yamaha rx-573 vs yamaha rx-673 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 26 Old 09-01-2012, 11:44 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
varchar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm trying to decide between the yamaha rx-573 and yamaha rx-673. It seems the biggest differences are the zone b (573) vs zone 2(673). I've got a couple questions I hope you guys can help me with.

1. With zone 2, I've read that the 673 requires an analog source for the second room. Does this mean I can't use it for airplay or other internet audio sources. Does it mean it wont play anything connected with hdmi?

2. The 573 is 110 wats vs the 90 of the 673. Should this be a concern. I have the 573 already (1 week sor far) and it sounds great. Would the 673 suffer by having 20 less watts/channel. I have Polk tsi400's and polk center speakers, along with a polk 110w sub. I'll be getting my surround speakers shortly.

The only reason I'm thinking of returning the 573 is so I can get zone 2 support. My worry is that the 673 will actually sound worse due to its lesser wattage.

Thanks for any help! Also, if there a much better option for a receiver, let me know! My only requirements is really airplay, good networking, and preferably pandora. Although neither of the yamaha's offer Pandora. I've been using airplay to fulfill this requirement.
varchar is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 26 Old 09-01-2012, 12:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
pukemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 776
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
It should sound about the same since there is only a one step in model difference. The 673 probably won't crank as loud effortlessly though. Should not be a dramatic difference unless you like listening to stuff real loud.

butter and jelly please.
pukemon is offline  
post #3 of 26 Old 09-01-2012, 12:55 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
afrogt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 23,365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Liked: 413
Quote:
The only reason I'm thinking of returning the 573 is so I can get zone 2 support. My worry is that the 673 will actually sound worse due to its lesser wattage.

The Yamaha 573 doesn't have more power than the 673. Make sure that the power is being rated the same way, preferrably 20hz-20khz with the same ohms, similar distortion and number of channels driven. Straight from Yamaha's website.

RX-V573
80W per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz-20 kHz, 0.09% THD, 2ch driven)

RX-V673
90W per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz-20 kHz, 0.09% THD, 2ch driven)


The 673 is a better all around receiver with more HDMI inputs, multizone capability, video upscaler and a better version of YPAO room calibration software.

http://www.crutchfield.com/App/Product/CompareTo.aspx?compareItems=01|022RXV573&compareItems=01|022RXV673&g=10420
varchar likes this.

Afro GT
afrogt is online now  
post #4 of 26 Old 09-01-2012, 01:00 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
varchar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by afrogt View Post

RX-V573
80W per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz-20 kHz, 0.09% THD, 2ch driven)
RX-V673
90W per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz-20 kHz, 0.09% THD, 2ch driven)

Thanks! I guess Amazon has the specs wrong? The definitely list the 673 at 90 watts/channel and the 573 at 110 watts/channel

http://www.amazon.com/Yamaha-RX-V673-7-2-Channel-Network-Receiver/dp/B007JF85WE/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1346520540&sr=1-1&keywords=rx-673
varchar is offline  
post #5 of 26 Old 09-01-2012, 01:15 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
afrogt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 23,365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Liked: 413
The problem is that Amazon doesn't give any specs with those power ratings so it is totally useless. It also says the 373 and 473 are more powerful and they are not.
varchar likes this.

Afro GT
afrogt is online now  
post #6 of 26 Old 09-01-2012, 01:22 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
varchar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks Afrogt! Thats great knowledge!
varchar is offline  
post #7 of 26 Old 12-20-2012, 06:29 AM
Senior Member
 
happy hopping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Malibu, CA, USA
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by varchar View Post

Thanks! I guess Amazon has the specs wrong? The definitely list the 673 at 90 watts/channel and the 573 at 110 watts/channel
http://www.amazon.com/Yamaha-RX-V673-7-2-Channel-Network-Receiver/dp/B007JF85WE/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1346520540&sr=1-1&keywords=rx-673

okay, I don't understand that neither. I thought the 573 is 115 W / chnl.

