AV Receiver

[TampaRico]

Hi

I own a Onkyo 606 that has a failing hdmi and I need a new receiver. I was looking at the Onkyo 676 or the new Sony str1080 ??? I tested both and I find the Sony to be a bit bright for music but good in the theater.
The Sony has been getting great reviews but I found it a bit bright and I could not find a way to get the fullness back while playing music.



I also tested the Onkyo 676 an found it ok but at times sound dark in the mid range area.

My theater is 16 x 12 with klipsch quintet and velodyne vlf sub. I'd like to spend less than 700 dollars. What is the best bang for the buck ??

Thank you

 

[PENG]

Hi

I own a Onkyo 606 that has a failing hdmi and I need a new receiver. I was looking at the Onkyo 676 or the new Sony str1080 ??? I tested both and I find the Sony to be a bit bright for music but good in the theater.
The Sony has been getting great reviews but I found it a bit bright and I could not find a way to get the fullness back while playing music.



I also tested the Onkyo 676 an found it ok but at times sound dark in the mid range area.

My theater is 16 x 12 with klipsch quintet and velodyne vlf sub. I'd like to spend less than 700 dollars. What is the best bang for the buck ??

Thank you

You said you "tested both.....", what and how did you do that? "Bright" could be a subjective thing. I compared the bench test data and found both measured quite well, indicating virtually flat response if used within their limits in pure direct mode. Speakers and your room would typically determine the perceived sound characteristics. If your quintets are those with 3.5" woofers, they are going to be the weak link in your system.

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/onkyo-tx-sr606-av-receiver-measurements

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/sony-str-dn1080-av-receiver-review-test-bench

Your Onkyo has Audyssey so if you typically has it on you may want to try out a Denon or Marantz. At the moment the best bang on the buck can be found here:

https://www.amazon.com/Denon-AVR-X3300W-Channel-Receiver-Bluetooth/dp/B01HL8KYAY/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1506345078&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=sony+avr-x3300w

https://www.amazon.com/Denon-AVRX4300H-technology-featuring-Bluetooth/dp/B01KZRPNIQ/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1506345618&sr=1-1-fkmr0&keywords=sony+avr-x4300w

The X4300H is the best bang for the buck if you can stretch your budget, but at this price they probably won't be available for much longer.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The Sony has been getting great reviews but I found it a bit bright...

I also tested the Onkyo 676 an found it ok but at times sound dark in the mid range area.

I'd like to spend less than 700 dollars.

If anything sounds BRIGHT or DARK, it would be your speakers, room acoustics, or sound source, not the AVR, unless you used some EQ, DSP, Tones.

But for less than $700, I would unequivocally get the $1,100 Denon X3300 on sale for $540 brand new on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/Denon-AVR-X3300W-Channel-Receiver-Bluetooth/dp/B0719LTVPY/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?ie=UTF8&qid=1506346675&sr=8-1-spons&keywords=denon+avr-x3300w&smid=AKR88PAWTQVN2&th=1

I just noticed that the "PRO" version with the RACK KIT is CHEAPER than the standard version.

They should sound exactly the same, except one has the extra rack kit.

I wonder if the rack kit can easily be removed by simply removing some screws on the sides?

Of course, the Denon X4300 for $799 is better if you don't mind paying a little more.

 

[TampaRico]

When I set up the Sony I use the auto cal function on the receiver. It had a setting called

=============================
Select [Calibration Type
].
2
Select the setting you want.
Full Flat
:
Makes the measurement of frequency from each speaker flat.
Engineer:
Sets to “the Sony listening room standard” frequency characteristics.
Front Reference
:
Adjusts the characteristics of all of the speakers to match the characteristics of the front
speaker.
===========================================================

I used the default engineering setting.

I can say one thing that when i tested it with a movie ... some of the gun shot sounds startled me !!!

My issue is when I Listen to music it seem like it's missing warmth in the mid-range....

I just wonder it that is the Audyssey that made my Onkyo 606 sound better with music ?? When I used the Onkyo 676 aueq auto config it did not do a good of job as the Audyssey auto config on the Onkyo 606.

Do you think I can get the Sony to sound as good as the Onkyo 606 ? Or do you think the Onkyo 676 is a better choice ( i'm on the fence here ) or do i go with the Denon 3300 ??

 

[PENG]

Do you think I can get the Sony to sound as good as the Onkyo 606 ? Or do you think the Onkyo 676 is a better choice ( i'm on the fence here ) or do i go with the Denon 3300 ??

I would say as ADTG said if you disable all EQ and DSPs you could possibly make them sound very similar, but for simplicity, you can't go wrong with the Denon. Either model recommended so far are equipped with Audyssey XT32 and Sub EQHT that performs much better than the old XT version that came with your Onkyo. In my opinion, that latest version of Audyssey alone is worth $200.

