New receiver suggestions.

[dhark]

Hey guys looking to upgrade my system a bit since I have a 4K Tv now. Right now I have a Yamaha rx v867 which is probably not doing me an favors connectivity wise. Want to keep it in the $600 range give or take seeing I'm going to be upgrading my sub with most of my $$$$. Anyway was looking at Yamaha Avantage 660 or Marantz 5011 refurb at ACL both for about $550ish. Not sure about returns but certainly seems like the Marantz is the winner here. So what do you guys suggest feel free to suggest anything else I might have missed. Speakers are Polk monitor 70 series II and this is mainly for tv/movie watching over music.

 

[Halon451]

Before you go upgrade crazy like I did maybe consider alternate connectivity options which will save you money in the long run. That is if you're happy with the way your system sounds now and just need 4K connectivity, go with a 4k player that outputs dual HDMI. Run one to your receiver for audio only, the other directly to your TV. That way you still get your 4k source connectivity to your display and it's associated audio directly to your receiver.

I ended up on a long frustrating road of trying to regain my sound quality after buying a new receiver to complement my 4k upgrade. Went through a Marantz SR6011 before returning it and settling on a Yamaha RX-A2060 which cleared up some issues I had with the Marantz and sounds good but still not quite as good as my 10-year old pioneer ever did.

And that will free up more funds for a good sub.

 

[Bucknekked]

I ended up on a long frustrating road of trying to regain my sound quality after buying a new receiver to complement my 4k upgrade. Went through a Marantz SR6011 before returning it and settling on a Yamaha RX-A2060 which cleared up some issues I had with the Marantz and sounds good but still not quite as good as my 10-year old pioneer ever did.

And that will free up more funds for a good sub.

Halon451
May I ask what you didn't like about the Marantz SR 6011?
I am toying with the idea of an upgrade, and I have several Marantz receivers on my list to consider.
I also have some Yamaha's and Denons. Nothing imminent, but I have a shopping list.
I'd be interested in why you returned a Marantz

 

[Halon451]

Halon451
May I ask what you didn't like about the Marantz SR 6011?
I am toying with the idea of an upgrade, and I have several Marantz receivers on my list to consider.
I also have some Yamaha's and Denons. Nothing imminent, but I have a shopping list.
I'd be interested in why you returned a Marantz

Not to hijack the OP's thread or anything but to be fair I think the Marantz had a defect. I was getting some weird buzzing distortion in all channels that I couldn't isolate and fix. It was otherwise a fine AVR and I've nothing bad to say about Marantz at all. But by the end of my exhausting hunt to find the problem I had started to grow rather fond of the Yamaha I have now which is one upgrade level above the Marantz SR6011 and second only to yamaha's flagship receiver. It's a beast no doubt about it and I'm not unhappy with the choice.

 

[Bucknekked]

Not to hijack the OP's thread or anything but to be fair I think the Marantz had a defect. I was getting some weird buzzing distortion in all channels that I couldn't isolate and fix. It was otherwise a fine AVR and I've nothing bad to say about Marantz at all. But by the end of my exhausting hunt to find the problem I had started to grow rather fond of the Yamaha I have now which is one upgrade level above the Marantz SR6011 and second only to yamaha's flagship receiver. It's a beast no doubt about it and I'm not unhappy with the choice.

Halon451
I don't think we are hijaking the OP's thread: I think this kind of informational dialogue helps in what he is after: information about upgrading his stuff. The more you know about potential upgrade boxes, the better informed the OP's opinion will be when he makes his purchase. That's a win win.

 

[Halon451]

Honestly I wish someone had slapped me upside the head with the same advice I gave the OP above. I didn't even think of it then. Neither one of the new ones comes close in performance than my old Pioneer Elite. There's a growing number of articles coming out these days talking about manufacturers adding gobs of new fancy features at the unfortunate expense of audio performance. I read one that indicated that engineers are being hamstrung to design the amp sections in order to keep costs competitive cause all those new features add to the total cost to begin with. I'll have to find it again. I believe it may have even been penned by Steve Guttenberg.

 

[Halon451]

Here's the article:

How can 30-year old receivers sound better than new ones?

 

[Halon451]

Even in the last 10 years (forget 30) I think the audio performance has gone down in favor of bells and whistles. While I like the convenience of AirPlay and mobile app control of my zones, I'd give it all up in a heartbeat if it meant exchanging them for sheer performance where it's supposed to count in a dang audio receiver. So now I've had to spend no less than $800 more on a unit that only (sort of) sounds as good as my 10-year old one.

To the OP: Newer definitely doesn't always mean better.

 

[PENG]

Here's the article:

How can 30-year old receivers sound better than new ones?

I read that article and found it not totally credible. I suspect those gentlemen have been firmly in the golden ears camp for a long time, at least one of them as I have read quite a few of his. Anyone could have done a series of blind tests but for it to have credibility, we need more details and documentation about the tests. If he had compared that Pioneer to a Yamaha RX-V4XX, or Denon AVR-1XXX, okay no argument, but RX-V1800 and Denon AVR-5308, give me a break.

