Time to get a receiver to match my new speakers (1 Viewer)

[Brock]

I just picked up a pair of NHT SB1s and SB2s, and I'd like to match up a decent receiver with them. My room is not very big - 21 x 11 - and I'd like to use the receiver for both music listening and HT. Would a Yamaha work well with the NHTs, or would that combo be too bright? What about HK; is that a better match?

Budget is a mere $300-$400, so please recommend some good USED receivers in this range - (there's got to be a few that sound really good for the price). Please try to include model numbers, as I'm fairly new to what's currently out there.

I appreciate your help.

 

[Brock]

For instance, what about the HK AVR 130? Anyone have any experience with this one? Only 45 watts, though - but I hear it still sounds pretty full.

Would this complement the NHTs?

 

[Paul S]

There is no such thing as matching a receiver to your speakers as far as brightness goes. Those that think so don't know very much about audio. Any receiver you purchase will work just fine with your speakers.

On double blind tests the golden ear boys can't tell a Sony from a Denon. Incidentally, the Yamaha is not a bright receiver nor is any other that I know of. ALL receivers are made to be neutral.

 

[Drew_W]

Maybe, but they don't come out equal. Compare a Yamaha to an H/K and you'll be able to tell a difference. Or well, I did. And I heard less of a difference (but a difference nonetheless) between my Pioneer Elite and the Elite coupled to a Rotel amp. Then I swapped out the Elite for a Yamaha receiver as preamp, and again it sounded different. So the amp can make as much of a difference as speakers.

 

[Harold Wazzu]

you can get an H/k 330 on ebay for $400 shipped

 

[Paul S]

Drew, If a receiver were designed to be either warm or bright, the engineers would probably try to hide it in the specs. A significant frequency aberration isnt desirable to most people and engineers know better than to try and design their amps to give an uneven response.

Incidentally, how do you know your system sounded different? Aural memory is somewhere in the area of 5 seconds. Unless you had both units on an A/B comparison and volume matched exactly,you would have absolutely no way to make a comparison between any equipment.

On double blind tests Harmon Kardon would sound identical to the Yamaha.

 

[ScottCHI]

paul s

you're wrong

 

[Wayne Ernst]

This is not a very accurate statement. My new Yamaha compared to my previous H/K receiver reveals very different sounds. The H/K is definitially more laid back. While the Yamaha isn't excessively bright, I do like the dialoge in movies much better with the Yamaha.

Now cables ... it's arguable as to whether there is a difference between a $15.00 cable and a cable costing $200.00.

 

[Paul S]

"The H/K is definitially more laid back" Now who exactly would want a receiver that doesn't reproduce a recording exactly? If an H/K is laid back that must mean that it is not reproducing all the sound that it should and I seriously doubt that it isn't.

Incidentally, I am currently using a Yamaha RXV1400 and don't find it any different audibly than any other receiver I have ever used including H/K. I do not know of any receiver that colors an audio signal. That would be highly undesirable. I am not talking about sound field processing modes which is an entirely different thing.

 

[Drew_W]

So if I am to take that as saying that all receivers/amps sound the same, why do people buy Levinson/Krell/whatever ? I could get me some cheap monoblocks for a couple hundred bucks that have the same "features" and save myself lots and lots of money. I could probably buy a car with the difference.........

 

[ScottCHI]

paul s

same questions. are you saying the only difference between receivers or amps is the "features" they offer? why are there at least 7 (that i can think of off the top of my head) quite viable low to mid-level ht receiver companies out there? and, as drew said, what the heck drives the high-end audiophile market? all those people are "suckers", i suppose. nope. someone who bought a particular brand $5000 amp over the other brand's $5000 amp bought it for more reasons than just it's "features" alone.

sorry. there's no such thing as a "neutral" receiver/amp. great idea, but that's all it is; an ideal.

 

[Paul S]

I’m not sure why you believe that a $5,000.00 Krell or some huge monoblock amp will amplify information from a recording any differently than any other amp or why you believe it will make that extracted information sound better. However, if you feel that is the way to go, go for it.

When such testing was done at the Hirsh/Houck labs under controlled conditions no one could reliably tell any differencs between receivers.

 

[ScottCHI]

something drives the high end market, doesn't it?

wonder what that is? hmmmmm................

 

[John Garcia]

You are smoking some good stuff I guess. If you don't feel it makes a difference, they why didn't you just get a $199 Sony receiver?

More information is not EXTRACTED, it is PRESERVED. You are mixing two things here as well, amplfication and DAC/processing. DACs make a HUGE difference in how one receiver sounds vs another, when using digital connections. Quality amplification also has a significant effect on the way a given set of speakers will perform. I GUARANTEE anything from Krell will sound better than your 1400.

At this price point, I'd recommend the Marantz SR8400, or 8300 which should be on clearance right now. NAD T763 or 773, and Rotel 1056 or 1067.

 

[Drew_W]

I have a Yamaha RXV630 running as a preamp coupled to a Rotel 1075 amp. There is a marked difference between the sound that comes out of the Rotel, and that which comes out of the Yamaha on its own. It is not a HUGE HUGE HUGE difference, but there is a difference, especially in the definition and tightness of the bass.

 

[Drew_W]

Might be cheaper to get some of that than to buy high-end audio!

 

[Mike SJ]

"Now who exactly would want a receiver that doesn't reproduce a recording exactly?"

Obviously alot of people because receivers are selling like the smokeable stuff some others are talking ablout.




"I’m not sure why you believe that a $5,000.00 Krell or some huge monoblock amp will amplify information from a recording any differently than any other amp or why you believe it will make that extracted information sound better. However, if you feel that is the way to go, go for it. "

- LAWS OF PHYSICS


Paul, have you ever compared a receiver against a pre-pro setup?

 

[Drew_W]

Well, there are excellent receivers out there that could best some cheap pre-pro setups, but if you buy smart, you get a great return on your investment.

And there are a whole bunch of consumers who buy blind because they think something is good. The story of the guy at Future Shop (a fellow customer) who was bragging to me about how he was going to mate the top of the line H/K receiver with the top of the line Bose cube system and be in total H/T heaven. Well, expensive isn't necessarily always better, and he could have done an awful lot better for the price (around $4-5 grand Canadian). They don't even bother to listen to a system when they buy it. That's why entry-level receivers just sell and sell...

 

[Mike SJ]

Well, there are excellent receivers out there that could best some cheap pre-pro setups, but if you buy smart, you get a great return on your investment.

I run a $130 pre/pro with a 5 channel B&K amp and I'd put it up against ANY receiver.

 

[ScottCHI]

i don't really think he thinks a $199 sony will equal the performance of a $5000 anything. that's obviously wrong.

but i think he does think that 2 different $5000 amps will sound identical and that people who are willing to spend that sort of money are not very discerning customers.

receivers/amps are different. that's why you have a choice when you shop for one.