Replace my Yamaha with 1014TX? (1 Viewer)

[Leigh_M]

Ok, it's hard not to get caught up in the excitement about the 1014TX. I currently have a Yamaha RX-V630 driving Boston CR85/CR75/VRC system in a 12x20 room. I do not push the system just because I don't like listening at high levels, but I've often wondered if I would benefit from more power at normal listening levels. Also, I'm very curious about the MCCAC. I currently calibrate my system using a SPL meter. Do you think I would see any benefits from the Pioneer?

 

[John S]

Minimal benefit at best. I'd call the two AVR's definetly in the same league.

 

[Dave Lindhorst]

To double your output volumm you have to supply 10 times the power to the speakers. So if you have 120 Watts RMS then you need to go to 1200 to double volumm. Not going to happen is it. Best way to get more volumm is to buy more efficent speakers.

 

[Dave Lindhorst]

One thing about the 1014 is it doesn't have a phono input. I was looking at this reciever until I noticed that. As I have a record player I became disinterested in that perticullar reciever.

No you can't just plug a phono into a regular input like an auxilary. Needs a RIAA equilization input.

If thats what anyone was thinking.

 

[Dick Boneske]

You can buy a preamp with RIAA equalization for $10 and up, depending on how much you want to spend. It's not a big deal to use it with the 1014--plug it into the switched 120 volt outlet and hook up your phono leads and you're all set!!

I can't imagine not buying a receiver for lack of a phono input.

 

[Dave Lindhorst]

I guess you don't listen to many LPs. I don't think I would be interested in paying for a great receiver and then adding a $10 RIAA preamp. Over $2000 for a great turntable and you would have someone buy a $10 RIAA preamp when many receivers are equipped with it.

Sounds like I should also use some speakers from the garage sale down the street. Noname ones.

All kidding aside I think I would just make sure I got a receiver already equipped. Thanks for the suggestion just the same.

 

[Steve_L]

Audiophile quality phone pre-amp. About $50. US

http://www.audioreplay.net/tc750pp.html

Most modern receivers don't have phono inputs. this one works well for my Dual.

You prolly want something far more sophisticated than a 1014 to support the astounding frequency response of that over $2000 turntable you got there.

 

[Dave Lindhorst]

Most good modern recievers do have Phono inputs. I am so sorry you can't appreciate the different sound that LPs have, something is still said about the qaulity of the LP. If you are trying to be sarcastic about the turntable so be it. Technics SL 1000 MKII is one of the best turntables ever made and are even selling for $2000 for a 20 year old component. I bet not one component you have will be worth anywhere near that when it is 20 Years old.

Just because I happen to like the sound of the old LPs is no reason for anyone here to say anything negative about it. But I do appreciate your input.

 

[Gralen]

Love the sound of LPs Just bought a Technic myself. My Yammy runs it. Sounds good too.

 

[John S]

I beg to differ.. Most modern AVR's do not have Phono inputs. I add pre-amps for people all the time.

I got one issue right now. I have encountered a Moving Coil Cartridge. The pre-amps I am / have been using only do moving magnet level cartridges.

I will investigate the provided link for sure to see if that product will handle both.

 

[John Garcia]

Huh? To get a 6dB increase without changing anything else, you would need 250w per channel, unclipped. To double the TOTAL SPL, you would need 10x the power, but that would also likely make you DEAF... In the typical HT, there would never be a need for 1200wpc.

I agree with JohnS, there are very few AVRs on the market that still have phono inputs built in.

I don't see where a single person said anything negative about LPs, and anyone who responded obviously knows that they are still one of the best sounding media types out there.

 

[Tingwe]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiight....

Let's see, Yammy RX-V630: 75w/ch (overstated?),6.1,PLII

and our little Pio 1014: 115watts per channel ALL channels driven (specs say 110w/ch), 7.1, PLIIx, THX-Select, and has Auto-MCACC calibrates accurately with the best of them and is a snap

Right. They're definitely in the same league and "minimal at best" :rolleyes

 

[Chu Gai]

If you're not currently pushing your system, then you are indeed caught up in it.

 

[Dave Lindhorst]

Hey Gralen, what model of turntable did you buy?

John S, I said good receivers meaning upper end receivers have phono inputs, I didn't say anything about most receivers. You are right most receivers don't have phono ins and thats what makes them most, rather than good. You don't have to be mad if yours doesn't have a phono in. Wow you found out what yours doesn't have. Just joshing you.

John S just for your information. My Denon Preamp has a switch on the front for selecting either of the types of cartridge. Moving coil or magnetic. So I guess my set is no like most them.

 

[Ryan Leemhuis]

Those figures are being questioned in another post and most are agreeing that they probably aren't accurate

 

[Dave Lindhorst]

I am under the impression all wattage claims are met on an amp are met using a standard testing method. Those that claim some manufacturers under rate their equipment do so because the equipment doesn't meet some parameter somewhere and therefore cannot claim the maximum wattage as any higher than they do. Having said that, that does not indicate the sound quality those machines are capable of. It just means they have a lower power output within those parameters when being tested.

 

[Greg Yeatts]

Ryan

Interesting use of "most" in your reply. You should back up your assertion with facts. Are most people using the 1014TX saying that it is overrated, or are there one or two sceptics on one thread?

Here is a link review of the Pioneer Elite 52TX home theater receiver.

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers...eer/index2.html[/url]

With five channels driven the receiver puts out 115 watts per channel. Except for a second zone option the Elite 52TX and the Pioneer 1014TX share innards and the same service manual. I have owned a 1014TX now and am very impressed by its power output. It has much more guts than my old Onkyo 601.

Here is a link that shows the available service manual for the 1014TX and the 52TX.

http://parts.pioneerelectronics.com...SX%2D1014TX%2DK

Also, the specifications listed in the owners manual of both models are identical.

 

[Ryan Leemhuis]

All I am saying is that it does not make sense the way it is and others agree. A receiver cannot take in less power than it puts out, its simply not possible. So frankly, we don't know what Pioneer has done with the 1014 unless some measurements are taken on that receiver, and in the other thread, a member says a technician tested it and it did not come out to the high 115 mark of the 52TX. Which frankly, makes sense to me given the price difference

 

[Greg Yeatts]

Ryan

Now it "others". Before it was "most". I know that you want to present things so that readers think that "everyone" is on your side. This annoys me.

How do you know how the 480 watts was determined. It is not written on the back of the receiver. Is it one channel driven? Is it five channels driven? Is it just the front two channels driven? The actual power rating presented in the owners manual is a wonder of ambiguity as to how many channels driven for the rated output.

That is why I quoted a review of a receiver with the same guts. The link above shows the service manual available that applies to both the 52TX and the 1014TX. The wattage on the back of the 52TX is the same as the 1014TX (480 watts). The 52TX made the power in the link above in the magazine review.

The owners manuals of the two reeceivers are identical in content and specifications except for the second zone connections that the 52TX has.

 

[Ryan Leemhuis]

geez, their just words. I don't care if others believe me or not. Try not to overanalyze my words, all I meant was that it might be worth some thought. You don't need to try and make me look bad here. In the first post, most references the people that are participating in the post. Not most on the entire forum. Others represents the people participating in the post and not this post. It makes sense just think about it.

You would be speculating that the internal components are all the same, which I HIGHLY doubt. Thats simple not smart buisness. Fact is all we have to go off of is:

1. Price level
2. The rated power input on the back

Those are about the only facts we know until someone shows a review of the 1014's power until then, everything is speculation.