* Everything Important To Know About A/v Surround Receivers, But Were Afraid To Ask.*

[agarwalro]

I have not used YPAO yet, as my space is entirely too small (my rear speakers are practically above my head), however just out of the box and no tweaks it sounds awesome. As soon as I purchase a new home with a bigger room for my system I will then give YPAO a shot and see how it works (after I optimally position my speakers to Dolby standards of course).

No reason why not to run YPAO in your current configuration. If there is even a slight improvement in sound, it is better than what you had before...

 

[agarwalro]

I've tried room correction EQ enough times with my Denon AVR-5308CI (& HK receiver in the past) to conclude for myself that Room EQ and Dynamic EQs make absolutely no difference in my room.

I even added 4 huge acoustic panels, and I couldn't even tell the difference.

When was the last time you got your hearing tested. Those DefTech's can play really loud and the 5308 has tons of power... maybe you overloaded and blew your ear's voice coil

Man, I feel a little devilish lately.

Clearly

 

[lsiberian]

My opinion on receivers having a signature sound.

I don't buy it, but I do like the psycho acoustic effect of a warm HK
I know in Double Blind testing I could never tell.

My opinion on auto setups is that HK's is better than AS which is overly complicated and overkill IMO. My current system sounds just as good as an AS system and took only one spot for measurements.

Also of the DSP's my all-time favorite is the Logic 7 one. It's very nice.

Too much is made of gimmicks IMO. I've heard dolby digital track and TrueHD ones and can't tell a difference between them. So I call HD audio gimmick and not truly masterful.

HDMI is great for conveince but has a lot of issues. If your buying a system I suggest you get a used non HDMI beast. They are so cheap at the moment it's amazing the deals to be had out there.

 

[agarwalro]

Well, the solution is quite simple, let's build one for us here, for about $2,000
And others can build one for half of that, and others can build their own for $500
And for the very budget people, one for $200, but I don't want to go there.
At the other end, we can build one for $3,000, but let's stop at this junction, because if you want to spend more, the separates are specially made for us.
So, realistically speaking, a receiver from $500 to $3,000 period, no more no less. Less is for the deprived, the diffused, the generation Z, the boomboys...

So, what you say now? Is this sounds more exiting or what?

I'm ready for your comments. And don't come rushing all together at once.
Grab a number and wait your turn, like everybody else "online".

LOTR

LOTR, good thought provoking thread. Somewhat on the lines of the Amplifier section stickey.

IMO, anyone spending > $1500 on a receiver should go seperates. So IMHO, to keep things simple we should do, Budget: $200-$300, Mid: $400-800; High:$1000-1500. The gaps are intentional since like everything in life, there will be grey areas.

On topic:
First I had an Xbox and a projection TV. The video was great but the speakers were boomy and optimized for vocals, so the sound quality sucked big time (as I know today) but I loved it.

Then I added a Yamaha HTR 5790 and the mains. The improvement in sound blew me away. For the first time I understood what soundstage, "tight" for bass and other picturesque descriptions for sound meant. Yet, on the AVR side, the number of connections at the back never got used since, I had just a Xbox for gaming and an Oppo DVD player that I used for everything.

Then I added the center and sides and yet again I was blown away by the improvement in sound, namely, the enveloping effect on Eagles DTS DVD and other multi channel audio.

Adding the SVS PB-12 Ultra was literally Earth shattering. Yet another eye opener. But this time the sound quality seemed to deteriorate. I was loosing the mid bass, with was being drowned out by the sub.

To get HDMI, I upgraded the mid level Yamaha to a then upper-mid level Denon 3806. The sound improved but not by much. I played around with Audessy, placement, toe-in, Room Eq Wizard, used every article on AH to my benefit and got, what I felt, was more gains from correcting the room effects than upgrading the AVR. Then too, it left something to be desired on the sound side. On the connection side, I truly started to use the flexibility offered by the AVR. I had several sources for different purposes and it was great.

Recently, I added a bunch of Auralex room pannels and the Gramma (this weekend I will post pics in Member System Gallery ). Yet another eye opener. IMHO, it had made a bigger impact to sound improvement than YPAO and Audessy ever did. So, I am somewhat with AccuDefTech on the room correction software stuff. Today I am of the opinion that room effects correction software should be the last option, not the first. I concede that it is not feasible at times to add acoustical treatments. For those instances, some room correction is better than none.

