Yamaha RX-V2400 audiophile review

R

RX-V2400

Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>My new system is today up and running. Here are my first thoughts on the RX-V2400.

I’m a bit of an audiophile and listen to classical music and films. Before I got the RX-V2400 I was running a huge NAD 7600 receiver built on the 2600 amp rated at a realistic 150W per channel producing about 400W into my 6 ohm horribly complex, difficult and inefficient a/d/s M15 monitor speakers that were on their last legs, so the RX-V2400 had a bit to live up too. I bought all Yamaha speakers – the EX series that is available easily in the US – putting compatibility and a known quantity before something a little better. The whole system consists of the RX-V2400, two NS-777’s at the front, a center NS-C444, a NS-SW315 250w internal powered sub-woofer at the side and four NS-333 bookshelf speakers on the walls at the back for surround. My room is large being open plan of about 6000 cubit feet with asymmetrical cathedral ceilings and a solid wood suspended floor. My only problem with the room is that my wife does not allow me to move my front speakers away from the wall – but I did – just a little - for this audition.

I gave the RX-V2400 a tough test: DVD-A’s of Berlin Philharmonic playing Beethoven’s ninth, fifth and sixth and CD’s of The Cleveland Orchestra under Dohnanyi playing the same works. I like my music realistically loud and with my big room kept the volume control at half way – 0 db gain as the scale says.

First I run the Auto Setup – very easy. The soundstage was wide but not deep and in the multi-channel modes the speakers were not balanced - being very weak at the back. Also I noticed some ear distress and some very high overtones so I re configured the system manually. Playing with the manual controls I noticed that I preferred the auto sound better behind the monitoring position so I ran Auto Setup again (several times in fact) with the monitoring microphone forward of the listening position and finally got a nice balance. Playing the music I found the volume level at mid way very high – more than even I need – with neither the speakers nor the receiver complaining.

The first thing that struck me – and I guess in a way it was a bit of a disappointment – was that with all the multitude of Sound Profile available, for serious music no settings beat the basic 2 channel stereo mode, and more surprisingly, (even though when you think of it, with all that information spread over seven channels and not just two, it should not have been) the stereo CD’s sounded much better than the DVD Audio. There are some great emotions that can be carved out the air with this receiver and its multiple sound profiles, but for detail and sound-stage and realism of classical music I found stereo CD’s and the two-channel mode the best. I do not have a SACD player so anyone who does might like to add what they think I would have though had I had one.

Comparing the Yamaha system to the NAD and the dying a/d/s’s, the Yamaha had much more bite and raw power and more detail, but the NAD and the a/d/s’s had the soundstage and the depth of realism. If my change had been for stereo only I would have kept the NAD and purchased some top end efficient speakers, but I wanted my music combined with HT.

If you are interested in how the system plays newer EX/ES DVD movies then you need only know that this is what this system was built. Go listen - It will blow you away! Never have I heard better movie sound. Set the Sound Profile to THX and you will think you are in a state of the Art movie theater – switch to DTS and it just gets better!

The total cost of my system including wire, banana plugs, headphones and all was US $2730 – about the same I paid for the NAD in 1988. I’m not complaining!</font>
 
E

EdR

Audioholic
<font color='#000000'><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>
RX-V2400 : The first thing that struck me – and I guess in a way it was a bit of a disappointment – was that with all the multitude of Sound Profile available, for serious music no settings beat the basic 2 channel stereo mode, and more surprisingly, (even though when you think of it, with all that information spread over seven channels and not just two, it should not have been) the stereo CD’s sounded much better than the DVD Audio.
I thought that this was a very interesting observation, and I've noticed it also with my CSW Towers and 5.1 setup.  I have a few thoughts to share as to why this might be the case.

* stereo recording has been maturing for something like 50 years, and generations of very talented sound recording engineers have been fine tuning the process for optimum results for all that time.  I suspect that the best methods of multi-channel mixing are yet to be discovered.

* your NS-777's are far and away the best speakers in your system, so by listening to only them, you're hearing only the best you've got, and the minimal processing of the direct stereo allows what the sound engineers intended to come through.

