|
|
Post by frisco on Mar 8, 2015 16:02:19 GMT -5
I'm close to replacing my old Denon 791 in my ht with a fusion 8100, but had some questions. First the Denon has 90w rating. 8 ohms, but from what I read here, that rating isnt really comparable to the 8100s rating of 65 at eight ohms and 80+ at four ohms with all 7 channels driven. Correct? Will the 8100 be more than a side ways move in power, besides giving me comfort about handling 4 ohm loads? According to the documentation for your Denon, it's rated similarly to other typical receivers: two channels driven. Denon does indicate that each channel can deliver 90 watts into 8 ohms (full 20-20K bandwidth at 0.08% THD), but this just means that each amplifier channel is discrete and identical (which is a good thing). These figures can be misunderstood as 90 watts into all channels driven (ACD) which is definitely not the case. I can't find test reports for this receiver, but knowing how typical receivers end up performing with an ACD test, I'd be surprised if the AVR-791 could do more than 40 wpc all channels driven. The good news is that the ACD test is NOT typical of loads presented by music and movies. Most AVRs have more than enough power for reasonable listening levels. Adding a subwoofer helps even further by freeing up the higher power demands needed to reproduce bass. That being said, the Fusion 8100 is indeed more powerful than your Denon, but it's not just about power specs, it's about how that power is being delivered. With the Fusion 8100, you're getting a real amplifier that sounds (to my ears) every bit as good as a full-blown Emotiva UPA-series amp. In fact, it's basically a tweaked UPA-700 with less power handling. I have never owned a receiver with this much grunt regardless of what the marketing specs indicate. In looking at the specs, I couldn't locate an unbalanced sw out. Did I miss that, and if there is only an balanced output is there some sort of connection cord that I can use with my old sw, which appears to be unbalanced. I can assure you there is an unbalanced RCA subwoofer output. That's how my Rythmik sub is hooked up right now. If you check out the HUGE image of the 8100's rear panel (click the image to zoom in), the unbalanced RCA subwoofer preout is located just above the positive terminal of the Front Left speaker output. The balanced XLR subwoofer output is available for compatibility with some subwoofer systems and for those who prefer balanced runs (among other things). Last question is for anyone familiar with phase tech. I'm also looking to move my Phase Tech 1.5s to my office and will need to replace them as LR for the ht system. What would be a good phase tech speaker to match the 8100, another pair of 1.5s, or can the 8100, without adding external amps, do justice to a 3.5 or the 9.5 tower. I more interested in audio quality than ht by the way, but am space constrained with respect to external amps. is our resident Phase Tech enthusiast, so I've paged him to the white courtesy phone. He may have a recommendation for you. |
|
|
|
Post by frisco on Mar 8, 2015 16:03:04 GMT -5
Frisco - I just spent many months studying audio gear. Setting aside the high-end separates and the cheapest of receivers - I was looking at affordable separates or top-model receivers. I noticed that in this price range it seems the makers of separates also make a receiver version of their pre-pros for about the same price. It's like you can buy the pre-pro or you can buy the pre-pro with a free 7-channel amp for about the same price.
Take the Marantz AV7702 pre-pro and the SR7009 receiver. Look at them. It's the exact same product - same box, same remote, same specs, guarantee you they have the same pre-pro board inside of them, the user manual is the same even the back is the exact same except one has balanced connections where the receiver has speaker connections. Same price.
Take the UMC-200 and the Fusion 8100. Same remote. Same pre-pro board. Same box. Same back. Same user manual. Same everything except the Fusion 8100 gives you the BTM1 for free and tosses in a free 7-channel amp - and actually costs less. They're paying you to take a 7-channel amp and a BTM1.
Think about the system you want to build. For me personally building a high-end system means 2 really good front speakers and a good center and a quality 3-channel amp to drive the front stage. If I were going to add surrounds I would not spend much money on the amp that drives them. Many people nowadays care little about the center speaker and amp driving it. The point is buying a receiver instead of the same pre-pro inside of it for the same price makes sense since you can use the receiver to drive your surrounds (and center if you so chose). You can buy a higher-quality 3-channel amp - or stereo amp - to drive your fronts if your "free amp" isn't good enough.
I do hope a receiver based on the XMC-1 is on the horizon. |
|
|
|
Post by frisco on Mar 8, 2015 16:13:00 GMT -5
Please excuse the last couple of posts,having trouble with my I pad and hit create post button by mistake
|
|
|
|
Post by dwkdnvr on Mar 10, 2015 10:36:13 GMT -5
I have a Fusion 8100 downstairs with the projector, and wanted to pick up a 2nd one for my office. Disappointing to see that I may be out of luck. The fallback option would be a refurb Marantz 5008 or 6008 from A4L, but I'd prefer an 8100.
