Yamaha or Denon or Marantz or Onkyo for less than $350

[Lordoftherings]

Well, that's what I would run for now but I will upgrade it to 5.1 and 7.1 eventually. The variable that I don't know now is when I will upgrade it.

Oh yes, I definitely love loud but not noisy music (I listen to Jazz and Funk Jazz) also loud music. My neighbour may hate me but I only live once. lol....

Thanks a lot everyone, I learned a lot, i mean really really a lot, from this forum. So the Marantz 5002 still inferior to Onkyo 606 in term of audio processing. To jump up to 5003, it's out of my budget so the #1 candidate right now is 606. Too bad AC4L sold out of Denon 1909 coz by comparison and reviews, 1909 is better than 606.

Hey GomGom,

Not to make life more complicated, but the Marantz SR5002 deserves also serious consideration. If you can get the SR5002 for let say about the same price or less than the 606 (about $499 cdn now), I will say that the SR5002 should also be at the top of your list. The 5002 have preouts for all channels, which is a really nice feature for possible upgrade in the future by adding external more powerful amp(s). You might even like more the sound of the Marantz.
Like I said to you before, take your time and check all your angles...

Bob

 

[Lordoftherings]

To Isiberian

Hi Isiberian,

In my prior post regarding #1 (post #37), I made a small error. You are right that the 4002 can output the new high res. audio codecs though it's HDMI out via LPCM, so no need for a blu-ray player with 7.1-channel analog outs, just internal decoding like a Panasonic BD35.
The only difference is that the 4002 will not display Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA in it's front panel display, not a big loss at all in my book.

And the fact that the 4002 have preouts for all channels is also a nice feature to have as compare to the 606 which does not. (At #3 of my previous post #37, I mentioned the Onkyo 705 and not the 606.)

In my above post here (#41), I suggest GomGom to seriously consider the Marantz SR5002 after a double take.

If the Marantz SR5002 is at a similar price to the Onkyo TX-SR606, then the choice is a bit harder here, it needs some more thinking into the equation.
I know that it will be a tough choice for me. I will scrutinize all aspects, the sound quality, the speaker's matching, the list of features, the HDMI upconversion, the possible future upgrades (additional amp), etc.

Marantz have a smoother sound in general, with a nice top end.
Onkyo might be a little brighter in the top, but not negatively so.

For bright speakers (Klipsch for example), I will pick the Marantz.
For smooth speakers (smooth tweeters), I will tend towards the Onkyo for injecting a bit more life into my speakers.
I thought of mentioning these facts.

Regards,

Bob

 

[PENG]

I just want to add that the claims that HK, NAD, Marantz are warm, smooth, Onkyo and Sony are harsh or bright, and Denon may be neutral etc. are no longer true. It was likely the case years ago, but not any more. I spent enough time listening to too many of them to know this is no longer the case. What is still the case, is that if the receiver does not have enough power for the application, the system as a whole will naturally sound thin (may be bright to some people), due to the lack of mid bass and bass. It is the upper mid bass/bass frequencies that create the "warm" feeling.

 

[rnatalli]

I just want to add that the claims that HK, NAD, Marantz are warm, smooth, Onkyo and Sony are harsh or bright, and Denon may be neutral etc. are no longer true. It was likely the case years ago, but not any more. I spent enough time listening to too many of them to know this is no longer the case. What is still the case, is that if the receiver does not have enough power for the application, the system as a whole will naturally sound thin (may be bright to some people), due to the lack of mid bass and bass.

+1 Another thing that will cause a system to sound different with certain receivers is the EQ system. For example, Audyssey will obviously EQ different than MCACC or YPAO. This assumes of course you are using the EQ feature.

 

[PENG]

+1 Another thing that will cause a system to sound different with certain receivers is the EQ system. For example, Audyssey will obviously EQ different than MCACC or YPAO. This assumes of course you are using the EQ feature.

That is certainly true. I never bother with EQ, thinking that my room has a nice enough shape. A few weeks ago I was doing nothing so I decided to play with this thing. I did it with 5 positions and quickly became too lazy to experiment more. It does make enough difference for me to leave it on except for direct and pure direct modes.

 

[jostenmeat]

That is certainly true. I never bother with EQ, thinking that my room has a nice enough shape. A few weeks ago I was doing nothing so I decided to play with this thing. I did it with 5 positions and quickly became too lazy to experiment more. It does make enough difference for me to leave it on except for direct and pure direct modes.

