or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › 2 Channel Audio › Harmon Kardon 3490 vs Onkyo 8050
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Harmon Kardon 3490 vs Onkyo 8050 - Page 3

post #61 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcam406 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by postrokfan View Post

It is apparent to me that Arny, mcnarus, and others know what they are talking about. An AVR will do the job just as well or perhaps better with room correction depending on the listening space. However, at the end of the day the OP asked about two-channel receivers. The guy just wants a simple stereo receiver and that's perfectly acceptable. It's too bad these kinds of threads degrade into childish debates.
thanks for the reply.i obviously came to the wrong place for advice BETWEEN A HK 3490 AND AN ONKYO 8050.t

It would be cool if you could read your posts the way they look to a neutral observer. You were looking for affirmation about making what many people here thought is a bad decision, and now you're unhappy because you got some honest opinions that disagreed with your prejudices.

I can give you a long list of forums where this level of honesty and neutrality is unheard of...
post #62 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

I give credence to empirically sound research. All the empirically sound research I am aware of supports the conclusion that if amps are level-matched and not clipping, neither you nor I nor anyone else can tell them apart. I'm open to other evidence. But none of the dogmatic true believers in amp sound have ever been able to provide a shred of it.
That's the part the believers continue to shirk, to this day. Very telling. wink.gif
post #63 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by diomania View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

I give credence to empirically sound research. All the empirically sound research I am aware of supports the conclusion that if amps are level-matched and not clipping, neither you nor I nor anyone else can tell them apart. I'm open to other evidence. But none of the dogmatic true believers in amp sound have ever been able to provide a shred of it.
That's the part the believers continue to shirk, to this day. Very telling. wink.gif

I don't know if it is shirking or a tacit admission that they know that the vast majority of power amp comparisons will find "no audible differences".

At this point it would be a giant feather in the cap of any power amp manufacturer to bring an ABX test to an audio show that would consistently produce positive results.
post #64 of 127
As a lurker in this thread, I'd be quite interested to read some actual avr vs. 2 channel amp abx test data....
post #65 of 127
Quote:
As a lurker in this thread, I'd be quite interested to read some actual avr vs. 2 channel amp abx test data....
Good question, but I'm afraid I don't know of any. For those of us who want to think empirically about all this, the question of amp sound was settled a couple of decades ago. (Tom Nousaine did an AES paper in the 90s summarizing the couple dozen amp DBT tests whose results had been published.) Under the usual conditions, amps were sonically transparent then. The only reason they wouldn't be now is if manufacturers were making them worse. Seems unlikely.
post #66 of 127
I have done sighted comparisons on occasion, and couldn't differentiate different amps even then. I also had a $1500 nad avr, but now use a $500 Chinese tube amp for my 2 channel listening. I just couldn't seem to listen to the avr for long periods without fatigue, and I thought I had the world by the tail when I bought it.
post #67 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcam406 View Post

hey folks,thinking of upgrading my home 2 channel setup.as of now i have a Technics SA EX140 receiver i bought new back in the mid 90's with a Technics 5 disc cd player.speakers are Cerwin Vega LS-8's.this system has performed flawlessly over the years with no problems.i dont want to go the AVR route because surround isnt that important for me anyways.ive always been a HK fan,and the 3490 has the optical digital input that i want for my LG lcd.these 2 receivers have basically the same features for approximately the same price,so im at a crossroads as to which one to purchase.im not into the networking thing,so that doesnt matter to me neither.has anyone had any experience with either?i have read many reviews and there pretty well the same for both.any help or info would be appreciated.thanks.

here is my 2 cents. I have the LS-8's and have used a few receivers over the years. The most recent being the HK3490. The LS-8's sounded the same with all the receivers I used. So unless you plan on upgrading your speakers just get the receiver that has the features you want. I went with the HK because I wanted to upgrade my speakers (HK has good clean power and my new speakers benefit from that) and I just like the simple 2.0 setup. I dont need Audyssey for a 2.0 setup. Now if I wanted to add a sub it would be nice to have bass management and the HK doesnt offer that. I know you say you dont need the features of an AVR but it's always nice to have them just in case. I like my HK3490 but I would like it more if it had bass management. So I guess you just need to ask yourself a few questions. You upgrading speakers? You adding a sub? Will I need room correction or bass management in the next few years? As for the HK3490 vs the Onkyo 8050, both will be just fine. I would get the one with that fits my budget.
post #68 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

.... A few people tried to give the OP some advice he did not want, and he kinda took offense is all. Happens all the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcam406 View Post

i didnt take offense at all.my question wasnt answered.read the title of the thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcam406 View Post

thanks for the reply.i obviously came to the wrong place for advice BETWEEN A HK 3490 AND AN ONKYO 8050.this is the 2 CHANNEL AUDIO THREAD,am i correct? if i wanted advice on an AVR,i would of posted in the proper thread.AND IM AN IDIOT? READ THE ****ING TITLE? only some of you,who i have thanked,have enough COMPREHENSION SKILLS to give me a solid answer PERTAINING TO THE QUESTION I POSTED IN THE CORRECT THREAD.and im the idiot........

