How is denon etc. better than sony etc recievers (1 Viewer)

[Babek]

When I went to the store to buy a receiver the guy there said that the denons, marantz, onkyo, and harman kardons sound the best while sony, pioneer, kenwood and so on sounds average. Also, there is a huge price hike from the sonys etc to the higher end ones like onkyo etc.

My question is, how exactly do these higher end receivers sound 'better'? Because quite frankly, I came from a friends house who had a 3 year old Dolby digital/dts sony receiver and it sounded unbelievable.
A complete explanation would be nice becuase I'm likely to base my buying decision on you guys.

 

[Rich Wenzel]

a good sony receiver hooked up to vienna acoustic mahler's is still gonna sound good...it would probably sound better with an anthem avm20 and a sunfire cinema grand though...

my only point being, the receiver is only one piece of the puzzle...your friends system could sound great because his room is set up well and his speakers are really good, etc...

if you are asking me my opinion...as receivers go, i would stay away from japanese brands, in my mind they concentrate on features that i will never use and less on amp and sound quality...now someone may jump on this post and say, i am clueless, onkyo 898 rocks, and he is probably right, it probably does. what does that mean? it means that its all subjective...

the only one general constant is that the market is fairly efficient, one company's $1000 piece will sound better than another company's $500 piece as long as the features are fairly similar. if it doesn't, the market won't buy it (i mean why would someone pay more for equal or worse sound?), and the price will come down anyway....

The best thing to do is listen to each receiver while holding most of the other components and music constant. Also, try to keep volumes similar, however, notice how hard it is for the receiver to push it to that volume....

Rich

 

[Jack Briggs]

Taking that approach, though, would rule out most receiver options on the market. The products from Japan offer tremendous value for the dollar. And the top-dollar Japanese receivers, which tend to be pretty high-priced, are universally praised among equipment reviewers and pleased owners and are often compared favorably with separates of equal or greater value.

 

[TomH]

The Denon will only sound better if you purchase it from an "authorized" dealer. Warranty and that little bit of hype that make it sound better than the other Japanese products are not included with internet sales.

 

[Babek]

hmm, interesting.

But you guys still haven't really gotten to my question of why the denons etc sound better? Are tehy more clear or crisp or what?

 

[Jason GT]

In general they're more expensive but do essentially the same stuff. That means that both a cheaper and more expensive receiver will have an amplification stage, but the more expensive reciever will *probably* have a better amplifier section.
It could be better ICs, capacitors, more complex design, etc.
How they sound better? hard to say, one would have to listen for themselves. If you ever DO get to compare them, ensure that the other variables (source material, speakers, cabling) are kept as constant as possible.
Essentially it's not unlike cars -- a Focus will get you from point A to B; a 911 will get you to point A to B with greater speed and panache. It costs a bit more though.

 

[Jamey F]

Essentially it's not unlike cars -- a Focus will get you from point A to B; a 911 will get you to point A to B with greater speed and panache. It costs a bit more though

Glad I wasn't the only one using the car analogy today today

 

[Steve Schaffer]

Sony, Pioneer, and Kenwood all make receivers comparable to the $1299 Denon 3803, but they don't sell for $299-399.

The Sony ES line, Pioneer Elite, and Kenwood Soveriegn are the higher end models, and competitive with Denon, Onkyo, HK.

Many stores like CC don't carry the Sony ES, Pioneer Elite, or Kenwood Sovereign lines, only the lower end models, but do carry Onkyo and HK. So if a salesman in one of the mass-market stores tells you the Marantz or HK he sells is better than the lower line models they sell from Kenwood, Sony, or Pioneer, he's right, but as previously stated it's like comparing a Focus to a BMW. Sony, Kenwood, and Pioneer also make BMWs, but the store you went to probably doesn't carry those higher end models.

 

[Phil Dally]

I'm using a Sony STR DE945 and it seems to be doing the trick for me. I may sound like a hick when I say this, as long as I can see a movie clearly , can hear it beside me, infront of me and behind me, and I can make my floor vibrate at the right times, I'm happier than 90% of my friends who don't have a home theater.
However, my 945 is better than the Sony DE345 that I upgraded from, but not as good as the one I may eventually have.

 

[Jack Briggs]

That's the spirit!

 

[Steve Schaffer]

Phil,

You got it right. There are plenty of good choices out there for less than half the cost of a 3803.

I started out with a $300 Technics DD-ready, Energy Take-5 plus 8 inch sub and it rocked.

