AVR choice

[Good4it]

Which AVR is comparable to a Yamaha RX-A1050 in features, quality and price?

 

[speakerman39]

Which AVR is comparable to a Yamaha RX-A1050 in features, quality and price?

I have always liked Yamaha products. Especially, their AVR's. However, I prefer the Marantz/Denon brands myself. Been very impressed with Audyssey. YPAO is not bad and does a decent job for the most part, but Audyssey sounds better to my ears. Highly recommend you look at these:

http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/marsr7009/marantz-sr7009-9.2-ch-x-125-watts-networking-a/v-receiver-bonus-hdmi-cables-100-value/1.html

or even this one:

http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/marsr6010/marantz-sr6010-7.2-ch-x-110-watts-networking-a/v-receiver-bonus-hdmi-cables-100-value/1.html

Also recommend one of these:

http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/denavrx4200w/denon-avr-x4200w-7.2-ch-x-125-watts-networking-a/v-receiver-bonus-hdmi-cables-100-value/1.html

Acc4less is great to deal with. My Denon X4000 is a refurb and works perfectly! Hope this helps. Good luck in making your decision. BTW, what is it about the Yammy 1050 that YOU do NOT like?

Cheers,

Phil

 

[Good4it]

YPAO. ITS NOT that I don't like it, it's just that I don't trust it.

There is a lot I do like though.

 

[herbu]

YPAO. ITS NOT that I don't like it, it's just that I don't trust it.

1) Then don't use it. Set up manually.
2) Do you trust Audyssey? Why?

 

[3db]

YPAO. ITS NOT that I don't like it, it's just that I don't trust it.

There is a lot I do like though.

Why don't you use trust YPAO, especially the latest renditions of it? I have an early version of YPAO on my RX-V1800 and the only thing it did was set my towers to large but then again, they are capable of digging into the mid 30Hz region so that was not incorrect. I like what it did for my room.


I find it amusing that people say they prefer Audessey over YPAO but these preferences are subjective claims as the tests were not done via blind controlled listening methodology. (Not directing this at you Phil..). Furthermore, there haven't been any independent tests done to confirm which sounds better.

Based on my experience with it YPAO, I very much trust it.

 

[speakerman39]

Why don't you use trust YPAO, especially the latest renditions of it? I have an early version of YPAO on my RX-V1800 and the only thing it did was set my towers to large but then again, they are capable of digging into the mid 30Hz region so that was not incorrect. I like what it did for my room.


I find it amusing that people say they prefer Audessey over YPAO but these preferences are subjective claims as the tests were not done via blind controlled listening methodology. (Not directing this at you Phil..). Furthermore, there haven't been any independent tests done to confirm which sounds better.

Based on my experience with it YPAO, I very much trust it.

I have used YPAO, MCACC, and Audyssey. Of the three, in my honest opinion Audyssey sounded better to me. So, it is an opinion nothing more. That main reason I preferred Audyssey because of the ability to EQ dual subs. The versions of YPAO and/or MCACC did not employ that capability. Perhaps, newer versions are now doing so, no? No sure why the OP does NOT trust YPAO?

Have found that YPAO, MCACC, and Audyseey all do a good job for the most part. But, nothing is perfect that requires one to adjust things a bit. For example, Audyssey set my Polk RTi6's as LARGE. So, afterwards, I went back in and changed it to small. The ability to tweak is a HUGE one for me. Just saying......

Cheers,

Phil

 

[Good4it]

Ok here is why.

Audyessy and the others adjust many things at once in relationship to each other part.

Manual is nice but requires much time to get everything in relationship to each component of a system. Sure manual is best EVENTUALLY but it takes someone many hours (read days if not months) to get all working together right. Many would say that's best and it may well be, but I don't have the time or patience or knowledge (or a wife that would listen to it).

I prefer it to be good as quick as possible.

 

[PENG]

I find it amusing that people say they prefer Audessey over YPAO but these preferences are subjective claims as the tests were not done via blind controlled listening methodology. (Not directing this at you Phil..). Furthermore, there haven't been any independent tests done to confirm which sounds better.

I thought it is quite normal for people to "prefer" one thing over another, subjective or not. To me, when someone "prefers Audyssey...", it does not mean he thinks Audyssey is better in an absolute sense such as in terms of accuracy, neutrality etc., it could simply mean the individual likes it more, for whatever his/her reasons. I prefer Audyssey too, and my main reasons are that I like the Sub EQ HT and DEQ features a lot, subjectively, but I will never tell anyone that Audyssey is a "better", or "preferred" REQ system in an overall sense. Then again, YMMV, obviously..

 

[3db]

Ok here is why.

Audyessy and the others adjust many things at once in relationship to each other part.

Manual is nice but requires much time to get everything in relationship to each component of a system. Sure manual is best EVENTUALLY but it takes someone many hours (read days if not months) to get all working together right. Many would say that's best and it may well be, but I don't have the time or patience or knowledge (or a wife that would listen to it).

