Looking for advice - replacing HK AVR 7000

[SJesMe]

I'll preface this by stating I'm no audiophile, but I love my music.

That having been said, I have ... make that had ... a Harman Kardon AVR 7000 (100 watts x 5 into 8 ohms - 0.07% THD, circa 2000) driving a pair of JBL S312II's for the past 10 years. The set up delivered power, clarity, depth, warmth and dynamic I had only previously known via separate pre-amp/power amp. I unequivocally LOVED the sound - across the board (classical, jazz, rock n roll, etc from CDs) and from dvds like Matrix, Lord of the Rings and Pirates of the Caribbean. The HK had VMAx for dvds, which was a sort of virtual surround mode MEANT to elicit 3D sound from only 2 speakers which worked astoundingly well.

I'm (rather unhappily) hoping to find a comparable AVR to replace the HK.

The thing is, I am perfectly content with the 2 studio speakers ... and therein lies my dilemma. Do they even make receivers meant to drive only 2 channels anymore? Something in the back of my aging brain niggles at me concerning sufficient wattage to drive only 2 speakers from a receiver meant to drive 7.

Of course, I could be making it all up and unnecessarily complicating my life!

In any event, I am in the market for a new AVR and have a lower-end budget. Please educate me? Any suggestions are very welcome. Thanks in advance.

 

[Jeff R.]

Welcome to the forum. I had the same dilemna about 18 months ago. I Loved my AVR 7000, definitely a powerhouse amp. I have two suggestions: I have purchased an Onkyo 805 and it will come close to the HK in output. Now this is a 7 channel receiver so if you have no intention of utilizing the surround sound functionality then it may not be a great option. If you truly want a two channel set up, you can stay with the HK name and opt for a HK 3490. This is a 2 channel amp that cranks out 120 x 2. I personally own one ane use in my two channel system in my living room. It does not have bass management, that is the only real down fall that some folks do not like. I don't miss it a bit on my system, however I have a pair of towers that I am powering and a powered sub. See my sig for my system details.

On a side note, from everything I have read on JBL's they are extremely efficient speakers, so you likely are not even drawing very hard on the receiver. I am sure some others would be able to give you abetter understanding of where you speaker would fall on the efficiency scale.

Good Luck.

Jeff

 

[sholling]

This is a near duplicate of your earlier post. But to answer your question a 100w 7.1 receiver is not going to have any more trouble driving a pair of speakers than a 100w stereo receiver. Now if you were comparing a given inexpensive 7.1 receiver driving 2 channels vs the same receiver driving 7 channels you might be on to something in that the powersupply might be struggling to drive all 7 at once but it's going to be loafing with just 2. However if you must have a 2 channel receiver Onkyo makes the TX-8555. Personally I wouldn't cut off my future upgrade options like that but it's your call.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

This is a near duplicate of your earlier post. But to answer your question a 100w 7.1 receiver is not going to have any more trouble driving a pair of speakers than a 100w stereo receiver. Now if you were comparing a given inexpensive 7.1 receiver driving 2 channels vs the same receiver driving 7 channels you might be on to something in that the powersupply might be struggling to drive all 7 at once but it's going to be loafing with just 2. However if you must have a 2 channel receiver Onkyo makes the TX-8555. Personally I wouldn't cut off my future upgrade options like that but it's your call.

I can attest to the suggestion of Onkyo's TX-8555, as I just purchased one and installed it in our two channel audio room, which is still in progress (system wise); this thing is a BEAST for a stereo receiver. I have it hooked up to a pair of Polk R20 bookshelves, and this thing absolutely ROCKS...ridiculous dynamics, off-the-hook transient response and SPLs that mimic a stereo power amp -- it really does sound fantastic. The build quality is typical Onk, with a solid, heavy chassis, great feeling volume knob and quality look to it, suggesting (to me) something more expensive. This receiver/amp is a STEAL for the money.

As far as upgrade path with this unit, it comes fully equipped with pre outs to feed an amp if you need one, plus a subwoofer out.

