Onkyo Keeps Hi Fi Alive & Well With New Stereo Receiver...

[PearlcorderS701]

Guys, guys...

Let's relax a little -- the intended audience for this, I believe, would be someone like me...that is, someone who wants an affordable centerpiece to a music-only, serious two-channel setup and who doesn't want to go the separates route, or who can't afford a new integrated (most are on the pricey side -- as I said NEW)...I don't agree that a multichannel AVR is the way to go for serious 2-channel purposes, as Scholl does, and especially in a situation where a room does not warrant such a setup, a stereo device makes even more sense -- why would someone setting up a two channel room and system just for serious music duties (whether it be via tuner, turntable or CD player) purchase a multichannel AVR with onboard surround decoders when he or she knows ahead of time the room/system is just going to be used for two channel audio? In this instance, a stereo receiver or amp or integrated, etc. is what should be chosen, if not for anything but the seriousness of purpose...

I think the 8050 will make a nice parallel piece to Onkyo's new expensive hi fi separates, with their classic look and all, and will fill a small niche, albeit unique today, like the one I was shopping in -- that is, a person dedicated to separating stereo listening from multichannel home theater, and who wants a "one box" solution with a tuner and inputs for all the stereo gear. However, with Anamorphic's suggestion that the 8255 and 8555 are being phased out for this new model, it seems a bit odd because the 8050 is less powerful than the 8555 -- although it does fall, power wise, between the 8255 (50 watts x 2) and the 8555 (100 watts x 2), so perhaps that was their intention, to introduce a model that straddled the power line between those two models...

 

[sholling]

why would someone setting up a two channel room and system just for serious music duties (whether it be via tuner, turntable or CD player) purchase a multichannel AVR with onboard surround decoders when he or she knows ahead of time the room/system is just going to be used for two channel audio? In this instance, a stereo receiver or amp or integrated, etc. is what should be chosen, if not for anything but the seriousness of purpose...

I think there is a prejudice that somehow a stereo only receiver is somehow purer or significantly cheaper when used for 2 channel use. This would be be the case if the manufacturer sold roughly equal numbers of each. But in this case economies of scale make the more capable AVR better bang for the buck for most people. It's a niche product with a very small niche but if it fits your needs that's great. I just hope that they eventually wake up and add bass management.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I think there is a prejudice that somehow a stereo only receiver is somehow purer or significantly cheaper when used for 2 channel use. This would be be the case if the manufacturer sold roughly equal numbers of each. But in this case economies of scale make the more capable AVR better bang for the buck for most people. It's a niche product with a very small niche but if it fits your needs that's great. I just hope that they eventually wake up and add bass management.

I don't understand what you mean by the "stereo receiver is somehow cheaper when used for 2 channel" but the other element of your statement has some validity -- that is, there has been this belief that the stereo receiver is "purer" for 2 channel use as opposed to using a multichannel AVR; and indeed, I have fallen prey to that way of thinking. But let me explain a couple of things regarding these stances: First, there is something that's just "more pure" about not buying all the surround bells and whistles that comes with a multichannel AVR IF all you need is a system for music in a certain room -- without the complexities of setting up codecs and menus and such, a user can get right to listening to music by hooking up a couple of speakers and running their sources into the stereo receiver's back panel. It just makes it simpler.

Then, there is the issue of completely not NEEDING a multichannel AVR -- I know you keep bringing up this element of it being more cost effective and logical if one buys a surround AVR even if they only run two speakers, but again, I ask, why should one buy a surround receiver when all they need in a certain room is STEREO? I understand your point about one changing his or her mind down the road and adding surround to a system, but I'm talking about a person that KNOWS for a cold FACT that this particular room will NEVER require surround sound -- this was my particular situation, in which we were setting up a totally separate room for stereo music listening ONLY, with no intentions of doing surround in this room; for us, we needed a STEREO piece of gear, whether it was a receiver or integrated amp.

The bass management issue is something else; you're probably right in that department, but I myself don't know why Onkyo would include a sub pre out and yet no bass management for that output -- with that in mind, I pose this question...if one were to add a sub to such a receiver (as I plan to do down the line with my TX-8555), how does the receiver "know" what frequency to cut the mains off at? Does it just automatically cut off at 80Hz? And for that matter, how does the receiver "know" when you've plugged in a sub to the pre out jack when there is no "menu" like a surround AVR has?

