Where would you slot these receivers?

[wideyedwanderer]

I've been endlessly researching av receivers for the past one month. Although I have gained a lot of knowledge by lurking around in the forums, there are a lot of gaps I need to fill. One thing I still don't completely understand is which companies make what category of receivers (in general)?

Obviously, this is a very broad stroke but I'm trying to get a general understanding of who lies where. Some models of some companies might exceed others but I'm trying to get averages which with general consensus among the audiophile community.

I would appreciate if y'all could chip in with suggestions to fill this (and correct what I've already filled in)

Top High-end
???
-----------------------------

Medium High-end
Krell, Linn???
-----------------------------

Entry-level High-end
Rotel, Outlaw < NAD < Integra, Pioneer Elite, Denon 4000s
=======================

Top Mass-consumer
Denon < Onkyo < Yamaha, Pioneer
-----------------------------

Medium/Entry-level Mass-consumer
Sansui, Sony, Kenwood
-----------------------------

 

[Seth=L]

There aren't many companies on the high end that make receivers, Rotel would be one of the highest, along with Lexicon (which is really just an H/K that says Lexicon on it). Companies like Yamaha, Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer all have flagships which pretty much are top dogs in terms of bells/wistles and power in the receiver market. Companies like Krell, Linn, and countless others pretty much stay away from the receiver market and deal primarily in seperates.

Outlaw, Sunfire, NAD, Cambridge Audio, Arcam, Rotel would be a brief outline of high end specific brands, meaning their low end is still considered to be "high end".

Onkyo & Integra, Sony & ES, Pioneer & Elite, Harman Kardon, Denon, Marantz, Yamaha, Sherwood and a few others are the well known wide range products producers. They make high and low end receivers to cover both ends of the spectrum, both very high and low ends.

Kenwood is no longer producing home audio receivers.

Panasonic rarely produces a worthwhile audio product, especially receivers (if cost effectiveness is remotely concerned)

JVC is pretty slow right now. A few years ago they released a very solid high end line of receivers, but publicity lacked and the line failed. The expensive production costs and slow turnover killed the last great JVC audio products to grace Victor corp.

Sansui, technically died in the early 80's. Funai now produces some video products using the Sansui name being sold at Wal-Mart and other retailers. They basically are nothing.

Insignia, Best Buy's in house brand electronics. Their receivers are outsourced to the most cost effective solution (meaning decent quality enough to not be returned within warranty, but still cheap). Sherwood has produced Insignia's last two lines of receivers.

KLH, died after Henry Kloss left the company. Some people in California revitlized the name for selling garbage speakers and even trashier receivers (which RCA utilized the same OEM for a short while in the late 90's.

Tandy got a bit smart and marketed the Optimus brand and shortly after RCA professional at RadioShack, they where Pioneer OEMs. The line has since died and was replaced with Acurian, which is some cheap difficult to spell Asian OEM.

Just a little history and current affairs.

 

[wideyedwanderer]

Thanks Seth=L. Thanks for the quick history+current affairs class. That sorta clears up most of my confusion. So beyond the Rotels it's the separates that rule!!!

Is there any ranking (at the cost of over-generalization) in the hi-end like:
Rotel > NAD, Outlaw > Integra, Elite > Denon/Onkyo/Yamaha/HK flagships

If I may poke further, what are the broad characteristics of the hi-end, like I've heard "NADs are warm", "Rotels being characteristically British receivers are dry (or something similar)", "Outlaws are warm and have a good bass" etc etc.

So, is there a personality each receiver-make has?

 

[jamie2112]

I like to put mine on the top shelf

 

[PENG]

Seth=L summed it up very well. I would add B&K to the high end receiver category. There may be a few others that are not well known enough to be mentioned.

As to those hearsays about warm, thin, or whatever, are mostly hearsays. Read the British magazines and you can hardly find any mentioning of Rotel, NAD, HK being warm (they love the Arcam though, for being musical) and you can easily find good reviews (even given best choice awards) on certain Sony models. I owned an ES model before and I did not find it any brighter than my Denon or Bryston in pure direct mode. I almost owned a HK model but never found it warm, just neutral. If any H.T. modes or EQ are applied, then all bets are off. Ask our EQ expert WmAx and he will tell you all about it. To him, you should be able to make even a SS unit sound like a tube one.

As long as the AVR has more than enough power to drive your speakers in your listening environment and pure direct mode is selected, it should not have much of a sonic signature. In fact, those that offers their own sonic signatures/personality should not be considered as "hi fi", but if you like their sonic "signature", or "personality", go for it.

All being said, an AVR that does not have enough power for the job could still sound less "warm" due to the weakened mid bass (with sub).

 

[wideyedwanderer]

Thanks Peng.

