AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am currently in the market for a new a/v receiver and I have narrowed it down to these 4 - Yamaha rx-v1200 and 2200, Denon avr-2802 and 3802.


The salesman at a hi-fi store I visited (which doesn't happen to carry Denon), is telling me that while there is nothing wrong with the Denons, Yamaha has been doing surround sound for much longer and their receivers and custom-decoding chipsets are just better at 'localizing the action on screen' (his words).


Any thoughts on this claim, and the comparison between Yamaha and Denon in general?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,265 Posts
(BS Check) lol. I don't recall seing this one before. Its logical and straight to the point.


I like it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,168 Posts
"custom-decoding chipsets are just better at 'localizing the action on screen' (his words).


Any thoughts on this claim, and the comparison between Yamaha and Denon in general?"


That sounds like BS to me. I am not a Dennon or Yamaha user.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,301 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by jwd1
I am currently in the market for a new a/v receiver and I have narrowed it down to these 4 - Yamaha rx-v1200 and 2200, Denon avr-2802 and 3802.


The salesman at a hi-fi store I visited (which doesn't happen to carry Denon), is telling me that while there is nothing wrong with the Denons, Yamaha has been doing surround sound for much longer and their receivers and custom-decoding chipsets are just better at 'localizing the action on screen' (his words).


Any thoughts on this claim, and the comparison between Yamaha and Denon in general?
Let's see if we can decipher this:


The salesman at a hi-fi store I visited (which doesn't happen to carry Denon), is telling me that while there is nothing wrong with the Denons, Yamaha has been doing surround sound for much longer (in his store) and their receivers and custom-decoding chipsets are just better (has always worked better in his store compared to the Denons down the street) at 'localizing the action on his screen' (his words).


See - now it's an absolutely true statement.


Regards, Bruce
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
Bruce, your *translation* is right on!

Regards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
while I can appreciate and enjoy the sarcasm, a serious answer to this question from someone knowledgeable about both Denons and Yamahas would be appreciated...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,301 Posts
jwd1- Seriously most of these models have been discussed quite a bit around here. I'll bet If you were to use the powerful search function and do a search 'by post' on each you'll gain more insights over a longer time period. Sometimes it is more beneficial to search for your answers than to wait for the answers to come to you (short sample).


Regards, Bruce
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,301 Posts
jwd1- I don't know how important video bandwidth (HDTV) is in your application, but someone posted a nice list a few weeks back. That might be one distinction worth considering.


Good Luck - Bruce
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
541 Posts
It's kind of BS. I think what he is referring to is Yamaha's proprietary DSP's which, if you're into those things, are arguably better than other receivers. However the DD and DTS decoder chip AFAIK are OEM's and are not the product of brilliant Yamaha Engineers. Denon makes a fine receiver and I'm sure they use high quality decoder chips for DD and DTS. I wouldn't worry.


Someone correct me if I'm wrong, cuz I'm going on memory here.


pc
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,049 Posts
The results are positive: It's BS.


Whether you're using the DD, DTS, or DPL-I/II functions all of these receiver's DSP processors decode and steer the information the same way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
904 Posts
yamaha was known in the earlier days of dolby surround and pro logic for their really good implementations of the formats with their propietary DSPs. today, they are still highly regarded but are not on top anymore. I have a yamaha rx-v995 receiver and I like it a lot, but I've compared to denon 2802 in a friend's house and I think the brand new denon does better with surround processing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,402 Posts
When in doubt, I ask them a question that I know for certain what the true answer is, yet gives them the option to recommend an inferior component that they sell, such as:


I have an old Krell amp, but it was made before home theaters really got going. Would it sound better to keep it and get a seperate amp for the rear and centers or get rid of that amp and get a top of the line 5 channel aiwa amp so that they all have the same amp and sound alike?


When my local connection at the store switched stores and then told my friend that he would recommend Energy over Definitive for home theater, that was it. I never ask for his advice anymore.


Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Poindexter
When my local connection at the store switched stores and then told my friend that he would recommend Energy over Definitive for home theater, that was it. I never ask for his advice anymore.


Mike
I would recommend Energy over Definitive so I'm wondering why he can't be trusted if he has this opinion? If it's an opinion that he has changed as a result of switching stores I understand but... how do you know that the opinion is not honest? Maybe he has become more familiar with Energy as a result of switching stores? I just know that I have changed my mind on many things.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
876 Posts
Mr. Poindexter,


Energy makes some VERY good speakers and there are many knowledgeable people in the business who would recommend them over Definitive Technology. If he was recommending the Energy Veritas line then yes, I'd recommend them over DT also. Regards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,049 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by jakehall
yamaha was known in the earlier days of dolby surround and pro logic for their really good implementations of the formats with their propietary DSPs.
That's true, I forgot about that. Yamaha was the "go to" affordable brand in the early days of HT. I agree that the score has evened nowadays.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Poindexter
When my local connection at the store switched stores and then told my friend that he would recommend Energy over Definitive for home theater, that was it. I never ask for his advice anymore.


Mike
I would recomend Energy over DT any day. Only becuase I prefer the sound.


Perhaps he has had the chance to actually listen to some energy speakers?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,047 Posts
It isn't BS, but like everything (especially anything you hear from a salesperson) it requires context.


Yamaha has distinguished itself with an excellent set of surround effect modes that simulate the acoustics of live performance spaces. It's "ambient"-style modes are quite lifelike, and far superior to the junky concert hall, jazz club, stadium, etc. modes found on other receivers.


However, this superiority only applies to these unique ambience simulation effects. While they can most assuredly enhance two-channel music recordings (anyone who dismisses DSP out of hand has never heard properly implemented DSP), the playing field has been levelled by Pro Logic II Music, Jim Fosgate's excellent surround processing mode. Rather than simulating the acoustics of a specific space, PL II Music uses information in the recording to create a very naturalistic surround enhancement--in my opinion, it is more effective. The only thing better for surround enhancement in the receiver world is the Logic 7 mode, but that is only found on Harman Kardon receivers. PL II is offered by a number of manufacturers, including Denon, who must all implement it the same way under their license from Dolby. Because of its versatility and quality, I would make PL II a prerequisite for any receiver I was considering, regardless of the manufacturer.


As others have pointed out, Dolby Digital and DTS decoding is strictly by-the-book, and won't change, so the Yamaha won't offer any superiority there. Yamahas are known for their good sound quality, but so are the Denons (at least their higher-end models). One thing that irritates me about the Yamahas is their non-standard implementation of their own version of THX EX (Yamaha have never signed up for THX licensing)--they use a single rear center for the EX rear channel, instead of the two rears specified by THX. This is bad psychoacoustics, as our ability to differentiate front-to-back sound sources is seriously compromised along the centerline of our hearing. Receivers like the Denons which support dual rears are preferable in this regard.


Cheers,

Philip Brandes
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
770 Posts
Well it's not BS. But not for the reason listed above. Motorola is the usual makes of the DTS/DD chip set used by manufacturers. Yamaha is the only manufacturer to use a diferent motorola chip set for it's DD/DTS processing. This ship set was,designed my Yamaha WITH Motorola and does seem (to my ears ) have better localization of sound than other chip sets. The problem is........I thought this chip set was only used on the Highest end Yamaha's...I could be dead wrong though.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top