stangjason

Sub $200 Receivers

Any sub $200 Receivers worth purchasing. I'm looking to build a descent home theater system around my Polk R300 speakers and will slowly replace my other old HTIB JVC speakers with more Polk speakers as I get the money.

Also I've been looking at the HTR-5940 Yamaha receiver from Radio Shack that's currently $169

ThomasC

Re: Sub $200 Receivers

I would get the Pioneer VSX-516-K. The Yamaha is 6.1, the Pioneer is 7.1.

The man I loved - the man who vanished - he never came back at all. But maybe he's still out there, somewhere. Maybe some day, when Gotham no longer needs Batman, I'll see him again.

stangjason

Re: Sub $200 Receivers

I can't use 7.1 because I have no location for the side speakers. Past the Pioneer's 7.1 capability is either one of these better than the other.

John Garcia

Re: Sub $200 Receivers

If you don't mind refurb, I'd check www.ac4l.com for one of the lower Onkyos. They have the 504 for ~$150 and the 505 for $210.

"The trouble with the world is not that people know too little, but that they know so many things that ain't so." - Mark Twain

HT: Marantz SR-8300, MA500 monoblocks x 2, 5X GR Research A/V-2s, Adire Audio Tempest sub, Denon 2900, Oppo 980H, Toshiba HD-A2, RC2000MkII remote, Panamax 5100, Panamax Max2 sub, Slim PS2, PS3 60G + 320G USB

Bedroom: Marantz PM-7200 Integrated, GR Research A/V-1s, Sony 222ES SACD, RC3200 remote, Panamax M8EX

Audio: Audioquest * Video: Bluejeans

My DVDs My HT

LanceJ

Re: Sub $200 Receivers

Many times with a manufacturer's less expensive receivers, you actually get the same processing chips (Dolby, DTS, bass management, PCM-to-analog from CD players, etc) that most of the more expensive models utilize so they all basically sound the same. So actually all you're really missing is the costlier models' higher output power* and many of their "tweaking" features only A/V uber-hobbyists want.

Actually most people in the "average" living room only need about 1/2 to 5 watts of power for most listening situations.---> 1/2 watt heard through a speaker with the very common 91 dB SPL rating produces a low background level type effect but lyrics and drum beats are still easily heard; 5 watts can make peoples' conversation difficult. And with 20-30 clean watts, which many "100 watt per channel" receivers ACTUALLY generate (100 watts....but measured with lots of distortion at the same time ) can pretty much obliterate any normal conversation in that living room even with just two speakers running....and that's two floorstanders i.e. no sub. Two satellites crossed over to a powered sub? Apply 30 watts to that system and watch out. If anyone wonders why receivers no longer have power meters, well....:wink: Until meters disappeared by the late 80s, the average receiver had "only" 20-50 watts per channel, and also was measured with reasonable amounts of distortion.

* the power amp and power supply section are the most expensive systems in a receiver

John Garcia

Re: Sub $200 Receivers

That is true, however when you have a really busy or loud scene is why the average receiver needs to be capable of around 100w. One big dynamic peak can easily draw 10 times the power needed for average listening levels and that would mean the 5-10w needed for standard level listening might peak up at a real 50-100w depending on the room, speakers, listening level, etc... That explosion or fly by may be only a second or two, but when you don't have the power to handle it is when you will notice it.

"The trouble with the world is not that people know too little, but that they know so many things that ain't so." - Mark Twain

HT: Marantz SR-8300, MA500 monoblocks x 2, 5X GR Research A/V-2s, Adire Audio Tempest sub, Denon 2900, Oppo 980H, Toshiba HD-A2, RC2000MkII remote, Panamax 5100, Panamax Max2 sub, Slim PS2, PS3 60G + 320G USB

Bedroom: Marantz PM-7200 Integrated, GR Research A/V-1s, Sony 222ES SACD, RC3200 remote, Panamax M8EX

Audio: Audioquest * Video: Bluejeans

My DVDs My HT