http://usa.yamaha.com/products/audio-visual/av-receivers-amps/rx/rx-v573_black_u/?mode=model
Quote:
Channel 7.1
Rated Output Power (1kHz, 1ch driven) 115W (8ohms, 0.9% THD)
Rated Output Power (20Hz-20kHz, 2ch driven) 80W (8ohms, 0.09% THD)

also, what country make the 573?
happy hopping is offline  
post #8 of 26 Old 12-20-2012, 08:56 AM
Member
 
josh22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 26
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy hopping View Post

okay, I don't understand that neither. I thought the 573 is 115 W / chnl.
http://usa.yamaha.com/products/audio-visual/av-receivers-amps/rx/rx-v573_black_u/?mode=model
also, what country make the 573?

From that link on Yamaha's website you posted on the 573:

• 7-channel powerful surround sound
115W per channel (8 ohms, 1 kHz, 0.9% THD, 1ch driven)
80W per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz-20 kHz, 0.09% THD, 2ch driven)
josh22 is offline  
post #9 of 26 Old 12-20-2012, 06:09 PM
Senior Member
 
happy hopping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Malibu, CA, USA
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So? That's was my quote above. I still don't understand whether it's 80W or 115W
happy hopping is offline  
post #10 of 26 Old 12-20-2012, 06:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kini62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 3,259
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 292 Post(s)
Liked: 416
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy hopping View Post

So? That's was my quote above. I still don't understand whether it's 80W or 115W

It's 80 (at best) and less with more channels driven.

Klipsch RF-62II, RC-500, RS-400, SVS PC12+,
Def Tech SC8000
Harman Kardon AVR 1600
PS3, Apple TV, Sharp 70" Qattron
Kini62 is offline  
post #11 of 26 Old 12-20-2012, 06:34 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bond 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 12,426
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 404 Post(s)
Liked: 871
NEVER trust Amazon specs if you are going to make a serious purchase. There is a dedicated 673 owners forum here at AVS that would be helpful.
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1408245/the-official-yamaha-rx-v673-thread-7-2-channel-network-avr/810#post_22728747

No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!
Bond 007 is offline  
post #12 of 26 Old 12-20-2012, 06:38 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bond 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 12,426
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 404 Post(s)
Liked: 871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kini62 View Post

It's 80 (at best) and less with more channels driven.
Not sure about the 573 but the 673 has discrete amplification so that would not be true as far as the more channels driven the less per channel. Basically it has an amp for each channel.

No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!
Bond 007 is offline  
post #13 of 26 Old 12-20-2012, 06:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
commsysman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,292
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Liked: 257
As far as I am concerned, there is very little except distortions and lies in the specs of most HT receivers.

Check out the ACTUAL power output in the Home Theater magazine lab tests, and compare them to the advertised specs and you will see what is what.

The one company that publishes real honest specs and builds high-fidelity low-distortion amplifiers is Cambridge Audio. IMO the best receiver on the market AT ANY PRICE is their 551R receiver. If you check out the Home Theater review of it, you will see that they like it as much as I do.

You can easily spend $3000 on a receiver and end up with less power, more distortion, and generally poorer sound than the 551R has. It is a bargain IMO at $1200.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

NEVER trust Amazon specs if you are going to make a serious purchase. There is a dedicated 673 owners forum here at AVS that would be helpful.
commsysman is offline  
post #14 of 26 Old 12-20-2012, 06:54 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bond 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 12,426
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 404 Post(s)
Liked: 871
I agree as far as specs go. But while the factory specs may be skewed, sometimes the ones on Amazon are just a mistake and may not even be in the right ball field.

No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!
Bond 007 is offline  
post #15 of 26 Old 12-21-2012, 12:24 AM
Senior Member
 
happy hopping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Malibu, CA, USA
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kini62 View Post

It's 80 (at best) and less with more channels driven.

so you guys are saying yamaha is using "share amp power"? Alright, I only use the above for 5.1 application, and my sub-woofer has its own power. So I really only need 100 W per chnl.

with only 5 speaker, can this unit deliver 100W per channel?