 

[SJesMe]

Welcome to the forum. I had the same dilemna about 18 months ago. I Loved my AVR 7000, definitely a powerhouse amp. I have two suggestions: I have purchased an Onkyo 805 and it will come close to the HK in output. Now this is a 7 channel receiver so if you have no intention of utilizing the surround sound functionality then it may not be a great option. If you truly want a two channel set up, you can stay with the HK name and opt for a HK 3490. This is a 2 channel amp that cranks out 120 x 2. I personally own one ane use in my two channel system in my living room. It does not have bass management, that is the only real down fall that some folks do not like. I don't miss it a bit on my system, however I have a pair of towers that I am powering and a powered sub. See my sig for my system details.

On a side note, from everything I have read on JBL's they are extremely efficient speakers, so you likely are not even drawing very hard on the receiver. I am sure some others would be able to give you abetter understanding of where you speaker would fall on the efficiency scale.

Good Luck.

Jeff

Thanks for the welcome Jeff R. I'm glad someone can appreciate my despair over losing the AVR7000!
I was looking at the HK 3490. I don't mind the idea of adding a powered sub to enhance bass management (although it was completely unnecessary with the AVR7000). I'm under the impression I can hook up a standard dvd player to the 3490, but not a blu-ray. Is that correct?

Also, in another thread someone mentioned that "all AVRS can play in stereo mode just fine." And Sholling, here, says that a 7.1 won't have any trouble driving the JBL's ... but that doesn't speak to the quality of sound from a system meant to deliver surround sound when asked to simply deliver stereo. Thus, I'm inclined to agree with your opinion that the Onkyo 805 may not be a good option if I intend to use it purely in stereo.

The other consideration (were I to go 7.1 ... or preferably 5.1) is speaker compatibility. Back in the day, this was a bit of an issue.

But I honestly don't know ... which is why I'm here

Thank you for your help.

 

[SJesMe]

I can attest to the suggestion of Onkyo's TX-8555, as I just purchased one and installed it in our two channel audio room, which is still in progress (system wise); this thing is a BEAST for a stereo receiver. I have it hooked up to a pair of Polk R20 bookshelves, and this thing absolutely ROCKS...ridiculous dynamics, off-the-hook transient response and SPLs that mimic a stereo power amp -- it really does sound fantastic. The build quality is typical Onk, with a solid, heavy chassis, great feeling volume knob and quality look to it, suggesting (to me) something more expensive. This receiver/amp is a STEAL for the money.

As far as upgrade path with this unit, it comes fully equipped with pre outs to feed an amp if you need one, plus a subwoofer out.

Thank you Sholling and PearlcorderS701. And my apologies Sholling. This was actually my OP but it was impatient and impolite of me to start two threads within 24 hours of each other.

This Onkyo TX 8555 intrigues me. It certainly has gotten good reviews (although, to its credit, so has the HK 3490). I guess my only concern is whether I am forever precluded from hooking up a blu-ray due to lack of HDMI capability?

Thank you for your help. I really need it

 

[m_vanmeter]

until you mentioned the br word (blu-ray), I thought you might be content with a pure stereo system. BUT, if you ever want to move this system into a home theater setup, then go on and research modern 5.1 or 7.1 a/v receivers. Every one of them can be set to handle a stereo pair of speakers in their setup menus, so there is no reason not to consider them and have the option for HT use later.

You can save some real money at this time because several of the major manufacturers are changing over their a/v receiver line-up for 2010 models.
Onkyo SR607 (2009) to Onkyo SR608 (2010)
Yamaha V665 to V667 (skipped 666...I wonder why)
Pioneer VSX-x19 to x20.... no word on the new "Elite" series yet.
no news from Denon or H/K yet, but the Denons are on sale more often now.

And your "BUDGET" is ??

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Thank you Sholling and PearlcorderS701. And my apologies Sholling. This was actually my OP but it was impatient and impolite of me to start two threads within 24 hours of each other.

This Onkyo TX 8555 intrigues me. It certainly has gotten good reviews (although, to its credit, so has the HK 3490). I guess my only concern is whether I am forever precluded from hooking up a blu-ray due to lack of HDMI capability?

Thank you for your help. I really need it

You're Welcome, 'Jes.

