AVR for stereo?

[nitrofan]

My denon avr4311ci does an excellent job in two channel, but my previous onkyo (forget model) sucked. It was not top of the line,not even close though. I think the best avr's can handle 2 channel duty just fine

[richieb]

44 minutes ago, wvu80 said:

 

I also have a Khorn.  It absolutely 100% needs a sub due the muddy lower bass.

 

On my Onkyo AVR if there are only L/R speakers then the default is Full (Large to all other brand AVRs).  If I add a sub I can cross both the L/R and the sub at 80 Hz.  The speakers transform instantly from muddy bass to clear as a bell.  The transformation is dramatic.

 

Bah Humbug - the KHorn speaks for itself, by itself. Any "additions" only defeat the Masters design. Enjoy them as God intended, in all their naked glory. 

I do use a small, sealed 10 inch sub with my RB75's but then I'm augmenting inch woofers. The right tool for the right job. The KHorn is equipped with its own, built in tool belt. 

 

[wvu80]

34 minutes ago, richieb said:

Bah Humbug - the KHorn speaks for itself, by itself. Any "additions" only defeat the Masters design.

 

I don't think you're hearing me.  The Khorn had a major flaw that was unacceptable.  Several actually, but one that was a deal breaker.  I didn't  introduce a sub to augment the lower end, I needed the sub so I could use the AVR to run the Khorn with an 80 Hz crossover.

 

The Master's design as you put it, has undergone several changes since the 1978 model that I own, specifically the tweeter AND the squawker were changed as was the crossover network and its component parts.  If PWK changed it then it follows there was room for improvement and needed to be changed. 

 

You've got a top of the line RB-75 so you obviously know what good sound is like.  I think if you sat in my living room with my AVR you would hear what I heard.  It was not a minor problem to my ears.

[jdmccall]

1 hour ago, wvu80 said:

 

I don't think you're hearing me.  The Khorn had a major flaw that was unacceptable.  Several actually, but one that was a deal breaker.  I didn't  introduce a sub to augment the lower end, I needed the sub so I could use the AVR to run the Khorn with an 80 Hz crossover.

To quote Lampy from "The Brave Little Toaster"..."I think I know what you're talking about".  It's kind of similar to why I use subs with my '82's.  Not so much to extend the bass (although they do - which is good), but to smooth out a substantial bass boom in the 50Hz vicinity.  Setting the X/O at 100Hz really flattens the response below that point.  Of course, so would moving the speakers out from the front wall a bit, but I can't do that at the moment.

[Srinath]

8 hours ago, wvu80 said:

 

I also have a Khorn.  It absolutely 100% needs a sub due the muddy lower bass.

 

On my Onkyo AVR if there are only L/R speakers then the default is Full (Large to all other brand AVRs).  If I add a sub I can cross both the L/R and the sub at 80 Hz.  The speakers transform instantly from muddy bass to clear as a bell.  The transformation is dramatic.

I've not heard my Khorns yet, but my B&W 802 used to do this. That was because low end grunt takes current. And a high damping factor to sound great up high. Plain and simple, that is one reason why amps like a Pioneer sx1250 sound so great down low, but start to sound slow and not sharp up high. High current and not enough damping factor.

Cool.

Srinath.

[wvu80]

7 hours ago, jdmccall said:

 It's kind of similar to why I use subs with my '82's.  Not so much to extend the bass (although they do - which is good), but to smooth out a substantial bass boom in the 50Hz vicinity.  

 

Setting the X/O at 100Hz really flattens the response below that point.  Of course, so would moving the speakers out from the front wall a bit, but I can't do that at the moment.

 

I'm glad somebody understands what I'm saying.  By making that one simple tweak my Khorns went from pedestrian sounding to the phenomenal high performance speakers we all thought they were.

[jimjimbo]

 








I also have a Khorn.  It absolutely 100% needs a sub due the muddy lower bass.








 








On my Onkyo AVR if there are only L/R speakers then the default is Full (Large to all other brand AVRs).  If I add a sub I can cross both the L/R and the sub at 80 Hz.  The speakers transform instantly from muddy bass to clear as a bell.  The transformation is dramatic.

Not all Khorns are created equal, nor are room setups, acoustic treatment, sources, amps, etc.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[wvu80]

4 minutes ago, jimjimbo said:

Not all Khorns are created equal, nor are room setups, acoustic treatment, sources, amps, etc.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I'm not meaning to ignore your topical content Jim, but I see the multiple 20 to 30 extra line breaks again, so please forgive the reply.  I can't imagine an Ipad would create such a problem, but I know during the last forum software update Tapatalk was deemed no longer necessary to view and post replies.  I wonder if that's the problem?

 

Just as an experiment, would you mind trying to quote my same post, but from a PC?  It may help Chad troubleshoot the multiple line break problem.

[jimjimbo]

2 hours ago, wvu80 said:

 

I'm not meaning to ignore your topical content Jim, but I see the multiple 20 to 30 extra line breaks again, so please forgive the reply.  I can't imagine an Ipad would create such a problem, but I know during the last forum software update Tapatalk was deemed no longer necessary to view and post replies.  I wonder if that's the problem?

 

Just as an experiment, would you mind trying to quote my same post, but from a PC?  It may help Chad troubleshoot the multiple line break problem.

