazar,

check out this Panasonic Australia brochure (PDF)
http://panasonic.com.au/content/library/files/F001536.pdf

last page describes dual-amp bi-amp

dual amp is NOT zone A / B. Dual amp engages automagically when playing 2 channel stereo music. It uses 2 of the surround channel amps to add to the regular channels to drive the front L/R channels.
And so I was just wondering why those "back-surround" amps (those are the ones used according to that .pdf) couldn't be used full-time for the L/R if back-surrounds aren't programmed in setup. Not that it matters, just curious.

Jack,

you mean if you were set up as 5.1 the fronts should still be dual-amped? seems logical, but its in the relay programming i guess.

Well what I really want to know then... how many watts per channel is being sent to the speakers with "dual-amp" mode versus "bi-amp" mode.

Is dual amp a bridged mode?

Since the panny's primary deficiency is wattage, the 802's may be better served in the dual amp mode with more wattage than in bi-amped mode which really only supplies more current. Both modes rely on the passive crossover network in the speakers so the sound quality should be approximately the same in theory.

What really matters to me is setting up whichever mode that will avoid clipping or overloading the amp. The last thing I want to risk is damaging my speakers.

Anyone that knows EXACTLY what "dual mode" is doing?

And so I was just wondering why those "back-surround" amps (those are the ones used according to that .pdf) couldn't be used full-time for the L/R if back-surrounds aren't programmed in setup. Not that it matters, just curious.


When the back surrounds aren't programmed into the setup, the unit will automatically go into dual amp or bi-amp mode (whichever configuration you have setup. I have the overall setup in 5.1 now, so I can use bi- or dual- mode.

My question is which mode will offer safer operation of the amp and prevent clipping or the dreaded "overload".

Also will dual-amp or bi-amp mode prevent overload problems with significant transient impedance drops down to 3.5 ohms in the speakers.

Well what I really want to know then... how many watts per channel is being sent to the speakers with "dual-amp" mode versus "bi-amp" mode.

Is dual amp a bridged mode?

Since the panny's primary deficiency is wattage, the 802's may be better served in the dual amp mode with more wattage than in bi-amped mode which really only supplies more current. Both modes rely on the passive crossover network in the speakers so the sound quality should be approximately the same in theory.

What really matters to me is setting up whichever mode that will avoid clipping or overloading the amp. The last thing I want to risk is damaging my speakers.

Anyone that knows EXACTLY what "dual mode" is doing?

When you Bi-wire your speakers, the speakers are actually driven by three amps rather than two. In Bi-wire mode the FL & SBL amp will be driving the Low Freq, and LS amp will be driving the High Freq of each of the two front speakers, in 2 channel stereo.

Ok SiriouslyCOld, I just read that brochure and it looks like bi-amp mode actually uses THREE amps per channel.... which I'm sure some of the other threads have stated before.

two amps for bass and one amp for treble.

So actually the bi-amp mode should be superior to dual-amp mode for 2 channel music in terms of overall wattage. Low impedances should mainly occur in the bass frequency reproduction of the B&W 802's so two amps being fed into the bass frequencies should help avoid running out of current during impedance drops I would think. Someone with an EE degree correct me if I'm wrong here.

I guess that when you play 5.1 soundtracks though... the bass frequencies even in bi-amp mode will revert to only two amps per channel instead of three, otherwise there won't be enough channels.

During movies would be the time when the 802's in "semi-bi-amped" mode (4 amps instead of 6) would be susceptible to potential problems due to lack of current. Again someone correct me if I'm wrong here.

When the back surrounds aren't programmed into the setup, the unit will automatically go into dual amp or bi-amp mode (whichever configuration you have setup. I have the overall setup in 5.1 now, so I can use bi- or dual- mode.

So the "dual-amp" light stays lit for multichannel operation if you only have 5.1 set up (I'd test this myself, but the amp I bought is at my brother's)? I recall the manual stating that dual-amp is inactive for multichannel operation.

Anyone that knows EXACTLY what "dual mode" is doing?
No clue. All I can see in the specs is that stereo operation (which is at least dual-amped by default...possibly tri-amp as in the case of bi-wiring) increases the bandwidth of the 100 watt rating to 20Hz-20Khz (MC operation is rated only @ 1Khz) and THD goes down tenfold. The minimum impedance rating stays the same, though. If I recall correctly...

I'm still really impressed that Panasonic bothered with any of this capability. :)

I'm still really impressed that Panasonic bothered with any of this capability. :)

me, too. perhaps they have been listening in on internet forums or seen what BolderCables did with the XR25/45 (IIRC one of their mods turned it into a stereo amp). And someone had the temerity to call them "not an audio company"

I'm waiting for them to also make use of the EQ capability in the DAP (this one (http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/tas3002.html) maybe?)

Well during 5.1 playack last night I checked what the front panel lights were saying. With my bi-wired setup and 5.1 playback the dual amp and the bi-wire lights were still on suggesting to me that at least 4 amps were powering the main speakers.

I guess during 5.1, 4 amps power the main speakers and in 2 channel audio 6 amps power the main speakers. I can't think of any other explaination... The whole thing is certainly confusing since the documentation is not clear on what happens in what situations.

I would like to say that the 5.1 channel output sounds so good and the front sound field is so enveloping with the 802's that I don't feel any real need to go to a 7.1 setup. I would be a little concerned that the 802's may be underpowered in a "uni-amp" situation that would be caused by a 7.1 setup.