In all this, I have never used the multi zone features, rarely listened to radio and on the video side never used any connection other than component and HDMI. Ethernet, Satellite Radio, Ipod connectivity and the gamut of unused features are all just distractions intended to steer the inquisitive mind away from the fact that core component quality of the AVR is depreciating.

As for the future, based on my experience, I think in addition to the AVRs intended for the masses, a barebones AVR should also be made, providing only video source convergence with quality processing and amplification of a core set of audio formats. Unfortunately, that is never going to happen due to economies of scale. Chasers of "reference" sound quality and video quality are a niche market and in this generation of 128kbps MP3s fed to the ears via an Ipod using Ipod earbuds while on gym the treadmill watching CNN on the 9" LCD integrated into the machine, who think more money means more quality and BOSE is as good as it gets, the passionate folks on AH are a dying breed. People want their AVR to do everything and yet be "idiot proof" and simple to operate. The other extreme is the folks that "know" a $1000 power cable sounds better than the OEM one. I will completely ignore this catagory out of respect for my fellow AH members.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I thought I told you before, get some 802D and try everything again. If nothing change, then get something better. Your speakers are good but with your near high end electronics they may now be your bottle neck. Seriously your room may be close to perfect but it is also highly possible that you cannot hear difference (improvements) because you are limited by the resolution of your speakers.

Ha, Ha, Ha. Very funny.

I was just at a local speaker dealer in Edmond the other day. They had the RBH T-2 speakers, which was raved about by Gene. They were hooked to a Denon AVR-4308CI. Although the RBH T-2s sounded great, I did not think they sounded better than my BP7000SCs.

I do think the RBH T-2 speakers sounded better than the B&W 802Ds that I heard at another local dealer in Norman. The T-2s had much better bass, similar to my BP7000SCs.

So seriously, I do like the idea of getting expensive speakers. But the difference between them isn't all that significant.

I believe I have normal hearing. I take care of my hearing and health. But perhaps some people just can't hear the big difference.

 

[raypasote]

Fenix, Go ahead and try the YPAO

Fenix:
I have very similiar system to yours and I was amazed at the difference in sound after I ran the YPAO. Before running YPAO, the Klipsch RC 52 center was overpowering the Klipsch RF 62 mains so much so that I could barely hear them. After I ran the YPAO, the difference in sound was amazing. Everything was and is balanced out with true surround sound. Try it. You will like it and if you don't you can always reverse it.

For my 2 cents worth, I like the new A/V receivers with the new HDMI and the new sound decoders. This makes it very simple for us non techies and newbies. I do not have the knowledge to get more into room correction with sound panels, etc., so this does just fine for me. I think the bottom line is with a person being happy and content with what he has. I love AcuDeftechguy's system but I cannot afford it. As far as proper room acoustic is concerned, I probably cannot hear the difference since I ruined my hearing with loud 60's rock.
Ray

 

[Lordoftherings]

That's a toss up between "were afraid" and "are afraid" as you can be refering to everything in the past or in the present.

Anyways...we need some more people to chime in on this, so we don't go too off-topic.

Got you. I'm good then, cause that was exactly what I meant (Yesterday, as in the past).

And now, let's go back to our subject at hand.

 

[Lordoftherings]

Harman Kardon flavor.

My opinion on receivers having a signature sound.

I don't buy it, but I do like the psycho acoustic effect of a warm HK
I know in Double Blind testing I could never tell.

My opinion on auto setups is that HK's is better than AS which is overly complicated and overkill IMO. My current system sounds just as good as an AS system and took only one spot for measurements.

Also of the DSP's my all-time favorite is the Logic 7 one. It's very nice.

Too much is made of gimmicks IMO. I've heard dolby digital track and TrueHD ones and can't tell a difference between them. So I call HD audio gimmick and not truly masterful.

HDMI is great for conveince but has a lot of issues. If your buying a system I suggest you get a used non HDMI beast. They are so cheap at the moment it's amazing the deals to be had out there.

Hi Isiberian,

Thank you for participating in this newer thread.

It seems that you are contradicting yourself: you don't buy receivers signature sound, though your Harman Kardon AVR 247 receiver sounds "warm" to you!