 

[sholling]

there is something that's just "more pure" about not buying all the surround bells and whistles that comes with a multichannel AVR IF all you need is a system for music in a certain room -- without the complexities of setting up codecs and menus and such, a user can get right to listening to music by hooking up a couple of speakers and running their sources into the stereo receiver's back panel. It just makes it simpler.

If I had a need for 2.1 (.1 is a given these days) only system and could save $100 on a stereo-only receiver that includes bass management then I'd be all over it. But without a crossover the ease of setup (2.1) trophy goes to the AVR. 2.0 is probably a draw and a good use for a stereo only receiver.

but I'm talking about a person that KNOWS for a cold FACT that this particular room will NEVER require surround sound -- this was my particular situation, in which we were setting up a totally separate room for stereo music listening ONLY, with no intentions of doing surround in this room; for us, we needed a STEREO piece of gear, whether it was a receiver or integrated amp.

I'm talking about that same situation. Take the AVR out of the box plug-in two speakers and a sub set the crossover and level balance from your easy chair. Or Plop down the stereo-only and hook up the speakers and sub and spend the next hour with your rat shack meter and tones trying to level match while running back and forth to the sub.

The bass management issue is something else; you're probably right in that department, but I myself don't know why Onkyo would include a sub pre out and yet no bass management for that output -- with that in mind, I pose this question...if one were to add a sub to such a receiver (as I plan to do down the line with my TX-8555), how does the receiver "know" what frequency to cut the mains off at? Does it just automatically cut off at 80Hz? And for that matter, how does the receiver "know" when you've plugged in a sub to the pre out jack when there is no "menu" like a surround AVR has?

It lacks bass management so it doesn't cut off anything. To the best of my knowledge it sends 20-20khz to the speakers and 20-20khz to the sub. You can either go speaker out from the receiver to the sub's high level inputs (if it has them) and then hook the speakers to the high-level outputs on the sub (if it has any) and then use the crossover on the sub (if it has one). You then level balance using the sub's volume control. The lack of high-level inputs and outputs was one of the things that I found interesting on my Emo Ultra 12. I don't need them (I have bass management ) but I found the decision interesting. However Emo does include a variable "crossover" that's really just a low-pass filter (see below).

The other option is to use the subwoofer-out on the stereo receiver and send the full range to both sub and speakers and use the crossover on the sub as a low-pass filter to filter-out everything above say 80hz. It gives you an imperfect blend but it will work. I say imperfect because the crossover slope only effects sub and not the speakers. How noticeable that is I don't know.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

If I had a need for 2.1 (.1 is a given these days) only system and could save $100 on a stereo-only receiver that includes bass management then I'd be all over it. But without a crossover the ease of setup (2.1) trophy goes to the AVR. 2.0 is probably a draw.

The EASE of setup goes to an AVR? How could you say that? Especially to a newbie, the process of setting up a multichannel receiver with all the menus and channel adjustments and source listening modes -- which would be necessary in some regard to two channel use -- is MUCH more daunting than setting up a stereo receiver...

I'm talking about that same situation. Take the AVR out of the box plug-in two speakers and a sub set the crossover and level balance from your easy chair. Or Plop down the stereo-only and hook up the speakers and sub and spend the next 2 hours with your rat shack meter trying to level match while running back and forth to the sub.

The subwoofer isn't as critical of an element when you're talking about two channel -- it may be for you, but the concept of a subwoofer comes more into play, for most people, in a multichannel system; moving beyond that, most two channel users wouldn't take out a Rat Shack SPL meter to match the levels of the two speakers and the relative adjustments for the sub, etc.; I really don't see how someone who does not need a multichannel AVR is actually causing MORE work for his or herself by purchasing and setting up a stereo receiver...

It lacks bass management so it doesn't cut off anything. To the best of my knowledge it sends 20-20khz to the speakers and 20-20khz to the sub. You can either go speaker out to the sub's high level inputs (if it has them) and then hook the speakers to the high-level outputs on the sub (if it has any) and then use the crossover on the sub (if it has one). You then level balance using the sub's volume control. The lack of high-level inputs and outputs was one of the things that I found interesting on my Emo Ultra 12. I don't need them (I have bass management ) but I found the decision interesting. However Emo does include a variable "crossover" that's really just a low-pass filter (see below).

If it doesn't "cut off" anything, then it's essentially, you're saying, pushing full range signal to the mains WHILE providing a sub-bass signal to the subwoofer?

