Are todays receivers better then those from 5+ years ago???

[delirium]

I have Yamaha RX-V1500 and I would like to know how it compares to today's receivers.

Forgetting about all the fluff(streaming music apps, etc) I want to know if the internals and the designs of today's receivers are as good as they used to be, better or worse.

I ask because I was in looking at a projector and since the 1500 does not have HDMI we briefly talked about receivers and the guy tells me that these new receivers and there internal components such as amps, DACs, etc are not as good as they used to be.

We talked about power and he said that a 180 Watt receiver from a today would be as powerful as a 90 watt receiver from a few years ago because of the components they use today compare to what they used to use.

Is there any truth to this? I automatically assume what sales people tell me is complete BS but since I have no idea I figured I should ask around.

I am looking for a receiver that will sufficiently drive my paradigm monitor 7 setup and future speaker upgrades. The RV-X1500 does a fine job and if the receivers today do not compare I am considering getting a powered HDMI switch and keep the 1500.

Thanks.

 

[markw]

I have Yamaha RX-V1500 and I would like to know how it compares to today's receivers.

Forgetting about all the fluff(streaming music apps, etc) I want to know if the internals and the designs of today's receivers are as good as they used to be, better or worse.

I ask because I was in looking at a projector and since the 1500 does not have HDMI we briefly talked about receivers and the guy tells me that these new receivers and there internal components such as amps, DACs, etc are not as good as they used to be.

We talked about power and he said that a 180 Watt receiver from a today would be as powerful as a 90 watt receiver from a few years ago because of the components they use today compare to what they used to use.

Is there any truth to this? I automatically assume what sales people tell me is complete BS but since I have no idea I figured I should ask around.

I am looking for a receiver that will sufficiently drive my paradigm monitor 7 setup and future speaker upgrades. The RV-X1500 does a fine job and if the receivers today do not compare I am considering getting a powered HDMI switch and keep the 1500.

Thanks.

"The guy" is an idiot. That bolded section is just about te biggest like of bull ...err ...balderdash I've ever seen.

As far as basic performance, things are about even with five years ago. Improvements have been made in features such as automatic room equalization and such but as far as bare-bones sound quality goes, not much has changed. HDMI rules and component/composite inputs are disappearig and "B" speakers seem to be gone, replaced with more zones on receivers. And, if anything, DACs have gotten better.

You're better off not going to that guy for audio advice.

 

[lsiberian]

All the fluff is exactly what receivers are supposed to do. Amps have gotten more efficient in recent years, but I'm sure the salesman was adding some gravy to it.

If you don't have HDMI that alone is a reason to upgrade IMO.

Receivers have about 5 years of relevancy from what I can tell. I'd go ahead and plan to upgrade at that interval. If you are worried about amping then get an external amp and make sure you receiver has pre-outs.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

You guys do know that a 90 lbs receiver years ago weigh more than a 180 lbs receiver today, right?

A 90WPC Yamaha AVR from 5 YR ago will output 90WPC, and a 180WPC Yamaha AVR today will output 180WPC.

 

[Pyrrho]

As far as quality goes, markw has addressed that. New units are fine. The internal quality is about the same as it was 5 years ago. If you like Yamaha, you can stick with that brand, as they tend to be competitively priced and tend to be reliable. To get the same level receiver as your current one, you would have to go with their Aventage line, which has replaced the upper RX-V models (the low RX-V models are still RX-V). Probably the closest current model would be the RX-A 1020. But obviously, you could go a little higher or lower, depending on your finances and what, exactly, you would want the thing to do.

 

[delirium]

"The guy" is an idiot......
.....
You're better off not going to that guy for audio advice.

No argument here.

 

[DD66000]

a 180 Watt receiver from a today would be as powerful as a 90 watt receiver from a few years ago because of the components they use today compare to what they used to use.

Being we are talking Yamaha that statement is false, as has been said.
But, if you talking about HK, then it would be somewhat true.
For years HK rated their amps much different from other brands. A 90w HK would have been equal to 120~150w of other brands.
That has changed since Sidney Harman died a few years back. Now I believe that HK has more/less fallen in line with other brands ratings.

 

[gmichael]

I am still using my Yamaha RX-V2500 from 2006 as well as a Yamaha RX-A3000 from a year and a half ago. The amp sections are pretty much the same and both sound the same to me. The newer model just gives me more options, including more flexibility with video input & output.

 

[fmw]

I have Yamaha RX-V1500 and I would like to know how it compares to today's receivers.

Forgetting about all the fluff(streaming music apps, etc) I want to know if the internals and the designs of today's receivers are as good as they used to be, better or worse.

I ask because I was in looking at a projector and since the 1500 does not have HDMI we briefly talked about receivers and the guy tells me that these new receivers and there internal components such as amps, DACs, etc are not as good as they used to be.

We talked about power and he said that a 180 Watt receiver from a today would be as powerful as a 90 watt receiver from a few years ago because of the components they use today compare to what they used to use.

