Yamaha HTR-5560 or Outlaw 1050 (1 Viewer)

[Clayton_M]

Yamaha HTR-5560 or the Outlaw 1050
This is my final choice roundup.

 

[Paul Clarke]

The Yammy gives you component but you're limited to 480p without degradation so that's a limited bonus. Tons of DSP's but if you're not a heavy DSP user again, not much of a bonus. Now, multi-channel power...Yammy says 75W full bandwidth rated but I have to tell you that I have seen tests where Yammy's like the 620 are shown to be light performers with all channels driven...as low as 27W. This may be an abberration isolated to certain models or it may be something more. This is not a knock on Yamaha...I generally like their equipment but the 'little green button' machine has the beans and has been tested many times.

 

[Clayton_M]

Any other input ya'll can give me would be great. So far, 1-0 in Outlaw's favor.

Thanks for the great feedback Paul.

 

[jeff lam]

I am a Yamaha fan and have loved my 620 for the last year (and still do). However, if you can live without some of the newer features I would also vote for the Outlaw. I do wonder why Outlaw doesn't have a more up to date receiver. I feel this is one thing they should do. Build a new receiver with more up to date features and add a little more power. That would make it the best receiver around!

Can't go wrong with either one.

 

[Mike Veroukis]

Yammy says 75W full bandwidth rated but I have to tell you that I have seen tests where Yammy's like the 620 are shown to be light performers with all channels driven...as low as 27W.

Could you please tell me where you read this? Just curious.

Also, is the 620 reference a typo there? The RX-V620 has 100W per channel. It's the 630 that has 75watts per channel. Also, I have a HTR-5450 (equivalent to the RX-V520) which has 80 watts per channel driving a pair of Paradigm Studio40s (which like lots of power). They sound pretty good to me even at high volumes. So I'm not sure how an even more powerful amp in the same line could be sucked-out when mine is pretty impressive for what it is.

I'm not saying that the Yammie is better then the outlaw, I'm just interested in this "27W" figure and how accurate it is. If the 620 (or 630) really does output 27W when driving all channels, wouldn't that mean that Yamaha is lieing about it's amp?

- Mike

 

[jeff lam]

I don't believe the 27W thing. Yamaha has always rated their amps accurate and maybe even conservitively. I'm pretty sure you are getting at least near rated output power.

 

[Bruce Cadotte]

the 1050 is 6x65 watts with three channels driven at full power and the 630 is 6x75 watts with 2 channels driven at full power.

what that means is all channel can be full power at any time but only 2 or 3 at full power say if one of them says 6x75 watts but on the back of the unit it says 300 watts(the Yamahas says how many total watts it uses,don't remember if the 1050 says it)two channels are getting 2x75 watts while the other channels are getting the rest of the watts left-say 4x37 or 3x50 or 6x50 with all channels driven,etc,etc.

my Integra 9.1 says 7x130 with 2 channels driven but with all channels driven it is 7x97 watts(per review in Sound and Vision)

now-i have/had both the 1050 and the 630(1050 went to my in-laws in Dec.)have the 630 as a temp pre-amp till i get the 950 and i must say the 630 sounds so nice with the new formats that the 1050 does not have(PL 2,DTS ES,etc) i would not worry about the power difference-if any because they say you must double the power(say 75+75) just to get 3 db's louder

 

[KonradN]

when all 5 channels are driven it is very likely that the yamaha only puts out 27w per channel just like many other sub 500 dollar receivers. It may put out 100 watts when only one or at most 2 channels are driven.

Only few manufactures rate their receivers with all 5 channels driven from 20hz to 20khz at a given thd. H/K is one that comes to my mind and this is why their receivers often list lower wattage numbers compared to others in their price range. But when h/k says their receiver puts out 55 watts per channel, it will be 55 watts per channel while other 100 watts per channel receiver may only put out 20-30 watts per channel when all channels are driven.

back to the post,

if the yamaha has a feature that you absolutely want then go for it, otherwise go for the outlaw. personally I would go for the h/k.

 

[Bruce Cadotte]

when all 5 channels are driven it is very likely that the yamaha only puts out 27w per channel just like many other sub 500 dollar receivers. It may put out 100 watts when only one or at most 2 channels are driven.

__________________________________________________ _________

not true-on the back of the 630 it says i believe(wish i was home right now)340 watts so if that is right with all channels driven it would be right around 5x68 watts or 6x56 watts or so.

__________________________________________________ _________

Only few manufactures rate their receivers with all 5 channels driven from 20hz to 20khz at a given thd.

__________________________________________________ _________

check out Yamahas site they did rate the 630(and others)

at the 20hz to 20khz rate and it also said 6x80 watts at 1khz which is the way most less expensive receivers say as a selling point

 

[phill clarke]

I'm finding this thread very useful since I'm looking at the exact same decision. I too am deciding between the Outlaw and the Yammi. The Outlaw looks great with the info I've been reading, but all the bells and whistles sure make that Yammi tempting.

I'm going to be hooking up to a pair of Paradigm Titans (mains), CC 170 (center) and Atoms (rear). No sub yet as my money is locked up in a condo purchase, but I'd rather get out of my Pro-Logic only setup before getting a sub anyways.

Any info is greatly appreciated!