With regard to the setup described above, I wouldn't run the sub that way, instead I'd use the preout route, which brings me to this:

The other option is to use the subwoofer-out on the stereo receiver and send the full range to both sub and speakers and use the crossover on the sub as a low-pass filter to filter-out everything above say 80hz. It gives you an imperfect blend but it will work. I say imperfect because the crossover slope only effects sub and not the speakers. How noticeable that is I don't know.

But isn't just using the preout of the 8555 enough to "override" the sub's crossover knob? That's the way it works with surround AVRs (most), as I know my Onkyo 605 works that way when you hook up an RCA lead to its sub preout (it overrides the sub's crossover control)...

If what you're saying is so -- that the subwoofer's crossover is still active when using the TX-8555's sub preout -- then what kind of point would I be looking for when dialing it in? Somewhere BELOW 80Hz?

 

[sholling]

The EASE of setup goes to an AVR? How could you say that? Especially to a newbie, the process of setting up a multichannel receiver with all the menus and channel adjustments and source listening modes -- which would be necessary in some regard to two channel use -- is MUCH more daunting than setting up a stereo receiver...

With a 2-channel system what do you need to setup on the AVR? Are you saying that you can't just plug in the speakers on a freshly unboxed brand new AVR? I'm not sure there is a reason to setup anything if you don't want to. I haven't tried it but it should have the mains set full range out of the box - if so you're good to go. Sure it would be nice to run the autosetup but is it a requirement? By default the listening mode is stereo. Basically a draw with a 2 channel receiver. When you add a subwoofer the trophy goes to the AVR because of the ease of integrating the sub.

The subwoofer isn't as critical of an element when you're talking about two channel -- it may be for you, but the concept of a subwoofer comes more into play, for most people, in a multichannel system;

You assume that everyone has your musical tastes and/or has speakers that play down to 40hz with any authority. For someone that likes jazz content between 40 and 80hz is pretty critical and for those that enjoy electronic or organ music 20hz may not be low enough.

moving beyond that, most two channel users wouldn't take out a Rat Shack SPL meter to match the levels of the two speakers and the relative adjustments for the sub, etc.;

Then it's either going to have too little bass or sound like a kid's Honda.

I really don't see how someone who does not need a multichannel AVR is actually causing MORE work for his or herself by purchasing and setting up a stereo receiver...

I've explained it to you twice.

If it doesn't "cut off" anything, then it's essentially, you're saying, pushing full range signal to the mains WHILE providing a [strike]sub-bass[/strike] full range signal to the subwoofer?

Fixed it.

With regard to the setup described above, I wouldn't run the sub that way, instead I'd use the preout route, which brings me to this:

But isn't just using the preout of the 8555 enough to "override" the sub's crossover knob? That's the way it works with surround AVRs (most), as I know my Onkyo 605 works that way when you hook up an RCA lead to its sub preout (it overrides the sub's crossover control)...

The "override" has nothing to do with the AVR. Some subwoofers override their own crossover control when they detect a signal through the RCA input - but not all subs do that. Other subs offer a switch to override its crossover manually.

If what you're saying is so -- that the subwoofer's crossover is still active when using the TX-8555's sub preout -- then what kind of point would I be looking for when dialing it in? Somewhere BELOW 80Hz?

That depends on where your speakers need to crossover.

Don't get me wrong choosing a 2-channel receiver is a perfectly valid choice and the extra challenges can be fun. After all it's a hobby for you and I. People that can happily spend hours obsessing over speaker placement and toe-in can have a ball fiddling with blending a sub.

 

[anamorphic96]

Sholling,

Your starting to convince me to pull out my old Onkyo and give it a whirl before spending anymore money. Especially if I end up with a sub in here.

I'm like Mike in that I prefer dedicated componets. However my 506 is just collecting dust and this would be free. Can't beat that.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

With a 2-channel system what do you need to setup on the AVR? Are you saying that you can't just plug in the speakers on a freshly unboxed brand new AVR? I'm not sure there is a reason to setup anything if you don't want to. I haven't tried it but it should have the mains set full range out of the box - if so you're good to go. Sure it would be nice to run the autosetup but is it a requirement? By default the listening mode is stereo. Basically a draw with a 2 channel receiver. When you add a subwoofer the trophy goes to the AVR because of the ease of integrating the sub.

Here's a perfect example of what I'm talking about -- in our gym room, I am running an old Onkyo TX-SR600 surround AVR from an old system of mine, powering some small Polk R15s on stands...I needed to go into the receiver's setup menu, assign the only TWO speakers in the system as full range, then I HAD to set channel levels for those two speakers (because it's a surround AVR) unless I just wanted to leave them at "0dB" as a default (which is possible, I suppose, but I didn't want to) and needed to do some other random settings. There is NO WAY a novice to 2-channel using a surround AVR is going to have the wherewithal to set something like this up when they can just plug two speakers into a stereo receiver and be done with it, save for adjusting a physical balance knob, if necessary...

