Harman Kardon Beats Denon

[Seth=L]

Also, what room treatments are you using, and are you calibrating both the Denon and HK AVRs?
What settings are you using, any onboard EQs? That will clearly change the sound...
Etc....

Ooh, good thinking. Each receiver's settings could affect this as well, not to mention human bias.

 

[MDS]

Let us count the reasons to avoid H/K:
1. Butt Ugly.
2. Lower RMS power than other brands (due to their all channels driven rating) which translates into lower dynamic power, which is more important, than the other brands.
3. High failure rate at least if anecdotal reports of many problems are extrapolated to be true in a wider sense.

This is not meant to be offensive but it is the way I look at the brand. Everyone is free to choose what they think will work best for them for whatever reason.

 

[Gasman]

1. Butt Ugly.
.

LOL, that is funny.
But clearly that is subjective.

I actually like the look of them, or should I say, they don't look that bad.

I'm seriously thinking of getting one, because it will match my XA1.
Just wish they would come around with some new units, that will decode DD+, DTS MA, etc...

If anyone knows of another AVR that will match the XA1, please let me know.
See XA1 here - http://www.hometheatermag.com/discplayers/0506toshiba/

 

[matthewdclarkaz]

just a little to add

I'm glad people have mentioned subjectivity. There are lots of way to measure the quality of a receiver, but the last qualifier is if you like the sound of it.

Also, for anyone interested, I have heard the new Denon 3808, and it sounds quiet a bit better than its predecessor. I was actually pretty surprised, though I like the sound of Denon to begin with, I heard significant improvement (still a little too heavy in the bass.)

The only thing I personally don't care for with the HKs (besides the look, sorry but I can't stand the design) is that they seem to bright for me (although admittedly I am overly sensitive to brightness.)

Anyway, just thought I would through in my two cents and a little info (subjective) on the new Denons.

(Edited Part)
Oh, and Elvis, I hope with all the receiver switching you have been doing I hope you are using spades or banana clips, lest your poor hands need some rest!
(Edited Part)

Matthew

 

[MDS]

Interesting and definitely goes to show that perception of 'sound quality' is in the ear of the listener. I am certain that in a blind test one would be hard pressed to determine to which receiver brand was playing but in informal listening at big box stores I would not say under any under cirumstance that the HKs are 'bright'. Quite the opposite - I would say they were dull.

Anyone that says Onkyo is bright must also be off their rocker. I've owned half a dozen different models and bright is not an adjective I'd use to describe them. It all depends on other factors like room acoustics and speaker choice so yes there is quite a bit of subjectivity involved.

Incidentally this is why I never answer the threads 'which reciever should I buy'. I think in general all the top tier names are good and nobody wants to hear 'pick one, they are all good.'.

 

[matthewdclarkaz]

Incidentally this is why I never answer the threads 'which reciever should I buy'. I think in general all the top tier names are good and nobody wants to hear 'pick one, they are all good.'.

LOL. No one does like to hear that, despite that there is some truth to it. There is value though in feeling comfortable (or reassured) about your purchase.

About the HK and brightness, I have only heard a few of them, so I suppose I shouldn't generalize. The times I have heard them I didn't enjoy the brightness level.

 

[Gasman]

Interesting and definitely goes to show that perception of 'sound quality' is in the ear of the listener. I am certain that in a blind test one would be hard pressed to determine to which receiver brand was playing but in informal listening at big box stores I would not say under any under cirumstance that the HKs are 'bright'. Quite the opposite - I would say they were dull.

Funny, I was going to say something very similar (you beat me to it)

Anyhow, I find it very strange that ANYONE, can say that a AVR is bright, flat, etc..
Considering that if it is 'bright', then certainly there are ways to completely 'flatten' it out, by turning the treble (or any EQ in the AVR) down.


So, if I turned the treble all the way down on a HK, and all the way up on a Denon, then the person can still say that the HK is bright
????????????????????????????????????

I know my Pioneer Elite has a 7 band built in EQ, and the previous ones I owned had either a 5 band, or some way to lower the higher frequencies.
So, at this point, what the OP may be hearing is 2 AVRs, that are not level matched (including tuning for the subjective ear, of the high and mid FR)

 

[matthewdclarkaz]

So, at this point, what the OP may be hearing is 2 AVRs, that are not level matched (including tuning for the subjective ear, of the high and mid FR)

See, that brings up a question for me. I agree with what you said. The question it brings up though is would you compare two receivers on the exact same settings (direct/pure direct, with auto setup, with manual setup, with the same freq. changes?), or right out of the box or generic settings?

Obviously the better receivers will have the ability to adjust within larger ranges and 'match' the sound of other receivers. But is that receiver so much of a better choice than one that sounds 'better' to the listener out of the box?

Of course this is why I love the AV world. It's darn complicated to buy a receiver (and speakers.)

