Alternatives to the Onkyo SR600? (1 Viewer)

[John Garcia]

Check out the new JVC RX-8020VBK A/V receiver. It's rated at 120 Watts (2 channel) or 100 Watts (5 channels).

The fact that the power drops when in 5ch mode suggests a weak amp section to me, or one that is separated into channels via circuitry rather than having dedicated amps for each channel. I'd skip it at that price.
While the S&V tests are all fine and good, what they DON'T tell you is how a particular receiver SOUNDS. They all sound a little different, and pairing them with particular speakers changes that as well, then there are room effects, etc...
I agree with Ryan, the SR600 should be fine for now and in the near future. If you are happy with it now, then ENJOY IT! If you find that it is not doing the job once you do move, sell it and get a better one then.

 

[Norman L]

Cary,
I agree with you 100%, if that is your price range look for a unit with preouts, if you decide to upgrade you can use your receiver as a pre amp and for the rears.

 

[Rob Landolfi]

Tim,

This is in response to your initial post, though it could go in the "Where are the happy 600 owners?" thread as well...

I've been enjoying the 600 for a month now, and have no problem getting strong levels of sound (volume and fullness) from my receiver/system configuration. I have a decent-size room that is 20 X 12 with an extra 9 X 8 bumpout on one end. Behind Enemy Lines, Mission Impossible 2, From Hell and other movies have rocked the house and I've never felt that the 600 was lacking. My Axiom speakers (center, mains, surrounds) have listed sensitivities in the 93-95db range, though I've seen a review or two that listed actual sensitivities in the high 80's to lower 90's.

We've all read (and likely fretted) about the experience of the poster who blew his speakers (and some of us have even benefitted from his amazing Circuit City price), but I have had nothing but great success so far in my own situation. Obviously the decision is an individual one for each of us, and I'm staying put. Good luck and enjoy your HT!

 

[Paul_Fisher]

I can't believe everyone is whining about these stupid power ratings. I have a Marantz 5200 which is supposedly 85 X 6. Even if the power does drop to 30 X 5 when I'm watching movies, I don't give a sh*t. It sounds terrific to me, the detail and clarity is amazing, and I wouldn't trade it for another receiver. You get what you pay for. I don't expect my $400 receiver to perform like $1000.

The only reason I feel sorry for the 600 owners is that their receiver doesn't have preouts. I can add all the amplification I want to my 5200.

My point is that now knowing my receiver's wattage drops tremendously when watching DVD's, I really don't care, I still love my receiver for the SOUND it puts out, and so should all the 600 owners. If the 600 owners are happy with the way the unit sounds, then don't listen to the people who knock it.

 

[Paul Clarke]

Hi Norman,
Yes, it does pay to be careful. And frankly, I don't know what the hell S&V was doing with the 510. Virtually every other test I've seen on it shows significantly more power. The H/K rating is 80Wx2 8Ohms .07%THD, 70Wx5 8Ohms .07%THD
Home Theater got:
92Wx2 8Ohms @ .1% distortion (.03% higher than H/K spec)
111Wx2 8Ohms @ 1% distortion
92Wx5 8 Ohms @ .1% distortion (same note as above)
103Wx5 8Ohms @ 1% distortion
At 4 Ohms the numbers are:
155Wx2 @ .1% distortion (unknown spec @ 4Ohm)
180Wx2 @ 1% distortion
there was no x5 4 Ohm listing unfortunately.
The British site Hi-Fi Choice says about the AVR5000 (UK 510):
"In practice, the internal power supply will support 2x125W/8ohm, slipping very little to 5x100W/8ohm in full, multichannel mode.
A headroom of +1.4dB yields peaks of 2x165W/8ohm under dynamic conditions. This is comfortably in excess of its modest 70W rating and explains why the amplifier consistently sounds louder than reviewers have anticipated (Home Entertainment issue 94).
Reserves of current are limited to 12.5A into 1ohm before protection kicks in, but 13.7A is available to support 2x375W into 2ohm through a low 0.06ohm output impedance."
Now I don't know what these guys were smoking either but it seems to have been better stuff than S&V.
Even taking the truth to be somewhere in the middle yields handsome power nonetheless.
Now all this venting about the 600 doesn't mean that it shouldn't be considered a good receiver. Anymore than the shortcomings of the 595 did little to hurt that receiver's reputation. But people have just got to stop expecting miracles from this price class. Blowing nice B&W speak's is a terrible way to have to learn of a problem.

 

[Steve_Tk]

Obviously some people are angry about this.

I don't think people are trying to ruin Onkyo's name. Norman has said many times that he had an Onkyo for many years and loved it.

