What's new

is denon the superior musical receiver over hk and pioneer? (1 Viewer)

Nick V

Second Unit
Joined
May 7, 2002
Messages
421
If Music reproduction is your main interest for this receiver (which it appears to be), I would also have to recommend Marantz. I currently own a Yamaha, which IMO is better for HT than the Marantz was, but isn't as good as the Marantz for music. I also auditioned Denon, Sony ES, and Pioneer Elite, and the Marantz was the best out of all of them for music. What was even better for music IMO was the Arcam receiver (can't remember model no.), and the Rotel 1055. Those are a little pricier though.
 

Mark Dickerson

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
May 10, 2003
Messages
128
To Myo and Ed:

I am also looking for a very musical AVR because I also use my system for 80-90% music and only occasionally do I use it for HT, so the more musical the system, the more I like it.

Last week, I went to a local dealer, who I thought was pretty cool. He did not try to steer me to a particular brand, but set up four receivers, a H/K 525, NAD 742, Onkyo 700 (I think) and a Denon 1802. He calibrated the volume on each so that the sound level was equal and he played a variety of material through the same speaker system to see what I thought.

For me, the hands down winner was the NAD, the smallest unit of the bunch (50 wpc; MSRP $649). On HT, it had the best resolution and detail of any of the units--by far. It was like listening to high quality separates rather than a receiver. The H/K was second. It's sound was warmer, but it was a bit fuzzier compared to the NAD (which for some people may be a good thing). I was most disappointed in the Onkyo, which appeared to be the best value based upon the feature set for the price. I found the sound to be thin and unconvincing (sorta like someone speaking through cupped hands). The Denon's sound was a bit better than the Onkyo, but it seemed to lack power in the complex musical passages. I certainly didn't like it as much as the H/K, much less the NAD. I could listen to that NAD all day.

I am told by a dealer friend of mine that Denon has a real winner in their 3803, but what makes that receiver so good (power supply and DACs) does not translate down to their less expensive units. My problem is that I also have a budget of about $800, so I am not able to afford the 3803. Maybe the 2803 is good enough, but I have yet to hear it. I went to listen to a Marantz 7300 today, but it sounded like just another "me, too" receiver. Dealer wants me to buy it based upon its feature set, but after listening to it through two different speaker systems, I did not hear the resolution I heard on the NAD. I may be being too hard on the Marantz since it was at a different dealer and I did not have the ability to compare it to other receivers, so I will try it again where I can listen and compare.

Anyways, that has been my experience. I hope you find my input helpful. Everyone hears things a bit differently , so I would second the advice given above to trust your own ears. I certainly do not think any of these receivers is a bad product, and if someone said they bought any one of these brands, I have no doubt that they got something worth listening to. In that sense, there is no "best", but some products have a more appealing sound to me and that is what I have been looking for in my own AVR search. Myo, I would also recommend that once you think you have found the receiver you want, see if you can take it home for a few days and demo it with your own speakers in your own home. Sometimes things will sound different than you thought it did when you bought it. Best of luck with your own search.
 

Jamey F

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Dec 20, 2002
Messages
200
Try to listen to the 3803 if you are interested in the Denon line. There are significant upgrades from the 2803 as I have recently researched. I purchased the 3803 when they were first available, so the 2803 wasn't even out. I'm glad the 3803 came out first. I have really enjoyed mine so far.

If $800 is you budget, the 3803 will probably be a bit much, but if you can squeeze another hundred or so, I and others have been able to get deals for an authorized purchased of a 3803 for around $900. If htis is doable, give the 3803 an audition.
 

Albert Damico

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
118
Mark:

I have a Yamaha RX-V2095 receiver and it sounds great. Built like a tank and really drives. I use it for my HT in my bedroom. I also have seperates. A Sherbourn 7/2100 amp and B&K Ref 50 pre/pro. This drives my HT setup in my media room and is so dynamic that I feel like I am in the action. But in my music room, I have an NAD T-752. It doesn't matter what speakers I hook up, it is hands down the best sounding receiver I have ever heard for music reproduction. I have auditioned Marantz, and several other receivers and seperates, but when connected to similiar speakers, I have heard nothing that can beat the NAD. Since the T-762 came out, you can pick up an NAD T-752 in your price range. Give it a listen. 70 watts per channel, but it is VERY conservativly rated. Of course this is just my opinion. But anybody wanting primarily music, should give NAD a good listen.
 

