Enough receiver for now?

[willland]

18 minutes ago, dimanata2007 said:

 Luxman is gone. I needed HT receiver and unfortunately Luxman had only 2 channels and no HDMI.

I knew that, but if you want to drive a pair of speakers the way the R-117 does you most likely would have to step up to an outboard amp.

 

Bill

[vasubandu]

1 minute ago, The History Kid said:

I've said it before - I'll say it again - anymore, you will not get an AVR that puts out 100 WPC or more for under $2k that includes all of your Dolby Atmos/DTS:X, HDMI 2.2 stuff.  At least not the mainstream name brands.

History Kid, Crutchfield sells the A3070 for $1,999.99, and it is the one with that pathetic power.  It also is the top of the line for Yamaha.  I think you can change your saying and just say that no receiver most people have ever heard of will produce enough power.  I have checked the top from Yamaha, Pioneer, Onkyo, and they miss.  The Denon AVR-X7200WA is rated at 150W.  Its power consumption is 780 Watts.  There is only so much you can do with 780 watts.  My Outlaw 7700 has a power consumption of 1800 watts.  

 

I have been researching the heck out of this, and I cannot find a single receiver anywhere that seemed to actually have enough power.  

[vasubandu]

On 1/15/2018 at 4:08 PM, bkevind said:

Honestly, just give your AVR a try, be thoughtful and moderate as you increase the volume.  Then strongly consider an upgrade to something like the Marantz 6011, and see how you like it.  Unless you're going to spend big bucks on high end processor + external amps, you probably won't hear a huge difference going from the 6011

 

You raise an interesting question.  I am going to assume that my Outlaw 7700 will cover the power requirements for my entire 5.1 system (Assume RF-5 towers, RC-7 center, RS-7 surrounds and PB2 Plus sub.  If that is right, then my receiver or whatever does not need to provide power at all - it needs to provide a signal.  So the question then becomes whether there is a difference in the signal between devices.  To the extent that it is digital processing, would't they all process the same data the same way?  If not, how does one go about finding the best?  Is it different for speaker brands or even lines within a brand?

 

And why doesn't someone make a purely processing unit that does not pretend to be an amp.  Save the money and the heat.  Someone should.

[jjptkd]

5 minutes ago, vasubandu said:

And why doesn't someone make a purely processing unit that does not pretend to be an amp.  Save the money and the heat.  Someone should.

 

They already do, a friend of mine has the Yamaha 5100, believe they can be had for around $1800?

 

https://www.crutchfield.com/p_022CXA5100/Yamaha-CX-A5100.html?tp=47509&awkw=156044726905&awat=pla&awnw=s&awcr=81764436025&awdv=c&awug=9033271

[vasubandu]

28 minutes ago, The History Kid said:

They're honestly not doing anything wrong as long as the factual specs are posted.  It's the consumers responsibility to do the research and make an educated purchase - a company is not responsible for the fact that the customer bought into an annotated specification that could be disproven and corrected by just reading the manual or reading the specs online.

 

Actually you can commit consumer fraud by saying something that is technically true in a way that is likely or intended to deceive consumers.  This what Onkyo says at its site

 

      9.2-Channel Network A/V Receiver

---

• 175 W/Ch (6 Ohms), 135 W/Ch (8 Ohms)
• THX® Certified Select™ Theater Reference Sound

How does that not mean 9 channels at 175 watts per channel?  If I am an electrical engineer and read the specs?

 

What would the average consumer think?  

Why did Onkyo state it that way?

Is there a normal audio/video use where a consumer would actually get 175 watts, or is that for stereo, which they market separately and do not need 9.2

 

 

 

 

[The History Kid]

33 minutes ago, vasubandu said:

History Kid, Crutchfield sells the A3070 for $1,999.99, and it is the one with that pathetic power.  It also is the top of the line for Yamaha.  I think you can change your saying and just say that no receiver most people have ever heard of will produce enough power.  I have checked the top from Yamaha, Pioneer, Onkyo, and they miss.  The Denon AVR-X7200WA is rated at 150W.  Its power consumption is 780 Watts.  There is only so much you can do with 780 watts.  My Outlaw 7700 has a power consumption of 1800 watts.  

 

I have been researching the heck out of this, and I cannot find a single receiver anywhere that seemed to actually have enough power.  

Both AVRs from Cambridge Audio produce 120 and 200 WPC ACD respectively at the price of $1200 and $2500. Rotel also offers a 100+ AVR at $2000. They're out there, you just need to stop buying the Olive Garden brand.

[The History Kid]

11 minutes ago, vasubandu said:

 

Actually you can commit consumer fraud by saying something that is technically true in a way that is likely or intended to deceive consumers.  This what Onkyo says at its site

 

      9.2-Channel Network A/V Receiver

---

• 175 W/Ch (6 Ohms), 135 W/Ch (8 Ohms)
• THX® Certified Select™ Theater Reference Sound

How does that not mean 9 channels at 175 watts per channel?  If I am an electrical engineer and read the specs?

 

What would the average consumer think?  

Why did Onkyo state it that way?

Is there a normal audio/video use where a consumer would actually get 175 watts, or is that for stereo, which they market separately and do not need 9.2

 

 

 

 

Per channel, as in each channel is capable. Each channel on its own is capable of 175 RMS. Now if you add another...and another...and another...