Well during 5.1 playack last night I checked what the front panel lights were saying. With my bi-wired setup and 5.1 playback the dual amp and the bi-wire lights were still on suggesting to me that at least 4 amps were powering the main speakers.



Weird. It would seem that bi-amp and dual-amp operation could only occur simultaneously when in stereo mode, since 6 amps of the 7 amps are used ( "dual-amped" for LF, single amp for HF) as per the .pdf. So, while I'd agree the lights would indicate four amps running the L/R, are they bi-amped or dual-amped? Could be that the "bi-amp" light doesn't necessarily indicate present mode of operation, but is indicative of the wiring configuration chosen in "Setup". Even then, dual-amp is supposedly inactive in multichannel mode.
I live not far from Panasonic's headquarters in Secaucus...perhaps I'll stop in and corner someone. ;)

I live not far from Panasonic's headquarters in Secaucus...perhaps I'll stop in and corner someone. ;)

ooh, cool. if you do, could you give them a nudge in our direction? Panny doesn't want to sell XRs in Singapore officially, but check out the link in my sig and see how many owners there are...

I'd like to see pics of your 802Ds :)
awesome speakers.

Well during 5.1 playack last night I checked what the front panel lights were saying. With my bi-wired setup and 5.1 playback the dual amp and the bi-wire lights were still on suggesting to me that at least 4 amps were powering the main speakers.

I guess during 5.1, 4 amps power the main speakers and in 2 channel audio 6 amps power the main speakers. I can't think of any other explaination... The whole thing is certainly confusing since the documentation is not clear on what happens in what situations.

I would like to say that the 5.1 channel output sounds so good and the front sound field is so enveloping with the 802's that I don't feel any real need to go to a 7.1 setup. I would be a little concerned that the 802's may be underpowered in a "uni-amp" situation that would be caused by a 7.1 setup.

How did you get bi-amp and dual amp lamps to light up on 5.1 channel playback? I have tried turning off the SB in Setup 1 of the multi control for 5.1 but the lamps do not still light up. I always thought that the bi-amp and dual amp modes on the XR55 only works for 2ch sources and not multi-channel. Did you connect your speakers using both speaker A (LF) and B (HF) of the XR55?

How did you get bi-amp and dual amp lamps to light up on 5.1 channel playback? I have tried turning off the SB in Setup 1 of the multi control for 5.1 but the lamps do not still light up. I always thought that the bi-amp and dual amp modes on the XR55 only works for 2ch sources and not multi-channel. Did you connect your speakers using both speaker A (LF) and B (HF) of the XR55?

I guess he meant 2ch source with multichannel output, not multichannel source. Bi-amping (on XR55) doesn't work with multichannel (SACD or DVD-A) sources.

I guess during 5.1, 4 amps power the main speakers and in 2 channel audio 6 amps power the main speakers.

Blazar, based on the pdf, I think you need to connect the LS and RS amps to the high freq drivers of the left and right main speakers respectively... Have you done this?

This would require re-routing your surrounds to the "upper" mains, hence "NO 5.1 FOR YOU!!!"

Blazar, based on the pdf, I think you need to connect the LS and RS amps to the high freq drivers of the left and right main speakers respectively... Have you done this?

This would require re-routing your surrounds to the "upper" mains, hence "NO 5.1 FOR YOU!!!"


For the record here is how my stuff is setup and what it accomplishes:

The 802D each are connected in the bi-wire fashion with use of high frequency and low frequency sections. In STEREO mode this configuration uses TWO amps for the low frequencies for EACH speaker and ONE amp for the high frequencies for EACH speaker. So in essence that is 6 amps being used out of seven in the unit for bi-wire mode stereo playback.

Ok without changing ANY wiring, 5.1 STILL works and the Bi-amp and dual amp lights are STILL on.... the only difference here is that in 5.1 mode there is ONE amp powering each speaker for high frequencies and ONE amp powering each speaker for the low frequencies. You still get much of the bi-amping advantages.

Now when you move on to 7.1, the relays switch again and you are then only using ONE amp for each of the main speakers and the rest of the speakers are working on ONE amp each.

Basically I have decided that there is little advantage to a 7.1 setup and have very little interest in "matrixed" sound for the rears so I am not doing any 7.1 setup at this point.

Thus in summary, stereo sound utilizes 6 amps out of the 7 available and 5.1 surround sound utilizes 7 amps out of the 7 available.

This entire setup is panasonic genius and should be copied by all the manufacturers as far as I'm concerned. It makes tons of sense and makes use of all the available power possible.

I just tested the xr55 with mad heavy bass from some Drum & Bass tracks and it produced earth shattering clean bass tones out of the 802D's.... I don't even use a sub.

I watched the movie Stealth and the sound effects were produced with ridiculous volumes with ease.

The XR70 is $140 more, but has HDMI and A-B switching. Are those extra features worth the money? I would think that the HDMI might help future-proof your system? Yes/No?

FYI... the 802D's are reviewed in the current edition of Stereophile by Kalman Rubinson. He liked them, a lot, but hey, what's not to like? They look gorgeous, and B&W do a bit more than just slap any old driver into a box.

The 802D each are connected in the bi-wire fashion with use of high frequency and low frequency sections. In STEREO mode this configuration uses TWO amps for the low frequencies for EACH speaker and ONE amp for the high frequencies for EACH speaker. So in essence that is 6 amps being used out of seven in the unit for bi-wire mode stereo playback.