I still continue to not understand the logic behind a simple stereo receiver versus a surround AVR for music only applications...

You assume that everyone has your musical tastes and/or has speakers that play down to 40hz with any authority. For someone that likes jazz content between 40 and 80hz is pretty critical and for those that enjoy electronic or organ music 20hz may not be low enough.

What does it have to do with my musical tastes? I made no assumptions on that behalf; I'm simply saying that for MOST two channel applications, if good full range speakers are being used, a subwoofer isn't AS critical as it is when running a multichannel 5.1-plus system, as there is information in those soundtracks which should be handled by a sub, ideally. I'm not saying a sub in two channel applications can't or shouldn't be used, as the kinds of music you cited can benefit, I'm merely saying it's not as crucial when considering features for a two channel receiver shopping spree...

Then it's either going to have too little bass or sound like a kid's Honda.

That's not true -- I set up my two channel system without sub, and didn't need to use a Radio Shack SPL meter to set these speakers up...and my system sure doesn't sound like a "kid's Honda."

I've explained it to you twice.

And there's still no logic to it, regardless of how many times you have seemingly explained it -- there's no sense in purchasing a multichannel surround AVR when the user is intending to simply run a stereo system in a room in which they know will never be used for surround applications. The much more straightforward, simple route is to buy a two-channel product, whether that be a receiver, integrated amplifier or full-bore separates, depending on a given budget.

Fixed it.

So, the sub gets a full range signal? Even via preout level? And then what...the adjustments are made on the sub itself? This seems contradictory to everything that has come before in home theater, in which a sub's crossover knob is completely out of the loop when using a preout signal from a receiver or processor; perhaps it is because the 8555 in question does not do bass management, is that what you're suggesting?

I have emailed Onkyo support about this and will share their findings when I receive an answer...

The "override" has nothing to do with the AVR. Some subwoofers override their own crossover control when they detect a signal through the RCA input - but not all subs do that. Other subs offer a switch to override its crossover manually.

That's interesting -- it was my understanding that all preamp level signals automatically take the subwoofer's control out of the equation, no matter the brand or type of subwoofer so long as there is an LFE input jack...

At any rate, we'll assume you're correct about that (for the record, as far as I know, my Polk PSW350 does do this "auto override" thing when receiving a preamp level signal from an AVR) and move on to this:

That depends on where your speakers need to crossover.

...but you're suggesting that the TX-8555 does NOT "fix" a rolloff due to its lack of bass management via the sub preout, correct? If so, the sub's crossover knob itself would have to be adjusted for this, which leads me to questioning the best cutoff for my Polk R20s which are set up in this two channel rig...

What would you suggest for these large bookshelves...80Hz? That's what I was using when I was running these in my home theater...

Don't get me wrong

Apparently, this is all I have been doing because I don't understand your insistence on ramming home the theory that a stereo receiver is "as complicated" as a multichannel AVR in terms of setup, or can be as complicated, and that a surround AVR should be used even in a stereo setup...

choosing a 2-channel receiver is a perfectly valid choice and the extra challenges can be fun.

I'm still at a loss in understanding how a stereo receiver can pose "extra challenges" but I suppose I never will get that angle; to me, I simply plugged the unit in, connected TWO speakers to the terminals out back, adjusted the stands so placement and angling/toe in is correct and plugged in my sources...to ME, that is a heck of a lot simpler than adjusting menus in a surround AVR, assigning inputs, balancing (even two) channel levels...

Not that I don't enjoy that tweaking in my HOME THEATER system, but to me, that's where that kind of "tinkering" belongs...

After all it's a hobby for you and I. People that can happily spend hours obsessing over speaker placement and toe-in can have a ball fiddling with blending a sub.

That's true -- it is indeed a hobby; but to me, I see the logic in fiddling with sub blending when it comes to home theater applications, and if one needs a two channel system, I feel a product oriented for such a task (i.e. integrateds, stereo receivers) is the more logical choice.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Sholling,

Your starting to convince me to pull out my old Onkyo and give it a whirl before spending anymore money. Especially if I end up with a sub in here.

I'm like Mike in that I prefer dedicated componets. However my 506 is just collecting dust and this would be free. Can't beat that.

Oh Jesus...not you too now...