I'm lost. First you say you weren't offended for receiving replies with advice you did not want (i.e., being suggested option C instead of your initially requested choice between A or B), then here only a couple posts later, you certainly sound like you were offended. confused.gif
post #69 of 127
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CruelInventions View Post



I'm lost. First you say you weren't offended for receiving replies with advice you did not want (i.e., being suggested option C instead of your initially requested choice between A or B), then here only a couple posts later, you certainly sound like you were offended. confused.gif
i was offended when i was called an idiot for hearing a difference between 2 receivers using the same speakers.all i asked for was an opinion between 2 receivers,the HK3490 and the ONKYO 8050.simple enough right? only a few gave me an honest answer pertaining to MY QUESTION.what i got from a certain few was the biggest load of verbal diaherra ive ever read.nothing of it pertaining to the ORIGINAL QUESTION.
post #70 of 127
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by weez82 View Post

here is my 2 cents. I have the LS-8's and have used a few receivers over the years. The most recent being the HK3490. The LS-8's sounded the same with all the receivers I used. So unless you plan on upgrading your speakers just get the receiver that has the features you want. I went with the HK because I wanted to upgrade my speakers (HK has good clean power and my new speakers benefit from that) and I just like the simple 2.0 setup. I dont need Audyssey for a 2.0 setup. Now if I wanted to add a sub it would be nice to have bass management and the HK doesnt offer that. I know you say you dont need the features of an AVR but it's always nice to have them just in case. I like my HK3490 but I would like it more if it had bass management. So I guess you just need to ask yourself a few questions. You upgrading speakers? You adding a sub? Will I need room correction or bass management in the next few years? As for the HK3490 vs the Onkyo 8050, both will be just fine. I would get the one with that fits my budget.
thanks for the reply.to answer your questions,im going to grab 2 more speakers to add,still comparing towers as of late,im not adding a sub,dont need room correction or bass management,both receivers fit my budget,up here the Onkyo is a hundred bucks cheaper,albeit it has the same features with less advertised w/ch,which isnt a deal breaker imo.thats one of the reasons i asked this question,because i havnt heard much about the Onkyo,only positives about the HK.
post #71 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcam406 View Post

thanks for the reply.to answer your questions,im going to grab 2 more speakers to add,still comparing towers as of late,im not adding a sub,dont need room correction or bass management,both receivers fit my budget,up here the Onkyo is a hundred bucks cheaper,albeit it has the same features with less advertised w/ch,which isnt a deal breaker imo.thats one of the reasons i asked this question,because i havnt heard much about the Onkyo,only positives about the HK.

Yep, hard to find user feed back on the 8050. But on paper they look really close. I like the looks of the 3490 over the 8050 but I dont know if that would be worth the extra $100. Hard to say if the amp on the 8050 is as good as the amp in the 3490 but I dont think you can go wrong with either. I like my 3490 and have no regrets getting it
post #72 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcam406 View Post

I was offended when i was called an idiot for hearing a difference between 2 receivers using the same speakers.

Please provide a quote of a post in this thread that you did not originate that uses the word idiot.

I believe the the record of the AVS forum shows that the true situation was explained to you without the use of the word idiot.
post #73 of 127
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2obed View Post

It is really quite simple: if you hear a difference between two pieces of gear, it is because you are an idiot. If you accept the opinion of people who have not actually listened to the gear tell that it all sounds the same based on sophisticated tests that they did not actually do but claim they could have done, you are an audiophile. If you know what gear you listened to, it is a sighted test, and not to be trusted if you hear a difference you did not expect to hear. If they listen to two known pieces of equipment that they cannot see and do not hear a difference that they expected to not hear, then it is a scientific experiment.
If you do double blind experiment and hear a difference, you will be educated why your experiment must have been flawed, because it is a given that the differences are not audible. And all of this is authoritatively stated to be scientific.
See? Simple! biggrin.gif
there ya go,Arnie
post #74 of 127
Quote:
there ya go,Arnie
He was joking. And essentially coming to your defense.

Sheesh.
post #75 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcam406 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2obed View Post

It is really quite simple: if you hear a difference between two pieces of gear, it is because you are an idiot. If you accept the opinion of people who have not actually listened to the gear tell that it all sounds the same based on sophisticated tests that they did not actually do but claim they could have done, you are an audiophile. If you know what gear you listened to, it is a sighted test, and not to be trusted if you hear a difference you did not expect to hear. If they listen to two known pieces of equipment that they cannot see and do not hear a difference that they expected to not hear, then it is a scientific experiment.
If you do double blind experiment and hear a difference, you will be educated why your experiment must have been flawed, because it is a given that the differences are not audible. And all of this is authoritatively stated to be scientific.
See? Simple! biggrin.gif
there ya go,Arnie

OK, but it wasn't Mcnarus or I.