Regarding "missing warmth in the mid-range.... ", that's inherent from small satellite systems such as yours but Audyssey could possible make it more acceptable by doing a better job integrating the sub with with the satellites.

 

[TampaRico]

You said you "tested both.....", what and how did you do that? "Bright" could be a subjective thing. I compared the bench test data and found both measured quite well, indicating virtually flat response if used within their limits in pure direct mode. Speakers and your room would typically determine the perceived sound characteristics. If your quintets are those with 3.5" woofers, they are going to be the weak link in your system.

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/onkyo-tx-sr606-av-receiver-measurements

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/sony-str-dn1080-av-receiver-review-test-bench

Your Onkyo has Audyssey so if you typically has it on you may want to try out a Denon or Marantz. At the moment the best bang on the buck can be found here:

https://www.amazon.com/Denon-AVR-X3300W-Channel-Receiver-Bluetooth/dp/B01HL8KYAY/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1506345078&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=sony+avr-x3300w

https://www.amazon.com/Denon-AVRX4300H-technology-featuring-Bluetooth/dp/B01KZRPNIQ/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1506345618&sr=1-1-fkmr0&keywords=sony+avr-x4300w

The X4300H is the best bang for the buck if you can stretch your budget, but at this price they probably won't be available for much longer.

I would say as ADTG said if you disable all EQ and DSPs you could possibly make them sound very similar, but for simplicity, you can't go wrong with the Denon. Either model recommended so far are equipped with Audyssey XT32 and Sub EQHT that performs much better than the old XT version that came with your Onkyo. In my opinion, that latest version of Audyssey alone is worth $200.

Regarding "missing warmth in the mid-range.... ", that's inherent from small satellite systems such as yours but Audyssey could possible make it more acceptable by doing a better job integrating the sub with with the satellites.

Then Denon it is .... I do like the Audyssey setup much better, one more question is the 4300 the clear winner between the Denon 4300 and the 3300 ??

 

[PENG]

Then Denon it is .... I do like the Audyssey setup much better, one more question is the 4300 the clear winner between the Denon 4300 and the 3300 ??

IMO yes, mainly because:

- Better DAC, there may not be audible benefits but it feels good to have the second from the top AKM DAC.

http://www.akm.com/akm/en/aboutus/news/20150909AK4458DENON_001/
http://www.akm.com/akm/en/aboutus/news/20150917AK4458Marantz_001/

- 11 vs 7 channel of processing

- Lower distortions specs.

- 2 HDMI outputs vs 1 (main zone)

- Stronger power supply

It has other additional features that you may or may not need.

I cannot find any bench test measurements of the X4300H but you can read the following reviews on the older models.

http://hometheaterhifi.com/reviews/receiver-processor/receivers/denon-avr-x4100-a-v-receiver-review/

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-x4200w-av-receiver-review-test-bench

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I would say that if you have the Denon X4300, it could be the centerpiece for a $10,000 system.

But keep in mind that speakers and room acoustics are salient in any system, not the electronics.

 

[PENG]

I would say that if you have the Denon X4300, it could be the centerpiece for a $10,000 system.

But keep in mind that speakers and room acoustics are salient in any system, not the electronics.

Agree, but I suspect Audyssey may work better with the 4300, just guessing.

 

[lovinthehd]

Agree, but I suspect Audyssey may work better with the 4300, just guessing.

You think it's a different implementation of XT32/SubEQ?

 

[PENG]

You think it's a different implementation of XT32/SubEQ?

I see people complained about Audyssey making things worse but it works very well for me. One thing I noticed is that all my Audyssey equipped units are in the higher mid range, the 4308, av7005 and av8801 so I wonder if like you said, it has something to do with implementation, and/or processing power related.

People often brag about Dirac but that's always implemented in much more expensive units that may have more processing capability.

Again, I am guessing, no known technical basis.

 

[lovinthehd]

I see people complained about Audyssey making things worse but it works very well for me. One thing I noticed is that all my Audyssey equipped units are in the higher mid range, the 4308, av7005 and av8801 so I wonder if like you said, it has something to do with implementation, and/or processing power related.

People often brag about Dirac but that's always implemented in much more expensive units that may have more processing capability.

Again, I am guessing, no known technical basis.

Lots of people don't like what Audyssey does (let alone those who don't set it up well to begin with or have certain expectations as to what it does), altho generally I haven't seen as much dissatisfaction expressed for any version of XT32/SubEQ let alone between similar avrs as the 3300/4300.

 

[TampaRico]

OK thank you all for your input ... The 4300 is ordered and on it's way.

Again Thank You all for sharing your experience and time to help.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The $1500 Denon X4300 is comparable in power output to the old $1200 Denon 3805, about 150W x 2Ch 8 ohms, 240W x 2Ch 4 ohms.

