H-K, Marantz or Onkyo AVR for music?

[Rob_63]

I am looking to upgrade my receiver (so I can pass my H-K AVR 320 down to my son).

Usage is mainly music, 80-20, 90-10 to home theater. My H-K is rated 65 in stereo mode, it is clear and there is no clipping when cranked up, but on occasion I would like a little more juice. (I listen to mainly blues, jazz and all types of R & R )

My Speakers are Athena AS F1.2's, C1.2, BIC DV62si's with EFE modified crossovers for surrounds. I have been using the BIC's in the front for a couple of weeks and found them to sound a bit better than the Athenas, so I am considering buying 3 EFE modified DV62CLR's for the front. My sub is a Polk 12" that came from a T-I-B, not real powerful but adequate for now.

My budget for a receiver is $1000, these are the ones I have narrowed it down to:

Harman Kardon-AVR 3550HD, since I have an H-K and like it I like I feel warm and fuzzy all over about this one, and am comfortable with the on screen display. If it had the USB port and a little more power like the Marantz there would be no indecisiveness on my part.

Marantz SR 6003, I trust Marantz products, my parents had an old receiver from back in the early 70's (maybe late 60's?) that was a great unit until lightning killed it a few years back. The USB port is a very attractive feature for me, I have an extensive MP3 collection and a bunch of thumbdrives that I use in my Kenwood car audio receivers.

ONKYO TXSR876, I had an Onkyo surround receiver back in the early 90's and was very happy with it until the day the ex wife made off with it.
This one is rated 140 watts so that has more than I need, however I have been reading that most of these run very hot, and the lessor models have problems with the video chips in them. (which is why I picked this model, it has a different chip)

I prefer a warmer sounding system which is why I have the H-K and Marantz as the two I am considering most, Yamaha and Denon have a lot of complaints about the manual and GUI so I haven't considered them.

Any thoughts?

 

[rnatalli]

Welcome!

Receivers have little impact on sound these days unless you use the EQ systems. Speakers and room acoustics make a bigger impact on sound. I'd go with the receiver that has the features you want and the best price. If you've had HK in the past and liked it, then I'd go ahead and stick with it.

 

[lsiberian]

I am looking to upgrade my receiver (so I can pass my H-K AVR 320 down to my son).

Usage is mainly music, 80-20, 90-10 to home theater. My H-K is rated 65 in stereo mode, it is clear and there is no clipping when cranked up, but on occasion I would like a little more juice. (I listen to mainly blues, jazz and all types of R & R )

My Speakers are Athena AS F1.2's, C1.2, BIC DV62si's with EFE modified crossovers for surrounds. I have been using the BIC's in the front for a couple of weeks and found them to sound a bit better than the Athenas, so I am considering buying 3 EFE modified DV62CLR's for the front. My sub is a Polk 12" that came from a T-I-B, not real powerful but adequate for now.

My budget for a receiver is $1000, these are the ones I have narrowed it down to:

Harman Kardon-AVR 3550HD, since I have an H-K and like it I like I feel warm and fuzzy all over about this one, and am comfortable with the on screen display. If it had the USB port and a little more power like the Marantz there would be no indecisiveness on my part.

Marantz SR 6003, I trust Marantz products, my parents had an old receiver from back in the early 70's (maybe late 60's?) that was a great unit until lightning killed it a few years back. The USB port is a very attractive feature for me, I have an extensive MP3 collection and a bunch of thumbdrives that I use in my Kenwood car audio receivers.

ONKYO TXSR876, I had an Onkyo surround receiver back in the early 90's and was very happy with it until the day the ex wife made off with it.
This one is rated 140 watts so that has more than I need, however I have been reading that most of these run very hot, and the lessor models have problems with the video chips in them. (which is why I picked this model, it has a different chip)

I prefer a warmer sounding system which is why I have the H-K and Marantz as the two I am considering most, Yamaha and Denon have a lot of complaints about the manual and GUI so I haven't considered them.

Any thoughts?

http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/ONKTXNR905S/Onkyo/TX-NR905-THX-Ultra2-140w-x-7ch-HDMI-Receiver-SILVER-/1.html

If you don't mind silver that is a very sick deal. It comes with everything you could ever want from a receiver. If I had the funds I would get one. But receivers matter very little for sound, its the speakers that make the biggest difference.

