Higher end avr vs lower end avr. - Page 2 - AVS Forum
1  2
Receivers, Amps, and Processors > Higher end avr vs lower end avr.
duc135's Avatar duc135 09:21 AM 05-23-2013
To be honest, if it were me, I wouldn't take the 1913 either. Even though it is lower in the product line, I would rather get the 1713 if I were to go with a lower end receiver. The 1913 only has Audyssey MultEQ while the 1713 steps up to Audyssey MultEQ XT.

snyderkv's Avatar snyderkv 12:31 PM 05-23-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badouri View Post

I could buy an Arcam AVR600, oh but wait, that also comes with a laundry list of issues

Corrected with firmware updates. Not sure if you can correct overheating issues with firmware updates?
snyderkv's Avatar snyderkv 01:10 PM 05-23-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMoen View Post

I think the What Hi-Fi? review is an honest one.

Ofcourse you do, until it no longer benefits you're argument against high end AVRs.

It's obvious as this is one average review over 6 rave reviews that I can show you most with actual gear , room and speakers used.

"What Hi-Fi" loses credibility without this and has a majority of registered users calling BS. I'm not telling you what to believe, but it's not cheap running 2 Ohm capacitive loads with large phase shifts on an AVR. The Onkyo would get smoked and probably overheat and pop into a mushroom cloud compared to the AVR600 but that's just my opinion.
CMoen's Avatar CMoen 07:44 PM 05-23-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by snyderkv View Post

Ofcourse you do, until it no longer benefits you're argument against high end AVRs.

It's obvious as this is one average review over 6 rave reviews that I can show you most with actual gear , room and speakers used.

Good luck on "Mission: high end".
snyderkv's Avatar snyderkv 10:30 PM 05-23-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMoen View Post

Good luck on "Mission: high end".

I don't recall having one. Just pointing out facts from links given to me as any critical thinker should. You however, have provided no facts to prove otherwise. You seem to be on mission impossible, picking certain pieces of info that fit your mission to convince yourself that you made an intelligent buying decision. You come off as bitter against people who can afford high end gear.
ceh383's Avatar ceh383 10:56 PM 05-23-2013
Quote:
Just pointing out facts from links given to me as any critical thinker should
Quote:
Currently my friend is looking for a receiver for his new system. So now I have a spare denon 1913 laying around. I offered to sell him my denon 1913 for $150.00 which is really cheap. But past on it cause its not high end. I just shook my head.He said its not gonna make his sub sound as good versus a higher end receiver.
Fact: $500 or $5000 AVR not going to make much difference here.
Quote:
His front speakers are klipsch f-20, center is Polk audio unsure of model, surrounds klipsch unsure of model, sub is outlaw lfm-1ex. His main focus is all on the sub and the rumble he gets out of it.
Fact: Again...$500 or $5000 AVR not going to make much difference here.
Quote:
He has nothing right now. I told him he can borrow my receiver. He said no. I'm just gonna let him be. And spend whatever amount he wants to spend.
Fact: Not much more you can do.


Fact: This thread has turned into a pissing match that is of no use to the OP....


Just mo $.02
Hifi4Hobby's Avatar Hifi4Hobby 01:09 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by snyderkv View Post

I don't recall having one. Just pointing out facts from links given to me as any critical thinker should. You however, have provided no facts to prove otherwise. You seem to be on mission impossible, picking certain pieces of info that fit your mission to convince yourself that you made an intelligent buying decision. You come off as bitter against people who can afford high end gear.

Dude..too much prejudice and assumption from you. And getting LOW to defend your own belief for whatever reasons is just big NO NO.

High end isnt about how high the price tag is and this has been debated for many times. Its about redefine value and overall ownership experience.
duc135's Avatar duc135 02:41 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceh383 View Post

Fact: $500 or $5000 AVR not going to make much difference here.
Fact: Again...$500 or $5000 AVR not going to make much difference here.
Just mo $.02

I'm going to disagree with these two points. Not based on actual prices, but a lower end receiver with a lesser version or no auto room correction will not do as well as a higher end receiver with the better versions of room correction software. For example, the Denon 1612 will not do nearly as well as the Denon 4311. Especially in the sub area where the Audyssey XT32 is very capable. Higher quality room correction software will also do a better job of dealing with mismatched speakers. My comparison is not based on receiver price, but one of feature sets that "usually" come with the higher prices. Personally, I would not buy any receiver or pre-pro that is not capable of Audyssey MultEQ XT32 or equivalent. That's just my opinion though. That's why in my previous post I stated that I would pass on the 1913 and go with the lower end 1713 for the better room correction software if those were my choices.
Badouri's Avatar Badouri 05:23 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post

