|
|
Post by faralon on Aug 10, 2020 13:05:07 GMT -5
Looking for some suggestions. New home, prewired the living room for 5.2.4 (in ceiling atmos). The atmos speakers are already installed. Given that this is the living room system, I'm not looking to throw tons of money at it. Speakers are Micca in-wall, in-ceiling for the surrounds/atmos/center. L/R's will likely be some Jamo S803's. Subs will probably be the Jamo thin line subs.
2 questions I guess. Do I pull the trigger and spend $1000 on a budget 9ch receiver? If so, recommendations?
2ndly, do I just forget about 9ch all together and spend about $500 on a 7ch and just not use one of the in-ceiling pairs?
Thoughts? Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by frenchyfranky on Aug 10, 2020 14:16:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on Aug 10, 2020 22:03:13 GMT -5
Yep, what he said. Probably the best deal around for a 9-ch AVR. And they say it sounds pretty good too. |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Aug 11, 2020 6:32:11 GMT -5
Denon is solid. Best of the mostly computer much less so Amplifiers inside. Decoders and switching and more are the claim to fame today of AVRs. The Denon recommended here is a great jumping off point with the quality and versatility that will grow with you as your needs change. Avoid Onkyo and Pioneer at all costs. Marantz will be more, and Yamaha is still a solid choice. But from The Sound United gang, the Denon is a good choice.
|
|
cawgijoe
Emo VIPs 
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it." - Yogi Berra
Posts: 5,035
|
Post by cawgijoe on Aug 11, 2020 6:35:13 GMT -5
Denon is solid. Best of the mostly computer much less so Amplifiers inside. Decoders and switching and more are the claim to fame today of AVRs. The Denon recommended here is a great jumping off point with the quality and versatility that will grow with you as your needs change. Avoid Onkyo and Pioneer at all costs. Marantz will be more, and Yamaha is still a solid choice. But from The Sound United gang, the Denon is a good choice. Agree with this. Denon makes a solid product as does marantz and Yamaha. I did own a Pioneer Elite receiver and it was fine, but IMO a step below Denon. |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Aug 11, 2020 6:47:52 GMT -5
Pioneer as they ran out of money and started really declining and a shame too. I sold Pioneer Elite in the best of times. Now it is garbage. I remember the Urishi Wood Finish and piano black. The Honeycomb copper chassis. It was about the details and proud build. Anything Elite was sweet. CD players, Amplifiers, Preamplifiers, Cassette Decks. Pioneer was a contender. Now they suck and just take your money.
|
|
|
|
Post by frenchyfranky on Aug 11, 2020 7:20:53 GMT -5
Also like Marantz but in receiver for the equivalent model, nothing more except for the price. Denon and Marantz is the same manufacturer.
I specifically pointed out the Denon AVR-X3600H, because it's the first in the Denon lineup to have pre-out for the channels, so in future you can add power amp for your front or any other channels.
|
|
|
|
Post by frenchyfranky on Aug 11, 2020 7:44:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by davidl81 on Aug 11, 2020 7:51:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by faralon on Aug 11, 2020 9:11:25 GMT -5
Thanks for the advice all. Looks like the verdict is to go 9ch and not 7! Roger That!
|
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Aug 11, 2020 10:21:31 GMT -5
Denon & Marantz are one and the same company. Yamaha has the best reliability IMO, and I'm not alone with that opinion. I've yet to have one die on me. But Denon/Marantz have the best room correction if you need it. YPAO works fine for me since I don't have a very active room or I'd probably have a Denon. At any rate, if you don't mind buying refurbished (comes with warranty) Accessories4Less have some great deals on receivers. When new models hit the showroom floors it isn't uncommon for a buyer to get a new unused product. |
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on Aug 11, 2020 11:54:59 GMT -5
Something to keep in mind is that Denon and Marantz AVRs are "voiced" differently. Searching the internet you can find technical reports comparing Denon and Marantz, showing how Marantz tweak the DAC output filter (if I recall correctly) to have a slight roll off of the top end.
There is also the (un)famous HDAMs circuit used by Marantz. Some sees it as unnecessary, additional components in the audio path, others touts its discrete implementation. As always in audio (and anything involving our senses), YMMV.
|
|
|
|
Post by gus4emo on Aug 11, 2020 21:18:21 GMT -5
Denon!
