Do you think this would be an upgrade over what I already have?

A speaker upgrade is always something to consider. Speakers, without doubt, sound different, although what's "better" will ultimately be up to you.

As for the electronics upgrades you describe, I seriously doubt you'll hear any difference at all, not if you're honest with yourself. The differences among DACs are purely theoretical and highly overstated in a practical sense. As for power, those external amps would roughly double your wattage, which translates to +3 dB. That might make a difference, but only if you think you're overdriving the amp you already have. (Extra reserve power is a good thing, but it doesn't make your system "sound better" when your amp is tooling along at one or two watts, which is generally the case.)

I don't see where bi-amping comes into this equation. You'd need a crossover for that.

If you're hearing voices, you need to get back on your meds.
No. If you notice something particularly wrong with your current system, then the receiver might be a problem, but as you've mentioned nothing, we can pretty safely assume it's not.
Sure, everybody's positive about it. They listen to the little voices inside their heads, too. But it will do nothing for you.
If you're hearing voices, you need to get back on your meds.

The DACs in your receiver are already much, much better than your ears. A "better" DAC can't sound any better to you.

My advice? Save your money till you're ready to upgrade speakers. Then upgrade speakers.
You'll never guess what I'm going to tell you about people who hold this view. See answers above.

It's not a "waste of five other channels" as much as you think. HT receivers put out more power when driving only 2 channels; your Yamaha is most likely already able to feed your Jamos 130 watts.

I'd save my money toward a more significant speaker upgrade and/or get a sub. I've heard some people feel some Yamaha models to be a little bass light in the very lower frequencies (don't know if this is true). Better defined bass from a good sub could offset the brightness you feel the Yamaha has.

Ah, OK. You're new here, and you're about to get an education in the difference between audio hype and audio science. When you make comparisons like that, the differences you hear are often the result of differences in output levels, not real differences in sound quality. If something's louder, even a tiny bit louder, it often sounds better. There's also a strong tendency to just "hear" differences that aren't really there, It's human nature. If you thought Yamaha was a better brand than Philips, for example, you'd be very likely to think it sounds better. But match the output levels precisely, compare them blind so you don't know which is which, and the choice will be much, much tougher.

As for the DAC comparison you did, it's also possible that the analog output on your computer is noisy. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong, or even subpar, about the DACs in the Yamaha.

Wow, I somehow missed this.

If you have your equalization set to flat and any room-correction set to off, then there's nothing "bright" (or dull or whatever) about your receiver (Yamaha or otherwise) assuming there's nothing wrong with it. The response of your receiver -- and that of any modern solid-state receiver, preamp or power amp -- is dead flat. Frequency response is easy to measure, and they solved this kinda problem a long time ago. There is no way, no how that your receiver could be "bright" without test gear bearing that out (because it would amount to a rise in midrange/treble by several decibels), and there's likewise no way, no how that Yamaha is gonna let a product out the door with non-linear response. This isn't 1965; they know how to design amps with very flat, very wide response.

So where do myths like that come from? I dunno, 'cause they make no sense at face value. My best guess has always been those hack magazines and the non-critical thinkers who don't question what they read in them, but it's just a guess. Anyway, your system will be no more or less "bright" by swapping out the amp. Change speakers, yes. Changes to your room, yes. Fiddle with the tone controls, yes. Change your receiver or amp, no.
Edited by Brownstone322 - 9/23/12 at 2:55pm

Good news for you. Buy used speakers to get the best bang for your buck upgrade

Surely, you jest. That couldn't possibly happen.

Oh, that's just priceless.

That's not the same as matching levels. Actually, it's pretty much the opposite of matching levels. When we do real listening tests, we try to get within a tenth of a dB, which you cannot do by ear, or even with a SPL meter.
That you're conscious of. But it's the subconscious stuff that really effs you up in this business. No one knows why you might have preferred one to the other. Unfortunately, the way you compared them you left too many possibilities open. And it is unfortunate—it would be much easier if we could do a straightforward comparison like you did and draw some meaningful conclusions. Alas, we are only human.
Again, there's no necessary correlation between objective sonic characteristics and subjective sonic impressions. Humans are not calibrated test instruments, and they do very badly when they try to be.

My theory is that one guy, one time, accidentally jostled his treble control, and concluded that "Yamaha is bright." (As if every Yamaha amp design were identical, right?) He wrote it somewhere, and people who didn't know any better but assumed that if you wrote for a magazine, you had to know what you're talking about, took it as gospel and repeated it ad nauseam in the audio fora.

Could be. That's as good as anything I've got. If it started as you say, then, by extension of course, we got the myth that amps in general (not just Yamaha) are inherently "bright" or "warm" or "strong in the bass" or whatever (all of which are inexplicably invisible to measurement), and that you'll need to match your amp to your speakers for those very reasons. To wit: "Those speakers have metal tweeters, and metal tweeters are harsh [another myth], so you'll want to avoid a 'bright' amp. You're gonna want a 'mellow' amp."

And on and on it goes, I guess.

Doesn't it make you want to get a group together, buy a couple thousand op amps from China at $2 or $3 a piece, but with our own label and code printed on it? Then write testimonials on forums about how great it is for $60 and rake in the cash as it sells on ebay. LOL

I struggled with the same question, as I also use a Yamaha 5.1 AVR in my 2.1 system.

Just to review. When you use a 5.1 AVR as a 2.x channel you have a potential problem ensuring that you have indeed configured the AVR as a 2.x channel device. There are 2 things that you need to do.

(1) You need to configure the AVR speaker outputs to be as you are using it, IOW with all of the surround and center channel speakers set to none. The front mains should be configured as "large" unless you are using a subwoofer. The subwoofer should be configured to none if there is none. If you have a good subwoofer then you should configure your front speakers to small, so that they are relieved of the demands of processing bass. This usually gives a cleaner and more distinct sound to your system.

