Onkyo sucks nowadays?

[lovinthehd]

The only thing about Audyssey is that it's not that tweak-able.

Well, it is a little more tweakable now with the Editor App starting with the x300 series....altho some have had some issues with the app....

 

[T-Bone]

I just purchased an RZ920. AccuEq did a great job of setting up my speakers for my room.

I had a Denon X3100 for two years before that. With the high-end audyssey. Let me see, how many times did it get my subwoofer properly calibrated? None. I always had to breakout the SPL meter.

And my Denon always automatically crossed my Mains at 40 Hertz and set my mains as large. Knowing full well that I had a subwoofer in the system.

-T

 

[lovinthehd]

I just purchased an RZ920. AccuEq did a great job of setting up my speakers for my room.

I had a Denon X3100 for two years before that. With the high-end audyssey. Let me see, how many times did it get my subwoofer properly calibrated? None. I always had to breakout the SPL meter.

And my Denon always automatically crossed my Mains at 40 Hertz and set my mains as large. Knowing full well that I had a subwoofer in the system.

-T

The Denon 3100 didn't have the higher end Audyssey fwiw, only the middle level of MultEQ, the XT version (high end Audyssey would be Audyssey Pro, typically only accessed via units with XT32, the next highest up from XT). How can it set a crossover and still set them as large? Large means using no crossover...but in any case that's a Denon decision as to having Audyssey set speakers to large when a sub is in use (not an Audyssey recommendation), usually based on whether the mic measures an f3 of 40Hz for the speakers.

So AccuEQ automatically sets speakers to small when a sub is in use? Or uses a different f3?

 

[T-Bone]

The Denon 3100 didn't have the higher end Audyssey fwiw, only the middle level of MultEQ, the XT version (high end Audyssey would be Audyssey Pro, typically only accessed via units with XT32, the next highest up from XT). How can it set a crossover and still set them as large? Large means using no crossover...but in any case that's a Denon decision as to having Audyssey set speakers to large when a sub is in use (not an Audyssey recommendation), usually based on whether the mic measures an f3 of 40Hz for the speakers.

So AccuEQ automatically sets speakers to small when a sub is in use? Or uses a different f3?

Oops... I mixed up some info

The X3100 always set my fronts and center as large. Not 40 hz... Since, as you stated, would imply small with XO. I always had to manually set them as small and set my own crossover. So my bad for the wrong information.

But that is a problem that audyssey has been doing for years according to the forums.

A better implementation would be to always set the front speakers as small as long as there is a subwoofer in the system that goes lower than the fronts, for example.

That would satisfy 99.9% of all use cases

My Towers are rated down to 38 Hertz. And they are about 2 feet off the front wall. And my sub (SVS 12") goes down to 23 hz anechoic I believe, and I have it corner loaded.

The RZ920 AccuEq had my fronts and Center as small, with a 40 Hertz crossover. I raised the crossover after Onkyo got done with its calibration.

So between the two, the Denon keeping my fronts and center as large, versus the Onkyo using a crossover that was too low in my opinion, which one did the worst job?

-T

 

[lovinthehd]

Oops... I mixed up some info

The X3100 always set my fronts and center as large. Not 40 hz... Since, as you stated, would imply small with XO. I always had to manually set them as small and set my own crossover. So my bad for the wrong information.

But that is a problem that audyssey has been doing for years according to the forums.

A better implementation would be to always set the front speakers as small as long as there is a subwoofer in the system that goes lower than the fronts, for example.

That would satisfy 99.9% of all use cases

My Towers are rated down to 38 Hertz. And they are about 2 feet off the front wall. And my sub (SVS 12") goes down to 23 hz anechoic I believe, and I have it corner loaded.

The RZ920 AccuEq had my fronts and Center as small, with a 40 Hertz crossover. I raised the crossover after Onkyo got done with its calibration.

So between the two, the Denon keeping my fronts and center as large, versus the Onkyo using a crossover that was too low in my opinion, which one did the worst job?

