Yamahaholics [Archive] - Audioholics Home Theater Forums

View Full Version : Yamahaholics

rgriffin25

03-07-2004, 04:55 AM

I am very curious as to why there is so much hype about Yamaha in these forums?? One user has even gone so far as to use his model number as his user name. I have heard of such loyalty in other aspects of life. Take Ford and Chevy for example.. One is "Like a Rock" and the other is "Built Ford Tough". In reality both are great products and accomplish the same results. So do all us non-Yamaha owners a favor, and tell us what is so wonderful about these units. I am not at all being sarcastic when asking this. I am not asking for the specs that can be found in a PDF file at Yamaha's website.

Personal use and experience is prefered when replying. I guess the reason I am so curious is most answers to "please help me decide" questions is.. Yamaha 2400/1400. Is this personal bias, or have your thoroughly researched your product, comparing it to all models in its price range?

Please reply to this post so that we all may know the secret only Yamahaholics seem to know.

pam

03-07-2004, 05:47 AM

Hi

Some salesman told me that there was Yamaha customer that would get nothing but Yamaha. It seems this company was able to get extra fidelity. The fact that they have their owns DSP and their own 'sound' might be part of the reason.

From what I have seen the Yamaha lovers that are posting in this site have been able to propose other products (after Yamaha of course).

I must say that the RXV-2400 and 1400 are very good deals for the price. Also the RX-Z9 seems to be a good challenge for the title of best receiver. But a lot of other companies propose good products: Denon, HK, Pioneer, Rotel, etc.

zumbo

03-07-2004, 10:55 AM

My reason for loving Yamaha is a bit complex. In high school, I was over at a friends house, and he kicked on his dads Yamaha rack system. Now, this was a complete system with Yamaha speakers, and a small receiver. Looking at the system, you would think it was not that big of a deal. The reason it was not a big deal to me was because I had a system consisting of a seperate amp, tuner, eq, and Cerwin Vega D7's. The sound quality was so real. Not as loud as mine, but the sound was like the band was right there!

So when my amp gave out, I looked around for a new one. This was before the internet, or before I had ever heard of it. So I had to go with what was available. Onkyo was the best I could find. I went with a Pro-Logic receiver. I was never happy with this set-up. It did not match my seperates, although it has been very reliable.

My older brother later built a system with Yamaha and Paradigm. Out of the blue, there it was. That great sound I remembered so well. Since my system was working fine, I had no reason to go out and buy a new one. But, I did get a Yamaha 5-disc cd player knowing I would build a Yamaha system eventually. The cd player has never skipped in ten years.

With my Cerwins showing their age, foam surround cracking, it was time to update. I was able to hear many different brands of speakers, along with receivers and seperates. I knew what brand of electronics I was looking for. What I didn't know was which speakers.

So, I ordered the Yamaha RX-V1400, Yamaha DVD-S840, MB Quarts, & a recommended NHT sub. And there it was, although not as pure as the B&W 804's on seperates, the clean, pure, feel the vocals in your chest, and feels as if the musicians were in the room sound. Oh, and at a fraction of the cost of the B&W set-up! <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

RX-V2400

03-07-2004, 11:50 AM

Pam has answered this question correctly, The Z9 is the best consumer reciever out there, and the 2400 is the best value out there. That is why right now Yamaha is flavor of the month.

This question also reminds me to ask "where is Yamahaluver?"
he has not been around for some time!

JAB

03-07-2004, 03:17 PM

One of the main reasons I use Yamaha for my home theatre (Z9) is because I used to work for a high end audio store that sold the line, so I am very familiar with the sound and set-up. Yamaha has tremendous value and good sound for the buck, although I admit the Z9 is in different territory cost-wise. Yamaha is trying to make a statement - separates look out! There are a few things I don't  like about their A/V receivers, especially the multitude of DSP programs. I only use the DSP theatre programs (especially 70MM Spectacle, Sci-Fi, and Adventure) because of the huge theartre-like sound with the extra set of front DSP speakers. As far as I know, Yamaha is still the only company offering this speaker array. Theatre sound is so gimmicked anyway, and you can't beat the extra dimension the front DSP speakers give to the sound field.

As to the other DSP programs, which I never use, at least Yamaha has gone far afield to measure frequency response, reflection, decay etc. in actual cathedrals, concert halls, night clubs, etc. (all identified with each program) and attempted to duplicate the sound in your home. All this tremendous computing power is done with their own in-house chips, unavailable to any other manufacturer. The other manufacturers DSP programs are brewed in a lab and sound mostly awful. Still, I am of the old school - if the recording is done properly don't monkey with the sound.

There certainly is a lot of other A/V receivers with good sound, and I was very close to buying a Denon AVR5803 when I decided to wait for the Z9 (and wait I did - 5 months!!). The market is very competitive, and the A/V manufacturers are stumbling all over themselves to offer bang for the buck with good sound. The average consumer is very savy because of internet research, and the fact that most of the surviving audio/video (most, not all) mags pay a lot more attention to ear evaluation and less to meaningless specs ( thanks Harry Pearson and J.Gordon Holt!!).
A lot of the A/V manufacturers are now using proven high-end designs with high class power supplies, caps, decoding chips, etc. and paying a lot of attention to the resulting sound. Great for the consumer and the ear!

I just spent last evening helping a friend set-up his home theatre and music system (Yamaha & Totem speakers and sub woofer, a great combo). He bought a RX-Z1 that was heavily discounted and the sound that brute (I'm talking well recorded music) with the Totems put out was jaw-dropping. I am talking about wall to wall soundstage with incredible depth and imaging. This is sound that a few years back you would have to purchase super-buck BAT, Pass, Mark Levinson, Audio Research etc. to achieve.

I am runing the Z9 in 6.1 mode, as I don't have a big enough room for 7.1. I am using Totem Mani 2's as the front mains, a Totem Signature One for centre, a pair of Totem Micros for front DSP, Totem Model Ones (3) for rear, and 2 Velodyne HGS10's for stereo bass (thumbs up to Yamaha for providing 2 sub outputs that are actually stereo!). The sound is magnificent, and I know Gene and the boys will love this one (to bad about no sub output in Pure Direct Mode - Gene, a solution??).

I am currently setting up another system in my home using a NAD T763 with a different speaker manufacturer (Athena). Will report on my experience with this combo.

Other A/V receivers such as Marantz, Onkyo, Rotel, Arcam, B&K, Outlaw, JVC etc are receiving good press. All in the all, the consumer is the winner. Shop carefully and use the best A/D converters ever produced - your ears!!

Al

03-08-2004, 03:24 AM

Yamaha is all hype!

I based my purchase decision off of hype and appearances alone.

Why should I even look at other brands?

The word "Yamaha" has a nice ring to it!

All of the cool guys were buying them!

No other brands even come close.

All other brands bow down at the mighty thrown of Yamaha!

---------------------------------------------------------

Is this what you expected to hear?  My above comments are obviously meant to be sarcastic.  However, I do detect quite a few snide and condescending remarks in your post.  

"have your thoroughly researched your product, comparing it to all models in its price range?"

I think myself and other may take offense to your comments because you make it seem like we just woke up one morning and decided to throw money at something we did not adequately consider beforehand.  If you have any specific questions about the yamaha products we own, I'm sure myself and others would be happy to answer them!

best,

<img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':cool:'>

Shinerman

03-08-2004, 12:36 PM

Yamaha makes a fine receiver but so do most of the top receiver makers.  However,  right now, Yamaha is beating the comp. with it's features, realiablity, cost, performance,  value etc.  For under $1000 or even $1500, you can't find a better receiver than the rx-v1400 AND 2400.   I am sure once the Denon 3805 comes out, people will go wild over it.  But, from what I have seen so far it's seem to be pretty on par with the 1400/2400 and it's more money.  

In the end, go with what you like.  

Shinerman

hopjohn

03-09-2004, 02:25 AM

I've not had much experience with Yamaha receivers. The ones I have had experience with were more of the mid priced models. I never liked that they had the cheap spring clip speaker connections for the rear channels, while other brands in the same price range usually didn't. Maybe their higher end models compare better with the competion, but I've not had anyone specifically explain why they are so compelling. Their mid priced models always made me shy away from the brand in the past. Now there are numerous models that can be had for +/-150 dollars in the RX-V1400's price range yet I keep hearing in these forums that they are the best bang for the buck? Is it the components? the pre amp? what exactly? that makes it all the rage. And what about the Sony components is it that sucks so badly?

I'm not a real fan of trying to nit-pick over small differences in the quality of components anyway, especially when my room isn't completely acoustically sound. I think many people would be better off concentrating on getting every ounce of quality from their room sound rather than swapping receivers every couple of years for a new bell or whistle.

Rob Babcock

03-09-2004, 04:13 AM

Features are nice but most are overrated.  I'm not gonna chase my tail trying to get ten extra DSP's that will sound like crap anyway (no knock on Yammy- I don't really like hardly any of the DSPs except PLII).  For a feature to move me, it has to radically improve convenience or greatly improve the sound.  Not many "features" of the last couple years have done that, IMOHO.

I'm not a big Yammy fan myself, but to be honest, I haven't kept up with the new models.  I'm not an EE, but I'd guess that if you cracked the case on 10 budget models from 10 manufacturers, you'd probably find 95% of the same parts inside.  Sure, some brands make some of their own parts (or get them branded for them) how different are they in reality from competing parts?  Certainly they're not identical, but at lower price points you simply don't find many big performance differences.  It largely comes down to ergonomics, familiarity and brand loyalty/preference.

BTW, I'm a "Denon guy."  I'll buy another brand IF they make something I like better, but I'll always give them first crack when I'm ready to buy another model (I've got 2 Denon CD players, 1 Denon DVD deck, a Denon Dubbing CD deck & 1 Denon receiver).  Pretty much just like all you Yamaha guys! <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':laugh:'>

rgriffin25

03-09-2004, 04:14 AM

So maybe I was being a little condescending. Oh well! I am sick of people recommending this product and not justifying their reasoning. Give me a Break! The differences in the Denon 3803, Pioneer Elite 53TX/55TXi, Marantz SR7400 and the Yamaha 2400 are negligable.