 

[Scott_Jua]

not sure you got the response you were looking for yet. So I will quote yet again, my take on some of the more popular models, based on me actually listening to them all. Hope this helps:
from another thread:

We auditioned the 4ES just the other day. I brought along a slew of material to test as well and was mainly comparing it's sound characteristics to other receivers I have boiled it down to. I compared directly to the Elite 43TX/45TX and the Denon 2802 and 3803.
The Denon: 2802 doesn't hold a candle to the 3803. I was quite curious what the real world sound difference would be between the two models and man, let me tell you there's a almost night and day difference. It's quite amazing actually. The 3803 is much more balanced overall, and the tonal range is crisp, powerful, and seemingly accurate. However, I found both Denons lacking a sort of tonal characteristic, although I'm not sure exactly what it was, but the Denons sounded weak in the mid to low freq range to me. They had nice crisp and accurate and lows highs, but in comparison to the Elites and ES were missing some definition in the mid to low range. Nice, but not my cup of tea.
The Pioneers: Both 43 and 45TX models sounded so much alike it was hard to tell at times which was which. In fact, I may have only made a mental distinction between them to justify the fact that the 45 cost more. (shrug) The highs on the Elites were not as bright as the Sony or denons, but the highs were there and accurate to the source, I felt. Althoguh I tend to like brighter sounding electronics, I felt the Elites had a much more defined seperation in surround information, better low and mid responses, while being the most accurate and clean sounding to my ears. Coming from SONY fandom I was surprised that I liked them the most.
The SONY 4ES: Although having almost always sounding processed to me, the 4ES sounded much better than the Denons to me and was a subjective toss up against the Elites. It had nice crisp and bright highs, while not being painfully bright, while having nice range in the mid and lows, but seemed to lose a SLIGHT bit of definition compared to the pioneers and MUCH better than the Denon 3803 and a world apart from 2802. Althoguh I noticed slightly better seperation of surround info in the Elites, the SONY was right there close behind, and actually seemed to vary on material. The 4ES seemed to be slightly more sensative to material differences...does this mean it's more accurate? hmmmm... At times also depending on materail, I felt the SONY was a little less accurate than the elite and seemed to garble sounds together during certain scenes. Again, being VERY VERY nit-picky.
In the end it's all about features vs cost, perhaps looks factor in...but sound quality, the 4ES is very very hard to beat. I still liked it alot, but felt that the Elite receivers fit my current preferences for sound characteristics a little more. The SONY is a GREAT receiver, and in my opinion sounds so much better than the Denons it's really no comparison. I went in with no expectations other than already owning SONY and believing greatly in their build quality (everyday literally almost for 9 years)...I was surprised to have liked the Elite slightly more for sound quality...and really surprised about the Denons. Both 2802 and 3803 didn't live up to the hype they get...not to me anyway. Not to say they were bad machines...they are great as well, but didn't fit my ear as well as the others. In the end once you get past the features, pros and cons of each technology set, it's all subjective. Listen to them all and choose for yourself. I don't think you can go wrong with any of them in this range, but it's your ears...you decide.
I hope my ramble helped a little...
------- follow up:
The pioneers I tested were NOT calibrated using the MCACC function and all the receivers were set to source only...zero across the boards for processing and EQs. I took ALOT of time getting that and volume levels set so I could really evaluate the sound differences in the hardware respectively (since each had slightly different specs).
I used a few discs: Pearl Harbor (DTS and DD tested chapters 11,22; full range and surround separation), Toy Story 2 (opening buzz scenes, bass, mids, surround), Tombstone (DTS OK corral shootout for dialogue and naturally recorded sounds), Star Wars EPII/EPI (various scenes, full range, etc.), and some others... I was surprised at the quality level between sound formats and discs. Each test scene had unique characteristics, but helped me hear the differences between each receiver and how they handled different material. I think the Pioneer was the most accurate and consistent in my experience. The Denon seemed consistent as well, but had no tonal characteristics I favored. The 4ES varied more...but oh so slightly. The differences are there if you REALLY listen for them and pay attention. I wouldn't think you would tell much if not switching between receivers often enough. Just coming in off the street or home from work they all sound pretty bad arse. (Don't want to make this an outright Pioneer fan fest.)
...
I even threw in Onkyo as a possibility but listening to that once threw it out of contention for me. Overly bright, with good mid but poor lows for me. Decently accurate though.

hahaha funny how I've used my own post to try to help people three times so far. Anyway, it's subjective inthe end. Find the price point, and feature sets you want/need, then go listen to them. Better yet, find a place, ask their return policies (check for re-stock fees) and "borrow" your top picks...

 

[Scott_Jua]

I guess I could have given a shorter more general answer...basically each brand tends to have certain tonal charactersistics and is able to produce a certain type of sound in a unique way over another brand. I have found that to MY EAR at least, the SONYs and Pioneers sound about the most accurate to the source, while being not overly bright or lacking any mid or low range. The pioneers see less bright to me and slightly more warm, where the SONYs sound balanced overall with a slight lean towards the bright or "crispy" side.
The Denons seemed to have a more bright and balanced sound over the Kenwoods, but seemed to lack some mid range punch and depth. Their highs seemed slightly bright yet, muddled. The denons also seemed to vary greatly from chipset to shipset where most of the other brands stayed somewhat more consistant with their sounds. (although you get better soudn the higher up the chain you go, I believe) The Kenwoods sounded balanced, but the highs were tinny sounding...not as accurate as some others. Onkyo was very bright to me, although accurate and decently warm in the midrange. But, the overall high range was too bright for my liking.
and so on... Since I think my short reply became long as well...I'll leave it to what I said before...narrow down features and price points...then listen to them in your home.

