Denon 2802 vs. 1802: Better sound or just more features? (1 Viewer)

[RoyB]

Does the 2802 actually sound a lot better than the 1802 or is the upgrade mostly for features?

It will be powering Klipsch 5.5/1.5 with a 10" powered sub.

 

[GregoriusM]

More features, but a tad better sound.

Also, the 2802 has all of the pre-outs if you want to use it as a pre-amp down the road. The 1802 only has L, C, R, and sub.

It is a fair jump in price, but you ARE getting a ton more features!

... Greg

 

[Kyle_Y]

When I auditioned the 2802 which I was going to purchaes, I decided to first try the 1802 incase it the 2802 was not that much better, but when I listen to the 1802, it was just calling bring in the 2802 if you want power. I did not end up buying the 2802 due to a sale on an Onkyo 797, but I would certainly say a Denon 2802 is far better than anything in its pricerange.

 

[Nick G]

Roy, there is no difference in sound between the 1802 vs 2802. The difference is features. If the 1802 has all the features you need then their is no reason to buy the 2802 other than the "toy factor". A factor alot of us are not immune from BTW. But there will be no audible difference.

Regards, Nick

 

[EricHaas]

Yeah, I tend to agree with Nick, although I have not demoed these two side by side per se (I have listened to both in separate setups). I think that most receivers below the $1000 price point tend to sound fairly similar, though not identical. Certainly, there are differences in effective power, so that you can crank some up without distortion louder than others. Apart from that, expect sonic differences to be subtle. And you are more likely to notice a sonic difference between two different makes at a similar price point, e.g. Denon v. Onkyo, as opposed to 2 Denon models at slightly different price points. The weight differences between receivers up to about $1000 tend to be attributable to additional features such as a 6th or 7th amped channel making the amp heavier, but not necessarily better quality. In the Denon line, I would except the first major sonic difference in going from the 3802, which has almost all the features of the flagship, to the 4802, then again to the 5800. Beyond a certain point in the line, it becomes less about adding features, and more about improving the amp/preamp to emulate as best as possible a good separates system.

 

[ReggieW]

As the owner of an 1802, I agree with Nick as well. The only advantage for ME to have bumped up to the 2802 would have been for DTS Neo. However, I have read from most on this forum that DPL2 is more impressive. I am not interested in going to 6.1 anytime soon, because I have no space for a rear center in my large single apartment, and out of the 250 or so DVD's I own, only eight of them are Es/Ex compatible. Listening to both units side by side at the Good Guys, I could notice hardly any difference in sound. The 1802 was cheaper, so I went for it since it had everything I required (DTS, DPL2, analog outs, pre-amp outs if I ever should need them, and plenty of digital conections).

Reg

 

[Chuck C]

My buddy has the 2802, and although it sounded great just like any other decent digital receiver, it sounded* much better with the addition of a sixth channel; I couldn't imagine anyone not wanting 6.1 or 7.1 with today's latest technologies and acton packed movies.

*more enveloping with 6.1 compared to 5.1, tested by unhooking the rear center, doing a little re-positioning, then re-connecting it.

 

[ReggieW]

I guess it's all a matter of preference Chuck. I know that extra channel is definitely more enveloping, but there simply isn't yet an abundance of 6.1 discs out there (certainly not many I would buy) for me to warrant a bump up, and what 7.1 discs have you seen? and as far as the latest action packed movies go, I buy few of them (a majority of my films are Foreign, thus most are mono or two channel stereo anyway). However, if you are one who buys all of the latest Summer blockbusters, then a 2802 may be worth the bump up, but even then, the number of new discs carrying EX/ES tracks are still scarce in coming.

Reg

 

[Chuck C]

Reggie, the 2802 uses some sort of mixing element for a matrix rear center, so it works well with all 5.1 DVDs as well as 6 Channel stereo and DPLII, and if you're a big Gladiator fan, some, including my lucky buddy, feel DTS-ES discrete is the only way to go, esp. for a part in CH8 @ 40:36 sec.

 

[ReggieW]

You got me there Chuck (I was wondering if that extra channel was matrixed)....and I do have Gladiator! Believe me, I plan on moving to bigger place next year, and will definitely consider a 4802 (or by then, maybe 4803) for the living room. When I bought the 1802 when it was released last August, there was a $300.00 gap between it and the 2802 opposed to about $150.00 today. I'd probably swing for the 2802 if I had to do it over again now.
Reg

 

[MatthewJ S]

Ditto to Chuck's feelings...also like learning remote, and I know that there will be a slew of people complaning about the remotes on both units, I HAVE TO HAVE "LEARNING"!!!!!!