I'm going to disagree with these two points. Not based on actual prices, but a lower end receiver with a lesser version or no auto room correction will not do as well as a higher end receiver with the better versions of room correction software. For example, the Denon 1612 will not do nearly as well as the Denon 4311. Especially in the sub area where the Audyssey XT32 is very capable. Higher quality room correction software will also do a better job of dealing with mismatched speakers. My comparison is not based on receiver price, but one of feature sets that "usually" come with the higher prices. Personally, I would not buy any receiver or pre-pro that is not capable of Audyssey MultEQ XT32 or equivalent. That's just my opinion though. That's why in my previous post I stated that I would pass on the 1913 and go with the lower end 1713 for the better room correction software if those were my choices.

http://usa.denon.com/us/product/pages/productdetail.aspx?catid=avreceivers%28denonna%29&pid=avrx4000%28denonna%29

NAD T 787: Audyssey MultEQ XT
Cambridge Audio 751R: Audyssey 2EQ
Badouri's Avatar Badouri 05:28 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hifi4Hobby View Post

Dude..too much prejudice and assumption from you. And getting LOW to defend your own belief for whatever reasons is just big NO NO.

High end isnt about how high the price tag is and this has been debated for many times. Its about redefine value and overall ownership experience.

+1
snyderkv's Avatar snyderkv 05:58 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hifi4Hobby View Post

Dude..too much prejudice and assumption from you. And getting LOW to defend your own belief for whatever reasons is just big NO NO.

You keep repackaging the same messages I'm sending you. And where did I get low? You're obviously trying to defend your own purchasing decisions by disregarding the facts and picking informaiton you choose to further convinces yourself of that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hifi4Hobby View Post

High end isnt about how high the price tag is and this has been debated for many times. Its about redefine value and overall ownership experience.

Although a good attempt at saving face here, it's contradictory to the message you were sending earlier.
snyderkv's Avatar snyderkv 06:06 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badouri View Post

NAD T 787: Audyssey MultEQ XT

And your point is? This unit is modular fyi and can be fitted with the latest + Audyssey doesn't drive hard to drive speakers. Audyssey doesn't prevent an amp from voltage/current clipping, it doesn't drive high phase speakers or prevent your Onkyo from exploding into a napalm fireball. Does it?
Hifi4Hobby's Avatar Hifi4Hobby 06:26 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by snyderkv View Post

You keep repackaging the same messages I'm sending you. And where did I get low? You're obviously trying to defend your own purchasing decisions by disregarding the facts and picking informaiton you choose to further convinces yourself of that.
Although a good attempt at saving face here, it's contradictory to the message you were sending earlier.

Who's saving whose face here, dude? smile.gif
ceh383's Avatar ceh383 07:43 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by duc135 View Post

Not based on actual prices, but a lower end receiver with a lesser version or no auto room correction will not do as well as a higher end receiver with the better versions of room correction software. For example, the Denon 1612 will not do nearly as well as the Denon 4311. Especially in the sub area where the Audyssey XT32 is very capable. .

True enough, higher level room correction software can, and usually does, make a difference... But not always. My Denon 3313 with MultEQ XT sounded better in my room than the Denon 4520 with MultEQ XT32 that I returned. I now have a Yamaha RX-A2020 with YPAO, it sounds as good as the 3313 did with the added bonus of cleaner dialogue...

I wouldn't pick an AVR based on room correction software alone.
Hifi4Hobby's Avatar Hifi4Hobby 08:24 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceh383 View Post

True enough, higher level room correction software can, and usually does, make a difference... But not always. My Denon 3313 with MultEQ XT sounded better in my room than the Denon 4520 with MultEQ XT32 that I returned. I now have a Yamaha RX-A2020 with YPAO, it sounds as good as the 3313 did with the added bonus of cleaner dialogue...

I wouldn't pick an AVR based on room correction software alone.

Usually the so called higher end comes with more features to justify the price but some brands goes the other way round, they have less features, looks simple and straight forward but with quality parts loaded within that makes the sound so so seductive to listen that simply ooze quality. And they do offer extraordinary warranty period to cover even the subsequent owners as well as superior customer services that simply keep the customers smiling for years to come.

