Enough receiver for now?

[The History Kid]

4 minutes ago, vasubandu said:

 

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?

Sound Quality, generally.  Also you have to understand that most pre-pro's are just non-amped versions of the flagship model, they don't make a pre-pro version of the SR-5012 for example, no point in that.  They're built around the SR-8012.

 

Power amps aren't really subject to power declination either - so if you're doing 5.2.2 or something, I'd just do it that way anyway. 

[wvu80]

32 minutes ago, vasubandu said:

 

OK, but if the 7700 had the 5100 as its preprocessor, then together they would be complete, right?

 

Correct.  You also have to buy multiple RCA cables to pair them together for each amp.  Those can be expensive.

 

Quote

But the 7700 would be the only source of power, whereas

if I have the Marantz SR6011, it would power the surrounds for example. Did I get that right?

 

Correct again.  The 6011 is an AVR and is complete by itself to run your speakers, including the surrounds. The 6011 will power both side surrounds and back surrounds with ease.   I like AVR's because they are simpler and they fit my power needs, especially for highly efficient speakers like Klipsch.

+++

 

And the preprocessors seem like receivers with an amp, so why are they all so expensive?  Less is more?

Not really "less is more."

 

A lot of people want a pre-pro because they want higher end components, such as a high-end DAC which might not be cost effective in an AVR, although most flagship AVR's have top flight components.

 

Then the buyer can pick up an amp that has better components and they can get exactly as many amps as they want, 1 (mono block) 2, 3, 5 and 7 are common dedicated amp sizes. 

 

I think the Marantz SR6011 is a great value and will power almost anything you need.  You can go for separates if you want to go "next level."

[bkevind]

1 hour ago, vasubandu said:

 

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.

 

I just use an AVR, top of the line if I can (like the Yamaha 3070). I don't care as much for it's amp section, but I do use it for some channels, as I am running 11.1 (or 7.1.4 I guess).  And the height / surround channels don't typically need as much juice.

 

Good processors cost the same or more, I'm ok with the level of processing I get with an AVR and I like the flexibiity of using the AVR amp if I need to.

 

Take a deeper look at the specs, in particular the DACs used.  Maybe that's not something I can hear the difference in, but I know my 3070 uses superior DACs to the 2070 and below.  Peace of mind I guess.  Also the best room correction software is provided in the top of the line.  

[vasubandu]

31 minutes ago, wvu80 said:

I think the Marantz SR6011 is a great value and will power almost anything you need.  You can go for separates if you want to go "next level."

 

No, I am confident that based on what and others have said as well as my research, that it is the sweet spot receiver for me.  It was more a matter of trying to better understand the why of it.

 

It is really important to me that when I watch TV, I  be able to look at the electrical socket in my wall where things are plugged in and mentally follow the path of those electrons to the  power conditioner, then the receiver, then the amp and then to the speakers and to understand what they are doing or what is happening to them at every step along the way.  If I could not do that, I would get no enjoyment out of my TV.  Before I started this, it was no problem because I was not curious.  Now, I am curious.

[vasubandu]

32 minutes ago, bkevind said:

Take a deeper look at the specs, in particular the DACs used.  Maybe that's not something I can hear the difference in, but I know my 3070 uses superior DACs to the 2070 and below.

I am not familiar at all with DACs or even how they work, but as friend once showed me the difference between a $25 DAC and a $150 DAC with my Monitor desktop speakers, and I was quite surprised at how great they could sound, and also surprised at how far behind the $25 DAC my computer sound was.  I know DACs get better than his $150 DAC - I think it was a Schidt or something - and I can only imagine what the upper limit is.  And I have to say that was a difference that I could hear.

[willland]

1 hour ago, vasubandu said:

OK, but if the 7700 had the 5100 as its preprocessor, then together they would be complete, right?

Yes, for 7 channels.

 

1 hour ago, vasubandu said:

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?

Yes you did.

 

1 hour ago, vasubandu said:

And the preprocessors seem like receivers with an amp

An AVR without built in amps.

 

1 hour ago, vasubandu said:

so why are they all so expensive?  Less is more?

Most, not all, preamp/processors are built with better guts(DACs, processor, video chip, etc.) than even their flagship AVR.  Some have the same exact preamp section without the amp section.  Some mfr's like Marantz, put their best parts in their flagship pre/pro which is the AV-8802A. 

