D

drdawg

Junior Audioholic
I am looking at buying this reciever. The only issue I have is that it doesn't seem to have an IR input in the rear so that I can use my RF controller. The reason I am not looking to jump up to a lot better reciever is that honestly i don't think that i would notice the difference at this point. I am learning more and more about AV stuff but in my schooling and all that, i dropped the ball. Anyone have any ideas?

Thanks
 
lsiberian

lsiberian

Audioholic Overlord
I am looking at buying this reciever. The only issue I have is that it doesn't seem to have an IR input in the rear so that I can use my RF controller. The reason I am not looking to jump up to a lot better reciever is that honestly i don't think that i would notice the difference at this point. I am learning more and more about AV stuff but in my schooling and all that, i dropped the ball. Anyone have any ideas?

Thanks
Hey man. I suggest you look at spending a few dollars more and getting the 705. It has more power and the IR input you are looking for. Plus a really nice EQ setup and even a bi-wiring option if you go 5.1


Check out accessories4less. I got one shipped from them and am absolutely thrilled with it. They are going for 400.
 
M

MDS

Audioholic Spartan
The only issue I have is that it doesn't seem to have an IR input in the rear so that I can use my RF controller.
Having an IR input is a convenience but shouldn't be absolutely necessary. You should be able to use any IR emitter and place the eye somewhere near the receiver. Most RF basestations for universal remotes come with stick-on emitters but you can buy them separately if yours did not.
 
DonBattles

DonBattles

Audioholic
....

I have the 605 and I'm pretty happy with it and it too can be bi-wired as well. the only draw back or concern I have is this unit runs a little on the hot side. Nothing you could fry and egg on but hotter then my old Kenwood ever got, running the same speakers. Anyway a small fan would fix the heat issue other than that you would likely be good to go unless there is more than the IR issue.
 
Pyrrho

Pyrrho

Audioholic Ninja
Unless Onkyo has changed their ways, I personally would never buy one of their surround receivers. The reason has to do with the fact that with Onkyo there is only DPL II and DPL IIx, but no plain DPL. Why does this matter? Be patient, this will take a bit of explaining:

"Matrixing" is a troublesome word, in that it is used to describe two different processes. The kind of matrixing that is done with Dolby Pro Logic (and the center rear channel in Dolby Digital EX and the matrixed version of dts-ES) is where they take, in the studio, more channels than the finished product can contain, and mix them down in a special way to fit on those fewer channels. To make life simpler, let us confine our discussion for the moment to Dolby Pro Logic (hereafter referred to as DPL).

With DPL, they have 4 separate channels in the studio. The front right, front left, front center, and rear (also called "surround", which is why it is "S" in the quote below). These four channels are then mixed together down to two channels in a special way:

The L and R inputs go straight to the Lt and Rt outputs without modification. The C input is divided equally to Lt and Rt with a 3 dB level reduction (to maintain constant acoustic power in the mix). The S input is also divided equally between Lt and Rt, but it first undergoes three additional processing steps:
• Frequency bandlimiting from 100 Hz to 7 kHz.
• Encoding with a modified form of Dolby B-type noise reduction.
• Plus and minus 90-degree phase shifts are applied to create a 180 degree phase differential between the signal components feeding Lt and Rt.
From:
http://www.dolby.com/uploadedFiles/zz-_Shared_Assets/English_PDFs/Professional/208_Dolby_Surround_Pro_Logic_Decoder.pdf

Your DPL decoder at home reverses this process to give you 4 channel sound from a two channel source. This whole scheme was developed for theaters to use, so that there would only need to be two channels of sound on the film. There was not room on the film to easily add more channels, and also, this way, they could use existing projectors with two channel readers, which then feed the signal to a special decoder. But it also is perfect for two channel VCRs and 2 channel sound on analog TV.

Now, of course, they can do sound differently than when DPL was invented, and they can keep the channels totally separate from each other. Dolby Digital and dts (in their 5.1 versions) do just that.

Basically, the matrixed Dolby Digital EX and the matrixed dts-ES mix the rear center channel in the right and left rear in a manner similar to how the front center channel is mixed into the front right and left in DPL.

