Finally replacing an old Denon stereo receiver and found AV receivers too complicated. Just want to listen to music, perhaps hook up laptop to hear Pandora and Spotify, and HDTV but no desire for surround effects. At least not until I become more sophisticated audiovisual-wise. I'm finding good prices and reviews for Onkyo TX-8255 and Teac AG 790A. Any thoughts re either? Many thanks, Shari
Quick receiver pick question - Onkyo TX-8255 or Teac AG 790A
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
I'd go with the Onkyo - it has normal bass/treble/balance knobs whereas with the Teac you have to hit a bass/treble/balance button and then turn the volume knob to adjust it. If you find yourself tweaking the bass/treble a lot, the Onkyo will be easier to operate. The Onkyo has 5 inputs (plus phono) whereas the Teac only has 3 (plus phono).
The only positive I can see with the Teac is that it has twice the power of the Onkyo.
If it's in the budget, you may also want to look at the Onkyo TX-8050 which has a USB port for direct playback of MP3's/flac's from a thumbdrive/portable hard drive/IPhone/IPod/etc... It also has a built-in network hookup for various Internet radio sites, more power, digital inputs, pre-amp outputs and a subwoofer output. I just bought one of these about a month ago and am pretty happy with it.
The only caveat with Onkyo's is that they run a bit hot and need a lot of ventilation. You shouldn't stack another component on top of it and it may not be too happy jammed into an entertainment center where there's little or no air flow.
The only positive I can see with the Teac is that it has twice the power of the Onkyo.
If it's in the budget, you may also want to look at the Onkyo TX-8050 which has a USB port for direct playback of MP3's/flac's from a thumbdrive/portable hard drive/IPhone/IPod/etc... It also has a built-in network hookup for various Internet radio sites, more power, digital inputs, pre-amp outputs and a subwoofer output. I just bought one of these about a month ago and am pretty happy with it.
The only caveat with Onkyo's is that they run a bit hot and need a lot of ventilation. You shouldn't stack another component on top of it and it may not be too happy jammed into an entertainment center where there's little or no air flow.
I just centerpieced my 2.1 AV - music system with a new conventional 5.1 receiver (A Yamaha RXV-371). It is just fine as a stereo receiver, but has the advantage of useful tools like a nice collection of digital audio inputs and if when I needed it, bass management. It even had nifty 5-way binding posts for the main channels. And it too has about twice the output power as the Onkyo that you mentioned.
I actually paid less than the street price of either of the receivers you mentioned for a new receiver with warranty at a local appliance warehouse.
I just centerpieced my 2.1 AV - music system with a new conventional 5.1 receiver (A Yamaha RXV-371). It is just fine as a stereo receiver, but has the advantage of useful tools like a nice collection of digital audio inputs and if when I needed it, bass management. It even had nifty 5-way binding posts for the main channels. And it too has about twice the output power as the Onkyo that you mentioned.
I actually paid less than the street price of either of the receivers you mentioned for a new receiver with warranty at a local appliance warehouse.
Not really. Here's the power spec for the Teac:
Here's the power spec for the Onkyo:
The Onkyo is rated over the full audio bandwidth, while the Teac is rated at only one frequency. The Onkyo is also rated at a lower distortion point. So you're comparing apples and oranges. It's possible that the Onkyo is as powerful as the Teac, if measured comparably. The Teac certainly isn't twice as powerful.
Joined
·
110 Posts
I just put together an Onkyo 2-channel (music only) system in our den.
Consists of a TX-8050 Network Reciever, a C-7030 CD player, and pair of M-282 Power amps.
One power amp is driving the front tower speakers, and the other power amp is driving the rear speakers. The speakers are Polk RTi A7 and RTi A3s mounted on stands.
I use this system to listen to music via the CD, USB Flash Drive and Internet Radio Stations (v Tuner and Pandora). Works great and has a really nice sound. The music streaming abilities of the Onkyo TX-8050 work very well as long as you have a good Wi-Fi in the house.
![]()
![]()
Consists of a TX-8050 Network Reciever, a C-7030 CD player, and pair of M-282 Power amps.
One power amp is driving the front tower speakers, and the other power amp is driving the rear speakers. The speakers are Polk RTi A7 and RTi A3s mounted on stands.
I use this system to listen to music via the CD, USB Flash Drive and Internet Radio Stations (v Tuner and Pandora). Works great and has a really nice sound. The music streaming abilities of the Onkyo TX-8050 work very well as long as you have a good Wi-Fi in the house.
