|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 8, 2010 10:58:01 GMT -5
THe 886 is basically an advanced version of the 906. Including a real toroidal power supply, true independant block(stage)construction, XLR outputs, and advanced xover and EQ function along with a few other goodies. The 876 uses an ie transformer, and lacks the same block construction as the 906/886. The Toroidal transformer as well as the independant block construction are related to the amp sections of the 906. The 876 as shown on the Onkyo site (linked below) also has the independant block construction as does the 906. If you are comparing the preamp sections of the 876, 906 and the 886 what significant differences are there? If you were using all three as prepros would there be any obvious audible differences? When you mention advanced X-over and EQ functions are you referring to Audyssey Pro? If you are then from what I recall only the 885 and 886 are Pro capable. So when doing a direct comparison (no Pro used) with all three having Audyssey MultEQ XT then they would be equal inregard to X-overs and EQ functions IMO. Bill www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-SR876&class=Receiver&p=fwww.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-NR906&class=Receiver&p=fI was going to A/B the UMC-1 vs. the Onkyo 885 Pre/Pro or the Denon AVR-3310, but an overheating HD Radio tuner in my 3310CI is sending it back and the UMC-1 is going to have to go into immediate use, ready or not. I love the sound of Denon AVR's, but if you aren't using the amps, it is a bit wasteful. I think the Onkyo Pre/Pro's lack a little detail and definition in the high end. At some point, I may have a UMC-1 side-by-side with my 885 to confirm/deny that - assuming the UMC-1 is as transparent in its analog section as is claimed. |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Apr 8, 2010 11:27:32 GMT -5
The Toroidal transformer as well as the independant block construction are related to the amp sections of the 906. The 876 as shown on the Onkyo site (linked below) also has the independant block construction as does the 906. If you are comparing the preamp sections of the 876, 906 and the 886 what significant differences are there? If you were using all three as prepros would there be any obvious audible differences? When you mention advanced X-over and EQ functions are you referring to Audyssey Pro? If you are then from what I recall only the 885 and 886 are Pro capable. So when doing a direct comparison (no Pro used) with all three having Audyssey MultEQ XT then they would be equal inregard to X-overs and EQ functions IMO. Bill www.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-SR876&class=Receiver&p=fwww.onkyousa.com/model.cfm?m=TX-NR906&class=Receiver&p=fI was going to A/B the UMC-1 vs. the Onkyo 885 Pre/Pro or the Denon AVR-3310, but an overheating HD Radio tuner in my 3310CI is sending it back and the UMC-1 is going to have to go into immediate use, ready or not. I love the sound of Denon AVR's, but if you aren't using the amps, it is a bit wasteful. I think the Onkyo Pre/Pro's lack a little detail and definition in the high end. At some point, I may have a UMC-1 side-by-side with my 885 to confirm/deny that - assuming the UMC-1 is as transparent in its analog section as is claimed. Bill, I was not able to do a direct comparison but when the UMC-1 went into my system I could say without a doubt the analog section of the UMC-1 was better than the 886. When using the Stereo mode with my sub with the 886 I found the SQ to be lacking. Using the Pure mode with the 886 SQ is better but I can not use my sub which I feel is needed with my Ascend Sierra-1s. With the UMC-1 in Stereo with the sub the SQ was excellent very close to my Parasound 2100 doing a direct A-B comparison. Very impressive that the UMC-1 came so close to the 2100. I think you will be quite impressed with the 2 CH analog SQ of the UMC-1. For HT I thought the 886 sounded better but it has the advantage with Audyssey IMO. With the new FW coming hopefully Emo-Q will be fully operational and then it might compare more favorably. Bill |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 8, 2010 11:40:25 GMT -5
Thanks, Bill, very informative.
I do have high hopes for the SQ of the UMC-1. What's interesting to me about the 885 is that I find its analog output section to be lacking, not just the input. I know it is "well-known" that the analog inputs are supposedly not up to par, but I am using its internal DACs to decode PCM input via optical digital. Even in this scenario, over time, I have felt the sound has been lacking. I began to wish I had the Denon AVR-3808 back in the mix.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1derbar on Apr 8, 2010 14:10:49 GMT -5
I'm curious to hear of any comparisons here. Does anyone know if the Onkyo Pro 5507 is supposed to have better SQ than the 886?