Normally, with the spec. of some other receiver, they listed the total amt. of wattage the unit can do. Somehow, I can't find this 1. And by looking at the rear panel of the unit, it doesn't say what country makes it.

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2012/04/02/Yamaha_RX-V573.jpg
happy hopping is offline  
post #16 of 26 Old 12-21-2012, 12:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
afrogt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 23,365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Liked: 413
How do you even know that you "need" 100W per channel? My guess is you probably don't.

What speakers do you have and how big is the room?

The Yamaha RX-V573 is made in Malaysia if that matters to you.

Afro GT
afrogt is online now  
post #17 of 26 Old 12-21-2012, 04:11 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Bond 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 12,426
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 404 Post(s)
Liked: 871
Bond 007 is offline  
post #18 of 26 Old 12-21-2012, 04:21 AM
Senior Member
 
happy hopping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Malibu, CA, USA
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Rated Output Power (1kHz, 1ch driven) 115W (8ohms, 0.9% THD)

Rated Output Power (20Hz-20kHz, 2ch driven) 80W (8ohms, 0.09% THD)

what exactly does it mean by 1 channel driven vs. 2 channel driven? What does that mean in plain english?

I use Klipsch 5.1, 100W / chnl.
happy hopping is offline  
post #19 of 26 Old 12-21-2012, 06:03 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy hopping View Post

Rated Output Power (1kHz, 1ch driven) 115W (8ohms, 0.9% THD)

Rated Output Power (20Hz-20kHz, 2ch driven) 80W (8ohms, 0.09% THD)

what exactly does it mean by 1 channel driven vs. 2 channel driven? What does that mean in plain english?

I use Klipsch 5.1, 100W / chnl.

AVRs generally share the same power supply among all of their 5-11 power amplifiers which is a good idea. Every power supply has a tendency for its output voltage to do down when the current draw goes up. The more concurrent channels you operate at high levels and with a speaker load, the greater the current drain and the lower the power supply voltage becomes. As the power supply sags, the maximum possible undistorted power from any channel decreases.

It is a mistake to think of the power ratings of speakers and the power output of power amplifiers as being closely matched. One reason for this is that the power ratings of speakers are actually far more complex than the single numbers that you see on spec sheets. For example the undistorted power handling capability of speakers drops precipitiously in the bass range.

For example, this is the maximum power handling capability of a theoretically perfect SOTA 6 1/2" speaker (real speakers are even more limited than is shown here):

Freq,Hz Max SPL, DB Displacement Limited Max power, Watts

20 81 0.1
30 88 1
40 93 2
50 97 5
60 100 11
70 103 20
80 105 34
90 107 54
100 109 83
130 114 236*

* The speaker is thermally limited to 100 watts so it really can only put out about 110 dB SPL

On the spec sheet this speaker may be rated at 100 watts, but as you can see at 60 Hz (which is really a pretty high bass frequency) this speaker can only take 11 watts before it begins distorting pretty seriously. Rrunning out of Xmax or displacement capacity is the speaker equivalent of clipping.

I don't want you to get too engaged with my model as disturbing as it may seem. I want you to understand that saying a loudspeaker can handle so many watts is like saying that a full 2 gallon pail weighs so many pounds. In reality the weight of the pail varies depending on whether you fill it with foam beads, oil, water, sand, or lead shot. Think of bass as being the lead shot of audio.

Stepping back to the power amplifiers in your AVR the big disconnnect between specs and real life usage relates to the difference between running amplifiers with pure tones on a test bench with a resistive dummy load, and playing music into a normal speaker load. Audiophiles have long thought that speaker loads and pure test tones are easy and that speakers and music were hard. Reality is very different as I first discovered when I started testing amplifiers with loudspeaker loads and music more than a decade ago.

