is denon the superior musical receiver over hk and pioneer? (1 Viewer)

[Myo K]

jack briggs,

i apologize, and i dont mind if this thread is closed, the last thing id want, is to cause unnecessary problems in your forum, search engine will be utitlized .

 

[Myo K]

actually,

my budget hovers around 800, so denon i believe all three 525, 45, and 2803 can be found for a price 800 and below.

i was looking into the hk 225 preciously though, but if i were on a budget in the sub 500 category, id go with the hk 225 over the 1803.

 

[RobWil]

Really Myo, with your particular speakers, and I'm assuming you're talking about the Mirage Omni 60's, amp clipping is the last thing you need to be concerned about. You could use every single receiver that has been mentioned so far and not have to worry about that.
I'm glad you were able to increase your budget. From what I've read I'm sure the Denon 2803 would be an excellent choice. However, if you do decide to go with the H/K, I'd recommend saving some money and going with the 325. I guarantee you there will be virtually no difference soundwise between it and the 525, which shouldn't be surprising I guess considering there is only a 20wpc difference anyway.
BTW, and FWIW I chose an Onkyo over the H/K because I thought it was slightly better musically for my tatses. I have heard , but can not verify, that the Onkyo is more similar to the Denon in regards to music than other brands, so if that's actually the case I would probably prefer the Denon. I'm sure others here have the exact opposite opinion which I'm sure makes it more frustrating in making a choice. It certainly did for me when I was shopping.

 

[Cagri]

Thats what i mean! the whole high current low current thing, the 2803 has high current while the 1803 is not really, that would effect the receivers reserve power, no? then the 2803 would be likely to cause clipping while driving speakers?

Actually I have been talking about 1802 and 2802 since you have mentioned buying 2802 in a previous post. You are talking about 1803 and 2803.

I discovered that I was given incorrect information by the salesguy. 1802 has 24 bit, 96 kHz DACs whereas 2802 has 24 bit, 96kHz high resolution DACs so they are not identical. And 2802 has high power custom transistor, 1802 hasn't. I was suggesting if their audio sections were same these receiver shouldn't sound any different, now I don't suggest it anymore cause they aren't identical. They may still sound identical though, don't know...

OTOH, both 1803 and 2803 have 24 bit, 96 kHz high resolution DACs and high power custom transistors. Only difference is a little extra power 2803 has, which is negligible. I can't see any way they should sound different, such as RobWil mentions the case with HK325 an 525, they should sound identical. So if you don't need the extra features of 2803 why spend several hundred $s more?

But of course it's your call and your money at the end of the day...

 

[Albert Damico]

I think you would be making a mistake by not giveing NAD a listen. Musically, it is superb. And it is in your price range. But this is just my opinion

 

[Jack Briggs]

Ah, now a plethora of smiley faces.

Myo, be not concerned. Sometimes one just needs to get the "hang" of posting at HTF!

 

[RobWil]

Ah, now a plethora of smiley faces.

All due to your superior managerial skills!

 

[Nick V]

If Music is your main interest, and with your budget ~ $800, you should really check out the Arcam AVR-100. I think it should fit into your budget.

It's only a 5.1 receiver, but it's musical playback rivals some separate gear that I've heard. Before I didn't think it fit into your budget, but it might.

BTW, what's with this whole musician thing. Would you take my opinion more seriously if I told you I've been playing the alto saxophone for 14 years, the tenor sax for 9 years, and in the past few years I've become obsessed with and began learning how to play various percussion instruments?

I don't think it's all that relevant. What you have to understand is that people are here to share their opinions in helping other people (such as yourself) to make the best possible decision for themselves. People aren't here offering support and opinions because they want you to buy something that isn't very good, or something that you're not going to like. Wouldn't that be a huge waste of time?

Anyways, happy listening, and I hope you make your decision based not only on what your "music major" friends say, or what other forum members say, but on what YOU hear with your own ears.

 

[RobWil]

I used to play trombone in my grade school band....does that count

 

[LanceJ]

I have to give my brand of receiver some advertising: Panasonic (well, mine is a Technics but its still the same company).

Though I know that the fact they make vaccuum cleaners and rice cookers kind of erodes their audio image :b, I still think Panasonic makes some nice components. And I sold their audio line for three years at a big-box store, so am well-acquainted with their characteristics.

Their receivers are usually quite revealing. To others that translates into bright or shrill--but for me it means they convey lots of detail. Bass is tight and powerful. Their amps are always designed well & tolerate low impedance speakers gracefully: just to check this out once, I hooked up my buddy's 6 ohm Infinity bookshelfs (6.5" 2-way) in parallel with my 8 ohm Bostons (8" two-way). This is a tough load for an amp, @3.5 ohms. And I did not use the low impedance speaker option. Then I played 311's bass-heavy "Come Original" with the SA-DA8's volume knob straight up at 12:00 for exactly two minutes (12:00 being about 75% of full power). NO problems! Though being in an apartment prevented a longer test, I was still fully satisfied with my $350 receiver's amp section.