|
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Apr 8, 2010 14:42:33 GMT -5
I know it is "well-known" that the analog inputs are supposedly not up to par, but I am using its internal DACs to decode PCM input via optical digital. Even in this scenario, over time, I have felt the sound has been lacking. I began to wish I had the Denon AVR-3808 back in the mix. Bill, Its funny you mention about using the optical input on your 885 as I am using the Coaxial output of my CD player to the 886's Coaxial input. I believe it was Kal Rubinson over at AVS said to try the digital inputs of the 9.8 (similar to the 886) as he felt the SQ was somewhat better. I felt the SQ was slightly better than using the analog inputs but it could have been the placebo effect in action though  . Bill |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 8, 2010 14:42:35 GMT -5
I'm curious to hear of any comparisons here. Does anyone know if the Onkyo Pro 5507 is supposed to have better SQ than the 886? I have never personally heard them, but as I understand it, SQ is the same from the 885 to the 886 to the 5507. |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 8, 2010 14:44:41 GMT -5
I know it is "well-known" that the analog inputs are supposedly not up to par, but I am using its internal DACs to decode PCM input via optical digital. Even in this scenario, over time, I have felt the sound has been lacking. I began to wish I had the Denon AVR-3808 back in the mix. Bill, Its funny you mention about using the optical input on your 885 as I am using the Coaxial output of my CD player to the 886's Coaxial input. I believe it was Kal Rubinson over at AVS said to try the digital inputs of the 9.8 (similar to the 886) as he felt the SQ was somewhat better. I felt the SQ was slightly better than using the analog inputs but it could have been the placebo effect in action though . Bill I think the SQ difference here will have a lot more to do with which DAC implementation is better than the signal path in the Onkyo. I think the Onkyo's, for whatever reason, just don't have that last bit of detail for musical listening. Maybe it's intentional, in their tests they found it fatiguing to pass that through for long periods of home theater use? Who knows? It does sound good, it just doesn't sound wonderful. I'm hoping to get that clarity back at some point. I don't know if that will be the UMC-1, or the XMC-1 or another Denon, perhaps. Maybe I should just break down and buy myself a 2-channel pre, like a good boy. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Apr 8, 2010 14:58:13 GMT -5
I'm curious to hear of any comparisons here. Does anyone know if the Onkyo Pro 5507 is supposed to have better SQ than the 886? From what I have read 5507/80.1 owners that had owned the 9.8/9.9/885/886 report they thought the 2 CH SQ was improved. I believe the DACs in the 5507/80.1 are improved in quality over the previous Onkyo/Integra prepros. There maybe other updates as well but none I can think of off hand. Of course the ability to do FW updates and network capability are big upgrades over previous models. The one option I like that the 5507 has is the ability to use the sub with the Pure audio mode. Here is a link from AVS discussing the 5507: www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1199778&highlight=5507Bill |
|
|
|
Post by bob (aka *bleep*) on Apr 8, 2010 15:02:59 GMT -5
I have had the 885 and the 886 at the same time in my system and the 886 is clearly better to me. I can't comment on the 5507 vs the 885 or 886 as I did not have it at the same time.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 8, 2010 15:06:04 GMT -5
I have had the 885 and the 886 at the same time in my system and the 886 is clearly better to me. I can't comment on the 5507 vs the 885 or 886 as I did not have it at the same time. Bob, thanks for the info. What source were you using, and how was it connected? What was the clear sonic improvement you heard? |
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs 
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Apr 8, 2010 15:13:00 GMT -5
I have had the 885 and the 886 at the same time in my system and the 886 is clearly better to me. I can't comment on the 5507 vs the 885 or 886 as I did not have it at the same time. The 885 and 886 have literally identical circuitry. Analog sections are 100% identical. |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Apr 8, 2010 16:19:26 GMT -5
I have had the 885 and the 886 at the same time in my system and the 886 is clearly better to me. I can't comment on the 5507 vs the 885 or 886 as I did not have it at the same time. Bob, Are you referring to overall SQ (HT and Music)? Also were your impressions with Audyssey engaged? Do you have the 5507 now? If you do I would be interested on what you think of it overall over the 886. The one small difference between the 885 and the 886 in reference to Audyssey is the mic. The mic with the 886 is the newer tower style where the 885 has the hockey puck style. Chris at Audyssey said that the newer style mic will give a slightly better more accurate calibration than the older mic. I asked him if the newer mic can be used with older units and he said no that it was not recommended to mix and match. Bill |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Apr 8, 2010 16:27:04 GMT -5