You don't see the logic in using two channel audio components specifically geared for music tasks rather than using a multichannel AVR?

I suppose in your situation it can make a little sense -- if you already have a piece of gear that can be used (like in my gym room, as I explained to Sholl, in which I utilized a dusty old TX-SR600 for two channel use) but for someone just starting out building a DEDICATED two channel room/system, a multichannel AVR with onboard decoders for the latest flavors of Dolby and DTS just doesn't make any sense from my perspective...

 

[sholling]

Sholling,

Your starting to convince me to pull out my old Onkyo and give it a whirl before spending anymore money. Especially if I end up with a sub in here.

I'm like Mike in that I prefer dedicated componets. However my 506 is just collecting dust and this would be free. Can't beat that.

Free is a great price. The only thing I see that it won't have is internet radio but I rarely use that and wouldn't miss it. There's just no reason that you should need to spend money to get less.

 

[sholling]

I am running an old Onkyo TX-SR600 surround AVR from an old system of mine, powering some small Polk R15s on stands...I needed to go into the receiver's setup menu, assign the only TWO speakers in the system as full range, then I HAD to set channel levels for those two speakers (because it's a surround AVR) unless I just wanted to leave them at "0dB" as a default (which is possible, I suppose, but I didn't want to) and needed to do some other random settings.

So your argument is that because you needed to change one setting because you'd changed that setting before and needed to change it back to default, and because you chose to mess with some other settings means that everyone will have to do that? That makes no sense and seems to be grasping at straws. I can understand that your preference is for a minimalist system and you're looking for a way to say it's better but all you're saying is you chose to mess with settings and that somehow that's horrible. Will you need therapy?

What does it have to do with my musical tastes? I made no assumptions on that behalf; I'm simply saying that for MOST two channel applications, if good full range speakers are being used, a subwoofer isn't AS critical as it is when running a multichannel 5.1-plus system, as there is information in those soundtracks which should be handled by a sub, ideally.

Again you're assuming that a novice is going to be hooking the stereo receiver to good near-full-range speakers. Many if not most will be hooking up bookshelves that run out of steam below 60hz. Many will want to play their thump-n-bump music on it or other music with actual lows. A few will have good near full range towers. That's where musical tastes come in.

I'm not saying a sub in two channel applications can't or shouldn't be used, as the kinds of music you cited can benefit, I'm merely saying it's not as crucial when considering features for a two channel receiver shopping spree...

I would no longer buy any receiver without bass management and I own some fairly capable speakers. If a no bass management receiver suits your needs then I respect that and I'm happy for you but you're trying to argue that your personal tastes (no frills) are somehow immutable law of nature that apply to everyone.

Apparently, this is all I have been doing because I don't understand your insistence on ramming home the theory that a stereo receiver is "as complicated" as a multichannel AVR in terms of setup, or can be as complicated, and that a surround AVR should be used even in a stereo setup...

You keep getting this backwards. I'm saying that an AVR can be just as plug and play as a 2-channel receiver if you just plug it in and leave it alone. I've explained the 2.1 bass management advantage several times and won't go into that again. It's a settled matter that you choose to ignore or at least dance around. I will point out that a TX-SR508 sells for about the same and includes a setup mic making it even easier and I know from experience that you don't need a monitor hooked up to use the autosetup.

There isn't any reason to keep arguing this. We're just beating the same dead horse over and over again so let's just agree to disagree.

 

[bikemig]

If you can buy an AV receiver and an equally competent stereo system at the same price, then yeah it probably makes sense to buy the AV receiver. Your posts on this make a lot of sense. But there may be differences (and here we have to check out the specs) that might matter to some. The TX 8050 is 4 ohm stable; I wouldn't be surprised if a great many AV receivers in that price range are not. The TX 8050 may also have less distortion and so forth. I understand your point that manufacturers can pack more features in AV receivers because they sell so many more but you don't always get something for nothing. There might be trade-offs here that matter (or should matter) to some buyers.

 

[sholling]

If you can buy an AV receiver and an equally competent stereo system at the same price, then yeah it probably makes sense to buy the AV receiver. Your posts on this make a lot of sense. But there may be differences (and here we have to check out the specs) that might matter to some. The TX 8050 is 4 ohm stable; I wouldn't be surprised if a great many AV receivers in that price range are not. The TX 8050 may also have less distortion and so forth. I understand your point that manufacturers can pack more features in AV receivers because they sell so many more but you don't always get something for nothing. There might be trade-offs here that matter (or should matter) to some buyers.