Myo K

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
189
jamey and mark,

thank you for the friendly replies, even though some of you may have disagreements, i appreciate the non-abruptive tone in your posts.

i also seem to have struck a nerve with some people, i was going to assume there would be some disagreements, but this thread has gotten more attention then i thought it would :)

regarding the 3 opinions i took in, the opinions were based on those three individuals and their experience on how sound in music should actually sound like, and in their opinions denon had the most accurate sound reproduction with receiver"wise" out of the 3 brands. this is their opinion btw, yes i udnerstand there will always be conflicting opinions.

some of you raise the question of, "do musicians have better knowledge about how music should sound like then someone that is not a musician?"

i think that speaks for itself. there is a difference of what sounds pleasing to the listeners ears and what sounds more accurate to a live performance from sound reproduction are two very different things. given that as long as the receiver sounds good to you, thats all that matters right? thats very true, but in my case id like a receiver that sounds best based on how closely the receiver reproduces the musical sound.

If you have sources that you feel are better then why are you here?
that comment was uncalled for sir. i guess by your logic, freedom to express an idea, opinion or ask for other audio opinions from people with similar interests is prohibited? is conflicting opinions also prohibited? you have truely twisted my words and my posts intentions, judging from your replies, you let it get the best of you,

i thank you for your wonderful contributions to this thread.
 

Myo K

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
189
jamey, i was considering the 3803,

but i seriously think that receiver will be overkill for my current speaker set up, i think the 2803 will be more then sufficient for me and driving my book shelf speakers. in fact if i can find a 2802 thats really cheap id probably opt for that ;)

it actually took mne 5 months to save up enough money and build the 5.2 speaker set. extra spending cash is difficult to come by for me, an 800 dollar receiver will take me about 4 months to save up for, so the 3803 would probably be out of the question for me, id like to get this system up and running by the end of the year :)
 

RobWil

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 17, 2003
Messages
733
but now i will be getting the denon 2803
So what is it you want to hear from us? Why did you come back and ask for more advice if you've already made up your mind and criticized the advice you already got? I can't believe I'm the only one here that feels this way!
If you read my first post you will see where I gave very good opinions. My main point was that there is no best. It's too subjective. Instead of having your friends listen to each one, why don't you do the listening and then pick the one you like best? I know you would feel better if everyone would agree and pick the Denon for you.....that way you wouldn't ever second guess your choice. But it isn't like that my friend and maybe on your set of speakers and to your ears the Denon will, or maybe it won't sound the best.
Good luck with your decision...I hope you end up with something you really like.
 

Cagri

Second Unit
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
415
Maybe the 2803 is good enough, but I have yet to hear it.
Maybe it is, but I would like to know why if someone listened to the 1802, 1803 and 2803 and share his findings with me please. I thought the DACs in all three were same and the only difference -excluding extra features and inputs- was the 10watts extra power of 2802 and 2803 which I assume wouldn't effect the sound.
 

Myo K

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
189
Robwil,

imo, the only people that may have been offended by the comment are the ones that fall in the category that i pointed out. the ones that have only hk525 or pioneers elite 45 receivers and make their recommendations based soley on their purchase, possibly finding even more justification in their investment. Those that have come to a conclusion with their recommendations through auditioning certain brands should not be offended since you obviously dont fall in that category correct? as with my personal sources, theyve come to the conclusion from auditioning hk pioneer and denon.

in regards to the "will be getting denon" its a statement i made because it is a choice i have made, have you ever read someone post "im getting jbl this or panasonic that?" its the same difference. we are entitled to an opinion and we are allowed to voice a decision we make correct? if there is disagreement it couldve been handled differently similar to the other posts made in this thread, without resorting, to "why do you even post here" type comments.

once again i apologize for any comment that may have been offensive, i know the subject could get a little touchy, especially when it comes down to owners attesting to their investments.
 

Myo K

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
189
cagri,

i dont know how true this statement is, but a sales rep at goodguys told me that the difference between the 1803 and 2803 is much larger then the 2803 and 3803.

another sales rep from a different store told me the same thing, something to do with difference in reserve power and reliable current? im not an audiophile nor a techie, so i wouldnt be able to explain it to you.

but i beleive there is a noticeable difference in weight between the 1803 and 2803, and the build quality of the 1803 feels and looks a lot cheap and flimsy compared to the 2803 which feels solid, the 2803 and 3803 have then same look and feel.
 

Cagri

Second Unit
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
415
myo, did the dealer made that statement in regards to sound quality or overall?