It is not that I don't like the product, I just don't understand why so many people make it out to be so far superior. At this point if someone gave me one definitive reason it is so far above the other products mentioned I would be grateful. Comments such as "Best Value", "Some salesman told me" or "it blows the others aways with features" are unsatisfactory.

What concerns me is, that people who visit this site will read your comments and not take the time to audition various products. Making a blind purchase based on hype for the Yamaha 1400/2400 simply to save time. I am only making a stink about this because this site is supposed to be about pursuing the truth in audio.

Truth of the matter is.. There are several products out there that are equal to the almighty Yamaha.

RX-V2400

03-09-2004, 09:34 AM

rgriffin25: You are quite wrong when you say

"The differences in the Denon 3803, Pioneer Elite 53TX/55TXi, Marantz SR7400 and the Yamaha 2400 are negligable."

Can you get the Denon (which I love by the way) for $675? The reason the 2400 is a winner in its class is its value. It's not the greatest thing out there, I have NAD 2600 monoblocks attached to the front end of mine to make it work, but as a 7.1 ES/EX processor it is excellent and great value. The 2400 was rated a rave by all the mags and reviewers BEFORE it was flavour of the month here.

zipper

03-09-2004, 11:25 AM

My reasoning is similar to others'. 3 years ago,when I went shopping, I was able to compare the Denon, Yamaha, & Sony(ES too) with each other through the same sets of speakers. It came down to Denon & Yamaha(Sony sounded,well, kind of phony).Then the price difference made it simple. I don't have anything bad to say about Denon. The two compared pretty evenly so for $200 less I took the Yamaha. I just recently upgraded to a 3300 @ the closeout price of $600. That's $900 off retail & $700 cheaper than anywhere else within 50 miles of me. Didn't find any deals on Denon equipment.I would have to venture into Seattle to find any NAD or Marantz equipment, but for what I want,I can't see the reason to.Have listened to B&K,Krell, & Parasound at the same place I bought the Yamaha(my original 620) & I loved most of it,but can't afford it.

rgriffin25

03-09-2004, 11:28 AM

In one of the earlier posts a fellow yamaha fan stated that " For under $1000 or even $1500, you can't find a better receiver than the rx-v1400 AND 2400". So that is why I included the 3803 and the 55TXi in this group. If you were to buy the 2400 or the 3803 at Ultimate or other similar electronics stores the price would be the same $999. So I do feel that they should be compared. Even if you throw out the Denon, and only compare the Marantz 7400, and Pioneer Elite 53TX (which I bought for $645) the value is the same.

Please do not feel that you must defend your receiver. This topic was brought up to help others decide on a more realistic level which receiver to buy.

Shinerman

03-09-2004, 11:39 AM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>rgriffin25 : So maybe I was being a little condescending. Oh well! I am sick of people recommending this product and not justifying their reasoning. Give me a Break! The differences in the Denon 3803, Pioneer Elite 53TX/55TXi, Marantz SR7400 and the Yamaha 2400 are negligable.

It is not that I don't like the product, I just don't understand why so many people make it out to be so far superior. At this point if someone gave me one definitive reason it is so far above the other products mentioned I would be grateful. Comments such as "Best Value", "Some salesman told me" or "it blows the others aways with features" are unsatisfactory.

What concerns me is, that people who visit this site will read your comments and not take the time to audition various products. Making a blind purchase based on hype for the Yamaha 1400/2400 simply to save time. I am only making a stink about this because this site is supposed to be about pursuing the truth in audio.

Truth of the matter is.. There are several products out there that are equal to the almighty Yamaha.
The differences are not negligable.  Like RX-V2400, there is a pretty big price defference in street prices.  That's a big deal to some.  Customer service is also very good with Yamaha. Try getting good customer service from Denon.  Won't happen.  YPAO on the Yamaha and a similiar system on some Pioneers is also a big difference.

Also I don't think you need to be concerned with anyone here giving hap-hazard advise about receivers.  Most people here are very good at telling people to get what they like. Most here will point out differences between models and give their favorites but will rarely state "get this receiver".  It just does not happen.

Why are you so concerned about advise on this board?  You state that most common answers won't cut it for you.   Fine, but the fact is and like Rob B. stated, most mid and lower level receivers are pretty much the same.  Because of this, answers like "best value feature for feature, best customer service, best DSPs, Auto Calibration, and PLIIx" become very important to some people.  

If your really worried about getting the best, then get some seperates.  They will outperform most mid to low ened A/V receivers hands down.  

Shinerman

zipper

03-09-2004, 11:40 AM

That's a nice price for the Pioneer you have.

RLA

03-09-2004, 12:23 PM

Hi All
One more thing to consider is reliability As a custom installer that last thing I want to do is put a system together for a client only to have to come back a week or two later and rip it all back out because of a defective component  I have the unique ability to see what the most dependable components are and Yamaha is the most dependable by far  I am not saying that I have never had a defective Yamaha
component but I have had far fewer than  the other major brands  The worst for me has been Pioneer/Pioneer Elite
with Onkyo not far behind
<img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

zumbo

03-09-2004, 05:37 PM

Have to comment on the price issue. Got my 1400 to my door for $581.

As far as recommendations, I have been recommending a H/K receiver because it is $1000 off!

Value for the features & power is the bottom line! If someone were to ask YOU for a receiver under $1000, what would YOU recommend? *<img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt='???'> (rgriffin25)

Rob Babcock

03-09-2004, 06:48 PM

Odd, I've had superb service from Denon on the rare occasion that any was necessary (once in many years and almost a dozen purchases).

Shinerman

03-09-2004, 08:15 PM

rgriffin25,

This post has me wondering.  Why don't the answers given to support a receiver's worth/value hold much weight with you?

I read comments like,

"Oh well! I am sick of people recommending this product and not justifying their reasoning. Give me a Break!"

and

"Comments such as "Best Value", "Some salesman told me" or "it blows the others aways with features" are unsatisfactory."

and

"What concerns me is, that people who visit this site will read your comments and not take the time to audition various products. Making a blind purchase based on hype for the Yamaha 1400/2400 simply to save time. I am only making a stink about this because this site is supposed to be about pursuing the truth in audio.

Truth of the matter is.. There are several products out there that are equal to the almighty Yamaha."

and

"Please do not feel that you must defend your receiver. This topic was brought up to help others decide on a more realistic level which receiver to buy."

I start to feel like maybe myself and others are biased and maybe not giving the best advise.  Could we be Yamaha snobs?  You have given me and maybe others the idea that maybe you think our advise it not in the best interest of the posters.  You have given me and maybe the others the idea that we are missing something.  You seem to think our advise does not cut it in making an informed decision, at least by your standards.

BUT, then I read this post by you.

"After comparing the 2 units and finding no major difference, I decided to go with the unit that caught my eye with its glossy finish. No regrets here!"

WTF!?!?!?  LOL, LOL!  

Ah ha, when all else fails, go for the pretty one!  

Is that helping someone make a decision of which receiver to buy on a more realistic level?

No offense intended but I pride myself on giving pretty sound advise.  I try not to play favorites but tell it like it is.  I also  try not to talk above my head about things I don't understand.    

Anyway, just thought it was kindof funny.

Shinerman

zumbo

03-09-2004, 08:27 PM

Rob Babcock

03-09-2004, 09:38 PM

Hey, what's wrong with picking the pretty one!? <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':laugh:'>

rgriffin25

03-09-2004, 09:41 PM

Shinerman,

Maybe you need to relax a bit. I was not at all trying attack you or insult your knowledge about Home Theater products. Or anyone else for that matter.

I just felt that most responses that recommended the Yamaha receivers were not very informative. I thought that members such as yourself might give a better response if provoked to do so.

So instead of nit-picking each of my posts in hope of running me off, share with us your experiences with different products. So that we all may be better informed when spending thousands on our dream system.

By the way "Beauty" is not skin deep with my receiver.

zumbo

03-09-2004, 10:11 PM

You can put pearls on a pig, but it's still a pig. <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':laugh:'>

I am sure your receiver is a great receiver, sorry you are not as certain about your purchase as we are. *<img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt='???'>

P.S. Not trying to run anyone off. I am here for the learning experience. Nothing wrong with a little good humor. I certainly took no offense with your comments! <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

im timmy

03-10-2004, 01:50 AM

I like the sound of the 2400 period. Clear, well defined, ands sounds powerful to me without any problems. I don't use the dsp's, I do like the features on this unit, and that does play into a decision to some. I like the look of the unit, nice finish. I am not biased towards yamaha, I really compared the 2400 to the denon 3803, and onkyo. All of these manufacturers sound good to me, but they do sound different. The denon and the onkyo to me are warmer, they are well defined to my ear as well. The sound of my 2400 seems more edgy, I like it. Speakers paired with these units have alot to do with how they sound to many also. This is all just my opinion, I have posted here that if the 3805 were out the same time I may have gone the denon route just for a change of sound. From the looks of the 3805, i'm sure many will buy it, it is sharp looking. And lets all keep it real in that Company reputation does play a role in decision making. I would be confident buying a denon or an onkyo or a few others for that matter based on reputation and other reviews. Try listening to a yamaha and some others and decide for yourself what you like, and keep inmind the speakers that you will pair the unit with.  <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'>

rgriffin25

03-10-2004, 02:07 AM

Shinerman,

Perhaps my description of the Pioneer was not as technical as you like. The last time I checked, several magazines consider the asthetics of a product to be important. Some even use it when calculating the overall score. In my opinion the yamaha's build quality is not on par with the pioneer. The front panel looks cheap and the remote is a nightmare.

When making the comparison between the two receivers I compared the spec sheets thouroughly. There were only minor differences in the two.

The Yamaha upconverts to component video.
(which with my tv I do not need that feature.)
The Yamaha has DPL IIx
For those keeping score that is 2 points for Yammy!

Pioneer Elite
Multiple EQ settings- allows users to use MCACC or 2 other custom settings for different sources.
Hi-Bit audio conversion - Converts all audio sources to 96/24 resolution
Build quality and ergonomics

Then if you consider I bought the Pioneer for $680 shipped, it was the best value at the time.
Pioneer 3 points for performance and with the price factored in, +1 it receives a 4.

So on that particular day the Pioneer won. I have no regrets on my purchase. *With all the other specs compared there is no reason at all anyone shopping for a good "value" receiver should disregard the Pioneer VSX-53TX.