* CD's are Nyquist limited at 22KHz, thus they can, in theory reproduce all frequencies up to that point perfectly.  I'm under the impression that all DVD's use some sort of MPG compression that involves some compromise and loss which you might be noticing.

In any case, I'm finding with my new speakers that when I really want to enjoy the music, I likewise listen in stereo.

I also enjoyed the rest of your post. &nbsp;I'm looking to replace my low end Onkyo, and the Yamaha is the receiver of choice at the moment, and you've only confirmed that. &nbsp;The other option I'm considering are the Outlaw Audio separates, which seems to be the only other affordable option that might be enough of a step up to be worth considering.</font>
 
Shinerman

Shinerman

Senior Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>I also find it interesting that you thought CD's sounded better than DVD-A. &nbsp; I run the 1400 so it may be a bit different but DVD-A is truly awesome. &nbsp; CD is also very good but DVD-A just gives so much more impact. &nbsp; I know mixing has a lot to do with the quality of DVD-A and can sometimes give sub par results, but overall I find DVD-A to be better than CD. &nbsp;

If you want a truly impressive DVD-A, get the BLUE MAN GROUP. &nbsp;It's incredible. &nbsp;Track 2 I think (PVC IV), &nbsp;will really give your system a workout. &nbsp;The bass at the end is awesome. &nbsp;You will hear sounds flying all around you. &nbsp; This is a must have for DVD-A. &nbsp;It's fun to listen to and has been mixed extremely well. &nbsp;

Shinerman! &nbsp;
</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jeffsg4mac

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy
<font color='#000000'>My experience has been a little different, Having been in this hobby for the last 20 years, I have not heard anything that compares to DVD A, SACD and DTS 96/24. No cd recording ever compared. I think maybe you are having some image issues with all the speakers you are running. DVD A and SACD are mixed for 5.1 That being 3 up front 2 in the back and a sub. Anything more will cause all sorts of problems. Also DTS neo 6 on my denon does a truly amazing job on standard CD audio. There is not one CD I have listened to in my collection that does not sound more alive and real when in this mode. I also do not buy into the logic that because something has been around for awhile it is going to be better. If we go with that logic then we would still have LP's and 8 tracks. But hey this all just my opinion and you know what they say about those
I would at least play around with DVD A little more before you say it does not sound better than CD because that just does not make sense at all. &nbsp;Cheers and good listening.</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
R

RX-V2400

Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>Sinerman and Jeff: I don't disagree with you. Neo 6 is wonderful for popular, new-age and special effect music. I use it all the time but my post was title &quot;audiophile&quot; review. An audiophile does not look for emotional effect in the music so much as accuracy and closeness to the original live sound. Things like sound-stage width an voice seperation and authenticly reproduced tone. It is just that Audiophile judgement uses different criteria than what is used to judge the music sources you quoted.</font>
 
Shinerman

Shinerman

Senior Audioholic
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>
RX-V2400 : <font color='#000000'>Sinerman and Jeff: I don't disagree with you. Neo 6 is wonderful for popular, new-age and special effect music. I use it all the time but my post was title &quot;audiophile&quot; review. An audiophile does not look for emotional effect in the music so much as accuracy and closeness to the original live sound. Things like sound-stage width an voice seperation and authenticly reproduced tone. It is just that Audiophile judgement uses different criteria than what is used to judge the music sources you quoted.</font>
<font color='#000000'>I understood what you were asking and my answer is still the same. &nbsp;From my experience, DVD-A is superior is every way to CDs. &nbsp;Soundstage, voice seperation, tone, etc. &nbsp;Let's take my example of Blue Man Group. &nbsp;I have seen the show live 3 or 4 times now. &nbsp;I have listen to Blue Man Group recordings on CD and I now have listened to them on DVD-A. &nbsp;DVD-A clearly gives you the sense of being there and sounds much closer to the actual live show. &nbsp; Much more so than an normal CD recording. &nbsp; Playing the CD through Neo 6 is close but not the same as DVD-A. &nbsp;