One drawback compared to my old Pioneer receiver: badly recorded CD's and movies really sound crappy now. But there's a flip-side to that. WELL-recorded CDs, movies and LPs sound even better now and more involving. Kind of like putting good tires on your car--the ride gets worse on bumpy roads compared to cheapo tires but through the curves......oh boy now things are much more fun!

And don't worry about the heat from Panasonic/Technics receivers--that's totally normal for their modified class A amplifiers.

My next receiver will probably be a large model from Yamaha ($1,000 range) since Panasonic doesn't make anything in that range.

Good luck in your search.

LJ

 

[Myo K]

and I hope you make your decision based not only on what your "music major" friends say, or what other forum members say,

i did take into consideration the opinions of everyone, thats why it ultimately came down to hk 525 pioneer elite 45 and the denon 2803. those receivers didnt happen to be on my list without help of your opinions and search engines.

 

[Jason GT]

To LanceJ (and getting a bit off-topic here) -

Don't diss Panasonic 'cuz they make rice cookers!

Seriously speaking Panasonic (National) rice cookers are pretty much the best out there - and having the best rice cooker is a lot cheaper (and I daresay practical) than a full blown HT !

Of course it's not as sexy, but ya gotta eat.

 

[Albert Damico]

One last time and then I'll bug out. Since it seems important, I have been a musician since 1969 when I was a senior in high school. I have an extensive collection of guitars, from a 1956 flametop Les Paul to a Fender strat, to an old Danelectro with lipstick tube pickups, a Teisco Del Rey surf guitar, and a few others. I have two electronic keyboard, over a dozen blues harps, a mixer, various pedals and effects pedals. I have an old Fender tube amp head with speaker cabinet. A Peavey Delta Blues, tube amp. Two acoustic amps for my acoustic guitars and keyboards. I have what is called "perfect pitch" in that I can listen to any note, and tell you instantly what the note is. I can pick out any individual piece in any compostion, rock, metal, classic, and almost instantly reproduce it. I not only read, but played for 20 years entirely by ear. I sing and have a few mic's and while I have a horrible voice, I sing in perfect key. I have a Yamaha RX-V2095 receiver, a Technics receiver, a NAD receiver, a Sherbourn amp, a B&K pre/pro and have besides those units and the amps I named above for you instruments, have owned a Denon, a Pioneer, and still have an old Marantz kicking around somewhere. I still say that NAD is te best musical receiver I have ever heard. And you, my friend, are makeing a HUGE mistake by not even considering it. Of course this is just my opinion and as I have offered it up in detail this time, will move on.

 

[Angelo.M]

Just to offer another perspective:

Like Albert, I have "perfect pitch." I've been playing piano for almost 30 years, guitar for about 10, and I fool around with a few other instruments. I've used and hung around recording studios in my spare time for quite a while, and I like to think that I've had a taste of some of the very best amplification equipment and studio monitor speakers around.

That being said, I don't believe that AVRs or amps have a "sound." They produce electrical current and feed it to a resistor. Period. All of this "high-current," "wide-range current," etc and so on...I don't get it. Receivers or amps with roughly equivalent specs should perform roughly equivalently. So, among the receivers you're considering, pick the one with the specs and features you like. The differences will range from subtle to non-existent, IMO.

The good news here is you can't lose.

And, yes, NAD makes very nice stuff with excellent specs. Will it outperform (whatever that means) a Denon, H/K or Marantz with similar specs? I doubt it, and certainly not by an order of magnitude.

For my $, it comes down to reliability, and the AVR brands that have most impressed me in that regard are Denon, Onkyo (my 15+ year old Onk is still running strong) and Sony ES.

Let us know what you purchase and how it sounds at home.

 

[chun howe]

is pioneer a warm, neutral , bright, any other characteristic that i don't know?

is the lower end pioneer has the same characteristics with the higher end pioneer? say the vsx- model & tx model?

how about rotel's characteristics? how it compares to denon, hks, nad, pioneer? or is it a one step higher and i can't compare rotel with those mentioned?

some professional input is very much appreciated.