 

If channel expansion is in your future, then by all means get the flagship AVR over it's equivalent pre/pro.

 

Bill

[willland]

Even though I am completely happy with my HT rig with my NAD pre/pro, the Anthem AVM60, Onkyo PR-RZ5100, Yamaha CX-A5100, or another NAD are on my short list if mine takes a dump.

 

Bill

[vasubandu]

@willland you once again have demonstrated not only clarity  of your thoughts but also an ability to communicate complex subjects clearly.  Thanks.

 

I am far from being able to evaluate the components of AVRs or preamps, but your explanation makes sense.  The only analogy  I have is computers, and I suspect that it will only lead me in the wrong direction.

 

I understand you to be saying that an AV8802A would have better components than an SR6011.  An AV8802A would cost me $2,300, while I can nab a 6011 for $730 from A4Less.  Something (common sense) tells me that an 8802A is not going to give me three times as much listening enjoyment right now as an 8802A would.  So that decision, which seems have unanimous approval (why didn't you just tell me?) just makes more sense.

 

So thanks from the bottom of my heart. You have really helped me.

[willland]

7 hours ago, vasubandu said:

I understand you to be saying that an AV8802A would have better components than an SR6011.  An AV8802A would cost me $2,300, while I can nab a 6011 for $730 from A4Less.  Something (common sense) tells me that an 8802A is not going to give me three times as much listening enjoyment right now as an 8802A would.

Here is the thing, there will always be something "better".  The 6011 will bring the average buyer and user to complete HT enjoyment.  Will the 8802A bring more enjoyment to those same buyers?  Possibly but the law of diminishing returns will be a factor to most.  I am totally convinced that the 6011 plus your Outlaw 7700 will rock the house and impress most if not all who come to enjoy it.

 

Bill

[bkevind]

4 hours ago, willland said:

Here is the thing, there will always be something "better".  The 6011 will bring the average buyer and user to complete HT enjoyment.  Will the 8802A bring more enjoyment to those same buyers?  Possibly but the law of diminishing returns will be a factor to most.  I am totally convinced that the 6011 plus your Outlaw 7700 will rock the house and impress most if not all who come to enjoy it.

 

Bill

 

That's my take on it.  There are plenty of processor options out there for separates, but the budget options will not likely be superior to a high end AVR.  That's why I'm in the hybrid camp: AVR + external amp.  Keeps the budget reasonable, and the result is quite functional.  A decent/good external amp can provide all the muscle you need, then the question becomes, what are you missing with AVR processing vs a pre/pro?  Especially in my terrible mixed use family room - it's not worth investing any deeper for me.  

 

On that note, I'd like to see a breakdown of the technical spec differences between say the 6011 and the 8802A (not just the components used, but design that leads to improved sound signals).  I know you can use the same ESS Sabre whatever chips in two different components, and the result will be much different depending on the overall design.  

 

I think the real difference comes into play when you've got a proper theater room to work with + high end processor and amps.  My expectation for a good processor is absolute isolation from noise and distortion, differential circuits, balanced inputs outputs, etc.  It better have outstanding results on a test bench (and to my ears) or it's not any better than an AVR.   To me this means, budget for pre and amps is north of 10k or it's not really worth doing. 

 

It would be interesting to have a blind test session with a group of enthusiasts.

 

Maybe that's me looking to justify for my chosen path

[vasubandu]

Call me crazy or a cynic, but I suspect that there also is an element of self-fulfilling prophecies.  Anyone who buys the crazy expensive preprocessors also probably buys crazy expensive speakers and spends crazy money making sure their room is perfect.  Why is sounds "better" if it does would be hard to pin down, and they have an incentive to think it does after spending all that money.

 

The better component thing never made sense to me. Better components can be reverse engineered and duplicated in a few hours in China, and then the same quality is available for less. The only thing I know of that keeps an edge is a patent and royalties.  Largely analogizing to the computer world. here.  But as soon as the right to charge a royalty goes away, then poof! everyone has it. I don't know the royalty situation here.

 

Unless the components for the less epxensive models are intentionally dumbed  down, I really question how much difference exists.  I will get my 6011 next week and be thrilled with it.