Now, finally, we can get to the other idea of matrixed sound, and that is where you make up channels that never existed in the original recording studio. This is what happens, for example, when you apply DPL IIx to an ordinary two channel CD. The recording studio did not have a mix for 7.1 sound; they had a two channel mix. The processing that is done at home in this case moves sound that was intended for the front right and left speakers to other places. Hence, it re-directs, or mis-directs, the sound to other places. Now, whether this creation of previously non-existing channels is a good thing or a bad one is a matter of preference. But it simply is not what was originally mixed, whereas the result of using DPL on a DPL encoded movie soundtrack is not creating any new channels that did not previously exist, but is only recreating what was in the mixing studio before it was forced onto only two channels.

So, if one uses DPL II or DPL IIx on a soundtrack that was originally encoded as DPL, one is re-directing, or mis-directing, sound to where it originally was not intended to be. Whether you like the result or not is what should determine whether you do this or not. But do not imagine that you are simply decoding the sound; you are processing it in a way that was not intended when it was originally recorded. It is like using "Hall" or "Studio" or some other DSP mode to process the sound in a way that is, hopefully, pleasant.

With Onkyo (unless they have changed their ways), you can only use DPL II or DPL IIx. So Onkyo receivers cannot properly decode DPL encoded sources. Most other brands give you a choice and allow you to decode DPL sources with DPL, or to process it with DPL II or DPL IIx, if one prefers.
 
A

audion3wb

Junior Audioholic
I am looking at buying this reciever. The only issue I have is that it doesn't seem to have an IR input in the rear so that I can use my RF controller. The reason I am not looking to jump up to a lot better reciever is that honestly i don't think that i would notice the difference at this point. I am learning more and more about AV stuff but in my schooling and all that, i dropped the ball. Anyone have any ideas?

Thanks
My question is what are you planning on doing with this receiver? Are you hoping to buy tower speakers and use this AVR or are you doing bookshelf speakers? Do you ever plan on upgrading your system to a seperate amp?

I will tell you that I decided against the sr605 when I was AVR shopping because it did not have pre amp outs so you cant use it with a seperate amp. I also find that my 705 runs hot as hell even though I'm not using it to power my speakers.

Take a look at yamaha and marantz for AVRs too, if they run cooler than the onkyo then that is a big +++ in my opinion.
 
lsiberian

lsiberian

Audioholic Overlord
My question is what are you planning on doing with this receiver? Are you hoping to buy tower speakers and use this AVR or are you doing bookshelf speakers? Do you ever plan on upgrading your system to a seperate amp?

I will tell you that I decided against the sr605 when I was AVR shopping because it did not have pre amp outs so you cant use it with a seperate amp. I also find that my 705 runs hot as hell even though I'm not using it to power my speakers.

Take a look at yamaha and marantz for AVRs too, if they run cooler than the onkyo then that is a big +++ in my opinion.
I don't have this problem, but my shelf has a lot of ventilation. If you do have this issue I suggest getting a fan to move the air out of the enclosed area. You could also have something wrong with your system. ::(
 
D

dontknowabouthd

Audiophyte
I have the Onkyo SR606 and love it. To get RF, I purchased the URC RFS200 PowerPak Bundle w/ MasterControl RF20, which use RF signals from the IR base. I have the receiver in a closed cabinet and it works great.
 
lsiberian

lsiberian

Audioholic Overlord
Unless Onkyo has changed their ways, I personally would never buy one of their surround receivers. The reason has to do with the fact that with Onkyo there is only DPL II and DPL IIx, but no plain DPL. Why does this matter? Be patient, this will take a bit of explaining:

"Matrixing" is a troublesome word, in that it is used to describe two different processes. The kind of matrixing that is done with Dolby Pro Logic (and the center rear channel in Dolby Digital EX and the matrixed version of dts-ES) is where they take, in the studio, more channels than the finished product can contain, and mix them down in a special way to fit on those fewer channels. To make life simpler, let us confine our discussion for the moment to Dolby Pro Logic (hereafter referred to as DPL).

With DPL, they have 4 separate channels in the studio. The front right, front left, front center, and rear (also called "surround", which is why it is "S" in the quote below). These four channels are then mixed together down to two channels in a special way:


From:
http://www.dolby.com/uploadedFiles/zz-_Shared_Assets/English_PDFs/Professional/208_Dolby_Surround_Pro_Logic_Decoder.pdf

Your DPL decoder at home reverses this process to give you 4 channel sound from a two channel source. This whole scheme was developed for theaters to use, so that there would only need to be two channels of sound on the film. There was not room on the film to easily add more channels, and also, this way, they could use existing projectors with two channel readers, which then feed the signal to a special decoder. But it also is perfect for two channel VCRs and 2 channel sound on analog TV.

