Best AV Receiver for around $500

[KEW]

The 608 can be had for $379 brand new on amazon.com:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003BIFOL8/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ABNH5G9QYRAK3

This thing has SNR & crosstalk that matches the "superbly measured" Emotiva UPA-7.

I worry that some will misinterpret this. The Onkyo's amp section is certainly not close to being on par with the UPA-7.

I would be reluctant to recommend this Onkyo because it has no preamp outputs, so it cannot "grow" with the system. However, that may or may not be of concern to the buyer.

Also, I think it makes sense to reiterate Gene's comment about signal to noise ratio from another thread to make clear that receivers commonly have better SNR capability than a separate pre-amp amp arrangement.
Gene's statement:

That being said, the Onkyo sounds like it has very good noise performance. Receivers generally do since they have optimized preamp/power amp stages to work with each other without any external noise pick up via cabling.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=751708&postcount=13

The fact that Onkyo matches crosstalk performance is not such an accolade. From the review:

If the UPA-7 had an Achilles' Heel it would be its channel to channel crosstalk performance.

So the Onkyo does match the weakest aspect of the UPA.

That said, the performance of the Onkyo is certainly good. The Onkyo is a fine receiver, and may represent a great bargain. (unfortunately, Amazon raised the price to $420 when I checked it)

 

[3db]

If 3D isn't important to you (personally, I think 3D is overhyped Bull Pattties), see if you can't find a Yamaha RX-V1800/1900. The 1900 would be btter from a YPAO perspective as it does multipoint room correction of the 1800. I have the 1800 and I find the amp section on this receiver to be fairly stout having no troubles pushing my PSB Image T45s (6ohms nominal) well into the 90 SPL.

These receivers have all the latest audio codecs and can upconvert all analog video signals to 1080p.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

receivers commonly have better SNR

I don't think so.

I've never seen an AVR (even $7,500 or $5,500 AVR) with better SNR than -110dBA.

Yet, I've seen a lot of pre-pros & amps with SNR > -120dB.

If AVRs have better SNR than separates, then why the heck would any of us buy separates?

So the Onkyo does match the weakest aspect of the UPA.

Home Theater Magazine does not think so.

608 crosstalk: -87dB (HTM)
UPA-7 crosstalk: -72dB (Audioholics)

The Onkyo 608 has crosstalk of -87dB @ 1kHz & 1 watt. Compared to the rest of the Pre-pros, AVRs, & amps measured on HTM, that is ABOVE average even when compared to components > $2,000.

In fact, the 608 has better crosstalk than the $5,000 Audio Control AVR measured on HTM.

I guess Audioholics measure differently than HTM.

According to the measurement on Audioholics, the UPA-7 has crosstalk of -72dB @ 1kHz, which is 15dB WORSE than the Onkyo.

But we can't compare the Emotiva directly to the Onkyo unless both are measured on the same bench using the same equipments and technique.

And before someone says, "but crosstalk isn't the only part of the equation", yes, I'm aware of that. Its not even the most important either, but we are just talking for fun here.

I'm not sure if I would buy Onkyo either, but Onkyo & Integra keep on cranking out components with stellar measurements regardless of price.

 

[3db]

I don't think so.

I've never seen an AVR (even $7,500 or $5,500 AVR) with better SNR than -110dBA.

Yet, I've seen a lot of pre-pros & amps with SNR > -120dB.

If AVRs have better SNR than separates, then why the heck would any of us buy separates?



Home Theater Magazine does not think so.

608 crosstalk: -87dB (HTM)
UPA-7 crosstalk: -72dB (Audioholics)

The Onkyo 608 has crosstalk of -87dB @ 1kHz & 1 watt. Compared to the rest of the Pre-pros, AVRs, & amps measured on HTM, that is ABOVE average even when compared to components > $2,000.

In fact, the 608 has better crosstalk than the $5,000 Audio Control AVR measured on HTM.

I guess Audioholics measure differently than HTM.

According to the measurement on Audioholics, the UPA-7 has crosstalk of -72dB @ 1kHz, which is 15dB WORSE than the Onkyo.

But we can't compare the Emotiva directly to the Onkyo unless both are measured on the same bench using the same equipments and technique.

And before someone says, "but crosstalk isn't the only part of the equation", yes, I'm aware of that. Its not even the most important either, but we are just talking for fun here.

