Which of these 2 receivers for my setup?

[AFRomulus]

I'm just getting into home audio (and trying to not go overboard with things). From experience, I know how annoying it is when 'the new guy' wants everyone's input on his decision, so.. I've tried to narrow down my choices as much as possible.

Here's what I've decided to get so far.

Speakers:

Front R/L: B&W 601 S3's
Center: B&W LCR60 S3
Rears: B&W 600 S3's
Sub: Velodyne DPS12

I have looked at the H/K AVR340, Yamaha 659, and an onkyo's 703 and 803.

My question is, the H/K is rated at 55x7 and the others are around 100w. I realize not all power claims are the same, but if the H/K (which I really like) infact does produce 55w per channel, will this be enough for my setup?

Any input greatly appreciated

 

[InTheIndustry]

The Onkyo 803 would be my choice. It offers a THX Select mode as well as HDMI switching (no upconversion, though). I prefer the sound of the Onkyo over a Yamaha any day (just my opinion). Also, HK's aren't the most easy things in the world to operate if you've never owned one.

 

[Joban]

I don't think that you could go wrong with any of those choices.

I just picked up an H/K 135 which is rated at 40x6 (or 50x2). My room is about 12 x 16 feet and I only have 4 speakers going (none of which are particularly sensitive) and do just fine. I usually listen at -20 dbl and it is loud enough for me. Unless you have a massive room or really inefficient speakers I think that you would be fine with 55x7.

I don't find that H/K difficult to set up either. With onscreen menus it is straight forward.

In short, the H/K is a contender but that's not to say that the other 2 receivers aren't great choices either.

Cheers,

J

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

Compare the weight of the units, and you'll see the HK is as beefy, if not moreso than the other two.

 

[mouettus]

Compare the weight of the units, and you'll see the HK is as beefy, if not moreso than the other two.

Is that good or bad?

For myself, I don't think SQ has to go with weight. But GOD DAMN I like it when they're heavy beasts! Looks like a big tank ready to kill! mouahahahehuheuheuhaha [goin' crazy] lol

 

[3x10^8]

Is that good or bad?

For myself, I don't think SQ has to go with weight. But GOD DAMN I like it when they're heavy beasts! Looks like a big tank ready to kill! mouahahahehuheuheuhaha [goin' crazy] lol

If you're a chica in a bathing suit, that's VERY bad... Unless you're into that kind of thing, of course. You did mention that you like 'em built like tanks.

If you're a receiver, that's typically good... Although it's not scientific, it implies that there are better quality components used in manufacturing the unit (i.e. less plastic).

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

If you're a chica in a bathing suit, that's VERY bad... Unless you're into that kind of thing, of course. You did mention that you like 'em built like tanks.

If you're a receiver, that's typically good... Although it's not scientific, it implies that there are better quality components used in manufacturing the unit (i.e. less plastic).

The difference in weight between 'classes' of receivers is usually tied to the quality and beefyness of the power supply components in the unit. Larger & heavier power supply components are needed to draw more power.

That's probably the main contributing factor why entry level receivers typically weigh <30lbs, midrange 35-45lbs, and high end models can weigh 60lbs plus. That's not to say that a receiver that weighs 35lbs is necessarily better than one that weights only 30lbs, but in general...... Heavier tends to mean better power supply.

 

[Pyrrho]

I'm just getting into home audio (and trying to not go overboard with things). From experience, I know how annoying it is when 'the new guy' wants everyone's input on his decision, so.. I've tried to narrow down my choices as much as possible.

Here's what I've decided to get so far.

Speakers:

Front R/L: B&W 601 S3's
Center: B&W LCR60 S3
Rears: B&W 600 S3's
Sub: Velodyne DPS12

I have looked at the H/K AVR340, Yamaha 659, and an onkyo's 703 and 803.

My question is, the H/K is rated at 55x7 and the others are around 100w. I realize not all power claims are the same, but if the H/K (which I really like) infact does produce 55w per channel, will this be enough for my setup?

Any input greatly appreciated

I would probably go with the Yamaha among those. (H/K has had some quality issues in the past, and Onkyo, unless they have changed for the new models, has omitted the original DPL from the choices for surround.) But as others have said, probably all of them would be fine. Check all of the features before you buy, to make sure whatever you buy has everything you want.

 

[mouettus]

If you're a receiver, that's typically good... Although it's not scientific, it implies that there are better quality components used in manufacturing the unit (i.e. less plastic).

That's what I meant!

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

Two years ago, you couldn't buy a THX certified receiver that weighed less than 33lbs. The very bottom of the barrel for THX (at the time) was the Pioneer 1015TX. Now that THX has lightened it's standards and introduced some new categories, Onkyo is slipping in with some 29lb units (TX-SR 703 and 803). That should give you a starting point if weight is one factor in buying a receiver (class a/b of course).

Note: keep in mind, THX certification is not an "end all" in buying mid to high end receivers. But if it is THX certified, you can bet it will play loud - with less distortion, for a long period of time without shutting down. I've found these certified receivers to have larger heat sinks to help keep the units cool. That's one main reason they weigh 30+ lbs. Larger heat sinks (and as BuckeyeNut mentioned, a larger, heavier power supply) make for a more robust AVR. Larger capacitors are also a big factor in better AVR's. The larger the caps, the more potential stored energy for those demanding high dB bursts.

