Older Sony ES or Pioneer Elite?

[Keith1964]

I'm looking at buying an older AV receiver for my dad's movie room, don't need HDMI, and regular DD and DTS is good enough. The two models are a 2002 Sony STR-DA7ES and a 2003 Pioneer Elite VSX-55txi. He cares more about sound quality and build quality over features he would never use. There is no way to audition these receivers at home, so we are looking for suggestions on which is the better choice, Sony ES or Pioneer Elite? Thanks.

 

[TLS Guy]

I'm looking at buying an older AV receiver for my dad's movie room, don't need HDMI, and regular DD and DTS is good enough. The two models are a 2002 Sony STR-DA7ES and a 2003 Pioneer Elite VSX-55txi. He cares more about sound quality and build quality over features he would never use. There is no way to audition these receivers at home, so we are looking for suggestions on which is the better choice, Sony ES or Pioneer Elite? Thanks.

You are making bad mistake. Receivers of that era are virtually useless and in my view have no value.

We are way passed the analog sunset, and there has been a forcing of HDMI. So those older receivers have marginal functionality now.

I had a pre/pro from that era, and it rapidly became useless and an upgrade became mandatory. If he just wants analog audio it will work, but there are better options for that. If he wants audio with video, then HDMI is now pretty much mandatory, otherwise you will be involved in unsatisfactory complex work arounds. This is all because AV content now all contains draconian Digital Rights Management (DRM), and HDMI with its HDCP codes is the very heart of it all.

You may not think you need HDMI, but you will quickly find out that you do.

 

[lovinthehd]

What's the speakers and projector/tv the receiver will be used with? I'd toss a coin as far as sound quality goes, and another coin as to the longevity of 20 year old used units. If cheap enough, maybe. Might lean to the slightly more powerful Sony....

My only non-hdmi avr is of limited use/connectivity....but it's in a least used system but most of the gear I use it with is hdmi capable but and if I upgrade to a newer avr in another system then it will get replaced and put on a shelf most likely.

 

[Keith1964]

Forget it, I guess nobody read what I wrote, he doesn't care about HDMI, he can use digital optical or digital Coax, regular DD and DTS is good enough for him (70) He doesn't care about Atmos, DTS-X, he cares more about sound and build quality like I said. I will go somewhere else for suggestions; I always get the run around here. All I wanted to know is if anyone had any experiences comparing older ES and Elite in the past.

 

[TLS Guy]

Forget it, I guess nobody read what I wrote, he doesn't care about HDMI, he can use digital optical or digital Coax, regular DD and DTS is good enough for him (70) He doesn't care about Atmos, DTS-X, he cares more about sound and build quality like I said. I will go somewhere else for suggestions; I always get the run around here. All I wanted to know is if anyone had any experiences comparing older ES and Elite in the past.

I'm 75 and its not good enough for me. He will find it more awkward than you think, and it will get worse.

 

[svenyun]

I'm 75 and its not good enough for me. He will find it more awkward than you think, and it will get worse.

Wow. I don't think he cares what you consider good enough. He's looking for a solution for his dad, and stated what he was looking for.

Perfectly acceptable to run HDMI to TV and optical/coax digital to receiver, even these days. If all you are interested in is DD and DTS that is all you need.

 

[lovinthehd]

Forget it, I guess nobody read what I wrote, he doesn't care about HDMI, he can use digital optical or digital Coax, regular DD and DTS is good enough for him (70) He doesn't care about Atmos, DTS-X, he cares more about sound and build quality like I said. I will go somewhere else for suggestions; I always get the run around here. All I wanted to know is if anyone had any experiences comparing older ES and Elite in the past.

Might need a larger group of people to find someone who used both of those particular units. The Sony ES series back then just might have the edge on build quality over the Pioneer, tho. As long as the connectivity works otherwise....was just asking. No need to get your panties in a bunch.

 

[-Jim-]

Yes, the Sony ES was considered a "premier" line at the time, slightly above the Elite by most users and reviewers. I had a Sony HT Receiver (non ES at the time as I couldn't afford one - but I would of bought one if I could!)

But as mentioned above, at 20 years old either unit would turn me towards something more modern. @Keith1964 , you don't need to get something new, but some of the early HDMI receivers are dirt cheap on Craigslist these days. They'd be a bit more reliable and easy to set up. HDMI is a single cable between devices. My Mom who's 88 has a Sony HT Receiver with HDMI connections between her cable box, receiver, Blu-ray player, and 55 inch Samsung LED TV. Your 75 year old dad may not know if he'd appreciate lossless sound if he's never heard it.

I hope you make a wise decision.

 

[PENG]

I'm looking at buying an older AV receiver for my dad's movie room, don't need HDMI, and regular DD and DTS is good enough. The two models are a 2002 Sony STR-DA7ES and a 2003 Pioneer Elite VSX-55txi. He cares more about sound quality and build quality over features he would never use. There is no way to audition these receivers at home, so we are looking for suggestions on which is the better choice, Sony ES or Pioneer Elite? Thanks.

