List of Digital Home Theater Receivers - Page 8

I've got the same setup as you with the xr50 and athenas. Sounds great. Do you set your speakers to large all the way around & what subwoofer cutoff have you found best. Got mine at 100mhz.

Thanks

According to Sony's PDF on their digital technology they are also 100% digital until the binding posts.

Are you sure there is not some dsd conversion that takes place on the best model, and do they except a 192hz upsampled digital signal on there display,and pass it through unaltered?.....not likely.

The Kenwood, which uses the same T/I sourced digital as the Panys will not except a 192hz upsampled signal.

Even the 45's x over is in the digital domain, as is the tone controls ect.

What I consider digital direct is a signal whith no analog processing anywhere in the chain, that will also pass any digital signal whithout compromise.

These companies can use the term digital all they want, but having digital amps does not make any receiver direct digital unless the digital path is unaltered and uncompromised imo.

I beleive that maybe....the Sony 9000 can do direct dsd from the top sony sa-cd player, but I am not even sure if this is uncompromised whith no pcm conversion in the chain.

So how are you guys all running your audio from sources such as your DVD player? I currently using a digital coax from my Panny F87. Wondering if anyone feels the multi-channel hook-up with individual RCA cables actually sounds better?

I appreciate all the information you have been providing but I just want to mention that unless you are using some version of English that I'm not aware of with is not spelled with an extra 'h' (i.e. with not whith).

Thanks for wasting more bandwidth to point that out
Some of us have to limit are time while posting in a hurry at times, and have no time to proof read every post so excuuuuuuuse me

There is no need to correct people's typos.

We all understand his meaning. I have 2 college degrees but cannot type to save my life. It has no bearing on intelligence nor does it need to be pointed out. Just my opinion.

Sorry, he has spelled it this way in several of his posts, so I thought he thought it was actually spelled that way (not a typo). So, we can now get back to digital receivers...

The sony models have no analog processing. All is done in the digital domain.

DSD is a digital format, and even if conversion to DSD is done, the conversion is done completely in the digital domain and has close to no effect on sound quality. The reason for this conversion probably lies in the fact that the amplification stage works in similar manner to DSD and similar conversion would be required to be made in the amplification stage anyway. And as your speakers most likely wont accept a amplified PCM stream, all kinds of conversions will be done before they reach your speakers in all digital receivers. If they are done in the amplification stage , or before it, doesn't really matter...

There is NO conversion from input until the binding posts of the Pannys....none at all, this is why it accepts, displays and outputs a 192hz upsampled digital signal and no other digital amped receiver does.
I don't consider conversion at the binding post to be all kinds of conversion.


You get exactly whats on the recording whitout colorations, or in the case of the dsd conversion, improvement no doubt in sonics from the original.

So the Sony may be all digital, but I still don't consider it digital direct.
The only other truely digital direct gear that I am aware of, is the Tact Audio gear which uses the same T/I brand, but whith a lot better build and parts quality.

Sony = digital domain receiver
Pany = digital direct receiver

From what I understand reading Sony's literature, the Sony receivers do not convert incoming digital signals to a DSD signal. According to their PDF explaining their amps, the input is fed directly into the DSP and from there it goes into the amp, then a LPF.

Here is a quote from the PDF: "The S-Master 1 bit pulse stream has much in common with the Direct Stream Digital signal that Sony developed for SACD."

If you use an analog input, then the unit converts it to a DSD signal.

I don't own one to try to pass it a 192K signal.

Does the Kenwood have a port for connecting a powered sub?

You didn't get my point.

You really think that there are some magic binding posts that turn the signal to analog with no quality loss?

The conversion to analog has to be made somewhere (in digital amps in the amplification stage) and this conversion is much more important than conversions done completely in the digital domain.

Hello Earz,

I thinking that buying 2 Panny receivers and biamping them would be a better alternative to spending $350-$1000 for audiophile mods to one digital receiver. While mods are all the rage, biamping costs less and preserves warranties.

Was the difference in sound quality with the biamped setup so favorable as to suggest this? Granted, I realized you weren't performing comparisons with modded receivers, but the biamped results implied a dramatic improvement over a singular receiver, and I'm having difficulty justifying the cost differential.

Regards,
JnC

Yes it has a subwoofer preout for a powered sub.

Actually, I am sending both my 45's out today for as many WBT binding posts as will fit, even if it means tossing the s video and component switching as I will never use them anyway.
I am going to have all the 6 channels internal wire direct to the new posts as well as a few assorted caps replaced ect.

I am not doing this because it needs it for H/T sonics, but rather because I would like to replace my Sim Audio gear for 2 channel use and beleive that mods will raise the bar enough to compete or beat whith any hi end gear that I am likely to buy in the near future for 2 channel use.

I am also sick of dealing with the 12 crap speaker terminals, and all the adapters that are a pita.

