1603 or 1803....is it wort h the money? (1 Viewer)

[Jeff Braddock]

I have my heart set on getting a denon receiver after Christmas with some money I will hopefully get. Anyway, I was wondering if it would be worth the money to step up to the 1803 rather than the 1603. The main reason I would do it is because the 1803 has 6.1 capabilities. I am not that interested in using 6.1 right now, but I am trying to keep an eye towards the future. So what do you think? Is the 1803 worth the extra money. I would particularly be interested in hearing from 1603 and 1803 owners, but not only owners. Thanks.

 

[ChadLB]

I heard that the 1602/1802 sounds better than the 03 series but go listen for yourself.

 

[Jack Briggs]

Receiver/amplifier "sound" is debatable; if the unit is performing within its specs and is closely matched to a similarly rated (power/distortion) receiver or amp, there will be no noticeable difference in "sound."

As for the 1803 over the 1603, since it has what you want in terms of future compatibility, then go for it.

 

[Jeff Braddock]

That's just the thing Jack, I am not sure if it is worth the extra $ - hence the thread.

 

[Angelo.M]

Jeff, you've answered your own question. One hundred dollars for a bit of future-proofing sounds more than worth it to me.

-AM

 

[Wayne Ernst]

You may not use the 6th channel in a 6.1 format, But you might want to have sound going to a second room in your home. This could be a useful feature in the 1803 to you - then again, it may not be.

 

[DavidIK]

I was in the same position only it was between the 1403 and the 1603. I ended up with the 1603 because I was planning on the future. The 1603 is a great receiver but after looking at the specs for the 1803 I can see why you
would be tempted to get that one.

 

[Jeff Braddock]

Thanks guys. I think I probably will go with the 1803 if funds allow. This will be my first ht reciever so I want to do things right.