Recommendations for Stereo Receiver or Integrated Amp?

[PearlcorderS701]

Great! If your that impressed with it right from the very start, it is probably going to be fine later down the road. If you keep having to convince yourself that the stuff you bought is great when your really not quite sure, that's were the problems come in.

I was VERY impressed with this unit's power right off the bat and right out of the box -- and it wasn't because I was "telling" myself to like it; this receiver was shaking the walls connected to my R20's and it was seriously clean.

I'm not sure what "IntelliVolume" is, but it sounds like one of those "bells and whistles" type of thing that would normally put a scowl across this audio conservatives face. I wouldn't be surprised if the (probably) better A-9555 doesn't have (or need) any such feature.

Onkyo's "IntelliVolume" is most certainly not a bell or whistle; they incorporate this feature in their Integra line as well, and it's meant to level off the different input signals going into a processor or receiver so they're all at the relatively same volume at a certain value -- in other words, if your CD player is noticeably louder at the same volume value on the display as, say, your DVD player, you can compensate with IntelliVolume.

However, many Onkyo owners have used IntelliVolume the way I do, which is to kind of implement it as though it were a power amp's sensitivity input control -- by bringing up a given input's IntelliVolume value, that device will sound noticeably louder at a lower volume number on the display, as if the amp inside is "kicking" without much strain. It's really effective, and I'm saying that from many years of experience using this company's products, and it's not a useless bell or whistle.

What you want in a rack for a stereo system is something vertical that you could put a TT on top (if you plan on getting one) and something that is open on all sides so you can easily access and/or clean your components. This is also important for ventilation. I remember putting my old big Carver amp inside a stuffy rack with glass doors and the poor things warning lights were flashing signifying that it was overheating! I took off the stupid glass doors and there were no more problems.

Those confining, claustrophobic old school racks with the glass doors/shelves are for people who care more about furniture and looks rather then the performance of their audio components.

I happen to like those old school racks with the closing glass doors; right now, I'm running the two channel system on an open-shelved Bell'O stand (what they call an "Audio Tower") but it just looks SO sloppy and there's not much wire management. Here's what it looks like, but mine is in SILVER, not black:

http://www.bello.com/index.php?partition=show_product&prod_id=288&categ_id=41

You see, it's open on all sides, but you can't conceal much of the damn wiring, and it just looks cheap no matter where we place it; can you suggest some links for some good rack suppliers, or stand suppliers?

Oh, as for a top shelf for a TT, the Bell'o has that, as I was planning on placing the table on the very top shelf of this stand.

I know you mentioned having problems with the Sanus wooden speaker stands, but I recently bought their expandable "Euro Rack" system for AudioAdviser.com. I got the vertical 5-shelf rack for $279.00 (free shipping), which was very easy to put together, and came neatly packed in a surprisingly small box.

You can start out with a 3-shelf version for $179.99, and had a shelf separately later on as it suits your needs. It's a pretty good rack for the money, and looks nice too. It also comes with both adjustable spiked and flat sliding feet and a cable management system which is just a hole running through the middle of the back of each shelf, but helps to keep your spaghetti straight.

Cable management is something I have a TERRIBLE time with, and I'm trying to find an effective solution of some kind -- I have seen those Sanus expandable stands for gear though and I might try those out.

A better, but more expensive choice would be the SolidSteel 3-Series, which is made in Italy and is $499 for the 4-shelf version. Unquestionably better built then the Sanus, it's shelves rest on isolated cones attached to the steel frame itself.

Of course, you can spend more than your entire system on a rack if you wanted to, but these examples offers some of that "middle of the road truth" in terms of quality and price that I've mentioned before.

Thanks very much for these leads; is the SolidSteel part of the Sanus line -- or is this a different manufacturer altogether?

Yes. Believe it or not, there have actually been recent periods of my life where I didn't own a TV at all. TV today is mostly a mind-numbing, brainwashing waste of time and I didn't miss it at all once it was gone. The only reason I have one now is because one was given to me for free, plus I got free digital over the air broadcasting. No matter what happens, I will NEVER pay another dime for cable again!