Oh and HK is very conservative on their power ratings.

Weight usually is the best judge of a receivers power because weight = power supply size. Ignore the ratings and look at the weight of the receivers to compare power.

 

[DD66000]

I'd go for the HK or Marantz, imo the Onkyo leaves something to be desired for SQ.

 

[CraigV]

Of the 3, HK IMO

 

[Rob_63]

Thanks for all the input gents, it is appreciated

I agree HK is conservative on their power ratings, their website states that their rating for the AV receivers is equal for all speakers, not just two like some companies rate. My current HK is rated 55 in 5 channel mode, 65 in stereo and it is every bit and more powerful than my sons 100 watt Pioneer surround receiver.

The weight to qualilty/power ratio does make sense, I build-repair computers in my spare time and that holds very true with the power supplies for them also. The HK is 31lbs, the Marantz is 29, and the Onkyo is a big beast at 53, but is rated significantly higher in wattage output than the others.

 

[lsiberian]

Thanks for all the input gents, it is appreciated

I agree HK is conservative on their power ratings, their website states that their rating for the AV receivers is equal for all speakers, not just two like some companies rate. My current HK is rated 55 in 5 channel mode, 65 in stereo and it is every bit and more powerful than my sons 100 watt Pioneer surround receiver.

The weight to qualilty/power ratio does make sense, I build-repair computers in my spare time and that holds very true with the power supplies for them also. The HK is 31lbs, the Marantz is 29, and the Onkyo is a big beast at 53, but is rated significantly higher in wattage output than the others.

I suggest you just get a 2 channel setup since you mainly listen to music.

Onkyo doesn't leave something to be desired for SQ IMO. In Pure Audio mode it doesn't even touch the sound.

 

[rnatalli]

The weight to qualilty/power ratio does make sense, I build-repair computers in my spare time and that holds very true with the power supplies for them also. The HK is 31lbs, the Marantz is 29, and the Onkyo is a big beast at 53, but is rated significantly higher in wattage output than the others.

Not always. For example, I had a Cambridge Audio Azur 540R v2 which is rated at 80wpc into 6 channels and it came close to meeting that spec on the bench; it weighs about 21lbs. Compare that to the Yamaha 663 which put out about 47wpc into 7 channels and weights 26lbs. But I do agree that weight in general is a good indicator.

 

[Rob_63]

I suggest you just get a 2 channel setup since you mainly listen to music.

Onkyo doesn't leave something to be desired for SQ IMO. In Pure Audio mode it doesn't even touch the sound.

I will eventually do that, but we do use it for movies frequently. We plan on buying a larger house by next summer and I have plans to build a family room with home theater in mind, after that is done then I would go with a separate 2 channel system for the main/living room.

The receiver I am purchasing next I am keeping this in mind I want to get one powerful enough and hopefully with enough new technology that it will last a few years before another upgrade.

The Onkyo I had 16 or 17 years ago had great SQ so I won't discount it for that. Considering the size of the 876-905-906's I am starting to lean towards them since they are feature rich.

EDIT: Only one thing really bothers me with the Onkyo's past the models that have the video chip "blue dot pixelation" problem, and that is the heat everyone comments about.

 

[jostenmeat]

The Onkyo I had 16 or 17 years ago had great SQ so I won't discount it for that. Considering the size of the 876-905-906's I am starting to lean towards them since they are feature rich.

EDIT: Only one thing really bothers me with the Onkyo's past the models that have the video chip "blue dot pixelation" problem, and that is the heat everyone comments about.

Onkyo's do run hot. But that's nothing that adequate ventilation can't fix. Even in the case of inadequate ventilation, it's nothing a fan can't fix.

That said, the feature sets are not comparable here, IMO. Firstly, the Audyssey tech that the 876 uses is the XT version. I believe the best Marantz uses is vanilla multEQ, and that goes for their 8003 as well.

The VP is maybe in fact the largest difference in features. The 876 uses Reon HQV, accompanied by a set of ISF controls. You can adjust per source in multiple ways, with RGB for each, with various controls of NR and EE per source.

If you don't care about the VP, you can maybe find an 805 for a similar amp section, w/o the VP or Audyssey dyn vol/eq. Not the 806, though it's a decent receiver, there are some downgrades there, ya know, comparably.

