Yamaha AS801, Yamaha RN803 or Outlaw RR2160

[PENG]

Shouldn't you ascertain the quality of the recordings before buying gear trying to make lesser ones sound better?

Imo for serious decision making auditions people should bring their own, CD, sacd, digital files etc.

 

[LPJR]

Shouldn't you ascertain the quality of the recordings before buying gear trying to make lesser ones sound better?

I mainly listen to CD's. Some albums are mastered better than others. That's the way

Imo for serious decision making auditions people should bring their own, CD, sacd, digital files etc.

i think I may order one of the Yamahas and just demo it at home. Try a side by side bs my AVR. Which would you recommend? The Rn803 or the AS801. Will there be a difference in quality between the two, as the specs seems similar. I assume SQ amounts to more than just watts and distortion ratings...

 

[lovinthehd]

I mainly listen to CD's. Some albums are mastered better than others. That's the way

i think I may order one of the Yamahas and just demo it at home. Try a side by side bs my AVR. Which would you recommend? The Rn803 or the AS801. Will there be a difference in quality between the two, as the specs seems similar. I assume SQ amounts to more than just watts and distortion ratings...

Indeed. Why some recordings will just not sound as good as others no matter the gear. Side by side with separate listening sessions or actually able to quick switch between the two and level matched and blind for fair comparison?

 

[ski2xblack]

I assume SQ amounts to more than just watts and distortion ratings...

As mentioned previously, SQ is primarily a function of speaker and source quality, and greatly influenced by local acoustics.

Amps don't have any particular quality of sound, they just amplify (at least that is the common design goal, broadly achieved, by virtually all modern amps from reputable companies that aren't on the audiophool fringes). Clipping amps, however, will adversely alter the SQ if there is enough clipping taking place, so the main concern is that the amp is powerful enough to avoid that (which is trivially easy to determine),and, perhaps more importantly, has the specific feature set you're after (e.g. loudness eq, tone controls, bass management, all of which are specifically intended for purposefully altering the SQ, or utility features like streaming, built in phono pres, etc).

 

[LPJR]

SQ is primarily a function of speaker and source quality, and greatly influenced by local acoustics.

Amps don't have any particular quality of sound, they just amplify (at least that is the common design goal, broadly achieved, by virtually all modern amps from reputable companies that aren't on the audiophool fringes). Clipping amps, however, will adversely alter the SQ if there is enough clipping taking place, so the main concern is that the amp is powerful enough to avoid that (which is trivially easy to determine),and, perhaps more importantly, has the specific feature set you're after (e.g. loudness eq, tone controls, bass management, all of which are specifically intended for purposefully altering the SQ, or utility features like streaming, built in phono pres, etc).

Thanks! I’ve heard that from a couple different sources. How come consumers spend so much on intergrated amps - thousands- when the wattage and distortion ratings are similar to amps at a fraction of the cost? Some say the power supply, heat sinks, etc can affect tonality.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I don’t see how any of these other options will sound any better than the Yamaha AVR.

But if you just want to try something else, then get the Integrated amp, not another Receiver.

 

[LPJR]

I don’t see how any of these other options will sound any better than the Yamaha AVR.

But if you just want to try something else, then get the Integrated amp, not another Receiver.

What option do you think would result in an improvement- short of a speaker upgrade.

 

[PENG]

I mainly listen to CD's. Some albums are mastered better than others. That's the way

i think I may order one of the Yamahas and just demo it at home. Try a side by side bs my AVR. Which would you recommend? The Rn803 or the AS801. Will there be a difference in quality between the two, as the specs seems similar. I assume SQ amounts to more than just watts and distortion ratings...

All else being equal, I don't think one will sound better than the other, but if you can only demo one at home, then the A-S801 is the logical choice.

You should do blind tests right from the start to avoid expectation bias.

 

[lovinthehd]

Thanks! I’ve heard that from a couple different sources. How come consumers spend so much on intergrated amps - thousands- when the wattage and distortion ratings are similar to amps at a fraction of the cost? Some say the power supply, heat sinks, etc can affect tonality.

Marketing and audio magazines?

ps once upon a time I remember when integrated amps were considered just a bit better than a receiver...separates were supposedly the only way to go for a "purist"

 

[PENG]

Thanks! I’ve heard that from a couple different sources. How come consumers spend so much on intergrated amps - thousands- when the wattage and distortion ratings are similar to amps at a fraction of the cost? Some say the power supply, heat sinks, etc can affect tonality.

I will never spend thousands on an integrated amp (a thousand may be) but I had spent thousands on preamp and power amps. Integrated amp is just a receiver without the tuner, so no thanks, though I do have one and that's enough. I bought my preamp/power amp(s) because like you, but long time ago, I believed what I heard and read from print/online magazines, reviews etc. Then I found out they didn't do anything to sound other than loudness like speakers/room acoustics/placement and quality of recordings do. IMO people who experienced those so called night and day improvements were due to other reasons, the main one being placebo effect and expectation bias. I think HD, ADTG most likely have experience something similar, as they owned/still own electronics that cost a lot more than the average AV receivers, so we can sort of say been there, done that.. Who you choose to believe is obviously up to you.

