or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Help me choose a 7 channel AVR
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Help me choose a 7 channel AVR

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
I am getting too old to drag my heavy amps up and down stairs anymore.
In spite of my affection for the great sound they produce, it's time to move to lighter AVRs.

Have been using Onkyo Pro 885s for a long time and they're a fine pre/pro.
I want something at least as good in a AVR that weighs no more than 50 lbs.

My equipment is as follows:
Oppo 95 and 83SE
DirecTV

M&K LCR-750THX
(4 ohms, 200 watts RMS unclipped peaks, 80hz - 20khz plus minus 2 DB)

M&K SS-150THX tripole surrounds
(4 ohms, 200 watts RMS unclipped peaks, 100 - 20khz, high frequencies above 8khz are not rolled off)

M&K powered subwoofer


Although video capabilities are desirable, the most important criteria is GREAT sound.

I am looking for AVR with:
4K pass-thru
3D ready
32 bit DACs
7 channels
Pre-outs and multi-channel inputs

BUDGET = $2500


I have been looking at Pioneer, Denon, Onkyo, but will consider others.


Thanx for your help.smile.gif
post #2 of 17
Since I'm partial to Denon, I'll give you my opinion. Others will surely come along and argue my choices wink.gif

Denon AVR-3313CI or X4000, or the more expensive models. Since your speakers are 4 ohm and a bit of a load on any AVR, for amplification I would suggest separates, Crown XLS Drivecore Class D amps - XLS2500 for front L&R, XLS1000 or 1500 bridged for center, let the AVR power surrounds (or buy a third Crown).

With the Denon x4000 this puts you at roughly $2100 and a total of 46lbs, with the 3313 roughly $500 less.

Let me know when it's set up, I'll bring the scotch. biggrin.gif
post #3 of 17
Thread Starter 
Looking at the data sheet of the Crowns, I dunno.
The 2500 seems a little more powerful than what I need at 775w.
http://www.crownaudio.com/usa/xls-drivecore.html
post #4 of 17
Since your priority is GREAT SOUND, there is only one brand of HT receiver to consider IMO; Cambridge Audio.

Nothing else even comes close in that department.

If you want lots of bells and whistles, they do not compete. If that is want you want get an inferior Yamahonkonsonywa with the latest 37 1/2 kinds of sound processing and distortion.

Cambridge puts BEEF in the power supply and amplifiers and minimizes distortion for top sound quality. That is their priority. It costs money, so they are not cheap.

The Cambridge 651R is probably more than capable of meeting all of your needs, but with your budget the 751R should be doable, and it is THE Rolls-Royce of receivers IMO.

Crown is total garbage when it comes to sound quality. It is only intended for and fit for Public Address systems; not home stereo!

It is way worse than even the poor-quality mass-market receivers from Yamaha, Sony, and Pioneer.
Edited by commsysman - 6/19/13 at 2:20pm
post #5 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

Since your priority is GREAT SOUND, there is only one brand of HT receiver to consider IMO; Cambridge Audio.

Nothing else even comes close in that department.

If you want lots of bells and whistles, they do not compete. If that is want you want get an inferior Yamahonkonsonywa with the latest 37 1/2 kinds of sound processing and distortion.

Cambridge puts BEEF in the power supply and amplifiers and minimizes distortion for top sound quality. That is their priority.

The Cambridge 651R is probably more than capable of meeting all of your needs, but with your budget the 751R should be doable, and it is THE Rolls-Royce of receivers IMO.

Crown is total garbage when it comes to sound quality. It is only intended for and fit for Public Address systems; not home stereo!

It is way worse than even the poor-quality mass-market receivers from Yamaha, Sony, and Pioneer.
If I am looking at the 751R spec. sheet correctly, it doesn't indicate it is 4ohm capable, 4K pass-through or 32 bit DACS.confused.gif
http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/products/azur-751r-upsampling-home-cinema-receiver
post #6 of 17
^^ It also has the most basic room correction software currently available. If Cambridge is so great then no corners should have been cut. You can do much better for the price.
Quote:
Crown is total garbage when it comes to sound quality. It is only intended for and fit for Public Address systems; not home stereo!

Care to explain to us your audition process with Crown amplifiers? According to you and your self-proclaimed vast experience, surely you aren't making an assumption based purely on the fact that it's an affordable pro audio item? The link to audioholics I provided contains a discussion from many of the most respected and knowledgeable members of that community (several of them contribute here as well), vastly different from yourself. Care to guess whose opinion takes precedence?
Quote:
If I am looking at the 751R spec. sheet correctly, it doesn't indicate it is 4ohm capable, 4K pass-through or 32 bit DACS.

LOL, even after comm's rants elsewhere about 4 ohm speakers and receiver compatibility, you'd think he'd check the specs first. Oops!
Quote:
Looking at the data sheet of the Crowns, I dunno.
The 2500 seems a little more powerful than what I need at 775w.

Respect gained. You're a dwindling breed, one that does not over-purchase wink.gif So go with the 2000, or 1500 even.
post #7 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

Cambridge puts BEEF in the power supply and amplifiers.