Well, I TOTALLY agree that cable is a raping, life-sucking parasite of an operation that drains the essence out of human beings on a daily basis...and we PAY for this. I HATE cable's operations. And I agree most of TV is a brainwashing attempt to have us stare blankly at a screen feeding us mindless, senseless junk in the token of Twilight and the Vampire Diaries...99 percent of on-air TV just sucks, and you have to be a tweenager stoned and drunk to "get" what is going on during these broadcasts. No one else stands a CHANCE of relating to the material. But I will never give up on home theater, and it's a hobby which allows me to enjoy cinema of my choosing whenever I like. There's nothing like kicking back and letting a wild action flick unfold through five channels around you.

And 2-channel stereo sound from some movies can be pretty excellent. I remember watching Logan's Run on DVD and there was this scene where these birds were chirping all around in the background and you could have SWORE they were in the same room with you. And this from a cheesy 70's movie on top of that. I wonder what these same effects would have been like on a good surround system!

Oh, you REALLY need to experience films in TRUE five channel surround (plus the sub, or .1 LFE channel) -- I am sure many films sound good in a psuedo stereo matrix, or in straight stereo, but there's nothing like an equilaterally laid out surround array.

Did I mention getting drunk and dropping my equipment before? I thought this was the only time?

I thought you had mentioned it another time -- if not you, then someone else on here (or maybe it was on the Polk forums) certainly did. If it wasn't you, my apologies...

Actually, I only dropped my audio equipment once when drunk. I brought down my NAD C325 BEE integrated amp and cheap Sony SACD carousel downstairs to my friends apartment to play some SACD discs. One the way back up, I dropped them! They still worked ok, but had paint from the wall and a few scuffs to the front from the fall.

To add insult to injury, we compared the NAD to my friends beat up, old Sony integrated amp from the late 80's, and the Sony was more powerful and seemed to sound better than my new, overly hyped NAD unit I was duped into buying. My friend cares little for high end audio, and was not biased at all towards his unit, which he got for next to nothing. But even he noticed a difference in favor of the Sony, and I had to admit I did too.

Needless to say, the NAD was sold on ebay not long after, minor damage and all. Chalk it up to yet another episode of over hyped, bad audio advice!

I think it was you, as I remember that story vaguely...

I occasionally see them offered as demo models on MusicDirect or Elusivedisc for far less then the MSRP. Right now MusicDirect has the pair of Marantz KI-Pearl Series Special Edition Integrated amp/SACD player units for $4,995.

Hmmmmm....still not chump change, though...

This is still mega-expensive, but going by the MSRP prices on Marantz' website, buying these units separately would cost $6,600!

Yeah, that's what I'm sayin'...Jesus H. Christ on a saltine cracker, that line IS overpriced...

I'm glad everything is working out for you with this purchase, but if you can imagine, that A-9555 would probably be better even still.

Maybe, but if anything it would have been a MINISCULE improvement, if that; this receiver really is impressive for its price, size and reputation amongst separates devotees -- what I mean is, the way audiophiles pooh-pooh the stereo receiver at this price point...the receiver sounds impressive given those reputations.

 

[Cristofori]

I'm tempted to begin buying the newly-minted "heavy gram" vinyl that's been coming out on classic LP reissues...the local BB by me has some albums I'd pick up like Boston's debut, The Eagles' Hotel California, NWA's Straight Outta Compton, Def Leppard's Pyromania...these are awesome LPs.

It is tempting, they make them look so good don't they? But make sure the LP's you buy are from the original analog masters. This is usually (but not always) stated on the front cover sticker somewhere.

Unless your a collector, it makes little sense to buy an LP at those prices if they are derived from digital masters, and many of today's LP's are. Might as well just get the CD instead.

It also heavily depends on the equipment/cart and turntable being used.

No, it mainly depends on the source material itself, especially vinyl. Trust me. Most (not all) 45 reissues I've heard have sounded laughably bad compared to the originals, even some of the import pressings I heard were bad. A great TT set up can certainly help, but you ultimately "can't polish a turd" as the saying goes.

It is said that speakers are the most important link in the audio chain, and this is almost true, but I'd say the number one link is the source your using itself.

Many (not all) original 45's will have deeply cut grooves that look to have a somewhat dull surface sheen compared to the reissues, but you can better tell by the label.

When I'm talking reissues here, I'm talking the cheaper single pressings done by the original labels themselves, not the occasional odd, expensive boxed set or special limited editions. I've never owned any of these, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were still worse then the originals.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

It is tempting, they make them look so good don't they? But make sure the LP's you buy are from the original analog masters. This is usually (but not always) stated on the front cover sticker somewhere.

