Denon 5800 upgrade or Pioneer VS49TX

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Mike Peveler, May 10, 2002.

  1. Mike Peveler

    Mike Peveler Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2000
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well the thread heading says it all, I own the 5800 and the upgrade is $800. I can probably sell the 5800 for $1700, you add $800 and that is about the price of the 49TX.

    I have heard the 49TX and loved the sound of the processing but thought that the amp section was a bit lackluster. Any advice or observations would be appreciated thanks.
     
  2. Aslam Imran

    Aslam Imran Second Unit

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    0
    Or how about selling the 5800 and getting an outlaw 770 amp and for an additional $950 get the Outlaw 950 and become a separatist[​IMG] That way you will have a solid amp for years to come without ever worrying about upgrades and a fine preamp to go with it. Just my opinion.
    P.S. This is just my opinion and others esp. flagship owners' opinions might differ so please take no offence.
     
  3. Mike Peveler

    Mike Peveler Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2000
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    0
    None taken [​IMG] but I do think that is an interesting option but I would have to hear the Outlaw rig first. Thanks A.I.
     
  4. Jeremy Hegna

    Jeremy Hegna Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2000
    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mike,
    From the little I've read on the upgrade, it definitely looks worthwhile. I will be sending mine in soon. The upgrade will bring the 5800's processing and feature set to that of the 49TX....and a little bit more[​IMG]
    I'm very happy with my 5800 and I know that Elbert, another 5800 owner has done some extensive comparisons between the 5800, 5803, and the 49TX. He seems to prefer the Denon. YMMV.
    I would think it would be a lateral move to trade out an upgraded 5800 for the 49TX. Even though I love my Denon's sound, there are many happy Pioneer owners.
    Jeremy
     
  5. RajeeK

    RajeeK Second Unit

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 1999
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  6. Chip E

    Chip E Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2000
    Messages:
    1,165
    Likes Received:
    0
    "With the pioneer I guess you also get the satisfation of having brand spaking new component to play with which is always nice."
    That's why i bought a 5803 and got rid of the B&K.. [​IMG]
     
  7. Dave E H

    Dave E H Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2002
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    0
    MCACC is definitely not to be underestimated - I definitely think going to check that out is worth it.
     
  8. Jeremy Hegna

    Jeremy Hegna Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2000
    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Could ya elaborate a bit?"

    Rajee, Are you serious? Alright, from the specs...

    *Dolby Headphone

    *24bit/192khz DACs, 16 of them operating dual-dif mode

    *Denon Link, bass management of DVD-A, delay, channel levels, and tone controls

    *2 sets of 8 channel inputs (SACD and DVD-A)

    *More digital inputs, more analog inputs, more S-Video inputs and outputs

    *Dual Sharc "Hammerhead" processors, not sure if these are faster than those in the Pioneer

    *24 bit, 192khz A/D conversion on all 2 channel analog inputs.

    *4 24 bit 192khz digital interface receivers

    *Audio delay adjustment to match audio signal w/video, again not sure if the Pioneer will allow for lip sync correction...but as noted by Anthem owners, this is a great option.

    This is all I can find right now, but you get the picture. For some, less is more...and I agree that many features will go unused. But this was my point, "a little bit more."

    Of course, MCACC is an option NOT supplied by Denon and I see some folks raving about it. Myself, I love to tweak with my SPL meter...so it would be a feature that I don't find to be a deal maker.

    Rajee,

    For the most part, I agree that the two are very similar in feature packages/price/performance. This is not a thread about which one is better, rather about the advantages/disadvantages of upgrading a 5800 vs. selling it and buying the Pioneer.

    This is Pioneer's first "true" flagship offering, and it looks/sounds like it is a champion. Denon has been through 3 or 4 now and I find this to be another plus on the Denon side...which shows through their ability to provide an upgrade path for flagship owners at this time.