About the comment " I also try not to talk above my head about things I don't understand" You couldn't be further from the truth. I work at an electronis store and have hands on experience installing several brands of Home Theater receivers. A majority of the time spent at work is installing HD/ Home theater equipment purchased at our store.

On several occations I have installed Higher-End Home Theater receivers such as the Denon 5803. I have experience connecting Yamaha, Onkyo, and Pioneer Elite receivers.

I am not claiming that I am an expert in the field. But I can say that I have been around the various brands *enough to make a good decision on what brands are a good choice.

Shinerman

03-10-2004, 11:13 AM

Relax rgriffin25,

I just thought it was funny that you went on and on about wanting more in depth reasons why Yamaha is better and stated that the ordinary reasons would not cut but then stated the deciding factor for you was a glossy finish.   See, that's still funny. <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

And my not talking over my head comment was not about you.  It was about me. Sorry.  I in no way questioned your expertise which is clearly more than mine.

Remember, just because someone elses opinion does not match yours, that does not mean the other opinions are not valid.  You know that they say, "Opinions are like A^%*$#@, everyones got one".

Shinerman  <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':cool:'>

03-10-2004, 11:39 AM

Over the last 25 years I have owned three Yamaha receivers.  My first one was a 2 channel receiver that I owned for 15 years.

I have been pleased with the build quality and the sound.  Another reason I have purchased my last two Yamaha recievers is that I have established a great relationship with the local dealer that sells Yamaha.

stiletto pat

03-10-2004, 12:54 PM

I just had the opportunity to extensively A/B test a Yamaha Z-1 against a B&K AVR-507 on my choice of speakers - Sonus Faber Grand Pianos (also had Bost Acoustics, Monitor Audio Golds and Martin Logans, but the Sonus Fabers sounded the best to me on both receivers), and determined that the B&K provided markedly better sound, at about the same price (at least currently).  I like the look of the Yamaha and all the extra options/settings/features/gimmicks they provide, but let's face it, when I want to really listen to music, I want it to sound the best.  That's why I'm leaning towards the B&K right now, unless someone can tell me otherwise......  <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':cool:'>
Pat

Shinerman

03-10-2004, 01:16 PM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>stiletto pat : I just had the opportunity to extensively A/B test a Yamaha Z-1 against a B&K AVR-507 on my choice of speakers - Sonus Faber Grand Pianos (also had Bost Acoustics, Monitor Audio Golds and Martin Logans, but the Sonus Fabers sounded the best to me on both receivers), and determined that the B&K provided markedly better sound, at about the same price (at least currently). *I like the look of the Yamaha and all the extra options/settings/features/gimmicks they provide, but let's face it, when I want to really listen to music, I want it to sound the best. *That's why I'm leaning towards the B&K right now, unless someone can tell me otherwise...... *<img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':cool:'>
Pat
Oooo yeah,  Those B&K receivers are nice.  A bit out of my range.  OK, a big bit.

One thing to consider.  Since your spending that kind of money, you might consider going with separates.  That way you have money invested in your amps that will last for a long time and are not really going to become outdated anytime soon.  You can simply upgrade your Pre/Pro as technology advances.  

Just a thought.  I personally can't bring myself to pay that kind of money for something that will be outdated in 3 to 5 years.  Although, if ya got the money, go for it.

Shinerman

stiletto pat

03-10-2004, 01:43 PM

I understand your point, and it is well taken.  I too, have always been a separates kinda guy.  My issue now with separates is cost and simplicity, as well as sound.  The separates cost a good bit more, not to mention the additional big dollars for quality interconnects!!!  Plus, with the price decrease on the AVR-507, it is much more affordable.

Actually, what I didn't mention previously was that I really did an A/B/C test, which also included the B&K Ref 50 Processor and 200.7 Power Amp.  I could not tell a difference between the AVR-507 and the pre/amp combo until it was turned up to around +10 db (which was getting pretty dang loud - much louder than my wife would ever let me listen before divorce papers began to fly.... <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'> ), and at that point, the receiver started to run out of gas while the amp continued to shine.  For the extra +-$2000 plus interconnects, it becomes a matter of swallowing my pride and understanding that I'm getting old - thus, the receiver wins this battle.

Also, B&K makes it a point to allow one to upgrade their products.  For example, you can upgrade the prior model 307 to a 507 for about $500, and everything is upgraded except for the video processing.  Oh well, you can't have it all.

Thanks guys....

Pat

Shinerman

03-10-2004, 02:43 PM

Good point.  I was thinking  the diff. was around $700 to $1000. I forgot that B&K dropped some of their prices on the 507.   $2000 is a bit steep to justify the upgrade.  

Shinerman

stiletto pat

03-10-2004, 02:58 PM

I know - I'd really like the separates, but I have to exercise some reason.    

Anyway, can anyone think of any other reasons that I might be making a big mistake by taking the plunge on the B&K?  I'm getting ready to buy, and it's hard to keep holding back.  Same problem on a DVD - Universal Player - can't get anyone to make a definitive recommendation - Denon 2900, Yamaha 2300 Mk II or Marantz DV-8400??  (I do understand that no one on the forum has seen both units side by side)  I hate to make a large mistake, but I'm also anxious to get on with other things....
Pat

zumbo

03-10-2004, 06:12 PM

rgriffin25. You have caused me to research your receiver, & I have concluded that it does not even compare to the RX-V1400. Your receiver only has 100wx7. The RX-V1400 is 110wx7. That, my friend, is 70 more watts. And you can get one all day long for around 70 dollars less than you paid for yours! I can see why you are upset! The RX-V2400 is 120wx7. That, my friend, is 140 more watts. You can find one of these for about what you paid for yours!

here: (http://store.theelectronicsshowroom.com/yarx7.html)

zipper

03-10-2004, 06:20 PM

I've been drooling over a B&K 507 that's on sale for $3K. If I could afford it,I'd buy it over any other flagship.Actually,I can afford it but it would mean no vacation this year.

 Pat,any chance your finding this @ Magnolia?

stiletto pat

03-10-2004, 06:24 PM

I'm sorry, what do you mean by "@ Magnolia"?

zipper

03-10-2004, 06:29 PM

Up in the area I live (30 miles N of Seattle),the best hifi store we have is called Magnolia A/V. They happen to carry almost all the brand names you mentioned in your original post. They have the 507 on sale for $2999(floor model). Like I said,I'd take it over the flagships.

Shinerman

03-10-2004, 06:42 PM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>stiletto pat : I know - I'd really like the separates, but I have to exercise some reason. * *

Anyway, can anyone think of any other reasons that I might be making a big mistake by taking the plunge on the B&K? *I'm getting ready to buy, and it's hard to keep holding back. *Same problem on a DVD - Universal Player - can't get anyone to make a definitive recommendation - Denon 2900, Yamaha 2300 Mk II or Marantz DV-8400?? *(I do understand that no one on the forum has seen both units side by side) *I hate to make a large mistake, but I'm also anxious to get on with other things....
Pat
In terms of DVD players.  I have heard and read very good reviews of the Denon 2900.  Seems to be a great player.  Of the three, I don't think you would be sorry with any of them.   They are all top notch players.  Might come down to the best deal.

Shinerman

03-11-2004, 03:34 PM

rgriffen,
Like I asked in my first response, if you have any specific questions about yamaha products, we will make our best attempt to answer your questions.  Otherwise, this just turns in to a couple of guys defending the products they purchased.  I hope you enjoy your unit!

Oh yeah, yamaha rules all <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':;):'>  !!!

best,

<img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':cool:'>

rgriffin25

03-12-2004, 01:05 AM

zumbo,

Please do not assume that I am upset over my purchase. The sarcasm in my earlier posts was towards the people who use generic comments to recommend a receiver. Not discontent for the products I own.

This reminds me of the movie Spinal Tap..
Does your volume knob go up to 11??
I think mine only goes up to 10  

If so yours is 1 louder than mine!

S.R. Johnson

03-28-2004, 11:00 PM

HI my name is Sarandon and I would like to add some things in this discussion. Yamaha has involved in music and making products for over 100 years!! Yamaha has brought some things that you would never had if they had invented such as the IC chip and the Digital Soundfield Processor just to name a few. Now I know that there are some receiver brands out there that can beat the Yamaha hands down in certain areas but does not mean that the Yamaha can beat them at their own game!  You just have to understand that Yamaha is a world wide brand name that is BOTH respected and sometimes feared! But that is IMO! And if I cant the sound out of an Yamaha receiver that I want (which i seriously doubt!!!!) I would go to my other number one brand, and that is Marantz!

03-29-2004, 08:10 PM

I have owned 2 Yamahas in the past and I really enjoyed the overall quality of the product as well as the sound of the product (rx-v1200 & 2400). I think the Yamaha DSP's are the best in the business if you enjoy that, I never used mine becasue I never wanted to hear what Top Gun would sound like in some church in Germany.

I had the chance to swap my 2400 for a Denon 3805 strait across (paid right around $850 w/tax for the 2400, so I think I got a good deal on the Denon) I was hesitant to begin with as I have always owned Yamaha in the past but I thought I would give it a shot, very happy I did.
.
This is my first Denon product and so far I prefer the sound of the Denon over the Yamaha, but there are alot of thing I prefer on the Yamaha over the Denon (like the entire shell design front and back pannel layout and I really miss the good ol amber display) But the sound is what is important to me, that is where the Denon is the clear winner.... for my speaker set it just sounds much deeper and way more powerfull, again, in my opinion.

Time will only tell on how my luck is with this Denon but when the time comes to purchase a new receiver, I will go with what sounds best with my ears and speakers. I can tell you, I will look at Denon and Yamaha first!  <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

Brent.