#1 So for the benefit of those like me who would come to this thread, I'll summarize what you've mentioned fall under the entry-level hi-end receiver category (in no particular order):

Arcam +
B&K
Cambridge Audio
Denon*
Harman/Kardon *
Marantz
NAD
Pioneer Elite
Rotel
Onkyo*/Integra
Outlaw
Sherwood Newcastle
Sunfire
Yamaha*

* only flagship models
+ british mags love these for their very 'musical' quality


#2 There's nothing like top-of-line receivers (the above entry-level hi-ends are it) -- beyond the above, one needs to get into separates

#3 AV receivers don't and must not have a sonic signature (like "warm", etc)

 

[wideyedwanderer]

(1) When the British mags call Arcam 'musical' what do they mean? That the receivers performs better than others in stereo or pure direct mode?

Would you put Outlaw in the same 'musical receiver' category?


(2) "Enough power in speakers for my env" - now that's something I've been scratching my head with. How much is considered to be enough?

Example 1: I have a 250 sq living room (medium sized) and want to run the the AV123 525Ts http://bit.ly/17j0HB

Example 2: I have a 250 sq living room (medium sized) and want to run the the Totem Rainmakers http://bit.ly/1rndqT


How many Watts Per Channel should I be looking for?

Seth=L summed it up very well. I would add B&K to the high end receiver category. There may be a few others that are not well known enough to be mentioned.

As to those hearsays about warm, thin, or whatever, are mostly hearsays. Read the British magazines and you can hardly find any mentioning of Rotel, NAD, HK being warm (they love the Arcam though, for being musical) and you can easily find good reviews (even given best choice awards) on certain Sony models. I owned an ES model before and I did not find it any brighter than my Denon or Bryston in pure direct mode. I almost owned a HK model but never found it warm, just neutral. If any H.T. modes or EQ are applied, then all bets are off. Ask our EQ expert WmAx and he will tell you all about it. To him, you should be able to make even a SS unit sound like a tube one.

As long as the AVR has more than enough power to drive your speakers in your listening environment and pure direct mode is selected, it should not have much of a sonic signature. In fact, those that offers their own sonic signatures/personality should not be considered as "hi fi", but if you like their sonic "signature", or "personality", go for it.

All being said, an AVR that does not have enough power for the job could still sound less "warm" due to the weakened mid bass (with sub).

 

[njedpx3]

Sound Characteristics

Thanks Seth=L. Thanks for the quick history+current affairs class. That sorta clears up most of my confusion. So beyond the Rotels it's the separates that rule!!!

Is there any ranking (at the cost of over-generalization) in the hi-end like:
Rotel > NAD, Outlaw > Integra, Elite > Denon/Onkyo/Yamaha/HK flagships

If I may poke further, what are the broad characteristics of the hi-end, like I've heard "NADs are warm", "Rotels being characteristically British receivers are dry (or something similar)", "Outlaws are warm and have a good bass" etc etc.

So, is there a personality each receiver-make has?

OP .. Most of your sound characteristics: warmth, brillance, etc. are the result of your speakers! not the amp or pre/pro

Are you looking for particular features in a particular price range? I guess I don't understand what exactly you are trying to find out I have some input on the higher end Marantz SR8002 AVR

Good Luck!

Forest Man

 

[JerryLove]

At the risk of repeating.

AVRs have thr following characteristics:
Appearance.
Connections (HDMI, Optical).
Formats (DTS, DD, ProLogicEX, DTS-Master, etc).
Configurableness (5 band, 9 band, per-channel eq) and sound-field adjustments.
The quality of their auto-calibration and upscaling.
Extras (network streaming or the like)
The power of their amp.

They should not have a "sound", or something is wrong with the unit.

 

[mtrycrafts]

... you should be able to make even a SS unit sound like a tube one.

...).

What's his name, Carver, did just that by adding a resistor in each speaker output terminals> Not sure of the value but somewhere 1/2 Ohms to 1 Ohms

 

[mtrycrafts]

As another poster commented, what are you after with all your research?
Speaker impedance and sensitivity along with room size and listening volume may dictate which receiver or amp you should try.

 

[PENG]

(1) When the British mags call Arcam 'musical' what do they mean? That the receivers performs better than others in stereo or pure direct mode?

I assume they meant very low distortion level and probably extremely low odd harmonics contents.

Would you put Outlaw in the same 'musical receiver' category?

No idea, I have never listened to any Outlaw units.

(2) "Enough power in speakers for my env" - now that's something I've been scratching my head with. How much is considered to be enough?

Example 1: I have a 250 sq living room (medium sized) and want to run the the AV123 525Ts http://bit.ly/17j0HB

Example 2: I have a 250 sq living room (medium sized) and want to run the the Totem Rainmakers http://bit.ly/1rndqT

How many Watts Per Channel should I be looking for?

I don't know anything about the AV123 stuff but assuming your ceiling height is 8 to 10 ft, anything rated 200WPC into 4 ohms should be enough for the Rainmakers, but more is better.