If you have bought the receiver and then come upon these results, you shouldn't let it bother you at all if you have had no problems and are enjoying it.

BUT, those of us that have not bought one yet, and after reading such reviews, it makes us hesitant to buy something that drops in power that much. If those of you that have Onkyos are saying "who cares about all this?", had you not purchased the Onkyo yet, would you still buy it knowing this?

I went to CC and listened to the HK AVR 320 ($499 JandR authorized dealer) and the Onkyo 600 (listened to both through the same Polk speakers with TPM as the demo). They both sounded great and both were very loud. I could get the Onkyo for about 50 dollars cheaper, but since I liked them both I'm going to go with the HK.

I'm 100% positive that when I buy another receiver in the future I will look into Onkyo again. I've always heard about their great products. I'm sure with their long history of making good products that they will in the future continue this. Again, I'm not saying anything bad about Onkyo, but when choosing between 2 things, and liking them both, why go with the one that might give you trouble?

And thank you Paul and Norman for the Info.

 

[John Garcia]

(listened to both through the same Polk speakers with TPM as the demo).

While TMP is a good demo, movies do not tend to be the best way to judge the sound of a receiver. Music is far more revealing.

 

[Paul_Fisher]

While TMP is a good demo, movies do not tend to be the best way to judge the sound of a receiver. Music is far more revealing.

I totally agree with John on this point. And I think the Marantz and H/K are hands down winners in this area.

 

[Steve_Tk]

Well my reciever is going to be mostly for HT, not music. While I love music, I get plenty of it on the way to work. By the time I get home I really wouldn't want to listen to anymore music

 

[Del]

FWIW- I just received my Outlaw 1050 last week. It replaced a Pioneer VSX-D509S. The Outlaw is in a class by itself. To get the same quality, you'd have to spend almost twice as much.

It doesn't have as many bells and whistles as some of the others mentioned here (component video out, A/B speaker outputs, etc...) . The build quality is second to none. It's a tank, weighs(37lbs) .

I find comparing power ratings a pointless venture. With a rating of 65X6 @ 8Ohms, this things crushes the Pioneer I had. And it had a rating of 100X5.

I think there are so many good units out there in this price range, that it's hard to go wrong if you do good research.

Just my .02
Del

 

[Paul Clarke]

Del,

Rated power is being discussed because Norman L, of this forum, blew a rather expensive set of speakers using an underpowered receiver. He didn't know or expect that the new Onk 600 would voltage limit in multi-channel use so severely that his 50W minimum rated B&W's would blow.

For the vast majority of users, the 50W minimum is not an issue. Many large speakers nowadays are rated down to 10W, 15W, 20W. But people should be aware, not only of the Onkyo 600 but rather the growing trend toward voltage limiting in a fair number of so called quality receivers. This is being done in order to cover up the fact that the manufacturer has made some critical cuts in the most crucial area of receiver design...the amp stage. A major reason the cuts are being made is to maintain the competitive feature lists which are ever expanding while holding the line on price. Soooooo, all of this may seem like an exercise in watt masturbation but quality amping is vital to speaker health.

I agree with you on the 1050. There is nothing like buying a quality piece. There's a reason for the weight...and you hear it every time you turn it on.

 

[John Garcia]

The guy who damaged expensive speakers drove high end speakers to the point where he clipped the amp which did not have enough current to drive them at that level. This was HIS mistake in matching up a low power amp to heavy duty speakers, and driving them to that level, not a problem with the amp, IMO.

 

[Paul Clarke]

Hey John,
Read my previous post.
Now, I find myself generally in agreement with you on many issues (especially on Marantz sound) but this is one where the truth will out. Sure, you can fault the owner for doing the damage. But he's looking at an 80Wx5 in a quality manufacturer receiver. This self-same manufacturer has an info-FAQ website where they tout the 'goodness' of the Onkyo approach...they belittle the use of impedance switches, etc. and generally speak of honest amping and power delivery.
You tell me...where does the blame lie? Should every receiver owner now have to take his equipment in to be independently tested? Or should manufacturers just give us honest products?

 

[John Garcia]

Paul - No, I agree with you completely that amp ratings should be standardized and truthful, or at the very least, more honest. The situation is a compounded set of circumstances, and I still feel that, ultimately, the user is responsible for their actions. If I don't know what I'm doing, install something on my computer, and it gets damaged or I lose files, does that mean I should blame Microsoft? The computer manufacturer? The software manufacturer? Nope. Regardless of the misleading power rating, I think someone who had sufficient knowledge would not have considered a low power receiver adequate in that case.