Phill

 

[Mike Veroukis]

Sorry for the off topic post here, but I checked the back of my 5450 and it lists 250watts. So I guess there's no way it can maintain the 80watts per channel according to the above posts. However it would be able to maintain 50watts per channel, correct? Would it favour the main (front L&R) over the surrounds? I guess when in two channel stereo mode the L&R speakers get the full 80watts, right?
Wish I knew this before I bought my unit, would have gotten a higher up model. Oh well, live and learn.
- Mike

 

[Paul Clarke]

Sorry guys. I didn't mean to stir up a hornets nest here. I figured when referencing that review (I'm busy trying to locate the website in my bookmarks???...English I think) that someone would say...HEY! As I said, I like Yammy products by and large but was not taken aback by the test data for the reasons KonradN has already stated. I will post the link when I find it so keep checking back if you're curious.

For the record, I do own H/K and find their amp ratings and subsequent test data to be very reliable. The issue of power (which admittedly I myself raised) can be misleading and confusing to a lot of buyers. Many average HT and Music systems are likely to have speakers that are rated anywhere from 8 to 4 Ohm or less anyway . The power ratings given at 8 Ohms are largely irrelevant for most of these folks as their demands will be met with greater wattage output. What is of greater concern to me is the growing use of voltage limiting impedance guidance switches. Not all of them are implemented the same way but the majority I have come across in lower level to lower mid-level receivers do nothing but REDUCE power when set to a sub 8 Ohm position. I believe this may have been part of the Yammy result I first mentioned but I can't recall for sure.

 

[KonradN]

Bruce,

managing to put out 27 watts per channel with all channels driven is respectable performance for a sub $500 receiver.

here is what one of the higher end yamahas benched (from s&v mag)

yamaha rx-v1200

1 channel into 8 ohm 124w

5 channels into 8 ohms 50w

2 channels 111w

in general only receivers in the $1k range put out more than 100 watts with all channels driven.

 

[Rich Malloy]

I'd also offer a vote in favor of the OUTLAW, but I've never heard this particular Yamaha model. I do much, much, much prefer the OUTLAW over the Yammie 5440... but that ain't a fair fight!
There are some very important specs that aren't apparent on the Crutchfield site re the 5560 that I would definitely check out before purchasing. For one, are there pre-outs for every channel so that you could add an amp down the road? The Outlaw 1050 has pre-outs for each channel. Secondly, how flexible is the bass management? The Outlaw gives you crossover options from 60hz up to 200hz, so that you can fine-tune it to perfection for just about any speaker setup. I would definitely check into the bass management flexibility on the Yammie. If your primary concern is sound quality, I'd argue that these are far more important than any array of DSPs (YMMV, of course - I don't use DSPs).

 

[jeff lam]

here is what one of the higher end yamahas benched (from s&v mag)

yamaha rx-v1200

1 channel into 8 ohm 124w

5 channels into 8 ohms 50w

2 channels 111w

I wouldn't call the rx-v1200 much "Higher End" than the 630 as it is only one step above it. It is the next model up (took place of the previous RX-V800 I believe. Still, the RX-V1200 is only rated at 75 or 80Wx5 anyway (don't have the specs handy right now), so very similar to the 630. so I would assume the 630 has similar power.

 

[KonradN]

I wouldn't call the rx-v1200 much "Higher End" than the 630 as it is only one step above it. It is the next model up (took place of the previous RX-V800 I believe. Still, the RX-V1200 is only rated at 75 or 80Wx5 anyway (don't have the specs handy right now), so very similar to the 630. so I would assume the 630 has similar power.

it's true that the rx-v1200 is only one step above the 630, but there is a huge gap between rx-v1200 and 630 because the 1200 the entry into yamaha's high end line. Note that the retail on the rx-v1200 is 899 while the retail on the 630 is 499.

 

[Mike Veroukis]

Actually, the RX-V1200 is 80watts by 6. The 630 is 75x6. Check it out at: Yamaha RX-V1200.
And oh yeah, there's also the RX-V730 in between those two models.
- Mike

 

[jeff lam]

it's true that the rx-v1200 is only one step above the 630, but there is a huge gap between rx-v1200 and 630 because the 1200 the entry into yamaha's high end line. Note that the retail on the rx-v1200 is 899 while the retail on the 630 is 499.

True, but would this lead you to believe that the amp section in the 1200 is so much better than the 630 that the 1200 would bench nearly 2x the power with 5-ch driven when it's only rated at 5w/ch more?

somehow I have a hard time believing this.

Anyway, I guess we won't know for sure until the 630 is on the workbench and actually measured. However I still highly doubt it only puts out 27W/ch with them all driven.

 

[Norman L]

yamaha rx-v1200

1 channel into 8 ohm 124w

5 channels into 8 ohms 50w

2 channels 111w

If the 630 is 27w with all channels going that is why you need multi pre-outs, especially for the mains.

I am returning my Onyko 600 since it has no preouts other than sub. I blew 2 B & W old floorstand speakers (DM2000) with the Onkyo 600 yesterday. B & W said that certain speakers need much more watts when all channels are bing driven. Use a seperate Amp or buy a higher watt amp said B & W when discussing by blown speakers.

Do not buy a A/V receiver without preouts in my opinion.

 

[KonradN]

True, but would this lead you to believe that the amp section in the 1200 is so much better than the 630 that the 1200 would bench nearly 2x the power with 5-ch driven when it's only rated at 5w/ch more?

you're right, we won't know for sure until the 630 is benched but considering that the 1200 retails for almost twice as much as the 630, it would not be a surprise if the 1200 delivers almost twice as much wattage compared to the 630.