AVS Forum banner

21 - 40 of 66 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
188 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax542  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much#post_24168296

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prietz0r  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much#post_24167158


Then you didn't searched good enough


Here are pictures of the inside ánd outside of the European/World version Pioneer Elite SC-79, the Pioneer SC-LX87:
http://www.areadvd.de/tests/xxl-test-9-2-av-receiver-pioneer-sc-lx87/

Not always see below



And what about the own Pioneer Electronics promo video ?


And last but not least the official Pineer Japan pictures of the world version of the Pioneer Elite SC-79 the Pioneer SC-LX87:
http://pioneer.jp/components/avamp/lx87/quality.html

So I'm guessing you would choose the SC-77 over the Yamaha a3030? If so, why?

I would say the on-board amplifiers of the Pioneer's are most definitely more powerful than the Yamaha's. The Class-D amplifiers are since the introduction of the ICE-amplifiers in previous Pioneer Elite SC models always renowned for their performance, since the introduction of the D3 amplifiers produced in conjunction with the American company 'International Rectifier' they gained in performance and sonic qualities according various reviews and owners.


Myself I have listened to both type Class-D receivers, the older ones and the newer ones, and I do prefer the newer ones.


And the MCACC's features 'Full Band Phase Control' 'Standing Wave Control' and not to forget the feature 'X-Curve' which all do noticeable changes for the good in my experience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,471 Posts
Pioneer's D3 digital amps run more efficiently than regular class AB amps. They do not need large power supplies so it ends up lighter. They also have the advantage of being able to run 4-ohm loads rather well. Most AVRs are not rated for 4-ohms, but only 8- or 6-ohms. I have a Pioneer SC-67 and can say that the Pioneer can drive my speakers just as loud as my older Onkyo TX-NR906. I would have kept the Onkyo except the HDMI board failed twice. A friend of mine has a Onkyo 929 and it just died on him, so Onkyo's are still suffering from reliability issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,063 Posts
If I was making a recommendation to friend for a $2000 receiver, there is no doubt what I would say; the Cambridge 651R!


IMO it has the best sound quality and the most REAL power to drive REAL-WORLD complex speaker loads (as opposed to resistors on a bench).


It is specified by Cambridge to supply 100 watts of power to ALL SEVEN CHANNELS DRIVEN SIMULTANEOUSLY! No Japanese receiver brand I know of actually gives a specification like that (let alone matches the power). Those guys keep it verrrry mysterious.....lol.


Whether it has or does not have any particular feature you want is something for you to research.


The expert reviewers at Home Theater magazine have repeatedly commented on the superior sound quality of Cambridge receivers. They seem to have a good reason for singling out Cambridge for this kind of praise.


Anyone who says all receivers sound the same...(self-censored).


Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax542  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much#post_24165204


I simply want the build quality of NAD, the sound quality of Cambridge, the room correction of Anthem, all on a feature laden 9.2 receiver like the Onkyo and Yamaha. Is that too much to ask?



Edit: And it needs to cost around $2k.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
188 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much#post_24170287


If I was making a recommendation to friend for a $2000 receiver, there is no doubt what I would say; the Cambridge 651R!


IMO it has the best sound quality and the most REAL power to drive REAL-WORLD complex speaker loads (as opposed to resistors on a bench).


It is specified by Cambridge to supply 100 watts of power to ALL SEVEN CHANNELS DRIVEN SIMULTANEOUSLY! No Japanese receiver brand I know of actually gives a specification like that (let alone matches the power). Those guys keep it verrrry mysterious.....lol.


Whether it has or does not have any particular feature you want is something for you to research.


The expert reviewers at Home Theater magazine have repeatedly commented on the superior sound quality of Cambridge receivers. They seem to have a good reason for singling out Cambridge for this kind of praise.


Anyone who says all receivers sound the same...(self-censored).

Cool to see you back commsysman
Our own forum-troll :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,455 Posts
If you want weight these days, I'd recommend spending a few hundred dollars on a receiver with the feature set that you want, then get a 100lb amplifier. Separates are the way to go these days if you want some beefy, raw power. However, as most have mentioned, technology has come a little ways in the last ten years, so receivers don't need quite as gigantic power supplies and heat sinks. So unless you're trying to power a 9+ channel surround sound system to above reference levels, that 30lb receiver will be more than satisfactory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jevans64

·
Registered
Joined
·
397 Posts
Discussion Starter #26

Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much#post_24170287



It is specified by Cambridge to supply 100 watts of power to ALL SEVEN CHANNELS DRIVEN SIMULTANEOUSLY! No Japanese receiver brand I know of actually gives a specification like that (let alone matches the power). Those guys keep it verrrry mysterious.....lol.

Isn't the Azur 651R assembled in China?


I would love the build/sound quality that Cambridge owners boast about, but I also want features. I want at least 9.2 channels, smart phone apps, a high quality room correction system, and internet streaming.


My wife needs to think this thing is cool, in order to sell her on it.