My Home Theater (http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/simplemind355/my_photos) (have not had time to update my receiver picture yet)

Receiver: Denon AVR-3805
Fronts: Polk Audio RTi10's
Center: Polk Audio CSi5
Surrounds: Polk Auido FXi3's
Rear Center: Polk Audio RM2600 Center Channel
Sub: Polk Audio PSW404 x2

sparky

03-29-2004, 11:01 PM

I bought a yamaha 2400, a velodyne dd 15 sub, and i am using two sonus faber electa amator speakers with a samsung 46" dlp hi def. I am getting my mind blown at the sound of this thing. Everything comes in digital from the cable company and the cd player to the yamaha and the yamaha converts it to analog. The sub blows away any sub i have heard and the yamaha sets everything up automatically with a mic. The sub uses an on screen display and a mic with a test tone too. I cross at the thx 80hz. You can get the bass response very flat and the parameric equalizer is 100% digital. A lot of my friends have self powered subs but their jaws drop when they hear this thing. Every note is perfectly clear down very deep with no boomy sound at all. It is so tight and clean, about all you can do is grin. I don't know how much the yamaha has to do with the sound but the bass crossover is seamless and the high end is crystal clear. I have owned a lot of high end tube gear over the years but this is a new experience for me. I never though I would be enthused about a receiver but I love it. The sansumg is wonderful too. What a picture!!! My advise to all you guys is to save your money and buy a velodyne dd 15 or 18 or 12 or 10. If you can't afford one at least go hear one. They are way ahead of anyone else out there. The yamaha seems like a bargain. The velodyne is another story, you have to pay dearly for it.

abe

03-30-2004, 05:11 AM

rgriffin25,

You seems pissed off by lots of 'generic' praises of Yamaha gear AND claims 'there are many other equally good by .....'.  But I have lot of trouble finding any 'non-generic' facts from you either.   Any detailed reason why xyz or abc is as good as or better than Yamaha (similar priced of course) ?

Personally I owner Yamaha 1400, and 496 before that.  Until last year I've also owned  Bryston 4B-ST power amp with Camelot DAC for my 2 channel gear.   The SOUND QUALITY of Yamaha puzzled me comparing to my 2 channels which are highly claimed within audiophile circle ( Audiogon, AudioAsylum, AudioReview, etc ).    Later last year I sold all my gears and only Yamaha stayed.   That is how good Yamaha is.  

FYI,  my current set up comprises of Yamaha 1400 + Dynaudio Contour Special 25's ( Google them and see how good they are! )

So you still having problem with my recommending Yahama ? :-)

Abe

rgriffin25

03-30-2004, 07:52 PM

Abe,

You were correct in saying that I did not like the generic comments left about Yamaha. I know they make a good product. If you have read all of the posts in this thread you will notice a couple of things. The first few that were left were very basic and those people missed the point of the question. Now your response and many others are right on target.
I'm sure there are people that appreciate the real life experiences over "a salesman told me it was the best".  I am not saying that all comments were like that. I just felt if your going to make a recommendation you need to back it.

rgriffin25

03-31-2004, 01:47 AM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>rgriffin25 : When making the comparison between the two receivers I compared the spec sheets thouroughly. There were only minor differences in the two.

The Yamaha upconverts to component video.
(which with my tv I do not need that feature.)
The Yamaha has DPL IIx
For those keeping score that is 2 points for Yammy!

Pioneer Elite
Multiple EQ settings- allows users to use MCACC or 2 other custom settings for different sources.
Hi-Bit audio conversion - Converts all audio sources to 96/24 resolution
Build quality and ergonomics

Then if you consider I bought the Pioneer for $680 shipped, it was the best value at the time.
Pioneer 3 points for performance and with the price factored in, +1 it receives a 4.

So on that particular day the Pioneer won. I have no regrets on my purchase.  With all the other specs compared there is no reason at all anyone shopping for a good "value" receiver should disregard the Pioneer VSX-53TX.
Abe,

BTW I felt that this explanation I posted earlier in the thread was sufficient... <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':;):'>

hopjohn

03-31-2004, 02:10 AM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>abe : rgriffin25,

You seems pissed off by lots of 'generic' praises of Yamaha gear AND claims 'there are many other equally good by .....'. *But I have lot of trouble finding any 'non-generic' facts from you either. * Any detailed reason why xyz or abc is as good as or better than Yamaha (similar priced of course) ?
What was generic about those claims? Sounded pretty detailed to me.

Your Bryston was inferior to the Yammy? You've just saved me thousands my friend. Now if I can only figure out how to sell all these pet rocks...I'd be set for life. <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/glare.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':glare:'>

A. Vivaldi

03-31-2004, 02:40 AM

I think Yamaha makes pretty good musical instruments, but I've noticed little difference in sound or build quality between Yamaha, Denon and other mass market audio. I think the reason this gear is so popular because it gives good affordable multi-channel because that's what's in, not to mention the fact that truly great MC audiophile grade gear is expensive, which is why I don't have any. I don't know why this board is so popular for Yamaha, considering the quality of the Administrators reference systems, who apparently have little to do with it.

RX-V2400

04-01-2004, 02:09 PM

Your argument sort of shoots its self in the foot. True most pro-sumer middel range stuff is much the same in sonic quality, true audiophile stuff, as you rightly say being out of most of our ranges, but the popularity of Yamha is that within this average Joe range they give full features at the best price by far.

Also read this in relation with the threads myself and Zumbo have started about supplementing the Yamaha power supplies, and you will see the Yamaha recievers are the pathway to get top notch sound at a fraction of the audiophile price. No other recievers have the functionality to build on in this price range.

It's really quite simple and all getting very boreing.

04-02-2004, 06:46 PM

I have the Yamaha RX-V2400 and the reason I chose it over other comparable receivers (including ones by Denon, Marantz, Integra, Rotel...etc.) is that I liked the sound the best.  Sound quality is really a matter of personal preference and I listened to numerous receivers from the list mentioned above and didn't find one I liked better for even 3 times the price of the Yammy.  The 2400 kicks butt when it comes to home theater as well as 2 channel stereo and multi channel audio.  I have it hooked up to B&W speakers and an SVS subwoofer for a 5.1 system and I would rather watch movies at home then go to the theater because the sound quality is so much better with my home system.

It always strikes me as funny when some one puts down someone elses product (with relatively comparable specs) because it really comes down to personal preference.  There are alot of good receivers out there.  You just have to listen to them and see which sound you like the best.

As a side note, the picture quality on my TV (Mitsubishi 65" Diamond) actually went down after I hooked up my cable to the receiver.  With it's video upconversion feature to component video, the least I expeceted was to have the same picture, not worse.   I had been running S-Video from the cable box to the TV before.  I've talked to some "experts" about this and have tried changing cables, checking my connections, etc.  and nothing seems to help. Any of you have this problem?  Thoughts, suggestions?  Anything would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

abe

04-02-2004, 07:54 PM

hopjohn,

I didn't say Bryston is inferior to Yamaha, instead what I meant was 'Yamaha is not inferior to Bryston'.   Bryston's are highly acclaimed by many many people including me.   Comparing Yamaha to Bryston is meant to be a compliment to Yahama.

I sold my Bryston etc. because (1) want to integrate all my system into one.  no space for both 2-channel and HT  (2) by keeping Yamaha alone will NOT sacrifice much in terms of sound quality.  

Abe

Rob Babcock

04-02-2004, 11:46 PM

The Audioholics staff will be quick to note that using a receiver, any one even close to affordable, will usually degrade the picture quite noticably.  If you must use the receiver to switch vid sources, like I have to, that's just something you have to deal with.  The PJ I use just doesn't have enough inputs for everything I need to hook up.

hopjohn

04-03-2004, 02:41 AM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>abe : I didn't say Bryston is inferior to Yamaha, instead what I meant was 'Yamaha is not inferior to Bryston'.
If the Yamaha is "not inferior" to the Bryston, it can be one of two things: 1. equal to or 2. better than. Either way your statement is ridiculous.

Yes the yamaha consolidates things into one package, that is the main reason why people recognize it as inferior.

I'll agree to diasgree with you, as I'm guessing you are talking about the convenience of two products in your particular situation, while I'm talking about their accurate sound reproduction properties.

Yamahaluver

04-04-2004, 04:08 AM

It is a subjective field and this thread only reinforces this theory. Having said that Yamaha is an unique and among the few companies which make the musical instruments as well as the equipment to play them back with. The amp/speaker divison was created to fulfill Yamaha's own requirment for their musical instruments like electronic pianos etc. This later got developed as a consumer outfit. Most of those who work there are taken from the musical manufaturing department and are part time musicians themselves, this fact I confirmed when I last visited their factory in Japan.

They have always been the renegades, their sonic signature being quite neutral has always been considered to be on the brighter side and this goes for their speakers as well. To those which includes myself, we love that sound and nothing else comes even remotely closer to it. I for one downgraded years back from super expensive, so-called esoteric equipment to Yamaha and have never looked back ever since.

A. Vivaldi

04-04-2004, 05:00 AM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They have always been the renegades, their sonic signature being quite neutral has always been considered to be on the brighter side and this goes for their speakers as well. To those which includes myself, we love that sound and nothing else comes even remotely closer to it. I for one downgraded years back from super expensive, so-called esoteric equipment to Yamaha and have never looked back ever since. </td></tr></table>Japanese audio has always been known for it's brighter tendencies, and there's nothing wrong with that. Just a different sound, not necessarily better, or worse, depending on you're tastes. I've found it dosen't work so well for classical though. Cheers!

RX-Z9 Martin Logans

04-04-2004, 11:38 AM

If it's newer and cost more it must be better right. LOL

It was between the 5803 and the RX Z-9

Let's say the 5 month wait for the Z-9 was worth it.

abe

04-04-2004, 01:02 PM

hopjohn,

you wrote:
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If the Yamaha is "not inferior" to the Bryston, it can be one of two things: 1. equal to or 2. better than. Either way your statement is ridiculous.
</td></tr></table>

Nothing 'ridiculous' about it at all. *The fact may be harsh for you to swallow but you just can't argue with it. *I owned both systems for a while and, just out of curiousity, did fairly extensive A/B comparison. *I made the testing env as 'controlled' as possible, e.g., same SPL, same digital source, etc. and speakers as revealing as possible, Dynaudio Special 25's. * Well I will have to say that I just couldn't discern any difference sonically. *Maybe it's just me -- I am not 'golden ear' type. * If you can hear or have heard any difference between the two, good for you. But I couldn't.

People often are biased against integrated or packaged systems (vs. dedicated 2-channel ones) thinking they are of inferior sound quality. *This may be true in many cases, but it is not default. *In my opinion, Yamaha did an excellent job integrating many 'non-audiophile' features without sacrificing the sound quality. and I am telling you this from my experience.

