Receiver Assistance

[3db]

So if you agree that it is subjective, the original poster should go and listen for himself, instead of taking your words for it and assume that NAD sounds better to him. I am sure to many others, including me, Yamah and Denon sound just as good as the NAD. To some, Yamaha/Denon may even sound better. If he was to choose reliability and features, then based on your previous posts, Yamaha is the way to go.

As for the external amp thing, I just thought the poster may be interested in comparing the cost of a Yamaha (has a clean prepro section according Audioholics) plus a 2 channel amp and that of a NAD receiver that has a robust amp section.

Slow down slick. Since when do my ears set the standard around here for audio? Very presumptious of you don't ya think? I merely offered an opinion. Of course he should listen for himself. And he may draw the same conclusion as you liking the Denon and the Yamahas. Thats cool. I'm not taking this or making this a personal issue . I've seen people buy the NAD over the yamahas despite being warned about their QC problems because they liked the sound of the NAD better. So you see, not all people value the same thing. Its what makes the world such an interesting place.

I too am in the same boat as I want to ditch my Technics receiver for somthing better. And Yamaha and NAD are on my short list. And I too am trying to weigh the pro's and cons.. deciding whether or not to take the risk and go for NAD. I certainly can live with the Yamaha sound and be happy with it.

 

[Xsound]

In an all brick walled room with tile floor, and an

ancillary room that has glass walls, I am not sure that you will hear the subtle nuances of difference in most of the receivers you are looking at. The speakers you are driving will play a huge role in this set-up as well.

Given the acuostical issues you are probably going to be dealing with in that room, I would weight very heavy the features/price ratio. If you can get the features you want and save some bucks that can be put to treat the room, you will get better sound than spending the most money on the most sonically pure receiver and no room treatments.

I have not compared the new elites and the yammies, but I bought the previous generation elite (vsx-54) over the rx-v 2500. I liked both, but elite had a few features I prefered.

You really have some good receivers on that list.

 

[dave7002]

Elite versus Yamaha

That's great input regarding consideration of features that allow me to adjust for the room characteristics. Very reflective surfaces, rec's of some of been Elite over Yamaha to allow for adjustments, and the warmth of the Elite sound over the Yamaha.

 

[PENG]

Okay 3 dB, you’ve got a point. Of course we all have our opinions. I reacted to your first response that seemed to me like you were stating it as a fact instead of an opinion. Sorry about being presumptuous.

 

[Nick250]

Okay 3 dB, you’ve got a point. Of course we all have our opinions. I reacted to your first response that seemed to me like you were stating it as a fact instead of an opinion. Sorry about being presumptuous.

From my point of view 3 DB was most certainly stating it as fact, no need to appologize Peng IMO. Quote from 3 DB below:

"And like I said, if he values sonics over features, and want to take a chance on quality control, NAD beats the Yamahas and Denons."