So features isnt really the way to say it's high but it's pretty the common theme with those Eastern brands such as Denon, Marantz etc.
snyderkv's Avatar snyderkv 09:50 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badouri View Post

NAD T 787: Audyssey MultEQ XT

"SoundStage review" Onkyo vs Anthem vs NAD

The Onkyo’s sound was clean and clear, if just a shade less than perfect. Both the NAD T 787 and the Anthem MRX 700 had the kind of effortless transient jump you hear from tubes.

This was a pro Onkyo review and they basically said the $2000 Anthem sounded better than the $3000 Onkyo. There is your high end vs mid grade for you. And all without XT32.

Finally put to rest
CMoen's Avatar CMoen 11:00 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by snyderkv View Post

"SoundStage review" Onkyo vs Anthem vs NAD

The Onkyo’s sound was clean and clear, if just a shade less than perfect. Both the NAD T 787 and the Anthem MRX 700 had the kind of effortless transient jump you hear from tubes.

This was a pro Onkyo review and they basically said the $2000 Anthem sounded better than the $3000 Onkyo. There is your high end vs mid grade for you. And all without XT32.

Finally put to rest

From the review
Quote:
How does the $3000 TX-NR5010 compete with the $2000 Anthem MRX 700 and the $4000 NAD T 787? Each is an excellent receiver, and all deserve consideration. I like the Anthem’s power-amp section best -- it’s muscular and never seems to run out of power -- but its processor section lacks some of the newer surround modes. The Onkyo is loaded with every possible device, and has more setup flexibility than either of the others. NAD has that mindboggling remote control and much of the Onkyo’s flexibility, but no phono section.

Bottom line: Onkyo has a real winner here, one capable of standing proudly between two winners of the coveted SoundStage! Network Reviewers’ Choice award. The TX-NR5010 deserves that award as well. A job well done by all involved.

Hifi4Hobby's Avatar Hifi4Hobby 11:47 AM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMoen View Post

From the review

Ah..indeed..review said it all!!
snyderkv's Avatar snyderkv 09:21 PM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hifi4Hobby View Post

Ah..indeed..review said it all!!

From a SQ perspective, it's a subtle way of saying "it got bested by high end receivers". Towards the end, they commented on features, remote etc. Not sure what your point was here because we were talking strictly SQ and XT32.
ceh383's Avatar ceh383 10:13 PM 05-24-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hifi4Hobby View Post

Usually the so called higher end comes with more features to justify the price but some brands goes the other way round, they have less features, looks simple and straight forward but with quality parts loaded within that makes the sound so so seductive to listen that simply ooze quality. And they do offer extraordinary warranty period to cover even the subsequent owners as well as superior customer services that simply keep the customers smiling for years to come.

So features isnt really the way to say it's high but it's pretty the common theme with those Eastern brands such as Denon, Marantz etc.

Understood. The reality is this whole process starts with budget. If the OP's friend has 4~5k to spend on a "High End" AVR, the best bang for the buck would be to spend 75% of that on a better, matched set of speakers(given the statement of what he has). Then spend the remaining 25% on an AVR that has the features he needs.

IMO, a mid-grade AVR through good speakers will sound better than any "High End" AVR through average speakers...
Hifi4Hobby's Avatar Hifi4Hobby 01:07 AM 05-25-2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceh383 View Post



Understood. The reality is this whole process starts with budget. If the OP's friend has 4~5k to spend on a "High End" AVR, the best bang for the buck would be to spend 75% of that on a better, matched set of speakers(given the statement of what he has). Then spend the remaining 25% on an AVR that has the features he needs.

IMO, a mid-grade AVR through good speakers will sound better than any "High End" AVR through average speakers...

+1 smile.gif
snyderkv's Avatar snyderkv 11:54 PM 04-14-2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by snyderkv View Post

"SoundStage review" Onkyo vs Anthem vs NAD

The Onkyo’s sound was clean and clear, if just a shade less than perfect. Both the NAD T 787 and the Anthem MRX 700 had the kind of effortless transient jump you hear from tubes.

This was a pro Onkyo review and they basically said the $2000 Anthem sounded better than the $3000 Onkyo. There is your high end vs mid grade for you. And all without XT32.

Finally put to rest

I wanted to update my thoughts on the reviews. I purchased a cheap 50 watt receiver and can't tell the difference between it and my flagship Onkyo or my hi-end separates. I can tell a difference with the XT32 though, just not with watts. I noticed it only took a few watts to power my speakers at my listening level according to my meter. Lesson learned.
Tags: Denon Avr 2313ci Receiver , Denon Avr 1913 Receiver , Denon Avr X4000 7 2 Channel Home Theater Receiver , Denon Avr 4520ci Receiver
1  2

Up
Mobile  Desktop