Abe

hopjohn

04-04-2004, 04:30 PM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>abe : The fact may be harsh for you to swallow but you just can't argue with it. *
I've already agreed to disagree with you on this matter, but I guess you just aren't contempt with that. The bottom line is you are happy with what you have, and you didn't have to spend a fortune on what you currently own to be satisfied. I'm truly very jealous of you, because I wish I could find audio nirvana so easily.

If your 1400 meets all the criteria you require for the finest in 2 channel reproduction, then I'm truly happy for you. I'm sure the margains that most people do claim in general about the differences in seperates and receivers are not as signifigant as they'd like them to be, and I would also concur that the law of diminishing return certainly exists as you go up in price. I just don't believe that the law begins and ends with the 1400 for me personally.

The 4B-ST you previously owned is a wonderful piece of equiptment with 250 w/c and distortion ratings at .007% @ the full frequency range with both channels driven. I would fully expect that amp to be more dynamic and have tighter control of a speaker, particularly less efficient models, than that of your 1400. Do the differences outweigh the cost to spend more? Well that is a subjective debate that can only be settled by the individual, and this individual says no, you say yes. The rest of you can decide for yourself.

Yamahaluver

04-05-2004, 04:48 AM

Direct comparisons are futile but suffice to say that the RXV-1400 will fulfill what is expected of it to its best, sometimes better than other comparative models, in case of the Bryston a more apt comparison should be the Yamaha MX-1/MX-2 power amps with THD of less than 0.0007, class A power, 1 ohm drive capability, I am sure the match would be quite even then.

abe

04-05-2004, 05:03 PM

hopjohn (Posted on April 04 2004,3:30)
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The 4B-ST you previously owned is a wonderful piece of equiptment with 250 w/c and distortion ratings at .007% @ the full frequency range with both channels driven. I would fully expect that amp to be more dynamic and have tighter control of a speaker, particularly less efficient models, than that of your 1400. </td></tr></table>

Fully agree. * That's why I bought Bryston 4B-ST (year 2000 model) in the first place. *

I myself was 'shocked' by the 'little to none difference' between 1400 to 4B-ST, *honestly I expected more. * One huge advantage of 1400 is that it has DAC-amp all within one box -- I feed digital signal directly to 1400. *I believe, and this has been confirmed by at least another poster here on Audioholics, that sonically this configuration is much superior to analog feed into 1400 which is solely used as an Amp. *Very likely the integrated internal signal processing and amplification can do much better job over all.

IMHO, amplification has the least impact in the signal path, given the current stage of electronics technology, comparing to electrical-to-mechanical conversion (speakers) and digital-to-analog conversion (CD players, DACs). * Thoeretically only Class A amps can have significant improvement. *Unfortunately I has no experience with them so far.

Abe

mustang_steve

04-06-2004, 04:32 AM

Reason i like Yamaha is the performance I get  for what little money I have.  Things like magneplanar speakers, mono-block amps, and pre-amps that cost more than a carbon fiber bicycle are jsut a wee bit out of my price range.  

In that, i found yamaha to fit my preferences.  Good features, good sound (slightly bright, but not as bright as the majority of japanese gear), and most importantly a good price.

I have used my RX-496 for nearly a year now, and I don't regret my purchase one bit.  I also have a CDC-585 cd changer that I find to be a very solid changer.  I have had the cd changer nearly a year and a half, and not one single problem.

If you want to know my history in audio...started with my dad's quadrophonic system, Sansui preamps, amps, processors, and  speakers.  Technics Casette deck, Sansui reel-to-reel, and some rather bizarre record palyer (it could change records both ways and had a wireless remote if that helps).  The speakers were one pair of each: front: sansui SP-2500, Sansui SP-35, Sanui SP-2400.  rear (quad channels): Sansui SF-2.  

This system not only got insanely loud, but it sounded good too.  This system was part of the family home theater for a good many years.

Once I was about 18, my dad bought a Sony pro-logic setup, and gave me a few peices of the sansui gear.  That started my trip...

I was quick to damage the amps since I had no knowledge of impedance htough....so I ended up with a crap pioneer sx-205....still used the SP-35 and SF-2 set though...the SF-2 was not very impressive outside of quad channel though...while the SP35 had gorgeous sound, but no bass....none...I ended up downgrading to a set of KLHs once i went off to college...those things were usable...not much more...

Then a few years later, and many speaker sets later, i got sick of the pioneer and went out for better.  I wanted a stereo receiver....denon's offerings were rahter cheap-looking...I nver found a stereo Onkyo...but there was the yamaha...I tried it with about every speaker I couldget the salesman to hook up to it...and decided to bring it home...

Since then I've never looked back.  the old pioneer is still around for use as a beater system for BBQs and such...don't want to put my good system outside.

04-06-2004, 05:34 PM

Yamaha's sound is the best I have heard but everyone's ears are different. *They have a very knowledgeable easy to understand (located in the USA)customer service team! *If you
have a problem they will work with you to solve it.

04-16-2004, 05:23 PM

I apologize up front for the rather long post [response] that follows, but there were some statements issued by others in this post that have not been challenged or at least corrected. As a visitor, I feel that some other knowledgeable member of this discussion board should correct these, but since no one has stepped up to the plate yet, I guess I will.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Posted by: zumbo on Mar. 10 2004,5:12
rgriffin25. You have caused me to research your receiver, & I have concluded that it does not even compare to the RX-V1400. Your receiver only has 100wx7. The RX-V1400 is 110wx7. That, my friend, is 70 more watts. And you can get one all day long for around 70 dollars less than you paid for yours! I can see why you are upset! The RX-V2400 is 120wx7. That, my friend, is 140 more watts. You can find one of these for about what you paid for yours!</td></tr></table>

Zumbo, the amplifier in the RX-V1400 is not 70 watts more powerful than that in rgriffin25’s, it is 10 watts per channel more powerful which is nothing and would not even be noticeable in everyday circumstances. The same can be said for the RX-V2400, it is not 140 watts more powerful, it is 20 watts per channel more powerful. Here a slight difference may be perceived (increased dynamics on loud passages), but nothing dramatic; at least not as dramatic as you are trying to make it out to be. It would be like saying a 50W x 7 amplifier is almost as powerful as a 200W x 2 amplifier, after all there is only a difference of 50 watts. This statement would also be untrue as there would be a difference of 150 watts per channel! Now that would be dramatic and something you would notice especially during exceptionally loud musical or movie passages. The last time I checked, one channel of an amplifier can not transfer its power to another channel unless your amp can be bridged. In other words, if one of the channels in a multi-channel amplifier (or receiver) is not being used, the power from the [unused] channel does not appear in another channel, it just goes unused, so you have to compare amplifiers channel to channel, not on the accumulated total wattage of the individual channels together.

The kind of grandiose statement you declare here is something that I would expect from some uneducated salesman (with respect to the HT/Audio industry) working on commission in some audio store pushing his wares on the misinformed who would buy into the hype. This was not meant to be derogatory to you as an individual, but the fact that no one else has challenged this line of thought or this statement before this is, well, sad, as there appears to be some [reasonably] astute individuals in these forums.

If we are to expect the HT (and Audio) industry to grow in [not only] sales volume, but knowledge and if we are to expect the companies to be honest in the reporting of specifications and features for their equipment, this line of thought must be revealed and corrected for the limited scope and misguided ideology in which it was stated.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Posted by: S.R. Johnson on Mar. 28 2004,10:00
HI my name is Sarandon and I would like to add some things in this discussion. Yamaha has involved in music and making products for over 100 years!! Yamaha has brought some things that you would never had if they had invented such as the IC chip and the Digital Soundfield Processor just to name a few. Now I know that there are some receiver brands out there that can beat the Yamaha hands down in certain areas but does not
mean that the Yamaha can beat them at their own game! You just have to understand that Yamaha is a world wide brand name that is BOTH respected and sometimes feared! But that is IMO! And if I cant the sound out of an Yamaha receiver that I want (which i seriously doubt!!!!) I would goto my other number one brand, and that is Marantz!</td></tr></table>

I am not sure where to start with this one. Yes, Yamaha has been in the music business for quite some time, but that does not mean that they are by default the best. Ask a pianist what type of piano they would prefer to play for their concert at the Met and I’m sure names like Steinway, Baldwin, Kimball or Bösendorfer come up long before the name of Yamaha.

Yamaha invented the IC?!?!  I’m sure Jack Kilby working with Texas Instruments and Robert Noyce who co-founded the Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation in 1958 – 1959 would find that interesting since they are usually credited by most with coming up the concept of the integrated circuit (working independently by the way). Of course neither would have been able to do this without the engineers at Bell Laboratories who invented the transistor in the first place, or did Yamaha do that also.

As far as Digital Signal Processing is concerned, before 1950, signal processing was all done with analog circuits. In the 1950s, people began to use computers in signal processing to simulate the performance before actually implementing the circuits since DSP couldn’t be done in real time as it was too impractical. Then in 1965, James W. Cooley (IBM) and John W. Tukey (Princeton) proposed their Fast Fourier transform (FFT) algorithm, which significantly increased the efficiency of DSP.  This was the first major development of DSP technology. By the mid-1980s, integrated circuit technology had advanced to the level to make fast microprocessors, which enabled DSP to be done in real-time. This was the second major development of DSP technology. While Yamaha was one of two companies to introduce a sound field processor for home consumer use (the other was I believe JVC), the two big companies to advance DSP ideology further (as far as audio is concerned) were Meridian and of course Lexicon whom many consider to be the grandfather of the industry having done more research into sound reproduction and producing products for the professional recording and sound reinforcement industry for over 30 years. The idea that they can bring (and are willing to bring) this knowledge to the home consumer is to be admired.

