Pioneer Elite vs Yamaha or Denon? (1 Viewer)

[DrSteve]

So I'm trying to find a new HT receiver/amp. So far based on online searching only, the Pioneer VSX1015TXK/VSX1016TXVK looks a pretty good buy and the Elite VSX-80TXV. Nice reviews. The other options are the Denon AVR786s/787 or 1906/1907 and Yamaha RX-V659 or N600. I'm interested in NAd but can't afford their prices.

Any comments on these models? It will replace a Marantz s7200 which is dying. Probably 60% used for music and 40% movies.

Thanks!

 

[Alon Goldberg]

First take a look at the specs:

Pioneer VSX-1015TX: 120 watts x 7 @ 0.20 THD, 34 lbs
Pioneer VSX-1016TXV: 110 Watts x 7 @ 0.09 THD, 35.3 lbs
Yamaha RX-V659: 100 watts x 7 @ 0.06 THD, 34.2 lbs
Yamaha RX-N600: 95 watts x 6 @ 0.06 THD, 32 lbs
Denon AVR-1906: 85 watts x 7 @ 0.08 THD, 25.8 lbs

Right off the bat I would avoid the VSX-1015TX, its THD rating is awful. Next, looking at the weight of all of these receivers, I would take the Denon AVR-1906 off the list as typically weight is an indication of quality components like power transformers and a well-built chassis that resists acoustic vibrations.

That shortlists you down to the Pioneer VSX-1016TXV or the Yamaha RX-V659. I should note that the Pioneer models you selected are not in the Elite Series. Personally I would go for the RX-V659.

 

[DrSteve]

Thank you Alan. I forgot to add the Pioneer VSX80-TXV which is an Elite model.

Good point on the THD for the VSX1015.

Thanks again. Hopefully I can audition these this weekend.

 

[Alon Goldberg]

The Pioneer VSX80-TXV has 1080p HDMI pass-through capabilities (no upconversion however), which is a huge bonus for home theatre. I would carefully choose between this model and the Yamaha RX-V659. Let us know what you get!

Pioneer Elite VSX-80TXV: 110 Watts x 7 @ .09% THD, 33.1 lbs

 

[Seth=L]

Pioneer has a warm sound were the Yamahas tend to have brighter sound. I personally prefer the Pioneer Elite receivers. Just listen to them both and weigh the pro/cons of each to make a decision.

I can't beleive the Denon weighs so little, that is pathetic. I had an Onkyo 6.1 receiver with 75 watts per channel that weighed more than that Denon.

 

[Shiu]

May be you get it from a different source but here's what I found at the Yamaha.com site for the 659:

Product Dimensions (W x H x D) 17-1/8" x 6-3/4" x 16-9/16"
Product Weight (lbs.) 27.1
Shipping Dimensions (W X H X D) 21-13/16" x 10-5/8" x 19-13/16"
Shipping Weight (LBS) 34.2

The manual also confirms that it weighs 27.1 lbs, slightly heavier than the 1906 but no mentioning of whether that includes the remote control. The 1906's 25.8 lbs does not include the remote contol unit. The Pioneers on the other hand, weigh less than your numbers, according to their manuals.

 

[Seth=L]

I checked the Pioneer site, the Elite VSX-80TXV does actually weigh 33.1 lbs. It is also the most expensive of all options on the table $650 msrp. Aad the power is true rated, no 1khz bull crap.

 

[Shiu]

Well, this 7.1 Onkyo (TX SR-604) 90WX7 weighs only 25.1 lbs.

http://www.us.onkyo.com/model.cfm?m=...class=Receiver

Not trying to defend Denon and not trying to say weight is that important a criteria, but just wondering where people get their numbers from. One thing we have to be careful is not to mix up the product weight with the shipping weight. Even when we look at the product weights, some of them tend to include the remote control unit. Denon typically provide the weights of the remote separately. We have to compare apple to apple.

From what I have read from published specifications and manuals in the past, Denon is not the heaviest among the mid fi receivers but I would say they tend to be heavier than similarly priced Onkyo, Pioneer, and Yamaha, with a few exceptions. There are always exceptions.

 

[Seth=L]

I would deffinitly say H/K is one of the heaviest of this breed. I really don't like receivers much myself but if I had to have one on the lower end it would be a Pioneer Elite or an H/K were as I would rather have a Rotel, Sunfire, or some other heavy weight, and I despise digital receivers (digital feedback amplifiers).

