Yamaha RX-A2000; I think I am on the brink (1 Viewer)

[JimatMilkyWay]

After _many_ hours of reading, comparing features and price considerations I think I am on the brink of writing a check. I want to watch this item on Newegg, Amazon and anywhere else youse guys suggest, and when the price hits my predetermined magic number, then I'll commit. Does someone know where to get a full-warranty re-furb?

What I wish I could figure out in the mean time is how to flex it's muscles. Hardware this complex is rather intimidating even to me. Are there users/owners ( or tutorials ) out there who enjoy offering up advice on set-up of this beast? I like to experiment but even with my vivid imagination I would not even know how to plug this thing's power cord in! (- :

Now, when it comes to speakers, we won't even go there right now. I have "a supply" of them here and will make do till I lick my wounds from this investment before jumping on that band-wagon. I have no doubt the new amp will fill my needs for years to come. I am currently using a little Panasonic bi-amp stereo and matched speaker set in conjunction with a $50, 10" Pawn-shop sub and a pair of old Sanyo midis as a "surround system" so I think an amp makes the most sense as a first purchase. While it may not sound too impressive with cheap speakers, as long as I use balanced loads with the new amp, I don't think I'll harm anything.

What I would really like to hear is opinion from knowledgeable techs out there on the pros/cons of this puppy.

Jim@MilkyWay

---------------------

 

[John Brill]

Your plan is to spend ~$1300 on a receiver and pair it up with under $300 worth of speakers? That's really backwards.


We've said it before, spend the money on speakers, not the electronics.


What features of the RX-A2000 really appeal to you and why? Do you really need them or does it simply sound good on paper? There is nothing in the RX-A2000 that is a must have over the RX-V667 at $499 IMHO or any of the proverbial Onkyo favourites often mentioned on this sight.


Finally, lets say, for arguements sake, you had top notch speakers, for $1300, I'd explore getting a pre-amp with separates but I don't think you are in this market yet. Get a $500-$700 receiver and spend your balance on a 12" sub and decent satelite and/or bookshelf speakers.


JB

 

[winniw]

Oh, I agree with John. For that amount of money, you can buy a very decent system... receiver and speakers with sub! Then, after owning and using that for a couple of years, you can upgrade... if you feel the need.


But, that's just my opinion. Sometimes a person has a lust for a thing, which no one else can understand, so if you need an RA-A2000 to make your life complete, I stand behind that insanity! Really, Jim, get it if you want it but you know that you will want new speakers, two days later.


Nick

 

[JimatMilkyWay]

Originally Posted by John Brill

Your plan is to spend ~$1300 on a receiver and pair it up with under $300 worth of speakers? That's really backwards.


We've said it before, spend the money on speakers, not the electronics....

Hi John, and thanks for the help. That is why I am on site. You guys who eat, sleep and breath this stuff can save us underlings from terrible mistakes if we will but listen. I _always_ choose to buy more than I need in case it turns out I didn't know my own needs as well as I initially thought. Dumb, huh?.

I wanted to come home and put together an argument to support my receiver choice ( things like a three year warranty ) but there has been a major development since my post from yesterday. I am sitting here now listening to a pair of Polk SDA-2's that I could not pass up. I mentioned in a post here or elsewhere that I had run across these but I had no idea if I would be able to score them without taking out another mortgage, as they were not priced in the shop and we all know what that potentially means; "If you have to ask the price, then...." Well I brought them home with me and then spent the entire evening talking to my engineer. With his help I tested this that and the other and the only deal breaker type thing I could find wrong was a break in the "interconnect cable" ( whatever that is ). I've never even heard of one much less owned something that used one. Umm,,, fyi,,, ZZ Top just finished and now Pink Floyd is up and running. It is solid!


Nickster

I don't know how to post multiple quotes in a reply or I would quote you. Man, you _nailed_ it.

It's almost as if you were looking into my very soul as your wording was so perfect. It's kind a creepy; koel, but creepy.

Guys I have two weeks to accept or reject the speakers but I got to tell you, I like vivid and they are definitely that. I am sorry to be so short sighted but compared to what I hear, now using my little bi-amp bookshelf stereo I can't imagine what HD radio, 3D BD surround sound or other contemporary programing will sound like with a kickbuttreceiver but I am ready to find out.

You know, one thing my brain just for some reason derailed to is this; the instructions/connection guide on the back of the speaker states that these speakers should not be used with bridged amplifier arrangements and that the amp should use common grounded outputs. Is that going to be a problem with new gear?

Also, should I take these back, regardless of how much I paid for them? Do the surrounds just disintegrate after so long whether they are being used or not?