Ok without changing ANY wiring, 5.1 STILL works and the Bi-amp and dual amp lights are STILL on.... the only difference here is that in 5.1 mode there is ONE amp powering each speaker for high frequencies and ONE amp powering each speaker for the low frequencies. You still get much of the bi-amping advantages.

Sorry, I'm still confused... :confused:

How do you connect the HIGH freq drivers?? Not to the LS and RS amps?? The pdf clearly indicates that with grey lines...

Are your 802Ds simply biwired off the 2 main amps?

I would think that the HDMI might help future-proof your system? Yes/No?

erm, not if the HDMI v1.1 onboard is already obsolete, IMHO.. (now version 1.2) and I seem to recall some hardware change in the near future (connector shape, or something)

plus it's only 6.1 channels

Ok without changing ANY wiring, 5.1 STILL works and the Bi-amp and dual amp lights are STILL on.... the only difference here is that in 5.1 mode there is ONE amp powering each speaker for high frequencies and ONE amp powering each speaker for the low frequencies. You still get much of the bi-amping advantages.


OK, this is the part that I can't get to work on my XR55. Selecting 5.1 and without changing the wiring, where HF is speaker post A and LF is speaker post B, the Bi-amp and Dual amp goes off in multichannel mode. Blazar is your XR55 modified or different somehow that allows this to occur?

OK, this is the part that I can't get to work on my XR55. Selecting 5.1 and without changing the wiring, where HF is speaker post A and LF is speaker post B, the Bi-amp and Dual amp goes off in multichannel mode. Blazar is your XR55 modified or different somehow that allows this to occur?
You mean where LF is speaker post A and HF is speaker post B? :)



...

You mean where LF is speaker post A and HF is speaker post B? :)



...

Sorry, yes it was supposed to be LF for speaker post A and HF for speaker post
B :)

OK, this is the part that I can't get to work on my XR55. Selecting 5.1 and without changing the wiring, where HF is speaker post A and LF is speaker post B, the Bi-amp and Dual amp goes off in multichannel mode. Blazar is your XR55 modified or different somehow that allows this to occur?


I'm not really sure, I just setup the speakers where the mains are "large" and the rest are "small" speakers. I have the rear surrounds off like you have already done. I have the "biwire" function turned on in the setup. That's really about it... I'm not sure what else to tell you.

I have the mains connected to A and B sets of binding posts. There is nothing connected to the rear surround binding posts.

I'm not really sure, I just setup the speakers where the mains are "large" and the rest are "small" speakers. I have the rear surrounds off like you have already done. I have the "biwire" function turned on in the setup. That's really about it... I'm not sure what else to tell you.

I have the mains connected to A and B sets of binding posts. There is nothing connected to the rear surround binding posts.

Can anyone confirm this?

Yeah, I can confirm that, after having to answer my own question... :(

Go to the bottom left of page 15 of this manual:

http://service.us.panasonic.com/OPERMANPDF/SAXR55.PDF

one of nice things about going back to a receiver after so many years... so much fewer cables. Hook up the digital connection and the speaker wires and I'm good to go. The price tag on this thing doesn't take into account the amount of money you save on interconnects of one sort or another.

I've got the HTPC setup with Girder and USB-UIRT so now I can control my volume control from my mouse extra buttons (those little up and down internet navigation buttons on the microsoft wireless mouse). Controlling the whole deal from my pc screen with windvd to the projector and spdif out to the panasonic. I'm using a cheap 15" lcd monitor next to my couch that I can turn off during movie playback. It's ghetto Crestron!

Such simplicity is sweet... I don't even need to touch the panasonic. It might as well be inside the computer case. I just leave it on all the time.

Has anyone measured the idle power consuption in watts per hour? I know some of the "power conditioners" can do this....

valvaholic - the speaker B terminals use the LSB/RSB amplifiers when bi-wire is enabled. Those channels are routed to the actual LSB/RSB speaker terminals when bi-wire is disabled or 7.1 is selected. That's how you can get away without rewiring when you switch from stereo to 5.1/7.1.

That said, I was under the impression that bi-wire didn't do anything for you as far as additional amplifiers when in 5.1 mode? I thought they only worked in stereo. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong so I can go out and grab another set of speaker cables and bi-wire my fronts.

in some of the products I have owned from panasonic, it's not the lack of discreet codes I had problem with.... it was a lack of a FULL complement
What else are you looking for in the XR55? Discrete power, input, and surround mode selections are generally enough for me.

The only other thing that might be nice IMHO would be a specific volume setting (say -35db or whatever) so that you don't end up too loud by accident when switching inputs via macros, but it's really not bad.

Will this receiver work with Klipsch RF3 speakers in the biamp mode? On the back of the speakers there are two sets of binding posts, and there are two removable metal pieces connecting the right and left posts. Can I remove this metal and use one connection to one post and another for the other? Will I get the full advantage of this amp with these speakers?

Thanks! - Chris

Will this receiver work with Klipsch RF3 speakers in the biamp mode? On the back of the speakers there are two sets of binding posts, and there are two removable metal pieces connecting the right and left posts. Can I remove this metal and use one connection to one post and another for the other? Will I get the full advantage of this amp with these speakers?

