Recievers..narrowed down to 3..some questions (1 Viewer)

[John Wes]

First off, let me say that I've learned a lot on this forum by reading a lot of your knowledgeable threads..
I've done a few searches and by them decided on a few makes to not bother looking at. (no names mentioned as I'm not looking to start a war.)
Given the features I'm looking for and the money I'm willing to spend, these three are what I've narrowed my search for..
Pioneer Elite Model VSX-47-TX
Denon AVR-4802
Marantz SR8200
The Marantz has no phono line in..so I'd need a preamp..no big deal...
Both the Pioneer and the Marantz have 24 bit 192 DAC's the Denon has 24 bit 96 kHz DAC's..
First question..what good is the 192 kHz DAC's if the DVD-A players disables the digital out for high resolution stereo? I must be misunderstanding something here..
Second question..due to where I live..there is no place to actually listen to all three side by side...I'm curious as to those with experience thinks of them. Especially the Pioneer vs the Marantz..
Third question..the Pioneer VSX-49TXi and the VSX-47TX look identical in power, and features..why is the 49 an extra thousand? I must be missing something there as well.
Thanks in advance for those taking the time to read this confused persons questions..

 

[John Wes]

As to the third question...I've found my answer. A lot more digital effects and so forth. Probably not something I'm really interested in.

Does anyone have any experience with the Marantz?

 

[Scott Merryfield]

I did not look at the Marantz, but I did compare the Denon 4802 with the Pioneer 47TX. I preferred the Pioneer for a few reasons -- front a/v inputs, MCACC feature, clean sound matched with my B&W 600 Series speakers.

The MCACC auto-calibration feature of the Pioneer is not to be underestimated. Running this helped tame some room frequency response issues I was experiencing.

 

[chrisden]

John,

I've had the SR8200 for about one year paired with Studio 60's. I think the sound quality of the receiver is incredible. If your listening tends towards music you will love this receiver.

 

[chrisden]

John,

Let me add that it is also great for HT. IMO, you probably can't go wrong with any of the above receivers you've mentioned.

 

[John Wes]

Thanks for all your replies.
I'm still curious as to the 24 bit 192 DACS....
Again, if anyone knows this answer, thanks in advance.
If your DVD-Audio player, disables the digital out..then what is the benifit of having 192 DACs built in the reciver?
And yes, chrisden, I'll use it for HT but mostly for music..at loud volumes when the wife is not home.

 

[John Wes]

Over 400 views...It seems that there isn't a clear answer for the DAC question or that the "right" person hasn't had a chance to respond yet..

Anyone?

 

[John Wes]

I do know that this is kind of new but I'm sure someone out there must be a somewhat expert on DAC's and so forth or maybe shuffle me a few links to sites that maybe specialize?

I've googled till my fingers bled....:b

 

[TommyL]

I also have the sr8200 and it is one great piece! It sounds great with HT and with music...I don't think you can go wrong with this one...tom

 

[DanS]

John,

I got a Marantz 7300 earlier this month, after being talked out of the 8200 - less money, same results. However I am running the 7300 as a pre-out to two Aragon amps for the front l&r channels - so that's my caveat.

The Pioneer sounded pretty harsh and forward, while the 4802 sounded fabulous- deeper and more involving soundstage by far, but the price point is quite a bit higher than the 7300. The 7300 two channel soundstage matched the Denon with various test cd's and with "real music" in my setup. With All channels and the various DPII, Neo, Circle Surround etc, the soundstage grew to enormous proportions, but I felt the music on CD lost some detail and resolution. My ears, of course.

I spent an extra $300 on Nordost interconnects and got the 7300. Obviously the dealer sill got $1200, but I think I spent the money in a more appropriate way for my setup. Replaced a B&K Pro10-MC pre-amp without missing a beat. I'll use it as a phono pre-amp when I can put my turntable back in the mix (two toddlers - no records for now).

I'm running a Denon DVD player and use the analog out for
cd's because the Denon decodes HDCD, and the digital out for some CD's and DVD's. Switching between the two can provide a lot of entertainment, and also drive you nuts - what ever your listening pleasure. Depending on your source, the Marantz gives you some very interesting options for playback

I think Marantz has the right music/video combination if your speaker setup works well with it. I have PSB mains, Mirage center and def Tech surrounds - a mix, but pretty consistent sound through the test modes.

I highly recommend the Marantz - if music is at all a priority in your system. Good remote too.

