Onkyo 804 vs Harman Kardon 645

[Elvis1977]

Well, I just compared these two receivers in my basement for a long time and here is my result.

1) HK is more warmer with better & tighter bass output for sure.
2) HK is much better with cd music on all listening modes.
3) Too close to call for DTS or Dolby Digital sound. (call it a tie)


Any other opinions? I have 30 days to decide if I should return the HK to the store for a refund.

Maybe if someone wants to buy my Onkyo 804 dirt cheep then I might keep the HK for sure.

Here is my setup:

JBL E100 (Dual 10's) & (4" midrange) = Front
JBL EC35 (Dual 5.25")& (3" midrange) = Center
JBL E50 (Single 8's) & (4" midrange) = Surround
JBL E250p (12" Sub)

 

[mtrycrafts]

Well, I just compared these two receivers in my basement for a long time and here is my result.

1) HK is more warmer with better & tighter bass output for sure.
2) HK is much better with cd music on all listening modes.
3) Too close to call for DTS or Dolby Digital sound. (call it a tie)


Any other opinions? I have 30 days to decide if I should return the HK to the store for a refund.

Maybe if someone wants to buy my Onkyo 804 dirt cheep then I might keep the HK for sure.

Here is my setup:

JBL E100 (Dual 10's) & (4" midrange) = Front
JBL EC35 (Dual 5.25")& (3" midrange) = Center
JBL E50 (Single 8's) & (4" midrange) = Surround
JBL E250p (12" Sub)

The question becomes how did you compare the two amps?
Did you level match them to 0.1dB spl?
Did you control for human bias? If not, it becomes unreliable. Perhaps that Onkyo is better otherwise? Or, if indeed the HK is warmer, then it is euphonic by design and the specs would reflect this.

 

[Seth=L]

The H/K outclasses the Onkyo in this case, IMO. It is heavier, more expensive, and in all most likely, more powerful.

With that said, what did you pay for the Harman Kardon? How long have you had your speakers and have you considered upgrading, most specifically the subwoofer. When you have each receiver set up do you set all speakers to small and use the receiver's x-over instead of the subwoofer's x-over. Using the x-over on the receiver can reduce stress and make either receiver far more effective at doing what it does and also allows the subwoofer do what it does best.

If it where me I would return the H/K and get a better sub from Velodyne, SVS, Boston Acoustics while they are cheap at Circuit City. In my opinion JBL doesn't make the best subwoofers and much more can be had for the money.

 

[rnatalli]

I agree with Seth that the H/K is probably the better bet. From your observations, I'm guessing you prefer the H/K. You should definitely look at a better sub at least.

 

[mtrycrafts]

The H/K outclasses the Onkyo in this case, IMO. It is heavier, more expensive, and in all most likely, more powerful.

With that said, what did you pay for the Harman Kardon? How long have you had your speakers and have you considered upgrading, most specifically the subwoofer. When you have each receiver set up do you set all speakers to small and use the receiver's x-over instead of the subwoofer's x-over. Using the x-over on the receiver can reduce stress and make either receiver far more effective at doing what it does and also allows the subwoofer do what it does best.

If it where me I would return the H/K and get a better sub from Velodyne, SVS, Boston Acoustics while they are cheap at Circuit City. In my opinion JBL doesn't make the best subwoofers and much more can be had for the money.

The Onkyo is rated for 105 watts, HK is 75 watts. I would disregard the all channel aspect of rating, irrelevant marketing. As to features, that he needs to decide on.

 

[Elvis1977]

I paid $599 at J&R with free shippling. What a steal!!! Anybody wants my Onkyo 804 dirt cheap?

 

[Seth=L]

The Onkyo is rated for 105 watts, HK is 75 watts. I would disregard the all channel aspect of rating, irrelevant marketing. As to features, that he needs to decide on.

Without seeing a bench test there can be no proof. The Onkyo weighs just short of 30 pounds if I remember correctly, the Harman Kardon is a 41 pounder. I know weight doesn't mean everything, but this much difference can't be neglegible between two class A/B amplifiers.