Thanks! - Chris

yes you just remove the jumber metal and it will be bi-wire-able.

What else are you looking for in the XR55? Discrete power, input, and surround mode selections are generally enough for me.

The only other thing that might be nice IMHO would be a specific volume setting (say -35db or whatever) so that you don't end up too loud by accident when switching inputs via macros, but it's really not bad.


Well I'm not talking about the XR55, but panasonic products in general. My last TV didn't have discreet codes for the video input selector. It also didn't have discreet codes for the aspect ratio selector. Very annoying.

With the Xr-55, a nice feature would be the ability to set a default startup volume for each of the inputs. Music is invariably louder than dolby digital playback at any given receiver volume and it would be nice to be able to attenuate specific inputs OR be able to attenuate PCM stereo vs. PCM multichannel.

I'm quite happy with my current Xr55 setup because the only thing I adjust on it is volume via my HTPC mouse buttons (using Girder). I don't regularly change surround sound settings and I don't have any other inputs to the receiver besides my htpc. Actually I would be quite happy if they did away with all video inputs and all non-digital analog inputs. They serve no purpose for me at all.

I would have really loved a 12 volt input and output trigger. I would have liked the receiver to automatically turn on when my computer comes out of standby and turn off when it goes back into standby mode. This would simply save a little power. Right now I just leave the receiver on all the time since it uses so little power in idle anyway.

Well I'm not talking about the XR55, but panasonic products in general. My last TV didn't have discreet codes for the video input selector. It also didn't have discreet codes for the aspect ratio selector. Very annoying.
Panasonic has actually gotten quite a bit better in regards to this. My Panasonic TV from about 2 years ago actually does have discrete input select and discrete power, again not on the original remote though. I don't think it has discrete aspect ratio controls, but I'd have to double check since I have no need for that feature.

With the Xr-55, a nice feature would be the ability to set a default startup volume for each of the inputs. Music is invariably louder than dolby digital playback at any given receiver volume and it would be nice to be able to attenuate specific inputs OR be able to attenuate PCM stereo vs. PCM multichannel.

Agreed this would be nice, but not critical IMHO. Certainly not very common on other receivers in the <$500 price range.

I did some more listening tests of the 802D's and the panasonic with music at most common listening levels. I have been quite happy with the response and I still stand on my original statement that I can't tell the difference between the panny and my larger amplifier.

The money I saved on the panny by selling the rotel 1095 is going to really come in handy.

The more I listen in my already "acoustically" Auralex treated room, the more I realize that most of the failures in bass response that I may have are related to lack of enough bass traps.

After speaking with the guy at Realtraps.com, I figured out that I can put a set of Realtraps (which have far more low end bass trapping ability than Auralex Lenrds) behind my movie screen which is covering a 6x6 foot window. I plan to just stand several of these up behind the screen and then maybe also stuff some foam back there to get even more bass absorption.

If anyone here hasn't taken the opportunity to try room treatments, I would urge you to spend your money doing this BEFORE you go out and try to buy more powerful amps. The improvement in sound quality is going to be better than ANY amp you buy at ANY price when compared to the panasonic.

The 802D's in my ~20x23 foot room with vaulted ceilings still don't have the "perfect" sound I'm looking for yet... hopefully I get the room to that stage soon.

Has anyone measured the idle power consuption in watts per hour? I know some of the "power conditioners" can do this....

I recently bought a Kill-A-Watt meter and own the XR55. When I return home after the holiday, I will report back on the power consumption of the XR55. Cheers.

If anyone here hasn't taken the opportunity to try room treatments, I would urge you to spend your money doing this BEFORE you go out and try to buy more powerful amps. The improvement in sound quality is going to be better than ANY amp you buy at ANY price when compared to the panasonic.

Absolutely agree. I think even those who argue over sonic differences in amps would agree that they're rather subtle compared to what is wrought by the room. Yet buying and amp is easier, and treating a room is not always allowed due to SAF, so the amp (or cables, etc. ) is what gets bought and argued over.
In a video parallel, I'd take a lesser projector in a light-controlled (ambient and reflected)room over a state-of-the-art model in a white living room...no contest.

Can I use your epiphanous discovery of the sonic benefits of the panny xr55 with similar benefits for my intended B&W 703 set-up? 5.1 for music, 7.1 for DVD HT.

The TV I plan to start with is sony 34xbr960 - then panny 50" plasma next year or Fujitsu 50" when those $$$ drop - with its own quality tuners/input direct from STB. I read people buy high end AVR's and then have to bypass the darn thing b/o video input/HDCP conflicts.

For DVD would a high quality Denon 3910 make sense as it would input direct into HDMI on any good HDTV, right?

If this works and provides the high quality we all desire, then you have saved me a fortune!!! Where can I send you a bottle of wine? In fact, I'll deliver just to hear your w
whole set-up!!

Thanx
Norm

Can I use your epiphanous discovery of the sonic benefits of the panny xr55 with similar benefits for my intended B&W 703 set-up? 5.1 for music, 7.1 for DVD HT.

The TV I plan to start with is sony 34xbr960 - then panny 50" plasma next year or Fujitsu 50" when those $$$ drop - with its own quality tuners/input direct from STB. I read people buy high end AVR's and then have to bypass the darn thing b/o video input/HDCP conflicts.

For DVD would a high quality Denon 3910 make sense as it would input direct into HDMI on any good HDTV, right?