By AS, I presume you mean Audyssey? And what is Harman Kardon Automatic Room Correction EQ called, EZSet?
I don't know about EZSet, so maybe, because you did own the Onkyo TX-SR705 in the past, you can enlighten us on the differences between these two systems, with easy to understand and detailed observations?
And perhaps, other members also have the experience between these two systems and can share with us their own impressions?

Yeah, Lexicon and Harman Kardon "Logic 7" is supposed to be one of the best multichannel listening audio mode. Could you elaborate on that.
And I would believe that Yamaha is probably the best at DSP, plus their multitude of parameter adjustments.

As for saying that you can not tell any difference between DD & DTrueHD, I'll accept your belief, but I'll personally disagree myself.
I can tell a big difference between these two, in my own system.
With Dolby TrueHD, the bass is much tighter and deeper, plus every channel is more clear, with better definition and resolution of details, and the center channel is more intelligible too. I feel a much more pleasant overall experience.
Of course, YMMV.

And I agree with you about HDMI, you can live without it if you really want to. But why do so? It still does simplify your cable connections.
Of course, it is not quite perfect with certain combination of components, but it is much better now than it used to be. And it will only get better.
Does your Harman Kardon AVR 247 A/V receiver has HDMI convenience or inconvenience?

And it's also true that today, we can find some amazing bargains on older or even newer receivers. Some Marantz, Onkyo, Pioneer Elite and Yamaha receivers, for example are at huge discount. It's just a question of choosing your own gun with the right bullets for the use you're aiming at.

All right Isiberian, that's a good start, let's keep it up.

Bob

 

[mtrycrafts]

Thanks for the tip, I never thought of that, why should I, I didn't even know that such a thing existed.
...

Bob

Me neither until someone told me about downloading the Google toolbar so I did just for that

One less thing for my detractors to complain about

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

As for saying that you can not tell any difference between DD & DTrueHD, I'll accept your belief, but I'll personally disagree myself.
I can tell a big difference between these two, in my own system.
With Dolby TrueHD, the bass is much tighter and deeper, plus every channel is more clear, with better definition and resolution of details, and the center channel is more intelligible too.

You realize someone recently published a study comparing the HD audio w/ the non-HD DD & DTS using some very expensive equipments and Revel Salon speakers? The conclusion was that they could NOT tell the difference.

I am certain it all depends on the recording.

With some movies (Kung Fu Hustle, Dragon Tiger Gate, Black Hawk Down) I could easily tell the difference. But with a lot of other movies, I could not tell the difference at all between TrueHD vs DD (300, Superman Returns) & DTS-HD MA vs DTS (Day After Tomorrow, AVP).

So it just depends on the recording.

 

[Lordoftherings]

Great post from Agarwalro.

Thanks Agarwalro for your post. I really enjoy reading it, and you have some very good feedbacks in there.

OK, I agree with you that a budget receiver from $200 to $400 is absolutely part of the world we live in.
But, I'm not quite sure about a limit of $1,500 just yet. Because the average multichannel amp and pre/pro is still a bit high, after you take out Emotiva amps and pre/amps. Personally, like some other people that I know of, always look and still look at receivers in the $2,000 range, up to about close to $3,000. Of course, you have some people (that we know who they are here and somewhere else) that always want the mother ship load of receivers, which cost up to $7,000 (MSRP) more or less (Pioneer Elite SC-09).

So, when I say $2,000 to $3,000, I mean MSRP, but I really well know that a receiver that list for $3,000 can be had for about half of that, or $1,500.
So, you see, $1,500 is exactly the number you mentioned.
Because we are smart enough these days to know that whatever a manufacturer is asking for a receiver, he won't get it, unless there are buyers that are not aware, or in a rush, or just simply like to waist their money.
But for people like us, here at Audioholics or any other Audio Forums, we know the score and the formula of real value, which is about half of the list price, or 50% less, period. After all, we live in the year 2009, at almost the speed of light on the internet. Nobody is stupid anymore, except the true stupid ones. Which we are certainly not part of.

Yeah, I agree with you about room acoustic treatments. But I think it's only the smaller minority of people that do so.
And I still believe that even with good room treatments, Audyssey MultEQ PRO or Anthem ARC1 can still benefit you. There is also, Audyssey separate SEQ and Audyssey DSX, and the new AS-EQ1 SubEQ.