I agree completely. You're much more likely to get 4ohm stability out of a $250 stereo receiver than a $250 AVR and that's a valid consideration. The same with network features. If I still worked out of an office a $250 network ready stereo receiver would be on my shopping list if it had bass management. I'm not sure why they stubbornly refuse to include it but it can't cost much. Of course there is always Outlaw's 2.1 stereo receiver.

 

[bikemig]

The outlaw stereo receiver is pretty cool which is why it is on my list. It has bass management and lots of power. You can network the Onkyo, though, and it has more digital inputs. Hopefully one of the mass manufacturers will build the perfect stereo system one of these days. Maybe we can be the product testers,

 

[PearlcorderS701]

So your argument is that because you needed to change one setting because you'd changed that setting before and needed to change it back to default, and because you chose to mess with some other settings means that everyone will have to do that? That makes no sense and seems to be grasping at straws. I can understand that your preference is for a minimalist system and you're looking for a way to say it's better but all you're saying is you chose to mess with settings and that somehow that's horrible. Will you need therapy?

No -- I am not AT ALL saying that everyone will have to do what I stated; what I am saying is, and what you don't seem to be getting, is that those few settings I needed to adjust which I used as an example to you makes a surround multichannel AVR that much more "complex" for the end user than a stereo model would be to use...don't you understand that? With a surround AVR, NOTHING is "plug and play;" there are at least a series of different menus that must be navigated in order to get the thing up and running (input assignments, etc.)...there is NO such requirement with a stereo receiver.

Again you're assuming that a novice is going to be hooking the stereo receiver to good near-full-range speakers. Many if not most will be hooking up bookshelves that run out of steam below 60hz. Many will want to play their thump-n-bump music on it or other music with actual lows. A few will have good near full range towers. That's where musical tastes come in.

I'm not assuming anything -- I understand that musical tastes will vary and that many will require a subwoofer for music extensions...it seems you are the one, now, if I may be so bold, reaching for straws in that you cannot see my simple perspective and observation that most stereo music listeners and enthusiasts -- I STATE MOST and certainly not ALL -- are less concerned with a subwoofer in their systems than a surround enthusiast setting up a system would typically be. And, again, it seems you want to argue this notion that I feel most sub-bass has traditionally belonged in a multichannel setup with multichannel material on video-based media (i.e. DVD, BD)...if you want to continue defending this path of "you are assuming everyone with a stereo setup has a good enough pair of towers in which they don't require a subwoofer..." then go right ahead; it's really not what I was assuming at all. All I am saying is with good full range towers or large bookshelves, the notion or element of a sub in a stereo based system isn't as crucial as it is in a surround setup -- and I still hold to the opinion setting up for stereo is much easier than it is for multichannel.

I would no longer buy any receiver without bass management and I own some fairly capable speakers. If a no bass management receiver suits your needs then I respect that and I'm happy for you but you're trying to argue that your personal tastes (no frills) are somehow immutable law of nature that apply to everyone.

That statement is completely inaccurate and does not portray my intentions with my words, at all; I'm not arguing bass management vs. non-bass management equipped receivers, I am stating that for most music enthusiasts -- that's 2-channel and audiophile types -- a subwoofer is less crucial in a setup when good quality, capable towers or monitors are being utilized...I'm not SAYING EVERYONE should follow this "viewpoint," I am merely stating what I have learned from talking with others who are two channel/dedicated music enthusiasts and from what I have read on likewise sites.

You keep getting this backwards. I'm saying that an AVR can be just as plug and play as a 2-channel receiver if you just plug it in and leave it alone. I've explained the 2.1 bass management advantage several times and won't go into that again. It's a settled matter that you choose to ignore or at least dance around. I will point out that a TX-SR508 sells for about the same and includes a setup mic making it even easier and I know from experience that you don't need a monitor hooked up to use the autosetup.

Oh brother...this is useless; I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING ABOUT THIS ISSUE, and I am NOT TRYING TO DANCE AROUND ANYTHING...it seems now you have everyone in this thread agreeing with you undoubtedly due to popularity of tone and insistence regarding using a surround AVR for stereo duties, and I applaud you for that, but let me make one thing nice and sparkling clear: I DO NOT HAVE WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN STATING BACKWARDS. I STILL do not feel that a surround AVR is as "plug and play" no matter what the basic configuration as a stereo receiver -- and never will.

