Interesting current article on older receivers.

[markw]

Obviously, this only deals with two channel reproduction but before you chuck that old, obsolete "stereo: unit, click here. You might be surprised.

Yes, I think he skimmed a bit on the section on power, but I think he basically nailed it on everything else.

 

[highfigh]

That would have been a more fair test if all three receivers' power output and price were close to similar. The new Yamaha and the Sony are fairly close in output but when you compare two receivers that are rated at <100W/ch with one that was rated at 270W/ch, two of them may be gasping for air when the big one is barely past waking up. Any time an amp can operate with that much headroom, it's bound to sound better than another that's hitting the ceiling. Also, the lineup that included the STR-V6 wasn't one of Sony's best- they would have been better off using the STR-7800 or one of the Sony Audio Lab integrated amps, since the test wasn't concerned with equivalent models.

Good luck to anyone who finds an SX-1980 and has to lug it up a flight of stairs. That thing weighs 98 pounds and won't fit in any new rack I can think of.

 

[gene]

Kinda a senseless article comparing a dedicated two-channel receiver to a 7.1 receiver that has all the latest HD video and audio processing and certifications to have them. Of course amp quality will suffer when trying to keep within a budget and offer all of these features. How could this be of any surprise? Simple solution, buy a modern budget receiver and add a $700 Emotiva amp if you want to improve sound quality.

Buying a vintage 70s receiver that hasn't been restored will likely result in noisy potentiometers and power caps needing replacing. I've had the 70's receivers and glad they are no longer part of my collection

 

[markw]

I 's pointing out the focus has changed, that's all.

Please note that the only comparison made here was for basic two channel stereo performance. Believe it or not, a few people do still care about basic stereo music reproduction and for them HT is simply an adjunct, much like dessert isn't a main course.

All it's saying is that in the time since then, the focus has changed from a simple product designed purely to provide the best sound to a more complicated, feature-laden product that buried the basic sound producing elements so far down in the hierarchy of priorities that it's almost lost in the noise floor and almost an afterthought.

Let's not even get into tuner performance, shall we?

After all, all that sound "back then" was pretty much all simple, primitive, analog. Today, analog barely exists anymore.

Now, granted, ther ar estill a few two-channel receivers available today but they are far and few between and demand isn't all that great. A comparison between those and this unit might have been interesting though, but the bulk of sales is in the HT area so I guess that's where they chose to focus.

In fact, I'll venture to say that many people today never knew what a plain old stereo is. ...much like people who don't know how to drive a stick shift because they never saw one.

 

[its phillip]

I'd love to have an SX-1980

 

[GranteedEV]

Kinda a senseless article comparing a dedicated two-channel receiver to a 7.1 receiver that has all the latest HD video and audio processing and certifications to have them. Of course amp quality will suffer when trying to keep within a budget and offer all of these features. How could this be of any surprise? Simple solution, buy a modern budget receiver and add a $700 Emotiva amp if you want to improve sound quality.

Buying a vintage 70s receiver that hasn't been restored will likely result in noisy potentiometers and power caps needing replacing. I've had the 70's receivers and glad they are no longer part of my collection

I agree. But i do think some companies skimp too much on amp section to cram uselss features, regardless.... so when is AH going to review a newer Onkyo midprice receiver ;P

Heck, a lot of budget receivers have no or very low power pre-outs. I think that is unacceptable. The amp gains on the emotiva stuff should be 27db imo but it isn't for a good reason.

 

[TLS Guy]

Please note that the only comparison made here was for basic two channel stereo performance. Believe it or not, a few people do still care about basic stereo music reproduction and for them HT is simply an adjunct, much like dessert isn't a main course.

All it's saying is that in the time since then, the focus has changed from a simple product designed purely to provide the best sound to a more complicated, feature-laden product that buried the basic sound producing elements so far down in the hierarchy of priorities that it's almost lost in the noise floor and almost an afterthought.

Let's not even get into tuner performance, shall we?

After all, all that sound "back then" was pretty much all simple, primitive, analog. Today, analog barely exists anymore.

Now, granted, ther ar estill a few two-channel receivers available today but they are far and few between and demand isn't all that great. A comparison between those and this unit might have been interesting though, but the bulk of sales is in the HT area so I guess that's where they chose to focus.

