What I do not fully understand

[magnusga]

Dear readers,

I was looking at 2-channel options (perhaps a XPA-2 with a Benchmark DAC-pre), and I stumbled across a couple of strange price discrepancies.

Now, first I would have to mention that I am no audio expert, so I am writing this thread to learn.

The question: How come an integrated amp like Onkyo A-9555 goes for 800 USD and has 85 W/Ch, when a full A/V receiver with 100+ W/Ch goes for the same price (ie Onkyo TX-SR707).

You get less watts, less features, less channels, and same price:

us.onkyo dot com/model.cfm?m=TX-SR707&class=Receiver&p=s
us.onkyo dot com/model.cfm?m=A-9555&class=Amplifier&p=s

(The THD is the same as well)

====================

Second issue that has been bothering me:

nadelectronics dot com/products/hifi-amplifiers/C-165BEE-Stereo-Preamplifier
nadelectronics dot com/products/hifi-amplifiers/C-275BEE-Stereo-Power-Amplifier

This preamp and power amp from NAD are $900 and $1200 respectively.

Firstly, the preamp seems to have a focus on line level inputs. I do not understand the definition properly, but i though just normal RCA was better?

Secondly, the Power Amp has "only" 150 W/Ch, while the XPA-2 is a lot stronger and is only $800.

How do they defend these prices? Do you need to use a DAC with the preamps?


Thank you very much in advance for clearing this up for me!

 

[highfigh]

The receiver has a lot of processing that the integrated amp doesn't, and it's not free.

 

[magnusga]

That is what i am saying. The Onkyo case is just one out of many examples where a 2-channel integrated amp has the same, or worse, W/ch and THD as one of the company's receivers, yet they price the integrated amp at the same level as the receiver.

 

[zhimbo]

The list price of the 707 is actually more than the A-9555 (by about $100), and the amp section actually looks to be the same between the two (the 85W rating of the A-9555 is at a lower THD level than the 100W rating of the 707, and the dynamic power ratings are identical). The amp section seems to account for most of the cost, based on how many processing features are heaped upon even the cheapest recievers.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

This preamp and power amp from NAD are $900 and $1200 respectively.

Secondly, the Power Amp has "only" 150 W/Ch, while the XPA-2 is a lot stronger and is only $800.

How do they defend these prices? Do you need to use a DAC with the preamps?

Because NAD is a lot more prestigious than Emotiva.

So is Parasound, Sunfire, etc.

Emotiva may be just as good or even more powerful, but NAD is just a lot better known.

And no, you don't need to use a DAC with the preamps.

 

[PENG]

I would add one more factor to what has been mentioned already. It is sales volume. The more you sell the lower is your cost of sale. The 707 probably outsell the that integrated amp by at least 10 to 1 if not much more.

 

[magnusga]

Thanks for the input guys.

The list price of the 707 is actually more than the A-9555 (by about $100), and the amp section actually looks to be the same between the two (the 85W rating of the A-9555 is at a lower THD level than the 100W rating of the 707, and the dynamic power ratings are identical). The amp section seems to account for most of the cost, based on how many processing features are heaped upon even the cheapest recievers.

The receiver might be $100 usd more, but the Integrated amp has less W/Ch, and the receiver can do a ton of things the latter can't.

What I am trying to say is that, using rough estimates, integrated amps, and separate preamps, often have the same price as a receiver, but the receiver has more features, and even better audio specs. That is pretty strange, considering the fact that the stereo amps are priced so high due to the fact that they supposedly produce better audio.

I have not yet seen an argument that contradicts the belief that this up-marking in price has no root in actual performance.

I guess that is unless you go with something like the Banchmark DAC-pre, which apparently have a way better DAC then mid-range A/V receiver out there.

And no, you don't need to use a DAC with the preamps.

Unless you buy a preamp like the Emotiva USP-1, that only has analogue inputs, right? (emotiva dot com/usp1.shtm)

 

[M Code]

Dear readers,

I was looking at 2-channel options (perhaps a XPA-2 with a Benchmark DAC-pre), and I stumbled across a couple of strange price discrepancies.

Now, first I would have to mention that I am no audio expert, so I am writing this thread to learn.

The question: How come an integrated amp like Onkyo A-9555 goes for 800 USD and has 85 W/Ch, when a full A/V receiver with 100+ W/Ch goes for the same price (ie Onkyo TX-SR707).