Unless your a collector, it makes little sense to buy an LP at those prices if they are derived from digital masters, and many of today's LP's are. Might as well just get the CD instead.

Yeah, they do make them look good. I'll double check on those analog master labels; thanks for the heads up.

Many of these aforementioned LPs I already have on poor-condition LP or on CD; these new "audiophile quality" vinyl releases were very interesting and tempted me to replace the versions I already have...but if what you're saying is true, there is absolutely no sense to buy the LPs if they're derived from a digital master; it would be like spinning the CD version on your turntable, just in vinyl form...

No, it mainly depends on the source material itself, especially vinyl. Trust me. Most (not all) 45 reissues I've heard have sounded laughably bad compared to the originals, even some of the import pressings I heard were bad. A great TT set up can certainly help, but you ultimately "can't polish a turd" as the saying goes.

It is said that speakers are the most important link in the audio chain, and this is almost true, but I'd say the number one link is the source your using itself.

Many (not all) original 45's will have deeply cut grooves that look to have a somewhat dull surface sheen compared to the reissues, but you can better tell by the label.

When I'm talking reissues here, I'm talking the cheaper single pressings done by the original labels themselves, not the occasional odd, expensive boxed set or special limited editions. I've never owned any of these, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were still worse then the originals.

Granted...but there still needs to be an initial investment in a good cart and table...

 

[Cristofori]

Onkyo's "IntelliVolume" is most certainly not a bell or whistle; they incorporate this feature in their Integra line as well, and it's meant to level off the different input signals going into a processor or receiver so they're all at the relatively same volume at a certain value -- in other words, if your CD player is noticeably louder at the same volume value on the display as, say, your DVD player, you can compensate with IntelliVolume.

However, many Onkyo owners have used IntelliVolume the way I do, which is to kind of implement it as though it were a power amp's sensitivity input control -- by bringing up a given input's IntelliVolume value, that device will sound noticeably louder at a lower volume number on the display, as if the amp inside is "kicking" without much strain. It's really effective, and I'm saying that from many years of experience using this company's products, and it's not a useless bell or whistle.

I still don't quite understand, but it sounds like some kind of advanced "Loudness" control, a feature common on older receivers for adding some oomph to your music at low listening levels. If you find it useful then great, but I've seemed to been able to survive just fine without such things. I just turn it on, turn it up and go.

I happen to like those old school racks with the closing glass doors;

They can look nice, but not the best choice for audio equipment. Ever try to move and/or get behind a heavy, fully enclosed rack to get to the back of your equipment? It sucks, not to mention the ventilation/heat problems. And God help you if you had one of the kind with the TV in it.

You will never see such a rack in photos of serious audio systems.

can you suggest some links for some good rack suppliers, or stand suppliers

Audioadviser.com has the best quality vs. price ratio on audio racks and speaker stands that I currently know about. http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SAKNEUII They have free shipping, excellent customer service, and won't hassle you if you need to return something. They are on a par with Crutchfield, except they offer more better quality equipment, including a nice selection of TT's.

Cable management is something I have a TERRIBLE time with, and I'm trying to find an effective solution of some kind -- I have seen those Sanus expandable stands for gear though and I might try those out.

My Sanus rack has a hole in the middle of each shelf and has room for the main power cables, plus an antenna/ground wire (assuming you are using five components), but the inner-connects you will still have to manage in some way if you wish. I use pieces of bendable black plastic tubing split down the middle and stuff the cables in there.

Thanks very much for these leads; is the SolidSteel part of the Sanus line -- or is this a different manufacturer altogether?

No, Solidsteel is a different brand available at Musicdirect.com http://www.musicdirect.com/product/52228 They are a higher priced "audiophile" store but sometimes have good deals. During the spring (right now) they usually have good sales. This rack is now on sale for $399 instead of the $499 I quoted earlier. If this rack could be found elsewhere, it would probably be cheaper. But I haven't seen it.

This is the rack I would have got if I had the money, but like you I was on a budget. However, my Sanus rack is pretty good, and a big needed improvement and change over my 15 year old rack. I wouldn't recommend this if you had seriously heavy audio gear, but if works just fine for normal stuff.