If this works and provides the high quality we all desire, then you have saved me a fortune!!! Where can I send you a bottle of wine? In fact, I'll deliver just to hear your w
whole set-up!!

Thanx
Norm

Well I don't review like the magazines that want to sell advertising so I won't make any sensational comments about how my audio life was changed forever with this amp, nor will I bore you with cliche's.

All I can say is that I can't tell the difference between this unit and a rotel 1095 that I was using before. Unitil people with much more "uber" amps chime in, I can't be sure there isn't something better or at least different sounding out there. I'm just so sure that I can make more sonic impact with further room changes than with an amp change, that I won't bother with a newer amp until I get my room just right.

I'll have you guys know that my room has ambient silence that is probably better than 95% of the people on the forums plus there is a general amount of room treatment already. If anyone is going to hear a difference between equipment, it will be in a room like this.

I don't think your 7 series B&W's will necessarily have a miraculous transformation, but I would be shocked if you weren't pleased with the performance of the panasonic. I can say for SURE that you would be better off using the panny and then upgrading the stereo speakers to an 800 series if you could afford it instead of shelling out mad money for a more pricey amp.

You can tell the difference in speakers far more readily than you can with a change to a "better" amp, assuming such a thing exists.

I need to find a pair of 802Ds to listen to. I knew speakers were the 1st place to start out with; and these 703's were the best in the a/v shop for sure. I am interested in learning more @ acoustic treatment possibilities in a colonial Williamsburg interior decor that my honey is rather fond of.

That said, I need to be realistic about the total budget in home theatre, and something called a successful marriage. Slippery slope can carry me away if Iam not careful here. Been there, done that, w/r to sailing, SCUBA, golf, etc.

Your premise of not needing an "uber" amp or AVR, was an epiphany to me for sure, as i was budgeting $2500-3000 here. The I/O options, iPod, XM, ethernet, power ratings, etc., certainly distracted me from focusing on the crux of sonic performance. Thank you for this insight.

Along these lines of KISS, would you please comment on the overall quality of my system? I do understand and respect your hesitation to speculate.

Sony 34XBR960N HDTV (200lb CRT -- but best picture of all formats, suitable for 6- 8' distance viewing)
B & W package 703/htm7/750 sw/ds7 sides/ds6 backs in 7.1 set-up
??Panny XR55
Denon 3910 DVD
Unknown STB

.. with Girder and USB-UIRT so now I can control my volume control from my mouse extra buttons ....
blazar,
that sounds pretty high tech. Does your volume controlled by the USB-UIRT or are you changing the volume digitally with the S/PDIF output ?
If you can upload pictures of your setup, especially the name/make of your HTPC that would be great.

blazar,
that sounds pretty high tech. Does your volume controlled by the USB-UIRT or are you changing the volume digitally with the S/PDIF output ?
If you can upload pictures of your setup, especially the name/make of your HTPC that would be great.

You use the software Girder and the infra-red USB device (with IR in and out capability) available on the internet called USB-UIRT.

Girder allows you to memorize incoming infrared signals from the USB-UIRT (fully compatible with girder) so that you can "learn" the volume codes from the panny remote.

Girder allows you to assign keyboard keys or mouse keys to specific commands. So basically I set the commands Alt+[ and Alt+] to be for volume up and down. Then I assigned my mouse up and down keys to output Alt+[ and Alt+] with microsoft intellipoint software.

Basically it's a convoluted way to get my mouse to control the volume on the panny. This is not using the digital volume control over spdif. The spdif signal remains bitperfect. The USB-UIRT infrared beamer is aimed at the panny obviously.

here are the sites:
http://www.usbuirt.com/
http://www.promixis.com/

I happened to download the old freeware version of girder from on the net somewhere since it's no longer available.

I have a Panasonic 42PWD8UK with the standard inputs: BNC/RCA Composite, BNC/RCA Component, Component/VGA. I am trying to set up my HT.

I have an Xbox, PS2, and Time Warner DVR DTV cable box. I plan on getting the Philips DVP642 DVD Player (there is no need for a upconverting DVD player with EDTV right? or should I be considering that as well?)

Now I am getting a receiver for sound and from what I've been seeing on AVS one of the best bang for your buck receivers is the Panasonic XR55.

Ideally I want to connect everything to my receiver then just run one set of component cables to the PDP.

My one problem is that the XR55 does not upconvert s-video and rca video inputs to component video output.

In this case then, do i have to swap the XBox and the PS2 between the one RCA Composite Video Input on the PSP or can they both go into the receiver and have just one RCA Composite leading from the Receiver to the PDP.

Also would I then run the DVD Player and DTV Cable Box via component into the receiver then into the PDP?

So from the receiver to the PDP I would have one RCA Composite Video Cable and one Component Video Cable?

Can the receiver do this? and is this the optimal setup for me?

Essentially the inputs I have are:
XBox (RCA composite output)
PS2 (RCA composite output)
DVD Player (Component output)
STB (Component output)

Receiver choices:
Panasonic XR55
Denon AVR-685s (I read it can convert all inputs to component out??)
Onkyo 602 or 503 (don't know about their video conversion)

PDP:
Panasonic 42PWD8UK

there are enough inputs for all your devices. You would need to run one of each set of both composite and component cables from the panny to the TV. You would need to still change the video mode from component to composite when you change the source on the panny.

This is obviously because the panny doesn't up-convert.