I TOTALLY and completely recommend the Onkyo 8555 if you need a two channel receiver for a music-only kind of setup; this thing really sounds like you're listening to a two channel amp, I'm not kidding. Clean, crisp power...what Onkyo is known for. Straightforward, business-like looks for your rack. A great buy at its price, especially. Onkyo should probably get more money for this thing.

If you're really serious about music listening, some suggest going with an integrated amp, which doesn't have a tuner, as opposed to a receiver. Onkyo makes the A-9555 and it's rated at 85 watts X 2 I believe; I wanted this unit, but couldn't justify the $500-$700 asking price everywhere. The 8555 is an absolute excellent stand in for a good amp -- you won't be disappointed.

Oh, and I just noticed you asked about Blu-ray and these receivers; no, you cannot do home theater with a stereo receiver, as there's no on board decoding for the surround formats, nor are there digital inputs, especially the important HDMI jacks. These models are designed for two channel audio mostly/only.

If you need surround sound in your room along with stereo abilities, everyone in this thread is right -- the latest surround receivers will do absolutely fine in two channel STEREO mode. No, they won't sound like a $10,000 McIntosh amp or something along those lines, but you can play CDs, radio, LPs just fine through a surround receiver. If a turntable is important to you, you need to find a surround receiver that has a PHONO input otherwise you need to buy an external phono preamp. Any of Onkyo's receivers are up to the job for surround duties, depending on your budget, and you can look at other brands like Denon, Yamaha, Marantz, etc...the only thing I would recommend staying away from are Sony's receivers (at least their non-"ES" line).

I was using my Onkyo 605 for music playback in my previous home, and it worked just fine with good dynamics, separation, power...but we moved into a new house recently and I have a loft area which we will be turning into a two channel, music-only listening room, so I was able to separate my home theater from my music. And THAT'S why I got the Onkyo 8555 stereo receiver.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Do you need HDMI inputs or something?

I would just get a HK 7.1 receiver. In Direct Mode, it is as clean as any 2Ch analog preamp/amp setup I've heard.

Personally, I would stay away from Onkyo, but that's just me.

 

[Codifus]

......... I'm under the impression I can hook up a standard dvd player to the 3490, but not a blu-ray. Is that correct?.

You can hook up a blu ray's digital output to the 3490's co-axial or optical input port for sound and use the composite video port for video.

What I think the others are getting at is that with those connections you will not get the player's best audio or video output. Because of DRM the digital audio ports may be limited. Also, composite video cables only support 480i resolutions. A blu-ray player is capable of outputting 1080P video only thru HDMI. This then begs the question: Why buy a Ferrari to go shopping in the supermaket? You can bypass that composite video issue by connecting the blu ray player's HDMI cable directly to your HDTV.

Here's my scenario: like you I am a 2 channel guy. My blu-ray player, a Sony BDP-N460 is hooked up to my Beresford TC-7520 DAC which outputs to my Yamaha AX-596. The Sony blu ray player lets' me configure the coaxial port to put out 24/96 digital audio data, but guess what? Because of DRM, any blu-ray disc I play refuses to let the full digital audio stream go to that port. It is always downgraded to 48 Khz. Does it sound bad? No. But if a movie has a a DTS master audio or Dolby TrueHD soundtrack, I will never get the 24/96 or greater feed unless I connect via HDMI directly to my sound output device, my DAC or receiver.

I am completely OK with that because;

1. Audio tracks from a movie are not mastered to the same level as audio from CDs, SACD DVDA etc.

2. Downsampling to 48 Khz is not bad. It's definitely a major step up from DVDs because DVD movie soundtracks were almost always compressed lossy audio anyways. The Sony downgrades 24/96 audio data to 48/16 and there is no compression involved at all.


Also, my sony player is hooked up via HDMI to my Panasonic HDTV. This way I get full 1080P fed directly to the TV. The best digital audio signal is also going to the TV and ending right there. The audio outputs of the Panasonic do not forward that hi rez audio to other devices. This is also due to DRM.

With this setup I get the blu-rays best video output directly to the TV and get quite satisfactory 2-channel output to my stereo system.

Hope this helps!

CD

 

[Jeff R.]