It is one thing to be an advocate (zealous?) for a company and wanting to hearken there accomplishments, but we need to be able to this rationally and put that companies accomplishments and achievements in history correctly and give credit where credit is truly due. Yes Yamaha have helped introduce many individuals and companies to these advanced technologies based on the power of their name and for that reason they should be given accolades, but innovators they were not, at least not to the extent you declare.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Posted by: Yamahaluver on April 05 2004,3:48
Direct comparisons are futile but suffice to say that the RXV-1400 will fulfill what is expected of it to its best, sometimes better than other comparative models, in case of
the Bryston a more apt comparison should be the Yamaha MX-1/MX-2 power amps with THD of less than 0.0007, class A power, 1 ohm drive capability, I am sure the match would be quite even then.</td></tr></table>

Yamahauler, you have said that the MX-1 was a class A amplifier here (and elsewhere). I am not sure if you mean class A as in status or in operation, so I downloaded the manual for the MX-1/MX-2 power amplifiers. No where in the manual does it state that it is a class A amplifier. I believe that it is what is known as a ‘sliding bias’ amplifier similar to my Parasound (used in my HT) which means it operates in class A up to X watts (usually 6 – 8) and then switches over to class A/B1 or (more than likely in this case) A/B2. I base this on several factors:

1. Power output relative to power consumption. There has been some debate as to what classifies an amplifier as being ‘pure’ class A, with some defining it simply as idling heat dissipation of more than twice the maximum amplifier output. As an example, a 100 watt amplifier would draw 200 watts from the wall at idle. I personally believe that there is more to the story that this simple explanation. It would appear that the MX-1 does not even meet this minimum requirement since the MX-1 has a claimed output of 280W into an 8 ohm load with a power consumption of 420W. As a comparative example, the Parasound HCA 1500A (class A/AB1) has a rated output of 205W into 8 ohm’s with a power consumption of 700W. This amplifier is closer to the definition of what [some] constitute as a class A amplifier than the Yamaha, yet [Parasound] does not make the claim for their amplifier. Compare these to my Bedini which delivers only 50W into an 8 ohm load yet it consumes almost 500W from the wall outlet at all times, not just during musical peaks. This little amp needs a BTU rating as well as a power rating.

2. Pure class A amplifiers normally have a limited dynamic range (usually around 1.5 dB). If you look at the output of the MX-1, it appears to almost double its output as the impedance of the load halves (see Dynamic Power in manual). This is another characteristic of class AB1/AB2 amplifiers.

3. Weight is also another factor. Class A amplifiers require a very good power supply to operate properly since the outputs are ‘on’ all the time plus plenty of heat sink area to help dissipate the excess heat generated. The MX-1 weighs in at 52 lbs and appears to have internal heat sinks, the HCA 1500A weighs 40 lbs and also has internal heat sinks. My ‘little’ Bedini comes in at almost 35 lbs and has large external heat sinks. Half of this weight comes from just the transformer in the power supply. Remember, this is just a 50W amplifier. A class A amp with the output capability of the MX-1 would be heavy, probably in excess of 100-150 lbs and have a lot of large surface area heat sinks. Check out the big power amps by Jeff Rowland, Nelson Pass, Krell, Threshold and the old Mark Levinson for a visual. Those heat sinks are not there just for looks or a marketing gimmick and a lot of these amps are running class AB1, not just class A.

4. Along with being notoriously inefficient, class A amplifiers are expensive primarily because of the cost of the parts needed to put up with being on all the time and to help dissipate the heat this inevitably generates. My little Bedini cost $1500.00 dollars when new, to get an amplifier that can produce 100-200 watts (not to mention the 280 watts of the MX-1) would probably put you back on the wrong side of $5000.00 and that would be for a cheap amp!

This was not intended to take away from the MX-1. I have not heard one personally and I’m sure it is a perfectly fine sounding amplifier with a lot to offer, but I seriously doubt that it is operating in true class A.

By the way, if you ever get to hear a pure class A amplifier (especially driven by a good tube front end) there is a certain magic to the sound that is unmistakable and one you won’t soon forget. This is one of the reasons that I built the 2-channel portion of my system the way I did after hearing a friends system. I just could not get the sound of recording after recording out of my head.

Again, nothing here was intended to take anything away from Yamaha or any of their products. They are an outstanding company and make very good gear as does Pioneer, HK, Denon and NAD just to name a few. I have owned Yamaha equipment in the past and found them to be trouble free with many options and non-offensive; as well as nondescript and un-involving (for my taste) like most mass market equipment and receivers in general.

I have not owned a receiver for longer than I care to think about (approximately 15-18 years) because, as you can probably tell from above, I prefer good analog separates (read no op-amps in the signal path) to receivers or processors used as pre-amps [pre-pros] for several reasons:

• Most (not all) receivers and processors convert their analog signals to digital and then re-convert them back to analog even in their ‘direct’ or ‘by-pass’ modes. This causes most (again, not all) to sound two dimensional and somewhat bland.

• The level of performance I demand from a phono input can not be found in any current receiver or for that matter processor at any price. Most do not even have a phono stage in them. Yes I can buy a stand alone phono pre-amp (or make my own), but why subject this to a digital bit stream elsewhere in the reproduction chain.

• I like to modify equipment and separates allow me more avenues to squeeze the last ounce of performance out of a piece of equipment.

• I like the idea of keeping the heat and noise of a large power amplifier section away from the surround processor and from the line section of my pre-amp. In my current system, even the transformers for my pre-amp are in a separate chassis to keep their [potential] radiated noise away from the tubes, especially in the phono section.

• Since most of my time spent is listening to music (70%), watching television (really TiVo – 25%) with watching movies (DVD or VHS) coming in last (5%), I do not like most of the processing modes (DPL II & IIx, Neo:6, Logic 7, etc…) that seem to be popular these days to ‘enhance’ two-channel sound. To me it is like bleaching rice so that it looks appetizing then adding back all the nutrients that you stripped out, it’s just is not as good as the original.

These criticisms are directed primarily to what these A/V receivers and processors do to music, especially a good analog source. Movies are a different issue and I find that good old fashioned Dolby Digital (AC-3) is sufficient enough for me under most circumstances, but that is just my 0.02.

In closing, I again hope that no one is offended by anything written above. This hobby of ours is about reaching your desired sonic nirvana. I hope you all enjoy the system that you own and have painstakingly assembled, after all, that’s why you bought it in the first place, to enjoy the music they make and to help envelope you in the movie going experience at home.

zumbo

04-16-2004, 06:43 PM

Daniel S. Allen, I have learned alot from these forums. It is statements like mine that get people p;$$ed enough to get knowledge in here. Otherwise, It gets pretty dang boring. I have stated MANY times that I am an enthusiast, not an expert or "salesman". I have defended my Yamaha from the day I bought it. It is the best buy in it's price range. IMO, this is a true statement. I now have an Adcom 7605 amp added to this system because of some quality learning from people who have a little more class at helping others than you! I don't even remember what got this thread to this point. All I know is, there are many experts here, and I would tone it down just a little. I do thank you for your input, but I am beyond this point with my system. <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'>

04-16-2004, 07:15 PM

Zumbo,

All I was doing was trying to clear up a declaritive statement you made, that is it. I am sorry if you took any offense to what I wrote, that was not my intention. If you took any offense, I apologize. I did not select something from just you, but from others as well.

I do not need you to defend your decesion to me, nor should you have to defend it to anybody else, but what you stated in your response was incorrect wether you were talking about Yamaha, Pioneer, HK, NAD, TAG, Krell, Pass Labs or any other well known brand and that was my only intention.

Again, I hope you truley do enjoy your purchase for whatever reason you bought it.

DSA

zumbo

04-16-2004, 07:22 PM

Not offended at all. I am here to learn. I state things I believe to be correct. When I am corrected, it is very valuable to me. I just don't think you come into someone else's house and start correcting them. Not very nice.

Again, I am not offended at all. <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'>

BTW, Yamaha rules!  <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':laugh:'>

04-16-2004, 07:31 PM

[/QUOTE]I just don't think you come into someone else's house and start correcting them. Not very nice.[QUOTE]

Would you have taken a different view on anything I said if I were a member?

zumbo

04-16-2004, 07:44 PM

If I had time to learn you were a little rude, I could take it a little better. It is the fact of jumping on more than one here. Come on in & hash it out with us if you feel you have issues with so many. No need to jump on everyone at once. That is a good way to get a can of but woopin opened up on ya! <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':laugh:'>

04-16-2004, 09:47 PM

I have posted a few other items here (other forums) and I was considering joining. I will usually post a few things to see how others respond before I consider joining a forum, because let's face it, some forums are just not worth dealing with as they are steeply geared toward the camp that states so very ludicrous things (cable cradles, special feet made out of space age materials, etc… ) or the camp that believes a $99.00 portable CD player will sound as good as a $500.00 CD player and anybody who disagrees is just being lead astray or obviously doesn’t they are being lied to.

Let’s take your thoughts of my post one step further, after someone becomes a member how many posts are considered 'polite' before someone is allowed to make a correction to misinformation? Within in my response I tried to explain out why the stated information was incorrect. Again, it was not intended to be critical of any of the other posts that were sited; just wanted to correct some errors in information. I also concluded my post with some of my personal feelings with respect to the current state of our hobby so that at least someone reading it would understand where I am coming from.

Sorry for crashing your party. You can now have your forum back and discuss what it is you will to your hearts content.

Goodbye.

zumbo

04-16-2004, 10:09 PM

You did not crash my party. I was trying to poke a little fun back your way. I can get pretty rude when I feel I am correct. So, I have no problem with you stating facts. I have said that I thank you for your information. I have said my statement was to get things motivated & I learned it was wrong before you came in. And, the last thing I said was come on in and hash it out with people you don't agree with!

I can learn alot from someone of your knowledge! I can also enjoy a little cutting up. I hope you change your mind. I look forward to learning from you. Please don't go! <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':('>

dmoss

04-16-2004, 11:22 PM

I think this topic started out wrong. *And then got worse. *First of all I think the reason so many recommend the Yamaha is because it is safe. *Not overpriced and will achieve a level of satisfaction for any one who buys one. *I just bought the RX-V2400 and am really impressed with all its features. *Whether this is the 2 channel direct mode on the front panel or the learning feature on the remote to the clean, and I mean clean sound it puts out, to the bargain price I bought it at, etc etc etc. *Generally when you get something you think is a real value you feel good about sharing it with others. *I have always run with Yamaha, but almost bought a Denon 4802 r but after researching the differences and applying it to what I was trying to accomplice Great 2 channel stereo for cranking out hi definition music (Paradigm Studio 100's are on the way, Bo$e gotta go) to feeling the need to duct when the fire bombs hit the trees in Gladiator, *Yamaha does it for me. *The kind of quality( not the best but very good) that my receivers gives is something that makes me feel very confident in saying you can't go wrong with a yamaha. *SSSssssOOOOOooo, here we are again. *Listen to it, like it, if you can afford it get it. *There is a very fine line between correcting and criticizing, Informing and Embarassing, *lets keep it nice so we can all learn. *

<img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':('>

Yamahaluver

04-16-2004, 11:31 PM

Daniel S. Allan,

I guess you are selectively blind when you mention that Yamaha pianos arent preffered by musicians, I have seen them in major phillarmonias, big name pianists and conductors as well as some real big name concerts but then since it is MADE IN JAPAN, I guess it doesnt qualify in your exclusive criteria for good musical instruments as I can see, your list only includes made in the WESTERN WORLD.