Here I am quoting your post via my laptop, via Chrome.  It very well may be a Tapatalk issue, and I use it both on my phone and iPad.  For me, Tapatalk is convenient, organized, and easy to use.

[dtel]

For the original question, AVR for stereo? From my experience I would say NO WAY, thought it was ok until I separated it from the AVR and was shocked at the big difference. I was only using the pre-outs on the AVR.         Yamaha Rx V730 replaced by a DAC for a preamp

 

BUT with the huge difference in quality and even moreso the sound of different AVR's I would have to say try it and see how it sounds first, and go from there. It's not always about the cost of the AVR but more the design and just plain how it sounds, expensive does not automatically make things sound better.

 

IMO

[Woofers and Tweeters]

8 minutes ago, dtel said:

For the original question, AVR for stereo? From my experience I would say NO WAY, thought it was ok until I separated it from the AVR and was shocked at the big difference.

+1

[billybob]

Nakamichi AV-500...using it for 2 channel since getting it. Read audioreview all about it...

 

[jdmccall]

I full well plan to continue using the big ol' VSX55 and DV47 in my main music rig until at least one of the two croaks...assuming that I don't croak first, in which case I will no longer care either way.  But, as I originally said, I do daydream about replacing them -one needs to be ready!  And being the wishy-washy type, I find it very difficult to choose between the flexibility and value of a good modern AVR, and the simplicity and quality of good integrateds.  Ah, modern problems!  I'm lucky to be able to fret over such trivial pursuits! 

[jimjimbo]

Well, why doesn't someone ask twistoffcrankrammer (aka Roger)?  He DID take junior and senior electronics in high school.

[Quiet_Hollow]

14 hours ago, jdmccall said:

All AVR's are definitely not created equal!  That's for sure.

Big +1 there.

1 hour ago, dtel said:

...with the huge difference in quality and even moreso the sound of different AVR's I would have to say try it and see how it sounds first, and go from there. It's not always about the cost of the AVR but more the design and just plain how it sounds, expensive does not automatically make things sound better.

I totally agree. Prior to 2005, the traditional arguments in this regard tended towards holding water. Since then however, things have gotten murky....and recently even more so.  Blanket statements can no longer apply to a product where combinations of on-board DSP, sophisticated noise shaping, and novel amplifier topologies are involved.

[wvu80]

2 hours ago, jimjimbo said:

Here I am quoting your post via my laptop, via Chrome.  It very well may be a Tapatalk issue, and I use it both on my phone and iPad.  For me, Tapatalk is convenient, organized, and easy to use.

That looks completely normal, Jim.  ^^^

 

Chad knows this is a problem but with limited information and I'm sure his limited time to deal with this glitch obviously it remains a problem.  I'll go ahead and forward this information to him.  Thanks for the help.

[Ceptorman]

For a few hundred dollars you can experiment yourself. You can find a good used pre-amp/amp and try it out. You can always sell it for probably what you paid for it if you don't like it.

I have a 10 year old Yamaha AVR I used as a HT and 2 channel. I then bought a SS amp (500x2) and connected it to the pre-outs of the AVR. The extra power did make the AVR sound better for 2 channel listening. It was when I added a $225 SS pre-amp that the sounds became MUCH better. The low end really came to life. The pre-amp has much more detail and clarity. I'm sure a better pre would sound even better. I want to try a tube pre also.

[dtel]

1 hour ago, Ceptorman said:

For a few hundred dollars you can experiment yourself. You can find a good used pre-amp/amp and try it out. You can always sell it for probably what you paid for it if you don't like it.

True, but I would be surprised if you ended up selling it. 

[Srinath]

2 hours ago, Quiet_Hollow said:

Big +1 there.

I totally agree. Prior to 2005, the traditional arguments in this regard tended towards holding water. Since then however, things have gotten murky....and recently even more so.  Blanket statements can no longer apply to a product where combinations of on-board DSP, sophisticated noise shaping, and novel amplifier topologies are involved.

I almost believe the opposite. But I should say, I've not been inside any amp made after ~2009 or so. But the Onkyo 805 (Latest amp I worked on) was impressive in 2ch IMHO. The Z9 in pure direct also pretty good, I dunno depends on quality of both sides of course, but probably amps exist better than the 805/Z9

1 hour ago, Ceptorman said:

For a few hundred dollars you can experiment yourself. You can find a good used pre-amp/amp and try it out. You can always sell it for probably what you paid for it if you don't like it.

I have a 10 year old Yamaha AVR I used as a HT and 2 channel. I then bought a SS amp (500x2) and connected it to the pre-outs of the AVR. The extra power did make the AVR sound better for 2 channel listening. It was when I added a $225 SS pre-amp that the sounds became MUCH better. The low end really came to life. The pre-amp has much more detail and clarity. I'm sure a better pre would sound even better. I want to try a tube pre also.

 

500 X 2 - yikes. How can anything compare to that ?

 

Cool.

Srinath.

[Ceptorman]

1 hour ago, Srinath said:

I almost believe the opposite. But I should say, I've not been inside any amp made after ~2009 or so. But the Onkyo 805 (Latest amp I worked on) was impressive in 2ch IMHO. The Z9 in pure direct also pretty good, I dunno depends on quality of both sides of course, but probably amps exist better than the 805/Z9

 

500 X 2 - yikes. How can anything compare to that ?

 

Cool.

Srinath.

Another one just like it would compare, it's also a 1000w mono block