 

[PENG]

Thanks Peng.

#1 So for the benefit of those like me who would come to this thread, I'll summarize what you've mentioned fall under the entry-level hi-end receiver category (in no particular order):

Arcam +
B&K
Cambridge Audio
Denon*
Harman/Kardon *
Marantz
NAD
Pioneer Elite
Rotel
Onkyo*/Integra
Outlaw
Sherwood Newcastle
Sunfire
Yamaha*

* only flagship models
+ british mags love these for their very 'musical' quality


#2 There's nothing like top-of-line receivers (the above entry-level hi-ends are it) -- beyond the above, one needs to get into separates

#3 AV receivers don't and must not have a sonic signature (like "warm", etc)

I would put the * besides the Marantz and Pioneer Elite as well. Again, that's based mostly on hearsays in my opinion. As long as you stick with the near flag ship models, any of the brands you quoted will pretty much sound the same in pure direct mode, they really should.

 

[Seth=L]

Seth=L summed it up very well. I would add B&K to the high end receiver category. There may be a few others that are not well known enough to be mentioned.

As to those hearsays about warm, thin, or whatever, are mostly hearsays. Read the British magazines and you can hardly find any mentioning of Rotel, NAD, HK being warm (they love the Arcam though, for being musical) and you can easily find good reviews (even given best choice awards) on certain Sony models. I owned an ES model before and I did not find it any brighter than my Denon or Bryston in pure direct mode. I almost owned a HK model but never found it warm, just neutral. If any H.T. modes or EQ are applied, then all bets are off. Ask our EQ expert WmAx and he will tell you all about it. To him, you should be able to make even a SS unit sound like a tube one.

As long as the AVR has more than enough power to drive your speakers in your listening environment and pure direct mode is selected, it should not have much of a sonic signature. In fact, those that offers their own sonic signatures/personality should not be considered as "hi fi", but if you like their sonic "signature", or "personality", go for it.

All being said, an AVR that does not have enough power for the job could still sound less "warm" due to the weakened mid bass (with sub).

Adcom too, it's hard to remember them all in such a short space of time. I feel I did pretty well.

Someone mentioned making transistorized amplifiers sound like tube amplifiers. Bob Carver did that with the M-4.0t power amplifier. Bob Carver introduced a monoblock tube amplifier back in the 90's that was considered to be the most expensive production home audio amplifiers available at that time (per channel). He called them "SilverSeven". He created the M-4.0t to recreate the sonic signature of the SilverSeven monoblocks, which he successfully did. The M-4.0t was substantially less expensive than the SilverSeven mono block amplifiers, and was done in a stereo design. Bob also built the M-1.5t to replicate the sound signature of other high end amplifiers from Mark Levinson and Conrad Johnson (the most expensive amplifiers at that time). He successfully proved through a DBT test that his cheaper amplifier sounded just like the exorbitantly more expensive models produced by these esoteric companies.

My AR Classic 18s have similar specifications in regard to sensitivity and impedance to the Totem Rainmakers. I'm driving them with a 60wpc Rotel amplifier and have noticed no stress even at reference levels of output. I've learned to almost ignore wattage ratings and requirements and look at the product I'm using as a whole. Take into account the construction of the components of the amplifier or receiver and you can usually figure out where things are going.

 

[wideyedwanderer]

I realized I forgot to add Carver receivers to the list -- does anyone have any experience with these?

 

[ju10503]

I would not worry about how high end or low end "audiophile" a manufacturer is considered. What matters is the media you use, the room, and the speakers. Amps matter little as long as they are half decent and can power the speakers without clipping. Cables, interconnects, power conditioners, those silly speaker cable stands, anti-resonance doodads, all mostly snake oil for people with more money than sense, and worse, for some with no sense and no money, but high credit card balances. Get decent speakers, position them as well as possible, and then spend money on music not gear.

 

[lsiberian]

OP .. Most of your sound characteristics: warmth, brillance, etc. are the result of your speakers! not the amp or pre/pro

Are you looking for particular features in a particular price range? I guess I don't understand what exactly you are trying to find out I have some input on the higher end Marantz SR8002 AVR

Good Luck!

Forest Man

Partially. The room and placement factor in heavily too.

 

[highfigh]

What's his name, Carver, did just that by adding a resistor in each speaker output terminals> Not sure of the value but somewhere 1/2 Ohms to 1 Ohms

How does that make it sound like a tube amp?

 

[Seth=L]

*shrugs*

I don't understand the theory behind it, I just know that his DBTs proved that it sounded like his Silver Seven monoblock tube amplifiers. Keep in mind that a tube amplifier doesn't have a have a sound at all, it can be made not to. Most tube amplifier manufacturers intentionally make them the way they do to sound colored.

 

[wideyedwanderer]

How do the classic Carver amps of the 80s and 90s (now that you mentioned the Silver Sevens) compare sonically with the newer amps/receivers.