Actually if I'm not mistaken the Xbox and ps2 have s-video output which will definitely give you less comb-filtering artifacts than composite. I used to use the s-video when I had a ps2 and there was very obvious benefit.

Actually if I'm not mistaken the Xbox and ps2 have s-video output which will definitely give you less comb-filtering artifacts than composite. I used to use the s-video when I had a ps2 and there was very obvious benefit.
actually they both have the option to run over component, which you should definitely do. Trust me, the imgae quality benefits are definitely worth it, especially since you can get widescreen gaming in many xbox and some ps2 games. it'll also be in 480p from the source, so you don't have to worry about deinterlacing anywhere in the signal chain.

well I finally finished my acoustic treatments... at least for now. The addition of owens corning 703 2" panels behind my movie screen and in the front corners in addition to the auralex lenrds is my latest completed project. This visually obscene stuff will be covered by a set of curtains.

The sound results: That last bit of bass oomph that was lacking on stereo music playback is now present. The clarity of low bass extension on these speakers using the panny is just about as good as these speakers are likely to achieve without getting much larger speakers.

Particularly at lower volumes the bass is so much more controlled and clear that it was. I was testing sound out on Patricia Barber and Norah Jones tracks.

My last and final project will be to incorporate a Velodyne DD 15 sub into the setup now that low end bass control is much better in terms of room treatment. The final plan will be to achieve a linear 20-100hz response using that subs eq software.

I've got the 802D and XR55 combo playing right now, in bi-amp mode. This receiver has two interesting bi-amp settings.
Balance between HF and LF and "HF Phase". Has anyone come to any conclusions on the balance adjustment and phase
adjustment for these speakers?

Wouldn't it help if the test signal swept through the HF and LF amps so one could try to hear whether a balance adjustment
was warranted? Or maybe it would be as hard as trying to determine when a subwoofer gain needed adjusting? I've got
a cheap subwoofer I guess, or maybe it's even broken, but the level of the rumbling that comes out of it during the test sweep seems
impossible to compare with the white noise that comes out of the other speakers. Maybe I'll disconnect the HF wire from one main
and the LF wire from the other main and run the test sweep and see for myself.

But for the "HF Phase" adjustment, I can't find a spec sheet for these speakers that would give me the depth of their woofer drivers
and the depth of the mid-range. (I'm assuming it is the mid-range depth that should be measured and not the tweeter?)

Instead of the Denon 3910 look at the Oppo 971H upconverting DVI/HDMI dvd player. It has been compared to the Denon and is comparable for 1/5th the price. Even if the Denon is a bit better an extra 800$ is a lot of dvds or enough to buy a HDDVD/bluray player when they come out.

I've got the 802D and XR55 combo playing right now, in bi-amp mode. This receiver has two interesting bi-amp settings.
Balance between HF and LF and "HF Phase". Has anyone come to any conclusions on the balance adjustment and phase
adjustment for these speakers?

Wouldn't it help if the test signal swept through the HF and LF amps so one could try to hear whether a balance adjustment
was warranted? Or maybe it would be as hard as trying to determine when a subwoofer gain needed adjusting? I've got
a cheap subwoofer I guess, or maybe it's even broken, but the level of the rumbling that comes out of it during the test sweep seems
impossible to compare with the white noise that comes out of the other speakers. Maybe I'll disconnect the HF wire from one main
and the LF wire from the other main and run the test sweep and see for myself.

But for the "HF Phase" adjustment, I can't find a spec sheet for these speakers that would give me the depth of their woofer drivers
and the depth of the mid-range. (I'm assuming it is the mid-range depth that should be measured and not the tweeter?)

with the 802d's DONT mess with the phase and depth adjustments on the panny... this is taken care of by the crossover even in bi-wire mode.

I have finally had a solid month or two to listen to these speakers with the panny, and as I mentioned in another thread... The sound is simply stunning. The bass is clean and thunderous when called for. The high frequencies are also GREAT with the room treatments incorporated. Basically I have found no compelling reason to swap out the panny for anything yet.

My sub is coming in (SVS pb12-ultra) and I will post with followup on how well the panny behaves at high sound pressure levels with the crossover set at 80hz for the sub output.

I have also ordered a behringer feedback destroyer and I setup the Room EQ wizard software and radio shack sound pressure level meter. I will be able to create a very linear signal that is matched in sound pressure to the 802D's output.

I will post with followup once I've set it all up properly. I can only imagine how potent this setup will be now that I am finally buying a sub after so many years. As it is, the Room EQ wizard software shows that my bass response in the room is fairly linear with minimal nulls and good 20-140hz sound pressure linearity with the 802D's.... the sub will only help this further I hope.

With the addition of the SVS PB12 Ultra subwoofer and Behringer feedback destroyer (Sub EQ) and calibration with Room EQ Wizard the system sounds even more phenomenal for movies.

With the filter set at 80hz for the main speakers, I took up the volume to reference levels and the panasonic produces EARTH SHATTERING sounds with movies like LOTR and WOTW.... sweet god almighty the SVS does its job well.

Room EQ wizard did teach me something new about my room.... I defintely need more bass trapping surface area to improve a couple of nulls in the 100hz-300hz range.

Coupled with a subwoofer, I don't think anyone should have problems driving 5.1 surround with bi-amp for the mains at reference (105db) levels even with the 802D's which have impedance dips down to 4 ohms (at least so I hear).