Hope this helps.
DanS

 

[NickSP]

Of the three receivers you mentioned, I'd definitely recommend the Pioneer Elite. As a previous owner of the 4802 I was not that impressed. The Elite seems to be built much stronger and I would take that for the self calibration features, etc. over the other two.

 

[Dave Ma]

I would give the Rotel a listen to. Better then the 3 you listed unless you want more then 5 channel. The Rotel will trounce those 3.IMO

 

[John McCutcheon]

IMBO = In My Biased Opinion

 

[NickSP]

The Rotel will trounce those 3.IMO

Why?
Do you know the real power specs of the three receivers John mentioned i.e. Denon,Pioneer Elite and marantz? Do you know something we don't or are you simply speculating!!

 

[Phil Mays]

Still no answer on the DAC question? I have asked this before and have never gotten a responce either.

Some short answers I got were that there is no processing over 96Khz so it seemed that 192 was overkill. However I have asked my local dealer that is trying to sell me a Denon 5800 and they highly speak of the internal processing but can give no specifics.

I want the answer to be clear but I have never heard one yet.

 

[John Wes]

By Phil
Still no answer on the DAC question? I have asked this before and have never gotten a response either.
Some short answers I got were that there is no processing over 96Khz so it seemed that 192 was overkill. However I have asked my local dealer that is trying to sell me a Denon 5800 and they highly speak of the internal processing but can give no specifics.
I want the answer to be clear but I have never heard one yet.

Glad someone else has the same question.
Well I decided on the Pioneer...I did like the Marantz also but decided I really didn't want to spend the money on a preamp for my turntable...I'm not made of money..yet.
I'm not a bit disappointed either...but I will say that I think (off topic) that the DVD-A industry needs to figure a better standard for their 5.1 stuff...some uses a center stage..some doesn't and some only use 2.1 and stereo..I wish the packages would explain what's going on other than me having to discover there isn't anything wrong with my speaker. lol
About the 192 DAC's...I'm wondering if they are even being used as the literature mention that both receivers also have 24 bit 96 kHz DACs......
Anyone?

 

[John Sal]

Love my PIONEER VSX-47TX, great sound in both Audio and Visual fields.

 

[John Wes]

One more shot on the 192 DAC question..

 

[NickSP]

John, I'll be the guinea pig here and leave myself open for further attacks (LOL).

I gather that the 192 or 96 is the sampling rate and 24 are the bits. The higher the number of the sampling rate the lesser it is prone to "clock jitter" thus improving the Signal to noise ratio. So in short, the sampling rate is doubled but I do not think that one's ears can tell any difference because 96Khz is a pretty high sampling rate in itself.
On the other hand, a 196Khz sampling rate might be benificial to DVD-Audio or SACD which are high quality Audio formats. Someone might correct me on this one but I belive if you are using the 5.1/6.1/7.1 analog ins on your prepro or receiver for DVD-A/SACD, then the sampling rate depends on the DACs built in the DVD-A/SACD player. A receiver's DACs are good for sampling the digital feeds it gets thru the equipment connected to the receiver via digital inputs and in which case the receiver then samples it at the rate of the DACs. Also the sampling rate might have something to do with the recorded material too which is being sampled by the DACs.
Anyway, I doubt if you would tell any difference between the 2 sampling rates.

 

[Peter Jessee]

One more shot on the 192 DAC question..

All right, I'll take a stab.

I have no idea what you need the 192 kHz DACs for. There are some DVD-V's that encode the sound in 24/96 PCM stereo for higher resolution/better sound. I've never heard of a DVD-V with 192 kHz encoding, though - I don't think the format supports this speed.

You're right that DVD-A doesn't output a digital signal (except in special proprietary circumstances) and none of these receivers has the MLP decoder necessary to decode the DVD-A program, anyway. Some receivers will "upsample" a digital input (say from a CD at 16 bit/44.1 kHz) to it's highest supported level (typically 24 bit/176.1 kHz for CD, 24 bit/192 kHz for 48 kHz DVD-V audio) and then convert to analog. This is supposed to give better sound, reduce jitter, and eliminate greenhouse gases (I made up the last one, but I've heard wilder claims before).

In the specsmanship game of selling receivers, manufacturers try to cover every checklist item, and 192 kHz DACs have become one of those items. I don't think you'd hear any difference between a WELL-EXECUTED 96 kHz and a WELL-EXECUTED 192 kHz DAC when listening to a CD or DVD-V. All three of these manufacturers know their way around a DAC, so all of them should sound good.

Enjoy the Pioneer, but don't think that the Denon would sound worse because of a paltry 96 kHz DAC.

Peter