Well, I TOTALLY agree that cable is a raping, life-sucking parasite of an operation that drains the essence out of human beings on a daily basis...and we PAY for this. I HATE cable's operations. And I agree most of TV is a brainwashing attempt to have us stare blankly at a screen feeding us mindless, senseless junk in the token of Twilight and the Vampire Diaries...99 percent of on-air TV just sucks, and you have to be a tweenager stoned and drunk to "get" what is going on during these broadcasts. No one else stands a CHANCE of relating to the material. But I will never give up on home theater, and it's a hobby which allows me to enjoy cinema of my choosing whenever I like. There's nothing like kicking back and letting a wild action flick unfold through five channels around you.

Actually, it's not that hard to relate to today's programing. It seems like there is all this really cool, hip and bizarre stuff out there, but I've noticed that everything these days seems to have some kind of an agenda or message, whether political, multi-cultural, feminist or otherwise. This is sometimes subtly masked, sometimes not. But it's there. Either that, or it's just a bunch of gloomy, dark negative stuff or silly shallow nonsense, and the masses are just eagerly sucking it all up.

Nothing can just be plain entertaining or fun anymore like it used to be. This is why I don't like to watch TV that much. I don't like to have my mind toyed with. Not to mention all the intelligence insulting commercials.

Your right about the movie/film aspect of it, which is why I realized I still want a TV. There are a lot of great DVD's, tapes and stuff to watch that you can buy or find used. This way you can control what you watch, rather than the TV controlling you. How many times have we sat there mindlessly wasting time flipping through channels on the TV and not really watching or learning anything?

Oh, you REALLY need to experience films in TRUE five channel surround (plus the sub, or .1 LFE channel) -- I am sure many films sound good in a psuedo stereo matrix, or in straight stereo, but there's nothing like an equilaterally laid out surround array.

I've thought about it in the past, but I was never impressed with ANY of the multi-channel set ups people I knew had that I've heard. I've found that few people know how to set them up right, and it seems you need a college degree to do so.

There is also the matter of cost and practicality. I'd rather pool my resources into really great 2-channel gear than a mediocre multi-channel one, and I don't like the idea of dealing with setting up surrounds, the wiring, and all that pain in the rear stuff. And last but not least, I simply don't believe such a system is the best choice for music, which is the most important to me. Listening to TV/Film through high quality 2-channel is a good compromise for me. Right now, my TV isn't even hooked up to my amp, as there is no room for it with the way that I want my set up to be. It is off to the side and I'm just (gasp!) listening to it through the crappy built in speakers!

Yeah, that's what I'm sayin'...Jesus H. Christ on a saltine cracker, that line IS overpriced...

Yes, over priced, but awesome! The Build quality, photos, specs, and reviews of these units is nothing short of stellar!

Remember though that at least $1500 of that price your paying is because this is a "Limited Ken Ishiwata Edition". As I said... for serious (and wealthy) Marantz fans and collectors only!

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I still don't quite understand, but it sounds like some kind of advanced "Loudness" control, a feature common on older receivers for adding some oomph to your music at low listening levels. If you find it useful then great, but I've seemed to been able to survive just fine without such things. I just turn it on, turn it up and go.

No, Cris -- this is NOTHING like a "Loudness" control; I can't explain it any better than I have been. It's an INPUT LEVELING feature which allows each input to play at the same volume given the same value.

They can look nice, but not the best choice for audio equipment. Ever try to move and/or get behind a heavy, fully enclosed rack to get to the back of your equipment? It sucks, not to mention the ventilation/heat problems. And God help you if you had one of the kind with the TV in it.

I am using one right now in my HT room -- a GIANT wall unit system with my 50" rear projection set in it, too.

Getting behind these things to handle wiring requires three years as a contortionist for Ringling Brothers. But sometimes, a wall just NEEDS one.

You will never see such a rack in photos of serious audio systems.

Which ones would you see photos of?

Audioadviser.com has the best quality vs. price ratio on audio racks and speaker stands that I currently know about. http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=SAKNEUII They have free shipping, excellent customer service, and won't hassle you if you need to return something. They are on a par with Crutchfield, except they offer more better quality equipment, including a nice selection of TT's.

I'll check that out.

My Sanus rack has a hole in the middle of each shelf and has room for the main power cables, plus an antenna/ground wire (assuming you are using five components), but the inner-connects you will still have to manage in some way if you wish. I use pieces of bendable black plastic tubing split down the middle and stuff the cables in there.

That's the only thing I don't like about open-shelved designs is the fact that you can't hide EVERY friggin' cable...

Did you see the link to the Bell'O stand I'm using now?