 

[Steve_Tk]

Regardless of the misleading power rating, I think someone who had sufficient knowledge would not have considered a low power receiver adequate in that case.

I don't agree with this. I do agree with your computer statement, if you don't know what you are doing and start messing with a computer, then if it screws up you are to blame.

But Norman L did nothing wrong. He knew his minimum required wattage, which was 50W. So he purposely found an amp that had more than this. He found the Onkyo. He also knew that his previous onkyo was very good unit that worked for him for a long time. Then the onkyo blew his speakers.

Is it his fault he trusted the companies rated watts? He took the precautions. About the only thing he could have done is taken to a shop before he hooked it up. If this was in any way like your computer statement then he would have just run out buying a receiver and not known what his minimum wattage needed was.

There needs to be a law on this. Someone needs to call or start a petition because this is dishonest advertising. You shouldn't be able to say 80x5, if when all 5 are running it's only 30. Now I saw an email where Onkyo swept this under the floor by saying "well in real world this would never happen, it defeats the definition of surround sound". Regardless, they should at least have to say 30x5, then they can add that all 5 channels driven is not usually something that happens.

 

[Ryan Schnacke]

But [Norman's input is] most valuable to those who don't already have an SR600 in their home to experiment with.

 

[Del]

Th following link will take you to the latest rules implemented by the FTC concerning advertised ratings for amplifiers.



I found this part interesting:
"According to CEMA, members recently have “...expressed
concerns about inconsistent power output claims in retail advertising for amplifiers and receivers,
especially multichannel products.”16 These members report that certain relatively low cost
multichannel receivers, for which distortion information in advertising is not disclosed, have
distortion levels well in excess of one percent at rated power."

 

[Ferran Mazzanti]

My 5 cents here. I'd vote for the Marantz 5200, and better for the 6200 if you can put some extra $100. I had a 5200 and I can tell you that for movies it rocks
And concerning what they say about dropping from 100Wattsx2 down to 30Wattsx5, I simply can't believe it. Something similar was said about the SR7200, but seems that the unit tested was defective... I can tell you from my own experience that those units have plenty of power to fill a middle to large room with a nice soundfield.

 

[Paul Clarke]

Thanks Del for the link. And that is precisely what the issue is IMO. It doesn't matter to me if the company is Yamaha, Onkyo, Marantz, H/K (which I own), or anybody else...the problem lies in Multi-channel receivers in certain price classes. Power insufficiency is becoming more of a problem and when it reaches the level of blown quality speakers from using and trusting the manufacturer's own information there is a case for liability.

I am not on a consumer bandwagon...I don't subscribe to Consumer Report or fit any of the other usual pro-consumer canards. I agree with John that the 'consumer should beware' and that involves personal responsibility. But that responsibility ends when the product is either deliberately or misleadingly advertised or in any other way cannot be used safely following standard/recommended procedure without damage occurring.

 

[John Garcia]

But Norman L did nothing wrong. He knew his minimum required wattage, which was 50W. So he purposely found an amp that had more than this. He found the Onkyo. He also knew that his previous onkyo was very good unit that worked for him for a long time. Then the onkyo blew his speakers.

Point well taken, and I am not trying to say that Norman has no idea what he is doing. However, I personally would not have paired any decent speakers with the SR600. I consider the SR600 or TX-DS595 BUDGET receivers, and I never thought it would output it's full rated power driving all channels, just like I don't expect my 6200 to. Yes, most or all major manufacturers are optimistic in their numbers, however that does not mean a consumer can take that at face value. The Sony DE line also claims 100wpc, but I guarantee that similarly priced Onkyos will out power them without even trying. I guess what I am really saying is, I would not have considered running large B&W towers with a receiver of this level. The SR600 sounded great until I read that it lacked pre-outs.

The rated power is often PEAK, not continuous, and that is likely not taken from random testing of production units, I will guess it is taken from a pre-production unit that shares only design similarities with the production units.

This is very similar to car manufacturers rating HP, which is also very deceiving. HP numbers are typically given from a mule engine that is not attached to a car, not acutal numbers from a given car on a dyno. Not to mention that the numbers are FLYWHEEL HP. This measure is not what actually gets to the ground, which is what matters, IMO. Again, there is nothing that requires car manufacturers to give wheel HP ratings, and they don't want to because most people don't understand what it is that they are hearing anyway and it wouldn't really sound as good to consumers.

If Sony said their amps only actually put out 20wpc, 20Hz-20Khz, all channels driven, do you think anyone would buy them when all the other manufacturers are "claiming" 100wpc? They do it because the other companies do it, and the average, uneducated consumer does not know any better.

Truth in advertising? I don't think it will ever happen.