home theater/stereo/receiver question

[Apex]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Apex

Originally posted by: Anubis
why do you call JVC lesser? my JVC does 130w x7 and sounds better the my dads and brothers HK receivers

and it runs in stero mode, does 7 channel stero also which is kinda neet

it also cost 200$ at CC on clearence

There's a difference between rating and actual output. Unfortunately, this is very common with receivers. JVC makes good receivers, but they cannot hit their rated output with all channels driven. H/K is one of the only companies that rates their receivers with all channels driven, and actually exceeds the rating.

Denon, Onkyo, B&K, JVC, Kenwood, Marantz, Panasonic, Sherwood, Sony, NAD, Yamaha, and many others only rate their receivers with a single or two channels driven. There are a few models that actually hit their rating with all channels driven, but not across the board.

Again, this is not to say that JVC doesn't make some great products for their price.

You need to remove NAD and Yamaha off that list for sure. They rate with all 5 or 6 channels driven. I'm pretty sure most of the rest do, too. Check their respective websites.
In addition, the nicer receivers like NAD are under-rated....meaning they'll put out more than they advertise, if necessary.

How some of the companies get the high wattage rating is by only measuring at 1khz. A more quality company rates wattage from 20-20khz.
That's why you see receivers at BB and CC for 250.00 that claim 100+ watts per channel....and ones in the higher end shops for the same prices have maybe 70 watts, but are really equal.
Yamaha explains this somewhere on their website....basically they say that even though the amplifier sections of their receivers sold at mass merchandisers like BB and CC are identical to their other equipment, they are rated like I explained above...which is why they also have have different model #'s.

Here's a limited compilation of TESTED units.


Receivers real multichannel output.

Yamaha fails miserably for most of their receivers in these tests, with only 5 channels tested, not the full 7. NAD shows one passing, one failing in this report, but I've read others from S&V failing as well.

 

[nuonce]

Go with the Denon.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Onkyo TX-SR601 refurb is (was?) $250 at eCost, and brand new ones are $328 at OneCall.

This is what I ended up getting after deciding to pass on the Denon 3805 -- the Onkyo is 5.1 (and 6.1/7.1) and has a nice set of S-Video and digital inputs for DVD player, consoles, and/or hometheater PC.

I decided to pass on the Denon since I live in an apartment and only have a $1,000 speaker setup in the living room. The Onkyo is top-rated for an under-$800 receiver and should work great for me until I get around to buying a house and setting up a serious AV room.

FANTASTIC reciever for the money. The 601 even has 192/24 to all channels.

If you are in stereo mode, you will be pleased. It is rated @ 80/watts and actually does like 90-92. With all channels driven it is less, but still great.

 

[CalvinHobbes]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: element
hmmm I just discovered the new units with digital amplifiers. anyone heard of this yet?

tiny, but low power and the ones I looked at had far fewer AV inputs than normal receivers

There's a few threads over on http://www.avsforum.com about the digital amp/receivers. I think they panasonic is pretty well liked.

 

[EngenZerO]

save your money till you can affoard a 5.1 h/k

 

[v3rrv3]

I personally don't like H&K too much(even though I have an Infinity Center :x ) I would go with Onkyo or Denon. I personally got a Onkyo refurb off e-cost a while back and it has been great. My only problem is when I used TV mode(although I don't use TV Mode) I think they wired something funny and my left speaker comes out of my sub, it sounds really funny.

- Kevin

 

[whoiswes]

Originally posted by: CalvinHobbes

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: element
hmmm I just discovered the new units with digital amplifiers. anyone heard of this yet?

tiny, but low power and the ones I looked at had far fewer AV inputs than normal receivers

There's a few threads over on http://www.avsforum.com about the digital amp/receivers. I think they panasonic is pretty well liked.

I have a Panasonic SA-XR25 (the low end digital amp) and I love it.

Yes, it's small. Yes, it has fewer digital inputs. But in all digital mode (meaning you are running a digital stream from your DVD/HTPC/etc into the box) the clarity is amazing.

let's put it this way - the speakers I have are not the greatest - in fact, they're junk. but replacing my existing amp with the panny made these speakers sound bright and clear and I started hearing details in movies I had never heard before. I can only imagine what GOOD, EFFICIENT speakers will sound like.

BTW, I picked up the panny on clearnance from sears for $140. so, to me, it was an absolute steal and i couldn't be happier.

to second another poster's opinion - go to the AVS forums, do a search for 'panasonic xr45' or 'krell killer' if you wanna know more about the digital amps.

