AVS Forum banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
355 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Well, my Onkyo suddenly decided it's not going to output sound any more in any way shape or form, so who makes the most reliable receivers at this point and has the best warranty?


Some of the main features I want/things that irritate me:
  • BLUETOOTH remote - Bluetooth has been around for what, 15 years? I'm done with IR garbage. I love my PS3 remote, and I want a receiver that I don't need line of sight for. It should be standard by now. Hell, our satellite dish had an RF remote back in the 90s and that was awesome. I hate IR.
  • A decent amount of inputs and nothing wasted on locked ones. My Onkyo doesn't allow HDMIs to be assigned to the AUX/Front button. **** that button. Bad enough the controller wastes space on separate AM/FM buttons. It has 7 HDMIs but only 5 named inputs they can be assigned to and no simple input scrolling button without spending a full minute in menus. A simple input select like TVs have would be fine, but going through annoying sub-menus is stupid.
  • On-Screen Display is a must, though I assume that's standard at this point.
  • Optical inputs (2)
  • Optical output of EVERYTHING would be nice (including HDMI input).
  • I don't suppose it's possible to output 2 separate video (HDMI) sources at once with one giving audio and the other silent? Probably stupid expensive even if it exists, but I gotta ask. I know I could get a matrix switch, but I haven't felt like going that route yet.


If I think of anything else, I'll add to the list later. Will they ever make a receiver that doesn't require vents on top? The damn things are always the heaviest part of the HT setup. It sucks not being able to stack anything on them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts
Since receivers have power amps in them, they will pretty much always have vents on the top, as well as having some weight to them. Put it on its own shelf, not on top of other gear.


For reliability, I recommend Yamaha. Just do some searching at this site as well as elsewhere online and you will likely come to the conclusion that Yamaha is about as reliable as you can get.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,684 Posts
Well, I think you can eliminate every AVR in the market if you require that they have a BT remote. None that I'm aware of do. You can use your phone to control most of them though through the manufacturers' various apps.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
355 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kini62  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options#post_24538107


Well, I think you can eliminate every AVR in the market if you require that they have a BT remote. None that I'm aware of do. You can use your phone to control most of them though through the manufacturers' various apps.
15 years and not one ****ing receiver uses BT or RF? FFS!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,684 Posts
Don't know about RF. Maybe there is. I know that there are many owners that have equipment rooms so IR won't work for them. Maybe it's some kind of pro installation thing.


Like I said you can use your phone or tablet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
643 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kini62  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options#post_24538188


Don't know about RF. Maybe there is. I know that there are many owners that have equipment rooms so IR won't work for them. Maybe it's some kind of pro installation thing.


Like I said you can use your phone or tablet.

Assuming either have an IR blaster. Not all do.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
355 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kini62  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options#post_24538188


Don't know about RF. Maybe there is. I know that there are many owners that have equipment rooms so IR won't work for them. Maybe it's some kind of pro installation thing.


Like I said you can use your phone or tablet.

I don't use phone apps, and I don't own a damn tablet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viper187  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options#post_24536530


Well, my Onkyo suddenly decided it's not going to output sound any more in any way shape or form, so who makes the most reliable receivers at this point and has the best warranty?


Some of the main features I want/things that irritate me:
  • BLUETOOTH remote - Bluetooth has been around for what, 15 years? I'm done with IR garbage. I love my PS3 remote, and I want a receiver that I don't need line of sight for. It should be standard by now. Hell, our satellite dish had an RF remote back in the 90s and that was awesome. I hate IR.
  • A decent amount of inputs and nothing wasted on locked ones. My Onkyo doesn't allow HDMIs to be assigned to the AUX/Front button. **** that button. Bad enough the controller wastes space on separate AM/FM buttons. It has 7 HDMIs but only 5 named inputs they can be assigned to and no simple input scrolling button without spending a full minute in menus. A simple input select like TVs have would be fine, but going through annoying sub-menus is stupid.
  • On-Screen Display is a must, though I assume that's standard at this point.
  • Optical inputs (2)
  • Optical output of EVERYTHING would be nice (including HDMI input).
  • I don't suppose it's possible to output 2 separate video (HDMI) sources at once with one giving audio and the other silent? Probably stupid expensive even if it exists, but I gotta ask. I know I could get a matrix switch, but I haven't felt like going that route yet.


If I think of anything else, I'll add to the list later. Will they ever make a receiver that doesn't require vents on top? The damn things are always the heaviest part of the HT setup. It sucks not being able to stack anything on them.

