receiver's

[zepaholic]

<font color='#000000'>I currently have a Yamaha rx-v1300 and I will be upgrading soon. I have it down to 3 choices, sunfire ultimate receiver,denon 5803 upgraded(ces 2004), or the yamaha z9. Since my knowledge is limited I need help. Wich is the all around winner.

</font>

 

[Yamahaluver]

<font color='#0000FF'>Hi,

The Z-9 is a formidable unit but it would need extra speakers and prefferably a huge toom, why not bring in the RXV-1400/2400 in this equation, they are exceptionaly good values and maybe with the money left you can also think of upgrading your speakers.</font>

 

[Audioholics]

<font color='#000080'>Both the Yamaha and Denon are excellent choices.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>When I think about it I'm not sure I need 9 channels. I'm more interested in the amps of these units, and I see where nobody mentioned the sunfire any reason for that.

</font>

 

[Audioholic]

<font color='#000000'>i vote for either Z-9 or the RXV-2400 witch I recon is a top choice and best value for money.

</font>

 

[zepaholic]

<font color='#000000'>Does anyone have an opinion on the Sunfire Ultimate Receiver. I heard it has the best amp,does anybody know the real poop on the amp. &nbsp;

</font>

 

[aarond]

<font color='#000000'>check out the review of the theater grand III on the home page</font>

 

[simplman63]

<font color='#000000'>When last I shopped for a new reciever, I read every review I could and all the tech specs I could lay my hands on for a couple of months. I learned that the Yamaha rxv-2400 and the Denon 5803 are incredible units. I firmly believe you will be happy with either one. I have owned more Denon equipment than Yamaha but have always been perfectly satified with both. I was leaning toward the denon 5803 when I got a great deal on a B&amp;K REF.50 and a Serbourn 7/2100 so I went with separates for about the same money as either reciever you mentioned. Explore all your options.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Zep,

If I could offer any advice since I just went through this myself, don't be brand-centric. I had a Yamaha RX-V2092 which I wanted to replace after several years and without comparison, immediately jumped to Yamaha only because of the brand. I am not knocking Yamaha and many folks have given the 1400/2400 praise but I bought a 2400 and was not really moved by it as others proclaim it.

The Z9 is an awaesome unit from what I've heard but I can't speak from experience since it was out of my budget. It is clearly in a different class than the 2400.

I solicited advice as you did and NAD was one of the options proposed. Fortunately I was able to return the 2400 and my NAD dealer let me bring a T763 home to try out with my Paradigms. It sold it'self for me! I was truely moved. I ended up going with the NAD T773 since I could swing the extra bucks.

There are a lot of good brands and all I'm saying from my hard lesson is let your ears against your budget be your decision maker.

Of course, the speaker brand matched up with the receiver brand is another very important factor.

Just my 2 cents for what it's worth. Good luck.</font>

 

[gene]

<font color='#000000'>JDG;

The NAD T773 is in a different price &amp; performance class than the Yamaha RX-V2400. &nbsp;It is likely you preferred the much meatier amp section of the NAD to the RX-V2400. &nbsp;I think a more fair comparison would be the NAD to a RX-Z1 IMO.

NAD definately makes great sounding, easy to use gear. &nbsp;Sounds like you made a good decision.</font>

 

[stiletto pat]

<font color='#000000'>Gene,

As long as your at it, could you provide you $0.02 worth on the B&amp;K line, such as the AVR-507 AV Receiver? &nbsp;I'm starting to see some more favorable pricing on these units, and am considering them, along with the Denon, Yamaha and Integra. &nbsp;Your thoughts, please??? &nbsp;

</font>

 

[JDG]

<font color='#000000'>Gene,

You are absolutely right and I totally agree. The thing is if you line up ONLY the manufacturers spec's and features they should be in the ballpark as comparison models.

I realize the power ratings on many makes are skewed versus NAD who is more accurate and conservative with their ratings. I honestly believe component differences are why the price delta is there between the models but this is just an opinion.

I have a pretty large room (26' x 16') so I found myself turning the volume up on the 2400 more and more and more and never getting the sound I was satisfied with that I could &quot;feel&quot; surround me. Aside from the sound quality from NAD which is sweet, I think it was power also. So I look at the RX-V2400 rated at 120 watts x 7 and the NAD T773 at 110w x 7 and it didn't add up. Then I learned of the ratings game manufacturers use and it made perfect sense.

However, I think the Z1 is like $2700 MSRP or in that ballpark isn't it? That is why I really didn't consider it in the mix. My wife was ready to shoot me as it was stepping up to the T773.