Medium rare?
post #8 of 17
^^^ Cube steak.
post #9 of 17
I am not sure the current crop of the top end Onkyo's can accept the current crippled version of 4K video as an input; I know it can upscale 1080 to the crippled 4K currently available though. True UltraHD / 4K video will not be possible until HDMI 2.0 is ratified. That said, if you do not have, or plan on buying, one of the non-HDMI 2.0 4K sources, then the Onkyo 1010 would fit your needs nicely.
post #10 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage View Post

I am not sure the current crop of the top end Onkyo's can accept the current crippled version of 4K video as an input; I know it can upscale 1080 to the crippled 4K currently available though. True UltraHD / 4K video will not be possible until HDMI 2.0 is ratified. That said, if you do not have, or plan on buying, one of the non-HDMI 2.0 4K sources, then the Onkyo 1010 would fit your needs nicely.
Does that mean the claim being made these days of "4K pass-thru" by manufacturers won't hold true for "True UltraHD / 4K video" when it becomes a reality?
post #11 of 17
Thread Starter 
Well, I ended up going with a re-furbished 4520ci unit directly from Denon.
I couldn't pass it up at $1600 with free shipping.
post #12 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Does that mean the claim being made these days of "4K pass-thru" by manufacturers won't hold true for "True UltraHD / 4K video" when it becomes a reality?

Correct. Once real 4K video comes along none of the current AVRs will be able to pass it. This is due to it requiring MUCH more bandwidth than HDMI 1.x can provide.
post #13 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Well, I ended up going with a re-furbished 4520ci unit directly from Denon.
I couldn't pass it up at $1600 with free shipping.

You will be happy with it. Good AVR.
post #14 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage View Post

Correct. Once real 4K video comes along none of the current AVRs will be able to pass it. This is due to it requiring MUCH more bandwidth than HDMI 1.x can provide.

Aaahhh.....Em in confusion for my new AVR purchase and after viewing your comment that audio giants are fooling us with 4K pass through receivers, I questioned ur comments to one of dealer around and he batted that on any given day with any 4K pass through receiver you can enjoy uninterrupted output with highest satisfaction.
post #15 of 17
He is correct - with what we currently call 4K. Current 4K is a crippled version of what is to come. For example, you cannot do 4K at 60Hz - HDMI 1.x simply cannot push any more data than that. HDMI 2.0 will fix this problem, but then you will need all new equipment and cables for it.
Quote:
The first crop of 4K Ultra HD TVs from Sony, Samsung, LG and Toshiba have HDMI 1.4 ports that can feed full resolution 2160p (4096 x 2160) Ultra HD signals, but there’s a catch — they can only do so at 24 or 30 frames per second. That’s works fine for movies, but is of no use for gaming and TV broadcasts, which require 50 or 60 fps.

There is a caveat to note, too, especially if you’re looking to buy one of the first 4K Ultra HD sets available. Those sets won’t be compatible with HDMI 2.0 because it hasn’t come out yet. What that means is the TVs would have to drop the framerates to 30 fps just to display the image onscreen. Unless the HDMI input board is upgraded on one of these new 4K Ultra HD TVs, it will have that limitation

Another thing worth noting is that the current HDMI 1.4 limit of 24 fps in 4K is also in 8-bit color. Ultra HD is expected to bump that up to 10 or 12-bit. With the faster 60 fps rate, twice the data throughput will be needed to push all that — something HDMI 1.4 simply cannot do.
http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/hdmi-2-0-explained/#ixzz2Wy3QpFSC

When the new HDMI 2.0 comes out you will not be able to do 4K pass-through with current AVRs since none of them are HDMI 2.0 capable. They simply cannot pass enough data to make it happen.


Also, think about if you actually can see what 4K offers. Here is a seating distance vs screen size chart which shows when you actually get a better picture from each of the formats.



So if you have a 65 inch television you must to be closer than 8 feet to your screen to begin noticing the improved picture. Realistically, you have to sit no more than 6 feet from the screen to be able to confidently say you are enjoying the improved image. To put that into perspective, lay down on the ground and put a mark at the top of your head (assuming you are 6 foot tall), you have to have your face at about that distance from the TV. It is very close. This same discussion happened with 1080, but as you can see with the chart, most people sit in its range due to the larger sized sets people are now buying.

We also need a new video codec, and one is in the works For example, using current technology 3 hours of 4K Ultra HD video uses approximately 3.16TB of data. The new codec can theoretically cut that in half, but that is still over 1.5TB of data and current BluRays are limited to 40GB of storage so new media will need to be developed to sell you a 4K movie. And woe to those wanting to stream 4K content over the Internet or your Cable TV system (though FiOS could do it). These are all problems that need to be addressed before full 4K can ever reach the consumer's living room.


I am not poo-pooing the current iteration of 4K, just saying its lifespan is short and buying now with the expectation of being future proofed for 4K is an act of failure.
post #16 of 17
.
Edited by mikeygt350 - 7/8/13 at 1:53pm
post #17 of 17
^ Good job. smile.gif
Edited by GIEGAR - 7/8/13 at 7:29pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Help me choose a 7 channel AVR