    Jeremy
     
  9. BobRoulier

    BobRoulier Second Unit

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2002
    Messages:
    347
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rejeek,
    you can tell people till your blue in the face about mcacc and they just dont get it! Its not just like avia! this tool is not a gimmick it sets up your room and enhances the sound incredibly Its a shame Denon did not opt to use it or maybe it was just to costly to add to the unit cause if they did they would have an unbeatalbe unit. I think only 47tx and 49tx owners know whats up with mcacc
    When I listen to music in 7 channel stereo and mcacc is on front alighn the sound is incredible it is seamless you cant tell which speakers its coming from its all even. I had a manager from tweeter over and we listened to a lot of different stuff he just sat there with his mouth open he couldnt believe believe the seamless sound and he has a 5803 on display. he was impressed.
    Hey denon makes a great reciever so Im not trying to sell everyone a 49tx I just get frustrated when people think they can just pop in an avia disk and compete with mcacc I dont think so[​IMG]
    See ya Bob
     
  10. Jeremy Hegna

    Jeremy Hegna Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2000
    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bob,

    MCACC is speaker/room calibration, plain and simple. It doesn't do anything more than someone can do with a Rat Shack SPL meter and a copy of AVIA or Video Essentials. I'm sure you're happy with it and I know I would be too. However, one can achieve the same results you have or that you heard in Tweeter with an SPL meter.

    I, too, have great imaging with my speakers. Many others have achieved proper imaging over the last 50 years without MCACC abilities on their pre/pros and receivers. The convenience factor is the biggest plus. Also, 6 and 7 channel calibration is a bonus. Speaker calibration is something only the "true" hobbyist or audio/videophile will take the time to do correctly. This being the case, the Pioneer 49 and 47TX are great receivers for those folks that don't care about SPL meters and calibration discs, nor will ever take the time to use them.

    This of course is my opinion. And please don't think I am knocking the Pioneer's abilities...I think this is a cool function and should be implemented, especially in lower priced components for those folks making their first venture into HT.

    Jeremy
     
  11. Michael Langdon

    Michael Langdon Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 1998
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since the Acoustic Calibration in the Pioneer Elite 49TX adjusts specific frequencies, how would you change these frequencies in the Denon 5800? It seems the Pioneer has a kind of room equalizer in it. Even with a SPL meter and a calibration disc you may know your null and peak frequencies, but you cannot change these on the Denon as it seems you can on the Pioneer (according to the manual). It seems an SPL meter and a calibration disc are not all that is needed.
     
  12. James Elvick

    James Elvick Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 1999
    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello All,
    Jeremy your dead wrong about the Pioneer 49TX's MCAAC just being automated channel level calibrations. MCAAC is also full room EQ with level and distance with manual control also. It is likened to an automated digital domain EQ. It does much, much more than just set channel sound levels.
    As far as your comments on the other features please note that the 49TX also has 24bit/192khz DAC'c, Bass Management of DVD-A or SACD, and Dual Sharc Processors. I am not trying to get in a pissing contest about features now have you, but your comments would lead me to believe your somewhat uneducated about the 49TX.
    The 5803 does have more inputs, ouputs and Denon digital link. The Denon digital link at the point is only supported by Denon and only is available on their Denon 9000 DVD player for $3000. To me this is insane as DVD player technology for under $1000 is very good and multichannel digital connections are not established yet.
    The 5803 is probably still the king of the high end features on the megabuck receivers. However, the sound of every room is so different and the most overlooked area in high end home theater is room acoustics. Pioneer has tackled this with a reasonable solution. Even B&K realized this with their Ref 30 and AVR307 and their excellent notch filter for bass frequencys. Look at how many people now swear by the difference in sound quality after putting a EQ on the sub! I for one could never go back after this tweek. Room acoustic calibrations are the next big step in acheiving the best possible performance, IMHO only of course![​IMG]
    Please know this is coming from a Denon 5800 fan and supporter, and a soon to be 49TX owner. The 5800 is a great receiver but the extra features of it do not offset the 49TX ability to match my room acoustics.
    James Elvick
     
  13. RajeeK

    RajeeK Second Unit

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 1999
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  14. RajeeK

    RajeeK Second Unit

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 1999
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ya beat me to it James. Well said.
     
