Receiver that can run mains as Large with subs natively?

lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Hrm,

Looking at the 1080 vs the 5015, the 5015 has the bigger power supply, otherwise, similar features for my purpose. So maybe the 5015 is the better choice?

My mains are around 90db sensitive (3 x identical towers) and my surrounds are a bit less at 88~89db or so (bookshelf) and the room size is going to be what a double garage usually is, but finished as a living room (a 2nd living room dedicated to audio), so around 24 feet x 18~22 feet depending on finalized options and I'll wire the walls. So shouldn't be a challenging room, a rectangle, 8~12 feet listening position distance. So I don't think I need much power to get loud. 90db sensitivity near a wall, single speaker, 12 feet to listening position will hit around 101db SPL at 100 watts as a peak, so maybe a bit more with several speakers and some room gain. Plenty loud, though would like more headroom for transient peaks (not hitting THX spec unless I move seating closer). 8 feet puts me at 105db. But that's assuming a lot of things. So, I won't be able to push past that without going discreet on amps anyways and it would have to be at least 200 watts just to get +3db, so I'm not going to stress that.

Very best,
How did you compare power supply spec?
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Slumlord
Some will say go with the Marantz. Some will say go for the Yamaha. They have very different setup menu systems and music streaming service features. Those are a matter of preference. Think about the kind of power, audio/video processing and music playback formats and avenues you need for yourself and choose based on those needs.
I'd go with whichever features are more attractive. In this case I think I'd go with the 1080. The SR5015 only has Audyssey MultEQ XT, not XT32 like the higher models. XT32 is definitely the better version of Audyssey and I think Yamaha have the same level of YPAO in all of their models, right?
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
I'd go with whichever features are more attractive. In this case I think I'd go with the 1080. The SR5015 only has Audyssey MultEQ XT, not XT32 like the higher models. XT32 is definitely the better version of Audyssey and I think Yamaha have the same level of YPAO in all of their models, right?
There's more than one version of YPAO....
 
T

Trebdp83

Audioholic Ninja
I'd go for the 5015. It has newer features. Never say never. If one decides to get a new game console or enhance PC gaming and purchase a new TV, the Yamaha will be the weak link in the chain. On top of the power supply, the Marantz also features height virtualization from Dolby and DTS that can be used for 5.1 setups. This will enhance Dolby Atmos tracks from streaming services and DTS Virtual:X can be applied to non atmos tracks. There are a few audio features I find preferable in the Yamaha but they aren't enough to overcome what it lacks in video features. Now, throw in a significant price difference in the Yamaha's favor and I'd go that route.
 
MalVeauX

MalVeauX

Senior Audioholic
I'd go for the 5015. It has newer features. Never say never. If one decides to get a new game console or enhance PC gaming and purchase a new TV, the Yamaha will be the weak link in the chain. On top of the power supply, the Marantz also features height virtualization from Dolby and DTS that can be used for 5.1 setups. This will enhance Dolby Atmos tracks from streaming services and DTS Virtual:X can be applied to non atmos tracks. There are a few audio features I find preferable in the Yamaha but they aren't enough to overcome what it lacks in video features. Now, throw in a significant price difference in the Yamaha's favor and I'd go that route.
Both are refurb, 1080 is $888 and 5015 is $1099 or so. Not a huge difference, but $200+ is a 20% difference practically just to have those features.

Now that I see the 5015 has Aud XT and not 32, that is a big minus as I was only even considering a Marantz because of the access to the potentially better correction of Aud 32. So that swings me heavily back towards the 1080. I'm not trying to future proof at all, just crawl out of the ancient spot I'm in at the moment and maybe get pre-amp out. I've already written Atmos and stuff off for now, I won't bother until I can get an affordable receiver that can easily do 9+ channel atmos with the latest and not-glitch no-issue HDMI at the latest speeds, etc, since that's a big issue at the moment. I'll wait until whatever that stuff is, is sorted, to even consider going for a modern receiver at this point, versus something a few years old and refurb.

Very best,
 
MalVeauX

MalVeauX

Senior Audioholic
I'd go with whichever features are more attractive. In this case I think I'd go with the 1080. The SR5015 only has Audyssey MultEQ XT, not XT32 like the higher models. XT32 is definitely the better version of Audyssey and I think Yamaha have the same level of YPAO in all of their models, right?
I'm so behind on the latest AV tech that the most attrative part of these AVR's to me is simply the on-screen display for settings, pre-amp output and superior control over speaker setups and running full range, etc, with several subs. I've never even gotten into anything more than AC3 5.1 encoded content and stream almost everything in stereo (rural, limited internet) that I do stream. The only stuff that we do that uses modern anything is probably games on our Steam box (PC) but we're not playing the latest AAA titles, mostly couch coop games at 1080p.

Great point on the 5015's version of Aud, I thought it was 32 and it's not. That's one of the only reasons I even considered it was thinking it had 32.

The Yamaha 1080 has the YPAO RSC, Multipoint & Precision EQ, so the 2nd to highest level. I guess the best version (or latest rather?) is only in the 2080 or higher.

*******

Then again maybe a Denon X3700H for $1200 refurb is the way to go?

Very best,
 
MalVeauX

MalVeauX

Senior Audioholic
T

I seriously doubt that's the power supply spec for either avr. Probably just an unspecified power consumption figure as most manuals have. Try this https://www.audioholics.com/audio-amplifier/receiver-back-panel-power-ratings
Thanks, yea I'm not sure how they got that figure. Back in the day if the receiver was heavier and had more thermal handling for a big power supply, the better it was (at least, conventional wisdom was...).