A dedicated stereo device will ALWAYS be first choice -- of mine at least -- when it comes to a system dedicated to ONLY music listening. The only reason I used the aforementioned TX-SR600 in my gym system is because I don't really care about the application or dedication in this room; it's just for background workout music -- in a DEDICATED, serious music listening area, there is NO WAY I would choose a receiver with onboard decoders for DTS and Dolby codec flavors just to run it in "Stereo" or "Direct" mode...a stereo receiver or integrated amp is made for JUST THAT and is what, I feel, should always be used.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

The outlaw stereo receiver is pretty cool which is why it is on my list. It has bass management and lots of power. You can network the Onkyo, though, and it has more digital inputs. Hopefully one of the mass manufacturers will build the perfect stereo system one of these days. Maybe we can be the product testers,

I have given you my reasons for why you should be considering a stereo receiver for your needs -- albeit one with digital inputs -- and while the outgoing (apparently) TX-8555 doesn't offer those (as you and I have discussed in private), I still think sticking to a non-multichannel model is best for you IF YOU DON'T PLAN ON using this system down the road for surround applications; the 8050 looks nice, and as far as the Outlaw model suggested by Sholl, this model was suggested to me as well by others on this forum when I was shopping for a two channel system centerpiece, and it's a model that will continuously be brought up again and again by folks online if you search for "stereo receiver recommendations" -- it's even recommended amongst audiophile circuits and was reviewed in Stereophile -- but I didn't personally care for the "art deco table radios of yesteryear" look to the faceplate, and I read reviews online that claimed the controls, buttons and knobs felt cheap to the touch. Don't know how true that is, but you have to give Outlaw credit for introducing a model that keeps this genre alive -- as Onkyo has done with the 8050 now.

I can give you my seal of approval on the Onkyo stereo receivers -- they're solid, overbuilt with a nice heft to them beyond the price point and the controls feel, under your touch, very upscale and of high quality...the 8555 in particular sure doesn't look or perform like a piece of audio gear that is priced at what Onkyo charges for this thing. The lower-priced stereo model that's 50 watts X 2 instead of the 8555's 100 watts x 2 wasn't that impressive, though, to be honest...I saw one at a local RC Willey and it just screamed "not up to the standards of the 8555..." to me. But that one is being discontinued, according to Anamorphic, along with the 8555 so it looks like the 8050 will be your only Onkyo choice unless you want the A-9555 integrated amp (don't think that has digital inputs though). I am uncertain about the ultimate performance of the Outlaw, but I personally don't like its looks.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Well, as I promised, I am now sharing the information I received from Onkyo's customer support regarding the TX-8555's sub pre out; it appears the notion that a full range signal is sent from the pre out jack was indeed correct, as evidenced by this (cryptic) response:

Thank You for contacting Onkyo USA Product Support.

We are experiencing a heavy volume of inquiries. We apologize for the delay in responding. Thank you for your patience.

The sub uses a pre out connection that sends voltage only (1.5 v) not wattage so its a sound signal only with no crossover adjustments.

Now, taking into account this company's horrendous track record for any kind of "customer service" (i.e. it's pretty much nonexistant; I have been getting that "heavy volume of inquiries" message for years now from them), this is a convoluted response in my opinion, but let's break it down...I had originally asked them how it could be that a sub pre out jack isn't sending an pre level signal and threfore overriding the sub's crossover control (as Sholl and I were discussing in here about different brands of subs and if they do this) and the reply was what I provided above -- so, now they're saying the pre out connection on the 8555 actually sends "voltage" and not "wattage" so a crossed over signal is not existant...

I'm a bit foggy here, but let's just say, for the time being, that the original sentiments regarding the sub pre out on this unit is sending a full-range signal is correct...this means adjustment will have to be made at the sub's knob itself, so where should that level be set at? In my case, I would be using Polk R20 bookshelves as the main two channels, so what would be the crossover point on the sub itself if I was using the 8555's sub pre out? Further, I thought I read somewhere that it was confirmed by Onkyo (perhaps Anamorphic once stated this; not sure) that the 8555's pre out jack is "crossed over" at 80Hz -- but that's in direct opposition to what their tech support is telling me...

Also -- I had a question on the "IntelliVolume" feature which Onkyo processors and receivers have and how it behaves on the 8555...in all my surround AVRs I have used from this brand, I've utilized IntelliVolume as a way to raise the "stage gain" (not really what it's intended for) so it would act like a power amp's sensitivity gain control, making a source seem louder at a lower master volume level...but no matter the purpose, the IntelliVolume on their surround AVRs have common characteristics in that if you set any speaker channel level or IntelliVolume level to a "+dB" value, the receiver will automatically reduce the maximum allowed volume accordingly. The 8555 has this IntelliVolume feature as well, and I am using it the same way for the CD and Tuner selections (that is, they're both up "+9dB" based on how I like the sound), but I don't know if this stereo receiver model actually lowers the allowable maximum volume in response to this as the Onkyo surround AVRs do, and the tech support didn't answer my question about it...