 

[mistergsf]

I will eventually do that, but we do use it for movies frequently. We plan on buying a larger house by next summer and I have plans to build a family room with home theater in mind, after that is done then I would go with a separate 2 channel system for the main/living room.

The receiver I am purchasing next I am keeping this in mind I want to get one powerful enough and hopefully with enough new technology that it will last a few years before another upgrade.

The Onkyo I had 16 or 17 years ago had great SQ so I won't discount it for that. Considering the size of the 876-905-906's I am starting to lean towards them since they are feature rich.

EDIT: Only one thing really bothers me with the Onkyo's past the models that have the video chip "blue dot pixelation" problem, and that is the heat everyone comments about.

You know, I read a lot about the "blue dot pixelation" problem while researching the 706 and 806 (I believe the 806 was more affected) but that the problem had been identified and acknowledged and problem units being repaired under warranty. That being said, it came down to the 876 and 706 and I chose the less expensive 706 so that I could spend more on my speakers. No problems at all with it so far; no overheating with proper ventilation, easy set up, exceptional SQ for home theater AND music only listening. Great bang for the buck and I still feel strongly that Onkyo makes great quality receivers!

 

[Rob_63]

When I started this thread I had the 3 receivers in order of preference, with the Onkyo last. Now I am leaning heavily toward Onkyo, I guess that is why I registered here and asked for opinions / advice in this thread, so knowledgeable people could show me the difference.

I try to be as careful as possible when spending a lump of money, cause nothing sux like buyers remorse when you pay for something and end up not being happy with it.

I have had what I thought were a few nice stereos in the past, but as I look back now I wonder what I was thinking......... (Cerwin Vega DX-9's with the Onkyo receiver in the early 90's, that thing cranked, thumped and shook the windows but.......)

As I have gotten older I now appreciate music much differently, I enjoy the sound of a blues guitar much more than the screaming metal sounds I used to love.

My point being now I am looking for quality over quantity, so I want to spend my deneros as informed as possible so I don't end up wishing that I had done things differently.

Thanks to all who responded!

 

[Rob_63]

Well I wrestled all night at work between the Marantz and the Onkyo 876 or 905, and strangely enough the Marantz one, I pulled the pin on an SR6003 which should be here next week.

I think the USB port on the Marantz was the straw that tipped the scale for me, and although Onkyo has a great product there are some problems that swayed me away.

Thanks again to all who added to this thread

 

[lsiberian]

Well I wrestled all night at work between the Marantz and the Onkyo 876 or 905, and strangely enough the Marantz one, I pulled the pin on an SR6003 which should be here next week.

I think the USB port on the Marantz was the straw that tipped the scale for me, and although Onkyo has a great product there are some problems that swayed me away.

Thanks again to all who added to this thread

Just be glad you bought a good brand. I've said numerous times just get the best deal on a good brand receiver and move on to your speakers.

 

[sholling]

I'd always believed that receivers had little effect on sound, but I'm no longer sure that's 100% true. When I made the switch from a Pioneer VSX-1014 to an Onkyo TX-SR876, and the later a TX-NR906 there was a noticeable difference in high volume punch between the Pioneer and the Onkyos. That's using the same speakers and all audio processing turned off. I attribute that extra punch to the reserve power available to the Onkyo's amplifiers. If someone had told me this 3 months ago I'd have thought that they were high, and was surprised enough to do a double take. I think as long as you're choosing from three receivers at the same level that you're fine, but the Onkyo is the only one listed that I've heard personally.

 

[lsiberian]

I'd always believed that receivers had little effect on sound, but I'm no longer sure that's 100% true. When I made the switch from a Pioneer VSX-1014 to an Onkyo TX-SR876, and the later a TX-NR906 there was a noticeable difference in high volume punch between the Pioneer and the Onkyos. That's using the same speakers and all audio processing turned off. I attribute that extra punch to the reserve power available to the Onkyo's amplifiers. If someone had told me this 3 months ago I'd have thought that they were high, and was surprised enough to do a double take. I think as long as you're choosing from three receivers at the same level that you're fine, but the Onkyo is the only one listed that I've heard personally.

If you are using 3 or 2.5 way speakers or inefficient 2 ways then a jump in power would help you greatly. Also the higher end 906 has the best audio processors Onkyo makes it is their top of the line receiver with few corners cut. However even if you double your power you still get only a 3 db gain.

