Frequency

[vanillavato]

<font color='#000000'>I'm just 16 and cannot afford alot for a reciver, but I want the best one possible for around $450 CND, I guess thats around $300 US. I would listen to music mostly with it. I was thinking of the sony 686 or a JVC 7520. They both have enough audio and video hookups for me. JVC only goes down to 40 hz and the sony goes down to 20. I know the lowest frequency that most humans can hear is 20, but how much differnence can you tell? Is it worth the extra 100 for the sony that goes down to 20 Hz. My front speakers can only handle 30-20,000 Hz and 200 watts. The rears and center is 30-20,000 too, but they are smaller and the (fronts have 15&quot; woofers). So is it worth the extra cash for 20 Hz or will it blow the speakers? Or is there any other better reciever suggestions? Thanks alot. .. Oh they each have 0.7 THD, is that good or bad?</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>The 40 Hz - 20 kHz rating on the JVC probably refers to power bandwidth, not actual frequency response. Power bandwidth means the frequency range the amplifier will deliver at full rated power with no more than the specified amount of distortion. In other words, the JVC will reproduce 20 Hz sounds but not as loud as it will reproduce higher sounds when you crank it up. Theoretically, this might not be a huge issue to you because frequencies below 40Hz are fairly rare in music and also because you probably don't crank it up  that far very often. On the other hand, a 40 Hz lower power bandwidth limit suggests that the JVC's amplifier section isn't very robust. That's not a good sign.

Speakers get blown two ways: by being driven by too much power and by being driven by too little power. Oddly, the first way isn't as common as the second. When an amplifier isn't powerful enough to drive your speakers at the volume you want, it &quot;clips&quot; or produces high levels of distortion that can easily fry a tweeter (common) and potentially even damage a woofer (less common). An amplifier with a wider power bandwidth, like the Sony, is no more likely to damage your speakers than one with a narrower one, like the JVC. Deep bass per se won't blow your woofers, in other words; playing deep bass at too high a volume will.

0.7% THD, while probably inaudible with most music, is a rather poor figure but not surprising since Sony and JVC aren't exactly known for making great-sounding products at low prices. Consider instead the Onkyo TX-SR500 (20 Hz-20 kHz bandwidth, .08% THD) or the Yamaha RX-V430 (20-20 kHz, .06% THD). The Yamaha lists for $299US. The Onkyo lists for $320US and is often deeply discounted. Either one is a better choice than the JVC or Sony.</font>

 

[duff]

<font color='#000000'>Also consider the Denon AVR-1603 with a little more power and some different hookups (if you need them - component video, more optical inputs).  Hopefully you can find that for not much more than $450 Canadian.  I don't think you can go wrong with Denon.</font>

 

[vanillavato]

<font color='#000000'>I just looked back and saw that the sony 685 actually had 0.09% THD, 100 watts per channel, 20-20,000 Hz Bandwidth, 96k/24 bit capable, Pro Logic 2, DTS, Dolby Digital, 3 optical ins,1 out, 1 coaxil in, and a bunch of regular hookups (like vcr 1 and 2, dvd, aux, tape). Are the other recivers you mentioned still a better buy?</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Yes, the Onkyo, Yamaha, and Denon (thanks, Duff, I forgot about Denon) are still better buys than the Sony. Forget specs for a minute and think cars. The Sony is a Ford. The other three are Nissan, Honda, and Toyota. Better performance, better reliability. If you want Lamborghini, you'll have to give up on home theatre and settle for two seats--I mean, channels.</font>

 

[Audioholics]

<font color='#000000'>Hey, even Porche has an SUV now! So if you've got the money, you can certainly find multi-channel audio systems of excellent (Lamborghini) quality. &nbsp;

</font>

 

[vanillavato]

<font color='#000000'>I'm not trying to be stubburn I'm just confused. The sony has 100 wattsx5=500 watts. The others are 80x5 and 65x5, quite a bit less. All them have the 20-20,000Hz Including sony. Everything else is the same so will these other recievers sound better or would I only be paying for the name. The statistics show the sony is better than all them for watts, hookups, only 0.01% less THD plus the sony has Dolby digital es, and 5.1 regular channels. What makes these other recievers better?</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Vanilla,

I don't know if you're still checking this forum. I've been away for a week. No, I don't think you'd just be paying for the name if you chose the Yamaha, Onkyo or Denon over the Sony. The first three have solid reputations for quality and good sound. Over the years they've become widely considered the best among the &quot;mid-fi&quot; brands. These three are specialty brands; they specialize in high-quality consumer audio equipment (Yamaha makes other things as well, but their audio division is separate). Sony, by contrast, makes a wide range of audio products ranging from ultra-cheap boomboxes to rather expensive electronics.

Sony certainly could make excellent receivers. Whether they're doing so now, in the case of the model you're considering, is questionable. They might be. Onkyo, Denon, and Yamaha almost certainly are. It's unlikely that you'll be horribly disappointed with any of the above, including the Sony, so it's not that big a decision.

Finally, the difference in rated power output between these different models isn't very significant. Remember that to double the perceived loudness, you must increase the power tenfold. And into certain speakers, some &quot;80 watt&quot; receivers can play louder than other &quot;100 watt&quot; receivers. Rated power isn't necessarily actual power.

Happy shopping. Tell us what you got and how you like it.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Alright thanks everyone for all ur help, time to go buy a reciever!</font>