If 2 channel is truly all you need then go with the HK 3490. I looked very closely at the Onkyo and was not confident in the amp section on this unit. I will tell you the HK is a beast. It is a stout receiver for only being 2 channel. I also use this receiver for my outdoor speakers. It can power all 4 channels with no issues. I actually called HK before purchasing this unit and they claim it will power all 4 speakers at the same time with out decreasing power to any of the 4 speakers. I called Onkyo and asked the same question and they said it would half the output power when running all 4 speakers at the same time. For me that gave me a better confidence factor in the amp sectionon the HK. Now I will put in a disclaimer that I have nothing to actually test this out other than when I run all speakers and switch between 2 and 4 channels I can hear no audible difference in my speakers.

Just my 2 cents....

 

[PENG]

If 2 channel is truly all you need then go with the HK 3490. I looked very closely at the Onkyo and was not confident in the amp section on this unit. I will tell you the HK is a beast. It is a stout receiver for only being 2 channel. I also use this receiver for my outdoor speakers. It can power all 4 channels with no issues. I actually called HK before purchasing this unit and they claim it will power all 4 speakers at the same time with out decreasing power to any of the 4 speakers. I called Onkyo and asked the same question and they said it would half the output power when running all 4 speakers at the same time. For me that gave me a better confidence factor in the amp sectionon the HK. Now I will put in a disclaimer that I have nothing to actually test this out other than when I run all speakers and switch between 2 and 4 channels I can hear no audible difference in my speakers.

Just my 2 cents....

I don't believe the 3490 is more powerful than the 805, if the 805 has to drive only 2 channels. I understand you called HK and Onkyo and got different answers to your questions but I would say either they did not understand your question or one of them, or both did not give you the correct answer. I respect those people who answered your calls have a job to do, but we need to be aware of the fact that not all of them have the necessary technical knowledge to deal with every questions presented to them.

 

[SJesMe]

I'm really such a freakin n00b that I can't even figure out how to multiquote ... gawd. Bear with me here because you guys have been really helpful and I need to address several points that each of you have made.

Codifus:

"You can hook up a blu ray's digital output to the 3490's co-axial or optical input port for sound and use the composite video port for video.

What I think the others are getting at is that with those connections you will not get the player's best audio or video output. Because of DRM the digital audio ports may be limited. Also, composite video cables only support 480i resolutions. A blu-ray player is capable of outputting 1080P video only thru HDMI. This then begs the question: Why buy a Ferrari to go shopping in the supermaket? You can bypass that composite video issue by connecting the blu ray player's HDMI cable directly to your HDTV."

I think I understood all you said. I do have an HDTV but when I try an HDMI hookup to the blu-ray, the sound comes out of the TV speakers which (obviously) are not as magnificent as my JBL's. The TV has ONE HDMI connection so, yeah, I get the video at 1080p (nice) but the audio ... meh. If I utilize your example, and if I understand properly, you're saying I can get full video (1080p) if I hook my blu-ray directly to the TV and then output the audio via composite to the receiver to get (to your ear?) DRM limited audio through your main speakers (better than TV speakers). With the AVR7000, I had the HDMI from the blu-ray into the AVR7000 and a video out (S-video) to the TV. I sacrificed video for audio. The burning question is why should I have to compromise anything?

AcuDefTechGuy:

I would just get a HK 7.1 receiver. In Direct Mode, it is as clean as any 2Ch analog preamp/amp setup I've heard.

Personally, I would stay away from Onkyo, but that's just me.

Decades ago (literally) I had a bad and very short-lived experience with Onkyo. It was a cheap P.O.S., consistently ran hot, ultimately didn't deliver audibly, and then fell apart (crappy buttons to switch source inputs stopped working). In short, I hated it. BUT ... my understanding is they have changed significantly (to compete on parallel with Denon and HK). Fine. I'll consider it. Nonetheless, my experience with HK (the AVR7000 was actually 5.1 used, by me, as a "stereo") was magnificent so I'm leaning to the 3490 which incorpoates a "dolby virtual speaker" which according to at least two sources, "blows away" the HK VMAx mode. Cool, right? Other than that, I'm just not sure I believe a 5.1 or 7.1 will give me sound "as clean as any 2Ch analog preamp/amp setup I've heard." (see my reply to m_vanmeter directly below).I honestly don't care about surround-sound or preset DSPs or even HD quality video. I care about clean, clear, dynamic SOUND from all sources (wma, aac, mp3, RF, cda, dvd's - analog or digital - catch my drift?).

m_vanmeter:

Every one of them can be set to handle a stereo pair of speakers in their setup menus, so there is no reason not to consider them and have the option for HT use later.