I have used the DA-4ES and 2ES years ago. The DA-7ES was a higher model that should be comparable to the 5ES that was one of the best Sony AVR ever built.

Between the two, based on specs alone I would take the Sony. The only Sony models from those days I would recommend are the 5ES and 7ES.

 

[fmw]

At least Sony is still in the home audio business, unlike pioneer. Get him a modern unit.

 

[Kleinst]

This raises an interesting question, is there anything wrong with running the HDMI to the TV and using digital optical if you don't need Atmos OR is standard Dolby 5.1 becoming so obsolete?

There are a lot of people with soundbars and heaven forbit using TV speakers. I would think then some of the older formats would still be relevant.

I certainly agree that you can get "Newer" AVRS for bargains (I just did) if you hit the right deal. BUT better to have an average old AVR with non 4k HDMI or an even older AVR that is closer to flagship for someone like this or a kids set, etc. ? (and I'm talking about picking one up for $100 or less)

 

[-Jim-]

@Kleinst, buying an older receiver is technically okay if you are prepared for lossy codecs and poorer sound from the 5.1 sources of the day, and the increased risk of equipment failure that goes which each additional day of ownership. (Not to mention if the receiver fails in operation and takes out a speaker or two, etc.) "Newer" lossless capable receivers are available at or near your $100 US (I assume) price point if you keep an eye open for them. HDMI doesn't have to be 4K!

@Jerkface just gave away a decent Marantz for FREE here on this Site. (Freight was to be extra if needed.) See Marantz SR-5006 (even have the remote)

Good on him!

 

[Kleinst]

I agree. I just picked up a Denon 4200 for a wonderful price. The deals are there at times you just have to be patient and lucky.

 

[lovinthehd]

I agree. I just picked up a Denon 4200 for a wonderful price. The deals are there at times you just have to be patient and lucky.

I'd just like something from Denon a few years older like that (the X33x series and above) to be capable of using the editor app....

 

[Kleinst]

I'd just like something from Denon a few years older like that (the X33x series and above) to be capable of using the editor app....

I gotta be honest, I bought the APP for one of my receivers and frankly I found it to be a bit clunky. It craps out all the time when trying to upload the results to the AVR. But I'm certain there will be people like yourself that will be able to make magic with it.

 

[lovinthehd]

I gotta be honest, I bought the APP for one of my receivers and frankly I found it to be a bit clunky. It craps out all the time when trying to upload the results to the AVR. But I'm certain there will be people like yourself that will be able to make magic with it.

A bit (boot for our canadian fans) fussy, but there's help out there for those with difficulties....but somewhat same for other measurement based routines....you still need to idealize to an extent

 

[sterling shoote]

I'm looking at buying an older AV receiver for my dad's movie room, don't need HDMI, and regular DD and DTS is good enough. The two models are a 2002 Sony STR-DA7ES and a 2003 Pioneer Elite VSX-55txi. He cares more about sound quality and build quality over features he would never use. There is no way to audition these receivers at home, so we are looking for suggestions on which is the better choice, Sony ES or Pioneer Elite? Thanks.

I thought I would miss my circa 1999 Sony TA-E9000ES Pre-Pro when it blew; but, I discovered my multi-channel SACD and Movie desires could be better addressed by other means. The bottom line is get a new Sony ES Receiver with HDMI input, if you are a Sony fan. You do not think you need HDMI but you do to enjoy multi-channel SACD and surround sound movies these days. If its just 2.1 you want get a Marantz NR1200 Receiver.

 

[mandkthomas]

What did you end up doing?

I'm running an Srtda2es, w optical input from a bluray/ cd player. I think it sounds pretty boss. I did get a basx a3 to drive elac ub52, the av receiver just didn't have enough punch. I don't have any issues up-cycling, but I'm working w what I already had (no cost).

Anyway, just sharing the joy of good music from the cheap seats!

 

[Mike Up]

I was running my Denon AVR-3803 in my media room. It's analog only, no HDMI but is a powerhouse of a HT receiver from 2003.

The problem is that the receiver relies on all setup and functionality to be through an onscreen menu. While it has a front panel display, it's only used for the most basic of information.

Just to setup for DD and DTS was a pain. I had to use the composite video output from the receiver to a composite input on my TV. Yes, it's an old LG 3D 1080p with local dimming from around 2011.

However now a days, most TVs only have HDMI and no analog video inputs, so it you need on-screen menus for setup, you'll need a receiver with HDMI.

I replaced my 2011 Denon AVR-2312ci in my main living room system with a more up to date 4K/8K Onkyo TX-NR6050 receiver so I wouldn't have issues with the on-screen display for setup and info. This allowed me now to put the Denon AVR-2312ci into my media room and replace the analog only AVR-3803. So now I have HDMI onscreen displays for setup on my older LG TV.

Yes, there are work arounds connecting everything to the TV and feeding the optical out of the TV to the receiver but that means no onscreen menus for the receiver which is a major pain in the butt.

I'd honestly get something more up to date that uses HDMI.