- View New Content
- Blu-ray, DVD, Streaming Video and Digital Downloads
- Home Theater Hardware
- Theaters, Remotes and Accessories
- Equipment Reviews
- DVD & Blu-ray Reviews
- Other Diversions
- Bargains and Deals
- Feedback and Testing
- DVD/HDvision (French)
- Theater Photos
DVD & Blu-ray Reviews
- Equipment Reviews
Blu-ray Release Listings
- Shop Amazon
Need help picking and new audio receiver
15 replies to this topic
Posted January 08 2013 - 06:28 AM
Hello all, Just joined the Home Theater Forum community and hoping to get some assistance. About a year ago I inherited a somewhat ancient, but working and faithful, Sony DAV-FX10 DVD Dream Home Theater System. Up until I inherited this system I had just been using a soundbar to meet my needs. All my media is viewed via an HTPC with XBMC. My HTPC's video is connected to the TV via HDMI and the audio is connected to this ancient receiver by an optical audio cable (I believe it's called S/PDIF?). Because this receiver doesn't support HDMI it's becoming less and less practical for me to use. I'm looking to keep the speakers for now but ditch the receiver/DVD player/monstrosity they connect to. In short, I'm looking for a decent, affordable, reliable receiver that can support 5.1 audio (I'm planning on using the speakers from the DAV-FX10 for now and slowing upgrading piece by piece). I would be connecting my HTPC to the receiver via HDMI from the Nvidia GTX 580 graphics card. Most of my media has DTS surround but the more surround sound formats it can decode the better. I've done my best to read intro and noobie guides to receivers but for someone who doesn't know all that much about surround sound it can make your head spin a bit. Any recommendations on entry level receivers that would meet my needs would be fantastic. Thanks for all your help and happy to be part of the forums.
Posted January 08 2013 - 07:20 AM
I'd like to stay under $300 if at all possible but if it comes down to the difference between a worthwhile investment and a poor quality receiver, I'd be willing to bump up my budget a bit. Thanks for these links! I'll definitely check those out. So entry level Onkyos are good place to start looking? (Glad you like the avatar! Been using it for a while. )
Posted January 08 2013 - 07:33 AM
If you can swing a little extra, go for this deal. http://www.amazon.co...&keywords=Onkyo You would have plenty of power, lots of inputs, 3D capability, plus expandable to 7.2. Well worth it. Or if you don't mind buying refurbished: http://www.accessori...Receiver/1.html http://www.accessori...Receiver/1.html Of course there are other brands: Yamaha, Denon, etc... Pick your poison, but right now Onkyo is the best bang for the buck. For entry level performance anyway.
Posted January 08 2013 - 08:19 AM
Onkyo has the best feature/price ratio. For $300 in Onkyo you can have what would cost $500 everywhere else. I'm using a phone, so my ability to look up your speakers isn't easy... If they are 3ohm, don't use them. Buy your AVR and get a pair of bookshelf. Or, like I've linked numerous times... The Onkyo RC330 at A4L is still probably $110. Yamaha has a 5.1 speaker set for $110-140 that is "dreadful", but still better than the crap you get in HTiB. Polk and Energy have 5.1 sets around $200 that I wouldn't listen to...but are better than dreadful.
Posted January 08 2013 - 08:47 AM
So...in a nutshell... If all your sources are HDMI, get the RC330(provided it has enough) If you have a Wii(does the new "whatever it is called", have HDMI?) Get the Denon AVR 591. If you need more than one component input, the RC360?460? (Anyway...around $240 there is an Onkyo with 2 component)...