A little while ago you gave a stellar review on SA-XR55. Any additional comments on the SOUND quality (what is your source, by the way?)? Are you still happy? Please chime in!

still pretty nice setup... I've changed nothing else since I added my sub. My source right now is my HTPC media library with all my music in FLAC format. The source is also "bit perfect output" without upsampling, etc. I am currrently using the optical output to avoid ground loop issues.

The sound quality is still quite nice and the amp handles sound pressure levels on music and movies that I would never listen to normally.

Honestly I think the next upgrade to my system if I can find the time would be more bass traps.

For what it's worth -- I recently also bought a Panny XR57 (new model), and can also vouch for the amazing sound for the price. I haven't done any ABX testing, but from initial impressions, it can hang with my much more expensive Bryston amplifiers!

(I also have an SVS Ultra sub and B&W 803 II speakers, btw -- hehe)

blazar,
Have you tried the 'glass toslink' yet ? I have this as well a $50 Sound Professionals glass toslink. The $50 edges out the 'no name' glass toslink, by a small margin.
Are any of you guys using a power conditioner or upgraded power cords ? Bryston is now selling a 'powerful 'power conditioner after advising against a power conditioner for all these years. They feel this one does not limit current like most other power conditioners.

BTW, j8weeks, would appreciate a detailed feedback from you re: the XR57 whenever you get a chance, considering the complement of equipments you have.

I give the "Little Beast" one more year before you start to damage the amp section. Hope you don't hurt thoughs great speakers.

blazar, have you seen this (http://www.avbuzz.com/audio-video/200610/bw40/index.htm)?

I don't understand this message - you think that the Panasonic is going to break/down, damage his speakers ?

I give the "Little Beast" one more year before you start to damage the amp section. Hope you don't hurt thoughs great speakers.

After Reading blazar's post around April of 2006 and owning Rotel equipment, I decided on trying the Panasonic. I purchased the Panasonic SA-XR70 and was quite excited to try it out against the Rotel.

My first impressions were good, thinking to myself I have some other equipment that it comes close to that cost more. I think Panasonic did a good job with layout and ease of the product. The tuner works well too. After breaking in, I removed my Rotel RB-1090 and RC-1090 to see how the Panasonic did against it. It's very obvious that the Panasonic cannot create the soundstage depth and full roundness, richness, and airy sound that the Rotel creates. It collapses in and becomes thin sounding compared to the Rotel. It also leans towards the brighter sound.

The Panasonic is impressive with revealing the detail and resolution of the Rotel but it lacks the involvement and intimacy that the Rotel creates, as well as the well rounded and full sound, these are areas the Rotel has over the Panasonic that are very easily heard. I also own the Rotel RB-1080 and RC-1070 on another system and it's much the same difference with that setup as well. The Panasonic sounds flat sounding and less involving compared to the Rotel.

The Panasonic is still impressive, especially when you consider the price. It's a great product for those looking for a bargin price to get you near the high end sound without the high price tag but it definitely doesn't replace a Rotel. There's alot more to it than just hearing the detail. The Panasonic didn't replace my Rotel's. I did keep the Panasonic and use it in an office setup system. I tried both the digital and analog inputs and get same results that lacked in the difference of the Rotel's.

I still like the Panasonic and it's impressive with the level of detail it can reveal, very close to the Rotel. Just thought I would share my experience.

Wishing everyone a great 2007!

Onkyo has a new Integrated Amp out now called the Onkyo A-9555 and they are marketing it as high-end sound.

It's by far much better than the Panasonic SA-XR70 that I have. In all areas that the Panasonic falls short, the Onkyo does very well. It doesn't have the volume limitation of the Panasonic either.

The Onkyo A-9555 puts out a lot of power, can fill a large room with sound, sound superb while doing so, very detailed yet smooth with great vocals. The Panasonic tends to be a bit bright at times where the Onkyo doesn't and the Onkyo causes no ear fatigue at all while being smooth and detailed. I'm very impressed with it and it comes much much closer to my Rotel RB-1090 than the Panasonic ever could. Now that's impressive! All for under $600.00 where an analog amp of this sound quality would cost you well over $2000.00 plus $1200.00 and up for the pre-amp! The Onkyo A-9555 gives it all to you in one product for under 600.00
I still can't believe the power and extension this Onkyo can muster out!

Onkyo did a great job on this Integrated Amp! It certainly gives out high-end sound with a very large sound stage that only my most expensive amp can do while being very detailed and very, very clean sounding! Nice! Everything detail is very easy to make out with this amp!

Oh yes, The Onkyo A-9555 also is very cool running, very little heat. You can
put your hand on it and it stays cool.

I'm surprised with how hot the Panasonic SA-XR70 gets that not more people
reveal how HOT running the Panasonic runs! They get very HOT in the left center
if there is no fan inside. Panasonic decided to leave the fan off on the XR70
which it should have one! Gets way too HOT! I have to keep a fan on the
Panasonic.

Oh yes, The Onkyo A-9555 also is very cool running, very little heat. You can
put your hand on it and it stays cool.