The Denon 3805's Dynamic Power output into 1 ohms is 170W, which I think is impressive.

So your system is in good hands as far as the Processor-Preamp and Amps inside the Denon X4300.

 

[rnatalli]

People often brag about Dirac but that's always implemented in much more expensive units that may have more processing capability.

Dirac is nice, but my experience is that it isn't user friendly. I much prefer Anthem ARC and Audyssey XT32.

 

[PENG]

Dirac is nice, but my experience is that it isn't user friendly. I much prefer Anthem ARC and Audyssey XT32.

When I browse through avsforum I might have read one poster, just one, who sort of hinting his slight preference to XT32. Other than that you are the first and only one who actually indicated such preference. I may still try Dirac on my LS50/E15HP/minidsp system if and when price come down a little. I will not bother spending money on my HT when Audyssey is doing a decent job for me on the graph, and with my ears too. Are you using a newer version of AARC?

 

[PENG]

The $1500 Denon X4300 is comparable in power output to the old $1200 Denon 3805, about 150W x 2Ch 8 ohms, 240W x 2Ch 4 ohms.

The Denon 3805's Dynamic Power output into 1 ohms is 170W, which I think is impressive.

So your system is in good hands as far as the Processor-Preamp and Amps inside the Denon X4300.

After I read your post, I compared the specs of the two, almost line by line. It does look like the specs are comparable except:

1. The X4300H is almost 10 lbs lighter.
2. It has 2 more amplifiers.

The weight difference could be due to:

1. Denon/Marantz found ways to make the transformers more efficient in terms of lbs per VA.
2. Today's large capacitors used in the power supplies are generally lighter than those used 10 years ago.
3. More generous use of plastic and Aluminum.
4. Lighter, and reduced amount of heat sinks through more efficient design, and the use of fans.
5. Modern DSP processors are far more efficient, and likely produced less heat even with increased processing capabilities.
6. The 3805 was likely designed for 15 years+, the X4300H is probably designed to last less than 10 years.

Above are just my educated guess but I am sure I will be at least 50% correct, to some extent anyway. So I highly suggest users of the newer AVRs, say within the last 5 years, use at least one of those quiet 3.5" or slightly larger cooling fans externally (on top or blow from the rear) for longer term reliability.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

After I read your post, I compared the specs of the two, almost line by line. It does look like the specs are comparable except:

1. The X4300H is almost 10 lbs lighter.
2. It has 2 more amplifiers.

The weight difference could be due to:

1. Denon/Marantz found ways to make the transformers more efficient in terms of lbs per VA.
2. Today's large capacitors used in the power supplies are generally lighter than those used 10 years ago.
3. More generous use of plastic and Aluminum.
4. Lighter, and reduced amount of heat sinks through more efficient design, and the use of fans.
5. Modern DSP processors are far more efficient, and likely produced less heat even with increased processing capabilities.
6. The 3805 was likely designed for 15 years+, the X4300H is probably designed to last less than 10 years.

Above are just my educated guess but I am sure I will be at least 50% correct, to some extent anyway. So I highly suggest users of the newer AVRs, say within the last 5 years, use at least one of those quiet 3.5" or slightly larger cooling fans externally (on top or blow from the rear) for longer term reliability.

Yeah. I agree. Electronics these days won't match the "weight-build-quality" of the old days.

That's why I'll keep my 60-pound AVP-A1HDCI and my 63-pound AVR-5308CI for backup.

1080p, DTS-HD MA, and Dolby TrueHD are all I need.

 

[surveyor]

I suspect they are using a SMPS in them?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Other than Dynamic EQ to improve the bass and put a big smile on my face , I don't put too much MONEY into any Room EQ software to significantly improve the midrange and treble.

I don't care too much if it's Harman's ultra expensive room EQ, Dirac, DART, Lyngdorf, ARC, Audyssey Pro or YPAO.

Reasons:

1. If your room is Moderately or Severely messed up, may the gods help you because no room EQ will help you.

2. If your room is only mildly messed up, Room EQ may enhance the measurements, but it probably isn't too significant overall in reality.

You can get your speakers to measure 20Hz-20kHz +/- 0.3 dB and have smooth off-axis and great overall measurements. But it doesn't guarantee that everyone will prefer it to another speaker that measures 20Hz-20kHz +/- 3.0dB and has a little less smooth off-axis and less stellar overall measurements.

I think some of us may be chasing the numbers too much and too seriously. We chase that ultra flat in-room frequency response or the best 1w-audio-band-unweighted SNR. It's great because it's a hobby and we want to do that in leisure. It's especially true for professional publications like Audioholics who must have perfection in every way.

But for the rest of us mere mortals, all we want is to have that Super Dynamic Crystal-Clear Sound and when the bomb goes off, space ship flies overhead, and T-Rex stomps the ground, we want that Super Bass to put a big smile on our face.