 

[Pyrrho]

You should buy based upon performance, not weight. There are different designs that affect weight, and a lighter model can be better than a heavier one. Actual performance is what matters, not how much it weighs. Unless, of course, you are wanting a paperweight.

 

[PENG]

Compare the weight of the units, and you'll see the HK is as beefy, if not moreso than the other two.

I just checked their weights from their website. Looks like HK has gone on a diet. The 340 weighs only 24.4 lbs. The RX-V659 weighs 27.1 lbs.

On the other hand, one of the best sounding receiver, the ARCAM AVR300 weighs just a little over 30 lbs. A couple of popular mid-fi receivers such as the Denon AVR3806 and Yamaha RX-V2600 were bench tested by S&V and produced some nice numbers. They weigh 38.6 and 38.4 lbs respectively but the 3806 did 6X108W and the 2600 did more. Both did much better than the much heavier HKAVR635.

The RX-V659 is new but the RX-V657 produced some impressive lab result.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?article_id=863&section_id=3&page_number=3

 

[3x10^8]

I just checked their weights from their website. Looks like HK has gone on a diet. The 340 weighs only 24.4 lbs. The RX-V659 weighs 27.1 lbs.

On the other hand, one of the best sounding receiver, the ARCAM AVR300 weighs just a little over 30 lbs. A couple of popular mid-fi receivers such as the Denon AVR3806 and Yamaha RX-V2600 were bench tested by S&V and produced some nice numbers. They weigh 38.6 and 38.4 lbs respectively but the 3806 did 6X108W and the 2600 did more. Both did much better than the much heavier HKAVR635.

The RX-V659 is new but the RX-V657 produced some impressive lab result.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?article_id=863&section_id=3&page_number=3

Again, meaning that the whole concept of judging a receiver by weight is a general convention, not a scientifcally accurate one. One can find exceptions to just about anything. However, more times than not, this convention holds true. I'm sure buckeyefan did not mean that you should judge a receiver by weight alone. If that was the case, you'd see more receivers made of, say, lead for instance. In which case you'd have to resist the temptation of licking your receiver.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

PENG: I just checked their weights from their website. Looks like HK has gone on a diet. The 340 weighs only 24.4 lbs.

What's amazing is the jump in weight to the 435:

http://www.harmankardon.com/specifications.aspx?Region=USA&Country=US&Language=ENG&cat=REC&ser=&prod=AVR 435&sType=C

Can anyone guess the weight of the old 325?

 

[PENG]

What's amazing is the jump in weight to the 435:

http://www.harmankardon.com/specifications.aspx?Region=USA&Country=US&Language=ENG&cat=REC&ser=&prod=AVR 435&sType=C

Can anyone guess the weight of the old 325?

37.5 lbs? I remember it was heavy.

 

[PENG]

Again, meaning that the whole concept of judging a receiver by weight is a general convention, not a scientifcally accurate one. One can find exceptions to just about anything. However, more times than not, this convention holds true. I'm sure buckeyefan did not mean that you should judge a receiver by weight alone. If that was the case, you'd see more receivers made of, say, lead for instance. In which case you'd have to resist the temptation of licking your receiver.

I read enough of Buck's post to know what he meant. My post did not not mean to contradict what he said at all. I was truly surprised to see the new HK got lighter, except for the 740 and it is hard to resist not pointing out that sweet sounding Arcam can do 4 ohms 7X100W that weighs in the mid 30's. As you said there are always exceptions. Thanks anyway!

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

37.5 lbs? I remember it was heavy.

Close. 40lbs. I really liked the HK's in black.

http://manuals.harman.com/HK/Owner's Manual/AVR 325 OM FINAL.pdf

 

[3x10^8]

I read enough of Buck's post to know what he meant. My post did not not mean to contradict what he said at all. I was truly surprised to see the new HK got lighter, except for the 740 and it is hard to resist not pointing out that sweet sounding Arcam can do 4 ohms 7X100W that weighs in the mid 30's. As you said there are always exceptions. Thanks anyway!

Whoaa, buddy! Take it easy. I was AGREEING with you in my post. I wasn't implying that you were trying to contradict buck's post. You just pointed out, what I thought, was a very good example of what my original point was. Anywayz...

 

[PENG]

Close. 40lbs. I really liked the HK's in black.

http://manuals.harman.com/HK/Owner's Manual/AVR 325 OM FINAL.pdf

Me too, I thought the look of those heavy X25 series are also much better than the modern look of the new ones. If I were in the market for a HK I would search for a discounted 325 or 525 as my priority is sound quality not the latest video gadgets.

 

[PENG]

Whoaa, buddy! Take it easy. I was AGREEING with you in my post. I wasn't implying that you were trying to contradict buck's post. You just pointed out, what I thought, was a very good example of what my original point was. Anywayz...

3X10^8, I read my post and I know what you meant. Sorry, it was not intended, the tone somehow came out that way. Obviously it's okay to disagree but we were actually agreeing. Again, my apology.