I may do it again (spend "thousands" on preamp, amps, dacs etc.) though, but it won't be for sound quality any more, but for other reasons. People don't always buy expensive suvs for their rock climbing capability of acceleration/speed performance right?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

What option do you think would result in an improvement- short of a speaker upgrade.

Your setup is 2.0.

I think if you want to go a different route than AVR, Stereo Receiver, and Integrated Amps (which are really about the same),then I think you need to get an analog stereo preamp and stereo amp.

There are many used analog preamps and amps available.

As for new affordable preamps, Adcom has the GFP-815 preamp. You could also get the Adcom GFA-555ms 125W x 2Ch amp. You could probably get both for under $1,000 total brand new. Or even less if pre-owned.

I'm sure there are other brands of analog preamps and amps as well.

 

[killdozzer]

Some say the power supply, heat sinks, etc can affect tonality.

This is a slightly more cunning approach. There ARE certain specific set of circumstances where heat alters the sound (and, later on, results in ie speaker damage). If you drive your speakers in the red for a prolonged listening session, you may hear the sound deteriorating. I would assume this is the basis for the „heat sink“ „theory“.

My belief is that the smartest and most successful marketing always relies on some fatcs. There's always at least 5% of truth in every BS marketing. The rest is just BS.

But it's still BS in the end. Because, as @ski2xblack said “virtually all modern amps from reputable companies“ WILL NOT have overheating issues if used within their limits.

BS marketing is not spread only by those who have direct material interest. All of the tricked and fooled ones will push it simply because only other choice is to addmit they've been fooled. And believe me no one will opt for that. And all the placebo affected ones will push it because they really belieive they heard something.

Even your friends, and good ones at that, might give you false info simply because they honestly think they heard some night'n'day difference. It would be far less harmfull if there weren't a price tag attached to it.

OTOH power conditioners are 99% BS, the remainig 1% representing faulty power installations and that is something you don't fix by power conditioners.

 

[PENG]

This is a slightly more cunning approach. There ARE certain specific set of circumstances where heat alters the sound (and, later on, results in ie speaker damage). If you drive your speakers in the red for a prolonged listening session, you may hear the sound deteriorating. I would assume this is the basis for the „heat sink“ „theory“.

My belief is that the smartest and most successful marketing always relies on some fatcs. There's always at least 5% of truth in every BS marketing. The rest is just BS.

But it's still BS in the end. Because, as @ski2xblack said “virtually all modern amps from reputable companies“ WILL NOT have overheating issues if used within their limits.

BS marketing is not spread only by those who have direct material interest. All of the tricked and fooled ones will push it simply because only other choice is to addmit they've been fooled. And believe me no one will opt for that. And all the placebo affected ones will push it because they really belieive they heard something.

Even your friends, and good ones at that, might give you false info simply because they honestly think they heard some night'n'day difference. It would be far less harmfull if there weren't a price tag attached to it.

OTOH power conditioners are 99% BS, the remainig 1% representing fautly power installations and that is something you don't fix by power conditioners.

You covered many points, I would add one more example of such partial truth/BS marketing thing, namely the "Toroidal" transformer deal. Surely there are pros and cons, yet people often assume, as evidenced by posts on this forum, that if an amp is fitted with a toroid, it must be "higher end/better".. Case in point, since the Yamaha A-S801 was mentioned, it has a E-I frame transformer, same all the way up to the $3,500 listed A-S2100. Does that mean something like the $1,500 listed NAD C375 EE will sound better for less than half the money just because of the toroid? I guess this will never change though, that hearsay are often taken as facts..

 

[killdozzer]

I didn't want to stretch it too far; the OP will run away. There are numerous examples; there IS such a thing as skin effect, does it happen in home audio – NO, there IS a need for balanced if going for a long run, do you need it at 1.5 meters – NO, there IS a thing like jitter, does it affect your listening with a 500$ Yamaha – NO, vibrations DO mess with your turntable, do you need a 10k TT stand – NO.

I’m like this with all my interests. And I sell wine Winemakers hate me. Hate me!!! In this age of digital-baroque irrationalism, they keep coming at me with all their playlists of the music they play to their wine in the cellars and I just want to puke. And with all the “zodiac affecting wine” etc.

 

[John Parks]

I mainly listen to CD's. Some albums are mastered better than others. That's the way

i think I may order one of the Yamahas and just demo it at home. Try a side by side bs my AVR. Which would you recommend? The Rn803 or the AS801. Will there be a difference in quality between the two, as the specs seems similar. I assume SQ amounts to more than just watts and distortion ratings...

A-S801 owner here. The Yamaha is an excellent piece of kit and measures very well: https://www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/yamaha-a-s801-amplifier-review/yamaha-a-s801-measurements

I do not think you could go wrong in purchasing one. The same goes for the R-N803 - it is just a matter of function. Decoding DSD files is important to me, hence the 801. If that was not a priority, I probably would have gone with the richer feature set of the 803. Is there an appreciable sound difference between the two? I sincerely doubt it as the internals are pretty much identical.