Does anyone know?

 

[MDS]

the IntelliVolume on their surround AVRs have common characteristics in that if you set any speaker channel level or IntelliVolume level to a "+dB" value, the receiver will automatically reduce the maximum allowed volume accordingly. The 8555 has this IntelliVolume feature as well, and I am using it the same way for the CD and Tuner selections (that is, they're both up "+9dB" based on how I like the sound), but I don't know if this stereo receiver model actually lowers the allowable maximum volume in response to this as the Onkyo surround AVRs do, and the tech support didn't answer my question about it...

Does anyone know?

You can answer the question for yourself simply by observation. With IntelliVolume at zero and nothing playing spin the volume knob and observe the maximum number (or just look in the manual, it probably says what it is). Then increase the IV level and once again observe the maximum number on the volume display.

Note that it doesn't reduce the maximum volume. It reduces the maximum volume number on the display. The range from min to max is still the same as before; eg. if IV is at zero and the max number is 80, there are 80 steps between min and max; if IV is at +9 and the display ends at 71 there are still 80 steps (71+9) it's just that the receiver did the first nine for you.

 

[TLS Guy]

I'm a bit foggy here, but let's just say, for the time being, that the original sentiments regarding the sub pre out on this unit is sending a full-range signal is correct...this means adjustment will have to be made at the sub's knob itself, so where should that level be set at? In my case, I would be using Polk R20 bookshelves as the main two channels, so what would be the crossover point on the sub itself if I was using the 8555's sub pre out? Further, I thought I read somewhere that it was confirmed by Onkyo (perhaps Anamorphic once stated this; not sure) that the 8555's pre out jack is "crossed over" at 80Hz -- but that's in direct opposition to what their tech support is telling me...

Those type of units combine the stereo outputs from the preamp stage via a zero sum buffer amp. This presents a full range mono signal at line voltage at the sub out, without making the whole unit mono.

So the rule of thumb for setting the sub crossover is X2 the F3 of your R20s and go from there by ear.

There is no way to prevent a full range signal getting to your bookshelves.

That is why I don't recommend those type of units.

I advise a preamp to electronic crossover. Low pass to the sub and high pass to a separate amp to the main speakers.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

You can answer the question for yourself simply by observation.

This is the typical reply via online "help" forums -- ask a question about something and get a response telling you to "do it yourself" by doing such-and-such; but no matter, I was hoping someone with experience with their stereo models would be able to answer it for me.

With IntelliVolume at zero and nothing playing spin the volume knob and observe the maximum number (or just look in the manual, it probably says what it is). Then increase the IV level and once again observe the maximum number on the volume display.

I understand; I realize that's how it works, I was just hoping someone would know for sure on this particular model (it's not popular anyway, so I was probably mistaken in thinking this). But yes, the manual does state the maximum volume number -- which is different from my 605 surround AVR (the 605 goes to "99" with no + channel trims or IntelliVolume set; the 8555 is lower than that substantially, but I can't recall the exact number).

At any rate, their support team got back to me and stated IntelliVolume would affect maximum volume on the 8555, as would "channel adjustments" -- but I quickly responded by stating the 8555 has no channel adjustments because it's a stereo receiver, and that I was confused by this response...with this reply of theirs, I don't know how much of their "expertise" I should take into consideration...

Note that it doesn't reduce the maximum volume. It reduces the maximum volume number on the display. The range from min to max is still the same as before; eg. if IV is at zero and the max number is 80, there are 80 steps between min and max; if IV is at +9 and the display ends at 71 there are still 80 steps (71+9) it's just that the receiver did the first nine for you.

No, I know it doesn't reduce maximum volume literally -- it adjusts that value number, as you said, on the display, in accordance and response to what you sent IntelliVolume to in the "+dB" range; however, I was a little confused with your explanation of the "steps" and what the receiver "does" for you. According to what I know about how their surround AVRs work, the value of the master volume reading is physically reduced based on the positive setting of IntelliVolume -- in other words, if the max volume is, say, "99" and IntelliVolume is set to +10dB, that max volume reading drops to "89" and so forth...

Are we saying the same thing!?