You get less watts, less features, less channels, and same price:

us.onkyo dot com/model.cfm?m=TX-SR707&class=Receiver&p=s
us.onkyo dot com/model.cfm?m=A-9555&class=Amplifier&p=s

(The THD is the same as well)

EZ to answer..
The component biz is a 5% and the AVR is 95% at least within North America.
====================

Second issue that has been bothering me:

nadelectronics dot com/products/hifi-amplifiers/C-165BEE-Stereo-Preamplifier
nadelectronics dot com/products/hifi-amplifiers/C-275BEE-Stereo-Power-Amplifier

This preamp and power amp from NAD are $900 and $1200 respectively.

Firstly, the preamp seems to have a focus on line level inputs. I do not understand the definition properly, but i though just normal RCA was better?

Secondly, the Power Amp has "only" 150 W/Ch, while the XPA-2 is a lot stronger and is only $800.

How do they defend these prices? Do you need to use a DAC with the preamps?

Thank you very much in advance for clearing this up for me!

No defense required...
AVRs sell in volume while components require demo and product knowledge by the seller, which raises his overhead expenses significantly..
He would rather sell components @ 50% profit margin, rather than AVRs @ 15% profit margin.

Just my $0.01..

 

[magnusga]

Edit: See below for post

 

[magnusga]

No defense required...
AVRs sell in volume while components require demo and product knowledge by the seller, which raises his overhead expenses significantly..
He would rather sell components @ 50% profit margin, rather than AVRs @ 15% profit margin.

Just my $0.01..

So you mean that since Emotiva is an online retailer they sell their products for lower price than other brands, as other brands have to sell through distributers who take a substantial margin due to the costs of training their staff?

What did you mean when you said "the component biz is a 5%"? Were you talking about the margins?

If I understand you correctly you are in fact agreeing with my statement that for a stereo amplifier you pay the same price, but get less functionality and no better audio quality?

 

[M Code]

So you mean that since Emotiva is an online retailer they sell their products for lower price than other brands, as other brands have to sell through distributers who take a substantial margin due to the costs of training their staff?

Emotiva like Outlaw sell products cheaper because they have no middle-man profit margin/markups.

What did you mean when you said "the component biz is a 5%"? Were you talking about the margins?

Total market share in sales $, 5% are component sales and 95% are AVR sales.

If I understand you correctly you are in fact agreeing with my statement that for a stereo amplifier you pay the same price, but get less functionality and no better audio quality?

When buying components and certain brands you are paying for the mystique of that brand. Think about like wines, you can pay $10 a bottle or $200 a bottle..

Regarding features and performance there are distinct differences between components and AVRs..
The features on AVR are loaded on, thats why often 50% are not even used..
For performance, typically the component specifications are more realistic and honest.

Just my $0.01..

 

[magnusga]

For performance, typically the component specifications are more realistic and honest.

Just my $0.01..

But often the audio specs are just as good, if not better, on receiver X as on stereo amp Z, when both are in the same price range. Do you agree?

 

[M Code]

But often the audio specs are just as good, if not better, on receiver X as on stereo amp Z, when both are in the same price range. Do you agree?

Published specifications for AVRs selling for <$999 SRP are done by the advertising/marketing department, whereas the published specifications for components are released by the engineering/product development teams. Since price-point AVRs (<$999) are highly competitive with the big box sellers like Best Buy and the Internet sellers, and their power output specification are total BS..

This true for virtually all AVR brands as they chase one another for market share, the only honest AVR brands for their power output specs are Harman/Kardon, NAD and Rotel.

For example, Sony just released a new AVR model STR-DH810 and say its output power is 105W x 7 and sells for $249.. Do you really believe this power spec is real..
Maybe a single channel can output 105W @ 10%THD...

Next question..

Just my $0.01..

 

[magnusga]

Sony is not on level with Denon, Okyo, Marantz etc, at least not as far as I know. I have a Marantz SR6003 and they are spot on, on their reporting of W/Ch. I had an article that reported testing results on the marantz, from avsforum somewhere, i will see if i can find it.

I disagree with your point that for companies like Marantz, Denon and Onkyo the marketing department creates the spec list, but with their component products' specs are set by engineers. The top A/V (or pure audio) companies have a certain standard it does business by.

 

[M Code]

Sony is not on level with Denon, Okyo, Marantz etc, at least not as far as I know. I have a Marantz SR6003 and they are spot on, on their reporting of W/Ch. I had an article that reported testing results on the marantz, from avsforum somewhere, i will see if i can find it.

I disagree with your point that for companies like Marantz, Denon and Onkyo the marketing department creates the spec list, but with their component products' specs are set by engineers. The top A/V (or pure audio) companies have a certain standard it does business by.

Here are some updates of AVR info for you..

Marantz does not build their own AVRs (SRP <$999), they are assembled in China @ the same factory Harman/Kardon, NAD & Yamaha AVRs are..

