or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The "Official" Yamaha AVENTAGE RX-A1030, RX-A2030, RX-A3030 and CX-A5000/MX-A5000 Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The "Official" Yamaha AVENTAGE RX-A1030, RX-A2030, RX-A3030 and CX-A5000/MX-A5000 Thread - Page 32

post #931 of 2227
A lot of people seem to be mating the 3030 with Emotiva amps... has anyone compare the sound between them? or is there an assumption it will sound better? or do people need the extra wattage for inefficient speakers/large rooms?

I am curious about comparisons between internal vs. external amplification.
post #932 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcm2128 View Post

A lot of people seem to be mating the 3030 with Emotiva amps... has anyone compare the sound between them? or is there an assumption it will sound better? or do people need the extra wattage for inefficient speakers/large rooms?

I am curious about comparisons between internal vs. external amplification.

No there isn't any sonic difference between them. Most people do not need extra power. In fact it isn't even enough extra power to make much difference. Most people buy separate amplifiers because they want them, not because they need them.
post #933 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

No there isn't any sonic difference between them. Most people do not need extra power. In fact it isn't even enough extra power to make much difference. Most people buy separate amplifiers because they want them, not because they need them.

That's my thought on this topic as well. Pre-amps and DACs influence sonic characteristics, and to a lesser extent amps (if perceptible at all). I state this as owner of two expensive amp that I may be selling and replacing with a 3030. I was considering the CX-5000.. But instead of spending $2,500, I could actually sell my amps which are in mint condition for more than the cost of a 3030.

I find that A/V receivers do sound different as a result of the DACs and pre-amp stages. I just compared the RX-A3030 to the Marantz SR7008. Both are great but sound a bit different. They were as expected - most noticeably with the Marantz being warmer and fuller through the midrange with delicate but detailed highs and the Yamaha with a more clinical, leaner, and slightly brighter presentation. Both had a good soundstage, but the Yamaha had a bit more precision with imaging and bass seemed a slightly tighter as well. These traits were evident after volume matching and listening to 2-channel in "pure direct", I could pick the Marantz and Yamaha without knowing which was selected (the salesperson changed the randomly). The choice between the two should come down to features (e.g. Audyssey vs YPAO, etc.), sonic preferences and matching with speaker and room charaterics (bright vs acoustically treated or damped rooms).

My room is small... I don't need the extra power of the external amps. Thinking about pulling the trigger on the 3030 which is better match with my speakers and room. I liked the Marantz as well, and I would favor it with my prior speakers which were a bit forward sounding.
Edited by jcm2128 - 12/5/13 at 1:45pm
post #934 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by stieger View Post

What's your thoughts on the Emotiva? I'm debating removing my Crown Pro Amps (xls series) and replacing them with an Emotiva to power all my surround speakers (off by one channel). Anyway, I am going to be running my front 3 with a Bryston 6bSST, so can't wait to get that bad boy in the rack!

Curious if the Outlaw is overkill for surround speakers?

Thanks,

stieger

As for my little Emotiva Mini-X a-100 I found it to be an ideal fit to drive the rear presence speakers for my RX-A3030. At 50wpc and with its auto turnon capability it's basically a set and forget solution. I find that the presence channels really don't need much power.

In my other room where I have the 4 Outlaw Audio 2200s for the presence speakers I would have to say that it's overkill. But they were on sale! wink.gif

For the surround speakers I'd want more than the Mini-X since I think they require more power than the presence channels. In my living room system I have Def Tech BP8080s for front left/right and surround left/right and feel that they need equivalent (or at least close) to the same power in all four channels. My Outlaw Audio 7900 with all 7 channels delivering 300 watts each seems to be a good fit. However, I suspect that less power to the rear surrounds and center would be ok.
Edited by bwillcox - 12/6/13 at 8:07am
post #935 of 2227
Another great review of the CX-A5000 in the January 2014 edition of Sound & Vision magazine by David Vaughn. David's findings echo what a lot of us have identified with the sound quality. It was also great to see the Test Bench measurements for the audio section which are very very impressive.

I won't quote from the review here as this magazine is much easier to purchase in North America than the Home Cinema Choice magazine.

Review is not online yet so you can pick up the magazine in the meantime wink.gif

Cheers.
post #936 of 2227
folks,

Need a little help. I plugged in my rear presence speakers, and re-ran the setup, but the unit does NOT identify I have any rear presence speakers. Is it because I'm also running surround back speakers? I wouldn't think the setup would dictate "what" speakers I can use.

Am I missing something in the setup? Tried auto and manual setup, but the "rear presence speakers" are grayed out, suggesting it's not an option. I have them plugged in, amp on, etc., not sure what's occurring.

