Yamaha RX-A2020 AVENTAGE 9.2 Networking A/V Receiver Review

[admin]

The RX-A2020 retails for $1700 and is the 2nd to top-of-the-line receiver in Yamaha's 2012 Aventage (pronounced Ah-ven-taj) lineup (under the RX-A3020). The Aventage series has consistently impressed us with its build quality, sound quality, and abundant features, so the RX-A2020 has a lot to live up to. This year seems to be the year of 4K, Airplay, and network apps. With all of the potential options on the market, we were excited to see what Yamaha put together for the xx20 line-up. The receiver has 11 speaker connections, 2 independently controlled sub outputs, dual HDMI outputs, 3 powered zones, plenty of inputs, and a plethora of network features. Read on to find out how well all of these features are implemented and how the RX-A2020 stacks up against the competition.


Discuss "Yamaha RX-A2020 AVENTAGE 9.2 Networking A/V Receiver Review" here. Read the article.

[BoredSysAdmin]

Excellent review! My only slight gripe is with this part:

including 192K FLAC files.

I'd rather see it would say "HD FLAC" files or "192/24 FLAC files".
"192K Flac" just looks weird for me, it's not same as 192k Mp3 - which would indicate bitrate

[gmichael]

I just picked up a RX-A3000 last year at a great sale price, so I'm not in the market for a new AVR right now. Still, it's good to see the progress being made. At this rate, the models available when I am ready to upgrade will be very advanced.
4k seems way off in the distance to me. I'm supprised to see Yamaha getting on the boat so early.

[STRONGBADF1]

Thanks for the review.

I am really surprised that Yamaha still hasn't updated to be able to adjust below 62.5hz. I'm really unimpressed with the after YPAO measurements also. I would love to see a comparison test done the same way with the other room correction systems. I am still running my RX-V2500 and would love to see how the others compare so I can upgrade.

[antagron]

Excellent review! My only slight gripe is with this part:

I'd rather see it would say "HD FLAC" files or "192/24 FLAC files".
"192K Flac" just looks weird for me, it's not same as 192k Mp3 - which would indicate bitrate

How about the part where he say "Uncompressed FLAC files". What? If you write for Audioholics, you should know FLAC files *ARE* compressed. What he meant to say was 24/96 FLAC files or something like that.

[3db]

Nice review.

I was hoping that YPAO would be more effective in correcting room acoustics. I like the results obtained from YPAO on my RX-V1800 which is basic compared to that of the A2020. Maybe its academic at this point to see a flatter response??

[Adam]

How about the part where he say "Uncompressed FLAC files". What?

I'm no FLAC expert, but a quick Google search showed that they exist.

[Tomorrow]

Thanks for the review.

I am really surprised that Yamaha still hasn't updated to be able to adjust below 62.5hz. I'm really unimpressed with the after YPAO measurements also. I would love to see a comparison test done the same way with the other room correction systems. I am still running my RX-V2500 and would love to see how the others compare so I can upgrade.

Hey there, SBF1! I hope this finds you well.

You'll be glad to know that, in my experience at least, there seems to have been a large improvement in the YPAO system. I recently retired my RX-V2500 and splurged on an RX-A3010. The audio difference is quite notable. (It's possible the YPAO mike has improved...but it looks the same as the one with the 2500...so I don't think this is the source of the improvement.) The new unit's YPAO has smoothed out my room's FR by roughly 50% (through the entire system FR) over the 2500..measured by DVE disc frequency sweeps and an spl meter.

Unfortunately, I can't give you accurate YPAO improvement figures below my sub xovers. (I DO like the individual speakers xover ability that the 2500 does not have). I have too many filters in the loop already. I pretty much know my room modes, so I have tweaked the EQ system in each of my SVS PB12+'s and use an AntiMode 8033 on top of that. So much more than YPAO is playing with (pardon the expression ) my bottom end.

This is definitely the best my room has sounded for both 2-channel music and HT movie play. I've also set up the front presence speakers and they have added (again, IMHO) significant improvement in front action. Dialog lift works pretty well, too.

All in all, I think the 3010 was a painful but quite worthwhile investment. I would take the plunge on a 3020 if you can afford it...or perhaps find a deal on the soon-to-be-discontinued 3010. You'll love the 9.2 audio!

Do it, buddy. Do it!

[Ziontrain]

Its 2012 and we are steaming to 2013.
- This product has a GUI that really does not belong on a consumer product released in the last five years
- The remote isnt exactly a best practice output either
- The room is clearly weak relative to what is technically possible in an affordable consumer product today. This because the processing power is weak and the old school OS inadequate

Then we get lipsick on the pig, such as airplay and "dual sub outputs" in a product that hmmm....doesnt do any EQ below 65hz. Okay....right...

How on earth does this review end up telling consumers to run and buy this product?

The AV receiver segment is lame compared to what is possible today at reasonable prices. And this product is a good example of the rot: year after year of "new" product that paves old cowpaths instead of building new highways.

Overly generous reviews like this will not help the situation ,at least if we want to get any improvement.

I appreciate that a few of these things are meekly listed as "suggestions for improvement". But honestly that should be titled something like "why you need to go back to the drawing board and come out with something worthy of a 2012 release date, before we recommend your product".

[Cliff_is]

Its 2012 and we are steaming to 2013.
- This product has a GUI that really does not belong on a consumer product released in the last five years
- The remote isnt exactly a best practice output either
- The room is clearly weak relative to what is technically possible in an affordable consumer product today. This because the processing power is weak and the old school OS inadequate

Then we get lipsick on the pig, such as airplay and "dual sub outputs" in a product that hmmm....doesnt do any EQ below 65hz. Okay....right...

How on earth does this review end up telling consumers to run and buy this product?

The AV receiver segment is lame compared to what is possible today at reasonable prices. And this product is a good example of the rot: year after year of "new" product that paves old cowpaths instead of building new highways.

Overly generous reviews like this will not help the situation ,at least if we want to get any improvement.

I appreciate that a few of these things are meekly listed as "suggestions for improvement". But honestly that should be titled something like "why you need to go back to the drawing board and come out with something worthy of a 2012 release date, before we recommend your product".

Ziontrain, you make some good points about the receiver market. Each year companies are adding new features, but I am still waiting for a receiver to really wow me. It is frustrating when a $50-$100 streaming device has more processing power and a nicer looking interface than a $2,000 AVR.

I did cover the outdated GUI and YPAO limitations in the review. It is true that the RX-A2020 receiver is not perfect, but with a few refinements (such as EQ below 62.5Hz, updated GUI, more internet features) it could really stand out.

As is, the receiver has the build quality, features, and performance of much of the competition. It also worked reliably in our tests. Therefore, I would recommend it; however, it was not rated 5/5 stars and did not receive a "highly recommended" title.