Joined
·
110 Posts
BTW .. Here are the specs on the reciever. As I stated above, since I am using 2 power amps with this system, I am not using the power amp section of the TX-8050.
ONKYO TX-8050 NETWORK STEREO RECIEVER
Wide Range Amplifier Technology (WRAT)
Continuous Output Power:
80 w/ch RMS @ 8 ohms
Frequency Response:
5 Hz - 100,000 Hz
Total Harmonic Distortion:
0.08%
Signal / Noise Ratio:
106 dB
RCA Audio Inputs:
(2ea) CD, Phono
Toslink Audio Inputs:
(2ea) CD, Game Console
Coaxial Audio Inputs:
(2ea) DVD, Cable-Sat
Composite Audio/Video Inputs:
(5ea) TV, DVD, VCR, Cable-Sat, Game Console
Composite Audio/Video Outputs:
(2ea) TV, VCR
RCA Pre-Amp Outputs:
(3ea) Main Lft-Rt Channels, Zone 2 Lft-Rt Channels, LFE Sub
Speaker Binding Posts:
A/B (Banana Plug Compatable)
Front Panel USB Port
Ethernet and Universal Ports
AM / FM Tuner with 40 Presets
Pure Audio / Direct Modes
Headphone Jack
Remote Control
Certified for Use with:
Windows 7 with DLNA Version 1.5
Supported Audio Files:
MP3, WMA, WMA Lossless, FLAC, WAV, Ogg Vorbis, AAC, LPCM audio
Music Streaming:
Pandora, Rhapsody, Slacker, Sirius-XM, vTuner, LastFM, Napster, Aupeo
Accepts:
Optional Onkyo UWF-1 Wireless LAN Adapter, DS-A1 Remote iPod Dock
ONKYO TX-8050 NETWORK STEREO RECIEVER
Wide Range Amplifier Technology (WRAT)
Continuous Output Power:
80 w/ch RMS @ 8 ohms
Frequency Response:
5 Hz - 100,000 Hz
Total Harmonic Distortion:
0.08%
Signal / Noise Ratio:
106 dB
RCA Audio Inputs:
(2ea) CD, Phono
Toslink Audio Inputs:
(2ea) CD, Game Console
Coaxial Audio Inputs:
(2ea) DVD, Cable-Sat
Composite Audio/Video Inputs:
(5ea) TV, DVD, VCR, Cable-Sat, Game Console
Composite Audio/Video Outputs:
(2ea) TV, VCR
RCA Pre-Amp Outputs:
(3ea) Main Lft-Rt Channels, Zone 2 Lft-Rt Channels, LFE Sub
Speaker Binding Posts:
A/B (Banana Plug Compatable)
Front Panel USB Port
Ethernet and Universal Ports
AM / FM Tuner with 40 Presets
Pure Audio / Direct Modes
Headphone Jack
Remote Control
Certified for Use with:
Windows 7 with DLNA Version 1.5
Supported Audio Files:
MP3, WMA, WMA Lossless, FLAC, WAV, Ogg Vorbis, AAC, LPCM audio
Music Streaming:
Pandora, Rhapsody, Slacker, Sirius-XM, vTuner, LastFM, Napster, Aupeo
Accepts:
Optional Onkyo UWF-1 Wireless LAN Adapter, DS-A1 Remote iPod Dock
Here are the specs on the M282 power amps:
Power Output 2 x 125 watts/channel into 6 ohm
Running them at 8 ohms would produce pretty much the same amount of power, maybe a tad less. IOW, they are only a less than 2 dB increase over the power amps in the receiver. IMO the money (approx $500) would have been far better spent on a powered subwoofer that would take a significant load off of both the receiver and the main speakers.
Here are the specs on the M282 power amps:
Power Output 2 x 125 watts/channel into 6 ohm
Running them at 8 ohms would produce pretty much the same amount of power, maybe a tad less. IOW, they are only a less than 2 dB increase over the power amps in the receiver. IMO the money (approx $500) would have been far better spent on a powered subwoofer that would take a significant load off of both the receiver and the main speakers.
It's truly amazing to watch people throw hundreds of dollars for a 2-3 db power increase when the TX-8050 is more than capable of driving those speakers in a room that size. The time/money spent on the amps should have been spent on room treatments and better speaker placement.
Joined
·
110 Posts
I'm sorry
I don't know why you're apologizing. Spend YOUR money as you see fit. There's no need to say sorry.
Btw, I am building a system almost exactly like yours. Already has the C-7030 CD player and eyeing the TX-8050 receiver. The M-282 power amp will eventually be added. Just one amp since I have no rear speakers.