 

The issue is when you see specs stated as "95 x 7" which some do, because it is probably not that. Even then though one might argue it is 95, but after distortion, processing and signal path, it's lower.

[wvu80]

10 minutes ago, vasubandu said:

Actually you can commit consumer fraud by saying something that is technically true in a way that is likely or intended to deceive consumers.  This what Onkyo says at its site

You have picked on the advertising practices of my beloved Onkyo!  Since they are not here to defend themselves, I'll enter a plea on their behalf;  I plead guilty. 

 

Actually, it's even worse than you think.  I didn't see the entire specs from what you listed, but I bet anything the Big number 175 wpc  @ 6 Ohms is almost always with ONE channel driven.  And those specs could be derived from power at 1000 Hz, or power at 20Hz to 20Khz.  Who knows?

 

As I said, I love my Onkyo, I love the sound, but their way of displaying power numbers is deceptive.  Who runs an audio system on ONE channel? 

[vasubandu]

6 minutes ago, The History Kid said:

er channel, as in each channel is capable. Each channel on its own is capable of 175 RMS. Now if you add another...and another...and another...

 

9.2 means 9 channels going at once.  175 watts per channel means each having up to 175 watts.  99 out of 100 consumer would understand that. I just to that one off the jury.

[The History Kid]

1 minute ago, vasubandu said:

 

9.2 means 9 channels going at once.  175 watts per channel means each having up to 175 watts.  99 out of 100 consumer would understand that. I just to that one off the jury.

I didn't say, and don't say it's ethical or correct. I'm just telling you what they mean and what they'd say, and how the industry probably defends it.

[vasubandu]

6 minutes ago, wvu80 said:

As I said, I love my Onkyo, I love the sound, but their way of displaying power numbers is deceptive. 

 

It is the whole industry.  Forcing all of them to change would be a real benefit for everyone.

 

I don't see any earlier lawsuits,  Have to look into this some more.  

[The History Kid]

1 minute ago, vasubandu said:

 

It is the whole industry. 

Not at all true.

[Boilermaker86]

11 minutes ago, wvu80 said:

 

 

As I said, I love my Onkyo, I love the sound, but their way of displaying power numbers is deceptive.  Who runs an audio system on ONE channel? 

I Wonder if that is new. I was looking at the Marantz 8012 and they quote it now one channel too. I did a double take when I saw 205 per channel 

[vasubandu]

So with my amp, should I look at Marantz AV systems instead of SR? And should I stick with Marantz or look as low as Onkyo?

[vasubandu]

1 minute ago, The History Kid said:

Not at all true

 

I stand corrected.  I mean the whole "Best Buy" industry. And even that might be unfair.

[The History Kid]

Just now, vasubandu said:

So with my amp, should I look at Marantz AV systems instead of SR? And should I stick with Marantz or look as low as Onkyo?

AV systems are pres only, not AVRs. SR and NR are AVRs.

[wvu80]

8 minutes ago, vasubandu said:

So with my amp, should I look at Marantz AV systems instead of SR? And should I stick with Marantz or look as low as Onkyo?

I have an Marantz SR6011 2016-17 model.  It processes 11 channels and has discrete amps to power 9 channels, so to max it out I can run 7.2 (with zone 2), or 5.2.4, or 5.2 bi-amped with zone 2.

 

I like my Onk 717 (2014) as well.  I think it sounds better than the Marantz.  Both have more bells and whistles than I ever plan to use.

 

I don't know what you mean by "as low as Onkyo?"  Nothing wrong with the Onk.

[vasubandu]

6 minutes ago, wvu80 said:

I don't know what you mean by "as low as Onkyo?"  Nothing wrong with the Onk.

That was intended as a joke for wvu80 who proclaimed his love for Onkyo.  Actually, I love Onkyo too.  For the longest time I think they stood out as a unique value proposition, but the seem to have moved up in the world.

 

So now I am confused, If I got an Onkyo PR-RZ 5100 with my  Outlaw 7700 amp, would I still need another piece of equipment?  Do I need a receiver too? If so, what is the purpose of the 5100?

[wvu80]

1 minute ago, vasubandu said:

That was intended as a joke for wvu80 who proclaimed his love for Onkyo.  Actually, I love Onkyo too.  For the longest time I think they stood out as a unique value proposition, but the seem to have moved up in the world.

 

So now I am confused, If I got an Onkyo PR-RZ 5100 with my  Outlaw 7700 amp, would I still need another piece of equipment?  Do I need a receiver too? If so, what is the purpose of the 5100?

The 5100 does not have an amplifier, it is a pre-amplifier processor, pre-pro for short.  It can't do anything by itself in terms of making speakers work.

 

The Outlaw 7700 is a 7 channel amplifier, it also cannot do anything by itself.  It needs a pre-pro.

 

Both my Onk and Marantz AVR's have built-in amps of about 100 wpc so if I want a significant performance improvement both have a pre-amp OUT so I can add a (for instance) 200 wpc amp.  You have to double the power to get a 3 db increase in SPL.

[vasubandu]

1 minute ago, wvu80 said:

The Outlaw 7700 is a 7 channel amplifier, it also cannot do anything by itself.  It needs a pre-pro.

 

OK, but if the 7700 had the 5100 as its preprocessor, then together they would be complete, right? But the 7700 would be the only source of power, whereas if I has the Marantz SR6011, it would power the surrounds for example. Did I get that right? And the preprocessors seem like receivers with an amp, so why are they all so expensive?  Less is more?