Home Theatre Receiver Thread

[dreaderus]

kamascottra: can u summurize what I can expect (assuming it works lol) from this type of unit? what are the main things it will do that my 20 year old sony analog unit won't?

[Fantaz]

Here's some that I see:

BB: $199 Denon 550W (AVR-1513) 5.1 Receiver
BB: $229 Harman Kardon 550W (10216597) 5.1 Receiver
FS: $199 Pioneer 5.1 VSX-522-K Receiver

Any good? What makes other receivers cost way more ($250-$450+), and are those more expensive ones worth it?

[siennaLe2008]

kamascottra: can u summurize what I can expect (assuming it works lol) from this type of unit? what are the main things it will do that my 20 year old sony analog unit won't?

You cannot even compare between the two. It is like night and day. For starter, sound will be much better, HDMIs, network, Zone2 +3, 2 Subs, ability to control the receiver anywhere, THX system etc. etc.

The most important thing is the speakers. In order to feel the the receiver's wonder, you need to find decent tower speakers: PSB like warpdrive mentioned ~$1000, center ~$300-$400, 4 sats: $400-$500, 1 Sub: $300-$500. However your speakers need to match and here I am only talking about low-medium range speakers.
The onkyo sound is warm, I believe, so I am not sure if the PSB would go with it.

[DavidY]

Here's some that I see:

BB: $199 Denon 550W (AVR-1513) 5.1 Receiver
BB: $229 Harman Kardon 550W (10216597) 5.1 Receiver
FS: $199 Pioneer 5.1 VSX-522-K Receiver

Any good? What makes other receivers cost way more ($250-$450+), and are those more expensive ones worth it?

I typically avoid any receiver with clip on type speaker terminals....they are the 1st indicator of an entry level model. More expensive receivers typically have more power (watts per channel), cleaner power (lower THD), more features like network, 7.x vs. 5.1, better calibration like Audyssey XT (eg. Denon AVR-1713 has it....more $$$ AVR-1913 has the basic Audyssey...not sure why?), bigger and heavier (old days were 50+ pounds like my Sony ES), more HDMI, 1080p upconversion, THX certification, component video (eg. Wii), etc.

I think that one needs to go to a $300 price point as a rough minimum. I would be coming down big time from a $2K+ receiver.

I would love to see a Denon AVR-1712 for under $300 during Boxing Day/Week sale....would be sweet!!!

Dave

[tickyboy]

Here's some that I see:

BB: $199 Denon 550W (AVR-1513) 5.1 Receiver
BB: $229 Harman Kardon 550W (10216597) 5.1 Receiver
FS: $199 Pioneer 5.1 VSX-522-K Receiver

Any good? What makes other receivers cost way more ($250-$450+), and are those more expensive ones worth it?

DaveY touched on why they're worth more... bluetooth, better components, more connections and multi-zones available. More power, more fine tuning options.... better sound....

[RastaManMax]

DaveY touched on why they're worth more... bluetooth, better components, more connections and multi-zones available. More power, more fine tuning options.... better sound....

Agree with all but better sound. Different brands typically produce different sound but going up in a brand I don't find any real difference. You pretty much spend more for more features. I'd avoid the lowest end because they typically have clip speaker connections and no calibration. Calibration is something you need to pay for IMHO.

[Exocet77]

What receiver is better??

Yamaha 7.1 Channel Network Multi-zone Receiver (RXV573 B)

http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/produ...c65ce941b5en02

or the Pioneer VSX1022K Audio Video Receiver

http://www.visions.ca/catalogue/cate...0&sku=VSX1022K

There both going on sale for the same price on BD.'

HDMI inputs aren't important.

[Scortadict]

What receiver is better??

Yamaha 7.1 Channel Network Multi-zone Receiver (RXV573 B)

http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/produ...c65ce941b5en02

or the Pioneer VSX1022K Audio Video Receiver

http://www.visions.ca/catalogue/cate...0&sku=VSX1022K

There both going on sale for the same price on BD.'

HDMI inputs aren't important.

from cnet the yamaha sound better.

http://reviews.cnet.com/av-receivers...-35163428.html

http://reviews.cnet.com/av-receivers...-35182234.html

[tickyboy]

Agree with all but better sound. Different brands typically produce different sound but going up in a brand I don't find any real difference. You pretty much spend more for more features. I'd avoid the lowest end because they typically have clip speaker connections and no calibration. Calibration is something you need to pay for IMHO.