Stieger
post #937 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKO1 View Post

Another great review of the CX-A5000 in the January 2014 edition of Sound & Vision magazine by David Vaughn. David's findings echo what a lot of us have identified with the sound quality. It was also great to see the Test Bench measurements for the audio section which are very very impressive.

I won't quote from the review here as this magazine is much easier to purchase in North America than the Home Cinema Choice magazine.

Review is not online yet so you can pick up the magazine in the meantime wink.gif

Cheers.

Funny that they didn't test the real power output with all 11 channels driven. Regardless, with 7 channels driven, the output dropped from 160W to 99W.
post #938 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Funny that they didn't test the real power output with all 11 channels driven. Regardless, with 7 channels driven, the output dropped from 160W to 99W.

I really don't think that you will ever get much power sent to the 4 presence channels so that may be fair. In the case of the RX-Z11 its presence channels were only rated at 50W. And based on my 11.2 channel systems and what I hear from them, that's way above what ever gets sent to them (more like in the single digits I would guess). If you can rezone them then that could change things (and power needs) drastically. I don't do any multi-zone stuff so don't know anything about doing that (except how to turn off the other zones when they accidently get turned on).
post #939 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

No there isn't any sonic difference between them. Most people do not need extra power. In fact it isn't even enough extra power to make much difference. Most people buy separate amplifiers because they want them, not because they need them.

I would respectfully disagree with you

By sonic differences I assume you include audible distortion at a given volume level?

I have actually A/B ed a few receivers , in my home and played them at reference levels with some 4ohm speakers, Vienna Acoustics.
There were some big differences in a Pioneer VSX47TX, Onkyo 875, Yamaha Z7 and Denon 4310 receivers

It became pretty obvious after a short period which units had the beefier amps...in fact the Denon clipped and shut down

Put my 200x5 watt( all channels driven) Sherbourn amp in the mix

No contest...spanked every one of the receivers handily. In fact I felt the amp could play all day at reference volume and not break a sweat

Did that represent real world for me..?...sometimes..biggrin.gif

Do..I "need" that type of horsepower?

In the case of A/V gear the word "need" is pretty subjective

Do I "need" the Yamaha cx5000 to possibly replace my Onkyo 5508 preamp..?


Warren
post #940 of 2227
What input does it need to be on to be able to use ARC from the TV? I am trying to play an internet application on my TV but not getting any sound. ARC is enabled in the settings. I tried AUDIO1 but I'm still not getting any sound.
post #941 of 2227
Every Yamaha I've ever used defaulted ARC to AV4. Also check your connection to the TV. In my experience only one HDMI connection has the ARC feature so you could be connected to the wrong one.Check your HDMI Cable is it "HighSpeed" rated? How long is it?
post #942 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by RollTide2011 View Post

Every Yamaha I've ever used defaulted ARC to AV4. Also check your connection to the TV. In my experience only one HDMI connection has the ARC feature so you could be connected to the wrong one.Check your HDMI Cable is it "HighSpeed" rated? How long is it?

I had only tried AV1 until you said 4, but it still didn't work. I tried all 4 of them to be safe. I'm beginning to think it's either something on the TV or the cable itself. The cable is a couple years old from monoprice. It's 6 feet long and I'm fairly confident I ordered high speed. Maybe since its a little older it doesn't support ARC? HDMI Control is definitely turned on on both the TV and the receiver. When I turn the TV on it turns the receiver on automatically, turns off the TV speakers and volume is controlled properly. As far as I can tell everything is set properly on the TV as well. The TV is a Sony XBR-55HX929. Oh and the receiver is the 1030 model.

I originally had a Sony STR-1040 receiver but it was giving me nothing but HDMI problems, including handshake issues, video problems, as well as CEC issues. So far the only HDMI problem I have with this Yamaha is not getting ARC to work. Other than this is a huge upgrade over that Sony.
post #943 of 2227
Received my CX-A5000 the other day and got it up and running last night with my 5.1 setup. The 5000 was quite a bit taller than the RX-V1700 it was replacing. So much so that I had to buy a new equipment stand. I didn't notice a bit of difference when I first ran the XPA-5 with the 1700 vs. the 1700's amp section, but I decided to keep the XPA-5 anyway thinking I might move to a pre/pro one day. I'm glad I did because the XPA-5 and 5000 sound great together.

YPAO seemed to do an surprisingly accurate job as far as speaker levels/distances. I was a little surprised that the sub level was way lower than the other speakers, and could not be manipulated to even approach the levels of the other speakers (unlike the 1700) with the sub gain almost all the way up. However, I watched Wolverine with the sub setting per YPAO and sub sounded better than ever. I later discovered after I started reading the manual that there is another sub volume setting that I can play with, but I don't think its necessary. The sub sounds great as is.