-T

Well, Audyssey is implemented as the avr manufacturers see fit, if it were up to Audyssey (and they have stated such) they'd automatically set speakers to use bass management (i.e. set them to "small") when a sub is utilized. I figure many avr manufacturers' marketing departments just don't want to tell their customers their speakers are "small".

I personally would prefer they simply have a setting up front that says I have a sub and yes I want to use bass management for all speakers....Denon simply wants you to go back into manual mode and change it back for them, assuming you're speakers weren't "insulted" , at least both my Denons are prone to do that. My Onkyo does the same fwiw (its an older unit with XT). Not something I'd judge an avr on doing something "correctly" was my point. Many simply raise sub level post Audyssey, too as many simply prefer that....

From what I've seen Audyssey is still the superior req program by quite a bit...particularly for subs.

 

[M Code]

Well, Audyssey is implemented as the avr manufacturers see fit, if it were up to Audyssey (and they have stated such) they'd automatically set speakers to use bass management (i.e. set them to "small"). I figure many avr manufacturers' marketing departments just don't want to tell their customers their speakers are "small".

I personally would prefer they simply have a setting up front that says I have a sub and yes I want to use bass management for all speakers....Denon simply wants you to go back into manual mode and change it back for them, assuming you're speakers weren't "insulted" , at least both my Denons are prone to do that. My Onkyo does the same fwiw (its an older unit with XT). Not something I'd judge an avr on doing something "correctly" was my point. Many simply raise sub level post Audyssey, too as many simply prefer that....

From what I've seen Audyssey is still the superior req program by quite a bit...particularly for subs.

We have sold/installed all of the brand AVRs Yamaha, Pioneer, Elite, Onkyo, Integra, Denon, Marantz, Harman/Kardon the best room EQ software we found was the EZSet/EQ II used in the higher end HK AVRs and JBL Synthesis products. This software handles each subwoofer indepedently, plus before setting any X-overs or levels does a near-field sweep for each loudspeaker to evaluate its respective performance. Another interesting feature compared to other EQ sw is that rather than boost the transfer function to cover response holes it pulls down the peaks saving DSP headroom. This software developed with the support of Floyd Toole's R&D team and provided the best EQ solution. 1 of its advantages is that it was supported by the JBL/Revel acoustic engineers and then their input was integrated into the final software code.
Regarding multiple subwoofers, JBL/Revel through Dr.Toole's R&D team have been preaching its benefits for more than 15 years...

Note that we have known Audyssey and Chris K.'s team for >10 years and as well as being an Audyssey Pro Installer, but here again the majority of AV dealers and consumers rarely have the opportunity to compare 1 EQ system vs another.

Just my $0.02..

 

[lovinthehd]

We have sold/installed all of the brand AVRs Yamaha, Pioneer, Elite, Onkyo, Integra, Denon, Marantz, Harman/Kardon the best room EQ software we found was the EZSet/EQ II used in the higher end HK AVRs and JBL Synthesis products. This software handles each subwoofer indepedently, plus before setting any X-overs or levels does a near-field sweep for each loudspeaker to evaluate its respective performance. Another interesting feature compared to other EQ sw is that rather than boost the transfer function to cover response holes it pulls down the peaks saving DSP headroom. This software developed with the support of Floyd Toole's R&D team and provided the best EQ solution. 1 of its advantages is that it was supported by the JBL/Revel acoustic engineers and then their input was integrated into the final software code.
Regarding multiple subwoofers, JBL/Revel through Dr.Toole's R&D team have been preaching its benefits for more than 15 years...

Note that we have known Audyssey and Chris K.'s team for >10 years and as well as being an Audyssey Pro Installer, but here again the majority of AV dealers and consumers rarely have the opportunity to compare 1 EQ system vs another.

Just my $0.02..

