List of Digital Home Theater Receivers - Page 50

Is it indisputable? No, of course not. Is there any absolute proof, data, or testing that supports that it is? No again.

As with any such components, the devil is in the details. The actual implementation in terms of the quality of the parts used, the board/circuit architecture and worksmanship is as important as whether or not it's a digital or "analog" (even so-called analog receivers use DSPs, so I assume you are refering to the amplification stage) device.

Here is another review link I found for Tripath amps and the like.

http://www.tnt-audio.com/ampli/tripath_amps_e.html

Hola amigos,

I've been curious about the performance of some digital (home theater receiver)amps and I came to this thread. It is a few years old and it seems to have evolved into a DIY digital amps discussion.

Anyone have good (recent) reviews of the current digital receivers on the market?

I wonder why these have not taken off in the main stream yet???

I went to Best Buy the other day, but none of their receivers were digital amps. Why not? (maybe only the small HTIB solutions deploy this).


Any thoughts??

Low-cost digital amps like the Panasonic xr series IMO represent a threat to the entrenched interests of both electronics manufacturers and particularly the B&M dealers. Think about it, if the dealer's markup is usually a flat % of the retail price so let's say 40%...a dealer would have to sell FIVE $200 digital amps to make the same NET profit as a single $1000 analog receiver. The dealers are the ones who are largely supporting the higher end audio companies, which in turn are largely bankrolling the audio press through advertising, which in turn continues to push the high-end analog makes while totally ignoring the likes of the Panasonic digital amps.

Also the majority of audio purchasers are men, who are taken in by the macho bling factor of hulking analog amps, the same guys who love hulking trucks, SUVs and V8 sports cars. Being ignorant of the technological differences between a PWM amp and a traditional analog amp, they wouldn't look twice at the featherweight and tiny boxes that the PWM amps come in.

1) electronic dealers simply charge more for the products (making more on the markup).

2) designer/manufacturers can simply package the amps in bigger, heavy cabinets if that's important to the consumer.

The Panasonic XR series seems to be old school.

Is there any models that are new (2006 models or late 2005?)

Where is the industry going with this???

In order to do #1 they would almost certainly have to do #2, IMO.

We're not in the stone ages.

Technology has moved us into an age of smaller, more powerful devices. I would pay for a better machine no matter if it is smaller than a 'regular' receiver.

The problem I've seen is that I don't see DVI or HDMI input/outputs on the receivers. That's a show-stopper for me. (regardless of the copy protection issues)

LOL tell that to all the morons commuting to work in their Hummers, Expeditions, F150s, etc.


The xr70 has HDMI, as does the upcoming xr57. The mid/upper-range JVC digitals also have HDMI, though nowhere near the cult following of the Panasonics.

Panasonic has a model coming supposedly with there new Blu Ray player in September.
I read it was the SA-XR 700?
Its going to have hdmi 1.3 or maybe 2.0 depending on what they end up naming it.
This will be a fully capable DTS-HD and DD tru HD lossless capable receiver and most likely the first on the market capable of 8 channels of the new hi res audio codes for the new Blu Ray and hd dvd formats.
Also I believe Sonys linear uncompressed pcm audio at 7.1 channels would also work via the new hdmi.

In order to use the hdmi though for hi res lossless audio, you would have to wait for a player with hdmi 1.3 or 2.0 like the PS3 or the Panasonic Blu Ray player.

Ok, basic question:

Has anyone actually listened to one of these receivers and compared them to a good high-end analog amp (say, a Denon 3806)?

How does it sound compared to the Denon (never mind the feature/gadget differences between the two).

Yep, many times:

Don't know if these links will work, so you might have to search within that xr55 mega-thread using the post number (format is post# Model# Link).

HK
#325 ?? http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...2&&#post5917842 (-)
#353 AVR7200 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...3&&#post5947823
#415 AVR635 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...3&&#post5979763
#1050 AVR65 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...5&&#post6303005
#1064 AVR130 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...3&&#post6309053
#1294 AVR535 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...4&&#post6396784


Denon
#423 AVR1604 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...7&&#post5985687
#425 AVR3300 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...2&&#post5986092
#844 AVR3300 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...1&&#post6194321
#916 AVR2805 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...8&&#post6237298
#1168 AVR3802 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...5&&#post6352685
#1282 AVR1602 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...8&&#post6395328
#1307 AVR2700 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...9&&#post6397489 (+-)

Yamaha
#912 RX-V750 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...9&&#post6236209
#916 RX-V650 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...8&&#post6237298

Pioneer
#916 E54TX http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...8&&#post6237298

NAD
#298 T763 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post5907972

Marantz
#423 SR-19 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...7&&#post5985687
#1140 SR5400 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...9&&#post6341969

I don't generally consider Denon high end...but I had a pro modified Sim Audio I-5 as well as a Parasound Halo c1 pre/pro and Coda 250x5 muscle amp when I started messing with these digital cheap looking receivers.