No, Solidsteel is a different brand available at Musicdirect.com http://www.musicdirect.com/product/52228 They are a higher priced "audiophile" store but sometimes have good deals. During the spring (right now) they usually have good sales. This rack is now on sale for $399 instead of the $499 I quoted earlier. If this rack could be found elsewhere, it would probably be cheaper. But I haven't seen it.

This is the rack I would have got if I had the money, but like you I was on a budget. However, my Sanus rack is pretty good, and a big needed improvement and change over my 15 year old rack. I wouldn't recommend this if you had seriously heavy audio gear, but if works just fine for normal stuff.

Again, I'll have to check this out.

Actually, it's not that hard to relate to today's programing. It seems like there is all this really cool, hip and bizarre stuff out there, but I've noticed that everything these days seems to have some kind of an agenda or message, whether political, multi-cultural, feminist or otherwise. This is sometimes subtly masked, sometimes not. But it's there. Either that, or it's just a bunch of gloomy, dark negative stuff or silly shallow nonsense, and the masses are just eagerly sucking it all up.

Nothing can just be plain entertaining or fun anymore like it used to be. This is why I don't like to watch TV that much. I don't like to have my mind toyed with. Not to mention all the intelligence insulting commercials.

Well, I surely don't relate to the current crop of mindless, senseless, "my-daddy-gives-me-everything-because-I-live-in-Beverly-Hills-90210-and-therefore-I-can-text-and-talk-on-my-cell-in-movie-theaters-even-though-it's-totally-disrespectful-of-others" demorgraphic that all entertainment today caters to. I surely don't, and never will.

Your right about the movie/film aspect of it, which is why I realized I still want a TV. There are a lot of great DVD's, tapes and stuff to watch that you can buy or find used. This way you can control what you watch, rather than the TV controlling you. How many times have we sat there mindlessly wasting time flipping through channels on the TV and not really watching or learning anything?

Indeed. Exactly why I have a home theater/media room setup, so I can watch classic cinema -- or WHATEVER I want when I want.

I've thought about it in the past, but I was never impressed with ANY of the multi-channel set ups people I knew had that I've heard. I've found that few people know how to set them up right, and it seems you need a college degree to do so.

There is also the matter of cost and practicality. I'd rather pool my resources into really great 2-channel gear than a mediocre multi-channel one, and I don't like the idea of dealing with setting up surrounds, the wiring, and all that pain in the rear stuff. And last but not least, I simply don't believe such a system is the best choice for music, which is the most important to me. Listening to TV/Film through high quality 2-channel is a good compromise for me. Right now, my TV isn't even hooked up to my amp, as there is no room for it with the way that I want my set up to be. It is off to the side and I'm just (gasp!) listening to it through the crappy built in speakers!

Trust me, I know it can seem daunting and overbearing, but once you get the hang of surround installation and channel calibration, there's nothing to it -- if you ever get a surround system, I can walk you though each step of what you need to do if you'd like.

Yes, over priced, but awesome! The Build quality, photos, specs, and reviews of these units is nothing short of stellar!

Remember though that at least $1500 of that price your paying is because this is a "Limited Ken Ishiwata Edition". As I said... for serious (and wealthy) Marantz fans and collectors only!

Yes, indeed.

 

[anamorphic96]

Cristofori,

All the Intellivolume function on the Onkyo is doing is taking the input voltage from the various sources and matching them. Most devices output at 2volts however some devices such as NAD CD players output at 2.2 volts. This can cause a noticeable volume difference. So the Onkyo gives the owner the option of leveling these voltages to keep the volume the same between inputs. That's all this function does.

In no way shape or form is this a loudness control.

Hope this clears things up.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Cristofori,

All the Intellivolume function on the Onkyo is doing is taking the input voltage from the various sources and matching them. Most devices output at 2volts however some devices such as NAD CD players output at 2.2 volts. This can cause a noticeable volume difference. So the Onkyo gives the owner the option of leveling these voltages to keep the volume the same between inputs. That's all this function does.

In no way shape or form is this a loudness control.

Hope this clears things up.

I tried to explain just that to him...

Although, some people use it as I do, which is as a kind of "amp input sensitivity" control (like on a power amp) whereby you can "crank up" the output of a certain device connected through whatever Onkyo product you're working with.

It is, as I stated to him, most certainly not a loudness function.