I'd never say such a thing, and I'm not taking the blame for it.
.
post #76 of 127
Thread Starter 
did i say it was either of you?
post #77 of 127
2obed was being sarcastic, re-phrasing (mischaracterizing and oversimplifying I might add) the stance of someone like arnyk, mcnarus, etc., but nevertheless, his post was actually in sympathy to you. So nobody called you that word.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcam406 View Post

i was offended when i was called an idiot for hearing a difference between 2 receivers using the same speakers.all i asked for was an opinion between 2 receivers,the HK3490 and the ONKYO 8050.simple enough right? only a few gave me an honest answer pertaining to MY QUESTION.what i got from a certain few was the biggest load of verbal diaherra ive ever read.nothing of it pertaining to the ORIGINAL QUESTION.

OK, so you weren't "offended" per se, but obviously irritated by the suggestion of "C" (avr) vs your requested comparison of the two stereo receivers. Got it now!
post #78 of 127
And now comes the logical teardown and analysis of each word and phrase...

bigcam406, I realize this is your thread, but I'd recommend you simply abandon it and let the practitioners of epistemological scientism have their fun.

There are dozens of ways to call someone an idiot without using the word, then feigning mock indignation that the person would think he or she were being characterized as such. (That's the past subjunctive case, BTW, in case someone wants to jump on it.)

There are many ways to insinuate that someone is ignorant without coming right out and saying it, and many ways to belittle and marginalize someone's experience without uttering fool, clown, or simpleton.

There are multiple ways of implying that someone doesn't know what's good for him or her because he or she is not really asking the right question, so the question gets rephrased, corrected, modified, and repositioned to let the person know what he or she really should ask as opposed to what he or she did ask without calling that person ignorant, deficient, or stupid.

It's a type of fun game for some that rarely violates forum rules, but usually it's fun at the expense of others. The sad paradox is that there is a lot of good information and experience to be gathered from everyone including those on my ignore list (try it, you'll like it!), but the overbearing arrogance and intractable nature of some of the commentary devalues anything of merit that might be offered, and the uncanny ability to ignore the topic and make mountains out of molehills takes the whole thread off track and runs it into the abyss of scientism and individual inquisition, thus ruining the enjoyment of the participants.

The smart guys have had their fun. Don't take any more of their bait, and they'll have to go fish somewhere else.

Or maybe a moderator can simply lock the thread since it's been off thread for ten or more posts--including this one!
post #79 of 127
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by weez82 View Post

Yep, hard to find user feed back on the 8050. But on paper they look really close. I like the looks of the 3490 over the 8050 but I dont know if that would be worth the extra $100. Hard to say if the amp on the 8050 is as good as the amp in the 3490 but I dont think you can go wrong with either. I like my 3490 and have no regrets getting it
thanks for the reply.i appreciate it.
post #80 of 127
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by filecat13 View Post

And now comes the logical teardown and analysis of each word and phrase...

bigcam406, I realize this is your thread, but I'd recommend you simply abandon it and let the practitioners of epistemological scientism have their fun.

There are dozens of ways to call someone an idiot without using the word, then feigning mock indignation that the person would think he or she were being characterized as such. (That's the past subjunctive case, BTW, in case someone wants to jump on it.)

There are many ways to insinuate that someone is ignorant without coming right out and saying it, and many ways to belittle and marginalize someone's experience without uttering fool, clown, or simpleton.

There are multiple ways of implying that someone doesn't know what's good for him or her because he or she is not really asking the right question, so the question gets rephrased, corrected, modified, and repositioned to let the person know what he or she really should ask as opposed to what he or she did ask without calling that person ignorant, deficient, or stupid.

It's a type of fun game for some that rarely violates forum rules, but usually it's fun at the expense of others. The sad paradox is that there is a lot of good information and experience to be gathered from everyone including those on my ignore list (try it, you'll like it!), but the overbearing arrogance and intractable nature of some of the commentary devalues anything of merit that might be offered, and the uncanny ability to ignore the topic and make mountains out of molehills takes the whole thread off track and runs it into the abyss of scientism and individual inquisition, thus ruining the enjoyment of the participants.

The smart guys have had their fun. Don't take any more of their bait, and they'll have to go fish somewhere else.

Or maybe a moderator can simply lock the thread since it's been off thread for ten or more posts--including this one!
thanks.i couldnt of said it better myself.i'd appreciate it if a mod would lock this thread.since my QUESTION was answered by a certain FEW,and i do appreciate the POSITIVE responses,i see there is no sense in continuing this.thanks again.
post #81 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by filecat13 View Post

And now comes the logical teardown and analysis of each word and phrase...

bigcam406, I realize this is your thread, but I'd recommend you simply abandon it and let the practitioners of epistemological scientism have their fun.