Well, I'm 'bout fried; long day; you know the drill.

I'll hold off purchasing another piece in the puzzle till I run my options by youse guys; is that a deal?

Jim@MilkyWay

-----------------------

 

[winniw]

Yes, Jim, speakers do age, especially drivers with foam surrounds. With time, the foam gets brittle and if you push on it with your finger, you can put a hole right through it. Rubber surrounds are more durable.


It's a tough call as to whether you should keep them or not. You are happy with the sound and got them at a good price (apparently). I always say "you've got to start somewhere". Honestly, the first self-guided aquisition is almost always wrong. Without experience, a person doesn't know what they need, so they have to make that poor choice and learn from it.

You could take the advice of the experienced people here who would probably guide you in the right direction and later you would see the wisdom of it. However, that does take away from one's own autonomy and self-satifaction of guiding their own life.


Either way, you will probably have to change the system, whether you make the choices or someone makes them for you. Only with experience can you truly make the right decision. And so, your experience has begun.


Don't worry too much and HAVE FUN. It's not the last system that you will ever own.


Nick

 

[John Brill]

Don't know what to say. Polk SDA-2's have got to be 25 years old now?


This is where you will need to start thinking about what it is you want to accomplish. If you mainly rock out to ZZ Top and Pink Floyd, the SDA-2's are probably ideal if they haven't dried out. Good bass, probably some ear pleasing distortion, etc...


For home theater, totally inadequate. It's going to be very difficult to match them up to a center channel speaker and then blend them in with surrounds and I don't think the SDA's will bring clarity to dialogue.


So, be realistic, what do you want to accomplish, what's your budget, willing to buy online, and describe your room a little (dimensions, open on one side?, etc).


For $1,300, folks here could probably design you a good system. For $2,000 a great system, for $5,000 an awesome system, and for $150,000, a mind blowing blowing, total poser system

 

[davepr]

To put in in my 2 cents but not worth that much... Speakers are the most important part of your audio system... They deserve your time to compare and should take up the biggest part of your audio budget. Before you decide on the Polks....

The best method is to go to several b&m stores that will set up A/B comparisons. Bring your own music/video cd/dvd/bluray, listen and compare. Make sure the a/b auditions are at the same volume level. Pick out a couple of favorites even if they are from different stores and see if you can get them into your house at the same time. Do the a/b comparisons in your home and make your choice. It can be a fun experience and if you have a significant other it might be enjoyable for both. When I did this my wife, who hates technology and spending money on it, but has a better ear than I do, got into the listening act.

 

[JimatMilkyWay]

Not to be argumentative, but nobody seems to have gotten two of my principal/initial concepts ( see my original post ). I know I stated that ‘I’m ready to write a check’, but I did qualify that statement:

1) Whether I go with Yamaha or other, I will attempt to buy at _MY_ price point, not the current market price. New models are always just over the horizon, resulting in reduced prices for “the old stuff”. CES 2011 is history, how long before most current prices drop?

2) I want the surround experience _now_ while I ponder the most important speaker-set choices. That is what the whole cheap speaker usage thing is all about, as they are a whole sight better than the 3DHDTV on-board speakers; and on-hand speakers ( read ' free' for the most part ) sounds like a bargain.


Do you guys agree that no matter the choice of medium++ entry-level, quality AVR, a speaker-set can be built around it? To me, from all replies ( except Nick's ), it sounds like you all assume that the speakers I have on hand are intended as permanent, when in fact I just want to have my cake and eat it too. Is that too much to ask? With the purchase of a receiver, I can go to the dealers, except B&M whatever that is, take as much time as necessary and listen to my heart’s content. I can then come home, enjoy surround sound through cheap speaks and ponder on what I hear there while gaining better and better understanding till I make a well thought out selection with a lot more product knowledge and exposure than I now have.


Again, I am not trying to discourage _ANYONE’S_ input despite the way it sounds. I _fully_ grasped from the onset that speaker investment should exceed receiver investment. I have a thick skull and might therefore need a little more mental massaging to guide me through the fray, but don’t let that stop you from jumping in and contributing ideas. So go ahead; flame me! ( not ) (- :

Jim@MilkyWay

--------------

 

[winniw]

Jim... what they are trying to say is that top-of-the-line receiver has a lot of features that most people never use and a mid-level receiver has the same sound (minus all the bells & whistles) for much less money. They are saying that the money you could save on a mid-level receiver could go toward more expensive speakers and you would get much more sound for your money.

So, if you drop down even one model, from the 2000 to the 1000, you save $400, the power rating goes down a little, from 130w to 105w and you lose the learning remote.

