List of Digital Home Theater Receivers - Page 53

Mind if I ask why you specifically want an Equibit style class D receiver? The best sounding "Purepath" (No analog stage) receivers are Panasonic's SA-XR10 and SA-XR45. My preferance is the XR10, because Panasonic made all the XR10's in Japan. Panasonic made all XR45's in Malaysia.

lyman, I have to ask why you think the xr45 is far superior to the successors. I as because I own a 45, which I feed entirely digital audio streams (flac, mp3, hd-audio) and I absolutely love the sound, a fundamental difference from any of the pioneer or Denon analogs I have had in the past. Despite this, and because I managed to blow out my video circuits with some ill advised cable fumbling, I had been considering "upgrading" to the xr57 (since to xr700 appears to be a technull marketing trick.) Are you saying that the xr57 is in some way a downgrade from the 45 when it comes to digital processing?

Here is a simple question. I have a Pioneer XA25 and have had it for a long time. Will it handle Mpeg4 audio or is it restricted ti Mpeg2 through the optical digital out. I was thinking about upgrading to HD and I know that some programs from Dishnetwork come in as Mpeg4 and I was just wondering if my XA25 would still work with Mpeg4 audio.

MPEG2 vs MPEG4 is strictly related to video compression on the input side. The audio output from the Dish box will work just fine with your XR25.

I knew that was true about the video but was unsure of the audio. Thanks I was hoping I would not have the retool my a/v receiver.

Because it has zero (or very little) negative feedback, and has a sound of SET tubes.

jsm,

The xr57 is an upgrade in that you have HDMI, some other audio processing modes, and more channels of amplication. I feel that sound quality is better in the xr45 though (although I never auditioned a xr57). The xr57 can handle 4 ohm loads better in stereo mode, because of it's 'dual-amp' mode (surround amp sections share the load of the front amp section). Also keep in mind the TI PWM chips used in all of Panasonic's receivers have a modulation scheme that relies on the quality of the power supply. The most robust (keep in mind robust does not equal high power) power supplies were the XR10 and the XR45. Hope this helps.

No it doesn't. The Panny receivers (just like the big TacT amps) sound like...nothing. Like any good amp, they just amplify the signal fed them. All of it. By contrast, an SET does a Bose-like act on the highs and lows, while adding lots of sticky, gooey distortion to the midrange.

Thankfully my XR55 doesn't sound like the overpriced garbage that comes out of Cary, Audio Note, etc. If it did...well, I have neither money, time, or inclination to pollute my system with colored-sounding amps.

I'm not attacking you but seek clarification. How can you say the XR45 sounds better than the XR57 if you admitted you haven't personally listened to the latter?

So, you would suggest, perhaps, yanking the power supply out of my 45 and wiring it into the 57 if I were to upgrade? Swapping them shouldn't be too much trouble, as I would continue to use the 45 in a secondary location.

Otherwise, if i read you correctly, there is no downgrade in any of the processing circuitry or other electronics between the 45 and 57 - so I shouldn't be worried about a substantial degradation in the things I like about the 45.

For the record, I'm not someone who believes in the "magic power cable" but as a long time pc builder I am aware that the power supply itself can have an effect on the functioning of the unit, so I don't totally dismiss the thought that a better power supply would effect the sound on a DIGITAL amp.

Oh, and while I'm at it, great post DS-21, something that isn't pointed out often enough about these amps. The fact is, even the "audiophiles" in this crowd generally have preferences about the "color" they want added to their music. "Accurate" is not meant in its' literal sense, but rather in the same way that oenophiles use words like "grassy" to indicate an impression (hence all the quotes here) that they get. No analog system will ever perfectly reproduce sound, I don't care if you spend $100K on your set-up, and while the golden ear crowd might be able to tell the difference between two amps, they are just telling the difference between two different "colorations" of the underlying software. We digital enthusiasts want that color eliminated, we are seeking more and more perfect reproduction. That doesn't mean our equipment sounds "better" just that we seek true, objective, accuracy over a colorful reproduction, no matter how artfully done.

I think I didn't write clearly enough for my post to be interpreted the way it was intended. While I was condemning the audiophool flavor of the past couple years (direct-heated single ended triodes) I was not claiming any special sonic superiority for digital amps over analog amps, glass or sand, that are not expressly designed to color the signal passing through them.

To be perfectly honest, the advantages of digital amps are limited to the following three:
1) Social consciousness. Digital amps, because of their superior energy efficiency and lower mass (hence, less raw materials used in construction and less energy expended in transporting them) are a more socially-conscious choice that giant space-heaters.
2) Form factor. A digital amp can be considerably smaller than a solid state or tube amp of similar power and performance. In addition to making them better for society, that is an aesthetic improvement as well; instead of dominating the room digital amps allow a electronics to command less attention in a room. After all, the focus should be on the music, not on the stupid boxes used to conjure it up.
3) Cost effectiveness. Digital amps seem to allow manufacturers to really lower costs without compromising audio quality. A $200-$300 receiver with binding posts for each of its seven internal channels of ~70watt real world amplification that can decode all of the current surround formats takes "high end" audio processing/amplification from a luxury to a practically a commodity. Commoditizing (and thus democratizing) good audio is an unambiguously good thing, IMO.

One may, in the future, be able to add a fourth: durability. Intuitively, one would think that electronic gear that has less heat to dissipate with may be innately more durable. However, these things haven't been around long enough. And besides, the original purchaser might not care, as s/he may end up unplugging one and passing it down the food chain to someone or selling it via craigslist or eBay when new ones that can decode new formats or have important new capabilities (ever-improving room correction software, for instance) are readily and cheaply available.