I'm very impressed so far with the detail and clarity of the sound. The 5000 makes my 1700 sound somewhat muffled in comparison.

Looking forward to playing with it after I finish reading the manual. If there are any default settings that you guys think should be immediately addressed, feel free to chime in.
post #944 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Civik99si View Post

Received my CX-A5000 the other day and got it up and running last night with my 5.1 setup. The 5000 was quite a bit taller than the RX-V1700 it was replacing. So much so that I had to buy a new equipment stand. I didn't notice a bit of difference when I first ran the XPA-5 with the 1700 vs. the 1700's amp section, but I decided to keep the XPA-5 anyway thinking I might move to a pre/pro one day. I'm glad I did because the XPA-5 and 5000 sound great together.

YPAO seemed to do an surprisingly accurate job as far as speaker levels/distances. I was a little surprised that the sub level was way lower than the other speakers, and could not be manipulated to even approach the levels of the other speakers (unlike the 1700) with the sub gain almost all the way up. However, I watched Wolverine with the sub setting per YPAO and sub sounded better than ever. I later discovered after I started reading the manual that there is another sub volume setting that I can play with, but I don't think its necessary. The sub sounds great as is.

I'm very impressed so far with the detail and clarity of the sound. The 5000 makes my 1700 sound somewhat muffled in comparison.

Looking forward to playing with it after I finish reading the manual. If there are any default settings that you guys think should be immediately addressed, feel free to chime in.

You say it is lower. Did you measure and found the sub too be too low on the FR graph, or do you mean it just sounds lower by ear?
post #945 of 2227
The sub level was low compared to the other speaker levels when I ran/measured test tones. With my previous Yamaha receivers, I had to manually raise the sub level close to the other speaker levels to get the bass response I wanted. The 5000 sounded great after I ran YPAO without increasing the sub level.
post #946 of 2227

Hi,

 

i wonder if any of the members who have previously owned the Yamaha RXV1 (AX1 in the UK)

or the Yamaha A1 or Z9 could mention how they compare to the Yamaha CXA-5000

as there is a conflicting review on Amazon.com, that seems to say the reviewer thinks the Yamaha RXV1 sounds better

and also that the Z11 and Onkyo also sound much better than the CXA-5000

 

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1JC2K99DTY60H/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R1JC2K99DTY60H

this seems a bit hard to believe, but would appreciate the opinion of a few others, before considering buying one

i'm familiar with the Yamaha RXV1 (AX1) and A1 and have also heard a Z9, so would be helpful

 

thanks very much

post #947 of 2227
I've owned Yamaha's and currently have an Integra DHC. 80.3 and feel that review is likely not worth much. Really waiting for Kal's review in the March issue of Stereophile to be published as his focus is music. For movies the 5000 is pretty good from what I have gleaned.
post #948 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by WR1325 View Post

Hi,

i wonder if any of the members who have previously owned the Yamaha RXV1 (AX1 in the UK)
or the Yamaha A1 or Z9 could mention how they compare to the Yamaha CXA-5000
as there is a conflicting review on Amazon.com, that seems to say the reviewer thinks the Yamaha RXV1 sounds better
and also that the Z11 and Onkyo also sound much better than the CXA-5000

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1JC2K99DTY60H/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R1JC2K99DTY60H
this seems a bit hard to believe, but would appreciate the opinion of a few others, before considering buying one
i'm familiar with the Yamaha RXV1 (AX1) and A1 and have also heard a Z9, so would be helpful

thanks very much

Hmm, I've owned several RX-V1s (only flagship Yamaha receivers that ever needed repair...both failed with a bad input connector board) and a RX-Z9 and a couple of RX-Z11s. My experience is the opposite. I believe that my system sounds better now with the CX-A5000 than it has ever sounded (same power amps as when I was using the Z11, though the speakers have changed so it's not really apples to apples). I've not read the amazon.com review, but I also wouldn't put much stock in it.
Edited by bwillcox - 12/10/13 at 7:55pm
post #949 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by WR1325 View Post

Hi,

i wonder if any of the members who have previously owned the Yamaha RXV1 (AX1 in the UK)
or the Yamaha A1 or Z9 could mention how they compare to the Yamaha CXA-5000
as there is a conflicting review on Amazon.com, that seems to say the reviewer thinks the Yamaha RXV1 sounds better
and also that the Z11 and Onkyo also sound much better than the CXA-5000

