Digital Path Receivers - Why holding no value ?

[timetohunt]

I came across a Harmon Kardon Receiver, almost never used in box, for $200. A 7.1 system, model DPR1005. About 2 years old I think, MSRP was $1500.
I realize electronics once used have quite a drop off, but not this much.

My first thought was, its broken, or its hot. But, when I checked the internet auction sites, prices were very low. Much lower than I expected, not quite down to $200 but not that far off either. It seemed pretty much a universal thing - digital path receivers, even ones that are fairly new, just don't cost that much.

So, why is this? I don't have a handle on it. At $200, I was going to use it as a 'zone 3' amp for my current needs. I want to stem an outdoor/patio system off of my Pioneer VSX94. And zone 3 requires the use of separate amp with digital ins. Why not the Harmon Kardon AVR for this I am thinking.

 

[Pyrrho]

The reason surround receivers do not hold their value is that they keep coming out with new and better features. For example, if you want HDMI connectivity, the unit must be fairly recent. And if you want the new surround formats that are on things like HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, again, you will need a fairly new model.

In the past, improvements and additions included things like automatic setup (setting speaker levels and delays automatically, and some do more than just that now), adding 6.1 decoders, adding component video, converting between different kinds of video, and various DSP (Digital Signal Processing) modes that people wanted.

My advice is to figure out, as exactly as possible, what you need or want the thing to do, and buy accordingly. If what you need is all on an older model, you can get a really good unit at a very low price. Of course, its resale value will be next to nothing, but since you will be paying so little for it, that should not matter at all. But you may find that you want some capability that older units do not have, and then you will pay more for the receiver you select.

If you want advice on what features to look for, you will want to tell us what you are planning on doing with it. At this point, I would not even consider a receiver that did not have at least automatic setup (of speaker levels and delays), and an audio delay to sync up the audio with the video. I recommend looking for those features no matter what else you require.

In my particular case, I also want HDMI and the ability to deal with recent surround formats (one way or another), and so I require something fairly new (which I have).

My old receiver is being given to a family member, as selling it would not, as you have observed, bring in much money, and my old unit is in like new condition, with all accessories and so forth. Anyway, giving old equipment to a poor friend or relative is a great way to get rid of good used equipment. They upgrade from what they had, and you upgrade from what you had. And the cost to you to be generous is very little, and it saves you the time and trouble of reselling it.

 

[timetohunt]

^^ thanks for the writeup. But you have misunderstood. I am talking about receivers that are marketed as Digital Path Receivers as opposed to 'conventional'.

In both the DPR 2005 and DPR 1005, the digital signal from sources such a DVD player, cable box, HDTVset-top box, satellite receiver or CD player is routed directly to the receiver's DSP section and then to the digital-amplifier section, while remaining completely in the digital domain from input to the final amplifieroutput stage. This topology maintains maximum digital signal purity by eliminating multiple stages of A/D and D/A conversion, and the resulting distortion and noise that can occur in conventional amplifier designs.

These types just went to nothing in terms of price. And I am trying to understand why.

 

[Pyrrho]

^^ thanks for the writeup. But you have misunderstood. I am talking about receivers that are marketed as Digital Path Receivers as opposed to 'conventional'.

In both the DPR 2005 and DPR 1005, the digital signal from sources such a DVD player, cable box, HDTVset-top box, satellite receiver or CD player is routed directly to the receiver's DSP section and then to the digital-amplifier section, while remaining completely in the digital domain from input to the final amplifieroutput stage. This topology maintains maximum digital signal purity by eliminating multiple stages of A/D and D/A conversion, and the resulting distortion and noise that can occur in conventional amplifier designs.

These types just went to nothing in terms of price. And I am trying to understand why.

I did misunderstand you, but the basic point is still correct. The Harman/Kardon DPR 1005 is a 2005 model (at least, I found a review of it from April 2005), so it is out of date (no HDMI, no support for new surround formats, etc.) and therefore almost worthless. $200 seems plenty to pay for it; I would not touch it at that price, but if you want it, go ahead and buy it. For your purposes of amplification for another zone, it is probably fine.

From doing a quick search, it appears that the phrase "digital path receiver" is used exclusively or primarily by Harman/Kardon, and is evidently not a generic description of amplifier topography. With most receivers these days, with digital inputs there is only one conversion between digital and analog, not a bunch, so there isn't going to be "multiple stages of A/D and D/A conversion" that are going to cause problems with distortion and noise. You are reading Harman/Kardon propaganda, not an objective analysis of the merits or lack thereof of the particular designs in question. And regardless of the amplifier, it still is old and out of date by surround sound receiver standards.

As for other "Digital Path Receivers", Harman Kardon seems to have abandoned that phrase for the marketing of their new receivers, and so it is likely applied only to old, out of date, and therefore practically worthless units. So the reason why "Digital Path Receivers" don't hold their value is precisely the same reason why all other surround receivers don't hold their value.

 

[MDS]

'Digital Path Receiver' may indeed be an HK trademarked name but those receivers are different than conventional receivers. They are digital switching amplifiers. Digital switching amps use PWM at very high frequencies to track the input signal as opposed to the conventional A-B analog amplifiers in a normal receiver.

Panasonic made a big splash with their digital receivers with many claiming they sounded as good or better than mega buck amplifiers. The HK receivers however were universally panned and apparently full of problems.

The price drops like a rock for exactly the reasons Pyrrho stated but in this case add to that the fact the receivers were considered troublesome right from the beginning.

 

[mtrycrafts]

'Digital Path Receiver' may indeed be an HK trademarked name but those receivers are different than conventional receivers. They are digital switching amplifiers. Digital switching amps use PWM at very high frequencies to track the input signal as opposed to the conventional A-B analog amplifiers in a normal receiver.

Panasonic made a big splash with their digital receivers with many claiming they sounded as good or better than mega buck amplifiers. The HK receivers however were universally panned and apparently full of problems.

The price drops like a rock for exactly the reasons Pyrrho stated but in this case add to that the fact the receivers were considered troublesome right from the beginning.

Sounds like a 'lemon' of a product. Then, maybe it is not worth anything, let alone $200

 

[Seth=L]

The H/K "digital path" receivers are a very poorly implemented product. They wheren't marketed well (which to be perfectly honest accounts for most of how people "view" a product's value) and their implementation of digital amplifiers are weak compared to the competition. If you look at the bench tests on those things they are completely pathetic. The Panasonics that were sold for much cheaper at the time, as well as JVC, perform much better amplifier wise.

I am also not buying the digital signal purity crap, because that's what it is, CRAP!

 

[InTheIndustry]

The H/K "digital path" receivers are a very poorly implemented product. They wheren't marketed well (which to be perfectly honest accounts for most of how people "view" a product's value) and their implementation of digital amplifiers are weak compared to the competition. If you look at the bench tests on those things they are completely pathetic. The Panasonics that were sold for much cheaper at the time, as well as JVC, perform much better amplifier wise.

I am also not buying the digital signal purity crap, because that's what it is, CRAP!

Seth=L nailed it.

My experience with digital amplifiers, particularly the HK models, has been poor to say the least. These HK pieces were very pricey and extremely weak. On paper, the product looked & sounded good. In real world use, very poor performance and remarkably hollow sounding.

I, personally, have not run into any digital amps that are note worthy in a positive sense. Elan Systems has gone with new digital amps, NuVo uses them too. A lot of whole house audio companies use digital amps now & they only offer grossly weak and disgusting sounding real world performance. I stay away from them whenever possible.