Note that sound quality isn't an advantage of digital amps in any way, shape, or form. That's because digital amps sound just like well-designed analog amps. That is to say, they don't have any characteristic sound at all.

Personally, I find the above-mentioned advantages sufficiently compelling that both my home systems have ditched pricey separates for cheap digital receivers. (XR55 in the main system, and just today in fact a Pio Elite EX-500 in the home office.) One could also make a compelling case for analog separates even today without resorting to faith-based rationalization about any supposed innate sound quality advantage thereof. That's personal preference, and who's to criticize another's preferences so long as those preferences are based on sound reality and not bizzard flights of fancy about the alleged sonic superiority of one's choice.

If you get a chance to AB your Panny with the P.E. please post a detailed review. I've been very curious about that receiver for a long time!

jsm,

Unfortunately, you cannot simply swap the power supply out of the 45 and place it in the 57. All of Panasonic's receivers rely on a volume control based on system voltage & digital attenuation. I'm guessing each voltage/digital attentuation scheme is unique to each Panasonic model.

Not gonna happen, because I'd have to remove and replace the bananas on the speakers in my main system to fit the Pio's ghetto spring clips, or unplug way too much stuff to move the Panny into my office. Besides, I verified that both are good amps with flat FR and inaudible distortion, so an "AB" comparison is really beyond pointless. I'm not one of those faith-based weirdoes who, despite every serious subjective listening study saying otherwise, persists in insisting that competently designed and functioning power amps sound any different from one another.

Now how exactly did you "verify" that? Surely not just by reading forums and reviews I hope.


LOL well ya know, the only thing as ridiculous as a religious fanatic is a fanatical atheist.

By measuring it, of course. (Well, strictly speaking they could differ in the deep bass; I use separately-amped subwoofers and could not care less how my mains amps perform in registers where they are not used.)

I highly doubt that fora and reviews could tell me anything about the specific ones in my possession. I used Fuzzmeasure for OSX. If I saved the graphs, maybe I'll dig them up and post them.


I prefer to reserve my faith for things that really matter, not squander it on bizzare marketer-driven idiocy like believing audio circuits have magical properties which will lead them to sound different even when they have flat FR and essentially no distortion.

One very real concern about the amplifier is its output impedance. It may have a very flat, undistorted, and noiseless output- but if its output impedance is too high, your speakers can sound very different.

I don't doubt that it works extremely well for you- but I'm still trying to figure out how it will do for my speakers before I buy it. I've been searching all over for more information about the SA-XR57, but I can't seem to find what I'm looking for.

Has anybody seen exactly what TI amplifiers this receiver uses? I hear it's PurePath, but I'm not sure which chips. Also, what's the output impedance?

I don't have a specific impedance value for Equibit style amps, but you may be interested in this Equibit impedance vs. frequency graph:



The bottom line is 4 ohm, the middle line is 6 ohm, and the top line is 8 ohm. The xr57 uses TI's TAS5076 and TAS5182 as part of the amplification stage. Hope this helps.

Graph taken from this archived post:

http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/s...hreadid=477556

wow, very interesting data. I just want everyone to note that the squares are in 1db iincrements, so while it looks like there's a big swing based on impedance, it's really less than +/- 1db at 20khz and only +/- 2db at 40khz. I think this would be hardly noticeable, and potentially better than a lot of other amps/receivers, especially out to 40khz. The panny XR55 does have it's treble control centered around 20khz, which can help fix the slight high frequency peak or dip for 8 and 4 ohm speakers respectively.

DS-21 sure has a way with words!

So which large receiver makers do not yet offer a digitally-amplified receiver? I consider it as an unavoidable trend (for better or worse, although IMO, it's for the better). Kind of like how pretty much all the reputable car manufacturers have at least 1 hybrid or diesel model out and if not, will have 1 out soon.

Marantz
Yamaha
Denon
Sherwood
Outlaw
NAD

Thanks. However, I predict some of them, such as at least the 1st 3 on that list, coming out w/ digi-amp'ed receivers in the near future. But then again, there will always be a niche fan base that want a traditional receiver, with heat sink and all, so it's not a total loss if a make doesn't sell a digi-amp receiver.

Does anyone have any updated news on the Panny SA-XR700, such as release date and capabilities? Any signs of pre-release beta testing? I'm itching to hear it.

Sherwood appears to offer the R903p, or at least they did at one point. I've never seen one. (A 7.1 receiver in that form factor or maybe a little thicker with PurePath amps, Sherwood's new parametric EQ module, real binding posts and a pricetag of under $1500 or so would cause me to say goodbye to the XR55 in my main system....)

So does Yamaha. Their website doesn't list it separately, but I think you can get through Audio Advisor or B&H. (I think the Marantz DVD player/receiver Audio Advisor sells uses chip amps, as there is no mention of digital.)

I'd also add Pioneer to the "no" list, given that the Elite EX-500/VSX-50 is long discontinued with no replacement. IMO, the only companies that are doing digital receivers in the US market right now with any kind of distribution are Panasonic, JVC, and Sony ES in their more expensive models.

Its time to unstuck this thread. Digital receivers are becoming common place sense this thread was started. Keep posting to this thread to keep it live and on the first page.

Thanks to all. Lots of great info in this monster thread.

Bump

Samsung AV-R610 5.1

AV-R710? 6.1 - with HDMI Switching


AV-R710

no idea about the technology though (usual suspects are Philips, TI, Tripath, ICEPower, Sony)

Ok, seriously, any news at all on the xr700 panasonic? Or are they backing down from this naked marketing trick now that hd/blu-ray isn't taking off?

Commonplace?

This thread sure had a great run as being stickied in this sub-forum.