Posted January 08 2013 - 10:27 AM
Thanks for the help so far. So if I've read this correctly, and it's highly possible I haven't, the Onkyo RC330 only supports up to 720p? I've currently got a 50" 1080p Westinghouse so I would need a receiver that handles that resolution. The Onkyo TX-NR509 looks like a good potential option, would you say? The HT-RC460 looks fantastic but it's starting to edge out of my price range and I don't think I'm going to a have a nine speaker set up any time soon. Would you say the price jump is worth taking the hit or am I better off sticking with the TX-NR509 or perhaps another in that range? As far as the speakers go I should ditch them completely, you're saying? I was thinking of potentially getting an entry level pair of floorstanding speakers and maybe keeping the sub woofer and center speaker. Bad idea? And as poor as these Sony speakers maybe, they still would technically work with any of the receivers we've been talking about, correct?
Posted January 10 2013 - 10:05 AM
Well, from what I can tell from my limited knowledge poking around the TX-NR509 and TX-NR515 seem like two good introductory models. The TX-NR515 seems like it has a better interface with more room for potential upgrades in the future. That being said, I don't know when, if ever, I would be making the jump to the 7.2 from 5.1. Any opinions? Back onto the subject of speakers, it seems the verdict is that it's time to ditch my current speaker setup completely and upgrade. I can't really afford much after the purchase of the receiver so two solid floorstanding speakers seemed a good place to start, hoping to eventually, piece by piece, work my way up to a 5.0 or 5.1 setup. I'm currently very interested in the Sony SS-F6000. They've got pretty much universal spectacular reviews on Amazon. Any opinions? Much appreciated!
Posted January 17 2013 - 03:49 PM
Well, I'm settling into the idea of getting the TX-NR509 or TX-NR515 as the receiver and the Polk New Monitor 55t or 65t. I still don't quite understand power levels and stuff but the TX-NR509 is capable of 8Ω, 20Hz-20kHz, 0.7% THD. That should be a good fit with either of those Polk speakers, correct?
Posted January 18 2013 - 09:42 AM
The 515 is this years model, the 509 is last years or there-abouts (I can't keep track of all this stuff anymore). Anyway, either receiver, any receiver really, will be able to power those Polks to ear-bleeding levels. The 65t might be better for straight 2 channel stereo music listenning but for home theater with a decent subwoofer the 55t's should work very well. Spend the money you save on a better sub.
"Everyday room": Panasonic 58" Plasma, Dish HD DVR, Pioneer Elite vsx-23, BDP-23 BR, dv58avi universal dvd player, Dynaudio Audience 50's, 40's 122C, Dayton HSU-10 subwoofer.
"Movie/Music room": Toshiba 65" DLP, Dish HD receiver, Adcom GF-700 5.1 receiver, OPPO BDP-80 BR player, Polk LSI25's-LSi7's-LSiC, 2 original Dayton 10" "Mighty-Mites" subwoofers. (subject to change without notice).
Also have...too much to list. Help me.
Posted January 18 2013 - 09:46 AM
What makes the 55t better for home theater than the 65t? Just out of curiosity.
The 65t might be better for straight 2 channel stereo music listenning but for home theater with a decent subwoofer the 55t's should work very well. Spend the money you save on a better sub.
Posted January 18 2013 - 10:00 AM
Bass management vs "pure audio" are divergent goals...sorta. Like was said(plainly I might add) the 55t is a twin woofer speaker. The 65t is a triple woofer speaker. The 65 is 1db more efficient. The 65 -3 is 48hz. The 55 -3 is 52hz. Not that much different...but...the "less cone area" is typically easier to control...meaning more accurate. Essentially...if you "never" listen to pure 2.0 audio(meaning without the subwoofers involvement) there is no reason to buy anything more capable than the 55t. Now if you do listen to a bunch of pure 2.0...step right up to the 75t.
Posted January 18 2013 - 10:11 AM
The majority of the time the speakers will be used for movies and television. That's not to say I'll never play music out of them but the main priority is their home theater capabilities.
Posted January 18 2013 - 10:17 AM
Unless you parked the 55 and 65 in your living room for a sound off... I doubt you'd notice the difference. IF your "music source" is 100% itunes/streamed...stick with the 55. If you still spin CD/LP...then you might want the 65.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users