I don't know why you're apologizing. Spend YOUR money as you see fit. There's no need to say sorry.
Btw, I am building a system almost exactly like yours. Already has the C-7030 CD player and eyeing the TX-8050 receiver. The M-282 power amp will eventually be added. Just one amp since I have no rear speakers.
Joined
·
612 Posts
This is important information, not all specs. are created equal!
To the OP, I have a rebuilt 1985 Yamaha A-1000 integrated amp...Old and worn out...Nope, it has never broken down. Has technology improved in amplifier design? You be the judge as here are the specs:
Continuous power per ch. 120wpc 20Hz-20kHz . THD .005%
Power at full bandwidth: 60 wpc 10Hz-100kHz THD .03% (this is very respectable!)
TIM: .002%
S/N Ratio: CD-AUX, 106db, Phono, MM 94db, MC 80 db
Frequency Response: +- 0db 20Hz-20kHz (Direct On)
Power Consumption: 680W, Capacitance: 110,000uf
As you can see these are stellar measurements for any era. Companies can come up with fancy new names but the fact remains that a well designed amplifier will always be a well designed amplifier. I will grant that this was Yamaha's TOTL integrated amp in 1985 selling for $1000.00 ($3000.00 adjusted for inflation).
No, it is not brand spanking new but it is built beautifully and very well, It could have easily worn the McIntosh name with pride (and I have owned them and Krell among many others)! You don't seem a brand snob, at all! My point is that new does not always equate to better. I don't research for others, I have enough to do myself, but you may be able to find a nice amp on Audiogon for a reasonable price. Sometimes you have to think outside of the box.
I learned a lot about myself rebuilding this old Yamaha amp. It wasn't broke but I decided to get a service diagram and replace everything that I could in it. The end result is mine and I love it! I am not suggesting this for you at this time but a lot of satisfaction can be had by doing some serious research (and trial and error)!
Best of wishes in your search!
This is important information, not all specs. are created equal!
To the OP, I have a rebuilt 1985 Yamaha A-1000 integrated amp...Old and worn out...Nope, it has never broken down. Has technology improved in amplifier design? You be the judge as here are the specs:
Continuous power per ch. 120wpc 20Hz-20kHz . THD .005%
Power at full bandwidth: 60 wpc 10Hz-100kHz THD .03% (this is very respectable!)
TIM: .002%
S/N Ratio: CD-AUX, 106db, Phono, MM 94db, MC 80 db
Frequency Response: +- 0db 20Hz-20kHz (Direct On)
Power Consumption: 680W, Capacitance: 110,000uf
As you can see these are stellar measurements for any era. Companies can come up with fancy new names but the fact remains that a well designed amplifier will always be a well designed amplifier. I will grant that this was Yamaha's TOTL integrated amp in 1985 selling for $1000.00 ($3000.00 adjusted for inflation).
No, it is not brand spanking new but it is built beautifully and very well, It could have easily worn the McIntosh name with pride (and I have owned them and Krell among many others)! You don't seem a brand snob, at all! My point is that new does not always equate to better. I don't research for others, I have enough to do myself, but you may be able to find a nice amp on Audiogon for a reasonable price. Sometimes you have to think outside of the box.
I learned a lot about myself rebuilding this old Yamaha amp. It wasn't broke but I decided to get a service diagram and replace everything that I could in it. The end result is mine and I love it! I am not suggesting this for you at this time but a lot of satisfaction can be had by doing some serious research (and trial and error)!
Best of wishes in your search!
..as far as they go. For one thing they describe something that only existed 27 years ago - the integrated amp in question when it was new.
*everything* degrades with usage and even just the passage of time. Does it meet spec today? If you have to pay someone to check it out for you, you would probably pay them more than what the amp cost you new. Just because it sounds good to you, doesn't mean that much. Ever hear of the parable of the boiled frog?
In 2012 a well-designed amplifier with 120 wpc will cost you a little more than $200, but in general nobody wants one. All by itself it is not the centerpiece of a modern system. For openers, no bass management, no digital inputs, and no built in equalizer.
Hate to burst your bubble, but audio has changed a lot in the past 25 years. Think I'm wrong - do try to sell it.
..as far as they go. For one thing they describe something that only existed 27 years ago - the integrated amp in question when it was new.
*everything* degrades with usage and even just the passage of time. Does it meet spec today? If you have to pay someone to check it out for you, you would probably pay them more than what the amp cost you new. Just because it sounds good to you, doesn't mean that much. Ever hear of the parable of the boiled frog?