For linear audio amplifiers, any audible differences should be measurable, and any differences that are measurable may not be audible. It is a matured products based on science and technologies after all. Just look at the bench test data and graphs of loudspeakers, and the same for amplifier and I can rest my case.

 

[dhark]

Hey guys looking to upgrade my system a bit since I have a 4K Tv now. Right now I have a Yamaha rx v867 which is probably not doing me an favors connectivity wise. Want to keep it in the $600 range give or take seeing I'm going to be upgrading my sub with most of my $$$$. Anyway was looking at Yamaha Avantage 660 or Marantz 5011 refurb at ACL both for about $550ish. Not sure about returns but certainly seems like the Marantz is the winner here. So what do you guys suggest feel free to suggest anything else I might have missed. Speakers are Polk monitor 70 series II and this is mainly for tv/movie watching over music.

When you say 4K player what do you mean? Just a DVD player or other device directly to the tv?

 

[Halon451]

I read that article and found it not totally believable. I suspect those gentlemen have been firmly in the golden ears camp for a long time, at least one of them as I have read quite a few of his. Anyone could have done a series of blind tests but for it to have credibility, we need more details and documentation about the tests. If he had compared that Pioneer to a Yamaha RX-V4XX, or Denon AVR-1XXX, okay no argument, but RX-V1800 and Denon AVR-5308, give me a break.

For linear audio amplifiers, any audible differences should be measurable, and any differences that are measurable may not be audible. It is a matured products based on science and technologies after all. Just look at the bench test data and graphs of loudspeakers, and the same for amplifier and I can rest my case.

That's fair. I took it as a purely subjective demonstration more so than a scientific evaluation but coupled with my own experiences I guess I found it a bit difficult to dismiss. I think the higher end AVR's still have it where it counts but that's what you're paying for and like I said, in my case I had to shell out quite a few more quid to net a similar level of performance as my old unit. At the OP's price point of $500-600, probably much more of a difference I would imagine. I stick by my advice that if he's currently happy with his sound, don't mess with it. It could be a costly mistake. If he just needs better connectivity there are solutions other than buying a new AVR.

I would be interested to see those three receivers run through a proper bench test and measured. That might be a revelation for sure.

 

[lovinthehd]

@dhark DVDs can't play Blu-rays What are the sources of 4k for you?

PS Pick the avr that has the features/connectivity you want. I'd pick the Marantz personally.

 

[Halon451]

When you say 4K player what do you mean? Just a DVD player or other device directly to the tv?

I assume you want to actually feed 4k content to your new 4k TV but still have audio go to your receiver correct? I meant a 4k blu ray player.

 

[Bucknekked]

I read that article and found it not totally believable. I suspect those gentlemen have been firmly in the golden ears camp for a long time, at least one of them as I have read quite a few of his. Anyone could have done a series of blind tests but for it to have credibility, we need more details and documentation about the tests. If he had compared that Pioneer to a Yamaha RX-V4XX, or Denon AVR-1XXX, okay no argument, but RX-V1800 and Denon AVR-5308, give me a break.

For linear audio amplifiers, any audible differences should be measurable, and any differences that are measurable may not be audible. It is a matured products based on science and technologies after all. Just look at the bench test data and graphs of loudspeakers, and the same for amplifier and I can rest my case.

Peng
I must confess, I just finished reading the article when your post popped up and I was of the same mindset. I'm not sure I'm buying what the reviewer was saying. Since we have had many conversations about current model AVRs, your opinion would be of value since you have been researching the topic of AVR amplifier sections rather thoroughly. I don't have the technical chops to say whether one amplifier is better than another, but you certainly do. I'd advise the OP to look up some of your posts on the topic and he'll get an education. I know I've been getting schooled this week !

 

[dhark]

@dhark DVDs can't play Blu-rays What are the sources of 4k for you?

PS Pick the avr that has the features/connectivity you want. I'd pick the Marantz personally.

Lol yes 4K blu-ray I just want to make sure my receiver isn't messing anything up I guess. I am still learning but kinda no the basics. I didn't think my current Yamaha 867 is 4K compliant? No hdmi 2.0 and no hdcp 2.2 etc. Plus it would be nice to have some of the newer tech, wifi, Bluetooth, Atmos, 4K upscaling etc.... Right now I have a PS3, cable, and fire tv connect to it, then to the tv.

 

[PENG]

That's fair. I took it as a purely subjective demonstration more so than a scientific evaluation but coupled with my own experiences I guess I found it a bit difficult to dismiss. I think the higher end AVR's still have it where it counts but that's what you're paying for and like I said, in my case I had to shell out quite a few more quid to net a similar level of performance as my old unit. At the OP's price point of $500-600, probably much more of a difference I would imagine. I stick by my advice that if he's currently happy with his sound, don't mess with it. It could be a costly mistake. If he just needs better connectivity there are solutions other than buying a new AVR.