[willland]

I originally had a midlevel Onkyo TX-SR705 AVR driving my RF-63 setup and it sounded better than anything I had ever owned.  I added a B&K Reference 4430 200w/ch 3-channel amplifier to the mix and it sounded much better.  More control, better punch, more presence.  Added a matching B&K EX4420 200w/ch 2-channel amp to the system and it stepped it up another notch. 

 

Bought an older flagship NAD T773 AVR at a pawn shop just to flip and pocket some $$$ and slid it in where the Onkyo was.  Wow, did not expect such an improvement.  Bigger soundstage, better imaging, greater detail.  Replaced the B&K amps with Acurus and added a Revel B15 subwoofer and it literally took my system to another dimension.  Loved the NAD AVR so much I replaced it with an NAD preamp/processor and still used the Acurus amps.  Still more improvement across the board.  Added an SVS SB13 Plus and now my room was pressurized.  Added a pair of Klipsch RT-10ds and I am where I am and am very pleased.

 

My point here, let your system evolve over time.  Look for the deals(used, new, refurbished, etc.) and you will eventually be content.

 

Bill

[dtel]

10 hours ago, vasubandu said:

Unless the components for the less epxensive models are intentionally dumbed  down, I really question how much difference exists.  I will get my 6011 next week and be thrilled with it.

I bet you will be thrilled.

I don't think they are intentionally dumbed down, probably just better parts and design.

 

Kind of an example, I got a 10 year old receiver to replace a 12 year old receiver just to get HDMI. What I didn't expect was the difference in sound there was. The 12 year old was $500 new and the 10 year old was $1500 new. Now there was a difference in brands which could be part of it also.

I paid full price for the first one and $100 for the second one.

 

3 hours ago, willland said:

My point here, let your system evolve over time.  Look for the deals(used, new, refurbished, etc.) and you will eventually be content.

Great point, because it will evolve anyway, things change and deals come up.

[vasubandu]

@dtel that makes perfect sense.  In terms of processing, I would expect constant advances.  So the less expensive current system outperforming a more expensive older system  is understandable.  What I question is the difference between a $500 and $1500 speaker today. Assume that they have the same features.  Is DTS:X going to sound better on the more expensive one?  I do not know enough to have an opinion, but I assume that DTS:X has both a hardware and a software component.  If one is better, which is it?

 

There might be different levels of quality in the hardware components, but that just seems odd.  We are not talking computer processors here, so wouldn't they all be the same?  If it is software, who controls it?  I am just trying to actually under the "better parts and design" thing.  What exactly does that mean?

 

I think that audio equipment is also having a bit of the problem that computers do. As things get better, the differences between the good and the excellent tend to diminish in practical terms.  SO it becomes more a marketing thing.  All of the receivers today are amazingly impressive compared to a decade ago.  So our perspectives become a bit clouded.  

 

All of this reminds me of something a friend in the computer business told me.  He said that men buy computers based on specs - RAM, hard drive size, processor speed, etc., while women identify what they want to do and ask for something that will do that.  When it comes to audio, I am a big fan of the "good enough" school.  I doubt that I can hear the difference between great and exceptional, so good enough is great for me.

 

To pick the 6011, I went to A4Less and just kept clicking the check boxes for the features I wanted, and then looked at the least expensive 3 or 4.  

 

FEATURES

 4 Ohm Stable(19)

 100-120 Watts(4)

 121-Up Watts(15)

 Airplay(19)

 Dolby Atmos(19)

 Bluetooth(19)

 DTS:x(19)

 HDCP 2.2(19)

 HDR(19)

 Heos Ready(5)

 Mulit-Channel Preout(19)

 Multi-room Audio(19)

 Multi-room Video(18)

 Networking (wired)(19)

 Phono Input(16)

 Sound & Vision Top Pick(3)

 USB input(19)

 Wi-Fi (wireless)(19)

 Yamaha Musiccast(3)

 

An this left me the Marantz SR6011 ($730),  Pioneer Elite SC-LX701 ($800),  Denon AVR-X4300H ($900), and  Yamaha RX-A2070 ($1200).  I trust Marantz over Pioneer, so it was an each choice.  I don't think that any of the others would have given me a better experience.