  15. Jeremy Hegna

    Jeremy Hegna Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2000
    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Even B&K realized this with their Ref 30 and AVR307 and their excellent notch filter for bass frequencys. Look at how many people now swear by the difference in sound quality after putting a EQ on the sub!"

    I agree whole heartedly about taming sub response with equalization...but to adjust the EQ for the rest of the frequencies seems a bit silly to me. I am all for advancements in technology, but equalizing individual speakers seems like it would do more harm than good if you want to hear exactly what the artist(s) intended on the album you are listening to.

    "I for one could never go back after this tweek. Room acoustic calibrations are the next big step in acheiving the best possible performance, IMHO only of course!"

    EQ'ing your bass response in your room has not made you happy with the 5800? Why do you think that the 49TX will be the answer to your problems in your room? Treatments and room conditioning, yes. EQ'ing the frequencies above 100hz, no, IMO. It goes against everything I've learned about critical music listening. If this feature is so incredible, why has Meridian, Lexicon, and Mark Levinson not added it to their product?

    A notch filter for bass response and equalization for the low end frequencies is a priority in my opinion...but the higher frequencies I leave alone. This is one reason I'm very excited for the addition of flexible bass management with the 5800 upgrade.

    Jeremy
     
  16. Jeremy Hegna

    Jeremy Hegna Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2000
    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    0
    RajeeK, James, and Michael.

    Please read my initial response to the poster of this thread. I was only providing my opinion on whether or not the 5800 was a worthwhile upgrade. I did mention that "maybe a bit more" with a smiley face. The upgrade package for the 5800 equals the packaging of the 49TX. There are a couple of bonuses included with the 5800 and the 49 has it's spangles. I.E. MCACC.

    I have been fortunate enough to build a dedicated room that my wife allows me to do whatever I want with. After room treatments and tweaks with my trusty ol' SPL meter, I've attained the imaging and sound that I like. Could the Pioneer add even better sound to the room...IMO, no. I will need to add better amplification and most likely a seperate pre/pro to enjoy even better performance. Again, my initial response to this poster was that I felt the upgrade was worth it and that the Pioneer 49TX would be a lateral move NOT a downgrade.

    James,

    I was asked by Rajee to elaborate on a joking matter. The options I highlighted are the additional benefits of the 5800 upgrade or the 5803. The Pioneer does not offer 16 high resolution DACs, only 8 (24/192). The Denon operates in dual differential mode and quadruples the DAC structure on Pure Direct Mode. The A/DCs in the Pioneer are 24/96 while the Denon's are 24/192. The Sharc processors are, from what I've read, a new processor hence the availability problem. So again, I am informed and educated on the packaging of the Pioneer. Please don't think I want a pissing match to ensue either. I would just like to clarify my points I made earlier, as it seems you didn't read them in their entirety. I've never compared the two and I wouldn't say one sounds better than the other because of this. My opinion is that the upgrade to the 5800 is a great deal. The Pioneer is a great receiver, but at best equal to that of the 5803. Nothing more.

    Jeremy
     
  17. Ricky T

    Ricky T Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 1999
    Messages:
    921
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jeremy,

    Do all 8 or 9 of your speakers have flat response from 20 - 20k hz? It is very unlikely that ANY do; therefore room correction would create flatter response for each speaker by getting rid of peaks and valleys are any frequency. Ain't no Rad Shack meter can do that.........
     
  18. James Elvick

    James Elvick Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 1999
    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jeremy,

    You are one of the lucky few who actually is fortunate enought to have a dedicated home theater and has done some room acoustics. With that being said many high end theaters do have multichannel EQ's for all channels and almost all commercial theaters also. To set this up properly takes very serious calibration equipment, a lot of knowledge, and even more patience.