I prefer it to be good as quick as possible.

YPAO adjusts everything at once just like Audessy.

 

[3db]

I thought it is quite normal for people to "prefer" one thing over another, subjective or not. To me, when someone "prefers Audyssey...", it does not mean he thinks Audyssey is better in an absolute sense such as in terms of accuracy, neutrality etc., it could simply mean the individual likes it more, for whatever his/her reasons. I prefer Audyssey too, and my main reasons are that I like the Sub EQ HT and DEQ features a lot, subjectively, but I will never tell anyone that Audyssey is a "better", or "preferred" REQ system in an overall sense. Then again, YMMV, obviously..

To be fair Audessy kicked YPAOs butt in the early years of room correction. Unfortunately, that stigma is still at play in this forum even though YPAO can do everything that Audessy can. I have no issue with personal preference but the OP stated that he doesn't trust YPAO. The OP is making a judgement call on heresay and I'm simply giving him assurance that he has nothing to worry about in going with YPAO.

 

[lovinthehd]

YPAO has come up to the level of bass eq that Audyssey can provide? When did that happen?

 

[speakerman39]

YPAO has come up to the level of bass eq that Audyssey can provide? When did that happen?

I do not visit the receiver section much, but read over @AVS that the Yammy 3050 could EQ dual subs. Have not looked any further, but I would not be surprised if that is correct. Just curious what is going to happen with Onkyo buying out Pioneer's home division. Might see MCACC is some of the Onkyo AVR's, no? Perhaps, even in the Integras, no? Who really knows. Just have to wait and see what happens.

Cheers,

Phil

 

[herbu]

the OP stated that he doesn't trust YPAO. The OP is making a judgement call on heresay and I'm simply giving him assurance that he has nothing to worry about in going with YPAO.

In another thread the OP asked "How do you adjust the volume of individual speakers?". He's very new and has a lot to learn. I hope he pursues knowledge. Judgements born of ignorance cause a myriad of problems.

 

[PENG]

To be fair Audessy kicked YPAOs butt in the early years of room correction. Unfortunately, that stigma is still at play in this forum even though YPAO can do everything that Audessy can. I have no issue with personal preference but the OP stated that he doesn't trust YPAO. The OP is making a judgement call on heresay and I'm simply giving him assurance that he has nothing to worry about in going with YPAO.

I agree with you your comments on the OP's (the part you quoted). My post just referred to what I quoted, where you seemed to be commenting on people's preference. Now we are both clear on the difference between the "trust" part (derived from hearsay) and the "personal preference part" (subjective).

 

[lovinthehd]

I do not visit the receiver section much, but read over @AVS that the Yammy 3050 could EQ dual subs. Have not looked any further, but I would not be surprised if that is correct. Just curious what is going to happen with Onkyo buying out Pioneer's home division. Might see MCACC is some of the Onkyo AVR's, no? Perhaps, even in the Integras, no? Who really knows. Just have to wait and see what happens.

Cheers,

Phil

I know MCACC Pro does dual subs but not sure it has same filter capacity as Audyssey, but last time I tried to find about YPAO sub filters couldn't find much. I believe Pioneer Japan has been placed in charge of selling Dirac to various other entities IIRC so I'd expect Dirac down the line to replace MCACC....

 

[speakerman39]

I know MCACC Pro does dual subs but not sure it has same filter capacity as Audyssey, but last time I tried to find about YPAO sub filters couldn't find much. I believe Pioneer Japan has been placed in charge of selling Dirac to various other entities IIRC so I'd expect Dirac down the line to replace MCACC....

Wow! Did NOT know that. Was looking for the post over @AVS claiming the Yammy 3050 can EQ dual subs. Have NOT had much luck finding it. Like I said, I do not go in the Receiver sections too much. It is certainly going to be very interesting to see what Onkyo does w/MCACC. The same goes for Dirac! Thanks for the info!

Cheers,

Phil

 

[PENG]

Wow! Did NOT know that. Was looking for the post over @AVS claiming the Yammy 3050 can EQ dual subs. Have NOT had much luck finding it. Like I said, I do not go in the Receiver sections too much. It is certainly going to be very interesting to see what Onkyo does w/MCACC. The same goes for Dirac! Thanks for the info!

Cheers,

Phil

It probably can EQ two subs but there is little information about how it works, not even in the manual. Note that while it can be manually EQ down to 15.6 Hz, YPAO is still limited to 31 Hz, according to AH preview, https://www.audioholics.com/av-receiver-reviews/aventage-rx-a-60-preview

 

[everettT]

Is the sub the major concern? If so which sub? Antimode and others make standalone for just subs

 

[Good4it]

Is the sub the major concern? If so which sub? Antimode and others make standalone for just subs

No, it's all of it. Thanks for your suggestions. Everyone else just wanted to know WHY.