Why choose Marantz and Denon over other brands?

[3db]

I wouldnt choose Denon or Marantz over Yamaha... Just sayin. Don't get me wrong. They are excellent brands in their own right. However, I'm so impressed with the build quality of Yamaha in general and the robustness of their amps and power supplies. My first foray into Yamaha was when I replaced an old Technics AVR with an RX-V1800 that supported HDMI and the lossless audio codecs. YPAO in that receiver is for a single seated position and it works well. The Technics was put into a secondary system. I since replaced it by buying a used RX-V1500 for $90 because I was running out of inputs on the Technics. Last year I bought a used Yamaha KX-800U cassette deck to replace a POS Technics deck ( I still have a number of cassettes in use) and that unit works flawlessly despite being over 30 years old.

 

[highfigh]

I wouldnt choose Denon or Marantz over Yamaha... Just sayin. Don't get me wrong. They are excellent brands in their own right. However, I'm so impressed with the build quality of Yamaha in general and the robustness of their amps and power supplies. My first foray into Yamaha was when I replaced an old Technics AVR with an RX-V1800 that supported HDMI and the lossless audio codecs. YPAO in that receiver is for a single seated position and it works well. The Technics was put into a secondary system. I since replaced it by buying a used RX-V1500 for $90 because I was running out of inputs on the Technics. Last year I bought a used Yamaha KX-800U cassette deck to replace a POS Technics deck ( I still have a number of cassettes in use) and that unit works flawlessly despite being over 30 years old.

Specifically, what is better in the construction of a Yamaha over either of the other brands? Do the parts fall out of the circuit boards, do the screws loosen, are the circuit boards lower in quality? What about the copper shielding in the Marantz- is that not of high quality? Are the discrete circuits in the audio path a bad thing?

FWIW, I just installed a Yamaha RX-A760 and I'm not sure I like the requirement to choose between 4 and 8 Ohms for the speakers. I never set these to allow going WOT with the volume anyway, so it's unlikely that the amp or speakers will puke, but I prefer that the amplifiers are able to handle whatever load they're connected to.

 

[3db]

Specifically, what is better in the construction of a Yamaha over either of the other brands? Do the parts fall out of the circuit boards, do the screws loosen, are the circuit boards lower in quality? What about the copper shielding in the Marantz- is that not of high quality? Are the discrete circuits in the audio path a bad thing?

Wow, are you inferring all of this because I'm impressed with Yamaha's build quality?

FWIW, I just installed a Yamaha RX-A760 and I'm not sure I like the requirement to choose between 4 and 8 Ohms for the speakers. I never set these to allow going WOT with the volume anyway, so it's unlikely that the amp or speakers will puke, but I prefer that the amplifiers are able to handle whatever load they're connected to.

FWIW, this 4 ohm /8ohm speaker setting has been beaten to death so why bring it up now.?

 

[73ShureV15]

I use to run Sony equipment but "upgraded" to Harmon/Kardon AV receivers. I "believe" they sound a lot better than Sony, and feel they are of better build quality. My latest is the AVR 700. I love it... Analog inputs to boot! Got a refurbished unit for 150.00! No problems with the 700 whatsoever. Multichannel power: 100W per channel, two channels driven @ 6 ohms. Dolby TrueHD Surround for "Apocolypse Now," and later, I may spin a 180 gram pressing of Steely Dans "Aja". Either way, great sounding entertainment abounds! A receiver fit for a movie buff, and a Vinyl junkie.

 

[highfigh]

Wow, are you inferring all of this because I'm impressed with Yamaha's build quality?

No- you commented on build quality without being specific, so I asked.

FWIW, this 4 ohm /8ohm speaker setting has been beaten to death so why bring it up now.?

I hadn't installed a Yamaha until last week and was surprised they would include this in their Aventage line, which is supposed to be their higher quality gear. IMO, 'higher quality' means I don't need to deal with things like that. There's enough good equipment that doesn't generate a ton of heat without choosing to "dumb down" the power supply rail voltage just to satisfy UL.

At least it can't fry hamburgers, like some of the Harman-Kardon receivers.

BTW- how long have you had your turntable?

 

[yepimonfire]

All things being equal, I wouldn't buy a receiver over another just because it's slightly more watts per channel unless that watts per channel difference was double. Sony rates their receivers at 6 ohms, so their 100wpc rating is more like 70wpc. If a Denon receiver is rated at 110wpc into 8 ohms, that barely provides a 1.5 dB gain, hardly noticeable. Pick a receiver that has the features you want in the price range you can afford.

A lot of people also seriously overestimate the amount of power they actually need. Playing at reference level, which a majority of us don't do, requires enough headroom to reach 105dB on the speakers end and 115dB on the subs end. Assuming your speakers have a sensitivity of 88dB and you're seated 12 feet away, this can be achieved with a mere 50 watts in a 5.1 system.

I'd be more worried about the sub. Even if it has adequate power it's likely to reach a physical limit trying to get to 115dB and would require multiple subwoofers to make it.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[PENG]

All things being equal, I wouldn't buy a receiver over another just because it's slightly more watts per channel unless that watts per channel difference was double. Sony rates their receivers at 6 ohms, so their 100wpc rating is more like 70wpc. If a Denon receiver is rated at 110wpc into 8 ohms, that barely provides a 1.5 dB gain, hardly noticeable. Pick a receiver that has the features you want in the price range you can afford.

A lot of people also seriously overestimate the amount of power they actually need. Playing at reference level, which a majority of us don't do, requires enough headroom to reach 105dB on the speakers end and 115dB on the subs end. Assuming your speakers have a sensitivity of 88dB and you're seated 12 feet away, this can be achieved with a mere 50 watts in a 5.1 system.

I'd be more worried about the sub. Even if it has adequate power it's likely to reach a physical limit trying to get to 115dB and would require multiple subwoofers to make it.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

I agree in general but I think your numbers are a little optimistic. Sitting back 12 feet will result in losing about 11 dB without room gain and multiple speaker gain. It may be reasonable to assume most people should get 5 to 7 dB of such gains. Then there is the factor of impedance dipping below 8 ohms, though that will likely be covered in most cases by the sub(s). I would feel more comfortable if you bump the suggested 50W requirement to 100W. 50W is definitely fine for those in small to medium size room and listen at 70 to 75 dB average like I do.