Test tones and resistors have been the standard for testing amplifiers because for one thing it is easier to do and easier to analyze the results. About a decade ago I decided to take advantage of some more sophisticated knowledge about signals and systems analysis that could only really bear fruit if you used computers for testing audio gear. I had a good friend of mine who had about a dozen well-known (Bryston, Crown, Parasound, etc.) audiophile amplifiers sitting around to a 1 day long amplifier testing binge. Basically I hooked each amplifier up to resistive and loudspeaker loads and ran approximate 2 minute recordings that contained a mixture of test tones and music. I captured the results with a computer and did the actual analysis later on.

The actual equipment tests showed some pretty dramatic differences that were audible and visble. When we ran the test tones into standard load resistors we stressed the local infrastructure which included dedicated 30 amp power circuits. line voltage stabilizers that weighed about 100 points, and banks of forced-air-cooled high precision temperature insensitive load resistors. Cables got warm, equipment hummed, and the room picked up a dozen degrees. When we ran music everything acted like it was tea time. When we ran into speaker loads, everything acted like it was on vacation.

If you have a subwoofer and are playing music and movies, it is likely that the bench test results for a single channel are a good estimate of how your AVR is challenged in actual use.
arnyk is offline  
post #20 of 26 Old 12-22-2012, 05:33 AM
Senior Member
 
happy hopping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Malibu, CA, USA
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
you are saying even at 80W per channel, my speaker doesn't need it. So, back in 1999, I bought the Klipsch KSC synergy 5.1 series, that is rated 100W per channel by Klipsch, in their "horn technology" ad. These 5 speakers, along w/ the Klipsch sub-woofer, is connected to a Sony ES series integrated amp., the DA50ES.

it works fine and deliver the necessary sound effect on all the DVD & blu-ray THX sound effect. Here's a photo of the left/right speakers:

http://s7d1.scene7.com/is/image/vanns/542329534?$vdc_normal_image$

As you can guess, in the past few years, the center amp. has worn out, and the audio control has static sound, so I want to get another integrated amp.

Now, another audiophile, (an electrical engineer) told me that during most playback, a 80W per channel amp. can deliver fine, but at certain sound effect, such as a sudden low or high pitch sound, a 100W / chnl. speaker does require a 100W per chnl. amp. to push thru, otherwise, if it were a 80W/chnl. amp., then the resulting sound effect of these sudden low or high pitch note will appears "hallow". This is the reason I want a 100W/chnl. speaker. So I would agree with you that a 100W speaker can't consistently deliver 100W non-stop, but what about the sudden demand of low or high pitch tone on occasion? Wouldn't a 80W not have enough power to push thru?

Anyhoo, is 1kHz on the standard freq. use to rate the wattage of 1 chnl. driven speaker?
happy hopping is offline  
post #21 of 26 Old 12-22-2012, 10:38 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
afrogt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 23,365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 272 Post(s)
Liked: 413
Quote:
Anyhoo, is 1kHz on the standard freq. use to rate the wattage of 1 chnl. driven speaker?

The rating a 1 khz and 1 channel driven is the worst rating ever. Its useless because nobody listens to only a single frequency nor do they only listen to one channel.

You'd like a power rating from 20hz - 20khz at 8ohms with two channels driven with a specified distortion (THD 0.08%). Most receivers mfrs should post specs like this.

If they only provide a 1 khz rating then the receiver is not as powerful as you think.

Afro GT
afrogt is online now  
post #22 of 26 Old 12-22-2012, 12:17 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy hopping View Post


Now, another audiophile, (an electrical engineer) told me that during most playback, a 80W per channel amp. can deliver fine,

Without actual measurements, nobody can say yeah or nay to that without being guilty of baseless speculation.
Quote:
but at certain sound effect, such as a sudden low or high pitch sound, a 100W / chnl. speaker does require a 100W per chnl. amp. to push thru, otherwise, if it were a 80W/chnl. amp., then the resulting sound effect of these sudden low or high pitch note will appears "hallow".

Again, nobody knows how much power is being used in any particular audio system at any time without making actual real time measurements. The right way to do this is to measure the voltage across the output terminals of the amp or AVR with something that has quick response. Ideally, there would be record of this voltage as it varies while the music is being played.