Is there any truth to this? I automatically assume what sales people tell me is complete BS but since I have no idea I figured I should ask around.

I am looking for a receiver that will sufficiently drive my paradigm monitor 7 setup and future speaker upgrades. The RV-X1500 does a fine job and if the receivers today do not compare I am considering getting a powered HDMI switch and keep the 1500.

Thanks.

Next time someone says that to you remind them that amplifier power specifications are regulated by law. Everybody has to provide a rating for power with a bandwidth of 20 hz to 20 khz at less than 1% distortion, both channels driven. That's the power rating you should use. It is accurate because it has to be by law.

 

[DD66000]

Next time someone says that to you remind them that amplifier power specifications are regulated by law. Everybody has to provide a rating for power with a bandwidth of 20 hz to 20 khz at less than 1% distortion, both channels driven. That's the power rating you should use. It is accurate because it has to be by law.

So I guess you have never seen an amp rated 250wpc, one channel driven (but have to really look to find that statement); but all channels driven only 180w. I caught Anthem doing that with one of their 5 channel amps. Or to show THD @ 1Khtz.

 

[ichigo]

We'll, there's nothing out there today like the Yamaha RX-Z11 or Denon AVR 5308...

 

[DD66000]

We'll, there's nothing out there today like the Yamaha RX-Z11 or Denon AVR 5308...

And maybe the crap economy has something to do with that. Companies spend less when they know profits will be down.

 

[fmw]

So I guess you have never seen an amp rated 250wpc, one channel driven (but have to really look to find that statement); but all channels driven only 180w. I caught Anthem doing that with one of their 5 channel amps. Or to show THD @ 1Khtz.

They have to disclose the required government power rating. That can add any others that they wish but they don't really matter. 1 Khz ratings are popular with the manufacturers but they don't mean much.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

So I guess you have never seen an amp rated 250wpc, one channel driven (but have to really look to find that statement); but all channels driven only 180w. I caught Anthem doing that with one of their 5 channel amps. Or to show THD @ 1Khtz.

Yeah, I was also disappointed in Anthem for playing that dirty game.

Regarding AVR, I think some newer AVR actually measure better than the older AVR in almost every aspect, but it's a case to case thing.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

We'll, there's nothing out there today like the Yamaha RX-Z11 or Denon AVR 5308...

AVR-5308CI: 2Ch 8-ohm loads, reaches 1% THD @235.5 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 1% THD at 339.2 watts.
Denon AVR-5308CI A/V Receiver HT Labs Measures | Home Theater


RX-Z11: 2Ch 8-ohm loads, reaches 1% THD at 243.6 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 1% THD at 387.4 watts.
Yamaha RX-Z11 A/V Receiver HT Labs Measures | Home Theater

 

[PENG]

Yeah, I was also disappointed in Anthem for playing that dirty game.

Regarding AVR, I think some newer AVR actually measure better than the older AVR in almost every aspect, but it's a case to case thing.

I wouldn't call it dirty game as that seems harsh, but more like organized confusion kind of games. Now take a look of a topic that I brought up a few times recently, that transformer ratings (output kVA) and power consumption figures do not always support their so called continuous rated output. Just look at Emotiva's specs, their rated output watts per kVA are all over the map across their product lines (I mean within their class A/B design lines). The only models I have faith in them coming close theoretically to their continuous rated outputs are the XPA-2 and the top XPR models. Anthem's MCA lines are pretty bad too in that regard. Another thing, weight within the A/B design class, up to a point, does not seem to have much correlation to power output any more. Again, Emos are heavier than Bryston and Anthem but they don't offer more power per lb for sure. All sorts of games being played, intentional or not.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I wouldn't call it dirty game as that seems harsh, but more like organized confusion kind of games. Now take a look of a topic that I brought up a few times recently, that transformer ratings (output kVA) and power consumption figures do not always support their so called continuous rated output. Just look at Emotiva's specs, their rated output watts per kVA are all over the map across their product lines (I mean within their class A/B design lines). The only models I have faith in them coming close theoretically to their continuous rated outputs are the XPA-2 and the top XPR models. Anthem's MCA lines are pretty bad too in that regard. Another thing, weight within the A/B design class, up to a point, does not seem to have much correlation to power output any more. Again, Emos are heavier than Bryston and Anthem but they don't offer more power per lb for sure. All sorts of games being played, intentional or not.

I expected a lot more from Anthem. That's why I'm hard on them.

I wouldn't care if EMO weighs 150 lbs and Bryston weighs 15 lbs; I would take Bryston any day.

 

[twylight]

If you can the difference in decent audio electronics one of them needs to go the shop (with a meter, not ears)

 

[PENG]

I thought I would checked out AVRs launched withinn the past 3 years and see if they in fact do worse or better. Well, if we can believe somewhat in HTM and HCC's lab measurements, they seem to be actually doing better. I see no point comparing any of them to the likes of RX-Z11, TX-NR1000, 5805 and even the 5308 because they belong to a total different class of money no object type of gear. It would be fair to compare recent AVRs with 5-8 years models such as the AVR-3805,3808, 4308. The Onkyo/Integra 2008 models did seem to have the most impressive power output though, for whatever reasons. They weighed around 53 lbs, a touch lighter than the later year top models yet they yielded much better lab measured outputs.