Chun

 

[Albert Damico]

Angelo:

I only stated my music credentials as Myo only seems to listen to mucicians. But, I will say that in my music room I had a Yamah, a Nakamichi, and an NAD all sitting on the floor connect to the same CD player and driving the same speakers. Infinity Overture 2's. They all sounded different. To me. I will also say that my Les Paul or Fender sounds very different depending on whether they are plugged into my Fender Bassman, Peavey, or Advantage. Same guitar, same cord, different sounds. I am on the side of amps sound different, IMO

 

[Myo K]

nick,

ill be sure to keep an eye out for Arcam receivers, though i havent seen one around my area in my local ht shops, ill be sure to keep an eye for it.

albert,

i really want to listen to nad and marantz revceivers, i think theres a ht shop in the next city that carries marantz, but i dont know about nad, im gonna have to take look at the htm directory.

angelo,

well, i must disagree that not all receivers have negligiable sound differences, at least i notice a difference in sound, and i think that is why people will recommend a certain receivers to people based on their likes and dislikes.

since i have a clearer head, ill explain my reasoning


so, some ask why would i value an opinion of a musician about musical sound over an opinion of someone that does not have background history in music? i think it speaks for itself, no? but then some may still not understand why, so here goes

I am not a musician, but i do enjoy listening to music, i sing with my local Church choir, one of my friends who sings very well, always coaches me and helps me train. there is a reason for my madness , the normal person will not pick up subtle details in sound that a musician will hear. mainly small details, such as listening to overtones and undertones everytime someone sings in tune.

since hes been training me, ive been noticing smallest of things that ive never noticed before in music.
my ear is still developing and slowly becoming very "finicky" with what it hears, and i know i still have a lot to learn, so i cant judge only by "my ears and what sounds good" because i know what sounds good to me now will sound lacking in the future when my ears develop even more.

but i do know that my ears are slowly getting sharper "i can hear over tones, undertones, thd, micro-tuning and even high pitch frequencies electric components makes, i never noticed them before until i began voice training.

i must rely on those that already have sharp ears for music since they already are aware of subtle details found in music that a normal ear will easily find negligiable or unnoticeable. yes there are people that have good ears, that can pick up those sounds and detail also, BUT only a musician or a person with extensive history in the field can tell you whether or not, its supposed to be there.


----



i dont know why people keep questioning my motives, but please be assured that i do consider everyones advice, and i find it helpful no matter who types it, at least they took the time to respond right? i use all the responses and consider why they feel it should be recommended and why it shouldnt and compare them to the opionions of others.

 

[Angelo.M]

This has been an interesting discussion.

I didn't say that there aren't any differences between receivers; of course there are. But, with receivers of fairly equivalent specification (power and harmonic distortion), I usually find fairly equivalent performance.

The room, and its treatments, your speakers and your brain make much bigger differences. I think folks spend far too much time choosing a receiver and far too little time demoing speakers in their home.

And, I think the "music = h/k, marantz, nad" and "theater = denon, onkyo, yamaha" has been vastly oversold. Most of the better AVRs today are well-made and do a very respectable job w/ both music and theater.

Everyone's mileage will vary.

 

[Nick V]

Myo,

Fair enough.

Angelo,

I have to respectfully disagree with you there. When I went from my Marantz SR-6200 to my Yamaha RXV-1200 I found a VERY NOTICEABLE difference between their sounds. The difference was actually larger than the differnce between the Yamaha's internal amps, and that of my 2ch. Rotel. I am of the opinion that all amps sound rather similar, but that the preamp section of most equipment is where the largest difference occurs.

Now, this is in the same room, with the same speakers, and the exact same associated equipment. Also, before I bought my Marantz, I demoed Denon, Pioneer, Sony ES and Marantz all in my own room. While I can't say that they all sounded drastically different, I find they all seem to have their own sonic signature, with slightly different presentation overall.

 

[RobWil]

Going back to musicians vs 'normal people', I think there are many listeners who have developed their musical ear by listening only. Constantly listening, upgrading, auditioning, etc. The more you get into the hobby of music listening, the more you start to care about the sound and differences. The more money you spend the more you want to start hearing the differences so you start listening more closely. Also there are thousands that are musically inclined or have a musical aptitude that, for one reason or another, never had the desire to pick up an instrument. My dad taught guitar as well as played many more instruments. I could read both treble and bass clef by the time I was 12. But I never had the desire to practice so I quit playing. My brother OTOH has continued to play and excel all these years, but he really has no interest in listening to recorded music and, in fact, has a really crappy system.
I believe myself to be a much more discriminating and knowledgable listener than he is. Also, musicians who don't really listen to music, IMO , concentrate more on listening to their instrument of choice, i.e. practicing , and also while playing.
Now if you combine a musician who is also a great listener, then maybe you have a combination worth paying attention to.
I will listen to the serious audiophile/hobbiest every time over the 'musician only'. IMHO of course and just because it is an interesting debate
As usual, I accept all forms of agreement, criticism, mud-slinging or name calling, within the limits of our admins tolerance levels of course !