I was almost sold on the Yammy, until Prietz0r started chiming in. As a big time Star Wars buff, the THX logo pulls on my heart. It's partially why I picked up my Onkyo TX-SR800. The Pioneer seems to have more power, but not everyone is sold on the class D amps. Some even say that you have to warm them up for an hour before they reach their true sound potential. If I decide to watch Fellowship of the Rings on a whim, I want the receiver to be at its best before they get to Rivendell. Also, the Pioneer doesn't have multi channel inputs. I'm not sure that this is really a problem, but If I ever brought my 25lb Denon DVD-3800 down to my dedicated theater, I wouldn't be able to test its SACD capabilities against my OPPO BDP-83 (not that I ever would). What the Pioneer does have going for it, is an $1800 price tag. The Yamaha is $2000, but I will gladly spend the extra $200, if the sound and build quality are superior. People often brag on the A3030's DSP. I didn't see anything negative or positive about the SC-77's DSP in the pioneer thread, so I am at a loss.


These decisions are overwhelming and stressful. I wish I had never gotten into this stupid hobby.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
354 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax542  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much#post_24170747


Isn't the Azur 651R assembled in China?


I would love the build/sound quality that Cambridge owners boast about, but I also want features. I want at least 9.2 channels, smart phone apps, a high quality room correction system, and internet streaming.

You wrote "the room correction of Anthem", Cambridge Audio offers Audyssey 2EQ on the 751R...


You can read reviews and compare measurements here: http://www.soundandvision.com/category/av-receiver-reviews
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,063 Posts
I have been involved in audio for 50 years, and there are always decisions, and they can sometimes be wrong.


Ya just get all the information and input you can , and hope some of it is worth a damn...lol.


I think it was Casey Stengel that said "you win some, you lose some, and some get rained out...".

Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax542  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much#post_24170747




These decisions are overwhelming and stressful. I wish I had never gotten into this stupid hobby.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,808 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax542  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much#post_24170747


Isn't the Azur 651R assembled in China?


I would love the build/sound quality that Cambridge owners boast about, but I also want features. I want at least 9.2 channels, smart phone apps, a high quality room correction system, and internet streaming.


My wife needs to think this thing is cool, in order to sell her on it.


I was almost sold on the Yammy, until Prietz0r started chiming in. As a big time Star Wars buff, the THX logo pulls on my heart. It's partially why I picked up my Onkyo TX-SR800. The Pioneer seems to have more power, but not everyone is sold on the class D amps. Some even say that you have to warm them up for an hour before they reach their true sound potential. If I decide to watch Fellowship of the Rings on a whim, I want the receiver to be at its best before they get to Rivendell. Also, the Pioneer doesn't have multi channel inputs. I'm not sure that this is really a problem, but If I ever brought my 25lb Denon DVD-3800 down to my dedicated theater, I wouldn't be able to test its SACD capabilities against my OPPO BDP-83 (not that I ever would). What the Pioneer does have going for it, is an $1800 price tag. The Yamaha is $2000, but I will gladly spend the extra $200, if the sound and build quality are superior. People often brag on the A3030's DSP. I didn't see anything negative or positive about the SC-77's DSP in the pioneer thread, so I am at a loss.


These decisions are overwhelming and stressful. I wish I had never gotten into this stupid hobby.

If the Yamaha has all the things you want in an AVR then get it. It has plenty of power to make most speakers sound like they are capable of. It has a very good room correction program, it has analog inputs for that Denon player, and it will sound awesome. Buy it, run YPAO, tweak it if you need to and work the hell out of it. If it doesn't perform in your set up as you think it should return it. Crutchfield gives you 60 days to try it out. Don't like it get something else. I think you will like it very much. I like my A3000 very much, I just like my H/K 7550HD a lot more. I wouldn't hesitate a minute to put the Yamaha A3000 back in service if the H/K ever fails to work as it should. I do honestly feel though that the A3000 will be working long after the H/K quits. Yamaha's can't be beat for their reliability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
704 Posts
No need to stress, audio is mostly fun, to listen too. Set a budget ,find the best features in that range and buy from a trustworthy place. If money ain't the most important ,step up to NAD, Cambridge, Anthem etc...in that grouping they all sound good and ya can't choose the wrong one. You don't really have to though, if ya had an Onkyo and it was good get another. I would avoid "flag ship" avrs, if ya spend that much step up to the better names starter lines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,307 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much#post_24165693

Sound quality will be the same with any AVR. All of them have linear performance. Calibration software seems like a fairly silly requirement since all of them have routines that appear to work effectively. Build quality is only an issue in terms of reliability. Yamaha has an extremely good reliability record, perhaps better than that of NAD. So go for a $2000 Yamaha.

Do you truly believe this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,455 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much/0_60#post_24170947


Do you truly believe this?


To a point, I agree with him. I always hear people say this receiver sounded bright, or this one sounded warm. I think those statements are always ridiculous. When not using any room correction or special sound modes, I think anyone would have a hard time in a double blind test discerning which receiver they were listening to. Now, if you were to use highly sensitive, specialized sound testing equipment, would there be a difference? Probably. But, not one that I think humans will usually detect.