I'm surprised with how hot the Panasonic SA-XR70 gets that not more people
reveal how HOT running the Panasonic runs! They get very HOT in the left center
if there is no fan inside. Panasonic decided to leave the fan off on the XR70
which it should have one! Gets way too HOT! I have to keep a fan on the
Panasonic.
What kind of speakers do you have ? The Panasonic without some tweaks is not going to fight with the Rotel. I bi-amp, high-efficiency speakers (Silverline Sonatina), with after-market power cords and balanced power conditioners good rack with vibrapod footers etc. It never gets hot or does it sound harsh. But I still think, if I bought an Integrated amp for > $1K and a $1K DAC, I will get better sound. Till then I am enjoying my all-digital setup (with Squeezebox), with its nimble bass, very good detail and dynamics. Soundstage and 'warmth/harmonic richness' is one area that may not be that great.

I was surprised to find how hot the xr55 runs as well. Softwire, which of your tweaks would you say accounts for your lack of heat output? And, was it running hot even before you applied any of your adaptations?

I think when people say it is "not hot" its in comparison to some traditional analog receivers. I had a Yamaha that seemed like I could fry an egg on it, and the XR runs way cooler than that. You still won't want to put your hands on it for any length of time though

Hi SoftwireEngineer, My speakers are 102dB sensitive and 8 Ohms. They are very efficient but the Panasonic gets very hot left center, even if you leave the unit on with no speakers connected. I've talked to Panasonic tech support and he said it will run hot without a fan. He said the SA-XR57 has a new heat sink cross-bar to help out with that problem but I haven't tried the 57 model to confirm that.

The Panasonic runs much hotter than my Rotel analogs! The Rotels stay cool running and only sometimes hardly even warm to the touch, but these are 2-channel Rotel's not multichannel, as usually multichannel can run warmer. I was just very surprised how hot the Panasonic digital amp runs with all the advertised "no heat" marketing that digital amps get.

Anyway, don't take me wrong. The Panasonic is a very good sounding product, especially for it's price, enough for me to keep mine. I still like it. Panasonic did a good job. I was just surprised how close the Onkyo A-9555 comes in sound to the Rotel, but it still doesn't replace a Rotel, just much more so than the Panasonic. Digital still has the problem with not being able to give the round-airiness that some of the best analogs can give but I'm sure they will figure out how to in time, but that's been the big debate between the analog vs digital for quite some time now.

I think SiriuslyCold makes a good point, if someone is used to having such an amp as cooking an egg on it from how hot, then to those, the Panasonic might seem like it doesn't get as hot. I just don't like when poor designs allow for such heat build-up that doesn't have to be, it shortens component life. The problem is solved with the Panasonic with allowing a small fan keep it cool, then it runs very cool without any heat build up. So now my Panasonic does run very cool with using the fan. Enjoy! :)

Excellent review! Ive been doing some experimenting with pro amps out in my game room. Ive been thinking of bringing in my Crown and trying it on my 803Ds. I think the reason I havent yet was I dont want to know it sounds as good as my CA 301. i agree if you push your system hard, you will have problems as I cooked a brand new RXV2500 in about 20 min pushing the 803Ds abit too hard. This the reason Ive been so slow to pick an amp to drive the HTM2D I have coming, I was talking to a dealer the other day and he gave me the " 8 ohms easy to drive story" I beg to differ if you tend to turn it up from time to time :)

Thanks again!

Hello,

I have the infamous SA XR55 and am running it in dual amp mode driving transmission lines with Jordan JX92s. I like the sound despite the critics and I have other gear costing much more that I don't listen to anymore. I was curious if anyone could outline the mods I hear about but can find no references to. The more specific the better. Thanks.

tea

Hello,

I have the infamous SA XR55 and am running it in dual amp mode driving transmission lines with Jordan JX92s. I like the sound despite the critics and I have other gear costing much more that I don't listen to anymore. I was curious if anyone could outline the mods I hear about but can find no references to. The more specific the better. Thanks.

tea

You can try some of the things I have done to my XR45 http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=13996.0 I have seen the schematics of the XR55 and it is very similar to the XR45. The XR55 has a simplier power supply scheme as well as a simplier DSP section.

Hi Mike,
Would you like to mod a Panny for me ? I am running a XR55, but I can buy a XR57 or XR700 for the mod. I can compensate you for your time.
I think whatever you did makes complete sense.
I believe the future of amplification is the Panny's architecture.

BTW, Folks, if you really dont want to mess with the inside of the Panny, the best thing you can do is to get a IEC power cord adapter for $15 and use any aftermarket power cords. I use a VHAudio Flavor 2 cords, costs about a $100 or so I think. The Panny should also be placed on a vibration free shelf. Four footer is the range for $4 or 5 would do the trick. I use vibrapods for this.
I also strongly recomment a good Glass toslink under $30 or $40 I think.
(and no flames on powercords please, if you dont think it makes a difference, please ignore my suggestion).

I recently picked up a set of Paradigm Studio 60 v3, CC-570 center, and Studio 20 rears, and I ABed my XR55 against my Anthem AVM30 + Statement A2 amplifier.

The Panny does sound excellent during lower volumes consider it price. However, the Anthem combo was much more smooth, the vocals were more clear, and the soundstage was more realistic than the Panny. In addition, the bass control is much better with the Anthem. The upper region of mid bass sound muddy and uncontrolled on the XF55.

Finally, at higher volumes (much louder than I normally listen to), the Panny sounds much more compressed than the Anthem.

Given the price, the Panny sounded excellent, but there is definitely better components out there for much more money. In my case, I'm seriously considering if it's worth while to upgrade to a 5 channel amp or just keep the XR55.