I tried the SA-XR 25, SA-XR 45,JVC RX-10, Kenwood 7100,Harmon Kardon DPR2005.
I now have two pro modified SA-XR 45's in a passive bi amped 6.1 channel set up and have better details and tighter mid bass minus a bit of slam from the hi end set up.

The trade off was well worth it to me...and I will be upgrading to the newer hi res codec capable receiver as soon as I can.

I do wish they would make 120-150 rms receiver though instead of 100 x 6 @6ohms.

Earz,

Ok, you got me. The 3806 isn't a 'high-end' receiver. I'll give you that. It's the first one that popped into my head for comparison's sake.

But I must say for many people it is as 'high-end' as they will ever see.

Glad this thread has come to life again.

By the way, isn't the HK DPR2005 rated at 120 rms or something like that?

I think I fixed the links -

Bigrig, thank you for fixing the links.

Does anyone know if any of these are multi-room capable? (can I control DIFFERENT signals to another receiver or pair of speakers)???

I thought that the HD players would have the codecs to decode the new audio formats. Then the audio would be passed through a digital output and it wouldn't matter what receiver you owned.

As for the digital amps, I think it has to do with the merchants like others have said. Digital amps aren't anything new, they have been around for a long time. I have one in my car stereo. There is nothing inferior about them.

What's with the talk about power rating. I thought the manufacturers use that to draw in the uninformed consumers. It's the current rating that matters.

A little off topic but I'm curious, what car stereo make/model? The only digitallly amped head-unit I know of is the Panasonic CQ8(something) that's a hefty $300-400.

Alpine has just recently come out with some digital car amps, called the PDX series or something like that, but like that Panasonic head unit they are quite pricey---I wonder why they can't make them as (comparatively) cheaply as the Panasonic sa-xr receivers?

I thought all current car head units were digital amps...

That's how they get ~40W x 4 channels into that tiny box.

Matt

Edit - This says most car amps are Class AB: http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/S-...ew.html?page=2

What are the Panasonic XRs, Class D?

Its(2005) not future proof and sounds like a typical H/K receiver...but with bugs.
I much prefer the Panys for detail and tighter midbass.
Yep I had one of the first 2005's,Kenwood 7100, JVC RX-10, as well as a Pany 25 and 45, both stock and modified and directly compared them all.

The last expensive receiver I owned was a B&K,and I did not consider it to be hi end either....even though it is was, as far as receivers go.
Before the dual modded Panys, I was using a 4k amp, and a 4k pre/pro which some people with more money than I would not consider hi end either

That's "maximum output" which is a meaningless bullsh*t sales-driven spec. Most of them are around 20 wpc RMS. Even the digital Panasonic HU is only 50% better, at 31wpc:

http://www.crutchfield.com/S-pb5CsCD...300&I=133C9801


Not totally sure on the terminology. Usually they are called "digital switching" or "power width modulation" PWM amps.

Anybody notice that JVC is coming out with a new lineup of digital receivers? They are RXD205/206 and RXD411/412. I wonder if these models will improve upon the previous year models?

Lyman4242,

Do you have any links for information on these receivers?

J Borsh,

Here's the article:

http://www.twice.com/article/CA6296871.html

It's a little old, but explains the maind difference. I brought this news up because places like Ecost.com finally show the RX-D411 as a product. This means you can preorder it. I just hope they fixed the quality control issues of this latest JVC generation of digital receivers.

Another review of the JVC RX-D702b. this time by Home Theater Magazine:

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/306jvc/index.html

Numbers are pretty much the same as S&V's review:

5 channels driven @ 8 Ohm: 60.3 watts, .1% distortion
5 channels driven @ 8 Ohm: 102.5 watts, 1% distortion

Seems like the limiting power factor in this receiver is the amp chips used. take a look at two channel numbers:

2 chnnels driven @ 8 Ohm: 62.5 watts, .1% distortion
2 channels driven @ 8 Ohm: 114.2 watts, 1% distortion

4 ohm numbers could be better for a high end receiver:

2 channels driven @ 4 ohm: 54.3 watts, .1% distortion
2 channels driven @ 4 ohm: 125.4 watts, 1% distortion

kind of hard to tell how/if the reviewer liked it or not---sounded like he was kind of going through the motions...

Didn't know where to post this but this looks good as any! Same money which would you guys buy ? AMPS= Rotel, ATI, or Outlaw. my gig is video so I need some help.
Glenee

Some may be digital but most aren't. The wattage is all marketing, you won't get much more then 20w per channel. It's the voltage that makes them better than stock radios.

Most midrange multichannel amps are AB which is clean but runs hot so they are huge with heatsinks and very inefficient. Class D is used mostly for subs because they are more powerful and don't run as hot but produce distortion. So AB for mids/highs, D for subs.

I don't think the Panny has class D because the Panny is digital right and I don't think class D is digital. (D does not stand for digital in this case)

So any new news? I'm looking forward to this XR57 as everyone seems to glow about the XR55.