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1JC2K99DTY60H/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R1JC2K99DTY60H
this seems a bit hard to believe, but would appreciate the opinion of a few others, before considering buying one
i'm familiar with the Yamaha RXV1 (AX1) and A1 and have also heard a Z9, so would be helpful

thanks very much

The review is all over the map and almost incoherent at times. According to other reviews the reviewer has completed he was a teenager in 1956 so that would put him at around 75 years old. It might be a case of too much technology settings to understand how to setup the Yamaha. For example he states that the sub output setting would need to be adjusted to protect your amps or speakers from overload or clipping?????? The sub output goes to a powered subwoofer so not sure what he is thinking there. 0 of 7 people took the time to find the review unhelpful wink.gif

I have seen two very good reviews from professional reviewers (Home Cinema Choice and Sound & Vision) and have highlighted them in this thread. There have also been amateur reviews from a few of us which have also been very positive as it relates to the CX-A5000.

Feel free to choose the review you think holds the most weight. wink.gif

Cheers.
post #950 of 2227

Hi,


Thanks for the reply's

in hindsight perhaps the Amazon review isn't the best ever written :)

there is another French review (below) that it is much more in depth, and also made me think twice


i already have the AX1 and A1, and i also have an Arcam AV9 Processor which i bought a few yrs ago to replace the A1 and turned out it was and this is no where nr as good as the A1, even though the reviews say its very good - so replaced the A1 with the AX1

 

The AV9 cost a bit, so was a little concerned the CXA-5000 might be another sideways or downgrade move

but will probably get the CXA-5000 at some point and when they have been discounted a bit more


found these reviews the other week for the Yamaha - but are in French and German, so will need to use Google translate etc

 

http://www.hdfever.fr/2013/11/20/test-yamaha-cx-a5000-et-mx-a5000/

 

http://www.avcesar.com/test/amplificateur/id-57/yamaha-cx-mx-a5000/page-1.html

 

http://www.areadvd.de/tests/test-yamaha-vor-endstufenkombination-cx-5000mx-5000/

 

Thanks

post #951 of 2227
Just read the French reviews and both are positive but with some of the same limitations we already noted. They are also nitpicking on things (like the lack of THX processing etc. --- kinda defeats the purpose of the 33 Yamaha DSP settings if you have to pay to use the THX logo). All in all nice and thorough reviews. Sorry I am only bilingual in French so I can't help with the German reviews

Cheers.
post #952 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKO1 View Post

Just read the French reviews and both are positive but with some of the same limitations we already noted. They are also nitpicking on things (like the lack of THX processing etc. --- kinda defeats the purpose of the 33 Yamaha DSP settings if you have to pay to use the THX logo). All in all nice and thorough reviews. Sorry I am only bilingual in French so I can't help with the German reviews

Cheers.

Yeah, my Z11s had the THX logo/certifications. Can't remember ever using the various THX DSP settings though (other than to try them out). Don't think I'd want to pay extra to have them added to my CX-A5000.
post #953 of 2227

What is interesting is that Yamaha told me that their amplification in the 3030 is digital type D amplification! That's very unfortunate

post #954 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

What is interesting is that Yamaha told me that their amplification in the 3030 is digital type D amplification! That's very unfortunate

I really doubt that. The weight, large transformer, and heat sinks lead me to believe that the amplifiers are analog.
post #955 of 2227
FWIW class D is switching, not digital. Guessing the 3030 is class A/B.
post #956 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

What is interesting is that Yamaha told me that their amplification in the 3030 is digital type D amplification! That's very unfortunate

It's not. From the heat, weight and the drop in output power vs size of transformer, it's not a class D amp
post #957 of 2227
Im sure there are others but Pioneer is the only one I know for sure has a Class D amp in some of their AVRs.
post #958 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

It's not. From the heat, weight and the drop in output power vs size of transformer, it's not a class D amp

So the technician at Yamaha is wrong! Well that does not inspire confidence then:eek:
post #959 of 2227
Well, Yamaha also grilled me when I told them that my calculations on their MX1000 power amp shows 95 wpc @ 7ch and 65 wpc @ 11ch at 0.08%THD. Yet Sound and Vision also show the amp can only do 99 wpc @ 7ch at 1% THD.

This shows how wrong Yamaha (or any manufacturer, for that matter) can be.
post #960 of 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Well, Yamaha also grilled me when I told them that my calculations on their MX1000 power amp shows 95 wpc @ 7ch and 65 wpc @ 11ch at 0.08%THD. Yet Sound and Vision also show the amp can only do 99 wpc @ 7ch at 1% THD.

This shows how wrong Yamaha (or any manufacturer, for that matter) can be.

OK how about the Integra DTA-70.1THX Ultra2 9-Channel Power Amplifier

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The "Official" Yamaha AVENTAGE RX-A1030, RX-A2030, RX-A3030 and CX-A5000/MX-A5000 Thread