Edit: ah, I see from another thread that refurb NAD T-748's are available. That seems like a better option than an Marantz for my office setup.
|
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on Mar 10, 2015 12:47:29 GMT -5
I have no direct experience with Marantz (although I was looking at the 7007 or 5009 before I luckily snatched a 8100  ), however I had a NAD T752 for many years. A NAD would certainly be a worthy alternative to the 8100, they have a similar design approach, putting most of the money where it makes a difference in sound quality, rather than in piling feature over feature and skimping in other areas (read power supply...) One more thought: if you want a NAD in the same power league as the 8100, the T758 is the one to get. The T748 is rated at lower power, although if you look at it from a dB standpoint, it is not a huge difference. |
|
|
|
Post by rossonero3 on Mar 10, 2015 13:32:20 GMT -5
I have no direct experience with Marantz (although I was looking at the 7007 or 5009 before I luckily snatched a 8100 ), however I had a NAD T752 for many years. A NAD would certainly be a worthy alternative to the 8100, they have a similar design approach, putting most of the money where it makes a difference in sound quality, rather than in piling feature over feature and skimping in other areas (read power supply...) One more thought: if you want a NAD in the same power league as the 8100, the T758 is the one to get. The T748 is rated at lower power, although if you look at it from a dB standpoint, it is not a huge difference. I've been considering the NAD's as well since i missed out on the 8100, but still holding out hope for the 8100 to be back in stock soon or someone selling me a used one! |
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on Mar 10, 2015 13:52:24 GMT -5
rossonero3 (A.C. Milan fan? I really enjoyed the T752, plenty of power for my 17x13x8 room on 5 channels and pretty good sounding with music too. I am one of those "condemned" to have a single system serving double duty, but I am more interested in how it sounds with music than with movies. Hence, I have always typically avoided the more "mainstream" AVR brands in favor of those like Emotiva, NAD, Anthem, etc. At basically half the price, though, the 8100 is a steal compared to the T758 and a better one watt per watt compared to the T748. On the other hand, should that be important, NAD offers analog video inputs and conversion to HDMI output. |
|
|
|
Post by rossonero3 on Mar 10, 2015 14:26:59 GMT -5
rossonero3 (A.C. Milan fan? I really enjoyed the T752, plenty of power for my 17x13x8 room on 5 channels and pretty good sounding with music too. I am one of those "condemned" to have a single system serving double duty, but I am more interested in how it sounds with music than with movies. Hence, I have always typically avoided the more "mainstream" AVR brands in favor of those like Emotiva, NAD, Anthem, etc. At basically half the price, though, the 8100 is a steal compared to the T758 and a better one watt per watt compared to the T748. On the other hand, should that be important, NAD offers analog video inputs and conversion to HDMI output. Yup! the #3 at the end is for one of my favorite all time players, Il Capitano Paolo Maldini. Also, taking the fam to italy in 5 weeks and seeing the Milan/Inter Derby, can't wait. Got to see a champions league match last year at the San Siro but still have yet to be there for the derby…bucket list item soon to be checked off. My system also has to do double duty as well, and as much as bells & whistles are nice to have, all i think about while watching movies or listening to music is whether or not i'm satisfied with the sound, nothing else. One thing i seem to read often about NAD however, is that while sounding terrific, they can sound reserved or laid back and want to be cranked up a bit to sound best, have you found that to be true also? |
|
|
|
Post by dwkdnvr on Mar 10, 2015 16:40:23 GMT -5
I have no direct experience with Marantz (although I was looking at the 7007 or 5009 before I luckily snatched a 8100 ), however I had a NAD T752 for many years. A NAD would certainly be a worthy alternative to the 8100, they have a similar design approach, putting most of the money where it makes a difference in sound quality, rather than in piling feature over feature and skimping in other areas (read power supply...) One more thought: if you want a NAD in the same power league as the 8100, the T758 is the one to get. The T748 is rated at lower power, although if you look at it from a dB standpoint, it is not a huge difference. Well, jumped on a T748 refurb from Spearit after Emotiva got back to me confirming that the 8100 is discontinued with no more coming. My application is for an office system, so power probably isn't all that critical, and with the refurb pricing it would have been a big step up to a 758. I wanted a Fusion since it would be great in this role, but would also provide a backup for the main system in case that unit ran into any problems. The NAD will be a better fit in the office, but the Marantz probably would have been a better backup for the main theater (a bit more power, Audyssey etc) Oh, well - done deal, so no point in worrying now. |
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on Mar 10, 2015 17:06:32 GMT -5