The Yamaha MX-1 and MX-1000 along with their 165lb, $15000 MX-10000 have been the subject of many tests and all of them classified its hyperbolic conversion amp funciton to be class A. Seems like you are assuming that we at this forum have no idea of class A. BTW: Listen to a MX-1 or MX-10000 mated to the NSX-10000 and you will get an idea of audio nirvana, only hitch is that if you can find one and afford its $15000 price. Wireless World magazine in the 80s did an extensive take on Yamaha's patented HCA circuitry which was introduced in their B-2x amplifier and they were highly impressed at the class A operation acheived by them, yes it is a sliding bias design like Krell but the operation never degrades to class AB.

Yamaha never claimed to have invented the DSP IC, but they have done some real groundbreaking and pioneering work and are continuing to do so at their Mt. Fujiyama chip establishment, why not give the credit where it is due. Well I guess the lowly Japanese or for that matter any Asian are incapable of any greats in your book. Correct me if I am wrong but all this seems Deja' Vu. We have had another member in the past with opinions even stronger than yours but at least he was upfront and not trying to pass his opinions in a covert way.

Ross

04-17-2004, 02:24 AM

Whether or not you are a "concerned" passer-by or just another forum member posting behind the veil of anonymity, its not worth grinding your axe over units costing $1000 or less.  

I take it that you've been grinding your teeth over some of Zumbo's comments for quite some time now.  You have built up quite a bit of animosity and rudeness over something you would never even allow yourself to own.

If you'd consider what most of us are involved in as the little leagues compared to your HiFi dealings, why lower your standards, stop in, and try to tear someone else down?  Next time, don't "sink" to our level, just stay above the fray.

I can't remember the last time I stopped into a bose forum and tried to leave a trail of dead bodies behind me...

Yamahaluver

04-17-2004, 02:46 AM

Nicely put Ross, wish I hadnt got carried away and but this man's postings brings some real unfortunate and sad memories from the past.

hopjohn

04-17-2004, 03:02 AM

I think the lesson to be learned in this thread is that people need to be a little less consumed by brand loyalty. Brand loyalty was some grand scheme a marketer came up with to keep the buying public in with his product. I'd like to think that components are a little like people, you have to judge each one for their own merits, and not by some label. I enjoy making exhaustive comparisons across many, many, many, brands before I make a purchasing decision. Sometimes I've failed to make the right purchase, but it wasn't for lack of trying.

Maybe the whole point of this thread by rgriffin25 was to get you to at least consider other things before buying. The 1400/2400 is popular here most likely due to three factors. A favorable review, a decent product, and the positive reinforcement of people who've already made the purchase. After all who doesn't like feeling good and reading positive things about what they already own? * <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/glare.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':glare:'>

Ross

04-17-2004, 03:21 AM

In My Opinion, and with all due respect, I believe this post started with a guy who went through the usual comparison shopping process just like the rest of us, wound up purchasing what he thought was the "best" for his money, and can not understand why others are buying what he passed up on.

Does that mean that all of us are right and he is wrong, or that he is somehow enlightened, or that the rest of us are just a pack of lemmings???  ABSOLUTELY NOT!

I just hate it when these forums turn into one guy trying to justify or defend his purchase compared to what some other guy(s) purchased.  This type of stuff should never be taken on the personal level.  

It may just be late and my rantings are incoherent and garbled, and what I speak of may not apply to rgriffen, but it does to numerous forum-goers in the online A/V arena.

I sincerely hope rgriffen enjoys his pioneer just as much as some of us enjoy our yamaha's!

...take it easy...I'm just a newbie...and its late... <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':cool:'>

best,

abe

04-17-2004, 05:27 AM

Daniel S. Allan,

Your first post is long and sounds authoritive, I can't help to crack it before some people think you are holding the 'scientific truth'.

1. *10W power difference at 110W level doesn't make lots of audible difference. *But if you're paying more for an amp that is 10W less power, you will have to justify from other aspects why you are make the purchase. *You may not have a bad deal but power is one of the factors. *That's what I sense what Zumbo meant. *So your blunt statement implicating 10W less power is nothing is, to say the least, very misleading to someone who are not searching for amp purchase.

2. *you said, and I quote, 'Yes Yamaha have helped introduce many individuals and companies to these advanced technologies based on the power of their name and for that reason they should be given accolades, but innovators they were not, at least not to the extent you declare.' * * I am not very familiar with the DSP technology history. *By what research and data you claim that Yamaha has not been inovative and has been 'over credited' ? *

3. Your statement on Clase A amplification is like a pseudo doctor defines flu as " high fever, body ache, ...". * Yes they are associated with flu, but they are just symptoms not the essence of what flu is. * *All Class A amps do generate exessive heat during idle and are alway heavy (but not because of the circuit component requirement, rather just the heat sink -- pure solid metal). *Power supply has nothing to do with Class A or B or C or X.... * a good one will only provide an amp adequate transient high current requirement.
(Not consistent load though). * All your long talk on Class A are completely irrelevant to the technology.

----------------------------------

People, from their experience, claim a product or brand to be very good all the time. * It happens to cars, digital cameras, .... *It is NOT blind brand loyalty like you perceived. *I have own two Yamaha receivers ( 1400 is the current one) that I highly recommend. *I've posted in this thread the reason and comparisons that I did. *Why does that offend you surprised me, sort of. * Does ego has anything to do with it? maybe not. *I am just puzzled........

rgriffin25

04-17-2004, 03:05 PM

What I don't understand is why everyone feels the need to be defensive? I don't think I read one comment in his rather lengthy post about how yamaha was bad. I never said that yamaha was bad. For that matter I don't think anyone here will say that if they knew anything. The point I was trying to make and was echoed by hopjohn is that there other brands out there that make a great product as well. Unless you have experience with other brands it is not fair to discredit them due to your loyalty for your brand. Before I started this thread I asked "What about Pioneer Elite" in another thread. I received 1 response from someone asking the same question. So I thought that I would go at it a little differently. Maybe it was a bit rude and perhaps I could have worded it a bit differently. I will say this, I felt that I proved my point.. Which is that some (NOT ALL) of you base your recommendations on what you like, not with experience using other brands.  Throwing out numbers and specs. trying to prove that their brand is better. (we all have learned to hold the Mfrs spec sheet with a grain of salt.)
I just wish that we can all be happy with the brands we own without feeling the need to get into a huge debate on which one is better.

Ross

04-17-2004, 03:13 PM

"I just wish that we can all be happy with the brands we own without feeling the need to get into a huge debate on which one is better."

Well said.

best,

04-18-2004, 09:51 AM

If price were no object which would you choose to go with a paradigm speaker system?

Onkyo 901
Denon 3805
Yamaha 2400
Yamaha RX-Z1

Thank you.

dmoss

04-18-2004, 01:59 PM

I just went through that.  I never had the chance to hear the receivers.  I think all of the receivers are in the same category.  I looked for the basics.  Low THD, Assignable component video, digital input,outputs.  Thx ability, the 7.1 vs 5.1 wasn't really that important to me.( my room is only 18 x16.  I am pretty sure that all have clean sound.  So it came down to what I perceived as the best value.  I mean a buck not spent on a receiver is a buck spent on an Amp or Good wires, or components,  so I went with the Yamaha,  I have a set of Bo$e 701's I am going to give to my son when the Paradigm Studio 100's get here.  I will say that as far as bose go, the yamaha fires them right up.  The Bo$e simply are not capable of giving me the kind of rich, distinctive sound I want.   I can only tell you that I bot the Yamaha 2400 and the only thing I can see right now is that I wish it had an ethernet port to connect to my computer so I could play the mp 3's.  Oh well, I will just burn a bunch on my DVD burner and have to walk over to the DVD Player and play them.  I will say the auto setup of surround with the exception of a flat bass worked perfectly.

RX-V2400

04-18-2004, 07:47 PM

rgriffin63,425's FIRST LINE of FIRST POST called Yamahaholics love of these great products "hype". Does he now say this was not a form of critisism? And does he now complain that we defend our opinions?

mustang_steve

04-19-2004, 06:22 AM

If I found a product I liked form another manufacturer that met my budget and performed/was constructed better...I would be all over it with a quickness. The problem being often I do find a better sounding unit, but the quality build just isn't there...many of the stereo units seem quite flimsy anymore.

Pity that the stereo market has gotten so bad that you almost have to go either very expensive or give up and buy an HT reciever or preamp that has so many things you don't even want or will ever use.  By stereo i mean 2-channel gear, as I prefer 2-channel audio...just easier to live with than having a 5.1 setup with runs of cable all over the place  <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':)'>

Yamahaluver

04-19-2004, 10:07 AM

I fully agree with the above post by Mustang_Steve, it is getting nearly impossible for a 2 channel man to buy a decent pre/power amp or intergrated amp, most are being discontinued by their manufacturers forcing one to buy a HT amp which one would have no use for. Also good quality CD players are on their way out and either one has to be high priced SACD players or are left with DVD players.

Speakers too are bearing the HT brunt, they are being designed to be more HT friendly and thereby sacrificing other aspects like fidelity and accuracy sometimes.

Doufuss

04-19-2004, 10:36 AM

I made the decision to buy the Yammie after comparing all available receivers in the same price range, feature for feature. I got more, for less money.

The biggest issue was that none of the others were capable of driving 4 or even 6 ohm loads, indicating perhaps suspect power supplies. This is a major point for me for a lot of reasons, and experience with quality amplifiers from Rotel and Bryston. Simply put, the better the power supply, the more muscle you get.