I actually couldn't spot a difference in the looks or feels between 1802 and 2802. In regards to sound quality, I am not an audiopfile nor a techie too, but what I've been told by the salesguy is; same DACs were used in both 1802 and 2802. I checked Denon's site and regarding audio, all I can see is 10 watts difference in power, 2802's signal to noise ratio is 102db while 1802's is 100db, and there's a "High Power Custom Transistor" in 2802 which doesn't exist in 1802. I don't know if these differences count for better sound, but I'm sharing with you what I've been told and that is the sound from both these receivers is same when compared in an A/B test. I haven't been able to perform the test myself as the dealer didn't have the 2802. Even if he did and had I listened both to see 2802's sound was better, I would still have gotten the 1802 as the price of 2802 was twice 1802. I still wonder out of curiosity if this is the fact or not....
 

MikeRP

Supporting Actor
Joined
Aug 8, 2002
Messages
514
WOW what a conversation!

My .02 cents: Buy the receiver based upon the features you like the most not the sound. IMHO, you can't go into a store where someone has setup 3 or 4 receivers and say one sounds better than the others.

The reason I say this is that these receivers need to be lived with a while to tweak them to their best........they are complicated. I've been in many stores and I can guarantee you that, lets say, in my case, I have the Pioneer 45TX, the guys in the stores don't know enough about this receiver to set it up properly. Hands Down. It took me months of talking on this forum and others to owners, calling Pioneer almost daily, at times, to really understand what the 45TX was doing.

Also, I TRULY believe, given enough time, I can go in YOUR room and make all three of these receivers sound the same.

The question is: Can we make one of these receivers REALLY sound better than the others. Since sound is subjective to all of us, I don't know.

I had the Onkyo 595 and thought it was nice, I had the HK 520, and I know it was very good. I wanted the HK 525 or Denon 3803, but alas, I couldn't wait and I brought home a Pioneer 45TX last September.

AND I'm not looking back. It is truly the best receiver I've EVER owned. There is NOTHING I don't like about it from the remote to the sound.

Good Luck..........Just sweat like the rest of us over spending the bucks.

Mike
 

Cagri

Second Unit
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
415
Hey Mike are you a musician or what?? :)

Well, sound is subjective, yes and I don't think anyone would disagree... But you can easily discuss the quality and specs of the parts used in a receiver which effect the quality of sound. Quality meaning accuracy. One may prefer a receiver which produces a sound which is less accurate, there you can talk about sound being subjective but the accuracy=quality of sound is not subjective IMO. At least what I'm trying to find out at this point of this thread is( and I jumped in because there was a comparison between several Denon models) are there any differences regarding parts used in these different models which may affect the sound quality? I was told 'no', but I read here people suggesting 'yes'... Now I need to clarify that and I think that's why this forum is here for :)
 

Angelo.M

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2002
Messages
4,007
...but the accuracy=quality of sound is not subjective IMO.
Pu-lease.

Here it comes, the subjective/objective thing again. I'm ducking for cover.

Cagri, I suggest you seek and find the other, massive threads in which this stuff was hashed out endlessly with, of course, no resolution. We will always agree to disagree about this topic around here.

Bottom, bottom-line, and the last you'll hear from me in this thread: just go out and listen, and buy what sounds good to you. You will never find the answer you are looking for, other than between your own ears...
 

Cagri

Second Unit
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
415
Bottom, bottom-line, and the last you'll hear from me in this thread: just go out and listen, and buy what sounds good to you. You will never find the answer you are looking for, other than between your own ears...
I think you have misunderstood me. I am talking about the specifications of the parts used in the units. I am not talking about the "sound" itself. This is a technical matter, and it isn't subjective. What is subjective is the 'sound' itself. I am questioning the parts used in two different receivers. If they're same, the sound they produce will be same. But if they have different parts in them which effect the sound, then they may sound different and then we can reach the subjective part of the matter; who prefers which, which one sounds better. Now that is subjective. If you compare two receivers and one is rated 100w at 1kHz +-3db wile the other is rated 100w 20Hz-20 kHz +-2db then you can be very objective and say that the sound produced by the latter is more accurate.

Anyway I already made my decision and bought a receiver which I am very happy with, and don't really want to start a thread in someone else's thread. I still would be happy if someone can enlighten us about the specs of the denon models mentioned...