That is a bizarre and, I believe, unattainable list of features. As for Bluetooth, I imagine everything is still IR because 1) It works just fine for the vast majority of people. 2) A component that only responds to Bluetooth will only work with a remote that talks Bluetooth. There are few remote controls that talk Bluetooth. I also don't know that I've ever seen a receiver that has 2 optical inputs (at least not in recent years). I don't really understand why you'd even need this since, these days, most recent devices that emit optical also emit HDMI. "Optical output of EVERYTHING" is the most bizarre feature request. Why do you want to route everything through your AVR only to then re-route the digital signal to something else?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmsdms  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options/0_100#post_24538271


... I also don't know that I've ever seen a receiver that has 2 optical inputs (at least not in recent years). ...

See:

http://www.crutchfield.com/S-sBLR0yn1dFw/p_022RXA1020/Yamaha-AVENTAGE-RX-A1020.html

http://usa.yamaha.com/products/audio-visual/aventage/rx-a1020_black_u/?tab=PD514488


Even going as low as the RX-A720 or its replacement RX-A730 has 2 optical digital inputs. And there are the lower RX-V and HTR models that have 2 optical digital inputs.


In other words, you are not looking at the right models for that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
As a followup to the original question. Yamaha is highly regarded in terms of reliability. Marantz is also generally high quality but, also a lot more expensive (though, with more mainstream features like Audyssey instead of YPAO). Denon (same company as Marantz) is also pretty good. I've had many, many pieces of gear in my house over the last few years and I've never owned an Onkyo that I liked. Every piece of Marantz gear I've owned has been very expensive but has also worked very, very well. I believe Marantz gear also has the longest warranty (3yr). I've never had to use a Marantz warranty but, every piece of gear in my house is now Marantz and I have no regrets going that route.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack D Ripper  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options#post_24538330


In other words, you are not looking at the right models for that.

Not surprising to me at all. I obsess over AVR specs but, needing 2+ optical inputs is not something I've ever needed or seen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,445 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmsdms  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options/0_100#post_24538334


As a followup to the original question. Yamaha is highly regarded in terms of reliability. Marantz is also generally high quality but, also a lot more expensive (though, with more mainstream features like Audyssey instead of YPAO). Denon (same company as Marantz) is also pretty good. I've had many, many pieces of gear in my house over the last few years and I've never owned an Onkyo that I liked. Every piece of Marantz gear I've owned has been very expensive but has also worked very, very well. I believe Marantz gear also has the longest warranty (3yr). I've never had to use a Marantz warranty but, every piece of gear in my house is now Marantz and I have no regrets going that route.

Yamaha Aventage models have a 3 year warranty. Don't get me wrong; I have nothing against Marantz. But for my money, I would go with a Yamaha receiver. All of the Yamaha receivers that I have purchased have lasted well beyond the warranty. But I obviously cannot promise the same for you.


You are not going to get everything you want in a receiver, particularly at a price you want to pay. What you have to do is select from what is possible, and consider what matters to you, and what does not. Yamaha, Denon, Marantz, and Pioneer seem to be the brands making decent choices these days at decent prices. If someone wishes to add to the list, they may do so, though obviously I do not necessarily endorse their additions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack D Ripper  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options#post_24538366


Yamaha Aventage models have a 3 year warranty.

That's good to know. They seem like really nice pieces of gear too.
Quote:
You are not going to get everything you want in a receiver, particularly at a price you want to pay. What you have to do is select from what is possible, and consider what matters to you, and what does not. Yamaha, Denon, Marantz, and Pioneer seem to be the brands making decent choices these days at decent prices. If someone wishes to add to the list, they may do so, though obviously I do not necessarily endorse their additions.

Agreed. As long as no one wants to add Onkyo to the list. They have a very good price to feature ratio and an abysmal price to quirk/failure ratio. The reason I recommend Marantz is because you can buy really barebones stuff and, it may not be too fancy but, it will work exactly the way it's described and you expect. There is a lot to be said for simplistic consistency.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
355 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Well, if I can't get what I want, I guess I'll just get something cheap for now (Yamaha RX-V475) and hope somebody does a unit with a bluetooth remote at some point. Sony made Playstation 3 with one TEN years ago for christ sakes and everything else still uses goddamn IR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmsdms  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options#post_24538271


That is a bizarre and, I believe, unattainable list of features. As for Bluetooth, I imagine everything is still IR because 1) It works just fine for the vast majority of people. 2) A component that only responds to Bluetooth will only work with a remote that talks Bluetooth. There are few remote controls that talk Bluetooth. I also don't know that I've ever seen a receiver that has 2 optical inputs (at least not in recent years). I don't really understand why you'd even need this since, these days, most recent devices that emit optical also emit HDMI. "Optical output of EVERYTHING" is the most bizarre feature request. Why do you want to route everything through your AVR only to then re-route the digital signal to something else?