Also, you jumped from a 20lb amp to a 50 lb amp so of course you will have more power.

 

[PENG]

I'd always believed that receivers had little effect on sound, but I'm no longer sure that's 100% true. When I made the switch from a Pioneer VSX-1014 to an Onkyo TX-SR876, and the later a TX-NR906 there was a noticeable difference in high volume punch between the Pioneer and the Onkyos. That's using the same speakers and all audio processing turned off. I attribute that extra punch to the reserve power available to the Onkyo's amplifiers.

I think you can continue to believe what you'd always believed. It is the speakers that made the most difference. As you said, that extra punch from the reserve power of the reciever had done it for you! The 906 can certainly delievered at least 3 times as much as the 1014 can (on demand) to power hungry speakers in terms of peak power. If you had very sensitive speaker in a small room then it would have been a different story. So again, blame the speakers first, then the reciever.

 

[Seth=L]

Not always. For example, I had a Cambridge Audio Azur 540R v2 which is rated at 80wpc into 6 channels and it came close to meeting that spec on the bench; it weighs about 21lbs. Compare that to the Yamaha 663 which put out about 47wpc into 7 channels and weights 26lbs. But I do agree that weight in general is a good indicator.

The difference in weight on the cambridge and yamaha receivers can be contributed to two major factors. The Cambridge has a lower profile enclosure (which is likely to weigh less) and the reason for the lower profile enclosure is also the second reason why the receiver is lighter, it has a lightweight toroidal power transformer (a more efficient design).

A receiver or amplifier's weight is no solid indication of it's output power capability. It's a helpful ruler, but it's a ruler with no measurement markings. Other factors are always at play. The The Onkyo is an funny case because it's blatantly obvious it has more power, it's an unavoidable truth.

 

[Seth=L]

I'd go for the HK or Marantz, imo the Onkyo leaves something to be desired for SQ.

I am very curious how you have come to this conclusion. Of the three receivers mentioned the Onkyo TX-SR876, with all factors considered, would be the "best sounding" receiver on the list. Is it the best option for the OP, maybe not, but it most definitely has the highest output capability which does mean it will maintain a linear output signal to the speakers to levels that would exceed the dynamic potention of the Marantz and H/K receivers mentioned here. Assuming all three receivers are calibrated correctly and used within their design parameters they will sound the same. At this point in the game most mid level receivers can drive most arrays of speakers to levels that will satisfy all but the most demanding home theater aficionados.

Features, reliability, erganomics, ease of use (including intelligibility of the manuals provided), and customer support should be the key points in deciding on a receiver (this goes for most products, even those not home audio related). On rare occasions a user will have unusual demands for home theater and will require more power from an upper enchalon receiver or separates. Or maybe someone else needs to have an uber low noise floor for recording purposes or maybe white noise is their kryptonite.

In any case, the three receivers in question in this thread will probably meet most of the OP's expectations. The OP made the right decision for him by going with the Marantz because he felt more comfortable with the company in terms of reliability, service, and features (such as the USB). Onkyo has been shaky with their reliability and service. Harman Kardon also has reliability issues, but from what I hear they usually address them. H/K probably has a factory dedicated to refurbished receivers. If a company can salvage it's losses like H/K does then it has no problem having good service for it's customers. Even though I would prefer they make it right the first time, at least they have the good sense and a good business standard to keep their customers happy.

AND WITH ALL THAT SAID.

I would buy the Onkyo, because I have an unusual fetish for high power (and I HATE hearing clipping EVER!!!!

 

[Seth=L]

You know, I read a lot about the "blue dot pixelation" problem while researching the 706 and 806 (I believe the 806 was more affected) but that the problem had been identified and acknowledged and problem units being repaired under warranty. That being said, it came down to the 876 and 706 and I chose the less expensive 706 so that I could spend more on my speakers. No problems at all with it so far; no overheating with proper ventilation, easy set up, exceptional SQ for home theater AND music only listening. Great bang for the buck and I still feel strongly that Onkyo makes great quality receivers!

Those receivers use the Faroudja engine, the TX-SR876 uses a vastly superior scaler, the HQV Reon. That problem should not be related to the TX-SR876.