STR-DA5000ES, AVR-3805, RX-V24000 ! Ahh! Help! (1 Viewer)

[DarrylM]

Which is actually what makes them valuable, as far as I am concerned. Lab tests push the performance envelope of a product, so you can see how it holds up under demanding conditions and not just casual listening. They also provide an objective, unbiased benchmarking process to compare multiple products. After all, how often can you take every receiver you want to audition home for an A/B comparison?

Personally, I don't feel the need to listen to a receiver if I know that it delivers reference level power with a flat frequency response down to a reasonable load (impedance) with a minimum of noise, which is something a thorough bench test can tell me. I don't want coloration in any of the components of my system, so I am not out for a "bright this" to match my "warm that." I don't want to have to mix and match components and that sort of thing. I just want to hear my CDs and DVDs as the recording and mastering engineers intended. But that's just me, and I realize that others feel differently.

 

[Dave Moritz]

While a completly agree that most recievers are better off with external power amps. Still multi channel recievers made for the average consumer have improved over the years. My current receiver is not all that great compaired to others but it does do a decent job. I currently use a Yamaha RX-V995 that does a decent job at pushing a pair of Altec VOTT that have dual 15" woofer each, and my center channel and 2 pair of rear channel speakers (5.1 config). I have had a few people bring there recievers over and try them out with my speakers. My ultimate config will use a pre/pro with seperate power amplifiers. I also currently use a Sony DVP-9000 ES dvd player and while it is a very well built unit and is nice. I am ready to even replace the Sony ES with something better.

I have tried different receivers with my speakers ( Denon AVR-3803, Denon AVR-5803, Pioneer VSX-35 TX, Sony STR-DA5000ES & Sony STR-DA4ES). The Denon 5803 did a great job and the 3803 did a decent job as well. The Sony receivers did not seem to do so great. I realize that there is a difference in power output and the amps are different between the 5000ES and DA4ES. But I felt there was a difference in amp performance and over all sound. I also realize that the average person does not push there recevievers capability, and that I may be an exeption to the rule.

And yes Denon is not the only one to slightly exagerate power outputs as most companies do. And I also agree that most receivers will not deleiver full rated power to each channel. Especially when a reciever trys to draw power from a small single power supply. But the only thing that anyone can do is choose a product that is in the price range and one that they are happy with. Currently I do not beleive that digital amps can compete with a good solid state or tube amp. This most likely will change in the near future once the design has been perfected.

Mike~Sileck, I hope you get something that you are happy with and that works out for you. Let us know what you end up with and how it ends up working out for you.

 

[Evan M.]

I find all of this talk about "all channels driven" amusing!! When the %^$^ do you really drive all channels? If it is from movie watching it will almost never happen. When it does, it is from a huge explosion or something and that will last for what....a second or two? Lets concentrate on sound and features and get away from this all channels driven thing. This has been talked about to death around here. I am sorry but no receiver will rank there watts perfectly.....yes H/K I know I know but if you really look at it there receivers are jusr as loud as the tested receivers are. The others stretch the truth and the wattage is brought down to what H/K really is advertised as (for the most part). If people are sooooo concerned about volume (this ranks as #500 in my list os importance....first 499 is SOUND ) than get an external amp.

 

[Fernando Saa]

I agree, I always wonder if my receiver (Yamaha 2400), sounds so loud and clean, when will I need more, when I have hearing damage?, I feel I'll need to upgrade whenever I want better quality in sound at high volumes, not in high volumes alone. For that I'll buy a el-cheapo Pioneer receiver (like the one I had, VSX-D608), and run it till it fries my speakers (which it already did to my Def-Techs). It was a good receiver and I doubted I'd get a noticeable difference with the Yamaha, and boy was I soooo surprised!. Sound quality and features and upgradability where the key points not to return it.

 

[Wayne Ernst]

If you cooked your Def-Tech speakers, you were probably introducing a lot of distortion through them via the receiver. If you really insist on clear sound at very high volumes, you should be running separates. Get a good amp to cleanly drive your speakers.

 

[Fernando Saa]

Wayne:
That's exactly what happened to my speakers. I already knew that one. That's why I upgraded.
I didn' say VERY high volumes, you see high volumes is an introspective point of view for all of us here at the forum, for me loud is 15db, for some, listening at reference is the standard. I've tried my receiver at near reference when I'm home alone and thought my Yamaha handled it beautifully AND clean compared head to head to my Pioneer which I still have. Again, 35 watts per channel all channels driven (I think that's what the actual power was found from the reviewers from Sound and Vision) is a lot of power for what you really need it or I really need it: enjoying a good movie without straining your ears. When I build my own personal dedicated theater then I'll probably try to compete loudwise with the commercial ones.

 

[David Judah]

DarrylM,

Digital amp technology has come along way in the past few years, so I think you might want to do some reading on it. Some high end companies are investing in the technology and looking for it to replace conventional amps down the road. Some of them are even measuring better than their traditional counterparts(not that that is everything)and there are some obvious, inherent advantages to digital.

Yes, some companies were/are producing them for low cost/weight, but not everyone is developing them for low end applications.

I'm not saying Sony has solved all of the problems that have plaugued digital amps in the past, but it is worth considering, IMO.

There has been some talk at Audio Asylum and AVS that even the low end Panasonics with some tweaking can yield excellent sound quality for the money. Some even went so far as to call them "Krell Killers." I'm sure that's an exaggeration, but it piqued my interest because it was audiophiles that had some great gear saying it, not just folks looking for sound quality on the cheap.

It might warrant some further investigation.