I'm not sure if I would buy Onkyo either, but Onkyo & Integra keep on cranking out components with stellar measurements regardless of price.

Ok ok ok enough you crazy spec hound!! If it came down to powering speakers, which would you choose? The Emotiva or the Onkyo? Personaly I would choose the Emotiva anyday as it will drive without difficulty any speaker I wanted to attach to it in any size room. The Onkyo is best suited for smaller rooms.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Ok ok ok enough you crazy spec hound!! If it came down to powering speakers, which would you choose? The Emotiva or the Onkyo? Personaly I would choose the Emotiva anyday as it will drive without difficulty any speaker I wanted to attach to it in any size room. The Onkyo is best suited for smaller rooms.

Of course, I would choose the Emotiva.

In any room.

I was just talking principals.

To say that in general AVRs have better SNR or any specs over separates is just not right. It's no excuse. Period.

 

[bandphan]

I don't think so.

I've never seen an AVR (even $7,500 or $5,500 AVR) with better SNR than -110dBA.

Yet, I've seen a lot of pre-pros & amps with SNR > -120dB.

Some seems funny about your comparison

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Some seems funny about your comparison

Picky!

Okay, note: all SNR values are dB A-weighted.

 

[tom67]

Best quality new unit (no shipping cost) I have seen....was $499 about a week ago and may be able to dicker for that price... a true quality unit by any standard...about 37 lbs with quality parts....unlike some other brands, they actually sold these at the full price during first model year.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16882115139

 

[PENG]

I would add that if one is concerned about getting the best SQ for the bucks instead of SPL, then for entry level AVR preouts is not important. Sure you can add amps to those low cost Yamaha that has preouts but until you get to the RX-V1X00 series I am not sure if their prepro section is good enough to the point most of us with normal hearing cannot tell the difference.

OTOH I do know the Onkyo 606 could have fooled me in a DBT so it may be reasonable to assume the 608 could too, preouts or not.

Regarding the dB vs dBA, if you deduct 10 from A that should be close enough for a fair comparison. Gene says so (I know, not exactly, just sort of) and I am only agreeing with him.

 

[tom67]

The Yamaha RXV 1900 about the same as the $1,699 RXV 3900 except it lacks the network capabilities.....If you dont need those, this is a great buy....wish I needed a receiver...My guess is that they have an excellent pre-out capability since this is a robust well made amp.....look at the specs on this thing...

http://www.yamaha.com/yec/products/productdetail.html?CNTID=5016804&CTID=5000300&ATRID=1000&DETYP=ATTRIBUTE

 

[bandphan]

I would add that if one is concerned about getting the best SQ for the bucks instead of SPL, then for entry level AVR preouts is not important. Sure you can add amps to those low cost Yamaha that has preouts but until you get to the RX-V1X00 series I am not sure if their prepro section is good enough to the point most of us with normal hearing cannot tell the difference.

OTOH I do know the Onkyo 606 could have fooled me in a DBT so it may be reasonable to assume the 608 could too, preouts or not.

Regarding the dB vs dBA, if you deduct 10 from A that should be close enough for a fair comparison. Gene says so (I know, not exactly, just sort of) and I am only agreeing with him.

So of the Denons that ADxx has, his AVR has better SNR than his pre pro

 

[lsiberian]

AS is shorthand for Auddysey which I can't spell for the life of me.

 

[KEW]

Sorry, I've been out of town for a few days.

But we can't compare the Emotiva directly to the Onkyo unless both are measured on the same bench using the same equipments and technique.

Absolutely! That is exactly what compelled me to respond to your following post (I bolded the word "matches"):

The 608 can be had for $379 brand new on amazon.com:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003BIFOL8/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=ABNH5G9QYRAK3

This thing has SNR & crosstalk that matches the "superbly measured" Emotiva UPA-7.

To get some idea of the degree of inaccuracy, I found a receiver (Marantz SR-6004) which was recently reviewed by both, Audioholics and Home Theater Magazine.

Crosstalk:
Home Theater Magazine states Crosstalk at 1 kHz driving 2.83 volts into an 8-ohm load was –78.96 dB left to right and –80.67 dB right to left.
Audioholics states the worst channel exhibited around 61dB at 20hz, 70dB at 1kHz with a gradual increase with frequency (50dB @ 20kHz) due to capacitive coupling. These were good measurements.

Home theater Magazine's spec is 9dB better than Audioholics.