In 2012 a well-designed amplifier with 120 wpc will cost you a little more than $200, but in general nobody wants one. All by itself it is not the centerpiece of a modern system. For openers, no bass management, no digital inputs, and no built in equalizer.
Hate to burst your bubble, but audio has changed a lot in the past 25 years. Think I'm wrong - do try to sell it.
Joined
·
612 Posts
You are not bursting my bubble Arnie! The amp has been rebuilt in a world class engineering lab, it measures as good or better than the original specifications, I would accept no less! Funny how you left the "rebuilt" part out of your quotes! I will not fall into the "Troll" game with you nor anyone else!
BTW, Arnie how many of these 2012 amps do you think will be around in 2037??? As well, you clown, I have no intentions of selling it, I would pay through the nose to beter it! The OP is not looking for an AVR with bass management. I never read that in his original post! This amp has been tested to the nth degree and played in my wealthy friends Mac MA7000, B&W 802D system...It did a fantastic job, maybe a little down on max. power but that was it! His room is all but an anechoic chamber, with very extensive room treatments!
I will admit that this rebuild was exhaustive and extensive but it was an exercise in what is possible with "OLD" technology! Do not speak to me as if I am an idiot, that will upset me. This amp met and/or exceeded every factory spec. The capacitors, replaced with equivalent models, cost more than most new amps do. Most newer amps are not built like this thing was, end of story!
Come on over to Kalamazoo, MI if you want and we can have a more exhaustive discussion on this topic. If you have better equipment than our mathematicians, physicists, and engineers I would love to see it!
EWY, PhD Candidate, Mathematics
PS. I apologize to the OP over this, but I will not be attacked for misinformation! I am a scientist, research and understanding is what I do.
You are not bursting my bubble Arnie! The amp has been rebuilt in a world class engineering lab, it measures as good or better than the original specifications, I would accept no less! Funny how you left the "rebuilt" part out of your quotes! I will not fall into the "Troll" game with you nor anyone else!
BTW, Arnie how many of these 2012 amps do you think will be around in 2037??? As well, you clown, I have no intentions of selling it, I would pay through the nose to beter it! The OP is not looking for an AVR with bass management. I never read that in his original post! This amp has been tested to the nth degree and played in my wealthy friends Mac MA7000, B&W 802D system...It did a fantastic job, maybe a little down on max. power but that was it! His room is all but an anechoic chamber, with very extensive room treatments!
I will admit that this rebuild was exhaustive and extensive but it was an exercise in what is possible with "OLD" technology! Do not speak to me as if I am an idiot, that will upset me. This amp met and/or exceeded every factory spec. The capacitors, replaced with equivalent models, cost more than most new amps do. Most newer amps are not built like this thing was, end of story!
Come on over to Kalamazoo, MI if you want and we can have a more exhaustive discussion on this topic. If you have better equipment than our mathematicians, physicists, and engineers I would love to see it!
EWY, PhD Candidate, Mathematics
PS. I apologize to the OP over this, but I will not be attacked for misinformation! I am a scientist, research and understanding is what I do.
Joined
·
612 Posts
Sorry, Arnie but my idea and the OP's idea of a modern system are different than yours. It is possible that we do not care about surround sound and all the junk that goes with it! I will also run your "well designed" 120 wpc amp against mine seven days per week and kick its butt up and down the block, and then to the curb! Did you account for headroom? Did you account for capacitance? Did you account for transformer voltage?
A lot has changed in the past 25 years argument has lost some water with companies like Bryston and Yamaha that still have crap loads of fine equipment still operating just fine!
A lot has changed in the past 25 years argument has lost some water with companies like Bryston and Yamaha that still have crap loads of fine equipment still operating just fine!
I know of quite a bit of Bryston equipment that has required servicing during that time period. Just because they've got the markup to give out free repair service doesn't mean that their equipment is flawless for 25 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by math-geek /t/1421371/quick-receiver-pick-question-onkyo-tx-8255-or-teac-ag-790a#post_22250686
Sorry, Arnie but my idea and the OP's idea of a modern system are different than yours.]/quote]
Your mastery of the obvious is quite impressive! '\
I didn't mention surround sound!
For a PhD candidate you are showing a surprising lack of understanding of modern audio systems. Even the simpler 2-channel systems contain bass management, digital inputs and the like. Mine does.
Did you account for all the things that can happen to an amplifier in 25 years?
Caps drying out?
Transistors losing beta?
Resistors changing value or opening up?
Capacitors changing value, shorting or opening up?
Switch contacts going bad?
Just to mention a few of the many ways that equipment degrades, even while sitting on the shelf. Remember that just because an old part is good today doesn't mean that being closer to its end of life, it might fail tomorrow.