Would have liked to have used that system but never had the opportunity. Audyssey also provided for up to four individual subwoofers from my understanding, but no avr manufacturer implemented it (probably to save on processor cost I'd think), max as implemented was two subs via SubEQ feature afaik.

Curious, can you confirm that Chris K is gone now from Audyssey as someone else reported recently?

 

[M Code]

Would have liked to have used that system but never had the opportunity. Audyssey also provided for up to four individual subwoofers from my understanding, but no avr manufacturer implemented it (probably to save on processor cost I'd think), max as implemented was two subs via SubEQ feature afaik.

Curious, can you confirm that Chris K is gone now from Audyssey as someone else reported recently?

To my knowledge he is still there. I know his rite hand man founder/programmer Phil went to Lab 126, Amazon's R&D team behind the Echo. I do recall they received a $ infusion from Intel and are shifting their resources toward phones and other personal communication devices. Their income base shrunk significantly when certain AVR brands shifted away from Audyssey, as their royalty structure is significant. They did branch out into certain processing algorithms used by Best Buy in their Insignia HD displays but I think this didn't deliver the anticipated $...

Just my $0.02...

 

[lee_from_ct]

Several months ago, my 646 had an issue after I shorted out a couple of strands for two speaker wires (oops, my bad); but with assistance from Onkyo help (a live person!) I was able to reset the 646 to factory specs (then needed to re-customize), and now it again works 100%.

So, my experience has been good.

My 646 does not sound subjectively as "nice" as my old tube equipment; but, the modern Onkyo sounds "almost" as good... and of course it has many modern features (HDMI, etc.) and it doesn't need to warm up. For what you get; price is reasonable.

When HDMI 3.0 (or HDMI 4.0?) becomes available, I'll probably sell this and get something new. I would certainly consider another Onkyo.

 

[mattlach]

I don't know about "sucks", that seems like a bit of a strong choice of words, but it does seem like in the more mainstream range (you know, receivers for less than $1000) Denon has kind of run away with it, leaving the competition feeling somewhat stale.

 

[Braddock]

I have 4 Onkyos sitting in my garage becasue theyre POS!! I love those AVR's, but every single one of them, in 3 different households have blownup, failed to work, lost outputs/inputs or something. I will never buy them again.

 

[bikdav]

Bought a TX NR-656 less than a year ago, today, the surround left channel blew out. Ever since purchasing it, up to this point, I have been rather unimpressed by it’s performance. The amplifier section seemed pretty decent, but everything else left me feeling like they’d cheaped out.

First off, Accueq is still a dumpster fire, failing to even set trim and distances properly, let alone the horrific mangling of frequency response it does. Unlike every other brand that seems to have solved this issue soon after DTS: X was released, it still doesn’t allow crossmixing between Dolby and DTS upmixers. The streaming apps are clunky and frequently fail to respond. Atmos flag recognition often is buggy when streaming Vudu titles when hdmi CEC is enabled, and frequently requires restarting. Last but not least, many have reported issues with the subwoofer volume wildly varying with different sources, and while I can’t be 100% positive, there’s been a few instances it sounded off to me as well.

Reading through different discussions on avsforum and reddit, lots of people have complained of reliability and quality control issues with onkyo ever since the hdmi board problems from 2009-2012 models, which took them years to address, with even the newer receivers often failing soon after warranty expiration.

I have decided to replace the receiver with a Denon x1300w and resell the onkyo once it’s repaired for fear of longevity problems.

Does anybody else have any concerns with onkyos reliability or feel they’re not up to par with other brands?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don’t throw stones at ONKYO. Many problems are not their fault exclusively. For example, I’ve had my ONKYO 646 for over two years and an ONKYO 656 for almost a year and a half. Both are doing what I need them to do. I’ve played with a number of the room “auto EQs” of various versions and have ALWAYS had to manually tweak things to my liking. HDMI? HDMI is not seriously ONKYO’s fault. The HDMI system itself is very “fluky”. I’ve had problems with HDMI on TVs and computers. To complicate matters, it keeps changing and you don’t know what will work with what down the line.