I am editing my post just to add one more thing. I know even at this stage this may be a start for a discussion between objectivists and subjectivists. I have no intention as such, and I know that objectivists think that all gear will sound same as long as they have same specs, regardless of the parts used inside them. But I am one step behind this point, what I ask is, is everything in two different denon receivers, 1802 and 2802 same? If the answer is yes then even the subjectivists would agree that they can not sound different. If the answer is no, then from that point on there may be a discussion of objectivist/subjectivist camps, which is absolutely not necessary...
 

Evan M.

Supporting Actor
Joined
Feb 26, 2002
Messages
910
WOW!! This thread took right off. Actually Rob, I agree with you totaly. This thread just had danger written all over it the second I saw the title!! Myo, when you say that you have a problem with people who have these receivers you mention and make a biased responce, that is a pretty rough statement in itself. You are basicaly assuming that these people did not audition other receivers and just chose them for whatever reason. The reason they may seem biased is that they have heard the other receivers and eventually chose what they liked the best. By them sharing their opinions on the receivers is their opinion from probably a lot of auditioning. At least I hope. It sounds like from all of your posts that you are purchasing the Denon without auditioning it or anything else. If this is the case then you fall in the category that you are against. I certainly hope this is not the case and will give you the benefit of the doubt. So since I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, tell us what you heard on the denon that you didn't hear on the H/K and the Pioneer? I am curious on your findings since I will be looking at receivers soon for my friend. Have a good day.
 

Jamey F

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Dec 20, 2002
Messages
200
There are significant DAC upgrades in the 3803 over the 2803. Also, the 3803 adds upconversion from composite or S-video to component video. The 3803 also offers more power, but in a bedroom this wouldn't be an issue.

I believe the 2803 isn't as feature rich as the 3803, and should not (I haven't heard the 2803) sound as good with good speakers. I purchased the 3803 to serve as an AVR for a while until I can afford an external amp. I will then use it as a pre/pro. I wouldn't think of using the 2803 in that role. There are a few features that could be added to the 3803 to make it better (autocalibration, better remote, firewire, more component inputs), but the 3803 is one piece of impressive HT gear. I urge you to at least consider it and give it a fair listen if you are going with Denon.
 

Jack Briggs

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 3, 1999
Messages
16,805
I hate to play the heavy hand, but the thread will be closed if the bickering continues.

To the thread's originator: You've come here asking for advice, while the title of your thread works under the assumption that there is a "sound" to audio electronics in the first place (about which, as you may have gathered, there is no consensus at HTF). Then you criticize the advice you receive, and seem surprised when others express offense. Seems like a no-brainer to me. Be grateful and add the advice to your internal database and go buy a receiver.
 

Myo K

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
189
Hi evan, thanks for replying :)

the reason behind all the madness, was to read more opinions opposite of mine, maybe make me rethink about it, and if i read more explainations it would allow me to understand the reasoning behind the opinions? im sure there are many musicians here! which maks me find their replies even more insightful, whether its in agreement or disagreement, and opinion is welcome. im sorry for the negativity my post started off with, but the demeaner of my post also welcomed conflicting opinions and i actually encouraged people to disprove my opinion :)
---

cagri,

Thats what i mean! the whole high current low current thing, the 2803 has high current while the 1803 is not really, that would effect the receivers reserve power, no? then the 2803 would be likely to cause clipping while driving speakers?
 

RobWil

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 17, 2003
Messages
733
In the original post it was not mentioned which Yamaha or which Denon was actually compared to the H/K 325/525 and Pioneer Elite 45TX. I know from auditioning the H/K 325 and 525 that there is virtually no difference in sound between the two. I have not auditioned Denon, but from what I have read and from what I have heard here, there seems to be a difference between the lower and higher model Denon, and have heard similar reports vs lower/higher model Sony, Pioneer, Onkyo, etc.
In one thread Myo mentioned a budget of $400-$500 which would rule out many of the models mentioned. Thus, I think it would be wise for him to audition, or make sure his friends audition if that's the case, the different brand/models in his price range. In this case we're talking about the Denon 1803, the H/K AVR225, the Onkyo TX-SR600, the Pioneer VSX-811/912, etc.
The 2803 goes for around $800, the 3803 well over $1000, the Pioneer Elite 45TX well over $1000, the H/K 325 for around $800. etc. You can find deals and buy refurb/used and maybe get close to your budget on some of these. I'd just be interested to see what Denon was auditioned and would suggest that it be something in your price range as all Denons, evidently, don't necessarily sound the same.
What I'm trying to imply is that someone can't just make a blanket statement and say 'Denon is best for music' without knowing which Denon and compared to what other brand/model.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,646
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top