[wvu80]

10 hours ago, vasubandu said:

Unless the components for the less expensive models are intentionally dumbed  down, I really question how much difference exists. 

 

I will get my 6011 next week and be thrilled with it.

That's the right spirit!   

+++

 

Soap Box:  One thing I love about the group process is although it collectively may not always make the perfect decision, it almost guarantees you will not make the worst decision, or even a bad decision.

 

 

[dtel]

30 minutes ago, vasubandu said:

In terms of processing, I would expect constant advances. 

It's like computers, it's always changing. Get all set up, HDMI comes along, then the constant changes in processing every year or so, it never ends. Just in media alone, dvd then bluray, now i'm switching to 4K hdr, might be good for a year or so. 

 

I was talking with the oldest grandson yesterday about VHS and how it was so cool to go to a video store and pick from maby 50 movies we could play at home when we were ready. And that first VHS player cost us $350 back then. he just laughed. Plus back then the sound was in pro-logic only with no discrete channels.

 

 

 

41 minutes ago, vasubandu said:

Is DTS:X going to sound better on the more expensive one?  I do not know enough to have an opinion, but I assume that DTS:X has both a hardware and a software component.  If one is better, which is it?

 

I would say most of the time it will sound better on the more expensive one, but it's not a positive, price does not always mean better. Part of the problem is different models can affect things as much as cost of the unit. In other words there is no guarantee, not much help I know, it's why I depend on advice from friends and people here who have tried different models and spent the money already and have an opinion on it.
 

30 minutes ago, wvu80 said:

Soap Box:  One thing I love about the group process is although it collectively may not always make the perfect decision, it almost guarantees you will not make the worst decision, or even a bad decision.

 

This is exactly what I was thinking in what I was saying above, people here have helped me save alot of money, mostly from not making mistakes buying the wrong things.

[vasubandu]

3 hours ago, wvu80 said:

One thing I love about the group process is although it collectively may not always make the perfect decision, it almost guarantees you will not make the worst decision, or even a bad decision.

Group processes come in many forms.  Some are helpful and some are not.  Depends on the group I guess. This group process was about perfect.  People cared enough to see my need for information and provided it without just telling me what to do.  I appreciate it more than I can say. 

[vasubandu]

@dtel I second and third the notion that people here can help save money by avoiding mistakes.  Without the help I have received, my system would be a mess and I would be in a world of hurt.  It is taking me longer to put it all together than I expected, but I fine with that.

 

On the audio equipment question, I may have a different issue than most people here.  My sense is that you guys hear better sound from one receiver than from another, and you are drawn to consider the questions from a sound or audio perspective.  My own inclination is to consider it from a technology and economics perspective.  I can't write the difference off the better parts and design because I do not understand the parts and design elements.  

 

So if I have a $500 and $1,500 receiver with the same essential features, my instinctive question is how much of that difference is cost.  With most products, the profit margin increases dramatically as you move up models.  Design is a one-time cost, so there really should not be a reason to keep a feature out of a lower product on that basis.  Theoretically you should use it in as many products as possible to lower your average cost. At the same time, if the design creates a benefit that only a small percentage will appreciate, then it might make sense to keep it exclusive.

 

The parts thing is what really confuses me.  As I see it, the world is a bucket of parts, and most manufacturers will sell to anyone.  Contrary to popular belief, it usually is not more expensive to make a better part, but to invent and develop it.  So i want to get more information about what these parts are and whether there really is a price difference.

 

All of this is fueled by my distrust over the whole watts thing.  I guess I don't trust the namufacturers.

[willland]

38 minutes ago, vasubandu said:

All of this is fueled by my distrust over the whole watts thing.  I guess I don't trust the namufacturers.

You could avoid that all together and just get a preamp/processor.  If all the latest and greatest(Atmos, DTS-X) are not a must have, then you could get one of those highly regarded and expensive pre/pros for very little $$$.  The Integra below is an absolute steal for one of the most awarded line of preamp/processors for more than a decade.

https://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/intdhc803/integra-dhc-80.3-9.2-ch-thx-networking-a/v-preamp/processor/1.html

 

Bill

 

 

[vasubandu]

@willland There is an 80.6 on eBay up for auction at $699 right now. Would that be the same thing but better?

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/142659214385?rmvSB=true