 

[rnatalli]

Without seeing a bench test there can be no proof. The Onkyo weighs just short of 30 pounds if I remember correctly, the Harman Kardon is a 41 pounder. I know weight doesn't mean everything, but this much difference can't be neglegible between two class A/B amplifiers.

I think the H/K actually weighs in at 47lbs which is 56% heavier than the Onkyo. The H/K's max power consumption is around 1300 watts where the Onkyo is around 900 watts and I would think the efficiency of both amps is about the same. H/K has always been known to understate their amps' power and I'd bet the H/K puts out more juice than the Onkyo in this case. Like Seth said, there's quite a gap that's not easy to ignore.

 

[Seth=L]

I think the H/K actually weighs in at 47lbs which is 56% heavier than the Onkyo. The H/K's max power consumption is around 1300 watts where the Onkyo is around 900 watts and I would think the efficiency of both amps is about the same. H/K has always been known to understate their amps' power and I'd bet the H/K puts out more juice than the Onkyo in this case. Like Seth said, there's quite a gap that's not easy to ignore.

The 47 pounds is for the shipping weight (Box, remote, manual, and antenni) The main unit is 41 pounds.

 

[alexsound]

The H/K outclasses the Onkyo in this case, IMO. It is heavier, more expensive, and in all most likely, more powerful.

With that said, what did you pay for the Harman Kardon? How long have you had your speakers and have you considered upgrading, most specifically the subwoofer. When you have each receiver set up do you set all speakers to small and use the receiver's x-over instead of the subwoofer's x-over. Using the x-over on the receiver can reduce stress and make either receiver far more effective at doing what it does and also allows the subwoofer do what it does best.

If it where me I would return the H/K and get a better sub from Velodyne, SVS, Boston Acoustics while they are cheap at Circuit City. In my opinion JBL doesn't make the best subwoofers and much more can be had for the money.

HK may have been playing catch up the last few years in the feature's dept, but in the "power and clean clear sound" dept, they have always been as good or better than any of the major brands out there. I would even go further to say, that at 599.00 paid or even double that, on sheer sound quality, few if any of the other major brands can equal an HK AVR645, especially with stereo sources.

 

[mtrycrafts]

The 47 pounds is for the shipping weight (Box, remote, manual, and antenni) The main unit is 41 pounds.

Yep, I checked too but it isn't much heavier than the Onkyo. So, I doubt it will outdo it. The price, if I remember is substantially different though, list anyhow.

 

[rnatalli]

Yep, I checked too but it isn't much heavier than the Onkyo. So, I doubt it will outdo it. The price, if I remember is substantially different though, list anyhow.

My bad about the weight. I think I'd still go with the H/K though Their amp sections never disappointed me.

The original post by Elvis sounds like he preferred the H/K to the Onkyo. It's really a question if the dollars spent would be worth it and that will vary by the individual.

 

[mtrycrafts]

The original post by Elvis sounds like he preferred the H/K to the Onkyo. It's really a question if the dollars spent would be worth it and that will vary by the individual.

Yes, by all means.

 

[PENG]

It seems to me the OP prefers the HK from the beginning. That does not have to do with facts and figures, but has much to do with personal preferences, and one's preconception of the so called "warm" sound. That being said, the 645 does have impressive specs and great look.

As to the claims about HK always understates their power ratings, or having higher maximum power ratings (clearly stated as maximum in their spec sheet/manual) than other's so called "power consumption (without stating that it is maximum), all these had previously been discussed here and it turned out those claims were not supported by bench test results published by several AV magazines.

If anyone wants to see the proof, just follow the links posted on this site several times within the last two years or do a search on lab measurements by S&V, HT Magazine, and a couple of British AV magazines and will see that within the same price range HK receivers more often than not, gave less output their comparatively priced Denon, Yamaha and Pioneer products. I have not seen lab measurements for the 64X series. I am referring to, e.g. the AVR330 vs RX-V657, AVR2105, or the AVR630 vs RX-V2500, AVR3805, and the Pioneer Elite models.

 

[Elvis1977]

Thanks to all who have responded.

Yeh, I have actually done research On the Hk 745 and Onkyo 804.

Onkyo= 29.5 lbs
HK= 41.0 lbs.

Sound and Vision did a bench test with 5 channels driven on the Onkyo 804 and concluded a maximum of 56 wats per channel before safety clipping was engaged.