This may be a dumb question but, are you using a DVD-A/SACD that is properly hooked up using 5.1 analog inputs on the player and receiver. &nbsp; If not, then this would make a huge diff. &nbsp;

Shinerman</font>
 
R

RX-V2400

Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>I have used the 5.1 analog inputs before but now I am usin TosLink optical. Do you think analog better? if so, tell me why that is as I thought digital optical was best.</font>
 
E

EdR

Audioholic
<font color='#000000'><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>
RX-V2400 : I have used the 5.1 analog inputs before but now I am usin TosLink optical. Do you think analog better? if so, tell me why that is as I thought digital optical was best.
If I understand your question.  Digital is digital, and as long as the zeros and ones can be distinguished by the decoder, there can be no audible difference in how they got there. That is, unless the bits are scambled, the transmission is always 'perfect'. &nbsp;
Once they've been D/A'ed and you're dealing with an analog signal, it's a very different story. So you want, when using digital sources, to keep them digital for as long as possible.
 
</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jeffsg4mac

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy
<font color='#000000'>I am not up on that Yamaha recv, but I do not think it decodes SACD and DVD A does it? so if you are going digital then you are not hearing the full quality of DVD A and SACD. You will need to use the analog in on the recv. Otherwise, you are just hearing CD quality, Dolby digital or DTS. Also, If you read about DTS neo 6 you will find that it does not alter the sound in anyway, just adds dimension which makes it sound more like a live performance which is what an &quot;Audiophile&quot; is supposed to be trying to achieve with his or her system right? I consider myself an audiophile having been doing this for some 20 plus years, having designed and built my own speakers, worked in high end shops, ect,ect, but I no longer use that term because quite frankly I think it is snooty and snobbish sounding, I like the term buff or enthusiast or just plain old nut which is what I am, an audio nut. See much less snobbish sounding than &quot; Audiophile &quot; don't you agree?
</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Shinerman

Shinerman

Senior Audioholic
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>
RX-V2400 : <font color='#000000'>I have used the 5.1 analog inputs before but now I am usin TosLink optical. Do you think analog better? if so, tell me why that is as I thought digital optical was best.</font>
<font color='#000000'>RX-V2400,

You not getting DVD-A/SACD sound then. &nbsp;Optical only gives you CD sound which can been run through DTS, DPL2, etc. &nbsp; DVD-A/SACD has to been run the through the 5, 6 or 7 channel analogs inputs. &nbsp;No choice in this and no way around it. &nbsp;To properly hook up a DVD-A/SACD player you need a video run (S-Video or Composite), a CD Audio run (analog, optical, coaxial) and a 5.1 run (6 to 8 seperate RCA type lines.) &nbsp; If you have 5.1, you need 6 lines, if you have 6.1 you need 7 lines, if you have 7.1 you need 8 lines. &nbsp;I know it's a lot of lines but your not getting DVD-A/SACD sound without them. &nbsp;Big difference. &nbsp;On my Panasonic DVD-A player and RX-V1400 receiver, I have 8 different runs between them. &nbsp;1 optical, 1 S-Video and 6 runs for 5.1. &nbsp;

I know a couple of companies now make 5 plug sets for DVD-A and SACD players. &nbsp;I use standard Radio Shack gold lines. &nbsp;

Trust me, you will hear a difference when you hook it up properly.

Shinerman.</font>
 
jeffsg4mac

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy
<font color='#000000'>Shinerman said &quot; Trust me, you will hear a difference when you hook it up properly.&quot;

Correct, and if you can't then you are not an audiophile
</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
R

RX-V2400

Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>Thanks Guys: I will get back to you when I have tried it. I guess that is why Yamahaluver told me to use the co-ax connection.</font>
 
Shinerman

Shinerman

Senior Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>&quot;I guess that is why Yamahaluver told me to use the co-ax connection.&quot;

Co-ax won't work for DVD-A/SACD sound. &nbsp;You need to use the area just to the right of your co-ax inputs on the back of your receiver. &nbsp;You have to run a seperate line for each channel. &nbsp;(Lft and Rt fronts, center, lft. and rt. rears and sub.) &nbsp;This is the only way for DVD-A/SACD sound. &nbsp;

Just want to make sure you understand this.