PENG, I believe you have some nice Denon receivers, and if that's true, your EQ would be from Audyssey. It has always been recommended, by everyone that I have seen, to run "all" positions, whether 6 for MEQ, or 8 for XT. You probably already know this, but just in case . . .

ya know, notwithstanding laziness. I timed myself once, and it only took 26 minutes from hitting go.

 

[PENG]

PENG, I believe you have some nice Denon receivers, and if that's true, your EQ would be from Audyssey. It has always been recommended, by everyone that I have seen, to run "all" positions, whether 6 for MEQ, or 8 for XT. You probably already know this, but just in case . . .

ya know, notwithstanding laziness. I timed myself once, and it only took 26 minutes from hitting go.

The 4308 has the MultEQ XT. So you think I still have room to improve by doing it for all 8 positions? I did 5 and it felt like taking forever. I will do it next weekend.

 

[jostenmeat]

The 4308 has the multi XT. So you think I still have room to improve by doing it for all 8 positions? I did 5 and it felt like taking forever. I will do it next weekend.

YMMV, but the idea is that your auto eq will have more pictures/snapshots within the room, for a more accurate/resolving calculation. Since it can support it, I say do it.

Even if there is only seating for, say, 4 people, do 8 calibrations, one for each ear.

 

[PENG]

YMMV, but the idea is that your auto eq will have more pictures/snapshots within the room, for a more accurate/resolving calculation. Since it can support it, I say do it.

Even if there is only seating for, say, 4 people, do 8 calibrations, one for each ear.

You convinced me, I'll take that 26 minutes, for once anyway. As I said before I really didn't believe it could make much difference in my room, but it did. Thanks again!

 

[Lordoftherings]

YMMV, but the idea is that your auto eq will have more pictures/snapshots within the room, for a more accurate/resolving calculation. Since it can support it, I say do it.

Even if there is only seating for, say, 4 people, do 8 calibrations, one for each ear.

+1 I 100% agree with Josten, do all 8 positions and be ready to be impress.
If not, redo it again.

Bob

.................4.........5.........6................
.................2.........1.........3................
......................7.........8......................

 

[GomGom]

In fact, the Marantz 5002 is a tad cheaper than Onkyo 606 and both of them are refurbished. I just read a audio visual magazine and top pick low end receiver is Onkyo 606.

I'll learn about Marantz and see if it's still a better choice than 606. What is the bass management for? Marantz 5002 does not have it. Does the Onkyo 606 have it?

 

[Lordoftherings]

In fact, the Marantz 5002 is a tad cheaper than Onkyo 606 and both of them are refurbished. I just read a audio visual magazine and top pick low end receiver is Onkyo 606.

I'll learn about Marantz and see if it's still a better choice than 606. What is the bass management for? Marantz 5002 does not have it. Does the Onkyo 606 have it?

Yes, they both have bass management, sending the low frequencies to the sub when you select Small for your speakers. But the Marantz 5002 might have only a single choice of x-over that apply to all your speakers. Not so with the 606, unless I'm wrong, but I don't believe so. The 606 give you the choice for separate x-over for each set of speakers.
To find out more about this, just check at their web sites, and download their manuals. Check the section about automatic room correction and bass management.

The 606 have 4 HDMI inputs and internal decoders for Dolby TrueHD & DTS-HA MA.
And the 606 have Audyssey 2EQ, which takes measurements up to 3 positions.
The 5002 have only 2 HDMI inputs and no internal decoders for Dolby TrueHD & DTS-HD MA.

My first choice will still be the 606. I really believe that you'll be more happy with the 606. And the price should drop very soon too, when the 607 will become available at London Drugs. It will then be on clearance.

Cheers,

Bob

 

[GomGom]

I'm still shopping around to get Onkyo 606 locally. Then, after I look around, Harman Kardon eBay store auctions HK AVR254 and it ended at $300ish shipped. Do you think I would be better off with Onkyo or HK 254? The price of HK is so expensive in Canada, more expensive than the Onkyo but how about the quality and features?
Sorry, I'm a noob so they look the same to me. I need some suggestions and comments from the pro's like most of you here...

 

[Lordoftherings]

I'm still shopping around to get Onkyo 606 locally. Then, after I look around, Harman Kardon eBay store auctions HK AVR254 and it ended at $300ish shipped. Do you think I would be better off with Onkyo or HK 254? The price of HK is so expensive in Canada, more expensive than the Onkyo but how about the quality and features?
Sorry, I'm a noob so they look the same to me. I need some suggestions and comments from the pro's like most of you here...

I don't like repeating myself, go with the Onkyo, period!

The 606 will be dropping it's price pretty soon, then make your move ($399 to $449 cdn max.).
And just forget about the HK, don't even think about it, period!

Bob