I know of quite a bit of Bryston equipment that has required servicing during that time period. Just because they've got the markup to give out free repair service doesn't mean that their equipment is flawless for 25 years.
I see three serious problems with your advice that one run right out and obtain some ancient piece of gear and rebuild it and correct all of the flaws that have accumulated in use.
(1) Running right out and obtaining some ancient (decades-old) piece of gear and rebuilding it to correct all of the flaws that have accumulated in use takes as you have admitted, exceptional resources. Unless you are a skilled technician yourself, it will cost a ton of money to retain the services required. As a hobby or avocation of course this can be a great pastime. But it is not for the general audiophile.
(2) Once you restore that ancient piece of gear to full operational status, unless you have totally rebuilt it, it is inherently more unreliable than new equipment because of all of the ancient parts that you didn't replace.
(3) Once you restore that ancient piece of gear to full operational status unfortunately you have the origional piece of gear with its inherent limitations because it was designed to meet the need of a former age.
All of them, if they are treated as you have treated your ancient integrated amplifier.
(you can always tell the true men of science by how they express themselves! ;-) )
Thank you for explaining the source-of-supply problem with your advice. You are basically advising the OP to obtain something that is not obtainable! Furthermore, yor preferences are the very reason why the equipment you recommend is not obtainable! Are you trying to be cruel? ;-)
That is a a very unscientific comment. Just because someone does not articulate at some moment what is these days a common need, does not mean that it is not in his mind, or wouldnot shortly be in his mind as his situation evolves. . Absence of obvious evidence is not evidence of absence!
I think that must have been very rewarding for you, but I am pressed to understand how it would apply to the OP, especially since you have already said that he can't possibly obtain this equipment from you.
I think we all can understand the context of that situation, and its few strengths and many weaknesses.
I believe that you indicated your mental state when you mentioned something about circus entertainers. ;-)
Seems like a great project for someone with time and money to burn. I suspect that most people would have other priorities.
I could do that, as I am currently at my family's summer house just north of New Buffalo, overlooking Lake Michigan which I can see is kinda grey and cloudy right now...
However, given the uneasy emotional state your post evidences. I might think twice about that... Besides, I feel like enjoying the lake.
I believe I have shown many shortcomings along the lines of science, logic and critical thinking in the post I am replying to. I would humbly recommend that you reconsider your situation before proceeding.
I see three serious problems with your advice that one run right out and obtain some ancient piece of gear and rebuild it and correct all of the flaws that have accumulated in use.
(1) Running right out and obtaining some ancient (decades-old) piece of gear and rebuilding it to correct all of the flaws that have accumulated in use takes as you have admitted, exceptional resources. Unless you are a skilled technician yourself, it will cost a ton of money to retain the services required. As a hobby or avocation of course this can be a great pastime. But it is not for the general audiophile.
(2) Once you restore that ancient piece of gear to full operational status, unless you have totally rebuilt it, it is inherently more unreliable than new equipment because of all of the ancient parts that you didn't replace.
(3) Once you restore that ancient piece of gear to full operational status unfortunately you have the origional piece of gear with its inherent limitations because it was designed to meet the need of a former age.
All of them, if they are treated as you have treated your ancient integrated amplifier.
(you can always tell the true men of science by how they express themselves! ;-) )
Thank you for explaining the source-of-supply problem with your advice. You are basically advising the OP to obtain something that is not obtainable! Furthermore, yor preferences are the very reason why the equipment you recommend is not obtainable! Are you trying to be cruel? ;-)
That is a a very unscientific comment. Just because someone does not articulate at some moment what is these days a common need, does not mean that it is not in his mind, or wouldnot shortly be in his mind as his situation evolves. . Absence of obvious evidence is not evidence of absence!
I think that must have been very rewarding for you, but I am pressed to understand how it would apply to the OP, especially since you have already said that he can't possibly obtain this equipment from you.
I think we all can understand the context of that situation, and its few strengths and many weaknesses.
I believe that you indicated your mental state when you mentioned something about circus entertainers. ;-)
Seems like a great project for someone with time and money to burn. I suspect that most people would have other priorities.
I could do that, as I am currently at my family's summer house just north of New Buffalo, overlooking Lake Michigan which I can see is kinda grey and cloudy right now...
However, given the uneasy emotional state your post evidences. I might think twice about that... Besides, I feel like enjoying the lake.
I believe I have shown many shortcomings along the lines of science, logic and critical thinking in the post I am replying to. I would humbly recommend that you reconsider your situation before proceeding.
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!