Shinerman</font>
 
G

Guest

Guest
<font color='#000000'>[/QUOTE]
Co-ax won't work for DVD-A/SACD sound. &nbsp;You need to use the area just to the right of your co-ax inputs on the back of your receiver. &nbsp;You have to run a seperate line for each channel. &nbsp;(Lft and Rt fronts, center, lft. and rt. rears and sub.) &nbsp;This is the only way for DVD-A/SACD sound. &nbsp;


Shinerman, I have been watching this thread because I have a 1400 too. I have both the Coax and Separates hooked up even though I have yet to play a SACD or DVD-A Disc. Should I lose the digital COAX?

Thanks

Digital</font>
 
jeffsg4mac

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy
<font color='#000000'>Digital, you have to let the DVD player decode the SACD and the DVD audio signals and feed the analog signals out of the player to the preamp or receiver via the analog inputs. The receiver does not have DVD audio and SACD decoding and I do not think that the players will even stream those signals at this point in time. So the answer is to your question is yes, if you have a DVD A/SACD player. You can use both as I do, digital out of the player for movies and analog out for everything else. Just remember to switch the receiver back to the analog inputs when listening to music. Also depending on what player you have, you will need to go into it's setup menu and set it up for your  speaker. requirements whatever they may be. Also, you can use either the coax digital or the fiber optic connection for movies. For movies I mean anything you want to listen to in Dolby digital or DTS. Chance are the Dolby digital and DTS decoders in the receiver are better and have more setup options than the ones in the DVD player. &nbsp;Hope that helps
</font>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Shinerman

Shinerman

Senior Audioholic
<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>
Guest : <font color='#000000'>
Co-ax won't work for DVD-A/SACD sound.  You need to use the area just to the right of your co-ax inputs on the back of your receiver.  You have to run a seperate line for each channel.  (Lft and Rt fronts, center, lft. and rt. rears and sub.)  This is the only way for DVD-A/SACD sound.  


Shinerman, I have been watching this thread because I have a 1400 too. I have both the Coax and Separates hooked up even though I have yet to play a SACD or DVD-A Disc. Should I lose the digital COAX?

Thanks

Digital</font>[/quote]
<font color='#000000'>Yes, you need both. &nbsp;

Shinerman</font>
 
Shinerman

Shinerman

Senior Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>&quot;Yes, you need both.&quot;

I meant, NO you need both.

Shinerman</font>
 
R

RX-V2400

Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>Jeff et al:

I hyave read my DVD-Audio player (Toshiba sd4800) manual and it says for inputing Dolby, Dolby Pro Logics or DTS into a a souround-sound reciever to use the digital optical out with the setting on Bitstream. This is what I am doing.

However I will connect the 5.1 analog connection up too and then I can switch from one to another. I also need to check my &quot;groups&quot;. It may be I was playing stereo and did not know it.

Thanks for the input and I will get5 backi to you soon.</font>
 
Z

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan
<font color='#000000'>This is a cool thread to happen up on. I have the 1400 and have read the manual at least 6 times. I did notice that it showed how to make all audio connections, but did not know it was required. I went with the optical thinking it was the best.
So what I am getting here, is that if I hook up multi ch &amp; &nbsp;toslink, if I watch a dvd it will get the signal from the tos, and if I listen to dvd-a it will get the signal from the multi-ch? Just want to be sure I can choose my sound fields for movies.Thanks for any feedback!</font>
 
R

RX-V2400

Audioholic
<font color='#000000'>Where is Yamahaluver? Has he been away from his computer all this last week? He knows all this stuff about connections but is silent. Lets hope he is not sick and gets back soon!

Me like Zunbo used all optical thinking it best but the manuals, like Zumbo says, show all the possible connections but do not recommend which is best or correct. Maybe they are scared of offending cabel makers?

Zumbo is right - this originally silly thread I started has got quite interesting.</font>
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top