Now, on the HK they CLAIN a maximum of 75 wats per channel with ALL SEVEN channels driven is correct.

I listened to both for a long time and I am sure the HK 645 is stronger and cleaner at high volumes. 19 wats per channel is clearly a huge difference with 3 or more speakers driven.

The Onkyo 804 like I said sounded fantastic almost equal with HK 645 in DTS and Dolby surround modes. But, with cd music in stereo HK wins for sure.

Now saying that, will someone give me an offer for my Onkyo 804?

 

[Seth=L]

The power differences are negligible concerning output, but for dynamics that is another story. The H/K should have more headroom and sound better at higher levels than the Onkyo.

 

[PENG]

Thanks to all who have responded.

Yeh, I have actually done research On the Hk 745 and Onkyo 804.

Onkyo= 29.5 lbs
HK= 41.0 lbs.

Sound and Vision did a bench test with 5 channels driven on the Onkyo 804 and concluded a maximum of 56 wats per channel before safety clipping was engaged.

Now, on the HK they CLAIN a maximum of 75 wats per channel with ALL SEVEN channels driven is correct.

I listened to both for a long time and I am sure the HK 645 is stronger and cleaner at high volumes. 19 wats per channel is clearly a huge difference with 3 or more speakers driven.

The Onkyo 804 like I said sounded fantastic almost equal with HK 645 in DTS and Dolby surround modes. But, with cd music in stereo HK wins for sure.

Now saying that, will someone give me an offer for my Onkyo 804?

I am not sure about their prices but I would guess that the 645, may be even the 745, should be compared to the Onkyo 805 at the minimum. Given the choices, it is no wonder that you want to sell the 804 and keep the 645.

 

[rnatalli]

The lab tests I've seen have shown H/K to come in at what they're specs state or a bit higher. But facts and figures aside, you liked the H/K, roll with it. I personally have always preferred H/K to Onkyo and that's based entirely on subjective experience.

 

[no. 5]

Sound and Vision did a bench test with 5 channels driven on the Onkyo 804 and concluded a maximum of 56 wats per channel before safety clipping was engaged.

It didn't do to bad with two channels driven.

Anyway, just go with the one you like; I doubt that any of the higher end, big name receivers will cause buyers remorse, at least as far as sound quality is concerned.

 

[alexsound]

It seems to me the OP prefers the HK from the beginning. That does not have to do with facts and figures, but has much to do with personal preferences, and one's preconception of the so called "warm" sound. That being said, the 645 does have impressive specs and great look.

As to the claims about HK always understates their power ratings, or having higher maximum power ratings (clearly stated as maximum in their spec sheet/manual) than other's so called "power consumption (without stating that it is maximum), all these had previously been discussed here and it turned out those claims were not supported by bench test results published by several AV magazines.

If anyone wants to see the proof, just follow the links posted on this site several times within the last two years or do a search on lab measurements by S&V, HT Magazine, and a couple of British AV magazines and will see that within the same price range HK receivers more often than not, gave less output their comparatively priced Denon, Yamaha and Pioneer products. I have not seen lab measurements for the 64X series. I am referring to, e.g. the AVR330 vs RX-V657, AVR2105, or the AVR630 vs RX-V2500, AVR3805, and the Pioneer Elite models.

You may want to research this a bit further. The AVR340 has higher multichannel output (measured) than any of the receivers you mentioned from either Yamaha or Denon except for the 3805 from Denon. Check out HT's website and look at the numbers yourself. As for the RXV657, you can check the specs for that one on S&V's website. Both the 330 and 630 are old models in the audio world. I understand that the models you mentioned from Yamaha and Denon are also old models, but if you look at the Denon 2107, which is direct decendant of the 2105, it doesn't have the output of the 340, and if you look at Yamaha's 661, it's in the same ballpark as it's grandpa the 657. Also, the HK 340 is a discontinued item, replaced by the 347. I 'm not saying HK is the be all and end all of AVR's. Like I said before, they have been playing catch up for some unkown reason, especially when it comes to features, but when it comes to the amp section itself and the quality of the sound, they can go toe to toe with any of these guys.