Now, more about the weight thing that some of us are often obsessed with, according to Home Theater Magazine's lab measurements, the heavy weights NAD and Onkyo did not do well against their much lighter competitors. Onkyo, at least, (like Yamaha) turned out admirable output in 2 channel into 4 ohms.

Also note that 34 lbs seem to be the critical number. I have never seen any units under 34 lbs tested as well as the much heavier NAD and Onkyo models, but once they reach that mark, they seems to be able to compete well with the 50 pounders.

NAD T787 - 55.6 lbs

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 98.9 watts
1% distortion at 119.6 watts

This graph shows that the T 787’s left channel, from A1 input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 152.7 watts and 1 percent distortion at 184.5 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 180.1 watts and 1 percent distortion at 207.1 watts.

Onkyo TX-NR5008 - 55.1 lbs

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 78.7 watts
1% distortion at 94.6 watts

This graph shows that the TX-NR5008’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 162.8 watts and 1 percent distortion at 194.1 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 248.1 watts and 1 percent distortion at 309.5 watts.

Denon AVR-4810 - 44.1 lbs

Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads: (No point quoting their 7 ch driven numbers because it went into protection mode).
0.1 percent distortion at 123.5 watts
1 percent distortion at 148.2 watts

This graph shows that the AVR-4810Ci’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 168.2 watts and 1 percent distortion at 187.7 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 277.8 watts and 1 percent distortion at 303.5 watts.


Sony STR-DA5800 - 39.7 lbs

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 98.5 watts
1% distortion at 118.7 watts

This graph shows that the STR-DA5800ES’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 128.5 watts and 1 percent distortion at 171.4 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 174.3 watts and 1 percent distortion at 242.6 watts.


Anthem MRX-700 - 35.4 lbs

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 43.9 watts
1% distortion at 52.6 watts

This graph shows that the MRX 700’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 128.6 watts and 1 percent distortion at 160.2 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 164.8 watts and 1 percent distortion at 221.0 watts.

Yamaha RX-A2000 - 35.3 lbs

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 62.9 watts
1% distortion at 76.9 watts

This graph shows that the RX-A2000’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 170.5 watts and 1 percent distortion at 189.3 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 236.1 watts and 1 percent distortion at 287.4 watts.

Denon AVR-4310 - 34.8 lbs

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 104.6 watts
1% distortion at 116.6 watts

This graph shows that the AVR-4310CI’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 155.4 watts and 1 percent distortion at 179.3 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 224.6 watts and 1 percent distortion at 258.5 watts.

 

[ichigo]

I thought I would checked out AVRs launched withinn the past 3 years and see if they in fact do worse or better. Well, if we can believe somewhat in HTM and HCC's lab measurements, they seem to be actually doing better. I see no point comparing any of them to the likes of RX-Z11, TX-NR1000, 5805 and even the 5308 because they belong to a total different class of money no object type of gear. It would be fair to compare recent AVRs with 5-8 years models such as the AVR-3805,3808, 4308. The Onkyo/Integra 2008 models did seem to have the most impressive power output though, for whatever reasons. They weighed around 53 lbs, a touch lighter than the later year top models yet they yielded much better lab measured outputs.

Now, more about the weight thing that some of us are often obsessed with, according to Home Theater Magazine's lab measurements, the heavy weights NAD and Onkyo did not do well against their much lighter competitors. Onkyo, at least, (like Yamaha) turned out admirable output in 2 channel into 4 ohms.

Also note that 34 lbs seem to be the critical number. I have never seen any units under 34 lbs tested as well as the much heavier NAD and Onkyo models, but once they reach that mark, they seems to be able to compete well with the 50 pounders.

The thing is with Onkyo, starting around 2008 due to the heat induced rate fiasco with the xx5 series, they started putting chip limiters on power output, that's probably why even though they are behemoths that weigh 40% more than the competition, their ACD numbers don't look that great. Also Yamaha is the same, it's clear they artificially limit ACD on their 40lb RX-A3020 to 60 watts even though they are capable of much more peak output, otherwise it doesn't make sense how a 20-some pound Denon that definitely isn't using a switch mode power supply can beat 40 or 55lb monsters in ACD tests but can't even get within 50% of the big Yamaha/Onkyos in stereo output.

I think Onkyo is letting up a bit in the built-in ACD limitations, if you look at the TX-NR3010 review, it manages to put out a bit more power, and it has smaller caps than the 5xxx series.

http://www.hometheater.com/content/onkyo-tx-nr3010-av-receiver-ht-labs-measures

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 114.1 watts
1% distortion at 127.2 watts