- May 1, 2002
When buying a receiver, how much of the decision is based purely on the sound? 100%? 80%? 75%? How much on ease of use? For instance, I'v got to admit, I never bothered to listen to Denon because I hated using it in the shop. Not to pick on them, but I couldn't read the tiny display from my seating distance, slow response time from buttons, no visual way to "follow" source selection to find source I was looking for, no A/B speaker switch, etc. I also heard reliablilty was inconsistent. I ended up getting a Yamaha, which, ergonomically, seemed easier for my tiny brain to use. I've tried comparing it to my old Onkyo integrated amp on music (using headphones), and to me, the Onkyo sounds a little better, the Yamaha a little flat and dry. I guess I wish I had listened a little more to the other receivers. It was just a little tough since doing a true A/B comparison is difficult even when a shop uses a switcher to compare two sources on the same speakers. While I sure as heck want the thing to sound good, is there that much difference between receiver brands (not between receivers and separates) at a given price point to justify settling for poor ergonomics? I still think that the day to day ease of use definately counts in the decision (remotes notwithstanding since you can replace those) . What do you guys and gals think?