 

[LanceJ]

Pioneer 1015: 120 watts x 7 @ 0.20 THD

vs.

Pioneer 1016: 110 Watts x 7 @ 0.09 THD

First, the 1015's THD rating is measured at a higher power rating than the 1016's, so this doesn't allow for an accurate comparison. Second, even if both were outputting the same power at the time of testing, the 1015's THD number is basically only one tenth of one percent more than its newer cousin. Personally I wouldn't worry about such a tiny - and academic - difference.

What I wish would happen is that those new testing standards that were announced about a year ago for surround receiver power amps be adopted. IIRC one of the major requirements would be that ratings be for all channels operating at the same time - talk about separating the boys from the men! I'm pretty sure none of these receivers are rated that way.

But actually, unless you're running all channels full range AND there are full range signals going through all of them all the way down to 20Hz*, most people in the average living room, using the typical satellite w/5" woofer will only need about 5 watts (for casual viewing while watching CSI) to 50 watts (LOUD adventure movies) of clean power (THD under .5%) for each channel......and I'll bet all these models can easily manage that.**

Also, remember that not every scene will have all channels doing something at the same time, so the amp won't need to generate equal power all the time anyway.

I'm not trying to make excuses for them, but I'll bet all this is probably why the manufacturers aren't that worried about printing an all-channels-driven specification.

Weight differences: a few pounds difference in the same class of receviers shouldn't be cause for worry. For all know the Denon uses more aluminum than steel in its construction than its competitors. Also, if any of these receivers use a toroidal transformer, which are lighter than conventional transformers (and more efficient), that can also contribute to lower weight.

* and what movie soundtrack is mixed THAT way?? Anyway.......to reproduce a 20Hz signal already takes lots of power; to reproduce a signal from 20Hz up to 80Hz takes even more. But since most people xover their systems at 80Hz to the amp on their subwoofer, the receiver can breathe a lot easier.

** about three years ago Sound & Vision tested a Panasonic SA-HE100 receiver and with all six channels set to large and fed a full-range signal, this "budget" receiver was able to generate a clean 70 watts for all six channels at the same time for several minutes before it finally shut down.

 

[Seth=L]

Lance are you sure the model for the panasonic receiver is right, I googled it and it returned no results, I mean nada.

 

[LanceJ]

Oops, screwed up: it was HE100 not 300. I added a link to it on Panasonic's site.

 

[Seth=L]

Though the receiver had a good test I hate seeing silly power ratings like this.

Surround Sound: 100W per channel (6 channels, 1kHz, 6 ohms, 0.9% THD)

When will the FCC strictly enforce the ratings system to be accurate and not be this misleading crap. We need more companies like H/K that don't make phony ratings and throw off the consumers. I listen to very loud music sometime and can't stand when an amp goes into protect mode or clips. I have a Carver 80 watts per channel amp that would easily blow away the so called 120 watts per channel a cheap Pioneer, Kenwood, or Sony puts out.

 

[DrSteve]

I'm not into listening to stuff that is *that* loud. On my Marantz the loudest I have ever gone is -14 and that was for a mostly talkie movie. Music is usually played at -30 max.

Just for the record I have some decent speakers - Mirage omnis for F,C,L and Energy XL's for the surrounds with a Paradigm woofer (10" I think). So, at least I will be getting the benefit of the amp. I'm not sunning those paper-based-cubes that everyone raves about!

I'll audition the amps (after trying to see if I can see a broken connection inside my Marantz) and let you kow where I decide to go

Thanks everyone

 

[Seth=L]

What is the Marantz doing or not doing?

 

[DrSteve]

The center chanel is completely dead. I have checked all the connections and there is nothing wrong with the speaker or the receiver set up. It all started a few months ago with some occaisional crackle which I put down to the source (the iPod). Now the right surround speaker is doing the same.

At 65/h with 2h minimum billing plus parts, it doesn't seem worth sending it for repair, especially since it looks like another chanel is headed the same way. I contacted Marantz and they promissed to cll me back *that day* to tell me ho to reset the receiver just in case something had been corrupted in a power outage etc., 2 messages left with the person I spoke to and a week later no response. Not very good customer service.