Nobody knows exactly how loud you play and exactly what music you play and where in the song your system is playing and what sort of power that song requires.

Often when we actually measure the power levels that are actually being developed in someone's system, the numbers are ludicrously small.
Quote:
Anyhoo, is 1kHz on the standard freq. use to rate the wattage of 1 chnl. driven speaker?

I KHz is often used, but there's nothing special about that frequency except that it is a frequency that is one of the easiest for an amplifier to deliver. To be even just minimally complete, the amp should be tested at a number of frequencies that are representative of how the equipment is used in a real world audio system.
arnyk is offline  
post #23 of 26 Old 12-22-2012, 12:26 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 762 Post(s)
Liked: 1175
Quote:
Originally Posted by afrogt View Post

Quote:
Anyhoo, is 1kHz on the standard freq. use to rate the wattage of 1 chnl. driven speaker?

The rating a 1 khz and 1 channel driven is the worst rating ever. Its useless because nobody listens to only a single frequency nor do they only listen to one channel.

Both statements are true but one is too easy and one is too hard. I KHz is about the easiest frequency for the amplifier to deliver power at. A pure tone stresses an amplifier's power supply and heat sink far more than a musical tone with the same amplitude.
Quote:
You'd like a power rating from 20hz - 20khz at 8ohms with two channels driven with a specified distortion (THD 0.08%). Most receivers mfrs should post specs like this.

There are all sorts and caveats about that. For example, a modern AVR generally doesn't have to deliver power at 20 Hz because that gets handled by the subwoofer which has its own power amplifier. The nature of music is such that full power is rarely if ever needed as high as 20 KHz.
Quote:
If they only provide a 1 khz rating then the receiver is not as powerful as you think.

Agreed. Most amplifiers put out 5-20% more power at 1 KHz, as compared to 20 Hz or 20 KHz. However, we're talking about numbers, not serious differences in sound quality. 20% is about the same as 2 dB, and a 2 dB difference is not all that noticable. The actual power demands on audio amplifiers are very dynamic and may never actually run at their limits.
arnyk is offline  
post #24 of 26 Old 12-23-2012, 07:15 AM
Senior Member
 
happy hopping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Malibu, CA, USA
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by afrogt View Post


You'd like a power rating from 20hz - 20khz at 8ohms with two channels driven with a specified distortion (THD 0.08%). Most receivers mfrs should post specs like this.
.

I thought 2 chnl. is the old standard for left & right speaker. Today, they use 5.1 or 7.1 or 9.1, so saying w/ a pair of right/left speaker, it can generates x amt. of watt doesn't really apply to today's home speaker set anymore. Am I right?
happy hopping is offline  
post #25 of 26 Old 12-23-2012, 07:19 AM
Senior Member
 
happy hopping's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Malibu, CA, USA
Posts: 306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post


Agreed. Most amplifiers put out 5-20% more power at 1 KHz, as compared to 20 Hz or 20 KHz. However, we're talking about numbers, not serious differences in sound quality. 20% is about the same as 2 dB, and a 2 dB difference is not all that noticable. The actual power demands on audio amplifiers are very dynamic and may never actually run at their limits.

Judging by all the comments you made, it sounds like you believe that this Yamaha RX-573 can run my old Klipsch KSC series of 100W / chnl. without any problem?
happy hopping is offline  
post #26 of 26 Old 04-05-2013, 04:51 AM
Newbie
 
JasminLG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
If anyone is interested in rx-v373 i would totally wait for the new model the rx-v375 witch is a lot more robust with increased filtering capacitors and based on transistors instead of one big STK. The new x75 series from Yamaha seems to be better in every aspect from the old series.
http://www.audio-market.ro/images/yamaha-rx-v375-interior.jpg
JasminLG is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Yamaha Rx V573 Receiver , Yamaha Rx V673 Receiver , Yamaha Rx V473 Receiver
Gear in this thread - V473 by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off