Good link, thanks!

Very best,
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Thanks, yea I'm not sure how they got that figure. Back in the day if the receiver was heavier and had more thermal handling for a big power supply, the better it was (at least, conventional wisdom was...).

Good link, thanks!

Very best,
The article gives you one way some rate it, at the 1/8 power spec. I think they should be more transparent on the actual power supply spec, or like the article indicates, at least max amperage or something better to go on. Yes, they've cheaped out a bit on power supply/heat sink over the years, often better to aim at flagship models if that's a concern, but with pre-outs you can add more significant amplification as needed. Adding external cooling is another option.
 
T

Trebdp83

Audioholic Ninja
There isn't a bad receiver in that bunch. But, the Denon at $1,200 is the way to go.
 
MalVeauX

MalVeauX

Senior Audioholic
There isn't a bad receiver in that bunch. But, the Denon at $1,200 is the way to go.
Yea, the more I think about it, save a bit on a refurb 1080 at $888 compared to the X3700H at $1299 refurb, while more expensive, has a lot more usable features for me (more channels, better room correction algorithm).

Ultimately I don't want to flesh out a bunch of discrete amps. I did at one time. But the more I think about things, the more I'd rather just get really sensitive speakers instead long term. So probably would be better off putting upgrade money into that rather than a bunch of expensive heat makers here in Florida for my AC to fight with all day every day.

I'd love to get into some 96db sensitivity speakers at some point, give or take a tiny bit. That gives a ton more headroom for available power in a medium/large room.

Very best,
 
Last edited:
M

mtrot

Full Audioholic
Different manufacturers have different settings for using the SUB with FRONT set at LARGE. If using a Denon/Marantz with FRONT set at LARGE, the SUB must be set to LFE+MAIN. If using an Onkyo/Pioneer, the "DOUBLE BASS" setting must be turned ON with FRONT set at LARGE to send a signal to the SUB. If using a Yamaha with FRONT set at LARGE, the "EXTRA BASS" feature must be turned ON to get a signal to the SUB. Never use "EXTRA BASS" with FRONT speakers set at SMALL as it adds a bass boost to all channels compared to the low frequency duplication when FRONT speakers are set at LARGE.

Keep in mind that using ALL CHANNEL STEREO mode in a low/mid tier receiver while setting all speakers at LARGE will result in that receiver running quite hot. Also, if speakers are set to SMALL, changing the mode to PURE AUDIO, PURE DIRECT and DIRECT will result in two channel audio being sent to the FRONT speakers in full range regardless of the SMALL setting. However, a signal will not be sent to the SUB while playing a two channel signal in those modes. Though, a signal would be sent to the SUB in STEREO and ALL CHANNEL STEREO modes with speakers set at LARGE with the proper SUB/BASS setting in the receiver.
That does not seem to be the case with my Denon AVR-X5200. I'm now in the setup with my fronts set to Large, and in the Bass setup, Subwoofer Mode, I can select either LFE or LFE + Main.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
That does not seem to be the case with my Denon AVR-X5200. I'm now in the setup with my fronts set to Large, and in the Bass setup, Subwoofer Mode, I can select either LFE or LFE + Main.
Some models have a bit of an option in this respect for 2ch mode.
 
M

mtrot

Full Audioholic
Some models have a bit of an option in this respect for 2ch mode.
So, when I'm watching a 5.1 movie, that LFE+Main setting is not in effect?

I don't use the 5200 for two channel listening.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
So, when I'm watching a 5.1 movie, that LFE+Main setting is not in effect?
Not sure what you've setup but mine has one setting for 2ch mode, then different for multich. This setting also enables you to use sub in direct/pure direct mode. On mine (a 4520) I can set for 2ch mode use by first setting amp assign to 9.1/2 ch front mode, then it opens up a separate 2ch playback menu in speakers/manual setup. Would think yours is similar.

ps But if you never listen in 2ch mode it would be irrelevant....
 
Last edited:
M

mtrot

Full Audioholic
Not sure what you've setup but mine has one setting for 2ch mode, then different for multich. This setting also enables you to use sub in direct/pure direct mode. On mine (a 4520) I can set for 2ch mode use by first setting amp assign to 9.1/2 ch front mode, then it opens up a separate 2ch playback menu in speakers/manual setup. Would think yours is similar.

ps But if you never listen in 2ch mode it would be irrelevant....
Okay, I see that my Amp Assign is set to 7.1ch+ZONE2/3-MONO. I have a 5.1 system right now and wasn't sure which option to choose.

I wouldn't mind the LFE+Main setting to be in effect for movies. Why wouldn't it be? There is no LFE track in two channel music, anyway.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Okay, I see that my Amp Assign is set to 7.1ch+ZONE2/3-MONO. I have a 5.1 system right now and wasn't sure which option to choose.

I wouldn't mind the LFE+Main setting to be in effect for movies. Why wouldn't it be? There is no LFE track in two channel music, anyway.
Do you have all those things needed for your amp assigment? It could eliminate other choices. LFE+Main is fairly easy to implement on a case-by-case basis, altho you would have to change it manually when you don't want to use it for something else. Don't confuse LFE and bass management....
 
newsletter

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