I believe that you can have a very minimum of room treatments and still benefit tremendously from a very even bass in your room with the help of a good EQ system. Did you check this thread at the Shack?
-> http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/svsound/16738-astounding-new-eq1-subeq-goes-sale.html

Oh, and by the way, I don't want this thread to become "sticky".
Sticky theads are always the first ones to die, or become obsolete.
No, I want this thread to be free for all, and running it's due and ongoing course.

Bob

 

[Lordoftherings]

I just love it, and enjoy every minute of it.

Me neither until someone told me about downloading the Google toolbar so I did just for that

One less thing for my detractors to complain about

Well, I don't want Google to be my teacher in English language. I rather let true human Audioholic members be my one and only guide.

You realize someone recently published a study comparing the HD audio w/ the non-HD DD & DTS using some very expensive equipments and Revel Salon speakers? The conclusion was that they could NOT tell the difference.

I am certain it all depends on the recording.

With some movies (Kung Fu Hustle, Dragon Tiger Gate, Black Hawk Down) I could easily tell the difference. But with a lot of other movies, I could not tell the difference at all between TrueHD vs DD (300, Superman Returns) & DTS-HD MA vs DTS (Day After Tomorrow, AVP).

So it just depends on the recording.

Hey AcuDefTechGuy, can you provide us with some links please?
That will be of great interest, I'm sure, for many of us.

Me too, I agree with you, that it is also dependent of the recordings.

And lastly, I did read several opinions, in particular from blu-ray movie's reviewers that acknowledged the audio superiority of the new high resolution audio codecs. And this at many occasions, where they actually compared the DVD soundtrack with the Blu-ray one. And I would say that in general, the majority of films recorded in mutichannel LPCM, Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio are superior to their counterpart audio origins, such as Dolby Digital and DTS 5.1 or 6.1 multichannel.

I'll give you only one example of what high resolution music can do for you, get the blu-ray of "John Mayer - Where the Light is".
I can give you several more titles, but I just want to keep things very simple here. But if you insist to discover some more, I will provide you with some other titles of equal (more or less) audio quality.

Bob

 

[davidtwotrees]

Bob. I mentioned earlier that I miss my Audio Refinement prepro as it was so simple to use. It was mfgd. for YBA in southeast Asia. I have been waiting for YBA to bring out their new pre pro but it is getting delayed over and over. Any thoughts on YBA and what they bring to the table? You are, afterall from France. We would call YBA a boutique brand here in the states.
Also, you know that the Two Trees of Valinor are a huge part of the history behind the Lord of the Rings, right?

 

[Lordoftherings]

French from France vs French from Quebec.

Bob. I mentioned earlier that I miss my Audio Refinement prepro as it was so simple to use. It was mfgd. for YBA in southeast Asia. I have been waiting for YBA to bring out their new pre pro but it is getting delayed over and over. Any thoughts on YBA and what they bring to the table? You are, afterall from France. We would call YBA a boutique brand here in the states.
Also, you know that the Two Trees of Valinor are a huge part of the history behind the Lord of the Rings, right?

Hi David,

YBA from the Frenchman Yves Bernard.

No I am not French, I am Quebecquois, a small difference.

Yeah, I know all about the French audio piece of kits. I got several mags that I used to buy, from France. And I was a subscriber to Stereophile, The Absolute Sound, Hi-FI+, Gramophone, La Revue du Son, and others.

YBA have some of the best power amplifiers in the world, excellent designs.
But as far as pre/pro is concern, I'm blind, swimming in the abyss.
No wonder, they can't keep up with all the new stuff. Only the Japanese can.

LOL David, I know nothing about Two Trees of Valinor, but I will Google it.

One thing that I surely know about, is Trees; I planted over Two Million of them in just about 30 years period, about 3 to 4 months per year.
Let's say roughly about 1,500 days of work. Thats about an average of 1,333 trees a day. Some days, I planted only 500 of them, and other days, I planted over 3,000 of them. And some of them now, are over 60 to 70 feet high. I was what you call a "highballer". Very exeptional type of work, demanding great physical strength and high moral mind. And to do it for such a long time, is indeed very rare.
Audio has been my passion for as long as I can remember. I am a musician, and have been playing for over 40 years. I had my first stereo sound system almost 45 years ago. And I built my own first speaker about 40 years ago.
I was into multichannel surround sound 40 years ago also. I setup my own system then. I always been ahead of the curve, that's my nature.
Today, I'm a little behind, but I try to keep an edge and look sharp.