I would be interested to see those three receivers run through a proper bench test and measured. That might be a revelation for sure.

I read it a while back, if I find more details I will post the link. That receiver is a beast so don't get me wrong, I would love to have one and use it as an example to demonstrate why it is not correct to say receiver amps cannot compare to integrated amps as some do, and can even compare or beat some high power separate amps. Pioneer used to make top notch stuff, I am still using a very old Elite Plasma TV, I have yet to see a so called LED TV that can compare to the natural color of my Elite Plasma.

 

[Halon451]

I read it a while back, if I find more details I will post the link. That receiver is a beast so don't get me wrong, I would love to have one and use it as an example to demonstrate why it is not correct to say receiver amps cannot compare to integrated amps as some do, and can even compare or beat some high power separate amps. Pioneer used to make top notch stuff, I am still using a very old Elite Plasma TV, I have yet to see a so called LED TV that can compare to the natural color of my Elite Plasma.

Trust me I died a little inside when I learned onkyo took over the pioneer elite line... I've even gone so far as to try and find the older elite receivers for sale on eBay just to have one again for some kind of use.

 

[PENG]

Okay, Google found it for me:

http://www.iavscanada.com/receiver-shoot-out-vintage-vs-high-tech/

If this is the one Mr. Guttenberg referred to, it would have been better if he had included the link above.
Just a few points I would like to make:

1. First of all, the AVR-5308 was not involved, now you can see why I reacted the way I did..
2. Not everyone picked the Pioneer, there were two out of eight that picked one of the other two receivers.
3. As expected, most people like more bass, and apparently that's the obvious advantage of the Pioneer in that blind test. Heavier bass does not mean accurate bass, though in this case it probably mean that.
4. That pioneer was among the most powerful receiver ever built, so not knowing what Mr. Butterworth meant by "in conditions where none of the receivers were ever pushed past their limits", it is quite possible that the two little Yamaha and Sony were push to the point of clipping during the music peaks whereas the Pioneer would still be a 3 dB or more away from clipping.
5. The speakers used were the Mirage OM7, know to like lots of power, see review linked below:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/mirage-om-7-loudspeaker-measurements#eTsVCvFtrxxLRmwg.97

According to the reviewer:

"The Mirage OM-7's quasi-anechoic sensitivity was fractionally below average, at an estimated 86dB(B)/2.83V/m. However, it will appear to be more sensitive in-room due to the presence of its rear-firing drive-units, which is presumably why Mirage quotes a "room efficiency" specification of 90dB. Its impedance (fig.1) drops below 4 ohms slightly in the upper bass and midrange, the former coinciding with quite a severe phase angle. Optimistically specified receivers would best be avoided with the OM-7. The "saddle" at 35Hz in this graph's magnitude trace indicates the tuning frequency of the twin rear-facing ports.

So having re-read everything now, my educated guess is that unless the tests were done in a small room, all 8 participants should have picked the Pioneer mainly because the OM7 needed the power to get the best bass out of them. I am surprised only 6 participants did so.

6. I don't mean to be critical but that didn't appear to be a DBT session, if it was, Mr. Butterworth would have said so.

Thanks to Halon, I enjoyed reading Mr. Butterworth's shoot-out. And, by the way, Mr. Butterworth said in his conclusion:

"Does this test mean that vintage receivers are better than new receivers? Of course not. Looks aside, the Sony STR-V6 is clearly no better than the Yamaha RX-V1800, but it’s as good a choice for stereo listening and quite a bit less expensive than a midpriced home theater receiver. But the Pioneer SX-1980’s stellar performance shows that it’s possible to get truly world-class sound from a vintage receiver. I’d be curious to put the SX-1980 up against the very latest and greatest high-end audio gear-but I’m sure the manufacturers of the new stuff would rather I didn’t."

 

[Bucknekked]

I read it a while back, if I find more details I will post the link. That receiver is a beast so don't get me wrong, I would love to have one and use it as an example to demonstrate why it is not correct to say receiver amps cannot compare to integrated amps as some do, and can even compare or beat some high power separate amps. Pioneer used to make top notch stuff, I am still using a very old Elite Plasma TV, I have yet to see a so called LED TV that can compare to the natural color of my Elite Plasma.

I have a Pioneer Elite DVD player. I loved it. But then blu-ray and HDTV and it is now shelfware.
Pioneer Elite used to have some very cool stuff.

 

[PENG]

Trust me I died a little inside when I learned onkyo took over the pioneer elite line... I've even gone so far as to try and find the older elite receivers for sale on eBay just to have one again for some kind of use.

I felt like that when they pulled the plug on the Elite Kuro Plasma, and now everyone seem to have given up on Plasma altogether. Pioneer used to excel in everything audio, including car audio, tape decks, turntables, universal players etc., from entry level to high end. You should still be able to get one of those older Elite AVR easily though, but don't wait too long.