I have heard a single 45 whith just the internal 2 channel wiring replaced and ran direct to new binding posts.
The difference in sonics was easy to hear, so if just wiring new posts direct with better internal wiring makes that much difference, I can only imagine what the difference will be with the other cap,resistor ect mods.

So I choose both bi amping and mods, but if you already have a Pany receiver and want a huge upgrade in slam and headroom + tighter bass and cleaner treble, then yes, go for bi amping with out mods.

I do reccomend a good power conditioner that has plenty of headroom in its rating for any digital receiver.

I think you mean "our" and not "are".

HI All,

I have been reading this thread since a fellwomemeber (JnC) recommended me to read here before I buy my first receiver + speakers. I am planning on spending about $750 for both receiver and speakers. I had inclined for the Onkyo 770 since a lot of people were praising it in the HTIB area. After reading this thread maybe I should go digital now. The only question I have is I have a room that is about 36'X20 (TV viewing area is about 24'x12') the rest is a nook and a kitchen but there is no walls between them so it's all open space. So my concern is are these Digital Receivers enough (Panny, Kenwood, JVC) for setup. Also what is new on the upcoming Panny XR70 vs the XR50.

I will try and help with your first question...
I know of a setup were a Pany 25 is used in a 30.....actually more like 42ft x 15 ft room in a basement with 9ft ceilings.
The actual theater area is about 30 x 15, but extends to at least 42ft.

It sounds pretty good down there, but this person made all custom built in speakers across the front wall with a huge projection screen in the middle and I am sure the speakers were designed to be easy to drive.
He also uses a pro audio 2 channel amp to drive his subs.

About 26ft back or so, there are custom made surrounds that are mounted off the ceiling that are also designed to be easy to drive.

With a room as big as yours, you need effecient speakers imo, to use any of the cheapo digital wonders.
The Panys, and the JVC can be daisy chained for bi amping if that would work for you.
The Kenwood could be used from a source whith two digital outs in a bi amped configuration also, but this would be limited to that source only.

If the digitals will not work in your situation, I wouldn't expect an analog receiver with the same power rating to do any better.

I just took delivery of the JVC RX-ES1. Unfortunately, there is a noticeable humming noise present in my speakers and subwoofer which was not present when using my old analog receiver. Also, my subwoofer "thumps" every time I turn the unit on or off and makes a muffled "thump" when I switch sources on the receiver. Everything is connected via digital inputs. I imagine I have a defective one but just wanted to see if anyone has had similar experiences?

According to docdish's thread, the Panasonic SA-XR70 receiver is due to be released on 9/24/04. Be aware that this guy only has 1 post to his credit, so I don't know how credible he is. But if he's correct, we can say T minus 5 weeks and counting.

My RX-10 is just a 6 channel version of the RX-ES1 and had no hummimg or any other bugs.
It did run very hot, even at idle, and the fan seemed to be on constantly.

You may want to ask at www.audiocircle.com in the multi channel digital section as there are quite a few owners of the RX-ES1 over there.

Ok, thanks.

Thanks Earz for your comments,

Maybe what I can do is wait for the XR70 and then get some "efficient speakers" to test out in my room. If that does not have enough punch or juice then maybe I can add a second one. What consitutes their efficiency. I guess I have to do some reading in the speakers area. By the way what can I expect to pay for some "efficient speakers" to go along the XR70. My setup will be mostly used for HT.

For H/T use, probably 6ohm 88db or higher will work.

I make my speakers from kits, so I am not up on which commercial speakers to buy.
You should probably check the speaker forum.

I have noticed lately that adds for Infinity, Paradigm,B&W and Polk lately that listed there particular advertised models as easier to drive than my speakers as far as db and ohm's go.

I am sure there are many more speakers besides these brands also that have models that would work fine.

My rx-10 works flawlessly. It does run hot. Perhaps the fan runs but I am too far away from it to hear it. No hums or buzzing.

I am driving three wharfedale 6 ohm speakers and a pair of magnepan mmg-w (~5 ohm) without any problems.

It appears to me the Sony will be converting everything that is a PCM signal to DSD then, as PCM is not a native DSD format.

It would appear to me on the surface that any kind of conversion, even the the Sony's DSD conversion may impact the original signal.

I'm just wondering how you know the DSD conversion of PCM has no effect on the sound quality?

I said "close to no effect". Naturally it has an effect on sound quality, but the effect it has is so small, it probably isn't audible. This information I've taken from finnish reviews of S-Master Pro based sony receivers. They measured them to have nearly flat FR, low distortion (though a tad higher than with analog receivers), good SNR with digital inputs and lots of power reserves.

Pace,
The general consensus heard throughout the forums is that the Sony digital receivers just don't measure-up in the quality sound department to real human listeners.

I don't know if this is a result of these "close to no effect" digital conversions or the actual design of the amps.