Like Marantz, Denon does not assemble their own AVRs (SRP <$999), they are assembled in China @ the same factory Pioneer and Sherwood AVRs are.

Onkyo's AVRs (SRP <$999) are actually designed by the Harman/Kardon AVR team in Korea but assembled in the Onkyo Malaysia factory.

As I previously mentioned AVRs priced @ (< $999 SRP) is a highly competitive category, and are built to meet very aggressive price-points. Thats why the power output specifications are usually hyped..

Just my $0.01..

 

[highfigh]

Here are some updates of AVR info for you..

Marantz does not build their own AVRs (SRP <$999), they are assembled in China @ the same factory Harman/Kardon, NAD & Yamaha AVRs are..

Like Marantz, Denon does not assemble their own AVRs (SRP <$999), they are assembled in China @ the same factory Pioneer and Sherwood AVRs are.

Onkyo's AVRs (SRP <$999) are actually designed by the Harman/Kardon AVR team in Korea but assembled in the Onkyo Malaysia factory.

As I previously mentioned AVRs priced @ (< $999 SRP) is a highly competitive category, and are built to meet very aggressive price-points. Thats why the power output specifications are usually hyped..

Just my $0.01..

The reason specs and actual performance often don't match is because the FTC no longer requires manufacturers to make this happen. They did, but that came to an end years ago. Like many other situations, wrongdoing comes with no consequences. Used to be that exceeding specs brought pride to the manufacturers but that ended with the glut of MBAs that came into most industries. All they care about is counting beans and keeping losses below an acceptable amount.

 

[M Code]

The reason specs and actual performance often don't match is because the FTC no longer requires manufacturers to make this happen. They did, but that came to an end years ago. Like many other situations, wrongdoing comes with no consequences. Used to be that exceeding specs brought pride to the manufacturers but that ended with the glut of MBAs that came into most industries. All they care about is counting beans and keeping losses below an acceptable amount.

A little more complicated than that..
The FTC never did enforce the amplifier output statue (1973) which was for Stereo/2-CH products but now we have 7.1 and 9.3 products...

Fast forward....
Now the Consumer Electronic Association (CEA) has submitted their recommendations to the FTC....
Only problem is the CEA standards committee had brands like Bose, Pansonic and Sony as members driving the standards.

Doesn't matter if it is an AVR, iPod dock or car subwoofer amplifier publishing output power specifications is totally out of control...
So now it is impossible for a consumer to make an unbiased, comparsion between like products..

Just my $0.01..

 

[Seth=L]

Here are some updates of AVR info for you..

Marantz does not build their own AVRs (SRP <$999), they are assembled in China @ the same factory Harman/Kardon, NAD & Yamaha AVRs are..

Like Marantz, Denon does not assemble their own AVRs (SRP <$999), they are assembled in China @ the same factory Pioneer and Sherwood AVRs are.

Onkyo's AVRs (SRP <$999) are actually designed by the Harman/Kardon AVR team in Korea but assembled in the Onkyo Malaysia factory.

As I previously mentioned AVRs priced @ (< $999 SRP) is a highly competitive category, and are built to meet very aggressive price-points. Thats why the power output specifications are usually hyped..

Just my $0.01..

While I could tell by looking under the hood of Pioneer's most recent receivers that there are definitely many Sherwood workings (pretty much the whole thing aside from sub processing type boards) I'm interested to know how you came about the lot of this information. Are you an industry insider?

 

[M Code]

While I could tell by looking under the hood of Pioneer's most recent receivers that there are definitely many Sherwood workings (pretty much the whole thing aside from sub processing type boards) I'm interested to know how you came about the lot of this information. Are you an industry insider?

I guess I could be called an ex-insider..
I have been involved in the CE industry for many years, owning my retail store, working @ a distributor, CEDIA installer, media spokeman, working for various CE brands as an employee and consultant. But now quietly retired to my rocking chair, though I do keep active in the automotive world mainly with Mopar hemi muscle race cars.


Just my $0.01..

 

[zhimbo]

The receiver might be $100 usd more, but the Integrated amp has less W/Ch, and the receiver can do a ton of things the latter can't.

...and I disagree about the watts/Channel - or, rather, I don't think you're justified in saying there's a real difference. The promotional specifications give a *rating* that is different, but the ratings are at 2 different THD thresholds. Given that and the identical dynamic ratings, I suspect that the amp sections are identical.

And the "tons of things" are handled by relatively inexpensive mass produced solid state electronics; the amp section seems to drive the bulk of the cost.

This isn't to say that there aren't some strange patterns in pricing on the market, but the Onkyo pair you gave doesn't seem out of line.