There are dozens of ways to call someone an idiot without using the word, then feigning mock indignation that the person would think he or she were being characterized as such. (That's the past subjunctive case, BTW, in case someone wants to jump on it.)

There are many ways to insinuate that someone is ignorant without coming right out and saying it, and many ways to belittle and marginalize someone's experience without uttering fool, clown, or simpleton.

There are multiple ways of implying that someone doesn't know what's good for him or her because he or she is not really asking the right question, so the question gets rephrased, corrected, modified, and repositioned to let the person know what he or she really should ask as opposed to what he or she did ask without calling that person ignorant, deficient, or stupid.

It's a type of fun game for some that rarely violates forum rules, but usually it's fun at the expense of others. The sad paradox is that there is a lot of good information and experience to be gathered from everyone including those on my ignore list (try it, you'll like it!), but the overbearing arrogance and intractable nature of some of the commentary devalues anything of merit that might be offered, and the uncanny ability to ignore the topic and make mountains out of molehills takes the whole thread off track and runs it into the abyss of scientism and individual inquisition, thus ruining the enjoyment of the participants.

The smart guys have had their fun. Don't take any more of their bait, and they'll have to go fish somewhere else.

Or maybe a moderator can simply lock the thread since it's been off thread for ten or more posts--including this one!

The above is to me an example of how someone turns sincere efforts at sharing relevant scientific truth into a gigantic put-down where they try to pretend that they have seized the moral high ground. Two words: passive-aggressive, or if you will sore loser. This doesn't have to be a blood battle - it is just about a hobby!
post #82 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

The above is to me an example of how someone turns sincere efforts at sharing relevant scientific truth into a gigantic put-down where they try to pretend that they have seized the moral high ground. Two words: passive-aggressive, or if you will sore loser. This doesn't have to be a blood battle - it is just about a hobby!

Seriously man, troll much? Is the hobby you speak of actually 2 channel audio...or creating flame wars?
post #83 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by rntlee View Post

Seriously man, troll much? Is the hobby you speak of actually 2 channel audio...or creating flame wars?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rntlee View Post

It's actually "confirmation bias" and it seems to be quite a common fallacy is this forum.
But something keeps bringing you back. I guess you like it here.
post #84 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by diomania View Post


But something keeps bringing you back. I guess you like it here.

Back from where??
post #85 of 127
i find it funny you guys are arguing with the owner of avsforum.com even if you feel he is wrong. He is coming from a very technical background and knows his stuff.
I like that on the harman website they give you specification such as the max current of 45a. (Parasound Halo A23 125wpc, has 45a peak) The mediocre but not bad 95 SNR (not bad, the best receiver or pre-pro i found was only 100) and other specifications such as slew rate and damping factor(i know some say damping factor is useless)
post #86 of 127
Thread Starter 
did i want info on an AVR? no.did i go and compare an AVR and the HK3490 to see what all the fuss was about,and to come to MY OWN conclusions? yes.was i impressed with the sound quality of the aformentioned AVR vs. the HK? no. was my QUESTION answered ? yes,by a certain few.end of.
post #87 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigcam406 View Post

did i want info on an AVR? no.did i go and compare an AVR and the HK3490 to see what all the fuss was about,and to come to MY OWN conclusions? yes.was i impressed with the sound quality of the aformentioned AVR vs. the HK? no. was my QUESTION answered ? yes,by a certain few.end of.

I fail to see why members offering you good advice is a problem. It's your money though - if you want to ignore science and spend more for less, no one is stopping you.
post #88 of 127
I felt like the whole thread started off irrational. The main conflict started with people not coping with the fact the op had his mind set up on a stereo receiver which i don't blame him as it had everything he wanted and nothing more. Then, just like every other amp thread, the subject of sound quality was brought up and we all know that makes every thread go to hell.
Edited by bthrb4u - 1/30/13 at 7:02am
post #89 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by bthrb4u View Post

i find it funny you guys are arguing with the owner of avsforum.com

Does someboby around here own this website? I find it funny that a member of this site has an opinion as to who argues with who.

Depending on the area and thread of this site, you'll find members debating and sharing their experience or sharing documented test results. "Arguing" as you put it is normal on AVS. One should pick their battles and make sure the pool they are wading into isn't too deep unless they want to get their hair wet.

Like my Grandfather told me "Don't wrestle with a pig"
post #90 of 127
I find it funny that you find it funny that i have an opinion, which in my observation was nothing more than an observation and never suggested anything to anyone.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 2 Channel Audio
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › 2 Channel Audio › Harmon Kardon 3490 vs Onkyo 8050