 

[RoyB]

Thanks for all of your opinions. The reason I asked this question is that the stereo shop is trying to get me to buy the 2802 over the 1802 citing definite audible sound quality improvements and better build quality. They claim that Denon makes the 2802 at their factory in Japan but that the 1802's (and lower models) are farmed out to a different factory. Anybody heard of this?

I will not have a need for a rear-center channel (it would have to go in the fireplace) and no need for pre-outs. Also, I will be using the MX-500 remote so the 2802's learning remote would be tucked away in a drawer. I currently have an older 2600 and can't turn it up past 1/4 without hurting my ears (Klipsch KG5.5's)so I don't think the lower wattage of the 1802 would really matter. Anybody else see a reason to buy the 2802 over the 1802?

Thanks, Roy

 

[Mike Veroukis]

At the risk of getting flamed I'd suggest you compare the 2802/1802 with the Yamaha RX-V1200. When I was receiver shopping a few weeks back I did a direct A/B test between the 2802 and 1200. I felt the 1200 was significantly better in the sound quality department. Considering the 2802 and 1200 are about the same price you may want to consider it. I felt that the 1200 had a warmer sound which should sound great on those Klipsch of yours.

Just a suggestion.

- Mike

 

[Chris A H]

Just last night I finally got the chance to audition some a/v receivers in this price/performance class. Want to upgrade to a 5.1/6.1 set-up since I do not currently have a ht, so my listening experience is only 2.0 with Klipsch speakers and a flagship JVC receiver from the 80's.

So I took a wide variety of CD's I am familiar with and love to listen to, and had all the receivers played through the same Klipsch RF speakers.

Very interesting results, could not have predicted the results based upon specs or pre-conceived performance. Did all the right things, like balance the volume levels, had someone else start/switch between units so I would not know what system was playing, etc.

First A/B tested the Denon 1802 vs. the 2802. Audible difference in imaging and fullness in 2.0 direct mode on all material (intrumental, choral, jazz, solo piano, orchestral). 2802 better.

Then did the 2802 vs. the Yamaha RX-V1200, and (in 2.0 direct) there was a much better balance from top to bottom with the V1200. 2802 had more clarity in the high frequencies but the V1200 was more uniform across all frequencies. Vocals seemed more natural, lows seemed fuller and accurate, and imaging was slightly improved as well. V1200 better.

Since they had it there as connected, we did the V1200 vs. the V2200. Now supposedly the only difference between these two Yamaha units is 20 watts/channel. In listening (2.0 direct), there was a _huge_ difference in the sound field size and depth. Whereas with the V1200 there was always a sense of where the music was coming from (speakers), with the V2200 the speakers disappeared completely into the room. Seemed to increase the size of the sound image in all directions, even past the walls. Really surprised me. All styles of music sounded better, some markedly so. V2200 definitely better.

Since I did not have any 5.1 discs, I had the sales guy put in a 5.1 music demo, and did A/B with the V1200 and V2200. I had thought there would be much less difference in 5.1 mode between them, but again I was surprised. The same feeling of spaciousness and the impression of the speakers disappearing was there in 5.1 as well. Even boosted the volume on the V1200 to see if the louder receiver would sound better, but it just sounded louder, not better.

The relationship between the 1802/2802 is the same as the V1200/V2200 - one has more power, a few more features and that is _supposed_ to be it. But you really do have to listen to them to see if there is a difference to YOU! If you don't hear a difference, fine. Get the best priced model you can. Me, I heard a difference between brands and between models, and now have to drum up the extra money for the one I want!

Thanks to all who post to these boards, I have learned a lot in the past few months.

 

[RoyB]

Chris,

Do you know if the yammy has adjustable DPLII and 5 channel mode? Anybody out there using a yammy-klipsch set-up?

Roy

 

[Chris A H]

Yes, it does have adjustable DPL II, and an all-channel stereo mode as well (I assume this is what you mean by 5 channel mode).

Chris

 

[ReggieW]

Roy,

If you can hang on until summers end, Denon should be debuting their new 03' line in August. I know the changes will be minimal (according to Denon), but nonetheless, you may want to wait and see what they offer. I still stand by my earlier statement that I can hear no audible difference between the 1802 and 2802. I also believe they are made out of the same factory, and the build quality is pretty much the same. Hope this helps.

Reg