 

[techenvy]

i cant decide on it or the yamaha rs 700 or rx 797 or marantz 8004 or that outlaw 2150?

which do you all prefer

mainly looking to a/b switch via remote so im thinking yamaha but onkyo sounds good to me , right now im using the old 8511 and it sounds great.

any thoughts

 

[PearlcorderS701]

i cant decide on it or the yamaha rs 700 or rx 797 or marantz 8004 or that outlaw 2150?

which do you all prefer

mainly looking to a/b switch via remote so im thinking yamaha but onkyo sounds good to me , right now im using the old 8511 and it sounds great.

any thoughts

Wow, way to dig up this old thread, tech!

Are these Yamahas and Marantzes you mention stereo receivers or integrated amps? I know the Outlaw is a stereo receiver, no?

If you like the sound of the 8511, then I can honestly recommend the new 8555 with 100 watts X 2, which is what I bought after the discussions in this thread...this thing is a musical powerhouse, and really sounds like an integrated amp with a tuner that happens to be built in...the build quality is downright ridiculously overbuilt especially considering the retail price these go for, and the volume knob on the all-aluminum front panel in particular is a real treat, with a heavy, slow, solid movement that allows for precise control.

 

[anamorphic96]

i cant decide on it or the yamaha rs 700 or rx 797 or marantz 8004 or that outlaw 2150?

which do you all prefer

mainly looking to a/b switch via remote so im thinking yamaha but onkyo sounds good to me , right now im using the old 8511 and it sounds great.

any thoughts

The Onkyo TX-8511 and the TX-8555 are essentially the same receiver except for looks and features. The amp sections are indentical.

Same thing with the Yamaha receiver you are looking at. It has the same amp section as the RX-797 but has been updated with some new features and new looks.

Hope this helps.

 

[FattyMcFatFat]

Whats with all the NAD hate in this thread ? I bought a NAD C355BEE recently, and I absolutely adore it, albeit I haven't really purchased very good speakers yet, and I am still using my parents old Technics, the NAD basically gave them new life, and a completely different sound... But you guys got me rethinking my purchase :\

Also, this is my first post, so welcome me ^.^

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Whats with all the NAD hate in this thread ? I bought a NAD C355BEE recently, and I absolutely adore it, albeit I haven't really purchased very good speakers yet, and I am still using my parents old Technics, the NAD basically gave them new life, and a completely different sound... But you guys got me rethinking my purchase :\

Also, this is my first post, so welcome me ^.^

As the starter of this thread (some time ago now!), welcome.

I don't know about all the NAD "hate"; I don't think it's necessarily "hateful" feelings regarding the brand, but it did seem like there were some sentiments made that perhaps the gear is a bit overrated if I read into it right -- I do not have any personal experience with NAD's stuff, and never heard any of their gear, so I do not know, but based on many opinions in this thread, my budget and the way I was just drawn to it, I ended up getting the Onkyo TX-8555 stereo receiver and have loved it since day one.

 

[FattyMcFatFat]

As the starter of this thread (some time ago now!), welcome.

I don't know about all the NAD "hate"; I don't think it's necessarily "hateful" feelings regarding the brand, but it did seem like there were some sentiments made that perhaps the gear is a bit overrated if I read into it right -- I do not have any personal experience with NAD's stuff, and never heard any of their gear, so I do not know, but based on many opinions in this thread, my budget and the way I was just drawn to it, I ended up getting the Onkyo TX-8555 stereo receiver and have loved it since day one.

Ah yes, I did try out that specific receiver actually, before settling on the NAD I have now. I guess I was just picky is all, is why I returned it haha. Good product for the price though.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Ah yes, I did try out that specific receiver actually, before settling on the NAD I have now. I guess I was just picky is all, is why I returned it haha. Good product for the price though.

First of all...I SAID "WELCOME!!!"

Just kidding...it's just that you wanted a welcome and you didn't say thanks back...

Second...may I inquire as to what's up with your screen name?

Third...you had the 8555 in your system, really? What didn't you like about it? It's WAY overbuilt in my opinion, especially considering its price; is your NAD a stereo receiver or integrated amp?

 

[FattyMcFatFat]

First of all...I SAID "WELCOME!!!"

Just kidding...it's just that you wanted a welcome and you didn't say thanks back...

Second...may I inquire as to what's up with your screen name?

Third...you had the 8555 in your system, really? What didn't you like about it? It's WAY overbuilt in my opinion, especially considering its price; is your NAD a stereo receiver or integrated amp?