Now, of course, they can do sound differently than when DPL was invented, and they can keep the channels totally separate from each other. Dolby Digital and dts (in their 5.1 versions) do just that.

Basically, the matrixed Dolby Digital EX and the matrixed dts-ES mix the rear center channel in the right and left rear in a manner similar to how the front center channel is mixed into the front right and left in DPL.

Now, finally, we can get to the other idea of matrixed sound, and that is where you make up channels that never existed in the original recording studio. This is what happens, for example, when you apply DPL IIx to an ordinary two channel CD. The recording studio did not have a mix for 7.1 sound; they had a two channel mix. The processing that is done at home in this case moves sound that was intended for the front right and left speakers to other places. Hence, it re-directs, or mis-directs, the sound to other places. Now, whether this creation of previously non-existing channels is a good thing or a bad one is a matter of preference. But it simply is not what was originally mixed, whereas the result of using DPL on a DPL encoded movie soundtrack is not creating any new channels that did not previously exist, but is only recreating what was in the mixing studio before it was forced onto only two channels.

So, if one uses DPL II or DPL IIx on a soundtrack that was originally encoded as DPL, one is re-directing, or mis-directing, sound to where it originally was not intended to be. Whether you like the result or not is what should determine whether you do this or not. But do not imagine that you are simply decoding the sound; you are processing it in a way that was not intended when it was originally recorded. It is like using "Hall" or "Studio" or some other DSP mode to process the sound in a way that is, hopefully, pleasant.

With Onkyo (unless they have changed their ways), you can only use DPL II or DPL IIx. So Onkyo receivers cannot properly decode DPL encoded sources. Most other brands give you a choice and allow you to decode DPL sources with DPL, or to process it with DPL II or DPL IIx, if one prefers.
Very informative, but I think most people buying these types of receivers aren't buying for DPL. We are buying these receivers to decode blu-rays and at worst dvd's. CD listening is usually done through stereo or one of the dsp's on my system. That being said. I don't think this is a deal breaker given the current price of refurbs. I mean 400 dollars for a receiver is a price at which one shouldn't complain about losing an audio format that can be replaced and isn't necessary with the proper speakers. Personally I have found the Onkyo to excel at movies and render audio extremely well. I also have found that pure audio mode is the best on this receiver for music. And it sounds much better than the DPL I have heard on my two previous systems. Given that those in this budget range are probably like me. I think they will find the lack of DPL to be a non-issue.

However if it's important to you then buy all means look else where, but I think the value of the Onkyo 705 makes it a great receiver for almost any home theater setup. Which is by all means it's primary purpose. If you are listening to music mostly I would suggest a different brand, but if movies are your poison go with this receiver.
 
Pyrrho

Pyrrho

Audioholic Ninja
Very informative, but I think most people buying these types of receivers aren't buying for DPL. We are buying these receivers to decode blu-rays and at worst dvd's. CD listening is usually done through stereo or one of the dsp's on my system. That being said. I don't think this is a deal breaker given the current price of refurbs. I mean 400 dollars for a receiver is a price at which one shouldn't complain about losing an audio format that can be replaced and isn't necessary with the proper speakers. Personally I have found the Onkyo to excel at movies and render audio extremely well. I also have found that pure audio mode is the best on this receiver for music. And it sounds much better than the DPL I have heard on my two previous systems. Given that those in this budget range are probably like me. I think they will find the lack of DPL to be a non-issue.

However if it's important to you then buy all means look else where, but I think the value of the Onkyo 705 makes it a great receiver for almost any home theater setup. Which is by all means it's primary purpose. If you are listening to music mostly I would suggest a different brand, but if movies are your poison go with this receiver.
There are plenty of brands that allow one a choice regarding DPL, DPL II, and DPL IIx. Yamaha is one of them, and they do not tend to cost any more than an Onkyo of otherwise similar performance. So there is absolutely no need to give up the proper decoding of DPL encoded DVDs, if one wants it. And if one decides that one prefers to process the signal with DPL II or DPL IIx instead, a Yamaha can do that, too. There is no advantage to omitting the option of properly decoding a very common format.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top