Onkyo 805 / 806 Music First

[ematthews]

I was going to purchase the Onkyo 806 this week but reading reviews on this forum about 805 being a better system.......I have come to a stand still.
805 is on Amazon for $599.....806...$699

I listen to a lot of music as well.....What is a better unit for both music and movies....

 

[Chopin_Guy]

The 805 is going to be superior to the 806 without question. The 806 was really a down-grade...the DACs and amplifier are far superior in the 805. Don't worry or hesitate...you will be getting a much better AVR with 805...

 

[jopela]

The 805 has PCM1796 Burr Brown DAC's found in the $5,000 Yamaha RX-Z11 and Denon $5,500 5308CI, the 806 has Cirrus Logic DAC's.


The 805 will not process 24/192 Dolby TrueHD.
The 806 will process 24/192 Dolby TrueHD.


The 805 processes dts-ma 24/192 at 24/96
The 806 processes dts-ma 24/192 at 24/192


The 805 processes DSD directly to analog or to PCM for processing
The 806 processes DSD to PCM regardless of setting


The 805 has 60A High Instantaneous Current Capability
The 806 has 36A High Instantaneous Current Capability


The 805 doesn't have bridging for front speakers for 2.1 listening
The 806 does have bridging for front speakers to 210W/ch (8Ω) for 2.1

 

[jostenmeat]

I was going to purchase the Onkyo 806 this week but reading reviews on this forum about 805 being a better system.......I have come to a stand still.
805 is on Amazon for $599.....806...$699

I listen to a lot of music as well.....What is a better unit for both music and movies....

Hi. There was an AVS poll, 805 vs 806. 805 won 75% votes, 806 19%, and no difference was 6%. I stated the following in the thread:

"I've read that the 806 has Multi EQ w/Dyn EQ, whereas the 805 has the XT version. If true, I personally think this should be the deciding factor.

If you have an acoustically challenged room/setup/layout, or are free to crank it as loud as you like, whenever you like, go with the 805.

If you watch late at night, moderate volumes being the norm, with either sleeping kids or sharing walls with neighbors, go with the 806.

The XT version will have at least 8x the resolution for both speakers and sub. This by itself, for me, makes the 805 the better receiver. I, in fact, like it so much, even after significantly treating my HT, that I started looking towards it for my 2 ch setup. Not available, due to economies of scale (outside of actually using an HT receiver as pre, or buying the very expensive SEQ).

I think XT is cool as beans, and to have it included in the going price of the 805 is too hard to ignore! And hence my vote . . ."

 

[ematthews]

Great
I was also told that if you have any analog componets that the 806 would be better. Is this true?
Also...what does this mean


The 805 doesn't have bridging for front speakers for 2.1 listening
The 806 does have bridging for front speakers to 210W/ch (8Ω) for 2.1

Eric

 

[Chopin_Guy]

Great
I was also told that if you have any analog componets that the 806 would be better. Is this true?
Also...what does this mean


The 805 doesn't have bridging for front speakers for 2.1 listening
The 806 does have bridging for front speakers to 210W/ch (8Ω) for 2.1

Eric

What this is referring to is the ability to take the extra 2 channels, which are the surround back L & R channels, and bridge them over to the front. This, as you can see, gives you some very stout power to the front channels (210watts for the SR806) in stereo listening...

This would be cool if you had difficult speakers to drive but it's only good for the front two channels so even if you did have tough speakers to drive you still probably need an amp regardless....

 

[ematthews]

Pulled the trigger on the 805
i couldn't pass up the price with free shipping.

 

[EJD]

The 805 will not process 24/192 Dolby TrueHD.
The 806 will process 24/192 Dolby TrueHD.

I thought Dolby True HD was just Dolby True HD. Are some movies recorded in one of these formats and not the other?

The 805 processes dts-ma 24/192 at 24/96
The 806 processes dts-ma 24/192 at 24/192

Do these two differences mean anything in real-world listening?

Thanks

 

[WmAx]

Do these two differences mean anything in real-world listening?

Thanks

As long as the re-sampling is performed properly, there is no audible difference. Also, the more expensive DACs mean nothing in terms of audibility. So long as everything is properly implemented, it's not going to result i audible differences. It's marketing. Heck, people can't even tell a portable CD Discman from high end boutique component CD players with fancy DACs and other fancy parts, when compared under blinded, level matched conditions. Of course, this assumes a CD player designed to be accurate. In the case of a unit that was designed to alter the signal substantially on purpose, for example with distortion artifacts of high level or significant frequency response deviation(s), of course, there would be audible difference(s).

That being said, the 805 certainly appears to be a superior device just about in every area, and cost less. It would seem silly to buy the 806 if the 805 is available, unless the 806 offered some very specific feature that one needed.

-Chris

 

[allargon]

I thought Dolby True HD was just Dolby True HD. Are some movies recorded in one of these formats and not the other?

Some Blu-Ray/HD DVD movies with lossless audio are encoded with Dolby TrueHD. Some are encoded with DTS-HD MA. Others are raw lossless PCM (similar to CD's). The Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind Blu-Ray has all 3. 192/24 is almost non-existent in mainstream movies.

Most movies are encoded with 48/24 or 96/24(rare for movies, more common for music).

