[figlio]

Which one of these high end recivers do you prefer?


Yamaha RXZ9 or the Pioneer 59TXi

 

[Johnla]

The RX-Z9

 

[tubeguy44]

59txi

 

[DooDoo]

I prefer the clarity of yamaha to the sound of other comparable brands. IMO, you cannot beat the detail of yammies.

 

[tubeguy44]

your speaker selection is a very important consideration.....


yamaha receivers tend to be "bright" compared to a "warmer" sound from pioneer elite....


for example: matching a yamaha receiver with klipsch speakers is not a good idea... there are always exceptions....just a general guideline....

 

[DooDoo]

1. would your description of "bright" mean an overemphasis of certain frequencies or an accurate rendition of the source?


2. would your description of "warm" mean an underemphasis of certain frequencies or an accurate rendition of the source?

 

[tubeguy44]

Quote:

Originally posted by DooDoo 1. would your description of "bright" mean an overemphasis of certain frequencies or an accurate rendition of the source? 2. would your description of "warm" mean an underemphasis of certain frequencies or an accurate rendition of the source?

we could argue all day about definitions......


it is simply a fact that many people feel that yamaha receivers do not match up well with klipsch speakers......


for furthur info you can do some research on the klipsch forum..... i've been a member there for 4 years and this is a general consensus of the members there.....


the elite receivers do match up well with klipsch speakers.... i can testify to that..... despite that good match i went one step furthur and use a craver professional ZR1000 digital amp with my klipsch KLF-30's.....



"bright" or "warm".... you can make up your own definition if you want..... but i do know how these two brands sound with one brand of speakers.....


YMMV....

 

[DooDoo]

I dont disagree with your assertion regarding yamaha and klispch. I was just seeking to learn what your definition of those 2 infamous words is.

 

[Ovation]

It seems a lot of time and energy are spent arguing over the definition of "bright" and "warm" in audio, but at the same time, everyone seems to know what everyone is talking about. I think the problem is one of degree and relative perception. I think most people would agree that "bright" refers to a greater emphasis on high frequencies and "warm" emphasizes the mid to lower frequencies, each moving in opposite directions from "neutral". Of course, one's "bright" might be another's "neutral" and so on, but this applies to realms outside of audio. My wife and I have a very different notion about "warm" and "cool" when it comes to temperature settings in the car, for example. I favour proper and accurate word usage, but sometimes I wish people would go a little easy on those who use "warm" and "bright" in audio contexts. They might not be precise, but at least they offer a starting point for discussion.


End of rant.

 

[tubeguy44]

for a more in-depth discussion on "bright"....

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=397849

 

[DooDoo]

I was merely asking for tubeguy's definition of the words he was using so that I could place his comment into proper context. In common parlance these words are very subjective.

 

[Prozakk]

The current line up seem to have lost Yamaha's "bright" trait, of past models.


I had an Elite, but got rid of it & now have a Yammie.

 

[James Elvick]

Back from the bright versus warm thing...


I have a 59TXi and think it sounds excellent! This is from a former Parasound C2 and Anthem AVM-20 user!! The Yamaha I have not heard, but have read many good things about.


James

 

[DJ_JonnyV]

Do I dare play the internal amp card???

 

[DooDoo]

Quote:

Originally posted by DJ_JonnyV Do I dare play the internal amp card???

Play away my friend. I have never heard the amps of my 1400 so I cant comment. I use a Rotel 1075 for the juice.

 

[DJ_JonnyV]

The 1400 and 2400 have been bench tested both by reputable audio/video magazine publications, and they were very light on their advertised watts/channel ratings, especially with either 5 or 7 channels driven. Now, there will be a lot of people out there that say that this is not a real world test, that all 5/7 channels will never be driven at the same time like that. But, wouldn't you rather know your receiver has the [email protected] to drive 5/7 channels as advertised even if you never use it??? I have nothing against Yamaha; I really like their source components and believe their products are well-made, but I'm just not a big fan of their receivers mainly due to this reason.

 

[dvdvideo]

Prozakk, when you say the Yamaha's have changed, do you mean the just the models that came out RXV450, 550, 650, or last year or 2 too?

 

[Prozakk]

Quote:

Originally posted by dvdvideo Prozakk, when you say the Yamaha's have changed, do you mean the just the models that came out RXV450, 550, 650, or last year or 2 too?

I mean vs. the 1300/2300 & prior models.

 

[TauRus]

Once in a while I do agree fully with what tubeguy44 says I also believe that speaker/receiver sonic "compatibility" for the lack of a better word is a key factor. You guys can debate till the next millenium which receiver is brighter or warmer, but until figlio tries both recievers in HIS HT room, mated to HIS speakers he will never know for sure which one makes a better match for his system. Try persuading the dealer to allow you to take both receivers home for auditioning. In my mind this is the only sure way to find the right equipment.

 

[CCarncross]

100% agree with that TauRus....