All right David, till next time...

Bob

 

[raypasote]

Lordoftherings, do you remember quadraphonic SQ?

Hi Bob:
You mention that you were into "surround sound 40 years ago", do you remember Sony's abortive attempt into 4 channel or Quadraphonic SQ. I dived into it and bought 4 JBLs L-100 studio monitors, and then everything died, leaving me with 4 very good speakers but no surround sound. Do you remember that?
Just Curious,
Ray

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...they actually compared the DVD soundtrack with the Blu-ray one...

Did you mean comparing a DVD disc vs. a Blu-Ray disc?

Or comparing a DD soundtrack vs. a TrueHD soundtrack on the same Blu-ray disc?

 

[lsiberian]

Hi Isiberian,

Thank you for participating in this newer thread.

I appreciate the opportunity to expand upon the post as those here know I love to post.

It seems that you are contradicting yourself: you don't buy receivers signature sound, though your Harman Kardon AVR 247 receiver sounds "warm" to you!

To clarify and bring more understanding I had an Onkyo SR705 before I bought the AVR247. On that receiver I had a different front sound stage. The Beta 20/360. These speakers seems a bit hollow on the 705. This was likely more an effect of the speakers than the receiver.

I would love to do a double blind test someday on this subject and believe my difference would be dispelled.

By AS, I presume you mean Audyssey? And what is Harman Kardon Automatic Room Correction EQ called, EZSet?
I don't know about EZSet, so maybe, because you did own the Onkyo TX-SR705 in the past, you can enlighten us on the differences between these two systems, with easy to understand and detailed observations?
And perhaps, other members also have the experience between these two systems and can share with us their own impressions?

To me AS(Audyssey) is a very complex, annoying, and long process. Run properly you take 8 measurements in A grid. This takes a considerable amount of effort and if you mess up anything you have to start over. The sound is seamless in the entire listening area for movies though. Yet it's so complex that I don't consider it right for the novice, small time user, or even the sole movie watcher.

EZset/EQ uses one MIC position. I put it on the back of my couch in the center position and it works. It's extremely simpleless annoying than AS and sounds just as good to my ears.

When it comes to crossover both miss the mark. Though AS is far more accurate on crossovers.I'd love to see a double blind of this too. My room is untreated, carpeted with a couch. It's got high slanted ceilings. But acoustically it's actually decent.

Yeah, Lexicon and Harman Kardon "Logic 7" is supposed to be one of the best multichannel listening audio mode. Could you elaborate on that.
And I would believe that Yamaha is probably the best at DSP, plus their multitude of parameter adjustments.

It's been a while since I have heard the yamaha's(very well done), but the logic 7 is nice for classical music. Still I prefer stereo or my headphones for music(Etyomics Reasarch).

As for saying that you can not tell any difference between DD & DTrueHD, I'll accept your belief, but I'll personally disagree myself.
I can tell a big difference between these two, in my own system.
With Dolby TrueHD, the bass is much tighter and deeper, plus every channel is more clear, with better definition and resolution of details, and the center channel is more intelligible too. I feel a much more pleasant overall experience.
Of course, YMMV.

I propose you have someone test you on this.

Have them switch between the modes at random several times on a new movie with a great sound track. You may be very surprised at how hard it can be to tell a difference. I'm telling you I couldn't really tell a difference in quality. I still switch it over because many older movies sound better. Plus it raises the bar for studios.

And I agree with you about HDMI, you can live without it if you really want to. But why do so? It still does simplify your cable connections.
Of course, it is not quite perfect with certain combination of components, but it is much better now than it used to be. And it will only get better.
Does your Harman Kardon AVR 247 A/V receiver has HDMI convenience or inconvenience?

And it's also true that today, we can find some amazing bargains on older or even newer receivers. Some Marantz, Onkyo, Pioneer Elite and Yamaha receivers, for example are at huge discount. It's just a question of choosing your own gun with the right bullets for the use you're aiming at.

All right Isiberian, that's a good start, let's keep it up.

Bob

I do think the conveince thing is very nice, but for a budget buyer an HDMI receiver just isn't really in the price range. A person spend 500 on a system shouldn't spend half of it on a receiver. My point is unless it's in your budget don't buy it. Plus if you can get a top of the line non HDMI receiver for the price of a bottom hdmi. I think you go for it.