Maybe I should just break down and buy myself a 2-channel pre, like a good boy. ;D I can not recommend going with the 2 CH preamp with HT Bypass enough  . I have had six different preamps with HT Bypass in my system. Its a nice option to have if the AVR/prepro you have is not that great with 2 CH SQ. That would solve your 2 CH SQ concerns but with the UMC-1 I think you will be quite happy. Bill |
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 8, 2010 19:18:41 GMT -5
Maybe I should just break down and buy myself a 2-channel pre, like a good boy. ;D I can not recommend going with the 2 CH preamp with HT Bypass enough . I have had six different preamps with HT Bypass in my system. Its a nice option to have if the AVR/prepro you have is not that great with 2 CH SQ. That would solve your 2 CH SQ concerns but with the UMC-1 I think you will be quite happy. Bill It's funny. I've owned some very nice, and some very expensive preamps over the years. I may try to hold off and go for an XSP-1 some day. I'm thinking an XSP-1 + XMC-1 setup might be pretty nice. |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Apr 8, 2010 19:42:03 GMT -5
It's funny. I've owned some very nice, and some very expensive preamps over the years. I may try to hold off and go for an XSP-1 some day. I'm thinking an XSP-1 + XMC-1 setup might be pretty nice. The XSP-1 will definitely be on my radar when it comes out. Don't forget the XDA-1 DAC in that system as well . Bill |
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Apr 8, 2010 20:58:57 GMT -5
I'm curious to hear of any comparisons here. Does anyone know if the Onkyo Pro 5507 is supposed to have better SQ than the 886? From what I have read 5507/80.1 owners that had owned the 9.8/9.9/885/886 report they thought the 2 CH SQ was improved. I believe the DACs in the 5507/80.1 are improved in quality over the previous Onkyo/Integra prepros. There maybe other updates as well but none I can think of off hand. Of course the ability to do FW updates and network capability are big upgrades over previous models. The one option I like that the 5507 has is the ability to use the sub with the Pure audio mode. Here is a link from AVS discussing the 5507: www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1199778&highlight=5507Bill That was also what I read from the overall comments of people owning these pre/pros. * One major thing though, for people wanting that extra touch, the 5507 is NOT Audyssey MultEQ Pro Installer-Ready, as the 885 & 886 are. And for what true difference it can make, the 5507 has Burr-Brown PCM-1795 Dacs (32-bit/192 Khz), as opposed to the PCM-1796 Dacs (24-bit/192 Khz) in the 885 & 886. And also from what I gathered, the 5507 is definitively a sound improvement over the 906 receiver. *** And the winner is (for analog 2-channel stereo listening): UMC-1. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by junchoon on Apr 8, 2010 21:52:50 GMT -5
interesting to see that umc-1 beat all the onkyo pre-pros. guess i will wait for xmc-1 instead of pursuing the Onkyo.
thanks.
wps
|
|
|
|
Post by BillBauman on Apr 8, 2010 22:13:44 GMT -5
interesting to see that umc-1 beat all the onkyo pre-pros. guess i will wait for xmc-1 instead of pursuing the Onkyo. thanks. wps It just depends on what you want to use it for. Those of us that want our Pre/Pro to double as a fine, 2-channel preamp for music listening are likely to be looking for something other than the Onkyo. Those that are home theater focused are going to love what the Onkyo brings to the table and may never be sitting there in the dark with some high resolution loudspeaker trying to make out a subtle nuance of a song they're listening to for the 10 thousandth time. |
|
|
|
Post by radridd on Apr 9, 2010 4:55:11 GMT -5
My 886 is up and running. Performed a quick aud setup and seems to work fine. Seems a little more detailed than my 876 receiver but that is probably the new euphoria. Anyway my audio rack thanks me that 876 is a heavy beast of a receiver. Will for sure hold me over till the XMC hits the market. The best thing is the wife didn't even notice the change.
|
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Apr 9, 2010 5:47:43 GMT -5
My 886 is up and running. Performed a quick aud setup and seems to work fine. Seems a little more detailed than my 876 receiver but that is probably the new euphoria. Anyway my audio rack thanks me that 876 is a heavy beast of a receiver. Will for sure hold me over till the XMC hits the market. The best thing is the wife didn't even notice the change. You are quite right, I also noticed that difference for the better between my 876 and newer 886 pre/pro, more detailed, refined with better textures, no doubt. It's not euphoria, the 886 simply sounds better than the 876 receiver. * Good for your wife. ;D ...Cool thing those Onkyos look all alike. Anyway I'm glad for you and that you can also tell the difference, good set of ears indeed. |
|
.
. I have had six different preamps with HT Bypass in my system. Its a nice option to have if the AVR/prepro you have is not that great with 2 CH SQ. That would solve your 2 CH SQ concerns but with the UMC-1 I think you will be quite happy.