Last, but not least, was doing an apples to apples comparison in the showroom. We setup two receivers with the same speakers I have at home, and the result was the Yamaha simply sounded "fuller" and "warmer", which some people may not like.

You gotta decide for yourself.

abe

04-19-2004, 03:45 PM

rgriffin25,

From what I've seen in lots of posts here on Audioholics, there is little to none of such notation at 'yamahaholics'.  A few points:

(1) Yamaha makes excellent products, personally I like their Recieivers very much.  Many people like their other products as well.  

(2) therefore, when someone come on board and ask 'what receiver (or others for that matter) should I consider or buy?', people in (1) will naturally recommedn Yamaha.

(3) I didn't see many people in (1) bash other products at all, if not also compliment them, e.g., Denon receivers.

(4) by your statndard,  how should I post or reply on Audioholics to avoid being 'yamahaholics' ?  this is ridiculous!  sounds like too much of political correctness here -- I will have to mention ALL the other good receivers before recommend 1400 !?  Or since Denon, Maratz, etc are also excellent products, so 'Thou shalt not like Yamahas alone' ?

rgriffin25

04-19-2004, 07:55 PM

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>RX-V2400 : rgriffin63,425's FIRST LINE of FIRST POST called Yamahaholics love of these great products "hype".
rx-v2400,
Maybe if you took a little more time to read my post a little more carefully you might see that I didn't say the Yamaha products are hype. Here is what I said "I am very curious as to why there is so much hype about Yamaha in these forums??" That is quite a bit different than how you percieved it.
I don't know how many times I will have to explain myself before some of you will get it. The whole point of this topic is to make other people aware of other receivers in this price range. Not to knock you or your decision on which one you bought. I feel that to be truely objective any smart person would consider more than one brand before making a purchase. Yes, even those of you that live or die Yamaha.
I currently own a Pioneer Elite Receiver. I love it! It works great for me, and I love the way it sounds with my speakers. Does this mean that I will cram it down everyones throat? Or make a recommendation based on my experiences without considering the other persons tastes or needs?
What I think is funny is how defensive you all are. Throwing stones at me because I dare to be different. Nit Picking each of my posts and trying to use anything I say against me.

Abe,
Yes I do feel that it is necessary to suggest other products in addition to what you own. It lets other people know that you can be objective. It also tells them that you know what you are talking about*. Having the ability to compare the products both with specs and first hand use. It is always good to remember that what may work great for you isn't always the best choice for someone else.

*By the way did you really ever own a Bryston?
<img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt='???'>

Doufuss

04-19-2004, 09:04 PM

Griff

I guess the Bryston reference was directed at me.

No, I did not ever really own a Bryston, but I used to play top 40 in clubs and our leased PA had 3 Bryston 4B's and a Peavey 800, which we exchanged for another Bryston.

Our vocalist used a 3B for his monitor system.

Our bass player had a Proximity amp, which is the precursor to Bryston, right down to the Robertson screws.

abe

04-20-2004, 02:55 AM

rgriffin25,

Yes I did own a Bryston. *It was 4B-ST pro model year 2000. *I bought it on Audiogon and sold it there as well. *Along with it I also bought a Camelot Uther mkIII DAC with volumne control that I used with the Bry. * *I believe I might still have some old pictures that used in the classified somewhere on my computer....

If you are still having doubt, *try the following yourself :

use any CD/DVD player that has Digital output. directly hook to Yamaha 1400 or any RX-V series that has a Digital input. *Compare that with whatever pure 2-channel gear you have or can borrow, * with basic control of same speaker/cable/room/SPL. *

Then come back talk to me.

Have you ever owned a Yamaha receiver?

Abe

abe

04-20-2004, 03:16 AM

rgriffin25,

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Abe,
Yes I do feel that it is necessary to suggest other products in addition to what you own. It lets other people know that you can be objective. It also tells them that you know what you are talking about*. Having the ability to compare the products both with specs and first hand use. It is always good to remember that what may work great for you isn't always the best choice for someone else.
</td></tr></table>

You are way off here.  This forum is not a contest for who is the most 'audio correctness' but a place to post people's opinion about audit gears.   If a comprehensive comparison between Yamaha and all others can be provdied, great!  If one only has limited experience with only one brand, say Yamaha, he still has the right to voice his opinion.  Readers, including you, can dismiss any of them with discretion naturally.  

Even though I don't care a bit, but I couldnt help to notice the strong offensiveness in your post/tune/mind with such a 'holier than thou' attitude.   Calm down my friend,  this is only about electronic gears, not world peace.  not that a big deal either way.  

...

rgriffin25

04-20-2004, 04:12 AM

To: Abe

Can you please make your posts easier to read? Then maybe I could answer your questions a little better.

For now, I will answer your questions as much as possible based on how well my decoder ring works. (Thanks Green Lantern).

I do not consider myself to be audiophile. I enjoy my home theather, and my HT receiver for the reason it was built. So your little 2 channel test would do me no good. Which brings me to one of my questions. Why the heck would you sell top notch 2 channel equipment to go with something that is designed for multi-channel hometheater? I don't want to hear that the $800 Yamaha sounded better. Not only that, if you had that kind of money why didn't you buy a Z-1? I am sure the other Yamaha fans in here would not claim that the 2400 sounds better than the Z-1.
If any one should be puzzled here it should be me???
How many times do I need to explain myself to you. READ my POSTS. At this point your opinion does not matter to me. Honestly you lost all credibitliy with me when you downgraded for "better" quality. Maybe you should do some reading or even start a poll on who would chose a Home Theater Receiver for 2 channel music or a Bryston 4B-ST pro model with a Camelot Uther mkIII DAC. I have never personally used Bryston products. But I can say this.. I did a little research at their website.. Can you tell me a mass produced receiver can sound better than a hand built amp with a 20 year warranty. I wonder how the people at Bryston would react to your claims. Quit their jobs and go to work at Yamaha???

No I have never owned a Yamaha receiver. Which was one of the initial reasons for this thread. I truely wanted to know what made these receivers better... Now I must say thanks to you and a few other people who can't read that this has become a nightmare.
I give up! No matter what I say someone takes it the wrong way. I think I may have visited Yamaha city one too many times! Coming in here and questioning Yamaha's performance with you guys  is just like walking into a church and questioning whether Jesus actually exists.
At this point I am handing the reigns over to Zumbo. Ask him if his 1400 is better than a bryston. If so,  why did he add an adcom amp to his 1400 since it was not powerful enough. Or ask him why he suggests adding an amp to anyone considering an upgrade. You both need to resolve this... So that we all may know the truth.
For the record I am resigning my post in here. So do not direct any more questions towards me. Do not try and spin my words to make me look like the evil one!
Oh! Before I end this... If anyone wants a great sub $1000 receiver buy a Pioneer Elite 53TX. If anything it is far prettier than any Yamaha!!!!!! (Yeah I said Prettier Shinerman!)
<img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':cool:'>

mustang_steve

04-20-2004, 05:30 AM

If you can, try out a yamaha RX-496 (not the "V" part, that is a entirely different product). I'm using Dayton Loudspeaker BR-1 "bookshelves" on it and it sounds great. For a reciever/speaker combo under $500, I would be very hard pressed to beat it.  

I put bookshelves in quotes since they are "bookshelf" or monitor sized, but have rather strict placement  guidelines for optimal sound.  In all truth, these speakers are best placed as if they were floorstanders, using a stand of course <img src="http://www.audioholics.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':D'>

hopjohn

04-22-2004, 02:46 AM

Ross

04-22-2004, 07:46 PM

"Oh! Before I end this... If anyone wants a great sub $1000 receiver buy a Pioneer Elite 53TX. If anything it is far prettier than any Yamaha!!!!!!"

Like I said earlier, all to many times some threads just turn into one guy trying to justify, defend, or rationalize his purchase.

Griff, your new official job is to make others aware of "other" brands of receivers.

Just remember what you had already stated and everything will be fine!

"I just wish that we can all be happy with the brands we own without feeling the need to get into a huge debate on which one is better."

best,

Yamahaluver

04-22-2004, 10:55 PM

Make sure you add Marantz, SONY, Onkyo, Denon to your prospective list, it is only when you have heard others, you can come to your own conclusion and be satisfied with your purchase.

BTW: Pioneer with the exception of their Elite series, has been famous for Tokyo By Night look and therfore you have to really like it, as far as looks go, nothing beats Yamaha and Marnatz
s minimalist approach.

Unregistered

04-25-2004, 12:54 AM

To: Griff, Hopjohn,

Since you guys are quitting, I will be leaving soon as well. :-)

If Griff has never owned/heard both Bryston and Yamaha and is criticizing my experience with both ...., then I have nothing to say here. By the way, you didn't mention any other brands when you 'promote' Pioneer Elite receiver!!!!!

Hopjohn, puzzled at which part of my post puzzled you !? In one word, 1400 sounds NOT better than Bryston, but very very CLOSE. So close it can justify its place so I can own only one system (HT and audto combined) instead of two -- a HT with Yamaha receiver + a 2-channel system with Bryston. I figured, when count total cost and space, selling my 2-channel system and keep only HT is a good move.

Abe

hopjohn

04-25-2004, 01:48 AM

Quitting ....What??? I never said that. Anyway...I'm glad you like your system Abe. I'm sure the Bryston is not as good as most might think, but I probably would have kept it if I'd have had to the money to afford in the first place, it could have always been integrated into a HT powering the main channels. As long as you are happy with the 1400 that's all the matters. Just because we don't agree doesn't mean I don't understand. The decode ring comment refers to the difficulty reading your posts because I don't think you are always so clear. I have to kind of read between the lines at times...but that's alright. I don't always make sense either.

Nomo

10-05-2004, 10:43 PM

I have noticed the lean towards Yamaha in the forums since I began viewing this site. (Actually this has been only few weeks). I feel it is justfied. Several weeks ago I began shopping for a reciever to replace my Sony STR-DE885. (A miserable piece of electronics). A large majority of the "experts" I talked to had nothing but good to say about their quality and value. It was not surprising to me to find that these opinions were reflected in these forums. So far the best option I have found for my needs and budget seems to be the RX-V650. This leads me to my next point, and forgive me, the real reason for responding to this thread:
The going retail on this unit is 499.00. estores offer it for