The Yamaha RX-V663 (or the RX-V863 light as I like to call it) packs a wallop. Just about all the features of the higher end model (which is a deal in its own right) at almost half the price. If you are on the market for a receiver, you want to take a close look at the features included on Yamaha's newest offerings - you can save some serious coin by not paying for features you really don't need. The V633 is a deal - for the right buyer.
Discuss "Yamaha RX-V663 Receiver Overview" here. Read the article.
The Following User Says Thank You to admin For This Useful Post:
Just thougt I would let you know this appears to be double posted!
__________________ His and Her Room!
Klipsch RF7's,RC7,RS7's,RSW15,Denon 3805, Samsung BD-P1200, Toshiba HD-XA2, VIP622 HD DVR, 100" BW Carada Critereon, Panasonic AE700u, Wega 27",300 Disk CD Changer,Laurier-Carino AV Credenza, Logitech Harmony 1000 with RF extender, Impact Acoustics 5x1 HDMI switch,Tripp Lite HT10DBS, Blue Jean Cables March 2007 Issue Home Theater Magazine and Audio Video Interiors
I think it's notable, while others might not find this information helpful, that the RX-V663 and RX-V863 weigh the same and both feature a 500 va power supply with A 400 watt power consumption. I believe they are using the same amplifier or something very similar to what was in the well received RX-V659 (more than likely the same). One of the major selling points for the RX-V659 was it's amplifier. The RX-V661 accepted a cutback on power and the RX-V659 amplifier went to the RX-V861. This is how it all appears on paper, it seems like a very likely scenario. If Yamaha knows it's good, why change it?
This looks like it is going to be a big seller for Yamaha. If I had not recently purchased a Yamaha RX-V2700, I would probably consider it myself. I'll just have to make due with a Blu-Ray player that will decode the new audio formats and send the sound via multichannel PCM in its HDMI output. That is, when I get around to buying a Blu-Ray player, which may be a while, given all of the problems people seem to be having with them (it is rather interesting, when reading reviews at places like Amazon, that people rate a player 4 or 5 stars, and then in the review they mention various glitches in the performance!).
__________________
__________________
A fool and his money are soon parted.
__________________
Too many people seem to spend too much time reading between the lines for what is not there instead of paying attention to what is there.
Seth. Thats an interesting observation. I have been wondering if this is the case. I am looking for a reciever that has some headroom on the amp side and really liked the 659 review.
I was wondering if this design feature carried over into the 663. I wonder if the good folks here at audioholics can take a look under the hood to confirm your suspicions.
The other thing I am wondering is if there is any other receiver in this class that offers similar power/headroom?
Seth. Thats an interesting observation. I have been wondering if this is the case. I am looking for a reciever that has some headroom on the amp side and really liked the 659 review.
I was wondering if this design feature carried over into the 663. I wonder if the good folks here at audioholics can take a look under the hood to confirm your suspicions.
The other thing I am wondering is if there is any other receiver in this class that offers similar power/headroom?
Fred
I would say it's a little more than suspicion. Consider this, what would be more cost effective?: to design a new amplifier that is not proven to be very good, or to stick with a successful design. They apparently tried the first idea and pushed the amplifier of the RX-V659 to the higher model (RX-V861) in the following year while putting a less robust amplifier in the RX-V661. It seems as though Yamaha pulled an Onkyo move. The Onkyo TX-SR805 and TX-SR875 use the same fundamental amplifier (regardless of published specifications). The new RX-V663 and RX-V863 are a similar story.
How else can you explain them weighing the same, having the same current draw, same power supply? It all adds up to one simple yet cost effective for Yamaha answer. Instead of two different primary assembly lines, the can have one that accepts slight modification. Consider the reduced cost of parts from ordering more bulk of the same parts (think transformers). Personally, I give kudos to Yamaha and Onkyo for doing this because it allows the tech savvy get what they need for less, and the average consumer that doesn't know they are only paying for a few extra features will get what they want as well. All the while it saves these companies money.
However, Sony has taken the game to a different level. Every receiver starting from the STR-DG1100 is fundamentally the same. The have really cut costs to a minimum for the ES line and the top end DG models. The variance in price is almost completely unjustifiable IMO. Just look at their specifications, it's mind blowing. There's a good reason that Sony has gotten to be so huge.
I did find the scaler comments in the review very interesting. I do not use a cable box. My cable has been "on" since I moved here. So I get basic cable through a cable direct to my recently purchased panny plasma. SD network channels look like crap. I have read some threads on this and it didn't seem like there is much I can do. But the reviewer seemed to think the scaler could help the network channels be clearer. Any thoughts on this?
__________________
Canton Karats,Onkyo TX-SR706,Samsung BDP2550,Escient SE80,Panasonic42PX75U,
Personally, this is the kind of reciever I've been waiting for. This with an automatic 2xHDMI switch (Cable always on, and the switch hooked up to a 360 and a bluray player) with an Emotiva LPA-1 is going to be my next setup...for those of us who don't need scaling or upconversion this would be an almost unbeatable package for roughly 1k.
Just canceled my pre-order. I have decided to wait a while longer. My 7 year old HK receiver still sounds unbelievably good. There is just no compelling reason for me to upgrade at this point.
I did find the scaler comments in the review very interesting. I do not use a cable box. My cable has been "on" since I moved here. So I get basic cable through a cable direct to my recently purchased panny plasma. SD network channels look like crap. I have read some threads on this and it didn't seem like there is much I can do. But the reviewer seemed to think the scaler could help the network channels be clearer. Any thoughts on this?
I subscribe to the "garbage in,garbage out" theory.A bad signal or source can only be improved incrementally.The scaler in your display may very well be better than the scaler in a $500 AVR.Try some different resolution settings to see if any help.Sometimes a 480i setting for the analog signal can clear things up a bit.Basic analog cable in most places is very poor and no amount of scaling is going to fix it.Your plasma is just putting a magnifying glass to the problem.
The dvr/hd cable boxes from most providers give you some output options,such as 480i and 480p that may be of some help as well,but there's no way of telling until connected to a particular display.
The Following User Says Thank You to koebner For This Useful Post:
Yamaha RX-V663 Receiver Overview
Linear Mode