Firstly, I apologize, I thank you sir for welcoming, that was very rude of me.

Second, This has been my gamer tag for something like 5 years, so now I just use it as my screen name too. I find it quite funny

Third, I dont know if it was the Onkyo itself, or the phono preamp they put in it, but I find the sound quality to be lacking, mostly because the highs would get recessed into the mids, and it would make it sound like the singer was behind the music, and not the other way around (if that makes any sense??). Anyways, I decided it wasn't my thing, so I took it back. My NAD is an integrated amplifier. At first, I was going to get another receiver, but then I auditioned a nad C326beeto, to *Be* (hahaha) exact, against one of yamaha's high end receivers, and I was blown away by the sound difference.

Although, like one of the posters in this thread said, it could have been because of a loudless level, but the guy spent close to 10 minutes making them even, so I don't know.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Firstly, I apologize, I thank you sir for welcoming, that was very rude of me.

LOL -- I was only kidding. You are welcome, at any rate.

Second, This has been my gamer tag for something like 5 years, so now I just use it as my screen name too. I find it quite funny

Okay; it was just odd appearing to me!

Third, I dont know if it was the Onkyo itself, or the phono preamp they put in it, but I find the sound quality to be lacking, mostly because the highs would get recessed into the mids, and it would make it sound like the singer was behind the music, and not the other way around (if that makes any sense??). Anyways, I decided it wasn't my thing, so I took it back.

Interesting, if a bit disheartening as I haven't tried the 8555's phono preamp yet -- I hope to have a new turntable connected to it soon. Did you find this sound quality issue only with vinyl? What about other sources connected? I find the CD playback quality through the "CD" analog input is solid and powerful -- making this unit seem like a good integrated rather than a receiver with a tuner built in...

My NAD is an integrated amplifier. At first, I was going to get another receiver, but then I auditioned a nad C326beeto, to *Be* (hahaha) exact, against one of yamaha's high end receivers, and I was blown away by the sound difference.

Interesting...

Although, like one of the posters in this thread said, it could have been because of a loudless level, but the guy spent close to 10 minutes making them even, so I don't know.

I'm uncertain of the reference here; can you explain a bit more?

 

[FattyMcFatFat]

LOL -- I was only kidding. You are welcome, at any rate.



Okay; it was just odd appearing to me!



Interesting, if a bit disheartening as I haven't tried the 8555's phono preamp yet -- I hope to have a new turntable connected to it soon. Did you find this sound quality issue only with vinyl? What about other sources connected? I find the CD playback quality through the "CD" analog input is solid and powerful -- making this unit seem like a good integrated rather than a receiver with a tuner built in...



Interesting...



I'm uncertain of the reference here; can you explain a bit more?

I don't really want to go digging through this whole thread again to find the exact post, but someone mentioned that if the two receivers being auditioned are off even by a few dB's, it can change the appearance of the sound quality. I auditioned one of Yamaha's higher end (cant remember the exact name, but it was stereo), and the NAD C236BEE. The person helping me in the audio shop spent a good amount of time trying to get the volume levels evened, so i'm not sure if there is truth to what the poster said or not. I personally found a huge difference between the receiver and the amp, but hey, everyone's ears are different.

As for the TX8555, I used the phono input exclusively, meaning I didn't try it with any other sources, as I didn't have any . So, it could have very well been a phono stage problem, or it could have been a defective unit.... or it could be how it was made haha, I don't know. All I know is the sound wasn't really for me, that being said, what sounds bad to one person might sound good to another. If it sounds good to you thats all that matters

 

[anamorphic96]

Phono stages in most receivers are somewhat of an afterthought most of the time. It's not important to most people, and the people who are serious about vinyl will be using an outboard phono stage. Companies know this so they don't put much effort into implementing a really good one.

A good quality phono stage can be had for about 100 to 150.

 

[FattyMcFatFat]

Phono stages in most receivers are somewhat of an afterthought most of the time. It's not important to most people, and the people who are serious about vinyl will be using an outboard phono stage. Companies know this so they don't put much effort into implementing a really good one.

A good quality phono stage can be had for about 100 to 150.

I realize this, when I purchased my nad, I also purchased a cambridge audio 640p that suits me quite well... but that still doesn't explain the NAD hate that was goin' on in this thread

 

[GranteedEV]

some men just don't feel comfortable talkin bout how warm a nad is is all