 

[shadyJ]

I don't know about "sucks", that seems like a bit of a strong choice of words, but it does seem like in the more mainstream range (you know, receivers for less than $1000) Denon has kind of run away with it, leaving the competition feeling somewhat stale.

I dunno, I feel like Yamaha and Marantz present some strong competition. In the lower priced AVR market, I think Sony has some solid offerings as well. But then, I don't care about or use room correction. The only automated room correction I would use is Dirac or Trinnov. Otherwise I am EQing manually.

 

[mattlach]

I dunno, I feel like Yamaha and Marantz present some strong competition. In the lower priced AVR market, I think Sony has some solid offerings as well. But then, I don't care about or use room correction. The only automated room correction I would use is Dirac or Trinnov. Otherwise I am EQing manually.

Marantz is the same company as Denon

I've looked at Yamaha a few times, but they have never quite impressed me. I can't quite say why. I'd have to go back and look at the features and specs pages again.

I do use room correction, but only because I have a very complicated room. Two sets of permanently open double doors, one in the back wall to the right of the screen in to the dining room, and one on the left wall to the hallway. One single door in the back wall leading into my office. A wall full of windows on the right. Hardwood floors, a hard brick fireplace in the back wall on the left of the screen. Tiled floor under the fireplace. Hardwood drop ceilings.



I fully understand how many say room correction can do a worse job than manual correction, but I think in my challenging room, I'd be lost without it. I usually let Audyssey run, and then go back and tweak it after the fact. I usually wind up shifting the left and right speakers from "large" back down to "small". Setting the crossovers all around to 80hz, and boosting up the subwoofers by a few db, but keeping everything else Audyssey does as is. It has worked OK for me thus far.

 

[panteragstk]

Don’t throw stones at ONKYO. Many problems are not their fault exclusively. For example, I’ve had my ONKYO 646 for over two years and an ONKYO 656 for almost a year and a half. Both are doing what I need them to do. I’ve played with a number of the room “auto EQs” of various versions and have ALWAYS had to manually tweak things to my liking. HDMI? HDMI is not seriously ONKYO’s fault. The HDMI system itself is very “fluky”. I’ve had problems with HDMI on TVs and computers. To complicate matters, it keeps changing and you don’t know what will work with what down the line.

Sorry, but as good as my 809 is (after repair) a bad batch of HDMI boards causing audio output to cease working is a design/manufacturing flaw. That is Onkyo's fault.

As much as I still love my 809 (use it every day) I like my Denon's better.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

I have an 808 and with the exception of the HDMI “fix” they did, it’s been an excellent receiver. 135x7(as bench tested by home theater magazine, IIrc still put out something like 110-115 acd. I can’t find it anymore to confirm but almost as good as the legendary 805. It’s a beast). I feel they’ve done way more than any other manufacturer would have to make good on the HDMI thing. I think most would had said tough titty. That says a lot to me.
I also think that since around that time Onkyo represented probably the best bang for the buck, so there were far more Onkyo avr’s out in the wild than others. Therefore there were more units to fail, and more people complaining. Imo the biggest offense was accueq. It’s a still birth afaic. My issue with Yamaha is their stupid menu structure. Also having 500 sound modes is just dumb. Im also one the few who actually like the marantz “porthole”, but I’m not convinced the premium is worth it. I’m waiting for the x4400 to hit close out at 799 like the 4300 did. Or buy a refurb... I have a minidsp and 3 subs but I really want to see how subeqHT treats my room.

 

[bboro30]

I believe i had a rz620. It worked fine for about 3 years. Thought the room correction was poor and the onscreen interface was real BS. It blew up 100% because of me so i cant blame them. Then i ran out and bought a rather cheap refurbished denon and think it a much better receiver. Better interface, great room correction and the remote makes most things pretty easy. Again just another guy with 2 cents to through in.