(2) According to page 36 of the user manual, you need to select 2 ch mode, and possibly also Straight mode depending on the source you are listening to. If you are listening to a source with > 2 channels then 2 ch mode ensures that a sensible downmix of the multiple channels is fed to your speakers. If you are listening to a source with 2 channels then Straight mode ensures that the receiver is functioning as a purely 2 channel device.

If you follow the instructions above, then you have, for all intents and purposes, a system with a stereo amp.


Usually a waste of time and money. I've done these comparisons lately but with the background of being an EE with about 52 years of experience with audio, and also more than a decade of experience as a live sound mixer and recordist. Most of these high priced alternatives provice few advantages, and such advantages as they provide they are mostly paper advantages and cost a ton of money for what little you get even on paper.

I don't see any advantage. For example if you look at the specs for your receiver, it is rated at 165 wpc into 6 ohm speakers such as yours. Note the 27 pound weight of your Yamaha, as compared to the 26 pound weight of a pair of the Daytons: their power supplies actually have a pretty similar weight if such things actually contribute to better sound, which they don't. Most of the weight of your receiver is in its power supply, and if you only drive 2 channels then that rather large power supply is basically split among the 2 channels that you are using.

The DAC in your receiver is rated at 24/192 KHz operation. Its actual performance is not specified, but it can be inferred from lab tests of other Yamaha receivers in the same product line. A published test shows that in surround mode which forces the signals through the receiver's DAC, its frequency response is better than +/- 0.1 dB 20-20 KHz which is very good performance.

As far as your Audigy 4se audio interface goes, there is a technical test of it posted at http://rw3ps.qrz.ru/sb3.files/SCardSDR.htm I would summarize it as saying that the Audigy 4 is a significant upgrade over the Audigy in terms of measured performance, and that in some ways it even outperforms the far more expensive M-Audio (professional audio) card they compared it to.


I agree with the other posters who seem to be suggesting that probably your next most productive move in terms of improved sound quality would be to spend $500 or more on a good subwoofer. Acoustic treatments for your listening room may also be a good price/performance move.

Hi Mcnarus. Since we're on this subject of DACs for a bit, I have a question for you. Let's say you had two identical Wolfson WM8740 dacs in two different CD players, and these players consisted of different output stages, would they still sound basically identical? In other words, can an output stage, whether it be op amp or a passive transformer, influence the sound of a particular source component in any way? Because that's what I hear a lot about in the audiophile world. Thanks for any feedback.

Sure, it can. There are CD players with tubes in them. They most likely affect the sound audibly. Assuming we're talking solid state, however, you'd have to be a screaming incompetent to produce such a CD player. Understand what "making something sound different" means in this case. It means adding so much distortion that it's actually audible. That's what you're buying—distortion.
Find a different world.

Yes, measurable way. But not many vary enough to be audible when played at same volume for the reasons already mentioned by mcnarus.

Yes.

All things are possible, but the more relevant question is probable about what is likely.

First off, the WM8740 is vast overkill for a CD players, It is a high performance 176 KHz part with better performance than can possibly be recorded on a 16 bit medium such as a CD. If you use one in a CD player, the CD is most likely the weakest link in the chain, not any part of the CD player itself.

Secondly, the Wolfson DAC being a premium part, it is unlikely that any reasonable manufacturer is going to compromise the performance of his produce by matching the WM8740 with an ultra-cheap output stage. Here is what his parts cost look like: Way under $1 for premium grade parts for a quality output stage versus his cost of maybe $5 for the DAC chip.

Thirdly, even far lower grade parts than I was talking about in the previous paragraph will still result in an output stage that has no audible effects.

OTOH, if a transformer is used the CD player's output stage, not only does that make the production costs skyrocket, it also dramatically increases the possibility that some audible change will occur with the sound.

In the audiophile world, a lot seems to be based on very crude listening evaluations. In many cases there are no absolute references (such as a short piece of plain wire), so it is incorrect to even call what they do "testing". Tests that are properly done routinely find nothing but pure sound, which always sounds the same!

Thanks Arnyk. Before I joined here, I notice everyone in the hi-fi world went on and on about the output stages in external DACs! They say the output stage is the main determining factor in influencing the sound and to absolutely avoid op amps. What's the big deal with op amps? Other than the skyrocketing price that you mention, are transformers less "accurate" than op amps?

This is no doubt because in general internet eggspurts are sheep and just go on and on about the results of reviews they read and maybe on a good day their sighted evaluations, both of which which are generally worse than nothing. Very few people on the web have enough practical experience and technical knowledge to rub together and even get modest warmth, let alone a fire.

As I said, the parts to build a premium grade line or headphone driver run about a buck. However far cheaper parts can yield something that works really well. Add a case and a power supply and we should still be under $30 out the door. And I'm not making this up because good but inexpensive mass-market products like the Sansa Clip and Fuze have well-done headphone amps and sell in that price range, and that's including everything else it takes to make a digital player including the memory, CPU, display, and internal battery.

People say lots of crazy things.

It is true that back in the 1970s the general run of op amp chips were a little light in the performance department. By the early 80s some great audio chips came on the market (e.g. NE5532), the better of which are still being sold in volume but for about $0.25 a channel because the development costs were paid off a few decades back!

Too many people with little or no brains or experience know how to spell the words and get them in the right order, I guess. ;-)

Yeah, transformers being very old tech are relatively big, heavy and can't be stamped out a zillion at a time for a buck a dozen like chips. They have some inherent problems but can be pretty good if they are big, heavy and cost a lot of money. They still have a few legitimate uses in audio, but not so much for driving headphones. They are like like umm... well you know. You don't use them unless you have to. ;-)