Signal to Noise Ratio:
Home Theater Magazine states "The signal-to-noise ratio with 2.83 volts driving an 8-ohm load from 10 Hz to 24 kHz with “A” weighting was –103.11 dBrA. . "
Audioholics states "The SR6004 yielded 82.9dB for the worst channel which is an excellent measurement. It's no wonder why the SR6004 sounds so clean and detailed at low power levels."

Home theater Magazine's spec is 20dB better than Audioholics. That is a dramatic difference!

This is a sample of one instance and it would be simplistic to believe these differences are typical or could be accurately used to compare specifications. However, this does establish that the results between these sources are not comparable.

Audioholic's review:
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/receivers/marantz-sr6004-1/sr6004-measurements
Home theater Magazine's review:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/marantz_sr6004_av_receiver/index4.html

 

[PENG]

Sorry, I've been out of town for a few days.



Absolutely! That is exactly what compelled me to respond to your following post (I bolded the word "matches"):



To get some idea of the degree of inaccuracy, I found a receiver (Marantz SR-6004) which was recently reviewed by both, Audioholics and Home Theater Magazine.

Crosstalk:
Home Theater Magazine states Crosstalk at 1 kHz driving 2.83 volts into an 8-ohm load was –78.96 dB left to right and –80.67 dB right to left.
Audioholics states the worst channel exhibited around 61dB at 20hz, 70dB at 1kHz with a gradual increase with frequency (50dB @ 20kHz) due to capacitive coupling. These were good measurements.

Home theater Magazine's spec is 9dB better than Audioholics.

Signal to Noise Ratio:
Home Theater Magazine states "The signal-to-noise ratio with 2.83 volts driving an 8-ohm load from 10 Hz to 24 kHz with “A” weighting was –103.11 dBrA. . "
Audioholics states "The SR6004 yielded 82.9dB for the worst channel which is an excellent measurement. It's no wonder why the SR6004 sounds so clean and detailed at low power levels."

Home theater Magazine's spec is 20dB better than Audioholics. That is a dramatic difference!

This is a sample of one instance and it would be simplistic to believe these differences are typical or could be accurately used to compare specifications. However, this does establish that the results between these sources are not comparable.

Audioholic's review:
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/receivers/marantz-sr6004-1/sr6004-measurements
Home theater Magazine's review:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/marantz_sr6004_av_receiver/index4.html

How about consider the following examples (all numbers are A weighting):

Marantz 5003,5004,6004 all have S/N ratio of 105 dB analog pure direct, according the Marantz spec sheets.

HTM's Mark Fleischmann reviewed the 5003, 6004 and reported S/N ration measurement of

SR5003, -102.19 and
SR5004, -103.11 dB

Onkyo 608 specs S/N ratio of -106 dB,

In the review by the same Mr. Fleischmann, it was measured -105.64 dB. Being all A weighting and by the same reviewer, I would think that it is reasonable to expect the 608 has S/N ratio comparable, or likely better than the Marantz SR5003, 5004 and 6004.

More by Mr. Fleischmann:

Yamaha RX-Z7, -103.52
Yamaha RX-Z11, -106.95

Marantz SR8002, -95.25

Denon 3808, -106.09
Denon 4810, -112.63
Denon 4310, -112.28

sony ES5400, -107.13

Integra DTR8.8, -107.76

Separates (By someone else at HTM):

Marantz AV8003, -122.19
Marantz MM8003, -114.34
Integra DHC9.9, -124.35

I can still detect anomalies in the above numbers but the fact they were measurements obtained in reviewed by the same person at HTM, I would think that while we cannot take them to the bank, they must at least mean something. The Denon models seem to have good S/N ratio consistently.

 

[3db]

How about consider the following examples (all numbers are A weighting):

Marantz 5003,5004,6004 all have S/N ratio of 105 dB analog pure direct, according the Marantz spec sheets.

HTM's Mark Fleischmann reviewed the 5003, 6004 and reported S/N ration measurement of

SR5003, -102.19 and
SR5004, -103.11 dB

Onkyo 608 specs S/N ratio of -106 dB,

In the review by the same Mr. Fleischmann, it was measured -105.64 dB. Being all A weighting and by the same reviewer, I would think that it is reasonable to expect the 608 has S/N ratio comparable, or likely better than the Marantz SR5003, 5004 and 6004.