But are they REALLY as purist as the 2-channels? The AVR7000 could handle stereo with aplomb, but I've gone and listened to many of the new "home theater" AVRs (5.1, 7.1 and 9.1) Denon, Panasonic, Yamaha and Sony models (the most readily consumer-available in my area) and purposefully demanded that they be played in 2-channel mode ... and, to me, they aren't as rich, full and/or crisp as I am happy with or used to, even in an optimized (dealer) environment.

Yamaha V665 to V667 (skipped 666...I wonder why)

lol ... gee, lemme think ...

And your "BUDGET" is ??

Probably better than I thought at around $1500. I do balk at the wiring and placement of all these additional speakers when I'm perfectly happy with the JBL's all by their lonesome. Still and all, I'm certainly willing to add a powered sub (for the HK 3490 or any other sub par receiver) if necessary to be "happy". So we're talking a preference of 2.1 IF I can find one with an HDMI capability.

Pearlcorder:

Oh, and I just noticed you asked about Blu-ray and these receivers; no, you cannot do home theater with a stereo receiver, as there's no on board decoding for the surround formats, nor are there digital inputs, especially the important HDMI jacks. These models are designed for two channel audio mostly/only.

Yeah and, see, here's the thing for me (and this is to all of you who have so generously given your input) ... I believe standard dvds will go away and blu-ray will be all that's available in the near future (just like the transitions from vinyl to 8-track to cassette, and VCR to dvd). So I'm stuck with the inevitable evolution which now occurs with frightening rapidity (months rather than years). While I couldn't care less about "home theater" per se, I do care about spending $$ on something that will be completely useless in a year (or two if I'm lucky). And, again, (while I hate to keep harping on this), the AVR7000 did have onboard decoding for surround formats AND HDMI capability. BUT ... upconversions shouldn't necessarily be on the shoulders of the receiver, right? Let the blu-ray and the HDTV and the HDCD player handle its own decoding and backward compatibilities.

So, what I came here to find out is: is there a (retro/purist) 2-channel STEREO with significant power (100 - 150 w/channel RMS - like HK, rather than aggregate rated power (better known as total system power) or "peak" power for multi-channel "surround" capacity - like Onkyo), and low THD (0.07% or better) with HDMI capability to accommodate current/future A/V standards? And the answer seems to be a resounding "no." As far as I can tell. Which su ... stinks.

I want sound now. But I'm tempted to wait a year and see what the manufacturers shake out (if they're listening to those of us who want retro simplicity, quality and power coupled with HDMI capabilities).

Thank you all for your help and continued input. I'm still listening. I think the HK 3490 will give me what I need ... until what I really want reaches the shelf, if it ever does.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Pearlcorder:

Yeah and, see, here's the thing for me (and this is to all of you who have so generously given your input) ... I believe standard dvds will go away and blu-ray will be all that's available in the near future (just like the transitions from vinyl to 8-track to cassette, and VCR to dvd). So I'm stuck with the inevitable evolution which now occurs with frightening rapidity (months rather than years). While I couldn't care less about "home theater" per se, I do care about spending $$ on something that will be completely useless in a year (or two if I'm lucky). And, again, (while I hate to keep harping on this), the AVR7000 did have onboard decoding for surround formats AND HDMI capability. BUT ... upconversions shouldn't necessarily be on the shoulders of the receiver, right? Let the blu-ray and the HDTV and the HDCD player handle its own decoding and backward compatibilities.

I think I follow you here in terms of the evolving technology, so let me address that first:

Yes, HT is evolving at a ridiculously rapid pace -- 3D and HDMI 1.4 has arrived and is making a lot of people nervous that their gear they just bought is already obsolete. However, don't worry about Blu-ray eliminating DVD altogether; I still buy into the DVD format, and have a massive collection already existing -- keep in mind that whatever receiver you get, it WILL decode Dolby Digital and DTS, the two main DVD formats.