Yeah, all the siht they can engineer and they can't include BOTH IR and BT receiver and BT remote so those people clinging to universal remotes can still do their thing? Optical for my 2 PCs. Excuse me for not buying a current $500 video card to pass the audio out HDMI on a LINUX box. Pass everything out optical as an option in case I ever find a headset/headphones I really like (or need to use at night) with my Mixamp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viper187  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options#post_24538486


Well, if I can't get what I want, I guess I'll just get something cheap for now (Yamaha RX-V475) and hope somebody does a unit with a bluetooth remote at some point. Sony made Playstation 3 with one TEN years ago for christ sakes and everything else still uses goddamn IR.

I think it's unlikely that Bluetooth will ever become a standard for AV equipment control. It's a handshaked protocol that can fail for any number of reasons and in very irritating ways. IR certainly has limitations but, as I said before: Most people are unlikely to ever see them. Also, it works extremely well within its limitations and is universally adopted. If you are putting your AVR in a place where IR will not cut it (like a closet or another room), get an IR flasher and run it to the AVR. It's like $10 shipped. There are various other solutions as well. Basically, Bluetooth hasn't replaced IR because IR is about sending tiny bursts of one way data over a spectrum of the room. Bluetooth is a communications protocol with tons of overhead and complexity. It's a protocol that might make sense for a gaming controller but, it's kind of bonkers to use it for a standard remote control.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
355 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmsdms  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options#post_24538565


I think it's unlikely that Bluetooth will ever become a standard for AV equipment control. It's a handshaked protocol that can fail for any number of reasons and in very irritating ways. IR certainly has limitations but, as I said before: Most people are unlikely to ever see them. Also, it works extremely well within its limitations and is universally adopted. If you are putting your AVR in a place where IR will not cut it (like a closet or another room), get an IR flasher and run it to the AVR. It's like $10 shipped. There are various other solutions as well. Basically, Bluetooth hasn't replaced IR because IR is about sending tiny bursts of one way data over a spectrum of the room. Bluetooth is a communications protocol with tons of overhead and complexity. It's a protocol that might make sense for a gaming controller but, it's kind of bonkers to use it for a standard remote control.

I've never had issue with the PS3 remote, and RF remotes worked great 25 years ago. WTF is the excuse for the lack of those nowadays? If I could get a simple, direct email address to these receiver manufacturers, I'd definitely email them about adding support for something other than IR in some models, but they all want you to register and provide a ton of unnecessary info to email them. Most of the time the people answering the emails are clueless anyway though. LG still can't/won't tell me IF there will be a Revere 3. I didn't even ask when. I asked IF.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viper187  /t/1524534/considering-a-new-receiver-looking-for-options#post_24538486


Well, if I can't get what I want, I guess I'll just get something cheap for now (Yamaha RX-V475) and hope somebody does a unit with a bluetooth remote at some point. Sony made Playstation 3 with one TEN years ago for christ sakes and everything else still uses goddamn IR.

Yeah, all the siht they can engineer and they can't include BOTH IR and BT receiver and BT remote so those people clinging to universal remotes can still do their thing?

As I've said before, Bluetooth isn't just a little receiver that understands one way impulses like IR. It's a full blown communications protocol. It's a fairly mature technology these days but, it's pointless to include it if less than 1% of your user base is going to use it. Your TV isn't BT, your cable box isn't BT, your universal remote likely doesn't speak BT. Because they don't need to be. Bluetooth isn't as niche as it was 10 years ago but, it's still not an in demand feature to replace something as reliable and cheap as IR.
Quote:
Optical for my 2 PCs. Excuse me for not buying a current $500 video card to pass the audio out HDMI on a LINUX box. Pass everything out optical as an option in case I ever find a headset/headphones I really like (or need to use at night) with my Mixamp.

I'm not really sure how to respond to this. I have at least 10 computers in my house, most running Linux and every one of them can output HDMI/DisplayPort and I'm quite positive that I've spent less than $500 total on all the video cards combined. Optical is a last resort/only resort kind of connection. It works just fine (my music player is hooked up via Toslink to my PM6005) but, only if the thing you are connecting the computer to doesn't support HDMI. I don't think you can buy an AVR that doesn't support HDMI these days. If you do have video cards that can only emit optical and DVI/VGA, well, upgrade your video card. Amazon will sell you a Linux supported HDMI output card for like $20.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top