EDIT: if you decide to go with a standard amp, the Harmon Kardon line is well respected for entry level stuff. Denon and Yamaha also have decent reps. Stay away from Sony (just repeating what I've read, although I refuse to buy Sony for several reasons)

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: whoiswes

Originally posted by: CalvinHobbes

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: element
hmmm I just discovered the new units with digital amplifiers. anyone heard of this yet?

tiny, but low power and the ones I looked at had far fewer AV inputs than normal receivers

There's a few threads over on http://www.avsforum.com about the digital amp/receivers. I think they panasonic is pretty well liked.

I have a Panasonic SA-XR25 (the low end digital amp) and I love it.

Yes, it's small. Yes, it has fewer digital inputs. But in all digital mode (meaning you are running a digital stream from your DVD/HTPC/etc into the box) the clarity is amazing.

let's put it this way - the speakers I have are not the greatest - in fact, they're junk. but replacing my existing amp with the panny made these speakers sound bright and clear and I started hearing details in movies I had never heard before. I can only imagine what GOOD, EFFICIENT speakers will sound like.

BTW, I picked up the panny on clearnance from sears for $140. so, to me, it was an absolute steal and i couldn't be happier.

to second another poster's opinion - go to the AVS forums, do a search for 'panasonic xr45' or 'krell killer' if you wanna know more about the digital amps.

EDIT: if you decide to go with a standard amp, the Harmon Kardon line is well respected for entry level stuff. Denon and Yamaha also have decent reps. Stay away from Sony (just repeating what I've read, although I refuse to buy Sony for several reasons)

wow...I just read up on that and am quite impressed

 

[cucumber]

Originally posted by: element

Originally posted by: Anubis
why do you call JVC lesser? my JVC does 130w x7 and sounds better the my dads and brothers HK receivers

and it runs in stero mode, does 7 channel stero also which is kinda neet

it also cost 200$ at CC on clearence

Because audiophiles say Harmon/Kardon, Denon and such or nothing at all. Go figure... To each his own. Glad to hear you're happy with your JVC, I have a feeling I would be too. I doubt with my cheesy setup I'll be able to tell subtle differences the way most audiophiles do. I think I'll forgoe the more expensive H/K 2.0 idea and go with a 5.1 setup. Also thanks to those that answered my question on 5.1 receivers working in 2.0 mode just fine. i had a feeling they would just wanted to be sure.

Well as far as recievers go the serious high end ones also include Rotel, B&K, Sunfire, Yamaha, Arcam..... I'm probably forgetting some. HK and Denon are great too, but they're not the only serious contenders. I think most of JVCs recievers are on the cheaper and not so good side (compared to other brands of similar price) but they have brought out a really good one recently. I think it's on the expensive side though.

For $200 you're not likely to get antything really high end, but in recent years you can get a pretty good sounding reciever for that much. Also look at the cheaper Denons, Pioneers, Onkyos, ..... Listen to a bunch of them and decide which ones sound the best to you. If you like how the JVC sounds get it.

Pretty much if it sounds good to you go for it. Don't worry about what people say is good. It's your money and your ears.

 

[cucumber]

Originally posted by: element

Originally posted by: Anubis
why do you call JVC lesser? my JVC does 130w x7 and sounds better the my dads and brothers HK receivers

and it runs in stero mode, does 7 channel stero also which is kinda neet

it also cost 200$ at CC on clearence

Because audiophiles say Harmon/Kardon, Denon and such or nothing at all. Go figure... To each his own. Glad to hear you're happy with your JVC, I have a feeling I would be too. I doubt with my cheesy setup I'll be able to tell subtle differences the way most audiophiles do. I think I'll forgoe the more expensive H/K 2.0 idea and go with a 5.1 setup. Also thanks to those that answered my question on 5.1 receivers working in 2.0 mode just fine. i had a feeling they would just wanted to be sure.

If anything spend a bit more money on getting good stereo speakers instead of some cheap 5.1 setup. Good stereo will allways sound better and make you happier in the long run than trashy 5.1. You can always add surrounds, center and a sub later. If you get some cheapy 5.1 setup the nasty sound will get to you after a while. Then to upgrade you have to replace the whole thing since no single part of it is really good to begin with.

I think the best order of things is to start with as good a stereo set first, get a decent sub when you can afford one, then get a center and surrounds last when you can (if possible make them the same brand and similar models as the main stereo pair)

Just my suggestions. If you find a 5.1 set that you really like and can afford , go for it.