I've owned about 7 different receivers in the past ten years and I honestly don't notice any difference except in the sound correction. I'm currently running a Pioneer with MCACC, which yields some different results compared to YPAO and Audyssey which I've also had. But, as far as just hooking the receiver up upon unboxing and playing some content, no difference to my ears. I had two Onkyos, two Denons, two Pioneers, a Sony and a Yamaha.


EDIT: Let me also add that I agree with this, assuming the receivers are of comparable power. Obviously, a $100 HTIB receiver will not push a set of speakers as well as a $1000 stand alone receiver, in which case, the speakers aren't going to sound as good on the $100 receiver once you start turning it up past 1/4 loudness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
397 Posts
Discussion Starter #33

Quote:
Originally Posted by phantom52  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much#post_24170884


If the Yamaha has all the things you want in an AVR then get it. It has plenty of power to make most speakers sound like they are capable of. It has a very good room correction program, it has analog inputs for that Denon player, and it will sound awesome. Buy it, run YPAO, tweak it if you need to and work the hell out of it. If it doesn't perform in your set up as you think it should return it. Crutchfield gives you 60 days to try it out. Don't like it get something else. I think you will like it very much. I like my A3000 very much, I just like my H/K 7550HD a lot more. I wouldn't hesitate a minute to put the Yamaha A3000 back in service if the H/K ever fails to work as it should. I do honestly feel though that the A3000 will be working long after the H/K quits. Yamaha's can't be beat for their reliability.

Have you compared Yamaha's new video processing, with the HQV of past models?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,307 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrEastSide  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much/30#post_24171110


To a point, I agree with him. I always hear people say this receiver sounded bright, or this one sounded warm. I think those statements are always ridiculous. When not using any room correction or special sound modes, I think anyone would have a hard time in a double blind test discerning which receiver they were listening to. Now, if you were to use highly sensitive, specialized sound testing equipment, would there be a difference? Probably. But, not one that I think humans will usually detect.


I've owned about 7 different receivers in the past ten years and I honestly don't notice any difference except in the sound correction. I'm currently running a Pioneer with MCACC, which yields some different results compared to YPAO and Audyssey which I've also had. But, as far as just hooking the receiver up upon unboxing and playing some content, no difference to my ears. I had two Onkyos, two Denons, two Pioneers, a Sony and a Yamaha.


EDIT: Let me also add that I agree with this, assuming the receivers are of comparable power. Obviously, a $100 HTIB receiver will not push a set of speakers as well as a $1000 stand alone receiver, in which case, the speakers aren't going to sound as good on the $100 receiver once you start turning it up past 1/4 loudness.

I have owned all those brands and more. To me each brand has a characteristic sound. I do not prefer RC in any except XT32.

Onkyo sounds full without losing detail, Denon sounds sterile (except 4520), Pioneer detailed but not much depth, Sony currently sounds too warm (older ES series was great), Yamaha varies with series but still similar (very warm and lacking on the bottom end). Just an opinion and we all have them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,455 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much/0_60#post_24171273


I have owned all those brands and more. To me each brand has a characteristic sound. I do not prefer RC in any except XT32.

Onkyo sounds full without losing detail, Denon sounds sterile (except 4520), Pioneer detailed but not much depth, Sony currently sounds too warm (older ES series was great), Yamaha varies with series but still similar (very warm and lacking on the bottom end). Just an opinion and we all have them.

Hey, to each his own. No argument here. My ears could be worse than yours, who knows. lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,808 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax542  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much/30#post_24171218


Have you compared Yamaha's new video processing, with the HQV of past models?

No sir I haven't. But it's also something you won't need in most cases. Read the review below to give you a better idea what the 3030 is capable of doing.

http://www.whathifi.com/review/rx-a3030


And this with a comparison against the Denon 4520CI. This review below is of the Yamaha 3020.

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/av-receivers-preamps-processors-amplifier-reviews/67906-yamaha-aventage-rx-a3020-receiver-review.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much/30#post_24171273


I have owned all those brands and more. To me each brand has a characteristic sound. I do not prefer RC in any except XT32.

Were all of the brands that you made a comparison with all have XT32 applied? Were they all in the same room, same speaker and furniture arrangement?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,480 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45  /t/1509749/why-do-onkyos-and-nads-weigh-so-much/30#post_24170947


Do you truly believe this?

Of course. They all have inaudible noise, distortion and variance from a flat frequency response. There isn't anything audible to affect the sound.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
I totally get the original posters theory of wanting to get the most bang for you buck if you want your receiver to last ten years. My question is why not think outside of your own fishbowl? I would much rather have a new 1,000 dollar receiver every 5 years then a 2,000 dollar receiver every ten years. Technology just moves way to fast to wait ten years. I am sure a bunch of people will pipe up and disagree with me, but I think having most electronics for ten years is laughable. I guess I like to upgrade too much!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,480 Posts
It's called audiophilia - an expensive affliction. I finally cured mine. I don't see any point in upgrading until the equipment fails. Gadgets don't make for a better listening experience in my view. My receiver is 7 years old and works perfectly. It's just a matter perspective.
 
21 - 40 of 66 Posts
Top