Worth the upgrade to a RXV-2400? (1 Viewer)

[Jesse Sharrow]

I have a yamaha RXV-440. I love the way it sounds with my boston VR-950's. Very clean. But at louder volumes some movies make it sound like its distorting. Now is it worth it to upgrade my reciever? Or should I wait till I can afford speperates which is proably 5 yrs down the road. Im thinking of doing this for my B-day, either upgrade the reciever or get an SVS sub. So thats my dillema.

The 2400 has YPAO wich is cool. Also it has S-video in which I need to get video from my comp. So give me some opinions.

 

[NickSP]

I read that the 2400 came out testing only 35W or so driven with all channels driven but I can't find the post where I read it. I think the 2400 is a fantastic receiver myself and believe it is worth the upgrade over a 440.

 

[Marty M]

This came from a review in Home Theater magazine. Overall, the receiver was given a good review. I wouldn't dwell too much on this. I have a 2400 and am very pleased.

 

[Thomas_A]

I just upgraded fromt a 795a to the 2400... Quite a diff. The 2400 is a much stronger amp! Not only that... the componant up conversion is most excellent! It really cleaned up the back of my system!

dont be afraid...just do it

BTW...this is my 3rd Yamaha purchase in the last 10ys...and all still working strong!

 

[Evan M.]

A few years ago I upgraded from an rx-v620 to the rx-v2200. I was very happy I did. The amp section was much stronger and clean and played great at higher levels. Do not wory for a second about all of the 35 watts with all channel driven stuff. You will hardly EVER have all channels going at once and when you do it is for a split second for large explosions and what-not.

 

[Wayne Ernst]

True. Also, satellite speakers will most never likely chew up that much power anyway. Having a good subwoofer/amp is much more necessary in my opinion.

 

[Jesse Sharrow]

Well then do you still think I should upgrade and wait on the sub?

 

[Oachalon]

i really dont know if you should or not. Its up to you. I went from the denon 2802 to the yamaha 1400. Which is pretty much the same as the 2400. I believe the receiver has definately more power than 35 watts a channel with all channels driven. Its definately got more power than my denon did. Its all up to you. I think the svs sub would probably make a bigger difference though.

 

[Jesse Sharrow]

Ok... well the thing is with my boston VR-950's will I even notice the difference. I know you have to double your power to get a 3db/noticable difference in sound. I just dont think I will notice this. I know if I went from the yamaha to a krell stack I would notice!!!!

 

[ChadLB]

Do you have a sub now?

 

[Evan M.]

I forgot to mention that I have Boston speakers. I had vr965's and upgraded to vr3's. You will notice a different in power. It may not be volume wise but it will be cleaner and fuller sounding at high volumes. With that said, it is a tough call on the svs or receiver choice. The 440 is an entry level receiver, while the 2400 is just under flag ship. On the other hand, svs is awsome. If you do not have a sub then I might be inclined to go the svs rout as those 950's will not handle a lot of deep bass. If you have a sub and are ok with it for now than I would make the upgrade for the receiver. The 2400 has pre-outs, I mention this because you wrote something about separates. You can add an amp down the raod and use the 2400 as the processor if you like, which will get you into separates. Good luck.

 

[Jesse Sharrow]

Well I do not have a sub. I think thats the way I need to go next. Get a sub. Thanks guys.