 

[Seth=L]

2. Lower RMS power than other brands (due to their all channels driven rating) which translates into lower dynamic power, which is more important, than the other brands.

In all fairness, I feel this is just a marketing tactic that makes them appear more honest about their power ratings. Their benchtests next to comparably priced receivers tend to show fairly similar real power ratings.

The whole Onkyo being bright this is just silly. The audiophile reviewers typically say the same thing about each particular brand of receiver and that can bias opinions of potential consumers. Each make likes to market themselves to a particular audience. So, H/K is supposed to have a warm sound, Onkyo is supposed to be bright and lean on bass, Denon is supposed to be warm with a heavy low end, Yamaha is supposed to be edgy but overall powerful, Pioneer Elite is supposed to be warm... and so forth. It is all a bunch of bull.

 

[dem beats]

what they say about great minds....

In all fairness, I feel this is just a marketing tactic that makes them appear more honest about their power ratings. Their benchtests next to comparably priced receivers tend to show fairly similar real power ratings.

The whole Onkyo being bright this is just silly. The audiophile reviewers typically say the same thing about each particular brand of receiver and that can bias opinions of potential consumers. Each make likes to market themselves to a particular audience. So, H/K is supposed to have a warm sound, Onkyo is supposed to be bright and lean on bass, Denon is supposed to be warm with a heavy low end, Yamaha is supposed to be edgy but overall powerful, Pioneer Elite is supposed to be warm... and so forth. It is all a bunch of bull.

BUUUUUUURN!

 

[mike c]

i actually bought my harman receiver because of the look!

I sacrificed having a 12v trigger for that blue volume control

 

[fmw]

I found the frequency response specs for the AVR645 on the HK website. It shows a response curve of 20hz -130khz at +0, -3db. That means that before the valleys get to 3 db, the amp is way, way, way beyond audibility. There are no peaks at all. That means that the amp is not bright. It can't be. It is as flat as a ruler, like most amps. Designing and building an accurate amplifier is trivial in this day and age. Virtually all the manufacturers can and do do it.

My guess about why the OP preferred the HK amp, however, is that the test probably didn't match levels accurately enough. In a listening test, the subject will always prefer the louder presentation even if other things aren't equal. I would put money on the fact that the two sound identical in a properly conducted level matched blind listening test.

I should mention for the prior poster, that rating amplifier output power with all channels driven is a more conservative way to rate it than with just the measured channel being driven.

 

[3db]

Id' still choose Yamaha over everything else

Why?

1) Because here in Canada, they have the best bang for the buck in terms of features, power, and price.
2) Denon in Ontairo Canada is ridicously marked up as if trying to present themselves as a "highend" receiver .
3) and the last thing is probably the most relevant, I can't afford my tastes in electronics.

 

[Seth=L]

BUUUUUUURN!

Well, while my descriptions of what the audiophiles and reviewers say they are supposed to sound like could be a tad off base from what they say (not really relevant), but the fact is they do it every time, with every model from a specific manufacturer. It isn't just the receivers either, they do it with amplifiers. Rotel for example is supposed to sound lean and a tad bright. Yeah, maybe their new Class D amplifiers do, but they have been saying this for a while. The reviewers' bias as well as consumers might be due to them being built in a certain area (China) who knows, but it is a bunch of bologna.

"Yeah, I just got a new Adcom amplifier and it sounds really bright with my Klipsch speakers." Maybe it is the speakers that people choose to use with the amplifiers based on what manufacturers suggest to use with their products. Rotel suggests that you use B&W with their amplifiers most regularly, or at least the dealers do, but I gotta say that B&W does tend to have a prominent top end, you can't account the sound of an amplifier based on recommended component combonations.

Sorry for the ranting.

 

[gmichael]

I think that you will enjoy the HK.
Did the new one show up yet?

 

[Seth=L]

I think that you will enjoy the HK.
Did the new one show up yet?

Elvis had it for a while and decided that it had more to offer than he would need at this time.

 

[gmichael]

Elvis had it for a while and decided that it had more to offer than he would need at this time.

Is he using the other HK?

 

[stratman]

I believe I'm the only person on this site with a Panasonic receiver! Which fits my bill to the T. Panasonic SA-XR700, rare in these hills!

 

[Seth=L]

Is he using the other HK?

He had purchased the 745 thinking it would be better, and he said it was, but decided that the 645 was enough for him and returned the 745. He is now using the 645, according to him (can't prove anything here, I could be using some Martin Logans with Krell Monoblocks and you wouldn't know it if I didn't want you to.)

 

[Seth=L]

I believe I'm the only person on this site with a Panasonic receiver! Which fits my bill to the T. Panasonic SA-XR700, rare in these hills!

I have owned two Panasonic receivers and one Technics, they are alright, but not a personal favorite. I am a tad curious about the Class D receivers they have, but I already know I won't like their sound for music especially, because I just don't like Class D for full range applications (particularly the upper frequencies).