In fact, I'll venture to say that many people today never knew what a plain old stereo is. ...much like people who don't know how to drive a stick shift because they never saw one.

I agree with you Mark, and that article.

I'm not surprised the older receivers came out ahead in a double blind trial. And lets not forget those older receivers though good were not state of the art.

I have not had a modern receiver on my bench. However I visit homes and hear them. It is hard to know what is speaker and what is receiver trouble. But I have formed the impression that when it comes to audio quality modern AV receivers of the type discussed in these forums are just awful as far as audio quality is concerned. They sound strained grainy and gritty at any attempt to push them beyond background.

Frankly with the pictures that have been posted of their guts, with those puny output devices, I'm not surprised at all.

No good audio quality as far as I'm concerned is a prerequisite.

I have stated even more often of late, that if you want good quality on a budget, build a good two channel system.

If you want facilities, you really do have to pony up and go the separates route in my view.

 

[davidtwotrees]

I agree with the gist of the article, as well, MarkW. I quote, "...but it would be nice if they could occasionally offer one or two models with a minimal features set, and devote the maximum resources to making the thing sound as good as possible."
HT receivers are just packed to darn full of features. The funny thing is most of the people that buy mid-level receivers will NEVER come close to using the features offered.
We've harped on this time and again- sound quality has lost out to perceived quality- ie, it has more bells and whistles so it must be better.
I quote, "He tested the Pioneer and confirmed the specifications: "It delivered 273.3 watts into 8 ohms and 338.0 watts into 4 ohms." It's a stereo receiver, but it totally blew away Denon's state-of-the-art flagship model in terms of power delivery!" 275 WATTS!
Dr. Mark is right, imho. Either go separates or two channel for sq. The question seems to be- how to get the digital age to remember the the analog era's attention to solidly built, simple to use, hard to break gear.
Digital has such huge potential that is somehow lost to gadgetry and marketing.

 

[PENG]

I am not keen in reading that reviewers articles. This one is not exception, it is not a fair comparison at all.

 

[ptalar]

I have owned Yamaha receivers since 1980. My first was a 60w CR-840. It looked and felt quality. Its sound was absolutely outstanding. I enjoyed the green glow of the receiver in the evening as I would sit and relax and listen to music. It sounded great hooked up to a pair Bose 601 speakers (when Bose, truly was high end) and a Dual 1264 Turntable.

I then traded up to a Yamaha RX-V2095 A/V Receiver. It was absolutely outstanding and much more capable than the CR-840. It sounded great and I enjoyed the Dolby Digital and DTS. I added a subwoofer and the 5.1 speakers.

I have now traded up to an RX-A3000. Absolutely outstanding. I would never go back.

 

[3db]

I agree with you Mark, and that article.

I'm not surprised the older receivers came out ahead in a double blind trial. And lets not forget those older receivers though good were not state of the art.

I have not had a modern receiver on my bench. However I visit homes and hear them. It is hard to know what is speaker and what is receiver trouble. But I have formed the impression that when it comes to audio quality modern AV receivers of the type discussed in these forums are just awful as far as audio quality is concerned. They sound strained grainy and gritty at any attempt to push them beyond background.

Frankly with the pictures that have been posted of their guts, with those puny output devices, I'm not surprised at all.

No good audio quality as far as I'm concerned is a prerequisite.

I have stated even more often of late, that if you want good quality on a budget, build a good two channel system.

If you want facilities, you really do have to pony up and go the separates route in my view.

There is nothing wrong with a midif AVR driving a reasonably efficeint speaker system full range into a small or mid sized room Mark. They do NOT sound grainy, etched, or what have you. I drive my PSB full range in 2 channel mode into the high 80s and there is NO strain, no grainess, etc. Just smooth controlled sound. If one is doing HT, all the bass and tehrefore the majority of the pwoer required to drive teh speakers go to the sub thus freeing up the power for center channels and teh two mains. Surrounds get very little workout and are negligible.

Now, if you use inefficient speakers or trying to fill a large room, then I can certainly understand running into power delivery.

Blanket statements like your can have many holes punched thru them. You may want to stipulate some conditions. AVRs when used under the proper conditions can provide great sound. Anything being used at or beyond its limits can be damaged or destroyed....