Warner movies tend to be encoded with 48/16.

Where you do see higher sampling frequencies is with music titles. I believe the Divertimenti Blu-Ray disc has a 192kHz sampling frequency and 24-bit depth audio.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_truehd
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DTS-HD_Master_Audio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse_code_modulation

 

[ematthews]

I think I picked the wrong one

Looks like the 805 is not as good of a AVR as the 806 in terms of Video..
Did I pick the wrong one for my HT system......
The 805 looks much better in the audio department but fails in the other

Am I missing something in the pro reviews?
Looks like I should have gone with a 875......maybe

 

[sptrout]

Looks like the 805 is not as good of a AVR as the 806 in terms of Video..
Did I pick the wrong one for my HT system......
The 805 looks much better in the audio department but fails in the other

Am I missing something in the pro reviews?
Looks like I should have gone with a 875......maybe

The 806 may have a little better video section, but many users do not even use the video processing function of an AVR (use HDMI passed straight through). If you plan to do a lot of video upconverting then the 875/6 does have a better processor, but will the results be better than your TV?

For me, I do not use the 805 for video processing at all and would not regardless of the AVR's video capabilities.

 

[ematthews]

sorry for the stupid question but I am new to all this
Why wouldn't you use the video part of the receiver? I thought this was one reason to hook all the stuff into it.

 

[jostenmeat]

sorry for the stupid question but I am new to all this
Why wouldn't you use the video part of the receiver? I thought this was one reason to hook all the stuff into it.

We run HDMI to receivers to access lossless audio codecs. This is the main reason. Others do use VP from receivers. Some enjoy the convenience of using the receiver as a simple switcher (although some receivers may allow video calibration settings per HDMI input, whereas others don't).

If looking to deinterlace/upscale component connections, most particularly SDTV, I also agree to spend a few hundred more to get Reon HQV.

I haven't watched SD tv, or SD DVD since last year. Hi-def or bust.

 

[sptrout]

There are no stupid questions in HT! This hobby of ours can be very complicated, confusing, and everybody has their system design preferences.

I agree with “jostenmeat” that the primary reason to connect multiple devices to an AVR is for convenience, and to grab the audio for processing. I seldom watch SD programming either so there is no reason for me, and many others, to up-convert anything.

When I do watch something that is not in HD, my TV works fine converting this type of video to the TV’s native resolution of 1080p. At least good enough for me. Others may prefer a good external scaler, but I do not have a need for one.

One reason that you may not want to run everything through your AVR is that you may not want to power-up your entire HT system just to watch the news or similar audio-poor programming. To explain, this is how my system is configured:

Onkyo 805 AVR (connected via HDMI) to HDMI input #1 on my TV. Used to pass video from devices connected to the 805 to the TV.

Blu-ray player connected via HDMI to the 805 so it can grab and process the HD audio. The video passes straight through to the TV untouched.

DirecTV HR20 DVR connected via HDMI to my TV’s second HDMI input with a separate optical link from the DVR to the 805. This provides two audio options when I watch DirecTV; 1) just standard audio from the TV speakers (news, regular programming, etc.), and 2) 5.1 audio from the 805 for programs that have good sound tracks.

I also have an Oppo DVD Player in the system that is connected to another HDMI input on the 805. Since the Oppo output connector is DVI (which blocks digital audio), I must use a coaxial connection to get its audio to the 805. Oppo products are well known for their up-converting capability so there is no reason for the 805 to touch its video either.

Lastly, I have an optical connection from my TV’s audio output to the 805 so I can watch/listen to OTA TV through the 805, or just listen to the TV though its speakers.

I image this all sounds complicated, but it gives me many options whenever I turn on the system. If I just ran everything through the AVR my listening options would be greatly reduced. (It really helps to have a good universal remote!) In addition, I have no need for the 805 video processor at all. Other than for the on-screen setup menu, I really would not need a video section at all.

 

[ematthews]

Thanks for the answers...
If I have a blue ray player hooked up to the Rec and play NON bd DVD'S, would the 805 upconvert the signal to a better picture...or does the BD player do this?

 

[sptrout]

Thanks for the answers...
If I have a blue ray player hooked up to the Rec and play NON bd DVD'S, would the 805 upconvert the signal to a better picture...or does the BD player do this?

The Blu-ray player up converts to the one resolution it is programmed for; typically 1080p.

 

[ematthews]

So it seems to me that why have any video conversion in a receiver??

I have been able to understand most hobbys that I get into but this one just seems to miff me more and more...I need to read up a lot I guess before spending any more big dollars.

 

[sptrout]

So it seems to me that why have any video conversion in a receiver??

For most, there is no reason. My last three AVRs all had at least video switching capability and I never routed video through any of them with the exception of my current AVR and that is only to strip-off the HD audio from the Blu-ray player.

One other comment; the number of inputs into your TV may also affect how you want to interconnect your system.

 

[Chopin_Guy]

The only reason to utilize video upconversion on your AVR would be if you still have SD sources such as standard cable or an old DVD player. But even in those cases, depending on what kind of display you have---the display itself probably does just as good a job or better of scaling the source. So despite these possibilities, the applicable value of AVR video upconversion is still questionable...