Sorry... cleaner sound

[kamascottra]

kamascottra: can u summurize what I can expect (assuming it works lol) from this type of unit? what are the main things it will do that my 20 year old sony analog unit won't?

the stuff that i think will be the most obvious will be:
-upconversion. no more worries about having a video output for each type of video cable. hook up whatever to the back of the receiver, and you only need one hdmi cable output to the tv. the receiver will convert all the other cable types to hdmi
-video upscaler. maybe not be as obvious if your tv has a good upscaler, but along with the upconversion, the receiver will convert all your SD video signals to HD, which might clean up some sources
-auto calibration. love this feature, even the ones that aren't great do a better job than setting up 'by ear'. super easy, and you get probably within 90% of ideal settings in just minutes.

the rest is really just updating what it's compatible with. hdmi/component inputs, HD audio support, etc. and hopefully an improvement in overall quality

[kamascottra]

I typically avoid any receiver with clip on type speaker terminals....they are the 1st indicator of an entry level model. More expensive receivers typically have more power (watts per channel), cleaner power (lower THD), more features like network, 7.x vs. 5.1, better calibration like Audyssey XT (eg. Denon AVR-1713 has it....more $$$ AVR-1913 has the basic Audyssey...not sure why?), bigger and heavier (old days were 50+ pounds like my Sony ES), more HDMI, 1080p upconversion, THX certification, component video (eg. Wii), etc.

I think that one needs to go to a $300 price point as a rough minimum. I would be coming down big time from a $2K+ receiver.

I would love to see a Denon AVR-1712 for under $300 during Boxing Day/Week sale....would be sweet!!!

Dave

good summary and i agree that 300 seems to be about the 'butter zone' for a good value. spend any less and it's not quite up to par for a main theatre. you can certainly get away with one for auxillary rooms though, but i try to use my 'retired' receivers in those situations anyway, and not buy something that's already out of date.

imo, the minimum features i would now require to consider a receiver are:
-video upconversion. i don't want to ever use more than one video output again
-auto calibration. obviously some are better than others, but if it doesn't have anything, forget about it.
-INPUTS. you can never have too many. i still use component for quite a few sources, and those seem to be hard to find these days. unless there's like 12 hdmi inputs, i'm not willing to give up all the component inputs.

i think everything else is the difference between a capable value receiver, and a really nice premium receiver. power, headroom, channels, zones, networking, etc

[kamascottra]

Agree with all but better sound. Different brands typically produce different sound but going up in a brand I don't find any real difference. You pretty much spend more for more features. I'd avoid the lowest end because they typically have clip speaker connections and no calibration. Calibration is something you need to pay for IMHO.

that could be a limitation of your speakers then. going up in a brands line almost ALWAYS adds more in sound quality, but only if you have speakers or equal/better quality to make use of it.

[kamascottra]

What receiver is better??

Yamaha 7.1 Channel Network Multi-zone Receiver (RXV573 B)

http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/produ...c65ce941b5en02

or the Pioneer VSX1022K Audio Video Receiver

http://www.visions.ca/catalogue/cate...0&sku=VSX1022K

There both going on sale for the same price on BD.'

HDMI inputs aren't important.

i'm super happy with my pioneer(1018), i've always found yamaha's to sound much to bright for my tastes(or speakers)

from cnet the yamaha sound better.

http://reviews.cnet.com/av-receivers...-35163428.html

http://reviews.cnet.com/av-receivers...-35182234.html

i don't think it's fair to say one sounds 'better'. they will sound different, and which one is preferred is up to the listener.

in my experience yamaha receivers have always been very bright, to the point i find they sound harsh. i don't think the pioneer is super soft by any means, but it's definitely a warmer, more laid back sound than the yamaha's i've heard.

i think yamaha's make everything sound like titanium tweeters, and i'm a fan of silk domes.

[ViperZ]

-auto calibration. obviously some are better than others, but if it doesn't have anything, forget about it.

Good and bad point. Calibration software is very important when you're setting up a theater room. Some software that I have seen - I'd rather not have any than those, and setup using basic radioshack sound meter. Unfortunately, good calibration software only goes into at least mid-end receivers - i.e. my older Onkyo TX-SR805 has a pretty decent Audyssey MultEQ XT software. No problems setting up 7 speakers (levels, cutoff frequency, distances), but software setup for subwoofer is just not up to par, which makes sense, as it's the hardest thing to setup. Latest Audyssey MultEQ XT32 is the only calibration software capable of properly setting up two subwoofers separately (7.2 setup). Would love to get a processor with it, but even used ones are $1200+.

[tickyboy]

Debating the 1227 from FS .... don't really *need* a new receiver, but it's a tank. Maybe I'll wait for open box in January....