rossonero3, I am more of a bianconero, but Paolo Maldini is a myth, hat off to a great career both with Milan and Italy's national team. What a great soccer player. About the NAD sound, well, I have my own ideas on this whole deal of different amps having different sound signature. I have never found the T752 to be laid back (whatever that may mean . If nothing else I believe that might be a characteristic coming from speakers and interaction with the ambient, where bumps and dips in response or choice of crossover point can impart certain coloration to the sound. I have passive front speakers, 6 Ohm, lowish sensitivity and no sub. The NAD could definitely and happily drive them without losing composure. That was particularly true for the low end (up to reasonable level, of course). Got really solid and clean bass. Maybe this is the reason while people consider the NAD sound "laid back". It could be because of the ability to pump out bass on low impedance speakers and not starting to clip too soon, which would make the sound a little shrill, giving the appearance of being "forward" as opposed to "laid back". Although audio memory is notoriously short and not reliable, I got to say that the 8100 "seems" to me to sound very similar to how the T752 sounded. I do not know, maybe it is my engineering background, but I always have a hard time with all those subjective terms for describing how audio gear sounds  . |
|
|
|
Post by recsq on Apr 9, 2015 9:14:44 GMT -5
This blows I was considering a Fusion as an upgrade to my smaller HT system
|
|
|
|
Post by teaman on Apr 9, 2015 10:47:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on Apr 9, 2015 10:59:57 GMT -5
I find it interesting that Emotiva has not removed the 8100 product page, although it shows "out of stock". I know that other loungers have called Emotiva and been told that the 8100 is gone for good. However, it could be that 8100 page has been left as a place holder for an upcoming successor, maybe a larger unit with more power, as in the original plans when the 8100 was under the Sherbourn brand. Maybe something will be presented at Axpona. Nothing wrong with dreaming  . |
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Apr 10, 2015 17:55:11 GMT -5
Maybe they have a 8100D coming out with Dirac and class d amps.
|
|
|
|
Post by donovan on Apr 12, 2015 23:41:42 GMT -5
I have a question. Is the Direct Mode the same as other company's "Pure Direct?" In other words, does the direct mode bypass the Fusion's DAC? If yes, I'm thinking of buying the Firestone Audio Spitfire DAC in-between my Apple TV and the Fusion 8100. I'm guessing the DAC in the Spitfire may be a little improvement over the internal DAC of the 8100, or am I wrong? The Spitfire uses Burr-Brown PCM1793: www.positive-feedback.com/Issue24/firestone_spitfire.htm |
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on Apr 13, 2015 13:12:43 GMT -5
Donovan, I suppose so, from the manual: "Note: If you have Direct Mode selected, or are using the 7.1 Channel Audio direct input, you will NOT be able to preview the EQ settings (because EQ is not applied in Direct mode)." Also, as another insight on how Direct Mode works, prior to my purchasing the 8100 I had emailed Emotiva, asking whether the analog inputs where sampled and then handled by the DSP or they where kept in the analog domain. I got a reply from Lonnie in person (isn't great to deal with Emotiva? . He replied that all analog signal paths work the same way in direct mode and they do bypass the tone controls, going straight to the volume control and then to the output. What comes in is what goes out. The DAC in the Fusion 8100 should be the Cirrus 42528, see this thread here, third post down: emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/37494/fusion-8100-dacHope this helps. |
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on Apr 13, 2015 13:16:34 GMT -5
Maybe they have a 8100D coming out with Dirac and class d amps. That would be interesting. Going to Class-D should even allow to keep the same form factor, given the much higher efficiency and consequent lower power dissipation. And with more output power per channel to boot!!! |
|
|
|
Post by donovan on Apr 13, 2015 22:53:33 GMT -5
Great, thanks Sensei for that info. Sounds like the Fusion's DAC is pretty well regarded. I'll need to think about whether I should try the Spit Fire, or not. |
|
ra990
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 3 
|
Post by ra990 on Apr 14, 2015 18:33:17 GMT -5
This thread was a huge bummer. I was very excited about discovering this gem of a receiver for my new home theater then I found out it's gone forever.
Is there ANY chance that there will be more in stock any time soon? Does anyone have any information on that or a newer version of this coming out?
Also, what are the recommendations for another receiver that would be a good alternative to the 8100? I've started eyeing the Denon AVR X4000, which can be had for under $800 these days. Honestly, I just care about solid stereo and 7.1 multichannel audio quality, HDMI 1.4+, 1080p/24/60 support, and great automated room correction/calibration capabilities. Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Post by broncsrule21 on Apr 14, 2015 23:46:39 GMT -5
keep checking for b-stock....comes with the same warranty.
|
|
), however I had a NAD T752 for many years. A NAD would certainly be a worthy alternative to the 8100, they have a similar design approach, putting most of the money where it makes a difference in sound quality, rather than in piling feature over feature and skimping in other areas (read power supply...)
.
.