    The DAC structure is different and perhaps better on the 5803 but I'm not convinced that it is clearly an audible difference compared to another 24/192 DAC on a high end receiver or prepro.

    Clearly I've stated the 5803 is the king of features and is a fantastic receiver. Without the MCAAC on the Pioneer 49TX I also believe it to a better feature set overall and would recommend it to anyone. However, it is also clear that you do not fully understand MCAAC or that the flatest frequency response on every speaker, not just the sub, should be the desire for best duplication of what the artist intended.

    James Elvick
     
  19. Arthur S

    Arthur S Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 1999
    Messages:
    2,568
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jeremy

    The single biggest factor in the sound that arrives at your ears is the room. Followed closely by the speakers. Being able to bring speakers to the same frequency response at your listening position should not be underestimated. Incorporating such a system in a $2500 (street) receiver is something of a coup.

    High end multi channel room-speaker equalizers run into the thousands. Check out the TACT Audio Room Correction Systm (RCS)2.2X to get an idea of what we are talking about.

    Artie
     
  20. Jeremy Hegna

    Jeremy Hegna Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2000
    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    0
    "You are one of the lucky few who actually is fortunate enought to have a dedicated home theater and has done some room acoustics. With that being said many high end theaters do have multichannel EQ's for all channels and almost all commercial theaters also. To set this up properly takes very serious calibration equipment, a lot of knowledge, and even more patience."
    I agree. And while my HT room is far from High end, I don't believe it is necessary to EQ all the channels for proper sound in the size of rooms that most will have available to them. In a commercial theater, the size is much greater and the necessity to accent the highs and maybe the midrange to offset the size of the auditorium and how many people are viewing would be more necessary. There isn't a commercial theater in my town that sounds good regardless. Maybe it is because they EQ all channels?[​IMG]
    "The DAC structure is different and perhaps better on the 5803 but I'm not convinced that it is clearly an audible difference compared to another 24/192 DAC on a high end receiver or prepro."
    Once again, I never said there was an audible difference. I've never even listened to the 49 in my house, I have in the showroom. Once again, I was pointing out the differences in the two as Rajee asked of me.
    "Clearly I've stated the 5803 is the king of features and is a fantastic receiver. Without the MCAAC on the Pioneer 49TX I also believe it to a better feature set overall and would recommend it to anyone."
    This is kind of a contradictory statement. IF, In your opinion, the 5803 is king fo the features...why would you recommend the Pionner, because the MCACC bests the 5803's feature set[​IMG] I have yet to declare ONE the KING of receivers. I think they are both incredible, but each has their bonuses. What one may like, another may not.
    "However, it is also clear that you do not fully understand MCAAC or that the flatest frequency response on every speaker, not just the sub, should be the desire for best duplication of what the artist intended."
    Why is it clear that I don not understand how MCACC operates? I think you have been pretty clear in your definition, and I had some knowledge before I answered the intitial poster that the 5800 was worthwhile to upgrade. Some folks may have a need to EQ their speakers all the way around....some may have peak/valley/null problems in their set-up. IMO, if someone carefully puts their system together with precise timbre matching throughout the speaker system...and treats the room for sonics, MCACC is unneccesary. If it works for you, cool. I don't need it in my room and I don't think most people do. A director and producer have the end-product sound mixed for a reason. I am not a fan of THX post processing of any other form of EQ. The sub response can be tamed with a cheap EQ and that is all I find necessary. This has nothing to do with whether or not I understand the benefit of MCACC or any other feature of the Pioneer.
    AND once again, I am not saying that one is better than the other...but why have some of the truly high end companies not included the MCACC in their packaging? Meridian is one of the best surround sound companies along with Lexicon. Why would they have not pursued some sort of "in room calibration package" on their gear? Because IMO, it is not necessary to get the optimum performace from a timbre matched system.
    Jeremy
     

Share This Page