I am a "form follows function" kind of guy and would not consider an HT receiver for my two channel audio - but that is just me (plenty of members here, as you can read in the comments, are perfectly satisfied with an HT receiver for their stereo needs - which is cool). Both of the Yamahas fit the bill nicely. Their performance is such that it would take (me) spending north of a several grand to replace them with something "better". Cheers!

 

[PENG]

A-S801 owner here. The Yamaha is an excellent piece of kit and measures very well: https://www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/yamaha-a-s801-amplifier-review/yamaha-a-s801-measurements

I do not think you could go wrong in purchasing one. The same goes for the R-N803 - it is just a matter of function. Decoding DSD files is important to me, hence the 801. If that was not a priority, I probably would have gone with the richer feature set of the 803. Is there an appreciable sound difference between the two? I sincerely doubt it as the internals are pretty much identical.

I am a "form follows function" kind of guy and would not consider an HT receiver for my two channel audio - but that is just me (plenty of members here, as you can read in the comments, are perfectly satisfied with an HT receiver for their stereo needs - which is cool). Both of the Yamahas fit the bill nicely. Their performance is such that it would take (me) spending north of a several grand to replace them with something "better". Cheers!

Agreed but would like to mention two points:

1. The R-N803 can decode DSD files too, but no USB DAC, the A-S801 does have the USB DAC function.
2. Good point about "form follows function", me, but I think a lot of people won't "follow" that at any cost.

Using a 7 channel AVR as a 2 channel integrated amp sure looks stupid and odd, but it is practically viable because of the typical huge price drop 12-18 months after launch date. It is mostly for that reason, that some of us do like to mention them as an option. Beside that, they do also typically compete well with integrated amps on brute power output for two channel applications.

 

[LPJR]

A-S801 owner here. The Yamaha is an excellent piece of kit and measures very well: https://www.audioholics.com/amplifier-reviews/yamaha-a-s801-amplifier-review/yamaha-a-s801-measurements

I do not think you could go wrong in purchasing one. The same goes for the R-N803 - it is just a matter of function. Decoding DSD files is important to me, hence the 801. If that was not a priority, I probably would have gone with the richer feature set of the 803. Is there an appreciable sound difference between the two? I sincerely doubt it as the internals are pretty much identical.

I am a "form follows function" kind of guy and would not consider an HT receiver for my two channel audio - but that is just me (plenty of members here, as you can read in the comments, are perfectly satisfied with an HT receiver for their stereo needs - which is cool). Both of the Yamahas fit the bill nicely. Their performance is such that it would take (me) spending north of a several grand to replace them with something "better". Cheers!

Thanks for the insightful response! I was thinking there would be no downside in trying a dedicated two channel amp/receiver. Worst case- I return it. I spoke with Crutchfield - they sales rep said the AS801 is slightly better sounding, but recommended - in balance - the NR803 (given the features). I already have a Yamaha CD-300 player. So staying in the Yamaha family seems to make sense.

So you think I should try the NR803? Or some other brand? Price is not so much a factor if the quality is superior so long as it’s not terribly north of $1,000. My speakers are the monitor audio bronze 6’s.

Thanks again!

 

[PENG]

I suggested the A-S801 before because going from an AV receiver to another receiver just less channels does not sound as logical. Practically speaking, the R-N803 likely have very similar (or even shared) components, in the amp section. However, if you find YPAO helpful in your room, then I would definitely go with the R-N803.
On another note, I do have some experience with MA speakers, and I believe they will benefit from stronger truly 4 ohm capable amps. But then, it depends on your seating distance and how loud you listen. If sit close enough at low enough level, most amps and receivers are 4 ohm capable, just for argument sake.

 

[KEW]

I suggested the A-S801 before because going from an AV receiver to another receiver just less channels does not sound as logical. Practically speaking, the R-N803 likely have very similar (or even shared) components, in the amp section. However, if you find YPAO helpful in your room, then I would definitely go with the R-N803.
On another note, I do have some experience with MA speakers, and I believe they will benefit from stronger truly 4 ohm capable amps. But then, it depends on your seating distance and how loud you listen. If sit close enough at low enough level, most amps and receivers are 4 ohm capable, just for argument sake.

I did not realize that the MA were a little bit of a load. I would suspect the A770 may be a step down from the A860 that Gene found to be so poor in the amplification section. It may not be the slightest issue since only 2 channels will be used, but with that particular AVR there is a chance of improvement moving to something more robust.!

 

[LPJR]

I can pickup the Marantz pm7005 for $750- which is $250 off. How does it compare with the Yamaha AS801? I like the loudness feature of the Yamaha. But some people swear by the Marantz SQ over the Yamaha. Has anyone compared the two- just in terms of SQ (as read the specs). My speakers are somewhat sensitive - so either will likely be sufficiently power them. Thanks!