The point is this, really. If you want a separate two channel system in another room of the house, as I did, get a good two channel receiver, amp/preamp or integrated amp. For HT, any receiver you choose will provide a CD, Tape, Phono (some) input for you to enjoy music as well, AND provide the Dolby Digital/TrueHD, DTS/Master Audio decoding for your films. It really depends on what you want to do with the system.

Did this clarify a bit, or am I missing your point of the inquiries?

So, what I came here to find out is: is there a (retro/purist) 2-channel STEREO with significant power (100 - 150 w/channel RMS - like HK, rather than aggregate rated power (better known as total system power) or "peak" power for multi-channel "surround" capacity - like Onkyo), and low THD (0.07% or better) with HDMI capability to accommodate current/future A/V standards? And the answer seems to be a resounding "no." As far as I can tell. Which su ... stinks.

No, as far as I know, there is no two channel stereo piece of gear that accommodates HDMI and surround parameters as you're asking about here.

STEREO receivers are for music. SURROUND AVRs are for HOME THEATER.

Thank you all for your help and continued input. I'm still listening. I think the HK 3490 will give me what I need ... until what I really want reaches the shelf, if it ever does.

I still recommend the Onkyo TX-8555 stereo receiver over the H/K; I know this comes down to "fan preference" but I've never been a fan of H/K's stuff. Some will say they're not a fan of Onkyo's stuff, which is fine and exists here in this thread, but I'm just giving you my opinion as someone who just hooked up a brand new 8555.

 

[M Code]

I don't believe the 3490 is more powerful than the 805, if the 805 has to drive only 2 channels. I understand you called HK and Onkyo and got different answers to your questions but I would say either they did not understand your question or one of them, or both did not give you the correct answer. I respect those people who answered your calls have a job to do, but we need to be aware of the fact that not all of them have the necessary technical knowledge to deal with every questions presented to them.

Reason is the Onkyo uses Series A/B speaker switching and the HK uses Parallel A/B speaker switching..
In a Series configuration the amplifier's output power decreases as the load impedance increases, whereas in a Parallel configuration the output power increases as the load impedance decreases..

Just my $0.01..

 

[Codifus]

Codifus:

I think I understood all you said. I do have an HDTV but when I try an HDMI hookup to the blu-ray, the sound comes out of the TV speakers which (obviously) are not as magnificent as my JBL's. The TV has ONE HDMI connection so, yeah, I get the video at 1080p (nice) but the audio ... meh. If I utilize your example, and if I understand properly, you're saying I can get full video (1080p) if I hook my blu-ray directly to the TV and then output the audio via composite to the receiver to get (to your ear?) DRM limited audio through your main speakers (better than TV speakers). With the AVR7000, I had the HDMI from the blu-ray into the AVR7000 and a video out (S-video) to the TV. I sacrificed video for audio. The burning question is why should I have to compromise anything?

With the setup I suggested you compromise less in the audio downgrade than in the video downgrade for your previous setup.

Your video setup downgraded 1080P high def video to 480i/p standard def video through your s-video output. AND your 94/24 surround mix got dumped into the TV and it didn't really do much with it

In my setup you get 1080P in all its glory and audio is downgraded from 96/24 to 48/16.

Remember, downsampling does not involve any compression, and the transfer is digital from the blu-ray player to the receiver. So the only loss is in the downsample from 96/24 to 48/16. Compared to MP3 or any other lossy format, the downgrade is fantastically small. The numbers make it look worse than it really is. To get a better idea, think about this: 16 bit audio has a theoretical max dynamic range of 96 db, and most audio products, like CD and DACs and such, have pretty much achieved that. 24 bit audio has a theoretical max dynamic range of 144 db, and most audio products haven't come any where close to that. With most 24 bit audio, you get a real max dynamic range of maybe 104 to 112 db. It's better than 16 bit, but not much, not much at all. Also, 96 db dynamic range of 16 bit audio is more dynamic range than we will ever, ever be able to appreciate anyway. And in movies anyhow, it's all about the visual and aural experience, and audio is not the priority. In audio, it's just about audio.