DJ

 

[DarrylM]

If a $250 Panasonic home-theater-in-a-box can produce better (or even comparable) sound to Krell, then I would say that Krell has some serious issues. I also think that calling them "Krell Killers" would be a bit silly, since I can't imagine Panasonic and Krell targeting the same demographics. That would be like calling the new Saturn sports coupe a "Ferrari Killer" or something.

 

[JackS]

Five or ten years from now, analog amps will probably in the niche market along with vinel, tubes and possibly integrated amps. The purist will still maintain present day technology and insist that it's better. I think it's eventually going to be replaced. Time marches on. Were on 2nd or 3rd gen. digital already so huge improvements in a relatively short time span has already occured. It's evolution that analog will not be able to keep up with. I could be wrong but, I doubt it. We shall see.

 

[DarrylM]

I completely agree. As the world is slowly overrun by cheap plastic crap, I'm sure that digital amps will indeed take over.

 

[David Judah]

It was their stand alone receiver, not an HTIB(I think it retailed for $399)and what if it was an owner of both saying it, not just the Saturn owner?

Incidently, I doubt it outperformed the high end units in absolute terms, but the point was, it held its own for around 1/20th of the price.

Welcome to the brave new digital world.

DJ

 

[DarrylM]

I have seen the future, and it isn't pretty.

 

[MuneebM]

I could not agree more! Mike, also keep in mind that the Yamaha and Denon offer auto-calibration and parametric equalization which may really help the sound quality of your speakers. I can say for a fact that the parametric EQ of the Yamaha really helped the midrange of my speakers, and I have the exact same speakers as you. Personally, I'd stay away from the Sony and only consider the Yamaha, Denon, equivalent Pioneer Elite, and if you're really concerned about power, which you always seem to be, get the hefty H/K 7300. As others have said, don't buy the receiver solely on wattage ratings, they're overrated, unless its an H/K receiver.

 

[Dave Moritz]

I would agree that compairing a Panasonic to a Krell is very funny. I was at CES this year in Las Vegas and even after hearing the Sony STR-DA9000 ES I would not even put that receiver in the same league as the Krell. While the Sony sound decent at low levels. It does not hold a candle at louder listening levels. And the thd rating at full bandwith at .15% is not so great. Digital switching amps have improved and they will only get better. But at this time I would not put any of them up there with Krell, Meridian, McIntosh, Mark Levison or a few other solid state amplifiers out there. I especially would not compair a low cost Panasonic to something high end. While Panasonic makes nice displays and dvd players for the average consumer. Calling a Panasonic digital swithing amp a Krell Killer

Digtal switching amps will most likely improve and just might surpass solid state and tube amplifiers one day. But for now I would not invest in that technology. And especially not a product that had lots of plastic and was built like a paper weight.

 

[Fernando Saa]

I wouldn't dare to call my Yamaha a Krell killer because I respect them big league boys, but one thing's for sure, my hats off to Yamaha! you don't have to spend a lot of money nowadays to enjoy HT and how!. I could have gone for the 1400 but I had the money...and I'm crazy...but if I had not had the money I'm sure I'd be happy with it too. I say start small then grow. You'll notice a difference and that's the rewarding part about it isn't it?. In the more distant than near future, I know I'll upgrade and it will be to separates. First will be my front projector, then I'll match my speakers, then....

 

[Shiu]

That may be true, but also keep in mind that if you compare a Yamaha 2400 to a a similarly priced HKAVR430, you may find that even after discounting the power claimed by the Yamaha's 120W X 7, say by 40%, you still have as much power as the HKAVR430. If you compare their 1, or 2 channels, for sure I will bet my money on the Yamaha. HK does seem to have power supplies that can handle nice all channel driven rating, but it does not look like they under state the ratings of their amps that much. The AVR7200 is a different story, it is impressive in 1, 2, and all channel driven ratings.

 

[David Judah]

It interesting you mention that receiver. I was revisiting some of those Panasonic digital receiver threads at AVS, Audio Asylum, and Audio Circle, because I'm getting Panasonic's new flagship DVD player as a warranty replacement which has HDMI, and I was thinking about trying their new receiver that has HDMI(the $399 SA-XR70)to mate with it for DVD-A.

One poster had an AVR7200 and bought an older model SA-XR45 because of the buzz. He actually preferred the sound of the Panasonic and felt the digital amp had more authority in the bass region. I also saw others who had compared the same Panasonic to their mid-line receivers and even some mid-line seperate amps($2000 and under)reporting similiar preferences.

Now to be fair, there is obviously a subjective component and some who tried it weren't as impressed when compared to some high end gear(some weren't impressed at all), and as expected, it didn't fare well through the analog inputs when an analog to digital conversion was required, but it was suprising to me that when used as just an amp, it got alot of praise by guys who had some very nice(and very expensive)tube and SS gear.

There is even a guy who is doing a $750 mod(for an under $300 receiver), which some who have had it done have said it does compete with their higher end stuff.

It's very intersting to say the least.

DJ

 

[DarrylM]

I think we need to remember that the sound of a receiver is influenced a great deal by the preamp section, particularly at lower volume levels. Consequently, when auditioning a receiver, you are auditioning the entire product, not just a digital or solid state amp. Also, "buzz" in that HK is probably less of a result of inferior amplification and more of a result of either electrical interference or DSP processing noise.

 

[David Judah]

By "buzz", I meant the popularity of the Panasonic receivers in some circles, not a noise produced by the HK.

If you are running into the multi-channel inputs, there is very little the signal has to go through to the amp section(if it's competently designed), so it is the main variable.

DJ

 

[DarrylM]

Yes, if you are using the multi-channel inputs and if it is a pure analog bypass or pass-through system. I haven't seen the receivers you are referring to, but I wouldn't be surprised if the multi-channel inputs are indeed processed digitally for bass management and that sort of thing.