 

[Brad Newton]

I am also looking at these 3 units. I thought that the Sony had more "umph" than the Pioneer & especially the Denon. Now, I am by no means an expert. I am just now trying to understand the lingo & the features of all of these units. I just thought that the Sony sounded clearer, sharper, especially in the dialogue area. The Pioneer that I listened to had not been calibrated. It was straight out of the box to the display. I listened to all 3 receivers with Klipsch rf7's & theil speakers. Would calibrating the Pioneer sway me.......again, I don't know. The Pioneer and the Sony sounded great. I am still trying to decide between these 2 units. I guess it boils down to me wanting the auto calibration & thx or the video conversion??????

 

[Steve Schaffer]

Brad,

I have the 45tx and the MCACC eq settings can be bypassed with one button on the remote without affecting distance and speaker level settings. The difference with it on or off is quite noticeable. I much prefer the MCACC eq turned on. Just sounds more natural, less "canned" and seems to have more defined channel separation.

My previous reciever was a Sony 333ES, which I calibrated with AVIA and RS meter.
Since getting the 45tx and running MCACC I've watched several movies that were favorites on the Sony and have found dialog intelligibility to be noticeably better with the Pioneer. I don't have to resort to subtitles nearly as often as I used to. I usually use the THX mode on the Pioneer and find this also helps dialogue come through more clearly without adversely affecting channel separation. On some movies with the Sony I'd have to turn up center level on occasion, haven't had to with the Pioneer.

 

[Dave Moritz]

I find that there is a wide difference in reciever due to there target demegrafic. You can compare one reciever against another and there will be differences. Due to the differences in preamp sections, capacitors, power supply, cross overs etc.... Much of it is subjective and depends on the speakers that are connected to the reciever. IMHO I find Sony's to be drab and flat but many others think they rock. I prefer the Pioneer Elites especially with the MCACC feature that seams to really help. It does a good job at compansating for acustics and speakers used. I like the Pioneer Elite 45,47,49tx and the Denon 5803 flagship reciever. There are many fine recievers like Marantz, Sunfire, Rotel and Harman Kardon. And because recievers are geared more towards a certain task. You need to know what you are going to use the reciever more for? Do you listed to movies or music. Some do one better than others and vice versa. And others do a good job at both. I find that while japaness brands can produce a really nice HT reviever. The US and European brands can match them in performance for a higher price. And the music part of these products especially in the music area is better. Because of better preamp sections built to handle music. But again we get back to it being subjective. What sounds great to me may not sound great to you. So I hope you get something that you will be happy with and I hope this forum helps you as much as it has helped me.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

My previous reciever was a Sony 333ES, which I calibrated with AVIA and RS meter.
Since getting the 45tx and running MCACC I've watched several movies that were favorites on the Sony and have found dialog intelligibility to be noticeably better with the Pioneer.

My experience is very similar to what Steve describes. I upgraded from a Sony DA50ES to a Pioneer Elite 47TX receiver, and have found that my center channel is much clearer and intelligible with the Elite than my old ES. The MCACC feature helped with the some frequency response issues, too.

Different receivers, just like different speakers, have their own unique sound characteristics. Whether one brand is "better" than another brand, though, is a very subjective matter, since we each have different likes and dislikes when it comes to audio. While the audible differences between receivers may not be as pronounced as with speakers, there are still differences. Only by listening to different models will you be able to determine which are "better" according to your criteria.

 

[Alex Dydula]

I have had many receivers over the past 30yrs and just got a $640 SONY DA4ES receiver and absolutely amazed at how well it sounds and what it is capable of doing for this price....theres lots of great stuff out there and you can mortgage the farm on a lot of it.

Spend your bucks on the best speakers you can afford/fit in your room, and any one of these $500-$1500 receivers will do you just fine.

I have a PS Audio 2CH 200watt amp and a bunch of high end stuff, but none of it sounds thousands of dollars better than the cheap old SONY reciever, the listenting tests were don in my listening room with program material that I like to hear....not in a showroom with someone trying to sell me something they thougth was good.

Good luck in your search, aint this a wonderful pastime!

A.

 

[Mark All]

1. Set a price range and stick to it. There's always something up the price range that offers more.
2. Identify each receiver in your price range.
3. Do some internet research to compare features in the price range.
4. Pick two or three and find local authorized dealers with good return policies.
5. Listen patiently to the salesman but let his advice go in one ear and out the other. Only your ears in your listening environment can tell you what you like.
6. Start by buying the one you think looks best cosmetically.
7. Try it at home with your speakers in your room.
8. If you're happy with it, keep it. If it seems like there's something missing, or too much of something, return it and try another.
9. Don't regret what you end up with, because you may be going through the process again two years or sooner from now.

This was how it worked for me. I started out with the DA4ES but found it to be overly "bright" with my speakers. The Denon matched my speakers to me ears. Features tend to be comparable in the same price range.