The only downside I see to the 96/24 to 48/16 downsample is that documentation suggests that the LFE track of movies is left out of the mixdown sometimes. I don't know why they just don't leave it in the mix. I like my bass In my experience, with DVDs that is, that hasn't much of an issue except with one movie, and I just went in and chose another soundtrack, like Dolby surround instead of DTS. With my blu-ray player, so far I've found the 48/16 mixdowns to be the best movie soundtracks I've heard, excluding the full 24/9 surround mix, of course.

These discussions have made me realize something else: the consumer audio manufacturers are employing this divide and conquer approach so as to maximize their profit margins. This is another part of the reason you have to compromise. There's another thread about the HK980 and the HK3490.

The HK980 is built to please the 2-channel audio guy,full stop. The 3490 is built to please the home theater individual whose priority is 2 channel audio. The very heart of their differences is the type of amplifier architecture they have.

I haven't shopped for an amplifier in a while until recently but the general rule for amplifiers that I believe still applies is this:

Class A amplifiers are the absolute best for sound but hardly anyone makes them because they are extremely in-efficient and hence consume gargantuan amounts of power.

Class AB amplifiers are the next best. Their efficiency improves without sacrificing too much in sound quality, compared to Class A.

Then there are all the other Class types, D, H, etc. These types are even more efficient, but they sacrifice even more in terms of sound quality.

When I used to look at surround receivers, it used to baffle me how they could produce so much power, AND drive 5 to 7 channels from a box that is not that much larger than their 2 channel counterparts from yesterday.

Through some posts from PENG, now I know how to tell what type of amplifier architecure a device is using, and that explains how they've been producing all that power. Look at the the amplifier's max power output and compare it to its power consumption. ClassAB amplifiers will hover around a 50% ratio, and Class D, H etc will have greater than 60% ratio. These are generalizations so please don't take my numbers as hard and fast.

Now, compare the HK 980 and the 3490. The 980 puts out 80 watts/channel and has a consumption of 410 watts. The 3490 puts out more power, 120 watts, yet has a max power consumption of 310 watts. Hmmmmm.

Anyway, I may have elaborated too much but I hope this helps!

CD

 

[PearlcorderS701]

It used to baffle me how they could produce so much power, AND drive 5 to 7 channels from a box that is not that much larger than their 2 channel counterparts from yesterday.

That's because they can't. 99.9-percent of AVRs are ridiculously overrated in terms of the "power output" on paper.

 

[yepimonfire]

STEREO receivers are for music. SURROUND AVRs are for HOME THEATER.

i wouldnt agree, ever since figuring out how to adjust Dolby PLII music on my surround AVR, stereo sounds so flat and boring.

one of the biggest stereo problems eliminated using PLII: no sweet spot in between the LR channels, you can sit anywhere in the room and still have perfect imaging.

doesent sound like instruments are stuck in front of you, sounds realistically spread out to be convincingly spacious, especially with acoustic music like a symphony. i would never go back to 2 channel music again, its like mono became when stereo hit the market.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

i wouldnt agree, ever since figuring out how to adjust Dolby PLII music on my surround AVR, stereo sounds so flat and boring.

one of the biggest stereo problems eliminated using PLII: no sweet spot in between the LR channels, you can sit anywhere in the room and still have perfect imaging.

doesent sound like instruments are stuck in front of you, sounds realistically spread out to be convincingly spacious, especially with acoustic music like a symphony. i would never go back to 2 channel music again, its like mono became when stereo hit the market.

That's true -- modes like PRO LOGIC II MUSIC or, for some, ALL CHANNEL STEREO, have opened up the soundstage for music listening on surround AVRs.

But, what I was trying to explain to him was that there's a difference between stereo and surround receivers; for their serious applications and what they were really "meant for," surround receivers are really supposed to be placed in an HT room for surround duties while stereo receivers can be used in separate two channel listening setups/rooms for dedicated music listening.

Also, two things: Does your username mean what I think it means? And isn't it time to upgrade that 19" display in your sig?? Do you honestly have a 19" display?

 

[yepimonfire]

hahaha yes i do, i slowly upgrade things as i can and the room where its placed is small enough it wont make a big difference since the sitting area is only 5' from it, i usually upgrade one thing a year because i am on a budget.