However, having been into many expensive hobbies, I have a little different way of looking at it. Aim high! If you get a $500 receiver now and in six months you are wanting a $1000 receiver, then you should have bought the $1000 receiver in the first place. I have made this mistake many times. I buy the one for $500, later want the better one... now I can't sell the $500 one for even half of what I paid for it. Now I buy the $1000 one and it has cost me $1250 to $1500 to own it. If I had paid $1000 in the first place, I would have saved money. : (


One thing that is different about this hobby than say... golf, is that everyone already knows that they like it. They don't need any trial period to know that they like kickass hi-fi sound and awesome video. We have plenty of experience to know that. So it's not like we are going to get a fantastic (and somewhat expensive system) and a few months down the road... get tired of it and feel that we wasted our money... NO... and unlike golf and astronomy and RC helicopters... we can enjoy our fantastic AV system EVERY SINGLE DAY, if we want to. Not only that but usually our mates and our friends seem to enjoy just as much as we do. EVERYBODY is HAPPY and ENJOYING IT. So, in my mind, every dollar spent on Home Theater is a dollar well spent, much more so than any of my other pursuits.


Hey, I read some great reviews on those Polks that you got. You can always use them in a second room, later.

 

[davepr]

B&M is brick and motor, meaning stores with doors, floors ceilings etc as opposed to online stores. And yes you can build a system around an AVR. In fact you can play with an AVR, while you just listen to speakers. If you love the Polks (and they make good speakers) go for it. Mr. Reed is right. The speakers can always move to another room and almost any AVR at the level of the Yamaha 2000 is going to support multiple zones. Just to confuse matters more... Competitive AVRs with the Yamaha 2000 are the Onkyo TX-NR1008 or 3008, Denon 3311ci, and Pioneer SC27. All of them are really good and so many features.

 

[JimatMilkyWay]

Originally Posted by John Brill


.... If you mainly rock out to ZZ Top and Pink Floyd, the SDA-2's are probably ideal if they haven't dried out. Good bass, probably some ear pleasing distortion, etc...


For home theater, totally inadequate. It's going to be very difficult to match them up to a center channel speaker and then blend them in with surrounds and I don't think the SDA's will bring clarity to dialogue...

Thanks for your help Mr. John

I am sure your comments were directed toward the use of the old Polks. I don't believe you were implying that kickbutt music reproduction is a deal killer for good home theater components. I also understand that it would be like hitting the big lottery if timbre matching of the Polks to anything else were to accidentally occur, although I am not sure how to approach this subject. How would I go about finding a Brick and Motor store in my area, and how helpful is it to listen to setups in-store which may sound nothing like a in-home setup with that same equipment?

A lay-out of my viewing area will follow at some point. My current 'gear' arrangement is most unsatisfactory in the big/long-term scheme. I don't even think I want to use the room I currently use for a number of reasons which I won't lay out now as it is way past time to shut 'er down.

Nick and Dave, if you read this, I will address your comments this weekend. Fridays are too full for me to do much networking since I work the planetarium and observatory most weeks.

Jim@MilkyWay

 

[John Brill]

Jim, believe me, I understand the itch you are feeling. All I'm trying to project is that the differences between the $600 receiver and $1300 receiver (MSRP comparison) are minimal unless you need zone 2-3-4 capabilities and ethernet/networking capabilities. It certainly won't be the "extra" 20-30 watts/channel as this is mostly fiction. Easthetically speaking, the $1300 receiver will "look" more impressive in your cabinet but performance wise, with the lights off, you won't be able to tell the difference.


That said... as an all-in-once receiver to scratch your surround-sound itch and excellent bang-for-buck, I'd probably pick up an Onkyo receiver from accessories4less.com The refurbished and warrantied Onkyo TX-NR1007 for $699 (MSRP $1599) will give you plenty to play with until you can start auditioning speakers.


If you want/can spend $1300 and want to get something really unique that no one on your street/neightbourhood/city will have, take a gander at the Emotiva UMC-1 and pair it up with a Emotiva UPA-7 amplifier. I can garauntee that you will not be able to build something comparable with Onkyo, Yamaha, Denon, etc... without spending well over $3000. As an example, the Onkyo TX-NR1007 weighs in at 52 lbs and claims 135 wpc. while just the Emotiva UPA-7 alone weighs in at 66 lbs with a 125 wpc claim. Guess which one is probably closer to their claim and which one is most likely exagerating!


Bottom line, unless you can get the Yamaha RX-A2000 in the $650-$750 range, you can do better with the Onkyo.


JB