|
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Aug 12, 2020 5:37:53 GMT -5
Also like Marantz but in receiver for the equivalent model, nothing more except for the price. Denon and Marantz is the same manufacturer. I specifically pointed out the Denon AVR-X3600H, because it's the first in the Denon lineup to have pre-out for the channels, so in future you can add power amp for your front or any other channels. Not quite. They are under the same Distribution here in the USA. Sound United in Southern California. But they are not the same manufacturer. Collaboration and commonality sure. But they certainly are not the same. Look under the hood, and you see the power supplies of a Denon are not anywhere close to what a Marantz is. The pressures of the technology are more felt on the Denon than the Marantz, hence the higher costs on the Marantz. A Toroidal Transformer is nowhere to be found on a Denon for instance. The older 4000 and 5000 receivers years back were power houses. Now they are computers with gutless Amplifiers inside in direct comparison. I hate to rain on people's parade. But it wasn't my idea. Since many things are going full centric control for the TV, optical to anything you want says you don't have to get the latest HDMI whatever to keep up with that arms race. You can get one of the beefy traditional receivers with power built in instead. Versus the latest technology with gutless Amplifiers built in. A choice. |
|
cawgijoe
Emo VIPs
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it." - Yogi Berra
Posts: 5,035
|
Post by cawgijoe on Aug 12, 2020 6:29:34 GMT -5
Also like Marantz but in receiver for the equivalent model, nothing more except for the price. Denon and Marantz is the same manufacturer. I specifically pointed out the Denon AVR-X3600H, because it's the first in the Denon lineup to have pre-out for the channels, so in future you can add power amp for your front or any other channels. Not quite. They are under the same Distribution here in the USA. Sound United in Southern California. But they are not the same manufacturer. Collaboration and commonality sure. But they certainly are not the same. Look under the hood, and you see the power supplies of a Denon are not anywhere close to what a Marantz is. The pressures of the technology are more felt on the Denon than the Marantz, hence the higher costs on the Marantz. A Toroidal Transformer is nowhere to be found on a Denon for instance. The older 4000 and 5000 receivers years back were power houses. Now they are computers with gutless Amplifiers inside in direct comparison. I hate to rain on people's parade. But it wasn't my idea. Since many things are going full centric control for the TV, optical to anything you want says you don't have to get the latest HDMI whatever to keep up with that arms race. You can get one of the beefy traditional receivers with power built in instead. Versus the latest technology with gutless Amplifiers built in. A choice. The other option of course is to pick your "computer" and then add a multichannel amplifier using the preouts of the receiver. More money, yes, but usually more satisfaction. |
|
|
|
Post by frenchyfranky on Aug 12, 2020 7:24:38 GMT -5
Also like Marantz but in receiver for the equivalent model, nothing more except for the price. Denon and Marantz is the same manufacturer. I specifically pointed out the Denon AVR-X3600H, because it's the first in the Denon lineup to have pre-out for the channels, so in future you can add power amp for your front or any other channels. Not quite. They are under the same Distribution here in the USA. Sound United in Southern California. But they are not the same manufacturer. Collaboration and commonality sure. But they certainly are not the same. Look under the hood, and you see the power supplies of a Denon are not anywhere close to what a Marantz is. The pressures of the technology are more felt on the Denon than the Marantz, hence the higher costs on the Marantz. A Toroidal Transformer is nowhere to be found on a Denon for instance. The older 4000 and 5000 receivers years back were power houses. Now they are computers with gutless Amplifiers inside in direct comparison. I hate to rain on people's parade. But it wasn't my idea. Since many things are going full centric control for the TV, optical to anything you want says you don't have to get the latest HDMI whatever to keep up with that arms race. You can get one of the beefy traditional receivers with power built in instead. Versus the latest technology with gutless Amplifiers built in. A choice. Denon AVR-X3600H   Marantz SR6014   |
|
|
|
Post by vcautokid on Aug 12, 2020 9:46:49 GMT -5
Well this is kind of sad testimony. Why would you pay more for a Marantz if this is the case. Brand naming with the same guts inside. Game played around for years. But kind of sad this is making Marantz less than what it should be. Thank you Frenchyfranky. Some people have been dishonest with me. I appreciate the heads up.
|
|
cawgijoe
Emo VIPs
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it." - Yogi Berra
Posts: 5,035
|
Post by cawgijoe on Aug 12, 2020 9:50:51 GMT -5
Between the two brands I have always liked the look of Denon. I don't like the round circle on the front of the Marantz units....hey, we have to choose somehow, right!?
|
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on Aug 12, 2020 10:32:17 GMT -5
The thing with AVRs is that there is no consistency from one model to another, even within the same brand, when it comes to performance.
The X3600 from Denon seems to be one of those rare convergence where features, measurements, sound quality and price hit the sweet spot FOR AN AVR.
The argument about AVR being gutless when it comes to power is valid up to a point. The poor designers are pushed by marketing to cram more and more channels in more or less the same volume. That means either finding more space for a bigger transformer or playing the numbers game, sizing the system to hit the "magical" 100W per channel with only two channels driven (to make marketing happy) and then not caring much what power you can get with seven or nine channels in operation.
Even if you can design a decent power supply (Marantz and perhaps Denon have this "75% power guarantee", meaning that their AVR will deliver at least 75% of the rated 2-ch power over 5-ch), there is still the issue of power dissipation. With a class AB power stage you are going to have heat, period, and lots of it with seven, nine or eleven power amps all active at the same time. Not easy being a AVR designer these days.
Personally, I am not interested in anything beyond 5.1, perhaps 5.2 some day in the future. Due to that, and now that the days of heavy duty 5.1 AVR are over, if I had to buy an AVR, I'd "buy up", get a 7-ch or 9-ch AVR and take advantage of the extra power supply headroom using only five of them.
I used to have a NAD T752 5.1 AVR. It was heavy, with a sizeable transformer and could drive five channel simultaneously, full bandwidth at full power all day long. I had 6 Ohm, 87dB full range speakers as my mains, no sub and was never left wanting for power.
Once the NAD died I got the Emotiva Fusion 8100, which is a beafy AVR in its own right (within its design limit). With now 90dB+ speakers and supplemented by a Rythmik L12 sub, it outperforms the NAD in my 18x14 room.
As always, you need to look at the equipment in the context of the application. Big room, low sensitivity/low impedance speakers, no sub and high listening levels? Forget the average AVR. And if you have to get a $4,000-5000 AVR to satisfy your needs, you can get a better sounding system with separate at that price.
|
|
|
|
Post by frenchyfranky on Aug 12, 2020 10:52:24 GMT -5
Well this is kind of sad testimony. Why would you pay more for a Marantz if this is the case. Brand naming with the same guts inside. Game played around for years. But kind of sad this is making Marantz less than what it should be. Thank you Frenchyfranky. Some people have been dishonest with me. I appreciate the heads up. To be honest I didn't compared a lot of model, I made the exercise just for this specific price range of receivers, last fall for a buddy who changed his 30 years old sounds system. Certainly that in the Marantz big flagship they're designed specifically for them but in the receivers mass market they share a lot with Denon. |
|