More by Mr. Fleischmann:

Yamaha RX-Z7, -103.52
Yamaha RX-Z11, -106.95

Marantz SR8002, -95.25

Denon 3808, -106.09
Denon 4810, -112.63
Denon 4310, -112.28

sony ES5400, -107.13

Integra DTR8.8, -107.76

Separates (By someone else at HTM):

Marantz AV8003, -122.19
Marantz MM8003, -114.34
Integra DHC9.9, -124.35

I can still detect anomalies in the above numbers but the fact they were measurements obtained in reviewed by the same person at HTM, I would think that while we cannot take them to the bank, they must at least mean something. The Denon models seem to have good S/N ratio consistently.

Yeah but whats the point? You have reached such low values in SNR in all those receivers thats all inaudable to anything but a bat. . If one is a spec whore, by all means, go nuts but now we reached a point of splitting hairs.

 

[KEW]

Peng,
You misunderstand my post!
I have never said that the Onkyo is a poor performer.
My interest was simply to ensure no one would think that the Onkyo's amp section was truly on par with the UPA-7.
As the first sentence in my first post of this thread (post #21) said.

I worry that some will misinterpret this. The Onkyo's amp section is certainly not close to being on par with the UPA-7.

If you disagree with this, then we do have a disagreement.

I was absolutely not trying to make a case that the Marantz was better (or worse) than the Onkyo. It was simply the first receiver I noticed which had been reviewed by both Audioholics and Home Theater Magazine - so the measured spec's from these two sources could be compared.
I think this is a very informative comparison of test data, and we need to be aware that it is a bad idea to assume the measured specifications are comparable between sources.
Also, I had no intent to discount HTM's testing. I agree with you completely, I would expect that any measurements from HTM are comparable to any other measurements they make. If a lab doesn't use consistent methodologies for their testing, their data would be worse than no data.
Please reread my post. I never said that Audioholics or HTM was right or wrong, I only wanted to point out how different their numbers could be on an identical piece of equipment.

As my concluding sentence said:

However, this does establish that the results between these sources are not comparable.

 

[Waikru]

I'm enjoying this post, although the tech readings are above my head. I'm looking to purchase a reciever and have been looking at the recommended models. I do not require 3D passthrough. With that being said, can i have a few thoughts on the comparison of the following two items:

Onkyo Tx-sr707

Marantz Sr5003

I am slightly worried about the said heat output of the onkyo because my cabinet tends to run hot.
I'm going to be using this 90% for 5.1 HT(blue-ray and gaming) and 10% for music.

Thanks in advance
-J

 

[jostenmeat]

If it's me I'd get the 707 because for a while now have I wanted to try Dynamic EQ, Dynamic Volume, and DSX. I do think Marantz receivers look better. I also don't have to worry about heat, in general. Hmm, good luck!

 

[Pyrrho]

I'm enjoying this post, although the tech readings are above my head. I'm looking to purchase a reciever and have been looking at the recommended models. I do not require 3D passthrough. With that being said, can i have a few thoughts on the comparison of the following two items:

Onkyo Tx-sr707

Marantz Sr5003

I am slightly worried about the said heat output of the onkyo because my cabinet tends to run hot.
I'm going to be using this 90% for 5.1 HT(blue-ray and gaming) and 10% for music.

Thanks in advance
-J

Since you say "around $500", I would try to push it to $599 (including shipping):

http://www.amazon.com/Marantz-SR7002-Surround-Receiver/dp/B000X14W4G/

 

[PENG]

Yeah but whats the point? You have reached such low values in SNR in all those receivers thats all inaudable to anything but a bat. . If one is a spec whore, by all means, go nuts but now we reached a point of splitting hairs.

3db and Kew,

I really don't think I misunderstood anything stated so far. I agree it would be splitting hair to say -105dB is better than -101dB (A weighting). I was simply saying that Denon seems to have some consistently good numbers in the HTM measurements while others might have their ups and downs but even the downs were likely inaudible in real world listening, that's all.

I also agree we cannot say one AVR has better SNR than the other based on the apparently better numbers measured by HTM and the lower numbers obtained by Audioholics. We now all know HTM uses A weighting while Audioholics are unweighted. I was proposing that we can, however, do fair comparisons among AVRs tested and measured by HTM who presumably use the same measurement methodology on all tests, especially those (there are many) reviewed by the same person, namely Mr. Fleischmann.