That being said I use HDMI.
I recommend the Marantz line. I've seen a lot less issues posted on them than the Onkyo's or HK.

I regret buying the 705 honestly because I overspent on it. The 247 has been nearly as good with some of the features gone like the THX modes which I loved for movies and games.

 

[anamorphic96]

Here is the link regarding the comparison of the new digtial formats. Pretty good stuff. It really does not surprise me either.

IMO most of the stuff that we think we hear would probably not be heard in a proper double blind test.

http://www.hemagazine.com/node/Dolby_TrueHD_DTS-MA_versus_Uncompressed_PCM

 

[Lordoftherings]

Great flasbacks from my childhood.

Hi Bob:
You mention that you were into "surround sound 40 years ago", do you remember Sony's abortive attempt into 4 channel or Quadraphonic SQ. I dived into it and bought 4 JBLs L-100 studio monitors, and then everything died, leaving me with 4 very good speakers but no surround sound. Do you remember that?
Just Curious,
Ray

Hi Ray,

Of course I do. I remember Sansui Quad receiver, and Quad turntables to play these special 4-channels vinyls. Or was it the receiver itself abled to decode these 4 separate tracks from these LPs? Or I do think that you needed those special turntables with special cartridges to be able to decode the grooves? And then the Quad receiver to extract and reproduce these 4 channels.
And yes, Sony had one too. Is Pioneer had one also?
This was from the 70's.

I was into Surround Sound in the late 60's. Even before these Quad receivers came into the scene. Or just about then. But one thing for sure, is that at the time, I was not aware yet of these Quad LPs and Receivers.
I was not reading yet about audio, but I started very soon after.

But, I never personally owned one of these (Quad receiver or Quad turntable).

My first experience with Surround Sound was back in 1968 or 69, with one front center channel and one rear center channel. And it was purely of my own invention. So, in a certain way, I was already experimenting with Surround EX way back then! And that's when I built my first speaker with a big 10" woofer and a midrange plus tweeter from a portable AM/FM or just AM radio, if I remember correctly. It was a pretty fairly sized box, certainly not the bookshelf type, with no crossover.
I used this system to watch the live recording of Pink Floyd "Live at Pompeii".
It was broadcasted on TV, in black in white, if I remember again correctly.
It was a blast, I was in my way already to audio nirvana way back then.
I never stop since then, I was totally hooked.

But music, records (Vinyls, LPs & 45s) started in the mid 60's. And my first portable AM radio was in the early 60's. And my first full stereo system with receiver and 8-track cassette player was in the mid 60's, soon replaced in the same year with another receiver without the 8-track, but with a turntable. These were fantastic years.
My first ever 8-track recording was The Beatles "Revolver".

I can tell you so many fond memories from those years that I can fill a whole thread just about it. And not just any thread, but the longest thread here at Audioholics, I kid you not.

Hmmm.... Feeel sooo gooood just to think about it. Wow! Think about it, these were my first love affairs with audio, music and girlfriends. So many great souvenirs... I'm all shivering now with great nostalgia from all parts of my body, including my heart and mind.

Ok, I'm all smooth and mellow now, soft as warm butter and vulnerable as a child...

Bob

 

[Lordoftherings]

At your fingertips.

Did you mean comparing a DVD disc vs. a Blu-Ray disc?

Or comparing a DD soundtrack vs. a TrueHD soundtrack on the same Blu-ray disc?

Yep, a DD soundtrack is usually found on a DVD disc, or sometimes on a blu-ray disc, but this is getting very rare indeed. So sometimes, they used the DD soundtrack from the DVD version or even the DTS soundtrack, and other times they used the DD or dTS version of the HD DVD or Blu-Ray version, comparing with the Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA soundtrack from the HD DVD or Blu-Ray disc.

Why? You didn't already read any of these many detailed reviews?
They were appearing all over from the first reviews of HD DVDs and Blu-Rays.
Check High Def Digest, Big Picture Big Sound, Blu-Ray Disc Review, The Digital Bits, and many many more other sites. Heck, they might even have some comparisons here at Audioholics, I'll bet you.

AcuDefTechGuy, you're a smart guy, get your fingers on that keyboard, and start your search.

Bobby