In the end IMO, comparing the T763 or the T773 to the 1400/2400 is not fair. But if one purely looks at the specs. they can be fooled into thinking they should line up.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>check out the B &amp; K AVR-507 on www.bkcomp.com. It is an awesome reciever. It's odd to me that when I see these forums, all anyone talks about are the yamahas, denons, etc. B &amp; K products compared to the others is like comparing acura to honda or audi to volkwagon. Yes, B&amp;K is more expensive, but do yourself a favor and at least check it out. Good luck</font>

 

[gene]

<font color='#000000'>Hi Mike;

B&amp;K receivers do look nice and are certainly compariblein many aspects to flagship receivers from the big brands previously mentioned. &nbsp;For some reason B&amp;K seems reluctant in having online audio websites review their products. &nbsp;We have requested on more than one occassion and received no reply.</font>

 

[JAB]

<font color='#000000'>B &amp; K is certainly an A/V receiver that deserves a close look. They are built for the music lover with the added bonus of excellent surround sound. Good old stereo playback is very important to me (in vinyl and CD), and if a receiver sounds terrific in this mode, the surround sound mode is generally great, too.

The Z9 to my ears sounds great and it is going to get interesting when reveiwers compare it to the Denon AVR 5803 which will surely happen.

I agree there is other great sounding moderately price receivers out there such as B&amp;K, NAD, Arcam, Rotel, etc.. I am currenty investigating a NAD T773 &amp; 763 for a second sound room. Could you NAD owner's please advise me if the models listed have an M/M, M/C phono input. If not, I guess I will have to invest in an add-on NAD phono amp. Still in love with viny!!

Gene, it's to bad B&amp;K won't send you review samples. Perhaps they read your negative Sunfire review and positive Yamaha and Denon reviews and are scared!

I remember back when nobody would send review samples to Harry Pearson of The Absolute Sound (stereo equipment manufacturers were terrified of him and J.Gordon Holt of Stereophile, who used a new method to evaluate equipment - their ears! - not juiced-up factory provided specs), so anything he couldn't afford to buy off the shelf (which was his favorite method), he appealed to friends and subscribers to lend &nbsp;their own personal stereo equipment for reviews!!

Al</font>

 

[goodman]

<font color='#000000'>I grappled with the same question for several months, before choosing the AVR-5803. &nbsp;To me the quality of the sound was paramount and the Denon apparently had the best DACs (See Gene's review of the AVR-5803 on this web site) and the best sound. &nbsp;Also upconversion of video was important to me, because I did not want to run multiple cables through the ceiling to my projector. &nbsp;You can buy an AVR-5803 for about $2,900 online, as I did, as long as you're willing to deal with the insecurity of purchasing from a nonfranchised dealer.
&nbsp; &nbsp; I have had my AVR-5803 for about six months. &nbsp;It is extremely quiet and performs flawlessly. &nbsp;It is a little confusing to set-up. &nbsp;There is a learning period, but when something goes wrong, it's because I pushed the wrong button, not because there's anything wrong with the receiver.
&nbsp; &nbsp; It's worth the money and is highly recommended.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>&quot;I have had my AVR-5803 for about six months. &nbsp;It is extremely quiet&quot;

&quot;quiet&quot;

</font>

 

[petermwilson]

<font color='#000000'>Hi,
Obviously when considering one of the flagship recievers the goal is to try and get the best video and audio handeling in a 1 box solution.

If your interested in the 2 new hirez music options you've already read reviews of combi players that suggest that a given player is superior in one format or the other.

While the rest of the world is deciding on their digitailia, if you decided to go the Denon 5803 route you could experiment with both formats by picking up a couple of inexpensive mltidisk players which have been discontinued as the Denon is the only reciever with 2 sets of analogues as well as dolby headphone which is surprisingly effective. (some of the others may have DH).

I also find the Pure Direct mode which shuts down all non audio functions is the mode that professional reviewers use when they write that the 5803 can be compared to the highest end separates.

Peter m.</font>

 

[S.R. Johnson]

<font color='#000000'>Hey dont forget about Marantz receivers.</font>

 

[brochini]

<font color='#000000'>In the end IMO, comparing the T763 or the T773 to the 1400/2400 is not fair. But if one purely looks at the specs. they can be fooled into thinking they should line up.
********************************************
JDG/gene,
As NAD quotes, meaningless &quot;brochure power&quot; can fool. I'm in the verge of choosing T773/T763 (aware of the long tread 'humm/hiss issue),  until I learn there is Rotel 1067/1065 and H/K 7300 to consider. Can you please line these up to one another so I could decide. Of course no 'humm' to the one you recommend.</font>